Quote

Finnish prime minister Sanna Marin has called for Europe to build its own defence capabilities in the wake of the war in Ukraine, saying that without US help it is not resilient enough.  "We should make sure that we are stronger,” Marin said in Sydney on Friday. "And I’ll be brutally honest with you, Europe isn’t strong enough. We would be in trouble without the United States.”  Her remarks came in response to a question about China’s responsibility to "rein in Russia”. Marin said that while China could play a role, "We shouldn’t only rely on that.”  Marin insisted Ukraine must be given "whatever it takes” to win the war, adding that the United States had been pivotal in supplying Kyiv with the weapons, finance and humanitarian aid necessary to blunt Russia’s advance.  "We have to make sure that we are also building those capabilities when it comes to European defence, the European defence industry, and making sure that we could cope in different kinds of situations,” she said.

Marin said that when Russia invaded Ukraine on 24 February, the priority of most Finns changed "overnight” to security.  Until Russia invaded Ukraine, Finland’s priorities were to have working bilateral relations with Russia and be close partners with members Nato, but not be a member, she said. "That was the best way to secure our nation.”   Finland and Sweden applied to join the alliance in May, but are waiting on Turkey and Hungary to ratify their requests, which have been approved by the other 28 nations in the group. In June, Putin warned that if Nato installed military infrastructure in Finland and Sweden, Moscow "would be obliged to respond symmetrically and raise the same threats for those territories where threats have arisen for us”.  Asked what the likeliest scenario was in terms of threats posed by Russia to Finland, with which it shares a 1,300km border, Marin said: "We have extensive military forces, so we’re not expecting them to engage in that account and we’re not seeing any military action near the Finnish border.”  "But of course we are prepared for different kind of hybrid attacks that we might see.”  "We are preparing for different kinds of cyber-attacks … we’re preparing for different kinds of hybrid attacks, for misinformation.”

Between February and late October, cyber-attacks on "critical targets” in Finlandincreased by a third, according to a recent article by Finnish broadcaster YLE citing Aapo Cederberg, the CEO of Cyberwatch Finland.  In August, Russian hackers claimed responsibility for a denial-of-service attack on Finland’s parliamentary website, as well as another Finnish state website, writing on Telegram that it had, "decided to make a ‘friendly’ visit to neighbouring Finland, whose authorities are so eager to join Nato”, YLE reported.  In September, Antti Pelttari, the director of Supo, the Finnish Security and Intelligence Service, warned that, "We consider it highly likely that Russia will turn to the cyber environment over the winter.”  October alone saw what would previously have been three months’ worth of denial-of-service attacks, Trafficom, the Finnish transport and communications agency reported.

Concerned by the prospect of other hybrid attacks including weaponised mass migration, Finland’s main political parties have backed a proposal to build a fence along parts of the country’s border with Russia.  The country is also concerned about large-scale illegal crossings as Russian men flee the mobilisation drive. About 40,000 Russians have entered Finland since the start of the war, according to foreign minister, Pekka Haavisto.  Finland recently suspended tourist visas for Russian citizens. On Friday, Marin said, "It became morally unacceptable to allow the Russian middle and upper classes to continue to enjoy their vacations in Europe while their army kills, tortures and terrorises Ukrainians.”  Finland, which has a population of 5.5 million, still has military conscription for men, and has a wartime troop strength of 280,000, with 870,000 trained as reservists. It spend 2% of GDP on defence, a higher proportion than most Nato members. The country fought two wars against Russia in the 1940s, in which 100,000 Finns died.  "Our story after the wars, when we gained our independence, is a successful one,” she said. "We have to make sure that Ukrainians have that hope, that they will have that future.”

There was Europe.

 

Quote

Finland’s prime minister has warned democratic countries to "stop being naive” about China, saying it is essential that they reduce their technological and energy dependency on authoritarian regimes. Sanna Marin argued at the Lowy Institute think-tank in Sydney on Friday that countries such as Australia and Finland had to forge "common lifelines”. Finland applied to join Nato in the wake of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine this year and Marin said she expected the Nordic country to become a full member and participate as a security provider.

Her comments follow a Nato meeting in Bucharest where economic measures aimed at containing the "challenge” posed by China were discussed. The US is attempting to persuade more countries to ensure that critical supply chains are no longer reliant on China and to place restrictions on the export of essential products — such as minerals and semiconductor manufacturing equipment — to the country. Marin, who met the leaders of New Zealand and Australia on a trade tour of the Pacific this week, said that Russia’s invasion was "a war and fight concerning what is going on in the world” and that democratic values needed to be defended. "This is the time to stop being naive, also when it comes to China,” she said. The prime minister insisted this did not mean "we close all the doors and windows” to trade with China. She said that Beijing was still an important partner on global issues such as climate change, but it was important for democratic countries to have "strategic autonomy” in important sectors.

