Podcasts about soviet

Katsiaryna Shmatsina, Eurasia Fellow at Lawfare, sits down with Gabrielius Landsbergis, former Lithuanian Foreign Minister (2020–2024), now a visiting fellow at Stanford University, and Vytis Jurkonis, Associate Professor at Vilnius University and Director of Freedom House's Lithuania office.They discuss Lithuania's response to Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine, including shifts in security policy, public sentiment, and military readiness. The conversation covers regional defense, U.S.–Lithuania relations, NATO's role, and growing concerns about possible escalation into the Baltic region. They also reflect on Lithuania's path from Soviet occupation to independence and its integration into NATO and the EU.Additional resources on this topic:Read more from GabrieliusRead more from Katsiaryna on the U.S. administration's deal with Belarusian regimeRelated: Regional threat assessment of Russian military buildup near NATO bordersTo receive ad-free podcasts, become a Lawfare Material Supporter at www.patreon.com/lawfare. You can also support Lawfare by making a one-time donation at https://givebutter.com/lawfare-institute.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Journalist Julia Ioffe returns to The Naked Pravda to discuss her new book, Motherland: A Feminist History of Modern Russia, from Revolution to Autocracy, which was recently listed as a finalist for the National Book Award. Julia describes her years-long writing process, the blending of memoir and historical analysis, and the unique perspective provided by the narratives of women from the top echelons of Soviet and Russian society. The episode provides a detailed look at the complexities of Soviet and Russian feminism, making it a must-listen for anyone interested in this history and gender studies. Timestamps for this episode: (2:25) Chronological structure and key figures(6:07) Stalin's daughter: A metaphor for Russia(9:49) Challenges of historical accuracy(18:09) Balancing American paradigms and Russian perspectives(29:22) Class and cultural differencesКак поддержать нашу редакцию — даже если вы в России и вам очень страшно

This is a free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit www.wethefifth.com Michael McFaul, former US ambassador to Russia, has a new book…- The disaster of Russia- Trump's evolving views on Putin (and Nigel's…and Georgia's…)- When McFaul met Putin…in 1991- Was the Maidan uprising an American-sponsored coup?- It's not about NATO- From boring technocrat to a nationalist, imperialist ideologue- What does Putin believe?- Vlad the flat taxer - He's not a Bolshevik- A crook, sure. But an ideological crook- Does no one care about 200,000 dead Russians?- Liberation or surveillance - Elite fatigue in Putin's Russia- The documentary Moynihan mentioned - Mike McFaul, Soviet bootlegger

Last time we spoke about the beginning of the Wuhan Campaign. As Japanese forces pressed toward central China, Chiang Kai-shek faced a brutal choice: defend Wuhan with costly sieges or unleash a dangerous flood to buy time. The Yellow River breached its banks at Huayuankou, sending a wall of water racing toward villages, railways, and fields. The flood did not erase the enemy; it bought months of breathing room for a battered China, but at a terrible toll to civilians who lost homes, farms, and lives. Within Wuhan's orbit, a mosaic of Chinese forces struggled to unite. The NRA, split into competing war zones and factions, numbered about 1.3 million but fought with uneven equipment and training. The Japanese, deploying hundreds of thousands, ships, and air power, pressed from multiple angles: Anqing, Madang, Jiujiang, and beyond, using riverine forts and amphibious landings to turn the Yangtze into a deadly artery. Yet courage endured as troops held lines, pilots challenged the skies, and civilians, like Wang Guozhen, who refused to betray his country, chose defiance over surrender. The war for Wuhan was not a single battle but a testament to endurance in the face of overwhelming odds.   #173 The Fall of Wuhan 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. In the last episode we began the Battle of Wuhan. Japan captured Anqing and gained air access to Jiujiang, Chinese defenses around the Yangtze River were strained. The southern Yangtze's Ninth War Zone held two key garrisons: one west of Poyang Lake and another in Jiujiang. To deter Japanese assault on Jiujiang, China fortified Madang with artillery, mines, and bamboo booms. On June 24, Japan conducted a surprise Madang landing while pressing south along the Yangtze. Madang's fortress withstood four assaults but suffered heavy bombardment and poison gas. Chinese leadership failures contributed to the fall: Li Yunheng, overseeing Madang, was away at a ceremony, leaving only partial contingents, primarily three battalions from marine corps units and the 313th regiment of the 53rd division, participating, totaling under five battalions. Reinforcements from Pengze were misrouted by Li's orders, arriving too late. Madang fell after three days. Chiang Kai-shek retaliated with a counterattack and rewarded units that recaptured Xiangshan, but further progress was blocked. Li Yunheng was court-martialed, and Xue Weiying executed.   Madang's loss opened a corridor toward Jiujiang. The Japanese needed weeks to clear minefields, sacrificing several ships in the process. With roughly 200,000 Chinese troops in the Jiujiang–Ruichang zone under Xue Yue and Zhang Fukui, the Japanese captured Pengze and then Hukou, using poison gas again during the fighting. The Hukou evacuation cut off many non-combat troops, with over 1,800 of 3,100 soldiers successfully evacuated and more than 1,300 missing drowned in the lake. Two weeks after Hukou's fall, the Japanese reached Jiujiang and overtook it after a five-day battle. The retreat left civilians stranded, and the Jiujiang Massacre followed: about 90,000 civilians were killed, with mass executions of POWs, rapes, and widespread destruction of districts, factories, and transport. Subsequently, the Southern Riverline Campaign saw Japanese detachments along the river advance westward, capturing Ruichang, Ruoxi, and other areas through October, stretching Chinese defenses thin as Japan pressed toward Wuchang and beyond. On July 26, 1938, the Japanese occupied Jiujiang and immediately divided their forces into three routes: advancing toward De'an and Nanchang, then striking Changsha, severing the Yue-Han Railway, and surrounding Wuhan in an effort to annihilate the Chinese field army. The advance of the 101st and 106th Infantry Divisions slowed south of the Yangtze River, yet the Central China Expeditionary Army remained intent on seizing Ruichang and De'an to cut off Chinese forces around Mount Lu. To this end, the 9th and 27th Infantry Divisions were deployed to the sector, with the 9th regarded as an experienced unit that had fought in earlier campaigns, while the 27th was newly formed in the summer of 1938; this contrast underscored the rapidly expanding scope of the war in China as the Japanese Army General Staff continued mobilizing reservists and creating new formations. According to the operational plan, the 101st and 106th Divisions would push south toward De'an to pin Chinese defenders, while the 9th and 27th Divisions would envelop Chinese forces south of the river. Okamura Yasuji ordered five battalions from the 9th to move toward De'an via Ruichang, and the Hata Detachment was tasked with securing the area northwest of Ruichang to protect the 9th's flank. North of the Yangtze, the 6th Infantry Division was to move from Huangmei to Guangji, with Tianjiazhen as the ultimate objective; capturing Tianjiazhen would allow the 11th Army to converge on Wuhan from both north and south of the river.  The operation began when the 9th Division landed at Jiujiang, threatening the left flank of the Jinguanqiao line. The Chinese responded by deploying the 1st Corps to counter the 9th Division's left flank, which threatened the Maruyama Detachment's lines of communication. The Maruyama Detachment counterattacked successfully, enabling the rest of the 9th Division to seize Ruichang on August 24; on the same day, the 9th attacked the 30th Army defending Mount Min. The Chinese defense deteriorated on the mountain, and multiple counterattacks by Chinese divisions failed, forcing the 1st Corps to retreat to Mahuiling. The seizure of Ruichang and the surrounding area was followed by a wave of atrocities, with Japanese forces inflicting substantial casualties, destroying houses, and damaging property, and crimes including murder, rape, arson, torture, and looting devastating many villages and livelihoods in the Ruichang area. After Ruichang and Mount Min fell, the Maruyama Detachment and the 106th Infantry Division advanced on Mahuiling, seeking to encircle Chinese forces from the northwest, with the 106th forming the inner ring and the Maruyama Detachment the outer ring; this coordination led to Mahuiling's fall on September 3. The 27th Infantry Division, arriving in late August, landed east of Xiaochikou, providing the manpower to extend Japanese offensives beyond the Yangtze's banks and outflank Chinese defenders along the river. Its main objective was to seize the Rui-wu highway, a vital route for the continued advance toward Wuhan. After the fall of Mahuiling, Japanese command altered its strategy. The 11th Army ordered the Maruyama Detachment to rejoin the 9th Infantry Division and press westward, while the 101st Infantry Division was to remain at Mahuiling and push south toward De'an along with the 106th Infantry Division. This divergent or “eccentric” offensive aimed to advance on Wuhan while protecting the southern flank. The renewed offensive began on September 11, 1938, with the 9th Infantry Division and Hata Detachment advancing west along the Rui-yang and Rui-wu highways toward Wuhan, followed days later by the 27th Infantry Division. Initially, the Japanese made solid progress from Ruichang toward a line centered on Laowuge, but soon faced formidable Chinese defenses. The 9th and 27th Divisions confronted the Chinese 2nd Army Corps, which had prepared in-depth positions in the mountains west of Sanchikou and Xintanpu. The 27th Division encountered stiff resistance from the 18th and 30th Corps, and although it captured Xiaoao by September 24, its vanguard advancing west of Shujie came under heavy attack from the 91st, 142nd, 60th, and 6th Reserve Infantry Divisions, threatening to encircle it. Only the southward advance of the 101st and 106th Divisions relieved the pressure, forcing the Chinese to redeploy the 91st and 6th Reserve Divisions to the south and thereby loosening the 27th's grip. After the redeployment, the 9th and 27th Divisions resumed their push. The 9th crossed the Fu Shui on October 9 and took Sanjikou on October 16, while the 27th seized Xintanpu on October 18. The Hata Detachment followed, capturing Yangxin on October 18 and Ocheng on October 23, further tightening Japanese control over the highways toward Wuhan. By mid-October, 11th Army commander Okamura Yasuji resolved to sever the Guangzhou-Hankou railway to disrupt Chinese lines. On October 22, the 9th and 27th Divisions attacked toward Jinniu and Xianning. By October 27, the 9th had captured Jinniu and cut the railway; the 27th Division extended the disruption further south. These actions effectively isolated Wuchang from the south, giving the Imperial Japanese Army greater leverage over the southern approaches to Wuhan. The push south by the 101st and 106th Infantry Divisions pressed toward De'an, where they encountered the entrenched Chinese 1st Army Corps. The offensive began on September 16 and by the 24th, elements of the 27th Division penetrated deep into the area west of Baishui Street and De'an's environs. Recognizing the growing crisis, Xue Yue mobilized the nearby 91st and 142nd Divisions, who seized Nanping Mountain along the Ruiwu Line overnight, effectively cutting off the 27th Division's retreat. Fierce combat on the 25th and 26th saw Yang Jialiu, commander of the 360th Regiment of the 60th Division, die a heroic death. Zhang Zhihe, chief of staff of the 30th Group Army and an underground CCP member, commanded the newly formed 13th Division and the 6th Division to annihilate the Suzuki Regiment and recapture Qilin Peak. Learning of the 27th Division's trap, Okamura Yasuji panicked and, on the 25th, urgently ordered the 123rd, 145th, and 147th Infantry Regiments and mountain artillery of the 106th Division on the Nanxun Line, along with the 149th Regiment of the 101st Division on the Dexing Line, to rush to Mahuiling and Xingzi. To adapt to mountain warfare, some units were temporarily converted to packhorse formations. On the 27th, the 106th Division broke through the Wutailing position with force, splitting into two groups and pushing toward Erfangzheng and Lishan. By the 28th, the three regiments and mountain artillery of the 106th Division advanced into the mountain villages of Wanjialing, Leimingguliu, Shibaoshan, Nantianpu, Beixijie, and Dunshangguo, about 50 li west of De'an. On the same day, the 149th Regiment of the 101st Division entered the Wanjialing area and joined the 106th Division. Commanded by Lieutenant General Junrokuro Matsuura, the 106th Division sought to break out of Baicha and disrupt the Nanwu Highway to disrupt the Chinese retreat from De'an. At this juncture, Xue Yue's corps perceived the Japanese advance as a predatory, wolf-like maneuver and deemed it a strategic opportunity to counterattack. He resolved to pull forces from Dexing, Nanxun, and Ruiwu to envelop the enemy near Wanjialing, with the aim of annihilating them. Thus began a desperate, pivotal battle between China and Japan in northern Jiangxi, centered on the Wanjialing area. The Japanese 106th Division found its rear communications cut off around September 28, 1938, as the Chinese blockade tightened. Despite the 27th Division's severed rear and its earlier defeat at Qilin Peak, Okamura Yasuji ordered a renewed push to relieve the besieged 106th by directing the 27th Division to attack Qilin Peak and advance east of Baishui Street. In this phase, the 27th Division dispatched the remnants of its 3rd Regiment to press the assault on Qilin Peak, employing poison gas and briefly reaching the summit. On September 29, the 142nd Division of the 32nd Army, under Shang Zhen, coordinated with the 752nd Regiment of the same division to launch a fierce counterattack on Qilin Peak at Zenggai Mountain west of Xiaoao. After intense fighting, they reclaimed the peak, thwarting the 27th Division's bid to move eastward to aid the 106th. Concurrently, a portion of the 123rd Regiment of the 106th Division attempted a breakout west of Baishui Street. Our 6th and 91st Divisions responded with a determined assault from the east of Xiaoao, blocking the 123rd Regiment east of Baishui Street. The victories at Qilin Peak and Baishui Street halted any merger between the eastern and western Japanese forces, enabling the Chinese army to seal the pocket and create decisive conditions for encircling the 106th Division and securing victory in the Battle of Wanjialing. After the setback at Qilin Peak, Division Commander Masaharu Homma, defying Okamura Yasuji's orders to secure Baishui Street, redirected his focus to Tianhe Bridge under a pretext of broader operations. He neglected the heavily encircled 106th Division and pivoted toward Xintanpu. By September 30, Chinese forces attacked from both the east and west, with the 90th and 91st Divisions joining the assault on the Japanese positions. On October 1, the Japanese, disoriented and unable to pinpoint their own unit locations, telegrammed Okamura Yasuji for air support. On October 2, the First Corps received orders to tighten the encirclement and annihilate the enemy forces. Deployments were made to exploit a numerical advantage and bolster morale, placing the Japanese in a desperate position. On October 3, 1938, the 90th and 91st Divisions launched a concerted attack on Nantianpu, delivering heavy damage to the Japanese force and showering Leimingguliu with artillery fire that endangered the 106th Division headquarters. By October 5, Chinese forces reorganized: the 58th Division of the 74th Army advanced from the south, the 90th Division of the 4th Army from the east, portions of the 6th and 91st Divisions from the west, and the 159th and 160th Divisions of the 65th Army from the north, tightening the surrounding cordon from four directions. On October 6, Xue Yue ordered a counterattack, and by October 7 the Chinese army had effectively cut off all retreat routes. That evening, after fierce hand-to-hand combat, the 4th Army regained the hilltop, standing at a 100-meter-high position, and thwarted any Japanese plan to break through Baicha and sever Chinese retreat toward De'an. By October 8, Lieutenant Colonel Sakurada Ryozo, the 106th Division's staff officer, reported the division's deteriorating situation to headquarters. The telegram signaled the impending collapse of the 106th Division. On October 9, Kuomintang forces recaptured strategic positions such as Lishan, tightening encirclement to a small pocket of about three to four square kilometers in Nantianpu, Leimingguliu, and Panjia. That night, the vanguard attacked the Japanese 106th Division's headquarters at Leimingguliu, engaging in close combat with the Japanese. Matsuura and the division's staff then took up arms in defense. In the early hours of October 10, Japanese forces launched flares that illuminated only a narrow arc of movement, and a limited number of troops fled northwest toward Yangfang Street. The two and a half month battle inflicted tremendous casualties on the Japanese, particularly on the 101st and 106th divisions. These two formations began with a combined strength of over 47,000 troops and ultimately lost around 30,000 men in the fighting. The high casualty rate hit the Japanese officer corps especially hard, forcing General Shunroku Hata to frequently airdrop replacement officers onto the besieged units' bases throughout the engagement. For the Chinese, the successful defense of Wanjialing was pivotal to the Wuhan campaign.  Zooming out at a macro level a lot of action was occurring all over the place. Over in Shandong, 1,000 soldiers under Shi Yousan, who had defected multiple times between rival warlord cliques and operated as an independent faction, occupied Jinan and held it for a few days. Guerrillas briefly controlled Yantai. East of Changzhou extending to Shanghai, another non-government Chinese force, led by Dai Li, employed guerrilla tactics in the Shanghai suburbs and across the Huangpu River. This force included secret society members from the Green Gang and the Tiandihui, who conducted executions of spies and perceived traitors, losing more than 100 men in the course of operations. On August 13, members of this force clandestinely entered the Japanese air base at Hongqiao and raised a Chinese flag. Meanwhile, the Japanese Sixth Division breached the defensive lines of Chinese 31st and 68th Armies on July 24 and captured Taihu, Susong, and Huangmei Counties by August 3. As Japanese forces advanced westward, the Chinese Fourth Army of the Fifth War Zone deployed its main strength in Guangji, Hubei, and Tianjia Town to intercept the offensive. The 11th Army Group and the 68th Army were ordered to form a defensive line in Huangmei County, while the 21st and 29th Army Groups, along with the 26th Army, moved south to outflank the Japanese. The Chinese recaptured Taihu on August 27 and Susong on August 28. However, with Japanese reinforcements arriving on August 30, the Chinese 11th Army Group and the 68th Army were unable to sustain counteroffensives and retreated to Guangji County to continue resisting alongside the 26th, 55th, and 86th Armies. The Chinese Fourth Army Group directed the 21st and 29th Army Groups to flank the Japanese from the northeast of Huangmei, but they failed to halt the Japanese advance. Guangji fell on September 6, and while Guangji was recovered by the Chinese Fourth Corps on September 8, Wuxue was lost on the same day. Zooming back in on the Wuhan Front, the Japanese focus shifted to Tianjiazhen. The fortress of Tianjiazhen represented the 6th Infantry Division's most important objective. Its geographic position, where the Yangtze's two banks narrow to roughly 600 meters, with cliffs and high ground overlooking the river, allowed Chinese forces to deploy gun batteries that could control the river and surrounding terrain. Chinese control of Tianjiazhen thus posed a serious obstacle to Japan's amphibious and logistical operations on the Yangtze, and its seizure was deemed essential for Japan to advance toward Wuhan. Taking Tianjiazhen would not be easy: overland approaches were impeded by mountainous terrain on both sides of the fortress, while an amphibious assault faced fortified positions and minefields in the narrow river. Recognizing its strategic importance, Chinese forces reinforced Tianjiazhen with three divisions from central government troops, aiming to deter an overland assault. Chinese preparations included breaching several dykes and dams along the Yangtze to flood expanses of land and slow the Japanese advance; however, the resulting higher water levels widened the river and created a more accessible supply route for the Japanese. Instead of relying on a long overland route from Anqing to Susong, the Japanese could now move supplies directly up the Yangtze from Jiujiang to Huangmei, a distance of only about 40 kilometers, which boosted the 6th Division's logistics and manpower. In August 1938 the 6th Infantry Division resumed its northward push, facing determined resistance from the 4th Army Corps entrenched in a narrow defile south of the Dabie Mountains, with counterattacks from the 21st and 27th Army Groups affecting the 6th's flank. The Dabie Mountains are a major mountain range located in central China. Running northwest to southeast, they form the main watershed between the Huai and Yangtze rivers. The range also marks the boundary between Hubei Province and its neighboring provinces of Henan to the north and Anhui to the east. By early September the 6th had captured Guangji, providing a staging ground for the thrust toward Tianjiazhen, though this extended the division's long flank: after Guangji fell, it now faced a 30-kilometer front between Huangmei and Guangji, exposing it to renewed Chinese pressure from the 21st and 27th Army Groups. This constrained the number of troops available for the main objective at Tianjiazhen. Consequently, the Japanese dispatched only a small force, three battalions from the Imamura Detachment, to assault Tianjiazhen, betting that the fortress could be taken within a week. The KMT, learning from previous defeats, reinforced Tianjiazhen with a stronger infantry garrison and built obstacles, barbed wire, pillboxes, and trench networks, to slow the assault. These defenses, combined with limited Japanese logistics, six days of rations per soldier, made the operation costly and precarious. The final Japanese assault was postponed by poor weather, allowing Chinese forces to press counterattacks: three Chinese corps, the 26th, 48th, and 86th, attacked the Imamura Detachment's flank and rear, and by September 18 these attacks had begun to bite, though the floods of the Yangtze prevented a complete encirclement of the eastern flank. Despite these setbacks, Japanese riverine and ground operations continued, aided by naval support that moved up the Yangtze as Matouzhen's batteries were overtaken. After Matouzhen fell and enabled a secure riverine supply line from Shanghai to Guangji, 11th Army commander Okamura Yasuji quickly sent relief supplies upriver on September 23. These replenishments restored the besieged troops near Tianjiazhen and allowed the Japanese to resume the offensive, employing night assaults and poison gas to seize Tianjiazhen on September 29, 1938, thereby removing a major barrier to their advance toward Wuhan along the Yangtze. The 11th Army pressed north along the Yangtze while the 2nd Army, commanded by Prince Naruhiko Higashikuni, concentrated the 3rd, 10th, 13th, and 16th Infantry Divisions around Hefei with initial aims at Lu'an and Heshan and the broader objective of moving toward the northern foothills of the Dabie Mountains. When Chinese forces began destroying roads west of Lu'an, Naruhiko shifted the 2nd Army's plan. Rather than pushing along a line from Lu'an to Heshan, he redirected toward the Huangchuan–Shangcheng corridor, where more intact roads remained accessible, and Chinese withdrawals in the Huangchuan–Shangceng area to counter the 11th Army's Yangtze advance allowed the 2nd Army to gain speed in the early stage of its offensive. The 10th and 13th Infantry Divisions were ordered to begin their advance on August 27, facing roughly 25,000 Chinese troops from the Fifth War Zone's 51st and 77th Corps, and achieving notable early gains. The 10th captured Lu'an on August 28, followed by the 13th taking Heshan on August 29. The 10th then seized Kushi on September 7. Meanwhile, the 13th crossed the Shi River at night in an attempt to seize Changbailing, but encountered stiff resistance from multiple Chinese divisions that slowed its progress. To bolster the effort, Naruhiko ordered the Seiya Detachment from the 10th Division—three infantry battalions—to reinforce the 13th. Despite these reinforcements, momentum remained insufficient, so he deployed the 16th Infantry Division, which had arrived at Yenchiachi, to assault Shangcheng from the north. After crossing the Shi River at Yanjiachi, the 16th outflanked Shangcheng from the north, coordinating with the 13th from the south; the Chinese withdrew and Shangcheng fell. Following this success, Naruhiko ordered the 13th and 16th Divisions to push deeper into the Dabie Mountains toward Baikou and Songfu, while the 10th and 3rd Divisions moved toward Leshan and Xinyang, with Xinyang, a crucial Beijing–Wuhan Railway node, representing a particularly important objective. The Japanese advance progressed steadily through the Dabie Mountains, with the 10th executing bold maneuvers to outflank Leshan from the south and the 3rd penetrating toward the Beijing–Wuhan railway north of Xinyang, collectively disrupting and cutting the railway near Xinyang in October. An independent unit, the Okada Detachment, operated between these forces, advancing through Loshan before sealing Xinyang on October 12. The seizure of Xinyang effectively severed Wuhan's northern artery from external reinforcement and resupply, signaling a decisive turn against Wuhan as a Chinese stronghold. While the 2nd Army advanced in the Dabie Mountains, another critical development was taking place far to the south. By the end of 1937, southern China became more crucial to the Republic of China as a lifeline to the outside world. Guangzhou and Hong Kong served as some of the last vital transportation hubs and sources of international aid for Chiang Kai-Shek, with approximately 80 percent of supplies from abroad reaching Chinese forces in the interior through Guangzhou. Imperial General Headquarters believed that a blockade of Guangdong province would deprive China of essential war materiel and the ability to prolong the war. As I always liked to term it, the Japanese were trying to plug up the leaks of supplies coming into China, and Guangzhou was the largest one. In 1936 the Hankow-Canton railway was completed, and together with the Kowloon-Canton railway formed a rapid all-rail link from south China to central and northern China. For the first sixteen months of the war, about 60,000 tons of goods transited per month through the port of Hong Kong. The central government also reported the import of 1.5 million gallons of gasoline through Hong Kong in 1938, and more than 700,000 tons of goods would eventually reach Hankou using the new railway. In comparison, the Soviet Union in 1937 was sending war materiel through Xinjiang to Lanzhou using camels, with Chinese raw materials traveling back either the same route or via Hong Kong to Vladivostok. By 1940, 50,000 camels and hundreds of trucks were transporting 2,000–3,000 tons of Soviet war material per month into China. Japanese planning for operations began in early November 1937, with the blockade's objectives centered on seizing a portion of Daya Bay and conducting air operations from there. In December 1937, the 5th Army, including the 11th Division, the Formosa Mixed Brigade, and the 4th Air Brigade, were activated in Formosa under Lt. Gen. Motoo Furusho to achieve this objective. Due to the proximity of Daya Bay to Hong Kong, the Japanese government feared potential trouble with Britain, and the operation was subsequently suspended, leading to the deactivation of the 5th Army. By June 1938, the Battle of Wuhan convinced Imperial General Headquarters that the fighting could not be localized. The headquarters reversed policy and began preparations to capture Guangzhou and to expedite the settlement of the war. During the peak of the battles of Shanghai and Nanjing, urgent demands for aerial support at the Battle of Taiyuan in the north and at Canton in the south forced the Nationalist Air Force of China to split the 28th Pursuit Squadron and the 5th Pursuit Group , based at Jurong Airbase in the Nanking defense sector. The squadron was divided into two smaller units: Lt. Arthur Chin led one half toward Canton, while Capt. Chan Kee-Wong led the other half to Taiyuan. On September 27, 1937, the 28th PS under Lt. Arthur Chin dispatched four Hawk IIs from Shaoguan Airbase, and the 29th PS under Lt. Chen Shun-Nan deployed three Hawk IIIs from Tianhe Airbase. Their mission was to intercept Japanese IJNAF G3M bombers attempting to strike the Canton–Hankow railway infrastructure. The two flights engaged the Japanese bombers over Canton, claiming at least two kills; one G3M dumped fuel and ditching off the coast of Swatow, with its crew rescued by a British freighter, though one of the gunners died of battle injuries. In October 1937, amid mounting demands and combat losses, the Chinese government ordered 36 Gloster Gladiator Mk.I fighters, whose performance and firepower surpassed that of the Hawk IIs and IIIs, and most of these would become frontline fighters for the Canton defense sector as the war extended into 1938. On February 23, 1938, Capt. John Huang Xinrui, another Chinese-American volunteer pilot, took command of the renewed 29th PS, now equipped with the Gladiators. He led nine Gladiators from Nanxiong Airbase on their first active combat over Canton, supporting three Gladiators from the 28th PS as they intercepted thirteen Nakajima E8N fighter-attack seaplanes launched from the seaplane tenders Notoro Maru and Kinugasa Maru. The battle proved challenging: most of the Gladiators' machine guns jammed, severely reducing their firepower. Despite this, five of the E8Ns were shot down, confirmed by Capt. Huang and his fellow pilots who managed to strike the Japanese aircraft with only one, two, or three functioning guns per Gladiator. Chin later revealed that the gun jams were caused by defective Belgian-made ammunition. The combat nevertheless proved tragic and costly: Lt. Xie Chuanhe (Hsieh Chuan-ho) and his wingman Lt. Yang Rutong pursued the E8Ns but were stymied by inoperable weapons, with Lt. Yang killed in the counterattack, and Lt. Chen Qiwei lost under similar circumstances. The 4th War Area Army, commanded by He Yingqin, was assigned to the defense of south China in 1938. General Yu Hanmou led the 12th Army Group defending Guangdong province. The region's defense included about eight divisions and two brigades of regular army troops stationed around Guangzhou, with an additional five divisions of regular troops deployed in Fujian. The 4th War Area Army totaled roughly 110,000 regular army troops. By this time, most regular army units in Guangxi and four Guangdong divisions had been redirected north to participate in the Battle of Wuhan. Beyond the regular army, two militia divisions were deployed near Guangzhou, and the Guangxi militia comprised five divisions. Militia units were typically raised from local civilians and disbanded as the army moved through new areas. Their roles centered on security, supply transportation, and reconnaissance. Guangdong's main defensive strength was concentrated in Guangzhou and the immediate environs to the city's east. Other Chinese forces defended Chaozhou and western Guangdong. Defensive fortifications included the Humen fortress guarding the Pearl River mouth and three defensive lines near Daya Bay. Guangzhou housed three batteries of four three-inch guns, a battery of three 120mm guns, and Soviet-supplied 37mm anti-aircraft guns. The Imperial Japanese Navy conducted an aerial and naval interdiction campaign aimed at China's communication lines to neighboring regions. Japan believed that the blockade would hasten the end of the war, and disruption of the Chinese logistics network was the primary objective in Guangdong province from August 1937 until October 1938. The 5th Fleet's blockading actions extended along the coast from Haimenchen, Zhejiang to Shantou, with the 5th Destroyer Squadron patrolling the coast south of Shantou. At times, units from the Marianas were deployed to support coastal blockade operations in south China, usually consisting of cruisers accompanied by destroyer flotillas. One or two aircraft carriers and fleet auxiliaries would also be on station. Naval interdictions focused on stopping junks ferrying military supplies from Hong Kong to coastal China. The first recorded attack occurred in September 1937 when eleven junks were sunk by a Japanese submarine. Although Japan successfully blockaded Chinese shipping and ports, foreign shipping could still enter and depart from Hong Kong. The central government had established Hong Kong as a warehouse for munitions and supplies to pass through. Aerial interdictions targeted Chinese railway bridges and trains in Guangdong. Starting in October 1937, the Japanese launched air raids against the Sunning railway, focusing on government facilities and bridges in Jiangmen and towns along the railway. By 1938, airstrikes against the Kowloon–C Canton railway became common, with damaged trains periodically found along the line. An air-defense early warning system was created to divert trains during raids into forested areas that offered overhead concealment. In May 1938, the Colonial Office and the Foreign Office approved a Chinese request to construct and operate a locomotive repair yard within the New Territories to keep the railway operational. Airstrikes against rail facilities in Guangzhou were designed to interrupt rail supplies from Hong Kong so Japan would not need to commit to land operations in south China. However, the air raids did not severely impede railway operations or stop supplies moving through Hunan or Guangxi. The blockade in south China also targeted aircraft flying out of Hong Kong. In November 1937, a Royal Navy aircraft from HMS Eagle encountered Japanese naval anti-aircraft fire off the coast of Hong Kong. In December 1937, fifteen Japanese bombers overflew Lantau Island and the Taikoo docks. In August 1938, Japanese naval aircraft shot down a China National Aviation Corporation passenger plane, and two Eurasia Aviation Corporation passenger planes were shot down the following month. Beyond military targets, the Japanese conducted politically motivated terror bombing in Guangzhou. Bombing intensified from May to June 1938 with incendiary munitions and low-level strafing attacks against ships. The Imperial Japanese Navy Air Service, operating from Formosa and the carrier Kaga, conducted about 400 airstrikes during this period and continued into July. By the end of the summer, Guangzhou's population had dwindled to approximately 600,000 from an original 1.3 million. From August 1937 to October 1938, casualties in Guangzhou were estimated at 6,000 killed and 8,000 injured. On October 12, 1938, Japanese forces from the 21st Army, including the 5th, 18th, and 104th Infantry Divisions, landed in Guangzhou, launching the operation at 4:00 am with elements of the 5th and 18th Divisions hitting Aotou and elements of the 104th Division landing at Hachung in Bias Bay. Initially totaling about 30,000 men, they were soon reinforced by a further 20,000, and resistance was minimal because most of Yu Hanmou's 12th Army Group had been redeployed to central China to defend approaches to Wuhan, leaving only two regular Chinese divisions, the 151st and 153rd, to defend the region. By the night of October 12, the Japanese had established a 10-kilometer-deep beachhead and advanced inland; on October 13 they seized the towns of Pingshan and Tamshui with little opposition, and on October 15 they converged on Waichow and captured it. The fall of Pingshan, located on the Sai Kong River with a deep, broad river and only a flimsy crossing, and Waichow, where Chinese defenses included trenches and concrete pillboxes, surprised observers since these positions had been prepared to resist invasion; nonetheless, Chinese forces fled, opening the road to Guangzhou for the Japanese. Between October 16 and 19, three Japanese columns pushed inland, with the easternmost column crossing the East River on the 16th and the 5th Infantry Division capturing Sheklung on the 19th as Chinese forces retreated. By the night of October 20, Guangzhou's defenders withdrew and adopted a scorched-earth policy to deny resources to the invaders. On October 21, Japanese tanks entered Guangzhou without infantry support, and a regiment from the 5th Infantry Division captured the Bocca Tigris forts with no resistance. With Guangzhou secured, the Guangzhou–Wuhan railway and the Hong Kong–Guangzhou railway were severed, supplies to Wuhan were cut, Chiang Kai-Shek faced a daunting and depressing task, he had to abandon Wuhan. 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. The Yangtze became a bloodied artery as Chinese and Japanese forces clashed from Anqing to Jiujiang, Madang to Tianjiazhen. A mosaic of Chinese troops, filled with grit and missteps, held lines while civilians like Wang Guozhen refused to surrender. The siege of Wanjialing crowned Chinese resilience, even as Guangzhou buckled under a relentless blockade. The Fall of Wuhan was all but inevitable.

