Informal Institute for National Security Thinkers and Practitioners

Quotes of the Day:

"Political warfare includes all measures short of war... for hostile intent through discrete, subversive, or overt means short of open combat... Whereas gray zone tells us where along a spectrum between war and peace activities take place, political warfare tells us why."

- Matt Armstrong

“Treat all men alike.... give them all the same law. Give them all an even chance to live and grow. You might as well expect the rivers to run backward as that any man who is born a free man should be contented when penned up and denied liberty to go where he pleases. We only ask an even chance to live as other men live. We ask to be recognized as men. Let me be a free man...free to travel... free to stop...free to work...free to choose my own teachers...free to follow the religion of my Fathers...free to think and talk and act for myself.”

- Dee Brown, Bury My Heart at Wounded Knee: An Indian History of the American West

"I've fought in two World Wars and countless smaller ones on three continents. I led thousands of men into battle with everything from horses and swords to artillery and tanks. I've seen the headwaters of the Nile, and tribes of natives no white man had ever seen before. I've won and lost a dozen fortunes, killed many men and loved only one woman with a passion a flea like you could never begin to

understand. That's who I am. Now, go home boy!"

- actor Robert Duvall in the film “Second Hand Lions”

1. RUSSIAN OFFENSIVE CAMPAIGN ASSESSMENT, AUGUST 28 (Putin's War)

2. ‘The Eye of the Storm’: Taiwan Is Caught in a Great Game Over Microchips

3. Here’s every weapon US has supplied to Ukraine with $13 billion

4. Biden's Iran nuclear deal sets the stage for a real 'forever war'

5. Fighting between U.S. troops and militias draws scrutiny to Syria role

6. Through the Taiwan Strait

7. Restore Reagan’s Military ‘Margin of Safety’

8. The ‘MacGyvered’ Weapons in Ukraine’s Arsenal

9. The Army wants exoskeletons so soldiers can defeat their worst enemy: Lower back pain

10. After the Next War: The U.S. must Grasp the Reality of Sustained Competition

11. This Picture Is How China Plans to Beat America If World War III Breaks Out

12. Russian dirty dancing with Sanna Marin

13. US Coast Guard cutter is denied entry in Solomon Islands

14. Indo–US special forces joint exercise completed in Himachal Pradesh

15. Russia is Fighting Three Undeclared Wars. Its Fourth – an Internal One – Might be Looming

16. Four years after the death of John McCain, my father's legacy is more important than ever

17. The surprising connection between military strategy and success of the Civil Rights movement

18. How this Marine Corps clarinetist evacuated 2 US embassies in 1 year

1. RUSSIAN OFFENSIVE CAMPAIGN ASSESSMENT, AUGUST 28 (Putin's War)

Maps/graphics: https://www.understandingwar.org/backgrounder/russian-offensive-campaign-assessment-august-28

RUSSIAN OFFENSIVE CAMPAIGN ASSESSMENT, AUGUST 28

Aug 28, 2022 - Press ISW

understandingwar.org

Russian Offensive Campaign Assessment, August 28

Kateryna Stepanenko, Layne Philipson, Angela Howard, and Frederick W. Kagan

August 28, 8:30 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.

Russian President Vladimir Putin signed two decrees on August 27 in a reported effort to assist stateless peoples and residents of Donbas and Ukraine live and work in the Russian Federation. The first decree allows Donbas residents, Ukrainians, and stateless peoples to live and work in Russia indefinitely.[1] The decree also allows Ukrainian and Donbas residents to work in Russia without a permit so long as they have acquired an identification card within 30 days of the August 27 decree.[2] The order also requires that all Donbas and Ukrainian residents arriving to Russia undergo mandatory fingerprint registration and a medical examination for the use of drugs, psychotropic substances, infectious diseases, and HIV.[3]

The second decree orders Russian social services to provide social payments to individuals forced to leave Ukraine and the self-proclaimed Donetsk and Luhansk People’s Republic (DNR and LNR) for Russia after February 18, 2022.[4] The decree mandates that social services provide monthly pension payments of 10,000 rubles (approximately $167) to all affected peoples, pension payments of 3,000 rubles (approximately $50) to those with disabilities or those over the age of 80, and payments of 5,000 rubles (approximately $83) to World War II veterans.[5] The decree also orders that social services pay pregnant women 10,000 rubles during pregnancy and an additional 20,000 rubles (approximately $332) when the child is born.[6] The decree excludes refugees and specifies that Russian Federal Republics must execute the payments to the parties.[7]

Russian and Ukrainian forces continued to trade claims of shelling at the Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Power Plant, including at the Tenth Review Conference of the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons.[8] Russia blocked a proposal aimed at strengthening the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons on August 27 in objection to a clause concerning Ukrainian control of the Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Power Plant.[9] The Ukrainian Mission to the United Nations published a statement signed by a large proportion of NPT signatories at the last meeting of the conference that condemned Russian aggression in Ukraine, nuclear rhetoric, and provocative statements as “inconsistent with the recent P5 Leaders Joint Statement on Preventing Nuclear War and Avoiding Arms Races.”[10]

Russia has further begun to implement strategies similar to those used by Iran in attempt to manipulate and possibly delay an International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) mission to the plant in the near future. The New York Times reported on August 27 that the IAEA had assembled a mission consisting of IAEA Chief Rafael Mariano Grossi and 13 experts from “mostly neutral countries” to visit Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Power Plant for observation next week.[11] The list notably excludes the United States and the United Kingdom, which Russia views as unfairly biased. The IAEA stated that the IAEA remained in active consultations for an upcoming mission.[12] Ukrainian official sources have reported that Russian special forces are torturing Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Power Plant employees to prevent them from disclosing safety violations to IAEA inspectors, that Russian authorities are attempting to limit the presence of Ukrainian employees at the plant, and that occupation authorities have begun collecting signatures from Enerhodar residents demanding an end to Ukrainian shelling to present to inspectors.[13] Manipulation of the nationality of inspectors and attacks on the “fairness” of IAEA inspections are tactics that Iran has long used to obfuscate its obstruction of IAEA inspections.

Key Takeaways

Russian President Vladimir Putin issued two decrees in a reported effort to assist stateless peoples and residents of Donbas and Ukraine live and work in the Russian Federation.
Russian forces conducted unsuccessful offensive operations northwest of Slovyansk.
Russian forces conducted limited ground attacks southeast of Bakhmut and west and southwest of Donetsk City.
Russian forces conducted a limited ground attack north of Kharkiv City.
Russian forces did not conduct any reported offensive operations in Kherson or Zaporizhzhia Oblasts.
The Kremlin likely directed a media outlet closely affiliated with Moscow to criticize the Governor of St. Petersburg Alexander Beglov for failing to incentivize recruitment to volunteer battalions within the city.
Russian occupation authorities continued efforts to facilitate the integration of the education system in occupied territories in Ukraine according to Russian standards.

We do not report in detail on Russian war crimes because those 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 population and specifically on combat in Ukrainian urban areas. We utterly condemn these Russian violations of the laws of armed conflict, Geneva Conventions, and humanity even though we do not describe them in these reports.

Main Effort—Eastern Ukraine (comprised of one subordinate and two supporting efforts)
Subordinate Main Effort—Encirclement of Ukrainian Troops in the Cauldron between Izyum and Donetsk and Luhansk Oblasts
Supporting Effort 1—Kharkiv City
Supporting Effort 2—Southern Axis
Mobilization and Force Generation Efforts
Activities in Russian-occupied Areas

Main Effort—Eastern Ukraine

Subordinate Main Effort—Southern Kharkiv, Donetsk, Luhansk Oblasts (Russian objective: Encircle Ukrainian forces in Eastern Ukraine and capture the entirety of Donetsk and Luhansk oblasts, the claimed territory of Russia’s proxies in Donbas)

Russian forces conducted limited ground attacks along the Kharkiv-Donetsk Oblast border on August 28. The Ukrainian General Staff reported that Russian troops conducted unsuccessful offensive operations near Dovhenke (20km south of Izyum, 24km northwest of Slovyansk) and Bohorodychne (25km southeast of Izyum, 18km northwest of Slovyansk).[14] Geolocated footage from Bohorodychne posted on August 22 shows a Ukrainian UAV destroying a Russian Auriga-1.2V portable satellite communications station, suggesting that control of the settlement remains contested.[15] Geolocated footage from Yarova (30km southeast of Izyum, 22km northeast of Slovyansk) posted on August 24 shows Ukrainian forces firing on Russian positions, affirming ISW’s previous assessments that Russian forces have been unable to conduct a river crossing of the Siverskyi Donets and move on Slovyansk from the north.[16] ISW has previously assessed that such limited Russian ground attacks south of Izyum are likely spoiling attacks intended to disrupt Ukrainian forces rather than efforts intended to take territory along an axis of advance.[17] Russian forces conducted an airstrike on Husarivka (40km northwest of Izyum, 80km southeast of Kharkiv City) and continued to target settlements along the Kharkiv-Donetsk border with artillery.[18]

Russian forces did not conduct any confirmed ground attacks toward Siversk on August 28 and continued routine shelling of Siversk and surrounding settlements.[19] Russian artillery also struck railway and civilian infrastructure in Kramatorsk.[20]

Russian forces continued ground attacks southeast of Bakhmut on August 28. The Ukrainian General Staff reported that Ukrainian forces repelled Russian offensives in the direction of Kodema, Vershyna, and Zaitseve and near Vesele Dolyna and Semihirya (all within 15km southeast of Bakhmut).[21] A Russian milblogger shared footage of Wagner Group forces reportedly posing in Kodema, and Deputy LNR Interior Minister Vitaly Kiselev tentatively amplified claims from social media users that Russian-led forces have taken control of Kodema.[22] ISW has previously noted the presence of proxy and Wagner Group forces near Bakhmut, but ISW cannot independently confirm the validity of claimed Russian control of Kodema at this time.[23]

Russian forces conducted limited ground attacks west and southwest of Donetsk City on August 28. The Ukrainian General Staff stated that Russian forces withdrew following failed attempts to advance in the Pervomaiske area (10km northwest of Donetsk City) and near Pavlivka (40km southwest of Donetsk City)[24]. Russian sources have made contradictory claims regarding the status of Pavlivka, alternately asserting both Ukrainian control and Russian control of the settlement.[25] Deputy LNR Interior Minister Vitaly Kiselev claimed that Russian forces advanced a couple of hundred meters in the Opytne direction (5km north of Donetsk City) on August 28. Such limited reported gains are likely discouraging for Russian-led forces already struggling with low morale, though Kiselev added that this alleged progress is “slow, but better than nothing.”[26] Russian sources reported and shared footage showing high levels of artillery activity in the Vuhledar direction (3km southwest of Pavlivka) and suggested that Marinka (15km west of Donetsk City) as a possible direction for further advances in the coming days.[27] Russian forces continued shelling west of Donetsk City and conducted an airstrike on Pervomaiske on August 28.[28]

Luhansk Oblast Administration Head Serhiy Haidai reported an unspecified explosion at a Russian redeployment management base in occupied Svatove, deep within Russian-controlled territory, on August 28.[29] Ukrainian officials have not claimed responsibility for the explosion. Russian sources attributed the explosion to a Ukrainian HIMARS strike on an agricultural company.[30] Haidai stated that Russian forces had previously left Svatove, but did not provide details.[31] ISW cannot confirm details of the explosion or Russian strength of presence in Svatove at this time. Svatove has served as a hub on the Russian ground lines of communication (GLOCs) to Severodonetsk.

Supporting Effort #1—Kharkiv City (Russian objective: Defend ground lines of communication (GLOCs) to Izyum and prevent Ukrainian forces from reaching the Russian border)

Russian forces conducted a limited ground attack north of Kharkiv City on August 28. The Ukrainian General Staff reported that Russian forces unsuccessfully attempted to improve their tactical positions near Svitlynchne, approximately 42km north of Kharkiv City, but were unsuccessful and withdrew.[32] Russian forces conducted an airstrike on Rubizhne, approximately 52km northeast of Kharkiv City, and continued using tanks, and tube and rocket artillery to shell Kharkiv City and settlements to the north and northeast.[33]

Supporting Effort #2—Southern Axis (Russian objective: Defend Kherson and Zaporizhzhia Oblasts against Ukrainian counterattacks)

No Russian offensive operations in Kherson or Zaporizhzhia Oblasts were reported on August 28. Ukrainian military officials reported that Russian forces continued to launch airstrikes near the Ukrainian bridgehead over the Inhulets River in northwestern Kherson Oblast and northwest of Kherson City.[34] The Ukrainian Southern Operational Command reported that Russian forces launched high precision air-to-surface Kh-59 missile at a public bathroom in Novovorontsovka on the Kherson-Dnipropetrovsk Oblast border.[35] The Ukrainian Main Military Intelligence Directorate (GUR) had previously reported that Russian forces only have 45% of missiles remaining from the pre-war arsenal, but Russian forces are reportedly continuing to use their limited stockpile of such weapons to strike civilian infrastructure in Ukraine.[36] The Ukrainian Center of Countering Disinformation reported that Russian forces in Kherson Oblast are maneuvering equipment to create the illusion of reinforcements in the region.[37]

Ukrainian forces continued to target Russian ground lines of communication (GLOCs), command posts, and ammunition depots. The Ukrainian Southern Operational Command reported that Ukrainian missile units struck a Russian command post in Darivka (approximately 15km northeast of Kherson City) and that Ukrainian forces disrupted Russian GLOCs over the Inhulets River via the Darivka Bridge with missile strikes.[38] Ukrainian officials noted that Ukrainian forces struck the command post of the Russian 35th Combined Arms Army at the Sokil Plant in Nova Kakhovka.[39] Ukrainian forces also struck a Russian command post and an ammunition depot in Kherson City, and a concentration of manpower and equipment in Lyubymivka (approximately 18km east of Nova Kakhovka.)[40] Ukrainian aviation struck Russian strongholds in Soldatske and Oleksandrivka (both northwest of Kherson City), and an area of troop and equipment concentration in Vysokopillya on the Kherson-Dnipropetrovsk Oblast border.[41] Ukrainian missile units also struck Russian ammunition depots in Dudchany (about 58km northeast of Nova Kakhovka) and Davydiv Brid, on the eastern bank of the Inhulets River, and a field ammunition supply point in Voskresenske (approximately 120km southeast of Kherson City).[42] Russian and Ukrainian sources published footage of smoke reportedly after the Ukrainian strikes on a bridge over the Kinka River in Oleshky, approximately 9km southeast of Kherson City.[43] Ukrainian forces have yet to confirm the strike on Russian GLOCs over Kinka River as of the time of this publication.

Russian forces continued to undertake measures to restore Russian GLOCs in Kherson Oblast. Social media footage shows that Russian forces are attempting to construct a pontoon crossing over the Dnipro River, near the damaged Antonivsky Bridge.[44] Satellite imagery published on August 27 also shows Russian forces operating two pontoon ferries near Lvove, approximately 13km southeast of Nova Kakhovka.[45] Russian milbloggers amplified footage that showed some movement on the Antonivsky Bridge on an unspecified date, claiming that Russian forces are still able to move some equipment across the bridge.[46] The footage is grainy, and it is unclear if any military equipment is moving on the bridge. The footage also shows Russian forces pulling a barge.

