Patrick Zoll’s Post

“A Chinese attack on Taiwan is automatically a military contingency for Japan,” says Katsuya Yamamoto, a retired rear admiral of Japan’s Maritime Self Defense Forces. “China always claims that Taiwan is its internal affair. But Japan would be quickly affected in the event of an attack: Japan's south-westernmost island, Yonaguni, is only about a hundred kilometres away from Taiwan. Chinese missiles would most likely crash down in our waters. In addition, a war over Taiwan would cause insurance premiums for civilian shipping in the region to skyrocket. That would hit our economy hard.” I talked to Yamamoto-san a couple of weeks ago on the sidelines of the Taipei Security Dialogue 2024 organised by the Institute for National Defense and Security Research (INDSR) in Taipei. Yamamoto is now Program Director of the Security Studies Program at the Sasakawa Peace Foundation / 公益財団法人 笹川平和財団 in Tokio.  He points out that the lack of direct military to military channels between Taiwan and Japan harbours the risk of misunderstandings and accidents. In his view, this danger is increasing now that Taiwan is in the process of putting new submarines into service: “Sea trials will be taking place off the east coast of Taiwan, where the water is deep. Our submarines are also traveling there. How are we supposed to know whether a submarine is Taiwanese or Chinese? If we don't have an agreement with the Taiwanese side, we may even inadvertently let the Chinese know where a Taiwanese submarine is.” I wanted to know how this is possible. His answer: “If one of our maritime reconnaissance aircraft detects a signal while searching for unknown submarines, it will circle over the relevant location to find out more. It is quite possible that the Chinese armed forces are watching us, for example by satellite. They know whether there is a Chinese submarine in that area - if not, they can deduce from our activities that it must be a Taiwanese one.” Thank you again Yamamoto-san for taking the time to talk to me in Taipei. The full interview was just published in NZZ (in German, paywalled) https://lnkd.in/gs_hFDGv

“It is not too late for #Ukraine to win. We have to send more arms and ammunition to 🇺🇦 including critical air defence and long-range weapons.” NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg to Welt (in German). Yesterday, President Zelenskyy thanked Germany for delivering the fourth IRIS-T air defence system, and the decision to deliver a third Patriot system. It’s time for 🇩🇪 to also deliver the TAURUS long-range missile system, and for other #NATO allies to provide more of the vital air defence systems Ukraine needs right now. #StandWithUkraine https://lnkd.in/ecYmd2A3

A RNLAF CH-47 Chinook touches down in Holzdorf, joining forces with German CH-53s for joint exercises 💪. What a fantastic example of international collaboration in defense. Amazing to see how the German Air Force is already collaborating with the Royal Netherlands Air Force (RNLAF) today, deepening cooperation and interoperability 🤜 🤛 . The Chinook will significantly enhance Germany's defense capabilities. Its versatility, from disaster relief to combat operations, ensures a wide spectrum of mission readiness. Moreover, its interoperability with over 20 nations worldwide, including nine NATO members, reinforces a strong commitment to global security. As the German Armed Forces put it perfectly: "In Holzdorf wird die Zeitenwende spürbar!" #Zeitenwende #Chinook #Holzdorf #Luftwaffe

Ever since Russia invaded Ukraine, Germany has been wrestling with the question how much (more) to spend on its own defense and that of Europe. Some observers even see the country in the thralls of a new armament euphoria. Critics of bigger military budgets have pointed out that the European #NATO states are already spending three times as much on defense as Russia while the latter is "bleeding out" on the battlefields of Ukraine. But these are flawed starting points for assessing whether Germany should invest more in military capabilities, argues GPPi's Lea Marlene Korb in a new commentary. Moscow is gearing up for a long confrontation with the West – and NATO may be spending more in absolute terms, but more money doesn't equal readiness. As things stand today, Lea explains, Europe would hardly be able to defend itself against Russia without support from the United States. ➡ Read why that must change (in German): https://lnkd.in/dVhRRA6H

What truly defines military readiness? My opinion piece delves into why sheer numbers don't capture the complexities of defense capabilities. Despite NATO's higher defense spending compared to Russia, the actual readiness and strategic effectiveness of European forces reveal critical gaps. From technological dependencies to logistical inefficiencies, I argue that Europe must bolster its independent defense capabilities to counter real threats.

