The war in Ukraine has been defined by periodic bursts of certainty that Russia is on the back foot, if not close to collapse, and that Ukraine, conversely, is inches away from victory. We appear to be in the middle of one of these moments of euphoria now. Finnish President Alexander Stubb has declared that Ukraine is “on top” and “in a much better place than it has been at any stage in this horrific war,” charging that Russia is unable to recruit enough soldiers to make up for those it’s losing. Ukrainians have “a growing self-confidence” on account of the territory they have supposedly retaken, as one former U.S. ambassador put it, and their growing confidence over military advances “is strikingly higher today than a year ago,” charged another. A spate of reports have it that the walls are closing in on Russian President Vladimir Putin. A Ukrainian military breakthrough is imminent, in other words, and Ukraine’s population remains committed to endless fighting. But this is hard to square with Ukraine’s growing recruitment crisis, most viscerally embodied by the growing violent resistance to its policy of forced conscription.

For years now, videos have circulated of ordinary Ukrainians being “recruited” for military service — or, put more bluntly, being snatched by sometimes masked men from the streets or their homes, and dragged into a minivan to be driven away. It is part of a war mobilization effort that has been wracked with controversy, including a series of bribery scandals going back years, widespread allegations of abuse, and the drafting of mentally and physically disabled men. Unsurprisingly, forced conscription has been unpopular. A petition calling for the end of mobilization in public places quickly passed the 25,000-signature threshold for a presidential response. Before long, recruitment officers started facing angry protests from local communities. Last year, Ukraine’s Human Rights Ombudsman Dmytro Lubinets publicly labeled it a “coercive system” and revealed that complaints against enlistment officers with the Territorial Recruitment Centers (TRC) had exploded more than 33,000% since the start of the war — from just 18 in 2022 to more than 6,000 in 2025. As the war has gone on, civil disobedience against conscription practices has turned increasingly violent. The year 2025 was bookended by killings of draft officers. At the close of January, a man showed up at a military training center and shot dead a TRC officer who had “recruited” an acquaintance of his. In December, a draft officer was fatally stabbed in the groin by a man whose papers he asked to see, and who went on to attack three other officers before fleeing.

As the Kyiv Independent, hardly an antiwar outlet, noted in its report on the stabbing, videos of violent “recruitment” practices were “initially dismissed as an exaggeration fuelled by Russian disinformation networks,” but were in reality widespread thanks to Ukraine’s manpower shortage and a sharp drop in voluntary enlistment. December also saw a group of people attack TRC officers trying to check their papers, leaving one with a broken rib. The violence has only escalated this year. The end of this past January saw a man kill a draft officer and escape with one of the conscripts he was escorting. February saw at least two separate attacks on TRC officers in Kharkiv and in the Lviv Oblast, with the latter suspected by police of trying to help a conscript escape. A month later, a group ran a minivan driven by recruiters off the road and broke in to free the conscript they were transporting. The first week of April saw three stabbings in four days, including a recruiter pierced in the neck by a customs officer whose brother he and his colleagues allegedly tried to forcibly mobilize. A few days later, a group of teenagers attacked TRC officers to protect a man they were trying to conscript, and the month ended with a 48-year-old soldier going AWOL and firing an automatic weapon at a car that TRC officers and a policeman were in, sending two to the hospital. Only a few days ago, an alleged draft-dodger sent two more recruiters to the hospital in serious condition, stabbing them after they tried to check his papers.

According to government figures, these incidents are just a handful of more than 600 attacks on enlistment officers carried out since the start of the war, with the number of assaults nearly tripling from 2024 to 2025, when 341 were recorded. The first four months of 2026 alone have seen at least 117 attacks, more than 20 times the five that were recorded in the war’s entire first year. How, then, does this square with polling that has tended to show, even recently, a Ukrainian population willing to fight indefinitely until military victory?

“Almost all of those polls are exclusively in the territory under the control of the Ukrainian government,” says Volodymyr Ishchenko, research associate at the Institute of East European Studies, Freie Universität Berlin. “That means they don’t poll Ukrainians in Crimea, in Donbas, in the occupied territories, in the EU, or Ukrainians who went to Russia as refugees, and there are millions of them.” “So up to one third of the total population of those who carry Ukrainian passports are not even polled,” Ishchenko adds. Other metrics point to a silent reluctance to fight. Ukraine’s own defense minister revealed this year that there were 2 million draft dodgers and 200,000 cases of desertion. While voluntary enlistment drove the war’s early months, conscription is now responsible for 70% of recruitment. Ukrainian nationals who fled to Europe at the start of the war have resisted European efforts to send them back, in some cases to be drafted at the Ukrainian government’s request. While affluent Ukrainians are able to bribe their way out of being conscripted, the commander of Ukraine’s National Guard has urged those who “have money problems” to join the military. According to one analysis of Ukrainian casualty figures, the vast majority of those killed in action come disproportionately from small towns, where poverty rates tended to be higher.

