Indian Strategic Studies: May 2024

31 May 2024

India's Maritime Dominance

Anshu Meghe

India's Maritime Dominance: Safeguarding Commerce and Stability in the Indian Ocean

Far beyond India's western shores, the Indian Navy (IN) stands as a guardian of global trade in the bustling waters of the Gulf of Aden. Since December 2023, this force has undertaken its largest and most decisive deployment ever. It has rescued over 18 commercial vessels from the clutches of piracy—most notably from those affiliated with the Somali Al Shabab. Operating in the strategic confluence of the Gulf of Aden and the Red Sea, the Navy's robust presence underscores its growing prowess in projecting power across the vast oceans and solidifying its stature as a principal security provider in the Indian Ocean Region (IOR). Amidst the backdrop of an increasingly assertive China, these operations do more than safeguard waters; they signal the maturity of an Indian strategic vision that has been over two decades in the making. With each successful mission, the Indian Navy not only earns global accolades but also cements India's role as a rising major power within the intricate geopolitical tapestry of the Indo-Pacific, offering both a stern warning to its competitors and a promise of stability to its partners.

Combating Piracy in the Western Indian Ocean

Amidst the internal conflicts and civil wars plaguing Yemen and Somalia, these nations have become fertile grounds for non-state actors engaging in piracy in the Gulf of Aden. With the U.S. and UK ground resources preoccupied by the Houthi rebels, who escalated their maritime attacks in response to Israeli operations against Hamas, global shipping routes near Bab el Mandeb in the Red Sea have been significantly disrupted. This has forced major shipping lanes to reroute around the African continent, inflating shipping costs considerably. Capitalizing on the Western naval focus on the Red Sea, Somali pirates have intensified their activities, attempting over 20 hijackings since November and exacerbating the crisis for global shipping by driving up insurance and security costs. This situation has revived piracy by Somali groups, which had seen a decline after 2017.

The sniper with one of the longest kills in Afghanistan has a message for Joe Biden

WILLS ROBINSON

Sergeant Nicholas Ranstad was twenty minutes into a nap when his spotter woke him up.

Four Taliban fighters were 1.28 miles away from the hut where the Army specialist sniper was living in Kunar Province in northeastern Afghanistan.

If the insurgents had looked more carefully, they would have seen white marks on boulders beside them. Ranstad, a 28-year-old Florida native, had been using them for target practice for weeks.

Now, however, his AK-47-wielding target could shoot back while they were surveilling the U.S. traffic checkpoint.

Nick Ranstad set up on top of a Afghanistan Border Patrol (ABP) hut and got into the prone position.

Is Myanmar Teetering On The Verge Of Another Disaster? – OpEd

Dr. Imran Khalid

Myanmar’s military junta is confronting its most formidable challenge since seizing power three years ago. A coalition of ethnic militias and anti-coup groups has disrupted vital trade routes and captured strategic territories and towns. These incursions into former military strongholds mark a historic shift in power dynamics, with resistance forces now commanding control over almost half the country – an achievement unprecedented in Myanmar’s tumultuous history. The junta’s predicament reflects the aggravating complexity of Myanmar’s political landscape, characterized by deep-seated ethnic divisions and a populace weary of military rule.

Data from the Institute for Strategy and Policy – Myanmar reveals a distressing reality. Conflict has engulfed 221 townships in three years, with 141 teetering on the brink of insecurity. Opposition forces have seized at least 35 towns, underscoring the military’s failure to maintain control. This prolonged state of unrest not only exposes the regime’s inability to restore stability but also highlights the resilience of opposition forces. China brokered peace talks between the Tatmadaw and the Brotherhood Alliance on January 10-11, 2024 – resulting in atemporary ceasefire in northern Myanmar. However, the Arakan Army (AA) continued its clashes with the Tatmadaw in Rakhine State, where it now controls several towns. This success has emboldened other opposition groups, including ethnic resistance organizations (EROs) and the People’s Defense Forces (PDFs), which collectively seized at least 35 towns.

Xi Hosts Arab Leaders as China’s ‘Soft Power’ Expands in Mideast

President Xi Jinping will meet Arab leaders this week seeking deeper ties in a region where China does plenty of business — and increasingly diplomacy, too.

Xi will address the China-Arab States Cooperation Forum in Beijing on Thursday with heads of state from Egypt, the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain and Tunisia among the attendees. Talks will likely focus on fast-growing trade and investment, and regional security concerns amid the Israel-Hamas war.

As the Biden administration backs Israel in the conflict, China sees eye-to-eye with Arab nations, supporting an immediate cease-fire and recognition of a Palestinian state. That alignment is helping Beijing to extend its political sway in countries that until recently saw China chiefly as an economic partner — and win new allies in its global contest for influence with the US.

Xi’s visit to Saudi Arabia in late 2022 was hailed as a landmark by both countries. Last year, China followed up by brokering a surprise accord between the kingdom and Iran, the Islamic world’s biggest rivals. The détente has held up even amid the strains caused by the Gaza war, and there are signs it’s been followed by an acceleration of investment between China and the Middle East.

China Launches 10th Type 055 Vessel, Increases Production At Dagushan

Alex Luck

Chinese naval builder Dalian Shipbuilding has launched a new Type 055 “large destroyer”, the tenth overall, and commenced construction on a further hull. According to new commercial satellite imagery the builder has also laid down another Type 052D destroyer, the sixth of the latest batch at the yard. Beam figures for the new modules of 18 and 20 metres respectively suggest an effort of parallel construction in a single drydock.

Dalian is one of two principal naval yards together with Jiangnan in Shanghai constructing all recent guided missile destroyers for the PLAN. This most recent construction of new combatants for Dalian is taking place at a secondary yard typically referred to as Dagushan.