Australia is presenting itself as an alternative to global industries that are trying to secure different supply lines to reduce their dependency on China for critical minerals such as lithium and rare earths, which are needed to make electric vehicles. Anthony Albanese, Australia’s prime minister, met Marin on Friday to discuss Canberra’s free trade agreement with the EU. Recommended The Big Read Australia’s defence dilemma: projecting force or provoking China? "The opportunities that are there are boundless between us,” he said, citing Australia’s mineral wealth and renewable energy investment. Marin said the changing global security environment was drawing Australia and Europe closer together, adding that she understood why Australia had forged a closer alliance with the US and UK in the face of rising tension with China. "We all have worries about China and we must make sure we don’t have those critical dependencies when it comes to China,” she said. Marin added that the Ukraine invasion had demonstrated the need for democratic countries to forge closer trading and strategic alliances. "I must be brutally honest with you,” she said. "Europe isn’t strong enough right now. We would be in a lot of trouble without the US involvement in the war in Ukraine.”

And then there's the Pacific.

It will be interesting to see how they fund the reality.

Someone's gotta do it

And one for Vikas

 

Quote

US soldiers are training with Indian troops in the Himalayas this month for exercise Yudh Abhyas.  This year's version of the exercise is being held near India's disputed border with China.  It also takes place as the US and India strengthen their ties and manage rising tensions with China.  US soldiers arrived in India this month for Yudh Abhyas, venturing to the Himalayas for the 18th iteration of the annual exercise to train in cold, mountainous conditions with Indian troops.  The exercise, held around Auli in the northern state of Uttarakhand, comes as the US and India both manage rising tensions with China, and the training is seen as a message to each other and to China about the strength of their relations.

Yudh Abhyas has alternated between the US and India since the early 2000s. In 2021, it took place in Alaska for only the second time. The US participants this year are members of the Alaska-based 11th Airborne Division, which was reactivated this summer to focus on operations in extreme cold and mountainous conditions — a skill set getting renewed attention from the US, its allies, and their rivals.  "The Army typically doesn't go to the Himalayas, and now we have an Arctic force and we're training in the Arctic. We feel confident that we could do things like that now that the Army couldn't do before," Maj. Gen. Brian Eifler, 11th Airborne Division commander, said in an interview at the Association of the US Army conference in Washington DC in October.  "The Indian Army asked us last year to train at 10,000 feet up in the Himalayas," Gen. Charles Flynn, head of the US Army's Pacific forces, said at the conference. "Now we have a force capable of being able to say, 'Yes, we'll be there.'"  According to an Indian press release, the two-week exercise will focus on humanitarian assistance and disaster relief and include "all operations related to peace keeping & peace enforcement."

In addition to a command-post exercise and expert discussions, it will include a field-training exercise involving "establishment and functioning of surveillance grids," mountain-warfare training, and casualty evacuation and combat medical aid "in adverse terrain and climatic conditions," as well as drone and counter-drone operations, the release says.  The exercise was originally scheduled for October and US soldiers wanted to parachute in, but the jump didn't work out and the exercise was delayed until this month, kicking off on November 19.  "But they do want us to be up there and have us in Himalayas, and we're like, 'Yeah, absolutely,'" Eifler told Insider, adding as part of US Indo-Pacific Command, his division's task is to focus on working with countries in the region "that have those extreme cold [conditions] and mountain terrain."

