The New Delhi-Moscow Arms Trade Dynamic May Be Changing

 

Over $2 billion worth of payments from India to Russia for weapons systems have been stuck in limbo for around a year. New Delhi has been unable to use U.S. dollars due to fears about retaliatory sanctions from the West, and Moscow has refused to accept Indian rupees. This has India's air force the most, as it depends on a steady supply of Russian-made vehicles. This development, however, has not shifted Russia from being India's top supplier of weapons even though the purchases have slowed in the last few years due to sanctions.

 

But why is Russia the top supplier for India?

 

India has been a customer of Moscow since the 1960s during the Cold War. Their relationship was largely reliant on steady arms sales from the USSR to India, which was an important leader of the Non-Aligned Movement, and India was an important balance in the USSR & India vs. US, Pakistan, & China dynamic during much of the Cold War period. The USSR's disintegration at the end of the Cold War weakened its position, but Russian arms exports to India still remained a fundamental part of the two countries' relationship.

 

The damage done to the arms trade between India and Russia may or may not be permanent. If the West wants to seize the opportunity to draw India away from Russia (which may be made difficult due to India's massive increase in importing Russian oil), it must act now and expedite various programs, such as improving India's industrial base and building closer relations between New Delhi and Western capitals.

Will there be a Spring Offensive in Ukraine?

Ukrainian social media in the past few weeks has hyped a potential offensive this spring against Russian forces in the east, implying a push toward annexed Crimea. Past offensives last year implied a push toward the city of Kherson in their buildup, but Ukrainian forces instead advanced on northern cities and made large territorial gains. It wasn't until later that Ukrainian forces pushed into Kherson and retook the major city. This feint maneuver was likely key to their success, but it is unclear whether this tactic will work again.

Recapture of Crimea has been a goal since its annexation by Russia in 2014. Although Ukraine has imported a large amount of weapons and improved their military greatly since then, the Crimean peninsula is a very difficult land mass to attack. Connected to mainland Ukraine by a loose land bridge, Russia has had years to reinforce the region as a launching point for the invasion in 2022. Thus, it is more likely that the hype is a feint once again. This might be done to decrease Russian presence in the contested city of Bakhmut, or to again strike in the northern Luhansk region. 

There is a possibility, however, that there will no longer be a spring offensive as planned. Given the tactic's success last year, Russia may now be less vulnerable to a feint maneuver. Furthermore, the recent classified intelligence leaks cast doubt on a potential offensive and have caused the Ukrainian government to alter its plans.

The Impact of the Iran-Russia Arms Deal

The arms deal between Iran and Russia will significantly shift Iran's regional and global role in great power politics. Iran is surrounded by countries that are either hostile or suspicious of its intentions, including Israel, Saudi Arabia, and the United States. Iran's domestic production of weapons has created more concern for the U.S. and stability in the Middle East. Now, the U.S. has more to worry about than Iran's nuclear weapons advancements. These countries will likely increase their defense spending because of the Iran-Russia alliance. Due to sanctions, Iran has shifted to developing its own weapon systems. Iran has achieved substantial advancements in fields including missile technology, drones, and small arms, even though the industry may not be as developed as those in major arms exporting nations. Iran's drone program has emerged as one of the country's significant military capabilities. Russia's use of Iranian drones in the Ukraine War has sounded alarms for the U.S. and its Western allies. Iranian drones, which are disposable and could terrorize Ukrainians, are just one example of the cheap weapons that Russia wants to use in its conflict with Ukraine. Cheap Iranian drones could force the U.S. or other allies to Ukraine to step up military support to counteract the use of drones on the battlefield. 

Limitations of NATO ISR Around Ukraine

The Intelligence, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance capabilities around Ukraine are limited by the threat of nuclear war. Intelligence products are built on the surveillance and reconnaissance being conducted. This intelligence is then provided to Ukraine to facilitate their defenses and counter-offensives. Examples of this being used effectively are the strike on a large Russian transport plane flying toward Kyiv with hundreds of troops onboard, and another is the sinking of the Moskva naval cruiser in the Black Sea. Due to ISR detection of these critical targets, Ukraine successfully defended the capital and garnered international popularity for destroying Russia's flagship in the region. 