Russian forces continued to strike Dnipropetrovsk and Zaporizhzhia Oblasts with missiles and MLRS rockets. Ukrainian officials reported that Russian Mi-24 helicopters struck unspecified infrastructure in Nikopol with unguided missiles, and that Russian forces launched S-300 missiles and fired Grad MLRS rockets at the settlement throughout the night.[47] Russian forces also fired Uragan MLRS rockets at the Zelenodolsk Hromada (territorial community) in Dnipropetrovsk Oblast.[48] Zaporizhzhia City officials reported that Russian forces launched unspecified missile strikes at Zaporizhzhia City, destroying civilian infrastructure, while the Russian Defense Ministry claimed that Russian forces struck the Motor Sich production plant in the city.[49]

The British Royal Navy official newspaper NavalNews reported on August 28 that the Russian cargo ship Sparta II with S-300 air-defense systems previously withdrawn from Syria passed through the Bosphorus Strait on August 27. NavalNews indicated that the ship’s destination is Novorossiysk, just southeast of the Russian Kerch Strait Bridge to Crimea. Russian forces will likely use the S-300s to strengthen the air defense over Crimea.[50]

Social media footage reportedly showed the activation of Russian air defense systems in Cape Fiolent and near the Alupka-Simeiz area in Crimea on August 28. Russian-appointed Sevastopol Governor Mikhail Razvozhayev claimed that Russian forces shot down an unspecified drone over the sea near Cape Fiolent.[51] Russian Telegram channels also reported an explosion near Alupka which they claimed was the result of Russian air defense activation.[52]

Mobilization and Force Generation Efforts (Russian objective: Expand combat power without conducting general mobilization)

The Kremlin likely directed a media outlet closely affiliated with Moscow to criticize the Governor of St. Petersburg Alexander Beglov for failing to incentivize recruitment to volunteer battalions within the city. A pro-Kremlin and Russian nationalist outlet Pravda.Ru published an article blaming Beglov and his administration for failing to allocate appropriate funds, issue necessary recruitment directions, or organize a media campaign promoting recruitment into the St. Petersburg-based volunteer battalions “Neva,” “Kronshtadt,” and “Pavlovsk.”[53] Pravda.Ru has long expressed pro-Kremlin views, even publishing a list of all “anti-Russian” publications that criticized the Kremlin, so this attack on Beglov may have originated with the Kremlin.[54] The outlet claimed to have spoken to military recruitment centers in St. Petersburg that stated that Beglov refused to sign a decree for a media campaign plan that would invite artists, musicians, civil society leaders, and social media managers to promote contract service in the city, resulting in only 100 volunteers enlisting since early July. The outlet claimed that Beglov complained about the financial strain of the cost of the volunteer battalion one-time bonuses and the media campaign, while “killing” all free recruitment events in the city to avoid stoking tensions in the city. Beglov reportedly sought to have a “quiet” recruitment and “sabotaged” the process by tasking individual districts in the city with hosting and financing their own recruitment drives with no instructions or assistance from the St. Petersburg City Administration.

Beglov faced significant criticism from the Kremlin prior to the Russian invasion in Ukraine for quarreling with local elites and struggling to resolve endemic issues in St. Petersburg.[55] Russian President Vladimir Putin did not meet with Beglov in early February, likely an indication of poor relations between the two.[56] Beglov attempted to improve his relations with the Kremlin by becoming a mouthpiece for Russian “victory” in Mariupol and making St. Petersburg the patron city of Mariupol. A source close to the Putin administration told Russian opposition outlet Meduza that war was Beglov’s opportunity to repair his public support in St. Petersburg, but it is likely that a recruitment campaign for the volunteer battalions would only alienate inhabitants of the city.[57] ISW has previously reported that some St. Petersburg military recruitment centers distributed summonses to all local men in an effort to advertise contract service, which drew criticism online and prompted the St. Petersburg officials to deny the legitimacy of the letters.[58]

Pravda.Ru’s article is an indicator that individual federal subjects (regions) are using the volunteer battalion recruitment to remain on Putin’s “good side.” Beglov’s concern over tensions within St. Petersburg over recruitment advertisements, if true, may also help explain why Russian officials appear to be shielding Moscow City residents from military recruitment campaigns.[59] Contract service is likely unappealing to most Russians despite high salaries and is a burden on local bureaucratic institutions and the state budget.[60] The Ukrainian Main Military Intelligence Directorate (GUR) also noted that Russian forces are seeking to generate about 90,000 servicemen, and city dwellers are reportedly expressing concerns over potentially having to fight in Ukraine.[61] Local administrations of federal subjects interested in pleasing Putin are continuing to advertise contract service through all available means. Nizhny Novgorod officials, for example, sent a recruitment email to a mother of several children via the social benefits office and is advertising recruitment at local kindergartens.[62]

Activity in Russian-occupied Areas (Russian objective: consolidate administrative control of occupied areas; set conditions for potential annexation into the Russian Federation or some other future political arrangement of Moscow’s choosing)

Russian occupation authorities continued efforts to facilitate the integration of educational systems in occupied Ukraine into the Russian system on August 28. The Ukrainian Main Intelligence Directorate (GUR) reported that Russian occupation officials in the Luhansk People’s Republic (LNR) released an education plan entitled “The Structural Plan of the Lesson on the Topic ‘My History,’” an introductory course for students of the occupied territories.[63] The GUR emphasized that the report calls on teachers to promote fake historical “facts,” anti-Ukrainian ideologies, and pro-Russia propaganda.[64] Pro-Russia sources reported that 94 Ukrainian teachers from occupied territories in Kharkiv Oblast departed for Russia on August 28 to participate in advanced training in preparation for the upcoming school year.[65] The sources also claimed that a previous group of teachers from occupied territories in Kharkiv Oblast returned from the same training on August 28.[66]

Russian occupation authorities continued to face challenges to their administrative abilities in occupied areas and took measures to crack down on perceived threats to their control on August 28. The Ukrainian Resistance Center reported that likely Ukrainian partisans hanged former Ukrainian border guard and self-proclaimed head of occupation police Andriy Ryzhkov in Mykhailivka, in the Melitopol district of Zaporizhzhia Oblast.[67] Melitopol Mayor Ivan Fedorov suggested that Russian security services are “cleaning up” collaborators and that collaborators are increasingly telling Ukrainian special services that they no longer want to work against Ukraine.[68] Fedorov also reported that unspecified actors destroyed a building housing preparations for a referendum in Mirnyi, in the Melitopol district of Zaporizhzhia Oblast.[69] Russian-appointed Kherson Oblast Administration Deputy Kirill Stremousov stated that “quiet sabotage and unexplained stupor are an unsuccessful companion in the current realities” when claiming that every Kherson Oblast resident who wishes to be “helpful” is already working for the development of the region.[70]

A pro-Russia source expressed concern surrounding the state of Mariupol on August 28. Russian milblogger Alexander Khodurkovsky reported that there many Mariupol citizens remain in the city despite their wishes to evacuate.[71] Khodurkovsky stated that childless individuals stay with Russian forces in a medical unit and that those with children are staying in temporary accommodation centers in unspecified areas.[72] Khodurkovsky emphasized that decreased humanitarian aid to Mariupol will only intensify humanitarian concerns as winter approaches.[73]

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.

[1] http://publication dot pravo.gov.ru/Document/View/0001202208270002?index=2&rangeSize=1

[2] http://publication dot pravo.gov.ru/Document/View/0001202208270002?index=2&rangeSize=1

[3] http://publication dot pravo.gov.ru/Document/View/0001202208270002?index=2&rangeSize=1

[4] http://publication dot pravo.gov.ru/Document/View/0001202208270001?index=1&rangeSize=1

[5] http://publication dot pravo.gov.ru/Document/View/0001202208270001?index=1&rangeSize=1

[6] http://publication dot pravo.gov.ru/Document/View/0001202208270001?index=1&rangeSize=1

[7] http://publication dot pravo.gov.ru/Document/View/0001202208270001?index=1&rangeSize=1

[9] https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/aug/27/russia-blocks-un-nuclear-t... https://suspilne dot media/275595-rf-zablokuvala-dokument-konferencii-oon-pro-adernu-zbrou-cerez-punkt-pro-zaes/

https://www.facebook.com/GeneralStaff.ua/posts/pfbid0GLCBGRpfMCnmFaPUVzU...

[36] https://kyivindependent dot com/news-feed/ukrainian-intelligence-russia-has-no-more-than-45-of-its-missiles-left; https://www.facebook.com/sergey.khlan/posts/pfbid02RcGhkDnHg7nkY5BSLdBxm...

[53] https://www dot pravda.ru/districts/1740695-dobrovolcheskie_batalony/

[55] https://meduza dot io/en/feature/2022/06/30/the-warmongering-governor

[56] https://meduza dot io/en/feature/2022/02/12/snow-trash-and-influential-people

[57] https://meduza dot io/en/feature/2022/06/30/the-warmongering-governor

[61] https://gur dot gov.ua/content/rosiia-zbilshuie-mobilizatsiini-rezervy-i-planuie-mobilizuvaty-blyzko-90-tysiach-viiskovosluzhbovtsiv.html

[62] https://nn dot tsargrad.tv/news/objavlenie-o-sluzhbe-po-kontraktu-razmestili-v-nizhegorodskom-detsadu_613193; https://nn dot tsargrad.tv/news/v-nizhnem-novgorode-mnogodetnaja-mat-poluchila-priglashenie-vstupit-v-tankovyj-batalon_613769; https://opennov dot ru/news/society/2022-08-28/68018

[63] https://gur dot gov.ua/content/okupanty-v-lnr-pidhotuvaly-psevdoistorychnu-metodychku-do-1-veresnia.html

[64] https://gur dot gov.ua/content/okupanty-v-lnr-pidhotuvaly-psevdoistorychnu-metodychku-do-1-veresnia.html

[67] https://sprotyv dot mod.gov.ua/2022/08/28/na-zaporizhzhi-povisyly-kolaboranta/; https://t.me/spravdi/16112

UNDERSTANDINGWAR.ORG

2. ‘The Eye of the Storm’: Taiwan Is Caught in a Great Game Over Microchips

Excerpts:

TSMC will also receive American chip subsidies linked to pledges not to further expand in China under the recently passed CHIPS and Science Act of 2022. Taiwanese officials have been receptive to a new U.S.-proposed Chip 4 alliance, which seeks to unite the American chip supply chains with those of Taiwan, South Korea and Japan — at the exclusion of China.

Analysts debate how much protection China’s reliance on Taiwan gives it. Some argue that calculations over supply chains are insignificant in a decision over war, which could bring untold devastation and reshape geopolitics.

“You have to worry that those interdependencies look very significant, in peacetime, to the people who are embedded in those relationships,” said Richard J. Danzig, who served as Navy secretary under President Bill Clinton. “But when the momentum for war begins to develop, it tends to swamp those things.”

Nonetheless, few deny that Taiwan’s centrality in the supply chain makes such considerations a factor, a concept generally referred to as the “silicon shield.” An invasion of Taiwan would mean a form of mutually assured destruction, not necessarily of the world, but for the many modern gadgets we use every day.

‘The Eye of the Storm’: Taiwan Is Caught in a Great Game Over Microchips

By Paul Mozur, John Liu and Raymond Zhong

Aug. 29, 2022

Updated 3:55 a.m. ET

nytimes.com · August 29, 2022

Worried about the Chinese threat to Taiwan, the U.S. and others have tried to expand their piece of the island’s semiconductor production.

The Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company factory in Nanjing, China.Credit...Agence France-Presse — Getty Images

TAIPEI, Taiwan — As Chinese warships rehearsed a blockade of Taiwan this month, they simulated a scenario global leaders and policymakers have been busy worrying about: not war, but a grinding halt to the electronic supply chains that make the modern world run.

Taiwan’s biggest trading partners — which include China, the United States, Europe and Japan — have different ideas about the self-ruled island’s political future, yet all share common ground in one desire, to expand their piece of its cutting-edge semiconductor industry.

Beginning with Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s visit in early August, a succession of American delegations have kissed the ring of top Taiwan chip executives. There’s much to gain. In recent years, Taiwan’s biggest chip maker, Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company, or TSMC, has pledged to open new factories in the United States and Japan. The Taiwan chip design firm MediaTek recently partnered with Purdue University to open a chip design center.

The calculation begins from a basic, and unsettling, reality of the global economy. Taiwan is the biggest producer of the world’s most advanced chips. It is also rapidly becoming one of the world’s most dangerous geopolitical flash points. The fear is that in the event of a conflict, firms won’t get the microchips they need to make phones and drones, set up supercomputers and cellular networks, and even build new weapons.

Tech companies on both sides of the Pacific now rely heavily on TSMC to craft the high-performance chips that render graphics in video games and give smartphones their smarts, but that also guide missiles and analyze oceans of military data. That has turned TSMC, whose name is obscure to most consumers, into a vital strategic asset for both Washington and Beijing.

During the geopolitical drama of the past month, the power of TSMC and the rest of the island’s chip supply chain has been clear. On Ms. Pelosi’s trip to Taiwan, she met with TSMC’s chief executive, Mark Liu, and its storied founder, 91-year-old Morris Chang. A separate delegation led by Senator Edward J. Markey, Democrat of Massachusetts, met with the company to discuss investments and improving semiconductor supply chains.

Taiwan’s president, Tsai Ing-wen, told one group that she saw the island’s tech prowess as a means of shoring up support for its democracy. Calling economic security a “pillar” of national security, she said Taiwan was willing to work with partners to build sustainable supply chains for what she called “democracy chips.”

Chinese state media sniped at the efforts, calling Ms. Pelosi’s meeting a “photo op.” Still, in an indicator of how important Taiwan’s chips are, it did little to hit back at the company.

For all of her feting of American delegations, Ms. Tsai, and the semiconductor industry she seeks to protect, face a precarious balancing act. Many Taiwanese businesses — TSMC included — rely on China for their livelihoods, even if they support Ms. Tsai in standing up to Beijing’s pugilistic behavior.

Here’s every weapon US has supplied to Ukraine with $13 billion

BY JORDAN WILLIAMS - 08/26/22 6:00 AM ET

The Hill · August 26, 2022

The Biden administration has committed nearly $13 billion worth of military assistance to Ukraine since Russia invaded six months ago.

The scope and power of those weapons has increased over time, with Ukrainian officials arguing that firepower is crucial to defend not only their country, but democracy worldwide.

“Finally it is felt that the Western artillery — the weapons we received from our partners — started working very powerfully,” Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky said last month.

On Wednesday, the United States greenlighted another military assistance package to Ukraine, preparing to send nearly $3 billion in arms and equipment to meet Kyiv’s medium- and long-term needs as it beats back Russia’s military.

