Podcasts about eurasian

Gaius and Germanicus: On a rainy late summer night in 92 AD Londinium, the hosts convene in their newly expanded wine bar by the River Thames, built so retired centurions of the eighth legion—such as Strabo, who served twenty-seven years—can rest and put their feet up. Gaius apologizes for his tardiness, delayed by a commercial dispute with a Gaulishmerchant demanding extra money for a shipment of Greek wine brought across the choppy English Channel; a poor bargainer, Gaius resolves to pay whatever it takes to secure the wine for the centurions by Sunday, and shares his day planting fragrant sumacs and tall purple-flowered ironweeds as pollinators. From this first-century frame, the hosts turn to the collapse of American strategy: the Persian Empire (modern Iran) no longer fears the American "imperator," as shown by Iran inviting Iraq—a country generously supported by the United States for years—to ship at least five backed-up tankers of oil through the Strait of Hormuzuntouched, and by Pakistani army chief General Munir's travel to Tehran to meet the IRGC. Russia and China are in constant communication with Iran; Germanicus traces Russia's interest to the nineteenth century, the 1908 spheres-of-influence division, and the 1942 invasion, arguing the American "feckless war" has stitched the Eurasian continent together and frozen the US out. Where the post-9/11 US "bestrode the Middle East like a colossus" and Iran sought breathing room through the JCPOA, now Turkey, Saudi Arabia, and Pakistan court Tehran, the Gulf states seek accommodations in the new order, and the US has been reduced to nothing more than Israel's direct defender. (1)