Yudh Abyhas has previously taken place elsewhere in northern India, including in Uttarakhand, but this year it is being held only about 60 miles from the Line of Actual Control, a 2,100-mile boundary separating China and India that was established as part of a truce following their 1962 border war.  Parts of the LAC remain disputed, and after decades of relative calm, that dispute flared in June 2020, when at least 20 Indian soldiers and four Chinese troops were killed in a brawl in the Ladakh region northwest of where Yudh Abyhas is being held.  Since then, New Delhi and Beijing have held a series of talks leading to the disengagement of troops and equipment that both sides moved into the area before and after the June 2020 clash, but they continue to bolster their military presence and infrastructure in the region.  "The US and India probably anticipated that conducting the exercise near the Chinese border would draw Beijing's ire. It sends a useful hint — to both China and equally the Indian Army — that the US appreciates India's security concerns on the border," Arzan Tarapore, South Asia research scholar at Stanford University's Shorenstein Asia-Pacific Research Center, told Insider.  "But as far as political signaling goes, the US and India have still left some room to escalate — while this iteration is near the border, it is not near disputed stretches of the LAC or near recent crisis areas," Tarapore added.  The exercise also reflects the recent advancement of US-Indian relations, particularly on defense issues. "The deepening of strategic and defense ties on a bilateral front has been significant," India's ambassador to the US, Taranjit Singh Sandhu, said this month.  Between 2002 and 2020, the two militaries signed four foundational agreements allowing for expanded cooperation on logistics and communications and sharing of classified information.  In addition to increased US arms sales and larger exercises, the militaries have achieved several milestones in recent years, including the first visit by a US bomber aircraft and the first repair of a US naval ship in an Indian shipyard.  The US Army has sent India's army some 30,000 sets of "extreme cold-weather gear" for individuals and small units "over the last couple of years," Flynn said in October, "because operating at that altitude and in those conditions is radically different" from other environments.

Tarapore, whose research focuses on Indian defense policy, said that beyond political signals, US-Indian military exercises should aim to build "understanding, trust, and interoperability."  "We should be watching to see if each iteration of Yudh Abayas gets more realistic, more complicated, tests more military functions, and scenarios more likely to be used in the real world," Tarapore told Insider, adding that this year's focus on disaster response and "some fairly complex staff and field components" was "a good sign."  "The more complex and realistic an exercise is, the better postured they will be to work together in real contingencies — and to deter potential adversaries," Tarapore said. "Ultimately, that's the goal of the military relationship."

 

5 minutes ago, The_Omega said:

Someone's gotta do it

Would hit.

 

In all seriousness, this has been a long time coming. Trump was right about Europe needing to shoulder more weight.

Cold War 2 is here. I think With Russia showing weakness we truly need a pivot to the Pacific and let Europe shoulder more of the European responsibilities.

Merge? 

 

 

You know, I worked really hard on that fish egg thing. 

The Finnish priority has always been security. What has changed was their approach to securing it. She nails it (just as I’d like to nail her). 

I have to say, Finland joining NATO is a huge deal. Not only do they have a really big military by European standards (especially relative to their population) but it’s just so close to St Petersburg. It’s absolutely a game changer from a geo-political perspective. 

 

12 minutes ago, TEW said:

I have to say, Finland joining NATO is a huge deal. Not only do they have a really big military by European standards (especially relative to their population) but it’s just so close to St Petersburg. It’s absolutely a game changer from a geo-political perspective. 

Yep, and add in Sweden and the unsinkable and huge aircraft carrier of Gotland and it is a massive change. 

3 minutes ago, DrPhilly said:

Yep, and add in Sweden and the unsinkable and huge aircraft carrier of Gotland and it is a massive change. 

It will definitely be interesting to see if the US builds any bases in these countries in the future. 

15 minutes ago, TEW said:

It will definitely be interesting to see if the US builds any bases in these countries in the future. 

I think Norway is the standard model so no bases generally.  However, with the situation in the Ukraine that could certainly more the needle at least for some time.

That's sheety

Quote

Vladimir Putin is said to have soiled himself in front of his bodyguards when he allegedly slipped down stairs at his official residence.

A Telegram channel which claims it uses his minders as sources has suggested the Russian leader, 70, took the fall as he is secretly stricken with cancer.  It said he suffered the tumble last week when coming down stairs at his Moscow home.  Channel General SVR claims Putin landed on his coccyx, fell down five steps, then rolled on to his side and slid down two more.  It added the impact caused him to "involuntarily defecate” due to "cancer of the gastrointestinal tract”.  The channel has posted updates about Putin's health since the start of his invasion of Ukraine but has provided no evidence to support its claims or proof.  In the latest post, the channel wrote Putin "stumbled and fell to his back, after which he fell on his side and slid down a couple of steps”It added: "The incident took place in front of the president’s bodyguards, who reacted quickly and rushed to Putin’s aid.  "Three security officers helped the president to get to the nearest sofa and called the doctors who are on duty at the residence.”

The channel said medics arrived within minutes, but could not immediately examine the president as he had to be cleaned from his involuntary defecation.  It added: "Before the examination, the doctors escorted the president to the bathroom and helped to clean up.  "After a complete examination, a bruise of the coccyx and soft tissues was diagnosed.  "Nothing critical was diagnosed and the bruising was treated with painkillers. An investigation is to be carried out into what provoked the fall.  "He wears special shoes, even at home, with anti-slip coating, and the stairs in the residence are considered ‘safe’.  "As it turns out, all precautions are meaningless when nerves are at stake.”

