Indian Strategic Studies: 01/19/26

19 January 2026

China Won’t Save Iran’s Regime – But Chinese Surveillance Technology Might

William Figueroa

The outbreak of mass protests in Iran amid economic disaster and ongoing foreign aggression poses a serious challenge to the leadership of the Islamic Republic of Iran. While the unrest raised serious questions about the survival of the regime, even among those who are normally skeptical of such claims, the brutal and technologically sophisticated crackdown that followed was as effective as it was ruthless. The protests have slowed under violent repression, and despite Trump’s reckless claims that “help is on the way,” the United States does not seem to be gearing up for another military campaign. Caught between American bombs and Iranian bullets, ordinary Iranians are the ones who suffer the most.

Given the dramatic events that have unfolded, the cautious and relatively muted response of China, arguably Iran’s most significant economic and political partner, took many observers by surprise. Mao Ning, the spokesperson of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, struck an initially cautious tone when she called for the Iranian government and people to “overcome the current difficulties and uphold stability.” Foreign Minister Wang Yi condemned U.S. threats to intervene as a return to the “law of the jungle,” and juxtaposed American aggression with China’s offer to play a “constructive role” to help the Iranian people and the government “stand united.” Other than these statements, no concrete actions have been taken.

Taiwan’s Probable Risk Scenario Shifts to Potential Blitzkrieg

Jens Kastner

Although the bulk of Taiwan observers wargaming Beijing’s takeover of Taiwan tend to see a naval blockade choking it into negotiations for annexation as the most probable course, the latest developments in Latin America are raising the odds for a more violent approach even though Chinese success is not certain, a survey and online research by Asia Sentinel suggests.

The US’s capture of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro on January 3 triggered a flood of commentary on Chinese social media calling for the China’s People’s Liberation Army (PLA) to replicate the same kind of military operation against what officials regard as a renegade province and arrest the political leadership to quickly solve Beijing’s self-perceived Taiwan problem.

War, diplomacy, or revolt: What comes next in Iran?

Nadeen Ebrahim

After a week of the largest nationwide demonstrations in years, the streets of Iran have once again fallen silent, subdued by force. One resident of Tehran compared the mood in the capital to the days around Nowruz, the Iranian New Year, when many leave the city and shops close early. But there’s no festive cheer, only eerie quiet, they said. Life carries on in the shadow of a deadly crackdown on protesters and under the specter of a potential new military faceoff with the United States. The Islamic Republic hopes to celebrate the 47th anniversary of the revolution that brought it to power next month. It will bring out crowds and blast revolutionary tunes. Yet the mood in the halls of power in Tehran is likely to be far less celebratory, as the regime faces the biggest threat to its survival yet.

It may have been able to crush the latest wave of protests using its tried-and-tested playbook of repression. But the fundamental grievances animating protesters haven’t gone away.

How did we get here?

US paralysis on Iran crisis owes to Navy capacity gaps

Julian McBride

The ongoing Iranian protests and the Islamic Republic’s brutal repression have led to widespread massacres nationwide, with far-reaching regional and geopolitical implications. Amid the crackdown, both the US and Israeli governments have prepared numerous contingencies should the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) and Basij militia’s murderous repression continue to escalate.

This week, US President Donald Trump told Iran’s anti-regime protesters US “help is on the way” and that he had canceled US meetings with Iranian officials “until the senseless killings stop.” On January 2, he said the US was “locked and loaded” and ready to “rescue” protesters if Iran used lethal force against them.

Thinking Carefully About Iran at a Dangerous Moment

A few days ago, I got a message from a West Point classmate. He knows my background, knows where I’ve spent most of my adult life—Special Forces, the Pentagon, the intelligence community—and he didn’t dress it up. He asked me straight out: “Are you tracking what’s happening in Iran, and what do you think we should do?”

That question stuck with me.

Not because I don’t have views on Iran—I’ve had them for decades—but because it forced me to stop reacting to headlines and start thinking through the problem the way we were trained to: clearly, sequentially, and without comforting illusions. Iran is dangerous. The protesters are brave. U.S. rhetoric is escalating. And the margin for error is shrinking.

