Does the Static War in Ukraine Overstate Current Small Drone Power?

Are we getting carried away with small aerial drone worship based on the static nature of the Winter War of 2022 this past year?

Mind you, I identified the need to protect forward units from swarming drone attacks in the "brown skies" just above the ground some time ago, arguing in Army magazine for fighter drones to lift the air defense burden from already busy small units at the tip of the spear in close combat.

Small drones have been great for recon and strike in the Winter War of 2022 this last year, seemingly justifying my worry. Yet I suspect that the static front magnifies the effect of the small strike drones:

Just as snipers had an outsized role in the World War I trenches, surely it is easier to use the cheap drones when the operators have a secure area and operate over familiar territory--because the front isn't moving much--with those short-range suicide drones.

I imagine the same is true for recon drones. Recon drone information is siloed and the information gained will often take time to get stale. Unless the information from many drones is fused and analyzed in minutes, this capability is also a static-war feature. 

If war goes mobile, how do the short-range small drones operate when patient searching is needed? How do they identify targets that are moving--and perhaps heading for the drone operator's position with fire support raining down suppressing and killing fire? How do you use drone information to mass fires from many sources--some far away--to break up fast-moving, large formations.

At the very least, the small drones will need to adapt, becoming disposable fired from advancing vehicles in launchers much like smoke dispensers. Or even released from carrier rounds fired from cannons and rocket systems. They will need to be AI-directed with somebody in the battalion immediately collecting all the data, analyzing it, and distributing it to appropriate recipients for rapid decisions to exploit the information.

And the information must flow to higher levels to get bigger pictures for the brigades, divisions, corps, and the army itself. Although the time to create those pictures will be longer. But the scope of decisions at higher levels will have additional time.

At that point, the drones may be as broadly effective as the current buzz credits them with. Assuming counter-measures don't catch up in that endless race the drones currently have the lead in.

I just don't want to be hasty in crowning small drones the queen of battle based on the Winter War of 2022 experience in 2023. 

NOTE: TDR Winter War of 2022 coverage continues here.

NOTE: I'm adding updates on the Last Hamas War in this post.

Red Teaming the Obstacles to Invading Taiwan

 So invading Taiwan is likely beyond China's capabilities? Does China only get one shot at victory?

Technically the article doesn't say China can't successfully invade. It says China would have a number of "struggles". Why yes. War is like that. Taiwan will have struggles defeating an invasion, too. And sometimes the outcome of a war rests on who is less incompetent.

But what about China's struggles in the path to victory?

The Taiwan Strait, over ninety miles wide, is incredibly choppy, and due to two monsoon seasons and other extreme weather events, a seaborne invasion is only viable a few months out of the year.

The windows will help China, too. If China lands during a window, will allies of Taiwan be able to send sufficient force to operate around Taiwan before extreme weather and monsoons close in? By the time a window to intervene opens up again, Taiwan could be defeated.

China would need to shift military assets to its eastern coast and undertake other visible preparations for an invasion, which Taiwan and the United States would likely be able to detect.

Well, China can gear up for one of the invasion windows. Does Taiwan gear up every window just in case. Does America? How about other potential allies of Taiwan? The cost of just-in-case readiness every window will exhaust those countries while China waits for them to get dulled reactions to Chinese activities.

Some questions remains about whether China has the naval vessels it would need to invade Taiwan successfully. China’s amphibious fleet is relatively small, and although Beijing will likely turn to civilian ships to sustain and supplement an invading force, those take longer to unload and would be more vulnerable to Taiwanese missiles.

I think the fact that China hasn't built an amphibious fleet means China doesn't think it needs that to invade. And consider that America's large amphibious fleet can't lift anywhere close to a single division. 

As for the civilian ships? Some argue that China has too many for their ports to load. And that's a problem! Yeah, lots of assets with spares to lose is a problem?

As the problem of unloading shows, China doesn't need to load them all just to have them clustered around Taiwanese ports waiting to unload.

Even if Chinese troops successfully cross the strait, few deep-water ports and beaches in Taiwan could accommodate a large landing force.

That is a problem. But Chinese special forces infiltrated prior to the war reinforced by troops carried in PLA helicopters, old navy warships, and coast guard ships could make a high-speed dash to secure the ports ahead of the main invasion.

Beijing would also have to assume Taiwan could destroy its major ports at a conflict’s outset to prevent an invader from using them.

But would Taiwan? There will always be ambiguous signals that will argue against preemptively wrecking Taiwan's economy. Heck, why would China blockade Taiwan if overt preparations to invade followed by an announced "exercise" (that really is an exercise and not the first wave) means Taiwan will destroy its own ports and self-isolate?

Taiwan’s west coast has shallow waters extending from most of its beaches, meaning they are not ideal for an invading force.

That is, the authors say, the Chinese invaders will be vulnerable to attack by Taiwanese missiles and artillery. 

But that's where a combined arms assault of China's missiles, aircraft, electronic warfare, propaganda and subversion, and special forces come in. Destroying and suppressing the missiles and artillery as well as the command and control, road networks, and ammunition depots will erode the Taiwanese missiles and artillery. 

Will it be enough? Don't know. Sometimes you only find the answer during the war. But I do know that saying Taiwan has a plan to use missiles and artillery ignores the reality that China has a plan to nullify them.

Taiwan’s east coast is lined by cliffs that are too steep for an invading force to scale. Moving to Taiwan’s major population centers is only possible via a few narrow passes and tunnels, which Taiwan can destroy or defend.

So what? East coast landings only have to take or destroy the ports to deny Taiwan access to resupply or reinforcements. And bonus if China sets of air defense systems on the east coast.

A Chinese amphibious invasion of Taiwan would likely have to dwarf D-Day in scale.

Why? Taiwan's active military is small and poorly motivated. My worries haven't eased with time. And in addition to weaknesses in the active forces, its reserves are a joke.

Taiwan has also invested in defenses, from mines to anti-landing spikes, and mobile missile launchers.

Sure. But Taiwan has to deploy the mines. Just like wrecking the ports to defeat a Chinese invasion, deciding to close off Taiwan's coast with mines is a big decision that won't be taken likely lest "peace" be disrupted. You think nobody--especially in America--will argue such moves "provoke" China? Anti-landing spikes work on beaches, and as I've long said, I don't think we'll see D-Day 2.0.

Even if China’s military successfully established a beachhead on Taiwan, it would struggle to navigate the mountainous terrain to secure the island.

The Taiwanese could mount a guerrilla campaign in the mountains, they add.

Seriously? Why would China pursue Taiwanese resistance into the mountains rather than secure the cities where most people and all the economic activity are? Letting the die-hards starve in the mountains will be the solution to that.

Taiwan’s military, by contrast, has the advantage of knowing the land and terrain and how to defend it.

Well, great. That's a single advantage. It may not be enough if the Taiwanese lack numbers, supplies, the will to fight on in adversity against a gargantuan enemy ashore, and American help.