Double Edgar Allan Poe! The Universal Classics deep dive continues with two very loose Poe adaptations: The Black Cat (1934) and The Raven (1935) both starring Bela Lugosi and Boris Karloff. From wiki: “The Black Cat is a 1934 American pre-Code horror film directed by Edgar G. Ulmer and starring Boris Karloff and Béla Lugosi. It was Universal Pictures' biggest box office hit of the year, and was the first of eight films (six of which were produced by Universal) to feature both Karloff and Lugosi. In 1941, Lugosi appeared in a comedy horror mystery film with the same title, which was also named after and ostensibly "suggested by" Edgar Allan Poe's 1843 short story.”The Raven is a 1935 American horror film directed by Louis Friedlander (who started to be credited as Lew Landers the following year) and starring Boris Karloff and Bela Lugosi. Billed as having been "suggested by" Edgar Allan Poe's 1845 poem of the same title, excerpts of which are quoted at a few points in the film, it was adapted from an original screenplay by David Boehm. Lugosi stars as a neurosurgeon obsessed with Poe who has a torture chamber in his basement, and Karloff plays an escaped murderer on the run from the police who Lugosi manipulates into doing his dirty work.Also discussed: ™, gay Halloween, Bubble Bath (1980), Frankenstein (2025), deaf crocodile, Soviet fantasy films, Knives Out,  NEXT WEEK: Frankenstein (1931) and The Bride of Frankenstein (1935) Bloodhaus:https://www.bloodhauspod.com/https://www.instagram.com/bloodhauspod/https://letterboxd.com/bloodhaus/Drusilla Adeline:https://www.sisterhydedesign.com/https://letterboxd.com/sisterhyde/https://www.instagram.com/sister__hyde/Joshua Conkelhttps://www.joshuaconkel.com/https://www.instagram.com/joshua_conkel/https://letterboxd.com/JoshuaConkel/  

This spooky season on Parallax Views, we venture behind the Iron Curtain with historian Alexander Herbert, author of Fear Before the Fall: Horror Films in the Late Soviet Union. Herbert uncovers a hidden world of Soviet horror cinema — films that reflected the fears, contradictions, and collapsing certainties of late socialism. We talk about Viy (1967), the first officially Soviet horror movie and a chilling adaptation of Nikolai Gogol's tale about a terrified seminarian forced to pray over a witch's corpse. From there, Herbert explores how later Soviet filmmakers created movies that were either horror or horror-adjacent. It's an exploration of a rather unexplored topic. It's a conversation about horror, history, and ideology — and how the Soviet Union's final decades produced some of the most fascinating and overlooked genre films ever made.

Tom Mulcair can be heard every weekday morning at 7:40 on The Andrew Carter Morning Show.

Wrap up warm and fight off a cold with our episode on Stvene Spielberg's Cold War drama BRIDGE OF SPIES, released in 2015 with a script by Matt Charman and the Coen Brothers. The film charts the extraordinary true story of insurance lawyer James Donavan (played by Tom Hanks), who is charged with defending a captured Soviet spy (Mark Rylance), which leads to him become a key figure in the negotiations for a ‘spy swap' in the early 60s. To dive into Spielberg's murky world of espionage, government bureaucracy and one man's struggle to uphold American values we invite back Ramblin's resident bridge expert Rob Yeomans - line producer and co-host of the CineMortuary Podcast - to take the journey to East Germany with us in the hope of some successful negotiations. You can find CineMortuary wherever you get your podcasts. Follow the podcast on Twitter, Bluesky and Instagram and be sure to subscribe so you don't miss an episode! Get in touch with us either via socials or email rambinaboutamblin@gmail.com.Ramblin is created and produced by Andrew Gaudion and Joshua Glenn. A special thanks as always to Emily Tatham for the artwork, and Robert J. Hunter & Greg Sheffield for the theme music.

When one person stands up to lies or oppression, others can become emboldened to do the same. On this classic episode of ID the Future, neurosurgeon Michael Egnor discusses his article about Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn. Solzhenitsyn, the great Soviet dissident and recipient of the Nobel Prize in Literature, penned the short essay "Live Not By Lies" in 1974, just before he was arrested and exiled from Russia. It was his advice, or even strategy, for living under totalitarianism. Solzhenitsyn's basic advice is simply not to participate with lies, and to refuse to speak what one does not believe. It's unnervingly relevant counsel to us in America today, where “cancel culture” and other silencing tactics, long foreshadowed in the intelligent design debate, are spreading to the broader culture. As Egnor relates, sometimes it takes a single person to stand firm before others will do the same. "There are orders of magnitude more of us than of them," Egnor says. "That is people who feel as we do: who support academic freedom, who support human dignity, who support freedom of speech and freedom of religion...the only way they control us, the only way they oppress us, is with our cooperation." Source

I continue chatting with Dennis Greene about his incredible journey from a challenging childhood in segregated Savannah, Georgia to a distinguished military career. Dennis is made Senior Flight Commander responsible for 50 Minuteman nuclear missiles. Dennis shares his firsthand experiences of the intense pressure, the psychological toll of nuclear readiness, and the groundbreaking integration of women into the Minuteman 2 system. He recounts pivotal moments, from the deactivation of nuclear warheads following the signing of the START1 disarmament treaty to the unique interactions with Soviet counterparts during verification processes. Episode extras including videos here ⁠https://coldwarconversations.com/episode427/⁠ The fight to preserve Cold War history continues and via a simple monthly donation, you will give me the ammunition to continue to preserve Cold War history. You'll become part of our community, get ad-free episodes, and get a sought-after CWC coaster as a thank you and you'll bask in the warm glow of knowing you are helping to preserve Cold War history. Just go to ⁠https://coldwarconversations.com/donate/⁠ If a monthly contribution is not your cup of tea, We also welcome one-off donations via the same link. Find the ideal gift for the Cold War enthusiast in your life! Just go to ⁠https://coldwarconversations.com/store/⁠ Continue the Cold War Conversation via social! F acebook ⁠⁠https://www.facebook.com/groups/coldwarpod/⁠ BlueSky ⁠https://bsky.app/profile/coldwarpod.bsky.social⁠ Threads ⁠https://www.threads.net/@coldwarconversations⁠ Twitter/X  ⁠https://twitter.com/ColdWarPod⁠ Instagram ⁠https://www.instagram.com/coldwarconversations/⁠ Youtube ⁠https://youtube.com/@ColdWarConversations⁠ Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Shaun points out what you get by incentivizing scum! PLUS, Michael Finch, President of the David Horowitz Freedom Center and author of the new book A Time to Stand: The Dire Hour to Defend American Beauty, discusses the systemic destruction and corruption of Democrat-run cities and how it is all by design to gain control. And Dr. Michael Huber, creator of Virogo, tells Shaun how the Covid vaccine has created a patient pool with an uptick in things like cancers and autoimmune diseases and how he has found that Virogo can combat the symptoms. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Rīga's pre-fabricated apartment blocks built during the Soviet occupation represent a significant urban planning project. The 13 microdistricts on the city outskirts were not merely housing solutions but comprehensive attempts to create new forms of socialist urban living. Join me as we delve into the history of these microdistricts, find out what it was like to live there during the Soviet era, and take a walk around present-day Imanta, where I live. Thanks for listening!

Dive into the dramatic world of Boris Pasternak and his epic novel Doctor Zhivago in this episode of History Ignited!