The Dagushan-based yard is located to the East across Dalian Bay from the builder’s primary facilities previously performing all DDG-construction. This development may indicate that Dalian Shipbuilding is trying to offload more naval output from their primary facilities in order to free up larger drydocks for commercial construction. Interestingly Dagushan first assembled this new Type 055 on a slipway, similar to Jiangnan. However the yard then used a barge to move the hull into a drydock for further work in late March.

Why Trying to 'Defeat' the Chinese Communist Party Could Backfire

David Santoro

Summary and Key Points: The U.S. faces strategic challenges with China, which aims to reshape the international order. The Biden administration's approach involves managing competition rather than seeking outright victory or confrontation. While some advocate for a more aggressive stance, aiming to defeat the Chinese Communist Party, such a strategy could backfire, strengthening the CCP and increasing conflict risks. The preferred strategy is maintaining U.S. dominance through enhanced focus on the Indo-Pacific, innovation, and alliances, while remaining open to engagement with China.

China dominates the US strategic calculus. It is “the pacing challenge” for the US government and is, warns the Biden administration’s National Security Strategy, “the only competitor with both the intent to reshape the international order and, increasingly, the economic, diplomatic, military, and technological power to do it.” The emergence of competition as the defining feature of the US-China relationship, which dates back to the Trump administration, reflects the failure of the longstanding belief that engagement would facilitate China’s transformation and convergence with Western ideals, notably on democratic governance, a market-led economy, and the existing international order.

Is the EU already in a trade war with China?

KOEN VERHELST, JORDYN DAHL, STUART LAU AND CAMILLE GIJS

BRUSSELS — What do vanilla, steel pipes and electric cars have in common?

You guessed it: The European Union is investigating imports of these goods from China to find out whether they are being sold below cost or are being unfairly subsidized by Beijing. China, in return, suspects Europe of dumping premium cognacs on its market — and is dropping heavy hints that European luxury cars and pork meat could soon face restrictions.

The tit-for-tat dynamics suggest that the EU — which last year ran a bilateral trade deficit in goods of nearly €300 billion and now wants to narrow that gap — may soon slide into a trade war with China.

But are they in one already?

We’ll find out soon enough. Here’s POLITICO’s take on how this could play out:

Why is everyone talking about Chinese cars?

Trade nerds in Brussels — and auto industry bosses in Stuttgart, Munich and Wolfsburg — are nervously awaiting the outcome of the EU’s investigation into whether China unfairly subsidizes its electric vehicle industry.

China’s Quixotic Quest to Innovate

George Magnus

By now, the systemic problems that bedevil China’s economy are obvious. The country is suffering from slowing economic growth, stagnating productivity, a malfunctioning property sector, the misallocation and inefficient use of capital, debt-capacity constraints, and weak household income and consumer demand. But it is less clear how Beijing should fix these problems. Many economists outside China, as well as some inside the country, believe that it must recalibrate its development model by making it far more market-oriented and driven by consumer spending. Chinese leader Xi Jinping’s Chinese Communist Party (CCP), however, cannot accept the political and institutional changes that such a recalibration would require.

So Xi has chosen a different path: a growth strategy centered on industrial policy, aimed at boosting what he and the CCP call “new productive forces.” In Marx’s thinking, this phrase describes the process whereby major changes in technology clash with the existing economic order, enabling communists to overthrow it. For Xi, these new forces are the sectors now at the vanguard of scientific and technological development, such as clean energy, electric vehicles, and batteries—in which China already leads—as well as industrial machinery, semiconductors and computing, artificial intelligence and robotics, the life sciences industries, and biotechnology and pharmaceuticals. Xi’s ambition is for China to achieve self-sufficiency in all these sectors. Xi believes that by focusing on industrial policy and innovation, he can rescue China’s beleaguered economy, seize geopolitical opportunities to lead the twenty-first century’s new industrial revolution, and end the United States’ dominance in the international system.

Meet the CRANKs: How China, Russia, Iran and North Korea Align Against America

Paul J. Saunders

Adeepening alignment among China, Russia, Iran, and North Korea is drawing considerable attention as the United States and its allies confront new challenges from these four nations, both individually and in various assortments. Yet in addition to the policy problems this cooperation poses, Washington faces another difficulty: what to call them?

Some are eager to brand these American adversaries as a new “Axis of Evil,” reassigning former President George W. Bush’s two-decade-old label for Iran, Iraq, and North Korea. Yet like efforts to define international relations as a semi-apocalyptic struggle between democracies and authoritarian states, the rhetoric of “evil” makes America’s job harder rather than easier. Moralistic rhetoric undermines rather than facilitates opportunities to exploit gaps between U.S adversaries whose interests are not identical. Beijing, Moscow, Tehran, and Pyongyang are each trying to drive wedges between Washington and allied capitals. America would benefit from a greater ability to attempt the same.

Marine Corps Stand-In Forces: A House of Cards

Anthony Zinni & Jerry McAbee

How did the United States Marine Corps transform itself from the world’s premier expeditionary force-in-readiness to a poor parody of the French Maginot Line in just four years? In his Force Design 2030 plan, the 38th Commandant of the Marine Corps radically redesigned and restructured the Marine Corps to operate as a defensively oriented, narrowly specialized regional force under Navy command to attack and sink Chinese warships in the South China Sea. This new mission came at the expense of providing much needed crisis response and global force projection capabilities to all Geographic Combatant and Functional Commands in an increasingly unstable world. The crown jewel of this new warfighting organization are called Stand-in Forces (SIFs), which are small isolated detachments of Marines, armed with anti-ship missiles, persistently spread across islands in the so-called “contested” areas of hostilities: specifically the first island chain.

To fund these largely experimental units, the Marine Corps divested proven capabilities needed to fight and win today anywhere in the world, an unwise and unproven approach termed “divest to invest.” The Corps jettisoned all its tanks and bridging, most of its cannon artillery and assault breaching, and much of its infantry and new, state-of-the art aviation at a time when these certain capabilities are showing to be critical in ongoing conflicts.

