Broadcaster @BoomRadioUK | Writer | Military roots 🎙️ Host of Fault Lines - exploring resilience, security, and the battle for truth | Member RUSI |
Lincoln
Joined January 2009
- Tweets15.6K
- Following2.3K
- Followers3.7K
- Likes28.4K
A thought-provoking assessment from Afghanistan veteran @ThreshedThought ahead of today’s Budget.
The primary purpose of strengthening our defences is to deter Putin from further aggression. And credible deterrence depends as much on operational readiness as military capability. There’s little point investing billions in sophisticated weapons systems if we lack the personnel, munitions, infrastructure and industrial capacity to sustain their use in a prolonged conflict
But it’s not simply a choice between capital investment and day-to-day spending. We need both, and a procurement system capable of responding to rapidly evolving threats rather than one geared primarily towards expensive, long-term programmes.
If the urgency is as Mike (and others) suggest, we need to signal demonstrable deterrence capability sooner rather than later. Ukraine has demonstrated how quickly battlefield experience must translate into innovation, production and deployment. It’s a lesson we still seem painfully slow to absorb.
And there’s a wider issue here. National defence depends on the resilience of the country behind the armed forces - its industry, infrastructure, communications and healthcare.
The real test of today’s announcements won’t simply be how much money is committed, but whether it strengthens our ability to deter Russian aggression by demonstrating that we have both the capability and the capacity to sustain a conflict if necessary.
I had a difficult relationship with my father but there was one thing that brought us together for half an hour a week in the early seventies - the genius of Python!
Rod Whiting retweeted
The main reason why NATO enlargement happened was because of Russia.
The main reason why Ukraine was militarily attacked was the lack of NATO membership.
The main reason why Sweden and Finland joined NATO after hundreds of years respectively decades of neutrality was also Russia.
🚨 Putin plans to use Ukraine peace talks to push NATO back to its 1997 military posture
According to The Telegraph, the Kremlin wants to force NATO to scale back its military presence in Europe to levels seen before Eastern European countries joined the Alliance.
This could mean demanding the withdrawal of NATO forces from Poland, the Baltic states, and Finland.
That is why Moscow is pushing for European countries to participate in negotiations over Ukraine. Diplomatic sources cited by The Telegraph say Putin wants to turn talks about ending the war into negotiations over the entire European security architecture.
The issue may also have been discussed during Putin's three-hour meeting with Trump's special envoy, Steve Witkoff, in St. Petersburg.
However, European countries have previously rejected the Kremlin's demands to reduce NATO's military presence on its eastern flank.
Rod Whiting retweeted
FT comments never miss.
I don’t think I’ve read such a rational analysis of the situation we’re in for a long time.
I've been in France since 2002 and have never seen the streets so violent nor the politics so extreme. From the sacking of the supermarket on my street to the prospect of Présidente Le Pen, here's me @FT including thoughts from 2 French Nobel laureates as.ft.com/r/addcad57-0f9d-4e…
Rod Whiting retweeted
'Today, after nearly five years of war, and 22 months of the second Trump administration, the mental map guiding Russian strategy has changed. First, Russia now sees Europe, instead of the United States, as its principal geopolitical adversary, a shift that has driven Russia’s defense establishment to call for an approach known as “castling” to deal with the main threats. Related to this, Moscow now attributes new strategic agency to Europe itself because of the dramatic military modernization taking place in many European countries and the growing interest among some European leaders in developing or extending their own nuclear deterrent. A third shift concerns Russia’s theory of deterrence: Moscow’s traditional understanding of nuclear coercion is giving way to new thinking about nonnuclear strategic deterrence using advanced conventional weapons systems aimed at Europe.
...
One of the most notable trends in Russian strategic thought over the past year has been the emergence of the idea of “castling.” A term borrowed from chess, castling in geopolitics describes the repositioning of forces and resources to optimize a state’s strategic posture. Moscow’s defense experts have used the concept to describe a strategy for dealing with a new reality: for the first time since World War II, they have argued, Europe, rather than the United States, has become Russia’s principal geopolitical adversary. According to this view, European countries are now the principal source of Ukraine’s military capacity, political resolve, and strategic resilience; it is Europe and not the United States that has made Ukraine its proxy and is encouraging Kyiv to pursue Moscow’s strategic defeat.