If We Want to Help the Iranians, We Should Disrupt the IRGC

Gary Anderson

President Trump is considering military intervention to protect Iran’s legitimate protesters from the regime. I am not necessarily recommending intervention, but if we do, I have some thoughts on how it should be done. Unlike Venezuela, where targeting President Maduro was seen as a critical first step to modifying the government, the center of gravity of the Iranian regime is the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC). It is the glue that holds the rotting edifice together. The frightened old men who constitute the Grand Ayatollah and his Guardian Council are nothing without them, nor are the various ministries that comprise the executive branch of the government; they are technocrats and bureaucrats who have no real power outside their narrow responsibilities.

The IRGC is more powerful than the regular armed forces or the police. If it is nullified, the regime collapses under pressure from the mob. Unlike the Taliban and ISIS, the IRGC is very vulnerable to both air and cyber attack. In contrast to the Iranian nuclear program, the IRGC’s internal security forces have to operate in the open from fixed bases to intimidate the general public. We know where their key facilities are. They are not well hardened underground. Their Quds Force special operators are primarily geared toward supporting overseas terrorist groups; they may be relatively covert, but that limits their usefulness against civilian demonstrators.

Is Iran Headed Towards a Persian Spring?

Gordon Gray

Synopsis and Key Points: Former U.S. Ambassador to Tunisia Gordon Gray draws striking parallels between the current 2026 protests in Iran and the 2011 Arab Spring.

-Following the collapse of Syria’s Bashar al-Assad in December 2024, Gray argues that Tehran faces a similar existential crisis driven by economic ruin and a loss of dignity. While the regime has survived five uprisings since 2009 due to the loyalty of the IRGC, Gray warns that “brittle” autocracies eventually shatter.

How Trump’s Foreign Policy Gambits Are Reshaping the World

Brian Bennett and Nik Popli

Four weeks before the beginning of his second term as President, Donald Trump abruptly floated the idea of taking back the Panama Canal. It had been a quarter-century since the U.S. formally ceded to Panama ownership of the channel connecting the Atlantic and Pacific oceans. With one social media post, Trump threw a seemingly stable relationship off-kilter, accusing Panama of overcharging U.S. ships for passage and recklessly permitting China too much influence in the canal’s operations.

Looking back, it was an early sign of how America’s relationship with the rest of the world was about to be shaken to its core. Trump’s maximalist threat sent his foreign policy advisers scrambling. Within days of his Inauguration, military planners started work on options for taking the canal by force, according to a former Trump Administration official. “We’re going to take it back, or something very powerful is going to happen,” Trump warned. Ultimately, no military operation was necessary. Panama’s President José Raúl Mulino quickly and quietly agreed to a number of concessions, including re-examining Chinese investment in the country.

Trump Is Making China Great Again

Catherine Rampell

SOMEONE ALERT the Norwegian Nobel Committee: Against the odds, Donald Trump has succeeded in peacefully uniting the world. Unfortunately, the world has been united against us.

This Pax (Ex) Americana era was illustrated Friday, as Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney wrapped up a trip to China. This wasn’t just any old visit, either: It marked the first time a Canadian PM had been to the world’s second-largest economy since 2017—and based on the glamorous video Carney’s team released, it was a smashing success for Beijing.

Carney and Chinese President Xi Jinping unveiled a “new strategic partnership” between the two countries. Among the key planks of this agreement, China will reduce tariffs on Canadian canola seed, peas, and lobsters. It will also allow visa-free travel for Canadians, who are apparently eager for new tourism destinations.1 Canada, in turn, will allow 49,000 Chinese electric vehicles into its market at lower tariff rates.

The Stain of American Timidity

Mike Nelson

In the summer of 2003, I was a newly promoted captain in the 82nd Airborne trying to convince an Iraqi Shiite university professor to take more of a leadership role in the emerging district council we were establishing in Rashid, the southern portion of Baghdad. While U.S. forces had taken control of the Iraqi capital to celebrations and the toppling of statues, there was still an air of uncertainty about the future. Saddam Hussein had not been captured yet, and there was a fear he would return to power if America lost interest in transforming Iraq. Those we were asking to stand up and stick their necks out had questions—namely, could they count on Americans to help them rebuild Iraqi governance?

As we sat in the sweltering heat, the professor recounted to me that his father and older brother had risen up against Saddam in 1991 when asked to by President George H.W. Bush—part of a larger uprising by Shias and Kurds in the aftermath of the Gulf War—only to have those populations suffer massive casualties in a brutal crackdown by the Ba’athist government, while the U.S. largely sat idly by and observed. Eventually, these led to Operations Provide Comfort, Northern Watch, and Southern Watch to enforce no-fly zones and provide humanitarian aid—but the damage was done. Tens of thousands of civilians lay dead. This professor went on to say we had done the same thing to the Czechs in 1968 and the Hungarians in 1956.

