Situational Awareness

US fails in Cambodia, reverts to sanctions, Glimpses of an endgame in Ukraine, Australia hosts anti-China Axis, Eroding U.S. military power and influence, Biden stuck as Ukraine offensive stalls

UPDATE:?The United States has announced punitive measures against Cambodia following elections that Washington alleges were “neither free nor fair.” This is a continued oppression by the super power against Cambodia over the years.

The problem with the war in Ukraine is that it has been all smoke and mirrors. The Russian objectives of “demilitarisation” and “de-Nazification” of Ukraine wore a surreal look. The western narrative that the war is between Russia and Ukraine, where central issue is the Westphalian principle of national sovereignty, wore thin progressively leaving a void.

This year Talisman/Sabre includes 13 nations and 30,000 troops. The drills are rehearsing conflict with a fictional adversary called “Olvania” [China] in various locations across Australia and the surrounding region, and includes many of the advanced weapons systems the US has supplied to Ukraine in recent months, including the HIMARS rocket system and the M1 Abrams main battle tank, which are now being marketed to other countries.

The U.S. defense strategy and posture have become insolvent. The tasks that the nation expects its military forces and other elements of national power to do internationally exceed the means that are available to accomplish those tasks.?

Doubts about US President Joe Biden’s Ukraine strategy seem to be increasing in the US. This provides for military support for Kiev in order to force Moscow to the negotiating table. But what if the Ukrainian offensive continues to fail?

US fails in Cambodia, reverts to sanctions

The United States has announced punitive measures against Cambodia following elections that Washington alleges were “neither free nor fair.” This is a continued oppression by the super power against Cambodia over the years.

Following a landslide victory in Sunday’s voting, the Cambodian People’s Party (CPP) of Prime Minister Hun Sen won 120 of the 125 available seats, according to preliminary results.

Hun Sen, who has been in power for 38 years, has said that he plans to hand the prime minister’s job to 45-year-old Hun Manet, who heads the army and won his first parliamentary seat on Sunday.

On Sunday night, the US State Department said it had “taken steps” to impose visa restrictions “on individuals who undermined democracy and implemented a pause of foreign assistance programmes” after determining that the elections were “neither free nor fair.

“Cambodian authorities engaged in a pattern of threats and harassment against the political opposition, media and civil society that undermined the spirit of the country’s constitution and Cambodia’s international obligations,” State Department spokesman Matthew Miller alleged.

US Cluster Bombs

Cambodia still underwent pain from U.S. cluster munitions, dropped in the country half a century ago, the country’s Prime Minister, Samdech Techo Hun Sen, has said.

“Cambodia has suffered painful experience from cluster bombs dropped by the United States in the early 1970s,” […] ”Until now, it has been more than half a century, but (we) have not found a way to destroy all of them yet,” he added.

Between 1965 and 1973, the U.S. dropped some 230,516 bombs on 113,716 sites in Cambodia.

The Cambodian leader’s message came, after the U.S. began supplying cluster munitions to Ukraine. “It will be the worst danger for the Ukrainians for decades or even centuries, if those cluster bombs are used,” Hun Sen said.

“I know for sure that Cambodia is small and weak, and our voice is weightless, but with our pity towards the people of Ukraine, I call on the U.S. president, the provider, and the Ukrainian president, the recipient, not to use cluster bombs in this war, because the real victims will be civilians, especially the Ukrainian people,” he said.

Ream Naval Base

Prime Minister Hun Sen urges an end to “baseless” foreign accusations surrounding the development of the Kingdom’s Ream Naval Base, as the US has consistently suggested that the base is being expanded to accommodate a Chinese military presence.

Cambodia is mordernising the naval base with a grant from China. The project has been criticised by the US, which has alleged for years that Cambodia has permitted a Chinese military present on its territory, despite the fact that such a presence would contradict the Kingdom’s Constitution.

“I have noted that the campaign to discredit Cambodia through false claims about the Ream Naval Base have resumed. I want to remind people abroad that they don’t need to take pictures of the base via satellite or other clandestine means,” he chided.

“We announced the construction and then held a large ceremony to break ground. It is clear that the construction is underway, and it is equally clear that it is not being carried out in secrecy. Nobody should be unduly concerned. The details of the work we are doing are freely available, people just need to ask,” he added.

Hun Sen stressed that there is nothing wrong with the Kingdom seeking to strengthen its defence capacity.

“Cambodia has the right to expand the capabilities of its naval forces. The base was previously just 2.7m deep, and needed to be dredged. This is hardly a threat to any other nation, let alone a superpower,” he said. Hun Sen also said the idea that there could be any purpose in Ream Naval Base accommodating aircraft carriers is “absurd”.

