Except for timely election info, the extensive list of voting resources will now be at the end.

“There’s a reason why you separate military and police. One fights the enemy of the State. The other serves and protects the People. When the military becomes both, then the enemies of the State tend to become the People.” ~ Commander Adama, “Battlestar Galactica” (“WATER”, Season 1 episode 2, at the 28 minute mark.)

“What we’re discovering is that the Constitution is not a mechanism that runs by itself. Ultimately, we are a government of men and not law. [But] The law has no force without people who are willing to enforce it. The ball is now squarely in the court of the Republican Party, and particularly Senate Republicans. Will they ever be prepared to say enough is enough?” ~ William A. Galston, a senior fellow in governance at the Brookings Institution who graduated from college just before Watergate. (From, “Trump’s Ukraine call reveals a president convinced of his own invincibility”, By Philip Rucker, Robert Costa and Rachael Bade | WASHINGTONPOST.COM | September 21, 2019); and as quoted in, “A Very Stable Genius” by Philip Rucker and Carol Leonnig”, p. 416) 

 Welcome to Thinkwing Radio with Mike Honig, now in its 14^th year on KPFT from Houston 90.1-HD2, Galveston 89.5-HD2, Livingston/Goodrich 89.9-HD2, and Huntsville 91.9-HD2. KPFT is Houston’s Community radio.

And welcome to our international listeners from China,Brazil, Hong Kong, Belgium, and elsewhere.

On this show, we discuss local, state, national, and international stories that may have slipped under your radar. At my website, THINKWINGRADIO-dot-COM, I link to all the articles I read and cite, as well as other relevant sources. Articles and commentaries often include lots of internet links for those of you who want to dig deeper. I do try to fact-check myself and include the links I use to do so.

It’s the 46^th week of Trump’s military occupation of Washington DC; and 35 weeks since those states’ governors deployed National Guard troops to Memphis, Tennessee and New Orleans, Louisiana, at Trump’s request, which is where they remain for now.  

The next gubernatorial election in Tennessee is in about 4 months. I can’t wait to see how that one turns out.

LAWFARE has a chart of where US troops are currently stationed around the US. The link is in this show post at ThinkwingRadio-dot-com.

Due to time constraints, some stories may be longer in this show post than in the broadcast show itself.

1. First, from COMMUNITYIMPACT[.]COM — Houston has 16 high-risk ZIP codes for lead poisoning. The city has a program that can help; By Ariel Worthy | COMMUNITYIMPACT.COM | 3:18 PM Jun 26, 2026 CDT/Updated 3:18 PM Jun 26, 2026 CDT. TAGS: Houston, Lead Paint Control, Lead Poisoning, Houston Health Department’s Lead-Based Paint Hazard Control Program, Houston Health Department,
   1. Houston has 16 ZIP codes that are more likely to have risks of lead poisoning than other areas. Those residents may be qualified for free lead paint control from the city.
   2. … The … Lead-Based Paint Hazard Control Program [from the Houston Health Department (HHD),] provides services that help low-income residents identify, remove or stabilize lead-based paint issues for free.
   3. To qualify for the program, residents must meet the following qualifications: Live in a home built before 1978; Be in an eligible, high-risk area; Do not live in a flood zone; Have a resident under 6 years old; [and] Meet the financial criteria of middle-to-low-income.
   4. If a resident qualifies, HHD and state-licensed contractors can assist in two ways: Abatement or interim control.
   5. Abatement is a permanent solution, said Muhammad Farhad, the program manager for the lead-based program.
   6. [Farhad said,] “Most of the time, when we abate the house, for example, we replace windows, we replace doors, we cover the exterior siding with vinyl siding and then paint it.”
   7. Interim control is not a permanent solution, but it is a more common solution, he said. It is often used in areas that are not highly accessible, such as ceilings. The goal is for interim control to be done in areas that children do not have access to, he said.
   8. [Said Farhad ,] “It may last for two to five years before it can start deteriorating again.”
   9. … Lead can have negative health effects on children under six and pregnant people. HHD officials said lead can cause health problems that can affect development, including learning, behavioral development, hearing growth rates and nervous system development.
   10. … The city identified 16 high-risk ZIP codes in the city that are more likely to have lead poisoning issues. Those areas include: 77002, 77003, 77004, 77005, 77006, 77007, 77008, 77009, 77011, 77012, 77019, 77020, 77023, 77026, 77030, [and] 77098.
   11. According to HHD, these areas qualify as high-risk because at least 25% of residents live below the poverty level, at least 20% of houses were built before 1950 and historically, at least 10% of children have tested positive for blood lead poisoning.
   12. … HHD officials encourage residents in affected areas who [may] qualify to apply to the program. The city has had the program since 1995 and has assisted with over 4,100 houses. Farhad said they have an additional 400 homes in the pipeline to be completed by 2028.
   13. MIKE: This is a program I’d not heard of before. It sounds like an important strategy for mitigating the risk of lead poisoning in many of the oldest parts of Houston, and especially for preventing lead poisoning in our most susceptible populations.
   14. MIKE: This program needs plenty of publicity in the parts of the city where it’s likely to be most needed, so that it’s more widely known.
2. Next, from HOUSTONPUBLICMEDIA[.]ORG — Houston ISD board unanimously approves controversial Bible-infused curriculum for 2026-27 school year; By Bianca Seward | HOUSTONPUBLICMEDIA.ORG | | Posted on June 26, 2026, 12:00 AM (Last Updated: June 26, 2026, 2:07 PM). TAGS: Education, Education News, HISD, Houston, Houston Matters, Local News, Religion, Bible-Infused Curriculum, Bluebonnet Curriculum, Bluebonnet Learning, Hisd, HISD Board Of Managers, Houston ISD,
   27. Houston ISD’s state-appointed board of managers greenlit Bible-infused curriculum for elementary school students at a special board meeting Thursday night, when the board also voted to adopt a $2 billion operating budget for 2026-27.
   28. The state-developed Bluebonnet Learning curriculum for students in kindergarten through fifth grade has been criticized for its inclusion of biblical teachings in reading and language arts lessons. Its implementation also comes with a per-student financial incentive – more than $3 million in additional revenue for HISD, the largest school district in Texas.
   29. The Bible-infused curriculum, approved by the State Board of Education in 2024, teaches elementary school students about the Golden Rule using text from the Bible, introduces fifth-graders to Leonardo Da Vinci’s “The Last Supper” painting based on the Christian story about the last meal of Jesus Christ, and features a story on the Parable of the Prodigal Son from the Bible.
   30. Dozens of community members spoke out against the curriculum and urged the HISD board to vote against adopting it.
   31. Former high school teacher and current HISD parent Victoria Hauptman-Bryan called the implementation of the curriculum “unconstitutional.”