Trump and the Special Operations Panacea Reflections on the aftermath of the raid to capture Nicolas Maduro

Tim Ball

US Air Force crew chiefs watch as F-35A Lightning II’s taxi following military actions in Venezuela in support of Operation Absolute Resolve, Jan. 3, 2026. (US Airforce)

The recent raid to capture Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro appears to have been a nearly flawlessly executed special operation. Conducted by the Joint Special Operations Command (JSOC) with interagency support, the raid demonstrated the professionalism and expertise of America’s special operations community and will likely be used as a case study in the training of future special operators. While the raid’s tactical success is unquestioned, its aftermath raises the same historical issues with not only the use of special operations forces, but US-sponsored regime change as well. Even in the hands of disciplined civilian policymakers, competent special operations forces can appear as a tempting panacea, available to solve national security woes without the full commitment of the US military.

Trump’s Threats to Greenland Raise Serious Questions for NATO

Lara Jakes

Over the past year, President Trump has pushed NATO with threats and coercion to make divisive changes. Now he is threatening to seize control of Greenland, potentially with military force, which has heightened concerns that he will destroy the trans-Atlantic security alliance.

Leaders in Europe and Canada, which have depended on the United States for nearly 77 years as the alliance’s largest partner, are determined to not let that happen. Greenland is a semiautonomous territory of Denmark, which is a founding member of NATO. Top diplomats from Greenland and Denmark will defend the territory from Mr. Trump’s ambitions at the White House on Wednesday.

Trump Renews Threat on Greenland Before Meeting at White House

Amelia Nierenberg

The foreign ministers of Denmark and Greenland are expected to meet on Wednesday with Vice President JD Vance and Secretary of State Marco Rubio at the White House, with tensions rising over President Trump’s push to buy or take over Greenland.

It will be the first such meeting between the three governments over Greenland, a semiautonomous Danish territory. Apparently emboldened by the success of the U.S. military operation that led to the capture of Venezuela’s leader on Jan. 3, Mr. Trump said last week that he was “going to do something on Greenland, whether they like it or not.”

Information Advantage in the Indo-Pacific to Fight Digital Guerrilla Warfare and State-Sponsored Disinformation

Priya Batchu

The 1st Theater Information Advantage Detachment (TIAD) originated at Fort Shafter, Hawaii, on November 7, 2025. The 65-soldier Unit reflects the Army’s aggressive play for a tactical edge to fight digital guerrilla warfare in the Pacific’s gray-zone environments.

The 1st TIAD is a theater-level Army formation that supports U.S. Indo-Pacific Command, U.S. Army Pacific, Special Operations Command Pacific (SOCPAC), and other units of INDOPACOM. Special operations is one of the most information-sensitive elements in the U.S. military, so the 1st TIAD is in a unique position to support SOF.

Strategic Disruption from Orbit: Space-Based Capabilities for Irregular Warfare in the Indo-Pacific

Trent Keipour

During World War II, U.S. forces in the Pacific faced a vast and challenging expanse. Islands were isolated, supply lines were stretched thin, and intelligence was limited to the speed of ships, aircraft, or radios. Today, although the geography and the challenges that come with it remain unchanged, technological capabilities have advanced significantly. Warfighters now look beyond the horizon for an advantage; in fact, they look to orbit, where space has become the ultimate high ground. From that vantage point, modern forces gain essential capabilities in communication, navigation, intelligence, and targeting—capabilities that increasingly influence outcomes in conflict and require new strategic approaches for future operations.

This technological evolution is unfolding as the character of competition in the Indo-Pacific continues to shift. The region is increasingly shaped by irregular forms of competition including coercive infrastructure development through China’s Belt and Road Initiative, illegal fishing, gray-zone maritime pressure from state-affiliated militias, and malign operations designed to undermine democratic institutions. Yet many frontline partners, small island states, and midsized regional powers lack the surveillance, communication, and intelligence infrastructure to compete in this space.

The Balance of Nuclear Deterrence in Europe after the Cold War

Chick Edmond

Cold War-era nuclear deterrence is arguably the most complicated and challenging security concept faced by European states. With the rise of multipolar world order, the ways in which modern European states apply deterrence have evolved dramatically due to ongoing tensions in Ukraine and rapid advancements in technology.