NATO ISR does not reach far into Ukraine in order to avoid becoming an active belligerent and a greater conflict with Russia. Instead, manned and unmanned aircraft make up the capability around Ukraine, with advantages and disadvantages to each. Manned aircraft are able to produce actionable intelligence in real time, providing Ukrainian forces with quick access to important information. However, NATO is hesitant to use manned aircraft in the Black Sea closer to Russian forces, limiting it to coverage of the western half of the country. Unmanned aircraft are able to be used in riskier areas such as the Black Sea, but without onboard analysts to produce intelligence the raw information must be transferred, which creates a greater delay in sharing with Ukraine. The risk of contact with Russia was proven in March of this year, when a Russian jet intentionally collided with a US drone that caused it to crash. Since it was unmanned, it was much less consequential to relations than if it resulted in loss of life. Overall, NATO ISR is an effective if limited asset to the conflict, facilitating Ukraine's ability to fight back against Russian forces.

Arms Export is the Greatest US Foreign Policy Tool

Since becoming the largest arms exporter during the Cold War, the United States has used the sale of fighter jets, artillery, tanks, and small arms as a tool to influence the outcome of wars and the global balance of power. For the Cold War, it was done to counter the spread of Soviet influence of communism in conflicted countries. Under the Raegan administration, arms export was a key component to the Iran-Contra Affair and the Soviet-Afghan War. Arguably the tactic was successful for both the Contras in the Nicaraguan civil war and the mujahideen in Afghanistan against the Soviets, but the consequences of supplying these actors became known as blowback. The Contras were found to conduct multiple human rights abuses using US support, while the mujahideen formed into the Taliban and terrorist organizations such as Al-Qaeda, which the US fought after the 9/11 attacks. US forces fighting previously supported actors has become a common theme in history, but that has not stopped the trend of arms export use.

During the Global War on Terror, arms export was used against the spread of terrorism in the Middle East, but it wasn't until the intervention in Ukraine did it become a tool to constrict Russia's influence since the Cold War. After the annexation of Crimea in 2014, the US conducted arms exports to Ukraine to support its civil war against the Russian-backed separatists. In 2022, arms export to the country increased massively, passing $30 billion to date since the Russian invasion began. Like the Soviet-Afghan War, the arms being provided are making real results in Ukraine's defense of the capital and furthering its capability for counter-offensives against Russian gains. However, as seen in the past, blowback can strike again depending on what is done with the arms after the war ends, or worse if Russia succeeds and takes control of the provided arms, becoming a major threat to national security. Yet the benefits to this risk are the subversion of a greater nuclear conflict between NATO and Russia, which is why arms export are the greatest foreign policy tool to support our interests globally.

Sanctions and the India-Russia Arms Trade

 The Russian-Indian diplomatic and strategic relationship has been critical to both countries historically and up to the present day. While questions arose as to the degree of support Russia would receive from India after the Russian invasion of Ukraine began, India has, to date, resisted signing on to Western sanctions, while simultaneously growing business ties with Russia. In fact, the Indian Foreign Minister Jaishankar recently called the relationship the “‘steadiest’ in global relations.” In many ways, India has served as a release-valve for Russia as Western sanctions pile on and force economic rerouting away from the West towards the rest of the world. Yet, even if India has not signed on to the sanctions regime imposed by the West, sanctions nonetheless are having an impact, in this case on the arms trade between Russia and India.

The arms trade between the two countries has a long and consistent history. During the Cold War, the Soviet Union served as nearly the sole-source of Indian arms by the 1960s. While in the post-Cold War era that number has fallen off, Russia still supplies around two-thirds of arms. Nonetheless, arms flow has come to a standstill, as the two countries struggle to find a payment mechanism that will not run afoul of sanctions, while satisfying both sides. As much as $2 billion worth of weapons payments are caught in limbo as a result, with Indian Air Force capabilities the most degraded due to the countries’ inability to agree on a payment mechanism. While Jaishankar has committed to working with Russia to resolve these issues and get the arms trade relationship back on track, it remains to be seen what the long-term impact will be on continued weapons sales to India and whether the void will be filled by other nations, especially if sanctions and currency issues continue to forestall cooperation between the two countries.

Value arms market

 The US should incentivize its industrial base to get more involved in the value arms market. Cheap and easily producible arms could bolster a lackluster defense industry, especially evident due to the war in Ukraine. By allowing and supporting key defense industry partners, they can produce munitions and other inexpensive equipment for other countries, thereby maintaining a robust production line on critical munitions and weapons systems that will be needed in a high-end attrition-style conventional war (Colff, 2023). Moreover, by engaging in the value arms trade, the US can engage countries within the market that typically buy cheaper Russian-made equipment, thus increasing security ties between the US and these countries (Banerjee, Tkach, 2022).