In this final episode of our first series on the 1,001 Nights, we take up Frenchman Antoine Galland's adaptation, where we see a Europe that has only begun to see its nearest Afro-Asiatic merchant-capitalist great power as a different , “eastern” civilization whose cultural products must be held at arm's length and ethnographically explained—rather than adopted wholesale without comment, as stories from the very same 1,001 Nights had been in medieval European literature like the Canterbury Tales (1387–1400) or Orlando Furioso (1516–1532). Galland introduces critical details and disparaging attitudes, writes new scenes not found in the Arabic, and sometimes misreads the Arabic quite dramatically. The things he needs to explain to his readers—that druggists can be respectable members of society, that poetry can express emotions vicariously—reinforce for us the low level of development of “Europe” as it begins to step onto the stage of history for the first time (it was not meaningfully continuous with Greco-Roman antiquity but rather borrowed most from the Arab-Islamicate Mediterranean world from whose side it sprang) and as an awkward newcomer rather than an overwhelmingly powerful main character (it would not even begin to dominate the Eurasian economy until after 1800). Finally, here too Galland's central interest is evident in the bureaucrat-connected merchant rogues and organized criminals who are able to slip through the cracks of this highly developed and regimented society and accumulate capital—the Sons of the Silk Road who were already the main model for the Crusader bourgeoisie. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Last time we spoke about the ending of the Second Battle of Changsha. In late September and early October 1941, Chinese commander Chen Cheng planned an operation to retake Yichang, a strategic Yangtze River city whose control was essential for protecting the approach to Chongqing. Japanese forces were pulling back from Changsha, weakened by supply problems and casualties, which created an opportunity for Chen to intensify his campaign. Yichang had been captured by Japan in 1940, a defeat that Chen carried as a personal and political burden. He therefore moved to encircle the Japanese 13th Division inside Yichang and drive it to collapse. Although the Chinese held a clear manpower advantage—fourteen divisions against the encircled Japanese—progress was slowed by stubborn fighting from prepared, entrenched positions. The battle inside the city produced desperate close-quarters combat and heavy casualties, showing how the fate of Yichang and the wider defense of Chongqing were tightly linked.    #214 War hits the Pacific Welcome to the Fall and Rise of China Podcast, I am your dutiful host Craig Watson. But, before we start I want to also remind you this podcast is only made possible through the efforts of Kings and Generals over at Youtube. Perhaps you want to learn more about the history of Asia? Kings and Generals have an assortment of episodes on history of asia and much more  so go give them a look over on Youtube. So please subscribe to Kings and Generals over at Youtube and to continue helping us produce this content please check out www.patreon.com/kingsandgenerals. If you are still hungry for some more history related content, over on my channel, the Pacific War Channel where I cover the history of China and Japan from the 19th century until the end of the Pacific War.   The guns fell silent on October 9, 1941, as the Ninth War Zone's forces restored their pre-battle positions, marking the end of the Second Battle of Changsha. The balance sheet was grim on both sides, but it was China that bore the heavier cost. The Ninth Military Front suffered 70,672 killed, wounded, or missing. The concurrent Yichang offensive added a further 21,368 casualties to the Sixth Military Front, a force that outnumbered its Japanese opponents ten to one yet still failed to retake the city. By the time the dust settled, the Chinese army had lost nearly 100,000 men across both theatres. The Chinese command was frank, at least in private, about what had gone wrong. The Japanese had moved with a speed that recalled Blitzkrieg, advancing 130 kilometres in eleven days and withdrawing at twelve kilometres a day, catching the defenders perpetually off-balance. The 26th, 37th, 10th, and 74th Corps had been picked apart piecemeal rather than fighting in concert, the original plan to destroy the Japanese south of the Miluo River coming to nothing. Elite formations had paid a disproportionate price: the 74th Corps suffered 14,521 casualties, the 37th Corps 14,015, and the 58th Division alone lost 6,192 of its 11,907 men, nearly its entire fighting strength.   Yet none of this was the story the public would hear. On October 10th, China's National Day, radio stations announced the "Second Great Victory in Northern Hunan", the annihilation of over 40,000 enemy troops. Newspapers rushed out special editions. Congratulatory telegrams flooded in from government ministries and civic organizations. Senior officials seized on the moment: Sun Ke, Premier of the Executive Yuan, declared that the victory "laid the foundation for the counter-offensive and the recapture of Hankou and Guangzhou," while General Bai Chongxi called it "the pivotal moment for us to turn defeat into victory." Chiang Kai-shek, reading through the pages of triumphant commentary produced overnight by his propagandists, was reportedly impressed by their industry, if not convinced by their content. He had not wanted to call it a victory at all, but the political calculus was unavoidable: after four years of war, an exhausted nation needed the psychological sustenance that only "victory" could provide.   The gap between public performance and private reality was nowhere more visible than in the arrival of a twenty-two-member international press delegation on October 13th. Journalists from Britain, the United States, France, the Netherlands, Portugal, Hong Kong, and major Chinese newspapers were flown to Changsha and carefully guided through selected battlefields, where they inspected mountains of war trophies and heard testimony from soldiers and civilians. They left satisfied, presenting their war souvenirs—swords, binoculars, Japanese military flags—to their audiences back home as proof of Chinese heroism and Japanese defeat. Both China and Japan were claiming victory simultaneously. The only conclusion the foreign press could draw was that one side was lying, and it was not the side that had shown them the evidence.   Chiang Kai-shek's real verdict came at the Third Nanyue Military Conference, held from October 16 to 21. His anger was withering. He condemned his generals for their obsession with defending sprawling outer perimeter lines while leaving city centres barely fortified, a mentality so rigid, he said, that the Japanese could announce the exact time of their advance and withdrawal in advance and still execute it on schedule without interference. "Generals, what a disgrace this is!" On the failure to capture prisoners, only 263 prisoners were claimed across the entire front, of whom only 16 names were actually published, he was almost incredulous: "We can definitely defeat the enemy, capture many enemy prisoners, and seize countless enemy weapons! Even if we cannot capture ten thousand prisoners, we should at least capture a thousand! If not a thousand, then at least a hundred! But now, you don't even have ten!" The conference handed down punishments to match the rhetoric. Liao Lingqi, commander of the shattered 58th Division, was sentenced to death for desertion and shot on October 22nd. His men were so outraged that three regimental commanders resigned in protest; the division was pulled from the order of battle entirely and given three months to rebuild. Li Yutang, commander of the 10th Corps, was dismissed—though the Third Battle of Changsha would begin before his replacement could take post, and he would be reinstated to play a key role in the city's defence.   On the Japanese side, the 11th Army acknowledged 1,670 killed, 5,184 wounded, and 14 missing, far fewer than Chinese claims, though post-war regimental histories suggest the true figure was higher. Lieutenant General Anami, who had championed the operation, found himself stung by the charge that the battle had served mainly as material for Chinese propaganda. On November 23rd, he reportedly reacted with visible displeasure when someone in his headquarters said as much aloud.  Anami's annoyance was easy enough to understand, but the accusation carried a troubling degree of accuracy. The Second Battle of Changsha had yielded no decisive strategic gain and no substantial alteration in the military balance. What it did generate, rather effectively, was a story and by the autumn of 1941, stories were one of the few things China still had in plentiful supply. The most consequential struggles were taking place not along the Miluo River, but in foreign ministries and embassies, in Washington and Moscow, in the messages passing between Chongqing and London, and in the increasingly strained calculations of statesmen trying to determine, amid rapidly changing circumstances, whom to support and for how long.   For Chiang Kai-shek, the challenge was never merely military. It was structural, and had been so from the outset. He had always seen clearly, precisely because he understood China's weakness, that Japan could not be defeated by China alone. The country lacked the industrial base, the logistical reach, and after four years of relentless attrition more and more the manpower needed to force a decisive result on the battlefield. China's survival depended on making its war inseparable from the wars of other powers. Since 1937, Chiang's diplomacy had pursued that single objective: convincing enough great powers that their interests were aligned with China's, and holding that coalition together long enough for Japan to be subdued. That effort turned out to be vastly more difficult than it ought to have been.   The problem started with the international order in which the war emerged. Chiang had hoped to assemble a concert of allies willing to help defend China against Japanese aggression. He was blocked not just by the reluctance of neutral states to aid China, but by the speed with which alliances shifted in the opening years of the Second World War. He had never welcomed the prospect of a general European conflict, correctly fearing that it would push China even further to the margins of world attention. Even so, he recognized that once the lines had hardened between the imperial democracies and fascism, new alignments might become possible. From his perspective, the growing amity between Berlin and Moscow was therefore disastrous. He had been eager to draw the USSR into war against Japan. Instead, the Soviets were now effectively aligned with the Nazis, who were themselves allied with Tokyo.   The world created after Versailles had already enraged many Chinese. After all, the May Fourth demonstrations of 1919 had arisen directly from the settlement reached at the Paris Peace Conference. Yet that older order had at least possessed recognizable anchors, especially the dominance of the two great European empires and the United States. Now those empires were weakening, and no one could say with confidence what the new geopolitical order would be. For all Chiang knew, Germany might emerge as Europe's new dominant power. The early years of the European war produced a bewildering spectacle of diplomatic realignment.   The Nationalist government had previously enjoyed a short-lived flirtation with Nazi Germany. In fact, Hitler's regime continued supplying Chiang with munitions in the first months of China's war against Japan. The Anti-Comintern Pact of 1936 had theoretically joined Germany, Italy, and Japan into the Axis, but mutual distrust prevented them from forming anything like a fully coherent alliance. Chiang found it useful to imply to Western powers that he might be pushed into closer alignment with Germany, a particularly disturbing possibility for the USSR, which faced enemies in both Europe and Asia. But eventually the contradictions in German policy toward East Asia became too severe. In April 1938, Germany yielded to Japanese pressure and ended its support for China.   Britain offered little meaningful help. Neville Chamberlain became prime minister in May 1937 at the head of a Conservative-led National Government, and was quickly overwhelmed by the deteriorating European situation. If Czechoslovakia was for him a "far-off country of which we know nothing," China's fate was even more distant and obscure to many,  perhaps most  policymakers in London. The Nationalists had more success in cultivating the United States. At the Nine-Power Conference in Brussels in November 1937, the Chinese delegation failed to persuade Washington to impose sanctions on Japan and confront it directly. By the middle of 1938, however, American views were beginning to shift. As Japan pushed deeper into southern China, it became increasingly obvious that the occupied territory would be closed to foreign trade. In December 1938, Treasury Secretary Henry Morgenthau arranged a private American loan of $25 million to China, to be repaid through shipments of tung oil, a varnish product whose real importance lay not in itself, but in what the arrangement signified: a quiet American expression of faith that Chongqing would survive. Chiang also held on to the hope of an even less likely partnership. He had become fiercely anti-Communist during the 1920s, yet in the early years of the anti-Japanese war his greatest hope still rested on Soviet entry into the conflict. Soviet advisers and pilots had aided China from 1937 to 1939, but the USSR never formally declared war on Japan. Still, as Japanese aggression in northern Asia intensified, it remained possible that the Soviets would eventually be drawn in.   Then, as so often happened whenever Chiang tried to impose some control over the course of the war, events beyond China's borders altered the struggle in fundamental ways. While Western attention remained fixed on Europe's darkening horizon, a battle with major consequences for East Asia unfolded on the frontiers of Outer Mongolia, Manchukuo, and the eastern Soviet Union. Throughout much of 1938 and early 1939, one faction within the Japanese Imperial Army sought to pressure the Soviets along their eastern frontier. The USSR appeared vulnerable; Stalin's paranoid purges had executed or exiled many of the Red Army's best officers. In May 1939, fighting broke out near Nomonhan between forces from Soviet-backed Mongolia and Japanese troops from Manchukuo. Within days, both sides had reinforced heavily, until nearly 60,000 Soviet troops faced about 40,000 soldiers from the Kwantung Army. Over the next four months, until mid-September, they fought a major battle ending in a decisive Japanese defeat and establishing the reputation of General Georgi Zhukov, who would later become one of Stalin's most celebrated wartime commanders. The much-derided Soviet Army had fought with formidable effectiveness, and the result was not only a ceasefire but also a nonaggression pact between the two sides, extinguishing, in one stroke, Chiang's hopes for a Chinese-Soviet military alliance. The final blow came after developments in northern Europe. In the Winter War of 1939–1940, the Soviet invasion of Finland led Britain and France to back a motion expelling the USSR from the League of Nations. China, then a member of the League Council, declined to use its veto to block the resolution. Stalin was enraged by Chiang's failure to prevent Soviet expulsion, and mutual suspicion thereafter poisoned relations between the two leaders for the rest of the war against Japan. China would now have to continue without further major Soviet backing.   By the spring of 1940, China's position had become deeply precarious. In March, senior Japanese negotiators sought an agreement with Chiang in Chongqing, while Wang Jingwei was trying to formalize his rival Nationalist government in Nanjing. This effort, known in Chinese as the Tong Operation, and in Japanese as Operation Kiri, led to talks in Hong Kong from March 7 to 10, 1940. Militarily, the Nationalists were in grave danger: the United States remained neutral, and Europe was in chaos. Indeed, that same spring, with France seemingly near collapse, the British government also sent out discreet feelers to explore the possibility of a negotiated peace with Germany. For China, Western assistance was nowhere in sight. The Japanese judged the moment favorable for pressing Chiang toward concessions. Faced with serious danger to his regime, Chiang allowed the door to negotiation to open just slightly.   As a consequence, the Japanese delayed full recognition of Wang Jingwei's new government. Through the summer and autumn of 1940, Tokyo remained uncertain about the defector. Prominent Japanese figures such as Count Arima Yoriyasu of the Privy Council said Wang's conduct demonstrated his untrustworthiness, and Foreign Minister Matsuoka Yōsuke continued to express interest in an agreement with Chongqing. Zhou Fohai captured the defectors' frustration, men who believed they had made the highest patriotic sacrifice when he wrote: "Chongqing sees us as collaborators, we see ourselves as heroes. We think only peace can save the country — that's why we think of ourselves as heroes. If we end up classed as heroes, then China and Japan will be at peace. If we end up classed as collaborators, then China and Japan will never be at peace."That formulation conveyed something genuine about the moral dizziness of the period. Most of the defectors were not men devoid of principles; they were men whose principles had carried them to a place that history would find exceptionally hard to pardon.   The "New Fourth Army Incident" brought to a close one of the most consequential years in modern Chinese political history. The battle of ideas unfolding in 1940 was already visible to informed contemporaries. Early in 1941, US Ambassador Nelson Johnson sent Washington a detailed assessment of the Chinese political situation in reply to another report passed along by Major Evans Carlson, an American officer who had made an extensive journey through the Chinese interior. The contrast between the two documents revealed a widening split in American views of China. Carlson, together with his travelling companion, the New Zealander Rewi Alley, had become increasingly sympathetic to the Communists after visiting their territories in 1938 and admiring their discipline. Carlson described the Nationalists as moving toward "fascism," and argued that American aid should be conditioned on Chiang's government being compelled to adopt more "democratic" institutions.   Johnson strongly disagreed. It was "only normal and natural," he wrote, that the Nationalists wanted to retain power, but during the war they had established the National Political Consultative Council, in which multiple parties, including the Communists, were represented. He also noted that the CCP could publish its own newspaper in Chongqing in a way that would have been impossible before the war. One might have expected the Nationalists to use the war as a justification "to extinguish . . . all political opposition," yet instead they had chosen to "muddle along." Johnson further thought that the influence of competing cliques inside the Nationalist Party had been overstated. Chiang Kai-shek, by contrast, had "grown in stature, as he has come to be recognized as the symbol of united resistance to Japanese encroachment"; ultimately, "it is he who makes the final decisions." Johnson did agree with Carlson that Chiang's regime was hesitant to encourage a broad-based popular movement animated by anything beyond anti-Japanese feeling, though he also pointed to Nationalist cooperative programs and county-level reforms. But he rejected the idea that American support should depend on sweeping political transformation. Chiang was committed to continuing the war against Japan, and Washington should back him in that effort. In a notably farsighted passage, Johnson wrote: "It is my view that since the fall of the Manchu dynasty and the collapse of the traditional Chinese concept of government the Chinese people have been feeling their way along toward a new evolving form of government. A definitive form of government has not yet been established and may not be established for decades; it may or may not be in the form of a democracy, but it will be a type of government that will be adapted to the needs of China and its people." The tension between these two American interpretations,  Carlson's idealized belief in the Communists and Johnson's pragmatic support for Chiang was more than a minor bureaucratic dispute. It foreshadowed a debate that would dominate American foreign policy for the next decade, and would still echo when the People's Republic was proclaimed in 1949.   The disastrous experience of 1940 seemed to cast doubt on whether any future for China existed outside the Japanese Empire. As 1941 wore on, another dreadful event shook the exhausted wartime capital. On June 5, Chongqing endured roughly five hours of bombing, driving the population into air-raid shelters. In one tunnel in the Shibati district, the conditions were even worse than usual. The large shelter was supposed to have lights and electric fans, but the generators had never been connected. Inside, the air was dark, hot, and suffocating. Around ten that evening, people began emerging from the tunnel when rumors spread that the Japanese were returning with poison-gas bombs. Air-raid wardens forced people back inside, even as others were still trying to come out. Bodies toppled over one another, and panic spread as people realized they could not breathe. Over the next few hours, hundreds died underground in the darkness. The exact number was never definitively established: the official figure was 461, though a contemporary police report placed it far higher, at 1,527. What rescuers remembered most vividly were the tortured expressions of the dead, people tangled together in each other's arms as they lost consciousness, clothing ripped to shreds by desperate hands clawing at one another, and bodies so drenched in sweat that they looked as though they had been soaked in water. One survivor, Tang Zhengchang, remembered a hand reaching out from a pile of corpses and pleading, "Sir, please help me . . ." The grip on Tang's shorts was so tight that it pulled them off; he escaped the tunnel naked from the waist down. Official descriptions of the disaster were softened. Even so, the tragedy deepened the city's gloom and in a place already saturated with grief, an added layer of darkness mattered a great deal.   Yet events elsewhere would soon offer the National Government a narrow margin of hope. Late in 1940, Franklin D. Roosevelt won re-election as president of the United States. "I am not going to send your boys into any foreign wars," he had proclaimed during the campaign against Wendell Willkie. But Roosevelt and Secretary of State Cordell Hull both understood that Nazi domination of Europe posed a grave challenge to American influence there. And with China's "Open Door" to trade effectively shut by Japanese occupation, it was becoming increasingly clear that strict neutrality might not remain viable. In a 1941 report on China's domestic and foreign situation, Ambassador Johnson noted that during Germany's sweeping victories across Europe in mid-1940, the Chinese had become anxious about whether the Allies would remain committed to their cause. Britain's refusal to surrender, however, together with continuing Soviet goodwill, lifted public morale in China. People now looked toward the United States and Britain for support and felt that "victory" was "virtually theirs."   Then, on June 22, 1941, the world awoke to news that roughly three million German soldiers were advancing into the Soviet Union. Operation Barbarossa, Hitler's invasion of the USSR, dramatically overturned the nonaggression that had governed relations between the two major European dictatorships for the previous two years. It transformed the war in Europe entirely. Less obviously, it also transformed the war in Asia. Thanks to intelligence leaks, Chiang Kai-shek had already realized that war between Germany and the USSR was likely. After the neutrality treaty between the USSR and Japan was signed on April 13, 1941, Chiang predicted that the United States would be drawn into the Asian war, and even that Japan might eventually reverse course and strike the Soviet Union. If that happened, China would become the critical Asian ally of both Washington and Moscow. Stalin had been caught off guard by the German assault — largely because he ignored increasingly urgent warnings from senior colleagues receiving intelligence from well-placed spies in Germany and the Comintern, eager to preserve its alliances, now pressed the Chinese Communists to cooperate more closely with the Nationalists. On June 23, 1941, the CCP Central Committee responded with a declaration that it would "persevere in the Anti-Japanese United Front, persevere in Nationalist-Communist cooperation," and would align itself with the British, the Americans, and others resisting the "fascist rulers" of the Axis.   In Chongqing and Yan'an, the German attack on the Soviet Union was interpreted as a hopeful sign that Japan's fortunes might be beginning to turn. In Nanjing, the reaction was different. On June 22, Zhou Fohai recorded in his diary that, although the outcome "cannot be predicted," members of the Nanjing regime "all believe Germany will win and will take Moscow within two months." Zhou speculated that Japan could not easily reconcile its neutrality treaty with the USSR and its membership in the Anti-Comintern Pact, which was supposed to unite the Axis against Soviet expansionism. Still, because Germany had struck first, Japan was under no formal obligation to help. Zhou also continued to view events through a lens he had never abandoned: that of Chinese nationalism. "If Chongqing joins the Allies and they win," he wrote, "then this is good for China." If they lost, it would be disastrous for Chiang Kai-shek; but because Wang Jingwei had established a government in Nanjing under Japanese sponsorship, China now had "a foot in both boats." It was a ruthless calculation, but not a wholly dishonorable one. Zhou was not merely advancing Japanese interests. He was hedging, wagering on multiple futures in the name of a China he believed would endure beyond whatever constellation of powers happened to dominate at the moment. Whether posterity would judge that conduct prudent or collaborative was a question he could neither settle nor live to see resolved to his satisfaction.   The summer of 1941 marked a major geopolitical turning point in the war. Until then, the conflicts in China and Europe had remained separate, if desperate, struggles on the Eurasian continent. Germany's invasion of the Soviet Union now forced Japan to decide whether it too would enter war against the USSR. Debate in Tokyo was brief. Although some officials, including Foreign Minister Matsuoka, favored striking north before moving south, both the Kwantung Army and the Navy advised against helping Germany at least until Germany had succeeded in drawing substantial Soviet forces away from Siberia and into Europe. Konoye, once again prime minister, agreed. With the northern option set aside, Japanese leaders turned toward another great power instead: the United States. Japan's failure to gain further decisive momentum in China had fueled demands for broader regional expansion, especially into Southeast Asia, with its abundant oil, rubber, and other strategic resources. From 1940 onward, measures such as the pressure to close the Burma Road made it increasingly obvious that Tokyo had adopted a more aggressive posture in Asia. Unable to subdue China, Japanese policymakers chose instead to escalate the conflict still further.   Japanese political life had become ever more dominated by the unresolved war in China. As early as 1938, military expenditures consumed about 70 percent of the national budget, and that same year a National Mobilization Bill granted the government "total war control" over the zaibatsu, Japan's major industrial conglomerates. By 1940, the New Order was making itself felt throughout everyday life, with campaigns against luxury and extravagant consumption taking on new prominence. In February 1940, a parliamentarian was expelled from the Diet simply for daring to criticize the "holy war" in China. In such an atmosphere, retreat from imperial ambitions became increasingly unthinkable. That figure, 70 percent of the national budget devoted to the military is worth dwelling on, because it reveals something essential about the trap in which Japanese strategists had placed themselves. The war in China had not been won, yet abandoning it would have meant admitting a failure so severe that it would have shaken the ideological and institutional foundations of military supremacy in Japanese politics. The only apparent ways out required pushing further in: more conquest, more extraction, more expansion. The logic was brutally clear, and profoundly destructive.   The Roosevelt administration watched these developments with growing alarm. Though still formally neutral, the United States was already using Lend-Lease to provide major assistance to Britain and the Soviet Union in their struggles against Germany. It now expanded aid to China as well. On February 10, Roosevelt's representative Lauchlin Currie visited Chongqing to inform Chiang Kai-shek that the United States would soon provide $45 million in military equipment. General John Magruder, head of the small AMMISCA mission,  the American Military Mission in China had been sent to Chongqing in September 1941, as part of quiet preparation for possible Chinese entry into an alliance against Japan. The China branch of the OSS, precursor to the CIA, was led by General William "Wild Bill" Donovan, whom Roosevelt had dispatched to China in early 1941.   The Americans repeatedly tried to discourage Japan from moving south into Southeast Asia, but relations only grew more confrontational. Japan occupied the southern part of French Indochina, and in response the United States imposed an oil embargo in July 1941. The consequences were immense. Japan imported around 80 percent of its oil from the United States. Without that supply, its navy, the essential instrument for southern expansion  had reserves for perhaps eighteen months. The real question facing Tokyo, then, was not whether it must act, but how soon. Unable any longer to resist mounting military pressure for war, Konoye resigned on October 16 and was replaced as premier by General Tōjō Hideki. Tokyo accelerated its preparations for conflict with the Western powers. Planned targets included Singapore, Hong Kong, Malaya, the Netherlands East Indies, and the Philippines. I should note, if you want to learn about all of this history in more detail, you can go check out the pacific war channel on youtube. I have a chronological series that is just now talking about events like the Japanese invasion of french indochina and the road to pearl harbor.   Throughout the autumn of 1941, increasingly desperate negotiations took place between Japan and the United States. Washington insisted that Japan withdraw from China; Tokyo was equally firm that it would do no such thing. From the Japanese point of view, the demand to leave China was not a serious negotiating position but a demand for national humiliation a call to repudiate four years of war, vast casualties, and the ideological basis of Japanese militarism in a single diplomatic act. In the end, the gulf between the two positions could not be bridged.   While civilian and military leaders in Tokyo argued over the pace at which they should move toward war, few among Japan's rulers doubted that war was coming. At the imperial conference of November 5, it was formally agreed that if no satisfactory diplomatic solution had been reached by December 1, war would follow soon after. Talks in Washington between Ambassador Nomura Kichisaburō, diplomat Kurusu Saburō, and Secretary of State Cordell Hull led nowhere. On November 26, Hull delivered a note repeating the American position that Japan must withdraw from both China and Indochina. On December 1, the imperial conference resolved to go to war; the following day, the date of attack was fixed as December 8, December 7 by American time. In one sense, this was the culmination toward which the entire previous decade had been moving. The war in China had started as a localized conflict, then expanded into a continental one, and was now about to become something larger still: a truly global war, stretching from the North Atlantic to the western Pacific. China's long, lonely resistance would suddenly gain new dimensions and new allies,  though not the ones Chiang had spent four years trying to cultivate, and not under circumstances he would have chosen.   In the early morning of December 7, 1941, the US Pacific Fleet lay anchored at Pearl Harbor in Hawaii, its sailors and officers still largely asleep as dawn crept across the Pacific. The attack did not come without warning signs,  American and Japanese diplomats had been locked in increasingly desperate negotiations throughout the autumn, each side hardening its position until no room remained to maneuver. Washington had demanded that Japan withdraw from China, a condition Tokyo viewed not as a serious opening offer but as a demand for national humiliation: a call to repudiate four years of brutal war, hundreds of thousands of casualties, and the entire ideological foundation upon which Japanese militarism rested. No agreement was possible on those terms, and both sides privately knew it.   The strike force assembled in secret was formidable. Six aircraft carriers,  the Akagi, Kaga, Sōryū, Hiryū, Shōkaku, and Zuikaku had sailed under strict radio silence across the North Pacific, launching their aircraft in two successive waves before the American base had any meaningful chance to respond. The first wave of approximately 183 planes swept in just before 8 a.m., targeting the rows of battleships moored along Battleship Row and the military airfields at Wheeler, Hickam, and Ford Island simultaneously, ensuring that American aircraft could not scramble in time to mount an effective defense. A second wave of roughly 170 planes followed less than an hour later, pressing the attack on damaged ships and harbor installations.   The destruction was staggering. The battleship Arizona suffered a catastrophic magazine explosion after a armor-piercing bomb penetrated her forward decks, killing nearly 1,177 of her crew in minutes, almost half of the total American dead from the entire attack. The Oklahoma capsized after being struck by multiple torpedoes. The West Virginia and California sank at their moorings. In total, seventeen vessels were damaged or destroyed, and the vast majority of military aircraft at the nearby airfields were caught on the ground and obliterated before they could take flight. Around 2,400 Americans were killed and another 1,100 wounded, making it the deadliest single attack on American soil or territory in the nation's history to that point.   Yet the attack was not a complete strategic success for Japan. The US Pacific Fleet's aircraft carriers, the vessels that would ultimately decide the naval war in the Pacific happened to be at sea that morning and escaped unharmed. The harbor's fuel storage and repair facilities were also left largely intact, allowing the fleet to reconstitute faster than Japanese planners had anticipated. What Japan achieved in tactical devastation, it partly squandered in strategic miscalculation. The attack ended American neutrality instantly and irrevocably. The following day, President Roosevelt addressed Congress, calling December 7 "a date which will live in infamy," and within hours the United States declared war on Japan. For China, after more than four years of fighting alone, the blow that devastated Pearl Harbor paradoxically carried a thread of desperate hope at last, the great power Chiang Kai-shek had spent years trying to draw into the conflict had arrived, not under circumstances he would have chosen, but arrived nonetheless. I would like to take this time to remind you all that this podcast is only made possible through the efforts of Kings and Generals over at Youtube. Please go subscribe to Kings and Generals over at Youtube and to continue helping us produce this content please check out www.patreon.com/kingsandgenerals. If you are still hungry after that, give my personal channel a look over at The Pacific War Channel at Youtube, it would mean a lot to me. After years of fighting, China's situation darkened in 1941 with intense bombing of Chongqing and fears of poison-gas attacks. Germany's invasion of the Soviet Union in June shifted alliances and pressured Japan toward wider war. Japan escalated plans for Southeast Asia, suffered an oil embargo, and negotiations with the United States broke down over withdrawing from China and Indochina. Then the Pearl Harbor attack began the Pacific War.