   32. [She said,] “That the state of Texas has spent taxpayer money to write such a curriculum is disgusting.”
   33. HISD said in a Friday statement that references to the Bible will be “presented as literature and historical text for academic study, consistent with Texas state standards. They are not used for religious instruction or religious practice.”
   34. [The district also said in its statement,] “The Bluebonnet materials align with Houston ISD’s existing literacy framework, including explicit and systematic phonics, knowledge-rich grade-level texts, and instruction designed to build strong readers. … HISD will continue using its own lesson design and instructional approach, incorporating the Bluebonnet materials to meet new state requirements while minimizing changes for teachers.”
   35. The Texas Education Agency, which developed Bluebonnet Learning materials, issued more than 4,000 corrections and changes in February — including hundreds of copyright violations, formatting errors and typos. According to The Texas Tribune, the corrections will cost taxpayers up to $8.4 million.
   36. But adoption of the curriculum also comes with a significant financial incentive for school districts, and the budget adopted by HISD includes a nearly $25 million deficit. Deputy Superintendent Kristen Hole said HISD would be able to access roughly $3.3 million in additional funding by implementing the curriculum.
   37. HISD is the latest district in the state to approve the curriculum. Hole added in her presentation to the board that 30% of districts across the state have adopted Bluebonnet and 12% of all kindergarten through fifth-grade classrooms are actively using it. Hole said the materials will be available in English and Spanish.
   38. … Priscilla Midani, a parent of a Travis Elementary student, said the errors in Bluebonnet will take millions of dollars to fix when schools in the district and across the state are already underfunded. She also expressed frustration at the district’s decision to bring the item for review after the school year had ended.
   39. [Midani said,] “Among the many reasons I oppose its adoption are separation of church and state; schools should not be in the business of teaching faith in any capacity; lack of transparency; and inopportune timing. … To review this by the board during summer vacation does not give the community, families or parents adequate time to raise proper discussion regarding the matter.”
   40. State-appointed board member Marco Rosales said he had reviewed the materials personally and did not feel the curriculum amounts to religious indoctrination, “but rather it is the use of religious texts in a few instances for providing context to other, perhaps historical texts.”
   41. Rosales asked Hole if she felt the curriculum is overtly religious.
   42. [Hole said,] “What I will say is that by law we are not allowed to promote religion, and so the guidance to teachers is that you are not to promote religion, you are to stay focused on the academic learning objective and not do that promotion. … We are neutral on any one religion, and that’s the guidance that we were providing.”
   43. But several faith leaders who attended the meeting, who stood silently as a form of protest during the presentation proposing the adoption of Bluebonnet Learning, disagreed with their arguments.
   44. Rabbi Joshua Fixler with the Congregation Emanu El said he laughed when board members denied the curriculum contains Christian influences.
   45. [Fixler said,] “If [Rosales] says he’s read the curriculum and hasn’t found that, then I can’t imagine he’s read it very closely.”
   46. Fixler called the unanimous and swift vote to approve Bluebonnet a “betrayal.”
   47. [Fixler said,] “I am deeply concerned that the Bluebonnet curriculum is a violation of our public school students’ religious liberty. … I am also deeply concerned that this board slipped this item onto the agenda late, so that people couldn’t testify.”
   48. Pastor Alma Gast with Messiah Lutheran Church said she felt compelled to stand up against the Bluebonnet curriculum because of her role in the church.
   49. [Gast said,] “I get frustrated when Christianity gets lumped into one narrative, as we’re seeing a lot in the public debate around Christianity. … And to stand for a different voice from Christianity that represents something different, I think it is a huge part of what I understand my role to be.”
   50. MIKE: This new rule amounts to teaching the Bible in Texas schools, incentivized by what amounts to State bribery, and is just another example of Christian nationalists, Christian evangelicals, and Christian chauvinists trying to push the Bible down the throats of people who worship differently or simply don’t worship at all.
   51. MIKE: I want to make one thing clear. I believe in the value of educational courses in comparative religion, where religion is taught about as an academic subject.
   52. MIKE: I believe that the Bible does have wisdom that can be appreciated even from a secular perspective. The “Golden Rule” of doing unto others as you would have others do unto you is absolutely worth knowing, following, and teaching. It’s also one of the least honored teachings from the Christian Bible.
   53. MIKE: It’s ironic that this key tenet, that is perhaps the best summation of what Christianity is claimed to be, is mostly honored in the breach by a great many American Christians, many of whom are Republicans, and many of whom govern and legislate in Texas and America.
   54. MIKE: And this doesn’t even touch on the matter of its First Amendment Constitutionality, which many American Christians have been trying to circumvent for at least as long as I can remember, and I was born 18 days into the second half of the 20^th century! And it didn’t just start with Republicans adding “In God We Trust” to our coins in 1864 or when it was made the official motto of the United States by voice vote in 1955 and signed into law by President Eisenhower in 1956, when it replaced the secular and — I believe — much more relevant “E pluribus unum (“Out of many, one”), which had been the de facto motto [of the US] since the initial design of the Great Seal of the United States.^[6]”
   55. MIKE: In 2019, I ran across a quote during Trump’s first term. I believe that it’s vital to remember, especially in these current times, and which I read at the beginning of this show: “What we’re discovering is that the Constitution is not a mechanism that runs by itself. Ultimately, we are a government of men and not law. [But] The law has no force without people who are willing to enforce it. The ball is now squarely in the court of the Republican Party, and particularly Senate Republicans. Will they ever be prepared to say enough is enough?” ~ William A. Galston, a senior fellow in governance at the Brookings Institution (From, “Trump’s Ukraine call reveals a president convinced of his own invincibility”, By Philip Rucker, Robert Costa and Rachael Bade| WASHINGTONPOST.COM | September 21, 2019)
3. From APNEWS[.]COM — Troubled Reflecting Pool faces fresh scrutiny over vandalism claims and duck deaths; By  MATTHEW DALY | APNEWS.COM | Updated 8:50 PM CDT, June 23, 2026. TAGS: Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool, President Donald Trump, Trump’s $14-Million-Plus Rehabilitation Project, Spokeswoman Katie Martin,
   1. The saga over the Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool took a turn as President Donald Trump said Tuesday that six people have been arrested over recent damage. The president’s troubled $14-million-plus rehabilitation project has become a visceral flashpoint over law enforcement, aesthetics and environmental concerns ahead of the country’s 250th anniversary celebrations.
   2. In a social media post, Trump claimed without supporting evidence that there had been a “350-foot gash” in the paint as the administration faces a self-imposed deadline to fix the botched renovation before the nation’s 250th anniversary celebration next week. He has also said, including again on Tuesday, that the federal government would release images to substantiate his claim.
   3. Trump pledged to beautify the century-old Reflecting Pool ahead of the anniversary celebrations, draining its water and having the bottom painted a color he dubbed “American flag blue.” But since the site was restored, its water has been plagued with algae bloom, and pieces of the new coating appeared to be peeling off the bottom.
