Defense leaders ordered the mine hunter Fulda and the support vessel Mosel to redeploy from Djibouti, a European and international naval hub at the southern mouth of the Red Sea, to the eastern Mediterranean, the Ministry of Defense announced on Thursday. The ships and crew will hold there and await further instructions about whether an international Hormuz mission will come to pass at all.

After the U.S-Israeli war against Iran began in late February, European nations pledged to assign naval vessels to a multinational mission for securing shipping in the economically vital Strait of Hormuz, over which Iran claims control. A precondition for such a deployment, governments here said, was that the conflict would ebb to such a degree that none of their ships would come under fire in a war many here consider pointless. The prospect of a “permissive environment” is now deemed slim by Berlin, the Ministry of Defense announcement reads, as open hostilities have broken out again between Iran and the United States following a period of calm. Aside from the geopolitical aspect of the redeployment, there is also a more mundane rationale, Navy officials acknowledge: The two vessels’ cooling systems, which rely on sea water, were not built for the high temperatures of the Gulf of Aden environs.

The eastern Mediterranean will be a more suitable parking spot for the ships, constructed decades ago with operations in the North Atlantic and Germany-adjacent waters, the hope goes. The redeployment of the Fulda and the Mosel has been “coordinated with international partners,” the ministry statement reads, as the vessels await an opportunity to tag along with a beefy air-defense escort to make the journey to the Mediterranean. On the way to Djibouti in June, the British air-defense destroyer Dragon provided protection through the Red Sea leg of the voyage. “I can imagine Trump will criticize the move as a lack of staying power in the region,” said Sebastian Bruns, a fellow at the Royal Swedish Society for Naval Sciences (KÖMS), about the German naval redeployment plans. But fellow European nations will understand it, as they all are puzzled by the dizzying pace of U.S. President’s Donald Trump’s proclamations variously trumpeting military strikes and prospects of some kind of peace deal, sometimes at the same time, he said. Bruns criticized the German government for jumping on a bandwagon of “Symbolpolitik” in the first place — taking action only for the envisioned signal of aiding the Americans in some form even though the security context was unclear.

well, yeah, that's what being a vassal is like, generally

“For such highly specialized units as mine hunters, that role must feel like a waste for the crew,” he said. The German Ministry of Defense said it will continue to keep the Fulda and the Mosel deployable for a future Strait of Hormuz operation, with officials eying “durable indications for a near-term start” of such a mission.

According to Lieutenant General Lee Ching-ran, Chief of Staff of the Air Force Command, the first aircraft is now expected to arrive at Republic of China Air Force facilities only in September 2026, representing a substantial postponement from the original timeline. Speaking before legislators this week, Lee confirmed that Taipei has repeatedly raised the issue with U.S. authorities and has requested assistance from the U.S. government in pursuing compensation from the aircraft manufacturer. He noted that compensation is not necessarily limited to monetary reimbursement and could instead consist of additional technical services, spare parts, maintenance support, or extended warranty coverage. Speaking during the legislative hearing, Lee observed: “There are many ways to seek compensation.” He stressed that the current priority remained obtaining practical support that would improve long-term operational readiness, rather than simply receiving cash payments. Such compensation packages are relatively common in major defence procurement contracts when significant delays occur, particularly when the purchasing nation incurs additional costs or operational impacts as a result of postponed deliveries. Extra spare parts, engineering support, software upgrades, maintenance assistance, or longer warranty periods can provide greater long-term value than direct financial compensation by reducing lifecycle operating costs and improving aircraft availability.

