We are developing the social individualist meta-context for the future. From the very serious to the extremely frivolous... lets see what is on the mind of the Samizdata people.

Samizdata, derived from Samizdat /n. - a system of clandestine publication of banned literature in the USSR [Russ.,= self-publishing house]

Samizdata quote of the day – Markets are discovery mechanisms even during wartime

Markets are discovery mechanisms. In war adaptation and discovery are a matter of survival.

Ukraine began the war with a traditional military procurement system. Large, standardised orders from suppliers chosen by the defence ministry with no room for adjustment to individual circumstances. Ukraine’s key innovation was to decentralise military acquisition, placing the funding and decision-making power in the hands of military commanders on the front lines.

Enabled by their earlier implementation of a public electronic procurement system Prozorro, groundbreaking in its own right by allowing greater price competition and transparency, Ukraine launched DOT-Chain Defence in July 2025. Perhaps best described as an ‘Amazon’ for weapons systems, Military units independently select, order, and reserve the necessary equipment, see delivery timelines, leave feedback, and receive quick responses. The system is designed to eliminate unnecessary bureaucracy and allow frontline brigades to order in exactly the resources they need at any given time with minimal delay. If a product is low-quality individual units will cease to order it as soon as battlefield conditions expose its flaws, providing rapid feedback to manufacturers to improve their products.

The e-points system is another recent deployment. A unit carries out a combat mission and uploads video proof of its achievements, targets destroyed etc., to the DELTA combat and control system. The unit is then awarded e-points at the end of the month, a virtual currency which it can use to purchase the weapons systems of its choice.

By introducing clear incentives at every step of the process, combat units are motivated to provide results, manufacturers to improve quality and the Ukrainian military machine becomes ever more effective.

Samuel Williamson

So when you boil it down, the ‘memorandum’ secures Iran’s war aims?

No end to the Islamic Republic of Iran’s government, no end to Iran’s missile programme, no handover of enriched uranium, yes to ending US sanctions and thus forgoing any political leverage, yes to accepting Iranian (and Omani, for what it’s worth) control over Hormuz, no end to the IRGC proxy forces in Yemen, Iraq, and Lebanon… and, er, an Iranian promise to be nice in the future and not make nukes?

This is not being well received by everyone.

Assorted wags have remarked:

Hegseth renamed the Department of Defense to the Department of War, whereupon he lost a war.

and…

Donald Trump promised the war would end with unconditional surrender, and boy did he deliver.

It would all be a lot funnier if it was not quite so tragic.

A question about the war against the Islamic Republic of Iran…

So, has anyone determined what US war aims actually are? Damned if I can figure it out.

Ukraine’s mid-range strike campaign

Another very interesting presentation from Perun…

Highly recommended.

The Moscow Raid & trends in the long-range war

Latest from Perun…

A shift in Ukraine?

Another interesting bit of analysis by Perun

Samizdata quote of the day – We can’t rearm in an industrial void

But the new military Keynesianism is based on a delusion. It refuses to confront the fact that defence spending is, in strictly economic terms, one of the very worst ways to promote broad industrial rejuvenation. The growth multipliers are weak and the long-term productivity gains are non-existent. Unlike, say, investment in large-scale capital projects, building things, creating new fixed assets in energy, transport or digital infrastructure, there’s little diffusion of defence spending through the wider economy. While the construction of new roads, power stations or tram networks might provide decades of cheaper inputs, rearmament has a severe opportunity cost. An arms factory might create demand for steel and provide jobs for workers in much the same way as a high-speed rail link — but the former produces few positive spillovers, while the latter can regenerate whole regions. Rather than building the lifeblood of work, jobs and economic activity for the next century, in short, this khaki-clad Keynesianism sacrifices domestic prosperity for a real or perceived threat from without, or else because of an illusory attachment to the idea of Britain as a “global player”.

In truth, building and maintaining a world-class military exists downstream of a serious level of industrial capacity that Britain now sorely lacks. In the days of Bevin and Glubb, Britain built over half the world’s exported cars. Today it’s around 4%. In the aftermath of the Second World War, the UK was second only to the US in its steel production. Today, it manufactures less than Iran and Brazil, not enough to satisfy even half our own national demand. For all Labour’s rhetoric about a manufacturing renaissance, we simply don’t have the basic foundations of a durable industrial ecosystem: steel production; petrochemicals; plastics and advanced materials; energy independence and abundance; and a self-reliant productive base that isn’t subject to the whims of international oil shocks or geopolitical wrangling.

Jonny Ball writing What the Anglo-Gaullists get wrong

How to end American power?

I often do not agree with Peter Zeihan, to put it mildly, but he might be more or less right about this, given the Atlantic alliance effectively ended in January 2025, at least de facto if not de jure. It pains me to write that as someone who has been a pro-US Atlanticist my entire life.

I’ve heard this story before

Many years ago, I was chatting with the grandmother of a family friend, whose name was Hannelore. She grew up in Germany on a family farm in Schleswig-Holstein, not far from Hamburg, and candidly admitted that as landowning farmers, they all feared the communists and so were broadly supportive of the NSDAP during the 1930s. Indeed, when the war started, any misgivings they had evaporated when Poland swiftly fell in 1939, and then France collapsed in a month and a half campaign in 1940. The family even attended some pro-government rallies to celebrate these victories.

By 1943, Hannelore said it was clear it was not going to be a short war, as Allied bombers were now a constant presence in the skies above. It was also very hard to find farm labourers as the war effort was consuming more and more resources by then. Yet even so, the family remained broadly optimistic about the war ending with German victory.

But then in late July for an entire week, the RAF and USAAF filled the sky over Hamburg by day and by night. And although Hannelore did not know it at the time, it was called Operation Gomorrah. She told me that on one night in particular, her father called the whole family outside. It was bright as day, the entire skyline to the south a line of incandescent light. By morning, white dust entirely covered their home and farmland, with a constant rain of ash still falling from the sky. 40,000 people had burned to death in a firestorm in a single day in Hamburg. And only then, our friend’s grandmother said, did they finally realise everything was not going to be alright and the war had been a catastrophic mistake. Only then, and from then onwards, did everything they read in the newspapers or heard on the radio ring hollow.

I was in my late teens sitting in an old farmhouse in Scotland when Hannelore told me that story from her youth.

So, on this portentous Beltane as I watched a series of videos from Tuapse in Russia, I had something of a flashback to that story told me several decades ago.

In the early days of the ‘special military operation’ against Ukraine in 2022, there was a series of rallies in Tuapse in support of Putin’s government. I wonder if perspectives have started shift now that the reality of this war is coming home to Russia in earnest.

Strategies in the US-Iran war…

The Iranian Islamic Republic’s strategy is obvious: simply remain in power by gunning down or hanging any internal opposition, and inflict as much global economic damage as possible to increase pressure on the USA and Israel until Trump lives up to his TACO nickname.

The USA strategy is rather less obvious as pretty much any result that leave Iran as a hostile Islamic Republic is an Iranian political win even if their military capabilities are degraded.

Droning on about drones

I know I keep droning on about drones, but this really is a paradigm shift happening in real-time.

TL’DR… 100km from the FEBA is now a persistent danger zone due to the omnipresent threat of drones. Some were sceptical in an post earlier when drones were credited with 70% of battlefield casualties. Well, the number claimed now, based on video confirmation, is 90%.

NATO lost a “battle” with Ukrainian drones – how?

Interesting video about evolving battlefield doctrine