This Means War

Peter is joined by Dr John Hemmings, a Senior Director at the Pacific Forum in Hawaii, to talk about what might have been missed in the Indo-Pacific while we have been busy watching Russia get whooped in Ukraine. It looks and feels more like a Cold War in the Pacific (between China and the USA), than simply a state of non-peace. Beyond the furious diplomatic negotiations to prevent sway states from aligning with either side, there is a darker side to China's attempts at alliance building and covert coercion happening on Pacific Islands and around the parliaments of smaller states. Building a coalition to contain China’s interpretation of their ‘manifest destiny’ may no longer be possible, but deterring Chairman Xi still might be. So, with an inability for American to fight two major campaigns on different sides of the world simultaneously before 2040, others will have to step up if they want their societies to continue to operate in a way their populations have become used to.

Peter talks to Professor Alessio Patalano about whether the naval aspects of the Russian invasion of Ukraine offer anything new to navies as lessons or tactics for the future. Given the experiences of Pacific navies with PLA(N) coercive activities in the past 20 years, the different interpretations of Maritime Security to Europeans and their counterparts elsewhere in the world have become rather stark. Indeed, even in force design terms non-European maritime forces have tended to retain a Balanced Fleet (of capabilities) whereas those in Europe have cut and divested themselves of military capabilities viewed as having no utility today. It could be a decision they come to regret.

A panel of strategic experts predicts a troubling world by 2035, marked by heightened global threats. Discussions reveal the urgent need for countries to embrace strategic ambition in defense policies. The emphasis is on fostering collaboration between the defense industry and governments to enhance security. The podcast highlights the significance of national resolve and the necessity of transparency in military discussions. It also tackles the evolving nature of deterrence in response to rising powers like Russia and China, urging proactive engagement in national security issues.

In this engaging discussion, military expert Mick Ryan analyzes the operational art behind Ukraine's resilience against Russian forces. He emphasizes the effectiveness of the Ukrainian General Staff, who adeptly combine historical insights with modern tactics. Ryan contrasts Ukraine's innovative strategies with outdated Russian command structures and highlights the significance of real-time decision-making on the battlefield. He also touches on the role of platforms like the Wavell Room in enhancing military discourse. A thought-provoking exploration of modern warfare!

Despite a shared ideology loosely based around communism, and perhaps a similarly hopeful interpretation of Mackinder’s Rimland theory, China and Russia don’t have much in common. Even their equal desire to see the USA undermined by weakening the linkages to Europe comes apart in vying for control of Central Asia. As Theresa Fallon explains to Peter, the reality of a ‘No Limits’ relationship is starting to hit home in Beijing as the invasion of Ukraine becomes a much more drawn out affair than was promised by Vladimir Putin. From rewriting history, to a death by numbers, the conversation covers elite capture and the competition for influence that each of the parties is trying to gain. Fascinating, if a little confusing!

Rob Wilson, a maritime security expert, sheds light on critical vulnerabilities in the West's naval operations. He discusses the alarming rise of sea mines and the geopolitics of the Black Sea following recent maritime incidents. The conversation dives into the possible implications of underwater sabotage on global trade and communication. Wilson also critiques current military preparedness, stressing the need for technological advancements to combat emerging threats. The potential revival of Sea Denial is a wake-up call for governments to act before catastrophe strikes.

Dr. Peter Layton, a visiting fellow at the Griffin Asia Institute, delves into the escalating tensions between China and Taiwan. He discusses the Chinese Communist Party's intentions for Taiwan's reintegration, exploring the implications of China's military modernization under Xi Jinping. Layton also examines lessons from the Ukraine invasion that could impact Chinese military strategy and highlights how the People's Liberation Army approaches conflict without direct engagement. It’s a deep dive into the geopolitical dynamics shaping East Asia.

It has only taken one year from the Western withdrawal out of Afghanistan for that country to descend once more into a fractured society – 90% of who live below the poverty line – with a plethora of factions fighting for power, and an equally numerous set of foreign states vying for influence and resources in an all too familiar game of one-upmanship. Violence has also returned with frightening predictability. What is actually going on in Afghanistan today, specifically with regard to India, China, Pakistan, and Iran? Peter is joined by Indian soldier-scholar Anant Mishra to try and make sense of it all. Don’t expect simplicity or clarity.

Deciding to go to war, to support a war, or even which war to engage with should not be an easy decision. It should be complex: informed and debated. That wasn’t the case for the majority of countries which have been overtly supporting Ukraine in 2022, but it might well have been in the Kremlin. That doesn't make either party right. Peter talks to veteran diplomat, soldier, politician, traveller, adventurer and aid worker Rory Stewart about why some wars garner political interest (and others don’t); about why chance, narratives and strong voices in the Cabinet room culminate in moments that make investment in conflict happen; about why strategy, signalling and diplomacy are absent in preventing wars from starting in the first place; and, about how ending wars is such a difficult conversation to have.

Open Source Intelligence (OSINT) has matured considerably since the early 2000s. More data sources, better data bases, lower costs, increasing automation and processing all provide a wealth of data for analysts to get hold of. But exploiting all those sources requires a skilled team of tenacious people to provide the answers that are being sought, but also in checking that the veracity of the data. Peter talks to James Byrne, Director of the Open Source Intelligence and Analysis (OSIA) Research Group about constructing teams for OSINT work, the technicalities of OSINT, dealing with data overload, spoofing and fooling OSINT systems, and the future of Open Source Intelligence.