Diplomacy
We are no longer in 1992, the US has lost its military superiority, Ret. Lt. Col. Davis says
Editor’s note: In a presentation delivered at the East-West Forum in Istanbul on September 26, retired US Army Lieutenant Colonel Daniel Davis argued that Washington has lost its post-1992 unipolar military superiority. Stating that the American administration and its European allies fail to read new military realities, Davis noted that China, Russia, and Iran are fully aware of shifting balances. He stressed that UAV systems such as the Bayraktar TB2 rendered conventional armored warfare doctrines obsolete in the Karabakh War and on the Ukrainian front, while the US has fallen far behind its adversaries in the unmanned systems race. Pointing out that Iran has built a formidable line of defense with underground mountain facilities and ballistic missile capabilities, the senior officer noted the necessity of returning to realistic diplomacy rather than military impositions.
So I have some breaking news to report. It is no longer 1992. Apparently I have to break that news because there are Those in Washington D.C. and in Europe that don’t seem to know that in 1992 the United States had just finished Operation Desert Storm where it completely took down the military of Iraq in just record time with its coalition.
The Soviet Union had just disbanded, the Warsaw Pact had disbanded. The surviving Russian military was. Its navy was rusting in ports and it couldn’t do anything on any conventional level. It had its nuclear weapons, of course, but on a conventional level it was nothing. China was still basically an infantry based army.
And so up until that point, the United States was definitely the supreme military power all on the on the global stage, we could deploy power better than anybody else. We could use it conventionally. And of course, we had our nuclear weapons.
It’s not 1992 anymore. The United States acts like today. It’s still 1992, and we are still this unipower military power dominant. But China’s not confused on this point. Russia’s not confused on this point. Now Iran is not confused on this point. They know that we are no longer the most powerful military force on the planet.
And you’ve had President Trump, you’ve had Secretary of War Pete Hexth, the Speaker of our House, Johnson. They commonly and routinely say we are the most powerful military force on the planet in history. Nobody else is even close. Well, there’s a lot of people that are close, but they’re close. Like on the other side of us right now.
We’re still trying to operate in the 21st century militarily, like it’s still the 20th century. We’re behind the scales here, and that has enormous implications.
You can’t be a unit power force, and you can’t tell people what they’re going to do, and you can’t try to dominate over people unless you have a military to do it. We no longer have that military. And it’s now becoming evident to everybody except us.
And, and that is so dangerous because if our leaders believe what they’re saying, that we’re the most powerful military, we can do whatever we want.
And unfortunately, one of the worst examples of that appearing to be true was Venezuela. So President Trump had what a colleague of mine called catastrophic success. He thinks that he was told by many people there could be a lot of problems with it, and there would have been if Venezuelans had actually fought.
But, but because we had some insider information and some people cooperating on the inside, it was basically a bloodless, near bloodless coup. There was still about 80 people that got killed. So definitely wasn’t bloodless for them, but it was a big success for Trump.
And so he came to the conclusion that all the people who said, all these naysayers said it would be a problem, it would be difficult, it would turn into a new Vietnam, something like that. They’re not. They’re nuts. So now then, he thinks everything will work.
And so he’s operating on this belief that we could go into Iran, that we could maybe go into Cuba, maybe go at least up until recently, maybe Greenland. Basically, he sees there’s. There’s nothing that we can’t do.
But we have now proven graphically that that is not true. And you know, and you and I were talking about this a couple of days ago.
To me, as a, as a former tank officer, I fought in a Desert Storm. Just so you know, I fought in the biggest tank battles Since World War II up until that point, the Battle of 70 Easting, I was the second in command of an armored cavalry squadron for the U.S. 1st Armored Division in the, in the 2000s in Germany. And so I was responsible for training and getting ready for combat. And then was the modern war.
So that was after the 2003 Iraq war that we fought, which was also conventional. It’s also not 2003, by the way, because in those fights we didn’t have to worry about an enemy that had air force, drone force, ballistic missile force. We didn’t have to worry about any of that kind of stuff.
The war that I fought in in 2000, my first one in 1991 in Desert Storm, we couldn’t do that today because of the presence of missiles, as Iran has absolutely graphically shown.