“Let me respond to these ‘journalists’. Your brains are clearly weak – you were lucky that you were born in a wealthy country. Because of your limited analytical powers, you just write whatever you feel like, without thinking about it,” he mocked.

“Why on Earth would they need to moor aircraft carriers at Ream when the Kang Keng airport [Sihanouk International Airport] is close by and much easier to land on? If it were true that we allow the Chinese military to use our territory, then why would they need to land on carriers? Don’t be ridiculous,” he added.

“I send this message to those who are behind the campaign to try and stop the Kingdom from expanding its base. You are welcome to keep your satellite above the base, but I will update you as to how the construction is going, for free. Guess what? We have laid the foundations, and next we will build on top of them. What a surprise,” he joked.

The premier also pointed out the “hypocrisy of some foreign powers”, which he said have explained to Cambodia and other ASEAN member states about their nuclear submarine deals, apparently in reference to AUKUS, a trilateral security pact between Australia, the UK and US.

“They expect the leaders of ASEAN to listen to them, but do not appear to listen to the bloc leaders,” he said.

He stressed that Cambodia needs to expand the base and could seek funding from wherever it chose and explained the importance of upgrading the Royal Cambodian Navy’s capacity to protect its sovereign territory, combat illegal drug and human trafficking, prevent illegal fishing, and eliminate other transnational crimes around its maritime border.

“Once again, I stress that no foreign countries maintain a presence on Cambodian soil – or its waters,” he said, adding that once the base is completed, all foreign navies were welcome to dock there for joint military exercises.

“They have refused to accept our explanation, so I have no choice but to reject their false conclusions,” he said.

Read more?here .

Glimpses of an endgame in Ukraine

By M. K. Bhadrakumar

The problem with the war in Ukraine is that it has been all smoke and mirrors. The Russian objectives of “demilitarisation” and “de-Nazification” of Ukraine wore a surreal look. The western narrative that the war is between Russia and Ukraine, where central issue is the Westphalian principle of national sovereignty, wore thin progressively leaving a void.

There is a realisation today that the war is actually between Russia and NATO and that Ukraine had ceased to be a sovereign country since 2014 when the CIA and sister western agencies — Germany, the UK, France, Sweden, etc.— installed a puppet regime in Kiev.?

The fog of war is lifting and the battle lines are becoming visible. At an authoritative level, a candid discussion is beginning as regards the endgame.?

Certainly, Russian President Vladimir Putin’s videoconference with the permanent members of the Security Council in Moscow last Friday and his meeting with Belarus President Belarus Alexander Lukashenko in St. Petersburg on Sunday become the defining moment. The two transcripts stand back-to-back and need to be read together. (here ?and?here )?

There is no question that the two events were carefully choreographed by the Kremlin officials and intended to convey multiple messages. Russia exudes confidence that it has achieved dominance on the battle front — having thrashed the Ukrainian military and Kiev’s “counteroffensive” moving into the rear view mirror. But Moscow anticipates that the Biden administration may be having an even bigger war plan in mind.??

At the Security council meeting, Putin “de-classified” the intelligence reports reaching Moscow from various sources indicative of moves to insert into Western Ukraine a Polish expeditionary force. Putin called it “a well-organised, equipped regular military unit to?be used for?operations” in Western Ukraine “for the subsequent occupation of these territories.”?

Indeed, there is a long history of Polish revanchism. Putin, himself a keen student of history, talked at some length about it. He sounded stoical that if the Kiev authorities were to acquiesce with this Polish-American plan, “as?traitors usually do, that’s their business. We will not interfere.”?

But, Putin added, “Belarus is part of?the?Union State, and?launching an?aggression against Belarus would mean launching?an?aggression against the?Russian Federation. We will respond to?that with all the?resources available to?us.” Putin warned that what is afoot “is an?extremely dangerous game, and?the?authors of?such plans should think about the?consequences.”?

On Sunday, at the meeting with Putin in St. Petersburg, Lukashenko picked up the thread of discussion. He briefed Putin about new Polish deployments close to Belarus border — just 40 kms from Brest — and other preparations under way — the opening of a repair shop for Leopard tanks in Poland, activation of an airfield in?Rzeszow on Ukrainian border (about 100 kms from Lvov) for use of Americans transferring weaponry, mercenaries, etc.?

Lukashenko said: “This is unacceptable to us. The alienation of western Ukraine, the dismemberment of Ukraine and the transfer of its lands to Poland are unacceptable. Should people in Western Ukraine ask us then we will provide support to them. I ask you [Putin] to discuss and think about this issue. Naturally, I would like you to support us in this regard. If the need in such support arises, if Western Ukraine asks us for help, then we will provide assistance and support to people in western Ukraine. If this happens, we will support them in every possible way.”?

