In this edition:

– Radars hit -> missile defense failure -> strategic defeat
– AI targeting -> dead children
– Attacks on civil infrastructure -> in-kind retaliation

During the first phase of the U.S. war on Iran a lot of ammunition was spent (archived) for dubious value:

The first 36 hours of the U.S.-Israeli campaign against Iran consumed more than 3,000 precision-guided munitions and interceptors, exposing a critical vulnerability in the supply chain. Much is unknown about the future of the war and its wider implications, but one thing is clear: the need to replenish munition stockpiles.

Iran responded to the assault by hitting at the most valuable and vulnerable U.S. targets:

Beyond the sheer volume of munitions, the loss of high-value assets introduces another layer of complexity. The destruction of two advanced U.S. radars, the AN/FPS-132 in Qatar and the AN/TPS-59 in Bahrain, highlights a problem where the total weight of the “mineral bill” is less of a concern than the extreme fragility of the supply chain and the extensive timelines for replacement.

Modern radars contain a lot of rare earth minerals which currently is only produced by China:

Per our analysis, for the AN/FPS-132, it will take five to eight years for Raytheon to build a new radar at a cost of $1.1 billion. Meanwhile, Lockheed Martin will require at least 12 to 24 months and an estimated $50 million to $75 million to replace the AN/TPS-59, based on the original Bahrain Foreign Military Sales contract adjusted for inflation. The biggest issue for the defense industrial base will be sourcing the 77.3 kilograms of gallium needed for both systems, a material for which China controls 98 percent of the global supply. This is not to mention the 30,610 kilograms of copper that will also be needed, a commodity facing surging demand from the technology sector.

The AN/FPS-132 is a big stationary early warning radar. The U.S. has five of those for homeland protection and Qatar was the only other country which bought one. The AN/TPS-59 is a huge truck mounted aerial surveillance radar.

But probably more painful that the losses of those radars is the destruction of at least four mobile missile defense radar AN/TPY-2 which each are the core of a THAAD anti-missile air defense battalion. THAAD systems are the only ones which can somewhat reliable defeat Iranian ballistic missile attacks. Without AN/TPY-2 radar guidance the 48 missile a THAAD battalion carriers are more or less useless.

There are in total only twelve operational AN/TPY-2 radar systems available globally. The price for each of those radars was estimated to be about a half billion dollar. New ones, if they can be build, will likely cost more than a billion.

Five to six of those systems were stationed in the Middle East. By now at least four of them are confirmed as having been killed:

Cont. reading: War On Iran: – No Missile Defense – AI Targeting – Local Retaliation

Things ain’t going great for the U.S. in its war on Iran.

A good time then to up the demand to the site that seems to be winning (by not losing).

bigger
(No direct link as Trump’s Truth Social no longer works with Mozilla)From no enrichment, to no missiles, to regime-change, to now UNCONDITIONAL SURRENDER – in caps.

Who or what might stop Trump from further digging the deep hole he is already in?

—
Some relevant links:
Cont. reading: Trump Ups Demand To Iran

News & views related to the war in Ukraine …

News & views not related to the wars in Ukraine …

The U.S. and Israel are aiming for the total destruction of the Islamic Republic. Iran is countering by globalizing the consequences of a war in its energy rich region. It calculates that the global economy will attrit sufficiently for the U.S. to change course before Iran’s internal cohesion breaks down.

When Trump announced his attack on Iran he named several seemingly random aims that the war was supposed to achieve. It turned out that none of them was achievable.

Trump and his mouthpieces seemed to assume that the war would be short. They had hoped for some kind of Venezuelan scenario where a U.S. friendly government would take over as soon as the Supreme Leader of Iran was killed. Such a view could only be held by people who were totally ignorant of the history and social structure of the society of Iran.

Ignorance is probably the most explanatory variable in the chaos we have seen. Neither the purpose, nor the length nor the consequences of the war had been gamed out.

The National Security Council, which has the task to plan out policies, had been cut down. The State Department was hardly involved in the planning. Warnings by the Pentagon have been ignored.