For 2,500 years, her tattoos were invisible, hidden beneath mummified skin until infrared imaging revealed what no one knew existed. In this episode, we dive into the world of Scythian tattoos, tracing the history of the Pazyryk people, a nomadic culture from the Eurasian steppe, through one of archaeology's newest and most fascinating fields: tattoo archaeology. From the discovery of the famous "Ice Maiden" in 1993 to cutting-edge infrared research published in 2025, we explore how ancient nomads used tattoos to mark status, memory, and identity — and why every single preserved mummy from this culture was covered in ink. We'll also fact-check the ancient Greek historian Herodotus (again), debunk the internet's favorite "aliens made these tattoos" theory, and hear directly from the researchers and a tattoo artist who tattooed himself for 13 hours in the name of science. A huge thank you to Dr. Aaron Deter-Wolf and tattoo artist Daniel Riday for sharing their expertise for this episode. We also want to acknowledge Dr. Gino Caspari, whose 2025 research paper inspired this deep dive! ✨ Want more untold stories like this? Support the podcast and unlock bonus content over on Patreon. Website (⁠⁠⁠⁠

Think the Crusades were the defining conflict of the medieval Middle East? Think again.In this opening special for the Gloucester History Festival, host Paul Bavill welcomes back Associate Professor of History at Nottingham Trent University, Dr Nicholas Morton, to tear down one of history's most persistent misconceptions. While popular memory draws a neat line down the Middle East dividing Crusaders and Islamic forces in endless war, the reality was far richer, more complex, and endlessly fascinating.While Western crusaders captured only a handful of cities, massive nomadic powers like the Seljuk Turks forged vast empires stretching from Central Asia across Iran, Iraq, and Syria. Far from a permanent warzone, the medieval Middle East served as the global crossroads for trade, culture, and technology. From knightly rivalries turning into unexpected friendships to shared siege catapult designs, international currency trading, and mobile artisans crossing borders, Dr Morton reveals why the Crusades were merely one small piece of a much grander Eurasian mosaic.Guest Information & BookGuest: Dr Nicholas Morton (Associate Professor of History, Nottingham Trent University)University Profile: https://www.ntu.ac.uk/staff-profiles/arts-humanities/nicholas-mortonNew Book: The Crusader StormBuy the Book: Support the podcast and pick up your copy from the History Rage Bookshop at https://uk.bookshop.org/a/10120/9781399818728Live Event: Dr Nicholas Morton is speaking at the Gloucester History Festival (running 12th–20th September) on Thursday, 17th September at 12:00 PM. Book tickets now at https://www.gloucesterhistoryfestival.co.ukRecommended Episodes MentionedEpisode 214: Dr Nicholas Morton rages that the Mongols are a civilization, not a rabble.Episode 267: Rory McClellan rages that the Hospitallers are way more important than the Templars.Follow & Support History RageSupport on Patreon: Get early ad-free episodes, monthly live streams, and the official History Rage mug at https://www.patreon.com/historyrageFollow & Review: Subscribe on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or your favorite platform, leave a review, and share the episode with a fellow history enthusiast! Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Before Ivan was the Terrible, he was a young tsar who had tried and failed to destroy the last fragments of Genghis Khan’s Empire in the Volga River Valley. In October of 1552, the 22-year-old Ivan stood outside the walls of a city that had raided, humiliated, and enslaved Russians for over a century. The Kazan Khanate, successor state to the Golden Horde and one of the wealthiest trading cities on the Volga, had already repulsed two of Ivan's previous campaigns — both times thanks as much to the Russian weather as to Tatar arms. But this time was different. Ivan had spent two years building a prefabricated fortress hundreds of miles upstream and floating it downriver, creating Russia's first standing professional infantry corps, recruiting an engineer whose identity remains disputed to this day, and stockpiling enough gunpowder to blow the city's gates apart simultaneously at dawn. When 48 barrels detonated on the morning of October 2nd, the walls of Kazan came down — and with them, the last major Tatar khanate on Russia's eastern frontier Today’s guest is Mark Galeotti, author of Siege of Kazan 1552: Ivan the Terrible Breaks the Kazan Khanate, to walk us through one of the most consequential — and most misunderstood — battles in Russian history. We'll talk about why the siege was as much an intervention in a Tatar civil war as an act of Russian imperialism, how the Muscovite army that showed up in 1552 was fundamentally different from the feudal cavalry force that had failed twice before, and what really happened inside Kazan's walls when the assault nearly collapsed into looting and disaster before Ivan was physically dragged onto his horse and led to the banner. We'll also look at what came after the victory — the four-year guerrilla war Ivan didn't plan for, the rapid conquest of Astrakhan, and how the fall of Kazan set Moscow on a collision course with the Ottoman Empire that would define Eurasian geopolitics for the next two hundred years.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Parallel Journeys: Eurasian History through Travelers' Eyes (Cambria Press, 2026) is a comparative history of Eurasia told through travel writing and cross-cultural encounters. In this anthology, Anthony Barbieri pairs accounts from twenty-eight travelers across different historical periods, placing side-by-side travelers looking or going East with those looking or going West. Spanning from 400 BCE through to 1936, the anthology brings together ambassadors, monks, missionaries, merchants, and journalists in order to explore how people understood the cultures, societies, and worlds that they encountered through travel. Structured around these “parallel journeys,” the book highlights both similarities and differences in the ways travelers described foreign places and peoples. Some travelers used these encounters to criticize the societies they entered, while others turned outward observation into reflection on their own cultures. Across the anthology, travel writing emerges not simply as a way of describing a journey, but as a way of forging ideas about cultural difference, identity, religion, commerce, and political power. This anthology will appeal to readers interested in Eurasian history, travel writing, world literature, and cross-cultural exchange. It is also a flexible and engaging anthology perfect for classroom teaching, complete with both long and short versions of each account, helpful visuals, and contextual information — an excellent way to get students thinking about what it means to do comparison effectively. For another overview of the anthology, readers should check out Barbieri's lecture “Beyond the Mountains and Seas,” available on YouTube here. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/new-books-network

Parallel Journeys: Eurasian History through Travelers' Eyes (Cambria Press, 2026) is a comparative history of Eurasia told through travel writing and cross-cultural encounters. In this anthology, Anthony Barbieri pairs accounts from twenty-eight travelers across different historical periods, placing side-by-side travelers looking or going East with those looking or going West. Spanning from 400 BCE through to 1936, the anthology brings together ambassadors, monks, missionaries, merchants, and journalists in order to explore how people understood the cultures, societies, and worlds that they encountered through travel. Structured around these “parallel journeys,” the book highlights both similarities and differences in the ways travelers described foreign places and peoples. Some travelers used these encounters to criticize the societies they entered, while others turned outward observation into reflection on their own cultures. Across the anthology, travel writing emerges not simply as a way of describing a journey, but as a way of forging ideas about cultural difference, identity, religion, commerce, and political power. This anthology will appeal to readers interested in Eurasian history, travel writing, world literature, and cross-cultural exchange. It is also a flexible and engaging anthology perfect for classroom teaching, complete with both long and short versions of each account, helpful visuals, and contextual information — an excellent way to get students thinking about what it means to do comparison effectively. For another overview of the anthology, readers should check out Barbieri's lecture “Beyond the Mountains and Seas,” available on YouTube here. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/history

Parallel Journeys: Eurasian History through Travelers' Eyes (Cambria Press, 2026) is a comparative history of Eurasia told through travel writing and cross-cultural encounters. In this anthology, Anthony Barbieri pairs accounts from twenty-eight travelers across different historical periods, placing side-by-side travelers looking or going East with those looking or going West. Spanning from 400 BCE through to 1936, the anthology brings together ambassadors, monks, missionaries, merchants, and journalists in order to explore how people understood the cultures, societies, and worlds that they encountered through travel. Structured around these “parallel journeys,” the book highlights both similarities and differences in the ways travelers described foreign places and peoples. Some travelers used these encounters to criticize the societies they entered, while others turned outward observation into reflection on their own cultures. Across the anthology, travel writing emerges not simply as a way of describing a journey, but as a way of forging ideas about cultural difference, identity, religion, commerce, and political power. This anthology will appeal to readers interested in Eurasian history, travel writing, world literature, and cross-cultural exchange. It is also a flexible and engaging anthology perfect for classroom teaching, complete with both long and short versions of each account, helpful visuals, and contextual information — an excellent way to get students thinking about what it means to do comparison effectively. For another overview of the anthology, readers should check out Barbieri's lecture “Beyond the Mountains and Seas,” available on YouTube here. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/east-asian-studies

Parallel Journeys: Eurasian History through Travelers' Eyes (Cambria Press, 2026) is a comparative history of Eurasia told through travel writing and cross-cultural encounters. In this anthology, Anthony Barbieri pairs accounts from twenty-eight travelers across different historical periods, placing side-by-side travelers looking or going East with those looking or going West. Spanning from 400 BCE through to 1936, the anthology brings together ambassadors, monks, missionaries, merchants, and journalists in order to explore how people understood the cultures, societies, and worlds that they encountered through travel. Structured around these “parallel journeys,” the book highlights both similarities and differences in the ways travelers described foreign places and peoples. Some travelers used these encounters to criticize the societies they entered, while others turned outward observation into reflection on their own cultures. Across the anthology, travel writing emerges not simply as a way of describing a journey, but as a way of forging ideas about cultural difference, identity, religion, commerce, and political power. This anthology will appeal to readers interested in Eurasian history, travel writing, world literature, and cross-cultural exchange. It is also a flexible and engaging anthology perfect for classroom teaching, complete with both long and short versions of each account, helpful visuals, and contextual information — an excellent way to get students thinking about what it means to do comparison effectively. For another overview of the anthology, readers should check out Barbieri's lecture “Beyond the Mountains and Seas,” available on YouTube here. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/russian-studies

The Iowa Department of Natural Resources announced Wednesday it's working with Iowa Lakeside Laboratory to treat the West Okoboji Lake canal for Eurasian Watermilfoil.

