103 Comments
User's avatar
Arent's avatar

First of all, how nice of the Russians to finally admit Ukraine is a force majeure...

Second, Rheinmetall's business plan is built upon making heavy armour, artillerie and shells. We all know that heavy armour is not obsolete, if that is the case mr. Papperger tries to make, in a rather atrogant way I would say. No, Ukrainian housewives are not playing with LEGO, they're part of an innovation chain, a result of out of the box creative thinking.

Just as logistics, project management is an overlooked skill in military innovation. The Ukrainian adaptation and innovation cycle for AI and drone warfare is unmatched.

The Ukrainians took IT engineering and project management to a different level and have succesfully integrated into military structures. It's lean and mean, PRINCE2 on steroids. It's also a skill mr. Papperger doesn't seem to grasp, nor does he see the perfect sense it makes in modern warfare. German industry is famous for it's quality and standardization. But that also takes time, loads of time and money. And it's precisely this the Ukrainians don't have. So they found another way, perhaps even better. That's not foolish, that's astounding.

Phillips P. OBrien's avatar

It is astounding, and legacy producers being dismissive of this is depressing as hell.

Norbert Bollow's avatar

“Ukraine is a force majeure”

Nicely put!

jantje's avatar

But business as usual.

😱(Closed I could find to a primal scream. on windows use windows key+.(dot) type scream in the search bar)

Laura's avatar

Love your point about project management being a critical skill. (You mean that hyper-faux-masculine chest thumping, war crime braggadocio and social media preening aren’t critical skills in strategic thinking??) Good to know!

Sid Clough's avatar

I was fortunate to spend my working life in the Uk Met Office. Sometime in the 90’s all staff at/above were sheep-dipped for a few days in PRINCE2 training along with many other technical civil servants. Even if they were only participants in a project they knew how to scope and go about a project. From then on we could watch successive governments make a pigs’ ear of anything that could or should have been turned into a project. To the extent that they were so obsessed with immigration that they didn’t even notice their real project was supposed to be running a country that was falling apart at the seams for lack of attention or skill to real economic and working issues. And the same old closet racists at the top right are still playing the same old games.

Laura's avatar
3dEdited

My husband is a retired IT project manager!

billy mccarthy's avatar

someone should notify hergset

Smackey Bare's avatar

Like the Vietnamese, Ukrainians are using what they have and inventing what they need. Hard to beat dirt and rice farmers in their own countries.

Philip MINNS's avatar

Thanks for this heartening update ! At the pace things are going,Ukraine may be invited to join NATO before it becomes a member of the EU. Trump will never endorse that of course, but by November and the mid-terms, he may be sufficiently weakened to be overridden by Congress and the other member states.

Wishful thinking ?

Phillips P. OBrien's avatar

Ukraine is never getting into NATO while Trump is president. He is a Russian agent of influence at the least. So while the update was heartening (and news is better than last year) all optimism must be tempered! ;)

Richard Burger's avatar

I think we have to acknowledge the political power that the right wing, MAGA-linked international movement has acquired. Many European nations are likely to be influenced by Russia-friendly parties. Lets just say it: Ukraine will not be joining NATO.

Ukraine should be at center of a new security structure. If Trump does us the favor of exiting NATO (he won't, his lizard brain craves the leverage over Europe) perhaps a reformed NATO could emerge in time.

P.S. Wasn't it lovely to see Netanyahu endorse Orban? Disappointing but understandable. Netanyahu, Trump and Erdogan are cut from same cloth.

Phillips P. OBrien's avatar

Indeed. Pro-Russian populists in Europe are a massive problem as well. If the USA were strong, they could probably be controlled. However Trump has freed them to be disruptive.

Windriven's avatar

Let's not discount the possible effects of bad outcomes for Putin in Ukraine and Trump in the ME - to say nothing of the 2026 elections - on the appetite of other western nations for regression to the autocratic model. These regimes exist because they have sold the idea of returning to old glories (most of which are sepia-toned half-truths). When that flames out I expect them to glide like bricks.