China would need to capture the capital, Taipei, the article says:

However, gaining control of Taipei to establish full control over Taiwan would be enormously difficult. Few routes lead into the city, which sits in a bowl, ringed by mountains that defenders can utilize to target an invading force.

To prevent China’s military from seizing the capital, Taiwan can choose to destroy the city’s major port and the tunnels and highways leading into the city.

I do believe that China's primary effort will be to take the capital. And the map shows the direct assaults from the sea that I predict. And again, what if the Chinese move toward Taipei and the Taiwanese blow the ports and tunnels. Taipei is now self-isolated and starving. And Taiwanese units in Taipei are now trapped inside, unable to move out to eject the Chinese invaders. Freeing China to consolidate bridgeheads and build up for future operations. 

That's a problem for defining what a Chinese victory in an invasion is, as I addressed in Military Review. Failure to drive the Chinese invaders into the sea is a Chinese victory.

Even if China’s military entered Taipei, it would have to consider conducting urban warfare.

So? China won't try to win hearts and minds with a careful campaign. They'll blast their way through the cities like Russia did in Chechnya and Ukraine; and as the American-backed Iraqis did in Mosul. Rubble doesn't cause trouble. China will have the island and to Hell with the people and infrastructure. The former can be replaced with loyal subjects and latter rebuilt.

And here we get to the bottom line:

Taiwan has inherent advantages that will make an invasion difficult, expensive, and uncertain. Still, the Taiwanese people’s will to fight and resist will likely prove more decisive than mountains, ports, roads, or the ocean. If China conducts the operation with little opposition, it can probably navigate and overcome those obstacles. However, if confronted with millions of people determined to repel an invasion, China will face a much tougher task.

One, it is a big job to cross the Taiwan Strait and conduct an opposed landing. The struggle is real, as the kids say.

But China will have counter-measures to defeat or erode those obstacles. That's what joint operations are supposed to do in a rock-paper-scissors game for high stakes.

And as I noted in that Military Review article, the idea that a Chinese failure to capture Taipei in the first campaign means China loses the war is nonsense. Just holding a bridgehead means there will be a second campaign, just as 2022 followed 2014 for Ukraine. And Taiwan lacks Ukraine's depth to survive such an onslaught--this time with no amphibious landing required.

Again, I'm not saying Taiwan backed by powerful allies can't thwart China's invasion and leave it burning and bleeding in the waters off of Taiwan. China's plans won't survive contact with the enemy. I'm just saying Taiwan's victory isn't inevitable. Even Taiwan's plans won't survive contact with the PLA enemy.

Have a super sparkly China-can't-possibly-defeat-Taiwan-and-Ukraine-has-sobered-China day.

NOTE: TDR Winter War of 2022 coverage continues here.

NOTE: I'm adding updates on the Last Hamas War in this post.

The Winter War of 2022 Rests and Refits

The Winter War of 2022 drags on with no end in sight. Russia is rebuilding with its own resources and those of its weak rogue friends. Ukraine lacks the size to compete with Russia's industry and must endure Russian bombardment of any industry it builds to compete. Will the West support Ukraine against Russia's brutal invasion more effectively than Russia's Axis of Weasels is helping Putin?

Ukrainians aren't enlisting like they did early when Russia was storming into Ukraine and when driving the Russians out seemed in their grasp:

On Christmas night, the Ukrainian government submitted the long-awaited bill on mobilization to parliament, triggering scorn from some opposition lawmakers.

Ukraine needs to draft people to win this war.

Keep in mind that it is normal for citizens to lose enthusiasm when a war drags on. We faced that even in our Revolution. 

And for the long run, Ukraine wants to reduce dependence on the West for the means to fight by building up its own industry and increasing production cooperation with foreign defense companies:

Ukraine’s prospects for sustaining its military forces with limited assistance over the long term are excellent. Ukraine is heavily industrialized with a highly educated and technically sophisticated population. It had a massive arms industry during the Soviet period and continued to be a significant arms exporter after independence. The Russian occupation of key industrial areas and destruction of important centers of weapons production, especially the Kharkiv tank factory, has degraded but not eliminated the solid base on which Ukraine can build a viable DIB to support its military forces in the future.

It will take years, so Western help to reach higher self-sufficiency and to meet Ukraine's needs in the short run is critical. Although right now Ukraine does not have the capability to produce all tank components.

Russia has seemingly changed the focus of its strategic bombing campaign away from the effort to hurt civilian morale in last winter's aerial assault:

The target of Russia's winter campaign of missile strikes is predominantly Ukraine's military-industrial complex, Vadym Skibitskyi, a representative of Ukraine's Military Intelligence (HUR), said in an interview with RBC Ukraine on Jan. 15.

We'll see if that lasts.

Slowing Ukraine's rearmament down is only half of Russia's objective. Russia, too, is counting on mobilizing industry to wage a long war:

Professor Justin Bronk, senior research fellow for Airpower and Technology, says Russia’s economy is now on a war footing, with armament production rising sharply. 

“The Kremlin’s strategy is to conquer Ukraine by continuing to fight until the West gives up, so forcing Kyiv to ‘negotiate’ won’t end the war, it will only encourage Russia to fight on.”

And we shall see if Putin orders another wave of mobilization for more men over the winter or after his spring "re-election" puts that potential means of the public signaling discontent in the rear view mirror.

By doing this, Russia hopes to grind down Ukraine's ability to fight and erode the West's resolve to arm Ukraine. 

Breedlove gets to the basic issue: 

"If the West chooses to give Ukraine what they need to win, Ukraine will win this war," the four-star general said. "This war is going to end exactly how Western policymakers want and desire it to end." 

In the long run, helping Ukraine arm itself is what it needs to win. Don't let weakened Russia scare us into retreating from our assistance to Ukraine. When you start to take Vienna, take Vienna. 

UPDATE (Monday): Expect no liberation of territory this year:

The [American] idea now is to position Ukraine to hold its position on the battlefield for now, but “put them on a different trajectory to be much stronger by the end of 2024 … and get them on a more sustainable path,” said the senior official[.]

But eventually, Ukraine must attack. 

UPDATE (Tuesday): In the short run, higher-than-expected costs push leaders to demand higher objectives to justify the higher costs:

Russian Foreign Intelligence Service (SVR) Director Sergei Naryshkin reiterated that the Kremlin is not interested in any settlements short of the complete destruction and eradication of the Ukrainian state, likely in an ongoing effort to justify the long-term and costly Russian war effort to domestic audiences.

Only Westerners are talking about Russia keeping what they've taken as the price of Russia reloading peace.

But eventually, no objective is high enough to justify increasing costs. Assuming your army or homefront doesn't break, you might just turn around and go home.

UPDATE (Friday): Area denial--or perhaps just anti-access--in action:

A dramatic new view released by the Ukrainian Defense Intelligence Directorate (GUR) shows several of its uncrewed surface vessels (USVs) strike and sink the Russian Tarantul-III class missile corvette Ivanovets. The attack took place Wednesday night local time on the Black Sea near Lake Donuzlav in western Crimea, the GUR said on its Telegram channel.

It depends on whether the Russians stay out of that area or pay a higher price to operate in it.