   4. Trump, without evidence, has repeatedly blamed the peeling paint on vandalism.
   5. [Trump wrote Tuesday,] “It was purposefully and criminally done, and somebody had to work very hard, probably in the dark of night, to create such a condition,” … adding that another seven people were cited for allegedly damaging the pool.
   6. The U.S. Park Police and the Interior Department did not immediately respond to requests for comment on the arrests or Trump’s claim of vandalism.
   7. The Associated Press verified that one man was arrested after touching the already-peeling paint. He said he wanted to examine the new coating, touching a still-attached chunk briefly then letting go shortly after a park worker told him to.
   8. … National Guard members and Park Police have been patrolling the deck around the pool after Trump insisted over the weekend that vandals were responsible for damage to the liner, without providing evidence.
   9. Crews were seen adding fencing near the area late Tuesday. An Interior spokeswoman said the Reflecting Pool “was always set to be fenced off ahead of the 4th of July,” noting that one of the launch pads for the fireworks is near the pool.
   10. [Spokeswoman Katie Martin said in an email,] “With the increase in vandalism by leftist activists, the fencing is going up earlier than originally planned to ensure no more damage is done to this historic site.” She did not provide evidence of her claim about the political leanings of possible vandals.
   11. [MIKE: I just have to say that it’s amazing to me that people can say this stuff with … I guess straight face? Continuing …]
   12. Trump said Tuesday that the Interior Department will release images of alleged vandalism at the pool. Pressed by reporters after Air Force One landed in Pennsylvania for a visit to a trucking company, Trump said Interior is “going to share” photos and videos of the alleged vandalism, which remains unverified.
   13. The president had said on Monday that the images existed, and the federal government would provide them. No photos were made public as of Tuesday afternoon.
   14. [MIKE: I’ll note here that as of Saturday night, the only photos I’ve found are of the coating peeling off the bottom. Continuing …]
   15. The arrests highlighted what’s expected to be tightened security in the capital ahead of and during the 250th anniversary celebrations, which are set to draw large crowds to the National Mall and other tourist sites.
   16. Trump also said Tuesday that “some of the water” will be drained from the pool “either immediately before or after the Fourth of July, to do the permanent repair.”
   17. It was unclear from his post what the scale, scope or cost of the permanent repair would be.
   18. [MIKE: Of course, I thought we h ad already done a permanent repair, but nevertheless, continuing …]
   19. Atlantic Industrial Coatings, a contractor on the pool project, said it has identified some areas in the Reflecting Pool that require repairs. [The company said in a statement,] “These areas are a very small part of the massive 7-acre project, and do not indicate a failure of the liner.” … The company said it expected to make the repairs to the pool once it is drained, as part of the warranty.
   20. … Adding to the controversy swirling around the pool, an environmental group called on the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to investigate after a Mallard duckling carcass was photographed floating in the algae-filled pool, and two other ducks were found dead nearby. The Center for Biological Diversity said Tuesday that the Wildlife Service must enforce the Migratory Bird Treaty Act, which protects migratory birds.
   21. [Said Tara Zuardo, a senior campaigner at the Arizona-based group,] “Wasting taxpayer money turning the reflecting pool into a giant duck death trap just in time for America’s 250th birthday party is as Trump as it gets. Cruel, stupid and selfish.”
   22. [MIKE: I have to give credit to Ms. Zuardo. She really has a way with a turn of phrase: “giant duck death trap”, “Cruel, stupid and selfish”, and “as Trump as it gets”. Wow. I can only aspire … Continuing …”
   23. City Wildlife, a Washington-based rescue and rehabilitation non-profit that also conducts necropsies on birds found in the city, said they could not comment on the cause of the death of the duckling because its carcass “wasn’t recovered for examination.”
   24. [MIKE: Probably a deliberate failure. Continuing …]
   25. … Trump pitched the original improvements as intended to clean, beautify and reinforce an iconic site that he said had become dilapidated and dirty because of previous presidents’ neglect. Algae has plagued the pool for a century, and Trump insisted that the newly installed “American flag blue” coating, which he selected himself, would turn the pool into a gleaming expanse along the National Mall.
   26. Yet within weeks of Trump declaring the rehabilitation completed in time for Independence Day, the water was plagued by a vivid green algae bloom that clouded the pool’s coating. A piece of liner, about 4 square feet, was observed on Friday, partially floating in the pool. The Associated Press saw additional pieces in the water on Monday.
   27. [MIKE: And here we have a brief cat intermission. Sometimes, cats get in the way of serious business, and that can be a good thing for the human spirit. Now, back to work. SIDE NOTE: I could have cut that out, but I thought that the cat meowing in the background made a fun segue. Continuing …]
   28. Workers were seen in recent days pouring hydrogen peroxide into the pool in an attempt to kill the algae. Hydrogen peroxide can act as a paint remover.
   29. Experts say the dark lining can add to algae growth by absorbing more sunlight than lighter surfaces. That raises the surrounding water temperature, allowing algae to thrive.
   30. MIKE: I’m going to do a lengthy analysis here and then draw some conclusions.
   31. MIKE: From my readings, there have been some social media claims that hydrogen peroxide acts as algae fertilizer. This is NOT true. The consensus of my readings, an example of which I have linked to in this show post at ThinkwingRadio[.]com, is that a sufficiently concentrated hydrogen peroxide solution will kill algae.
   32. MIKE: According to my cursory research, the weakest solution that is effective against algae is 3%, though many sources recommend 6%. The stories I’ve read do not specify what strength hydrogen peroxide solution was used in the Lincoln reflecting pool in an attempt to kill the algae,
   33. MIKE: I think that the jury is still out on what can be done to kill and prevent the algae in the specific case of the reflecting pool while leaving the water undisturbed enough to still be a reflecting
   34. MIKE: There have also been reports that Trump directed a motorcade to drive in the pool so he could inspect the work.
   35. MIKE: When I first read about that in social media, I thought that maybe it was a joke and that the still images or even the videos were generated by Ai. But nope. That wasn’t the case.
   36. MIKE: After I read those comments, I did some research. A story from PBS[.]ORG said in part, “President Donald Trump on [May 7^th] went on an unannounced trip to the Lincoln Memorial to see the Reflecting Pool after he had it coated in a color he calls ‘American flag blue.’ He did more than just see it — the Republican president was driven across the new coating before he got out of his SUV to make a statement and answer questions from reporters who had been taken there to await his arrival before the sun set.”
   37. MIKE: There are even videos — real ones — of Trump’s motorcade driving in the drained reflecting pool. This must have been done at Trump’s direction.