This episode, I want to formally introduce him — Palli.That afternoon, he drove me out to the Golden Circle to see Þingvellir National Park — home to the world's oldest parliament, and the meeting point of the Eurasian and North American tectonic plates.The sun was setting, turning the snow golden. My hands were freezing. And then Palli reached out.Suddenly, Iceland didn't feel quite so cold anymore.My website: Flywithlily.com

This week on Autonomy Signals presented by KPMG, Grayson Brulte and Rob Grant discuss Tesla expanding robotaxi to Tampa and Orlando, Zoox recalling its entire 105 vehicle fleet after driving into an active fire scene in Las Vegas, and China embedding autonomous truck manufacturing in Kazakhstan.Tesla continues their robotaxi expansion launching service in Tampa and Orlando, establishing their third Florida market alongside Miami. All three Florida service areas are next to the airport, signaling Tesla's ambition to secure airport service, while Tampa marks the first market where Tesla launched commercially ahead of Waymo.With Tesla moving from ground validation vehicles to driverless operations in roughly three weeks compared to Waymo's 30 week timeline in Charlotte, Tesla's deployment velocity is running approximately 10X faster than its main competitor.A company that has struggled to scale, Zoox voluntarily recalled its entire US fleet of 105 autonomous vehicles after an unoccupied robotaxi drove into a smoke-obscured fire scene in Las Vegas, requiring a remote teleoperator to reverse the vehicle after its sensor suite was blinded.The recall arrives as NHTSA escalates enforcement around autonomous vehicles interfering with first responders and as Zoox's FMVSS exemption petition for 2,500 driverless vehicles remains pending. With nine vehicles operating in Miami and no Amazon branding anywhere on the vehicles, rider lounges, or website, questions are mounting about Zoox's commercial direction and Amazon's willingness to stand behind its bet.Closing out the show, Grayson and Rob discuss China and Kazakhstan formalizing an agreement to establish domestic assembly lines for autonomous SITRAK heavy trucks, turning Kazakhstan into a regional production and deployment hub for driverless freight across Eurasian trade corridors and accelerating China's Autonomous Belt and Road Initiative.Episode Chapters0:00 KPMG Sponsor Introduction01:34 Signal 1: Tesla Expands Robotaxi to Tampa and Orlando27:15 Signal 2: Zoox Recalls Its Entire 105 Vehicle Fleet57:15 Signal 3: China Embeds Autonomous Truck Manufacturing in KazakhstanFollow The Road to Autonomy Indices--------About The Road to AutonomyThe Road to Autonomy is the leading applied intelligence platform covering the convergence of automation, autonomy, and the Autonomy Economy.™.Through our podcasts, newsletter, and proprietary applied intelligence, we set the narrative for institutional investors, industry executives, and policymakers navigating the convergence of automation, autonomy, and economic growth.Join institutional investors and industry leaders who read This Week in The Autonomy Economy every Sunday. Each edition delivers exclusive insight and commentary on the autonomy economy, helping you stay ahead of what's next.Sign up for This Week in The Autonomy Economy newsletterSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Welcome to the forty third episode of the Zoology Ramblings Podcast! In this episode, Robi starts by talking about the unusual fake news claiming that the government is planning to cull 95% of the ponies on Dartmoor. Emma discusses the unprecedented global temperatures we've been experiencing this summer. Robi and Emma then compete for the sexiest bird in their species of the week. Robi talks about the Malaysian rail babbler, and Emma sheds light on the plight of the Javan magpie. To end, Robi and Emma delve into the secret return of the Eurasian eagle owl to Britain. Robi Watkinson is a Conservation Biologist and wildlife filmmaker specialising in the spatial and movement ecology of large carnivores, camera trapping survey methods, rewilding, metapopulation dynamics and conservation planning. He has an MSc in Conservation Biology from the FitzPatrick Institute of African Ornithology, and the Institute of Communities and Wildlife in Africa, University of Cape Town. He is based between Cape Town and London, and has strong interests in equitable and inclusive conservation, palaeontology and wildlife taxonomy and evolution!Emma Hodson is a Zoologist and wildlife content creator, currently working in the community and engagement team at Avon Wildlife Trust. Emma's role as a Wildlife Champions Project Officer involves supporting and upskilling people to take action for nature in their local communities. Emma has experience in remote wildlife fieldwork, and has been part of Arctic fox, macaw and cetacean research teams in Iceland, Peru and Wales respectively. She has also been involved in animal care and rehabilitation work in Costa Rica and South Africa. Emma is particularly passionate about the interface between community engagement and wildlife monitoring, and enjoys running workshops and giving talks on topics including camera trapping, beaver ecology and rewilding. You can follow more of our weird and wonderful wildlife adventures on instagram: @zoologyramblingspodcast & @robi_watkinson_wildlife & @emma_hodson_wildlife Zoology Ramblings Merch: https://zoology-ramblings.teemill.com/

In February 2023, Flaco, a Eurasian eagle-owl, escaped from the Central Park Zoo through a hole cut in the netting of his enclosure and soon found himself alone on a Manhattan sidewalk. But, as director Penny Lane (“Hail Satan?”, “Our Nixon”) shows in her inquisitive, insightful and irresistible documentary “Wild Inside,” Flaco would not be alone for long. Soon, he became the toast of the town, with his own devoted followers including owlers, tourists, apartment dwellers, TV late night hosts, and the news media.   Penny joins Ken on the pod to discuss how this enigmatic, majestic bird with the penetrating pumpkin eyes won New Yorkers' hearts from one end of Manhattan to the other and touched off a debate about how the wild animals in our midst should be treated and protected. Penny talks about how she, a birder herself, first heard about Flaco from a filmmaker friend who happened upon Flaco on his first night of freedom, and then embarked on her own journey to tell this multi-layered story from different perspectives. Flaco's point of view on all of this remains unknowable, but Penny succeeds wildly in illuminating how one bird can give us new eyes to see the world anew.     “Wild Inside” is from HBO Documentary Films and has its world premiere in Central Park on July 29th, followed by screenings in select theaters across the U.S. See more details at FlacoDocumentary.com.   Hidden Gem: “Best Worst Movie”   The Presenting Sponsor of "Top Docs" is Netflix.   Follow: @pennyjupiter on Instagram and @lennypane on X @topdocspod on Instagram and X

Ghost welcomes War Hamster Brady back to the Badlands for a deep dive into a name most people have never heard but probably should: Yevgeny Primakov. Political mentor to both Putin and Lavrov, Primakov drafted a doctrine in the 1990s that Brady argues is basically the blueprint for everything unfolding on the world stage right now. The two trace it all back to the fall of the Soviet Union, that famous "not one inch" NATO promise, oligarch chaos, and the long game of building a Eurasian counterweight to Western dollar dominance. Expect maps, a rescued 1997 Heritage Foundation article, a tour through reserve currency history from the Dutch Guilder to today, and a healthy dose of "how does the world actually work" energy. Heavy on geopolitics, light on hand waving. If you like your history with receipts and a few dots connected, this one delivers.

Our speaker is Seth Cropsey is the President of the Yorktown Institute and the author of a new book entitled Breaking the New Axis: A US Grand Strategy for Eurasia.I want to learn from Seth about why the Eurasian land mass is critical to American security.  In addition, I want to hear about why the lack of ideological coherence of our adversaries is a weakness that we can exploit. Get full access to What Happens Next in 6 Minutes with Larry Bernstein at www.whathappensnextin6minutes.com/subscribe

For centuries, popes were far more than spiritual leaders. They negotiated treaties, crowned rulers, excommunicated kings, and sometimes reshaped European politics. But when did the papacy reach the height of its political power? Why did that power decline? And why do modern popes still find themselves at odds with political leaders—from Henry VIII to today's presidents? Historian Roger Collins traces nearly two thousand years of papal history to explain how the relationship between the papacy and political power has continually evolved.

Join The Man of the West for one Old English root, four Rohirric names, and a word that has been galloping through the language since the Eurasian steppe. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Eurasian Interests in Middle East Conflict. Guest: Edmund Fitton-Brown and Bill Roggio. Guests discuss how Russia and China are benefiting from America's Middle East difficulties, often frustrating US objectives on the nuclear file. Fitton-Brown notes the Europeans have been "anemic," failing to coordinate a forceful naval presence to ensure the Strait of Hormuz remains reliably open for global energy trade. 121879

What does it mean to believe in ghosts? It turns out that's exactly the wrong question. In this special episode of Talking Indonesia, co-hosts Tito Ambyo and Jamie Edmonds sit down together not as interviewer and guest, but as co-editors who have spent months immersed in a collection of essays on ghosts and haunting in Indonesia. The result is something that is a bit different than the usual podcast interview: two scholars thinking aloud about what the ghostly has done to them. They move between the personal and the theoretical. Jamie's childhood on a road called Whispering Woods, his years navigating psychosis and hallucination, and the way ghost stories kept refusing to let him stay on the outside. And Tito's discovery, buried in a Dutch East Indies newspaper, that his grandfather hosted a radio programme about spirituality, which was a revelation that arrived mid-thesis, mid-life, with the force of a haunting. The episode also serves as a guide to the Inside Indonesia special edition on ghosts that Tito and Jamie co-edited: essays on pulung gantung in Gunung Kidul, haunted manuscripts that resist digitisation, headless soldiers whose presence keeps colonial violence from being forgotten, female dancers whose spectral power is reshaping Indonesian cinema, and journalists learning to take seriously the tree that refused to be felled. What emerges from all of it is not an argument for or against the existence of ghosts, but something more interesting: a case for sitting with what we cannot explain, and for the kind of knowing that begins with admitting we do not know. In this episode of Talking Indonesia, Tito Ambyo and Jamie Edmonds explore what ghosts teach us about Indonesia — and about ourselves. Jamie Edmonds is Director of the Critical Languages Institute, Associate Director of the Melikian Center for Russian, Eurasian, and East European Studies, and Clinical Assistant Professor of Religious Studies at Arizona State University. His research focuses on Islam, popular culture, and the supernatural in Indonesia. In 2026, the Talking Indonesia podcast is co-hosted by Dr Jemma Purdey from the Australia-Indonesia Centre, Dr Elisabeth Kramer from the University of New South Wales, Dr Tito Ambyo from RMIT, Dr Jacqui Baker from Murdoch University, and Dr Clara Siagian from University College London.

In this episode of Disorder Latest, Jason is joined by Thomas de Waal, journalist, author, and Senior Fellow at Carnegie Europe who has spent decades studying the politics, conflicts, and societies of the Caucasus and wider Eurasian region. His book ‘The Caucasus: An Introduction', is a must read for anyone looking to understand the region—its ethnic diversity, its ties to Russia, its cults of personality, and its geopolitical importance. Jason and Thomas discuss the  June 7 Armenian election—won by pro-EU incumbent Nikol Pashinyan--, the Trump negotiated peace deal between Armenia and Azerbaijan, and whether Georgia is moving permanently away from Europe and the West. For ad free listening, early release episodes and more bonus content, join our Mega Orderers Club at ⁠disordershow.com/club⁠ Producer: Sam Cluely Subscribe to our Substack - https://natoandtheged.substack.com/ Disorder on YouTube - https://www.youtube.com/@DisorderShow Show Notes Links: Get Thomas' book at ⁠https://www.amazon.co.uk/Caucasus-Introduction-Thomas-Waal/dp/0195399773⁠  Listen to our previous episodes with Armen Sarkissian, Armenia's former president ⁠https://pod.link/1706818264/episode/OWJlOTI5YTYtMDBjZC0xMWVmLTg0N2MtMmIzNDcwZTAyMDQx⁠  And for more on the Armenian election: ⁠https://apnews.com/article/armenia-election-result-pashinyan-7168ab86aa0d9f2c967171c91c9611c9⁠  Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

