David Ignatius, The Washington Post columnist, talked to several high-level US officials about the balance of power in Ukraine. While the Russian military achievements in eastern Ukraine are raising concerns among Western allies, Biden administration officials believe the situation is stable, and Ukrainian defense remains solid. Weaponry-supply program worries multiple experts. Ignatius talked to Stephen Hadley, a former national security advisor to President George W. Bush, who thinks the administration needs to accelerate weapons deliveries to Ukraine. Pentagon officials warn that delivery would not be sufficient without training, and training takes time: the first Ukrainian US-trained MLRS team be deployed next week. Ukraine also needs ammunition – both for soviet-era artillery and for modern western M777 howitzers previously supplied by the US. US officials claim that their contractors are working triple shifts to provide a steady stockpile for Ukraine. Russia, on the other hand, has lost about 30% of its inventory, and nearly 70% of its precision-guided munitions, according to Pentagon officials. The Ukrainians aren’t winning right now, summarizes Ignatius, but they aren’t losing, either. And a lot more weapons are arriving soon.
Politico published an op-ed about the deteriorating nuclear threat by Ivo Daalder, a former US Ambassador to NATO. As Russia is threatening the world with tactical nuclear weapons in response to the successful resistance of Ukrainian military forces backed up with sophisticated Western weapons, the world is facing a lowering of the nuclear threshold. It’s not only Russia that contributes to this tendency as more worrying developments are taking place in other parts of the world. The US is in the middle of a massive nuclear modernization program, including the development of low-yield nuclear warheads; China is expanding its nuclear forces ending its policy of minimal deterrent. Britain and France are introducing their nuclear capacities as well. Pakistan and India are growing their atomic arsenals, while Iran has enough materials for a nuclear bomb. The more countries take this path, the more would have the incentive to follow. For example, Iran’s nuclear potential would increase pressure on Turkey, Saudi Arabia, and Egypt to reconsider their non-nuclear status. Unfortunately, writes Daadler, the only nuclear agreement that remains is set to expire in four years, and there is no indication of new talks aiming at stabilizing the global nuclear order.
Russia is taking over the internet in occupied Kherson, writes Wired. According to the outlet, since May 30, all internet traffic in Kherson has been routed through Putin’s powerful online censorship machine. Since the beginning of the full-scale invasion disabling the internet and infrastructure has been a standard Russian tactic, one of the tools aiming to control the information flow. The Russians are taking control of connection systems in several ways: first, the troops are physically seizing the equipment, then they order Ukrainian staff to reconfigure their networks. Russia is also trying to control mobile connections, as after banning the operation of Ukrainian cellular operators, new unnamed blank sim cards are sold in Kherson. Gaining total control of Kherson’s internet would enable Kremlin to read people’s emails, intercept text messages, and surveil other communications, writes the Wired. The limitations on what kind of information people can get would also be used as a powerful propaganda tool, signaling Russian intent to stay in Kherson for long.