Meighan Corbett's avatar

"sepia-toned half truths" such excellent and elegant phrasing

Condo's avatar

At this point, why would Ukraine (or any other country) try to join NATO as long as the orange agent leads the States?

Asking for a friend

Norbert Bollow's avatar

“I think we have to acknowledge the political power that the right wing, MAGA-linked international movement has acquired.”

Yes. And think carefully and strategically both about how to work around in the short term, and how to dismantle it in the medium and long term.

Richard Burger's avatar

Yes, you've suggested a giant, painful topic. How do you ask public to sacrifice to fight Russia without handing a political win to the far right? Not easy.

Mary Ann Kmetyk's avatar

Anna Paulina Luna (R), FL invited members of the russian Duma to meet with with U.S. Congressional representatives on March 27 to discuss "peace" and economic opportunity. Those who joined the meeting were Republican Reps. Eli Crane (R-Ariz.), Derrick Van Orden (R-Wis.) and Andy Ogles (R-Tenn.), as well as Democrat Vicente Gonzalez (Texas). Rep. Joe Wilson (R-S.C.) said in a statement. “I compare this meeting on Capitol Hill as having a visit by the Third Reich.”

tRUMP's had a relationship with russia for over 40 years that Craig Unger and others have described as that of an "asset": - "you do a favor for him, he does a favor for you." Now we have members of Congress acting on behalf of russia and who knows what "favors" they will receive in return?

https://www.politico.com/news/2026/03/27/russia-lawmakers-washington-capitol-hill-00848559

https://euromaidanpress.com/2025/03/05/craig-unger-trump-wont-betray-putin-after-40-years-of-russian-money/#google_vignette

Slava Ukraini!

neroden's avatar

Gonzalez is a known crook (look his record up).

Annemiek van Moorst's avatar

It’s indeed terrible. Operation Epstein Fury. Read this of how US Is taken over by Russia https://european-security.com/en/cesspool-and-chaos-the-russian-connection-in-the-epstein-affair/

Sorry if I set you off with the Patriot missiles but we are both pro Ukraine that should prevail. I am mostly on bluesky

Annemiek van Moorst's avatar

We need an alternative to NATO with Ukraine, all reliable EU members, UK, Norway, Turkey, Australia, Canada, Japan, South Korea, New Zealand.

Without USA, Hungary and Slovakia

Ukraine is vital for any type of NATO alliance

Slava Ukraini! 🇺🇦💙💛🇺🇦💪

Smackey Bare's avatar

Maybe. Trump is unpredictable.

Meighan Corbett's avatar

I really hope you are right.

Denise Wallace's avatar

I hope Europe looks to Ukraine and really forget about Trump/USA. We might never prove Trump is a Russian asset - but he really performs like one. I am so happy Ukraine has rained on Russian oil profits. This was a great update.

Andrew Pavelyev's avatar

Some legacy systems are still extremely important. It is very hard to detect, let alone destroy a nuclear submarine, never mind cheaply. And just think what Ukraine could have done even with a single one carrying Tomahawks. For starters, it could go to the Pacific and hit Trans-Siberian railroad and/or pipelines to China, as well as sink some ships carrying shells from North Korea. And then there are stealth bombers. Even with a single one, and without even trying to fly over Russia, Ukraine could knock down the Kerch Bridge and devastate Black Sea ports.

Phillips P. OBrien's avatar

Indeed--you need some of the legacy ones. Its the idea that you can insult what is clearly an effective change in production that is so depressing. I would rather have one million drones than one thousand tanks....

Andrew Pavelyev's avatar

Of course. But given the cost of legacy systems, they will still account for the bulk of spending on procurement, especially in the air and space and on the sea. So one can see why defense contractors look down on drones. Rheinmetall should not be so complacent though since it mostly produces ground weapons, and they are much more affected by cheap drones (which cannot fly ten miles up or dive half a mile under the sea, but can easily operate on the ground or right above it).

