For the last 20 years, the Western Alliance has focused its warfighting capacity on Counter Insurgency Warfare. Driven by reckless engagements in the Middle East, the Hindu Kush and North Africa, our thinking, equipment procurement...1/n
...force organisation and training has been focused on this type of war. Often, it involves fighting in urban or mountainous environments, but always in small scale, low intensity engagements against a lightly armed enemy, while having total air, informational and EM...2/n
...dominance. Armour isn't much used, and artillery is static and used for fire support against outmatched opponents. Mechanised, high-intensity, combined arms warfare is an entirely different matter. It requires a great deal of training in mass to be able to manoeuvre...3/n
...rockets, artillery, tanks, air support and missiles onto the enemy's position, while not allowing him to do likewise. It involves punching holes in defensive lines, striking deep into the enemy's strategic space, and destroying his ability to fight in a high intensity...4/n
...awesomely destructive series of manoeuvre battles. Insofar as we civilians have any knowledge of this sort of warfare, it comes from our collective memory of the Second World War. We tend to assume that combined arms war on open ground (like Ukraine's) would be like that...5/n
...but with more modern weapons. Wrong. The speed, violence and kinetic force of such warfare has increased exponentially. Armenia lost 40% of its in-theatre tanks and 60% of its air defences within the first 30 minutes of its recent war against Azerbaijan. And that was...6/n
...in territory far more defensible than Ukraine. The Russian Army has spent the last twenty years training intensively to fight exactly this sort of war. They have the equipment for it. They're good at it. There is nothing -- repeat, NOTHING -- that Britain, the EU or US...7/n
...can send Ukraine to stop them. I feel sick to say that when it happens, we will be educated on the horror of this sort of war, because it has a capacity we can barely comprehend to chew up men, material and entire economies.
There must be a better solution than that. ENDS
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Our story centres on three events in 1955-56. Two are barely known and the third is misunderstood, but they created modern Britain. The first event was the publication of The Future of Socialism by Anthony Crosland, the Oxford academic and Labour MP. No book has had more... 2/n
...influence on postwar British society. In it, Crosland argued that the Labour Party should stop focusing solely on economic policy as a means to achieve its socialist ends: there was more than one way to skin a cat. Instead of attempting to control the commanding...3/n
The third is a superb piece from Rob Lee (@RALee85) on the current military buildup on the Ukrainian borders and what might come next. I also recommend following his Twitter feed, which is cataloguing the build-up in real time.
People might also like to take ten minutes to listen to the below podcast, which offers an insight into Russia's vulnerability to sanctions, and thus Western leverage.
🇪🇺 This is the sort of 'strategic autonomy' Macron (and many in Brussels) want: deciding European issues to the exclusion of the US. It's exactly what they *should* be doing if that's what they want.
🇷🇺 If not handled carefully, it might...2/n
...allow Russia to triangulate and weaken everybody's negotiating position.
🇪🇺 It must have infuriated the EU that the US was deciding on the affairs of the EU's near abroad but excluding Brussels, Paris and Berlin.
🇪🇺 This is likely to help France cleave closer to Germany...3/n
Is sending arms to Ukraine a move of deep geostrategic wisdom by the Foreign Office? A THREAD mostly aimed at @JezzaCorncob and @DominicLawson.
If the EU could ever get its act together and form a unified military, it would pose an existential risk to Britain. Such an... 1/n
...armed force is highly unlikely, given the political and national interests involved. However, if it *did* happen, and the UK was on the outside, British trade and even regulation would ultimately continue at the grace of the EU, and the UK would have to maintain friendly...2/n
...relations with the EU on EU terms. It is therefore crucial (from a realpolitik perspective) that the UK does not allow this to happen. The traditional means for this has been to sow discord and act as a swing power to balance European powers against eachother...3/n
In his 2016 documentary film, HyperNormalisation, Adam Curtis explains that by the 1980s, Soviet leaders had realised that their vision for a socialist society had failed. They could not predict accurately and could not...1/n
...micromanage everything. However, they were so involved the system they had built that they could not think of any alternatives. So instead, they pretended that things were getting better as they traveled along the road to a socialist utopia. Aleksi Yurchak...2/n
...the Leningrad-born professor of anthropology at Berkeley, explained what it was like to live through this period in his book, 'Everything Was Forever, Until It Was No More: The Last Soviet Generation'. He wrote that the citizenry knew the leaders were lying; however, the...3/n