Compensation claims over delayed F-16 deliveries are far from unprecedented, with Premier Cho Jung-tai having in October 2025 stated that the government did not rule out “taking legal action against the manufacturer.” He noted, however, that the deal was executed through the U.S. Foreign Military Sales process which does not provide for direct compensation claims. “Only under Direct Commercial Sales could we pursue such claims,” the minister added, noting that plans were nevertheless underway to request repayment for the delayed delivery period. The deliveries are far from isolated, with outstanding backlogs of undelivered U.S. equipment to the Republic of China Armed Forces having in December 2025 reached over $21.45 billion. The Republic of China Air Force’s procurement of F-16s follows a prior order for 140 F-16A/B Block 20 fighters in 1992, and occurs at a time of high tensions in the Taiwan Strait and rapid modernisation of the Chinese People’s Liberation Army Air Force. The two Chinese governments have remained in a state of civil war for over 70 years, with the People’s Republic of China having developed multiple types of fifth generation fighters and currently leading the world in sixth generation fighter development. The Republic of China Air Force by contrast has relied on procuring ‘4+ generation’ fighters from the United States, ensuring that the balance of power increasingly favours its primary adversary.

https://www.reddit.com/r/LessCredibleDefence/comments/1v5ubco/republic_of_china_defence_ministry_seeks_us/ozow6y1/

Taiwan bought the F16s under the US FMS route. This offers no legal guarantees against delays as any schedule mentioned is just an estimate. Also, Taiwan's FMS contracts are with the DoD , not with Lockheed. Japan had many similar issues with its FMS contracts

One of the most serious cases involved maintenance equipment for the E-2D Advanced Hawkeye early warning aircraft. The audit states that equipment scheduled for delivery within the original contract period had still not arrived years later, directly affecting the Air Self-Defense Force’s ability to maintain its airborne early warning fleet. The E-2D is a core asset used to monitor airspace and coordinate air defense operations

The report explains that under the FMS system, delivery dates listed in contracts are only estimates and are not legally binding on the U.S. government. As a result, Japan had limited leverage to enforce timelines once contracts were signed and payments were made in advance. In many cases, the U.S. side unilaterally modified delivery schedules through administrative procedures without requiring Japanese approval. ... Japan had already paid the full contract amounts for most of the delayed equipment, as FMS [typically] requires advance payment ... Contracts are managed by the U.S. government, which then places orders with American defense companies. Japan is not a direct party to those contracts and cannot directly negotiate with manufacturers. This structure limits transparency over production schedules, cost breakdowns, and delay reasons.

Even Morocco is facing delays on F16s it ordered... Lockheed cites relocation of its F-16 production line to Greenville, S. Carolina from Fort Worth; slower than expected production ramp up thereafter and supply chain disruptions for the delay.

https://www.reddit.com/r/LessCredibleDefence/comments/1v5ubco/republic_of_china_defence_ministry_seeks_us/ozluwz3/

The ROC has just suffered humiliation after humiliation from its allies lately. First Trump tariffs it brutally and forces TSMC to invest in America, then Japan and the Philippines partition its territorial waters, and now this? All the western powers are obsessed over the possibility of an invasion, but realistically, they're destroying the ideological basis of the Pan-Greens bit by bit; it's clear even its allies don't respect the ROC as an actual independent nation except where convenient. At this point they should be less concerned about reunification by invasion than reunification by KMT majority.

https://www.reddit.com/r/LessCredibleDefence/comments/1v5ubco/republic_of_china_defence_ministry_seeks_us/oznbdfr/

40 year old training tanks, moldy body armor, floating oil barrels filled with gas outside of hsinchu, and like 100 anduril drones. a terrifying display of might and power.

U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio ​has asked diplomats to push back against talk of a "kill switch" in American technology products following the White House's short-lived decision to keep foreigners from ‌America's most advanced AI models, according to a recent cable reviewed by Reuters. The talking points, which were circulated worldwide, show how U.S. diplomats are trying to deal with the international backlash from the Trump administration's efforts to control how and to whom American AI companies release their models. The White House referred questions to the State Department, which in turn pointed Reuters to an editorial from U.S. Under Secretary of State for ​Economic Affairs Jacob Helberg that decried "autarkist measures" which aimed to push American technology aside in favor of native AI solutions, a trend he described as "backward and counterproductive." Rubio's missive ​follows the Trump administration's June 12 move to block foreign nationals from Anthropic's most advanced models, Mythos and Fable, on national security ⁠grounds, prompting the AI company to abruptly suspend access to the models globally. Asian tech executives seized on the disruption to tout their own alternatives and European lawmakers redoubled their calls for ​digital independence from the United States. Although the ban was lifted later the same month, the fallout lingers. Combined with Trump's June 2 executive order, which asked AI companies to voluntarily submit their models ​to 30 days of cybersecurity testing ahead of their release, it signaled a new appetite from the U.S. government to police AI companies' products -- and potentially yank them even from the hands of allies at a moment's notice. European lawmaker Christophe Grudler said the episode showed that "the U.S. holds a real ‘kill-switch’ over essential technologies and that they are more than willing to use it." Aura Salla, a member of the European People's ​Party, the European Parliament's biggest political group, said that the continent "cannot keep building its tech stack on access that can be switched off overnight by a foreign government."

