Indian Strategic Studies: 02/12/25

12 February 2025

In Bangladesh, Islamists Are Stepping up Actions Against Women

Subir Bhaumik

Islamist radicals, long considered a fringe group in Bangladesh, managed to stop two women’s football friendly matches in the north of the country in late January, raising fears of increasing Talibanization in what was until recently seen as a moderate Muslim nation anchored on liberal Bengali language-driven syncretic culture.

This comes immediately after three incidents of Islamist mobs preventing leading actresses from inaugurating showrooms and restaurants for business groups.

In late January, a women’s football friendly match in the northwestern town of Joypurhat had to be cancelled following violent protests by students from religious seminaries. The students were joined by Islamist radical activists who ransacked the venue and chased away spectators who had bought tickets to witness the matches.

Another similar match involving two women teams was postponed in the nearby town of Dinajpur a day before following a similar demonstration by angry protesters who had armed themselves with clubs.

The Current Status And Trends Of China’s Border Port Economy Development – Analysis

He Yan

Border ports serve as crucial gateways, connecting a country to the outside world and facilitating foreign exchanges and economic cooperation. Over the years, as global trade has grown and evolved, China’s border ports have also transformed. They have shifted from a traditional “channel economy” to a more dynamic, value-added, and sustainable “industrial economy”. However, geopolitical tensions and rising trade protectionism present new challenges in the current global climate. Policies like import restrictions and higher tariffs in some countries affect China’s port economy. These shifts also mean that border ports now face even greater demands for further development.

The shift in the industrial economic development of China’s border ports from the traditional “channel economy” to the “industrial economy” is reflected in many ways.

One key area of growth is in logistics and tourism. As transportation infrastructure in border cities continues to improve, both sectors have become significant and rapidly growing components of the port economy. For example, in places like Yunnan, industries such as cross-border tourism, shopping, e-commerce, and logistics are rising quickly, showing strong growth trends. At the same time, the increased convenience of cross-border logistics has facilitated the export of local specialty products, further boosting the economic development of border regions. Specifically, data from Yunnan’s entry-exit border inspection stations shows that the total number of entry and exit passengers reached 24.77 million for the year, marking a 64.5% year-on-year increase. The number of transportation vehicles (including cars, ships, planes, and trains) was 3.42 million, up by 21.6%. Notably, Kunming Changshui International Airport, the busiest airport of entry in Yunnan, saw a passenger flow of 2.97 million, a 137% increase compared to the previous year.

China hits back as Trump’s tariffs go into effect

Simone McCarthy

Beijing announced a broad package of economic measures targeting the United States on Tuesday, hitting back after US President Donald Trump imposed 10% tariffs on Chinese imports.

The fresh duties, announced by China’s Ministry of Finance, levy a 15% tax on certain types of coal and liquefied natural gas and a 10% tariff on crude oil, agricultural machinery, large-displacement cars and pickup trucks. The measures take effect on February 10.

The Ministry of Commerce and China’s customs administration also announced new export controls effective immediately on more than two dozen metal products and related technologies. Those include tungsten, a critical mineral typically used in industrial and defense applications, as well as tellurium, which can be used to make solar cells.

The ministry also said it was adding two American firms — biotech company Illumina and fashion retailer PVH Group, owner of Calvin Klein and Tommy Hilfiger — to its unreliable entities list, saying they “violated normal market trading principles.”

A Ministry of Commerce spokesperson said Tuesday that it found PVH discriminated against and interfered with the operations of Chinese companies, though the spokesperson failed to provide specifics.

How Might the United States Engage with China on AI Security Without Diffusing Technology?

Karson Elmgren

Given the transnational risks posed by AI, the safety of AI systems, wherever they are developed and deployed, is of concern to the United States. Since China develops and deploys some of the world's most advanced AI systems, engagement with this U.S. competitor is especially important.

The U.S. AI Safety Institute (AISI)—a new government body dedicated to promoting the science and technology of AI safety—is pursuing a strategy that includes the creation of a global network of similar institutions to ensure AI safety best practices are “globally adopted to the greatest extent possible.”

As with cooperation with the Soviet Union during the Cold War on permissive action links (PALs), a technology for ensuring control over nuclear weapons, the United States may again wish to keep its competitors safer to assure its own safety. The PALs case also shows how a track record of engagement between subject matter experts can be critical to enabling cooperation later. However, as with PALs, care must be taken to make sure that in helping make Chinese AI safer, the United States does not also help it advance its AI capabilities. For this purpose, the safer bet may be avoiding cooperation on technical matters and focusing instead on topics such as risk management protocols or incident reporting.