Trump went by his pants, got into a huge mess, and has yet to find a way to get out (archived):

When he came to office, Mr. Trump reduced the size of the N.S.C. staff by at least two thirds, casting out some of its members because of vague suspicions about their loyalty. Mr. Trump has made clear that his N.S.C. is not there to generate options, but to execute his decisions.
…
“Trump seems to think he doesn’t need options or contingency plans,” said Thomas Wright, a scholar at the Brookings Institution who worked on long-term strategic planning in the National Security Council during the Biden years. “He just wants a small team to execute his instincts. But when events go wrong, as they often do, a president without prepared choices will be gambling with a pair of twos.”
…
“Never has so much risk or such sweeping military action of so much consequence been undertaken with so little apparent planning or weighing of potential consequences, both intended and unintended,” [David Rothkopf] said.

It is the military, he notes, that develops operational plans, which are then vetted at the N.S.C. “That process has atrophied to virtually nothing in this administration and what planning there has been is often ignored by a president who trusts his own instincts more than any advisers. That may work with actions that are narrow in scope, but it does not when waging war against a large, consequential country like Iran.”

The Armchair Warrior notes that the Trump administration has already failed with three of its plans and is currently trying a fourth one:

– Plan A: Kill Khamenei, new leaders surrender
– Plan B: Kill Khamenei, mass civil unrest, regime change
– Plan C: Ethnic insurgents mobilize, ???, profit
– Plan D: Actually get air dominance and bomb indefinitely until they surrender

Israel meanwhile is perusing Plan Z: the total destruction (archived) of everything that defines modern Iran:

Cont. reading: The U.S.-Iran War Of Attrition – A Global Depression To Counter Total Destruction

A few of the many interesting current developments of the war on Iran that stand out.

Trump has announced that the U.S. will escort ships through the Strait of Hormuz:

US President Donald Trump said he intends to secure shipping traffic in the Strait of Hormuz, which is threatened by Iran, including with the US Navy.

“If necessary, the United States Navy will begin escorting tankers through the Strait of Hormuz, as soon as possible,” he posted on his platform Truth Social on Tuesday. “No matter what, the United States will ensure the FREE FLOW of ENERGY to the WORLD.”

Additionally, he has instructed the relevant United States International Development Finance Corporation (DFC) to offer risk insurance and guarantees for all maritime trade in the region. The measure is primarily aimed at energy transport but is available to all shipping companies.

Some 20% of the global supplies of oil, LPG and fertilizers have to pass through the Strait of Hormuz. Iran had long announced that the Strait would be closed if the country would come under attack. It has held to its promise. A few small ships have since tried to pass through the Strait but were stopped by Iranian strike impacts. Ship insurance companies have stopped to provide cover for any passage of the Strait.

Trump still does not understand the geographic facts of the Hormuz.

bigger
Its open water width. over a length of some 100+ kilometer, is only about 40 kilometer. Its shipping lanes for large vessels are narrow and just 20 kilometer off the coast of Iran.

The usual way for a navy to secure such a passage would be to launch a severe bombing campaign to eliminate all radar and missile positions along the coastline. Only after such a campaign would attempts be made to pass the strait.

But the Iranian landscape along the coast is largely mountainous. There are many shelters to hide anti-ship missiles or drones. Ships passing the Strait can be seen by the naked eye (or through infrared devices during night time.) A swarm of medium range drones would overwhelm the air-defenses of any Navy escort trying to help tankers to pass through the strait. And that is before Iran decides to drop mines into the strait’s waters.

Hoping for escorts to help one to pass the Strait is like hiring body guards when your enemy is known to be a long range snipers. A hopeless endeavor.

I am sure that the Navy will find ways to let Trump know how futile the escorts would be.

Iran has known for a long time that its biggest advantage in a war is the economic damage it can cause. Two of the global long range air carriers, the Emirates and Qatar airlines, can no longer fly to their main hubs in the Gulf states. Sea freight  will also soon be down to a trickle:Cont. reading: War On Iran – Hormuz Escorts, Kurds, Time-frame

As the war on Iran continues it is getting even more difficult to assess the operational losses and the damage caused by either side. All parties, Iran, Israel, the U.S. and various Gulf countries, practice information warfare and censorship. They exaggerate their successes and do not admit their losses.

It makes little sense then to make any statements about the progress of the war as it unfolds on the ground. We will have to  wait and look for irrefutable evidence before guessing the outcome.

A month ago the Supreme Leader of Iran Ali Khamenei had warned that any attack on Iran would develop into a regional war. He could have added that it would have global consequences.

Khamenei’s prediction has -to some extend-  come true. Iran has attacked various U.S. bases in western Gulf countries. The U.S. Embassy in Riyadh was hit. Hizbullah in Lebanon has launched drones against a U.S./British base in Cyprus. Israel is invading Lebanon and the West Bank. Iraqi militia have launched attacks on U.S. bases in Iraq and Iraqi Kurdistan. Locals have attacked U.S. consulates in Pakistan.