NOTE: The image was made from DALL-E.

NOTE: ISW updates continue here. Also, I put war-related links and commentary in the Weekend Data Dump. 

NOTE: I'm adding updates on the Last Hamas War in this post.

Weekend Data Dump

The Detroit Lions are a game away from playing in the Super Bowl! Beat San Francisco! Nay, crush them.

North Korea has an opportunity to leverage Russia's new ammo-based friendship to make China increase its financial contributions to propping up North Korea's regime.

Russia sent the aircraft from its out-of-action Kuznetsov carrier to fight over Ukraine. Is an outbreak of strategic sanity breaking out in Moscow?

The Polish suicide drone sent to Ukraine.

Using high-speed cameras for drone navigation.

Was the secrecy from CCP incompetence or a desire not to endure Covid alone? "Chinese researchers isolated and mapped the virus that causes Covid-19 in late December 2019, at least two weeks before Beijing revealed details of the deadly virus to the world[.]" Tip to Legal Insurrection via Instapundit.

Via Instapundit, America's "weird passivity toward Iran's aggression". It isn't America's weird passivity. It's Democrats' weird looove of mullah-run Iran.

Hiding behind civilians when Israel isn't actually committing genocide has its advantages: "Israel is falling short of its goal to quickly eradicate Hamas as it has only killed 20% to 30% of the terrorists’ estimated 30,000 militants, according to US intelligence." But more will be wounded--perhaps permanently.

Not equivalent: "Russia could seize Western investments worth £226billion ($288billion) in revenge if the West takes the £236billion ($300billion) of assets frozen since the war in Ukraine began." The West invested in Russia. Russia hid assets from Russia.

Just as the stalemated Iran-Iraq War expanded to the sea and through the air to targets behind the lines, so too has Ukraine followed where Russia struck from the beginning: "The Kremlin has blamed Ukraine for a blaze at a liquefied natural gas (LNG) terminal in the Russian Baltic Sea port of Ust-Luga[.]"

Hmmm: "Ukrainian commanders of all ranks give the same answer: first-person-view drones, which pilots on the ground maneuver while watching a live feed from an onboard camera. These drones have made tank-on-tank engagement a thing of the past." Well, it's a static front. Tanks are built for movement.

The myth that General Shinseki was fired for saying several hundred thousand American troops would be needed to secure Iraq lives on. Shinseki's retirement was announced a year before that testimony. And America never had 300,000 troops in Iraq. Yet we won. You might be surprised at who agreed. 

France is about to enact a tougher immigration law. Ah, those nuanced and sophisticated Europeans that America is supposed to emulate, according to Democrats. A review will likely strike some provisions. 

Have hope for Iraq. San Francisco was "Baghdad-by-the-Bay": "A large Bohemian presence thrived in both [with] unsung tolerance, ranging to an admiration, for their diversity and colorful characters, many of the colorful rising to high places in Baghdad, and respected, if not exalted, in San Francisco."

The Saudis just want a path: "Saudi Arabia's top diplomat said the kingdom will not normalize relations with Israel or contribute to Gaza's reconstruction without a credible path to a Palestinian state — a nonstarter for Israel's government." Paths can be long or short. This is a path.

The Iraqi government needs American troops to hold off Iranian pressure and influence; but American troops are a convenient club for Iran to beat the Iraqi government with. Assuming Biden doesn't want to run from Iraq, too, we'll get past this Iranian ploy with some cosmetic changes. At some point.

Transparency: "The former House Select Committee on Jan. 6 deleted more than 100 encrypted files from its probe just days before Republicans took over the majority in the House of Representatives[.]" That's a lot more than Nixon's 18-minute tape gap. 

Lenin was a monster: "On the 100th anniversary of his death, it's worth recalling that almost all the worst features of communist totalitarianism began under Lenin, not Stalin and other successors." His demented vision was continued, if turned to "11" --not twisted--by Stalin. That was real communism as envisioned.

The Houthi won't end tit-for-tat strikes: "The pressure on [Biden] to respond to each and every Houthi attack with yet more airstrikes will increase[.]" That's why responding is an error. We must hit the Houthi until they can't strike. The author said we should aid Gazans.  FFS. But the author isn't naïve. Nope.

With few exceptions, a "new University of Michigan-led international study finds that fruits and vegetables grown in urban farms and gardens have a carbon footprint that is, on average, six times greater than conventionally grown produce." there goes moral superiority! Hahahaha. Tip to Instapundit.

Democratic Socialists of America has a "financial crisis" and will lay off staff and slash its budget after financing pro-Hamas groups. They are perplexed. They were so sure "from each according to their ability; to each according to their need" worked in the real world. Please notify "the Squad". Via Instapundit.

The Pentagon said US and UK forces hit the Houthi again on Monday: "The strikes, which were conducted with the support of Australia, Bahrain, Canada and the Netherlands, struck eight targets in Yemen, including an underground storage facility and sites linked to missiles and aerial surveillance[.]"

Fake news photo.

First that pleasure boat I mentioned a while back. Now this: "A drone flying over a newly activated Marine Corps base on Guam “was disabled” on Jan. 14, a Marine spokeswoman said." Guam is getting attention.

Oh? "Most U.S. and Taiwanese experts polled in a new survey say China lacks the capabilities to effectively carry out an amphibious invasion of Taiwan[.]" After decades of military expansion China didn't build the capabilities to take their most core objective? I disagree. Also, please define "victory".

I've joked about Putin claiming Alaska as "historic" Russian territory. But unless Snopes analyzed the wrong decree, Putin didn't just do that. I don't rule out a future claim, of course. And yes, I know, Snopes ...

Germany develops Skyranger, a turreted auto-cannon for destroying drones and low-flying aircraft. Soon to be combat tested in Ukrainian service, I assume.

Nigeria's 225 million face: "Endemic corruption means the national police is not only ineffective but part of the problem. Criminal activity is widespread and often intense. Currently there has been a sharp increase in kidnapping for ransom." Jihadis were suppressed. Corruption and Islamism will revive them.

The B-21 has been approved for low-rate production: "Northrop Grumman has the greenlight to begin producing the Pentagon’s newest bomber."

Delaying carrier buys will endanger the shipbuilding and supply bases for building carriers. Well maybe those resources would be better used for more non-carrier surface ships.

Recruiting woes: "[The Army Secretary] said the 'wokeness' charges stemmed from the hyper-partisan political climate gripping the nation and challenged the critics to come see firsthand how the Army trains." It's not the combat leaders I'm worried about. It's the top leadership. And I think lower ranks get that.

"Election": "Little will change as a result of the sham [Belarus] elections in February. Depressingly, its sole useful purpose will be to underline the regime’s dictatorial behavior and set the stage for another rigged vote in 2025, when Lukashenka, now 69, will seek to extend his 30-year rule." It's vital territory.

Sweden is getting closer to entering NATO: "Sweden edged nearer to joining NATO after Turkey planned a vote to approve the Nordic nation’s accession and Hungary sought talks on the matter."