            This unique perspective is intriguing, as it may provide an answer to the DIB's lack of production capabilities while also engaging other countries that often turn to Russia or China for cheaper and easily produced equipment. The US has used its leverage in the arms trade for diplomatic efforts, notably the peace between Egypt and Israel. Therefore, engaging in the value arms market could be beneficial. Lastly, maintaining production lines of equipment and munitions could benefit the US when surge capacity is needed in a future conflict. However, there is a question of whether this is practical, as cheaper equipment and munitions typically do not have a high-profit margin for businesses. Additionally, the market is saturated with older Russian and Chinese equipment, which may prevent US-based companies from being successful in the market. 

 

Banerjee, V., & Tkach, B. (2022, August 9). Amid russia-ukraine war, China could dominate the value arms market. – The Diplomat. Retrieved April 25, 2023, from https://thediplomat.com/2022/08/amid-russia-ukraine-war-china-could-dominate-the-value-arms-market/ 

 

Colff , J. (2023, March 31). Building a new American Arsenal. War on the Rocks. Retrieved April 25, 2023, from https://warontherocks.com/2023/03/building-a-new-american-arsenal/  

 

Serbia Denies Sending Weapons to Ukraine in Wake of US Document Leaks

 Serbian Defense Minister Milos Vucevic has denied reports that Serbia has delivered lethal aid to Ukraine, saying that Serbia "did not, nor will it be selling weapons to the Ukrainian nor the Russian side". Vucevic was responding to a Reuters report that Serbia appeared on a Pentagon briefing slide on European positions on aid to Ukraine as committed to supplying lethal aid or already having done so. The slide appeared as part of the widely covered leaks of US intel in recent weeks, allegedly by an Air National Guardsman. The report also comes a month after other documents and videos appeared in a Russian Telegram channel showing what appeared to be Serbian-made 122mm Grad rockets arriving in Kyiv, which remains unconfirmed. Vucevic admitted it was possible that Serbian equipment could have "magically appeared" in Ukraine, but stressed that any such appearances would have nothing to do with the Serbian state. 

Serbia is officially a neutral party to the conflict, has historically close ties to Moscow, and has to this point declined to join the sanctions regime against Russia. However, analysts have also noted that Belgrade's desire to join the European Union has placed it in a difficult position in regard to Russia and continues to recognize Ukrainian sovereignty at the pre-2014 boundaries. 

EUROPE'S ANEMIC DEFENSE INDUSTRY

 European countries' chronically low defense spending caught the continent off-guard for Russia's invasion of Ukraine. Europe needs to shore up its defense industry in order to be better prepared for conflicts like Ukraine and others on the horizon. The European industry is fractured among the constellation of different countries in the EU, none of them superbly-coordinated for general European defense, simply national concerns. This has left the continent over-reliant on U.S. military force for its security, a drag on the U.S.'s desire to pivot to Asia. The strengthening of the Europe's own defense base would not only alleviate pressure on the U.S., it would be welcomed by France, which has long called for a sort of 'strategic autonomy'. Things may be moving in that direction; European leaders seem to be slowly coming to the realization that peace in Europe is not secured without some sort of military power.

Precursor to War?

 It has transpired that many of the world's large powers are increasing their defense spending the US, China, India, Russia, Japan, South Korea, and certain countries in Europe. This may very well be a common trend, however, it does not disprove the trajectory the world faces. It is well established that US global hegemony is deteriorating from both internal and external factors. Such a decline, albeit slow, may be measured in how other countries increase their own dependence on on self-defense. Defense budgets are an obvious metric to observe (but cannot provide the fullest narrative) this self-dependence. The allies of the US may be putting more trust in their own capabilities. Furthermore, both China and Russia along with any other minor parties are actively seeking a more multipolar world. 

With multiple factors at play, are increased defense budgets an effective way to "predict" war? Do increased budgets indicate a more multipolar world? And if other countries do continue reliance on decaying US power, will they become vulnerable in the future when the US can no longer help them and have to retreat into itself?

ChatGPT and the Defense Industry

 Like everyone else, the defense industry is taking advantage of new artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML) powered writing tools to improve efficiency within the defense industry. ChatGPT-4 has proven that it can write at a college level and pull knowledge from all corners of the web. People have been experimenting with how far AI can go by testing it with contract writing. A recently published YouTube video shows ChatGPT writing a government contract proposal, which can significantly improve efficiency for small to medium sized businesses. The Chief Digital and AI Office of the DoD revealed this year that it is developing and testing "Acqbot," a contract-writing AI system. Acqbot aims is to accelerate workflow to help get emerging technology into the hands of service members faster.