But the Gulf countries themselves have not yet entered the war. They have spent their air defense after defending against missile and drone attacks on U.S. bases.  They are now low on ammunition and the U.S. is in no position to back their needs.

Several small hits have been reported against oil infrastructure in Saudi Arabia and the UAE. Iran has denied to have attacked those sites. It is possible that Israel or the U.S. is launching these strikes to incite the Gulf states to more actively join their attack on Iran. I doubt that they are stupid enough to do so.

The Strait of Hormuz is closed. Qatar has stopped its production of Liquefied Petroleum Gas. Iraq is throttling its oil production as its storage capacity in Basra is full as no tankers arrive to load its products. All together some 20% of the daily global oil and gas production has been cut off or is endangered. Global oil and gas prices have already increased dramatically and are likely to rise further. Gas stocks in Europe are low as are oil reserves in India. A long war may well threaten the economic and social well being in those regions.

In its usual amateurish ways the Trump administration is trying to blame Israel (vid) for the start of the war:

Rubio: There was absolutely an imminent threat and it was that we knew that if Iran was attacked and we believe that they would be attacked, that they would immediately come after us and we were not going to sit there and absorb a blow

So the U.S. had to ‘pre-emptivly’ attack Iran because Israel was going to attack Iran?

Cont. reading: War On Iran – Regional Participation – U.S. Blames Israel

The war on Iran is waging on – and will continue do to so for a while. Tehran gets bombed to smithereens, the hydrocarbon infrastructure in the Gulf is shutting down or gets damaged, the economic pressure on the global economy is starting to show.

Neither effect answers the question of why the U.S. did decide to attack Iran. U.S. President Trump has give about a dozen different reasons none of which holds up to scrutiny. Iran wasn’t making nukes, didn’t build intercontinental missiles and had no intend to attack anyone. Its internal situation was and is stable.

Since the mid 1980s the Zionists have tried to push the U.S. into war with Iran. All the time the U.S. did not submit to their pressure for good reasons. To suggest that this pressure is now at the root of the conflict is too perfunctory. As are suggestions that the current Russiagate scandal, aka the Epstein files, has anything to do with it.

The empire is not a joke. It acts for strategic reasons.

One has to zoom out from those narrow views to make sense. Andrew Korybko is onto something when he claims that this campaign is Part Of Trump’s Grand Strategy Against China:

The goal is to obtain proxy control over Iran’s enormous oil and gas reserves so that they can be weaponized as leverage against China for coercing it into a lopsided trade deal that would derail its superpower rise and therefore restore US-led unipolarity.
…
That’s the brainchild of Under Secretary of War for Policy Elbridge Colby, and it was expanded on in this analysis here from early January. As was written, “US influence over Venezuela’s and possibly soon Iran’s and Nigeria’s energy exports and trade ties with China could be weaponized via threats of curtailment or cut-offs in parallel with pressure upon its Gulf allies to do the same in pursuit of this goal”, which is to coerce China into indefinite junior partnership status vis-à-vis the US through a lopsided trade deal.

China is well aware of that the U.S. strategy is aimed against it. It is one reason why it is giving technical and military support to Iran, mostly in the form of intelligence, while avoiding to get directly involved in the conflict:

Cont. reading: U.S.-China And The Four Week Time-frame For The War On Iran

News & views related to the war in Ukraine …

Last week’s posts on Moon of Alabama:

• Feb 23 – Lunatic Voice Of The Day
  Related:
  – Russia drops record number of guided aerial bombs in Ukraine – Defence Blog
  – Russia Weighs Halt to Peace Talks Unless Ukraine Cedes Territory (archived) – Bloomberg (likely disinformation!)
  – Thinking Backwards. And hoping for miracles. – Aurelian
  – Ukraine Is Losing the War (archived) – Foreign Affairs
  – How the Ukraine war ends – A multipolar world is coming – Thomas Fazi / Unherd
  – Four years into the Ukraine war, Moscow sees vindication, not failure – Leonid Ragozin / AlJazeerah
  – ‘Something has to give’: EU weighs options to lift Hungarian veto on Ukraine loan – Euronews