Lukashenko continued, “I am asking you to?discuss this issue and?think it through. Obviously, I?would like you to?support us in?this regard. With this support, and?if western Ukraine asks for?this help, we will definitely provide assistance and?support to?the?western population of?Ukraine.”?

As could be expected, Putin didn’t respond — at least, not publicly. Lukashenko characterised the Polish intervention as tantamount to the dismemberment of Ukraine and its “piece meal” absorption into NATO. Lukashenko was upfront: “This is supported by the Americans.” Interestingly, he also sought the?deployment of Wagner fighters ?to counter the threat to Belarus.

The bottom line is that Putin and Lukashenko held such a discussion publicly at all. Clearly, both spoke on the basis of intelligence?inputs. They anticipate an inflection point ahead.?

It is one thing that the Russian people are well aware that their country is de facto fighting the NATO in Ukraine. But it is an entirely different matter that the war may dramatically escalate to a war with Poland, a NATO army that the US regards as its most important partner in continental Europe.?

By dwelling at some length on Polish revanchism, which has a controversial record in modern European history, Putin probably calculated that in Europe, including in Poland, there could be resistance to the machinations that might drag NATO into a continental war with Russia.

Equally, Poland must be dithering too. According to Politico, Poland’s military is about 150,000 strong, out of which 30,000 belong to a new territorial defence force who are “weekend soldiers who undergo 16 days of training followed up by refresher courses.”?

Again, Poland’s military might doesn’t translate into political influence in Europe because the centrist forces that dominate the EU distrust Warsaw, which is controlled by the nationalist Law and Justice Party whose disregard for democratic norms and the rule of law has damaged Poland’s reputation across the bloc.

Above all, Poland has reason to be worried about the reliability of Washington. Going forward, Polish leadership’s concern, paradoxically, will be that Donald Trump may not return as president in 2024. Despite the cooperation with the Pentagon over the Ukraine war, Poland’s current leadership remains distrustful of President Joe Biden — much like Hungary’s Prime Minister Viktor Orban.?

On balance, therefore, it stands to reason that the sabre-rattling by Lukashenko and Putin’s lesson on European history can be taken as more of a forewarning to the West with a view to modulate an endgame in Ukraine that is optimal for Russian interests. A dismemberment of Ukraine or an uncontrollable expansion of the war beyond its borders will not be in the Russian interests.?

But the Kremlin leadership will factor in the contingency that Washington’s follies stemming out of its desperate need to save face from a humiliating defeat in the proxy war, may leave no choice to the Russian forces but to cross the Dnieper and advance all the way to Poland’s border to prevent an occupation of Western Ukraine by the so-called Lublin Triangle, a regional alliance with virulent anti-Russian orientation comprising Poland, Lithuania and Ukraine, formed in July 2020 and promoted by Washington.?

Putin’s back-to-back meetings in Moscow and St. Petersburg throw light on the Russian thinking as to three key elements of the endgame in Ukraine. First, Russia has no intentions of territorial conquest of Western Ukraine but will insist on having a say on how the new boundaries of the country and the future regime will look and act like, which means that an anti-Russian state will not be allowed.?

Second, the Biden administration’s plan to snatch victory out of the jaws of defeat in the war is a non-starter, as Russia will not hesitate to counter any continued attempt by the US and NATO to use Ukrainian territory as a springboard to wage a renewed proxy war, which means that Ukraine’s “piece meal” absorption into NATO will remain a fantasy.?

Third, most important, the battle-hardened Russian army backed by a powerful defence industry and a robust economy will not hesitate to confront NATO member countries bordering Ukraine if they trespass on Russia’s core interests, which means that Russia’s core interests will not be held hostage to Article 5 of the NATO Charter.?

Read more?here .

Australia hosts anti-China Axis wargame

Once a bilateral drill between the forces of Canberra and Washington, this year it includes 13 nations and 30,000 troops. The drills are rehearsing conflict with a fictional adversary called “Olvania” in various locations across Australia and the surrounding region, and includes many of the advanced weapons systems the US has supplied to Ukraine in recent months, including the HIMARS rocket system and the M1 Abrams main battle tank, which are now being marketed to other countries.

Artyom Garin, an expert from the Center for Southeast Asia, Australia and Oceania at the Institute of Oriental Studies of the Russian Academy of Sciences, told Sputnik that the US is rehearsing not only a military clash with China, but drawing other regional nations into the confrontation as well.

