This Means War

NATO is rarely covered by mainstream news outlets between annual summits yet the work goes on constantly. In this episode, Peter talks to Professor Julian Lindley-French about the unsung heroes of the Alliance: the PermReps, the MilReps, the International Staff, the International Military Staff, and the Chairman of the Military Committee. Whilst the Sec Gen and SACEUR get all the headlines, it is this team of dedicated professionals who make deterrence and denial actually happen. Kudos to them. This episode is co-sponsored by NATO Public Diplomacy Division.

NATO is often trumpeted as the most successful military Alliance in human history: a grand claim indeed. The reality is less definitive. NATO did not win the Cold War alone nor has it had military success in every campaign; it was not responsible for the end of piracy off Somalia and the training missions in the Middle East did not deliver what was promised. The Alliance can be disfunctional, self-serving, and procedural inept too. Yet it has also delivered the underpinnings of peace and security for 75 years to member states. What has made it successful and what has undermined the other bits? Peter talks to Professor Julian Lindley-French about political leadership and strategy, the failure of advice, the inability to implement plans, and the European problem of only recognising as much threat (to national security) as you can afford.

Professors Peter Roberts and Julian Lindley French try and put the 75th anniversary of the North Atlantic Treaty in perspective: how much of the history of the Alliance remains relevant today? NATO is certainly an impressive organisation on the surface – but it isn't perfect. What does the future hold? What of Old Europe/New Europe, American isolationism, and what does Chinese imperialism means for NATO? Much covered and debated in an episode that looks at the least-worst Alliance in military history. This episode was co-sponsored by NATO Public Diplomacy Division.

Dive into the gripping lessons from the 1973 Yom Kippur War, where intelligence failures and strategic surprises led to unexpected casualties. Explore the remarkable adaptability of the Israeli Navy and their innovative combat tactics against powerful foes. Unpack the evolution of Multi-Domain Operations and the critical importance of logistics and psychological factors in warfare. Gain insights into how past conflicts have shaped modern military strategies and the value of effective communication under pressure.

Dr. Paddy Walker, a co-author of the recent book 'Wars Changed Landscape?', shares insights on the evolution of warfare. He discusses how understanding the norms and forms of combat provides a richer context for contemporary conflicts. The podcast dives into the interplay of enduring and new military norms influenced by technology and socio-behavioral factors. Walker also reflects on his writing journey and the role of historical context in adapting military strategies, offering a fresh perspective on the complexities of modern warfare.

John Hemmings, an expert on U.S. defense strategy, and Malcolm Davies from Aspian Australia, provide insightful perspectives on the AUKUS partnership. They discuss the complexities and slow progress of this pivotal security agreement since its inception. The conversation highlights the urgent need for enhanced military capabilities and the challenges posed by political dynamics in both the U.S. and Australia. They stress the importance of industrial capacity and STEM workforce development to ensure the partnership's effectiveness in a changing global landscape.

Professor Julian Lindley-French, a national security expert and conference convener, shares insights from a recent gathering of international defense specialists. They discuss the critical need for Western militaries to adapt to emerging technologies like AI and quantum computing to counter threats from nations such as China and Russia. The conversation highlights the strategic disconnect in European military investments and stresses the urgency of increased spending and cooperation within NATO. Lindley-French also emphasizes the importance of educating policymakers on modern warfare dynamics.

Some states face complex calculations in balancing their reactions to wars happening around them. Many (perhaps most?) governments of the day are approaching wars with less of an eye to the region and the future, and more towards domestic agendas and opinions. That is certainly the case in Europe. Importantly, decisions on foreign policy alignment are far more precarious for regional actors. For the conflict in Gazza following the terrorist atrocities conducted by Hamas in Israel in October 2023, understanding why Saudi Arabia, Egypt and Turkey are making the decisions that they are is important. After all, perhaps it is only through their eyes that we can see who is really winning.

We live in a guarded society. Humanity seems to have adopted fortification on the battlefield and in our homes and cities at an unusual scale. Forming an intrinsic part of positional warfare, urban combat, and modern warfare (from Iraq to Ukraine), the ideas around fortification have been long ignored by research in the national security community. Professor David Betz from King's College, London talks to Peter about his research and latest publication highlighting the continuities of this fortification zeitgeist across human evolution. The take away is about valuing more our engineers, our CS, our CSS, and our architects. But also in thinking a little more about the values we attribute to risk mitigation. We probably need to think some more about the reasons for failures in liquid modernity too.

Most people will not have missed the visit North Korea's leader, Kim Jong Un, to Russia last month. What went without comment was the significance of the realignment with Moscow and not Beijing. As the first foreign visit after three years of self-imposed pandemic national lockdown, the message was very clear: The Russia-Hermit Kingdom relationship is important. Russia needs ammunition and rockets for its on going war in Ukraine; the North Korean shopping list is more varied. It already has the diplomatic support needed at the UN and food aid continues to be delivered, so the cost to Russia is more likely to be material and knowledge based – satellite and military technologies trump that list. Nuclear demands probably are lower down since it appears that DPRK is already making preparations for its 5th test (under Kim Jung Un). What is a good response for Taiwan and the US? This was the question for Ankit Panda to ponder.