As a consequence, Moscow must direct coercive pressure at Europe—its elites, its decision-making centers, and its critical infrastructure. By doing so, Russia can instill into Europe’s calculus what theorists in Moscow call a “deterring fear”: a European reluctance to antagonize Russia through further support to Ukraine. Such action, they argue, can also rebuild Russian credible deterrence for long-term competition with the West, which is now centered on Europe.
....
Drawing on this experience, Russian military theoreticians center NNSD on using massive, deep, precision strikes against the adversary’s critical military, political, and economic infrastructure. The strategy, they suggest, should be aimed not only at Ukraine but also at its European supporters. Although the exact contours of NNSD are still emerging, the concept appears to be more escalatory than the hybrid warfare and deniable asymmetric campaigns that Russia is currently pursuing in Europe.'
Rod Whiting retweeted
The first thing to do is tell the public the truth. They will ask three hard questions. 1) how did we get into this mess. 2) why didn't you tell us earlier 3) what are you doing about it. But delay only makes it worse
Rod Whiting retweeted
Wow.
US executives quit $25bn gas venture over claims of secret Russian control ft.com/content/e9cfbfbb-e65a… via @ft
Rod Whiting retweeted
**You need to watch Zelenskyy's interview with Steven Bartlett.**
Sitting in front of the camera is an utterly exhausted, at times visibly broken man who has spent almost five years personally managing a war, making critical decisions day and night.
From the very first minutes, you can see just how drained he is. When asked the routine question, "How are you?" he replies that he barely sleeps because he spends his nights in military group chats, moving the last remaining air defense systems from one region to another.
Two stories are particularly heartbreaking.
The first is about a missile that struck a children's playground within seconds, while parents watched from their apartment windows as their children were torn apart.
The second is about presenting posthumous military awards to the families of fallen soldiers:
"You present an award to a father, feel his strong hand, and then he quietly asks, 'Can we hug?' At that moment, I simply cease to exist inside. These people are gone. They will never be the same again."
When the host tries to take him back into his past, showing old photographs from Kryvyi Rih, his student comedy performances, his voice acting as Paddington Bear, and scenes from *Servant of the People*, Zelenskyy looks at them with detachment, almost as though he is watching someone else's life.
He also recalls February 2022 without any attempt to portray himself as a hero.
He says that for the first 20 days, he simply ran from office to office on adrenaline, calling everyone he could and trying to organize deliveries of water and food to Kyiv.
Fear and the full realization of what had happened only caught up with him three weeks later, when Bucha was liberated and mass graves containing hundreds of murdered civilians were discovered.
Using Bucha as an example, he explains why advice from outsiders to simply negotiate a quick deal causes him such deep frustration:
"Imagine that in the United States or Britain, a mass grave is discovered containing 500 tortured people with their hands tied. How could you simply forgive everything after that?"
The rest of the conversation revolves around the deadlock in which Ukrainians, and indeed everyone involved, now find themselves.
Zelenskyy explains the causes of the war in simple terms: Moscow is trying to forcibly rebuild the Soviet empire because Ukraine's integration into Europe would finally bury that project.
But when the conversation turns to the present, there is unmistakable bitterness in his words.
Almost one-fifth of Ukraine's territory is occupied. The east is under relentless bombardment. Cities are left without electricity. People are dying every single day.
Meanwhile, every discussion about a ceasefire runs into the same demand: Kyiv must withdraw even farther from its fortified positions, without any guarantees that Russia will not launch another offensive a year later.
Toward the end, the conversation turns to Trump and Ukrainian strikes on Russian oil facilities.
Trump publicly reprimands Zelenskyy over attacks on Russian refineries because he fears rising diesel prices for American farmers ahead of the elections.