SCHEDULE JOHN BATCHELOR SHOW, 5-13-26.JULY 1930 ASTOUNDING.Vladimir Putin's isolation and paranoia were evident during a significantly diminished Victory Day parade in Moscow. Ivana Stradner notes that North Korean troop presence reflects Russia's military degradation and growing domestic security concerns. (1/16)Drone technology has shifted the war in Ukraine's favor while Putin seeks to exhaust Western resolve through protracted conflict. Ivana Stradner warns that the Kremlin uses psychological tactics to gain leverage during negotiations. (2/16)Iran's violation of uranium enrichment limits challenges the Non-Proliferation Treaty's effectiveness. Peter Huessyexplains how nations like North Korea and China have successfully circumvented international rules to develop and proliferate nuclear weapons. (3/16)U.S. allies like Saudi Arabia pursue nuclear power, raising proliferation concerns. Peter Huessy argues that Chinastrategically facilitates proliferation to create global instability while draining American military resources and testing international diplomatic authority. (4/16)Donald Trump's Beijing summit focuses on trade and Taiwan arms sales. Grant Newsham warns that relaxing advanced chip exports would provide China a dangerous advantage in AI warfare and broader geopolitical competition. (5/16)The CCP is "Sinicizing" Christianity by rewriting biblical stories to promote socialist values. Samuel Bener explains that state-run churches now emphasize loyalty to Xi Jinping and the party over traditional religious teachings and scripture. (6/16)European leaders monitor the Trump-Xi summit while seeking economic autonomy. Judy Dempsey notes that Europeremains strategically divided and lacks a unified response to the global energy crisis caused by Middle Eastern conflicts. (7/16)Germany's far-right AfD party is surging by exploiting voter anger over inflation and the Iran war. Judy Dempseyhighlights the party's success in eastern Germany, where it taps into deep-seated cultural and political resentments. (8/16)Mary Kissel highlights the scripted nature of Chinese diplomacy and warns against using Taiwan as a bargaining chip. She stresses that U.S. national security must be prioritized over short-term corporate interests and business deals. (9/16)Ukraine's innovative defense industry has enabled it to resist a larger Russian force. Mary Kissel criticizes weak European leadership and argues that only overwhelming military force will effectively bring Iran back to diplomatic negotiations. (10/16)Sinan Ciddi compares Eurasian trade corridors, noting that the U.S.-backed IMEC currently holds an advantage. He identifies Turkey's infrastructure deficits and economic instability as major hurdles for its ambitious regional transport and finance projects. (11/16)Russian oil production and exports are declining due to technological sanctions and successful Ukrainian drone strikes on refineries. Mikhail Bernstam notes that Russia's air defenses have proven ineffective against low-cost, highly destructive drone attacks. (12/16)Simon Constable reports on rising global commodity prices, including energy and food. He explains that inflation is outpacing take-home pay in Europe and the U.S., creating severe political challenges for current governing administrations. (13/16)Prime Minister Keir Starmer faces a significant revolt within the Labour Party due to extreme unpopularity. Simon Constable cites unpopular economic policies, like cutting winter heating allowances, as primary drivers of widespread public discontent. (14/16)Bob Zimmerman discusses private sector aerospace growth, including SpaceX's potential expansion in Louisiana. He highlights the success of vertically integrated companies like Rocket Lab and new private space station ventures involving multiple international partners. (15/16)Future Mars exploration will utilize high-speed helicopter rotors and data from the Psyche probe. Bob Zimmerman also emphasizes the abundance of water on Mars and the growing global alliance of Artemis Accords nations. (16/16)

Sinan Ciddi compares Eurasian trade corridors, noting that the U.S.-backed IMEC currently holds an advantage. He identifies Turkey's infrastructure deficits and economic instability as major hurdles for its ambitious regional transport and finance projects. (11/16)1930

The situation in the Strait of Hormuz is fluid as Iran attempts to wait out the U.S. Gregory Copley argues the U.S. requires regime change to stop trans-Eurasian monopolies and restore regional stability. (10/16)JUNE 1964

SCHEDULE JOHN BATCHELOR SHOW, 5-12-26.January 1931.Inflation reached 3.8% in April due to gas prices. Elizabeth Peek notes that real hourly wages fell while global eyes turn toward the Strait of Hormuz and Trump's consequential summit in China. (1/16)Elizabeth Peek critiques redistricting as an unattractive game that voters generally dislike. She emphasizes that population growth in Texas and Florida provides more long-term political power than manipulating district lines in blue states. (2/16)Iran is losing $400 million daily due to U.S. sanctions and blockades. Jonathan Schanzer discusses the leadership vacuum in Tehran, noting that decisions are currently made by a chaotic committee of revolutionary figures. (3/16)Israel engages in "constant gardening" to clear Hezbollah threats south of the Litani River. Jonathan Schanzer labels Hamas a spent force, having lost over half its territory and significant rocket-firing capabilities since the conflict began. (4/16)Indonesia is taking "baby steps" toward U.S. cooperation to counter China's unlawful maritime claims. James Holmeshighlights the importance of professional military education and potential overflight agreements to secure the Strait of Malacca. (5/16)Peter Huessy warns of China's lack of transparency regarding its massive nuclear expansion and dual-use systems. The CCP's push to dominate offensive artificial intelligence poses a significant threat to global security and stability. (6/16)Steve Yates reveals there is no such thing as a private meeting with the CCP, as every word is recorded and broadcast to thousands. Trump's top-down personal diplomacy lacks the usual preparatory paperwork. (7/16)The U.S. holds increased leverage over global choke points while China faces a demographic crisis. Steve Yatesdiscusses manufacturing shifts to India, suggesting that China's export-dependent model remains a "shaky house of cards." (8/16)Gregory Copley describes the Beijing summit as a theatrical performance while the Chinese economy and political structure collapse. China has lost global trust, particularly regarding the safety and quality of its electric vehicles. (9/16)The situation in the Strait of Hormuz is fluid as Iran attempts to wait out the U.S. Gregory Copley argues the U.S. requires regime change to stop trans-Eurasian monopolies and restore regional stability. (10/16)Turkey is now considered nuclear ready after displaying an ICBM with a 6,000 km range. Gregory Copley notes this shift toward a "gunpowder state" reflects neo-Ottoman ambitions to balance power against Israel, Russia, and China. (11/16)Gregory Copley discusses Prime Minister Starmer's struggle to maintain party trust following poor election results. He highlights King Charles's role in repairing the U.S.-UK special relationship despite Starmer's apparent indifference toward the monarchy. (12/16)Gordon Chang details China's historical failure to meet trade commitments and its ongoing support for the Iranian regime. He also notes reports of blatant Chinese bribery and intervention within the U.S. government. (13/16)Bob Zimmerman dismisses the government moon race as a political fraud, while noting China's rational, incremental progress. He identifies SpaceX as the true leader, likely reaching the moon with far superior, sustainable technology. (14/16)Syria neutralized a Hezbollah plot to assassinate senior officials to restore a logistical weapons corridor. AHmad Shariwah explains that both Hezbollah and Iran gain from inciting chaos and instability within the Syrian regime. (15/16)John Hardie analyzes the unusual appointment of an army general to lead Russia's Aerospace Forces. Despite high losses, Russia's battlefield gains remain slow, while Ukraine continues to have success with long-range strikes and drones. (16/16)

Hello Interactors,Neuroscience research on narrative shows that stories sharpen attention, improve recall, and recruit shared brain networks that help us organize events into a coherent arc. The trouble, for anyone who works with spatial data, is that the reality on the ground refuses to cooperate with clean narratives despite this inherent bias. Today I look at how the popular telling of how Homo sapiens came to contemplate such things — to become ‘modern' — is not the story the evidence keeps telling.THE LURE OF THE LEAPWe like our origin stories well defined. The popular telling — the Israeli historian Yuval Noah Harari's Sapiens is the bestselling version — locates a moment when archaic humans crossed a threshold and became modern, transformed by some neurological windfall in Africa. But a recent paper by anthropologist Huw Groucutt on Homo sapiens dispersal argues this says more about Homo sapiens' neurological bias toward clean narratives than about the evidence we have.This ‘revolution into modern' frame has traceable historical roots. In the 1960s and 70s, the only deeply excavated record was in a western sliver of the Eurasian landmass called Europe. There, the transition from Neanderthal to Homo sapiens congregations did look abrupt. It was reasonable, given what was known at the time, to read this regional shift as a species-wide threshold — a sudden flowering of cognition and culture. But that reading was a misinterpretation. What Europe records is not a transformation but a replacement where one population arrived as another receded. The arc of change was migration, not metamorphosis.That correction took hold, but the ‘revolution' story, like the species, simply relocated. There would be a coastal revolution in southern Africa, a cognitive revolution in the Rift Valley, a technological revolution in the Levant. The plot survived even as the setting changed.The deeper trouble lies with the word “modern” itself. It is a relic of mid-twentieth-century thinking that anchors humanity to an imagined ethnographic checklist: symbolic art, refined toolkits, complex burials, linguistic competence. These traits are taken to constitute a package, and the package is taken to arrive together. But the evidence keeps refusing this neatness. The traits show up in pulses across regions and disappear again. They appear in populations we have been trained to call “archaic.” They fail to coordinate the way the model demands, and as Groucutt says, provide just“another way of separating ‘us' and ‘them'.”For example at Panga ya Saidi in coastal Kenya, excavators recovered the burial of a child known as Mtoto dated to around 78,000 years ago. It is among the oldest deliberate burials known from Africa, and the kind of behavior usually slotted under “modernity.” Yet there is no continent-wide adoption of similar mortuary practice that follows from it. Burial complexity at Panga ya Saidi appears, then thins, then reappears elsewhere on different terms. It looks less like the leading edge of a wave and more like a local response to local conditions.A second example pulls in the opposite direction. The Iho Eleru skull, recovered in 1965 from a rock shelter in Nigeria, is roughly 13,000 years old — geologically yesterday — yet preserves features that morphologists have long called “archaic.” It refuses to sit in the bin its date implies. The bone is doing something the category cannot absorb.The cost of the revolution model, then, is not that it tells a tidy story. It is that the tidiness encourages researchers to treat their categories as facts of nature rather than instruments of description. Evidence that does not fit the frame gets explained away or quietly set aside. When you stop asking when our ancestors became human and start asking how, across thousands of generations and a shifting climate, particular behaviors were assembled and reassembled in particular places, the data reads very differently.This point is not new. In 2000, Sally McBrearty and Alison Brooks published a paper titled “The revolution that wasn't,” arguing that the complex behaviors taken to define modernity in Europe had appeared in Africa tens of thousands of years earlier, and gradually rather than in a single burst. That correction is over twenty-five years old. The fact that revolution thinking has persisted despite it — and persisted most loudly in popular accounts that sell in the tens of millions — is itself worth taking seriously. Models, like fossils, accumulate where the conditions are right for preservation.The trait-list at the heart of “modernity” is a fragile instrument in its own right. Many of the behaviors taken to mark our species are anchored to ethnographic data on recent hunter-gatherer societies, assumed to provide a baseline for what fully human cultural life looks like. Those datasets have well-known problems; when the archaeologist Robert Kelly examined a portion of Lewis Binford's widely used hunter-gatherer compilation in 2021, he was able to confirm the accuracy of only one percent of the entries. The benchmark we have been measuring the deep past against is, in places, made of sand.PATHS, NOT PIVOTSFor anyone who works with spatial data, the revolution model has a second problem. It ignores the terrain. A revolution, mapped, would look like an expanding circle radiating from a source — like a wildfire expanding from a single ignition point. Human dispersal looks nothing like that. It moves along corridors, hesitates at barriers, doubles back, fragments around resources. It is shaped by climate cycles that open and close routes on millennial timescales. The footprint is irregular because the ground is irregular.Groucutt's argument benefits from a concept that geographers and geomorphologists know well: equifinality. The same observed outcome can result from different processes. A bowl-shaped depression on a hillside can be carved by a glacier, scooped by a landslide, or eroded by a spring undercutting from below. The shape alone does not tell you which. Read the depression as a single signature of a single cause, and you will misjudge its history.The same caution applies to the deep human past. A scatter of similar tool types across regions does not necessarily document a single dispersing population with a shared cognitive package. It may document several populations independently arriving at similar solutions to similar pressures. A flicker of symbolic behavior in two distant places does not imply continuous transmission between them. The archaeological record is dense with cases where the simplest explanation — one cause, one origin — turns out to be the wrong one.A telling example of how revolution thinking distorts spatial evidence comes from a long-running argument about the Levantine sites occupied by Homo sapiens between roughly 130,000 and 75,000 years ago — Skhul, Qafzeh, and others. Did these represent a genuine out-of-Africa dispersal, or were they merely an extension of African ecology into Southwest Asia? In the latter view, our species was so tightly coupled to its native biome that early presence beyond Africa was a kind of optical illusion. One prominent researcher has argued that Israel is outside Africa “only by modern political convention.”But the Levantine mammal fauna of this period is dominated by Palearctic species — deer, gazelle, boar — and has been since at least the Middle Pleistocene. The supposed African flourish at Qafzeh shrinks under examination to a few rare elements, some of them present in the region long before Homo sapiens arrived. “Africa grew” is what the revolution model looks like when biogeography becomes inconvenient. Rather than accept that early Homo sapiens dispersed beyond the continent before achieving full “modernity,” the frame extends the boundary of “Africa” to wherever the species happens to be. The terrain bends to match the model.This is where genomic evidence becomes interesting and dangerous in roughly equal measure. Ancient DNA has transformed what can be reconstructed about population structure, and the resolution is genuinely impressive. But the analytic culture around that data has often defaulted to event-style narratives: a bottleneck here, a split there, a discrete mixture of pulses at a specific date. These tidy events, plotted on a tree, recover the satisfactions of the revolution at a different scale. They imply that the past has crisp joints, making“claims for events which never actually occurred.”The caution Groucutt raises is that population structure across the deep African past was probably continuous, regionally varied, and persistently interconnected — closer to a braided river than a branching tree. Apparent “events” in the genetic record may be artifacts of how the analysis is framed rather than discrete moments in time. Treating them as facts encourages claims of historical specificity the underlying signal cannot bear. Equifinality applies to genomes too. Different histories of structure and gene flow can produce overlapping statistical signatures.What follows, methodologically, is a shift in what models are expected to do. Instead of identifying the moment, the route, or the founding population, the task becomes mapping a field of overlapping processes whose visibility varies by region, by preservation, and by the history of where archaeologists have chosen to dig. That is a less satisfying answer than a date and a place, but it's closer to what the evidence supports.MANY CLOCKS, MANY PASTS, MANY THREADSThe physicist Carlo Rovelli, in The Order of Time, makes an observation that time is not a universal river running at one rate everywhere. It is local and relational. This is not intuitive but matches reality. Atomic clocks at different elevations tick at measurably different rates because gravity dilates time. There is no master clock against which “now” is defined for the whole universe.The revolution model assumes the opposite. It imagines a master clock striking modernity for the species at a particular moment — perhaps in East Africa, perhaps a hundred thousand years ago, perhaps fifty — after which a transformed humanity disperses outward. The image is compelling because it is simple. It is also, as a model of history, incongruent with reality. The record Groucutt reviews shows differently timed histories running in parallel across Africa, Arabia, Eurasia, and Sahul, with regional sequences that do not synchronize. There is no single instant at which the species, taken as a whole, became what it now is. There are only many local trajectories that we have, in retrospect, gathered under one name.One sign that the revolution frame is still doing harm is that the three main streams of evidence — fossil morphology, archaeology, and ancient DNA — currently tell stories that do not align. The dispersal chronology reconstructed from genetic data alone is not the dispersal chronology of the lithic archaeology of northern Eurasia, and neither matches the fossil record of Asia and Sahul. These are not minor discrepancies at the margins. They are different shapes of history. The temptation, encountering this, is to declare one stream definitive and explain the others away. The harder course is to take the disagreement as evidence. What it is telling us is that the histories these methods recover are partial, regionally weighted, and pitched at different temporal resolutions. There is no master clock available to bring them into sync because there was never a master event for them to be synchronized to.This is closer to what might be called emplacement than to revolution. Homo sapiens did not arrive in time as a finished product and then unfold into space. The species emerged through space — through specific landscapes, specific corridors, specific neighbors — and continued to be shaped by them long after any putative threshold. Cognition, technology, and social practice were not delivered together and then carried outward. They were assembled, lost, and reassembled in different combinations under different pressures. Whatever it is that we now point to as the human condition is the cumulative residue of that long, polycentric making. In Groucutt's terms, they are“polycentric and mosaic.”Letting go of the revolution story is uncomfortable because it removes the heroic frame that has organized so much storytelling about ourselves. There is no founding spark, no anointed lineage, no first true human. What remains is harder to compress into a sentence. It is also more honest, and more interesting. The work ahead — for archaeologists, geneticists, geographers, and anyone who builds models of the deep past — is to map the complexity of the terrain rather than identify a single point. To trace the connections that hold the picture together rather than the moment at which the picture was supposedly painted.The mosaic is no runner-up to the revolution. It is the record itself — rough, regional, and real. We need only learn to read it.References:Groucutt, H. S. (2026). Revolution, modernity, and the dispersal of Homo sapiens beyond Africa. Quaternary Science Reviews. This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit interplace.io