 

LINK

Quote

On Thursday, U.S. President Joe Biden will welcome French President Emmanuel Macron to the White House with the full pomp of an official state visit. France and America need each other now more than ever, but history suggests that cooperation won’t be easy.  Macron’s visit is a chance for Washington to get over its hang-ups about his sometimes irascible foreign policy and realize that France’s independence is at the root of what makes it such a valuable ally. For its part, France needs to show that its transformative agenda for Europe and its role in the world can deliver concrete benefits for America.

Macron’s predecessors have been aggravating Washington for more than fifty years, starting with president Charles De Gaulle, who lambasted America for the Vietnam War, protested the U.S. dollar’s global dominance, built France’s own nuclear weapons, and distanced France from NATO. Macron has been no less frank. When he called NATO "brain dead” in 2019, heads exploded in the corridors of the Pentagon, CIA, and State Department. When the Biden administration announced new plans for military cooperation with Australia and Britain in 2021, U.S. officials were stunned by Paris’s sharp rebuke. Macron’s insistence on keeping a diplomatic channel open with Moscow after its invasion of Ukraine only made more steam blow from the ears of U.S. policy elites. Most of all, Macron’s energetic cheerleading for European "strategic autonomy”—by which he means that Europe needs the economic and military might to take on much more responsibility for its foreign policy—rankles ardent NATO backers here and in and Europe.

 

But Washington needs to recognize the inherent value of having an ally that speaks its mind and thinks for itself. France’s independence is inextricably linked to its global aspirations and strategic vision, and these are highly valuable to the United States. It may be annoying when Macron acknowledges when French interests clash with America’s, but it’s an acceptable price to pay for an ally willing to spend money to defend itself—and an ally that offers global leadership on climate issues, understands the challenge China poses, supports the rule of law, is a member of the U.N. Security Council, has nuclear weapons, and, not least, shares America’s core political values. True, Macron’s approach to strategic autonomy may make things more difficult for U.S. diplomats in Brussels laboring to create some semblance of agreement from the divergent views of NATO’s thirty nations, but it’s exactly the kind of thing Washington should embrace.

Security in Europe has been shattered by Russian President Vladimir Putin’s aggression against Ukraine, and America should want the stronger, more united Europe that Macron seeks, especially in an era where the costs of deterring China in the Indo-Pacific are certain to mount. Thanks to its presence and experience in Africa and in the Middle East, France is also very well equipped to fight terrorism and strengthen security in regions from which the United States is pivoting—a sort of pivot enabler.  Moreover, Macron’s rebukes have often been right. When Macron criticized NATO as brain dead, not a few U.S. and European officials were secretly gratified that someone was finally telling the truth about how dysfunctional the alliance had become thanks to the internal feuding and ill will of its leaders. Macron’s critique was a wake-up call that helped strengthen debate about the alliance’s future.

 

France’s complaints about the U.S. and UK sale of nuclear submarines to Australia may have been too emphatic, but France was genuinely surprised and its interests damaged. Moreover, as the time lines for U.S. and U.K. nuclear cooperation with Australia stretch out into the distant future, France’s original plan to provide Australia with diesel submarines may turn out to have been the more realistic one to achieve something everyone wants: strengthening Australia’s underwater capabilities against China in the Indo-Pacific.  France is now spearheading a European approach to the Indo-Pacific that will deepen its relationship with India, Indonesia, and the United Arab Emirates. These relationships can serve U.S. regional interests as well. Biden and Macron should set up mechanisms to communicate and coordinate their regional approaches.  Finally, Macron’s diplomatic channel with Moscow could soon seem prescient if Ukraine’s advances slow and Biden decides to heed growing calls for a diplomatic way out of

To be sure, Macron sometimes promises too much. His appetite for disruption can backfire when it becomes too disconnected from reality—for example, at the outset of the war in Ukraine. His approach can also be self-isolating when it’s too rigid, as it sometimes has been in resisting U.S. economic and security efforts in the Indo-Pacific.  Franco-American relations will be put to the test as the war in Ukraine pushes Europe to the brink of its energy and defense capacities—areas where Macron has strongly advocated for European sovereignty and independence, yet the reality is glaring dependence on the United States. The two presidents will need to prevent this divergence between reality and expectations from causing collateral damage. They’ll also need to keep in view their common interest in combatting climate change as they work out their differences over emerging elements of their industrial policies, such those in Biden’s Inflation Reduction Act.