Major weapons

High Mobility Artillery Rocket Systems (HIMARS) and ammunition
The U.S. has committed 16 HIMARS since late-May. It is a lighter wheeled system that can allow Ukrainians to hit Russian targets within Ukraine from further distances.
1,500 Tube-Launched, Optically-Tracked, Wire-Guided (TOW) missiles
Manufactured by Raytheon, the TOW missiles are long-range precision, anti-tank and assault weapons that can hit targets up to 4,500 meters away.
155mm Howitzers
A towed field artillery piece that can hit targets up to 30 km, or 18 miles away. The U.S. has sent 126 of these howitzers, along with 806,000 155mm artillery rounds and 126 tactical vehicles to tow the howitzers.
105mm Howitzers
The U.S. committed to sending 16 105mm howitzers and 108,000 105mm artillery rounds to go with the howitzers. The United Kingdom has already provided the L119 model, which is a light weight howitzer that can provide direct fire support at armored vehicles or buildings or indirect fire to support combat arms in ranges over 10 km, or 6 miles.
120mm mortar systems
The U.S. Army uses three versions of the 120mm mortar systems, but they are designed to provide close-range, quick-response indirect fire during tactical combat. The U.S. has sent 20 of these systems, as well as 85,000 rounds of 120mm mortar ammunition.
National Advanced Surface-to-Air Missile Systems (NASAMS);
The National Advanced Surface-to-Air Missile System, also known as the Norwegian Advanced Surface-to-Air Missile System, are advanced air-defense systems that can hit targets up to 100 miles away. The U.S. has committed to sending eight NSAMS, along with munitions for the systems.
Phoenix Ghost Tactical Unmanned Aerial Systems
The U.S. has committed approximately 700 Phoenix ‘Ghost’ drones to Ukraine between April and July. The systems, made by AEVEX Aerospace, are designed to attack targets.
Switchblade Tactical Unmanned Aerial Systems
The U.S. has sent over 700 Switchblade drones to Ukraine since March. There are two types of Switchblade drones and the U.S. has sent both, those its unclear how many of each type Washington has sent.
The Switchblade 300 weighs about five pounds and can fly roughly 6 miles, and is intended to target personnel and light vehicles. However, the Switchblade 600 can fly more than 24 miles and can stay in the air for 40 minutes.
Puma unmanned aerial systems
The Pentagon awarded AeroVironment $19.7 million in April to produce the Puma AE RQ-20 system for Ukraine. Designed for reconnaissance and surveillance, it has a range of 20 km, or about 12 miles, and has over three hours of flight endurance.
Mi-17 helicopters
The U.S. has provided 20 of the Soviet-era transport helicopters that can also be used as a helicopter gunship. Can carry as many as 30 passengers or 9,000 pounds of cargo
Harpoon coastal defense systems
The U.S. announced in June that it would provide two vehicle-mounted Harpoon systems, which are intended for coastal defense. The U.S. said in June that it would provide the launchers, while allies and partners would provide the missiles.
Scan Eagle Unmanned Aerial Systems
The U.S. sent 15 Scan Eagle systems as part of its Aug. 19 package to Ukraine for reconnaissance, surveillance and target acquisition. These systems are just under four feet in length, and have an altitude of 16,000 feet above ground level. The Aug. 24 weapons package included support equipment for these systems.
VAMPIRE Counter-unmanned aerial systems
The U.S. first committed to providing the VAMPIRE system in its $2.98 billion weapons package announced Aug. 24. Colin Kahl, the Pentagon’s top policy official, said the VAMPIRE uses small missiles to shoot drones out of the sky.
Stinger anti-aircraft systems
The U.S. has provided over 1,400 Stinger anti-aircraft missiles. The Stinger has a range of 5 miles and can attack targets up to 15,000 feet.
Javelin anti-armor systems
The U.S. has provided over 8,500 Javelin surface-to-air missiles. Javelin is a portable anti-tank system that can hit targets from 65 meters to 4,000 meters away in most operational circumstances.
High Speed, Anti- Radiation Missiles
The Aug. 19 weapons package included an undisclosed amount of High-speed Anti-radiation (HARM) missiles. The Pentagon first disclosed in early August that it has sent these missiles, but didn’t specified which kind or how many. However, CNN reported that the U.S. has sent the AGM-88 HARM, an air-to-surface tactical missile that has a range of at least 30 miles, and is designed to find and destroy radar-equipped air defense systems.
Over 27,000 other anti-armor systems

Other equipment and small arms

Radars

50 counter-artillery radars
Four counter-mortar radars
Four air surveillance radars
Counter-battery radar systems

Vehicles/Boats

Four Command Post vehicles
Unmanned Coastal Defense Vessels
Hundreds of Armored High Mobility Multipurpose Wheeled Vehicles
50 armored medical treatment vehicles
200 M113 Armored Personnel Carriers
18 coastal and riverine patrol boats
40 MaxxPro Mine Resistant Ambush Protected Vehicles with mine rollers

Explosives, Small Arms, Ammunition, Munitions

M18A1 Claymore anti-personnel munitions (command-detonated fixed-direction fragmentation weapon for use against personnel)
C-4 explosives, demolition munitions, and demolition equipment
Over 10,000 Grenade launchers and small arms
Over 59,000, 000 Small arms ammunition

Equipment

75,000 sets of body armor and helmets
22 Tactical Vehicles to recover equipment
Laser-guided rocket systems
Tactical secure communications systems
Night vision devices, thermal imagery systems, optics, and laser rangefinders
Commercial satellite imagery services
Explosive ordnance disposal protective gear
Chemical, Biological, Radiological, Nuclear protective equipment
Medical supplies
Electronic jamming equipment
Field equipment and spare parts
Funding for training, maintenance, and sustainment
Mine clearing equipment and systems

Democrats peg inflation to corporate greed on campaign trail Watergate prosecutor: DOJ will be closely watching national security damage assessment of Mar-a-Lago documents

Sources:

Fact Sheet on U.S. Security Assistance to Ukraine – Aug. 24 (DOD)

Sources: $1 Billion in Additional Security Assistance for Ukraine – Aug. 8 (DOD)

Fact Sheet on U.S. Security Assistance to Ukraine – Aug. 8 (DOD)

Pentagon confirms anti-radiation missiles sent to Ukraine – Aug. 9 (The Hill)

The Hill · by Julia Mueller · August 26, 2022

4. Biden's Iran nuclear deal sets the stage for a real 'forever war'

Excerpts:

However, once Iran has its own nuclear deterrent, all bets are off. Not even the most hawkish American administration would counsel a military strike on Iran if it meant the real possibility that the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps would launch its nuclear weapons against U.S. regional facilities or, as they develop their missiles, at the continental U.S. itself.

This, in turn, means drawing a new baseline, one in which the Islamic Republic calculates that it can ramp up regional aggression and terrorism without consequence. Expect the terrorism of the mid-1980s to appear like a calm day as Iran mines the Persian Gulf and launches drone swarms to attack regional rivals, all in the belief that, as the IRGC Navy’s banners read, “The Americans Can’t Do a Damned Thing.”

Wars in the Middle East erupt not because of oil or water but rather because of overconfidence. This is the real danger. Biden may believe he is furthering diplomacy, but by convincing Tehran that it can act without consequence, he is setting the stage for a real “forever war” across the region.

Biden's Iran nuclear deal sets the stage for a real 'forever war'

Washington Examiner · by Michael Rubin · August 26, 2022

Word from Vienna suggests a further American collapse is in progress as Europe tries to broker a renewed Iran nuclear deal. With sanctions lifted and oil sales permitted, Iranian authorities will reap tens of billions of dollars, much of which will flow to Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps coffers. While the White House is trying to spin this deal as one that is robust and foolproof, facts suggest otherwise.

The original 2015 Iran nuclear deal reversed decades of counterproliferation precedent; the 2022 analog manages to do even less. Not only will clauses of the deal expire, leaving Iran an industrial-scale program not beholden to many controls, but the Iranian government also claims that the deal on paper closes the file on investigations into Iranian cheating. President Joe Biden’s team may applaud themselves, but they’re not fooling anyone in the region.

The reality is the new Iranian deal is a tacit acknowledgment that Biden has no Plan B. While there are tangible steps that a much more creative administration might take, starting with the renewal of former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo’s “maximum pressure” campaign, Biden simply seeks to kick the can down the road and hope that Iranian leaders are polite enough to wait until he leaves office so that his surrogates can blame Iran’s nuclear bombs on his successor.

It’s one thing to craft an illusion and another to deal with reality. The question with which the United States must deal is what it will mean when the Islamic Republic, like North Korea in 2006, declares itself a nuclear state.

For one, the U.S. will lose its ability to deter Iran. For more than four decades, the Islamic Republic has been extraordinarily lucky to have the U.S. as its adversary. It has waged an unremitting war against America but consistently avoided retaliation. Iran never paid much price for seizing the U.S. Embassy and holding 52 diplomats hostage for more than a year. Likewise, it suffered no military retaliation for the 1983 Marine Barracks bombing in Beirut or the 1996 Khobar Towers bombing in Saudi Arabia. In 2003, Iranian officials promised American and British diplomats they would not interfere in Iraq but then proceeded to mastermind the murder of more than 600 Americans — again without consequence. Ditto the torture and murder of former FBI agent Bob Levinson and the continued drone strikes on U.S. facilities in Iraq. Only once, in 1988, when a U.S. ship hit an Iranian mine, did the Iranian military suffer any meaningful consequence.

Still, the threat of U.S. retaliation always loomed large. It likely caused second-guessing inside Iran. The Revolutionary Guards knew that if they blew up an American embassy or encouraged its proxies to attack American airports, schools, or shopping malls, they would likely face a devastating response. Iranian air defenses are poor, and the U.S. has the ability to repeat Qassem Soleimani’s end with almost every Iranian general.

However, once Iran has its own nuclear deterrent, all bets are off. Not even the most hawkish American administration would counsel a military strike on Iran if it meant the real possibility that the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps would launch its nuclear weapons against U.S. regional facilities or, as they develop their missiles, at the continental U.S. itself.

This, in turn, means drawing a new baseline, one in which the Islamic Republic calculates that it can ramp up regional aggression and terrorism without consequence. Expect the terrorism of the mid-1980s to appear like a calm day as Iran mines the Persian Gulf and launches drone swarms to attack regional rivals, all in the belief that, as the IRGC Navy’s banners read, “The Americans Can’t Do a Damned Thing.”

Wars in the Middle East erupt not because of oil or water but rather because of overconfidence. This is the real danger. Biden may believe he is furthering diplomacy, but by convincing Tehran that it can act without consequence, he is setting the stage for a real “forever war” across the region.

Michael Rubin ( @mrubin1971 ) is a contributor to the Washington Examiner's Beltway Confidential. He is a senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute.

Washington Examiner · by Michael Rubin · August 26, 2022

5. Fighting between U.S. troops and militias draws scrutiny to Syria role

Speaking of potential forever wars...

Fighting between U.S. troops and militias draws scrutiny to Syria role

The Washington Post · by Karoun Demirjian · August 26, 2022

Clashes between U.S. troops and Iran-backed militias in Syria this month have prompted new scrutiny of the Pentagon’s mission in Syria, as tit-for-tat strikes threaten to escalate tensions in the region.

The U.S. decision to target facilities in eastern Syria on Tuesday — which officials say had been used to launch attacks against U.S. forces by groups affiliated with Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps — threatens to heighten tensions with Iran as the two countries try to reach a deal to revive the 2015 nuclear deal.

“Iran’s malign activities are increasing on a number of fronts right now,” said William Wechsler, director of Middle East programs at the Atlantic Council and a former high-ranking Pentagon official. “And to the degree that there’s anyone in the IRGC that thinks that as they increase the amount of malign activities that they’re doing in the region, that an appropriate thing on the list is to also target Americans, they need to be dissuaded.”

The United States has long maintained an unofficial policy that when provocations put American lives at risk, they demand a response. In recent months, as the attacks escalated however, the Biden administration has wrestled with when to respond and how to avoid sparking a wider conflict, according to officials and analysts.

President Biden’s order to strike targets belonging to Iranian-backed groups reflects a decision to act — “to protect and defend the safety of our personnel, to degrade and disrupt the ongoing series of attacks against the United States and our partners, and to deter the Islamic Republic of Iran and Iran-backed militia groups from conducting or supporting further attacks on United States personnel and facilities,” the president said in a letter to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.).

Since Army Gen. Michael Erik Kurilla took over U.S. Central Command in April, there has been a push to ensure that Iran cannot carry out attacks against U.S. forces and assets with impunity, according to a person familiar with planning, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss internal deliberations. The sense is that doing nothing will lead to more attacks, the person said, posing risks to U.S. forces that outweighs any danger of potential escalation.

The U.S. strikes drew an almost immediate response from the militias, which fired rockets into Green Village and a Conoco gas field in Deir el-Zour in northeastern Syria, injuring three U.S. troops. The United States responded with a barrage of counterfire, using heavy artillery, gunships and attack helicopters to destroy rocket launchers. Four Iranian-backed fighters were killed, the Pentagon said.

Officially, the United States is in northeastern Syria to counter the Islamic State, a holdover of the multiyear campaign to destroy the terrorist group. The current mission is considered to be “noncombat,” but U.S. forces often come in to conflict with other forces — including the militias aligned with Iran.

That can pose complications and risks, said Jonathan Lord, director of the Middle East Security Program at the Center for a New American Security, who previously served as a staff member at the Pentagon and in Congress.

“Just because it’s a noncombat mission doesn’t mean that those forces aren’t somehow at risk,” Lord said.

That reality has prompted fresh concerns from some lawmakers, who worry that a new, more aggressive approach to Iran — while justifiable under the president’s constitutional powers as commander in chief — could lead to further fighting.

“It is past time for a rethink about the wisdom of having so many Americans so thinly spread across the region,” Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) said in a statement Thursday, noting that while Biden’s actions this week were commendable, “I remain concerned about any decision to undertake unauthorized military action when the Constitution and the War Powers Act require the President to come to Congress to obtain that authority.”

The decision to strike Iran drew criticism this week not just from Democrats concerned about escalation on the battlefield, but also from Republicans, who saw Iran’s actions this week as reason to abandon nuclear negotiations.

“These attacks by Iran’s proxies against U.S. servicemembers show why we CANNOT cut a bad nuclear deal with #Iran,” Rep. Michael McCaul (Tex.), the top Republican on the House Foreign Affairs Committee, wrote in a Twitter post this week. “The Biden administration must walk away from this bad deal that will fuel Iran’s terrorist attacks on U.S. soldiers and civilians.”

Others in the GOP also raised recent attacks and plots against Iranian dissidents and critics in the United States — attempts on the lives of former national security adviser John Bolton and women’s rights activists Masih Alinejad — to argue against a nuclear deal.

“Iran’s attempts to assassinate American officials and dissidents on American soil should immediately disqualify them from any sanctions relief from the United States,” said Rep. Mike D. Rogers (Ala.), the top Republican on the House Armed Services Committee.

Pentagon officials said the clashes in Syria and nuclear negotiations are separate issues.

“Separate from the JCPOA, we will defend our people no matter where they’re attacked or when they’re attacked, so the two really are not interrelated,” said Pentagon spokesman Brig. Gen. Pat Ryder, referring to the Iran nuclear deal by an acronym for its official title, the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action. “My hope would be that these groups would have received the message loud and clear, and that we will not see similar behavior in the future.”

Lord said it is unlikely the attacks this month in Syria are related to the nuclear negotiations. Iranian officials, he said, are “just not that well coordinated,” especially since the Iranian general Qasem Soleimani was killed in a U.S. drone strike in Baghdad in January 2020.

“Some of the things that we’re seeing may or may not be directly ordered by Iran, because these guys have some independent agency, as well,” Lord said of the militias.

The Washington Post · by Karoun Demirjian · August 26, 2022

6. Through the Taiwan Strait

Through the Taiwan Strait

An important show of resolve by the U.S. Navy despite Chinese threats.

By The Editorial BoardFollow

Aug. 28, 2022 5:17 pm ET

https://www.wsj.com/articles/through-the-taiwan-strait-china-beijing-nancy-pelosi-uss-chancellorsville-antietam-warships-chinese-communist-party-navy-11661714292?mod=opinion_lead_pos2

The U.S. Navy said Sunday that two warships have sailed through the Taiwan Strait for the first time since China’s furious response to Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s visit to the island. The announcement was an important demonstration that the Biden Administration isn’t ceding the strait to China despite its threats and recent war games that simulated a blockade and invasion.

OPINION: FREE EXPRESSION

Can the U.S. and China Coexist Peacefully?

00:00

The USS Chancellorsville and USS Antietam, a pair of guided-missile cruisers, sailed in international waters between Taiwan and the Chinese mainland on what the Navy called a routine transit mission. But little is routine these days in U.S.-Chinese relations, especially regarding Taiwan.