What’s at stake is more than whether Ukraine wins or loses. The prolongation of the war has created and intensified a severe economic and demographic crisis for Ukraine that threatens its future as a stable and functioning state. Last week, the head of Ukraine’s Office of Migration Policy estimated that 70% of those abroad may not return to the country, threatening labor shortages in critical sectors. The Ukrainian state, which already is kept afloat through massive loans from Europe, owes an unsustainable debt worth many billions of euros to the families of dead soldiers, whose numbers have ballooned. Much of this is unknown to Western publics. English-language reports about violent resistance to conscription are dwarfed by stories claiming Russia is faltering. Some Ukrainian-language reports about the country’s recruitment and demographic crises are simply never translated to English. And so, those who most ardently back Ukraine unwittingly cheer policies that ensure its gradual destruction.

The U.S. military has depleted much of its inventory of advanced missile-defense interceptors after expending far more high-end munitions defending Israel amid hostilities with Iran than Israeli forces used themselves, according to Defense Department assessments described to The Washington Post. The imbalance, according to three U.S. officials who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive security matters, underscores the extent to which Washington has shouldered the burden of countering Iranian ballistic missile strikes during Operation Epic Fury, and raises questions about U.S. military readiness and security commitments around the world. The United States launched more than 200 Terminal High Altitude Area Defense, or THAAD, interceptors in defense of Israel — roughly half of the Pentagon’s total inventory — along with more than 100 Standard Missile-3 and Standard Missile-6 interceptors fired from naval vessels in the eastern Mediterranean, said the U.S. officials, who, like others in this article, spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive security matters. By contrast, Israel fired fewer than 100 of its Arrow interceptors and around 90 David’s Sling interceptors, some of which were used against less sophisticated projectiles fired by Iran-backed groups in Yemen and Lebanon.

Military analysts said the data described to The Post offers a rare window into how the United States and Israel work together. “The numbers are striking,” said Kelly Grieco, a senior fellow at the Stimson Center. “The United States absorbed most of the missile defense mission while Israel conserved its own magazines. Even if the operational logic was sound, the United States is left with roughly 200 THAAD interceptors and a production line that can’t keep pace with demand.” The shortage of U.S. interceptors has alarmed U.S. allies in Asia, particularly Japan and South Korea, which rely on the United States as a deterrent to potential threats from North Korea and China.

get fucked compradors, maybe you should've been vassals to a country that actually fucking makes things

“That bill risks coming due in theaters that have nothing to do with Iran,” said Grieco.

yeah, that's, uh, kind of how imperial overextension works

U.S. and Israeli officials routinely tout their close cooperation and the strength of Israel’s multilayered air-defense system. But the Defense Department assessments suggest a more lopsided dynamic. “In total, the U.S. shot around 120 more interceptors and engaged twice as many Iranian missiles,” said a U.S. administration official. If the United States and Israel resume hostilities against Iran in the coming days, as President Donald Trump has threatened to do, the U.S. military is likely to expend an even greater share of interceptors because of a recent decision by the Israeli military to take some of its missile defense batteries offline for maintenance, said an administration official. “The imbalance will likely be exacerbated if fighting restarts,” the official said.

In a statement, the Pentagon defended the balance of military resources used between Israel and the United States. “Ballistic missile interceptors are just one tool in a vast network of systems and capabilities that comprise a layered and integrated air defense network,” said Sean Parnell, the Pentagon’s chief spokesman. “Both Israel and the United States carried the defensive burden equitably during Operation Epic Fury, which saw both countries employ fighter aircraft, counter-UAS systems, and various other advanced air and missile defense capabilities with maximal effectiveness.” The Israeli government also defended the approach. “Operations Roaring Lion and Epic Fury were coordinated at the highest and closest levels, to the benefit of both countries and their allies,” the Israeli Embassy in Washington said in a statement. “The U.S. has no other partner with the military willingness, readiness, shared interests, and capabilities of Israel.”