   38. MIKE: When I asked Google Ai how much a presidential motorcade weighs, I got answers from an assortment of sources, but the summary was this: “A full United States presidential motorcade is estimated to weigh between 400,000 and 700,000 pounds (200 to 350 tons) [1], depending on the number of vehicles deployed for the specific mission. Because the exact composition changes constantly for security reasons, there is no single official weight, but the combined total of its heavily armored components is immense.”
   39. MIKE: All by itself, the presidential limousine — nicknamed “The Beast” — weighs somewhere between 15,000 to 20,000 pounds. That weight is distributed over a contact footprint defined by the tires.
   40. MIKE: To develop context, I’m going to digress here for a moment.
   41. MIKE: The US Interstate Highway System was originally named the “Dwight D. Eisenhower National System of Interstate and Defense Highways” and was authorized by the Federal-Aid Highway Act of 1956.
   42. MIKE: Interstate highways are designed to carry the weight of numerous vehicles, ranging from small cars to big rigs. Federal Interstate highways are built to the highest standards because they are built to carry heavy military vehicles, including tanks (which can weigh upwards of 40-50 tons), without being immediately destroyed by the weight. They were, in fact, inspired by the German autobahns built in the 1930s, which were also military grade highways.
   43. MIKE: The reflecting pool is not built as a defense highway. It’s built to carry water. Water is heavy, weighing in at a bit over 8 pounds per gallon (8.34 pounds, to be precise). The reflecting pool holds 6.5 million gallons of clean water, not counting leakage.
   44. MIKE: I’m going to risk publicly doing some math here.
   45. MIKE: Six point five million gallons would weigh about 54,210,000 pounds, or about 27,105 US tons. But all that weight is distributed over the size of the pool, which is roughly 2,030 feet long and about 171 feet wide, so it covers about 334,950 square feet.
   46. MIKE: If we divide the weight of all that water by the area it covers, that averages about 162 pounds per square foot, more or less. A square foot is 144 square inches.
   47. MIKE: A car tire footprint covers about 25 square inches.
   48. MIKE: When I do a bit more math, that means that the presidential limo, all by itself was concentrating about 3700 pounds on each of 4 rolling footprints, each less than one fifth of a square foot.
   49. MIKE: The pool normally carries an average of about 27-1/2 pounds in an area the size of that tire footprint. So the limo alone was putting 134 times the design weight on each part of the pool bottom points contacted by the rolling tires. And that limo wasn’t alone. There was a whole freaking motorcade with it.
   50. MIKE: Now I ask you. Who would be stupid enough to do that and think there would be no structural consequences to the pool? Would someone who actually knows about construction be ignorant and stupid enough to do that?
   51. MIKE: I was a window covering installer in a previous life, and I wouldn’t be ignorant or stupid enough to even contemplate doing something that idiotic.
   52. MIKE: So, Trump wants to look for the people who vandalized the Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool and to see them arrested?
   53. MIKE: All he needs to do is look in the mirror and turn himself in.
   54. MIKE: Al Capone was a mob boss accused of murder, extortion, and more, but the feds couldn’t make any of that stick. Instead, they got him imprisoned for tax evasion.
   55. MIKE: Sometimes, justice doesn’t come from the crime that really deserved it, but for some other, perhaps less serous crime.
   56. MIKE: Whenever I think of people being convicted for some crime other than what they should really being punished for, I think of this scene from THE LIFE AND TIMES OF JUDGE ROY BEAN (VIDEO) (EXCERPT STARTING AT 28:39, THEN AT 31:19. SAM DODD [19s]): “It was wrong to do this to me for the crimes mentioned, but, well, I’d also killed white men and stole their horses, so I figured that that’s what I was being hung for.”
4. Was Brexit a bad idea? How has the UK done economically since it left the European Union? In this article, we get an analysis of that decision; where Britain is now, and what its prospects may be. There are graphics in the story to show the impacts of Brexit. You can click on the full article by using the link at ThinkwingRadio[.]com. From BBC[.]COM— Ten years on, Brexit’s economic impact is becoming clearer; By Faisal Islam, Economics editor | BBC.COM | June 23,2026. TAGS: Brexit, UK Economy, Economic Effects Of Brexit, EU-UK Post-Brexit Trade Deal, Trade,
   1. Not long after the UK left the EU in 2020, a Bristol-based firm called Eskimo started selling a new kind of high-fashion and energy-efficient electric radiator, based on new technology developed by academics in the city.
   2. They planned to send them around Europe using the Channel Tunnel.
   3. It was a timely product given Europe’s green ambitions, and with orders flowing, its Birmingham factory was being kept busy.
   4. The boss, Phil Ward, tells [the author that] his start-up has continued to grow, but that in his view, it could have been so much more without what he calls “the Long Brexit effect”: in 2020, 40% of his exports went to the European Union, and by 2025 it was just 5%.
   5. The post-Brexit deal agreed with the EU by then-Prime Minister Boris Johnson in December 2020 guaranteed zero tariffs on exports to the EU, but Ward says that despite this, red tape and paperwork not directly related to tariffs were enough to create delays, costs, and the expectation of hassle for prospective customers.
   6. Eskimo did manage to export some goods to agents in France, but it stopped selling directly to European consumers entirely. A planned expansion to Germany floundered.
   7. And as Eskimo discovered when it attempted to export towel rails to Australia and New Zealand, both countries abide by international safety standards that are heavily influenced by the EU’s CE mark.
   8. This matters because one theoretical potential Brexit benefit was that it would allow UK regulators to not follow the EU’s safety regulations and take a more pro-innovation, less regulatory approach for high-tech inventions.
   9. [MIKE: I’ll note here that I currently have more faith in EU health and safety stands than American ones. That apparently isn’t just me. Continuing …]
   10. Eskimo’s experience is one example of a broader trend reflected in export figures. The UK Trade Policy Observatory at Sussex University calculated a rapid 26% reduction in … different types of UK exports by 2023, while a new study from Aston University Business School, using five years of more detailed trade data, concludes a loss of 53.8% of the type of exports and 31.5% for imports.
   11. These figures for “trade varieties” are [declines] in the number of products sent to different EU countries.
   12. A decade ago, many economists argued the UK would sustain longer-term economic damage by leaving the EU, and many believe that damage has come to pass.
   13. But to make that call you have to compare what did happen with what might otherwise have happened were it not for Brexit, and doing that is a matter of method and statistical judgement.
   14. And that judgement has to account for the fact that the period since Brexit has been a time of huge global flux. The pandemic that struck in the spring of 2020, the war in Ukraine that began two years later and, more recently, the energy price shock sparked by the conflict in Iran all have to be accounted for.
   15. So too does the question of whether a Brexit-free UK would have really kept up with the Silicon Valley tech boom in recent years to the extent Brexit Britain has.
   16. The clear consensus of economists making the calculations say they have factored in the global turmoil when assessing Brexit’s impact. Others question their methods and the extent of Brexit’s impact.