And this is where you can see just how deeply that approach affects Zelenskyy.
His country is burning.
Moscow has rejected his proposal for a mutual halt to attacks on energy infrastructure.
Patriot missiles paid for by Europe are being redirected by the Americans to the Middle East.
And somehow, Zelenskyy is the one being blamed for fuel prices in the United States.
The entire interview leaves you with a profoundly bleak feeling.
Here is a man trapped between the daily deaths of people in his own country and the pragmatic bargaining of allies who have their own elections, their own interests, and their own political calculations.
And yet, he can no longer step away from this responsibility.
**Watch it.**
Rod Whiting retweeted
Wer noch immer den Blödsinn glaubt, die Nato-Osterweiterung habe mit den Ursachen dieses Krieges etwas zu tun, sollte einfach mal Putin zuhören.
Der sagt ganz offen nach imperialistischer Manier: Ich sehe das als mein Land, deswegen greife ich an und hole es mir.
Putin on Ukraine:
The lands lost by Kyiv are not "their territory"; they are historically Russian lands.
Readers added context they thought people might want to know
Kyiv predates Moscow by centuries, and southern/eastern Ukraine was ruled by the Cossack Hetmanate and Crimean Khanate long before 18th-century Russian Imperial annexation. In 1991, every Ukrainian region voted overwhelmingly for independence, recognized by Russia 1994.
britannica.com/place/Ukraine/…
treaties.un.org/Pages/showDeta…
Rod Whiting retweeted
I'm an American, a U.S. Army veteran, and I live in Europe.
And I'll tell you something that might upset a few people back home.
I want my fellow Americans to enjoy the same rights, freedoms, and quality of life that millions of Europeans already enjoy.
I want Americans to have access to affordable healthcare without worrying about going bankrupt because they got sick.
I want American students to pursue higher education without burying themselves in decades of debt.
I want Americans to enjoy stronger digital privacy laws, meaningful consumer protections, paid parental leave, and guaranteed paid vacation.
I want police officers held to rigorous standards of accountability, where de-escalation is emphasized and deadly force is genuinely a last resort.
I want Americans to understand that freedom isn't just about what the government cannot do to you. It's also about having the security and opportunity to actually enjoy your life.
And before someone starts screaming about socialism, understand something.
European countries are capitalist democracies. They have private businesses, entrepreneurs, private property, competitive markets, and individual liberties. They've simply made different decisions about what protections their citizens should enjoy.
Europe isn't perfect. No place is. But pretending America has nothing to learn from other democracies is ridiculous.
I served my country. I love my country. And I don't believe patriotism requires pretending that America is the best at everything.
In fact, I believe the exact opposite.
Real patriotism means wanting your country to improve, even when that means admitting another country does something better.
I don't want Americans to have fewer freedoms.
I want them to have MORE.
More protections. More opportunities. More security. More accountability. More freedom to live their lives without being financially destroyed by illness, education, or circumstances beyond their control.
And having lived on both sides of the Atlantic, I know that much of this is possible.
We should stop asking why Americans can't have these things and start asking why they're expected to settle for less.
Rod Whiting retweeted
The national resilience moment that very nearly barely happened:
A huge amount of work has gone on behind the scenes to plan for the "Be Ready" rollout, which was first trailed during the dying days of Sir Keir Starmer's government.
Andy Burnham inherited the project as well as leadership of the much-promised but minimally-delivered national conversation on defence.
Yet he appears to have chosen not to speak out on the launch of the new readiness campaign despite its national significance.
Even Dan Jarvis, the security minister, who is leading on resilience, stayed away from journalists on Thursday, instead just publishing his ministerial statement and sending out a written post on social media.
This lacklustre approach was met privately with disappointment among members of the resilience community.
The concern - rightly or wrongly - is that it creates the impression that preparing the country (every post code!) for the possibility of any crisis, up to and including war, is not a top priority for the government.
news.sky.com/story/be-ready-…
This is really rather good.
