Europe must be ready to defeat Russia in 3-5 years.
Big money is coming, but spending it on lots of old platforms (tanks, IFVs), won't get us what we need in time - & will arm for the last war.
Europe needs a tech-based 'Offset' strategy
My new report 👇
https://www.democratic-strategy.net/s-projects-basic
Big money is coming, but spending it on lots of old platforms (tanks, IFVs), won't get us what we need in time - & will arm for the last war.
Europe needs a tech-based 'Offset' strategy
My new report 👇
https://www.democratic-strategy.net/s-projects-basic
1 / 4
Comments
https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidaxe/2025/03/11/russia-has-probably-hit-all-10-of-ukraines-ex-swedish-strv-122s-but-the-up-armored-tanks-keep-fighting/
Part of it is learning from Ukraine - but there are also wider trends and other factors to consider.
A balanced force with multiple capabilities is as old as warfare itself . Describing armour as legacy and citing AFU experience when the AFU have been begging for more armour, seems to be out of step with what’s occurring.
Who did you interview at Bde lvl+ in the AFU BTW?
We definitely need the heavy stuff and the missiles, but behind a thick screen of drones and AD.
Russia can mass meat, we must mass tech!
Making residents in Moscow or elsewhere uncomfortable has no effect on "the meat" on your dirt. Find-Fix-Finish [them]
But now would be a good time to start.
Ukraine has to rely on less effective drones partly because it doesn't have enough of everything else.
As the report argues - not as many as are often throught.
Moreover Ukraine is not only relying on drones because they have to- at low cost they have built a real & effective recce-strike complex. Europe can learn from that & must harness not ignore tech shift
Not dozens or hundreds, but thousands.
Maybe we should think about designing them to be more drone resistant though. Both in terms of electronic repression and where/how they are armoured.
.....
I can dream 😴
It's a shame that X is still so strongly favoured.
From an in-depth report on strategy?
There are different views on using X - but as @vatniksoup.bsky.social has said (& I agree) there is (& will not be) not a mass migration away from X (even as bsky grows) & it’s important to be in the discussion there too.
If it has to be X, then why only X?
Why so big right next to the headline?
First, the assertion that we will not trade space for time is important—but it must not become a tactical constraint. An unwillingness to retreat in the face of a looming defeat could be far too costly.
1/
2/
The answer must be twofold:
3/
4/
2. An integrated European military command, even in peacetime: It no longer makes sense for individual countries to claim that their forces cannot be mobilized for certain operations.
5/
6/
To be avoided.
It needs people like YOU!