Why the U.S. Has a Better Hand Than China in the Great Power Game | Opinion

Joseph S. Nye, Jr.

President Donald Trump describes China as the greatest external threat to American power. It is the world's largest manufacturing country, and the leading trade partner with more countries than is the United States. China is increasing its military budget, modernizing its forces in Asia, and increasing its nuclear arsenal. Now, it seems to be closing the gap in artificial intelligence. The Pentagon describes China as "the pacing challenge."

A serious strategy must neither underestimate nor overestimate a long-term threat. America has many problems, but overall, in the long-term competition, I would rather be playing the American rather than the Chinese hand. Imagine an entity from Mars visits Earth and sees two great powers locked in a strategic poker game. Using its x-ray vision to look into the hands of the two players, which would it bet to be ahead in 2040? Seeing that the U.S. holds seven higher-power cards in this game, it would bet on America.

One American ace is geography. While some argue that geography no longer matters in a borderless internet world, it remains important that the U.S. is surrounded by two large oceans and two friendly neighbors, while China has border disputes with half of its 14 neighbors, including India, which has now surpassed China in population.

China’s Trump Strategy

Yun Sun

In the months since Donald Trump won the U.S. presidential election in November, policymakers in Beijing have been looking to the next four years of U.S.-Chinese relations with trepidation. Beijing has been expecting the Trump administration to pursue tough policies toward China, potentially escalating the two countries’ trade war, tech war, and confrontation over Taiwan. The prevailing wisdom is that China must prepare for storms ahead in its dealings with the United States.

Trump’s imposition of ten percent tariffs on all Chinese goods this week seemed to justify those worries. China retaliated swiftly, announcing its own tariffs on certain U.S. goods, as well as restrictions on exports of critical minerals and an antimonopoly investigation into the U.S.-based company Google. But even though Beijing has such tools at its disposal, its ability to outmaneuver Washington in a tit-for-tat exchange is limited by the United States’ relative power and large trade deficit with China. Chinese policymakers, aware of the problem, have been planning more than trade war tactics. Since Trump’s first term, they have been adapting their approach to the United States, and they have spent the past three months further developing their strategy to anticipate, counter, and minimize the damage of Trump’s volatile policymaking. As a result of that planning, a broad effort to shore up China’s domestic economy and foreign relations has been quietly underway.

USAID Workforce Slashed From 10,000 to Under 300 as Elon Musk’s DOGE Decimates Agency

Kate Knibbs

Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) has gutted the United States Agency for International Development (USAID), taking a team of over 10,000 down to just under 300, according to an internal email viewed by WIRED and several current USAID employees.

The move leaves only 12 people in the agency’s Africa bureau and eight people in its Asia bureau, with around 290 overall. There will be some additional foreign workers retained, two USAID employees tell WIRED, but it is unclear how many.

“There are more impoverished people in Asia than anywhere else, and our presence has always helped counter the influence of China,” says one USAID employee, who was granted anonymity due to fears of retaliation and because they were not authorized to speak publicly about the agency.

On Tuesday, USAID workers received an email noting that all personnel would be put on an administrative leave starting Friday, February 7, with the exception of “designated personnel responsible for mission-critical functions.” The notice was published on the agency’s website shortly thereafter. It also specified that the agency’s workers stationed abroad would be recalled back to the United States.

Every President Has a Foreign Policy. Trump Has Five.

Hal Brands

President Donald Trump has come out firing, with a fusillade of policy actions and executive orders meant to reshape America’s approach to the world. In doing so, Trump has also made clear that this is his administration: No “axis of adults” will thwart his plans this time around.

But if loyalty is the watchword of Trump’s second administration, there are still profound intellectual debates within the government and political movement he leads. Trump’s foreign policy will be shaped by how he adjudicates a contest of ideas — and some brutal bureaucratic combat —among five key schools of thought.

Every presidency is an intellectual mélange, because every administration brings a range of perspectives to bear. Policy is ultimately made by the president. But internal debates matter because they shape the options that are presented, and because the often reflect the ambiguities within a leader’s own worldview.

The fights within Trump’s administration will, if anything, be more important than usual, because this president is so often influenced by the last person he sees — and because the gaps between contending factions are so profound.

