Really is the best deterrent https://t.co/I6ftiaj4CQ ...

NATO counts just about everything a government lavishes on its armed forces as military expenditure. But much of what the alliance considers “core” defence does not directly boost deterrence https://t.co/SfaupGxGqh ...

Western countries are struggling to deter their adversaries, and the provocations are piling up. At the same time, allies are increasingly doubting America’s reliability https://t.co/XNRWq8zxNO ...

RT David Rennie (@DSORennie)The U.S.-led West is struggling to deter China, Russia and other powers. Allies’ dwindling trust in America is one reason, but not the only one. My column, The Telegram https://t.co/lM34bpruab ...

Why the West is finding it so hard to deter China and Russia https://t.co/eHRSsg86jd ...

To establish true deterrence against Russia in Ukraine, any European force would depend on the certainty of American support. But Donald Trump can hardly be relied on https://t.co/iNf5RsHq6Q ...

America wants its Asian allies to spend more on defence to deter an attack from China. But Donald Trump has sown doubts about his country’s commitment to its friends. What is to be done? https://t.co/tRFQEVcW7g ...

Defense Investment Plan - NATO leaders agreed on The Hague Defense Investment plan, fueling a quantum leap in collective defense [1][2] - The plan aims to boost defense industries, increasing security and creating jobs [1] Financial Commitment - Allies agreed to invest 5% of GDP in defense [3] - At least 3.5% of GDP is invested in core defense requirements [3][4] - An additional 1.5% of GDP will go towards investments supporting defense and security [4] - The 3.5% investment will fund militaries and equipment, including air defenses, ammunition, drones, and tanks [4] Strategic Focus - NATO reaffirmed unwavering support for Ukraine [1] - The alliance is ready to defend every inch of its territory, ensuring the freedom and security of 1 billion people [2] - The decisions made will profoundly impact NATO's ability to deter and defend against challenges from Russia, terrorism, cyber attacks, sabotage, or strategic competition [1][2]

these key discussions. Joining us now is Mark Esper, former Secretary of Defense. Secretary, it's great to have you back on the show and and to get your insights here.Welcome. Yeah, good afternoon, Morgan. So, that's where I want to start with you.Yes, we saw this strike, a very weak response as President Trump uh just indicated there and a response that apparently the US as well as the Qataris expected or got some sort of heads up on. Does this in fact provide an offramp uh for retaliation by Iran. I think ...

Geopolitical & Security Landscape - The US military conducted a precision operation to devastate Iran's nuclear program, emphasizing it was not targeting Iranian troops or people [1][28] - The operation, dubbed "Midnight Hammer," involved strikes against three Iranian nuclear facilities [10][15] - The US asserts that Iran must not obtain nuclear weapons and that American deterrence is back [2][3] - The US military is postured to respond swiftly and decisively to any Iranian retaliation or proxy attacks [8][22] - Public and private messages are being sent to Iran, urging them to negotiate and abandon their nuclear program [46] Military Operation Details - The operation involved B-2 stealth bombers, fourth and fifth-generation fighters, air refueling tankers, and a guided missile submarine [7][21] - Seven B-2 bombers launched from the continental US, with some proceeding to the Pacific as a decoy [12][13] - The B-2 strike included the longest B-2 Spirit bomber missions since 2001 [7] - A US submarine launched over two dozen Tomahawk land cruiser missiles against key surface infrastructure targets at Esfahan [15] - US forces employed 75 precision-guided weapons, including GBU-57 Massive Ordnance Penetrators (MOPs), marking the first use of this weapon [20] - All three Iranian nuclear infrastructure targets were struck between 6:40 PM and 7:45 PM Eastern Time (2:10 AM local time in Iran) [18] Strategic & Political Considerations - The US maintains that the operation was a focused mission on the destruction of Iranian nuclear capabilities, not regime change [28][39] - The US claims to have complied with notification requirements to congressional leaders after the planes were safely out [31] - The US acknowledges the challenges of allies in the region and has been working in collaboration with them [44] - The US states that Iran's fighters did not fly, and its missile systems did not detect the US strike package [19] - The US believes the operation will have a clear psychological impact on Iran, hoping they will pursue negotiated peace [49] Alliances & Cooperation - The US recognizes Israel's military success in degrading Iranian capabilities and acknowledges ongoing conversations and cooperation [6][41] - The US took advantage of preparatory work done in terms of access of approach, but it was a US-led strike [42]