Rightly so.

“German defence minister Boris Pistorius has criticised his government for approving less than a fifth of the budget increase he said was needed by Germany’s military, in stark remarks on the eve of a Nato summit in Washington.” 1/
on.ft.com/4cRzqSp “I got a lot less than I asked for. That’s annoying for me because it means I can’t initiate certain things at the speed that . . . the threat level requires,” Pistorius said.” 2/

Don't take it from me. Excellent, sound piece @fstockman @nytimes.

"The US simply can’t do everything everywhere all at once, by itself. The future requires well-armed, capable allies. The indispensable nation has to be a bit less indispensable." 1/

nytimes.com/2024/07/07/opi… "What would Ike say now?

Gen. Dwight Eisenhower, NATO’s first supreme allied commander Europe, felt strongly that his mission was to get Europeans “back on their military feet” — not for American troops to become the permanent bodyguard for Brussels and Berlin." 2/

President Trump is spot on to warn of the danger of World War III and the urgent need to prevent it in ways that protect our key interests.

This superb piece from @OAWestad @ForeignAffairs breathes the right spirit for how to do so.

We should want a decent peace. Not war. 1/ "Xi Jinping and the CCP leadership are convinced the U.S. main objective is to prevent China's rise no matter what. [Yet] China's own statements regarding its international ambitions are so bland as to be next to meaningless." 2/

foreignaffairs.com/china/sleepwal…

These are the kind of people who we need to be heeding about our nation's security policy and decisions about war and peace. A very compelling and penetrating profile of a key group from @ianwardreports. 1/

politico.com/news/magazine/… Proud to call many of them my friends and to honor their and so many others' service on July 4th.

Americans - and our servicemen and women more than any - deserve better, wiser, and more judicious leadership like these leaders are pointing to.

🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸 2/

It was really great to speak to @SohrabAhmari for this @NewStatesman article. I'm grateful to Sohrab for the engagement and the very fair assessment of my arguments, warts and all!

Some key selections...1/

https://twitter.com/SohrabAhmari/status/1808473429495988337

"For about a decade, Elbridge Colby has been making a single argument in and out of government: that America can’t afford Chinese hegemony in Asia. He has also been saying that this outcome is narrowly preventable, provided Washington renews its industrial base and stewards its existing military capabilities – rather than waste them on Europe and the Middle East." 2/

This @dominiclaws column in @DailyMail gets the general thrust of my arguments right, but some important things wrong.

1) I've always said we should come to NATO's defense *with forces that do not degrade our first island chain defense.* 1/

dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1… See here in @FT. The United States must withhold key forces, not do nothing. Europe and the United States should work realistically to manage and address these vulnerabilities together. 2/

ft.com/content/b423aa…

👇🎯

“Even if Putin fails to secure such an outright triumph, Xi will have helped Russia drain the U.S. and its allies of military and financial resources, while pulling Putin’s weakened but resource-rich country closer into China’s orbit.” 1/

https://twitter.com/michaelschuman/status/1805511396194762838

“ere’s a good chance that sanctioning China could produce the opposite effect, convincing Xi that a partnership with Putin to overcome American global power is the right course for China. From his perspective, China has too much to gain from fostering deeper ties to Russia.” 2/

A very important, compelling, and clear-eyed case for a fundamental change in our foreign policy toward a new American realism from @robertcobrien. @foreignaffairs

Must read. 1/

foreignaffairs.com/united-states/… Some key excerpts:

“Trump was determined to avoid new wars and endless counterinsurgency
operations, and his presidency was the first since that of Jimmy
Carter in which the United States did not enter a new war or expand
an existing conflict.” 2/

The notion this Administration is focusing on China is now truly dead.

They’re not even denying the need for priority. They’re saying Ukraine is #1.

This will only make the inevitable need to focus on China all the more painful when it does come. 1/
on.ft.com/3VxXu5R “Biden said several nations had agreed to send Patriot and other systems to Kyiv, and that others expecting deliveries would have to wait because “everything we have is going to go to Ukraine until their needs are met”.

In case there was any ambiguity on the priority…2/

We need to be realistic about what to expect from Europe on China:

“But behind the group’s collective bravado on “getting tough” with China, the countries still have varying appetites for how far to actually go in challenging a world superpower...” 1/ politico.com/news/2024/06/1… “differences that some officials worry could dent the coalition’s ability to fend off Beijing’s advances.” 2/

Leveraging new technology is key. But we can’t get the farm on new, untested technologies. We need muttiple lines of defense.

“That plan hinges on quickly building and deploying thousands of new drones that would swarm the Taiwan Strait…” 1/ washingtonpost.com/opinions/2024/… “and keep China’s military busy until more help can arrive, according to the top U.S. military official in the Pacific. But time is running out to turn these plans into a reality.” 2/

In this important ⁦@TIME⁩ interview with Massimo Calabresi, ⁦@POTUS⁩ gives the best case for his foreign policy.