“Leading is easy. Getting people to follow is the hard part”. “Listen first; don't pre-decide the outcome”. “Japan is a Swiss watch—change one gear and the whole movement shifts”. “Do nemawashi before decisions; ringi-sho is the runway, not red tape”. “Bring people back to Japan—networks mature with the country”. Chris LaFleur is Senior Director at McLarty Associates, the Washington, D.C. based strategic advisory firm. A career U.S. Foreign Service Officer, he served multiple tours in Japan—including Sapporo, Yokohama language training, and Tokyo in political and politico-military roles—worked on the staff of Secretary of State Al Haig, at the U.S. Mission to the UN, and at the U.S. Embassy in Paris focusing on Asia during the Soviet war in Afghanistan. He later became Deputy Director of the American Institute in Taiwan, returned to Tokyo as Deputy Chief of Mission under Ambassador Tom Foley, and served in Washington as the No. 2 in the Bureau of East Asian Affairs as well as a negotiator on alliance modernisation with Japan and South Korea. He was U.S. Ambassador to Malaysia in the Iraq War era, then Vice Chairman of JPMorgan Japan, and repeatedly served as President and Chairman at the American Chamber of Commerce in Japan (ACCJ). Today, he advises global firms on policy, regulatory, and political risk across Japan and the region.  Chris LaFleur's leadership journey tracks the evolution of U.S.–Japan relations and the realities of making decisions inside complex systems. Beginning as a vice consul in Sapporo, he learned that listening precedes leading in Japan. Hokkaidō's standard Japanese, the step-by-step pace of regional life, and daily immersion built linguistic and cultural pattern recognition. That foundation scaled when he rotated through Yokohama language training and the Tokyo Embassy, where politico-military work brought alliance management into focus: with bases, communities, and bilateral policy layered together, decisions were not events but processes requiring consensus and continuity. Shifting to Washington to staff Secretary Al Haig offered a crash course in how policy gets made, while the UN posting and a Paris portfolio on Asia sharpened his systems view across capitals. Taiwan unlocked dormant Chinese language skills and reminded him that capability compounds with context. Returning to Tokyo as Deputy Chief of Mission under Ambassador Tom Foley, he saw that organisational power is distributed: success hinged on local staff with deep networks, continuity across rotating Americans, and steady, trust-building communication with home offices that wanted speed while Japan required sequence. As Ambassador to Malaysia during the second Iraq War, LaFleur had to explain and persuade amid public scepticism—learning again that legitimacy is earned by hearing concerns first. Transitioning to the private sector as Vice Chairman at JPMorgan Japan validated a surprising constant: large companies decide like large governments. He expected neat, calculated choices; he found coalitions, trade-offs, and path dependence. The lesson for leaders: map stakeholders, solicit ideas early, and let nemawashi do its work before the ringi-sho formalises momentum. In consulting today, he helps global executives reframe “risk” in Japan as uncertainty to be worked through with decision intelligence—aligning goals, mapping interdependencies, and testing scenarios before locking in. Japan, he says, is a Swiss watch: its precision is an asset, but every gear is linked. Leaders succeed by respecting that system—sequencing conversations, checking downstream effects, and ensuring consensus is genuine, not assumed. Technology can accelerate this work—digital twins for processes, collaborative platforms for traceable sign-offs—but tools must fit culture. Above all, bring people back to Japan; networks—and trust—rise with time. What makes leadership in Japan unique? Japan's operating model is sequence over speed. Nemawashi aligns stakeholders in advance; the ringi-sho codifies consensus; and downstream interlocks across compliance, customers, and partners mean details matter before decisions. Leaders must treat decisions as journeys, not moments, and recognise local staff as the critical path to progress. Why do global executives struggle? Headquarters often assumes top-down approvals equal action. In Japan, meetings with “the top” rarely move the machine unless the working levels are engaged. Foreign leaders also underestimate uncertainty avoidance embedded in tightly coupled processes—the “Swiss watch” effect—so a small tweak can ripple across functions and clients. Is Japan truly risk-averse? It is more accuracy-seeking than risk-averse. The system prizes predictability because errors propagate widely. What looks like reluctance is often prudent scenario-testing. Reframe risk as uncertainty management: clarify assumptions, run premortems, and build reversible steps that preserve harmony while enabling change. What leadership style actually works? Listening first. LaFleur emphasises not pre-deciding outcomes and actively soliciting ideas from Japanese colleagues. Credibility grows when leaders translate Japan's logic to HQ (and vice versa), sequence approvals, and sponsor inclusive consensus. Authority helps; empathy and patience deliver. How can technology help? Use decision intelligence to visualise interdependencies and simulate impacts. Digital twins of processes reveal where approvals, compliance, and client commitments intersect. Collaborative tools can make nemawashi transparent, while structured knowledge bases preserve networks as staff rotate. Tech should speed alignment, not bulldoze culture. Does language proficiency matter? Fluency amplifies effectiveness but isn't binary. Even partial competence builds sensitivity to context, omissions, and implied meaning. Leaders who grasp how Japanese sentences carry subject and object through context better “hear” what a yes might actually mean in terms of readiness. What's the ultimate leadership lesson? Inspire people to move together. Map the system, honour the culture, and turn listening into aligned action. Keep bringing talent back to Japan so relationships mature; in a consensus economy, trust is compounding capital. Author Credentials Dr. Greg Story, Ph.D. in Japanese Decision-Making, is President of Dale Carnegie Tokyo Training and Adjunct Professor at Griffith University. He is a two-time winner of the Dale Carnegie “One Carnegie Award” (2018, 2021) and recipient of the Griffith University Business School Outstanding Alumnus Award (2012). As a Dale Carnegie Master Trainer, Greg is certified to deliver globally across all leadership, communication, sales, and presentation programs, including Leadership Training for Results. He has written several books, including three best-sellers — Japan Business Mastery, Japan Sales Mastery, and Japan Presentations Mastery — along with Japan Leadership Mastery and How to Stop Wasting Money on Training. His works have also been translated into Japanese, including Za Eigyō (ザ営業), Purezen no Tatsujin (プレゼンの達人), Torēningu de Okane o Muda ni Suru no wa Yamemashō (トレーニングでお金を無駄にするのはやめましょう), and Gendaiban “Hito o Ugokasu” Rīdā (現代版「人を動かす」リーダー). In addition to his books, Greg publishes daily blogs on LinkedIn, Facebook, and Twitter, offering practical insights on leadership, communication, and Japanese business culture. He is also the host of six weekly podcasts, including The Leadership Japan Series, The Sales Japan Series, The Presentations Japan Series, Japan Business Mastery, and Japan's Top Business Interviews. On YouTube, he produces three weekly shows — The Cutting Edge Japan Business Show, Japan Business Mastery, and Japan's Top Business Interviews — which have become leading resources for executives seeking strategies for success in Japan.

The National Security Hour with Brandon Weichert – America's unraveling mirrors the Soviet collapse, says Russian insider Andrei Martyanov. From military decay to political rot, Washington's elite stumble while Moscow sharpens its edge. As Putin watches and waits, U.S. power slips beneath the weight of arrogance and delusion—proof that empires often fall not by invasion, but by their own corruption...

As the BBC's Chief International Correspondent, Lyse Doucet has witnessed and reported on some of the most consequential events of our time. She has reported from Afghanistan since 1988, during the Soviet troop withdrawal, played a leading role in the BBC's coverage of the Arab Spring uprisings reporting from Tunisia, Egypt, Libya, and Syria, and has covered major wars as well as efforts to make peace in the Middle East since 1994. In 2022 she covered the Russian invasion of Ukraine live from Kyiv as Putin's tanks crossed the border. Most recently she reported from Tehran in the aftermath of Israel's bombing of Iran. Doucet is renowned for her compassionate, human-centred reporting often in times of war and suffering. In October 2025 she came to the Intelligence Squared stage to share her reflections and insights from four decades on the frontlines. In conversation with fellow broadcaster Lindsey Hilsum, the International Editor for Channel 4 News who has also reported from frontlines of our time, Doucet also discussed the themes and approach of her new book, The Finest Hotel in Kabul, a vivid history of Afghanistan as seen from the iconic Inter-Continental Hotel. Drawing on years of interviews with its staff and guests, the book traces the country's tumultuous history – from the Soviet withdrawal and civil war to the US invasion and the return of the Taliban – through the prism of this landmark hotel and the lives of the staff who kept it running during war and peace.  --- If you'd like to become a Member and get access to all our full ad free conversations, plus all of our Members-only content, just visit intelligencesquared.com/membership to find out more. For £4.99 per month you'll also receive: - Full-length and ad-free Intelligence Squared episodes, wherever you get your podcasts - Bonus Intelligence Squared podcasts, curated feeds and members exclusive series - 15% discount on livestreams and in-person tickets for all Intelligence Squared events  ...  Or Subscribe on Apple for £4.99: - Full-length and ad-free Intelligence Squared podcasts - Bonus Intelligence Squared podcasts, curated feeds and members exclusive series … Already a subscriber? Thank you for supporting our mission to foster honest debate and compelling conversations! Visit intelligencesquared.com to explore all your benefits including ad-free podcasts, exclusive bonus content and early access. … Subscribe to our newsletter here to hear about our latest events, discounts and much more. https://www.intelligencesquared.com/newsletter-signup/ Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

How did the Israeli economy react to the war against Hamas?  Hear from a major player on the ground – Dr. Eugene Kandel, former economic adviser and Chairman of the Tel Aviv Stock Exchange, discusses Israel's financial resilience after the war against Hamas. Having made aliyah from the Soviet Union in 1977 with his family, Dr. Kandel covers the stock market rebound, missed economic opportunities with Jordan and Egypt, and the success of the Abraham Accords.  *The views and opinions expressed by guests do not necessarily reflect the views or position of AJC. Take Action: Elected Leaders: Demand Hamas Release the Hostages  Key Resources: AJC's Efforts to Support the Hostages Listen – AJC Podcasts: Architects of Peace The Forgotten Exodus People of the Pod Follow People of the Pod on your favorite podcast app, and learn more at AJC.org/PeopleofthePod You can reach us at: peopleofthepod@ajc.org If you've appreciated this episode, please be sure to tell your friends, and rate and review us on Apple Podcasts or Spotify. Transcript of the Interview: Manya Brachear Pashman:   Professor Eugene Kandel served as economic adviser to the Prime Minister of Israel from 2009 to 2015, and with Ron Sor is a co-founder of Israel's Strategic Futures Institute. He is also chairman of the Tel Aviv stock exchange, the only public stock exchange in Israel, known locally as the Bursa. He is with us now to talk about the impact of Israel's war against Hamas in Gaza on Israel's economy, the potential and impact so far of the Abraham Accords, and how history could one day view October 7 as a turning point for Israel's democracy.  Dr. Kandel, welcome to People of the Pod. Eugene Kandel:   Thank you. Thank you for having me.  Manya Brachear Pashman:   Before we begin, your family came to Israel in 1977. Can you share your family's Aliyah story? Eugene Kandel:   Yeah, when I was 14, my family was living very comfortably in the Soviet Union. My father was a quite known writer, playwright, a script writer. And around him was a group of Jewish people of culture that were quite known in their domains, mostly Jewish. And so at some point in 67 he sort of had this vision and started studying Hebrew. But 1970 and then by ‘73 when I was 14 years old, he came to me and said, Look, your mom and I decided to immigrate to Israel. What do you think about it, and I said, I don't know what I think about it. Okay, you know, if we want to immigrate, let's immigrate. I never felt too much belonging there. So unfortunately, Soviet authorities had other ideas about that. So we spent four years as refuseniks. My father, together with Benjamin Fine, were the editors of the underground publication called Tarbut. And for people who did not live there, they put their names on it. So this was, these were typewritten copies of Jewish culture monthly. And there were two names on it. You could go to jail for this. My father was always pretty brave man for his petite size, because during the Second World War, he was very, very hungry, to say the least. So he didn't really grow very much. But he's very big inside.  And so the following four years were pretty tough on them, because he couldn't work anywhere. Just like in McCarty years in this country, people would give work to their friends and then publish it under their own name. That's what he did for his friends, and they would share the money with him, or give him most of the money. There were very, very brave people. And then, you know, there was an incident where they wanted to send a message to my father to be a little less publicly outspoken. And so two KGB agents beat me up.  And that started a whole interesting set of events, because there was an organization in Chicago called Chicago Action for Soviet Jewry. Pamela Cohen. And I actually met Pamela when I was studying at the University of Chicago. And thanked her. So they took upon themselves to harass Soviet cinema and theater and culture officials. And so they were so successful that at some point, the writers league from Hollywood said that nobody will go to Moscow Film Festival unless they release us because they do not want to associate with people who beat up children. I wasn't a child, I was 17 years old, but still. And that sort of helped. At least, that's how we think about it.  So it's worthwhile being beaten up once in a while, because if it lets you out, I would take it another time. And then we came to Israel in a very interesting time. We came to Israel four hours after Anwar Sadat left. So we came to a different Israel. On the brink of a peace agreement with Egypt. And so that was it.  We came to Mevaseret Zion, which was an absorption center. A small absorption center. Today I actually live probably 500 yards from where we stayed. Sort of full circle.  And today, it's a significant, it's about 25,000 people town. And that's the story, you know, in the middle, in between then and now, I served in the military, did two degrees at Hebrew University, did two degrees at the University of Chicago, served as professor at the University of Rochester, and then for 28 years, served as professor of economics and finance at the Hebrew University. So I keep doing these circles to places where I started. Manya Brachear Pashman:   You say you arrived four hours after Sadat's visit to Israel on the brink of a peace agreement with Egypt. Did that peace agreement live up to expectations? Eugene Kandel:   Well, it depends what are your expectations. If your expectation will continue in the war, it definitely did, because, you know, for the last, you know, whatever, 48 years, we didn't have any military activity between Israel and Egypt. And we even have security collaboration to some extent. But if you're thinking about real peace, that would translate into people to people peace, business to business peace, it did not generate that at all. Because there was a very, very strong opposition on the street level and on the intellectuals level.  It actually started to break a little bit, because today you can find analysts on Egyptian television that are saying that we are, we are stupid because we don't collaborate with Israel. It is allowed today, It's allowed to be said in, you know, 20-30, years [ago], that person would have been ostracized and would never be allowed to speak.  So there is some progress, but unfortunately, it's a huge loss for the Egyptian economy. For Israeli economy, it is probably also a loss, but Israeli economy has a lot of alternatives in other countries. But Egyptians don't seem to be able to implement all the things that Israelis implemented a long time ago. You know, whether it's water technologies, whether it's energy technologies. Lots of lots of stuff, and it's really, really unfortunate that we could have helped Egyptian people, the same people who rejected any relations with us. And that's a pity. Manya Brachear Pashman:   The next peace agreement that came was with Jordan in 1994, quite some time later. Did that peace agreement live up to expectations, and where were you in 1994? Eugene Kandel:   1994, I was a professor at the University of Rochester, so I wasn't involved at all. But again, it was a very, very similar story. It was the peace that was sort of forced from above. It was clearly imposed on the people despite their objections, and you saw demonstrations, and you still see. But it was clear to the leadership of Jordan that Israel is, in their case, is absolutely essential for the survival of the Hashemite Dynasty. In the end the Israeli intelligence saved that dynasty, many, many times.  But again, it wasn't translated into anything economic, almost anything economic, until in the early 2000s there were some plants in Jordan by Israeli businessmen that were providing jobs, etc. But I was privileged to be the first to go to Jordan together with American officials and negotiate the beginning of the gas agreement.  We were selling gas to Jordan, because Jordan was basically going bankrupt because of the high energy costs. Jordan doesn't have its own energy, apart from oil shale. Sorry, shale oil. And for some reason they weren't able to develop that. But Israeli gas that we are selling to them as a result of what we started in 2012 I believe. Actually very important for the Jordanian economy. And if we can continue that, then maybe connect our electrical grid, which is now in the works, between the water-energy system.  And now maybe there is a possibility to connect the Syrian grid. If we have an agreement with Syria, it will help tremendously these countries to get economic development much faster. And it will help Israel as well, to balance its energy needs and to maybe get energy, provide energy, you know, get electricity, provide gas. You know, there's all these things where we can do a lot of things together. If there is a will on the other side. There's definitely will on the Israeli side. Manya Brachear Pashman:   In addition to gas, there's also water desalination agreements, as well, right? Eugene Kandel:   Yeah, there was a Red to Dead project, which was to pump the water all the way from the Red Sea along the Arava Valley. And then there is a 400 meter, 500 meter drop. And so to generate electricity through that desalinate that water that you pump, and then send that water to Egypt, send the electricity that was generated and not needed to Israel and then dump this salt stuff into the Dead Sea. Frankly, I don't know where this project is. Nobody talks about it for the last seven, eight years. I haven't heard.  Now there are different projects where you would get energy generated in Jordan and sold to Israel in Eilat, for example, because it's difficult for us to bring electricity all the way South. And so if the Jordanians have large fields of photovoltaic energy they can sell, they can satisfy the needs of a lot, and then in return, we can desalinate water and send it to them. So there's all kinds of projects that are being discussed. Manya Brachear Pashman:   But Israel does provide water to Jordan, correct? Eugene Kandel:   There are two agreements. One agreement, according to our peace agreement, we are supposed to provide them with a certain amount of water. I don't remember the exact amount. But that's not enough, and so we also sell them water. So think about it. There is a sweet water reservoir called Tiberius, Kinneret, in the north, and we sending water from there into two directions according to the agreement. We're sending it to Amman, pumping it up to the mountains, and then we're sending it throughout the Jordan Valley, all the way along the Jordan River, to the Jordanian side. So it's quite striking when I used to go between Jerusalem and Amman, it's actually an hour and a half drive. That's it. You go down, you go up, and you're there.  And so when you're passing the Israeli side, you see the plantations of date palms that are irrigated with drip irrigation. So very, very economically, using the brackish salt water that is pumped out of the ground there. You cross two miles further, you see banana plantations that are flood irrigated at 50-centigrade weather, and the water that comes from them comes on an open canal. So basically, 50% of the water that we send this way evaporates. Growing bananas in that climate and using so much water, it's probably, if you take into account the true cost of water, it's probably money losing proposition, but they're getting the water. The people that are the settlements on that Bank of Jordan River, are getting it for free. They don't care. And if somebody would just internalize that, and instead of sending the water down in an open canal, would send the whole water up to Amman, where there is a shortage of water, enormous shortage of water. And then you would take the gravity and use that water to generate electricity, to clean that water, the sewage, clean it and drip irrigate plantations, everybody would make enormous amounts of money. Literally enormous amounts of money. And everybody's lives would be better, okay? And I'm not talking about Israelis. It's within Jordan. And you can't say that there's no technology for that, because the technology is two miles away. You can see it.  And it just puzzles me. Why wouldn't that be done by some entrepreneurs, Jordanian entrepreneurs. We could really help with that. We could even help by buying the water from them back. The water that we give them, we can buy it back. Because in Israel, the water is very expensive. So we could finance that whole thing just by sending the water back, but that would be probably politically unacceptable, I don't know. But it's really, really . . . for an economist, it's just a sad story. Manya Brachear Pashman:   Missed opportunities. Well, let's go back. I introduced you as the chair of the Tel Aviv stock exchange, the Bursa. And I am curious. Let's talk about the economy. Does Israel treat its stock market the same way we do? In other words, are there opening and closing bells at the beginning and end of every day? How does the Tel Aviv Stock Exchange work compared to the United States? Eugene Kandel:   Well, we do have the opening bell, but it's usually reserved for some events. We don't have the events every day. Usually, if there's a new listing, or there's somebody celebrating, like, 20 years of listing, we have all kinds. Recently, we had Mr. Bill Ackman came and gave a speech and opened the trading together with us.  There are events around Jeffries Conference. But it's much more, you know, ceremony, I mean, it's not really connected to anything. Trading starts whether you press the button or don't. But Israeli stock exchange is unique in the following sense: it is an open limit book. What means that there is, you know, buyers meet sellers directly, and it works like that, not only in stocks, which is similar to what it is everywhere, but it's also in bonds, government bonds, corporate bonds, and in derivatives.  So in that sense, we do have our ceremonies, but the interesting thing is, what is happening with the exchange in the last two years. Accidentally, I joined two years ago as the chairman, and over the last two years, the stock exchange, the indices of Israeli Stock Exchange were the best performing out of all developed countries, by far. Manya Brachear Pashman:   Did that have something to do with the war? Eugene Kandel:   Well, it should have been, you know, in the opposite direction, but, the war is, not this length of war, not this intensity of war . . . but if you look back over at least 25 years, the Israeli economy responds very robustly to military conflict. Usually they're much shorter. If you look at even quarterly returns of the stock exchange, you would not know that there was a war in the middle, definitely not annual. If you look over the last 25 years, and you look at this stock, annual returns of the indices, you would not know that there was anything wrong, apart from our 2003 crisis, and Corona. Even the great financial crisis, you would not see it. I mean it was basically past us, because we didn't have a financial crisis in Israel. We had repercussions from, you know, the rest of the world's financial crisis, but we didn't get our own. And so we do have resilience built in, because we're just so used to it. However, having said that, it's the first time that we have such a long and intensive war on seven, whatever fronts. So it is quite surprising that just like any other time, it took about three months for the stock market to rebound after October 8. It was a big question whether to open the market on October 8. We struggled with it, and we decided that we do not want to give anybody the right to disrupt the Israeli economy.  I mean, it was a really tough decision, because there was certain people were saying, Well, how can you do that? It's a national tragedy. And of course, it was a national tragedy. But closing the market would have meant two things.  First of all, it would have shown the world that our economy can be interrupted. It would have given the benefit to those people that did these atrocities, that they managed to do more damage than they already did. And we didn't want to do that. And it didn't collapse. It went down, of course, but it rebounded within less than three months. By the end of that year, it was back on the same level. And then it did this comeback, which was quite phenomenal. And it's an interesting question, how come? Because during that time, we had some cases where Israel was boycotted by investors, very few, by the way, but we also saw many, many new investors coming in.  You could look at the war from the negative side. Of course, huge costs. But with all that, it was about 10% of annual GDP, because we are, you know, we're a big economy, and we borrowed that very easily because we had a very strong macro position before that. So we now 76% debt to GDP ratio. It's much lower than majority of developed countries. But we still had to borrow that. It was a lot of money, and then the defense budget is going to go up. So there is this cost.  But vis a vis that, A, Israeli technology has been proven to be unmatched, apart from maybe us technology in certain cases, but in some cases, even there, we have something to share. And so we have huge amounts of back orders for our defense industries. During the war, and they were going up when some of the countries that are making these purchases were criticizing us. They were learning from what we did, and buying, buying our equipment and software, etc.  And the second thing, we removed the huge security threat. If you look before October 7, we were quite concerned about 150,000 missiles, some of them precise missiles in Hezbollah's hands, an uninterrupted path from Iran through Syria to Hezbollah, constantly replenishing. We would bomb them sometimes in Syria, but we didn't catch all of them. We had Hamas, we had Hezbollah, we had Syrians, we had Iranians. We had, you know, not, you know, Iraqi militia. So, Hezbollah doesn't exist. Well, it exists, but it's nowhere near where it where was at. And the Lebanese Government is seriously attempting to disarm it. Syria, we all know what happened in Syria. We didn't lift a finger to do that. But indirectly, from what happened in Hezbollah, the rebels in Syria became emboldened and did what they did. We know what happened with Hamas. We know what happened with Iran. Okay, Iran, even Europeans reimposed the sanctions. So that's the side effect.  So if you look at the Israeli geopolitical and security situation, it's much, much better. And in that situation, once the war is over and the hostages are returned, and hopefully, we will not let this happen again, ever, to work hard so we remember that and not become complacent. It's an enormous, enormous boost to Israeli economy, because this security premium was quite big.  So that is on the positive side, and if we play smart, and we play strategically, and we regain sort of good relations with some of the countries which are currently very critical of us, and somehow make them immune to this anti Israeli antisemitism propaganda, we can really get going. Manya Brachear Pashman:   You mentioned investors. There were more investors after the war. Where were those investors coming from, internally or from other countries?  Eugene Kandel:   It's interesting that you asked this question, because in 2020, early 2024 a lot of Israeli institutions and individuals moved to S&P 500, and they got really hammered. Twice. Because A, S&P 500 was lagging behind the Tel Aviv Stock Exchange. So there was some other players coming in, because otherwise, when you move money, usually, you should see a drop, but you saw an increase. That meant that there are others came in. But the more interesting thing is that shekel was very weak when they bought dollars, and now shekel is about 15% stronger, so they lost 15% just on the exchange rate. And so a lot of money that went to S&P came back in the last six, eight months. So the internal money came back.  But on top of internal money, we looked at the behavior of foreign investors right after October 7. They didn't flee the country. Some of them sold stocks, bought bonds. And then so Israeli institutions made money on that, because Israeli institutions bought stocks from them at about 10%, 15% discount, and then when it rebounded, they made money. But that money didn't leave, it stayed in Israel, and it was very costly to repatriate it, because the shekel was very weak. And so buying dollars back was expensive. And the money slowly went into stocks. And then people made quite a lot of money on this. Manya Brachear Pashman:   The last topic I want to cover with you is external relations. You mentioned Syria, the potential of collaborating with Syria for water, gas. Eugene Kandel:   Electricity. Manya Brachear Pashman:   Electricity. And I presume that you're referring to the possibility of Syria being one of the next members to join the Abraham Accords. That has been mentioned as a possibility. Eugene Kandel:   Maybe. But we can, we can do something much less. Manya Brachear Pashman: Outside of the Accords. Eugene Kandel:   Outside of the Accords, or pre-Accord, or we can, we can just create some kind of collaboration, just we had, like as we had with UAE for for 15 years before the Accord was signed. Was a clear understanding.  Maybe. But we can, we can do something much less outside of the Accord, or pre-Accord, or we can, we can just create some kind of collaboration, just we had, like as we had with UAE for for 15 years before the Accord was signed. Was a clear understanding.  You know, I was in UAE, in Dubai on the day of signing of the Accord. I landed in Dubai when they were signing on the on the green loan, on the White House lawn. And we landed. It was amazing. It was the degree of warmth that we received from everybody, from ministers in the economy to ministers that came to speak to us, by the dozen to people in the hotel that were just meeting us. They issued, for example, before signing the Accord, there was a regulation passed by by UAE that every hotel has to have kosher food. We don't have that in Israel. I mean, hotels mostly have kosher food, but not all of them, and, and it's not by law.  This was, like, clear, we want these people to feel comfortable. It was truly amazing. I've never, I could never imagine that I would come to a country where we didn't have any relations until today, and suddenly feel very, very welcome. On every level, on the street, in restaurants. And that was quite amazing, and that was the result of us collaborating below the surface for many, many years. Manya Brachear Pashman:   Parity of esteem, yes? Suddenly. Eugene Kandel:   Yeah, they didn't feel they did exactly the important part when the UAE businessman or or Ambassador order you feel completely no chip on the shoulder whatsoever. They feel very proud of their heritage. They feel very proud of their achievements. They feel and you feel at the same level. They feel at the same level, just like you would with the Europeans. We always felt that there was something like when, when, Arab delegations, always tension. I don't know whether it was superiority or inferiority. I don't know. It doesn't matter, but it was always tension in here. I didn't feel any tension. Was like, want to do business, we want to learn from you, and you'll to learn from us. And it was just wow. Manya Brachear Pashman:   Same in Bahrain and Morocco? Eugene Kandel:   I haven't been to Bahrain and Morocco. I think Bahrain wants to do business. They were very even, sort of some of, we sent the delegation to Bahrain to talk about sort of Israeli technology and how to build an ecosystem in the same with Morocco. I think it's a bit different. I think it's a bit different because we didn't see much going on from from these two countries. Although Morocco is more advancing much faster than Bahrain. There are a lot of interesting proposals coming out of it.  There's a genuine desire there. In the last two years, of course, it was difficult for for anybody to do anything in those but interestingly, when almost no European airlines or American airlines were flying to us, Etihad and Emirates were flying to Israel. They were flying. Manya Brachear Pashman:   Past two years? Eugene Kandel:   Yeah, they would not stop. And you're just like, wow. Manya Brachear Pashman:   So would you say the Abraham Accords have had a significant impact on Israel's economy at all? Eugene Kandel:   I do not know. I mean, I don't have data on that by the sheer number. I mean, the the number of Israeli tourists Sue UAE, it's probably 10 or 20 to one to the vice versa. So we've been Israelis flooding UAE. In terms of investments, there are some technology investments. There's some, some more infrastructural investors, like they bought 20% of our gas field. There are collaborations between universities and research centers. So it's hard to measure, but you have to remember that there was a huge amount of trade and collaboration under the surface. So it surfaced. But that doesn't mean that there was an effect on the economy, just people suddenly saw it. So you don't know what the Delta was. If the same amount of business was suddenly coming out of Jordan, we would have seen, you know, big surge. So I'm not sure how much . . . I don't mean to say that there was no impact. I'm just saying that the impact was much more gradual, because there was so much already, right? But I'm sure that it is continuing, and the fact that these airlines were continuing to fly, indicates that there is a demand, and there's a business. Initially a lot of Israelis thought that there was, this was a money bag, and they would go there and try to raise money and not understanding culture, not understanding. That period is over. I mean, the Emiratis conveyed pretty clearly that they not. They're very sophisticated investors. They know how to evaluate so they do when they make investments, these investments make sense, rather than just because you wanted to get some money from somebody. Manya Brachear Pashman:   Well, thank you so much.  Eugene Kandel:   Thank you.  Manya Brachear Pashman:   If you missed our last episode, be sure to tune in for my conversation with AJC's Director of Congressional Affairs Jessica Bernton. We spoke shortly after receiving the news that a deal had been reached and the hostages from the October 7 Hamas terror attack might finally come home after two years in captivity. That dream was partially realized last week when all the living hostages returned and the wait began for those who were murdered.  