Eleanor Barraclough explores the hidden histories of the Viking Age by focusing on the real lives of Norse individuals through everyday objects rather than modern myths. A primary example is a 1200 AD runic message discovered on a sliver of wood in Bergen, Norway, from a woman named Gytha who writes "Gytha says that you should go home" to her husband while he was drinking in a tavern. While Gytha's message is clear, her husband's attempt at a response on the other side is completely unintelligible, likely due to his inebriated state. These spiky runes were often carved into hard surfaces like wood, stone, or even bone to serve as private, personal communications. Barraclough, who has a background in Old Norse language and literature, derived the title of her book, "Embers of the Hands," from an Old Norse kenning for gold which she repurposed to symbolize precious human stories found in historical ephemera. The Viking Age itself is traditionally marked by the shocking 793 AD raid on the rich monastery at Lindisfarne, also known as Holy Island, which sent terror-filled shockwaves across Europe. This era is characterized by a vast diaspora reaching from Arctic Scandinavia to the North Atlantic and eastward down Eurasian waterways to the Islamic Caliphate. 1/81600 SCANDANAVIA

How does the Soviet Union's approach to human rights compare to contemporary Russia? Bakhti is joined by historian Benjamin Nathans to discuss the evolution of the Soviet dissident movement, what Vladimir Putin learned from his time as a KGB agent quashing dissent in the Soviet Union, and the lessons of this period for those resisting authoritarianism today. -- Benjamin Nathans teaches and writes about Imperial Russia and the Soviet Union, modern European Jewish history, and the history of human rights. Currently, he is the Endowed Term Professor of History at the University of Pennsylvania. His most recent book, To The Success of Our Hopeless Cause: The Many Lives of the Soviet Dissident Movement, was awarded the 2025 Pulitzer Prize for General Non-Fiction, the Pushkin House Book Prize, the Vucinich Prize in Russian, Eurasian and East European Studies, and the Zelnik Prize in History. It tells the story of dissent in the USSR from Stalin's death to the collapse of communism, exploring the idea and practice of rights and the rule of law in the setting of "mature socialism." Nathans is also author of Beyond the Pale: The Jewish Encounter With Late Imperial Russia and edited A Research Guide to Materials on the History of Russian Jewry (19th and Early 20th Centuries) in Selected Archives of the Former Soviet Union [in Russian]. He is a regular contributor to the New York Review of Books and the Times Literary Supplement. He is the co-editor and contributor to two scholarly volumes, Culture Front: Representing Jews in Eastern Europe (2014) and From Europe's East to the Middle East: Israel's Russian and Polish Lineages (2021).   This podcast is hosted by Bakhti Nishanov and produced by Carly Breland, in conjunction with the Senate Recording Studio.

A version of this essay was published by firstpost.com at https://www.firstpost.com/opinion/shadow-warrior-the-need-for-pax-indica-malacca-was-blocked-1001-years-ago-hormuz-is-choked-now-14005673.htmlIn 1025 CE, exactly 1,001 years ago, Emperor Rajendra Chola sent an armada (probably the largest fleet in history before the advent of steam) 4,000 kilometers clear across the Indian Ocean. It was on a mission strangely familiar to us in 2026: open up a critical strait that was being choked by a littoral state. The thalassocratic SriVijaya Empire of Sumatra was closing the strait and imposing tolls, as well as winking at a little piracy.The strait in question then was Malacca. The Chola goal: to reopen Indian trade with Southeast Asia and China. Remarkably, the Cholas were not interested in territorial conquest, only in freedom of navigation.It is ironic that today, it is again a question of free trade, that shibboleth that has been waved about for decades (although that was a euphemism for ‘managed trade that benefits the West').The difference between then and now? The salient fact is that Rajendra Chola was able to open Malacca with his wooden ships. With all his aircraft carriers and F-35s and missiles, President Trump is unable to open Hormuz. This must mean something, although reasonable people may differ on what that is. My claim is that it means India has the opportunity, in fact the need, to step into the breach.Maritime trade is severely disturbed today, and it is increasingly a disaster for innocent bystanders bereft of oil and gas. And it is increasingly the Indian Ocean that matters: specifically the sea-lanes from Hormuz to Malacca, which handle a significant portion of both oil/gas trade and goods trade globally.Geo-politics and geo-economics, Mahan's and Spykman's theoriesIt is a reasonable conjecture that the locus of power has shifted over the centuries: in the 19th century, the Atlantic was supreme; in the 20th century, the Pacific; and in the 21st century, the most important ocean is the Indian Ocean. Asia has returned to center stage. In support of this assertion, see how the economic center of gravity of the world has returned to the vicinity of India, after the European colonial interlude.It is therefore appropriate to ask what it would take for India to regain its former keystone role in the Indian Ocean. Of course geography offers it to the country on a platter. From both Alfred Thayer Mahan's theory of naval power, and from Nicholas Spykman's Rimland theory, India could be, or should be, the dominant power in the region: it is almost literally India's ocean.Mahan's ideas, updated for today, suggest that a strong navy should protect a large merchant marine fleet, manage trade, and control choke-points. The preferred hardware may have changed from battleships to aircraft carriers and especially nuclear submarines these days, but the basic idea remains: speak softly but carry a big stick with a force-projection navy.Spykman's Rimland theory seems more appropriate in current circumstances than the Heartland theory popularized by Halford MacKinder. The Eurasian land mass may well be subject to control by a coastal hegemon or an alliance that controls the sea lanes and choke points. Despite pipelines and rail-borne containers, maritime trade still dominates.Spice Route >> Silk RoadA stark reminder of this is the comparison between the fabled ‘Silk Road' and the ancient ‘Spice Route'. Despite all the breathless propaganda about the Silk Road, it is abundantly clear that sea-borne trade was an order of magnitude greater, because a caravan of 500 camels, braving deserts, bandits and so on across central Asia couldn't possibly carry more than 100 tons of goods; whereas an ocean-going stitched teak ship, like a single uru from Beypore, Kerala, could easily carry 400 tons. And the monsoon winds provided predictable, seasonal propulsion.India's prowess was built on the monsoons. By mastering the seasonal winds, Indian mariners turned the ocean into a highway. This made India the supreme trading power. Merchants from Rome and Egypt traded with Chinese and Southeast Asian counterparts on the Malabar and Coromandel coasts, leaving behind troves of coins as evidence.The SwitchThe remarkable thing is that these merchants did not even need to meet each other physically, because India provided the “multi-protocol switch”: translating their diverse needs and offering the conveniences of an entrepot, while also itself producing coveted, high-value products such as black pepper. For example, a Greek buyer could buy something from a Chinese seller, and settle the transaction using Indian credit.And how did India do it? By providing the “switching fabric”, such as the ports, the credit systems, and the security, that allowed these disparate worlds to exchange products and wealth without ever meeting.This is much like what a network gateway such as TIBCO does for packets of different kinds of data (in passing, how appropriate that TIBCO was founded by an Indian-American, Vivek Ranadive!). Hardware switches, eg. from Cisco Systems, have been around for a while, but TIBCO abstracted that functionality in software to connect those with different protocols.India already has many of the ingredients of the switching fabric in the India Stack. Using protocols like UPI, e-KYC, Account Aggregation, Central Bank Digital Currency, and ONDC, especially along with distributed-ledger blockchain-based Smart Contracts, it should be possible to provide end-to-end transparent and reliable multi-party trade support which complements the SWIFT payment system. Complement, not necessarily replace.The same pattern held with India's age-old trade system. The ports were on the Malabar Coast, such as Muziris; on the Coromandel coast, such as Arikkamedu; and on the Konkan Coast, such as Bharuchcha. The credit systems were run by temples which acted as both bankers and venture capitalists for the trading guilds. The security: well, that's what Rajendra Chola demonstrated in 1025 CE.Alas, medieval India lost its maritime focus. So did China. Both became insular, and were overwhelmed by invaders, including Turkics and Europeans. In India's case, the Turkic invaders were land-focused powers, although there were isolated maritime attempts (e.g. the Maratha Navy, Travancore defeating the Dutch in an amphibious battle at Colachel in 1741, etc.)Now, however, there are new ports. The most interesting is the Port of Trivandrum (Vizhinjam). This deep-water container transhipment port is only 10 nautical miles away from the Hormuz-Malacca sea lanes, and now when Dubai is closed, it reportedly has a backlog of a hundred container ships waiting to be berthed. Then there is the upcoming Vadhavan container port in Maharashtra, and the Galathea Bay container port in Great Nicobar, which overlooks the mouth of Malacca.Pax Indica todayThe modern idea of Pax Indica borrows from both perspectives: hard power and a switch. An Internet search brings up the fact that it was my friend Bapa Rao and I who first started talking about it in terms of India being the benevolent hegemon in the Indian Ocean, way back in the 1990s.Later, Shashi Tharoor wrote in his 2011 book Pax Indica that it could be “a peace system based on cooperation, stability, and rule‑based order in Asia and beyond, in which rising India helps shape the rules of the road rather than impose its will through hegemony.” That is, along roughly the same lines as the “multi protocol switch” or entrepot concept.Pax Indica is not an empire; it is an ecosystem. There are three aspects: military power, the full exploration of the multiprotocol switch, and the port-led development policy. Bapa Rao and I will consider these in a future article. Briefly, though, here is what these entail.* Project Power: Use a 3-carrier, 18-24-submarine navy to ensure no single power can close the ocean's gates.* Enable Trade: Use the Digital India Stack to act as the “Multi-Protocol Switch” for a fragmented world, plus super-ports like Vizhinjam (Trivandrum).* Secure the Choke Points: Be ready, like the Cholas, to act decisively when a “Srivijaya-style” blockade threatens the common good.Hard power needs to come through the acquisition of a blue water navy: at least three aircraft carrier groups, one for the Arabian Sea (Hormuz), one for the Bay of Bengal (Malacca), and one in maintenance, refit and upgrades.Even though drones and missiles have rendered them less dominant than in earlier times, carrier groups are still important for air superiority and power projection. But an ever-more critical factor is “area denial” by nuclear attack submarines (SSBN) that can launch second strike nuclear missiles as part of the “triad”, of which India should have at least three to four. In addition, there should be at least a dozen silent AIP-equipped diesel-electrics for securing straits, and at least 6-12 SSN (possibly leased) to enhance blue-water reach.“The IOR must become an Indian lake,” said General Raj Shukla on X. I agree: Not as a territory of conquest, but as a sanctuary of trade, where India sits at the center, as the protocol provider that makes world trade work again, as in millennia past.1500 words, 27 Apr, 2026Here's the notebookLM.google.com AI-generated video about this article: This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit rajeevsrinivasan.substack.com/subscribe

В этом выпуске мы вместе с Нурдаулетом Базылбековым — венчурным инвестором из Лондона (Eurasian Hub), который выписывает первые чеки лучшим в мире фаундерам из СНГ — говорим о реалиях венчура и о том, как сделать 30 топовых стартап-инвестиций всего за 9 месяцев. Обсуждаем внутреннюю кухню венчурного капитала: как распознать будущего «единорога» на самой ранней стадии, по каким критериям отбираются прорывные проекты, как работает экосистема Лондона для IT-предпринимателей, и какие неочевидные ошибки чаще всего допускают фаундеры при фандрейзинге в 2026 году. Эпизод будет интересен тем, кто строит свой стартап и планирует привлекать инвестиции, хочет понять логику принятия решений венчурными фондами, и как получить тот самый «первый чек», интересуется глобальным рынком и масштабированием за рубеж, а также ищет инсайты от инвестора, работающего с лучшими tech-талантами.