F-35 Crashes In New Mexico (Updated)

HOWARD ALTMAN

An F-35 Joint Strike Fighter crashed outside the airfield at the Albuquerque International Sunport which is co-located with Kirkland AFB in New Mexico, according to media reports and video from the crash site. The pilot survived and was transported to a local hospital with serious injuries, fire officials said.

The incident took place shortly before 2 p.m. local time, according to a spokesman Albuquerque Fire Rescue, who added that the pilot was transported to the hospital with serious injuries.

The aircraft was an F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, according to imagery of the crash site and a recording of an air traffic control transmission.

The FAA deferred comment to the U.S. Marine Corps. The Marines would not immediately comment. We will update this story with any information provided. It is not clear if this was indeed a USMC F-35 or one that belonged to the Navy. Air Force or a foreign operator.

Bibi’s Problem Is Now Biden’s Problem – OpEd

Peter Isackson

In a highly instructive article teasing out the multiple threads of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s current political quandary, former diplomat and Fair Observer board member Gary Grappo describes the growing pressure that directly threatens Bibi’s hold on power. Not only are members of his own team on the cusp of revolt, but even the faltering senior citizen now occupying the White House, known for his patient indulgence in the face of Israel’s most egregious excesses, now appears to be chafing at the bit over Bibi’s failure to reign in his ministers’ enthusiasm for genocidal acts carried out in the name of self-defense.

US President Joe Biden has never ceased aligning the adjectives that proclaim his nation’s unwavering, unbreakable, unreserved, iron-clad support for Israel. Earlier this month, however, he wavered ever so slightly — and only briefly — when he chose to interrupt his regular delivery of the 2,000-pound bombs Israel needs in its quest to establish Greater Israel as a unified ethno-supremacist Jewish state.

In the meantime, the International Criminal Court prosecutor has requested an arrest warrant for Netanyahu as a war criminal. The International Court of Justice followed suit days later when it ordered Israel to halt its military operations on the town of Rafah which the IDF had previously designated as the last safe zone from Israeli bombing.

Wind Farms Are Cheaper Than You Think And Could Have Prevented Fukushima

Offshore wind could have prevented the Fukushima disaster, according to a review of wind energy led by the University of Surrey.

The researchers found that offshore turbines could have averted the 2011 nuclear disaster in Japan by keeping the cooling systems running and avoiding meltdown. The team also found that wind farms are not as vulnerable to earthquakes.

Suby Bhattacharya, Professor of Geomechanics at the University of Surrey’s Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, said:

“Wind power gives us plentiful clean energy – now we know that it could also make other facilities safer and more reliable. The global review finds that greener really is cheaper – thanks to falling construction costs and new ways to reduce wind turbines’ ecological impact.”

One of the report’s starkest findings was that new wind farms can produce energy over twice as cheaply as new nuclear power stations.

The AUKUS balancing act is not getting easier

Nick Childs

In the last twelve months, the three partners in the Australia–United Kingdom–United States (AUKUS) partnership have made significant strides in their core or Pillar 1 ambition to jointly create a nuclear-powered-submarine capability for the Royal Australian Navy (RAN). That ambition includes combining to produce a new SSN-AUKUS submarine, derived from a UK design, that will also serve in the Royal Navy. There is also an increased focus on the so-called Pillar 2 effort to cooperate on a range of other advanced defence technologies. That has included opening the door ever so slightly to the prospects of cooperation with other countries, notably Japan. But, in many ways, all these activities have served only to underscore the scale of the challenges ahead.

Sub-optimal approachAUKUS is in many ways a giant balancing act between risk and strategic reward for all three countries. It is also a balance between seeking to add to Indo-Pacific deterrence and stability and not stoking further tensions. In addition, it is attempting to manage urgent defence and operational needs with long-term capability goals. And the partners need to ensure the huge budgetary demands of AUKUS do not suck up too much funding at the expense of other defence requirements.

Across the Army, units lean into drone experimentation

SAM SKOVE

In speech after speech, Army leaders have made it clear that they want more drones in more units.

“We're going to see robotics inside the formation, on the ground and in the air,” Army Chief of Staff Randy George told Defense One in March.

Now a growing number of Army units, and particularly their junior officers and enlisted soldiers, are engaged in wide-ranging experiments to answer George’s call—and learn to train for, field, and operate their new systems.

“No longer is a drone just a safety net” for soldiers on patrol, said Capt. Adam Johnson, commander of Gainey Company, an experimental unit that serves as a hub for trying new technologies and tactics in the 82nd Airborne. “They have a purpose.”

American Globalism Versus ‘America First’

Francis P. Sempa

Hal Brands, a senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute and a professor at the Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies, has laid out in an essay in Foreign Affairs the key differences between what he rightly calls “American Globalism” and what has been called the “America First” approach to global affairs. Brands clearly is in the “American Globalist” camp, but unlike other supporters of the “liberal international order,” he does not label “America First” as isolationist. Instead, he lauds the global benefits to the post-1945 world order and worries that they will eventually disappear if Donald Trump regains the presidency. Brands doesn’t want the United States to be a “normal” country that only looks after its own national interests. What he fails to appreciate, however, is that the post-1945 world order he supports is already gone.

The geopolitics of 1945-1991 disappeared with the collapse of the Soviet Union. The war in Ukraine, despite the claims of many globalists, has not recreated the Soviet threat to Europe. If Ukraine, or parts of Ukraine, remain under Russian control, U.S. national security will not be endangered. Nor will Europe’s. NATO has doubled in size since 1991. Russia in relative power is considerably weaker than the Soviet Union was throughout the Cold War, and its ruling class no longer has a revolutionary ideology that legitimizes its continued rule and motivates international aggression. Of course, Russian imperialism has not disappeared from Russia’s foreign policy DNA, but the Russian empire of the Czars was never considered to be an existential threat to the United States (although the Monroe Doctrine included Russia in its restrictive warning), even when it occupied Alaska and parts of California in the 19th century. And today’s Russia is having difficulty holding on to the eastern provinces of Ukraine, and has once again sent out feelers for a ceasefire to end the war.