Fascinating: "Syria said on Tuesday there was no justification for Jordanian air strikes on its territory that its neighbour said had targeted Iran-linked drug dealers whose border incursions posed a direct threat to Jordan's national security." 

Reports that Russia switched their bombing targets from civilians to defense industries was premature: "Air raid sirens sounded in Ukraine's two largest cities just before dawn on Tuesday, as the Russian military again targeted residential areas with a barrage of missiles, killing five and injuring dozens."

David versus Goliath: "A Filipino fishing boat captain protested on Tuesday the Chinese coast guard’s aggression in the disputed South China Sea[.]"

Fast death from above: "A secretive lab in China has reportedly carried out a simulation in which hypersonic missiles and satellites launched an attack on American warships." The range is possibly global. 

DOD background briefing on the strike campaign against Houthi anti-ship capabilities. 

Good: "Taiwan’s largest private shipbuilder has started building an anti-submarine warfare frigate expected to relieve stress on the fleet." Taiwan has west coast and east coast needs.

Moving American USVs from testing to a combat role.

Too busy for one command: "U.S. Naval Forces Europe-Africa and 6th Fleet are separating after 19 years as a single command[.]" Will the Mediterranean force be more than a phantom fleet? Fleet size suggests "no."

Territorial stalemate: "Shorter reconnaissance strike response times, development of a 600-mile front filled with densely packed minefields and anti-tank weapons, and now two years of warfighting lessons, have made the Russian army into a much more “proficient” force, a senior UK defense official warned[.]"

Tragedy? "A Russian military aircraft carrying 65 Ukrainian prisoners of war crashed Wednesday in western Russia's Belgorod region, Russian officials said." That's what Russia claims. It was shot down, it seems. By who and who or what was on it remains unclear.

Thank you Captain Vice Admiral Obvious: "Iran is “very directly involved” in ship attacks that Yemen’s Houthi rebels have carried out during Israel’s war against Hamas, the Navy’s top Mideast commander told The Associated Press on Monday." Sorry. It actually needs to be said repeatedly. To his civilian bosses.

Meanwhile in the nation less real than Wakanda: "U.S. airstrikes killed three Islamic militants in Somalia, U.S. Africa Command said Tuesday, marking the first such attacks in 2024."

Russia isn't producing sufficient rifle ammunition.

The Americans and Indians are working together to block China's threats to Indian interests. Which ties up more Chinese military resources away from the Pacific. I love it when a plan comes together.

Biden efforts to make the Palestinians the center of Middle East problems falters on the fact that only the Palestinians think that is true. And that was before the Abraham Accords put a label on the trend I noted.

Taiwanese are increasingly worried America won't support it. I worry Taiwanese aren't committed to fighting for their freedom. It's a vicious circle that China stokes and benefits from. Does America need to station troops there again? Or would plans to send troops to win work, as I discussed in Military Review?

Every leftist has a friend in the Department of Justice: "Former IRS contractor Charles Edward Littlejohn, [who released IRS records, including Trump's], could face little or no jail time when he's sentenced later this month, because the DOJ allowed him to plead guilty to a single felony count." Tip to Instapundit.

Is it just me, or do you get this vibe when Karine Jean-Pierre whispers sweet nothings to reporters?

 

Tyranny rebuked: "A federal judged has ruled that Canada's use of emergency powers to end the anti-government Freedom Convoy protests two years ago was 'unreasonable' and unjustified." It was not an  insurrection.

He has really good eyesight: "Something unexpected happened at Davos this year. The conventional wisdom took some tentative steps toward the right" because China's woes "are the result of government planning gone wrong. As China doubles down on repression, its economic problems get worse."

Who do Europeans think will feed them? The same Green unicorns providing them with energy? I think we need to take away Europe's belt and shoe laces until they get help.

The policy was stupid, but this isn't the result: "President Biden’s personal war with Saudi Arabian royalty has pushed the Kingdom further into the sphere of Chinese and Russian influence and closer to Iran." Saudi Arabia just wants leverage to dilute the stupid. I think the authors actually see that.

Will America change how institutions work? "The federal government organized itself around expertise on various subject matters. But the inherent weakness of expertise is that it is narrowly focused. It can solve a problem without grasping the broader consequences of the solution." An echelon above reality.

Interesting: "[A Russian milblogger said] Russian forces need to figure out how to break out of positional warfare but that Russian forces are unable to concentrate in numbers sufficient to break through Ukrainian lines because Ukrainian forces strike all force concentrations larger than a battalion." Not just drones.

The mouse that roared: "The Philippines armed forces will guarantee the "unimpeded and peaceful" exploration and exploitation of natural resources within the country's exclusive economic zone (EEZ) as it shifts its focus to external defence, Manila's defense secretary said." Does China dare stomp on it?

Resistance: "The Chinese foreign ministry on Wednesday said China's claims to the Paracel and Spratly Islands in the South China Sea were backed by "history" after Vietnam over the weekend repeated it had sufficient evidence to claim sovereignty over the islands."

Oh, please: "Russia's willingness to deploy nuclear weapons in a potential conflict with NATO is growing because the Kremlin believes the US and its allies would not dare to respond, a think tank warned yesterday." The Kremlin is beating its chest and flinging poo. As it does.

Is now the time for peace talks between Russia and Ukraine? Depends on the definition of "peace". And these people define it as Russia keeping what it stole so far and getting the time to reload and finally conquer Ukraine. Because that's how Russia defines it. Ef people who want to call "defeat" a peace.

Congressional Research Report: "Report to Congress on Navy Force Structure". 

Lock and load: "Missile arsenals are growing at an exponential rate in the Asia-Pacific region, as countries there attempt to alter or maintain the regional balance of power."

So the 155mm ammo and air defense problems are solved? "Kyiv’s foreign backers have launched new efforts to furnish the Ukrainian military with enough drones and armored vehicles to 'keep ahead of the curve' in its fast-evolving fight against Russian invaders." The U.S. co-leads the 155 and SAM groups.

The U.S. has provided more than $44 billion in military assistance to Ukraine up to now. That's lower than figures I've heard. I assume non-military aid is another chunk of aid. The report provides numbers for weapons sent.

Global warming causes freezing weather. When all events support and no events falsify your theory, that's not science.

It's still not long enough, but at least it isn't a joke anymore: "The first batch of new recruits began serving their one-year compulsory military service in Taiwan on Thursday after the conscription period was extended from four months due to government concerns about China's rising military threat."

Apparently, Trump wants to send troops to cities to get crime under control. I'm against that. One, troops lose effectiveness if used in police roles. Two, it is necessary only if cities and states can't control unrest. Democrats simply refuse to control crime. I say let the residents enjoy what they repeatedly vote for.

Letting the robots fight China: "For the first time, two of America’s closest allies have agreed to pursue advanced research on key capabilities — “strategic capabilities in robotic and autonomous systems for undersea warfare” — for the Indo-Pacific." Makes sense.

Biden will have little success: "U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken on Tuesday pitched the United States as a better security partner for Africa in place of Russia’s Wagner mercenary group[.]" Russia protects dictators. Biden abandons allies--then claims success.