THE TRUMP EFFECT AND THE CONFIDENCE TRAP: HOW PERCEPTION DEFEATS INTELLIGENCE
It seems that hardly anyone still doubts that Trump is an idiot. His absurd behavior, economic ignorance, limited vocabulary, narcissism, contradictory statements, and constant reversals have even earned him the nickname TACO — Trump Always Chickens Out. But the real question is: how did someone like him become president of the United States?
Niccolò Machiavelli offered an explanation 500 years ago. Power is a performance. The winner is not necessarily the person who knows the most, but the one who performs most convincingly. Politics rewards appearances, confidence, and the ability to create an image of strength. People do not always seek truth. They seek certainty.
Intelligent people recognize complexity. They understand consequences, compromises, probabilities, and uncertainty. They hesitate before making promises because they know reality rarely offers simple answers. But crowds often interpret caution as weakness. One person says, “We need to analyze the consequences.” Another declares, “I know exactly how to fix everything!” Guess whom the crowd follows.
Modern psychology describes a related phenomenon: the Dunning-Kruger effect. People with limited competence may overestimate their abilities, while genuine experts are often more conscious of what they do not know. Confidence becomes a substitute for competence. The louder someone speaks, the more certain they appear, and the easier it becomes for others to mistake conviction for knowledge. As Shakespeare wrote, “The fool doth think he is wise, but the wise man knows himself to be a fool.”
This is the trap of modern politics. People who speak as though they know everything can attract enormous audiences, while those who carefully explain complicated realities struggle to be heard. But the greatest danger begins when such a leader actually gains power.
Machiavelli wrote: “The first method for estimating the intelligence of a ruler is to look at the men he has around him.” A weak leader fears strong personalities. He dislikes independent judgment, criticism, and anyone who might demonstrate greater competence. Instead of surrounding himself with experts, he chooses loyalists. Instead of people who identify problems, he appoints people who conceal them. Instead of advisers who challenge his decisions, he prefers those who applaud every word.
And incompetence spreads downward through the entire system. Eventually, the government becomes an ecosystem of mediocrity, where loyalty matters more than ability, criticism is treated as betrayal, and uncomfortable truths are systematically suppressed. Such a leader does not strengthen institutions. He gradually destroys them from within.
He fears independent experts because they expose his limitations. He fears honest feedback because it threatens his carefully manufactured image of greatness. And when a genuine crisis arrives, this system reveals its weaknesses. There is no depth, no independent expertise, no flexibility. Only mutual fear, personal loyalty, and illusions of strength.
History has repeatedly demonstrated how dangerous such political structures can become. The tragedy is that societies continue to reward the very qualities that make these systems possible. Why do people follow leaders who promise easy solutions, speak loudly, and never admit uncertainty? The answer lies not only in Trump, but in human psychology.
Our brains seek shortcuts. Confidence, decisiveness, and simple explanations feel reassuring, especially during periods of fear and instability. But confidence is not intelligence. Charisma is not competence.
The greatest political danger begins when a society can no longer distinguish between someone who understands reality and someone who merely sounds certain about it.
And that brings us to the most uncomfortable question of all: why do voters repeatedly mistake the performance of leadership for leadership itself?
Rod Whiting retweeted
When you hear Trump's team brag about how much they have given to Ukraine, here are the actual numbers.
Rod Whiting retweeted
Yeah, Putin the true „humanitarian“ of our Century, causing the greatest destruction, human death and suffering on the Old Continent since the end of the World War 2. The bitter irony!
full Kremlin video of Putin and Witkoff meeting. "The president sends his thanks, the whole nation sends their thanks, because of Stephen Hubbard. Because of you, he's going home.... You are a humanitarian also, sir. I salute that. I commend you." t.me/news_kremlin/8194
Rod Whiting retweeted
Fransa’da polis sokakta etkisiz kalmış olabilir. Ancak başka yöntem deniyorlar:
Kameralar ‼️
Sokakta, her köşede, mağazada, polisin üzerinde kamera var.