America’s Military Is Not Prepared for War — or Peace

Roger Wicker

Mr. Wicker, a Republican, is the ranking member of the U.S. Senate Armed Services Committee.

“To be prepared for war,” George Washington said, “is one of the most effectual means of preserving peace.” President Ronald Reagan agreed with his forebear’s words, and peace through strength became a theme of his administration. In the past four decades, the American arsenal helped secure that peace, but political neglect has led to its atrophy as other nations’ war machines have kicked into high gear. Most Americans do not realize the specter of great power conflict has risen again.

It is far past time to rebuild America’s military. We can avoid war by preparing for it.

When America’s senior military leaders testify before my colleagues and me on the U.S. Senate Armed Services Committee behind closed doors, they have said that we face some of the most dangerous global threat environments since World War II. Then, they darken that already unsettling picture by explaining that our armed forces are at risk of being underequipped and outgunned. We struggle to build and maintain ships, our fighter jet fleet is dangerously small, and our military infrastructure is outdated. Meanwhile, America’s adversaries are growing their militaries and getting more aggressive.

Russia Launches Wave of Mechanized Attacks at Ukraine

Ellie Cook

Russian forces launched four separate assaults with armored vehicles on Ukrainian positions along the eastern front line in recent days as Moscow probes the strength of Kyiv's defenses in the country's Donetsk region, according to a new assessment.

Russian troops attacked east of the strategic town of Chasiv Yar, and to the northwest of the captured former Ukrainian stronghold of Avdiivka between Monday and Tuesday, the U.S.-based think tank, the Institute for the Study of War (ISW), said in its latest assessment of the war in Ukraine.

Moscow also carried out larger mechanized attacks to the southwest of the Russian-controlled regional capital, Donetsk City, and the village of Staromayorske, not far from the Donetsk border with the neighboring Zaporizhzhia region, the think tank said.

Hamas can be defeated by rendering it insignificant in Palestinian arena - opinion

UDI DEKEL

There are those who argue that Hamas cannot be defeated. Indeed, it is difficult to annihilate an organization like Hamas, which relies on its foundation of being a social movement and espouses a rigid, extreme religious-nationalist ideology, in addition to having an armed military wing. But it is possible to greatly reduce Hamas’s influence among the public that it purportedly represents and leads, by denying its power to inflict damage and the veto power that it held and still holds.

This requires six combined efforts:

1. Military effort: The dismantling of Hamas’s military wing should continue for a while, even after the war officially ends, to ensure that the terrorist organization cannot reestablish itself and restore its military power. The purpose of the ongoing military campaign is to prevent Hamas from being able to torpedo the political and civilian measures aimed at stabilizing the Gaza Strip and the Palestinian arena in general after the war.

2. Civilian effort: Wherever it is possible to begin stabilizing and reconstructing the Gaza Strip, an official responsible for civilian control and public order should be appointed, and this measure should be implemented while preventing Hamas’s intervention and involvement.

Israel Is Stuck in Gaza's Mud - Opinion

Daniel R. DePetris

Last weekend, Israel committed a tragic error in the field. According to Israel's own account, a precision munition launched by the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) hit a designated Hamas target in the congested Gaza city of Rafah, only to see shrapnel ignite a fuel tank close to a constellation of tents where Palestinian refugees were staying. The result was a bloodbath; 45 people, including women and children, died from the large blaze. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, a man loathe to admit fault, had to concede that a "tragic mishap" occurred. The global response was one of anger and disbelief.

This specific incident was a microcosm of the entire war in Gaza, which will enter its eight month in a few weeks. Ultimately, civilians pay the dearest price. The second biggest-loser is Israel, whose international reputation has taken a big hit, even if the war itself was justified after Hamas' barbaric assault on Oct. 7. Even former President Donald Trump, who gave Netanyahu pretty much everything he asked for (recognizing Israeli sovereignty over the Golan Heights and moving the U.S. Embassy to Jerusalem, for instance) said Israel is losing the public relations battle.

The US unmatched in military force, but has no strategy

Ralph Schoellhammer

The two most important elements a state needs to have at its disposal in the international arena are first, a strategy, and second, the capabilities to execute said strategy.

At the time of writing the world is entering a new phase of great power competition, with the United States and her – sometimes reluctant – European allies on one side and the China-Russia-Iran axis on the other side. Any serious analysis of where this competition might be going must first assess what strategies are pursued by the individual actors and what their actual capabilities truly are.

Before we begin said analysis, however, it has to be said that it is unclear whether the countries involved are themselves aware of the strategy-capability nexus.

The United States, for example, are a nation that is very capable, but lacking a cohesive strategy. It is blessed with almost unlimited energy resources, a dynamic and innovate economy, friendly neighbours to the North and South, while being protected by oceans to the East and West. It commands the only military that is able to apply force anywhere on the globe within 24 hours.

Netanyahu frequently makes claims of antisemitism. Critics say he’s deflecting from his own problems

TIA GOLDENBERG

After the International Criminal Court’s top prosecutor sought arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, his defense minister and top Hamas officials, the Israeli leader accused him of being one of “the great antisemites in modern times.”

As protests roiled college campuses across the United States over the Gaza war, Netanyahu said they were awash with “antisemitic mobs.”

These are just two of the many instances during the war in which Netanyahu has accused critics of Israel or his policies of antisemitism, using fiery rhetoric to compare them to the Jewish people’s worst persecutors. But his detractors say he is overusing the label to further his political agenda and try to stifle even legitimate criticism, and that doing so risks diluting the term’s meaning at a time when antisemitism is surging worldwide.

“Not every criticism against Israel is antisemitic,” said Tom Segev, an Israeli historian. “The moment you say it is antisemitic hate ... you take away all legitimacy from the criticism and try to crush the debate.”