China’s foreign ministry declared in June that the Taiwan Strait is part of China’s “internal waters,” including “territorial sea, contiguous zone, and the exclusive economic zone.” That makes it all the more crucial for the U.S. to show to Beijing, Taipei and the world that it doesn’t agree and is willing to back that up with naval deployments.

The point isn’t to be provocative. It’s to underscore freedom of navigation and the U.S. willingness to defend it. As it builds its own blue-water navy, China has designs on a network of global bases and on turning the South China Sea and the entire Western Pacific into a region of Chinese dominance. Sooner or later China is likely to declare the Taiwan Strait off-limits without its permission, and the U.S. urgently needs a bigger Navy to counter that threat.

Advertisement - Scroll to Continue

WSJ Opinion: Joe Biden's Ambiguous Taiwan Stance

Restore Reagan’s Military ‘Margin of Safety’

While foreign policy ‘realists’ urge detente with China and Russia, only strength ensures peace.

By Roger Zakheim

Aug. 28, 2022 5:12 pm ET

https://www.wsj.com/articles/restore-reagans-military-margin-of-safety-russia-china-war-defense-threat-taiwan-cold-war-freedom-soviet-union-conflict-11661709975?utm

The U.S. faces the most daunting security landscape in 45 years. That’s no coincidence. Earlier this year Russia launched the bloodiest armed conflict in Europe since World War II, and this summer China publicly displayed plans to strangle or swallow the free people of Taiwan. Leaders in both countries examined the landscape and determined they could prevail in their ultimate goals, believing that the U.S. lacks the will to win.

OPINION: POTOMAC WATCH

The Lessons of the Afghanistan Exit, One Year Later

00:00

It isn’t the first time autocrats have brazenly defied norms and threatened freedom. It also isn’t the first time the U.S., stung by defeat in a “forever war,” roiled by political turmoil, and fixated on inflation and economic anxiety at home, has been judged weak by its adversaries. So how did the U.S. shift the security landscape the last time dictators were on the march? The answer is found on the campaign trail in the summer of 1980, just after Ronald Reagan won the Republican presidential nomination.

For years Reagan had consistently summed up his Cold War strategy as “We win, they lose.” It was more than a slogan, it was a plan. In August 1980 he explained how he would halt the Soviet Union’s advances and drive Moscow to the negotiating table.

In remarks to the Veterans of Foreign Wars in Chicago, Reagan declared he would restore America’s military strength through a major peacetime buildup. “Having known war,” he told the veterans assembled that day, “you are in the forefront of those who know that peace is not obtained or preserved by wishing and weakness. You have consistently urged maintenance of a defense capability that provides a margin of safety for America.”

NEWSLETTER SIGN-UP

Morning Editorial Report

All the day's Opinion headlines.

Preview

Those words became known as the “margin of safety” speech, and Reagan observed that “today, that margin is disappearing.” He rejected the prevailing view of the “realists” in both parties who championed a detente policy and assumed the U.S. lacked the will or the capacity to roll back the Soviet Union. He believed in a peace under which “freedom can flourish and justice prevail,” and rejected detente as a “false peace” or “a peace of humiliation and gradual surrender.”

It seems prescient now. It was provocative then.

Reagan insisted the two essential ingredients of U.S. security—resources and resolve—had been lacking. Invoking the “forever war” of his day, Reagan took the politically perilous position of denouncing Vietnam syndrome, which made peace a euphemism for defeat and saw winning as an unattainable goal. Instead, Reagan argued that “we must have the means and the determination to prevail or we will not have what it takes to secure the peace.”

Critics dismissed Reagan’s rhetoric. Defense Secretary Harold Brown rejected the approach as “unrealistic, simplistic, dangerous.” This was the prevailing orthodoxy of the time. But now history speaks to us unambiguously. Reagan was right: Timidity often cloaks itself in foreign-policy realism. Restoring the margin of strength produced true peace.

Today’s challenges are no doubt more complex, in part because China poses economic and security risks. Still, the solutions Reagan offered should be no less compelling. Yet 42 years later, leaders in both parties seem eager to make common cause with the detente-pushing realists, assuming that an aggressive Russia and a rising China are merely the facts of life in the 21st century.

Even with a bipartisan consensus that China is America’s pre-eminent security challenge and that Russia is a dangerous adversary, many in both parties wonder whether the U.S. has the economic and political strength to prevail against China while sustaining its security leadership in Europe and the Middle East.

There is good reason to wonder. The past three administrations have failed to expand and modernize the U.S. military sufficiently, and lawmakers seem more inclined to let the status quo calcify than to change course—no matter how predictable the results. This year’s security convulsions over Taiwan and Ukraine haven’t prompted a Reaganesque response. Yet we know from Russia’s 2014 invasion of Crimea that tolerating aggression encourages more aggression.

Billions of dollars in security support to Ukraine and the strong bipartisan vote for Sweden’s and Finland’s accession to the North Atlantic Treaty Organization demonstrate a general U.S. belief in checking Russia and strengthening security in Europe. But the Biden administration has fallen short of committing to restore Ukraine to the preinvasion status quo, while voices on the far right parrot Russian propaganda justifying Vladimir Putin’s atrocities. In Asia, the president has made America’s longstanding policy of “strategic ambiguity” seem anything but strategic.

Making matters worse, inflation effectively shrinks the defense budget, making it even more difficult for the military to sustain today’s force and modernize for tomorrow. Congress and the administration need to bolster these budgets significantly. As President Reagan showed, it is far better to spend now to prevent a war than to spend later to fight one.

To meet this moment, we need defense investment along the lines of what the Reagan administration pursued: roughly 5% to 6% of gross domestic product annually. To those who say we can’t afford a buildup without sacrificing our prosperity, Reagan’s response from four decades ago still rings true: “Our government must stop pretending that it has a choice between promoting the general welfare and providing for the common defense. Today they are one and the same.”

Refusing to provide the resolve and resources to win isn’t new. The country has been here before. Then as now, the timid, complacent and self-centered will retreat to the comfort of “realism.” But to achieve true deterrence, not false detente, look to the reality of history. It compels us to restore the margin of safety.

Mr. Zakheim is director of the Reagan Institute in Washington. He served as deputy staff director of the House Armed Services Committee (2009-13) and deputy assistant secretary of defense (2008-09).

8. The ‘MacGyvered’ Weapons in Ukraine’s Arsenal

Excerpt:

“The activities in the Crimean Peninsula likely mark a new phase in the war with the Ukrainians going on the offensive with an irregular warfare campaign designed to push Russia from an area they were sure was secure,” said Mick Mulroy, a former Pentagon official and C.I.A. officer.

The ‘MacGyvered’ Weapons in Ukraine’s Arsenal

The Ukrainian military has battled Russia with retrofitted equipment, including missiles and rocket systems mounted on trucks and speedboats, experts and officials say.

By Helene Cooper and Eric Schmitt

Aug. 28, 2022

nytimes.com · August 28, 2022

A satellite image shows the damage after a Ukrainian strike on the Saki airfield in Crimea. Eight Russian fighter jets were destroyed.Credit...Planet Labs, via Associated Press

WASHINGTON — The billions of dollars in military aid the United States has sent Ukraine includes some of the most advanced and lethal weapons systems in the world. But Ukraine has also scored big successes in the war by employing the weapons and equipment in unexpected ways, and jury-rigging some on the fly, according to military experts.

From the sinking of the Moskva, Russia’s Black Sea flagship, in April to the attack on a Russian air base in Crimea this month, Ukrainian troops have used American and other weapons in ways few expected, the experts and Defense Department officials say.

By mounting missiles onto trucks, for instance, Ukrainian forces have moved them more quickly into firing range. By putting rocket systems on speedboats, they have increased their naval warfare ability. And to the astonishment of weapons experts, Ukraine has continued to destroy Russian targets with slow-moving Turkish-made Bayraktar attack drones and inexpensive, plastic aircraft modified to drop grenades and other munitions.

“People are using the MacGyver metaphor,” said Frederick B. Hodges, a former top U.S. Army commander in Europe, in a reference to the 1980s TV show in which the title character uses simple, improvised contraptions to get himself out of sticky situations.

After six months of war, the death toll on both sides is high: While American officials estimate that up to 80,000 Russian troops have been killed or wounded, Ukraine’s outgunned military has said it is losing 100 to 200 troops a day. Even so, the engineering ingenuity of the Ukrainians lies in stark contrast to the slow, plodding, doctrinal nature of the Russian advance.

In the attack on the Moskva, for example, the Ukrainians developed their own anti-ship missile, called the Neptune, which they based on the design of an old Soviet anti-ship missile, but with substantially improved range and electronics. They appear to have mounted the Neptune missiles onto one or more trucks, according to one senior American official, and moved them within range of the ship, which was around 75 miles from Odesa. The striking of the Moskva was, in essence, the Neptune’s proof of concept; it was the first time the new Ukrainian weapon was used in an actual war, and it took down Russia’s flagship in the Black Sea.

“With the Moskva, they MacGyvered a very effective anti-ship system that they put on the back of a truck to make it mobile and move it around,” General Hodges, who is now a senior adviser at Human Rights First, said in an interview.

Ukrainian troops have done so well with the Bayraktar drone, in fact, that the company’s chief executive, Haluk Bayraktar, praised their ability to “squeeze as much as possible out of these systems,” in a recent interview with a Ukrainian news program. American military officials remain puzzled by why Russia’s many-layered air defense systems have not been more effective in stopping the drones, which have no self-defense systems, are easily spotted by radar and cruise at only about 80 miles an hour.

A senior Pentagon official said Ukrainian forces had put American-supplied HARM anti-radiation missiles on Soviet-designed MiG-29 fighter jets — something that no air force had ever done. The American HARM missile, designed to seek and destroy Russian air defense radar, is not usually compatible with the MiG-29 or the other fighter jets in Ukraine’s arsenal.

The State of the War

What Is Next?: After six months of fighting, the war seems to have settled into an impasse on the battlefield. Here is how the next stage of the war might shape up.
Nuclear Plant Standoff: As renewed shelling intensified fears about a nuclear accident at the Zaporizhzhia power plant, the United Nations neared a plan to send inspectors to the Russian-controlled station.
Russia’s Military Expansion: President Vladimir V. Putin ordered a sharp increase in the size of Russia’s armed forces, a sign that he expects a prolonged war — an outcome Ukraine has incentive to avoid.
Poking the Bear: On the battlefield and on social media, Ukraine’s leadership is regularly goading its antagonist, driven by a newfound military confidence, the need to rally support and the desire to unnerve the enemy.

Ukraine managed to rejigger targeting sensors to allow pilots to fire the American missile from their Soviet-era aircraft. “They have actually successfully integrated it,” the senior official told reporters during a Pentagon briefing. He spoke on the condition of anonymity per Biden administration rules.

Officials say the missiles can target Russian air defense systems up to 93 miles away.

The craftiness is now on display in Crimea. In recent weeks, Ukraine has targeted the Black Sea peninsula, which Russia illegally annexed in 2014, in a series of attacks.

In the strike on the Russian air base, Ukrainian forces destroyed eight fighter jets. A few days later, clandestine Ukrainian fighters operating behind enemy lines hit several sites in the occupied territory that Russia had thought were safe, including ammunition depots and supply lines.

What we consider before using anonymous sources. How do the sources know the information? What’s their motivation for telling us? Have they proved reliable in the past? Can we corroborate the information? Even with these questions satisfied, The Times uses anonymous sources as a last resort. The reporter and at least one editor know the identity of the source.

Then, blasts hit a military airfield outside Sevastopol, the largest city in Crimea and home to Russia’s Black Sea Fleet. Russia claimed that the booms from the strike were the sound of successful antiaircraft fire.

“The Ukrainians are able to exploit their knowledge in the area,” said Dara Massicot, a senior policy researcher with the RAND Corporation.

This exploitation is rooted in Ukraine’s history as the heart of the former Soviet Union’s defense industry. For decades, Ukraine was the place where the Soviet Union — and then Russia — developed turbines for warships, tanks and even aircraft, like the Antonov An-124, which is one of the largest cargo planes in the world and is used by Russia to transport weapons to Ukraine.

American military commanders who have worked with Ukrainian troops say that the Ukrainians are always ready to improvise.

General Hodges said he noticed “on a tactical level how clever Ukrainians were” when he worked with them in 2013 and 2014. He said the adaptation of the American-supplied HARM missiles to work on MiGs demonstrated the depth of technological know-how in Ukraine’s military.

“You can’t just hang any kind of rocket off of any kind of plane — there’s a whole lot of avionics and other aspects of flying and high-performance aircraft that are involved here,” he said. “And they did it.”

The attacks in Crimea underscore Ukraine’s increasingly aggressive military tactics, as the government in Kyiv has relied on special forces and local partisan fighters to strike deep behind the front, disrupt Russian supply lines and counter Russia’s advantages in arms and equipment.

American officials say the United States has provided detailed intelligence to help Ukraine’s forces attack Russian targets throughout the war. But Ukraine conducted the first of the recent strikes in Crimea — a series of blasts at the Saki military airfield on Aug. 9 — without notifying American and other Western allies in advance, officials said.

Indeed, one American official later briefed on the attacks said Ukrainian commandos and partisan fighters had used an improvised array of weapons, explosives and tactics in the strikes.

“It’s all homegrown,” the official said, speaking on the condition of anonymity to discuss operational details. “We did not get any advance notice.”

That first strike at the airfield destroyed much of the air power and munitions stores of the Black Sea Fleet’s 43rd naval aviation regiment. It was also intended to have a psychological impact on Russian forces in Crimea, the U.S. official said, calling it the “Doolittle Effect,” a reference to an American attack on Japan in World War II.

The bomber raid led by Lt. Col. James H. Doolittle was a low-level daylight attack in April 1942 that resulted in only light damage to military and industrial targets. But it buoyed an American home front reeling from a string of setbacks in the Pacific, beginning with the Pearl Harbor attack on Dec. 7, 1941. It also shattered the idea that Japan was invulnerable to American air attacks, as its government had claimed.

In a Telegram post after the Saki strike, Andriy Tsaplienko, a Ukrainian military journalist, said the damage suggested that a truck-mounted heavy missile launcher called the Grim, or Sapsan, had been used in the attack. That system was developed by Yuzhmash, a state-owned Ukrainian aerospace manufacturer. The Kremlin, however, rejected the possibility that a Ukrainian-made ballistic missile system had anything to do with it.

“The activities in the Crimean Peninsula likely mark a new phase in the war with the Ukrainians going on the offensive with an irregular warfare campaign designed to push Russia from an area they were sure was secure,” said Mick Mulroy, a former Pentagon official and C.I.A. officer.

nytimes.com · August 28, 2022

9. The Army wants exoskeletons so soldiers can defeat their worst enemy: Lower back pain

The Army wants exoskeletons so soldiers can defeat their worst enemy: Lower back pain

“Wearing the suit really helped a lot, especially with getting the rounds out of the back of the truck. It felt like it gave me an extra boost.”

BY DAVID ROZA | PUBLISHED AUG 26, 2022 5:48 PM

taskandpurpose.com · by David Roza · August 26, 2022

Between heavy rucksacks, heavy equipment and heavy weapons, military life can be a real pain in the backside. In fact, the Army had an average of 460 diagnoses of back overuse every day in 2019, according to the Army Public Health Center, and lumbar spine injuries accounted for more than a million lost duty days in 2018, according to the journal Military Medicine.

Don’t reach for your aspirin just yet, though. The Army is testing out a lightweight exoskeleton that soldiers say is helping them lift heavy loads more easily and without as much fatigue as they are used to.