The State Department cable, ​dated July 16, did not mention Anthropic by name or refer specifically to last month's ban or Trump's executive order, but it provided American diplomats with talking points aimed at countering the arguments that ‌have sprung ⁠up in their wake. "Pausing narrow uses or requiring a 30-day testing window prior to the release of a highly potent new technology is not a 'Kill Switch'," the cable said. "There is no government 'magic button.' This narrative is exaggerated and doesn't capture the nuances of U.S. technology policy."

lol, "nuances of US policy"

AMERICAN AI SALES PITCH

Rubio's cable pushed diplomats to fight "so-called 'digital sovereignty'" initiatives, which it defined as efforts to restrict American tech firms' access to foreign markets, subject them to localization requirements, charge them "network usage fees," or force them to follow local rules around issues such as content moderation. Rubio ​had already instructed American diplomats to oppose similar ​data sovereignty measures earlier this year, Reuters previously ⁠reported. The cable also discussed how to counter "AI sovereignty" arguments, instructing American diplomats to advertise American AI products as the best tools available and describe efforts to build rival AI systems from the ground up as a waste of time and resources. "American AI companies can build large, ​independent AI infrastructure, with secure and robust supply chains that minimize backdoor risk," the cable said. "They build it. It's yours."

Edward Fishman, ​director of the Maurice R. ⁠Greenberg Center for Geoeconomics at the Council on Foreign Relations, said he sympathized with the safety considerations that prompted the U.S. government to first impose restrictions on Anthropic's models, which can turbocharge complex hacking operations. But Fishman said the Trump administration's habit of wielding coercive economic tools such as tariffs and sanctions against friend and foe alike made the State Department's pitch a tough sell. European partners ⁠in particular ​were concerned that if their businesses became "ultra reliant on U.S. frontier AI models like those made by Anthropic ​and OpenAI, that the U.S. could use that as an economic weapon against them down the road," he said. Salla, the European lawmaker, told Reuters that the Trump administration's repeated threats against countries like Denmark had generated an atmosphere of ​mistrust that no amount of rhetoric could dispel. "They have not shown us any indication that they are reliable partners," she said.

The dwindling stockpiles of defensive interceptors and long-range missiles have become a pressure point for top military and civilian leaders who are weighing the demands of the war with Iran against maintaining readiness to deter other adversaries, including China. The U.S. officials, who spoke to CBS News on condition of anonymity given the sensitivity of the topic, said the U.S. cannot sustain the rate at which it expended precision munitions early in the campaign against Iran. The defense industrial base is not equipped to produce missiles rapidly enough to replenish munitions that have been fired or transferred to U.S. Central Command, which is overseeing the conflict, leaving inventories under mounting pressure even as military operations continue. Interceptors are in heavy use to defend U.S. interests in the Gulf states, which house U.S. troops and are being targeted by Iranian drones and missiles. One partner country told CBS News there is a need for a pause in fighting, particularly given the intensity of Iranian strikes that have been battering Kuwait and Bahrain. Kuwait said earlier this week that Iran struck its infrastructure, damaging electricity and desalination plants. In an interview last month with "Face the Nation with Margaret Brennan," Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth denied that there was any crisis with the stockpiles. He conceded that some munitions may take more time to produce than others, but he told Brennan, "We've got lots of them, we're building more than ever before." "Our stockpiles are strong, and they will only get stronger in the future," Hegseth said.