When Macron and Biden speak, their conversation should also extend beyond foreign policy to the question of the underlying values that underpin French and U.S. political systems and how to secure and adapt these values wisely for the future. Despite his reelection, Macron faces an uphill political battle for many of his objectives at home and a struggle against a nationalist right that resembles Biden’s own. France and America are democracies with different experiences and political traditions but also much in common. They can learn from each other.  If Biden and Macron can establish priorities and set the stage for cool-headed cooperation, both nations stand to gain. Above all, they will further their common interest in ensuring a predictable international order that is grounded in universally accepted rules and safe for democracy. Like long-bickering siblings, Paris and Washington need to put petty squabbles behind them and focus on the bigger—and rapidly evolving—global picture.

 

From back in May but still applicable, and the subject of a Taiwan invasion still keeps coming up.

 

Good, F China

 

Quote

Dec 12 (Reuters) - Japan and the Netherlands have agreed in principle to join the United States in tightening controls over the export of advanced chip-making machinery to China, Bloomberg News reported on Monday, citing people familiar with the matter.  In October, the Biden administration published a series of curbs aimed at stopping the export of chip-making technology and certain chips made through U.S. equipment anywhere in the world to China.

Apart from some U.S. gear suppliers, Japan's Tokyo Electron Ltd (8035.T) and Dutch lithography specialist ASML Holding NV (ASML.AS), were the two critical players needed to make the sanctions effective, making their governments' adoption of the curbs a key milestone, the report said.  The new curbs may be announced in the coming weeks, it added.

Japan's Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry as well as Netherlands' foreign affairs ministry did not immediately respond to Reuters' requests for comment.

 

LINK

Quote

TOKYO — Alarmed by increasing security threats and the risk of war in the Indo-Pacific, Japan will seek to purchase hundreds of U.S.-built Tomahawk cruise missiles as part of a major defense buildup unprecedented in the postwar period, Japanese and U.S. officials said.  The missile buy would boost Japan’s long-range strike capability and mark a stunning break with a long tradition of eschewing offensive weapons. And it would enhance Japan’s conventional deterrent as China undertakes a sweeping military modernization and North Korea barrels ahead with its nuclear program.

Japan will move forward on the Tomahawk decision as a part of the rollout of its new national security and defense strategies this month, along with a major hike in Japan’s defense budget — to the NATO benchmark of 2 percent of gross domestic product, which would make it the third-largest in the world. Together, these steps signal a Japan moving to shed its longtime pacifist constraints.  "Japan wanted to limit its defense spending and try not to acquire second-strike capability. But the situation surrounding us does not permit us to do that,” said Ichiro Fujisaki, former Japanese ambassador to the United States. "Many people thought [war] was a 20th-century issue, but we are now seeing that again.”

The missile acquisition and the growing defense budget have the support of the Biden administration, which views Japan as a pivotal partner in the western Pacific. Officials see a deepening alliance with Japan as part of a broader strategy of regional cooperation to enhance security, including a deal involving the United States and Britain helping Australia develop nuclear-powered submarines, and the United States lifting limits on South Korea building ballistic missiles.  "The United States is not just taking unilateral steps, but is seeking to empower allies and partners in ways that are deeply significant and magnify our capacities in the region,” said a U.S. official who, like several others interviewed, spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss plans that are not yet public.

The decision to buy hundreds of Tomahawks — 400 to 500 by some accounts — will put China and North Korea on notice that Japan is serious about self-defense, and that the bilateral alliance — arguably the most significant militarily in the region — is growing stronger in the face of threats from Beijing and Pyongyang, officials said.  "The introduction of this system will symbolize a major positive change regarding counterstrike capabilities,” a Japanese official said. The Tomahawk missiles, with a 1,000-mile-plus range, would put military targets on mainland China within reach.  While Japan has gradually been shifting away from self-defense-oriented policies — a 2014 reinterpretation of its constitution allowed for military action in the event an ally was attacked — change had been incremental.

Until now.  Russia’s February invasion of Ukraine was "absolutely” a pivotal factor in creating the political climate that allowed the ruling Liberal Democratic Party to push a strong national security agenda over anti-militarist public sentiment, a second Japanese official said.  Polls show that post-Ukraine, public support for what the Japanese government calls "counterstrike” capability has clearly risen, from 37 percent in July 2020 to over 60 percent in June.  For the Japanese, the war in Ukraine has made a Chinese invasion of Taiwan appear much more possible, deepening the public’s concern over Japan’s military readiness in the event of a regional conflict.