capabilities such as "sending a bunch of our lieutenant generals (all 19 years old btw) to stand out in the open and, to everyone's shock, get droned"

Since the start of the conflict on Feb. 28, the U.S. and Israel have worked together closely, killing Iran’s supreme leader and scores of senior Iranian military and political leaders while laying waste to Iran’s navy and air force. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was central to persuading Trump to go to war, promising an offensive that would inspire regime change and rid the country of its ability to develop a nuclear weapon, said U.S. officials. But tensions have grown between the two allies as the war has proven more challenging than either leader anticipated. Iran’s closure of the Strait of Hormuz has choked global energy supplies and ramped up inflation. |Despite Trump’s claims that Iran’s missile arsenal has been “mostly decimated,” Tehran retains about 70 percent of its prewar stockpiles of missiles, according to U.S. intelligence. Much of Iran’s highly enriched uranium probably remains in the nuclear facilities bombed by the U.S. and Israel last year. On Tuesday, Netanyahu and Trump held a tense phone call about the path forward, said U.S. and Middle Eastern officials. The Israeli leader’s persistent pressure to restart the war has irritated some U.S. officials, particularly given the strain that renewed fighting would impose on the Pentagon’s munitions supply.

and are these "irritated" officials going to actually fucking do something about it?

“Israel is not capable of fighting and winning wars on its own, but nobody actually knows this, because they never see the back end,” said a second administration official. It’s unclear whether the United States’ munitions shortages factor into Trump’s deliberations over restarting the war. Earlier this week, Trump said he called off an imminent military strike on Iran at the behest of America’s Arab allies who urged him to consider a peace deal with Iran that would restrict its nuclear program in exchange for reopening the Strait of Hormuz and ending the war. “We’re in the final stages of Iran. We’ll see what happens,” Trump told reporters on Wednesday. “We’ll either have a deal, or we’re going to do some things that are a little bit nasty.” In preparation for a potential resumption of hostilities, the United States moved more naval assets near Israel to provide additional protection from Iranian threats.

If fighting does resume, the extent to which Iran’s allies in the region may join in will be a significant factor, said U.S. officials. During the last round of fighting, Israel could generate only 50 percent of the airstrikes by the end of March compared with the beginning of the war because its aircraft and pilots were “worn down” by operations against Houthi militants in Yemen and airstrikes targeting Hezbollah in Lebanon, said a U.S. official. “The sortie degradation is important,” said Grieco. “The IDF was worn down by Gaza, Lebanon, and the question I have is whether Israeli commanders underestimated their ability to sustain operational tempo.”

lol. lmao. can't even sustain a month of bombing without losing half of your fucking capability to just maintenance and stress.

Given that Israel uses a lot of the same planes that the US does, I feel like it's not unrealistic to assume the US itself also suffered similar degradation in their sortie rates, probably somewhat less since the US hat more planes in total at least. Now imagine what would happen in a war against China, against a far more capable air defense network, and with US bases getting even greater quantities of missiles and drones thrown at 'em.

According to officials, the two countries agreed in advance to a ballistic missile-defense framework that effectively ensured that high-end interceptors such as THAAD and ship-based missiles would absorb the bulk of ballistic threats to Israel. Israel relies more heavily on lower-tier systems such as Iron Dome and David’s Sling to counter projectiles from groups such as Hezbollah and the Houthis, while conserving its more sophisticated interceptors. The result, officials said, was a “significant” drawdown of U.S. stockpiles while Israel was able to maintain its higher-end air defense stockpiles. The dynamic seemed to clash with Trump’s “America First,” mantra, said Justin Logan, director of defense and foreign policy studies at the libertarian CATO Institute. “Since Trump took office again, Israel’s position makes sense: our priorities first, our resources last,” he said. “Why Trump has tried to make this America First is less clear.” After the Pentagon last year reportedly disclosed having only 25 percent of the Patriot air defense inventory needed to fulfill existing U.S. defense plans, it should’ve been a wake up call, said Logan. “Why this wasn’t a screeching siren to Trump officials is a mystery,” he said.

The rebuilding of military capabilities, including replacing missile sites, launchers and production capacity for key weapons systems destroyed during the current conflict, means that Iran remains a significant threat to regional allies should President Donald Trump restart the bombing campaign, according to the four sources familiar with the intelligence. It also calls into question claims about the extent to which US-Israeli strikes have degraded Iran’s military in the long term. While the time to restart production of different weapons components varies, some US intelligence estimates indicate Iran could fully reconstitute its drone attack capability in as soon as six months, one of the sources, a US official, told CNN. “The Iranians have exceeded all timelines the IC [intelligence community] had for reconstitution,” the US official said.