Sid Clough's avatar

Being charitable to the legacy manufacturers (as if they deserve it) they have a huge and expensive business to sustain and wealthy customers to woo. At this point they’re probably still looking at the drone industry with horror after seeing what it’s done to the traditional model.

Andrew Pavelyev's avatar

That depends on their exact model. Manufacturers of stealth bombers are not threatened at all, as drones would have to cost at least tens of millions each to be able to deliver a big bunker buster. Manufacturers of nuclear submarines may in fact be boosted by drones, as surface ships become much more vulnerable, and advanced navies (US, UK and France) may start ordering MORE subs and fewer surface ships.

neroden's avatar

Sweden proved that they can detect nuclear subs. They're too noisy. This is why the trend is AIP.

Smackey Bare's avatar

That’s one interesting thing about Poland’s bragging about their tank fleet. The Ukrainians could wipe it out in a few months.

neroden's avatar

Armor isn't obsolete. Tank guns are obsolete, but not armor.

Mary Ann Kmetyk's avatar

Thanks for that reminder that nations do need those exquisite, expensive, and finite weapons. Combined arms in the 21st century means the right balance of the "exquisite" weapons as well as an army of aerial, naval and ground drones. Ukraine is heavy on the later, and needs much more of the former.

Slava Ukraini!

Andrew Pavelyev's avatar

Ukraine needs fifth generation fighters.

neroden's avatar

Ehhhhhhh, bad examples. AIP submarines appear to be replacing nuclear submarines for most applications. True, a nuclear sub could travel to the Pacific, but you can just do that with a cargo ship carrying containers. Take your containers to the Pacific, launch your Sea Babies from there....

Stealth bombers suffer the same problem as all manned aircraft: unmanned is better.

terwingi's avatar

Seems like the Russians have studied General Melchett: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rblfKREj50o

Phillips P. OBrien's avatar

Blackadder never gets old

Ken Festa's avatar

But...but...Trump told Zelenskyy that Ukraine didn't have any cards to play. Ukraine is doing a great job of playing cards they don't have (to paraphrase the Economist's recent quote about how well Iran is doing with the 0% of military capability they have left).

If Ukraine ever does achieve a complete victory (on hopeful days, I allow myself to think that's "when"), I have no doubt that Trump and Vance will try to take credit for setting Ukraine up for success with tough love.

Smackey Bare's avatar

Who said the hardest two weeks of a short war are the first two years?

Steve's avatar

Russia is failing to adapt its theory of victory in the face of overwhelming evidence that it is not succeeding.

By contrast, as you've described above, Ukrainian tactical success on the battlefield is self-evident, though it remains to be translated into something operationally significant it seems?

But can't be far off - it seems that more and more it seems Ukraine has the initiative on where and when to pick engagements.

Phillips P. OBrien's avatar

Indeed--the challenge Ukraine faces it being able to change the dynamic on the battlefield. Right now that does seem a long way off.

Windriven's avatar

Did you mean off the battlefield? Ukraine seems to be doing OK molding the battlefield dynamic to its relative advantage. What it needs now is political pressure to force Putin back to Moscow.

Punksta's avatar

Re: Systems Warfare

After the Baltic Oil terminals, what would be next?

Phillips P. OBrien's avatar

Pipelines and electricity generation at vital points.

Windriven's avatar

And military industrial assets.

Smackey Bare's avatar

Maybe drag some anchors along every inch of Russian shore.

Punksta's avatar

So sayeth google:

Key Recipients of Russian Energy Exports:

Crude Oil: China (47–48%) and India (37%) are the largest buyers, with Turkey (6%) and the EU (6%) also buying.

LNG and Pipeline Gas: The EU remains the largest buyer of Russian LNG (49% of total) and pipeline gas (34%). China is the second-largest in both, followed by Turkey and Japan.

Coal: China purchases 43% of Russian coal, followed by India (20%), Turkey (11%), South Korea (10%), and Taiwan (4%).