Elon Musk and his DOGE: Fixing government or dismantling the Constitution?

Simon Montlake , Caitlin Babcock & Story Hinckley

As an investor, Elon Musk embraced the idea that business turnarounds require fast, drastic, and disruptive measures. Now he’s applying the same playbook to the country’s largest employer, the federal government, by seizing control of its payments system and its overseas aid department – and pushing aside civil servants who raise legal and ethical objections.

In doing so, Mr. Musk, the billionaire head of a newly minted Department of Government Efficiency, or DOGE, appears to be carrying out the mission of President Donald Trump, who has vowed to cut waste and fraud in Washington.

To President Trump’s supporters, the Silicon Valley ethos that Mr. Musk brings to overhauling taxpayer-funded institutions is why he’s needed in Washington, where a permanent political class has proved unwilling or unable to prune a bloated bureaucracy. Previous presidents, like Ronald Reagan, who vowed to pursue smaller government all failed. Mr. Reagan himself quipped in 1964, “a government bureau is the nearest thing to eternal life we’ll ever see on this earth.”

A World Safe for Prosperity

Geoffrey Gertz and Emily Kilcrease

U.S. President Donald Trump jolted the global economy this past weekend when he announced sweeping tariffs on Canada, China, and Mexico, the United States’ three largest trading partners. Although most of these levies were ultimately delayed after a frantic few days of negotiations, Trump’s actions confirmed what his campaign rhetoric had led observers to believe: that tariffs, whether implemented or threatened, will be central to his foreign policy. The moves sparked outcry from industry leaders and economists, who cited the risks of crippled supply chains and higher prices for American consumers and companies. It was a strategic misstep

U.S. soft power took decades to build. Trump is dismantling it in weeks - Opinion

Max Boot

Political scientist Joseph Nye coined the term “soft power” in 1990 to denote “the ability to affect others by attraction and persuasion rather than just coercion and payment.” Long before this capability had a name, it was a key part of America’s power projection: Soft power helps to explain why the United States has military bases in at least 80 countries, why the dollar has become the international reserve currency, and why English has become the global language of business and diplomacy.

China and Russia are also powerful militarily, and China is an economic superpower, but they don’t exercise anywhere close to the global influence that the United States does. That’s because the United States has been a uniquely beneficent superpower. America has committed its share of crimes and blunders, to be sure, but it also has a long history of altruism (think of the Marshall Plan or PEPFAR, the President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief). The United States has also long stood as a beacon of hope to millions “yearning to breathe free,” and it has generally supported international norms and institutions that, to some extent, constrain its own power.

While America’s soft power took decades to accumulate, President Donald Trump appears determined to destroy it in a matter of weeks. Witness the trade war he launched this past weekend with Canada and Mexico (before pausing the tariffs for a month on Monday), the freeze he just imposed on U.S. foreign aid programs and the heartless decision he just reached that could send hundreds of thousands of Venezuelan refugees back to the Marxist dictatorship they fled. Each of these moves amounts to another nail in the coffin of U.S. soft power.

Will DeepSeek Upend US Tech Dominance?

ANGELA HUYUE ZHANG

In 1957, the Soviet Union launched the world’s first artificial satellite into orbit, sparking fears in the United States that, unless it took radical action to accelerate innovation, its Cold War adversary would leave it in the technological dust. Now, the Chinese startup DeepSeek has built an artificial intelligence model that it claims can outperform industry-leading American competitors, at a fraction of the cost, leading some commentators to proclaim that another “Sputnik moment” has arrived.

But the focus on the US-China geopolitical rivalry misses the point. Rather than viewing DeepSeek as a stand-in for China, and established industry leaders (such as OpenAI, Meta, and Anthropic) as representatives of the US, we should see this as a case of an ingenious startup emerging to challenge oligopolistic incumbents – a dynamic that is typically welcomed in open markets.

DeepSeek has proved that software ingenuity can compensate, at least partly, for hardware deficiencies. Its achievement raises an uncomfortable question: Why haven’t leading US industry leaders achieved similar breakthroughs? Nobel laureate economist Daron Acemoglu points the finger at groupthink, which he says prevented Silicon Valley incumbents from adequately considering alternative approaches. He might have a point, but it is only half the story.