 

There are many benefits of AI related tools in the defense industry, but there are also negative side effects. ChatGPT and other AI tools have improved the arsenal of weapons for cybercriminals, and can threaten the security of citizens and the federal government. In the future, ChatGPT's technology has the potential to be used by nation-state actors to conduct cyber espionage, information operations, and cyberattacks with increasingly devastating effects. It is already being used by non-state threat actors, hacktivists, and scammers, to engage in a variety of cybercrimes. The defense industry will need to be able to quickly adjust to new and ever changing era of AI and ML if it wants keep up in the new digital age. 

High Defense Budgets

In talking about defense budgets, it is important to address why nations spend so much money on defense.  In addition to explicit goals such as ensuring national security and deterrence by investing in military capabilities to protect citizens and defend sovereignty, other reasons also exist.  For instance, a strong military can enhance a country's geopolitical influence as the power of the military can be used to influence the actions and behaviors of other nations.  Certain economic benefits can also be identified, such as the creation of jobs through both military positions and research and development.  External benefits can be observed here as defense spending has the potential to drive technological advancements that may have other applications such as advances in communications, transportation, and medicine.  

The issues with such high budgets are centered around opportunity cost and potential arms races.  A continuing argument is that the billions of dollars spent on defense could have been spent on other areas such as education and healthcare that may be struggling with funding shortages.  High defense budgets have also been known to spark arms races as nations try to "keep up" with each other's military advancements and capabilities.  

Declining US Military Stockpiles and the Risk to National Security

 

The war in Ukraine has seen a significant shipment of US military stockpiles, resulting in some shortages of US equipment and munitions. For example, CSIS identified in its report Rebuilding U.S. Inventories: Six Critical Systems that 155-mm ammunition, Javelins, HIMARS, GMLRS, and Stinger have been used to such an extent that at current production rates, it will take years to rebuild stockpiles. Specifically, the replacement rate at current levels is estimated to take anywhere from 2.5 to 18 years, depending on the specific weapon or munition.

Not only does this present a national security issue for the US, but it also creates near- and medium- term issues for allies reliant on US weaponry. The Wall Street Journal’s report from last year, U.S. Effort to Arm Taiwan Faces New Challenge With Ukraine Conflict, indicates the impact that US stockpile deficiencies are having for the Taiwanese, particularly at a time when fears of military confrontation with China have heightened. While the Taiwanese government downplayed these reports, no denial was forthcoming, adding to the report’s credibility.

Therefore, as the war in Ukraine continues to drag on, with US involvement holding steady, if not increasing, military planners will need to make tough calls as stockpiles continue to deplete. At a minimum, ramping up US manufacturing to accommodate heightened military needs is a must. 

An additional step could be a reduction in arms shipments to Ukraine, which is the principal cause of declining inventories. Whether that comes through the successful implementation of a ceasefire and mediation process or a shift in policy priorities to key allies in other regions -- such as in the Asia-Pacific -- reducing support for Ukraine would afford the US a means to more effectively manage stockpile deficiencies in the short- to medium- term, especially as the defense industrial base begins a more rapid production cycle.

Failure to do so; however, will leave the US in a more vulnerable position at a time when great power competition is heating up globally, creating a more, not less, dangerous world.

Potential budget Crisis

The U.S. military is likely to face a budgetary crisis soon, as Congress has signaled its inability to agree on critical issues related to the federal budget. With a looming debt ceiling crisis on the horizon, it is becoming increasingly clear that the military will need to prepare for a potential reduction in funding.

The current political climate in the United States is characterized by deep divisions between Republicans and Democrats, which has made it difficult to pass legislation related to the federal budget, including defense spending in the past. 

Currently, Congress is facing political polarization issues, with some in the GOP-controlled house floating the idea of possible defense cuts. House speaker McCarthy supported capping the U.S. budget at the fiscal year 2022 levels; this would mean a 10% cut for the military if included in the cap. The push is mostly from the freedom caucus, but indicate that there will be a long budget debate in the near future. 