But in 2020, the Armenia, Azerbaijan War and the Baktiyar 2 drone, et cetera, showed that conventional warfare had radically changed forever. I thought there’s going to be a radical transformation in the U.S. army, especially our ground forces. And I thought ground forces all over the world, I thought everybody is so.
But you can never again fight on the ground the way we did even as recently as 2003 in Baghdad. You just can’t do it anymore because now you mass formations on the ground and armor, it doesn’t matter how good your tanks are, they’re going to blow up. And same with armor, so you can’t move in mass anymore. So you’re going to have to come up with some new ways to fight.
Russia, to my surprise, didn’t get that memo because when they had their initial operations into Ukraine 2022, they were still behind the curve. Ukraine was actually ahead of them at that point. They had, in fact, they used the Bakyar 2 drones in the early phases to significant effect.
Russia came around though. They definitely figured it out. And now then they are, in my view, the global leaders. Now Ukraine is very close and they’re really good at this sort of thing. But I think Russia has overtaken them, certainly in mass and scale.
We’re way behind. We’re still in the, in the 20th century. We haven’t even caught up. We’re just to show you we’re thinking now we would like to have at the end of 2027, about 300,000 drones of various types.
Russia’s making that many in what, two weeks? Something like maybe less than that. And Ukraine as well, even with their limitations and far cheaper, way cheaper. That’s just as important. So our mentality is still like a snail’s pace. And so we don’t understand it.
Well, we can’t do this, tell everybody what they’re going to do anymore, but we’re still trying. So President Trump won’t use the leverage he has to end the Russia, Ukraine war.
And he keeps having this fiction that we can keep helping them strike deeper into Russia and to make it more difficult than with some fantasy that that’s going to cause Russia to say, all right, I tell you what. Sure, go ahead. We’ll do whatever Ukraine wants to do. We’ll end it on their terms here. It’s absurd to even say, but that’s what we’re acting like.
Even more absurd in a certain sense is our war against Iran right now. I was screaming this from the rooftops before the war started, that militarily it can’t be won.
If you look at what the Uranian defensive systems are and in their attack systems with their ballistic missiles and their drones and a lot of the technology they got from Russia, which Russia improved upon and then probably returned some of that technological capability.
So Iran has this ability, they Learned from our 2003 war, that don’t put all your factories on the ground that can be easily hit by American missiles, put them under the mountains that we can’t reach. And they did all that.
And so now they have shown that whatever they shoot, they’re going to hit whatever our defensive capabilities are with PAC 3 interceptors or THAAD interceptors. It’s not sufficient. And Iran can hit whatever they shoot.
It is. It is remarkable how much restraint Iran has shown up to this point, because they could already have burned the Middle east down, which would have catastrophically impacted all of our national security and economic security for the world. They haven’t done that yet.
But you see President Trump in his nice speech that he gave the other day at the United Nations General assembly, which you may have seen some of you, that something I published on that right afterwards.
I was humiliated as an American and angry because I think of some of the great Americans like John Kennedy and Eisenhower, who had made some great speeches about, let’s find a way to get together with people. It’s work, peace and all this.
And now that here he’s setting himself up like a godlike thing that I can either grant peace and security for Iran or annihilate their country. And of course, that almost certainly means nuclear weapons, because you can’t do it conventionally.
He didn’t say it out loud, but whatever he was thinking, he’s thinking that we can and we can’t. We can kill a lot of Iranian people, no doubt about that. But you can’t take out their military capacity or prevent them from having a catastrophic impact on everywhere else.
The United States has got. I pray to God can come to sober recognition. It’s not 1992 anymore. And we can’t just tell people what to do.
There’s still an out. There’s an out in the Russia, Ukraine war, there’s an out in the Iranian war if we’ll sober up and take it. And we don’t even have to surrender. We just have to acknowledge reality.
But if we don’t, if we keep going down and thinking that we are this, this unipower, it’s still 1992 and we can, then everybody else has to do what we tell them, then it’s going to be catastrophic for everybody.