On 23 October 1956, thousands of students marched through Budapest calling for political reforms, free elections, and the withdrawal of Soviet troops. Over the next few weeks the revolution was brutally put ...

Quick recap: The program began with a focus on Neil Armstrong's academic background and connections to USC, including his completed coursework and potential master's degree, as well as his compensation as a NASA civil servant. The discussion concluded with an examination of space engineering education and industry practices, including the balance between government oversight and contractor responsibility, and the challenges of returning to the moon and planning future space missions. We were joined by Marshall Martin, Phil Swan, John Hunt and Dr. Ajay Kothari.I hosted this Space Show program featuring Dr. Mike Gruntman, who discussed his latest book about Neil Armstrong's connection to USC. Gruntman revealed that Armstrong, while serving in the Navy during the Korean War, took courses at USC from 1955-1962, eventually completing all coursework for a master's degree in aeronautics except for his thesis, which he never completed due to his NASA commitments. I also announced upcoming programs with Phil Swan, and Bill Gowan as well as a special day Halloween show featuring Dr. Sharma from Cedars-Sinai discussing their 3D printing of cardiac tissue and new space medical lab research unit.Mike discussed the history of the Apollo program, focusing on Neil Armstrong's involvement with Purdue University. He detailed Armstrong's earned Master of Science degree and shared insights from his personal archives, including his grades and the content of his lecture at USC on the moon landing. Mike also highlighted the significant workforce reduction following the Apollo program and the practice of bringing in top industrial talent to lead NASA projects, which he suggested could be relevant for future space missions. He drew a link to workforce reductions planned for NASA at this time.I informed Mike and the audience about Roger Launius upcoming appearance as a guest on their space show program on November 7th. Mike shared interesting findings about Neil Armstrong's compensation as a NASA civil servant in 1969, which was significantly higher than Michael Collins's salary as the latter was still in the military. They discussed Armstrong's academic background and his desire to become a professor, as well as his contributions to NASA and his subsequent career as a university professor. Marshall commented on the astronauts' reputation for being “rock-hard” test pilots, and Mike explained NASA's development of a lunar lander research vehicle and simulator for training astronauts to land on the moon.Mike discussed the unique space engineering department at USC, highlighting its success and the contributions of its students. He mentioned that Buzz Aldrin visited the campus several times, inspiring students. Mike also shared insights into the history of the Apollo program and the impact it had on the aerospace industry. David inquired about the current mood regarding the Artemis program at USC, to which Mike responded that faculty opinions vary, with most not having detailed knowledge of the program.Mike discussed the evolution of space engineering education and industry practices, highlighting the shift from performance-driven government programs to financially-driven commercial space initiatives. He explained that while commercial space has grown to be six times larger than government space worldwide, government programs remain crucial for technological advancement and fundamental research. Mike emphasized that both approaches are necessary, as government programs provide the performance-driven environment needed for technological innovation, while commercial space drives cost efficiency and rapid development.Mike discussed the balance between government oversight and contractor responsibility in space exploration, drawing on Apollo-era practices where NASA maintained discipline while granting significant autonomy to contractors like Grumman. He noted that today's government centers have varying levels of expertise, with some being effective while others are ossified, making it challenging to remove ineffective parts without harming the whole. Mike also compared Soviet space programs' heavy bureaucratic oversight with the U.S. approach, suggesting that while Soviet control could prevent fraud, it often stifled innovation. He concluded that while there are no easy solutions, NASA needs to make clear decisions about lunar exploration and contractor roles, particularly given SpaceX's current delays in meeting launch schedules.Mike discussed the challenges and considerations for returning to the moon, emphasizing the need for a strategic plan that could include a lunar gateway for long-term infrastructure. He highlighted the importance of strong leadership and the influence of politics on space programs, noting that NASA should provide a feasibility assessment for any mission. Mike expressed optimism about long-term lunar exploration but expressed concerns about the lack of investment in technologies like artificial gravity and nuclear reactors, which are crucial for sustained human presence on the moon and future Mars missions. He suggested prioritizing a return to the moon before attempting a direct trip to Mars, as it could serve as a stepping stone for future exploration.The discussion focused on space exploration and the challenges of congressional oversight. Dr. Gruntman, a space expert, explained how SpaceX's approach to rapid development and testing, reminiscent of NASA's George Mueller's strategy in the 1960s, differs from traditional government methods. They discussed the importance of the Lunar Orbit Rendezvous strategy in enabling the moon landing. John raised concerns about potential delays in Elon Musk's Mars colonization plans due to on-orbit refueling challenges. The group also discussed the need for better congressional oversight of space programs, with David questioning how to educate lawmakers on space issues. Mike noted that professional societies could play a role but have become politicized. The conversation concluded with a brief discussion about the Mars Society presentation scheduled for Friday by Phil Swan who participated in this program today.Special thanks to our sponsors:Northrup Grumman, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Helix Space in Luxembourg, Celestis Memorial Spaceflights, Astrox Corporation, Dr. Haym Benaroya of Rutgers University, The Space Settlement Progress Blog by John Jossy, The Atlantis Project, and Artless EntertainmentOur Toll Free Line for Live Broadcasts: 1-866-687-7223 (Not in service at this time)For real time program participation, email Dr. Space at: drspace@thespaceshow.com for instructions and access.The Space Show is a non-profit 501C3 through its parent, One Giant Leap Foundation, Inc. To donate via Pay Pal, use:To donate with Zelle, use the email address: david@onegiantleapfoundation.org.If you prefer donating with a check, please make the check payable to One Giant Leap Foundation and mail to:One Giant Leap Foundation, 11035 Lavender Hill Drive Ste. 160-306 Las Vegas, NV 89135Upcoming Programs:Broadcast 4450 ZOOM Phil Swan | Friday 24 Oct 2025 930AM PTGuests: Phil SwanZoom: Phil talks about going to Mars with kinetic energyBroadcast 4451 Zoom OPEN LINES | Saturday 25 Oct 2025 1200PM PTGuests: Dr. David Livingston, The Space Show Zoom Team & Zoom callersZOOM Open Lines discussion Get full access to The Space Show-One Giant Leap Foundation at doctorspace.substack.com/subscribe

In the new book Motherland, Julia Ioffe discusses how the Soviet feminist revolution was state sponsored. During and after 1917, the government mandated several rights that the women hadn't even gotten around really to demanding yet. The result was a kind of trickle down feminism, the opportunity and demand to be equal. It led to advances in women's careers in medicine and the sciences, but entrenched rather regressive gender roles in relationships and society. Because you can't dictate progress from above. Jessa and Nico discuss whether MeToo was another moment of Trickle Down Morality, and how a stupid movie like After the Hunt looks nuanced after such a stilted movement. Shownotes and references: http://theculturewedeserve.substack.com

The National Security Hour with Brandon Weichert – America's unraveling mirrors the Soviet collapse, says Russian insider Andrei Martyanov. From military decay to political rot, Washington's elite stumble while Moscow sharpens its edge. As Putin watches and waits, U.S. power slips beneath the weight of arrogance and delusion—proof that empires often fall not by invasion, but by their own corruption...

What do Stalin, Trump, and Viktor Orbán have in common? They're all fragile men terrified of truth, artists, and of anyone with a moral compass. In this week's Gaslit Nation, we talk with 91-year-old Peter Hidas, who as a young student helped ignite the 1956 Hungarian Uprising, a movement born of courage and faith in a better world. Peter's story is a testament to what ordinary people can do when they refuse to bow to tyranny. The revolts that shook the Iron Curtain in 1956 laid the groundwork for the movements that would one day bring down the Soviet empire, to the unforgettable soundtrack of Swan Lake played on repeat on Soviet TV by a collapsing regime. Today, a new generation of brave Russians has reclaimed that symbol: the “Swan Lake Collective” is being played by artists on the streets of Russia, creating a rallying cry “Let the swans dance!” for peace, freedom, and the end of Putin's Fox News–style dictatorship. Gaslit Nation is here to remind you that Putin's days are numbered.  This week's show also celebrates the heroes of the No Kings protests, the Gen Z meme pirates toppling corruption crime sprees pretending to be governments, how Trump and Putin might try to save Orban's doomed April 2026 election, and more.  So keep marching. Keep creating.That's how we win.  The song featured in this week's episode is “Election Day” by The Spiders. Check out their music at thespidersband.com If you have a song to share on Gaslit Nation, submit it here: https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1-d_DWNnDQFYUMXueYcX5ZVsA5t2RN09N8PYUQQ8koq0/edit?ts=5fee07f6&gxids=7628 Join the Gaslit Nation + Sister District Halloween Phonebank this Wednesday at 6pm ET – every phone call to Virginia plants seeds of hope! RSVP here: https://www.mobilize.us/sisterdistrict/event/847185/ Andrea's graphic novel In the Shadow of Stalin: The Story of Mr. Jones won the Ringo Award! Get your signed copy by subscribing to the show at the Producer-level or higher on Patreon.com/Gaslit, starting this week. All active donors at the Producer-level and higher, who help make Gaslit Nation possible, will receive a special thank you gift in early 2026: a signed copy of Andrea's soon-to-be-released graphic novel Mrs. Orwell.  Want to hear Gaslit Nation ad-free? Join our community of listeners for bonus shows, exclusive Q&A sessions, our group chat, invites to live events like our Monday political salons at 4pm ET over Zoom, and more! Sign up at Patreon.com/Gaslit! Show Notes: How to Overthrow a Dictator (Featuring the history of Andrea's father-in-law Mihai Sedaru Barbul) https://sites.libsyn.com/124622/how-to-overthrow-a-dictator From Epstein's Chief Accuser, a Memoir Both Sad and Devastating: Virginia Roberts Giuffre's posthumous “Nobody's Girl” doesn't break political news, but might break your heart. https://www.nytimes.com/2025/10/16/books/review/virginia-roberts-giuffre-nobodys-girl-memoir.html?unlocked_article_code=1.uk8.Fe6u.LwC3e8hbHgjq&smid=nytcore-ios-share&referringSource=articleShare Videos Show Russian Youths Chant Anti-War Song in St. Petersburg https://www.newsweek.com/videos-russian-youths-chant-anti-war-song-st-petersburg-10883035 Trump says he did not want 'wasted meeting' after plan for Putin talks shelved https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c4gjp73gp41o Hungary PM Orbán's advisor in hot water for saying resisting Russia is irresponsible https://www.euronews.com/2024/09/26/hungary-pm-orbans-advisor-in-hot-water-for-saying-resisting-russia-is-irresponsible What to know about the Trump administration's $20B bailout for Argentina https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/trump-administrations-20b-bailout-argentina/story?id=126513232 The Rise of the Inflatable Chicken Resistance https://www.nytimes.com/2025/10/20/opinion/no-kings-protest-chicago-tactical-frivolity.html Smearing Virginia Giuffre: What New Allegations Against Prince Andrew Reveal About Power and Silence https://www.marieclaire.co.uk/opinion/prince-andrew-virginia-giuffre-smear-campaign-sex-abuse-survivor-social-security-met-police The Tech Right Gets Its Own Phyllis Schlafly: Katherine Boyle, an influential venture capitalist who is a friend of the vice president, thinks the country's path forward involves cultural conservatism and more weapons production. https://www.nytimes.com/2025/10/19/business/katherine-boyle-andreesen-horowitz-american-dynamism.html?unlocked_article_code=1.vE8.7WA9.glWQrABz11-S&smid=url-share The Contagious Gen Z Uprisings: It's a good time to start paying attention to the youth-led protests that are spreading around the world and that have toppled governments. https://www.nytimes.com/2025/10/19/world/gen-z-revolutions-protests-louvre-heist-gaza.html?unlocked_article_code=1.u08.Yg4j.Swx4JtTHBLbC&smid=url-share Yekaterinburg Street Musician Detained After Performing in Support of Arrested Band https://www.themoscowtimes.com/2025/10/21/yekaterinburg-street-musician-detained-after-performing-in-support-of-arrested-band-a90887 Democratic win in Iowa special election breaks GOP supermajority https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/democratic-win-in-iowa-special-election-breaks-gop-supermajority Trump and Putin's planned summit in Hungary boosts an authoritarian ally https://www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/rcna238138 Europe Is Answering Putin's Challenge: Members of the NATO alliance are showing real grit—and, for now, the U.S. is with them. https://www.theatlantic.com/national-security/archive/2025/10/nato-putin-trump-europe-ukraine/684592/ CLIP 1: https://bsky.app/profile/courtwing.bsky.social/post/3m3ij7nu23c2f CLIP 2: https://bsky.app/profile/us-political-news.bsky.social/post/3m3i5tuagec2l CLIP 3: Springtime for Hitler: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ovCf9VRLnDY CLIP 4: https://x.com/visegrad24/status/1978242426461368656

This Day in Legal History: US Naval Blockade of CubaOn October 22, 1962, President John F. Kennedy delivered a televised address announcing that the United States would impose a naval “quarantine” on Cuba. This action followed the discovery of Soviet nuclear missile installations on the island, just 90 miles from U.S. shores. The announcement marked the beginning of the Cuban Missile Crisis, a 13-day standoff that brought the world closer to nuclear war than ever before. In his address, Kennedy framed the deployment of Soviet missiles in Cuba as a direct threat to American national security and international peace. He warned that any nuclear missile launched from Cuba would be considered an attack by the Soviet Union, prompting a full retaliatory response.The legal foundation for the blockade, while not formally declared an act of war, was justified under the collective security framework of the Organization of American States (OAS). The U.S. sought and received OAS backing to frame the blockade as a multilateral action rather than a unilateral act of aggression. Over the next six days, the world watched as U.S. Navy ships encircled the island, intercepting Soviet vessels bound for Cuba. Behind the scenes, intense diplomatic negotiations unfolded between the White House and the Kremlin.Ultimately, Soviet Premier Nikita Khrushchev agreed to dismantle the missile sites in exchange for a U.S. public pledge not to invade Cuba and a secret agreement to remove American missiles from Turkey. The crisis ended without military conflict, but it exposed the fragility of Cold War-era deterrence. The blockade, while effective, raised unresolved legal questions about executive war powers, international law, and the role of regional organizations in legitimizing force. It also led directly to the establishment of the “hotline” between Washington and Moscow and spurred negotiations for the 1963 Nuclear Test Ban Treaty.President Donald Trump responded to reports that he is seeking $230 million from the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) for legal costs tied to federal investigations, stating he is not personally involved in the request but would donate any awarded money to charity. The New York Times reported that Trump is pursuing compensation, alleging the investigations against him were politically motivated. Trump claimed he has not been in direct contact with his lawyers about the matter but believes the DOJ owes him for what he called unfair treatment related to election interference investigations.Trump has filed two administrative claims—typically a precursor to a lawsuit. One challenges the FBI and special counsel's probe into Russian interference in the 2016 election. The other concerns the FBI's 2022 search of his Mar-a-Lago residence, during which classified documents were seized, and accuses the DOJ of malicious prosecution and privacy violations.The filings mark a notable reversal, as Trump now leads the federal government that previously investigated him. A DOJ spokesperson stated that any potential conflicts in reviewing the claims would be handled according to ethics guidance from career officials.Trump says Justice Department owes him money, vows to donate any payout to charity | ReutersThe state of Arizona has filed a lawsuit against the U.S. House of Representatives over the delay in swearing in Democrat Adelita Grijalva, who won a special election to replace her late father, Representative Raul Grijalva. Although Speaker Mike Johnson has said she will be sworn in when the House reconvenes, he has not called lawmakers back to Washington, citing the ongoing government shutdown and the Senate's failure to pass a resolution.Arizona Attorney General Kristin Mayes argues in the suit that the delay violates the Constitution by preventing a duly elected representative, who meets all legal qualifications, from assuming office. The state is asking a judge to recognize Grijalva as a House member upon taking the oath, even allowing someone other than Johnson to administer it if necessary.Speaker Johnson dismissed the lawsuit as “absurd,” insisting the House controls its own procedures and accusing Mayes of seeking publicity. With three vacancies, the current House makeup is 219 Republicans to 213 Democrats. Once sworn in, Grijalva would slightly narrow that margin to 219-214.Arizona contends the delay is politically motivated, aimed at stopping Grijalva from supporting a petition that would force a vote on a bill requiring the release of all unclassified documents related to Jeffrey Epstein from the Trump administration. Grijalva herself has accused Johnson of silencing her district to protect political allies and obstruct justice for Epstein survivors.Arizona sues US House over delay in swearing in Democrat Grijalva | ReutersApple has asked the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit to overturn a lower court ruling that restricts its ability to collect commissions on certain app purchases. The request follows a contempt finding by District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers, who ruled in April that Apple had violated her previous 2021 order by continuing to impose indirect restrictions on alternative payment systems for app developers. That earlier order came out of a lawsuit filed by Fortnite creator Epic Games, which sought to loosen Apple's control over in-app transactions.In the appeals hearing, Apple's attorney argued that the district judge went too far by expanding the original injunction, and insisted that Apple deserves to be compensated for developers' access to its ecosystem. Apple claims it followed the original court order but maintains it has a right to impose a fair commission, including on external purchases. After Apple removed prior restrictions, it introduced a new 27% fee on purchases made outside its App Store if the user clicked a link within the app—prompting Epic to argue that Apple is still undermining the court's intent.Judge Smith of the appellate panel expressed concern about the potential financial impact of the new injunction, suggesting the stakes run into billions of dollars. Epic's attorney countered that Apple shouldn't get another chance to justify its commission practices after allegedly misleading the lower court. The district judge also referred Apple and an executive to federal prosecutors for a potential criminal contempt investigation.A decision from the appeals court is expected in the coming months, and the case could reach the U.S. Supreme Court if further appealed.Apple asks US appeals court to lift app store restrictions in Epic Games case | ReutersSEC Chairman Paul Atkins is advancing a fast-track strategy to implement deregulatory changes without going through the full rulemaking process, which often takes a year or more and is vulnerable to legal challenges. Appointed under President Trump, Atkins is using policy statements, guidance memos, and interpretations of existing law to relax corporate disclosure rules, restrict shareholder proposals, and expand companies' ability to divert investor fraud claims into mandatory arbitration.For instance, the SEC recently issued guidance allowing companies to include arbitration clauses in their filings—avoiding formal rulemaking while significantly altering investor rights. Similarly, Atkins has encouraged companies to reject environmental and social shareholder proposals under Delaware law, without a formal vote by SEC commissioners. Critics, including Democratic Commissioner Caroline Crenshaw, argue this approach sidesteps transparency and due process.While Atkins plans to propose new rules on shareholder resolutions and corporate disclosures by April 2026, current changes are being made through interpretations and enforcement discretion. This comes amid a government shutdown that has furloughed most of the SEC's staff, further limiting the agency's capacity to pursue traditional rulemaking.Atkins has also voiced support for eliminating quarterly reporting and scaling back executive compensation disclosures. However, even if rules are adopted, their durability is uncertain. Previous SEC rules—such as Biden-era climate disclosures and Gensler-era hedge fund regulations—have faced legal reversals. Experts note that rules with bipartisan support and grounded in market efficiency are more likely to survive than politically motivated ones.SEC Chief Fast Tracks Agenda, Averting Slog Through Rule Changes This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