   17. Some of the most negative predictions back in 2016, including those that said the UK could experience a Great Depression‑style hit, proved unduly pessimistic. Whatever economic hit there was, it was not sudden enough to cause an instant recession.
   18. But those who believe the UK did sustain longer-term economic damage by leaving the EU say the hit was no less profound.
   19. [Says Nick Bloom, a British Stanford University professor and author of one of the most prominent recent major studies using Bank of England data,] “Among economists, there is not much debate, but there still is among policy folks. The experts were right. It was, if anything, worse than we thought, but it’s taken longer to get there.”
   20. His work sits among dozens of academic economics papers that have analysed vast amounts of data to try to assess what effect Brexit had on the UK’s economy.
   21. … UK trade with Europe had been on an upward trend before 2016. But official figures show that compared to 2019, UK exports to the EU [in 2025] were down 14% and imports were down 10%.
   22. And they’ve been getting worse. Last year, 2025, was the worst year for export volumes [of UK goods] to the EU this century, apart from one year in the depths of the financial crisis.
   23. Thinktank Niesr calculates exports were 16.9% lower, and imports [were] 16.1% [lower] than what could have been expected based on … pre-2016 trends.
   24. The Centre for European Reform uses a different method, trying to take account of what could have happened if the UK had not been excluded from a more recent surge in intra-EU trade, leading to a goods trade hit of 16% to exports and 14% to imports. It’s all in the same ballpark and there is other research from European countries that suggest similar drops in their trade with the UK. Again, these calculations rely on selecting a method and statistical judgment.
   25. Most [using raw trade figures studies] conclude similarly … , so not accounting for significant inflationary spikes, you see a 4% rise in cash terms since 2019 of UK goods exports to the EU, which some analysts have used to argue there has been minimal impact.
   26. These calculations are based on modelling how a UK still within the EU could have been expected to perform economically had it still experienced the pandemic and the 2022 energy shock but not Brexit.
   27. The most recent study by the NBER takes account of population growth, and says the UK lost 6-8% of per capita output.
   28. Bloom says he has used a variety of approaches including accounting for distance, economic gravity, [and] the size of the economy and selectively omitting potential outliers.
   29. There are, however, other figures. The authors, including Bank of England economists, also used a special survey of thousands of firms, accounting for a tenth of private employment, that was created by the Bank in 2016 to track Brexit reaction. The first Brexit analysis based on this survey was only published this year and updated on Friday and it shows how prolonged Brexit uncertainty hit commercial decision-making.
   30. This entirely different firm-level method also leads to a conclusion of an economy about 6% smaller than without Brexit. That means an economy that would have otherwise grown about two thirds of a percentage point faster every year over the past decade.
   31. … The world that post-Brexit Britain entered in 2016 has changed beyond any recognition.
   32. Back in 2016, Brexiteers talked up the prospects of a free trade deal with the US when the reality in 2026 is a US that has put up higher trade barriers and weaponised tariffs. A decade ago, the idea was floated that the EU could collapse — it hasn’t, and has introduced protections for its manufacturers. And China is now increasingly assertive.
   33. The questions [raised by all this] about UK global economic strategy are almost entirely different questions [from] those posed a decade ago.
   34. It’s possible an economically independent UK is well placed to deal with this volatile world. It’s also possible that the opposite is true and that UK exporters would benefit from rejoining the EU single market.
   35. What’s clear from the data is that many UK goods exporters, especially smaller ones, have not [adapted well] to Brexit, and that in certain sectors it’s not getting any better.
   36. Does the UK align itself with the US and its focus on lightly-regulated tech, and in particular AI? Can a closer UK-EU relationship be squared with that? The EU has responded to the new economic nationalism with “Made in Europe” legislation that may require a certain percentage of parts to be made in Europe — it’s unclear if the UK is included or not. An early test will be steel next month, and then a deal to avoid UK-EU electric car tariffs at the end of the year.
   37. UK officials recently suggested establishing a single market for goods trade with the EU as part of the next phase of a Brexit reset, something the EU says is incompatible with current government red lines around freedom of movement.
   38. Unions have shifted position from wanting to rejoin the customs union, to looking for a Swiss-style deal in the European Economic Area.
   39. In recent weeks government ministers have begun to quietly say that these red lines are specifically for this Parliament and will be looked at again. What path Sir Keir Starmer’s replacement as prime minister decides to go down, we don’t yet know.
   40. Next month’s UK-EU summit has now been postponed. Sir Keir had wanted to seal a deal to [roll] back many of the post-Brexit frictions on food and farm trade that have impacted the cross-Channel trade flows. Other political parties have vowed to rip up the government’s EU reset or even try to [roll] back on elements of the post-Brexit deal.
   41. Put bluntly, the status quo will not hold. Ten years on, Brexit, and its impacts on the economy, remain very much with us, and the policy debates may be about to return.
   42. MIKE: Brexit was a bad idea. Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland knew it, but the English were Euroskeptics, and the English vote was the deciding factor.
   43. MIKE: It doesn’t shock me that the UK has suffered economically from leaving the EU, and it doesn’t shock me that lowering health and safety standards on British products has made them less desirable in the EU.
   44. MIKE: I mean, Who woulda thunk???
5. In articles about the Russia-Ukraine war, the Russian-allied nation of Belarus is usually mentioned almost in passing, as if it was merely an extension of Putin’s Russia. That is not precisely a true picture of the situation, and this geostrategic article from the European Institute for Security Studies gives an interesting and more well-rounded discussion of how Europe sees the reality, and ideas for how to manage it — Blunting the Belarusian blade: The growing threat Belarus poses to European security; By: Ondrej Ditrych (Download Brief) | ISS.EUROPA.EU (European Institute for Security Studies) | 23 June 2026. TAGS: Russia and Eastern Neighbours, EU Foreign Policy, Belarus, Ukraine, Russia-Ukraine War,
   1. Although it deploys no ground troops in Ukraine, Belarus continues to undermine European security by enabling Russia’s war of aggression.
   2. Ukraine is obliged to divert forces to secure its northern border with Belarus. Belarus hosts combat support systems such as drone control stations; its civilian infrastructure is used to map Russian drone trajectories; it provides training for Russian forces; and its defence industry — operating through sanctions evasion networks involving entities in Russia, China and the West — feeds Russia’s war effort by supplying military hardware and ammunition. Belarusian enterprises are key providers of launch vehicles for … missile systems, services to the Russian air fleet, sighting and guidance systems, and microchips – including those produced by the now-sanctioned company Integral. They may have supplied equipment worth more than €1 billion in the first three years of the full-scale war alone⁽¹⁾.
   3. Aleksandr Lukashenka is eager to avoid being seen as a belligerent on a par with Russia. However, his room for maneuver is limited.
