đź§µI have been back in DC for 1.5 months now, and I'm struck by the apparent lack of urgency in our national security policy debates when it comes to addressing the threats the US and its allies face, as they continue to multiply at speed. 1. #UkraineWar is in its 2nd year. 1/9
2. We're looking at potentially another major regional war triggered by Hamas's attack on #Israel. It has expanded the front and put additional strains on America's military resources. 3. As pressure build on Kosovo, I'm concerned that the Balkans may become another theater. 2/9
America's adversaries are preparing for war. #China is investing heavily across the spectrum of its military capabilities, and #Russia is busy at work expanding its armor production. The "axis of dictatorships" includes also two smaller players: Iran and North Korea. 3/9
Our analysts continue to push various and sundry estimates of CHN and RUS capabilities estimates, but IMO miss the fundamentals. The baseline should be that both the Chinese and Russian militaries are being built not to deter us but to attack. This should drive our planning. 4/9
We also continue to underestimate our adversaries. A case in point: Moscow has shown it understands mass; after 1.5 yrs the Russian army is capable of fighting and mobilizing at the same time. We need to re-learn that maneuver and attrition on the battlefield are linked. 5/9
The PLA and PLAN are untested, but they've shown they understand mass, redundancies and the imperative of stockpiling. But we keep talking precision, investing in ever-more expensive platforms of which we can buy fewer and fewer. Plus, our defense industrial base is too small.6/9
The massive expenditure of weapons, munitions, and human life in Ukraine ought to be a wake-up call for our political leaders and military planners. We need to ask whether our all-volunteer force model is up to the task of generating the capabilities and reserves we'll need. 7/9
The solution is not to “pivot to Asia,” but to rebuild the force, with the requisite redundancies in the reserves. Simply put, it is imperative that the United States and Europe increase their defense spending and rethink what we spend money on and how we generate our forces. 8/9
The US needs to move beyond the normative/reactive pronouncements about “defending the rules-based order." Let's stop talking about “great power competition” and ask instead what a geo-strategic map that favors America’s and other democracies’ interests should look like? 9/End
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
đź§µI'm weary of the fact that our national security debate continues to recycle shibboleths about "strategic competition," "great power competition" and such. I recently saw the acronym "GPC" on several PPT slides, so this nomenclature is now firmly embedded in the bloodstream.1/7
Looking at the horrors perpetrated by RUS in #Ukraine, now the attack by Hamas against #Israel, and with a conflict with #China brewing in the Indo-Pacific, why is it that we don't hear the "W" word, as in "war." Is it because to say so would require democracies to mobilize? 2/7
I submit that since Putin's notorious 2007 @MunSecConf he has put Russia on a path to war with the West, fluctuating between grey zone and kinetic (2008 Georgia, 20014 Ukraine, 2015 Syria, then again 2022 UKR). China, Russia, Iran & also North Korea are aligned in this effort.3/7
🧵Cui bono? The Hamas attack on #Israel of this magnitude required planning and external backing. Moscow’s ties to Teheran have grown exponentially since the Russian re-invasion of #Ukraine—Shoigu’s recent visit to Teheran underscored it. This attack creates a new theater. 1/5
We are in a period of protracted systemic instability where regional power balances will be critical to averting a wider war. The Hamas attack draws Washington’s attention away from #Ukraine and #Taiwan. It puts additional pressure on Western weapons and munitions supply. 2/5
The decision window is much narrower than most Western analysts believe it to be. How quickly #Russia reconstitutes its land forces and when #China decides it is ready to move against #Taiwan are the key question. The Hamas attack has ratcheted political pressure on the West.3/5
🧵I read some of the exchanges about @stephenWalt’s recent piece on #Ukraine via @ForeignPolicy. I won’t rehash Steve’s argument or various counters that were posted on @X in response to his piece. He believes what he believes, and so do those criticizing him. Fair enough. 1/7
My point: IR theory as practiced for the last 30 yrs at US universities has precious little to offer when it comes to understanding the war in #Ukraine. Profs opining about a country which they don’t know, don’t read the language etc is essentially a self-contained exercise.2/7
Such academic analyses may/may not be interesting but regrettably they are largely irrelevant other than becoming an opportunity to fuel heated exchanges on tv or on social media. They seldom move the needle on policy and if they are referenced it’s for bias confirmation. 3/7
đź§µI just reviewed a longer piece on the war in #Ukraine written by an eminent Western analyst. I was struck by how differently it sounded from what I hear from Ukrainians. Westerners tend to speak in conceptual generalities about the need to ensure that UKR remains sovereign.1/6
Equally general and borderline vacuous is the often repeated Western argument that #Russia cannot be allowed to win, but with precious little about what that means in practical terms, i.e., what Moscow’s defeat in this war is supposed to look like and what should happen next. 2/6
In contrast, #Ukrainian voices—though they also talk of our shared values and ideals—they speak in specific physical terms when it comes to victory, i.e., Crimea must be liberated, Donbas must be free, Russia must pay, etc. In short, there is a clear vision of victory in Kyiv.3/6
🧵I’m about to depart Cadenabbia after another terrific @KASonline @NATO workshop. Thank you to our KAS hosts for organizing a world-class event, with just the right mix of civilian, military, NATO and EU participants. Here are a few takeaways from the two days of discussion. 1/6
@NATO is politically united when it comes to helping #Ukraine, but there are still different levels of appetite when it comes to risk-taking. The Eastern flank countries share an acute sense of threat that Russia poses and are rearming at speed. Allies further West less so. 2/6
@NATO allies need to better understand the nature of RUS hybrid warfare. We need to appreciate that hybrid is driven by fear of escalation by a greater power, so it remains in a zone where kinetic response is not automatic. Russia has been operating this way for over 20yrs. 3/6
🧵In a recent piece for @guardian @lieven_anatol warned that #Russia’s defeat in #Ukraine could bring about the emergence of a post-Putin regime in Moscow that would replicate the trauma of Weimar Germany, implying we might end up with someone more dangerous than Putin. 1/7
At a risk of over-rationalizing history, I’d suggest that in fact Russia is already past its Weimar moment. I would submit that “Russia’s Weimar” played itself out during the 1990s and effectively ended with the arrival of Putin. Putinism is about the politics of grievance. 2/7
Putin’s narrative (similar to Hitler’s) has been one of a purported betrayal of the great Russian people. Like the Dolchstoßlegende of Weimar, Putin has consistently argued that Russia was never defeated, but in fact betrayed by cowardly Gorbachev, drunken Yeltsin, and so on. 3/7