Let's step away from Ukraine for a bit. Talk about the Chinese task force south of Australia.
China has been sailing a three ship task force in international waters near NZ and AUS
Here's a thread of what you need to know:
🧵
1. What ships are involved?
The fleet is composed of three ships. CNS Zunyi (107), frigate CNS Hengyang (568) and fleet oiler CNS Weishanhu (887).
These are two small Type 054A is a multi-role frigates. With a supply ships to extend the fleet's range.
(🧵 2/10)
2. Has this happened before?
Yes. The PLAN has been doing these sorts of three ships naval operations since 2008 with piracy operations.
Last year, a similar three ship task force visited Egypt and made stops in Morocco and the Seychelles. Even visiting Russia.
(🧵 2/10)
3. Why is it unusual this time?
Previous task forces ops scope was westward. Indian Ocean to combat piracy. Or good will visits to Africa and Europe.
This is unusual because a live fire exercise . Between NZ and AUS - allies of the US, and disrupted air travel.
(🧵 4/10)
4. What is the military point of this?
Its testing the PLAN's naval capabilities and logistics. This is gathering data on how it can perform naval operations in a new area.
Those are:
Madura Strait
Solomon Sea
Coral Sea
Tasman Sea
Indian Ocean near Perth
Thes are major sea routes for naval dominance in the South Pacific and the First Island Chain.
Madura Strait in the Philippines is a major transit point through the First Island Chain.
The Solomon, Coral, and Tasman Seas are major strategic sea routes to the South Pacific, Australia and New Zeeland.
(🧵 5/10)
5. What else it it testing?
Its also reconnaissance. Testing Australia, NZ, Philippines, and the U.S. to gauge their military and political reactions.
Live fire drills are a test.
If Australia and the U.S. do not react strongly, it shows China can increase its naval presence in the region without major consequences.
If Australia reacts aggressively, China can use that response to justify further military buildup in the South Pacific.
It gives them a shape of the military response. But also the political one. Which is great data for future maneuvers. Political and miltiary.
(🧵 5/10)
6. What is the domestic political message?
The PLA Navy’s ability to operate in blue waters demonstrates that military reforms are working.
It is a symbol showing the fleet is capable of operating far from home - and generate fear in Western naval powers. It is a statement of equality in a chaotic time.
This tells the domestic audience: “We are no longer a regional power confined to our coastline. We now project strength globally.”
Whether or not that is true is irrelevant.
7. Where is this fleet actually going?
Judging by the current route? It looks like it will make a loop around Australia. Into the Indian Ocean.
That leaves three routes back to their naval base.
Sunda Strait, Lombok Strait, or their original route through the Philippines and Banda Sea.
These would place the fleet in the Java Sea.
Were it can make a transit back the original route. If they feel more daring? They might go north into the South China Sea. This is a statement btw.
Means the PLA Navy has the ops range to sail AROUND Australia and into disputed waters in the SCS.
(🧵 7/10)
8. How does this naval deployment fit into China’s broader military strategy?
This confirms that the PLA Navy is an emerging blue water force. Capable of sustained operations far from China’s shores.
By circling Australia and conducting live-fire drills, China proves it is no longer confined to coastal defense or the first island chain.
Showing that Chinese warships can project power not just into the South China Sea or Indian Ocean. But can enter new naval theaters - without support from bases.
Rising great powers attempt to do power projection. This fits into the naval and military reforms of the last 10 years.
(🧵 8/10)
9. What will be the AUSNZUS response?
Expect increased surveillance, intelligence sharing, and joint naval drills from Australia, NZ, Philippines, US, Taiwan, and Japan.
With an increase in the South Pacific. But also naval interdiction routes that lead to it. The strategic buffer of the 1st and 2nd island chains have been tested.
Australia may fast-track its AUKUS nuclear submarine program. The U.S. could expand military drills in the South Pacific.
10. Will the PLA sail more task forces?
Very likely. The current task force has two destroyer types. Type 55 and Type 54A. Which are major escort ships for any larger naval task force or expeditionary unit.
What you need to look for? The presence of the new carriers or amphibious assault ships.
This would signal intent to build marine expeditionary forces. Or carrier task forces that can operate into the South Pacific or beyond the Indian Ocean.
This task force is the first of several in the South Pacific. You need to watch frequency, basing rights, and task force composition.
