My new piece: how heavy are Russian casualties in Ukraine, and how do we know? It depends greatly on the assumptions one makes about wounded-to-killed ratios in war, which in turn hinges on military medicine and the evolution of tactics over the invasion. economist.com/europe/2022/07…
In the first & second world wars, roughly three soldiers were wounded for every one killed. That soared over the 20th century, as @tanishafaza's research shows. But the Russian ratio is lower: three to one, according to @CIA director Bill Burns last week. economist.com/europe/2022/07…
Other estimates posit a higher wounded to killed ratio. It's probably risen as artillery, which wounds through shrapnel, has come to play a dominant role. But high ratios that mean even modest numbers of deaths can equate to enormous casualties overall. economist.com/europe/2022/07…
.@tanishafazal's excellent paper on the topic is below. She points out: "because of improvements in military medicine, the same conflict that produced 1,200 fatalities in 1860 is likely to have produced 800 fatalities in 1980". But relatively more wounded. belfercenter.org/sites/default/…
.@KofmanMichael's thread from May is here. He notes: "The problem with higher range KIA counts is that you quickly develop input/output problems. There are more casualties than could feasibly be involved in the fight...certain numbers become implausible"
And now we have another US casualty estimate, which reinforces my point that Bill Burns’ public figure of 15,000 Russians killed & 60,000 casualties overall was chosen from the *lower* end of the US spectrum.
I’m going to go mad tracking these casualty estimates. Because a few weeks after the CIA director said 60,000 Russian casualties, DoD says 70-80,000. Different people plucking figures from across the estimated interval?
The Economist's briefing this week. "ICE and Border Patrol have come to resemble militias that answer to the president and operate with seeming impunity. The killings in Minneapolis reveal how quickly this evolution has occurred" economist.com/briefing/2026/…
"The One Big Beautiful Bill Act, passed in July, included a whopping $170bn for immigration enforcement—more than most countries spend on their armed forces. ICE has more than doubled in size over the past year, hiring 12,000 new deportation officers." economist.com/briefing/2026/…
'Several ICE recruitment posts on social media include dog-whistles such as “Which way, American man?” (an allusion to a white supremacist book) and “Destroy the flood” (a slogan from a video game about invasive parasitic aliens).' economist.com/briefing/2026/…
"Retired Army Lt. Gen. @GenFlynn, who was once President Donald Trump’s national security adviser, was hired as a consultant for the Bosnian Serb republic eight years after he admitted to secretly working to benefit the Turkish government." washingtonpost.com/politics/2025/…
Essentially, corruption is being legalised (for some). Flynn 'joins Rod Blagojevich, the former Democratic governor of Illinois who went to prison on corruption charges, as the second person pardoned by Trump to work on behalf of the Bosnian Serb republic' washingtonpost.com/politics/2025/…
"The Trump administration also wiped away Biden-era sanctions levied in 2023 against Dodik’s children and several business entities that officials said he used to siphon public funds “and enrich himself and his family at the expense of [his] citizens and functional governance in the country.”...
So far this term, Trump has pardoned his most prominent allies involved in the effort to overturn the 2020 election results, the founder of an online drug market, former TV stars found guilty of fraud and tax evasion, and other people who have paid large sums of money to hire people who they believe have the president’s ear."
1/ The UK Parliament's intelligence & security committee (ISC) has published its first full annual report in two years, covering the administration and finance of the UK intelligence community. A few highlights below. isc.independent.gov.uk/wp-content/upl…
2/ As in previous reports, the committee notes that more & more departments are doing security & intel work compared to the past, and that the ISC doesn't have sight of these. "The impact of these matters has become more serious since then," it says. isc.independent.gov.uk/wp-content/upl…
3/ ISC: "China’s state intelligence apparatus – almost certainly the largest in the world – targets the UK and its interests prolifically and aggressively, presenting a challenge for our Agencies to cover" isc.independent.gov.uk/wp-content/upl…
1/ The first of two speeches by UK military / intelligence leaders today. The later one by Rich Knighton, the new chief of defence staff. This one by Blaise Metreweli, the chief of MI6. "We are now operating in a space between peace and war." gov.uk/government/spe…
2/ Metreweli says speech is not a "global threat tour". Says China "a central part of the global transformation taking place this century" and "essential that we, as MI6, continue to inform the govt's understanding of China’s rise and the implications for UK national security."
3/ Metreweli says "Russia is testing us in the grey zone with tactics that are just below the threshold of war" and includes "Drones buzzing airports and bases." About as close to an official attribution as you're going to get. gov.uk/government/spe…
Trump's national security strategy is out and some of the Europe sections are shocking. "...the growing influence of patriotic European parties indeed
gives cause for great optimism." whitehouse.gov/wp-content/upl…
Trump national security strategy: Make Europe White Again.
"Over the long term, it is more than plausible that within a few decades ...certain NATO members will become majority non-European"
"the real and more stark prospect of civilizational erasure"
As far as I can see, this nat sec strategy is far harsher on Europe than on Russia. There is no mention of a threat from Russia or of deterrence, only that "re-establishing strategic stability" is a priority. Europe is cast as a major threat to freedom.
The proposal is nothing short of a very bad joke. I mean, read this:
"$100 billion in frozen Russian assets will be invested in US-led efforts to rebuild and invest in Ukraine;
-- The US will receive 50% of the profits from this venture."
The fact that this absurd and unworkable clause is in there is itself a suggestion that the proposal is the basis for further negotiation and not a "take it or leave it"