Eleanor Barraclough details the evolution of the Vikings from raiders to conquerors and settlers who established vast territories. Following a massive raid on Paris that yielded 7,000 pounds of gold, the "Great Heathen Army" invaded England in 865 AD, creating the Danelaw where Norse law and place names left a permanent linguistic imprint. Simultaneously, the "Rus" expanded eastward, navigating Eurasian rivers to settle Novgorod by 862 AD, demonstrating the dual-facing nature of the Norse diaspora. (2)

Interview recorded - 16th of April 2026On this episode of the WTFinance podcast I had the pleasure of welcoming back Glenn Diesen. Professor Glenn Diesen is a political scientist at the University of South-Eastern Norway, associate editor at Russia in Global Affairs, and one of the most cited scholars on Russian foreign policy and Eurasian integration. His book, The Ukraine War and the Eurasian World Order, has been described by John Mearsheimer as a must-read for anyone trying to understand the great shift in global power taking place before our eyes.During our conversation we spoke about the overview of geopolitical situation, extended proxy wars, global economic fallout, conflict off ramp, potential for another Suez crisis and more. 0:00 - Introduction2:56 - Overview of geopolitical situation5:36 - Extended proxy war8:22 - Iran leverage12:01 - Attacking GCC neighbours15:08 - China & Russia supporting Iran17:45 - Global economic fallout19:51 - Conflict off ramp?22:54 - Trump destroying uni hegimony?25:48 - Another Suez crisis?28:14 - Middle powers33:22 - Re-militarisation of the world36:01 - Future world38:57 - One message to takeaway?Professor Diesen is an academic, author, editor, and political commentator. His research focus is primarily on Russian foreign policy and the geoeconomics of Greater Eurasia and the emerging strategic partnership between Russia and China. Diesen's latest books are The Ukraine War & the Eurasian World Order (2024); Russophobia: Propaganda in International Politics (2022), Europe as the Western Peninsula of Greater Eurasia: Geoeconomic Regions in a Multipolar World (2021); Russian Conservatism: Managing Change under Permanent Revolution (2021); Great Power Politics in the Fourth Industrial Rivalry: The Geoeconomics of Technological Sovereignty (2021); The Return of Eurasia (2021); Russia in a Changing World (2020); The Decay of Western Civilisation and Resurgence of Russia: Between Gemeinschaft and Gesellschaft (2018); Russia's Geoeconomic Strategy for a Greater Eurasia (2017); and EU and NATO relations with Russia: After the collapse of the Soviet Union (2015).Glenn Diesen: X: https://twitter.com/Glenn_DiesenSubstack: https://glenndiesen.substack.com/YouTube: @GDiesen1 WTFinance -Instagram - https://www.instagram.com/wtfinancee/Spotify - https://open.spotify.com/show/67rpmjG92PNBW0doLyPvfniTunes - https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/wtfinance/id1554934665?uo=4Twitter - https://twitter.com/AnthonyFatseas

Stephanne and Daryl expain the "pigsplosian" that has taken place across North America. Wild hogs, feral pigs, Eurasian boars... whatever you want to call them, they're bad but they're here to stay.

ACTA's Academic Affairs Fellow Veronica Bryant welcomes Glenn Corn, who spent 35 years working in the national security and international affairs community. Mr. Corn served as CIA chief of station for four different Eurasian and Middle Eastern countries. He now teaches graduate-level courses in International Affairs and Security Studies at the Institute of World Politics. In addition to his teaching work, Mr. Corn provides strategic advising and consulting, acts as a visiting fellow at George Mason University's law school's National Security Institute, and serves as an expert contributor to the Cipher Brief. Mr. Corn compellingly argues that language learning is essential, both for an intelligence career and for national security.

Conversations on Groong - April 4, 2026In this episode of Conversations on Groong, Pietro Shakarian joins Hovik and Asbed to examine the Iran war, its impact on Russia, Ukraine, and the wider Eurasian balance, and what it means for Armenia's security and foreign policy. The discussion also looks at Pashinyan's strained Moscow visit, the uncertain future of TRIPP, Armenia-Russia tensions, and the fast-forming landscape of Armenia's June parliamentary elections, including the opposition field, campaign narratives, and the stakes for the country's political future.Topics:   - The Iran War and Its Global Impacts  - Armenia-Russia Relations  - Parliamentary Elections in ArmeniaGuest: Pietro ShakarianHosts:  - Hovik Manucharyan  - Asbed BedrossianEpisode 529 | Recorded: April 3, 2026SHOW NOTES: https://podcasts.groong.org/529#IranIsraelWar #IsraelIranConflict #IsraelConflict #Armenia #MiddleEastCrisis#ArmeniaElections #PietroShakarian #TRIPPSubscribe and follow us everywhere you are: linktr.ee/groong

In this episode of GREAT POWER PODCAST, host Ilan Berman talks with Michael Kofman of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace about the current state of the war between Russia and Ukraine, and its implications for the U.S. campaign against Iran and Great Power rivalry more broadly.BIO:Michael Kofman is a senior fellow in the Russia and Eurasia Program at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, where he focuses on the Russian military, Ukrainian armed forces, and Eurasian security issues. Prior to joining Carnegie in 2023, he served as director of the Russia Studies Program at the Center for Naval Analyses, where he led a team conducting research on the capabilities, strategy, and military thought of the Russian Armed Forces. Kofman is a contributing editor at War on the Rocks, where he hosts the Russia Contingency, a bi-weekly podcast on the Russian military and the Russia-Ukraine war. He previously served as a research fellow and program manager at the National Defense University. Past fellowships have included the Modern War Institute at West Point, Center for New American Security, and the Woodrow Wilson Center.

Previously dismissed as a niche academic concept and a talking point for Central Asia specialists, the Middle Corridor has re-emerged as one of the most discussed trade routes in Eurasia amid war, sanctions, and growing instability across the world's maritime chokepoints. Running from western China through Central Asia, across the Caspian, through the Caucasus and on toward Europe, the corridor promises a route that bypasses Russia, avoids Iran, and reduces dependence on vulnerable sea lanes through Hormuz, Suez, and the Red Sea. Yet behind the hype lies a much messier reality. The route is fragmented, expensive, capacity-constrained, and still plagued by border delays, port bottlenecks, gauge breaks, and political risk stretching from Kazakhstan to Georgia. But as China searches for strategic redundancy, Europe looks for alternatives to the Russian route, and Central Asia seeks deeper regional integration and greater leverage between Moscow and Beijing, the question remains: is the Middle Corridor a viable new artery of Eurasian trade, or merely an overpriced hedge for a more dangerous world? Our panel of experts examines the economics, the geopolitics, and the hard limits of the route in 2026. - S. Frederick Starr (Central Asia -Caucasus Institute) - Bruce Pannier (Foreign Policy Research Institute) - Peter Leonard (CAPS Unlock)  - Eric Rudenshiold (Caspian Policy Center) Intro - 00:00 PART I - 03:20 PART II - 23:08 PART III - 50:12 PART IV - 1:03:39 Outro - 1:23:54 Follow the show on https://x.com/TheRedLinePod Follow Michael on https://x.com/MikeHilliardAus Support the show at: https://www.patreon.com/theredlinepodcast Submit Questions and Join the Red Line Discord Server at: https://www.theredlinepodcast.com/discord For more info, please visit: https://www.theredlinepodcast.com/ Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Further reading: Identifying the beasts in Caesar's forest Reindeer: Show transcript: Welcome to Strange Animals Podcast. I'm your host, Kate Shaw. After the glaciers retreated from Europe at the end of the last ice age, around 11,000 years ago, forests grew wherever there was enough soil to support a tree. As these new forests spread, they joined forests that had survived the glaciations. By the time ancient Romans were writing about the things they encountered while exploring western Europe, around 2,000 years ago, the forest stretched across much of the continent and was considered a wild, dangerous place. They called it the Hercynian [her-SIN-ian] forest and it was supposed to be full of peculiar animals. An account of the forest appears in the book Commentarii del Bello Gallico, the first edition of which was published just over 2,000 years ago in 49 BCE. It was written by Julius Caesar, or at least he was involved in it even if he didn't actually write it personally, since it was about his military campaigns. In one section of the book he discusses the Hercynian forest and three remarkable animals that lived in it. The first was called the uri, which were supposed to look like bulls but were almost the size of elephants, and were incredibly aggressive. This is probably the same animal often called the aurochs, which we talked about in episode 58. The aurochs was probably the wild ancestor of the domesticated cow and could stand almost six feet tall at the shoulder, or 1.8 meters. It had already gone extinct in most places 500 years before Caesar wrote his book, but it still lived in parts of Europe. The second animal is a lot harder to identify. The alces looked like a big goat that either didn't have horns or had very short ones, but its legs didn't have joints. If an alces fell over, it couldn't get up again. Caesar explained that hunters used this to their advantage. Because the alces couldn't lie down at night, it would sleep by propping itself against a tree. The hunters would note which tree an alces preferred, and during the day they'd cut a notch in the trunk. When the alces leaned against it at night to sleep, the tree would topple over, taking the animal with it. The waiting hunters would then be able to just stroll up and kill the alces. Naturally, this story doesn't make any sense. All tetrapods have jointed legs. But the story of an animal without joints in its legs crops up in various stories from around this time, including the part where hunters cut a notch in a tree trunk to knock the animal over. It's a story once told about the elephant and the Eurasian elk, among others, and the alces was probably based on the Eurasian elk. That's the Eurasian population of the animal called the moose in North America. Because the story specifies that the alces either didn't have horns or had very small ones, it's possible that Caesar based his story on the female elk, which doesn't have antlers. Incidentally, we're so certain that the alces was the same animal as the Eurasian elk that its scientific name is actually Alces alces. Finally, the Hercynian deer was likewise large and had a single horn. A translation of the passage states: “There is an ox with the shape of a deer; projecting out of its forehead, in the middle, between the ears, is a single horn, which is both longer and more upright than those horns we are used to seeing.” Other sources that talk about this animal also say that the horn branched at the end, and Caesar notes that both males and females had these horns. This gives us a big clue as to what animal might have inspired the account. Unlike most deer, both male and female reindeer have antlers. Unlike caribou, the North American reindeer species, the European reindeer often has relatively long and straight main shafts on its antlers that then enlarge at the end in what's called a palmate structure. That basically means it's shaped like a hand. But reindeer have two antlers, not one. It's possible that the story of the Hercynian deer was inspired by the unicorn legend, which was based on the rhinoceros. It might also have been inspired by Caesar sighting a reindeer that had dropped one antler but hadn't yet lost the other one, since like other deer, reindeer shed their antlers and regrow them every year. The reason Caesar wrote about the animals of the Hercynian forest in the first place was to underline how strange and uncivilized the people living in the area were. The people in question are what today we would call Germans. Caesar stresses that all these animals are ones never seen anywhere else, and he might easily have added exotic details from other fabulous animals to make these animals seem extra weird. These days most of the Hercynian forest is long gone, chopped down for people to turn into farmland and towns. While the Eurasian elk and the reindeer are still around, they no longer live as far south as Germany. The last aurochs went extinct in 1627 in Poland. But the German people are doing just fine, and they're a lot more civilized than Caesar gave them credit for 2,000 years ago. Thanks for your support, and thanks for listening!