In the 1950s, some ingenious Russians, hungry for jazz, boogie woogie, rock n roll, and other music forbidden in the Soviet Union, devised a way to record banned bootlegged music on exposed X-ray film salvaged from hospital waste bins and archives. The eerie, ghostly looking recordings etched on X-rays of peoples' bones and body parts, were sold illegally on the black market.“Usually it was the Western music they wanted to copy,” says Sergei Khrushchev, son of former Soviet Premier Nikita Khrushchev. “Before the tape recorders they used the X-ray film of bones and recorded music on the bones—Bone Music.”“They would cut the X-ray into a crude circle with manicure scissors and use a cigarette to burn a hole,” says author Anya von Bremzen. “You'd have Elvis on the lungs, Duke Ellington on Aunt Masha's brain scan — forbidden Western music captured on the interiors of Soviet citizens.”And we follow the making of X-ray recordings into the 21st century with Jack White and Third Man Records in Nashville, Tennessee.ProductionProduced by Roman Mars & 99% Invisible and The Kitchen Sisters Nikki Silva & Davia Nelson. With help from Brandi Howell, Andrew Roth and Nathan Dalton. We spoke with Sergei Khrushchev, son of Nikita Khrushchev; Gregory “Grisha” Freidin, Professor Emeritus of Slavic Languages and Literature from Stanford; Alexander Genis, Russian writer and broadcaster; Xenia Vytuleva, visiting professor at Columbia University in the department of History and Theory of Architecture; Anya Von Bremzen, author of a the memoir Mastering the Art of Soviet Cooking. A version of this story originally ran on NPR as part of The Kitchen Sisters' “Hidden Kitchens” series.The Kitchen Sisters Present is part of the Radiotopia podcast network from PRX.

As the chess world digests the devastating news of the passing of Grandmaster Daniel Naroditsky, I found myself thinking back to our first interview in August of 2020 (Episode 191).  At the time, as chess boomed during the pandemic, Danya was ascending from promising young American player to chess commentating superstar. In the interview  Danya's eloquence, empathy, and hilarious impersonations  were on full display. It is among the most listened-to Perpetual Chess episodes in the podcast's 9 year history. Danya's loss is immense and I extend my deepest condolences to his family, friends and many fans. - Ben 00:00 – 03:15 Ben's tribute and introduction following Danya's passing (2025)  03:16 – 04:00 2020 Interview with Danya begins- Introduction to Danya's chess background and early achievements 04:00 – 06:00 Danya on listening to Perpetual Chess and favorite episodes 06:00 – 10:00 Discussion of the Hikaru–Magnus finale and Armageddon tiebreaks 10:12 – 13:10 Early fascination with blitz and bullet chess; childhood training habits 13:10 – 16:00 Blitz addiction story and lessons from IM John Donaldson 16:00 – 21:40 Practical tips on blitz improvement — tactics, intuition, and time management 21:40 – 26:30 Deep dive into time management and “15-second rule” from Hikaru analysis 26:30 – 33:00 Stories of playing Magnus and Alireza online; Rebecca Harris account origin 33:00 – 36:15 Etiquette and psychology of elite bullet matches 36:15 – 38:10 What Danya works on to improve; paradox of bullet skill vs. classical weakness 38:10 – 40:10 Balancing streaming, teaching, and training during COVID 40:10 – 43:00 Untapped potential and thoughts on improvement as a 2600+ GM 43:00 – 45:30 The continuing value of classical chess in a fast-paced world 45:30 – 49:10 Teaching and streaming as dual passions; insights on Twitch culture 49:10 – 54:30 Streaming schedule, viewer expectations, and sustainability 54:30 – 56:30 The pressures and pitfalls of Twitch streaming; handling trolls 56:30 – 1:00:00 Patreon questions: notebooks, writing process, and early books 1:00:00 – 1:03:00 How Mastering Positional Chess came to be; influence of Russian literature 1:03:00 – 1:06:00 Formative chess books and lessons from Kasparov and Soviet literature 1:06:00 – 1:09:30 Advice for adult improvers: training priorities and tactical habits 1:09:30 – End Reflections on commentary, pedagogy, and love of teaching Photo in thumbnail via Charlotte Chess Center: https://www.charlottechesscenter.org/staff/gm-daniel-naroditsky Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

As the BBC's Chief International Correspondent, Lyse Doucet has witnessed and reported on some of the most consequential events of our time. She has reported from Afghanistan since 1988, during the Soviet troop withdrawal, played a leading role in the BBC's coverage of the Arab Spring uprisings reporting from Tunisia, Egypt, Libya, and Syria, and has covered major wars as well as efforts to make peace in the Middle East since 1994. In 2022 she covered the Russian invasion of Ukraine live from Kyiv as Putin's tanks crossed the border. Most recently she reported from Tehran in the aftermath of Israel's bombing of Iran. Doucet is renowned for her compassionate, human-centred reporting often in times of war and suffering. In October 2025 she came to the Intelligence Squared stage to share her reflections and insights from four decades on the frontlines. In conversation with fellow broadcaster Lindsey Hilsum, the International Editor for Channel 4 News who has also reported from frontlines of our time, Doucet also discussed the themes and approach of her new book, The Finest Hotel in Kabul, a vivid history of Afghanistan as seen from the iconic Inter-Continental Hotel. Drawing on years of interviews with its staff and guests, the book traces the country's tumultuous history – from the Soviet withdrawal and civil war to the US invasion and the return of the Taliban – through the prism of this landmark hotel and the lives of the staff who kept it running during war and peace.  --- This is the first instalment of a two-part episode. If you'd like to become a Member and get access to all our full ad free conversations, plus all of our Members-only content, just visit intelligencesquared.com/membership to find out more. For £4.99 per month you'll also receive: - Full-length and ad-free Intelligence Squared episodes, wherever you get your podcasts - Bonus Intelligence Squared podcasts, curated feeds and members exclusive series - 15% discount on livestreams and in-person tickets for all Intelligence Squared events  ...  Or Subscribe on Apple for £4.99: - Full-length and ad-free Intelligence Squared podcasts - Bonus Intelligence Squared podcasts, curated feeds and members exclusive series … Already a subscriber? Thank you for supporting our mission to foster honest debate and compelling conversations! Visit intelligencesquared.com to explore all your benefits including ad-free podcasts, exclusive bonus content and early access. … Subscribe to our newsletter here to hear about our latest events, discounts and much more. https://www.intelligencesquared.com/newsletter-signup/ Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Today on the show, I get to chat with Marielena Ferrer and Viktorsha Uliyanova, a multidisciplinary artist and educator working with alternative photography, installation, video, and fiber art. Her work explores impermanence, the notions of home, and cultural identity narrated through the prism of memory. Her practice is informed by her upbringing in the Soviet Union, political repression, and the immigrant experience. In her research, Uliyanova explores neglected and overlooked histories, often using archives as a catalyst for her work. She received her BA in English Literature, Language, and Criticism from Hunter College and an MFA in Photography and Related Media at State University of New York at New Paltz. Her work has been exhibited at Samuel Dorsky Museum of Art, Baxter St., MOMA PS1, Participant Inc, Collarworks, among others. She is the recipient of New York State Council on the Arts Grant, Arts Mid-Hudson Culture Grant, Traverso Photography Award, Women's Studio Workshop SAI Grant, Sojourner Truth Diversity Fellowship, and Research for Creative Projects Grant. Recently, she completed a residency at Vermont Studio Center. She lives in the Hudson Valley and teaches photography at SUNY New Paltz.Viktorsha's upcoming solo exhibit “Quieter than Water, Lower than Grass” is a multimedia installation that examines the fragility of memory and its impact on history, immigrant narratives ,and cultural identity. This work explores themes of migration, belonging, and domesticity. The opening is November 8 at Roundabouts Now Gallery in Kingston, with a panel discussion on November 16 featuring Marielena, Viktorsha, and two additional women artists whose work addresses these same themes.Today, we talk about the meaning of the show title, and how this Russian idiom permeated culture and played a role in repression and control. Viktorsha shares about the layers of her creative process and how this show came to be. We discuss some of the pieces, their meaning, the process in creating them, and the meaning behind that process. One of the main pieces in the exhibition is an installation of suspended large scale cyanotypes of "Brezhnevka"s, prefabricated  panel buildings that were built in the Soviet Union from 1964-1980. They were built fast and cheap and can still be found and seen throughout former Soviet states. Our conversation weaves through themes of assimilation, (uniform)ity, culture, healing, memory, domestication, femininity, the multidimensionality of softness, and belonging.Viktorsha's Project Statement: “Quieter Than Water, Lower than Grass'” is a multimedia project that explores the intersection between history, memory, and photographic evidence. The work employs analogue photographic processes , fabric, and video to explore remembrance, storytelling, and ancestral healing. Drawing from family albums, oral histories, and archival images, I construct narrativesthat have been hidden by the Soviet regime and are often invisible within the dominant historical discourse. The project takes its name from an old Soviet proverb which instills a behavior of keeping a low profile, avoiding any attention from the self, and acting in a way that does notgenerate conflict. The phrase has been used as a deliberate linguistic tool to disseminate imperialist ideologies, generate fear, and maintain repressive socio-political tactics throughout the USSR. This project outlines the importance of critically engaging with mainstream narrativesin order to unlearn them and see their limitations and biases.Quilts are powerful conveyors of the human experience. They are valuable historical documents and memory transmitters that honor storytelling and intergenerational knowledge. Using bed sheets , I hand-sew patchwork of imagery into quilt forms preserving not only my personal memories but also those obscured within the larger cultural and geo-political discourse.Each fabric piece will source from historical documents, family albums, and collected objects to explore, visualize, and underscore the complexity of post-Soviet trauma and immigrant experience. Blue is a color of peace, a color found in our dreams, our hopes, and our memories. It is the color of the sky, water, and our planet, Earth. The cyanotype process uses the natural elements of sun and water to register a photograph. While it is stable, the final result is prone to changing over time. Using this photographic technique allows me to address all of the themes that show up in my work such as identity, history, and memory, all of which are fragmented, mutating, and ever-changing.The project combines a collection of materials and techniques that reference matrilineage, ancestry, and transgenerational trauma. Through layering of fabrics and utilizing the deep blue hues of the cyanotype process, the work visualizes histories that have been hidden, obscured, and lost. The project examines the selective nature of memory, challenging historical biases and emphasizing the importance of community knowledge and healing. The final project will be presented to the public in an exhibition fostering cultural exchange, community dialogue, andbridging the gap between the personal and collective memories.Here's your New Moon Astrology!Today's show was engineered by Ian Seda from Radiokingston.org.Our show music is from Shana Falana!Feel free to email me, say hello: she@iwantwhatshehas.org** Please: SUBSCRIBE to the pod and leave a REVIEW wherever you are listening, it helps other users FIND IThttp://iwantwhatshehas.org/podcastITUNES | SPOTIFYITUNES: https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/i-want-what-she-has/id1451648361?mt=2SPOTIFY:https://open.spotify.com/show/77pmJwS2q9vTywz7Uhiyff?si=G2eYCjLjT3KltgdfA6XXCAFollow:INSTAGRAM * https://www.instagram.com/iwantwhatshehaspodcast/FACEBOOK * https://www.facebook.com/iwantwhatshehaspodcast