“Over the course of the day, lifting 60-pound rounds you get worn out, especially after hours. It takes a toll on your body,” said Pfc. Dale Paulson, of the 101st Airborne Division, in a recent press release. “Wearing the suit really helped a lot, especially with getting the rounds out of the back of the truck. It felt like it gave me an extra boost. I didn’t have to work as hard. I feel like it helped me move quicker.”

The Army describes the new device as a “soft, lightweight, unpowered exoskeleton” and calls it the Soldier Assistive Bionic Exosuit for Resupply, or SABER for short. And although the word ‘exosuit’ or ‘exoskeleton’ brings to mind images of Iron Man or the big forklift robot from Aliens, that might be too ambitious at this point. In fact, it might not even be necessary.

“We didn’t try to create Iron Man — a complex, full-body, rigid, unrealistic suit,” said Dr. Karl Zelik, associate professor of mechanical engineering at Vanderbilt University, who worked with the Army to test out the exosuits. “Instead, we started by deeply understanding soldier needs to develop a lightweight, low-profile, non-powered wearable tool that helps provide much-needed assistance without slowing soldiers down or interfering with other operational tasks.”

In fact, judging by the photos, the exosuit looks less like sci-fi power armor and more like a glorified harness. The Army is working with a company called HeroWear, which makes exosuits for commercial use, to develop the new exoskeleton, which uses passive-elastic bands to take up much of the force needed to move objects that otherwise would all be dumped on the human body.

Though it weighs just 3 pounds, SABER reduced stress on soldiers’ backs by more than 100 pounds while lifting objects, and it increased their endurance by over 60 percent, according to Vanderbilt.

Soldiers test out the Soldier Assistive Bionic Exosuit for Resupply, or SABER, an unpowered exoskeleton meant to reduce lower back injuries and help soldiers with heavy loads. (Larry McCormack/Army)

“The suits have really been helping, especially on the lower back area with all the heavy lifting we’ve been doing,” said another 101st Airborne Division soldier, Sgt. Alfredo Vela, during a hard day’s work lifting his unit’s howitzer, moving it to various locations, digging into the dirt and practicing fire missions.

“I really appreciate it, knowing that there is an exterior force out of the military that is designing this equipment to help us better ourselves and do our job better,” he added.

Subscribe to Task & Purpose Today. Get the latest military news, entertainment, and gear in your inbox daily.

Vela isn’t alone in his approval of the new exoskeleton. According to the Army, 90 percent of soldiers surveyed after operational field testing in May believed the exosuit “increased their ability to perform job tasks, and all of them reported that they would be likely to wear it for their job if it were developed into a product and made available to them.”

The Army has been looking for an exoskeleton system for a long time. But while science fiction often emphasizes powered armor used on the front lines to smash walls and deflect bullets, the Army’s ideal system would let soldiers “do their regular job easier than they can do it right now,” Ted Maciuba, deputy director for robotic requirements at Maneuver Capability Development Integration Directorate for Army Futures Command, said in 2020.

“More ammunition, heavier weapons … we’re making the individual soldier in small units more effective,” he said.

Of course, the U.S. military has also looked into more science-fiction style suits. In particular, Special Operations Command pursued a Tactical Assault Light Operator Suit, TALOS for short, which could withstand direct fire from small arms; manage heavy loads, provide biomedical monitoring and thermoregulation and a heads-up display with intelligence and operational data. After about five years of work, the project led to many effective subsystems, like advanced new body armor, an augmented reality heads-up display, and a lower-body exoskeleton. But in February 2019, Special Operations Command announced it had no intent to field a TALOS combat suit and the project ended.

Three years later, there may yet be hope for TALOS, or a project like it. Maciuba told Defense News in June that the Army could build a “Warrior Suit,” by 2040-ish, but the way to get there would be paved with “baby steps.”

Soldiers test out the Soldier Assistive Bionic Exosuit for Resupply, or SABER, an unpowered exoskeleton meant to reduce lower back injuries and help soldiers with heavy loads. (Larry McCormack/Army)

Even without bullet-proof armor or heads-up displays, the value of light equipment that can help service members lift heavy loads cannot be overstated. And it’s not just the military that wants exoskeletons for that purpose.

“The weaponized, sci-fi-sexy version is always going to get more attention, but the logistics side has always had an actual commercial equivalent driving it forward,” Peter Singer, a strategist for the New America Foundation and author of the novel Ghost Fleet, told Task & Purpose in 2020. “There’s always been that R&D work related to the construction field and other private-sector projects, and that’s what we’re still drawing on. We’ll end up seeing this in non-combat applications first.”

The same goes for HeroWear, which hopes its technology will be adopted by construction, manufacturing, agriculture, logistics and other industries as well as the military. In the meantime, the Army is providing funding to HeroWear to make “dozens of pre-production units in late 2022, with the goal to ramp up to hundreds of units in 2023,” the Army wrote. If the tests this summer are any guide, they will be well-received.

“It felt really great. A lot of support, especially on the back,” said Spc. Marrero Rivera, of the 101st Airborne Division. Marrero explained that he is part of a distribution unit where he moves ammo and equipment all day.

“I felt way safer… It will help me prevent future injuries,” he said. “So this is definitely something we could really use, especially for lifting boxes, hoses and all the other heavy equipment that we are constantly moving.”

The latest on Task & Purpose

Millions of troops cry out in horror as Dodge announces end of the Charger and Challenger
An Air Force captain with top secret security clearance vanished. He resurfaced 35 years later
Charges reinstated against Navy Corpsman in case of Green Beret contractor killed in Iraq
The Army wants you to skip ‘entry-level’ civilian jobs and be an officer instead
The Air Force published an entire photo album of mustachioed troops and it’s glorious

Want to write for Task & Purpose? Click here. Or check out the latest stories on our homepage.

taskandpurpose.com · by David Roza · August 26, 2022

10. After the Next War: The U.S. must Grasp the Reality of Sustained Competition

Excerpt:

The primary question for American strategists must be: can the U.S. win this sort of war? Could Taiwan be traded for time?

After the Next War

By Seth Cropsey

August 29, 20

https://www.realcleardefense.com/articles/2022/08/29/after_the_next_war_850530.html?mc_cid=d40fb49c22

The U.S. must Grasp the Reality of Sustained Competition

The Fourth Taiwan Strait Crisis is in full swing. The PLA has continued its military exercises after Speaker Pelosi’s departure from Taiwan, the PRC has imposed targeted sanctions upon Taiwan. Beijing’s diplomatic service and propaganda outlets compete to emphasize the overwhelming response that Taiwan and the West will suffer if Beijing’s demands are not met. Beijing’s demands, of course, cannot be met. Hence, we are headed for a cross-strait confrontation, sooner rather than later, likely before the early 2030s, and possibly sooner depending upon American political events.

As it stands, the cross-strait military balance is relatively even. However, we must reckon with the worst-case scenario: a decisive Chinese attack succeeds. China achieves its coup de main. Moreover, given China’s likely strategy, the U.S. cannot respond immediately – its only options are the cession of Taiwan and a new Pacific demarcation line or a multi-year Pacific war.

The primary question for American strategists must be: can the U.S. win this sort of war? Could Taiwan be traded for time?

First, China’s plan of attack against Taiwan should be recognized. It is not a long-term blockade that erodes Taiwanese economic capacity until some months later the lights go out. Certainly, the PLA’s recent exercises simulated a blockade, and a blockade would likely be an element of a Chinese invasion plan: as historical parallels demonstrate, sea and air control are prerequisites to a successful amphibious assault.

However, Taiwan is not Cuba, and the PRC is not the U.S. in 1962. The American “Quarantine,” a blockade by another name, successfully isolated Cuba from additional Soviet nuclear transfers. Yet the conventional balance gave the blockade teeth. The Soviet Union was incapable of challenging an American blockade without horizontal escalation, that is, the East German capture of West Berlin or some other European military pressure, which was likely to trigger an American nuclear response. Hence the crisis was one of nerve, not of actual power. By contrast, while the PLA could blockade Taiwan without attacking it, the U.S. could challenge that blockade with an air-naval escort mission. This puts China in a worse position than simply attacking: the U.S. would use the blockade as a valuable war warning, surging forces to the Indo-Pacific and encouraging allies to prepare for combat.

More likely than a gradual approach is a decisive, violent action to overwhelm Taiwanese resistance. This would involve a major missile barrage, blockade, and an air-heliborne assault followed by an amphibious landing and traditional combined-arms land combat. All the while, cyber-attacks and saboteurs will seek to disrupt Taiwanese cohesion. Unlike Russia, which constructed a display of military power that it believed would shock its opponents out of the war, the PLA would likely use extreme violence to resolve the conflict as rapidly as possible, or at least to reduce Taiwanese resistance and force Taiwan into an attritional war that relies on Western support.

The issue of support, like in Ukraine, is key. Hence second, it is essential to see that the PLA will strike American and allied targets almost immediately. China likely lacks the power to execute a Pearl Harbor style first-strike against American naval centers of gravity. However, the PLA can hit targets throughout the Western Pacific, including Kadena Air Base on Okinawa and Yokosuka Naval Base. It will attack deployed American Carrier or Expeditionary Strike Groups in the Philippine Sea and may hit Guam and even bases in Australia. China’s objective is to isolate the battlefield—if the U.S.’ logistical capabilities and air-naval forces are degraded, the PLA has a shot at simply overwhelming Taiwan.

A properly executed first move would not eliminate American combat power. Within days, the U.S. could deploy its forward-based submarines to the Taiwan Strait that would hit PLA transports ferrying troops to Taiwan, and potentially shuttle long-range bombers to the Western Pacific to conduct standoff strikes. Within a week, the U.S. could blockade the Malacca and Lombok Straits, a move to which China would have no counter apart from nuclear use or a long attritional conflict. The U.S. could impose all manner of sanctions upon China, while a global economic meltdown destroyed both economies. Over several months, the U.S. could mass combat power and slowly roll back Chinese gains.

However, if the PLA can limit the U.S.’ ability to intervene directly for weeks to months, it may be able to “lock in” its gains over Taiwan. This conquest, presented as a fait accompli may be sufficient to cut short American intervention, particularly if timed with an American domestic crisis. The CCP’s Ministry of State Security, alongside the Russian SVR, could supercharge civil violence, either manufacturing violence to accelerate an internal incident or aiding and abetting those domestic forces who seek to upset the peace. In the autumn of 2024, for example, it is quite conceivable that another riot wave could sweep through U.S. urban areas for any manner of reasons, and that the losing party in the 2024 presidential election contests the result, regardless of the candidate. Similarly, limited American military stockpiles, combined with divided American strategic attention in Europe, may reduce the U.S.’ ability to fight. Faced with the prospect of a long, hard slog in the Western Pacific, and fighting from a near-term disadvantage, the U.S. could refuse to act—although ideally it would welcome Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturer Company’s researchers and destroy its fabrication facilities to prevent them from falling into Chinese hands.

Chinese victory over Taiwan, however, does not guarantee Chinese dominance in the Indo-Pacific. Historically, systemic power transitions take at least two conflicts. Pre 19^th century confrontations took longer, although one might explain this given the lesser power of states at the time. However, post 18^th century power transitions nevertheless take two conflicts. Defeating Napoleon required two separate periods of war. Two wars broke Germany. The Cold War had two distinct competitive phases. While pre-modern trends may differ, the Peloponnesian War, the first thoroughly recorded example of a power transition in the Western world, took two separate conflicts to be resolved.

Taking Taiwan would strengthen the CCP’s strategic position, but not give it regional hegemony. Taiwan would serve as an effective base for power-projection into the Philippine Sea—as it did for Imperial Japan. Chinese submarines and aircraft could operate east of Taiwan, making greater Chinese naval presence in the central Pacific, or direct pressure on Japan, viable. China’s fundamental strategic issue, however, would remain unresolved. Even with Taiwan’s capture, the PLA would not be able to break a Malacca blockade without overwhelming escalation. The CCP, therefore, would still have its work cut out for it.

Could the U.S. prevail in a second confrontation? Quite possibly if it manages a post-Taiwan conflict economic meltdown well enough, expands its defense production, and keeps its alliance system intact. But this war, is far broader in scope, and therefore far more dangerous. As it stands, the PLA has only limited ability to push beyond the First Island Chain. War in the Central Pacific would be much bloodier than in the Western Pacific.

Better to prevent a U.S.-PRC war from reaching a second phase. This requires deterring a first one, which in turn means ending the U.S. policy of strategic ambiguity about Taiwan’s defense—and assisting Taiwan robustly to forestall an attack.

Seth Cropsey is founder and president of Yorktown Institute. He served as a naval officer and as deputy Undersecretary of the Navy and is the author of Mayday and Seablindness.

11. This Picture Is How China Plans to Beat America If World War III Breaks Out

Please go to the website to view the photo. https://www.19fortyfive.com/2022/08/this-picture-is-how-china-plans-to-beat-america-if-world-war-iii-breaks-out/

This Picture Is How China Plans to Beat America If World War III Breaks Out

19fortyfive.com · by Peter Suciu · August 28, 2022

Various experts for over a decade have warned that China’s missile forces have been built up dramatically to ensure that the U.S. Navy would be hit hard if war ever broke out. Indeed, you could even call China a missile superpower:

In the last couple of years, there has been a lot of attention on the build-up of China’s People’s Liberation Army Navy (PLAN). It has undergone a major modernization effort and is now the largest naval force in the world. Just last month, the PLAN launched its third aircraft carrier – the second to be entirely indigenously built. This will allow China to flex its muscles in the Indo-Pacific region and beyond.

Likewise, there has been great speculation regarding China’s efforts to develop a capable fifth-generation fighter aircraft and a medium- to long-range stealth bomber. In very short order, Beijing has finally made the great leap forward to become a major world power.

Yet, largely overshadowed by the ships and aircraft are China’s efforts to increase its missile capabilities. These efforts haven’t been ignored, it is simply a matter of fact that Beijing appears to be focused on multiple projects in a way that would have seemed impossible just a decade ago.

As a RAND Corp. study noted, China’s People’s Liberation Army (PLA) has transformed itself from a larger but antiquated force into a capable, modern military. What should be worrisome for Washington is the rate at which China has closed the gap, and there is a very serious risk that Beijing could overtake the United States.

Rocketing Ahead

A 2020 report from the United States Department of Defense (DoD) warned that China’s land-based conventional missile capabilities have also developed significantly over the past two decades. In the early 2000s, China’s missile forces were generally short-range with modest accuracy.

However, in the years since, China has developed the world’s “largest and most diverse” arsenal of ground-launched ballistic and cruise missiles – fielding multiple new missile systems in recent years. Many of those missiles are also capable of carrying both conventional and nuclear payloads.

The Success of Red Capitalism

China has been able to fund these multiple projects thanks largely to its booming economy. That explosive growth has resulted in significantly larger defense budgets, which in turn have funded the development of many new military systems – including ballistic and cruise missiles.

Even with its rapid expansion, China’s missile forces are, for the most part, not near parity with the United States. Beijing has fewer nuclear-armed missiles than the United States, and it has fewer conventionally-armed missiles as well.

However, one area where Chinese missiles have been able to exceed those of the United States has been with land-based medium- and intermediate-range ballistic missiles. It is a type of weapon that was banned by the Intermediate-range Nuclear Forces Treaty signed by the United States and the Soviet Union near the end of the Cold War. In fact, the United States and Russia were strictly prohibited from actually developing missiles of the class due to the 1987 missile treaty.

Hypersonic Missiles

Another area where the United States has already fallen behind China – as well as Russia – is in the development of hypersonic missiles. Last August, China reportedly tested a nuclear-capable hypersonic glide vehicle that could circle the globe in low-orbit space.

