A thread on #BurkinaFaso and 🇨🇵 and 🇺🇲 security assistance.
1. It is my understanding that 🇨🇵 and 🇺🇲 security assistance was always very limited and in retrospect never scaled to make a significant difference.
2. France's priorities arguably were Mali 1st, Niger 2nd, BF 3rd. Barkhane focused on Mali, though France hoped that by focusing above all on the tri-border area if Mali its actions might benefit all three.
3. Sabre--based in Burkina--was/is small and had a broad regional focus. Meaning, it's mission was never specifically helping Burkina, though Sabre and Barkhane ppl certainly provided training and occasionally intervened.
4. Sometimes Barkhane/Sabre did ops in Burkina, but only occasionally. I have no idea if Burkina ever asked France for a more robust, dedicated intervention. Or if France ever offered.
5. US assistance likewise always was limited. I believe we helped train a CT rapid response force in the capital. And did some training here and there.
6. Was US training useful? Probably, but only adequate relative to USG's very limited interest in the country.
7. Now Burkinabè are grasping for solutions. Many no doubt feel that 🇨🇵 and 🇺🇲 did them no good. That's true yet unfair. Regardless, if some think Russia might offer something better or different, I disagree, but also empathize.
Its mission.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Thread: The French Army Chief's new vision, or, what's the deal with the Legos?
1. French General Pierre Schill gave a talk Monday at which he outlined his vision for how the French Army needs to adapt to emerging realities (i.e. Ukraine).
2. He, I'm sure, disappointed some by making clear that the Army wasn't going to get any larger. It would stay at the current 77k-strong deployable force (total size is something like 100k). Also, the number of regiments/brigades would stay the same.
1. I've tweeted that India and Egypt have a ton of stuff they could give to Ukraine and don't. Lots of ppl jumped on me and said, "you ignorant/racist person, dont you know X has perfectly legitimate reasons a,b, and c for not arming Ukraine?"
2. Every country has good reasons not to arm Ukraine. Only two countries' hesitance to is subject to constant articles and condemnation. Germany and Israel.
3. Germany bc it's the biggest and richest country in the EU and just so happens to manufacture key arms. It makes sense that Germany lead Europe's response to a war in Europe that directly affects its own security. It makes sense that we would focus on Germany.
1. I just saw that Narvik movie on Netflix. Liked it a lot. It's a chapter of WW2 history that is too often overlooked. It's 1940...and British, French, Polish soldiers are performing magnificently, and winning.
2. And let's not forget the Norwegians, who did not go down gently.
3. The French operation in Navik is painful to contemplate, for one gets a glimpse of that alternative reality in which French forces along the German border take the initiative, go on the offensive, and fight the kind of audacious maneuver warfare that suits them best.
1. Did the Biden Admin ask Egypt to provide weapons to Ukraine? If not, why not? If so, what was Egypt's response?
2. Egypt has large modern air defense arsenals, over 1,000 Abrams, the works. Egypt MAKES ITS OWN Abrams.
3. I can't find a single article about Egyptian military aid for Ukraine, though Ukraine apparently has asked. If Egypt's giving it, no one's writing about it. If Egypt isn't, no one's complaining about it.
Neither 🇫🇷 nor the 🇬🇧 produces heavy tanks. I don't think 🇮🇹 does either. I believe 🇩🇪 still does, but with limited capacity. Maintaining somewhere in Eur. a production line with large capacity--even if most of that time that capacity is wasted and costly--would be worthwhile.
Correction: 🇩🇪 doesn't make new chassis...apparently only 🇬🇷 does.
In retrospect, it seems crazy that the big NATO powers seemed to think that they could get buy with modernizing their existing tanks while being unable to replace them altogether.
1. Ok, French people, let's have this out. In French I am aware of three names for the same thing. Cafe au lait, grande crème, and café crème. Let's call them A, B, and C.
2. At various times I have walked into a cafe and asked for A, B, or C. Often I am met with blanks looks. Then, if I'd asked for A they'd say, oh, you mean B. Or C. Or whatever. Ditto if I ask for B or C.
3. For a while I suspected that it was a question of the time of day: cafe au lait was for breakfast but after one asks for a grande crème or café crème. Which is fine, but surely if I ask for a cafe au lait at the wrong time my request would be perfectly understandable right?