Oil Products: Turkey is the leading purchaser (27%), followed by China (13%), Brazil (11%), and Singapore (8%).

Punksta's avatar

From my armchair, pipelines sound like a nice soft target - hundreds/thousands of miles to defend, and probably vulnerable to even light-payload drones ?

And do they have the range to hit the pipelines to China ?

Key Russian Export Pipelines

TurkStream (Gas): Connects Russia to Turkey via the Black Sea, providing the primary remaining conduit for Russian pipeline gas to Europe.

Druzhba Pipeline (Oil): One of the world's longest pipelines, it carries crude oil from Russia through Belarus to Europe, though its southern branch through Ukraine serves countries like Hungary and Slovakia.

ESPO Pipeline (Oil): A major link from Eastern Siberian oil fields to China, acting as a key artery for oil exports.

Power of Siberia 1 (Gas): Transports natural gas from Siberia to China, serving as a pillar of Russia's "pivot to the East".

Nord Stream 1 & 2 (Gas): Subsea Baltic pipelines that were damaged in 2022 and are currently non-operational.

Mary Ann Kmetyk's avatar

Ukraine has been hitting defense plants, and the most recent news is Ukrainian Flamingo missiles (FP-5) struck a plant in russia that produces military explosives. Big BAVOVNA:

https://united24media.com/latest-news/ukrainian-fp-5-flamingo-missiles-hit-key-russian-explosives-plant-in-samara-region-17370

Slava Ukraini!

Kathleen Weber's avatar

AAAAAGGGHHHHH- UHH-UHH !!!!

That's how I type a Primal Scream.

Phillips P. OBrien's avatar

Will have to remember that Kathleen

Joachim Sammer's avatar

We Europeans are largely led by career politicians - who don’t have a sliver of critical and creative thinking capability see Merz et al.

Phillips P. OBrien's avatar

There does seem to be a generational problem here, thats for sure

Windriven's avatar

Amusing that the guy shaking the crap out of Russia is a former stand-up comedian.

neroden's avatar

If you haven't watched _Servant of the People_, do. It is absolutely brilliant, while also being very very funny.

Paolo Christiano's avatar

Heartening indeed! Thanks! Btw, It is said that actually there are two Russian armies, one of volunteers fighting in Ukraine and one of conscripts defending the homeland against NATO…

Phillips P. OBrien's avatar

It would be interesting to see breakdowns of why they "volunteer". Plus, from what is being said, many conscripts are being pressured into becoming volunteers.

Windriven's avatar

What this column is really about is leadership. Compare and contrast the leadership of legacy autocrats like Putin and his stepchild Trump with that of Zelenskyy, Carney, and Sanchez. The former live in the 19th century, a time of centralized power and sprawling empire, a time when god was on the side with the biggest battalions. The latter live in the present with their eyes on the future.

It is hard for me to see how this doesn't end in tragedy far greater than we face today. Both Trump and Putin are involved in unnecessary wars of choice and neither entered those wars with an exit ramp in case things went badly. Oil supplies and prices are volatile, the US has burned through shitloads of its best offensive and defensive missiles. And Xi sits on the sidelines, smirking, contemplating Taiwan just miles off his coast where nearly all of the world's most advanced semiconductors are manufactured.

What was it that Forrest Gump said? Stupid is as stupid does?

neroden's avatar

It would be soooooo stupid for Xi to attack Taiwan. He would be joining the Putin-Trump club of idiots. He might do it.

Windriven's avatar

I have been told by foreign military officers that they expect China to invade Taiwan in the 2026-2027 window unless Taiwanese domestic politics shift to allow something like the Hong Kong - China relationship. KMT Chairwoman Cheng Li-Wun is, I think, scheduled to meet with Xi next month, so who knows?