Though it missed its target by about two-dozen miles, experts still warned that China had made astounding progress on hypersonic weapons, and at this point, its efforts are far more advanced than the United States had realized.

New Missile Silos

What is especially worrisome is that newly released satellite images have revealed that China is building a second nuclear missile silo field. This would be in addition to the 120 missile silos already under construction near Yumen in Gansu province. The second missile silo field is located 380 km (240 miles) northwest of the Yumen field, near the prefecture-level city of Hami in Eastern Xinjiang. The silos are reported to be for the DF-41 Intercontinental Ballistic Missile (ICBM), which is believed to be capable of carrying multiple nuclear warheads – perhaps up to 10 warheads. The missiles have an estimated range of 7,000 km (4,350 miles) – allowing them to reach targets in the United States. These are in addition to the force of approximately 100 road-mobile ICBM launchers that the People’s Liberation Army Rocket Force (PLARF) has in its arsenal.

U.S. researchers have warned that China is expanding its nuclear force in part to maintain a deterrent that would be able to survive a U.S. first strike and even be able to retaliate in sufficient numbers to defeat U.S. missile defenses.

China is truly rocketing its way towards being a missile superpower.

Expert Biography: A Senior Editor for 1945, Peter Suciu is a Michigan-based writer who has contributed to more than four dozen magazines, newspapers and websites. He regularly writes about military hardware, firearms history, cybersecurity and international affairs. Peter is also a Contributing Writer for Forbes.

19fortyfive.com · by Peter Suciu · August 28, 2022

12. Russian dirty dancing with Sanna Marin

I had not heard this or seen any other reports on this. But I would not be surprised.

Perhaps the way to counter this is for all of us to treat her by the same standard by which a male national leader would be treated. A positive outcome would be the elimination of the double standards.

Russian dirty dancing with Sanna Marin

euractiv.com · by Orhan Dragaš · August 29, 2022

The leaked private footage from the Finnish Prime Minister’s party is the Russian secret services counter-strike on Helsinki after the country decided to join NATO, suggests Orhan Dragaš.

Orhan Dragaš is the founder and director of the International Security Institute based in Belgrade.

In May, the Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman, Maria Zakharova, threatened Finland and said that Russia would respond if the neighbour joined NATO and that their response would be a “surprise”. Before that, she threatened with “serious military consequences”, saying that Finland “knows what its entry into NATO will lead to”.

And? Finland is joining NATO, and Russia retaliated, as it previously announced, with a surprise. Leaked private footage from the Finnish Prime Minister’s party is the Kremlin’s counter-strike on Helsinki; it is the response of one of the world’s largest military and intelligence powers (in its own opinion) that has been announced for months.

The heir of the KGB’s great murderous machine, Putin’s FSB, today deals with hacking the private phones of Sanna Marin’s friends with whom she has fun in her free time and at her own expense.

The attempt to expose Sanna Marin having fun is the maximum damage the announced Russian counterattack can cause to Finland. That is the extent of the ability of today’s Russian military and intelligence complex to influence foreign governments, their decisions and their fate.

What did Russia want with this? Russia wanted to discredit the leader of a crucial EU and NATO member to the extent of destabilising its government and causing its downfall. Thus, Finland would join several countries from the EU and NATO that, for various reasons, but mainly due to the consequences of the invasion of Ukraine, were left without a government (Britain, Italy, Bulgaria), or their leaders were left without majority support (France).

It was necessary to “hit” Finland because while the invasion of Ukraine continues, it is still a living symbol of resistance to Russia, a historical shame for its expansionist goals. In addition, Sanna Marin personally symbolises the opposite image of the world from the one that Russia sees as a model.

She is a young, hardworking, successful European capable of making strategic decisions for her nation. She is a symbol of a new generation of leaders who understand the 21st century because they have matured in it and are shaping it to a great extent.

And finally, she is a woman. The Kremlin and Lubyanka cannot stand any of this, particularly the last one. They cannot stand anything that Sanna Marin and, for example, Estonian Prime Minister Kaja Kallas symbolise.

Their leadership, and especially their charisma, is intolerable for Russian ethical and aesthetical standards, with models like half-naked Putin riding a bear and for the older generation, Brezhnev kissing Erich Honecker on the mouth. That’s why their “revenge” against Sanna Marin was personal, and that’s why it failed.

The Finnish Prime Minister managed the crisis she got into superbly. She adhered to a sacred rule that many of her colleagues ignore – she was honest and open, didn’t hide anything and thus managed to turn the problem into a quality.

Against the moral panic raised by the opposition politicians, she fought and won by reminding them that she has not neglected any of her duties and that she considers having fun normal behaviour for anyone her age. And really, what would you think of a 36-year-old who doesn’t want to have fun? You certainly wouldn’t trust such a person to run anything, let alone a country.

Sanna Marin received massive support from the European public, less from her colleagues among European leaders. Their silence is shameful, not only because they did not extend their solidarity, but because they indirectly gave wind to the dirty operation of bringing discord into the unity of the Western military and political alliance. Remaining silent on the accusations against Sanna Marin was not “non-interference” in petty, tabloid scandals from which no European leader is immune.

That was the clear attitude of an ossified bureaucratic Europe, which would cover up its corrupt operations and hide bad behaviour, even at the cost of leaving power. It is a pyramid of hypocrisy, where there’s understanding for Boris Johnson’s lockdown parties and, before that his “partying” in Italy with the Kremlin oligarch Evgeny Lebedev.

There’s also understanding for Emmanuel Macron’s appeals to help Putin “save face” by having Ukraine pay with part of its territory. In that structure, there is always tolerance for the reluctance of Germany and Olaf Scholz to break business and energy ties with the Kremlin.

It was possible for Karin Kneissl, the lady at whose wedding only four years ago, Vladimir Putin was a special guest, to become the head of an important European diplomacy (Austrian). In the end, in this structure, it is quite realistic that Silvio Berlusconi, the champion of corruption scandals, who has never apologised for his ‘bunga bunga’ adventures with minors, returns to politics.

There’s simply no room for Sanna Marin here, and it’s a good thing that’s the case. Her defence was also the defence of a strong and free Europe against the invasion of the ruined Russian war machine.

It was also the defence of common sense in European politics against decades of hypocrisy, corruption, sexism and dirty dancing with Putin’s Russia. Unfortunately, this will not be the final victory of the Finnish prime minister and everything she represents.

In addition to her and Kaja Kallas, other young and energetic European leaders are ready to lead their nations differently than their predecessors. Some of them will soon be under attack again, but Sanna Marin has already set a precedent and paved the way for future similar diversions to be doomed. Saying that she will “continue to be the same person as she has been until now”, she declared her own and all future victories.

The worst thing that could happen now, after all the attacks on her and the tears she’s shed, is for Sanna Marin to succumb to self-censorship and stop having fun. That would be the victory of a malignant cocktail of politics, corruption, sexism and conservatism. The main ingredient, the base of this cocktail, is, of course, vodka.

euractiv.com · by Orhan Dragaš · August 29, 2022

13. US Coast Guard cutter is denied entry in Solomon Islands

Excerpts:

China has been assertively trying to expand its presence and influence in the Pacific, and Solomon Islands Prime Minister Manasseh Sogavare alarmed some neighbors, the U.S. and others after he signed a new security pact with China.

The pact has raised fears of a Chinese naval base being established within 1,200 miles off the Australia's northeast coast.

US Coast Guard cutter is denied entry in Solomon Islands

US Coast Guard cutter is denied entry into the Guadalcanal port in the Solomon Islands stoking fears over China's growing influence in the Pacific

Cutter Oliver Henry was trying to make a scheduled stop at Guadalcanal, Solomon Islands, to refuel and re-provision, when it was denied entry
The cutter had been taking part in Operation Island Chief monitoring fishing activities in the Pacific, which ended on Friday
There was no response from the Solomon Islands' government for diplomatic clearance for the vessel to make a stop there
The Oliver Henry was then diverted to Papua New Guinea, the Coast Guard said
Coast Guard said the U.S. State Department is in touch with the Solomon Islands government and they 'expect all future clearances will be provided to U.S. ships'

By ANDREA CAVALLIER FOR DAILYMAIL.COM and ASSOCIATED PRESS

PUBLISHED: 10:59 EDT, 28 August 2022 | UPDATED: 11:08 EDT, 28 August 2022

Daily Mail · by Andrea Cavallier For Dailymail.Com · August 28, 2022

A U.S. coast guard cutter conducting patrols as part of an international mission to prevent illegal fishing was unable to get clearance for a scheduled port call in the Solomon Islands - an incident that comes amid growing concerns of Chinese influence on the Pacific nation.

The cutter Oliver Henry was taking part in Operation Island Chief monitoring fishing activities in the Pacific, which ended Friday, when it sought to make a scheduled stop at Guadalcanal, Solomon Islands, to refuel and re-provision, the Coast Guard office in Honolulu said.

There was no response from the Solomon Islands' government for diplomatic clearance for the vessel to stop there, however, so the Oliver Henry diverted to Papua New Guinea, the Coast Guard said.

China has been assertively trying to expand its presence and influence in the Pacific, and Solomon Islands Prime Minister Manasseh Sogavare alarmed some neighbors, the U.S. and others after he signed a new security pact with China.

The pact has raised fears of a Chinese naval base being established within 1,200 miles off the Australia's northeast coast.

The cutter USCGC Oliver Henry is pictured at the Port Moresby on August 23. On Friday, it sought to make a scheduled stop at Guadalcanal, Solomon Islands, to refuel and re-provision, but was denied entry, the Coast Guard office in Honolulu said

The move comes after Solomon Islands Prime Minister Manasseh Sogavare alarmed some after he signed a new security pact with China. Pictured: Solomon Islands Prime Minister Manasseh Sogavare, right, locks arms with visiting Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi in 2022

When the stop in Solomon Islands had been scheduled wasn't disclosed, but the Coast Guard said the Oliver Henry had arrived in Port Moresby, Papua New Guinea, on Tuesday 'following a patrol in parts of the Coral Sea and the Solomon Islands.'

Britain's Royal Navy did not comment directly on reports that the HMS Spey, also taking part in Operation Island Chief, was also denied a port call in Solomon Islands.

'Ships' programs are under constant review, and it is routine practice for them to change,' the Royal Navy said in an emailed statement.

'For reasons of operational security we do not discuss details. The Royal Navy looks forward to visiting the Solomon Islands at a later date.'

During Operation Island Chief, the U.S., Australia, Britain and New Zealand provided support through aerial and surface surveillance for Pacific island nations participating in the operation, including Solomon Islands.

A Chinese military presence in the Solomon Islands would put it not only on the doorstep of Australia and New Zealand but also in close proximity to Guam, the U.S. territory that hosts major military bases.

Chinese's influence and control in the Solomon Islands is growing following the signing of a bilateral security pact. Pictured is Chinese President Xi Jinping in July 2022

The pact has raised fears of a Chinese naval base being established within 1,200 miles off the Australia's northeast coast

Both the Solomon Islands and China have denied their pact will lead to a Chinese military foothold in the South Pacific.

Sogavare also raised eyebrows earlier in August when he skipped a memorial service marking the anniversary of the Battle of Guadalcanal, a key battle in World War II in which American and other allied forces wrested control of the islands from Imperial Japan.

U.S. Deputy Secretary of State Wendy Sherman, whose father was wounded during the Guadalcanal campaign and who attended the memorial, said Sogavare 'missed an important opportunity' by failing to attend.

U.S. Sen. Marsha Blackburn met with Sogavare in the Solomon Islands on Wednesday but it was not clear whether she raised the issue of the Coast Guard's refused port call.

The U.S. coast guard cutter (pictured here last week at Port Moresby) was conducting patrols last week as part of an international mission to prevent illegal fishing when it was denied entry

The Tennessee Republican said in a statement on her website that her visit to the Solomon Islands as well as Fiji and Papua New Guinea 'was an important step in showcasing America's commitment to the region and expanding our strategic relationships.'

The Coast Guard, in the statement from Honolulu, said it respects the sovereignty of its foreign partners and looks forward to future engagement with Solomon Islands.

Coast Guard Lt. Kristin Kam told the Stars and Stripes newspaper that the U.S. State Department had been in touch with the Solomon Islands government following the refusal of the port call and that they 'expect all future clearances will be provided to U.S. ships.'

Daily Mail · by Andrea Cavallier For Dailymail.Com · August 28, 2022

14. Indo–US special forces joint exercise completed in Himachal Pradesh

Indo–US special forces joint exercise completed in Himachal Pradesh - News Riveting

newsriveting.com · by Editor · August 28, 2022

Team News Riveting

New Delhi, August 28

The 13th Edition of India – USA Joint Special Forces Exercise VAJRA PRAHAR 2022 culminated at Bakloh (HP) on 28 August 2022.

This annual exercise is hosted alternatively between India and the United States. The 12th edition was conducted at Joint Base Lewis Mc Chord, Washington (USA) in October 2021.

The 21-day joint training provided an opportunity for the Special Forces from both nations to train in Air Borne Operations, Special Operations and Counter Terrorism operations in a joint environment under United Nations Charter. The exercise was conducted in two phases; the first phase involved combat conditioning and tactical level special missions training exercises and the second phase included 48 hours of validation of training received by both contingents in the first phase.

Both contingents expressed immense satisfaction on the outcomes of the exercise, in terms of the standards achieved and sharing of best practices, when both contingents undertook joint training, planning and execution of a series of mock operations in simulated conventional and unconventional scenarios in mountainous terrain.

Exercise VAJRA PRAHAR with the US Special Forces is significant in terms of security challenges faced by both Nations in the backdrop of the current global situation. The joint military exercise has further strengthened the traditional bond of friendship between the special forces of both Nations as well as improved bilateral defence cooperation between India and the USA.

newsriveting.com · by Editor · August 28, 2022

15. Russia is Fighting Three Undeclared Wars. Its Fourth – an Internal One – Might be Looming

Excerpts:

Finally, very few observers believe the hitherto-unknown National Republican Army, which claimed responsibility for the killing, was to blame. But if it were, then it points to the real possibility of organised domestic terrorism in Russia.

So any way you cut it, the killing of Darya Dugina brings Putin’s own leadership into question. This is something he has scrupulously avoided. He is obsessed with control, and enjoys the support of a massive propaganda machine to turn defeats into triumphs and blame others for his mistakes.

That’s a common vehicle for autocrats to deflect criticism, and has certainly worked for Putin. But unlikely though a Russian revolution from below may be, history is replete with examples – including the breakup of the Warsaw Pact and the USSR itself – where lies, repression, and personalised power eventually revealed the Emperor’s nakedness.

So perhaps three undeclared wars are not enough for Putin. Has he just lit the spark of another, personally more dangerous one?

Russia is Fighting Three Undeclared Wars. Its Fourth – an Internal One – Might be Looming

intpolicydigest.org · by Matthew Sussex · August 27, 2022

Now entering its seventh month, Vladimir Putin’s war against Ukraine shows no sign of resolution.

It has become a grim battle over territory between dug-in forces, resembling conflicts of the last century instead of the complex melange of covert operations and hybrid warfare that supposedly characterise contemporary “grey zone” contests.

Both sides are playing to their strengths: Russia to its dominance in firepower, and Ukraine to its ability to corrode the invader by targeting its supply lines.

Yet this is only part of the picture. Putin is actually waging three wars, each of them undeclared. He simultaneously seeks to control Ukraine, to dominate Russia’s region, and to hasten the fall of the West. And is there an internal struggle on the horizon?

Russian expansion

Putin’s “special military operation” is an undeclared war of imperial expansion seeking to enlarge Russian territory by, as Putin himself put it, taking back “our lands.”