Ah, Putin's brilliance: "The Netherlands is preparing to deal with the increasingly obvious threat from Russia by spending a lot more on defense."

Stormbreaker.

Improving artillery.

Telling China it must not conquer Taiwan is "provocative": "A Navy guided-missile destroyer made a trip through the Taiwan Strait this week, the first reported transit by a U.S. warship this year and one China immediately labeled provocative."

The Supreme Court did not deny Texas the right to defend the border as Biden declines to do its job. Federal statutes--not illegal presidential whims (via Instapundit)--have supremacy. There's a lot the media and historians get wrong. And don't forget this foundational myth of faux progressive moral superiority.

If South Africa goes belly up, who will save it? The West is busy closer to home. Have a ball China!

Iraq and America begin Withdrawal Theater to muffle Iran's pressure. New talks for U.S. withdrawal will be based on "the threat from ISIS, operational and environmental requirements, and the Iraqi security forces' capability levels." Or Biden chooses to lose. Again. Well, three-after 2011. Briefing here.

Biden linked border security to Ukraine, Israel, and Taiwan aid. Why are Democrats holding up aid to Ukraine in order to keep our southern border undefended? And why are Democrats linking the aid package to a Palestinian state? But no, it's conservative stubbornness, according to the media.

Erdogan demanded F-16s for approving Sweden's application to join NATO. Biden is now urging Congress to pay the ransom. Smart Diplomacy® is looking a lot like the old, bad transactional diplomacy.

Hitchhiking? "The U.S. Marine Corps is looking more closely at how to leverage alternate ships to keep its forces at sea, amid an amphibious ship shortage a top Marine called the “single biggest existential threat” to the service." How about The AFRICOM Queen, as I proposed in Military Review?

Shorter-range nuclear weapons are likely to play a larger role in the Kremlin’s strategy against NATO, given the struggle of Russian conventional forces on the battlefield in Ukraine, a new U.S. European Command-sponsored study argues.

Read more at: https://www.stripes.com/theaters/europe/2024-01-25/eucom-russia-nuclear-weapons-12789864.html?utm_campaign=dfn-ebb&utm_medium=email&utm_source=sailthru&SToverlay=2002c2d9-c344-4bbb-8610-e5794efcfa7d
Source - Stars and Stripes

Sure: "Shorter-range nuclear weapons are likely to play a larger role in the Kremlin’s strategy against NATO, given the struggle of Russian conventional forces on the battlefield in Ukraine,a new U.S. European Command-sponsored study argues." That was clear before Ukraine.

An American amphibious warfare ship headed to the Nordic region to practice amphibious warfare. 

China's expanding marines “[most likely] will serve in primarily non-war missions to protect citizens and their assets. Potential tasks include non-combatant evacuation, cooperation with partner nations for counter-terror operations, and humanitarian assistance/ disaster relief[.]" Yes. And in the South China Sea.

Shorter-range nuclear weapons are likely to play a larger role in the Kremlin’s strategy against NATO, given the struggle of Russian conventional forces on the battlefield in Ukraine, a new U.S. European Command-sponsored study argues.

Read more at: https://www.stripes.com/theaters/europe/2024-01-25/eucom-russia-nuclear-weapons-12789864.html?utm_campaign=dfn-ebb&utm_medium=email&utm_source=sailthru&SToverlay=2002c2d9-c344-4bbb-8610-e5794efcfa7d
Source - Stars and Stripes

Benefit: "China is building two advanced nuclear reactors with Russian assistance[.]" The reactors will make material for nuclear warheads. Russia and China are frenemies with benefits. How much longer can Russia provide China with benefits greater than its liabilities? And who will China aim the missiles at?

Ukraine wants more M-777 artillery. They've proven effective. More will be produced. I'm so old I remember when it was the XM-777 (and have the commemorative coffee mug).

The V-22 tilt rotor concept is great--when it works. Is peacetime going to kill it by amplifying the crashes and deaths with no advantages in combat to counter that?

Half the issue: "The United Nations’ top court stopped short Friday of ordering a cease-fire in Gaza in a genocide case but demanded that Israel try to contain death and damage in its military offensive in the tiny coastal enclave." Where's the court ruling telling Hamas not to use human shields? That's the major factor.

Countries are spurred to update--not replace--main battle tanks. 

A proto-imperial state naturally thinks the peasants are revolting: "After the Dutch, Polish, Italian and German farmers, France’s paysans are in revolt."

While I worry our open southern border enables terrorist infiltration, I don't want to panic about "multi-division" levels of infiltration. "Military-age men" could just as easily be called "working-age men." Or maybe I lack imagination even after October 7th. Still, prior to 10/7 securing the border was needed.

This just sounds like obscuring the Marine Corps changes to avoid challenges: "the 2030 aspect of Force Design [2030] is not a goal or ending point, and the service is 'kind of getting away from the 2030 moniker.'" The concerns about the evolving Corps remain valid.

The University of Michigan has a new football coach. Welcome Sherrone Moore! I had hoped Harbaugh would stay (dynasty!). But Moore won games in 2023. He can do the main job. Let's see which assistant coaches remain and who we can grab to replace those who leave. Next year's season starts off tough.

Iraq knows we'll leave if asked (2011). Iran knows talks will keep Americans in until distant conditions are met: "The Islamic Resistance in Iraq released a statement rejecting the US and Iraqi decision to begin negotiations over the status of US-led coalition forces in Iraq and vowed to continue attacking US forces."

If Biden federalizes the Texas National Guard to keep the Texas border open (summary of the issue), will the issue of troops being required to obey only lawful orders from their lawful chain of command come up? Is an order violating Article IV Sec. 4 of the Constitution lawful? TDR is not an attorney.

Russia needs artillery: "Russia Mounts Naval Rockets on Tanks & Trucks to Compensate for Artillery Losses in Ukraine"

Move and counter-move: "Initially lauded for technological ingenuity when Russian troops advanced on Kyiv, Ukrainian forces are now grappling with Russia catching up in the innovation race." Also, winter is not kind to battery-powered devices. As EV owners in a cold snap are discovering. Not a silver bullet.

Strategypage thinks Russia's plans "to reassemble the Soviet Union empire stumbled and died in Ukraine. Not only that, but the Russian effort to annex Ukraine failed because the Ukrainians were willing to fight while too many of the Russian invaders were not." The war goes on. Nothing is final. Assume nothing.

Close: "For historical analogy, think of Russia as the equivalent to World War II Japan while China is the wealthier and more powerful Nazi Germany." Putin gets the Mussolini role. But boy was I wrong on casualty tolerance.

The other threat to Europe: "The EU has run into problems because many Europeans see the EU developing into an unelected bureaucracy that can make all sorts of new rules and even foreign policy without any regard for what their constituents and, technically, employers, European voters, want."

Good advice: “If we are to avoid a multi-front war, the United States must be ready to fight and win conventional conflicts in several places simultaneously and must invest in strengthening our allies’ ability to defend themselves.” Endorsed. We have the capacity. 