Trump Links Further Ukraine Military Assistance In Exchange For Rare Earth Minerals – Analysis

Can Kasapoğlu

1. Ukraine’s Critical Mineral Resources Could Contribute to Battlefield Success

President Donald Trump said he is interested in a deal to provide Ukraine further military assistance in exchange for rare earth minerals and other critical resources. The president’s remarks may be a roadmap for Ukraine to increase its military capacity while providing the United States with geopolitically important resources. A substantial amount of Ukraine’s rare earth riches lie in Russian-occupied territory. But Kyiv-controlled territories still hold valuable resources.

Ukraine is one of the world’s largest potential sources of rare-earth deposits (see map here via the Ukrainian Geological Survey). It has many substances on the US Geological Survey’s list of critical minerals, including beryllium (aerospace, military, and nuclear applications), lithium (batteries, glass, and ceramics), and gallium (semiconductors). The country also has reserves of titanium, manganese, graphite, zirconium, nickel, apatite, and fluorite. With 20,000 deposits of 117 distinct minerals, the country could provide 5 percent of the world’s rare earths.

Don’t Believe What Trump Says About Gaza

Harrison Kass

President Donald Trump’s suggestion that the United States “take over” the Gaza Strip has raised questions over the future of the Israeli-Palestine conflict and America’s involvement in the region. The suggestion, made at the White House in the presence of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, conflicts with Trump’s campaign promise of avoiding foreign interventions and ending forever wars. Yet the sincerity of the suggestion deserves scrutiny, given Trump’s tendency to speak off the cuff.

What Trump Said

What Trump said has profound implications, so the precise quote is worth examining: “The U.S. will take over the Gaza Strip and we will do a job with it, too. We’ll own it and be responsible for dismantling all of the dangerous unexploded bombs and other weapons on the site. Level the site and get rid of the destroyed buildings. Level it out. Create an economic development that will supply [an] unlimited number of jobs and housing for the people of the area.”

When a reporter asked Trump whether he intended for the US to permanently occupy Gaza Trump answered: “I do see a long-term ownership position, and I see it bringing great stability to that part of the Middle East, and maybe the entire Middle East.”

The Implications of Russia’s New Nuclear Doctrine

Mark B. Schneider

In 2024, Russia published a new version of its nuclear doctrine entitled “Basic Principles of State Policy on Nuclear Deterrence.” It was universally recognized that Russia had lowered its nuclear weapons use threshold.[1] This is very significant because even before this new doctrine was made public, Russia already had the lowest threshold for nuclear weapons use in the world.

Some (but not all) of the “new” elements of the 2024 doctrine probably are from the earlier classified versions. A full depiction of Russia’s nuclear doctrine has never been made public. Moreover, statements by Russian officials and generals frequently go beyond the published doctrine, particularly with respect to Russian plans for preemptive or preventive nuclear strikes. For example, in 2009, Lieutenant General Andrey Shvaychenko, then-Commander of the Strategic Missile Forces, outlined the role of the nuclear ICBM force in conventional war. He said, “In a conventional war, [the nuclear ICBMs] ensure that the opponent is forced to cease hostilities, on advantageous conditions for Russia, by means of single or multiple preventive strikes against the aggressors’ most important facilities.”[2] In 2014, General of the Army Yuriy Baluyevskiy, former Chief of the Russian General Staff and Deputy Secretary of the Russian National Security Council, stated that “…conditions for pre-emptive nuclear strikes…is contained in classified policy documents.”[3] According to state-run TASS, there are “…completely new updates in the [2024] doctrine, which also has the confidential part where the situations for the use of nuclear weapons are described in detail.”[4]

Ukraine’s Rare Earth and Realpolitik

Charlton Allen

For years, American foreign aid has followed a simple, unquestioned rule: the United States gives, and a motley assortment of allies and opportunistic nation-states take. Aside from vague diplomatic assurances, billions in taxpayer dollars flow overseas with little expectation of return. Nowhere has this been more evident than in Ukraine.

The Biden White House poured billions upon billions into military, economic, and humanitarian aid without securing tangible benefits for American industry or security. Yet despite this massive commitment, there is little clarity on how much has actually reached Ukraine—or how effectively it has been used.

President Donald Trump has shattered this framework. Instead of continuing the blank-check approach, he has tied future U.S. support for Ukraine to something concrete: access to Ukraine’s untapped reserves of rare earth elements and its vast known deposits of other critical minerals—resources vital to national defense, high-tech industries, and the foundation of modern American life.

