Striking how much time UK chief of defence staff spends on Chinese military capabilities and practices in @Policy_Exchange speech unveiling new integrated operating concept. Cites "Unrestricted Warfare" by two PLA officers. Also name-checks @ASPI_org and @WarOnTheRocks.
Carter: new UK integrated operating concept (IOC): distinguishes between "operating" and "warfighting", and establishes need to compete below threshold of war to deter war. Requires "a campaign posture including continuous operating on our terms and in places of our choosing".
Carter: new UK "posture will be engaged and forward-deployed. Armed forces much more in use, rather that dedicated solely for contingencies, with training and exercises delivered as operations ... the willingness to commit decisively hard capability is essential ..."
Carter: Warfare increasingly "about hiding and finding", enabled by "digital backbone" into which you plug all "sensors, effectors and deciders". "Industrial age cap will increasingly have to make their sunset ... trick is how you find a path through the night".
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Important. "The US military strikes on three of Iran’s nuclear facilities last weekend did not destroy the core components of the country’s nuclear program and likely only set it back by months, according to an early US [DIA] intelligence assessment" edition.cnn.com/2025/06/24/pol…
Wow. 'Two of the people familiar w/ the assessment said Iran’s stockpile of enriched uranium was not destroyed. One of the people said the centrifuges are largely “intact.” “...the (DIA) assessment is that the US set them back maybe a few months, tops”...' edition.cnn.com/2025/06/24/pol…
And a caveat. "It is still early for the US to have a comprehensive picture of the impact of the strikes, and none of the sources described how the DIA assessment compares to the view of other agencies in the intelligence community." edition.cnn.com/2025/06/24/pol…
Pentagon briefing: “I know that battle damage is of great interest. Final battle damage will take some time, but initial battle damage assessments indicate that all three sites sustained extremely severe damage and destruction.”
Pentagon briefing: “In total, US forces employed approximately 75 precision guided weapons during this operation. This included, as the President stated last night, 14 30,000 pound GBU-57 Massive Ordnance penetrators, marking the first ever operational use of this weapon.”
Pentagon briefing: “our initial assessment… is that all of our precision munitions struck where we wanted them to strike and had the desired effect, which means especially in Fordo, which was the primary target here, we believe we achieved destruction of capabilities there”
1. Useful details here. “While some American officials find the Israeli estimate credible, others emphasized that the U.S. intelligence assessment remained unchanged” nytimes.com/2025/06/19/us/…
2. “American spy agencies believe that it could take several months, and up to a year, for Iran to make a weapon.” nytimes.com/2025/06/19/us/…
3. “new [White House] assessments echoed material provided by Mossad, Israel’s intelligence agency, which believes that Iran can achieve a nuclear weapon in 15 days.”
But: “None of the new assessments on the timeline to get a bomb are based on newly collected intelligence”
1. British Army CGS speaking at RUSI Land Warfare Conference: Today "nearly 100%" of army lethality comes from highly sophisticated crewed platforms. 100% of equip budget on sustaining that or buying next. But says army would los/e w these: "on the wrong side of the cost curve"
2. CGS says army will always need these sophisticated platforms at heart of land power. Aways need boots on ground &won't put them on ground without proper protected vehicles. But need to "layer around them a series of attritable platforms" to sense more & launch more munitions.
3. CGS argues that for price of two attack helicopters the army could instead “layer” disposable “mule drones” and “one way effectors” (attack drones) to go from 16 kills at 16km standoff to 200+ kills at 50+km standoff. That gets to 2x-3x “lethality” he argues.
'To reach even [Natanz] all the weapons available to the Israeli Air Force, and all except the 30,000 lbs GBU-57/B and the 5,000 lbs GBU 72/B available to the United States, would likely require several impacts into the same crater to ‘burrow’ down...' rusi.org/explore-our-re…
"For the FFEP [Fordow] and new facility at Natanz at an estimated 80-100 meters, possibly with layers of reinforced concrete, even the GBU-57/B [carried by B2/B21] would likely require multiple impacts at the same aiming point to have a good chance of penetrating the facility."
"Strikes with lesser penetrating weapons could still collapse entry and exit tunnels...However, unless a longer-term campaign were mounted with regular follow-up strikes, efforts to dig down...to re-establish access and supplies would likely begin almost immediately."
🧵A few other random observations from the Strategic Defence Review that caught my eye.
"much more rapid progress is needed in [carrier strike] evolution into ‘hybrid’ carrier airwings, whereby crewed combat aircraft (F-35B) are complemented by autonomous collaborative platforms in the air, and expendable, single-use drones"
Pretty interesting, but v non-committal.
"Exploring possible development from a Type 45 destroyer to a minimally crewed or autonomous air dominance system that could integrate directed energy weapons"