The Hamas Chief and the Israeli Who Saved His Life

Jo Becker and Adam Sella

This is how Dr. Yuval Bitton remembers the morning of Oct. 7. Being jolted awake just after sunrise by the insistent ringing of his phone. The frantic voice of his daughter, who was traveling abroad, asking, “Dad, what’s happened in Israel? Turn on the TV.”

News anchors were still piecing together the reports: Palestinian gunmen penetrating Israel’s vaunted defenses, infiltrating more than 20 towns and military bases, killing approximately 1,200 people and dragging more than 240 men, women and children into Gaza as hostages.

Even in that first moment, Dr. Bitton says, he knew with certainty who had masterminded the attack: Yahya Sinwar, the leader of Hamas in Gaza and Inmate No. 7333335 in the Israeli prison system from 1989 until his release in a prisoner swap in 2011.

How Ukraine Can Do More With Less

Keith L. Carter, Jennifer Spindel, and Matthew McClary

As the war in Ukraine enters its third spring, leaders from Brazil, China, the Vatican, and elsewhere have urged Ukraine to negotiate with Russia. Ukrainian forces are unlikely to break through fortified Russian lines, the argument goes, and Kyiv should recognize the reality of Russia’s territorial annexation. Ukraine has successfully used drones to both surveil and attack Russian targets, but drones alone cannot win the war. And so, hampered by weapon and personnel shortages, Ukraine will not be able to reclaim territory. Russia has successfully turned this fight into an attritional struggle in which Moscow holds several advantages: a larger population, greater defense industrial capacity, and well-prepared defenses in the Donbas, Kherson, and especially Crimea. Given the fatigue among its Western supporters and the inconsistency of their material support, this is a type of war Ukraine simply cannot win.

It is true that going toe-to-toe, shell-for-shell with Russia is no longer a viable strategy for Ukraine. But Kyiv does not need to give up; instead, it needs a new approach. A better strategy would economize on the use of Ukrainian forces and conserve the limited material they receive from the United States and European partners. Ukraine must adjust the way it organizes, equips, and thinks about the war, switching out head-on confrontation with Russian forces for an asymmetric, guerrilla-style approach. Doing so will no doubt prolong the fighting, but a pivot to unconventional warfare offers the best chance for Ukraine to chip away at Russian resolve, both on the frontlines and at home.

Quantum-Enhanced Radars Revolutionise Air and Space Warfare: Dr. Michal Krelina’s Insight

Dr. Michal Krelina from the Czech Technical University in Prague explores the potential of quantum-enhanced radars and electronic warfare in a recent article. Quantum technology, which harnesses properties like superposition and entanglement at the fundamental level of individual quantum systems, has significant potential in military applications. Quantum-enhanced radars could offer improved sensitivity, particularly in detecting targets with minimal radar cross-sections and weak return signals. Quantum clocks could refine GPS accuracy to the picosecond level. Quantum transducers could improve efficiency in complex signal-processing tasks. Companies like Honeywell and British Telecom are already developing and testing these technologies.

Quantum Technologies: Transforming Radars and Electronic Warfare

Quantum Technology (QT) is a rapidly evolving field that leverages quantum properties such as superposition and entanglement at the fundamental level of individual quantum systems, including electrons, ions, and atoms. This article explores the potential of quantum-enhanced radars and electronic warfare, focusing on their near to mid-term operational viability, particularly in the air and space domains.

Quantum-Enhanced Radars: A New Era in Sensing and Imaging

Quantum-enhanced radars harness the power of quantum properties to improve radar capabilities. Two promising technologies in this area are based on Rydberg atoms and Nitrogen-Vacancy (NV) centres, both applicable for narrow and wideband RF scanning and reception.

30 May 2024

Raghuram G. Rajan Says More…

Raghuram G. Rajan and Rohit Lamba: This is a very good question, and there seems to be much confusion about how India can generate jobs for the future. The received wisdom is that state-subsidized manufacturing – the development path taken by most East Asian countries – is the only way. But manufacturing’s share of jobs in India has not changed much since the early 1980s; those leaving agriculture have instead been absorbed largely by the services and construction sectors. In line with this experience, we see enormous potential today to create a huge number of jobs in tradable services (both direct services and those embedded in manufacturing), as well as more traditional services (such as retail and transportation).

As you note, India is already emerging as a global leader in services exports, accounting for around 5% of global trade in services, compared to less than 2% of trade in manufacturing. Improved communication technologies (think Zoom and Webex) and changes to the rules of business etiquette (meeting a new client virtually is now seen as perfectly acceptable) have made it possible to provide even direct services, like consulting or telemedicine, at a distance.

Modi’s Middling Economy

Rohit Lamba and Raghuram Rajan

On June 4, after counting roughly 650 million votes, the Election Commission of India is scheduled to announce the winner of the 2024 parliamentary elections. Polls suggest it will be the Bharatiya Janata Party, led by Prime Minister Narendra Modi. If the BJP is voted back to power after a ten-year tenure, it would be a remarkable feat, driven largely by the prime minister’s personal popularity. According to an April poll by Morning Consult, 76 percent of Indians approve of him.

There are multiple theories for why Modi is so popular. Some attribute it to the fact that he has advanced the “Hindutva” agenda, which views India from a Hindu-first lens. Despite the periodic dog whistles against Muslims during the elections by Modi and his lieutenants, this agenda is a primary electoral concern for only a small fraction of India’s voters. In the 2019 elections, BJP’s vote share nationally was less than 38 percent, and obviously, an even smaller share are committed to the othering of religious minorities.

Another explanation is that Modi has managed the economy well, with India recently overtaking the United Kingdom to become the fifth-largest economy in the world, and soon surpassing stagnant Germany and Japan to become the third largest. His economic stewardship, some experts argue, is setting up the country and its 1.4 billion people to succeed in the future.