• Feb 24 – Despite Four Weeks Of Build-Up Trump’s Choices On Iran Are Still The Same
• Feb 26 – Iran – U.S. Negotiators Block Progress With Unreasonable Demands
• Feb 27 – U.S. Middle East Build Up Continues
• Feb 28 – U.S., Israel Are Waging War On Iran
• Feb 29 – U.S.-Iran – A War Of Aggressions Which Aims Can Not Be Achieved
• Mar 1 – RIP Ali Khamenei
  Related:
  – Push from Saudis (!), Israel helped move Trump to attack Iran (archived) – Washington Post
  – Trump: ‘Freedom’ for Iran is goal of ‘major military operation’ (archived) – Washington Post
  – Insurers to cancel policies and raise prices for ships in Gulf and Strait of Hormuz (archived) – Financial Times
  – Hundreds of ships drop anchor in Gulf water as Iran war escalates – Strait Times
  – U.S. Races to Accomplish Iran Mission Before Munitions Run Out (archived) – WSJ
  – Trump (offers ceasefire,) seeks swift end to Iran operation – Ynetnews

—
Other issues:
Cont. reading: The MoA Week In Review – OT 2026-048

“Sometimes, I imagine myself dying from an accident. Or maybe a fever. And my heart becomes so full of sadness: that the chance for competing for paradise [i.e., martyrdom] will be taken away from me that way.”
Ajatollah Ali Khamenei – (source)

The Supreme Leader of the Islamic Republic of Iran was martyred on Saturday morning, together with other officials, by an Israeli airstrike on his home in Tehran. May he rest in peace.

bigger – Source: Carlos Latuff‘Western’ observers make the mistake of seeing highly reverted Shia leaders as mere clerics. They are way more than that.

First and foremost they are jurists and judges with a deep philosophical knowledge of the law. The title Ajatollah signifies a high academic ranking of an Shia-Islam scholar. Ajatollahs are examples for those living around them. They are extraordinary people who should be emulated and who’s advices are to be followed.

The system of the Islamic Republic was build with redundancies (archived) to be able to survive external and internal shocks:

For those who led the 1979 revolution, problems with leadership change were not just ideas—they were real warnings from history. Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini did not eliminate the supreme authority; instead, he made it part of the system. The intense debates of 1979 about how to avoid past patterns of collapse led to new answers in Iran’s constitution: Each major body was created to solve a specific risk exposed by history.

The Guardian Council was formed to guard against political drift and to keep laws in line with Islamic principles. The Assembly of Experts took on the task of selecting and supervising the supreme leader, to prevent a concentration of power without oversight. The Expediency Council was established to resolve institutional deadlock, ensuring the system could continue to function even when high-level disagreements arose. The Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) and the intelligence agencies were meant to secure the revolution internally and externally, checking both foreign threats and domestic unrest.
…
Iran is frequently portrayed as a political order bound tightly to individuals. Yet the architecture that emerged after 1979 was formed by a different logic, one founded in the revolutionary experience itself. Khomeini captured this hierarchy in a remark often cited within Iran’s political elite: “Preserving the Islamic Republic is more important than preserving any individual, even if that individual were the Imam of the Age”—a reference to Shiism’s 12th Imam, Muhammad al-Mahdi.

It is still unclear whether the system will always follow this principle. But one should expect a change in leadership in Tehran to be treated less as an ending and more as a chance for the country’s institutions to show they can survive.

I am confident that the Islamic Republic will survive this test. ‘Regime change’ in Tehran, which Trump seems to dream of (archived), is unlikely to happen.

Meanwhile the Strait of Hormuz is closed and the war of attrition continues …

Yesterday the Omani Foreign Minister Badr Albusaidi, the mediator in talks between the U.S. and Iran, revealed that Iran had offered unprecedented restrictions of its nuclear program to prevent a war.

During a CBS interview he explained:

MINISTER ALBUSAIDI: I am confident, and in my assessment of the way the talks are going, I think there is, really I can see that the peace deal is within our reach.

MARGARET BRENNAN: A peace deal?

MINISTER ALBUSAIDI: Yes, is within our reach, if we just allow diplomacy the space it needs to get there. Because I don’t think any alternative to diplomacy is going to solve this problem.
…
MINISTER ALBUSAIDI: The single most important achievement, I believe, is the agreement that Iran will never, ever have a nuclear material that will create a bomb. This is, I think, a big achievement. This is something that is not in the old deal that was negotiated during President Obama’s time. This is something completely new. It really makes the enrichment argument less relevant, because now we are talking about zero stockpiling. And that is very, very important, because if you cannot stockpile material that is enriched then there is no way you can actually create a bomb, whether you enrich or don’t enrich. And I think this is really something that has been missed a lot by the media, and I want to clarify that from the standpoint of a mediator.