   4. The regime’s consolidation following the post-election crisis in 2020 has relied heavily on the Kremlin’s support and protection. As a result, Lukashenka’s former hedging strategy, which periodically involved engagement with the EU, has collapsed. Even a ‘grand bargain’ with the Trump administration, now being floated in some circles, would not restore the regime’s autonomy vis-à-vis Russia, which continues to tighten its grip over the country. [Integration with Russia] has advanced furthest in the military domain, driven by Minsk’s deepening economic dependence on Moscow⁽²⁾.
   5. The military integration of Russia and Belarus under the framework of the Union State … as part of Russia’s Moscow Military District … poses a distinct threat to the EU.
   6. Belarus is turning into a potential operational platform for a future Russian war against the EU. Although Russia’s military presence in Belarus is currently limited to around 2 100 troops, recent agreements have consolidated its basing rights⁽³⁾.
   7. The agreement on joint combat training centres ratified in December 2023, and the provision regarding the presence of military formations …, provide a legal basis for the future deployment of Russian troops in Belarus, while the regime is considering allowing foreign nationals to serve in its armed forces.
   8. Military sites and logistical infrastructure are being developed in parallel …
   9. [MIKE: Note that there’s an explanatory map embedded in the story. Continuing …]
   10. The threat that Belarus poses is amplified by geography: the country’s flat terrain facilitates rapid troop movements, while its proximity to the Suwałki Corridor gives it strategic importance for the collective defence of the Baltic states.
   11. These developments also pose a threat to Ukraine. Kyiv came under attack launched from Belarusian territory at the outset of the full-scale war, and it now faces the prospect of escalation along its northern border as Russia seeks to weaken Ukraine’s defensive posture while pursuing its offensive campaign in the Donbas.
   12. At the same time, deepening integration threatens Belarus’s sovereignty, and even national identity, as Russia increasingly promotes the ideological principles of the [doctrine of] Russkiy mir [which translates as “Russian World”] in Belarusian society and culture.
   13. [MIKE: That sounds to me like more of the old Russian policy of colonizing and Russifying the old Soviet Socialist Republics. Continuing …]
   14. Moreover, Belarus already serves as a platform for Russia’s psychological warfare against the EU. Russia’s tactical nuclear weapons and dual delivery systems are central to Moscow’s strategy of intimidation.
   15. The scale of the deployment remains unclear, particularly in the case of Iskander-M missiles and Su-25 and Su-30 bombers reportedly adapted for nuclear missions, as well as the Oreshnik missile system…
   16. … The much-heralded deployment of Oreshnik missiles, meanwhile, appears to be limited to the designation of combat patrol areas around the Krichev-6 facility in Mogilev oblast.
   17. Oreshnik illustrates the role these deployments play in Russia’s psychological warfare. The missile system is not yet in serial production and its integration with the … launcher chassis… that would give it full mobility⁽⁷⁾, has not been confirmed.
   18. The missile is a serious concern for Europeans as an intermediate-range ballistic system with significant escalatory potential operating in a continent where no arms control regime has replaced the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) treaty. …
   19. The attention Oreshnik has attracted in Western media has magnified the impact of its largely performative deployment. Its purpose is less to strengthen Russian deterrence, as Moscow claims, than to enhance the effectiveness of Russian coercive diplomacy by reinforcing the Kremlin’s increasingly frequent nuclear threats, and to constrain the EU’s response options in a future limited war scenario.
   20. Nuclear use by Russia should not be ruled out. However, the heightened readiness of nuclear forces deployed in Belarus, demonstrated during the last joint exercise held in May 2026, still serves primarily as a tool of intimidation⁽⁸⁾.
   21. Like military integration in the conventional domain, these deployments – over which the regime does not exercise control – do not deliver more security for Belarus, but instead contribute to its further vassalisation. Contrary to Lukashenka’s claim that nuclear weapons protect Belarus from externally orchestrated regime change and safeguard the country’s independence, their presence is undermining both.
   22. … Russia is likely to continue its creeping penetration of Belarus. Direct annexation, whether to advance Putin’s imperial project or to remove the risks of Minsk deviating from Moscow’s script, is unlikely, even in the event of a sustained cessation of hostilities in Ukraine. The Kremlin appears content with the current balance of benefits and costs associated with Belarus’s subordinate status. It would also likely view an expanded border with NATO as more of a liability than an asset. Unless Moscow concludes that Western efforts to draw Belarus out of Russia’s orbit pose a clear and imminent threat, it is therefore unlikely to seek to dramatically alter the status quo.
   23. Even so, Belarus is likely to play a growing role as a launchpad from which Russia can exert pressure through hybrid warfare against the EU. Regardless of Minsk’s preferences, in the baseline scenario, Belarus is primed to play a key role in Russia’s multidomain escalation strategy.
   24. Ongoing military penetration is creating the conditions for the redeployment of Russian assets once the war against Ukraine settles into a frozen conflict. Areas surrounding the line of contact there will remain heavily militarised. Belarus, however, offers a natural destination for the partial redeployment of Russian kontraktniki (contract soldiers).
   25. Stationing some of these forces in Belarus would allow Moscow to maintain a military presence in the wider Ukrainian theatre while increasing pressure on the EU, forcing Member States to adapt their defence planning, while averting the political and social costs of their demobilisation at home. Soviet-era military infrastructure would help absorb the costs of redeploying these troops, and could turn Belarus into a staging ground for a future Russian military attack against the EU.
   26. A wildcard could, however, disrupt this baseline scenario in the form of an escalation of Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine that directly implicates Belarus.
   27. There is currently no evidence that the Lukashenka regime is preparing to take part in any offensive operations. But the use of Belarusian territory as a launchpad for Russian hostile activities could still prompt retaliatory strikes by Ukraine. The regime in Minsk is keen to avoid such a scenario, as it would carry a significant risk of upsetting the current fragile equilibrium. The EU can exploit this vulnerability to alter a trajectory that is steadily undermining European security.
   28. … Although the Lukashenka regime’s room for maneuver has narrowed, prudent and targeted engagement with it can still shape certain outcomes in ways that serve the EU’s interests.
   29. Any adjustment of the EU’s approach towards Belarus must not simply restore Lukashenka’s room for maneuver in exchange for limited and temporary humanitarian concessions. …
   30. [That would] indirectly aid Russia’s military reconstitution without advancing the EU’s overarching objective, which differs from that of the Trump administration: a future free and independent Belarus that does not pose a threat to European security⁽⁹⁾.
   31. Nor should the EU demand what the regime cannot realistically deliver at present: a complete break with Russia.
   32. What the regime can do is limit domestic repression, refrain from hostile actions of its own – something that should be a precondition for any engagement – and credibly resist involvement in any further escalation of Russia’s war in Ukraine or in Russian hybrid campaigns targeting the EU.
   33. [This] more geopolitically detached stance would be supported by domestic preferences and concerns about Russia’s growing influence in Belarus and the risk of deeper entanglement in its war.