America’s New Island Fighters Are Preparing for Conflict—a Stone’s Throw From Taiwa

Niharika Mandhana

The U.S. and Philippine marines arrived in waves on this little island nearly 100 miles from the southern tip of Taiwan. A platoon clutching automatic rifles and machine guns sprang from Black Hawks and took up positions around the airfield. In a whirl of hot air and dust, Chinook helicopters lowered dozens more men.

They unloaded fuel cans, sacks of ready-to-eat meals and cases of medical supplies, small drones and satellite-communications gear—everything they would need for a three-day stay.

If their ride had continued north, they would reach Taiwan in less than an hour.

This was a military exercise, the guns had no ammunition and the Javelin missile launcher had no missiles. But the marines were preparing for a real-world conflict, fine-tuning a strategy they see as critical to fighting China in its neighborhood—from strings of islands close to it.

What If China Chooses to Blockade Taiwan Rather Than Invade?

Brandon J. Weichert

There’s a debate raging in defense circles about how China plans to press forward with its goal to take Taiwan. Some believe the People’s Republic of China is readying to conduct a massive amphibious invasion of Taiwan.

Others experts, notably in the U.S. Navy, challenge this assessment. They think that the Chinese will use a slower, more methodical method to reabsorb Taiwan, deploying a long-term blockade. This would be supplemented by other non-kinetic approaches such as economic pressure and cyberspace brinkmanship.

China is developing the means to hit Taiwan hard and fast. I remain convinced that Beijing has the capabilities to attempt an amphibious landing this year. That would be a very big risk, however, for Chinese President Xi Jinping, who is already feeling political pressure at home after his failed economic policies and disastrous COVID response protocols.

How Is China Responding to the Inauguration of Taiwan’s President William Lai?

On May 23, 2024, China commenced large-scale military exercises surrounding Taiwan, called “Joint Sword-2024A.” The drills came just three days after Taiwan’s new president William Lai gave his inauguration speech. Chinese officials stated that the drills are intended to “serve as a strong punishment for the separatist acts of ‘Taiwan independence’ forces and a stern warning against the interference and provocation by external forces.” This activity by the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) was accompanied by what China called “comprehensive law enforcement operations” involving China’s coast guard around two of Taiwan’s offshore islands.

This is the third round of major escalatory military exercises China has held around Taiwan, following unprecedented exercises in August 2022 and another round in April 2023. How is this exercise different from the prior ones? What does this exercise reveal about China’s approach towards Taiwan? What was China’s rationale for engaging in these exercises, and what other non-military activities has China taken?

China’s secret spacecraft drops another mysterious object in space, says U

Christopher McFadden

According to the U.S. Space Force, China’s unnamed spaceplane appears to have released another object into space. The nature of the object is unknown, but it has been given the name 59884 (International designator 2023-195G).

China’s spaceplane has been in orbit for over 165 days, with the new object being spotted on May 24. The spaceplane first arrived in orbit on December 14, 2023.

Since then, the spaceplane has been orbiting Earth, deploying other strange objects or emitting strange signals. While the nature of the new object is unclear, some, like Jonathan McDowell of the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics, have some ideas.

China’s spaceplane releases another object

The spaceplane used a released object to perform multiple recaptures as part of on-orbit testing during its second flight.

“A new object (59884/2023-195G) has been cataloged associated with the Chinese CSSHQ spaceplane in a 602 x 608 km x 50.0 deg orbit. It seems to have been ejected about 1900 UTC May 24,” McDowell posted on X.

China-Proofing Asia

MOHAMMED SOLIMAN

China's Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), Beijing’s ambitious international infrastructure strategy, prompted a scramble in Washington and Brussels for a Western response. Perceived as a comprehensive Chinese statecraft initiative aimed at reshaping Eurasia's geoeconomic and geopolitical landscape, every Chinese overseas investment became, in Western eyes, part of the BRI. Indeed, the BRI itself became a catch-all for Western anxieties about Chinese economic power and influence, both justified and unfounded, leading to misinterpretations of Chinese actions and, more importantly, trepidation about China's rise and the West’s own relative decline.

The BRI's launch coincided with a seismic shift in American trade policy. The 2016 U.S. presidential election saw both Republican candidate Donald Trump and Democratic primary contender Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) criticize free trade's impact on America. Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, the eventual Democratic nominee, remained the sole national voice in favor of free trade—but she had to pivot her messaging and policy proposals to adjust to the new realities of American politics. The bipartisan consensus on trade fractured, and Trump ushered in a new era of growing support for industrial policy and trade restrictions. This shift continued under the Biden administration with in policies like the Inflation Reduction Act, the CHIPS Act, and a cautious approach to new trade deals due to domestic political considerations.

The Shallow Roots of Iran’s War With Israel

Ali M. Ansari

In early April, the cold war between Iran and Israel suddenly turned hot. A dramatic Israeli air attack in Damascus that killed seven senior commanders in Iran’s Revolutionary Guard Corps put Iranian leaders in a bind. If they launched a commensurate military response, they risked an escalation that could destabilize the very foundations of their regime. If they did not, they faced a credibility crisis among their own hard-liners and allies in Iran’s axis of resistance, a network that includes Hamas in the Gaza Strip, Hezbollah in Lebanon, the Houthis in Yemen, and various Iranian-backed militias in Iraq and Syria, several of which were already chafing at Iran’s restraint in responding to the war in Gaza.

In the end, through a mixture of telegraphing and technical incompetence, Iran’s leaders managed to produce a Goldilocks outcome. On April 13, they launched a massive aerial assault on Israel with more than 300 missiles and drones. But sound Western intelligence and the advanced warning technology and air defenses deployed by Israel and its allies ensured that there was little damage. Iran’s supreme leader, Ali Khamenei, proclaimed that it was the attack itself and not the “hitting of the target” that mattered. Israel was encouraged to “take the win” and, after a restrained retaliation of its own, the status quo between the two sworn enemies was restored with surprising alacrity.

