20 Comments

The US has talked itself into a corner with no constructive way out. By all rights, this should have ended two years and tens of thousands of lives ago, but cold warriors and opportunists never die. Lindsay Graham spoke a malicious truth a couple of weeks ago in talking about the trillions in resources within Ukraine, as if the US and US only has a divine right to those, and he envisions those resources as payment on future weapons sales. It's a good thing there are no domestic issues that he and others could tackle.

Expand full comment

Yes that was very revealing. If Ukraine is so rich in natural resources, then why has it been the poorest country in Europe for the last ten years?

Expand full comment

Hi David,

I have a couple of questions somewhat related to this article:

1. Cyrus Janssen was on the Daniel Davis Deep Dive show on Youtube. Janssen is an American citizen who lives and works in China. In this video (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KLQ7ZepmCyA), he explains that China really doesn't want to go to war with Taiwan, because the Chinese people see the Taiwanese people as relatives, so to speak. He also believes that China wouldn't really invade Taiwan unless the U.S. declared that it supports Taiwanese independence. While Taiwan does have a president who supports that, Biden did say after Taiwan's election that he doesn't support Taiwanese independence. Also, Janssen mentioned how Biden was recently asked again about Taiwan, and said military action to defend Taiwan was "on the table". While still not as good as a response as unequivocally saying no military action to defend Taiwan, Janssen notes it's a departure from his unequivocal yes answers. Do you believe China would be more likely to blockade Taiwan if Biden outright states that he does support Taiwanese independence? As an aside, the video I have linked is well worth to watch in its entirety.

2. "The problem is if Russia was able to force Ukraine’s surrender and get the Biden administration to capitulate through nuclear coercion, rather than peaceful negotiation, it would embolden Chinese President Xi Jinping to utilize non-strategic nuclear weapons against US military bases, assets and/or allies in the Pacific to force reunification with Taiwan. This is one of the many reasons why a peaceful resolution to the Ukraine war would be far preferable from a US standpoint."

Wouldn't this be a better outcome in the sense that if Russia resorts to using tactical nuclear weapons to coerce Biden and Zelensky to surrender, then China could deter Biden from making good on his pledges to intervene in Taiwan with tactical nuclear strikes on our bases in the Pacific? As much as I would hate to see that happen, I would rather us lose military bases in the Pacific than to see our power grid get taken down for even a couple of weeks with a cyber attack due to military intervention in Taiwan (or worse, a permanent blackout due to EMP strikes).

Expand full comment

I believe Cyrus is mistaken on this one. While its true that China doesn’t want to go to war with Taiwan it absolutely will because it has stated President Lai has already effectively proclaimed Taiwan’s independence and it likely will do so in October. A Chinese blockade of Taiwan is undeterrable unless we begin reunification talks this summer. Also, China likely intends to demand peaceful reunification one last time after it begins its blockade. They would maintain the blockade until Taiwan agrees to immediate reunification and then it would be a bloodless Chinese takeover of Taiwan. A better option would be for the US to mediate a EU style confederation agreement between Beijing and Taipei. Yes, after Biden said the US is obligated to defend Taiwan four times, this last time he said that it would depend on the circumstances. That to me means if China doesn’t land troops in Taiwan, he wouldn’t go to war with China. I believe China plans to force Taiwan to capitulate without invading it. I estimate Taiwan would surrender within 2-3 weeks if the US didn’t attempt to break the blockade. So that is giving me more hope that we can avoid all out-World War Three with China. But I still think US economic sanctions which I support would tank our economy and cause another depression along the lines of the 1930s even if China doesn’t cyberattack us. Yes, it likely would be better if Russia conducted a nuclear demonstration attack against Ukraine that killed no one, but injured thousands to force Biden and Zelensky to de-escalate the war and accept Russia’s current peace offer. Read the update at the top of my article below:

https://dpyne.substack.com/p/china-preparing-an-october-surprise

Expand full comment

I look forward to David's response on your points Anthony. At the end of the day I think China will do whatever it thinks is in it's best interests. ...regardless of the Ukraine outcome.

With five major war fronts all escalating at the same time around the world and countless other struggles on the financial sphere unfolding , the best thing in my opinion we can all do right now is make sure we are ready for that "come to Jesus" moment.