"Ukrainian experience helped the rebels in Syria" - executive director of the Ukrainian Security and Cooperation Center Dmytro Zhmailo for DER STANDARD. “The rebels successfully applied Ukrainian experience in using drones. Thanks to this, they managed to deliver strikes that neither the Russian contingent, which was in Syria at that time, nor Assad’s troops, expected,” the expert noted. He also suggested that Ukrainian intelligence could indeed have provided certain training and methodological recommendations to the Syrian rebels. “The Ukrainians are not directly participating in the fighting. We have a difficult situation at the front and all our units are involved in repelling Russian attacks in order to slow down their advance on the front. But our special services, of course, will provide educational and methodological support, information to all forces that are destroying the Russian military machine and the Russian contingent. Our task is to weaken Russia throughout the world”. Read https://lnkd.in/ddBczuU9

Interesting article and interview with former U.S. Rear Admiral Mike Studeman who warns of heightened tensions between #China and #Taiwan, suggesting that all signs of Chinese war preparation are visible. China’s actions—frequent military exercises, cyberattacks, and economic isolation—signal its readiness to enforce claims on Taiwan, which it views as essential to its national rejuvenation. Studeman suggests that China might delay full military action until after 2027, but this timeline could change if favorable conditions arise, such as weakened U.S. resolve or international disunity. Taiwan’s strategic location makes it critical to maintaining a balance in the Indo-Pacific; losing it could empower China to control key sea lanes, posing a threat to regional nations and shifting global power. To counter these risks, Studeman advocates for strong deterrence, improved U.S. military capabilities, and continued diplomatic engagement with China to prevent a miscalculation that could escalate into open conflict, which would destabilize global security. “Why is it so important to show China the limits of its power claims? Asia is likely to be the most important engine for the global economy in the 21st century. If China manages to hold the region hostage, it would be to the detriment of the rest of the world. That is no small feat.” https://lnkd.in/e5Eb3d4j

China's People's Liberation Army regularly conducts large-scale exercises in the Taiwan Strait and around Taiwan. Since the visit of Nancy Pelosi, then Speaker of the US House of Representatives, to Taipei in August 2022, Beijing has held four such exercises involving large naval units. These military activities have always been accompanied by loud propaganda salvos. Not so with this week's large-scale exercise. Taiwan's defence ministry has reported a sharp increase in China's military activity and put its troops on alert - and Beijing is keeping quiet. Taiwanese sources say the Chinese deployment is the largest naval force since the 1996 Taiwan Strait crisis. 90 ships from the PLA Navy and China Coast Guard were spotted. What does it all mean? Why is Beijing silent? Christopher Sharman, director of the China Maritime Studies Institute at the U.S. Naval War College, helped me make sense of it. For him, one thing is clear: the purges at the top of the Chinese military are not affecting its operational capabilities. Read my analysis here (in German, paywall): https://lnkd.in/ghWJ_eHk

"The US decision to provide Ukraine with anti-personnel mines will help significantly strengthen defensive positions in the Kursk region," - executive director of the Ukrainian Security and Cooperation Center Dmytro Zhmailo for DER STANDARD. “Our best units are currently in the Kursk region, including paratroopers and Western equipment, including Leopard and Abrams tanks. A third of the enemy forces have been destroyed in the minefields. That is why the US decision to provide Ukraine with anti-personnel mines is so important, because it will help us strengthen our defensive positions. This also applies to permission to use long-range strikes on Russian territory,” the expert noted. According to him, in order to test Ukrainian defense, Russian forces will first attack in small raid groups. And mine defense is a good countermeasure to their intentions. Read https://lnkd.in/ev6bmHSW