Oldest Stories Album available here: https://distrokid.com/hyperfollow/oldeststoriesmusic/oldest-stories-vol-1 but also possibly on your favorite music distributor service also. Check it out!This episode examines the middle years of the reign of Sargon II of Assyria (r. 722–705 BCE) during a brief period when the Assyrian Empire faced unusually little large-scale war. Following Sargon's major victory over Urartu in 714–713 BCE, the geopolitical balance of the Near East shifted dramatically. Urartu, long the primary rival to Assyria in the Armenian highlands, was weakened both by Sargon's campaign and by the simultaneous arrival of Cimmerian nomadic groups moving south from the Eurasian steppe. With the northern frontier temporarily stabilized, Assyria was able to redirect attention to other regions of the empire.The episode explores several smaller conflicts and political developments across the western and northern frontiers of the Assyrian state. These include Assyrian responses to Ionian Greek activity in the eastern Mediterranean, tensions involving the kingdom of Phrygia under King Midas, and Assyrian intervention in Que (Cilicia) and surrounding Anatolian regions. At the same time, Sargon dealt with internal revolts and political instability among the Medes, the mountain regions of Ellipi and Karalla, and the frontier kingdoms of Tabal and Melid. These campaigns illustrate the normal functioning of Assyrian imperial policy: suppression of rebellions, deportations of local populations, and the conversion of client kingdoms into directly administered Assyrian provinces.A major focus of the episode is the internal operation of the Assyrian imperial system during periods without major war. The construction of Dur-Sharrukin (Khorsabad), Sargon II's new royal capital, was underway during these years and required enormous logistical coordination. The episode discusses how the Assyrian state mobilized labor through the ilku labor obligation, how deported populations enabled large-scale construction and agricultural expansion, and how provincial governors coordinated the movement of materials such as timber, metals, and stone across the empire. Additional projects included fortress construction along frontier regions, mining expansion in the Zagros and Syrian territories, canal digging, orchard planting, and temple renovation in major Assyrian cities.The episode also examines Assyria's economic structure and trade environment during Sargon's reign. Evidence from administrative letters suggests increased regulation of trade routes and resource flows, including restrictions on certain goods such as iron. Interactions with Arab tribes and desert traders, including references to Queen Samsi of the Arabs, highlight the complex relationship between Assyria and nomadic groups operating on the edges of imperial control.Finally, the narrative turns to renewed instability in the west triggered by rumors of Sargon's death and unfavorable omens. Rebellions in Philistine Ashdod, Gurgum, and Kammanu prompted swift Assyrian retaliation, demonstrating the continuing reliance on rapid punitive campaigns to maintain imperial authority. These events mark the end of the short period of relative calm and set the stage for Sargon's major campaign to reclaim Babylon, which had been lost earlier in his reign after the revolt of Merodach-Baladan and Elamite intervention.I am also doing daily history facts again, at least until I run out of time again. You can find Oldest Stories daily on Tiktok and Youtube Shorts.If you like the show, consider sharing with your friends, leaving a like, subscribing, or even supporting financially:Buy the Oldest Stories books: https://a.co/d/7Wn4jhSDonate here: https://oldeststories.net/or on patreon: https://patreon.com/JamesBleckleyor on youtube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCCG2tPxnHNNvMd0VrInekaA/joinYoutube and Patreon members get access to bonus content produced when and as I have time.

The Inca Empire was the largest and most sophisticated state ever created in the pre-Columbian Americas, stretching along the Andes from present-day southern Colombia to central Chile and Argentina by the early 16th century.  What makes it historically significant is that the Inca managed to build and administer this enormous realm without many technologies that Eurasian civilizations relied on, such as iron tools, wheels, draft animals, or a conventional writing system. As great as its accomplishments were, its fall at the hands of the Spanish was just as dramatic and sudden. Learn more about the Incan Empire on this episode of Everything Everywhere Daily. Sponsors Quince Go to quince.com/daily for 365-day returns, plus free shipping on your order! Mint Mobile Get your 3-month Unlimited wireless plan for just 15 bucks a month at mintmobile.com/eed Subscribe to the podcast!  https://everything-everywhere.com/everything-everywhere-daily-podcast/ -------------------------------- Executive Producer: Charles Daniel Associate Producers: Austin Oetken & Cameron Kieffer   Become a supporter on Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/everythingeverywhere Discord Server: https://discord.gg/Ds7Rx7jvPJ Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/everythingeverywhere/ Facebook Group: https://www.facebook.com/groups/everythingeverywheredaily Twitter: https://twitter.com/everywheretrip Website: https://everything-everywhere.com/  Disce aliquid novi cotidie Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Here's some real news that will shock the normal people. Scripted world events are happening that the MSM won't touch. Subscribing to rigid ideologies generates worldwide problems. Russia's balancing act on energy is looking shaky. They lose, we don't. Eurasian struggles occur over power issues. Control the tap and call the shots. The huge geopolitical lessons of the day. Real wars occur that aren't on TV. The geographic chessboard is real. Let's start with the recent history of Yugoslavia. It got help in falling apart. Regional power struggles in action. Find fault lines and wire them to explode. History's extraordinary ironies are showing. The Ottoman Empire represented the beating heart of Islam. Turkey created Sharia law. Yes, our intel people were involved. No American citizens are dying for Israel. Geography provides unreal dynamics, and genocide. Cyprus was always screwed. The world's throat is the Bosporus Straight. Who are the new Ottomans? Erdogan is playing big cards. China's Belt and Road project produces political pressures. We needed Turkey, so that changed NATO's game. Don't forget the Saudi Turkey shadow war to control Sunni Islam. For those understanding the puzzle, the pieces are fitting together in an alarming way.

  1.Michael Vlahos as Germanicus debates Gaius in Londinium on parallels between FDR's strategic pivoting in 1941 and the modern United States facing a two-front confrontation against Russia and China. While FDR successfully managed a global vision across separate theaters in Europe and the Pacific, Germanicus argues the contemporary US faces a far more dire reality. Unlike 1941 when American industrial capacity was ascending and capable of outproducing all adversaries, today's United States lacks the manufacturing base to fight simultaneously on two fronts. Germanicus notes that China possesses two hundred times the shipbuilding capability of the US and that American naval vessels are currently covered in rust from neglect. While Gaius observes that FDR prepared Americans for initial losses and questions whether Russia and China constitute a unified axis similar to the Tripartite Pact, Germanicus contends modern America is too divided domestically to absorb military reverses. He argues that Russia and China effectively operate as a single Eurasian entity playing a long game, while the US is losing its proxy war in Ukraine and lacks both military discipline and industrial might to confront Putin and Xi Jinping's strategic patience.

Jeff Smith and Carson Odegard wrap the season with a clean, property-by-property breakdown—January numbers, year-over-year changes, species quirks, and the big themes (fog, late rains, road work, king tides) that moved the needle across CWA hunts. Expect straight talk on mallards and pintail, why Staten keeps trending up, and how Goose Lake quietly turned in one of its best mixed-bag years.January by the numbersStaten Island: 4.4 birds/hunter; GWT + specks led.Goose Lake (Tulare Basin): 4.2; teal-heavy, strong mixed bags.Quimby Island (Delta): 3.4; GWT + mallard.Sanborn Slough (Butte Sink): 3.4; deeper water pushed hooded mergansers & ring-necks.Grizzly Ranch (Suisun): 2.6; GWT + spoonies, up from December.Butte Creek Island Ranch: 2.6; flood/high water effects.Potrero (Suisun): 1.7.Denverton (Suisun): 1.5.Season takeawaysMallard softness: Big drop at Quimby (248 → 101 mallards) and a lighter mallard picture statewide.Goose gains where it counts: Staten goose harvest jumped (specks 231 vs. 146; snows 156 vs. 75).Species surprises: Goose Lake went from 0 → 33 redheads; Staten logged a long-tailed duck and Eurasian wigeon.Weather & work mattered: Long tule-fog stretches, night road work, king tides, and late rains reshuffled use patterns—good for some units, tough on others.Pintail reality check: A 3-bird limit didn't blow the doors off harvest totals—availability and conditions were the limiter.Quick stat stack (program-wide) 1600+ teal • 1040+ spoonies • 390+ mallards • 330+ specks.If you hunted with us—thank you. Keep an eye on calwaterfowl.org for spring turkey, pig hunts, and next season's applications.

American Front, James Porrazzo, Abraxas Foundation/circle, Adam Parfrey, Michael J. Moynihan, New Resistance, Third Column (Porrazzo's band), Porrazzo's Springfield arrest, Porrazzo's drug arrest, GHB, ketamine, was Porrazzo dealing?, Joshua Caleb Sutter, the timing of Sutter and Porrazzo's arrests, Lyndon McLeod, McLeod's Denver killing spree, McLeod's trip to Utah, Thomas Schoenberger, Cicada 3301, alternate reality games (ARGs), QAnon, Wolves of Vinland, Jack Donovan, Porrazzo's links to McLeod, Lily Moss, extremist researchers, Process Church of the Final Judgment, Order of Nine Angles (O9A), New Generation Jalisco Cartel (CJNG), Porrazzo's alleged links to CJNG, Daria Dugina, Dugin, Uriel's background and links to Porrazzo, informants/agent provocateurs, nationalism in the Global South, Fourth Position, the Eurasian movement, Dugin's links in Brazil, New Resistance in Brazil and France, what Dugin really thought of PorrazzoThis episode is a companion piece to "The Secret History of the American Front"Also related to "The Secret History of Nazi Satanism"ResourcesThe documentary Porrazzo appears inThe Vice McLeod ArticleMoss' Porrazzo InterviewMoss' CJNG ArticleMoss' Dugina ArticleMusic by: Keith Allen Dennishttps://keithallendennis.bandcamp.com/ Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Sometime around 5,500 years ago, an event took place on the Eurasian steppes that fundamentally changed the world.  We don't know who did it or exactly when it took place, but it was one of the single greatest moments in all of human history.  It ushered in revolutions in agriculture, transportation, and warfare, and its impact can still be witnessed around the world today. Learn more about the domestication of the horse and how it impacted the world on this episode of Everything Everywhere Daily. Sponsors Quince Go to quince.com/daily for 365-day returns, plus free shipping on your order! Mint Mobile Get your 3-month Unlimited wireless plan for just 15 bucks a month at mintmobile.com/eed Chubbies Get 20% off your purchase at Chubbies with the promo code DAILY at checkout! Aura Frames Exclusive $35 off Carver Mat at https://on.auraframes.com/DAILY. Promo Code DAILY DripDrop Go to dripdrop.com and use promo code EVERYTHING for 20% off your first order. Uncommon Goods Go to uncommongoods.com/DAILY for 15% off! Subscribe to the podcast!  https://everything-everywhere.com/everything-everywhere-daily-podcast/ -------------------------------- Executive Producer: Charles Daniel Associate Producers: Austin Oetken & Cameron Kieffer   Become a supporter on Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/everythingeverywhere Discord Server: https://discord.gg/UkRUJFh Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/everythingeverywhere/ Facebook Group: https://www.facebook.com/groups/everythingeverywheredaily Twitter: https://twitter.com/everywheretrip Website: https://everything-everywhere.com/  Disce aliquid novi cotidie Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

4/8. The Second Eurasian Invasion: Herding Culture, Wolves, and the Birth of the Global Market Economy — Dan Flores — European colonists expressed astonishment regarding the extraordinary abundance of American wildlife following the catastrophic population decline of Native American societies. Flores explains that European settlers possessed a distinctive herding culture and ideology of human exceptionalism—the conviction that animals lack souls and exist solely as human resources. Flores documents that colonists immediately targeted apex predators, particularly wolves, for systematic elimination. Flores argues that this predator-eradication philosophy, combined with the emergence of the global market economy and Adam Smith's ideas of rational self-interest, transformed wild animals into commodities, exemplified by the systematic fur trade targeting beaver populations.

1/8. The Deep History of North American Mammals and the Arrival of Human Predators — Dan Flores — Flores's book Wild New World examines North American fauna spanning 66 million years, detailing the evolutionary processes and intercontinental migration patterns that created the diverse Pliocene animal assemblage. Flores argues that Eurasian animals including deer and elk possessed significant adaptive advantages over indigenous species because they possessed millennia of evolutionary experience with humans functioning as apex predators. Flores emphasizes that humans emerged as a distinctive carnivorous mammalian species possessing unprecedented hunting capabilities, ultimately driving them across continents and oceans in search of prey.

The Decline of Democracy: Autocracy and Oligarchy on the Rise. Gaius and Germanicus discuss Michael McFaul's hypothesis that democracy is in recession and autocracy is ascendant. Germanicus concurs, blaming "Blue" (Democrats) for pursuing steps that strip the nation of its Republican character, including efforts to control media and censor, which he terms "creeping authoritarianism." He cites examples like a two-tier justice system and the pursuit of "thought crimes" (e.g., silent praying outside an abortion clinic) in the US and UK. Germanicus believes the US is heading toward a "brutal oligarchy" controlled by a ruling class, rather than a classic autocracy. Gaius asks if autocratic models, such as Chinese capitalism, are appealing to allies. Germanicus confirms that certain nations (like the expanding BRICS) view China and Russia as providing a better model for societal progress, especially given the US's poor global reputation since 2001. Furthermore, neoliberalism benefits only the very wealthy, creating devastating wealth inequality akin to the ancien régime before the French Revolution. Projecting 100 years ahead, Germanicus believes the US will likely be an "oligarchic autocracy" and an empire competing as a trans-Pacific/transatlantic block against a Eurasian block. They agree that modern technology, capable of tracking thoughts and speech, is an "enormously powerful instrument" supporting this autocratic trend. Germanicus notes that moralizing about dictators and "saving democracy" will persist, but merely as a means to keep the population passive and quiet, labeling modern censorship as highly Orwellian. They conclude they are living through a transformation from kingship to democracy, now moving toward autocracy. 80 BCE. SULLA 

2. From Raiders to Rulers: The Danelaw and the Eastern Expansion of the Norse Eleanor Barraclough Embers of the Hands: Hidden Histories of the Viking Age The discussion highlights the transformation of Vikings from raiders—who famously plundered Paris for 7,000 pounds of gold—to military conquerors. The Great Heathen Army arrived in England around 865, conquering East Anglia, Northumbria, and Mercia. The subsequent stalemate led to an agreement between King Alfred and the Norse leader Guthrum toward the end of the ninth century. This accord established the Danelaw, granting the Norse political and legal control over vast swathes of England, evidenced today by Old Norse influences in place names. The Norse cultural sphere was enormous, characterized by a diaspora that spread east and west. People from what is now Sweden moved down Eurasian waterways, becoming known as the Varangians, or Russ (rowers), and settled Novgorod in 862.