Expand full comment

Nobel Committee Considers Other Types Of Primates For This Year's Peace Prize:

"OSLO, NORWAY –– Disappointed with the selection of human candidates, judges on the Nobel Committee have started looking at a variety of apes as potential recipients of the 2024 Peace Prize."

https://www.newworldhumor.com/p/primates-considered-for-nobel-peace-prize

Expand full comment

Hey David.. just wondering about the escalated China/ Taiwan situation.

Specifically your thoughts on all the U.S. farmland that China has gobbled up these last few years. Especially the land grabs close to military bases!

Also wondering what if anything can be done to reverse this land ownership trend.

Lastly I am concerned that should a war between the west and China erupt, what concerns if any you might have, about all the Chinese immigrants coming into the United States via the southern border?

Expand full comment

The US government as well as the individual states should ban China from owning land either forcing them to sell the land at a market price or else seizing it from them. It really is a national security issue particularly the Huawei celltower in DC that can disrupt nuclear launch orders. China has sent 85,000 military age men likely PLA Special Forces and Airborne troops which could destroy the US from within without China having to fire a single missile at us in the event Biden decides to defend Taiwan militarily.

Expand full comment

Thank you Mr. Pyne!

I think it's time I picked up your book and do a re-read!

You may have already addressed this question.

It truly is unbelievable to think anything even remotely capable of disrupting launch orders would be compromised . Ridiculous.

Expand full comment

Yes it is outrageous that Congress ordered it be removed in 2020 and nothing has been done to date!

Expand full comment

Better print this one out, send it special delivery and pray that someone within Biden's circle of influence can sit down and explain these facts to the big guy!

Question: Dr. John Mearsheimer, has indeed stated and agreed with your position on the Ukraine war and has said there is no existential threat one way or the other when it comes to the demise or success of Ukraine's existence to the US.

That said, he has also stated strongly in the past, that the US would most definitely engage militarily if China attacks Taiwan.

So I am just wondering for such a smart guy, why would he support this dangerous position? An all out war with China? He must be joking.

Expand full comment

Unfortunately, my position that a war with China over Taiwan is unwinnable and would almost certainly lead to the destruction and dissolution of the United States is not widely shared even by my fellow realist foreign policy thinkers. There are a lot of brilliant national security strategists which side with the neocons on the China-Taiwan issue. President Trump is one of the few US leaders who has stated that the US has no way of preventing China from conquering Taiwan. Clearly, the US has a strategic interest in ensuing Taiwan retains some level of self-rule if not independence but the risks of fighting a full-scale world war against a nuclear superpower that has 2-3 times more nukes than we do very much outweigh any potential benefits of preventing China from capturing Taiwan's advanced microchip manufacturing facilities which likely can be disabled by the US or Taiwan in advance of a Chinese takeover without the need to resort to nuclear war with China.

Expand full comment
Comment deleted
Jun 26
Comment deleted
Expand full comment

The period of US liberal hegemony ended a while ago. We have had a bilateral international order since 1996 or at least since 2001 and US leaders have just refused to admit it. There have been two power blocs just like during the Cold War. The Sino-Russian alliance and the US led alliance. The sooner US planners realize that and try to break up the SIno-Russian alliance to achieve a far better tripolar international order the better and the safer the US will be.

Expand full comment
Comment deleted
Jun 20
Comment deleted
Expand full comment

It appears the NATO contingency plan if a Russian offensive threatens Kyiv would be to send tens of thousands of British, French, Polish and Baltic troops to help Ukraine defend the Dnipro River line and would only attack Russian forces directly if Russia attacked them which they undoubtedly would.

Expand full comment
Comment deleted
Jun 20
Comment deleted
Expand full comment

I would say somewhere between 8 and 9. The war could escalate horizontally without warning as the US and NATO have crossed multiple Russian redlines.

Expand full comment

I would put the number lower, more like 6. As we see with North Korea, there are still many rungs left on the escalation ladder. It should also be noted that Russia has never enunciated any red lines, and they never use that term. The red lines are ones imposed by the US itself that they then proceed to cross. In reality, Russia has always had maximalist goals in Ukraine, and realizing them is predicated on both Ukraine and the US perpetually refusing to negotiate or surrender. They are dutifully fulfilling this role, and are sinking ever deeper into the quicksand. It's entirely possible China will never need to initiate hostilities against Taiwan once the US' defeat in Ukraine proves to be strategically comprehensive.