And I’m almost surprised more at the Europeans than the Americans. I’m disgusted about what a lot of the American leaders are doing, but I’m puzzled about the Europeans because this stuff is self evident. It’s not hard to see.
They, you see what we’ve tried to do, what we failed to do. And I’m talking like through nearly five years in Russia, Russia, Ukraine, war, and then all these years in Iran and none of it is militarily working. And yet we keep claiming the next time it’s going to work.
And you know, Trump, if they don’t do this, then I will not. You can’t. And it would. You see, Saudi Arabia, they recognized that that wasn’t going to work and they begged Trump not to attack the last time because they knew they were in the crosshairs and they could be devastated. And who knows if they’re going to survive if they lose their oil capabilities.
It is time for us. And that’s why I’m so excited about this opportunity here. That’s why I didn’t hesitate to come to this, because we’ve got to get recognition that we are not this military dominant power that can do anything at once.
And that’s good, because if you think you can, too many people die because you just say, if you don’t do what I tell you, I’m going to kill you. That’s not diplomacy.
A lot of the stuff we’re doing with Iran is not diplomacy. We’re saying, if you’ll agree to our terms, we won’t kill you. That’s not diplomacy.
And now then they have the ability to resist and they’re going to. And Russia is not going to just give in to that and say, okay, yeah, sure, if you say you’re going to hit us, then yeah, we’ll just do whatever you say. They’re never going to do that. It’s an existential threat for them too.
All of these things are self evident. And I just pray to God that we can find some way to come back to sanity before it’s too late.
Because there’s too much chance for a nuclear threshold to be crossed in both the Middle east and in Europe. And that would be catastrophic for all of mankind, no matter where it comes from.
Diplomacy
US drafts Ukraine plan with Nord Stream restart and sanctions relief
Draft proposals by the US administration to end the war in Ukraine envisage establishing a demilitarised line in the Donbass region, easing sanctions against Moscow, and offering a comprehensive investment package to Kyiv.
According to a report by the British magazine The Economist, citing Ukrainian officials, Washington is working on a broad framework comprising both economic and political points to persuade the parties to reach a settlement.
Under the draft plan reported by the publication, Russia is offered the opportunity to conclude trade agreements with the US, an easing of sanctions, and the normalisation of political relations.
Ukraine, in exchange for relinquishing its goal of NATO membership, is promised direct foreign investment and European Union accession.
The report notes that Ukrainian officials do not possess complete visibility over every detail of the final text on the table, but are closely familiar with its overarching framework.
Nord Stream pipeline and natural gas shipments on the table
The Economist reported that the package designed to persuade the leadership in Moscow also includes items such as the resumption of Russian natural gas sales to the European market and the reactivation of the Nord Stream pipeline.
The magazine also points out that decisions regarding the operation of a pipeline located on European territory do not fall directly under US jurisdiction.
Ukrainian negotiators, meanwhile, are concerned that the Washington delegation may lock in commercial agreements in line with its own economic interests before the fighting formally stops.
Speaking to the magazine, a Ukrainian official summed up the American side’s approach with the words: ‘Why wait and waste time? Time is money.’
Diplomatic contacts intensify at leadership level
Stating that it is ready for talks, the Russian government announced that an agreement had been reached in recent contacts with Washington to launch a trilateral negotiation process that would also include Ukraine.
Russian President Vladimir Putin said: ‘The objective of these negotiations will be to address the issue of ensuring the security of Ukraine and Russia once peace agreements are reached.’
As part of these diplomatic efforts, US President Donald Trump’s special envoy, Steve Witkoff, met Russian leader Putin on 21 October at the Konstantinovsky Palace in St. Petersburg.
Speaking during the portion of the meeting open to the media, Witkoff noted that he had brought documents outlining a pathway to peace and asked Putin to examine these texts.
Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov announced that the president would evaluate the American proposals.
Noting that concrete ground for a ceasefire had emerged during the St. Petersburg meeting, Witkoff expressed hope for the start of trilateral contacts between Russia, the US, and Ukraine to address technical matters.
Putin thanked Trump for his interest in peace efforts and recounted that the US president had specifically emphasized during their recent telephone calls that the war must end as soon as possible.