Depending on how we assess its war aims – which have pivoted from conquest and regime change to “protecting” the people of Donbas and back again – Russia’s performance is mixed. Certainly it has succeeded in bringing Ukraine to the brink of state failure. It has already left a reconstruction burden that will take decades to overcome.

Despite Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky’s perfectly understandable desire to keep fighting until all Russian invaders leave its territory, in even the most optimistic outcome for Kyiv the complete restoration of Donbas or Crimea is far from assured.

But Putin has also decimated Russia’s conventional forces for surprisingly little gain in six months. Along the way, he has blunted his own rhetoric about Russian power, demonstrated a callous disregard for human rights, and revealed his armed forces to be corrupt, poorly managed, and deficient in doctrine, discipline, and capabilities.

Putin’s forces have made surprisingly few military gains in Ukraine.

Struggle for regional primacy

Putin’s second undeclared war is aimed at consolidating control over a sphere of influence stretching from Central Asia to Central Europe.

It is most certainly a war: Russia destroyed Georgia’s armed forces in five days in 2008 over the disputed territories of Abkhazia and South Ossetia. It has threatened Moldova with invasion if it abandons neutrality. And it has intervened with military forces in Kazakhstan, and in the conflicts between Armenia and Azerbaijan.

Putin is badly losing his struggle for regional primacy. Russia’s diminishing influence relative to China – especially in Central Asia – has long been recognised. But the war against Ukraine shows just how much the Kremlin’s reach has slipped.

Kazakhstan has called the Russian invasion a war, and sent aid to Ukraine. Moldova is actively seeking to join the EU. With the exception of Belarus, all of the states that were once part of the USSR either voted for, or abstained from, a UN General Assembly resolution deploring Russia’s invasion and calling for it to withdraw its forces from Ukraine.

Putin’s stated desire to prevent Ukraine from becoming an “anti-Russia” has failed utterly. Even Belarus’ President Alexander Lukashenko, beholden to Putin for his political survival, has resisted attempts to lure him directly into the conflict. And the decision by Finland and Sweden to join NATO has brought the military alliance closer to Russia, lengthening its border with the alliance by some 1,300 kilometres.

Finland’s and Sweden’s pursuit of NATO membership is the exact opposite of what Putin wanted for Russian neighbors https://t.co/ZOoBzDmCd3

— The Conversation U.S. (@ConversationUS) June 21, 2022

War with the West

Putin’s third undeclared war is his most nebulous, taking the form of a global struggle against the West, with an eye on resetting Europe’s strategic map.

It has three main components:

1. Political warfare designed to fragment European and North American societies from within.

2. Exploiting dependencies for strategic purposes.

3. Seeking to weaken Western influence by courting the parts of the world where its reach is weakest.

Putin’s war with the West is important for his great power vision of Russia as a Eurasian Third Rome. It also carries the most risk for those who seek to contain him. The spectre of Putin running rampant in Europe under the indifferent eye of a second Trump administration should underline the urgent task of healing America’s fractured society.

A looming hard winter for many Europeans will reinforce the lesson that deterrence comes with costs, as does over-dependence on resource giants who can weaponise energy for strategic leverage. The West must also recognise that comfy rhetoric about Russia being a global pariah is untrue: there are plenty of nations sympathetic to Kremlin disinformation about NATO’s historic culpability for today’s events in Ukraine.

The West’s future credibility also relies on how well it withstands Russian pressure at home and abroad. It will need to resist the temptation of inward-looking statism and continue supplying Ukraine with the weapons and assistance it needs. It will also need to actively counter false Russian narratives currently flooding India, Africa, and parts of South-East Asia.

Thus far, NATO unity remains remarkable. It has certainly rendered false Putin’s assumption the West would fold quickly.

But how long will this be maintained?

Analysis from Russia expert @matthew_sussex (@ourANU):#Auspol https://t.co/1ZRaUkKh9U

— The Conversation (@ConversationEDU) July 7, 2022

But is another undeclared war on the horizon for Putin?

The car-bomb killing of Darya Dugina, daughter of Russia’s neofascist philosopher Alexander Dugin, has prompted an outpouring of bile from the Russian extreme right.

With it has come the first hint of domestic fragility in Russia since February’s invasion, which saw 15,000 anti-war protesters arrested.

Both Dugin (who is neither Putin’s “brain” nor his muse) and Dugina (who promoted far-right propaganda) are bit players in Russian politics at best. However, the targeting of an ultranationalist is a rare event in Russia, where assassinations, poisonings, and “accidental” deaths overwhelmingly afflict moderates.

Russia’s Federal Security Service (shortened to FSB) took a lightning-fast 36 hours before unconvincingly announcing it had cracked the case. Displaying a Ukrainian National Guard ID card (likely faked) it claimed the perpetrator was Natalya Vovk, a member of the Azov Regiment, which Russia falsely claims to be a Nazi-dominated military unit. According to the FSB, Vovk had moved into Dugina’s apartment block, followed her for weeks, carried out the bombing, and then escaped to Estonia with her young daughter and her cat.

While we will probably never discover the true identity of Dugina’s killer, any remotely plausible explanation is damaging for Russia. If Ukraine was indeed to blame, how did Russian security fail to stop Vovk at the border, since deep background checks of all Ukrainians entering the country are supposedly routine? And why was she permitted to leave?

Alternatively, if the killing was carried out by the FSB itself, was it a rogue anti-Putin faction, or acting on Putin’s orders to whip up flagging support for the war? If the former, it points to a deep rift in Russia’s elite. If the latter, Putin has cynically targeted Russia’s ultra-right, which has criticised him for not being tough enough on Ukraine.

Finally, very few observers believe the hitherto-unknown National Republican Army, which claimed responsibility for the killing, was to blame. But if it were, then it points to the real possibility of organised domestic terrorism in Russia.

So any way you cut it, the killing of Darya Dugina brings Putin’s own leadership into question. This is something he has scrupulously avoided. He is obsessed with control, and enjoys the support of a massive propaganda machine to turn defeats into triumphs and blame others for his mistakes.

That’s a common vehicle for autocrats to deflect criticism, and has certainly worked for Putin. But unlikely though a Russian revolution from below may be, history is replete with examples – including the breakup of the Warsaw Pact and the USSR itself – where lies, repression, and personalised power eventually revealed the Emperor’s nakedness.

So perhaps three undeclared wars are not enough for Putin. Has he just lit the spark of another, personally more dangerous one?

This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article.

intpolicydigest.org · by Matthew Sussex · August 27, 2022

16. Four years after the death of John McCain, my father's legacy is more important than ever

Excellent OpEd from former Georgetown Security Studies program student. Needless to say I concur with my former student's views.

Four years after the death of John McCain, my father's legacy is more important than ever

USA Today · by Jack McCain | Opinion contributor

The fight to protect democracy is never-ending. Let’s set aside our differences and unite behind the defense of democracy, a cause greater than ourselves.

Show Caption

Hide Caption

John McCain: An American icon

Senator John McCain devoted his life to serving our country.

USA TODAY

Monday would have been the 86th birthday of my dad, John McCain. He spent his life fighting for causes larger than himself. The greatest of those was the fight for democracy. It has been four years since he passed away, but his legacy is more important than ever. With autocrats in Russia and China becoming more emboldened and trust in America’s political systems eroding, democracy is at a critical moment.

If Dad were here today, he would be outraged by Vladimir Putin’s power grab in Ukraine. I have no doubt he would be in Kyiv right now, standing shoulder to shoulder with the Ukrainian people, just as he did during the Independence Square protests in 2013.

“We are here to support your just cause, the sovereign right of Ukraine to determine its own destiny freely and independently,” he said at the time.

Dad saw Putin for who he was: a KGB thug. He would be doing everything in his power to encourage the free nations of the world to rally behind Ukraine in defense of democracy.

Devoted to democratic ideals

Dad spent his four-decade career in public service working to advance the democratic ideals that he believed were essential to creating a more free, fair and just world. He condemned the brutal Maduro regime in Venezuela and the Chinese Communist Party’s interference in Taiwanese elections. He championed the Global Magnitsky Act to hold accountable human rights violators. And he firmly believed in open speech, a free press and fair elections.

Can you love a Democrat? How about a Republican? Here's how we can bridge our divisions.

Dad also strongly believed in the importance of finding common ground. I was always struck by his ability to put personal differences aside for the greater good. Perhaps the greatest example of this attribute relates to his time as a prisoner of war in Vietnam for more than five years. When I was 14, we went to the Hanoi Hilton where I witnessed this part of his life for the first time. The conditions were unimaginable. I still have a photo of myself, arms outstretched, touching both walls of a tiny cell. Yet, when I asked Dad about his experience, he held no malice in his heart about it. He spoke as though it was just a brief chapter in history, and he went on to help reconcile the United States with Vietnam.

Red and blue America don't trust each other. And that's driving us dangerously apart.

Our adversaries want to weaken democracies around the world, and they seek to do so by dividing us. Dad addressed the threat of tribalism in his farewell address to the nation, but sadly, the political divide has only deepened since his passing. We must fight back. Dad said any great cause could only be won when people from all sides work together.

A cause greater than ourselves

I’m proud to sit on the board of the McCain Institute at Arizona State University, which works to protect and promote democracy, combat human trafficking, prevent hate and violent extremism, and build the next generation of leaders like my dad.

The McCain Institute’s Human Rights & Democracy program advances democracy and supports human rights defenders around the world. The program recently launched its Defending American Democracy series that examines the biggest issues facing America’s democracy – including the role of journalism, voting rights and political violence – and aims to find common ground between voters and elected officials on both sides of the aisle.

'What I learned from my father': Reflections of the daughter of the first Black secretary of the Army

The fight to protect democracy is never-ending. Dad dedicated his entire life to it. He has been gone four years now, but his legacy lives on and is more important than ever. Let’s set aside our differences and unite behind the defense of democracy, a cause greater than ourselves.

Jack McCain, son of the late Sen. John McCain, is a member of Arizona State University's McCain Institute Board of Trustees.

You can read diverse opinions from our Board of Contributors and other writers on the Opinion front page, on Twitter @usatodayopinion and in our daily Opinion newsletter. To respond to a column, submit a comment to letters@usatoday.com.

USA Today · by Jack McCain | Opinion contributor

17. The surprising connection between military strategy and success of the Civil Rights movement

Another book for the "to read pile."

Excerpts:

King and the others made miscalculations, a failed campaign in Albany, Ga., and disastrous foray into Chicago. But they learned from these mistakes, always keeping their eyes on goal, the prize of equal rights. I hope our military leaders similarly learn from miscalculations in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Having read Ricks, I couldn’t help thinking that contemporary military leaders, like Gen. James Mattis and Adm. James Stavridis, are more impressive than their Vietnam-era predecessors. But, perhaps unfairly, it’s hard to see a King or a Lewis or a Nash today.

Ricks, noting that Selma’s Bloody Sunday was about voting rights for Blacks, worries now that America is in a “downward spiral,” with efforts to roll back voting rights. Then, recalling those courageous and bold leaders of a couple generations ago, he hopes it can be done again.

The surprising connection between military strategy and success of the Civil Rights movement

BY ALBERT HUNT, OPINION CONTRIBUTOR - 08/28/22 11:00 AM ET

THE VIEWS EXPRESSED BY CONTRIBUTORS ARE THEIR OWN AND NOT THE VIEW OF THE HILL

The Hill · August 28, 2022

The civil rights campaigns of the 1950s and 60s changed America. It’s hard to think of the nonviolent movement and its leader, Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr., in military terms. Yet that’s exactly what Tom Ricks does in a very interesting book out this fall, “Waging a Good War: A Military History of the Civil Rights Movement, 1954-1968.”

“There is a direct relationship between wars and struggles for civil rights,” Ricks writes in an advance copy of the book I read. My skepticism vanished.

This is Ricks seventh non-fiction book on the military themes. He is an acclaimed historian, after a distinguished reporting career at the Wall Street Journal and Washington Post. As the Journal’s Washington bureau chief, I assigned Ricks to cover the Pentagon.

For all the obvious differences, Ricks convincingly establishes real parallels between successful wars and the militantly non-violent civil rights movement: the importance of strong leadership; meticulous planning and realistic goals; recognizing the strengths and weaknesses of both your own side and the enemy; learning from inevitable setbacks, and — above all — courage in the face of grave danger.

A good starting point is a million black veterans returning from World War II. Ricks relates the story of Charles Dryden, a black fighter pilot returning to train new pilots at Walterboro Army Airfield in rural South Carolina. The German POWs at the camp were allowed to eat in the white section of the cafeteria; Dryden wasn’t.

Leadership that inspires and is surrounded by talent is a sine qua non of military success — Gen. Ulysses S. Grant, Adm. Chester Nimitz, Gen. Dwight D. Eisenhower. “Eisenhower tried to focus on the absolutely essential while delegating to others the merely important,” Ricks notes.

If King was the four-star general of the civil rights movement, he was surrounded by a lot of three-stars: John Lewis, Ralph Abernathy, Andrew Young, Diane Nash, Bob Moses, Fannie Lou Hamer, James Bevel, James Lawson, Fred Shuttlesworth and others.

We read or remember the demonstrations, the marches, the eloquent speeches, the courage under attack. That was all made possible by meticulous training and discipline. “Passion and enthusiasm were no substitute for sound strategic planning,” Andy Young noted.

One of the few women leaders in the movement was Diane Nash, who according to Ricks personified Clausewitz’s dictum that the most important task of a commander is to understand the nature of the war in which one is engaged. Last month Nash was awarded the Medal of Freedom by President Biden.

John Lewis is remembered for the beatings he endured in leading the Selma marchers across the Edmund Pettus Bridge. He also was a disciplined leader; witness the detailed specificity of his handbook of do’s and don’ts for young blacks sitting in at segregated Southern lunch counters.

Before the Freedom Summer hundreds, almost a thousand volunteers attended two-week training sessions in Oxford, Ohio; those not ready for the dangers of riding buses through Mississippi trying to register voters were weeded out. The Selma march was planned for months. The pictures and broadcasts of “Bloody Sunday” stirred the country and paved the way for congressional approval of the Voting Rights Act.

Logistics are a key to military success. Ask the Russians, with their 40 miles of backed-up, fuel-starved tanks and food-deprived troops North of Kyiv in their invasion of Ukraine, or think of Hitler’s ill-fated 1941 Russian invasion.

The logistical brilliance of the Civil Rights movement was on display in the 1963 March on Washington. It was opposed by some of the old-line Civil Rights leaders and the Kennedy administration, which feared chaos and violence. It was a remarkable success, highlighted by King’s “I have a Dream” speech, one of the most memorable of the 20th century.

That was possible because of the extraordinary assemblage of 2,000 buses, 21 trains and 10 aircraft bringing many of the 250,000 to Washington — and because of the orderly discipline and preparation on the mall. They all left without incident, and in a few hours the mall was cleared and clean.

King and the others made miscalculations, a failed campaign in Albany, Ga., and disastrous foray into Chicago. But they learned from these mistakes, always keeping their eyes on goal, the prize of equal rights. I hope our military leaders similarly learn from miscalculations in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Having read Ricks, I couldn’t help thinking that contemporary military leaders, like Gen. James Mattis and Adm. James Stavridis, are more impressive than their Vietnam-era predecessors. But, perhaps unfairly, it’s hard to see a King or a Lewis or a Nash today.

Ricks, noting that Selma’s Bloody Sunday was about voting rights for Blacks, worries now that America is in a “downward spiral,” with efforts to roll back voting rights. Then, recalling those courageous and bold leaders of a couple generations ago, he hopes it can be done again.