In August, after U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) visited Taipei, an outraged Beijing carried out aggressive military drills near Taiwan, including the launch of a ballistic missile that landed in Japan’s exclusive economic zone. And over the past year, North Korea has tested an unprecedented number of ballistic missiles as it pursues its nuclear weapons program, even sending one over Japan.  "This represents a significant evolution in Japan’s strategic thinking,” said Jeffrey Hornung, an expert in Japanese security and foreign policy at the Washington-based Rand Corp. "China’s behavior over the last 10 years has really put Japan on a trajectory of thinking more seriously about its defense.”  Prime Minister Fumio Kishida has pushed a more assertive foreign policy agenda since February. Late last month, he took the extraordinary step of saying he wanted to grow the defense budget to 2 percent of GDP by 2027 — a move long considered controversial and implausible. If he succeeds, Japan in five years likely would have the world’s third-largest defense budget after the United States and China.

Japan views the Tomahawk missiles as a "stopgap” weapon that could be delivered within five or so years, as it works to extend the range of its own Type 12 cruise missiles to have a similar ability to attack military targets on land from a distance. But that project is likely to be a 10-year effort, experts said.  Japan plans to reconfigure existing vertical launch systems on its destroyers to accommodate the Tomahawks, officials said. The Tomahawks were a top choice because they are "combat proven long-range fires,” the first Japanese official said.  The Tomahawk Land Attack Missiles, or TLAMs, are built by Raytheon. They were notably used in the 1991 Persian Gulf War, demonstrating that targets could be struck at long range with precision. They would give Japan the ability to strike bases on Chinese or North Korean soil, unlike its current array of missiles, which are geared for invaders closer to Japanese territory.

Possessing Tomahawks would "add a lot” to Japan’s conventional deterrent, said the former head of U.S. Indo-Pacific Command, retired Adm. Phil Davidson. "You’ve got to have some offensive capability,” said Davidson, who retired last year. "You can’t win the World Cup without scoring a goal. You can’t just play defense all the time. If you’re going to have a deterrent capability, your adversary has to feel they’re at risk.”  The benefits would accrue to partners in the region as well, said Christopher B. Johnstone, Japan chair at the Center for Strategic and International Studies: "A Japan that is capable of striking back on its own would make a significant contribution to deterrence in East Asia.”  Japan and the United States already cooperate closely in military technology, former officials noted. The Japanese fly the F-35 fighter jet and use the Aegis missile defense system, both built by U.S. contractor Lockheed Martin. They run joint ballistic missile defense exercises at sea, including a successful one last month off Hawaii. 

Japanese officials say the move would also deepen U.S. confidence in Japan’s will and ability to shoulder its defense burden.  "We are backing our intention with the budget and security strategy,” said the second Japanese official. "And that should elevate U.S. confidence in Japanese capability. That kind of confidence is important for the alliance.”  To date only Britain has been sold the Tomahawks, noted Hornung, from Rand. The United States selling to Japan "sends a message that you are in our top tier of really trustworthy countries as allies,” he said.

China has bristled at Japan’s shift. At a briefing this month, Chinese Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Mao Ning called Japan’s plans a "very dangerous” development.  "Japan needs to earnestly reflect on its history of aggression, respect the security concerns of Asian neighbors, act prudently in the field of military security, and do more things that are conducive to regional peace and stability,” Mao said.  In May, Japan’s national security adviser, Takeo Akiba, met in Washington with his White House counterpart, Jake Sullivan, and broached the idea of buying Tomahawks, according to people familiar with the matter. Sullivan, they said, was receptive.  "We’ll start a process to look at it,” he told Akiba, according to the people. "And we’ll stay in touch with you.”

Tokyo has not yet made a formal request to purchase the weapons, officials said.  The government is still sensitive to domestic antiwar sentiment and is steadfastly framing the weapons in terms of self-defense. "It’s defensive-offensive — not offense-offense,” said the second official. "We still consider it defensive.”  But, the official conceded, "this [move] is quite extraordinary. The Tomahawk is very significant.”  Japan was the first Asian nation to join the West in imposing sanctions on Russia over its invasion, leading Russia to label it an "unfriendly” country and to increase its military activity in the vicinity.  Officials in Tokyo saw how NATO support for Kyiv increased after it demonstrated a will to fight in the face of long odds, said Johnstone, until June a White House director for East Asia: "They concluded the best way to ensure the United States and others are in their corner in a crisis was to show they had invested in their own defense and were prepared to fight. That is the central lesson of the Ukraine war for Japan.”  Indeed, Japan is poised to take a remarkable turn in its defense posture in many ways beyond just new hardware and increased spending. This month, the Defense Ministry is also expected to announce an increase of its cybersecurity team to 20,000 by 2027, up from the current 800, staffing up the government to close major gaps in its cybersecurity capabilities.  Japan is also considering making it easier for the Self-Defense Forces to use civilian ports and airports in peacetime, a further reflection of its concerns over readiness in case of conflict.