This raises an ongoing issue with the budgetary process; Congress often has a long, drawn-out process for issuing budgets for the next fiscal year. As a response, Congress should adopt a process of granting multi-year contracts; this will enable a secure military industrial base and ensure production lines continue for needed equipment, such as munitions, in order to resupply our reserves and support Ukraine. Multi-year contracts will also insulate critical production lines from congressional gridlock, which could avoid the ongoing crisis altogether 

JAPAN PLANS TO DOUBLE ITS DEFENSE SPENDING OVER NEXT FIVE YEARS

 Japan, which has a constitution that bans land, sea, and air forces, is planning on doubling its defense budget within five years. The spending increase would bring Japan to the world's third-highest spender behind the U.S. and China. Analysts see the change in defense spending as largely due to Japan's anxieties about Russia growing closer to China. Japanese officials still say they are abiding by their constitution by forswearing preemptive strikes. Japan will also have to pay for this defense spending, a fact which Japanese officials haven't sorted out yet.

U.S. Defense Budget and the Impact of Supplying Ukraine

 Ukraine and Russia have been fighting a war for over 14 months and the effects of this war are being felt across the world. Before the war even broke out, US Congress agreed to increase the Defense budget exponentially with the war in Ukraine still waging in 2023, US Congress has agreed to raise the defense budget even more. With all of the ammunition and supplies being shipped to the Eastern European country, it has caused massive depletions of US reserves. With this FY2023 increased defense budget, it will enable the US defense industry to start producing more munitions to restock the reserves that have been shipped out to Ukraine. However, as this war continues to draw out and Ukraine continues to go through munitions at as an alarming rate as it has, then the US stockpiles will continue to deplete to critical levels. The good news though is that now with more funding in the Defense budget, more defense contractors can start to produce new munitions and more industrialization of munitions will produce a greater market for competition. As long as this war continues then it is plausible to assume that the US defense budget will continue to vastly increase each year. 

The added wrench in the cog though is with China and the increasing tensions with Taiwan we may see a heavier mobilization of the defense industry which in turn will most likely initiate emergency defense spending. 

What is your take? 

Reducing US Hypocrisy (Ukraine War Leak)

 In light of the leak of US and Ukrainian documents, there's been much talk about the contents of the documents, yet, out of curiosity, I had attempted to find images of these original files but a thorough scan of the internet via computer browsers have yielded little to no results and search results are flooded by commentaries, media reports and other miscellaneous results. 

My first reaction to this finding (or lack thereof) was disappointment. But a bigger question emerged from this and that is: despite these documents already being leaked, there appears to be much toil to scrub the internet of these original images of documents. Why is this the case? What is the US government trying to achieve by working closely with tech companies to reduce the amount of primary information? Is this nefarious? And how does this affect the international scene (and your personal reflections) on how the US basically censors the internet and no one even points this out. 

What is worse is the hypocrisy of the US government in light of this development. Any educated student is informed on moments of US failure to uphold its own standards (legal or moral), yet this is exactly the ammo the Chinese government uses to discredit the US on the international stage or to diminish their own crimes. No major consideration of this is being discussed among the "educated" academics of the US; its always pondered with no action. 

Every state will fail at times and that is inevitable, yet there is a necessity to be truthful and honest (especially with your own citizens) in a democracy (that is, if you think you are a democracy). This is hypocrisy and unfaithfulness; it's abuse of power and against humanity. 

Thoughts?

FY24 Budget Munitions Update

 The high rate of ammunition usage on both sides of the Ukraine war has made munitions acquisition questions much more relevant for policymakers. This is reflected in the DoD's FY24 budget released last month, which provides a $12.9 billion increase in acquisition funding, which includes raw procurement and testing and evaluation procedures. This includes expanding the use of multiyear contracts for systems like the Naval Strike Missile (NSM) and Long Range Anti-Ship Missile (LRASM), which defense companies have argued is necessary to meet capacity for high-tech weapons. Other systems, however, continue to use the yearly procurement system. 

However, while the FY24 budget allocates $1 billion for expanding the capacity of the defense industrial base, DoD officials have noted that munitions acquisition is currently "buying to the limits of the industrial base", which may explain why net changes in actual weapons procurements are minimal from FY23. And the increase in acquisition funds is less impressive when the analysis is extended to the next 5 years; the FY24 budget projects acquisition funding to increase by 5.7% in that period, which would not keep up with even average inflation rates. 

INTERSERVICE RIVALRY IN HALO

 The Air Force crushed the other services in the U.S. military's first-ever service-wide video game tournament in Halo Infinite last summer. Perhaps their dominance was due to 86% of airmen between 18 and 34 identify as gamers, maybe their win was because they were more comfortable sitting at desks for extended periods of time than the other branches. While this competition may not be novel (interservice sport competition has a long history), it highlights the fact that the different services are seen as separate entities, between which inherent competition arises. 