Saudi Arabia Is Becoming One of Biden's Most Important Swing States

Tom O'Connor

As President Joe Biden prepares to fight for reelection this November across a contentious battleground of U.S. states, the White House also finds itself vying for influence among several increasingly critical players on the world stage, among them a long-standing partner in the midst of groundbreaking changes in its policies at home and abroad.

At just 38 years old, Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman of Saudi Arabia is one of the world's youngest de facto heads of state and is the driving force behind a nationalist agenda that is taking hold in the kingdom. His father, 88-year-old King Salman, has led since 2015 but has increasingly handed over control to his seventh son since naming him next to rule in 2017 and prime minister in 2022, particularly amid growing concerns over the monarch's health.

The transformation overseen by Crown Prince Mohammed, often referred to simply as MbS, has led to substantial shifts in the kingdom's domestic outlook, which has embraced a more globalized character and a transition away from oil dependence, among other initiatives in line with the youngest-ever heir to the throne's ambitious Vision 2030 plan. It's also prompted a recalibration of foreign relations and the pursuit of more robust ties with other leading powers, including top U.S. rivals China and Russia.

What If Iran Already Has the Bomb?

Arash Azizi

There’s rarely a dull moment in Iranian affairs. The past few months alone have seen clashes with Israel and Pakistan, and a helicopter crash that killed Iran’s president and foreign minister. But spectacular as these events are, the most important changes often happen gradually, by imperceptible degrees.

One such change took a while to register but is now obvious to all: In a sharp departure from a years-long policy, Iran’s leading officials are now openly threatening to build and test a nuclear bomb.

Earlier this month, Kamal Kharazi, a former foreign minister, said that Tehran had the capacity to build a bomb and that, if it faced existential threats, it could “change its nuclear doctrine.”

“When Israel threatens other countries, they can’t sit silent,” he said in an interview with Al-Jazeera Arabic on May 9.

Putin’s Peace Plan

George Friedman

Under President Vladimir Putin, Russia invaded Ukraine under the assumption that Ukraine’s defeat would be rapid and complete, bringing Russia to NATO’s eastern border. Russia has failed to achieve its goals, of course, misreading Ukraine’s defense intelligence and underestimating the intentions of the United States and Germany, which Moscow assumed would accommodate some kind of resolution when Russian oil would stop flowing. Instead, the U.S. sent massive amounts of weapons to Kyiv, Germany made do without Russian energy, and Ukraine continued to hold most of its territory.

The underlying problem was that the Russian military was not prepared to wage the war. For this reason, Putin brought in the Wagner Group, the private defense organization in which he appeared to have more confidence than his own commanders. The Wagner Group and Russian senior staff engaged in progressively intense battles over strategy and the allocation of supplies, culminating in an insurrection and, later, an aircraft crash that killed the Wagner commander. Since then, Putin has had to rely on the regular army’s command, resulting in an inability to impose a decisive victory.

What Ukraine Hawks Miss About the War

Dominick Sansone

Hakeem Jeffries’s recent appearance on 60 Minutes was a perfect encapsulation of present discourse on the war in Ukraine.

The House Minority leader condemned both his Republican counterparts and a major fraction of the country for being “pro-Putin” on account of their aversion to sending further aid to Ukraine while the situation on the U.S. border continues to deteriorate. According to this argument, there was no rational reason to oppose the previously stalled $61 billion funding package, outside of directly supporting the Russian government.

Jeffries specifically discounts Senator J.D. Vance’s argument that the new aid will simply prolong the war. Kiev does not have access to the productive capacity nor the manpower requirements to seriously alter the strategic dynamics of the conflict. Nonetheless, Jeffries offers a convenient if less than erudite counterargument that mixes equal parts gambler’s and sunk cost fallacies: Kiev has been able to hold off Russian forces for more than two years, so they must be able to do it indefinitely.

“This has been a strategic success by any definition,” Jeffries concluded.

Is Putin Preparing for Nuclear War?

Paul Dibb

On 6 May, Russian President Vladimir Putin announced he had authorised a military exercise involving the deployment of tactical nuclear weapons in southern Russia. He claimed there was ‘nothing unusual’ in such a planned training exercise.

But to my knowledge this is the first time such an announcement has been made since the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991. This exercise also involved the transfer of some tactical nuclear weapons to Belarus. This was also the first move of such warheads outside Russia since the fall of the USSR.

Moscow said it was deploying tactical nuclear weapons after what it said were military threats from France, Britain and the United States. The Pentagon has since said it has seen no change to the alert status of Russia’s strategic nuclear forces—as distinct from tactical nuclear forces—despite ‘irresponsible rhetoric’ from Moscow detailing plans for exercises involving the deployment of non-strategic nuclear weapons.

The day sleeping American patriots woke up - Op-E

William Haupt III

“I fear all we have done is to awaken a sleeping giant and fill him with a terrible resolve.”

– Naval Admiral Isoroku Yamamoto, Japanese Commander at Pearl Harbor December 7, 1941

Seventy-eight years ago, on December 7, 1941, a Japanese strike force unleashed 353 warplanes on Pearl Harbor in Hawaii. Relations between the two nations went south when the U.S. stopped exporting oil, metals and other war items to Japan after they invaded China in 1937. The U.S. had not interfered since Japan was a trading partner. But when Japan and Germany signed their Anti-Comintern Pact in 1936, the U.S. considered this necessary to curtail Japan’s assault against the Chinese and their quest to form a world military empire with Germany and Italy. The U.S. went the extra mile to avoid this conflict and was confident their laissez faire foreign policies were working.

The most devastating strike on U.S. soil in history lasted over two hours. Japanese warplanes sank or severely damaged 18 U.S. warships and demolished 200 military aircraft. Over 3,000 American servicemen and civilians tragically sacrificed their lives on this first day through “the gates of hell” on the high seas for freedom.