Sonra bu görüntüler izleniyor ve suça karışanlar akşam karanlığında sessizce evden alınıyor.
Orada almaya kalksa, iş büyüyecek.
Görüntüde: Polis yüz kapatanları açıyor. Bir kaç saniye görüntü yeterli.
Bir kaç güne gidip alırlar.
Rod Whiting retweeted
🛰 🇷🇺 🇫🇮 Specialists tracking this in real time now have harder numbers than "a close pass." Orbital Radar's latest computation puts the closest approach at roughly 26 meters, with earlier passes logged at 136 meters and 578 meters as Kosmos 2612 tightened its formation over multiple orbits, each pass occurring at essentially zero relative velocity, meaning the Russian satellite wasn't drifting past ICEYE-X36, it was flying in matched formation with it.
The deliberateness is no longer a matter of interpretation. Kosmos 2612 launched as part of a six-satellite cluster, Cosmos 2609 through 2614, and it is the only one of the six that has maneuvered at all. LeoLabs, the commercial tracking firm, said in a statement the movement "appears to be a deliberate approach toward" the US-owned satellite. CSIS researchers documented a two-week maneuver sequence beginning September 30 that brought Kosmos 2612 into coplanar alignment and matched altitude with ICEYE-X36, exactly the kind of orbital mechanics work that doesn't happen by accident. Dutch tracker Marco Langbroek, whose data anchors most of this reporting, called it bluntly: "an RPO without consent," rendezvous and proximity operations conducted without the target satellite's cooperation or clearance.
What makes the target non-arbitrary is who relies on it. ICEYE-X36 is a Finnish-built, US-registered radar imaging satellite, and Poland's own military has flagged direct alarm because its forces use ICEYE intelligence to identify targets inside Russia. A Ukrainian official told Axios the military works with ICEYE's capabilities, though it's unconfirmed whether this specific satellite supports Ukrainian operations directly. Either way, the pattern read by trackers across multiple countries is the same: a Russian military asset spent three weeks deliberately burning fuel and adjusting its orbital plane, altitude and eccentricity to shadow, at zero relative velocity and within tens of meters, exactly the kind of Western-linked space asset Russia would want to understand, disable, or demonstrate it can reach.
No tracker has found evidence Kosmos 2612 carries a destructive payload or that it struck ICEYE-X36. What's established instead is a precedent: Russia has now shown the technical willingness and capability to maneuver a military satellite into near-contact proximity with a commercial asset tied to Ukrainian and Polish defense intelligence, holding formation close enough that the only remaining open questions are what Moscow intended and whether the target satellite still functions exactly as it did before.
🤖 Made with AI
Rod Whiting retweeted
According to the Financial Times, the US ambassador to the EU has threatened severe economic consequences if Europe gives preference to its own satellite communications companies.
At the same time, the US administration is restricting Starlink and Starshield services in Ukraine, even though European countries are paying for some of these services.
It's a remarkably consistent policy: make your allies dependent on American technology, then threaten them economically when they try to reduce that dependence.
The EU is already in a very difficult position. Its economy is struggling, and the Russian military threat is becoming increasingly real, with Russian drone attacks now reaching EU territorial waters.
And instead of helping its European allies become stronger, Washington is threatening them for trying to become less dependent on it.
Rod Whiting retweeted
Russian Kosmos 2612 and ICEYE-X36 (providing Ukraine military support) are now in perfect sync with each other. The Russian military satellite is intentionally stalking and tracking the Western radar satellite. Keeping a satellite "bumper-to-bumper" in this manner allows Russia to intercept or jam data transmissions, physically inspect Western technology, or quickly pivot to execute a kinetic or non-kinetic anti-satellite (ASAT) attack with very little warning or fuel expenditure.
Kosmos 2612 executed a series of highly precise, fuel-heavy maneuvers to force itself into a "coplanar" orbit—matching ICEYE-X36's exact altitude (~555 km), speed, and inclination (~97.8°). The ICEYE-X36 satellite is giving the Ukraine military support.