Al Hunt is the former executive editor of Bloomberg News. He previously served as reporter, bureau chief and Washington editor for The Wall Street Journal. For almost a quarter century he wrote a column on politics for The Wall Street Journal, then The International New York Times and Bloomberg View. He hosts Politics War Room with James Carville. Follow him on Twitter @AlHuntDC.

The Hill · by Cheyanne M. Daniels · August 28, 2022

18. How this Marine Corps clarinetist evacuated 2 US embassies in 1 year

Very cool story. Military Bands are good for recruiting!

How this Marine Corps clarinetist evacuated 2 US embassies in 1 year

marinecorpstimes.com · by Hope Hodge Seck · August 26, 2022

Marine Staff Sgt. Ryan San Juan just wanted to spend four years playing in a military band.

Instead, he became a witness to history, evacuating two embassies in global hot spots in a single year ― and earning Marine Corps legend status in the process.

San Juan, 31, helped oversee the emergency departure of U.S. embassy staff from Afghanistan as the Marine Security Guard detachment commander in August 2021 in Kabul.

A month later, he arrived at a new post as detachment commander at the U.S. Embassy in Kyiv, Ukraine. Half a year later, he’d support the evacuation there just before Russia declared war on that country.

It’s all a little unbelievable for the first-generation American who struggled in school and ended up in the Marine Corps almost by chance.

3 Marine security guards nominated for meritorious honor award after Jamaica embassy bomb threat

A rant quickly escalated into a bomb threat.

By Philip Athey

San Juan grew up near Miami, the son of a Dominican mother and a Cuban father, he told Marine Corps Times.

“My first taste of the Marine Corps was back when I was in middle school, in seventh grade,” he said. “One of my teachers came to one of my musical performances. A few days after my performance, my teacher informed me that if I was interested in going to college … I should look into auditioning for that.”

San Juan had clear natural talent as a clarinetist, but securing a place in the military turned out to be a greater challenge than expected.

Thanks to a social studies teacher who had served six years in the Army Reserve, recruiters from every service came to his high school, and he collected their business cards.

At the Navy recruiting center, he was told he needed a higher Armed Services Vocational Aptitude Battery, or ASVAB, score. The Air Force office was closed, and the Army recruiter he spoke with didn’t seem to know much about opportunities for musicians. But at the Marine Corps recruiting office ― his final stop ― something clicked.

“I felt like for the first time, somebody was listening to me,” San Juan said. “And eventually, they were able to set me up with an audition.”

With his clarinet by his side

San Juan’s first assignment after graduating boot camp in 2010 was with the Marine Forces Reserve Band in New Orleans.

He enjoyed performing at Mardi Gras parades, command functions and once at a Houston rodeo.

But social media posts from another Marine musician who was traveling the world as a Marine security guard piqued his interest.

Instead of leaving the Marines after his first enlistment as he’d planned, he put in an application package with Marine Corps Embassy Security Group.

In 2015, he was assigned to the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad as a watchstander. It felt like he was contributing to the core mission of the Marines in a more direct and intense way.

“That was the first time I really left the country other than visiting family in the Dominican Republic,” San Juan said. “I was excited to be able to work in a new job within the Marine Corps, and work with Marines that are not all like me … everyone comes from a different background.”

The next few years took San Juan to Tegucigalpa, Honduras, and Canberra, Australia.

He then returned to his primary duty as a musician, serving with the III Marine Expeditionary Force Band in Okinawa, Japan.

His second enlistment was coming to an end, and again he planned to get out. But he was offered the opportunity to return to Marine security guard duty as a detachment commander, which he took.

As his training for the role wrapped up, he learned he was headed to Kabul. He was curious, but not particularly nervous.

“With everything that was going on with reducing the troops within the country, I was intrigued to see what that meant for our diplomatic presence in Kabul,” he said.

When San Juan arrived in Kabul mid-June 2021, he was told his mission was to stay there and keep the embassy open.

“It was always reiterated to us that our mission is there, to have a diplomatic presence in Kabul, and that the embassy was not going to go anywhere,” he said.

That all changed Aug. 13, 2021.

San Juan received orders that the embassy, with all its diplomatic personnel, would be evacuated within 48 hours.

US official: US troops to help evacuate embassy in Kabul

John Kirby, the chief Pentagon spokesman, said the Afghans still have time to save themselves from final defeat.

By Robert Burns, The Associated Press and Lolita C. Baldor, The Associated Press

Training kicked in; he and his Marine watchstanders in the detachment began shredding sensitive documents, destroying electronics and transporting staff to helicopters that would take them to Hamid Karzai International Airport, where they could board a plane out of the country.

San Juan got brief snatches of sleep over those two final days. He didn’t stop to reflect on the significance of helping to close out the U.S. diplomatic presence in Afghanistan until he departed the embassy compound himself, early in the morning on Aug. 16, 2021.

“It was a surreal moment for myself,” he said. “That moment was when things started to sort of come into light that I might have done something important.”

As San Juan’s plane departed Kabul, his clarinet, as always, was right by his side.

Apart from emergency evacuations, he tried to play a little bit daily, and organize gigs and performances for Marines and embassy staff when he could.

‘Oh, it’s the legend’

San Juan arrived back at Marine Corps Embassy Security Group headquarters in Quantico, Virginia, just before the weekend.

On Monday morning, he was presented a list of options for his next posting.

He had a good relationship with his regional commanding officer, and wanted to stay in his region, so he chose what looked like the most promising posting available: Kyiv.

“I knew nothing about Eastern Europe, or Ukraine in general, other than it has some history with the Soviet Union,” San Juan said. “I felt like it could be an interesting place to go to.”

He arrived in September 2021 and enjoyed playing tourist in a way he hadn’t been able to in Kabul, exploring the old city and learning bits of Ukrainian and Russian.

But he quickly was brought up to speed on the looming conflict and threats from Russia.

In October 2021, when Russia began to amass troops on the border, the embassy security guard detachment watched for news closely, awaiting any orders. In February, they came: an ordered departure of staff from Kyiv, Ukraine, followed by a deliberate evacuation.

“The first thing that came to my mind was, I will forever be known as the Marine that evacuates embassies,” San Juan said. “I joined the Marine Corps to play clarinet. And know I’m going to be known for something I didn’t originally join the Marine Corps for.”

That also meant San Juan had the benefit of experience with embassy evacuation, something many Marine security guard watchstanders never do even once in their careers.

While the Kabul evacuation was hasty and unplanned, the Kyiv departure felt orderly and proactive.

Staff and then the Marines moved to Lviv, Ukraine, and then west to Poland, departing before Russia launched its full-scale attack on the country in March.

San Juan is proud of doing his job well. But it’s not always easy to contemplate the war zones he has left behind.

“It’s unfortunate that I have to be a part of things like this. But ultimately, I’m responsible for the safety of the embassy, and I’m their last line of defense,” he said. “So when the time comes to evacuate mission personnel, I have to make sure that I don’t make any emotional decisions based on how I feel with the situation at hand, and just make sure that our mission gets completed.”

San Juan was quickly reassigned to his current posting in Muscat, Oman. But now, at least in the Marine security guard community, he’s a celebrity.

“When I walk into a room, someone will usually say, ‘Oh, it’s the legend,’” he chuckled.

The jokes are also incessant: Marines rib him for bringing chaos wherever he goes, warning that any coffee shop or restaurant he enters is about to be evacuated.

Within Marine Corps Embassy Security Group, he is a sought-after speaker. He has spoken to instructor staff at the schoolhouse in Quantico, Virginia, about his experience evacuating Kabul and Kyiv, briefed other detachment commanders within his region and even spoken to detachments at other embassies.

“My best piece of advice is just thinking back to, everyone joined the Marine Corps for a different reason,” he said, “It doesn’t matter what your MOS is. If you’re a musician like me, you’re a cook, you’re an administrative specialist, ultimately, every Marine is a trained rifleman. And when you get put in a situation … the embassy folks are looking at you as their last line of defense. All the trust and confidence is placed on yourself.”

As for his family back in Florida, he has worked out a system to stave off worry.

“My family monitors my social media closely,” he said. “As long as I’m posting nice and happy things, that’s what keeps them calm and sane. And they know at this point, if I’m in a hectic situation, once the storm passes, I will call them and let them know I’m OK.”

marinecorpstimes.com · by Hope Hodge Seck · August 26, 2022

19.

De Oppresso Liber,

David Maxwell

Senior Fellow, Foundation for Defense of Democracies

Senior Fellow, Global Peace Foundation

Senior Advisor, Center for Asia Pacific Strategy

Editor, Small Wars Journal

Twitter: @davidmaxwell161

VIDEO "WHEREBY" Link: https://whereby.com/david-maxwell

Phone: 202-573-8647

email: david.maxwell161@gmail.com

V/R

David Maxwell

Senior Fellow

Foundation for Defense of Democracies

Phone: 202-573-8647

Personal Email: d avid.maxwell161@gmail.com

Web Site: www.fdd.org

Twitter: @davidmaxwell161

Subscribe to FDD’s new podcast, Foreign Podicy

FDD is a Washington-based nonpartisan research institute focusing on national security and foreign policy.

If you do not read anything else in the 2017 National Security Strategy read this on page 14:

"A democracy is only as resilient as its people. An informed and engaged citizenry is the fundamental requirement for a free and resilient nation. For generations, our society has protected free press, free speech, and free thought. Today, actors such as Russia are using information tools in an attempt to undermine the legitimacy of democracies. Adversaries target media, political processes, financial networks, and personal data. The American public and private sectors must recognize this and work together to defend our way of life. No external threat can be allowed to shake our shared commitment to our values, undermine our system of government, or divide our Nation."

Access NSS HERE

Company Name | Website

RUSSIAN OFFENSIVE CAMPAIGN ASSESSMENT, AUGUST 28

Aug 28, 2022 - Press ISW

understandingwar.org

Russian Offensive Campaign Assessment, August 28

Kateryna Stepanenko, Layne Philipson, Angela Howard, and Frederick W. Kagan

August 28, 8:30 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.

Key Takeaways

Main Effort—Eastern Ukraine

Subordinate Main Effort—Southern Kharkiv, Donetsk, Luhansk Oblasts (Russian objective: Encircle Ukrainian forces in Eastern Ukraine and capture the entirety of Donetsk and Luhansk oblasts, the claimed territory of Russia’s proxies in Donbas)

Russian forces did not conduct any confirmed ground attacks toward Siversk on August 28 and continued routine shelling of Siversk and surrounding settlements.[19] Russian artillery also struck railway and civilian infrastructure in Kramatorsk.[20]

Supporting Effort #1—Kharkiv City (Russian objective: Defend ground lines of communication (GLOCs) to Izyum and prevent Ukrainian forces from reaching the Russian border)

Supporting Effort #2—Southern Axis (Russian objective: Defend Kherson and Zaporizhzhia Oblasts against Ukrainian counterattacks)

Mobilization and Force Generation Efforts (Russian objective: Expand combat power without conducting general mobilization)

Activity in Russian-occupied Areas (Russian objective: consolidate administrative control of occupied areas; set conditions for potential annexation into the Russian Federation or some other future political arrangement of Moscow’s choosing)

[1] http://publication dot pravo.gov.ru/Document/View/0001202208270002?index=2&rangeSize=1

[2] http://publication dot pravo.gov.ru/Document/View/0001202208270002?index=2&rangeSize=1

[3] http://publication dot pravo.gov.ru/Document/View/0001202208270002?index=2&rangeSize=1

[4] http://publication dot pravo.gov.ru/Document/View/0001202208270001?index=1&rangeSize=1

[5] http://publication dot pravo.gov.ru/Document/View/0001202208270001?index=1&rangeSize=1

[6] http://publication dot pravo.gov.ru/Document/View/0001202208270001?index=1&rangeSize=1

[7] http://publication dot pravo.gov.ru/Document/View/0001202208270001?index=1&rangeSize=1

[9] https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/aug/27/russia-blocks-un-nuclear-t... https://suspilne dot media/275595-rf-zablokuvala-dokument-konferencii-oon-pro-adernu-zbrou-cerez-punkt-pro-zaes/

https://www.facebook.com/GeneralStaff.ua/posts/pfbid0GLCBGRpfMCnmFaPUVzU...

[36] https://kyivindependent dot com/news-feed/ukrainian-intelligence-russia-has-no-more-than-45-of-its-missiles-left; https://www.facebook.com/sergey.khlan/posts/pfbid02RcGhkDnHg7nkY5BSLdBxm...

[53] https://www dot pravda.ru/districts/1740695-dobrovolcheskie_batalony/

[55] https://meduza dot io/en/feature/2022/06/30/the-warmongering-governor

[56] https://meduza dot io/en/feature/2022/02/12/snow-trash-and-influential-people

[57] https://meduza dot io/en/feature/2022/06/30/the-warmongering-governor

[61] https://gur dot gov.ua/content/rosiia-zbilshuie-mobilizatsiini-rezervy-i-planuie-mobilizuvaty-blyzko-90-tysiach-viiskovosluzhbovtsiv.html

[62] https://nn dot tsargrad.tv/news/objavlenie-o-sluzhbe-po-kontraktu-razmestili-v-nizhegorodskom-detsadu_613193; https://nn dot tsargrad.tv/news/v-nizhnem-novgorode-mnogodetnaja-mat-poluchila-priglashenie-vstupit-v-tankovyj-batalon_613769; https://opennov dot ru/news/society/2022-08-28/68018

[63] https://gur dot gov.ua/content/okupanty-v-lnr-pidhotuvaly-psevdoistorychnu-metodychku-do-1-veresnia.html

[64] https://gur dot gov.ua/content/okupanty-v-lnr-pidhotuvaly-psevdoistorychnu-metodychku-do-1-veresnia.html

[67] https://sprotyv dot mod.gov.ua/2022/08/28/na-zaporizhzhi-povisyly-kolaboranta/; https://t.me/spravdi/16112

UNDERSTANDINGWAR.ORG

‘The Eye of the Storm’: Taiwan Is Caught in a Great Game Over Microchips

Read More on the Relations Between Asia and the U.S.

Here’s every weapon US has supplied to Ukraine with $13 billion

Major weapons

Other equipment and small arms

Biden's Iran nuclear deal sets the stage for a real 'forever war'

Fighting between U.S. troops and militias draws scrutiny to Syria role

Through the Taiwan Strait

An important show of resolve by the U.S. Navy despite Chinese threats.

Restore Reagan’s Military ‘Margin of Safety’

While foreign policy ‘realists’ urge detente with China and Russia, only strength ensures peace.

The ‘MacGyvered’ Weapons in Ukraine’s Arsenal

The State of the War

The Army wants exoskeletons so soldiers can defeat their worst enemy: Lower back pain

The latest on Task & Purpose

After the Next War

The U.S. must Grasp the Reality of Sustained Competition

This Picture Is How China Plans to Beat America If World War III Breaks Out

Russian dirty dancing with Sanna Marin

US Coast Guard cutter is denied entry in Solomon Islands

US Coast Guard cutter is denied entry into the Guadalcanal port in the Solomon Islands stoking fears over China's growing influence in the Pacific

Indo–US special forces joint exercise completed in Himachal Pradesh - News Riveting

Russia is Fighting Three Undeclared Wars. Its Fourth – an Internal One – Might be Looming

Four years after the death of John McCain, my father's legacy is more important than ever

The fight to protect democracy is never-ending. Let’s set aside our differences and unite behind the defense of democracy, a cause greater than ourselves.

Devoted to democratic ideals

The surprising connection between military strategy and success of the Civil Rights movement

How this Marine Corps clarinetist evacuated 2 US embassies in 1 year