To safeguard sovereignty, states continue to utilize all instruments of national security, and in many cases, acquiring or upgrading nuclear weapons. Such as how the United States and the Soviet Union amassed enormous nuclear arsenals to promote national security domestically and internationally in response to rising tensions and competition for global influence during the Cold War.

Maneuver to Victory: The Ideal Post-Operation Venezuela – Breaking the Cycle of Failed Interventions, Before the Mid-terms

Donald Vandergriff

The perfect post-3 January scenario for Operation Absolute Resolve (often referred to in strategic discussions as Operation Venezuela), from my perspective as a longtime advocate of mission command, maneuver warfare, and the generations of war framework, would represent a decisive break from the failed attrition-based approaches and prolonged occupations seen in past U.S. interventions.

The January 3, 2026, operation—codenamed Operation Absolute Resolve—captured Nicolás Maduro and his inner circle in a precision coup de main, blending 3rd Generation maneuver (rapid, decentralized exploitation) with 5th Generation enablers (information dominance, cyber-shaping, and non-kinetic isolation of the regime). This avoided the quagmires of 2nd Generation firepower-heavy occupations seen in Iraq or Afghanistan.

Did A Mysterious “Sonic Weapon” Really Aid Delta Force In Capturing Maduro?

Joseph Trevithick

Aviral and as-yet totally unsubstantiated claim that U.S. forces used a mysterious “sonic weapon” that left security forces bleeding and stunned during the recent operation to capture Venezuelan dictator Nicolas Maduro has been getting a ton of attention. The allegation – amplified, but not expressly confirmed by the White House – does add to years now of persistent rumors of weapons very loosely similar to this description being in use globally, with separate news on that front having broken just today. When it comes to the United States, this has been further fueled by decades of known work on directed energy weapons, including ones intended to produce novel auditory and less-than-lethal effects.

The sonic weapon claim looks to originate with a video posted on TikTok on January 9 by an individual who goes by Varela News (and who uses the handle @franklinvarela09). The Spanish-language clip is a purported interview with a member of the Venezuelan security forces who was involved in the response to the U.S. operation in Caracas just over a week ago. The contents of the clip gained wider traction online after Mike Netter shared an English transcription in a post on X that same day. Netter is a political commentator and advocate who describes himself as the “main proponent” of the failed 2021 effort to recall California Governor Gavin Newsom. He is now Vice Chair of an organization called Rebuild California and hosts a radio show on KABC, a Cumulus Media station that broadcasts in the Greater Los Angeles area.

AI Applied to Tackle Energy Conundrums For Modern Battlefields

Josh Luckenbaugh

The United States is determined to be the global leader in artificial intelligence, and just as important as the models themselves is having the computing power to run them. Both government and private sector entities are pursuing AI solutions that would work in the energy-constrained environment of the modern battlefield.

The Trump administration is looking to expand the country’s AI infrastructure. The Energy Department in July 2025 selected four sites — Idaho National Laboratory, Oak Ridge Reservation, Paducah Gaseous Diffusion Plant and Savannah River Site — where it will look to house AI data centers and energy generation projects.

The Trump Doctrine

Seth Cropsey

The U.S. attack on Venezuela, much like its attack on Iran’s nuclear facilities last summer, was an operational masterstroke that undermines China, Russia, and Iran. It may undermine deterrence. America’s adversary’s may conclude that the Trump Doctrine, which has now been employed twice, means the U.S. acts with decision only when the United States faces a sufficiently vulnerable enemy, and only if it can fulfill specific operational criteria. China, in particular, may assume it can simply present too thorny a target for American power to crack. The solution is for the Trump administration to move beyond tailored strikes, and to wage a large-scale effort against America’s enemies through economic, intelligence, and alliance means.

The raid that captured Venezuelan narco-terrorist-in-chief Maduro was an instance of spectacular planning. Only the United States could have conducted Operation ABSOLUTE RESOLVE. The U.S. used technical means and high-end human intelligence sources from a clandestine team inserted into Venezuela months before the strikes to build a detailed picture of Maduro’s daily habits. It combined this with a likely offensive cyber effort that disabled Venezuelan electricity just as the operation began. In turn, U.S. carrier aviation and aircraft deployed from the American homeland simultaneously jammed and attacked Venezuelan radars and air defense systems, creating a corridor for U.S. Delta Force operators to insert into Caracas, capture Maduro and his wife, and extract him within 30 minutes. Some luck was involved, of course, with one helicopter taking damage from low-level anti-air fire. But any threat that Venezuelan defenses posed was mitigated to the greatest possible extent.