How naval power projection evolves? Signals nations ambitions
(🧵 10/10)
END
EDIT:
One is Type 55 Frigate and the Type 54A.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Why Alaska is used again for negations? It's not just Trump and Putin meeting. There's diplomatic reasons:
- Meeting in the middle
- Distance from flashpoints
- Staging for graduated engagement
- Controlled access
A venue is a stage and a battlefield. Her's why.
🧵(Thread)
1/x
This isn't the first time Alaska has been used. Nixon for Japan. And Regan for the Pope. Most recently it was used during the tense 2021 China US summit during the Biden administration.
2/x Both in China and Russia's case? Alaska gets chosen to emphasize neither side was summoning the other to their capital. Which can be inappropriate for early talks.
Meeting on roughly middle ground equalizes the venue. A diplomatic concession to emphasize equal footing.
"Do not debate! Is one of my inventions"
Is a much lesser known quote from Deng Xiaoping.
Here's what it really means:
- Power must precede consensus
- Output over debate and signaling
- Strategic ambiguity allows reform and compromise
There's a bit to go into this
🧵
1/x After the Cultural Revolution, the PRC was institutionally shell-shocked. Factions of the CPC had torn into each other, paralyzing ministries and state capacity. A culture of fear replaced bureaucratic discipline. Signaling and slogans prevailed.
Deng inherited disorder.
3/x Deng realized that the PRC could not survive by staying ideologically loyal to Mao. But also could not survive by disowning him. Legitimacy of the state rested on it.
The Party was unified on paper but internally fragmented. With shared knowledge that open confrontation could tear the system apart again.
What is the role that realpolitik plays into this - even though this is a major humanitarian crisis?
Let's talk about it. From a realpolitik angle.
🧵(Thread)
1. Why would China even consider intervening?
Gaza is a humanitarian catastrophe—thousands dead, cities destroyed, civilians trapped.
China sees that. But states don’t act on sympathy alone. They act when it serves their interests and when they have the force to make it count.
Gaza offers neither.
– No control over key energy routes.
– No impact on Taiwan, the South China Sea, or East Asia’s balance.
– No shift in U.S.-China competition.
Even if China wanted to intervene, it lacks the military presence and logistics to back it up. Taking a position without power behind it is meaningless.
And worse declaring a side openly means compromising diplomacy elsewhere.
– Support Israel? Alienate Iran, Saudi Arabia, Muslim partners.
– Support Hamas? Blow up ties with Israel, Western markets, Europe.
No payoff for a massive strategic loss. With a narrative that can be spun by the US that its a terrorist supporter.
Better to stay quiet, keep options open, and focus on where their interests
2. Why saying things aloud doesn’t do anything
You’ll hear big statements, calls for ceasefires and direct criticism of Israel from accounts on here.
It’s meaningless without force behind it.Rhetoric is cheap.
Power to prevent or stop a genocide means:
– Troops positioned to act.
– Ships fueled and armed, ready to strike.
– Economic tools that hit.
Talking loud without leverage just burns credibility.
China knows that.
They keep statements vague because they know words without hard power don’t move the needle.
- Import tons of talent for bloated tech orgs
- More GPUs = moat
- Throwing more money = results
- Build it and they will come.
Success requires purpose and process, not just bricks and more resources.
Short 🧵
Importing talent is fine. If you know who you're importing. You need talented people. But you also need HR processes and leaders to id WHO you need.
But that didn't matter to big tech. More headcount = more power for managers. So they pressured for relaxed requirements.
GPUs are not moat. They are very essential for compute for models, feature engineering, etc. But you needed use cases and biz need. Then scale once you got a baseline.
Problem? Most of the GPUs were used to train dirty data, biased AI models, and for poorly understood use cases. Many ppl went straight for moar GPUs.
Didn't help that software engineers trying to pivot to AI engineers thought more data volume = better models. Or call an API and grift. It didn't
So many companies we're strapping a rocket engine to a skateboard. None I ever ran into asked why.
For 11 days now, President Yoon of South Korea has been holed up in his residence. 42 days from declaring martial law.
This hasn’t got a lot of attention the Western media. But we need to look at this closely.
Lot of political red flags here.
🧵THREAD
1/n
We already know about Yoon’s coup attempt - declaring martial law and senting special forces to arrest legislators - while trying to provoke North Korea.
Since then, the ROK National Assembly has issued a warrant for his arrest and impeached the acting president.
2/n The Corruption Investigation Office (CIO) has attempted to arrest Yoon once- but Presidential Security Service has turned them back.
Yoon’s legal team have threatened "civil war" if he's arrested. The CIO has begun assembling over 1000 officers for the 2nd attempt.