Drone attacks are a particular concern for regional allies. If hostilities resume, Iran could augment its missile production capability — which has been significantly degraded — with more drone launches, to continue firing at Israel and Gulf countries that are well within range of both weapons systems. Trump has repeatedly threatened to resume combat operations against Iran if the two countries fail to reach a deal to end the war, including saying publicly on Tuesday that he’d been an hour from restarting bombing, meaning these military capabilities could come into play. Iran has been able to rebuild much faster than expected due to a combination of factors, ranging from support it is receiving from Russia and China to the fact that the US and Israel did not inflict as much damage as the two countries had hoped, one of the sources told CNN.

love how "the Iranians actually, y'know, have a lot industry" doesn't enter the discussion at all, always the same shit with westerners...

For example, China has continued to provide Iran with components during the conflict that can be used to build missiles, two sources familiar with US intelligence assessments told CNN, though that has likely been curtailed by the ongoing US blockade. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu told CBS last week that China is giving Iran “components of missile manufacturing” but declined to elaborate further. Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson Guo Jiakun denied the allegation during a press conference, calling it “not based on facts.” Meanwhile, Iran also still maintains ballistic-missile, drone-attack and anti-air capability despite the serious damage inflicted by US-Israeli strikes, according to recent US intelligence assessments, meaning the quick rebuilding of military production capacity isn’t starting from scratch. A spokesperson for US Central Command declined to comment, saying the command does not discuss matters related to intelligence.

Chief Pentagon spokesman Sean Parnell told CNN in a statement that “America’s military is the most powerful in the world and has everything it needs to execute at the time and place of the President’s choosing.”

if I keep declaring "I'm the toughest guy around" surely it will become true!

“We have executed multiple successful operations across combatant commands while ensuring the U.S. military possesses a deep arsenal of capabilities to protect our people and our interests,” Parnell added. CNN reported in April that US intelligence assessed that roughly half of Iran’s missile launchers had survived US strikes. A recent report increased that figure to two thirds partially due to the ongoing ceasefire providing Iran with time to dig out launchers that might have been buried in previous strikes, according to sources familiar with the intelligence. The US intelligence assessment total may include launchers that are currently inaccessible, such as those buried underground by strikes but not destroyed. Thousands of Iranian drones still exist — roughly 50% of the country’s drone capabilities — two sources previously told CNN the intelligence indicated. The intelligence also showed a large percentage of Iran’s coastal defense cruise missiles were intact, consistent with the US not focusing its air campaign on coastal military assets though they have been hitting ships. Those missiles serve as a key capability allowing Iran to threaten shipping traffic in the Strait of Hormuz.

Taken together, recent US intelligence reports overwhelmingly suggest that the war has degraded Iran’s military capabilities, but not destroyed them, with the Iranians demonstrating they can effectively limit the long-term impact of the war by quickly reconstituting after those strikes. That includes rebuilding its defense industrial base, which CENTCOM commander Adm. Brad Cooper said on Tuesday has been largely eliminated. “Operation Epic Fury significantly degraded Iran’s ballistic missiles and drones while destroying 90% of their defense industrial base, ensuring Iran cannot reconstitute for years,” Cooper testified during Tuesday’s hearing before the House Armed Services Committee. But Cooper’s testimony stands in stark contrast to US intelligence assessments examining Iran’s ability to rebuild its military capabilities and the timeline in which they are able to do so, with two sources telling CNN the intelligence is inconsistent with the descriptions provided by the CENTCOM commander. One of the sources familiar with recent US intelligence assessments told CNN that the damage to Iran’s defense industrial base has likely set its ability to reconstitute back by a matter of months, not years. And some of Iran’s defense industrial base remains intact, which could further accelerate the timeline for reconstituting certain capabilities, the source noted.