“This is a rehearsal, partly a coordination of actions in case the United States really clashes with China.?China does not need a clash with the United States , because China has huge economic and political influence in the region, and it has achieved this by completely legal means,” he explained.

“At the same time, the United States is losing its influence in the region, and in economic terms, they cannot do anything to oppose China. In political terms, their influence is also significantly reduced, so for the United States, armed conflict and destabilization of the region may be its only option to somehow maintain its presence there, regardless of the fact that they will only spoil their future in the region,” Garin said.

Previously, these exercises were limited to the participation of only a limited cohort of US and Australian allied states in the region. The exercise has now become a global military operation involving leading NATO members. Of particular significance is the fact that, for the first time in history, the German armed forces are participating - the longtime?NATO partner?which has found itself in the very center of the remilitarization of Europe and one of the main actors in the US-NATO war against Russia, which is being waged with the help of Ukraine.

Vladislav Belov,?the deputy director of the Institute of Europe of the Russian Academy of Sciences, believes that the participation of NATO countries in the Australian drills indicates how deep the inroads are in the Asia-Pacific region that the North Atlantic alliance has made. Belov has also noted that NATO’s interests in the region are already represented by the?AUKUS bloc.

“Germany's participation in these exercises is a continuation of the policy that it has been pursuing for a long time,” Garin explained. “It is connected with the willingness to take on more responsibility, to participate in resolving conflict situations that may arise in this region. It is clear that, first of all, Taiwan is one of the possible conflicts of the future. Germany is showing its allies and partners that it is ready to participate in this conflict.”

Here, he recalled the term used by?Chen Hong, the director of the Center for Australian Studies at Shanghai’s Eastern China Normal University, who has spoken about the “Asia-Pacificization of NATO.”

“This year, the Talisman Saber exercise is aimed at practicing coordination tasks between the US military and its allies and partners,”?Chen said.?“The direction of the tactical plan of military exercises against China is obvious. ‘Talisman Saber’ was originally a military exercise between Australia and the US, but this time, 13 countries took part in the exercise, making this year's exercise the largest ever. Against the backdrop of the ‘NATO in the Asia-Pacific’ concept promoted by the United States and its Western partners, the promotion of the presence of Germany, France and Great Britain in the region through these exercises seriously violates the security situation in the Asia-Pacific region.”

Hong told Sputnik it was obvious that the drills are intended to display both aggressiveness and scale, although he noted that “their internal cohesion of the participants and the strategic momentum are very weak.”

“In fact, most of the countries participating in these exercises were ‘invited’ to participate under pressure from the United States, and at the same time, from the point of view of their own national strategy, they do not have the potential to carry out any military adventure directed against China,” he explained.

“Even the ‘protagonist’ of the exercises - Australia - is not set to confront China. These exercises involve the western, northern and northeastern coasts of Australia, which clearly indicates plans for a deep involvement of the country in the maelstrom of a military conflict. This is contrary to Australia's long-term and overall national strategy. The imposition by the United States of the Asia-Pacific region of its ‘Indo-Pacific strategy’ directed against China seriously threatens the peace, stability and development of the region,” Hong said.

“This has already caused serious concern among some allies and partners of the United States and will cause more and more concern among civilians in the Asia-Pacific region,” he noted.

Last week, Japan Self-Defense Force units, along with US Marines and Australian soldiers, conducted their first shootings in Australia. A number of new weapons are also being tested out in the drills, including Japan’s Type 12 surface-launched anti-ship missiles and South Korea’s K239 Chunmoo multiple-launch rocket system (MLRS).

Japan and South Korea can also see these exercises as an opportunity to develop their military industry and a way to prove that their equipment can adapt well to different climatic conditions and be used all over the world, which will increase their arms exports.

Read more?here .

Eroding U.S. military power and influence

The U.S. defense strategy and posture have become insolvent. The tasks that the nation expects its military forces and other elements of national power to do internationally exceed the means that are available to accomplish those tasks. Sustained, coordinated efforts by the United States and its allies are necessary to deter and defeat modern threats, including Russia's ongoing war in Ukraine and reconstituted forces and China's economic takeoff and concomitant military modernization. This report offers ideas on how to address shortcomings in defense preparations.