F-15 variants--to test innovations--that seem awesome. I thought the anti-satellite capability existed--or could be rigged up quickly. I was very impressed when I saw an F-15 flying over me on a military base go vertical and accelerate straight up.

I will ask again, why is Biden willing to risk aid to Ukraine, Taiwan, and Israel in order to keep our border open to a figurative mass invasion of illegal immigrants? It's bizarre. Almost as bizarre as the media's inability blame anyone but Republicans.

Russians are trying to mount a large AT-4 anti-tank missile on a cheap commercial drone. But why bother putting a guided missile on a platform that can't guide it? Is the AT-4 too old and using it as an unguided rocket is worth it?

I wonder if electronic warfare drones could help regular drones penetrate ground based EW systems that scramble drone command and control. Pre-stealth aircraft needed special planes to penetrate and survive enemy radar-guided air defenses. Add in fighter drones and we're getting closer to a mini air force.

I don't buy the spin that Republicans rejected the best border security bill in the last 20 years. Maybe nothing in that span was better. But that speaks to the past crap rather than current gem. I don't believe we need new laws or funding to control our border. Decide to close it. Let Mexico deal with the migrants.

I wish we had journalists. But we have far too few of them What we mostly have can rot in Hell. Or at least learn to code or make a latte'. Via Instapundit, with more links.

Good: "India and France have agreed to work together on the joint production of defence equipment including helicopters and submarines for the Indian armed forces and production for friendly countries, New Delhi said."

Turkey will be paid its blackmail to let Sweden into NATO after the sale of F-16s to Turkey was approved. Oh, and by the way, Turkey's NATO ally and frenemy Greece will get F-35s. Ah, Erdogan's Smart Diplomacy. 

It was kind of interesting to see in my statistics package someone find this post in a Google search and then pass the sad news on to three other people in different cities. I wonder if I knew any of them? Or at least would recognize them?

Does Israel use so much air power despite Gaza being in range of any artillery system because Ukraine's lack of an air force means it gets priority on 155mm shells? And Israel can use bombs that Ukraine can't? Mind you, I understand sometimes you need the warhead  size or penetration of bombs.

Canada edition of the government supports a private group that identifies an opposition organization as a hate group which the government-supported media wrongly amplifies as a hate group, giving the government an excuse to suppress the opposition. But the left may pay in their next election.

The destruction of the Russian tank force. Can Russia replace losses faster than Ukraine inflicts losses?

Seems like a mobile Iron Dome: "The American military is receiving twelve of the new IFPC (Indirect Fire Protection Capability) [...] armed with launchers for the ground based version of the air-to-air AIM-9X heat seeking missile, which has a range of 40 kilometers." But you can't kill the rain.

Imagining Nuclear War

How much of a world with proliferating nuclear weapons will rely on every leader sleeping soundly in their beds knowing that nobody can launch a decisive nuclear attack without enough warning to reply--thus reinforcing deterrence?

The United States spends a lot of money on ballistic missile early warning systems to make sure the first warning of a nuclear attack isn't a mushroom cloud inside America on a social media account:

Over the past 70 years the United States has spent thirty billion dollars on several generations of ballistic missile early warning systems, which is often shortened to BMEWS. This effort began in the 1950s, before the Russians, as the Soviet Union, strived to create such a threat.

America shares this data with Israel, according to Strategy Page. I assume the British and French get heads up, too.

What about the other smaller and poorer countries with or developing nukes? Will Pakistan, North Korea , or Iran have social media warning systems? Heck, how's India doing? Or China? And egad, how much has Russia's system deteriorated? 

Will those states without effective BMEWS in practice have a destabilizing launch-on-warning "system" for their nukes to "use them or lose them"? And with more states having nukes, will these nuclear-armed launch-on-warning states under attack or, without actual data to inform them, worried they are about to be attacked have to guess who is attacking them?

What if Taiwan had nukes and the people in charge of the nukes saw this alert?

The bilingual alert sent to residents’ mobile phones cautioned in English that there was a missile flyover. The Defense Ministry later issued a statement apologizing to the public for the faulty English translation and clarifying that China had launched a rocket carrying a satellite -- not a missile.

What if those people assumed regular communications channels had failed? And believed a decapitation strike was inbound (either to destroy leadership, the Taiwanese nukes, or the communications system)?

This is a problem when each and every leader of a nuclear-armed country is fully mentally healthy. And knows that the people in charge of the nukes aren't having a bad year--or even just a moment--too. 

Have a super sparkly day. 

NOTE: The image was made from DALL-E.

NOTE: TDR Winter War of 2022 coverage continues here.

NOTE: I'm adding updates on the Last Hamas War in this post.

Toward a Privatized Modularized Coast Guard?

Austin Bay suggests a private coast guard under Coast Guard supervision to get the number to protect our lengthy coasts.

I've noted the continental United States is no longer a sanctuary. We have a homeland security problem:

We know U.S. seaports are vulnerable to terrorist/saboteur attacks. An enemy nuclear weapon hidden in a hold was a Cold War fear. But here's a hard fact: U.S. coasts are vulnerable to proxy attacks using 21st-century unmanned air and sea vehicles launched a hundred miles offshore.

With every available hull needed overseas in war, how much of the Coast Guard will be on guard? A solution?

Here's a solution I like: Allow states and corporations to hire private maritime security firms operating offshore security patrol vessels. Let them provide police security and firepower to protect offshore assets. Make the firms' Coast Guard auxiliaries and subject to USCG regulation as well as state control.

This is an old idea. In early WWII the Navy and U.S. Coast Guard had to focus on blue-water combat missions. So, Washington deputized private craft to patrol the coasts, looking for U-boats and saboteurs. Ernest Hemingway aboard his fishing boat is the most famous example.

Sure, drones are the flavor of the month. But don't forget the whack-in-a-box that has already been a threat.

And I'll add to this. I've suggested a modularized auxiliary cruiser as a means to quickly get Navy numbers. 

We could use smaller vessels with deck space to handle systems mounted in shipping containers (including the whack-in-a-box). One could even use Coast Guard personnel to handle anything too sensitive to simply give private maritime security firms physical control of them.

NOTE: TDR Winter War of 2022 coverage continues here.

NOTE: I'm adding updates on the Last Hamas War in this post.

Sure, Let's Throw Away the Benefits of Winning Two Hot Wars and a Cold War in the Twentieth Century

Keeping Europe from being a launching platform to attack America, using the great military potential of its population, industry, and technology, has been an enduring if unappreciated American strategic objective. Some would claim to be deep thinkers for throwing that all away. Why? When so often people argue for walking away from recently won wars because "we don't win wars like we did in World War II", I find it bizarre that people want us to walk away from what we began to achieve in World War II.

Deliberately encouraging NATO to go dormant by pushing Europeans to defend the continent while America in effect departs Europe? This has about as much of a basis in reality as our supposed imminent Green energy nirvana. 

The author offers three general reasons for America telling Europeans they must provide conventional air-land power to defend Europe from Russia. Arguing America should be in a supporting role, only.