The Dangerous Incoherence of US Trade Policy

STEPHEN S. ROACH

The United States does not have a coherent trade policy. It has a political strategy masquerading as trade policy that has taken dead aim at China. Unsurprisingly, China has responded in kind. With the two superpowers drawing on their allies for support – the US leaning on the G7 and China turning to the Global South – economic decoupling is the least of our problems.

It is easy to blame US Presidents Donald Trump and Joe Biden for this unfortunate turn of events – Trump for firing the first shot in the Sino-American trade war, and Biden for doubling down on protectionism. Yet the problems predate both presidents – they stem largely from a decades-long misunderstanding of the role foreign trade plays in open economies.

Politicians tend to see trade balances in black and white: surpluses are good, deficits are bad. For the US, where the merchandise trade balance has been in deficit for all but two years since 1970, trade is viewed as bad – a source of leakage in an otherwise strong economy that puts pressure on jobs, companies, communities, and incomes.

Why the Gaza war is tearing the West apart

HUGH BREAKEY

The recent Gaza war protests and counterprotests roiling universities around the world have attracted vocal supporters and critics alike. Protesters have occupied buildings on campuses from Los Angeles to Paris to Melbourne, and police have intervened to break up encampments, at times with violent altercations.

Clashes between pro-Israel and pro-Palestinian protesters have also become commonplace outside universities, while people on both sides of the debate have been subjected to doxing, harassment and abuse.

US President Joe Biden warned of a “ferocious surge” of antisemitism in the United States, while the Australian government has established an inquiry to report on racism at universities. Hate crimes are on the rise across Europe, as well.

What’s going on? Why has this issue over the war in Gaza – compared to all the other controversies and crises we face – become so fraught, and the debate so toxic?

There are some straightforward reasons why the Gaza war attracts attention and activism.

The lost war in Gaza is not the end of Israel - opinion

MARK LAVIE

Yes, Israel has lost the war in Gaza.

No, it’s not the bitter, bloody end of the Jewish state.

When Israeli Prime Minister Golda Meir famously said that if the Arabs lose a war, they lose a war, but if Israel loses a war, it loses everything, she was right—for her time. The 1973 war threatened Israel’s existence. Heroic Israeli army operations and a huge American airlift of weapons and ammunition saved the Jewish state but left it in a deep, decades-long trauma.

The pogrom of last October 7, when Hamas sent thousands of bloodthirsty terrorists across the border and killed, maimed, mutilated, and raped more than 1,200 Israelis, most of them civilians, taking more than 200 hostages, equally traumatized Israelis. However, the state itself was never in danger of destruction. Israel is many times stronger than it was in 1973. Today, defeat in war is painful, but it does not mean losing everything.

And defeat it is. Israel has failed to achieve its stated goals: wiping out Hamas and returning all the hostages.

Today’s Generals and Admirals, Children of a Lesser God

Gary Anderson

It was 2012 when I first realized that our current group of four star military leaders are largely inept at best and incompetent at worst. I was serving as a Department of State advisor in Afghanistan, and it became obvious that the four star American who commanded all NATO forces (ISAF) was either ignorant or willfully ignoring the fact that the Afghan Army would never be able to take over the war effort. Despite this, he was enthusiastically carrying out the Obama administration's "Afghanization" program which was transferring military responsibility for whole districts and provinces to Afghan Army control despite the actual situation on the ground. That's when I became convinced that we were losing the war. Nearly everyone realized this except the generals who were running it. While home on leave, I accepted an invitation from an old friend who was a high ranking Defense Department official to visit him at the Pentagon and give my impression of the war. When I expressed my pessimism, he was shocked. He had been receiving optimistic reports from the field.

As the decade progressed, this trend continued downhill. It became increasingly obvious that the senior officers of the Navy had lost control of their shipbuilding and ship repair programs and had no idea how to fix the problem. The dysfunction persists today. The recent ignominious return to home port of the USS Boxer just a few days after it had sailed and the problems aboard the aircraft carrier George Washington are emblematic of the dire situation.

The idiotic 2019 decision by the then Commandant of the Marine Corps to shift the focus of the Corps from that of a world-wide force in readiness to a China-centric anti ship organization was met with disbelief by the entire retired community. Dissent in the active duty ranks recently forced his successor to issue a gag order to the students at the Marine Corps Command and Staff College from criticizing the new doctrine.

Ukraine War Maps Reveal Russian Advances Along Whole Front Line

Isabel van Brugen

Russian forces have advanced along the front line in Ukraine, battlefield maps published by a U.S. think tank show, as Ukraine warns that Moscow is preparing for a major offensive in the east.

Maps released by the Institute for the Study of War (ISW), a U.S.-based think tank, on Sunday, show that Russian forces have made progress in Ukraine's Luhansk and Donetsk regions, which together comprise the Donbas.

The Kremlin has been pushing for the total capture of the Donetsk and Luhansk regions since Russia's initial invasion of eastern Ukraine in 2014.

In the Luhansk region, Russian forces advanced northwest of the city of Svatove, and geolocated footage published on Sunday indicates that they recently advanced into the rural settlement of Ivanivka, northwest of Svatove, the ISW said.

Mapping Russia’s Sudden Push Across Ukrainian Lines

Marco Hernandez

All of a sudden, Russian forces are making progress in many directions at once.

In recent days, Russian troops have surged across the border from the north and opened a new line of attack near Kharkiv, Ukraine’s second-largest city, capturing settlements and villages and forcing thousands of civilians to flee.

It may be a feint. The real goal may be to divert already-weakened Ukrainian forces from critical battles elsewhere. But one thing is clear: The map of battle in Ukraine looks a lot different today than it did only a week ago.

Ukraine is more vulnerable than at any time since the harrowing first weeks of the 2022 invasion, a range of soldiers and commanders have said in interviews.

It is too soon to know if the war in Ukraine has hit a turning point. But Russia’s progress isn’t just in the northeast.

Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)