This isn’t just a policy shift on Ukraine—it indicates a fundamental rethinking of how America engages with allies and strategic partners. For President Trump, U.S. foreign and economic policy are intertwined, and both must serve American interests first and foremost. American assistance to an ally or would-be ally is not a right; it must be earned and reciprocal.

Does globalisation have a future?

Joseph S Nye Jr

As wildfires raged through Los Angeles in January, the infamous American conspiracy theorist Alex Jones posted on X (formerly Twitter) that they were ‘part of a larger globalist plot to wage economic warfare & deindustrialize the [United] States’.

While Jones’s suggestion of causality was absurd, he was right that the fires had something to do with globalisation. Last year was Earth’s hottest since recordkeeping began—and likely the hottest in at least 125,000 years—eclipsing the record set in 2023. For the first time, global average temperatures exceeded the Paris climate agreement’s target of 1.5 degrees C above preindustrial levels. For this, scientists overwhelmingly blame human-caused climate change.

Globalisation refers simply to interdependence at intercontinental distances. Trade among European countries reflects regional interdependence, whereas European trade with the US or China reflects globalisation. By threatening China with tariffs, US President Donald Trump is trying to reduce the economic aspect of our global interdependence, which he blames for the loss of domestic industries and jobs.

Pax Technica Is Over - Analysis

Olena Tregub and Marc R. DeVore

For almost as long as it has been fighting its war against Ukraine, Russia has received help from its friends. In September 2022, Russia began using Iranian one-way attack drones; last May, it began using North Korean missiles to strike Ukrainian power stations, apartments, and military targets.

That an expansionist, revisionist Russia is violating international agreements—including United Nations sanctions—by importing weapons from two rogue states should give the world cause for alarm. Worse, however, is what the debris from North Korean, Iranian, and Russian missiles has revealed: They are filled with newly produced Western electronics.

The Indo-Pacific: What You Need to Know Now

As the United States navigates a pivotal leadership transition, the Indo-Pacific region stands at the forefront of global strategic interests. The region is home to an uncertain mix of political disquiet, military peril, and economic potential, with issues like North Korea's nuclear ambitions, China's assertive territorial claims, and the delicate balance of power involving Taiwan shaping the narrative. All this makes the Indo-Pacific a crucial arena for U.S. foreign policy and the alliances and partnerships that will influence global trade and security frameworks moving forward.

We asked a team of RAND researchers with deep expertise on the various countries that make up the Indo-Pacific to assess the issues, objectives, and outlook for the region at this critical moment.

Jeffrey Hornung highlights Japan's focus on maintaining U.S. commitments amid regional security concerns.
Miyeon Oh discusses the Korean Peninsula's security challenges, balancing U.S. alliances with economic ties to China.
Samuel Charap addresses Russia's shifting priorities post–Ukraine conflict, emphasizing its ties with China.
Raymond Kuo outlines Taiwan's goals to enhance U.S. relations and defense capabilities.
Jude Blanchette examines China's strategic maneuvers and its hopes for an enduring “honeymoon” in U.S.-China relations.

Through objective research and expert analyses, RAND contributes to better understanding of the Indo-Pacific's geopolitical landscape, offering invaluable guidance during this critical period of U.S. leadership transition.

The End of ‘Palestine’

Lee Smith

Yesterday, President Donald Trump single-handedly collapsed the most destructive idea of the last hundred years—Palestine. During meetings with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and other Israeli officials, Trump said he was going to move 1.7 million Palestinians out of Gaza. And just like that, he broke the long spell that had captured generations of world leaders, peace activists, and Middle East terror masters alike, who had paradoxically come to regard the repeated failure and haunting secondary consequences of the idea of joint Arab Muslim and Jewish statehood in the same small piece of land as proof of its necessity.

Palestine was a misshapen idea from the beginning, engendered by an act of pure negation. The Arabs could have gone along with the U.N.’s partition plan like the Jews did, and chosen to build whatever version of Switzerland or Belgium on the eastern Med in 1948. Instead, they resoundingly chose war. That’s the storied “Nakba” at the core of the Palestinian legend—the catastrophe that drove the Arabs from their land and hung a key around the neck of a nation waiting to go home. The Arabs chose the catastrophe; they chose war, based on the premise that they would inevitably win and exterminate the Jews.