Yesterday Rybar posted two updates on the west Zaporozhie and south Kharkov sectors of the front line. Coincidentally the day after I posted skeptically about those sectors myself and called them out for laundering Ukrainian propaganda, but I digress. And - predictably for mappers - they doubled down. In West Zaporozhie, Rybar marked up Stepnogorsk - a town with a number of comblock apartment buildings in its center and generally a solid defensive stronghold - as having been largely cleared by the AFU. Their evidence for this? The same Ukrainian propaganda video I posted two days ago - a heavily blurred mess showing a handful of AFU troops dismounting from two APCs in a low-rise suburb, which was accompanied by a text claim of having seized the town from the Russians. They're quite explicit in their post that this video alone was what led to them making this assessment. As I pointed out in my original post, it's likely this small group of Ukrainian infantry was killed by an airstrike shortly after dismounting - they certainly haven't been seen or heard from since after likely attacking during low-visibility conditions on or about May 4th. Alternatively they may have attacked during heavy cloud cover during the May 15-18 timeframe, which would make the video VERY recent - and its release a reckless breach of operational security regardless of the amount of blurring being done. In any event it shows nothing more than a squad attack well outside the town center of Stepnogorsk, conducted in low-visibility conditions that hinder drone operations. Significant portions could have easily been shot elsewhere and edited in. Rybar accepted the Ukrainian claims without question regardless, marked up their map, and posted some defeatist commentary to go with it. Earlier today, the Russian unit operating in the area publicly denied the claim and posted a video of them attacking a couple small handfuls of Ukrainian infantry with drones in a rural area and the outskirts of a settlement, and destroying a couple AFU trucks on country roads. Rybar does not seem to have consulted them on the matter. As of this writing, no Ukrainian flags have gone up in Stepnogorsk.

Now to Borovaya. Yesterday Rybar reverted their map (where they had previously marked up a very small Russian control zone in the eastern outskirts of the town based on geolocated video) and straight-face claimed that Russian troops had assaulted and actually taken the town in late April, but then had their supply lines cut off by the AFU (somehow) and been forced to retreat. The Russian General Staff then apparently decided to announce the town had been seized regardless, for some reason. Rybar entirely missed this action - which must have been a considerable battle and presumably worthy of commentary at the time it was going on - while it was allegedly happening. They only posted this very strange narrative after having consulted with parties unknown after the status of Borovaya became a topic of discussion, and they again ran with a Ukrainian framing that acknowledged an attack had taken place but minimized Russian gains in the area. The Russian unit responsible has doubled down on their claim that they control all of Borovaya, and the AFU has provided no evidence that they continue to hold the town despite this actually being something of a hot-button topic right now.

I remind the reader that the AFU is quick to exploit the Russians getting over their skis with control claims. A couple weeks ago the Russians claimed to have seized the border village of Miropolia in Sumy Oblast, and within hours the AFU had a video out showing a couple of rather forlorn-looking infantrymen in the center of town with a Ukrainian flag. Perhaps they were doomed holdouts, perhaps this was a last bit of propaganda before the Russians swept through (the AFU's done that before) - but the point is that the AFU put video evidence on the table and made propaganda hay immediately when they had a chance to peacock and make the Russians look like liars. In these two much larger towns, in far more important front sectors? Crickets. Which brings me back to my original point. In both of these cases Rybar's map updates and analysis trailed and in fact conformed to Ukrainian propaganda framing and entirely ignored what the actual units responsible for these sectors had to say for themselves. And in both of these cases the evidence at hand does not fit the narrative that's being put forward. All of this suggests rather strongly that Rybar lacked any inside information from the Russian military on the front situation and in fact relied entirely on Ukrainian propaganda and/or discussions with Ukrainian propagandists to seed their analysis. And even then they didn't apply a lot of critical thinking to what they were getting!

Simply put, the Russian Army seems to have really tightened down on OPSEC recently and the leak vectors out of the front line that many voenkors previously relied upon have dried up - this is likely why they're still crying about the Starlink cutoff, by the way. That's an obvious way for journalists to extract information out of the front line and it's likely that was their means of communicating with sources. This goes back to something I say frequently when the fog of war thickens, as it appears to be thickening in Ukraine. Practice informational hygiene. Consider not just the sources you're getting your information from but where they themselves sourced it, and form your own opinions accordingly. And be aware that source quality can and does vary over time and between geographical and subject matter areas.