I would like to thank Patreon member Xizer for suggesting this one, as Xizer put it    “An in depth look at General Kanji Ishiwara would be interesting. The man was the architect for the Mukden Incident that led to the Second Sino Japanese War, but he was vehemently opposed to the abuse and exploitation Japan's colonialism indulged in. His vocal condemnation of the brutality and excesses of the Imperial Japanese military foreign policy and Tojo in particular led to his removal, but he couldn't be executed for popularity in the rank and file. Even at the trials after the war he remained defiant, declaring that President Truman should be tried alongside the Axis War criminals for firebombing Japanese cities. He was truly a fascinating figure.   Indeed Kanji Ishiwara is a fascinating character and his story has a startling impact on the Pacific War and global history as a whole. Now by the time I am reading this the script got out of hand, its a long one haha, so it might have to be a multi parter, but I want to limit the first part to Ishiwara and how the Mukden Incident occurred first. It might come further down the road but I will finish the story of this fascinating man later on after hitting up more Patrons desired subjects, without further adieu enjoy part one of Kanji Ishiwara.    Kanji Ishiwara was born in Tsuruoka, Yamagata prefecture on January 18th of 1889. He was the second son of a policeman who was a descendent of a samurai family serving the Shonai Domain. His clan supported the Tokugawa Shogunate during the Boshin War and as a result of their defeat, alongside other Shogunal allied clans would see themselves shut off from larger governmental positions in Meiji Era Japan. Not to go too deep down that rabbit hole, but domains like Choshu and Satsuma would see the lionshare of higher positions, while domains who served on the opposite side would be cast out more.   Ishiware began his army career at the military preparatory school in Sendai at the age of 13, followed up by 2 years at the Central military preparatory school in tokyo. In 1907 he entered the military academy as a member of its 21st class. He left the academy in july of 1909 with the commission of Lieutenant and an assignment as platoon commander of an infantry regiment in Tohoku. After the annexation of Korea in 1910 his regiment was shipped over to the peninsula and he served at Ch'unch'on in a small garrison. After two years of occupation duty, Ishiwara returned to Tohoku and in 1915 passed the examinations necessary to enter the Army Staff college. He held an outstanding record, graduating top of his class in november of 1918 and would be amongst the elite ranks of the Gunto Gumi, receiving the imperial sword.   Now in 1920 he had a frustrating assignment with the department of military training he applied for service in China and received an assignment to the Central china garrison in Hankow. He spent a year traveling through central china before returning back to Tokyo in 1921 where he worked as a lecturer at the army staff college. He sought another China assignment, but his superiors sent him instead to Europe, as they did with all their promising young officers. He went to Germany for 3 years, studying languages and military history. In 1925, he was now a Major, 36 years of age and he received an assignment to the faculty of the army staff college to lecture about the history of war. Now from the very beginning of his character, Ishiwara proved himself a very unconventional officer. He was on the eccentric side, quite argumentative and burdened with a lot of health problems. He had multiple kidney infections, gastro-intestinal problems, tympanitis and other ailments that clawed at him. You also cant forget his ancestry which was important to the Japanese military even in the 1930s. Many of those that came from a disgraced clan had the habit of going above and beyond in terms of imperial loyalty, sort of like a way to rid themselves of the stigma of distrust that was seen in the early Meiji years.   Ishiwara was a bit bizarre, he was nonconforming, quite an independent spirit you would say. Many biographers of his point out, while he held an outstanding record in his education, this went alongside things like his disregard for military punctilio, such as his dress and appearance. In his early career he spoke out against inequalities he saw within the military such as what he saw as favoritism for staff college graduates. Such talk was quite reckless. He read a lot about politics, religion, history and philosophy, he seemed to have quite the restless mind. His behavior drew attention from his colleagues, many deeming him brilliant.   Now everyone in any military has to learn about military history, but not all seek to learn it outside the required readings and such. Ishiwara is one of those rare individuals who was obsessed with learning more about military history. He read about the Russo Japanese war and took quite a critical look at it. He believed the Japanese victory was due to a large part because of luck. He thought Japan had taken the von Moltke strategy of annihilation, but Russia was simply to large to be dislodged from Asia with a swift stroke. If Russia had preserved herself better, he believed Japan would have lost and it was only by a peculiar set of circumstances that Japan had avoided a war of endurance. Ishiwara believed if such a set of circumstance occurred again, Japan defense planning would need to change dramatically to base itself on the realities of modern warfare. This led him to read thoroughly about WW1 in europe and he looked critically at the differences between a short duration vs long duration war. How prolonged conflicts eventually became total wars where politics, economics and social order played larger roles, than just that of the military. This led him to think of categories for different types of war such as “kessenteki senso / decisive war” and “jizokuteki senso / continuous war”. He viewed these two types as flowing back and forth throughout history, in a cyclical rhythm.    While in Germany he studied Clausewitz, von Moltke and the works of Hans Delbruck. He was particularly taken by Delbrucks niederwerfungstragie “strategy of annihilation, the decisive battle” and ermattungsstrategie “the strategy of exhaustion”. He could see his own theorizes more fleshed out in such works and took quite a liking to them. This brought him to analyze the Napoleonic war as the archetype of the war of annihilation and the wars of Frederick the Great as that of a war of exhaustion.    Now further on in his studies, Ishiwara became convinced like many of his colleagues, that Japan and the United States for reasons of power and ideology were on a set course for war. He also concluded such a war would be a protracted one, that of a strategy of exhaustion. But how could Japan prepare for such a protracted war when her natural resources were so clearly inadequate. This led him to think more so about Asia. Ishiwara believed Asia was an entity distinctly different from the west. He held beliefs that Asia should be liberated and unite. During the Xinhai revolution of 1911, as a young cadet in Korea, Ishiwara was quite excited by the idea China might revitalize itself, but he became disillusioned during his time in China later. In the 1920's he dealt with bandits, warlord era conflicts, chaos and disorder, seeing poverty everywhere, all of this shattered his image of China progressing and reforming herself. He wrote this during that time “Looking at the situation in China, I came to harbor grave doubts as to the political capacities of the chinese race and came to feel that, though they were a people of high cultural attainment, it was impossible for them to construct a modern state”. Despite how disappointed he was with the political problems of China, he was likewise disgusted with how his Japanese colleagues treated the Chinese. He recalled feelings of shame when he saw fellow colleagues in Hankow descending from rickshaws and tossing coins to the ground at the rickshaw mens feet. He would constantly write of how the Japanese needed to shed their racial superiority feelings, but funny enough he would write this alongside his beliefs it was necessary for Japan to help guide nations like China to their destiny. While he may have held beliefs in racial equality between Japan and China, he certainly did not think the same of China's politics. Like the majority of his colleagues he believed China required reform and modernization that Japan should usher in. To Ishiwara the issue at hand was if Japan did not help China, the west would aggressively do so and thus subjugate her further. To Ishiwara China needed liberation. Ishiwara also linked the incoming war between Japan and the United States to play a large role for what would occur between China and Japan.   Ishiwara like many Japanese officers held beliefs concerning the Kokutai. I will try to summarize exactly what the Kokutai is, but honestly its a unbelievably complex cultural phenomenon. The Kokutai was a spiritual motive force that influenced the Japanese military. It can be viewed as the national character of Japan. Japan was a constitutional monarchy that held the Kokutai (national body or character)  and Seitai (government body/structure). Thus there was in reality two ideologies, one held the traditional belief focusing on that of the emperor and that of the official government. If I were to give you a overly confusing summary, I would tell you “Japan is run by the emperor and the government simultaneously” this of course if confusing as hell, and it should be. Article 4 of the former Japanese constitution held “the emperor is the head of the empire, combining in himself the right of sovereignty, uniting the executive, legislative and judicial branches of government, although subject to the consent of the imperial diet”. Its like saying you have an absolute monarch, but he will be listening and following the democratically elected people. This contradiction would lead to the Pacific War. A large issue that would emerge is that the constitution literally said the navy and army were controlled by the Emperor and not the political diet. Thus many in the military viewed themselves subject to the Kokutai, which as an ideology would evolve dramatically from the Meiji era to the Showa Era. For example, what if you are a military high ranking officer who views the political elites as nothing more than criminals, taking the emperor hostage against his will and thus against the will of the Japanese people. Well this might lead you to try and overthrow the government to make sure the Emperor was really in charge as you think he should be. A real rabbit hole I could go down.   Ishiwara had a unique view of the Kokutai. In his early education he wrote this about his doubt on understanding it as a principal. “Even though I, myself, because of my training…had come to have an unshakeable faith in the kokutai I began to lack confidence that I could imparts this belief to others –to the common soldier, to the civilian, to non-Japanese”. His issue was how did the Kokutai apply outside Japan? How could its value transcend the national boundaries and interests of Japan? If a Japanese soldier was to sacrifice his life for the Kokutai, how did this take on any meaning for men of all races? How could the kokutai's supra-national value by linked to other outside ideologies?   Ishiwara found some answers to these questions in Nichiren Buddhism. It seems here he was able to combine his conceptions about war, history and national purpose. Now Ishiwara did not come from a religious family. He dabbled in christianity for a bit, but did not pursue it. Shinto likewise did not sufficiently fulfill Shiwara' beliefs. Nichiren Buddhism is strongly patriotic, has a apocalyptic character to it and represents a holy mission to be the religion for all mankind with the center of propagation as Japan. There was this kind of quasi idea of world regeneration behind it with Japan as the moral righteous leader. Thus as you can imagine the Kokutai and Nichiren buddhism sort of fit like a glove in many ways.    Utilizing Nichiren Buddhism, the kokutai could be raised from its purely national dogma and be amplified to the entire world. Ishiwara was introduced to all of this by Tanaka Chigaku who was part of the Kokuchukai “national pillar society” a nichiren nationalist organization with an HQ in tokyo. After attending a public meeting held by Tanaka, he quickly converted to Kokuchukai and he would write down in his journal “I was attracted to the Nichiren faith's view of the kokutai”. Nichiren buddhism.    One aspect of Kokuchukai's nichirenism that greatly appealed to Ishiwara was its combative passages. Ishiwara would justify and attribute much of the military force Japan used on the asian continent drawing parallels to Nicherns idea of drawing the sword to defend righteousness. He often quoted nichirens statement “that the significance of the art of war appears in the wonderful law”. Ishiwara become engulfed by the nichiren doctrine and came to believe in its prediction that there would be a “Zendai mimon no dai toso / titanic world conflict, unprecedented in human history”, something like a global armageddon. After this would come a reign of universal and eternal peace under the harmony of “the wonderful law”.   While in Germany Ishiwara became convinced that if Japan and the United States were destined for war and the US won that war, the kokutai would be destroyed. He took the trans-siberian railway enroute back to Japan and stopped in Harbin. There he met with Nichiren believers and he spoke to them about his idea of “a final war”. He stated he believed it would come through religious prediction and his military analysis. He warned everyone Japan must hasten herself for it and that “the final war is fast approaching”. Ishiwara came back to Japan in 1925 fired up with conviction to lecture at the army staff college about his final war. His audience was the army's bright and youthful officers. He taught them Frederican and Napoleonic campaigns, Moltke and WW1 and of course his thoughts on the future conflict before them all. The Army staff college continuously called for him to expand his lectures because they were so popular. Then in 1927 he drafted an essay titled “Genzai oyobi shorai Nihon no kokubo / Japan's present and future national defense”. Here he spoke about the inevitable war between the US and Japan. These were quite provocative and took a hell of a lot of attention from colleagues. Later on in april of 1931, he would brief his fellow Kwantung officers using the essay, arguing the need for decisive action on the asian mainland.   In 1928 he would have given another course on European war, but he came down with influenza and was forced to take leave. As he was getting better he was hit with a case of tympanitis in his ear and had to be hospitalized for 6 months. It was to be one of many ailments that would grind at his health. He eventually was drawn into an elite study circle to talk about war theories led by Major Suzuki. The group consisted of young reformist type officers who talked about political and military issues. He carried on his work on the final war and eventually wrote “Sensoshi taikan / general outline of the history of war” which was delivered as a lecture before Kwantung officers at Changch'un in Manchuria on July 4th of 1929. It would receive revisions in 1931, 1938 and became a book of the same title after 1941. As he began lecturing using Sensoshi taiken he also circulated amongst an inner circle within the Kwantung army “kokuun tenkai no konpon kokusakutaru man-mo mondai kaiketsuan / Plan for the solution of the Manchuria and Mongolia problem as a basic national policy to revolutionize our country's destiny”, what a title. As you might guess the plan called for occupying Manchuria in preparation for the upcoming war with America. By the way, all of his lectures and works would gain so much fame, he was asked in 1936 to adapt the materials for a text on military history for Emperor Hirohito.    Now the 1930's were quite a tense time for Japan. The Japanese leadership saw Marxism everywhere, and believed it was withering away their nation. Japanese liberal types were arguing the military budget was out of hand, many were calling for reduction. To Ishiwara it was insanity, how could Japan not arm itself? Marxists preached communism would save Japan; Liberals preached true democracy would save Japan; Ishiwara and many in the army preached the Kokutai would save Japan. Ishiwara preached his final war theories and that the coming apocalypse would not see an American synthesis, but a supreme victory for the Japanese kokutai that would unify the world. “Japan must be victorious not for the sake of her own national interest, but for the salvation of the world. The last war in human history is approaching, Nichiren's titanic world conflict, unprecedented in human history”.   From the offset of his initial theories, Ishiwara believed the final war would be a strategy of exhaustion. But WW1 and the 1920's brought technological advances such as tanks, poison gas and the airplane. The airplane in particular made Ishiwara believe the defensive stalemate seen in WW1 was coming to an end. Airpower could deliver bomb loads past all known defenses such as naval surface units, fortresses, armies with automatic weapons. He believed the final war would see absolute horrors brought upon the greatest cities of the world. London, Shanghai, Paris even Tokyo would be wiped out within a day of the commencement of hostilities. Air bombardment would deliver victory and he would be quite right about that in regards to what would happen to Japan. He believed such a war would be waged only once and “we will enter an age where war will become impossible because of the ultimate development of war technology”.   Ishiwara argued Japan must directly or indirectly control Manchuria and to a lesser degree over parts of China. He asserted Japan had a moral obligation to the asian continent and a special relationship to Manchuria and China. China must be stabilized, for her people were threatened by turmoil, corruption and conflict. He argued Japan would be eventually obliged for the sake of peace and the welfare of the Chinese people to take a more active effort to stabilize her, particularly in Manchuria. He wrote in 1930 “To save China, which has known no peace, is the mission of Japan, a mission, which, at the same time, is the only means for the salvation of Japan itself. To accomplish this task it is an urgent matter that the interference of the United States be eliminated”. Ironically, he was advocating that in order to prepare for a conflict with the US, Japan must take a stronger hand in Manchuria and China…which would probably force the United States to confront her. He advocated against the strategy of a decisive battle at sea, instead emphasizing a continental strategy. “If the worst comes about and the war at sea turns against us, if proper measures have been taken, Japanese forces on the Asian mainland can be made self-sufficient and the war continued.” Above all else, Manchuria was the key, alongside parts of Mongolia and China.    In 1931 he began writing about how China needed to reform and it would be in her best interest to accept Japanese guidance. He saw China as the most valuable ally to be beside Japan in the event of war with the United States. If anything he argued Japan must try to not become involved in a war with China, every effort should be made to avoid provoking such an event. Yet as he continued his writing he began to see the diplomatic issues play out between China and Japan and came to the conclusion, “every attempt should be made to avoid provoking China, but in the event that it is impossible to bring about China's understanding, then Nanking should be swiftly attacked and north and central China occupied” way to go 0-60. His attitudes to Britain and Russia were quite similar, every effort should be made to remain friendly, but in the case of war Hong Kong and Malaya should be quickly occupied or in the case of the USSR, predetermined objectives inside Siberia should be seized quickly.    Now lets talk about Manchuria, specifically Manchuria in the late 1920's. Manchuria was in a huge tug of war between Russia, China and Japan. Her ties to China proper were severed by years of warlordism allowing Japan to grow her position. For Japan, the quote “manchurian problem” as it would be known centered on a single question “how to consolidate and expand it under Japanese influence in the face of an expanding China”. Japan saw 3 viable methods, taking control over the south manchuria railway, using the kwantung army and Japanese colonists, the good old filibuster approach. Each of these 3 methods offered different approaches to the same problem which of course would have very different outcomes.    Controlling the railway allowed quite a lot of control over southern Manchuria. The issue with this of course being Japan having to constantly fight off Chinese political efforts against such control. Zhang Zuolin, the Tiger of Manchuria and arguably greatest of the warlords of China held control over Manchuria and was firmly acting in Japanese interests, but for how long would he play ball? To the Kwantung Army members operating in and around Manchuria, the northern expedition of Chiang Kai-shek was getting out of hand and threatening Zhang Zuolin and thus their interests as well. Anti-Japanese sentiment was only getting worse as the northern expedition climbed north. The Kwangtung army sought more than anything to assert and retain their control over Manchuria, because it offered a buffer against the USSR. Anything that threatened that control had to be dealt with. Ultimately it was believed by many in the Kwantung Army that Manchuria would have to be separated officially from China and in order for this to occur, Japan would most likely need to use force.    Senior officers of the Kwantung army were invited in June of 1927 for a meeting called upon by Premier Tanaka Giichi. The purpose of the meeting was to formulate Japan's policy toward China and Manchuria. A more radical Kwantung army group headed by Colonel Komoto Daisaku sought to eliminate Zhang Zuolin, as he was increasingly being seen as a major obstacle to Japanese ambitions in Manchuria. Well they would do just that in 1928 when Zhang Zuolin was assassinated via a bomb placed on train tracks known as the Huanggutun incident. The assassination did not work out as the Kwantung Army officers thought it would. Instead of their groomed puppet General Yang Yuting taking up the role as leader of Manchuria, it went instead to Zhang Zuolin's son, Zhang Xueliang, who lets just say was not too happy the Japanese had obviously killed his father. Thus the Kwantung Army did not assert the forceful policy they wanted in Manchuria, they had actually made it worse for them.   The half-hearted investigation into those responsible for killing Zhang Zuolin, led to the removal of Colonel Komoto from his post. Tanaka's cabinet was toppled. The Kwantung army were now embarrassed and angry that their stance in Manchuria was weakened. The Japanese colonists within Manchuria felt more threatened and called more so upon the Kwantung army for protection against Chinese nationalists wishing to kick them out. The Kwantung army was grasping at straws trying to think of a way to sever Manchuria from China. In 1928, Ishiwara was a lt colonel and he was consulted in length by Kwantung officers about his views on the Manchurian problem. While he had not fully hashed out his Final War theory by this point, he nonetheless spoke about the fundamentals of it, arguing the necessity of taking action to control Manchuria. For the next few years, all efforts were made by Kwantung officers to influence policy towards Manchuria. Ishiwara's ideas were being stimulated and influencing the debate over Manchuria amongst his high ranking colleagues. In October of 1928, Ishiwara sought and received an appointment to the Kwantung army staff. The assignment was to be as an operations officer and his number one backer was Colonel Komoto Daisaku. It seemed Komoto saw Ishiwara as the firebrand necessary to push the Manchurian policies they wanted.   When Ishiwara arrived at Port Arthur, he found the Kwantung Army HQ in a state of confusion and demoralization. This of course was a large part due to the cluster fuck of a failure from the bombing of Zhang Zuolin. The investigation into the assassination led to many shifts within the Kwantung army staff, many quite restrictive. Even though Komoto's career was shattered by the Zhang Zuolin failure, he kept arguing to his colleagues that the Manchurian crisis hamukdend to be resolved by force. Ishiwara it seems agreed with this and during the early months of 1929 worked alongside Komoto, planning operations against Chinese forces in the Mukden area. By spring of 1929, Komoto was officially being kicked out. By May he was relegated to a divisional backwater in Japan and by June he was out of the army. This did not mean however that he lost influence on Manchurian affairs. Komoto's replacement was Lt Colonel Itagaki Seishiro and old comrade of Ishiwara since Sendai military preparatory school.    For the next two and a half years, Ishiwara and Itagaki worked alongside other Kwantung Army staff to solve the Manchurian problem as they saw it. By the mid 1931's the idea Manchuria needed to be seized via force was now the mainstream viewpoint for the Kwantung army in general. Ishiwara believed firmly that Japan could no longer stand idle in Manchuria, because every day that went by saw little by little, Japan relinquishing rights and interests in Manchuria to China, and at some point they would simply be kicked out. To “quit manchuria” would be a national disaster, they would lose their buffer state, the resources and the land for their booming population to emigrate to. Simply put Manchuria was the steroid keeping Japan alive, she needed it to continue to grow. Ishiwara would often say “manchuria provides Japan with breathing space” where have we heard that type of talk before?. To the military heads in Tokyo Ishikawa would often assert Manchuria had to be seized via force, because of the soviethreat of the USSR and communism as a whole “In view of the traditional russian policy in that area, once the soviets advanced into manchuria, it would become a base for the communization of asia. Not only would the internal stability of manchuria become impossible to maintain, but Japan would be unable to maintain its own national defense, and China's defenses, too, would become imperialized". The Army HQ in Tokyo likewise agreed Manchuria was the vital defensive line against the USSR. But unlike the Kwantung army who sought all of Manchuria, the heads in Tokyo sought to absorb southern Manchuria via the south manchurian railway and did not seek anything north of it. Ishiwara however assumed the only way Japan could prevent the USSR from placing pressure on southern Manchuria was no less that Japan having to occupy northern Manchuria and even further north towards the Amur River so Japan could control the mountain ranges flanking western and eastern frontiers of northern manchuria.  Once Japan controlled northern Manchuria, Ishiwara stated in 1931 “With the solution of our defense problems in the north, we would then be free to plan an advance in any direction: to China proper, for example, or even to Southeast Asia”.   Ishiwara took all of this a step further, after Manchuria was conquered, Japan would have to somehow administer and pacify the peoples of it. Ishiwara argued the stability of Manchuria would be developed through the special talents of various races living there. The Chinese would develop the small businesses in the region, the Koreans would use their paddy farming knowledge, etc. These racial ideas would contribute to the development of Manchukuo and the greater east asia co-prosperity sphere. But above all else, Manchuria would serve the interests of Japan, many of which would be exploitative and economic in nature.    By early 1930 Ishiwara and Itagaki worked out a plan using the same strategy used during the Russo-Japanese war, a surprise night attack. The Kwantung army would assault the Liaoning area hitting important Chinese garrisons. The plans had to be meticulous as the Kwantung army was severely smaller than most of the Manchurian forces led by Zhang Xueliang. Around Mukden alone Zhang held 20,000 men well equipped with aircraft and tanks. Throughout all of Manchuria, if a war arose, Zhang could assemble roughly 250,000 troops to bear down on an enemy. The Kwantung army meanwhile could muster 10,000 men which were basically garrison units around the railway. They did not have significant aircraft nor mechanized forces at hand, and were pretty poorly equipped to boot. Ishiwara's answer to the disparity in forces called for the use of intelligence and rigorous training. He sought to perfect specific assault techniques so that when the conflict broke out, the Japanese would use lightning speed and effective concentration of force to overwhelm the Chinese. The plan overall was remarkably simplistic, wagering everything on dealing a crushing blow at the center of Zhang Xueliangs military powerbase at the Peitaying barracks at Mukden. If this fell, he predicted the enemy's morale would break, giving the Kwantung the necessary military and psychological momentum to subdue the surrounding areas. If the USSR got involved, the plan would have gone to utter shit.   One important variable Ishiwara highlighted was the necessity to pull off the operation before any attempt to restructure the domestic order in Japan occurred. Ishiwara knew his arguments and those of his colleagues would influence the heads in Tokyo, and they had to act before they did. However the heads at Tokyo and the Kwantung army held very different perspectives on when to act. In June of 1931 the Central army HQ stated in its General Outline of a solution to the Manchurian problem “we must defer the question of military action for a whole year. During this time the foreign ministry would attempt to dampen anti japanese activities in manchuria through negotiations with the government of Nanking. In the meantime the government would launch an information campaign to try and drive acquiescence at home and aboard for military action ”. Ishiwara as you can imagine was very bitter about the idea of prolonging for a year and argued the international environment meant they must strike immediately. The Soviet 5 year plan was still in mid course; the US, Britain and France had yet to overcome their financial crisis and could offer limited resistance in the far east and most obviously the Nationalist regime in China was still busy in its unification efforts south of the Great wall, but that would change soon. If they waited a year all of this would change for the worse, the time was now or never to Ishiwara.   In july of 1931 Ishiwara and Itagki organized a final major staff reconnaissance designed to get the newest Kwantung officers up to date with northern Manchuria. To cover for what they were doing they told high command it was a survey against the USSR, but it was of course to investigate the Chinese power in northern manchuria. On their return trip, the party heard of the disappearance of one Kwantung staff officer, captain Nakamura Shintaro. Ishiwara and the others found out when they reached Port Arthur and the rumor spread that Captain Nakamura had been killed by Chinese soldiers under “mysterious circumstances”. Now over the past few months there had been violent riots, murders, work strikes and other incidents occurring in Manchuria. The Nakamura affair flared all of these tensions up. Seeing the paint on the wall, Chinese and Japanese foreign ministries tried to negotiate the issue, but those at the central army HQ like Nagata Tetsuzan who were sympathetic to the impatience of their Kwantung colleagues felt compelled to aid them. For Ishiwara the issue was clear as he wrote “the Nakamura incident adds just one more issue to the others. What the army should do now is to ignore the foreign ministry and solve the problem by taking matters into its own hands”. And that is just what he did. The Kwantung officers took their forces outside the railway zone, which they had been restricted to and without waiting for approval from Itagaki who was in Japan at the time, initiated the steps to despatch an armored train and a mixed regiment of infantry and artillery forces to go to Mukden to get the Chinese military to help investigate the Nakamura disappearance. Tokyo got word of this and dispatched a telegram to stop their departure from the railway and to not use the Nakamura incident as a way to use force to solve the manchurian problem.   For Ishiwara this was the last straw. On August 20th he sent a message to Nagata condemning the current diplomatic situation and that negotiations were an utter waste of time. “There is no way to settle the matter except by placing it in the hands of the army. If central hq finds it so difficult to trust its field personnel then it had better replace them with representatives more suitable to the conditions it imagines to exist in Manchuria”. Ishiwara doubled down and pushed for a plot to provoke military conflict outside of Mukden. As he wrote in almost a messianic Nichiren conviction ‘I will be the pillar of Japan; I will be the eyes of Japan; I will be the great vessel of Japan” .   “Gekokujo / ruling from below” is a Japanese historical term referring to when subordinates defy or manipulate their superiors. Ishiwara and his like minded close colleagues were about to perform Gekokujo. On september 18th, 1931 a bomb was planted by the Kwantung army on the tracks of the south manchuria railway at Liutiaokou and it exploded. Japanese troops under the guise the bomb was a “chinese terrorist attack” moved to swiftly overrun the Peitaying barracks. Ishiwara's plot had finally unfolded. 

In September 2025, in Kyiv, a prominent American historian Timothy Snyder received the Vasyl Stus Prize — a Ukrainian award honoring the name of Vasyl Stus, one of Ukraine's greatest poets and dissidents of the 20th century, killed by the Soviet regime in 1985. Founded in 1989 by Yevhen Sverstiuk, another prominent Ukrainian dissident, the prize is now awarded by PEN Ukraine, the publishing house Dukh i Litera, and the Kyiv-Mohyla Business School. Before the award ceremony, we held a public conversation with Snyder on the good and bad ways of thinking about history. Since interpretations of history often lie at the heart of both the good and the evil that people do, this question remains vitally important. *** Host: Volodymyr Yermolenko, a Ukrainian philosopher, editor-in-chief of UkraineWorld, and president of PEN Ukraine. Thinking in Dark Times seeks to find the light through — and despite — today's darkness. *** UkraineWorld is an English-language media about Ukraine run by Internews Ukraine Listen to our podcasts: Explaining Ukraine: https://li.sten.to/explaining-ukraine Thinking in Dark Times: https://li.sten.to/thinkinggg *** Special thanks to the Ukrainian History Global Initiative, PEN Ukraine, and the Kyiv-Mohyla Business School for helping organize this event. This episode was made possible with the support of Politeia, a Ukrainian NGO dedicated to preparing a new generation of change-makers in Ukraine. *** You can also listen to several other conversations with Timothy Snyder from previous years: On freedom: Timothy Snyder in Kyiv https://ukraineworld.org/en/podcasts//ep-344 Timothy Snyder in Kharkiv: A conversation about freedom https://ukraineworld.org/en/podcasts//ep-340 Freedom as a value and a task https://ukraineworld.org/en/podcasts//ep-258 Ukraine, the war, and the plurality of values https://ukraineworld.org/en/podcasts//ep-144 *** SUPPORT: You can support UkraineWorld on https://www.patreon.com/c/ukraineworld We rely on crowdfunding to continue our work. You can also support our regular trips to the frontlines, where we provide support to both soldiers (cars) and civilians (books): PayPal, ukraine.resisting@gmail.com *** CONTENTS: 00:00:00 Timothy Snyder, world-known historian 00:03:04 What are the good and bad ways to use history to understand who we are? 00:08:53 How does a 'single line' view of the past, like Putin's or Trump's, take away our freedom? 00:25:18 Why recognizing the 'difference' of people in the past is a liberating act for us in the present? 00:49:55 Is the world truly living in a 'post-history' era where conflict and tragedy are safely in the past? 00:56:22 Does seeing a pattern in history mean the war is repeating, or is it a moment of new responsibility? 01:03:35 Was the US response in March 2022 a failure because American leaders were stuck in 'memory' instead of 'history'? 01:13:52 How does the power of data-driven tools force us to be careful about the human questions we ask? 01:24:21 Was the printing press as disruptive to society as social media is today?

Most cases of intimate partner violence are never made and the stories never told.  Joy Neumeyer did both.  The victim of an abusive relationship while a graduate student at Berkeley, Joy succeeded in having her former boyfriend and fellow graduate student expelled through the Title IX process.  Equality important, she gained recognition for the truth of the physical and emotional harm she suffered.  Through the lens of her training as a historian of the Soviet Union, Joy finds parallels with her own experience with women in both the Soviet and American past.  She explains the history and challenges of the Title IX process which is at once under assault and a vital support for victims of intimate partner violence.  A conversation with Joy Neumeyer, author of A Survivor's Education: Women, Violence and the Stories We Don't Tell, on this episode of Realms of Memory.  