 

China is about to get schwacked hard by COVID.

 

 

LINK

Quote

WASHINGTON—The U.S. is taking new steps to arm Taiwan against China, with Congress passing legislation that will finance weapons sales and authorize the potential transfer of arms from American military stockpiles to Taipei, as the U.S. has done for Ukraine.  The Taiwan provisions, tucked into this year’s $858 billion annual defense-policy bill that the Senate passed on Thursday, amount to some of the biggest changes in U.S. support for Taiwan’s defense in decades. It requires the U.S. government to accelerate the transfer of arms to Taiwan amid the continuing war in Ukraine.

For the first time, the bipartisan legislation budgets as much as $10 billion in financing and grants for weapons over five years, providing an additional avenue to transfer armaments beyond direct military sales to Taiwan. It also gives the president the authority to draw down existing stocks of U.S. weapons to transfer directly to Taiwan in the event of a Chinese attack or other acts of aggression.   Upgrading Taiwan’s defenses has become a pressing priority for Washington. Defense Department officials have said that China’s military aims to acquire capabilities that would allow it to launch an attack or invasion of Taiwan by 2027. An attack, top commanders and military specialists warn, would alter the region’s security and economy, giving China greater scope to control sea lanes, pressure U.S. allies and push out American forces . 

The new support package should over time give Taiwan sufficient capabilities to deter or forestall potential aggression from China and allow the U.S. to position forces in to defend the island, said Mark Montgomery, a retired admiral. He said the weapons financing and other changes go beyond the Taiwan Relations Act of 1979, which committed the U.S. to support Taiwan’s defense.  "This goes significantly farther,” said Mr. Montgomery, now a senior fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, a hawkish Washington think tank. "We are going to help you pay for weapons, stow weapons for you to access, give you presidential drawdown authority from U.S. stocks, and work together to plan and exercise.”  President Biden is expected to sign the legislation. Whether the new measures will be funded in full remains an active debate on Capitol Hill, lawmakers said.

Aside from Taiwan funding, the defense bill, known as the National Defense Authorization Act, also authorizes new weapons purchases for the U.S. military, increases pay for service members and ends the Pentagon’s Covid-19 vaccine mandate, despite the Biden administration’s preference that it remain in place.  Rising American support for Taiwan is among the steps the U.S. is taking to gear up for what the Biden administration sees as a decisive competition with China. On Friday, the State Department formally launched a new office to coordinate China policy and better gear the U.S. response to Beijing’s efforts to reshape the global order.

The challenges the U.S. faced in rapidly arming Ukraine has brought into greater focus  concerns about equipping Taiwan and gave momentum to the new policy measures, lawmakers said. Since Russia launched its full-out assault in February, the U.S. has heaved nearly $20 billion in arms into Ukraine to help Kyiv defend itself, mostly by drawing down American stocks of missiles, artillery, drones and other weaponry.  "We’ve learned a lesson from Ukraine, where we need to make sure that we’re working with partners and friends around the globe to ensure that they are ready to push back against these authoritarian regimes,” said Sen. Joni Ernst (R., Iowa), who serves on the Senate Armed Services Committee and is a member of the chamber’s Taiwan caucus. 

Beijing, which claims self-ruled Taiwan as its territory, has turned to military pressure, frequently sending jet fighters and naval ships near the democratically governed island. This summer, to protest a visit to Taiwan by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, Beijing conducted multiday live-fire exercises and demonstrated capabilities to mount a blockade.  The financing of weapons transfers is seen as crucial to getting Taiwan the kind of armaments it needs to deter China, said Sen. Bob Menendez (D., NJ), who chairs the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. He said lawmakers are still negotiating over the actual funding levels as part of talks on a massive year-end government spending bill, but said it is important that the program be robustly funded.