Sometimes this competition serves a good purpose for the state. For example, when services compete to do jobs more effectively, it creates a sort of environment akin to healthy capitalist competition; the more effective/efficient business (in this case, service) wins, bettering the state. However, this competition can sometimes lead to negative outcomes. The services may reject cooperation with one another if they disagree on priorities - this can, in a way, sabotage certain objectives the civilian leadership wished to achieve. 

Either way, the competition cannot be avoided, as the services are all fed from the same budget. Inconsequential interservice tournaments, football games, and more are one of the ways the services can play out competition in a friendly environment.

Wagner Shifting Focus from Ukraine

Yevgeny Prigozhin, the head of Russia's Wagner mercenary group, is allegedly turning his focus away from Bakhmut and towards Africa. The group is already present in Sudan, the CAR, Mali, and other sub-Saharan African countries. What has caused this shift? 

There may a few factors at play. The mercenary group is infamous for recruiting from Russian prisons, but it appears that Putin has rescinded that allowance and has given it to the Defense Ministry. The shift may also be due from the increasing complications from Wager's activities in Bakhmut. Prigozhin recently admitted that intense urban fighting in the city had "badly damaged" the group. 

What does an increased presence in Africa suggest for the group's future? While the group competed for resources from the Kremlin with Russia's actual military in Ukraine, Wagner's presence in Africa serves as an extension of Russian influence on the continent. The greater role of Wagner in Africa (and therefore, the smaller footprint they have in Ukraine), the less competition will be had with Russia's conventional military forces. 

Wagner's increasing relationships with African countries has a detrimental influence on the continent. African nations often give the group rights to natural resource rents for a number of years in exchange for their services. While this may seem attractive for those countries, many of which suffer from little control over their territory or even their own armed forces, the relationship will ultimately do more harm than good. 

While other forces, such as UN peacekeepers, are seen as ineffectual, Russian mercenaries are seen as heroes to be celebrated. Wagner, however, has been accused of troubling human rights violations while providing their services in the continent. The group, by its nature, also detracts from the legitimacy of the countries' own armed forces, however poor in quality they may be. 

Russia's bid for influence is already paying off - this can be seen in the voting results of the UN resolution condemning Moscow's war against Ukraine, where numerous African countries abstained or even voted with Russia. Will Wagner's human rights violations catch up with them, prompting popular discontent in the countries hosting it, or will demand for mercenaries in the region negate any wrongdoing? Only time will tell.

Interservice Rivalry: Air Force and Army’s Competing Priorities

  

The U.S. military has several branches, each with its unique culture, priorities, and mission. Historically, these differences have led to inter-service rivalry, as each military unit vies for resources and influence. A recent article by the Defense Technical Information Center (DTIC) sheds light on one example of inter-service rivalry: the competition between the U.S. Air Force and Army for control over unmanned aerial systems (UAS).

 

According to the article, the U.S. Army has been seeking greater control over UAS operations, arguing that it is better positioned to integrate UAS into ground operations. The Air Force, meanwhile, has been reluctant to cede control over UAS, citing concerns about safety and security. This conflict has been exacerbated by the fact that both services have invested heavily in UAS technology and capabilities, each seeking to establish itself as the primary provider of UAS support for ground troops.

 

Despite these challenges, there have been efforts in recent years to promote greater collaboration and cooperation between the Air Force and Army in UAS operations. One example is the Joint Interoperability Test Command (JITC), established to ensure that UAS systems from different services can work together seamlessly. While the inter-service rivalry is a persistent challenge within the U.S. military, efforts to promote collaboration and cooperation between the different branches can help to overcome these obstacles and ensure that the military can meet the challenges of the 21st century.

 

Sources Retrieved From: 

https://media.defense.gov/2021/Jan/07/2002561080/-1/-1/1/DEPARTMENT-OF-DEFENSE-COUNTER-SMALL-UNMANNED-AIRCRAFT-SYSTEMS-STRATEGY.PDF

 

https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/pdfs/ADA460480.pdf. 

Assassination of Maksim Fomin (also known as Vladlen Tatarsky)

What are the multiple repercussions for the assassination of Maksim Fomin? How does this affect the cyber realm (since he was a Russian milblogger with over half a million followers on Telegram)? Who do you think was behind the attack? Does this have as much weight besides optics?

A link to the Institute for the Study of War's report on this incident.

https://www.understandingwar.org/backgrounder/russian-offensive-campaign-assessment-april-2-2023