But U.S. commanders have increasingly been shifting toward using more GPS-guided bombs fitted with Joint Direct Attack Munitions, or JDAM, guidance kits, along with Small Diameter Bombs, which are precision-glide weapons that can attack fixed targets at shorter ranges and can also be used in lieu of long-range standoff weapons. Earlier in the conflict, U.S. forces frequently employed long-range cruise missiles such as the Joint Air-to-Surface Standoff Missile, known as JASSM, and the Tomahawk Land Attack Missile. Those weapons remain in the arsenal, officials said, but are being used more sparingly. In April, Adm. Samuel Paparo, the head of U.S. Indo-Pacific Command, told lawmakers on Capitol Hill that scaling up output of high-end systems such as the Tomahawk cruise missile or JASSM could take years, as defense companies work on expanding production lines. "I think it will take one to two years for them to scale," said Paparo, whose responsibilities include preparing for any potential conflict in the Pacific region, including with China. "It won't be soon enough. There are finite limits to the magazine, and I have all the faith in the world that they're being employed judiciously."

judiciously

Following the collapse of the ceasefire earlier this month, U.S. strikes have focused on targets closer to Iran's coastline, reducing the need for aircraft to penetrate deeper into Iranian territory, where they would face denser air-defense networks and a greater threat from surface-to-air missiles. The U.S. officials told CBS News there are limited inventories of the Army Tactical Missile System, or ATACMS, the long-range missiles fired from the High Mobility Artillery Rocket System, known as HIMARS, a truck-mounted launcher capable of firing precision rockets and missiles. Concerns over certain munition inventories are not new. The Biden administration delayed giving ATACMS to Ukraine in part because drawing from those inventories could undermine U.S. military readiness, CBS News previously reported. The U.S. has comparatively healthier supplies of the shorter-range Guided Multiple Launch Rocket System, or GMLRS, which is also fired from the HIMARS launcher, the officials told CBS News, allowing commanders greater flexibility for targets within its range. The most pressing concern involves air-defense interceptors, used to defend against cruise and ballistic missiles, aircraft and lethal drones, several sources said. The U.S. has expended large numbers of Patriot and Terminal High Altitude Area Defense, or THAAD, interceptors to defend against both ballistic missiles and drones, consuming inventories faster than industry can replace them. To support operations in the Middle East, the Pentagon has shifted interceptor inventories from other regions, including stocks that had been prepositioned for the Indo-Pacific. Those transfers have left other combatant commands operating with thinner margins than military planners consider ideal, particularly as the U.S. seeks to deter Chinese military action around Taiwan and reassure allies across the Pacific.

Asked for comment, chief Pentagon spokesman Sean Parnell told CBS News: "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. 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." In 2022, Elbridge Colby, who was a defense official during the first Trump administration and is now the undersecretary for policy at the Pentagon, summed up the choices confronting an American military stretched across the globe: "A missile used in Europe can't be used in Asia," he wrote in Time magazine. He was commenting on the use of U.S. munitions in the war in Ukraine. But the latest stage of the American campaign against Iran has brought the same strategic dilemma into renewed focus. A year later, Colby argued that weapons that could be useful for defeating a Chinese attack along the first island chain — a string of islands off China's coast extending from Japan, through Taiwan and the Philippines — should be reserved for that purpose. The concerns of U.S. officials about current stockpiles involve some of those same weapons. During the ceasefire pause, a Center for Strategic and International Studies report said more than 1,000 Tomahawks and 1,100 JASSMs had been used and that replacement timelines were approaching four years. It said that supplies of air-defense interceptors are under even greater strain, as the U.S. burns through a significant share of prewar inventories of THAAD, SM-3 missiles and Patriots. These weapons face production timelines of up to five years. Taken together, the numbers suggest that the central problem is not simply cost but time. Many of the weapons being fired in weeks or months cannot be replaced for years.