Trump’s Wild Plan for Gaza

Jonathan Lemire

President Donald Trump, who campaigned on a promise to put America first, just proposed the wildest and most improbable intervention by the United States in overseas affairs since the invasion and occupation of Iraq, more than 20 years ago.

At a joint press conference with the Israeli prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, Trump promised that the U.S. would become the occupier of Gaza.

“The U.S. will take over the Gaza Strip and we’ll do a job with it, too. We’ll own it,” Trump said. “I do see a long-term ownership position, and I see it bringing great stability to that part of the Middle East, and maybe the entire Middle East.” Trump suggested that U.S. troops would be used, if needed, to implement his vision for Gaza.

He presented this idea, one never before suggested by a U.S. president or Middle East peace negotiator, as a way to end generations of conflict between Israel and the Palestinians and, also, as a bonus, an opportunity to create sweet real-estate development opportunities. The idea was breathtaking in its audacity, and it would be fair to say that its implementation would run into myriad obstacles at home and abroad, except that the overwhelming likelihood is that the U.S. would never come near implementing this notion.

War of attrition strains Ukraine’s army

Veronika Melkozerova

Anastasia, a Ukrainian combat medic, volunteered to join the army in 2022. She had no military or medical experience but wanted to help wounded Ukrainian soldiers in rear hospitals and planned to stay far from combat.

Last fall, while on medical leave, she discovered that army command had transferred her to one of the hottest spots of Russia’s war against Ukraine, near Kurakhove in the eastern Donetsk region.

“I did not even have basic military training by the time I arrived. My former command forged my documents,” said Anastasia, who asked to be identified only by her first name. Military officials denied that such a thing could happen.

Anastasia said her new comrades are helping her adapt: “Already in this new brigade, drivers [have] taught me how to assemble a gun and [have] helped me a lot.”

Her story is being repeated across Ukraine as the country’s military struggles to fill personnel shortages caused by the fight against Russia’s relentless — slow but bloody — advance in eastern Ukraine.

Irony: Might Trump become Ukraine’s liberator?

Mark Toth and Jonathan Sweet

In February 2023, Russian President Vladimir Putin was facing a choice: He could either be the Don of the Donbas and bag its riches, or he could become the Czar of Crimea and militarily dominate the Black Sea.

So far, Putin has failed to do either. Although his armies continue to make incremental gains in Eastern Ukraine, the Donbas region is far from secure. And the Russian Black Sea Fleet has been forced to flee its ports in Crimea and the Sea of Azov.

Putin may face an added problem. President Trump may be preparing to deny him both by setting himself up as the unlikely liberator of Ukraine.

History, occasionally, likes its plot twists.

On Monday, Trump indicated that he wants to strike a $300 billion deal with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, declaring “We’re looking to do a deal with Ukraine where they’re going to secure what we’re giving them with their rare earths and other things.”

Notably, by late Monday evening, Reuters reported that the U.S. had resumed military equipment and ammunition shipments to Ukraine. Thus far, no new military aid packages have been announced. However, it is significant that Trump, at least for now, is willing to continue backstopping the armed forces of Ukraine.

The Crisis in Western AI Is Real

CHARLES FERGUSON

The release of the Chinese DeepSeek-R1 large language model, with its impressive capabilities and low development cost, shocked financial markets and led to claims of a “Sputnik moment” in artificial intelligence. But a powerful, innovative Chinese model achieving parity with US products should come as no surprise. It is the predictable result of a major US and Western policy failure, for which the AI industry itself bears much of the blame.

Unprepared in the City: Operational Planning for Urban Environments

Brandon Schwartz

On February 24, 2022, Russian forces air assaulted into the Antonov Airport near Kyiv while a large ground force attacked from the north. In the end, the air assault failed but Russian troops pushed their way to Irpin, a suburb of Kyiv. There they clashed in a monthlong battle with Ukrainian forces, grinding the city to a pulp. Since then, the Russians and Ukrainians have fought in numerous large-scale urban battles, including in Bakhmut, Mariupol, Izium, Kharkiv, and Toretsk.

A year and a half after Russia’s invasion and about 1,200 miles south, Israel responded to Hamas’s surprise attack on October 7, 2023, by deploying three divisions into the heavily urbanized terrain of the Gaza territory, battling upwards of thirty thousand enemy fighters. The campaign in Gaza gained worldwide notoriety for its urban complications and remained a multidivision mission for over half a year.

Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)