   34. The EU should seek to leverage these concerns and insist on practical confidence-building and risk-management measures, including more extensive exchanges of military information.
   35. The EU’s debate on Belarus policy should move beyond the current engagement-or-isolation paradigm towards a strategy that combines increased pressure with a clearly defined pathway towards sanctions relief.
   36. In practical terms, increased sanctions pressure should be accompanied by clear signals about what steps the regime needs to take for restrictions to be eased to their current level or below.
   37. The EU should coordinate this approach closely with Ukraine. Any potential easing of restrictions, including allowing potash exports by Belarus’s state-owned producer Belaruskali to transit through the EU, must be strictly conditional, and subject to robust verification and snapback mechanisms. Safeguards are also needed to ensure that sanctions relief does not indirectly facilitate Russia’s military reconstitution and hence magnify the threat Russia poses to the EU.
   38. In addition, the EU should increase its support for democratic forces and civil society. Any future political change capable of extricating Belarus from Moscow’s embrace and permanently reducing the threat that the country currently poses to the EU will depend not on a single grand bargain with the regime but on the gradual rebuilding and expansion of the political and civic space in Belarus.
   39. The process will also need to be protected from Russia’s efforts to derail it. This will require both constraining Russia’s ability to interfere, and including Belarus in any future discussions with Russia on a European security architecture.
   40. Such discussions could cover force deployment limits and military transparency measures (which Minsk appears to be ready to consider in principle) as a means of managing risks along Europe’s extended frontline with Russia. Despite Russian infringement of its sovereignty, Belarus should be treated as an independent actor in these discussions, helping to create the conditions for that status to become a reality in the future.
   41. In parallel, the EU needs to strengthen its capacity for defence, deterrence and escalation management across the full spectrum of threats emanating from Belarus. These range from coercion and intimidation – including tools of psychological warfare like [the Oreshnik missile deployments] – to the use of Belarusian territory as a platform for Russian military aggression against the EU.
   42. EU-wide efforts should complement initiatives already pursued by neighbouring states, exemplified by Poland’s measures to counter drone incursions and weaponised migration.
   43. MIKE: I think that in some ways, Belarus is a combination of pre-Maidan Ukraine and 1968 Czechoslovakia.
   44. MIKE: Belarus is a Russian-influenced state that once tried to interact with the West, and whose current Russia-aligned government is deeply unpopular among its people. At the same time, like post-1968 Czechoslovakia, it’s a nation whose people don’t like Russian influence, while Russia’s physical military presence offers few options for national independence.
   45. MIKE: Interestingly, though, the Belarussian people and the Belarus government probably have at least on thing in common: Neither want direct involvement in the Russia-Ukraine War. It would bring bloodshed, destruction and financial costs to Belarus, and would probably create serious internal political destabilization.
   46. MIKE: That latter point — internal political destabilization — is a calculation that Russia must make as a potential risk of pushing Belarus to directly involve itself in the Ukraine war.
   47. MIKE: If direct Belarussian involvement led to internal strife and possibly even the collapse of the pro-Russian government there, Russia might then face a new military-political front in Belarus instead of having an ally there.
   48. MIKE: It’s still a truism that “no plan survives first contact with the enemy”. Russia was first reminded of that in 2022. I hope they don’t need another reminder in Belarus.
6. Along those lines, from a June 4^th story in the EURASIANTIMES[.]COM — Russia’s Baltic Neighbor Seeks U.S. Nukes Amid Growing Threats from Moscow: Why Lithuania is “On The Edge”; By Sakshi Tiwari | EURASIANTIMES.COM | June 4, 2026. TAGS: Lithuania, Lithuania Minister of National Defense Robertas Kaunas, NATO, US Nuclear Weapons, UK, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, Belgium, Turkey, NATO’s Nuclear-Sharing Arrangements,
   1. Lithuania, a NATO frontline state that shares a direct border with Russia and Belarus, has signaled its willingness to host US nuclear weapons as part of NATO’s nuclear-sharing arrangements.
   2. Lithuania’s Minister of National Defense, Robertas Kaunas, said his country was in talks with the United States over a potential hosting of nuclear weapons on its territory, Politico has reported.
   3. [Referring to concerns about potential gaps in NATO’s security amid a potential drawdown of US military presence as indicated by Washington, he said,] “Lithuania is certainly not standing on the sidelines.”
   4. The statement comes after a Financial Times report claimed that the US was contemplating expanding the deployment of its nuclear weapons to additional countries and resurrecting security guarantees amid a reduction in conventional military presence in Europe.
   5. Currently, only a few countries host the American B61-12 bomb as part of NATO’s nuclear sharing program, including the UK, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, Belgium, and Turkey.
   6. These are US-owned weapons, kept under US custody and control, but hosted at air bases in Europe for potential delivery by allied dual-capable aircraft in a crisis where their use is authorized by the United States and the NATO alliance.
   7. The FT report stated that deploying nukes to additional NATO countries is meant to assuage concerns about the US commitment to the alliance, as it reduces the US military presence in Europe. The report noted that some Baltic states and Poland were interested in hosting weapons due to the increasing security threat posed by Russia.
   8. This is particularly relevant for Lithuania, as some 1,000 American soldiers are withdrawing from the Baltic country after completing a deployment rotation, and the arrival of their replacement remains uncertain.
   9. [Kaunas stated,] “The next rotation is currently under review … because the number of (U.S. troops) in Europe is changing; this naturally leads to a review of regional stance.”
   10. A negative US decision could leave Lithuania without a US armored battalion on its soil for the first time since 2020. The uncertainty has left Lithuania visibly concerned, particularly since there have been nearly constant US force rotations in the country.
   11. Lithuania sees nuclear hosting as a way to keep a strong American skin in the game and maintain credible deterrence, even in the absence of conventional troops. While the Baltic country’s constitution forbids the deployment of nuclear weapons within its borders, the Lithuanian President Gitanas Nausėda [: gee-TAH-nahs now-SAY-dah] has reportedly proposed amending this fundamental legislation due to current security threats.
   12. [At the moment,] these plans seem very premature, given that the US has not formally acknowledged any plans to expand nuclear coverage.
   13. The US has historically been cautious about moving nuclear weapons further east, fearing it would be too escalatory.
   14. Russia could most likely view this as a major provocation — placing US nuclear weapons on its immediate border. Moscow has already issued strong warnings about NATO nuclear expansion eastward, and President Vladimir Putin has even threatened the use of nukes in the past. Moreover, this could complicate future arms control discussions and contribute to further nuclear saber-rattling.
   15. Therefore, even if the United States decides to deploy nuclear weapons to additional nuclear states, it might choose states that do not share a border with Russia.