Framework prepared in Oslo carried to Moscow
Immediately before his visit to St. Petersburg, Witkoff had attended talks held on 20 October in Oslo, the capital of Norway.
Trump’s son-in-law Jared Kushner joined the meeting remotely due to illness, which was attended by Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, Finnish President Alexander Stubb, and Norwegian Prime Minister Jonas Gahr Store.
According to information provided by Stubb, the parties at the Oslo meeting clarified key security and economic elements that the American envoy would present to Moscow. Air defence systems, energy infrastructure, and partial ceasefire measures were also discussed.
Commenting after the talks in St. Petersburg, Russian presidential aide Yury Ushakov argued that the newly presented approaches did not contain many elements useful for a resolution.
Noting that Witkoff informed Putin about the contacts in Oslo and relayed fresh nuances in the positions of European leaders and the Kyiv government, Ushakov stated that the meeting was thorough and frank, adding that the conflict is ‘moving toward an end.’
Diplomacy
South Korea pulls part of embassy staff from Ukraine amid POW dispute
The South Korean government has decided to withdraw part of its embassy staff from Ukraine.
According to the Yonhap news agency, Foreign Ministry spokesman Park Doo-sun cited the Kyiv administration’s failure to take “positive steps” in the dispute that began with the leak of information concerning the handover of North Korean prisoners of war as the justification for the move.
The spokesman also listed the ongoing threat of air strikes, which complicates the safety of diplomats, among the reasons.
Following the withdrawal of part of the personnel, essential diplomatic contacts will continue under the leadership of the charge d’affaires ad interim to Ukraine. All consular staff tasked with protecting South Korean citizens will remain in Ukraine.
Prior to this move, the Seoul administration decided on 8 October to withdraw its ambassador. The Foreign Ministry stated at the time that it was ready to continue consultations with Kyiv to resolve the emerging issues constructively.
Tensions between the two countries began with a speech delivered by Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy at the United Nations General Assembly in September.
Zelenskyy announced that two captured soldiers from the North Korean army had been handed over to South Korea.
South Korean President Lee Jae-myung, meanwhile, accused Kyiv of breaching a confidentiality agreement.
Lee said the disclosure of this information endangered the prisoners’ families and stability on the Korean Peninsula.
Seoul expects a public apology
Dmytro Lytvyn, an adviser to the Ukrainian president, denied the existence of a confidentiality agreement.
The South Korean Foreign Ministry summoned Ukrainian Charge d’Affaires Andriy Veshkin on 28 September and issued a note of protest against Lytvyn’s remarks.
President Lee Jae-myung warned in a statement on 2 October that they would take additional measures against Kyiv if Ukrainian authorities did not acknowledge the agreement and make a public apology. Lee stated that Ukraine itself had initially requested that the transfer of the prisoners be kept confidential.
Ukrainian Foreign Ministry spokesman Heorhii Tykhyi said the dispute stemmed from differing interpretations of the confidentiality regime.
Tykhyi noted that Seoul, based on its constitution which recognises the entire Korean Peninsula as its own territory, requested that the prisoners be handed over “like its own citizens”.
Describing the handover as a “gesture of goodwill”, Tykhyi stated that they were conducting closed-door negotiations to resolve differences of opinion.
Ambassador Park Ki-chang returned to Seoul on 10 October. According to a report by The Korea Times newspaper citing the ministry, recalling the ambassador served as a diplomatic protest against the leak of information regarding the prisoners.
The newspaper wrote that South Korea had last taken a similar step in 2008 by withdrawing its ambassador to Japan.
Moscow warned foreign diplomats
On 3 October, the Russian Foreign Ministry reiterated its warning to foreign nationals, including diplomatic mission staff, against remaining in Ukraine.
The ministry recalled its advice to leave Kyiv, citing ongoing strikes against military targets.
The ministry noted that those who failed to heed the warnings would bear responsibility for the potential consequences.
Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said in a statement on 24 September that they had no information regarding Kyiv handing over two North Korean prisoners of war to Seoul.
Peskov, noting that prisoner matters fall under the authority of the Defence Ministry and intelligence services, said, “Contacts through the special services are continuing.”