2. Galicia, World War I, and the Finkel Family's Soviet Incorporation This segment explores Western Ukraine (Galicia), distinct from the Russian Empire until relatively late. While Russia used forced assimilation and violence against Ukrainians, Galicia under the Austro-Hungarian Empire practiced tolerance, allowing Ukrainian language and nationalism to flourish. St. Petersburg deeply feared this, viewing the small region as a "Ukrainian Piedmont" that could spread nationalistic ideas and eventually unite Ukraine against Russian control. This anxiety—the desire to seize and Russify Galicia—was a key, often overlooked reason for Russia's entry into World War I. Russia occupied Galicia briefly but failed to keep it; however, in 1939, following the division of Poland by Stalin and Hitler, Western Ukraine was finally incorporated into the Soviet Union. The professor's grandfather, Israel/Lev Finkel, fought bravely for the USSR in the Great Patriotic War despite his Galician background, demonstrating the complex loyalties resulting from shifting imperial projects.

4. Khrushchev, Putin's Perceptions, and the Soviet Golden Age in Ukraine The Soviet period saw Ukraine rise to crucial importance; leaders like Khrushchev and Brezhnev spent large parts of their careers in the Ukrainian Communist Party apparatus. In 1954, Khrushchev transferred Crimea from the Russian Federation to Ukraine for practical reasons, as Kyiv was better positioned to manage it than Moscow. During the 1960s, Ukraine became a critical industrial manufacturing center, producing coal, military ballistic missiles, and space-related equipment, reinforcing its centrality to the Soviet state. Vladimir Putin, born in 1953, formed his understanding of Ukraine during this relatively calm period. For his generation, it was implicit and taken for granted that Ukraine was merely an extension of Russia—a source of industry, grain, and the beloved vacation spot of Crimea, the "Soviet Florida." Russians became emotionally attached to Ukraine as "ours," making the idea of Ukrainian independence not even a question for debate in the Russian mindset. 1855 CRIMEA

On October 22 1962, President John F. Kennedy announced that Soviet missiles has been discovered in Cuba. Over the following days, the fate of the Americas was on the line.In this episode, Don is joined once again by Renata Keller to explore the causes and events of the Cuban Missile Crisis, and to discuss what might have happened had the situation not been resolved.Renata's new book 'The Fate of the Americas: The Cuban Missile Crisis and the Hemispheric Cold War' shows how this was not just a Soviet-US event. She explores how leaders and citizens throughout South America, the area at most risk from nuclear missiles, impacted on the events of October 1962.Edited by Aidan Lonergan. Produced by Sophie Gee. Senior Producer was Charlotte Long.Sign up to History Hit for hundreds of hours of original documentaries, with a new release every week and ad-free podcasts. Sign up at https://www.historyhit.com/subscribe.  You can take part in our listener survey here.All music from Epidemic Sounds.American History Hit is a History Hit podcast. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Last time we spoke about the flooding of the Yellow River. As Japanese forces pressed toward central China, Chiang Kai-shek weighed a desperate gamble: defend majestic Wuhan with costly sieges, or unleash a radical plan that would flood its heart. Across/Xuzhou, Taierzhuang, and the Yellow River's bend near Zhengzhou, commanders fought a brutal, grinding war. Chinese units, battered yet stubborn, executed strategic retreats and furious counteroffensives. But even as brave soldiers stalled the enemy, the longer fight threatened to drain a nation's will and leave millions unprotected. Then a striking idea surfaced: breach the dikes of the Yellow River at Huayuankou and flood central China to halt the Japanese advance. The plan was terrifying in its moral cost, yet it offered a temporary shield for Wuhan and time to regroup. Workers, farmers, soldiers, laborers—pushed aside fear and toiled through the night, water rising like a raging tide. The flood bought months, not victory. It punished civilians as much as it protected soldiers, leaving a nation to confront its own hard choices and the haunting question: was survival worth the price?   #172 The Road to Wuhan 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. Following the Battle of Xuzhou and the breaching of the Yangtze dykes, Wuhan emerged as Japan's next military objective for political, economic, and strategic reasons. Wuhan served as the interim capital of the Kuomintang government, making it a crucial center of political authority. Its fall would deprive China of a vital rail and river hub, thereby further crippling the Chinese war effort. From a strategic perspective, Japanese control of a major rail and river junction on the Yangtze would enable westward expansion and provide a base for further advances into central and southern China. For these reasons, the Intelligence Division of the Army General Staff assessed that the capture of Wuhan would likely deliver the decisive blow needed to conclude the Second Sino-Japanese War.  Recognizing Wuhan's strategic importance, both the National Revolutionary Army and the Imperial Japanese Army committed substantial forces to the city and its approaches. The IJA deployed roughly 400,000 troops, while the NRA fielded at least 800,000. China began the war with an estimated regular force of 1.7 to 2.2 million men, organized into six broad loyalty-based categories around Chiang Kai-shek's command. Directly loyal troops formed the first group, followed by a second tier of soldiers who had previously supported Chiang but were less tightly controlled. The next category consisted of provincial troops that Chiang could ordinarily influence, while a fourth group included provincial units over which his sway was weaker. The fifth category comprised Communist forces, the Eighth Route Army in the northwest and the New Fourth Army forming in the central Yangtze region. The final category consisted of Northeastern or Manchurian units loyal to Zhang Xueliang, known as the “Young Marshal.” The first two categories together accounted for roughly 900,000 men, with about a million more in independent provincial armies, and roughly 300,000 in Communist and Manchurian forces. As commander-in-chief, Chiang could effectively command only about half of the mobilizable units at the outbreak of war in July 1937, which meant that military decisions were often slow, fraught with negotiation, and administratively cumbersome. Division-level coordination and communication proved particularly challenging, a stark contrast to the Japanese command structure, which remained clean and disciplined. Geographically, most of Chiang's loyal troops were located in the corridor between the Yangtze and the Yellow rivers at the start of 1938. Having participated heavily in the defense of Shanghai and Nanjing, they retreated to Wuhan at about half strength, with an already decimated officer corps. They then numbered around 400,000 and were commanded by generals Chen Cheng and Hu Zongnan. The northern regional armies, especially Han Fuju's forces in Shandong, had suffered severe losses; some units defected to the Japanese and later served as puppet troops. After six months of Japanese onslaught that cost the coastal and central regions—Peiping-Tianjin to Shanghai and inland toward Nanjing—much of the relatively autonomous, sizable armies remained from the southwest or northwest, under leaders such as Li Zongren, Bai Chongxi (Guangxi), Long Yun (Yunnan), and Yan Xishan (Shanxi and Suiyuan). Roughly 700,000 of these troops—predominantly from Guangxi under Li and Bai—were committed to the defense of Wuhan. The Communist forces, by contrast, numbered about 100,000 and remained relatively unscathed in bases north and east of Xi'an. In total, approximately 1.3 million men were under arms in defense of Wuhan. In December 1937, the Military Affairs Commission was established to determine Wuhan's defense strategy. Following the loss of Xuzhou, the National Revolutionary Army redeployed approximately 1.1 million troops across about 120 divisions. The commission organized the defense around three main fronts: the Dabie Mountains, Poyang Lake, and the Yangtze River, in response to an estimated 200,000 Japanese troops spread over 20 divisions of the Imperial Japanese Army. Li Zongren and Bai Chongxi, commanding the Fifth War Zone, were assigned to defend the north of the Yangtze, while Chen Cheng, commanding the Ninth War Zone, was tasked with defending the south. The First War Zone, situated to the west of the Zhengzhou–Xinyang segment of the Pinghan Railway, was responsible for halting Japanese forces advancing from the North China Plain, and the Third War Zone, located between Wuhu, Anqing, and Nanchang, was charged with protecting the Yuehan Railway. Following the Japanese occupation of Xuzhou in May 1938, they sought to expand the invasion. The IJA decided to dispatch a vanguard to occupy Anqing as a forward base for an assault on Wuhan. The main force would then advance north of the Dabie Mountains along the Huai River, with the objective of eventually capturing Wuhan via the Wusheng Pass. A second detachment would move west along the Yangtze. However, a flood from the Yellow River forced the IJA to abandon plans to advance along the Huai and instead to attack along both banks of the Yangtze. Despite Chinese numerical superiority on the Wuhan front, roughly a 2:1 advantage, the offensive faced several complicating factors. The NRA was a heterogeneous, fragmented force with a variety of tables of organization and equipment, and it lacked the unified command structure that characterized the IJA. Historian Richard Frank notes the broad diversity of Chinese forces at the outbreak of the war, which hindered cohesive mobile and strategic operations: “Chiang commanded armies of 2,029,000 troops of highly variegated capability and loyalty. His personal forces included an elite cadre of three hundred-thousand German-trained and eighty-thousand German armed men. A second stratum of the Chinese armies, numbering roughly 600,000 included various regional commands loyal to Chiang in the past that generally conformed to his directives. These troops were better armed and trained than the rest. The third category encompassed a million men who were neither loyal nor obedient to Chiang”. The NRA faced a significant disadvantage in both quantity and quality of equipment compared to the Japanese. The disparity was stark in artillery allocations. An IJA infantry division possessed 48 field and mountain guns, whereas a German-equipped Chinese division had only 16. In terms of regiment and battalion guns, a Japanese division had 56, while a German-equipped Chinese division possessed just 30. Of roughly 200 Chinese infantry divisions in 1937, only 20 were German-equipped, and merely eight of those met their paper-strength standards. Many Chinese divisions had no artillery at all, and those that did often lacked radios or forward-observation capabilities to ensure accurate fire. These deficiencies placed the NRA at a clear disadvantage in firepower when facing the Japanese. These equipment gaps were compounded by poor training and tactical doctrine. The NRA lacked adequate training facilities and did not incorporate sufficient field maneuvers, gun handling, or marksmanship into its program. Although the 1935 drill manual introduced small-group “open order” tactics, many formations continued to fight in close-order formations. In an era when increased firepower rendered close-order tactics obsolete, such formations became a liability. The NRA's failure to adapt dispersed assault formations limited its tactical effectiveness. Defensively, the NRA also faced serious shortcomings. Units were often ordered to create deep positions near key lines of communication, but Chinese forces became overly dependent on fixed fortifications, which immobilized their defense. Poor intelligence on Japanese movements and a lack of mobile reserves, there were only about 3,000 military vehicles in China in 1937, meant that Japanese infantry could easily outflank fixed NRA positions. Moreover, the Japanese enjoyed superiority in artillery, enabling them to suppress these fixed positions more effectively. These realities left Chinese defenses vulnerable, especially in the war's first year. The leadership deficit within the NRA, reflected in limited officer training, further constrained operational effectiveness. Chiang Kai-shek reportedly warned that Chinese commanders often equaled their counterparts in rank but did not outmatch them in competence. Only 2,000 commanders and staff officers had received training by 1937, and many staff officers had no military training at all. Overall, about 29.1 percent of NRA officers had no military education, severely limiting professional development and command capability. With the exception of the Guangxi divisions, Chinese units were hampered by an unnecessarily complex command structure. Orders from Chiang Kai-shek needed to pass through six tiers before action could be taken, slowing decision-making and responsiveness. In addition, Chiang favored central army units under direct control with loyal commanders from the Whampoa clique when distributing equipment, a pattern that bred discord and insubordination across levels of the Chinese field forces. Beyond structural issues, the Chinese force organization suffered from a lack of coherence due to competing influences. The forces had been reorganized along German-inspired lines, creating large field armies arranged as “war zones,” while Russian influence shaped strategic positioning through a division into “front” and “route” armies and separate rear-area service units. This mix yielded an incoherent force facing the Japanese. Troop placement and support procedures lacked rationalization: Chiang and his generals often sought to avoid decisive confrontation with Japan to minimize the risk of irreversible defeat, yet they also rejected a broad adoption of guerrilla warfare as a systematic tactic. The tendency to emphasize holding railway lines and other communications tied down the main fighting forces, around which the Japanese could maneuver more easily, reducing overall operational flexibility. Despite these deficiencies, NRA officers led roughly 800,000 Chinese troops deployed for the Battle of Wuhan. On the Wuhan approaches, four war zones were organized under capable if overextended leadership: 1st, 3rd, 5th, and 9th. The 5th War Zone, commanded by Li Zongren, defended north of the Yangtze to protect the Beijing–Wuhan railway. Chen Cheng's Ninth War Zone defended south of the Yangtze, aiming to prevent seizure of Jiujiang and other key cities on approaches to Wuhan. The 1st War Zone focused on stopping Japanese forces from the northern plains, while Gu Zhutong's 3rdWar Zone, deployed between Wuhu, Anqing, and Nanchang, defended the Yuehan railway and fortified the Yangtze River. Japan's Central China Expeditionary Army, commanded by Hata Shunroku, spearheaded the Wuhan advance. The CCEA consisted of two armies: the 2nd Army, which included several infantry divisions under Prince Naruhiko Higashikuni, and the 11th Army, advancing along the Yangtze's northern and southern banks under Okamura Yasuji. The 2nd Army aimed to push through the Dabie Mountains and sever Wuhan from the north, while the 11th Army would converge on Wuhan in a concentric operation to envelop the city. The Japanese forces were augmented by 120 ships from the 3rd Fleet of the Imperial Japanese Navy under Koshirō Oikawa, more than 500 aircraft from the Imperial Japanese Army Air Service, and five divisions from the Central China Area Army tasked with guarding Shanghai, Beijing, Hangzhou, and other key cities. These forces were intended to protect the back of the main Japanese thrust and complete the preparations for a major battle. The Kuomintang, led by Chiang Kai-shek, was acutely aware that Japan aimed to strike at Wuhan. Facing Japan's firepower and bold offensives, Chiang and his commanders pursued a strategy of attrition at the Wuchang conference in January 1938. Central China would be the primary theater of China's protracted struggle, distant from Japan's existing center of gravity in Manchuria. Chiang hoped Japan's manpower and resources would be exhausted as the empire pushed deeper into Central China. Eventually, Japan would be forced either to negotiate a settlement with China or to seek foreign assistance to obtain raw materials. The mountainous terrain to the north and south of the Yangtze presented natural obstacles that the Chinese believed would hinder large-scale concentration of Japanese forces. North of the Yangtze, the Dabie Mountains provided crucial flank protection; to the south, rugged, roadless terrain made expansive maneuvering difficult. In addition to these natural barriers, Chinese forces fortified the region with prepared, in-depth defenses, particularly in the mountains. The rugged terrain was expected to help hold back the Japanese offensive toward Wuhan and inflict substantial casualties on the attackers. The Yangtze itself was a critical defensive factor. Although the Chinese Navy was largely absent, they implemented several measures to impede amphibious operations. They constructed gun positions at key points where the river narrowed, notably around the strongholds at Madang and Tianjiazhen. Specialized units, such as the Riverine Defense Force, were deployed to defend these river fortifications against amphibious assaults. To reinforce the Riverine Defense Force, Chinese forces sank 79 ships in the Yangtze to create obstacles for potential Japanese naval advances. They also laid thousands of mines to constrain Japanese warships. These defensive measures were designed to slow the Japanese advance and complicate their logistics. The Chinese aimed to exploit stalled offensives to strike at exposed flanks and disrupted supply lines, leveraging terrain and fortified positions to offset Japan's superior firepower. On 18 February 1938, an Imperial Japanese Navy Air Service strike force comprising at least 11 A5M fighters of the 12th and 13th Kōkūtais, led by Lieutenant Takashi Kaneko, and 15 G3M bombers of the Kanoya Kokutai, led by Lieutenant Commander Sugahisa Tuneru, raided Wuhan and engaged 19 Chinese Air Force I-15 fighters from the 22nd and 23rd Pursuit Squadrons and 10 I-16 fighters from the 21st Pursuit Squadron, all under the overall command of the 4th Pursuit Group CO Captain Li Guidan. They faced a Soviet Volunteer Group mix of Polikarpov fighters as well. The 4th Group fighters claimed at least four A5Ms shot down, while the Soviet group claimed no fewer than three A5Ms. Both the Japanese fighter group commander, Lieutenant Kaneko, and the Chinese fighter group commander, Captain Li, were killed in action during the battle. A largely intact A5M downed in the engagement was recovered with a damaged engine; it was the second intact A5M to be recovered, repaired, and flight-tested in the war, following the first recovered-intact A5M credited to Colonel Gao Zhihang during an air battle over Nanjing on 12 October 1937. On 3 August 1938, 52 Chinese fighters, including 20 I-15s, 13 I-16s, 11 Gloster Gladiators, and 7 Hawk IIIs, intercepted at least 29 A5Ms and 18 G3Ms over Hankou. The Guangxi era pilots Zhu Jiaxun and He Jermin, along with Chinese-American fighter pilots Arthur Chin and Louie Yim-qun, all flying Gladiators, claimed at least four A5Ms shot down on that day. The Wuhan Campaign began in earnest when the Imperial Japanese Army's 3rd and 13th Infantry Divisions advanced north of the Yangtze River. Central China Expeditionary Army commander Hata Shunroku designated Shouxian, Zhengyangguan, and the Huainan coal mine as the objectives for the 3rd and 13th Infantry Divisions. Meanwhile, the 6th Infantry Division, part of the 11th Army, advanced toward Anqing from Hefei. The 6th Infantry Division coordinated with the Hata Detachment, which launched an amphibious assault from the river. The 2nd Army's sector saw immediate success. On June 3, the 3rd Infantry Division seized the Huainan coal mine; two days later, it captured Shouxian. The 13th Infantry Division also secured Zhengyangguan on that day. The 6th Infantry Division then made rapid progress immediately north of the Yangtze River, taking Shucheng on June 8 and Tongcheng on June 13. These advances forced the Chinese 77th Corps and the 21st and 26th Army Groups to withdraw to a line spanning Huoshan, Lu'an, and Fuyang. More critically, the Hata Detachment crossed the Yangtze River and landed behind the Chinese 27th Army Group's 20th Corps. The sudden appearance of Japanese forces in their rear forced the two Chinese divisions defending Anqing to withdraw. The fall of Anqing represented a major Japanese success, as they gained control of an airfield crucial for receiving close air support. After battles around Shucheng, Tongcheng, and Anqing, all three cities and their surrounding countryside suffered extensive damage. Much of this damage resulted from air raids that indiscriminately targeted soldiers and civilians alike. In Shucheng, the raids were reportedly aided by a Chinese traitor who displayed a red umbrella to guide daylight bombing on May 10, 1938. This air raid caused substantial destruction, killing or wounding at least 160 people and destroying more than a thousand homes. The town of Yimen also endured aerial destruction, with raids killing over 400 people and destroying 7,000 homes. Yimen and Shucheng were among many Chinese towns subjected to terror bombing, contributing to widespread civilian casualties and the destruction of livelihoods across China. The broader pattern of air raids was enabled by a lack of quality fighter aircraft and trained pilots, allowing Japanese bombers free rein against Chinese cities, towns, and villages. While the aerial assaults caused immense damage, the atrocities committed in these cities were even more severe. In Anhui, where Shucheng, Anqing, and Tongcheng were located, the Japanese brutality was on full display. The brutality can be partly understood as an attempt to destroy China's will and capacity to wage war, yet the extremity of some acts points to a warped martial culture within the Japanese Army, which appeared to encourage murder, torture, rape, and other crimes. Indeed, the Army eventually enshrined this brutality in its doctrine with the so-called “three alls”: kill all, burn all, loot all.  These acts, and more, were carried out in Anhui during the summer of 1938 as the Japanese advanced up the Yangtze River. In Anqing, the Hata Detachment killed at least 200 people without compunction. A further 36 civilians on a boat were detained and killed by Japanese marines, who claimed they were potentially Chinese soldiers. The countryside around Anqing, Shucheng, and Tongcheng witnessed continued atrocities. In Taoxi village of Shucheng County, the Japanese burned over 1,000 houses and killed more than 40 people. At Nangang, Japanese soldiers killed more than 200 people and committed numerous rapes, including many victims over 60 years old. Tongcheng also became a site of forced sexual slavery. The Japanese atrocities, intended to terrify the Chinese into submission, did not achieve their aim. Chinese resistance persisted. After a brief withdrawal, the 20th Army held stoutly at Jinshan for four days before retreating to Xiaochiyi and Taihu. These withdrawals, while costly, lured the Japanese deeper into the interior of China. As the Japanese advanced, their flanks became increasingly vulnerable to counterattack. On June 26, 1928, the Chinese 26th Army Group attacked the flanks of the 6th Infantry Division at Taihu. The 26th Army Group was supported by the 20th and 31st Armies, which attacked from the front to pin the 6th Infantry Division in place. The 6th Infantry Division was ill-prepared to respond, suffering a malaria outbreak that left about 2,000 soldiers unfit for combat. Fighting continued until June 29, when the Japanese withdrew. The focus of operations north of the Yangtze shifted to Madang, a key river fortress protected by obstacles and river batteries. Roughly 600 mines were laid in the Yangtze near Madang, and the fortress was largely manned by the Riverine Defense Force, with a small garrison; including stragglers from the 53rd Infantry Division, the Madang garrison totaled roughly 500 men. Initial expectations had Madang holding, since Japanese ships could not easily remove obstacles or suppress the batteries. On the dawn of June 24, however, news reached Madang that Xiangkou had fallen to the Japanese, enabling a land threat to Madang, and many Madang defenders, including most officers above the platoon level, were absent at a nearby ceremony when the attack began.  On 24 June, Japanese forces conducted a surprise landing at Madang, while the main body of the Japanese Eleventh Army advanced along the southern shore of the Yangtze. The Chinese garrison at the Madang river fortress repelled four assaults, yet suffered casualties from intense bombardment by Japanese ships on the Yangtze and from poison gas attacks. Compounding the difficulty, most of the Chinese officers responsible for Madang's defense were absent due to a ceremony at a local military school by Li Yunheng, the overseeing general. Consequently, only three battalions from the second and third Marine Corps and the 313th regiment of the 53rd Division took part in the defense, totaling no more than five battalions. When the 167th Division, stationed in Pengze, was ordered by War Zone commander Bai Chongxi to move swiftly along the highway to reinforce the defenders, divisional commander Xue Weiying instead sought instructions from his direct superior, Li Yunheng, who instructed him to take a longer, more navigationally challenging route to avoid Japanese bombers. Reinforcements arrived too late, and Madang fell after a three-day battle. Chiang Kai-shek promptly ordered a counterattack, offering a 50,000 yuan reward for the units that recaptured the fortress. On June 28, the 60th Division of the 18th Corps and the 105th Division of the 49th Corps retook Xiangshan and received 20,000 yuan, but made no further progress. As the Japanese army pressed the attack on Pengze, Chinese units shifted to a defensive posture. Chiang Kai-shek subsequently had Li Yunheng court-martialed and Xue Weiying executed. After the fall of Madang, the broader Wuhan campaign benefited from Madang as a foothold along the Yangtze, as the river continued to function as a dual-use corridor for transport and amphibious landings, aiding later operations and complicating Chinese defensive planning. The rapid capture of Madang demonstrated the effectiveness of combined arms, amphibious insertion, and secure supply routes along a major river, while Chinese defenses showed weaknesses such as reliance on rough terrain, underestimation of Japanese amphibious capabilities, and delayed reinforcement, which, coupled with gas warfare, produced a swift loss. The fall influenced subsequent Chinese fortifications and defensive doctrine along the Yangtze and affected decisions regarding garrison allocations and riverine operations. After Madang fell, Japan's 11th Army pressed toward its next major objectives, Jiujiang, Huangmei, and Xiaochikou. It took nearly three weeks for the Japanese to clear the waterway around Madang of mines, costing them five minesweepers, two warships, and a landing craft full of marines. Jiujiang stood out as the most important due to its status as a key river port and railway junction. To defend these targets, China deployed the 1st Army Corps to Jiujiang, the 2nd Army Corps to cover the area west of Jiujiang, and the 4th Army Corps to defend Xiaochikou. Despite these reinforcements, the Japanese continued their advance.  The Japanese initially captured Pengze but met strong resistance at Hukou, where they again deployed poison gas during a five-day battle. During the breakout, there were insufficient boats to evacuate the auxiliary troops of the defending 26th Division from Hukou, leaving only a little over 1,800 of the more than 3,100 non-combat soldiers able to be evacuated, and the majority of the more than 1,300 missing soldiers drowned while attempting to cross the Poyang Lake. On July 23, they conducted an amphibious operation at Gutang, with the Hata Detachment landing at Jiujiang shortly thereafter. These landings south of the Yangtze represented another step toward Wuhan, which lay about 240 kilometers away. The Chinese responses consisted of relentless counterattacks, but they failed to dislodge the Japanese from their bridgeheads. Consequently, the Japanese captured Xiaochikou by July 26 and Jiujiang by July 28, with a note that poison gas may have been used at Jiujiang. North of the Yangtze, the 6th Infantry Division moved forward and seized Huangmei on August 2. Despite stubborn Chinese resistance, the Japanese had gained considerable momentum toward Wuhan. Soon after the fall of Jiujiang and surrounding areas, the local population endured a renewed surge of war crimes. The Imperial Japanese Army sought to break China's will to resist and its capacity to endure the onslaught. Male civilians were executed indiscriminately, along with any POWs unable to retreat in time, while women and children were subjected to mass rape. In addition, numerous urban districts and suburban villages were deliberately razed, including the city's ceramics factories and its maritime transportation system. The widely documented “three alls” policy proved devastating in the Yangtze region: in Jiujiang alone, as many as 98,461 people were killed, 13,213 houses destroyed, and property losses reached 28.1 billion yuan. Yet numbers fail to convey the brutality unleashed in Jiujiang, Hukou, and Xiaochikou south of the Yangtze. On July 20, the Japanese confined 100 villagers in a large house in Zhouxi village, Hukou County, and erased them with machine guns and bayonets. Tangshan village witnessed similar brutality on July 31, when eight people were drowned in a pond and 26 houses burned. That September, learning that children and the elderly at Saiyang Township were taking refuge in caves on Mount Lushan, the Japanese proceeded to bayonet defenseless civilians, many beheaded, disemboweled, or amputated. These acts, among others, were carried out on a mass scale south of the Yangtze, resulting in tens of thousands of deaths around Jiujiang. Despite the enormity of these crimes, Chinese people did not surrender. Among those who resisted was Wang Guozhen of Wang Village in Pengze County. Upon learning of the Japanese approach to Pengze on July 1, Wang, a teacher, led women, children, and the elderly into mountains and forests to seek safety. However, Wang and his followers soon encountered Japanese troops who attacked them, instantly killing over 20 people. Wang denounced their actions as the Japanese took him captive and had him whipped for over an hour. They had hit him so hard his skin was peeling off and he had broken his left thigh. They then demanded he collaborate with them, but to this Wang responded “a common man cannot resist the enemy for his country and he will only die”. After hearing these words, the Japanese simply stabbed him with a bayonet in his left eye and in his chest area, ultimately killing him. Wang's small act of defiance would earn him a plaque from the KMT that states “Eternal Heroism”. Even though Wang's heroism was commendable, bravery alone could not halt the Japanese advance along the Yangtze. After securing Jiujiang, Xiaochikou, and Gutang, the 106th and 101st Infantry Divisions carried out amphibious operations further upriver. The 106th Infantry Division landed on the Yangtze's east bank, pushing south of Jili Hu. Concurrently, the Sato Detachment, two infantry battalions plus a field artillery battalion from the 101st Infantry Division, landed east of Xiaochikou and concentrated on the east side of Mount Lu. The Japanese advance soon faced firm Chinese resistance despite these early gains. The 106th Infantry Division encountered the in-depth defenses of Xue Yue's 1st Corps. These defenses formed an isosceles triangle with Jiujiang at the apex and the Jinguanqiao line at the base. Although Jiujiang was abandoned in late July, the triangle's base at Jinguanqiao remained strong, with the 8th, 74th, 18th, 32nd, 64th, 66th, 29th, 26th, 4th, and 70th Armies concentrated in the Jinguanqiao area. These forces inflicted heavy losses on the 106th Infantry Division, which saw nearly half of its captains killed or wounded during the fighting. To aid the 106th Division's breakthrough near Jinguanqiao, the 11th Army deployed the 101st Infantry Division to the area east of Xiaochikou in mid-August. From there, the division pushed toward the east side of Mount Lu, aiming to seize Xingzi in an amphibious assault via Lake Poyang. The objective was to outflank De'an and the nearby Nanxun Road. On August 19, the 101st Infantry Division executed the plan and landed at Xingzi, where they faced strong resistance from the 53rd Infantry Division. However, the division found itself isolated and thus vulnerable to being outflanked. By August 23, the 53rd Infantry Division had withdrawn to the east. 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. In 1938 Wuhan stood as China's fragile beacon. Wuhan's defense hinged on a patchwork of war zones and weary commanders, while Japan poured in hundreds of thousands of troops, ships, and air power. The Yangtze became a deadly artery, with river fortresses, brutal bombings, and mass casualties. Yet courage endured: individuals like Wang Guozhen chose defiance over surrender.