Here's one:

Assumption one dictates that NATO is designed not just to defend Europe, but to neuter European great powers and deter any attempt of having a continental hegemon opposed to the United States.  

He says the two objectives are incompatible with American democracy because it is an empire. That's nonsense. Because it isn't an empire. It's a recognition that when we left Europe after intervening to prevent a continental hegemon in World War I, we had a second world war in Europe. That's reason enough to have a robust presence in Europe.

And remember, preventing a European hegemon from arising--and I see that as the EU, which American withdrawal would strengthen--includes preventing Russia from again becoming a threat to control or dominate Europe. 

He sees our objective of keeping Europe friendly. But then forgets that moment of clarity as he drives on. So close to making a bit of sense!

Two:

In a world where there is no American military power acting as a glue to keep Europe united by force, the European Union will implode into several pieces, as older powers and territorial interests return to form. 

Well, Britain already left the EU. And other parts of Europe are chafing in the velvet chains. Our current military presence clearly isn't the glue to support the EU. In what alternate world would America send troops to put down future exits from the EU? Good grief. A dormant NATO is what the proto-imperial European Union is pushing for in order to strengthen their power! 

Three:

The structural forces that allowed U.S. hegemony are now gone. America is hollowed out, with a $33 trillion debt: arguably the biggest threat in front of the United States. Put simply, America is on the verge of economic collapse, and a bloated government and defense budget are but one cause of it.  

No. The problem is non-defense spending. You have to be living in a fantasy world to think a further retreat from Europe means America will get its economic house in order. FFS. And remember that defense spending is a smaller share of the American economy as economic growth has outpaced the burden of defense since World War II.

Further, if America can't pay for defense, how on Earth are we going to shift the burden to Europeans with similar burdens? There won't be enough of a shift to prevent either Russia or the EU from taking control to our detriment. As for American nukes, air power, and naval forces doing the job alone? We long ago found out that nukes alone are not enough as we once thought in the 1950s. Also, there's a little problem with that reliance on the assumption that Europeans will arm up in response:

There was always a thread of European worry [during the cold War] that if they spent too much on defense that they'd be a conventional battlefield for a third time in the 20th century. So the Europeans skimped on defense to make it more likely that America would have to escalate to strategic nukes to prevent the Soviets from taking Western Europe. The Europeans hoped that would deter war between America and the USSR.

Air power supremacy is also a long-discredited Silver Bullet defense theory. And our Navy presence in European waters is a faint shadow of its Cold War levels, incapable of doing more than showing the flag and extending a thin missile defense shield to select locations.

And to remind you, we have only two Army brigades stationed in Europe. Another brigade is there now because of rotations through Europe in response to Russia's threats to European security since invading Ukraine.

And really, we're seeing even the long-annoying Germany deciding to arm up since Russia invaded Ukraine on a large scale. I'd say mission accomplished on shifting responsibility to Europeans. Remember, American troop strength in Europe is already greatly diminished. We are already in a supporting role.

Abandoning NATO is insane and throws away more than a century of effort to protect America. We must not count on Europeans to be our first line of defense in the Atlantic. I don't think Europeans are ready to man the walls of Western civilization alone. And a dormant NATO sounds like a proto-imperial EU wet dream. 

And seriously, without American influence to keep Europeans focused on defending themselves from Russia, who wants to risk Europeans with military power unrestrained by a vibrant NATO that America dominates? FFS. Remember when Europeans had full responsibility for their defenses? Wasn't 1939 fun? And 1914? That's one reason we've actually encouraged Europeans to be reliant on America.

I say (in Military Review starting on page 15) that a strong American military presence secures Europe from Russia. And from themselves, as I noted about our role in spreading democracy in Europe:

Europe is fully part of the free West because America helped make Europe fully part of the free West. The EU is a force working against that positive American influence to go back to the Europe of autocracies and strongmen whose legitimacy came from blood and soil rather than individual liberty.

It has long been in America's interest to prevent a hostile power from taking Europe and mobilizing its scientific, military, economic, and demographic potential to be used against America. We stopped the Kaiser, we stopped Hitler, and we stopped the USSR.

The EU will so obviously be a threat given time that I am astounded that any American--or any European who values freedom and liberty--can support the EU.

Europe is an economy-of-force front. But we still need to stay in Europe with our shrunken commitment to keep NATO strong. That's the way to get Europe to defend itself more effectively without tempting Russia to attack or dangerous internal European blowback that will only increase our need to spend much more on our military rather than focus on China.

By all means, be willing to modernize NATO for the current era. But you have to admit that Russia has given NATO renewed meaning for its original role when Soviet armies were 100 miles from the Rhine River--and still claiming they needed a larger buffer zone. 

UPDATE: A reminder that once the USSR fell, a strain of conservatism stopped thinking Russia is an evil empire. The other side of the coin is bizarre, too. But I say welcome to the party, even if it is a late and brittle conversion given that far left elements still love Russia--or anyone that opposes America:

Just because Democrats are suddenly and oddly determined to defeat Russia despite their late-Cold War "moral equivalence" nonsense doesn't make me oppose defeating Russia. Instead I say to the Democrats, "Welcome to the party, pal." But how converted are they?

UPDATE: To be clear, I'm not pointing out two world wars in Europe as evidence of unique European war-making impulses. That's a human impulse. But Europe has had a lot of concentrated power among numerous bordering states. And again, Europe is extremely important to American security.

UPDATE: The Russians make it clear that the West should support Ukraine until Russia is defeated:

Putin and Kremlin officials have increasingly stressed in recent weeks that Russia has no interest in negotiating with Ukraine in good faith, that Russia’s maximalist objectives in Ukraine remain the same, and that Putin continues to pursue his overarching objective to weaken and dismantle NATO.

The long struggle to keep Europe from being controlled by a hostile power did not begin when the Cold War started. And it did not end when the West won the Cold War.

NOTE: TDR Winter War of 2022 coverage continues here.

NOTE: I'm adding updates on the Last Hamas War in this post.

Defending the Foundation of Our Economic and Military Power

Despite claims that America doesn't need to think about the Middle East because we don't rely on energy imports from the region, America does rely on trade and defense relations with the rest of the world which does rely on the region's energy. Will America fight Iran in the war it wages on us?

The vulnerable points of world trade:

Half of these eight global chokepoints are dispersed widely. Only one each can be found in Europe (the Strait of Gibraltar), in Africa (the Cape of Good Hope), in East Asia (the Straits of Malacca), and in the Americas (the Panama Canal). Unfortunately, the other half of these critical chokepoints are all concentrated in a relatively small region where southwestern Asia meets Europe and Africa: the Bosporus Strait, the Suez Canal, the Bab-el-Mandeb Strait, and the Strait of Hormuz. This area also happens to be the most important single source of the energy required to sustain global economic growth. Those two facts explain why US presidents keep rediscovering the need to focus disproportionately on the Middle East, despite their often-heartfelt desires to do otherwise.