Diplomacy
Ex-BND head Hanning tied to former Mossad chief amid spy inquiry
August Hanning, who led Germany’s Federal Intelligence Service (BND) between 1998 and 2005, was arrested on 6 October on allegations that he obtained roughly 2,000 classified agency documents and used them during contacts with intelligence officers from a foreign state.
Accused of high treason and espionage on behalf of a foreign intelligence agency, the former spy chief is alleged to have procured the documents from former BND employee Manfred D.
Prosecutors stated that the leaked records included internal briefing notes presented to senior German officials, though the Berlin government has not yet publicly disclosed which country received the classified data.
According to an exclusive report by Jake Green for The Cradle, seized email exchanges revealed extensive ties between the arrested Hanning and former Mossad director Danny Yatom.
The correspondence shows that the two former intelligence directors built an ongoing network of contacts following their public service, combining commercial ventures, efforts to secure political influence, and intelligence links.
This dynamic has triggered debate that using personal connections and official access for private gain has left Germany’s intelligence apparatus vulnerable.
Intelligence notes for 10,000 euros and campaign proposals
According to the reviewed emails, Hanning told Yatom in a 2018 message that he could prepare an “overall assessment based on information obtained from senior German officials and intelligence agencies” concerning an unidentified candidate.
The former BND head committed to completing the report by 13 July in exchange for 10,000 euros.
Contacts between the two men subsequently expanded to cover domestic political processes in Germany. Ahead of the September 2021 federal election, Yatom asked Hanning to approach leading candidates.
Describing CIY Global as a “political campaign company”, the former Mossad chief noted that he aimed to introduce its capabilities to German politicians, and he mentioned his intention in the same exchange to transfer documents concerning a cybersecurity firm.
Cybersecurity partnership and surveillance operations across Europe
The partnership between Yatom and Hanning reached beyond political lobbying initiatives into the cybersecurity sector.
Hanning reportedly served as a consultant for World Health Energy Holdings, a cybersecurity company linked to Yatom.
Firms of this type, established or managed by former intelligence personnel, provide commercial platforms on the international market for Israeli-origin surveillance, cyber intelligence, and political influence capabilities.
The operational presence of private Israeli-based surveillance technologies across Europe has recently entered judicial records through scandals in Poland, Spain, and Greece.
Polish prosecutors announced on 12 October that data collected under the previous government via Pegasus spyware against political opponents had been transferred out of the country, adding that manufacturer NSO Group maintained access to the technical infrastructure.
In Spain, the 2022 CatalanGate investigation established that at least 65 people, including politicians, lawyers, and civil society representatives, were targeted using Pegasus or Candiru software, with Citizen Lab researchers publishing strong evidence linking the operation to Spanish authorities.
In Greece, the surveillance operation targeting journalist Thanasis Koukakis and Member of the European Parliament Nikos Androulakis was determined to have used Predator software, linked to Intellexa, a company founded by former Israeli intelligence officer Tal Dilian.
In the German espionage investigation, the traffic between Hanning and Yatom involving paid reporting, contacts with electoral candidates, and commercial partnerships does not yet provide conclusive legal evidence regarding the final destination of the roughly 2,000 classified documents.
Nevertheless, the disclosed correspondence gives German investigators a concrete line of inquiry to assess whether classified state secrets reached commercial networks tied to Israeli intelligence.
-
Europe2 weeks agoBerlin Left Party backs Israel’s right to exist for coalition pact
-
America2 weeks agoTrump weighs presidential memorandum to cut surging US diesel prices
-
Diplomacy1 week agoSWP urges backing for Gulf trade routes bypassing Strait of Hormuz
-
Diplomacy2 weeks agoEU and China reach preliminary deal to curb hybrid car imports
-
Europe1 week agoLSE study finds post-bailout Greece turned into a cafe economy
-
America2 weeks agoEnergy firms enlist ex-US officials to tap Venezuelan oil
-
America2 weeks agoThiel targets Pope and Obama over AI in new ‘Antichrist’ lectures
-
Europe2 weeks agoRaphaël Glucksmann wins French centre-left presidential primary