If Xi attacks I don't expect much pushback from the US. We have no mutual defense treaty with Taiwan and China has all the cards. We're pissing away our best missiles on an pointless Iran war, China is just a few hundred kilometers away with their entire logistics chain right there. We would be attempting to intervene by sea and air but neither is a good option. China has excellent anti-ship missiles and they have them in depth. Defenders have to intercept every one, China only has to get lucky once to send a multibillion dollar ship to the bottom. The quality of their air defense systems is less clear to me. But China ain't Iran so I wouldn't expect the US to be able to assert air superiority in a matter of hours or days. Xi would likely tell Donnie that if he sits on his hands the flow of semiconductors will continue. If he gets involved, all bets are off.

I'd be interested to hear why you think it would be so stupid. I agree that it would be wrong. But Xi has made it clear that reunification is a priority. I can't imagine a better time for him to do it.

Mary Ann Kmetyk's avatar

It's extraordinary to me that Ukraine has transformed itself from being a recipient of military aid to a supplier of military aid, an acknowledgement that Ukraine is the world's leader in drone technology. I was concerned that selling interceptor drones to other nations would reduce Ukraine's supply but President Zelenskyy has said on several occasions that Ukraine could increase interceptor drone production to 2,000 per day with sufficient funding. Ukraine has co-production agreements under the "Build with Ukraine" program with the U.K, Denmark, Finland and Latvia and now with the Gulf states. Another example of Ukraine taking a systems approach to solving the problem of weapons supply for a country in the midst of war:

https://www.ukrinform.net/rubric-defense/4105781-zelensky-ukraine-could-produce-2000-interceptor-drones-daily-with-sufficient-funding.html?utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email

Slava Ukraini!

billy mccarthy's avatar

ukraine is thinking smartly, the taco guy and putin has not the ability to do so

neroden's avatar

Oh, and the important point: the Gulf States are willing to pay a lot for these interceptor drones, so the *profit* on the drones which are exported will fund Ukraine's production for its own military needs.

Stephen ONeill's avatar

As always, states fight the current war with tactics and weapons from the last war. The winners adapt and innovate, those who don't...lose. Iran has taken lessons from Ukraine and is punishing the US accordingly. The loss of the AWACS plane and damage to US KC-135's at Prince Sultan AFB in Saudi Arabia are a prime example. Sound familiar? "Shock and Awe" meets "Street Fighter". For too long, the US's generals and admirals have luxuriated in their nearly one trillion dollar annual defence budget to the point where they can no longer design and build functioning warships, or reasonably priced fighter and support aircraft, or air defence systems in sufficient quantities for modern combat conditions. Fat-assed and career-oriented, they are being given a lesson in humility. The parallels to the way the US fought the Vietnam War are unmistakable. The result will be the same, but in a shorter time. Initiating a land war in or along the Strait of Hormuz will compound this ill-conceived and ego-driven conflict. A disaster here will truly make it the "Strait of Trump".

Smackey Bare's avatar

Maybe. I hope we can learn, adapt, adopt, and overcome.

Rose Mason's avatar

I read Simon Shuster's article in The Atlantic yesterday, and he gets to the heart of the matter towards the end. The same applies to US military contractors:

“The [NATO] war games served as proof of Ukraine’s potential, not only as a fighting force but also as a supplier of weapons to the rest of Europe. Eric Schmidt, a former Google CEO, has invested in Ukrainian drone manufacturers and believes that the Ukrainians could one day overtake their Western peers in the arms market. 'They will be the primary arms supplier to all of Europe,' Schmidt told the audience at a security conference in Germany last month. Ukrainian drones, he said, 'are so inexpensive; they are so battle-tested.'

Papperger, of course, sees it differently. ***The rise of cheap drones poses a direct threat to his business model. To continue winning multibillion-dollar contracts for tanks and artillery, he needs to convince his clients that these weapons will remain essential to wars of the future. Ukraine has made that a much greater challenge.”***

Michael Doyle's avatar

With Trump stabbing Ukraine in the back and siding with Putin, I hope Ukraine is receiving arms, ammunition, support, and currency from the Middle Eastern countries it is helping.