Today, the greatest threat to these chokepoints is Iran and its proxies. The regime in Tehran has long threatened to shut down Hormuz and repeatedly attacked shipping in the area. Most recently, it even threatened to shut down Gibraltar. The Houthis, Iran’s partner and proxy in Yemen, had repeatedly attacked ships transiting the Bab. The Biden administration recognized the threat, laid the diplomatic predicate, assembled the multilateral coalition, deployed the assets, issued clear warnings, and then took action. This is what professional policymaking looks like. One hopes that the right lessons will be learned in both Sanaa and Tehran.

But the United States also needs to learn its own lessons. Across multiple administrations and congressional terms, Washington has long underestimated the inherent threat posed by the Houthis, and thus allowed the conditions to develop that allowed the Houthis to prosper. Thursday’s action should mark the end of those practices.

Iran wants to wage an oil war against its Arab enemies. This is an outgrowth of the Iran-Iraq War when each side tried to degrade the other's oil exports in the long war of attrition in the 1980s. 

The obvious objective is the Strait of Hormuz. But the Red Sea from the Suez Canal to the Bab-el-Mandeb Strait is the other major objective as Arab states worked to reduce reliance on Hormuz and as Iran followed the Gulf states to the Red Sea.

And after finally getting an outpost inside Yemen astride that trade route, by unleashing the Houthi with the anti-ship weapons Iran gave the Houthis--Iran is threatening all trade--not just the oil trade. The threat is real (tip to Instapundit):

U.S. National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan said nations with influence in Iran need to take a stronger stand to demonstrate the “entire world rejects wholesale the idea that a group like the Houthis can basically hijack the world as they are doing.”

This isn't the first time Iran has unleashed the Houthi--then with naval mines. I worry Iran will directly attack the Suez Canal. Either by lodging a ship nearly sideways in the canal or by detonating a ship there to really do damage to its Arab enemies, including Egypt.

As I've noted, the mullah regime in Iran is a Gordian Knot tying up efforts to alleviate a lot of our foreign policy problems. Sadly, Democrats bizarrely love mullah-run Iran (and their little pitbulls like the Houthi). Yet somehow Iran continues to sow mayhem to drive America from the region.

Iran--not Israel--is the main problem in the region.

And what signals do calibrated--possibly even nuanced--strikes on the Houthi send when they are Islamist fanatics on a mission from God? Some enemies just need to be killed rather than courted. 

And what message do we send to Iran when Iran is more than happy to fight its enemies to the last dead Arab? As Iran does inside Iraq and  in our forward shield inside eastern Syria to keep the terrorist rat lines from Syria that pumped suicide bombers into Iraq closed.

Still, there is a faint hope of sanity in our four-decade quasi-war with Iran emerging from the ruins of our fantasy hopes:

The Biden administration announced on [last] Wednesday it has decided to reclassify the Houthis in Yemen as a “specially designated global terrorist."

Although even now the administration used a diluted--dare I say nuanced--form of the designation. I guess what the Houthi do isn't terror-terror. How do we hope to deter the Houthi when we've officially designated them as ... what? ... naughty?

We need a lot less Smart Diplomacy®-engineered nuanced soft power and a lot more smart bombs. We successfully fought Iran in a tanker war before. What has America learned?

UPDATE: Iran's proxy campaign is working (tip to Instapundit):

Global shipping rates are skyrocketing as the Iran-backed Houthi militants in Yemen step up their attacks on commercial shipping vessels in the Red Sea[.]

Biden needs to either surrender to Iran's demands or crush Houthi anti-ship capabilities. Eventually, Iran must be stopped.

UPDATE: We struck again, including against non-Houthi Iranian proxies:

The U.S. military struck three facilities in Iraq and two anti-ship missiles in Yemen operated by Iranian-backed militias that have attacked U.S. personnel and ships in the region as the United States tries to keep the Israel-Hamas war from spilling over into a wider conflict.

But in regard to the Houthi, this DOD description of the foundation of our anti-Houthi campaign is wrong:

This action aims to deter further regional maritime attacks and diminish Houthi capabilities.

Deterring Iran's Houthi must not be the objective. Diminishing Houthi anti-ship capabilities shouldn't be the objective. We should not be in a preemptive or reactive mode, tied to determining an "imminent" threat or responding to an actual Houthi attack. That grants the initiative to the Houthi.

The objective should be a relentless campaign to destroy Houthi anti-ship capabilities. And then bounce the rubble in a double tap to kill anybody trying to rebuild the capacity.

UPDATE: Not deterred:

Houthi militants fired three anti-ship ballistic missiles Wednesday at a U.S.-owned cargo ship in the Red Sea, defying a U.S.-led military effort to prevent attacks on commercial shipping.

We shot down two and one missed. On its own or not is not reported. 

UPDATE: Let's not go overboard lauding the Houthi for deploying , firing, and evading. Any force under threat of enemy detection and attack adopts "shoot and scoot."

NYT calls the Houthi "scrappy" and "ragtag" as if it's a movie review of Stand and Deliver and not a story about Iran-backed terrorists who attack civilian ships, our warships, and support Hamas for the right to recover and slaughter and rape even more Jews.

UPDATE: More information on the previously noted Houthi ballistic missile attack:

Houthi fighters fired three anti-ship ballistic missiles targeting two US-flagged ships transporting US military supplies through the Gulf of Aden on January 24.

Is Houthi interdiction of our supplies more successful than our interdiction of theirs?

UPDATE: Defending a ship from missiles. At that point we've already failed to avoid detection or destroy the incoming missiles before they are launched.

UPDATE (via Instapundit): Exactly:

For a quintessential example of the Biden administration’s farcical foreign policy, look no further than its duplicitous re-designation of Yemen’s Houthis as a terrorist group — an election-year ruse to create the appearance of combating the Iranian proxy while preserving the Iran-empowering status quo.

Why would the Iranians rein in their Houthi attack dogs when they know Biden loooves them? 

UPDATE: China isn't relying on bribery: 

Chinese officials have asked their Iranian counterparts to help rein in attacks on ships in the Red Sea by the Iran-backed Houthis, or risk harming business relations with Beijing[.]

We'll see if money talks and jihad walks. 

UPDATE: All this "imminent threat" and "self defense" justification is ridiculous and lets the Houthi decide how much pain they can endure:

The US destroyed a Houthi anti-ship missile in Yemen, hours after an attack that left a fire raging on a British-linked oil tanker. ...

It presented an “imminent threat” to merchant vessels and American navy ships, US central command said in a statement on X, formerly Twitter, adding that it had acted “in self-defence”.

Hammer them until we bounce the rubble. Don't let them decide whether to attack or not. Make them incapable of attacking--preferably because they're dead. 

UPDATE: WTF happened to the Royal Navy?

Britain’s warships cannot attack Houthi targets on land because they lack the firepower, in a situation described by former defence chiefs as a “scandal”.

Seriously?  Are they now basically just ASW and air defense vessels to escort a carrier?

NOTE: The image was made from DALL-E.

NOTE: TDR Winter War of 2022 coverage continues here.

NOTE: I'm adding updates on the Last Hamas War in this post.