The Guardian view on Europe’s crisis of self-confidence: a new mindset needed for new times

Another week, another set of dilemmas for Europe’s beleaguered political class to deal with. On Wednesday Brussels is due to outline the terms of the €90bn loan it has promised to Ukraine, amid internal tensions over whether Kyiv can use the money to buy US as well as EU weapons. On the same day, the US secretary of state, Marco Rubio, is due to meet ministers from Denmark and Greenland, as Donald Trump continues to insist that the US will take ownership of the latter “one way or another”. And as the body count of protesters rises in Iran, the EU is under mounting pressure to do more than merely “monitor” the situation, as the European Commission president, Ursula von der Leyen, somewhat feebly put it over the weekend.

Beyond the crisis management, a deeper reckoning is overdue after a tumultuous beginning to 2026. It has long been a truism that there is a profound mismatch between the EU’s economic heft and its geopolitical clout. But only a year into Mr Trump’s second term, the disjunction looks unsustainable in the “America first” era.

The Trouble With Regime Change What History Teaches About When and How to Pursue It

Richard Haassuary

For at least a decade, the conventional wisdom has been that direct attempts at regime change by the United States have ended in disaster. And for good reason. In Afghanistan, the very same Taliban that was dislodged in 2001 returned to power in 2021 after two decades of futile U.S. efforts. In Iraq, U.S. forces succeeded in permanently ending Saddam Hussein’s regime, but in no way was the result commensurate with the human, economic, strategic, and political costs. Then, in Libya, a U.S.-led NATO intervention intended to prevent the dictator Muammar

A massive Arctic military buildup will center on Greenland

Caroline Kennedy-Pipe

Donald Trump is clearly in a hurry to dominate the political narrative in his second term of office. He began 2026 with strikes in Syria against Islamic State groups, the kidnapping of Venezuelan president Nicolás Maduro, threats to intervene in Iran and the declaration that the US would take control of Greenland – by hook or by crook. Of all these the plan to add Greenland to the US either by negotiation or by force is easily the most controversial as it could lead to the break-up of the NATO alliance.

Greenland, the world’s largest island and a part of the kingdom of Denmark, has an abundance of critical minerals offering wealth and business opportunities. But the US president is also making a big deal out of the need to secure Greenland for US national security. He has repeatedly spoken of danger from Russia and China, whose ships, he says, stalk the island’s waters, most recently on Wednesday.

The Army Built an AI Talent Pipeline—But It’s Filled with Career-Killing Roadblocks - Modern War Institute

Nathaniel Fairbank

The Army is losing exactly the kind of artificial intelligence talent it insists it needs to win the next war. Only four of the seven Army Artificial Intelligence Scholars recently considered for on-time promotion to major were selected. That sub-60 percent promotion rate stands in sharp contrast to a population in which more than 80 percent of captains normally promote on time, with additional officers selected early. Not one of these scholars, nor any of the thirteen in the year group immediately behind them, was selected early. The three officers the Army declined to promote were not marginal performers: Collectively educated at West Point, Princeton, MIT, and Carnegie Mellon, one was among only three officers selected in 2021 for the program’s most technically rigorous track.

In practical terms, the Army chose not to promote officers—barely three years after finishing graduate school—in whom it had invested more than $350,000 each (counting tuition and the cost of pay and benefits while in school). In its first measurable test, the Army’s flagship AI talent pipeline produced worse promotion outcomes than the force at large, despite drawing some of the service’s most academically and technically competitive officers.

Grok is in, ethics are out in Pentagon’s new AI-acceleration strategy

Patrick Tucker

Seven projects are to lead the charge to embed artificial intelligence ever more deeply in military affairs.n The Pentagon’s third AI-acceleration strategy in four years sets up seven “pace-setting projects” that will “unlock critical foundational enablers” for other U.S. military efforts, the department announced Monday.

The six-page document also directs the department’s many components to fulfil a four-year goal to make their data centrally available for AI training and analysis. It omits any mention of ethical use of AI and casts suspicion on the concept of AI responsibility while banning the use of models that incorporate DEI-related “ideological ‘tuning.’”

Subscribe to: Comments (Atom)