A newly discovered problem with the Apache helicopter’s transmission is plaguing the Army’s fleet, just as funding woes have pushed the service to drastically cut flight hours and rapidly retire older variants of the combat helicopter, Defense One has learned. An Army investigation has indicated that “some AH-64E [improved drive system] main transmissions can experience an internal failure resulting in loss of accessory gearbox drive, which can result in loss of tail rotor thrust, electrical power, and hydraulics,” according to an April internal safety document reviewed by Defense One. “The root cause is still under investigation.” The safety document said “All AH-64E series aircraft” are affected, and instructed the service to “ground affected [improved drive system] main transmissions” until more guidance is provided. The service confirmed the investigation, but declined to say when the transmission problem was discovered and how many helicopters were affected. A spokesman for Boeing, the Apache’s manufacturer, declined to comment. “The Army has identified a potential transmission issue involving the AH-64E helicopter,” a service spokesperson said in an emailed statement. “We are actively collaborating with the manufacturer to conduct a comprehensive investigation to determine the root cause of the problem.”

The Apache transmission investigation comes as the Army leans heavily on the combat helicopter for the war in Iran, sends them to foreign militaries, transports celebrities and administration officials in them, and plans to upgrade them into high-tech drone hunters for future conflicts. At the same time, other internal documents reviewed by Defense One revealed that the service’s III Armored Corps is heavily reducing its flight hour program and is quickly divesting the older AH-64D model to overcome funding woes. The AH-64E has been involved in several incidents stateside and abroad in recent months. One Apache pilot said the combination of the helicopter’s transmission problems and the service’s push to reduce some flight hour programs is a brutal combination, particularly amid seemingly continuous maintenance woes. “It's a double-edged sword,” the Apache pilot said. “You're getting less money in these budgets, at the same time, you're having more maintenance problems, which cost more money, but the money's not there.”

There have been at least three Apache incidents within the last three months. In March, an AH-64E, the latest Apache variant, crashed during a training exercise at Fort Rucker, Alabama, leaving two crew members injured, several local media outlets reported. Last month, another Apache made an emergency landing in rural Alabama following an in-flight problem, one local TV station reported. That same month, another Apache crashed at Fort Hood in Texas during a maintenance flight, according to photos and information one pilot provided to Defense One. Last week, another Apache made a similar precautionary landing outside of Camp Humphreys in South Korea, Stars and Stripes reported. An Army spokesperson declined to confirm a timeline of recent Apache incidents and wouldn’t say whether they were tied to the transmission problems. “While we have gathered some preliminary findings, we are currently withholding these details to prevent any unnecessary speculation while the investigation is still in progress,” an Army spokesperson said in an email.

Less money, more problems

The ongoing investigation into the AH-64E’s transmission comes as the Army works through sudden funding challenges that have pushed some units to drastically reduce flying hours and divest the older helicopter variant, internal documents reviewed by Defense One show. Sen. Jack Reed, D-R.I., hinted at the issue during a Senate Armed Services hearing last week, and said the Homeland Security Department’s domestic missions have caused funding headaches for the Army. “The Army is facing a nearly two-billion-dollar readiness shortfall, largely because DHS has failed to reimburse the Army for border support missions,” Reed said in his opening statement.

holy shit they're literally grinding the US military down in fucking border control bullshit!? genuinely some of the stupidest motherfuckers to have ever ruled a country, jesus christ

“The committee will want to understand what that means in concrete terms. I have received concerning reports about the potential for cancelled training rotations, grounded flight hours, and reduced Guard and Reserve training resources.” One internal memo shows that’s the case for the aviation units of the Army’s III Armored Corps. The funding for the III Corps flying hour program was to be decreased by about $46 million, “effective immediately,” due to “operational requirements,” according to an April 26 internal memo reviewed by Defense One. To meet minimum aviation requirements, the III Corps commander transferred $26.6 million from the funds used for armor training to its aviation units, the memo said. The formation recognizes that the sudden shift in funds comes with risks, according to the memo. The III Armored Corps “accepts the secondary effects of degraded combined arms support for Division [Armored Brigade Combat Teams and Combat Training Center] rotations, and the long-term career stagnation for Warrant and Company Grade officers resulting from a constrained [flight hour program],” the memo said. “Rebuilding this combat proficiency is estimated to take 12+ months.” III Corps officials will "tightly manage” the flight hour program on a monthly basis, with plans to “restrict all non-essential flying” and to issue waivers for not hitting flight hour minimums, the memo said. Missions that are exempt from the flying-hour restrictions are the Southwest border mission, transportation for the 1st Infantry Division, cadet summer training, and flights tied to the modernization of the AH-64E and divestments of the older D models.