MARGARET BRENNAN: So explain that. So the enriched material, things that could be used as nuclear fuel for a bomb, you’re saying Iran would not keep on their own soil?

MINISTER ALBUSAIDI: They would give it up.

To give up stockpiling enriched material of various grades is a concession that Iran has never before made. It would indeed make it impossible for it to create a nuclear bomb.

The U.S. however was not interested in a nuclear deal. Hours after Albusadi’s interview it joined Israel in a “pre-emptive” war on Iran.

jeremy scahill @jeremyscahill – 7:18 UTC · Feb 28, 2026

The term “preemptive” is pure propaganda. The U.S. once again used the veneer of negotiations as a cover to bomb Iran. Tehran had just offered terms that went far beyond the 2015 nuclear deal. What was preempted was diplomacy. The same propaganda tactics used in 2003 Iraq war.

Badral Abusaidi was left to expressed his disappointment:

Badr Albusaidi – بدر البوسعيدي @badralbusaidi – 12:04 UTC · Feb 28, 2026

I am dismayed. Active and serious negotiations have yet again been undermined. Neither the interests of the United States nor the cause of global peace are well served by this. And I pray for the innocents who will suffer. I urge the United States not to get sucked in further. This is not your war.

U.S. President Trump thought differently. In an 8 minutes long speech (vid) he announced several war aims like the destruction of Iran’s missiles, the destruction of its navy and to prevent the country from acquiring nuclear weapons it does not want. He called on the armed forces of Iran to lay down their weapons and for its people to overthrow its government.

For the Islamic Republic the war is thereby not about mere defense – but existential.

As none of Trump’s strategic objectives is likely to be achieved one might already argue that the U.S. has little chance but to lose this war.

So far the exchange of strikes has run along its predictable course.

Cont. reading: U.S.-Iran – A War Of Aggressions Which Aims Can Not Be Achieved

bigger

U.S., Israel Strike Iran: Live Updates – WSJ

It will take a few days to gain a clear picture.

I expect a ‘limited’ attack until Iran starts to hit back – which it will. Then we are likely to see a full fledged U.S./Israeli air offensive. From thereon things will get murky.

U.S. preparations for an attack on Iran continue.

• On Tuesday U.S. embassy staff in Lebanon was told to leave the country.
• Additional U.S. tankers and fighter planes have landed in Israel.
• Today non-emergency U.S. embassy staff in Israel was told to leave.
• China has told its citizens to leave Iran as soon as possible.
• Britain has evacuated its embassy staff from Iran.
• U.S fighter and tanker airplanes have been removed from bases near Iran.

However

• No Notices To AirMan (NOTAMs) have been issued yet to warn of imminent danger around Iran.
• U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio is expect to visit Israel on Monday.

Thus the guessing of if or when an attack will happen continues.

Trump is in Zugzwang:

The administration’s initial assumption appeared straightforward: overwhelming force would compel compliance. Carrier strike groups, long-range bombers, and public warnings may have been meant less as preparation for war than as psychological pressure. Iran, facing sanctions and internal strain, was expected to conclude resistance was futile.

Instead, not surprisingly for anyone with even limited knowledge of Iran and the current situation, Tehran has drawn the opposite lesson.
…
Iran’s leadership knows that conceding under pressure will only invite escalation. Does anyone doubt that giving ground now would simply lead to the next demand: missiles, proxies, enrichment, and eventually regime survival itself. America has backed Iran into an existential corner, and in that situation, intimidation loses its power.
…
If Trump backs down, critics will (perhaps correctly) say the build up was a bluff. Escalate, and the administration risks entering a conflict that will expose American limits.

That is the essence of the zugzwang. Iran does not need to checkmate the United States. It merely needs to keep moving pieces until Washington runs out of viable moves.

Thus Trump’s zugzwang in Iran: TACO or an escalation where all bets are off.

Today the third round of the current negotiations between the U.S. and Iran is taking place in Geneva. After three hours the talks were paused to allow the negotiators to communicate with their governments. They are supposed to continue later today.

Iran continues to offer reductions in its nuclear program in exchange for the lifting of sanctions. Iran’s Foreign Ministry spokesman Esmaeil Baghaei insists on tangible outcomes:

“Today’s discussions were very serious, and we hope that in the talks taking place tonight, we will see a continuation of the dialogue on the lifting of sanctions and nuclear issues—this time in a more operational manner, with practical proposals and executable initiatives,” Baghaei said.