Expand full comment

I disagree. Russia has stated multiple redlines and Biden has crossed nearly all of them pushing us ever closer to World War Three which, after all, has been Zelensky's objective all along believing that if the US entered the war then we would help Ukraine liberate all of its Russian annexed territories. Russia has always had minimalist goals in Ukraine so minimalist in fact that under the Istanbul Agreement, Putin agreed to withdraw all Russian troops from all pre-war Ukrainian controlled territory including eight oblasts a mere five weeks before the war began in exchange for Ukrainian neutrality and a 50% reduction in the size of Ukraine's prewar active duty armed forces. Sadly, Biden, BJ and Zelensky vetoed it costing the lives of 300,000 brave Ukrainian patriots who they have inexcusably squandered since.

Expand full comment

What, specifically, have been Russia's redlines that Biden crossed? The Istanbul Agreement never had a chance, it was all a charade. Russia had to pull out of all the oblasts because they didn't have nearly enough soldiers to control such a long front line and occupy so much territory. The early stage of the war had three goals, with varying degrees of potential success. One was to decapitate the political leadership, or perhaps force a quick surrender from an overwhelming show of force. Finally, and most crucially, it pinned down Ukrainian forces all over the country and this allowed Russia to move men, artillery and armor into the Donbas, where they knew they'd be doing the bulk of the fighting. You may think Russia had minimalist goals, but, in reality, it was obvious from the beginning that there would be no negotiated settlement and Russia will take the entirety of the country.

Expand full comment

There is zero evidence for your claim that Russia had maximalist goals for Ukraine. On the day after Russia invaded, the Russian Foreign Ministry declared if Ukraine accepted neutrality, demilitarized and denazified, all Russian troops would be withdrawn to their prewar positions. The next day Zelensky happily accepted Russia's offer for negotiations along those lines declaring Ukraine could accept permanent neutrality outside of NATO. Russia invaded with only 190,000 troops when if it had mobilized 500,000 men it could have overrun and maintained control of all Ukrainian territory. Every military analyst was saying at the time that wasn't enough troops to occupy Ukraine. While its true that Russia hoped that Zelensky would be replaced with a pro-Russian leader by March 8th they had dropped that demand issuing more lenient peace terms which even Zelensky stated at the time were much more reasonable. The Istanbul Agreement was Ukraine's only hope of ensuring a full Russian military withdrawal. Once Putin issued a new peace proposal in September 2022 that deal has been forever lost just as I warned it would be in my April 2022 article.

Expand full comment

Zero evidence, except for how things turned out, you mean (speaking of zero evidence, I'd still like to hear examples of Russia enunciating "redlines")? Do you think the Russians are stupid? When do you think they realized that the West categorically refused to recognize that Russia was allowed to have any national interests at all, and, therefore, would never even enter into any negotiations, let alone make concessions? Was it after the Maidan agreement that was abandoned the next day, or maybe Minsk I, Minsk II, Istanbul, or the latest proposal before the Swiss peace summit? Yes, the Russians keep making peace proposals, and they keep getting worse for the West over time, because the Russians not only know, but are counting on all of them being rejected. There will be plenty more peace proposals, including when Russian tanks are in Lvov.

Look, I understand you mean well, and want peace, as many of us do. But if you want to know how events will develop along broad lines, then it makes sense to recognize reality for what it is. After exhausting all otherwise reasonable attempts at normal relations, the Russians have embarked on a very aggressive and ambitious path towards the West. It is engaged in a multi domain war that includes economic, diplomatic/geopolitical, social/political and, of course, kinetic elements. In order to appeal to the broader world, which is absolutely crucial, they are doing their utmost to appear reasonable, while painting the West as unreasonable war mongers, and the ones responsible for increasing escalation. To their credit, they've been effective, as intelligent and informed observers such as yourself buy into this narrative. But we shouldn't fool ourselves, the Russians are cunning and determined, and when in war mode they will just steamroll anything in their path. It's their history, it's their way.

Expand full comment