“The Army has issued guidance to subordinate commands – for the remainder of this Fiscal Year, make tough, sound resource decisions that optimize and prioritize resources toward their most critical requirements,” the service spokesperson said in an emailed statement. “Army commanders are taking all necessary measures to prioritize critical readiness and operational requirements, ensuring we operate responsibly within the funding levels currently in place. We continuously analyze and assess funding across the force to ensure the Army remains agile, prepared, and ready to defend the nation.” The Army’s III Corps will "divest all AH-64Ds to achieve cost saving" by June 15, the memo said. Officials must also “cancel all static displays and flyovers” for the rest of the fiscal year. The service was already retiring the older models as part of its Army Transformation Initiative and its pivot to the upgraded Apache models. The Apache pilot said the sudden push to reduce time in the cockpit and the persistent mechanical problems with the AH-64E could be a deadly combination. “Aircraft are going to break, that's kind of a given in this life, but it feels like a snowball effect,” the pilot said. “We have lower-hour cockpits and lower-hour piloting commands because they can't get the training they need, and then, in my own personal opinion, you see an uptick in incidents when you see a downtick in flight hours.”

The Pentagon said on Tuesday that it would reduce the number of US soldiers stationed in Europe to levels last seen before Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine. The defence department said the decision to reduce the number of brigades on the continent from four to three was “the result of a comprehensive, multi-layered process focused on US force posture in Europe”. It marks the latest move by the Trump administration to pressure European allies to take more responsibility for military defence, although critics warned that it would weaken Nato deterrence against Russia. The announcement comes following a week of confusion after the US abruptly cancelled the planned rotation of 4,000 US troops to Poland, blindsiding officials in Warsaw. Pentagon spokesperson Sean Parnell on Tuesday said the delayed deployment to Poland was temporary and came as a result of the decision to reduce the overall number of Brigade Combat Teams in Europe. He said the “final disposition” of US forces would be “based on further analysis of US strategic and operational requirements, as well as our allies’ own ability to contribute forces towards Europe’s defence”.

The US deployed additional troops to Europe following the Russian annexation of Ukraine’s Crimean peninsula in 2014 and sent more troops after Moscow’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022. Jim Townsend, deputy assistant secretary of defence for Europe and Nato policy during the Obama administration, said the deployments “are based on our concept of the threat to Europe, and the role the US needed to play in Europe with force structure, to deter the Russians”. “If we are pulling troops out willy-nilly, this pell-mell retreat, what messages does that send?” he said. During Donald Trump’s second term, US officials have sought a dramatic overhaul of the Nato alliance, urging European leaders to shoulder more responsibility for the continent’s defence. Vice-president JD Vance earlier on Tuesday said the US had not decided whether the 4,000 troops would eventually be sent to Poland. “Those troops could go elsewhere in Europe. We could decide to send them elsewhere,” he said.

The Pentagon said earlier this month that it intended to withdraw forces from Germany, whose leader Friedrich Merz’s critical comments about Trump have caused a rift with the US. However, Trump does plan to attend the G7 leaders meeting in France in June despite these tensions, the White House confirmed on Tuesday. US General Alex Grynkewich, the most senior Nato military officer, said on Tuesday that he did not immediately expect the US to draw down more than 5,000 soldiers from its European footprint. “It’s all that I’m expecting in the near term,” Grynkewich told reporters. Alongside the 4,000 soldiers whose planned dispatch to Poland has been cancelled, the Pentagon said earlier this month it was curtailing the scheduled deployment of a battalion equipped with long-range missiles to Germany. There has been growing concern in some European capitals that Washington could decide to reduce American forces in Europe more significantly. Trump has repeatedly demanded that European countries take more responsibility for defending the continent. “We are not talking about pulling every single American troop out of Europe. We are talking about shifting some resources around in a way that maximises American security,” Vance said on Tuesday. “I don’t think that’s bad for Europe. That’s encouraging Europe to take more ownership.”

The Pentagon said the reduction would encourage “Nato allies to take primary responsibility for Europe’s conventional defence” and added that it remained in “close contact” with Warsaw. Polish deputy prime minister Władysław Kosiniak-Kamysz wrote on social media on Tuesday that US defence secretary Pete Hegseth had confirmed in a phone call the US “commitment to Poland’s defence and security remains unchanged”. He added the Pentagon was preparing a new plan for the deployment of American forces across Europe. “The process of repositioning US Army forces and assets in Europe is ongoing but no decision has been made to reduce American military capabilities in Poland,” Kosiniak-Kamysz said.