Key Findings

• The nature of warfare has evolved since the Cold War, and it has become increasingly clear that the U.S. defense strategy and posture are insolvent.
• The U.S. defense strategy has been predicated on U.S. military forces that were superior in all domains to those of any adversary. This superiority is gone. The United States and its allies no longer have a virtual monopoly on the technologies and capabilities that made them so dominant against adversarial forces.
• U.S. and allied forces do not require superiority to defeat aggression by even their most powerful foes. The United States, acting in concert with key allies and partners, can restore credible postures of deterrence against major aggression without having to regain overmatch in any operational domain against China or Russia.
• Russia's brutal and unprovoked aggression against Ukraine has awakened North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) allies to the risk of a wider war in the Euro-Atlantic area. This realization has motivated allies to make significant increases in defense spending and preparedness, but much more must be done over the next few years to deter and defend the region against further aggression by Russia's reconstituted military forces.
• Taiwan has embraced the rhetoric of asymmetric warfare, but its budget reflects a preference for legacy systems. As a result, there is a gap between the United States' and Taiwan's goals for the direction of Taiwan's defense program.

Recommendations

• Equip and posture forces and support assets for rapid and robust response.
• Field the basic elements of a multidomain sensing and targeting grid.
• Field weapons and platforms capable of delivering sufficient levels of lethality into contested battlespaces to impose severe attrition on the enemy's invasion force in the opening days of a conflict.
• Ensure that inventories of preferred munitions and other consumables are sufficient to carry out continued strikes against enemy forces.
• Articulate a short list of priority operational challenges for defeating aggression in highly contested environments.
• Incentivize innovation.
• Make Congress a partner.
• Define the future operational concept; efforts will be immeasurably enhanced if all stakeholders have a shared understanding of how joint and combined forces are intended to fight in the future.
• Accelerate force adaptation.
• Taiwan should assess both its existing force and all future investments to determine the ability of these investments to survive and operate effectively against full-scale attack on Taiwan.
• Encourage NATO allies to meet agreed-on defense investment goals and force posture requirements and to devote more resources to military capabilities for sustained, high-end conventional operations, including five-year plans to enlarge munitions inventories.
• Create a more resilient forward posture for collective defense on NATO's eastern flank. Work with allies to bring all eight battle groups on NATO's eastern flank to brigade strength and enhance readiness and exercises to realize the force generation goals of the allied Force Model.
• Provide Ukraine with assurances of long-term Western security assistance and training and a clear path to NATO membership.

Download full report?here .

Biden stuck as Ukraine offensive stalls

Doubts about US President Joe Biden’s Ukraine strategy seem to be increasing in the US. This provides for military support for Kiev in order to force Moscow to the negotiating table. But what if the Ukrainian offensive continues to fail?

In the US, hopes are apparently fading that Kiev will be able to make significant territorial gains as part of the offensive launched in the summer. This comes from a report on Tuesday in the US newspaper?The Wall Street Journal (WSJ). As a result, there would also be no negotiations between Kiev and Moscow, for which Ukrainian territorial gains are a prerequisite according to the US strategy.

However, a pending battlefield tie could cast doubt on this strategy, putting US President Joe Biden in a politically awkward position and strengthening opponents of the arms shipments. So far, Kiev has received $43 billion in military aid.

Ukraine withdrawal would be worse than Afghanistan

John Herbst, a former US ambassador to Ukraine and an associate of the Atlantic Council think tank, said?WSJthat the Biden administration has no choice but to continue supplying arms. A withdrawal from Ukraine and even a partial Russian victory “would be the biggest failure of Biden’s foreign policy, eclipsing the withdrawal from Afghanistan.”

Hesitating major offensive: Time is running out, the USA still have a few months

However, Biden, who stylized US support for Kiev as the final battle between democracy and authoritarianism, already sees himself being challenged by some Republican members in Congress?WSJ?writes. And last Thursday, 13 Republican senators out of 100 supported an amendment to the annual defense spending bill that would have limited the availability of funds to Ukraine.

In addition, two top candidates for the 2024 presidential election, former President Donald Trump and Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, have indicated that they would tone down Kiev’s support if elected.

Continued military aid despite failed offensive?

A change of strategy is not yet an option for Biden, and according to unspecified US officials, it is still too early to assess the outcome of the Ukrainian offensive. However, should the Ukrainian brigades, which were trained by the US at bases in Europe and are currently being held back, also fail, the further course of action will have to be determined, according to US officials.

The prognosis of another high-ranking, also unspecified European official, whose government is one of the “strong supporters of Ukraine”, fell according to the?WSJeven more pessimistic. His government does not expect, the official said, that Ukrainian forces could drive Russian troops out of all of eastern Ukraine or retake Crimea.

Another Western diplomat in Washington said so?WSJ, the USA would have to accept that the war in Ukraine would not end any time soon. Allies must prepare to supply Kiev for a conflict that will last for years. The question is, sums it up?WSJ?whether the US and its allies have the determination to continue and expand their support if the Ukrainian offensive fails utterly.

Read more?here .