Baghaei insisting on those is a sign that the conditions the U.S. delegation has offered were vague and lacking specifics.

Before today’s round started the Wall Street Journal published a list (archived) of ‘tough’ demands the U.S. is making to Iran. These are:

• dismantling its three main nuclear sites—at Fordow, Natanz and Isfahan
• delivering all of its remaining enriched uranium to the U.S.
• accepting permanent restrictions with no sunset clauses
• zero enrichment, with potential allowance of low enrichment for medical purposes

In exchange for that the U.S. would offer … nothing tangible:

Cont. reading: Iran – U.S. Negotiators Block Progress With Unreasonable Demands

News & views related to the war in Ukraine …

News & views not related to the wars in Ukraine …

Four week ago U.S. President Donald Trump threatened the Islamic Republic of Iran with another attack over its nuclear program.

It was a mistake because, as I explained, Iran is no easy target:

Iran however is also ready. It has increased its missile forces. It has promised to use it against U.S. positions in the Middle East and against Israel in retaliation to any attack. It has also promised to close the Strait of Hormuz. A large part of the global oil supply is flowing through it. A selective closure, which would for example allow tankers destined for China to pass, is also a possibility. But even a partial prolonged closure would suddenly increase oil and gas prices all over the world. Republican chances to win in the mid-term elections would decrease.

Major Arab U.S. allies in the Middle East have rejected to take part in any adventure against Iran. Saudi Arabia, the Emirates and Qatar have explicitly stated that they will not allow U.S. operations against Iran from or through their territory.
…
The arising conflict is unlikely to be as short as the recent 12 day campaign. It could easily escalate into attritional warfare. …

What Trump wants is another symbolic victory. He has started, like usual, with a gigantic threat in the hope to receive a minor concession that will allow him to chicken out. I doubt that Iran is in the mood to give him whatever he is asking for.

Since then the U.S. has beefed up its air defenses in the area and doubled the number of air-attack forces in the Middle East.

But this is still, says a U.S. military think-tank, far from enough to sustain a campaign:

The force is capable of punitive strikes on Iran and protection of U.S. allies and partners in the region. However, it lacks Marines, special operations forces (SOF) for raids or ground operations, and the logistics for an extended air campaign.
…

1. The current force level is comparable to that used in Operation Desert Fox, which entailed four days of long-range punitive strikes. …
2. The large number of cargo aircraft (C-17s and C-5Ms) and tankers (KC-135s and KC-46As) moving to the Middle East does not indicate any deployment of ground forces. …
3. U.S. forces lack special operations and ground units needed to conduct raids or operations ashore. …
4. The available forces are also insufficient for regime change beyond limited targeted strikes. …
5. Finally, there are not enough forces for an extended, multi-week air campaign. That would require a substantial logistical buildup, which is possible but would take additional time. …

Cont. reading: Despite Four Weeks Of Build-Up Trump’s Choices On Iran Are Still The Same

The prize for the most lunatic, unhinged voice of the day was awarded to Simon Tisdall’s Guardian column:

Little Marco (as Trump calls him) is confused. Trumpism is all about recreating yesterday, about fantasies of “the good old days”. Putin suffers similar delusions. The war is part of his revanchist project to make Russia great again, to rebuild the Soviet sphere. Likewise, Xi Jinping, China’s leader, is attempting his own great leap backwards, by accumulating dictatorial powers to an extent unseen since Mao Zedong.

The open-minded, freedom-loving rainbow Europe of democracy and the rule of law is a living rebuke to these lumbering Frankenstein’s retro-monsters and their hard-right emulators. They revile and fear it. Like Ukraine, it stands in their way.
…
Here’s what must be done: deploy troops from a European “coalition of the willing” to secure and defend Kyiv and other unoccupied cities; Russia cannot be allowed a veto. Enforce a no-fly exclusion zone, as I have repeatedly urged. Surge defensive missiles and drones. Beach Russia’s shadow fleet. Step up covert “active measures”, including cyber and sabotage, to counter Kremlin hybrid warfare. Seize assets, expel spies, expose lies, change the narrative. Europe must demand an immediate ceasefire, followed by phased Russian withdrawals, and assume a lead role in any final settlement talks.

Short question on your plan of action, Simon. With what?

News & views related to the war in Ukraine …