Beyond financing, the legislation also accelerates the timelines for deliveries of arms.  The Wall Street Journal in November reported a $19 billion backlog of arms deliveries to Taiwan amid the continuing conflict in Ukraine. Some weapons, like the Javelin antitank weapon and Stinger surface-to-air missile, which were approved for Taiwan in 2015 still haven’t reached the island.   The legislation also increases U.S. spending on munitions stockpiles in the Pacific region, from $200 million to $500 million a year, an increase of roughly $900 million over three years, from which Taiwan could draw if needed.  Other measures expand training and exercise between the U.S. and Taiwan. The U.S. has quietly been conducting training inside Taiwan with a small contingent of Marines and special operations forces, The Wall Street Journal reported last year.

The Ukraine conflict has strained the U.S. government and the defense industry in providing a vast number of arms in a short period. U.S. officials said, unlike Ukraine, the bulk of the strategy to arm Taiwan relies on sales, not drawing directly from U.S. stocks. Still, an official said Thursday that industrial capacity remains a concern.  "The real issue and the challenge that is in front of us now is how do we expand that production capacity, and how do we increase the diameter of the soda straw for the production of those in-demand items,” a State Department official told reporters.  The Defense Department has created one ad hoc group to look at foreign military sales, and another to examine the issues particular to the arming of Taiwan. Pentagon officials have so far declined to say what changes could be made.

 

It's an IFV, not a tank. In any event, the readiness of Germany's military is pathetic.

Quote

BERLIN (Reuters) - Germany is assessing its Puma tanks, manufactured by Rheinmetall and Krauss-Maffei Wegmann (KMW), after some of the vehicles were put out of service during a recent military drill, a defence ministry spokesperson said on Monday.  "The failure of the Pumas in the latest exercise is a heavy setback for us," the spokesperson told a regular news confidence in Berlin.

Germany would still fulfill its NATO readiness commitments by switching to older Marder tanks from Jan. 1, the spokesperson said, describing this as a "fall-back solution".  The Spiegel magazine reported over the weekend that 18 Puma tanks intended for NATO's very high readiness joint task force (VJTF) next year were not operational after problems arose during a firing exercise.

German Defence Minister Christine Lambrecht held talks on Monday with industry and officials and said in a statement that she had requested a report on the difficulties by the end of next week.  "NATO can continue to rely on our performance of duty in the VJTF," she said in a statement.  Rheinmetall shares were trading 5% lower on Monday afternoon following the reported problems with the tanks.  A spokesperson for the company did not comment on the issues.

 

 

Second order consequences of the Ukraine War.

 

 

LINK

Quote

Just like that, the government of China decides it no longer needs quarantines, announces it won’t be updating some of its wildly unbelievable statistics on Covid cases, and opens up the country to foreign visitors. After nearly three years of a spectacularly repressive "zero-Covid” philosophy that locked up millions of people inside their homes — sometimes by welding doors shut in Wuhan apartments buildings — Xi Jinping and the Chinese government offer an Emily Litella–esque "never mind,” turn on a dime, and reopen their society hoping that the consequences of more widespread Covid infections don’t become too severe. Keep in mind that a recently leaked document contends that 250 million Chinese citizens caught Covid-19 in the month of December.

The consequences of Beijing’s sudden about-face are . . . predictably dire: "Emergency rooms are turning away ambulances, relatives of sick people are searching for open beds, and patients are slumped on benches in hospital corridors and lying on floors for lack of beds.” (If we’re ever going to see a more severe variant emerge, it’s likely going to be in this mega-explosion of new cases.)

Now, I welcome the authoritarian Chinese government’s acceptance that it cannot control and quarantine its way to victory over a virus that is as contagious as the common cold, particularly when so many of its citizens live in close quarters in crowded cities. But it would be nice if governments and civil-society elites around the world would openly acknowledge that the Chinese government lies all the time. Some of us have been pointing this out since the start of the pandemic, and others have noted this for decades! Everyone — from the U.S. government to the EU, the World Health Organization, the United Nations, the World Bank, international economic institutions, and multinational corporations — that regularly deals with the Chinese government acts as if its statements mean something beyond what Beijing wants the world to believe. We endured this ordeal — with lingering impact on the lives of Americans — in large part because of the dishonesty of the Chinese government, whether you subscribe to the lab-leak theory or not.

All health data coming out of China are consistent with what the Chinese government wants the world to believe and are likely at odds with the truth. They’re worse than useless to the extent that they steer epidemiologists astray.

This should also blow up the narrative that China is some sort of supercompetent, ruthlessly effective colossus offering the world a brutal but effective governance alternative to Western liberal democracy. Beijing demonstrates at least as much incompetence, butt-covering, dishonesty, spin, denial, and corruption as Washington, London, or Paris. China simply doesn’t have a free press to expose the mess.