And makes it clear why it isn’t working and isn’t the right one for Americans. 1/ time.com/6984970/joe-bi… He says: “We’re playing [that role] even more,” Biden says. “We are the world power.”

Yet here’s @TIME: “In China, the U.S. faces an adversary potentially its equal in economic and military power that is intent on tearing down the American global order.” 2/

What has changed in terms of the *risk* to America that is leading @POTUS to change this calculus?

"He has long resisted authorizing Ukraine to use U.S. weapons inside Russia because of concern it could escalate into a direct American confrontation with a nuclear-armed adversary."

nytimes.com/2024/05/29/us/… This suggests the risk is still there:

"The Kremlin, eager to make the choice harder, has leaned heavily into the narrative that the president is risking escalation. Last week, it ran a series of exercises over how to move and use its large arsenal of tactical nuclear weapons."

This should not have been a surprise. It was anticipated.

“Brown put it more simply: “Russia has aggressively reconstituted its military force.”
Coming a month apart, the comments show a distinct change in how the U.S. views Russia’s military.” 1/ defensenews.com/global/europe/… “While American officials have long detailed the costs of Moscow’s invasion for its armed forces and its economy, in the last two months they’ve started to acknowledge Russia is recovering faster than the U.S. expected.” 2/

My basic message to Taiwan:

Taiwan must do much more for its own self-defense and readiness to resist a Chinese attack.

Hashtags, sympathy, and strong words from abroad won’t save you.

Some reactions to @ChingteLai inaugural address. 1/

english.president.gov.tw/News/6726 “Peace is priceless, and war has no winners.”

Sadly, the second part is not true. China *won* the Civil War and thinks it did. It would do it again.

In fairness, so would we Americans.

Check out how we got California and Texas. 2/

North Korea has “tested new weapons capable of carrying nuclear warheads, including powerful solid-fuel ICBMs and an underwater nuclear weapons system. Pyongyang is also developing hypersonic missiles designed to penetrate U.S. air defenses.” 1/

foreignaffairs.com/north-korea/co… “Back on earth, North Korea is expanding its uranium enrichment capabilities in order to make more nuclear weapons. Kim has vowed to “exponentially increase nuclear weapons production to realize all kinds of nuclear strike methods.” 2/

"It is a moment when Russia has gained the upper hand. Its forces have made advances in the eastern Donbas region and threaten a breakthrough in Kharkiv against Ukraine’s outmanned, outgunned army as it waits for long-delayed US aid." 1/

ft.com/content/eade30… “Implementing this change of guard in the middle of an offensive, you have to be feeling very confident in order to do so...He clearly felt that things were going so well...without damaging anything in terms of the war effort,” she said." 2/

Friends and interlocutors,

My account is flooded due to inundation by "NAFO" accounts. This makes it very difficult to apply my usual approach to engage with those who engage with me civilly and without defamation or ad hominem. My apologies if I miss you. 1/ That said, I'm *definitely* not going to be inhibited from using this incredible platform for engaging constructively with people from all walks.

In that vein, I'm not going to engage further with the "NAFO" group. I've made my points - and indeed my concerns have only grown. 2/

The key issue is this:

NAFO wraps itself in the flags of NATO and Ukraine. But the aggressive, ad hominem approach NAFO takes here and its enmeshment in fraught U.S. political debates risks conflating those causes with those divides.

Ergo NAFO doesn't help NATO or Ukraine. 1/

https://twitter.com/thaynekoll/status/1789668429542420482

Whether the U.S. or allied governments sponsor NAFO is of course a serious concern.

But the real damage NAFO does to the long-term interests of NATO and Ukraine is plain to see. Do NATO and Ukraine think they benefit from such behavior? It certainly doesn't convince us. 2/

"Taiwan is running out of time. It is on a knife’s edge in terms of its defensibility against a Chinese assault that Beijing is preparing for. Taiwan’s task is very challenging yet straightforward. Significantly increase your defense spending..." 1/

taipeitimes.com/News/editorial… "Pursue every conceivable measure to strengthen the island’s defenses against invasion and blockade. Make the case to the world about why the defense of Taiwan is critical rather than engage in triple bank shot posturing about battles half a world away." 2/

I've come to the conclusion that Taiwan is led by committed liberals of the brave dissident style.

Unfortunately, this model will not protect Taiwan from China. I don't question their sincerity. I question their wisdom. 1/

foreignaffairs.com/china/defendin… Brave dissidents only work if either 1) someone strong with lots of weapons protects them or 2) the oppressor loses heart and doesn't impose its will by violence.

Vaclav Havel worked in 1989.

But observe what happened in Hungary in 1956 or the Prague Spring in 1968. 2/