Christian ; Follower of GOD Servant of CHRIST        Decorated Combat VeteranCorporate; U.S. Marine Corps Urban Warfare Instrictor;       S.R.T. Commander Active Shooter Response Team Law Enforcement Los Angeles Police (L.A.P.D.) Police Officer / Fugitive RecoveryF.B.I. Instructor N.R.A Instructor Competition Shooter; Multi Time State Rifle Pistol Champion Hunting; Life Long Hunter Proffessional Hunter and Guide Private Security Contractor; Several Agencies,  Current.Patreon https://bit.ly/3jcLDuZhttps://account.venmo.com/u/MilitoMinistryPodGOD Provides JESUS SavesBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/gunfighter-life-survival-guns-tactical-hunting--4187306/support.Have a Blessed Day 

5. Alex Station, the Virtual War on Al-Qaeda, and the Struggle for Presidential Attention Liza Mundy Book: The Sisterhood: The Secret History of Women at the CIA Following the 1993 World Trade Center attack and the fatal shooting of two CIA officers, the Counterterrorism Center created "Alec Station" (named after a CIA officer's son). Alec Station was a "virtual station" created during a period of CIA resource loss ("peace dividend"). It represented a novel collaboration of analysts and clandestine operatives working in the headquarters basement to track and understand Osama bin Laden's network. Women analysts, including Cindy Storer and Barbara Sude, developed new skills in "manhunting" and targeting, sometimes directing field operatives. Cindy Storer recognized that al-Qaeda was a meticulous worldwide organization, not a mere confederation. However, the group's key struggle was gaining traction: they faced resistance from senior leaders (like those on the Soviet desk who feared losing funding) and could not consistently persuade editors to include their warnings about bin Laden in the President's Daily Brief (PDB).

3. Learning Tradecraft on the Job: Heidi August's Rise from Clerk to Operative Liza Mundy Book: The Sisterhood: The Secret History of Women at the CIA Heidi August proved her competence in Africa, learning tradecraft such as making dead drops. While working in Europe for David Whipple—an eccentric and anti-feminist mentor—she continued to develop her logistical skills, often running operations and handling people being exfiltrated from Soviet-occupied countries. Although Whipple preached against "women's lib," he recognized Heidi's capabilities. Unlike male case officers (the "fighter pilots of the CIA") who received prestigious training at "the farm," Heidi, hired as a clerk, learned her skills on the job. She eventually demonstrated the skills of a recruiter when she initiated a recruitment against Whipple's initial rejection, targeting a woman clerk from another country. She used elicitation skills to identify the target's vulnerability—a desire for revenge against her bosses—and successfully obtained critical communications technology, cementing her reputation as a capable officer.

There have been enigmatic aerial phenomena reported across the ages, shadowy forms gliding through the heavens that challenge our understanding of the possible, often manifesting as elongated vessels resembling colossal cigars or cylinders, silent and deliberate in their passage. From biblical accounts of fiery chariots descending upon ancient lands to the phantom airships that haunted the American West in the late 19th century, these sightings have sparked debates about secret human inventions, natural illusions, or intelligences from distant stars. Yet, in the frozen isolation of Soviet Siberia, where vast taiga forests conceal secrets and the weight of authoritarian silence stifles inquiry, a cluster of such encounters near the scarred site of history's most mysterious explosion invites profound speculation about what may lurk in the remote heavens.This tale ventures into the remote wilderness surrounding the Tunguska River, a landscape forever marked by the cataclysmic blast of 1908 and later whispered to be a focal point for otherworldly visitations amid the Cold War's veil of secrecy. It encompasses thunderous detonations without craters, massive rotating cylinders birthing fleets of discs, and a witness whose path wove through the gulag's brutality and encounters with forgotten prisoners. At its essence is the 1953 observations of Benjamin Dodin, a gulag inmate whose detailed accounts of these craft not only defied Soviet orthodoxy but also suggested technologies transcending earthly bounds, prompting questions about whether these were clandestine prototypes, extraterrestrial scouts, or autonomous emissaries from multiple cosmic origins surveying our world.Soviet citizens chronicled cigar-esque forms exhibiting physics-defying maneuvers. A 1965 submarine crew beheld a 200-meter entity submerging silently, sonar hissing briefly. 1915 Volga apparitions aligned with wartime Zeppelins, but 1896 San Francisco's ovate craft with voices and searchlights predated known airships.www.mydarkpath.com/76-cigar-shaped-craftRead MF Thomas' novels Like Clockwork https://amzn.to/417lOzyArcade https://amzn.to/4aTpisxA Sickness in Time https://amzn.to/41apSPKSeeing by Moonlight ...

French author Olivier Norek presents ‘The Winter Warriors’, his first historical novel, on the 1939 Soviet invasion of Finland. He joins Georgina Godwin to discuss his research and why this story deserves global recognition.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Max Pearson presents a collection of the week's Witness History interviews from the BBC World Service. Indian-based author and podcaster Purba Chakraborty talks about the history of fiction writing.We hear about the rise in popularity of 'Nordic Noir', following the publication of Henning Mankell's crime novels.Then we listen to BBC archive of writer and poet Jorge Luis Borges - regarded as one of the most influential Latin American writers in history.Plus, the trial of two Soviet writers, Yuli Daniel and Andrei Sinyavsky, accused of smuggling their works to the west.Helen Fielding looks back at her weekly newspaper column about a 30-something, single woman in London, which became a cultural phenomenon in the 1990s.The niece of Finnish writer and artist Tove Jansson talks about her iconic Moomin books - which have been published in more than 60 languages.And finally, we hear the personal story of young Nepalese athlete Mira Rai, which shocked the ultra-running world. Contributors: Anneli Høier - literary agent. Jorge Luis Borges - short story writer and poet. Purba Chakraborty - writer and podcaster. Andrei Sinyavsky - Russian writer and Soviet dissident. Alexander Daniel - son of Yuli Daniel, Russian writer and Soviet dissident. Helen Fielding - journalist and writer. Sophia Jansson - niece of Tove Jansson, author and artist. Mira Rai - Nepalese trail runner.(Photo: Swedish crime writer Henning Mankell and a copy of one of his books. Credit: Jonathan Nackstrand/AFP via Getty Images)

Episode Summary: When the Soviet Union gained atomic weapons technology in the early days of the Cold War, U.S. homeland defense catapulted to the top of America's security priorities. The idea that Soviet bombers, and later ICBMs, could strike American targets demanded a response. Two primary pathways took shape: 1) strategic deterrence via the nuclear triad, and 2) an incredibly robust set of homeland air defense investments to defeat a hostile Soviet strike. With air and missile defense once returning as a major point of focus given mounting threats, it is important to explore America's homeland air defense systems from the early Cold War. The paradigms they harnessed are still quite relevant to architecting a modern set of air and missile defense capabilities taking shape via the Golden Dome program. Join us as we explore this critical issue with Mitchell Institute experts Brig. Gen. Houston “Slider” Cantwell, USAF (Ret.), Heather “Lucky” Penney, and Doug Birkey, along with Air Force air battle manager Lt. Col. Alex “Big Bobby” Wallis. Credits: Host: Heather "Lucky" Penney, Director of Research, The Mitchell Institute for Aerospace Studies Producer: Shane Thin  Executive Producer: Douglas Birkey Guest: Brig. Gen. Houston Cantwell, USAF (Ret.), Senior Resident Fellow for Airpower Studies, The Mitchell Institute for Aerospace Studies Guest: Lt. Col. Alex Wallis, Air Force Strategic Policy Fellow Alumni Guest: Douglas Birkey, Executive Director, The Mitchell Institute for Aerospace Studies Links: Subscribe to our Youtube Channel: https://bit.ly/3GbA5Of Website: https://mitchellaerospacepower.org/ Twitter: https://twitter.com/MitchellStudies Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/Mitchell.Institute.Aerospace LinkedIn: https://bit.ly/3nzBisb Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/mitchellstudies/ #MitchellStudies #AerospaceAdvantage #missiledefense

A special look at episode 1 of Mike Baker's PDB special subscriber only series: On September 26th, 1983, the world came closer to nuclear war than most people ever realized. Inside a secret Soviet bunker, Lieutenant Colonel Stanislav Petrov faced a terrifying choice: trust the computers that screamed U.S. missiles were on the way—or trust his gut. Protocol said one phone call could unleash thousands of Soviet warheads and end civilization in less than an hour.This is the story of how one man's decision in the middle of the night may have saved humanity.In this first episode of PDB's The Day the World Almost Ended, Mike Baker takes you inside the Cold War's most dangerous moment, explores the global tensions that set the stage, and explains why Petrov's judgment still matters in today's world of AI, cyber threats, and hair-trigger nuclear systems.Watch now to learn how close we came to annihilation—and why the fate of billions rested on a single man at a console in 1983. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Uncover the chilling legend of phantom cosmonauts: secret signals, erased names, fiery re-entries, and Soviet cover-ups. From Laika to Komarov, did Gagarin go first? Strap in for a space mystery. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

What do we know about theatre — the most ephemeral of the arts — in Ukraine? What role did Ukrainian theatre play in Soviet times? How is the heritage of the Executed Renaissance generation still alive today? And why are women in theatre so important — and yet so often ignored? *** The Explaining Ukraine podcast is produced by UkraineWorld, an English-language media project about Ukraine run by Internews Ukraine. Host: Tetyana Ogarkova, a Ukrainian literary scholar at Kyiv Mohyla Academy and journalist at Ukraine Crisis Media Centre. She also runs a French-language podcast, “L'Ukraine face à la guerre”. Guest: Mayhill C. Fowler, historian and associate professor in the Department of History at Stetson University. Her first book, “Beau Monde on Empire's Edge: State and Stage in Soviet Ukraine” (Toronto, 2017), tells the story of how theatre in Soviet Ukraine was formed, through a collective biography of young artists and officials in the 1920s and 1930s. *** This episode is produced in partnership with the Kyiv-Mohyla Academy and the project Heritage Ukraine, supported by the European Union's Erasmus programme. Special thanks to the Ukrainian History Global Initiative for helping organize this conversation. *** SUPPORT: UkraineWorld is an English-language media about Ukraine run by Internews Ukraine You can support UkraineWorld on https://www.patreon.com/c/ukraineworld We rely on crowdfunding to continue our work. You can also support our regular trips to the frontlines, where we provide support to both soldiers (cars) and civilians (books): PayPal, ukraine.resisting@gmail.com

For a brief period after Korea's liberation, a cross-peninsula postage system shuttled letters across the 38th parallel, linking the Soviet-led north and U.S.-led south.  This week, postal expert Tony Bard and historian JiHoon Suk join the podcast to explore this forgotten link and the logistics, politics and human stories behind the letter exchanges. They also reflect on the lasting significance of the inter-Korean postal system and the lack of any regular mail contact in the 75 years since its demise. Anthony Bard is editor of The London Philatelist and a member of the Royal Philatelic Society London. He collects North and South Korean postal history from 1945, with a focus on Korean War material and post-Armistice commissions. JiHoon Suk is a Korean historian completing his Ph.D. at Yonsei University, specializing in early modern Korean history. About the podcast: The North Korea News Podcast is a weekly podcast hosted by Jacco Zwetsloot exclusively for NK News, covering all things DPRK — from news to extended interviews with leading experts and analysts in the field, along with insight from our very own journalists. NK News subscribers can listen to this and other exclusive episodes from their preferred podcast player by accessing the private podcast feed. For more detailed instructions, please see the step-by-step guide at nknews.org/private-feed.

Some historians argue that President Trump is using a Stalinist-style playbook to amass power, silence his enemies and suppress science. What Americans should know about notorious Soviet dictator Joseph Stalin's style and political tactics.

In 1965, two writers were accused of publishing anti-Soviet material abroad.The arrest of Yuli Daniel and Andrei Sinyavsky was seen as symbolic of the new era in the Soviet Union. The liberal leader Nikita Khrushchev had been ousted in favour of hardliner Leonid Brezhnev, and dissenting political views were being cracked down on.In a moment considered the start of the dissident movement in the Soviet Union, hundreds of protesters demonstrated in Pushkin Square, in Moscow, for the writers to be given an open trial.Vicky Farncombe tells the story using BBC archive and an interview with Yuli Daniel's son, Alexander.Eye-witness accounts brought to life by archive. Witness History is for those fascinated by the past. We take you to the events that have shaped our world through the eyes of the people who were there. For nine minutes every day, we take you back in time and all over the world, to examine wars, coups, scientific discoveries, cultural moments and much more. Recent episodes explore everything from the death of Adolf Hitler, the first spacewalk and the making of the movie Jaws, to celebrity tortoise Lonesome George, the Kobe earthquake and the invention of superglue. We look at the lives of some of the most famous leaders, artists, scientists and personalities in history, including: Eva Peron – Argentina's Evita; President Ronald Reagan and his famous ‘tear down this wall' speech; Thomas Keneally on why he wrote Schindler's List; and Jacques Derrida, France's ‘rock star' philosopher. You can learn all about fascinating and surprising stories, such as the civil rights swimming protest; the disastrous D-Day rehearsal; and the death of one of the world's oldest languages.(Photo: Soviet authors Yuli Daniel (left) and Andrei Sinyavsky sit in prisoners' dock. Credit: Getty Images)

In this powerful episode of The Mike Litton Experience, we sit down with George Zavershinsky, a former Soviet nuclear physicist turned Orthodox priest, bestselling author, and PhD in theology, to explore his dramatic life transformation and the story behind his new novel, Atomic Shepherd. ➡️ What happens when a man working at the height of […]

In May 2024, Yevgenia Berkovich and Svetlana Petrichuk, the director and writer of an experimental play, became the first Russian artists since Soviet times to be put on trial for the content of their work. It was a show trial. Like all show trials its outcome was preordained. But when professional actors took the stand, it turned it into a different kind of show—one that put the spotlight on a radical ideology that has gripped the Russian state.In a bonus episode of our Next Year in Moscow series, The Economist's Russia editor Arkady Ostrovsky presents a dramatisation of that trial to find out why the Russian state needed to make an example of a fringe production and, more importantly, its director.Listen to what matters most, from global politics and business to science and technology—Subscribe to Economist Podcasts+For more information about how to access Economist Podcasts+, please visit our FAQs page or watch our video explaining how to link your account. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

In May 2024, Yevgenia Berkovich and Svetlana Petrichuk, the director and writer of an experimental play, became the first Russian artists since Soviet times to be put on trial for the content of their work. It was a show trial. Like all show trials its outcome was preordained. But when professional actors took the stand, it turned it into a different kind of show—one that put the spotlight on a radical ideology that has gripped the Russian state.In a bonus episode of our Next Year in Moscow series, The Economist's Russia editor Arkady Ostrovsky presents a dramatisation of that trial to find out why the Russian state needed to make an example of a fringe production and, more importantly, its director.Listen to what matters most, from global politics and business to science and technology—Subscribe to Economist Podcasts+For more information about how to access Economist Podcasts+, please visit our FAQs page or watch our video explaining how to link your account. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.