   16. It is pertinent to note that deploying nukes on Lithuanian territory would pose challenges for both Washington and Vilnius. For one, Article 137 of Lithuania’s Constitution explicitly states: “There may not be any weapons of mass destruction and foreign military bases on the territory of the Republic of Lithuania.” 
   17. Even if Lithuania were to amend the Constitution, it would require a strong parliamentary majority and could potentially face political resistance, given the country’s long-standing anti-nuclear stance.
   18. Moreover, hosting B61 [nuclear] bombs requires highly secure underground vaults, dual-capable aircraft such as the F-35, pilot training, and strict US custody arrangements. This means Lithuania would need to invest in nuclear-capable delivery systems and specialized training, which could be a time-consuming process.
   19. … Lithuania is one of the most exposed NATO countries because of its geography. It directly borders Russia’s [heavily militarised ] Kaliningrad exclave … , and Belarus. 
   20. Additionally, it faces vulnerability in the Suwalki Gap … If Russia seized the Suwalki Gap in the event of an escalation, the three Baltic States (Lithuania, Estonia, and Latvia) could be isolated from the rest of NATO.
   21. Lithuania, like the other Baltic states, has remained on edge after several undersea cables in the Baltic were sabotaged in 2024.
   22. Lithuanian intelligence and officials assess that a full-scale conventional invasion is currently a low probability, while hybrid and unconventional threats are growing. For example, Russian drones have been found to be violating the country’s airspace on multiple occasions, and Lithuania’s president and prime minister were rushed to underground bunkers amid one such incident that occurred last month.
   23. Lithuanian officials have warned that Russia could rebuild the capability to threaten the Baltics in 3–5 years if the war in Ukraine ends or freezes on favorable terms.
   24. Additionally, Russia is expanding units near NATO borders, including in Kaliningrad, and its economy is now geared toward war production.
   25. Lithuanian intelligence recently concluded in its annual assessment of security risks that Russia is increasing military units at the NATO border, providing them with combat experience in Ukraine, and warned that it could use these combat-hardened troops in a clash with NATO after the war.
   26. [The intelligence report said,] “Russia would likely create not only a 30-50 percent larger army than it had before the war but also a relatively modern one. Strategic reserves of weapons and ammunition would be fully restored. Russia would be ready for a conventional military conflict with NATO.”
   27. To combat the sustained threat posed by Russia, Lithuania has embarked on a steady military modernization and is determined to bolster its armed forces. For example, the country previously approved defense spending of 5.38% of GDP, one of the highest in Europe.
   28. Further, it is strengthening combat readiness in the event of an exigency. Lithuania has taken some tough measures, such as reinstating conscription, building up reserves, and adopting a “total defense” approach that includes civilian resistance.
   29. [Carnegia stated in a previous article,] “Lithuania’s move toward conscription demonstrates once again that Russia is still a driving force behind military planning and foreign policy formulation in the Baltic region. In a way that is simply unimaginable in many Western European countries and North America, Lithuania still sees Russia as an existential threat.”
   30. To bolster its security, Lithuania decided last year to host a permanent German military brigade. Germany’s 45th Panzer Brigade (Armored Brigade 45), with a strength of 4,800–5,000 troops, is scheduled to be fully operational by 2027. It includes a heavy armored brigade with Leopard 2 tanks, Puma infantry fighting vehicles, artillery, and support units.
   31. Moreover, it regularly participates in military exercises with NATO allies and has purchased a host of offensive and defensive weapon systems, including German Leopard … main battle tanks, Swedish … infantry fighting vehicles, and [from the US,] the HIMARS and NASAMS Air Defense, … Black Hawk helicopters, … Light Tactical Vehicles, and Javelin ant-tank missiles … among other things.
   32. The alacrity to host US nukes is probably part of the same desperation to enhance preparedness against a potential Russian aggression, or perhaps, to deter a Russian aggression altogether.
7. The warning by Lithuanian officials that Russia could rebuild its capability to threaten the Baltics in 3-5 years actually aligns with a story from EURONEWS[.]COM on June 6 titled — UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer says Russia could attack NATO within four years; By Gavin Blackburn | EURONEWS.COM | Published on 05/June/2026 – 19:01 GMT+2. TAGS: Keir Starmer, United Kingdom, Russia, War in Ukraine, NATO,
   1. [MIKE: I don’t have time to read this story, but it will be included in today’s show post at ThinkwingRadio[.]com.]
   2. Russia could attack a NATO country within four years according to western intelligence assessments, UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer warned … .
   3. He made the comments as he pledged his government would publish a long-delayed defence investment plan before [July’s] NATO summit.
   4. [Starmer said,] “It is our intelligence assessment and the assessment of other countries in NATO that there could be an attack by Russia on NATO as soon as 2030. … So you can see the urgency and the priority that we’re putting behind this now …” …
   5. It echoes similar timeframes expressed by other European leaders and NATO chief Mark Rutte who warned in December that Russia “could be ready to use military force against NATO within five years.”
   6. Starmer has pledged to raise defence spending to 2.5% of GDP from next year, increasing to 3% in the next parliament.
   7. A 10-year defence investment plan following a review of the UK’s defence capabilities was meant to be published late last year but has not yet been produced.
   8. Starmer announced it would be published before the NATO summit in Turkey, beginning on 7 July.
   9. UK media has reported that the plan has been delayed due to disagreements between the finance ministry and other departments over the cost.
   10. Starmer insisted to reporters it would be “fully funded.”
   11. Earlier on Friday, Britain’s military chief warned the country must boost its defences in response to threats posed by Russia, which invaded Ukraine more than four years ago.
   12. [Air Chief Marshal Richard Knighton told the BBC,] “In my 35-year career, this is the most dangerous period that I have known. … And as a consequence, it is important that we enhance the capability and the readiness of our armed forces alongside our allies to deter our adversaries from doing something daft.”
   13. US President Donald Trump has repeatedly urged NATO countries to spend more on defence and become less reliant on Washington for security.Bottom of Form
   14. MIKE: I’ve been saying since before the Russian annexation of Crimea that it feels like we’re in a prewar period, but I was expecting any hostilities to start in the South China Sea rather than in eastern Europe.
   15. MIKE: I think we can say with confidence that since the February 2022 invasion of Ukraine by Russia, we have been in a war period, and not a pre-war one.
   16. MIKE: Now, we’re getting some really frightening convergences.
   17. MIKE: Russia and Ukraine are fighting a hyper-modern 21^st century war, showing us the combat tech and stockpile attrition that we can expect, and which most modern militaries — including ours — are not really prepared for.
   18. MIKE: NATO nations are seemingly coming to a consensus that Russia could be in a position to attack NATO by about 2030-ish.
   19. MIKE: At the same time, China has been aggressively upgrading and expanding its military capabilities in Asia and the western Pacific. It has made an increasing number of veiled threats against Taiwan. It’s aggressively pursuing territorial claims against neighbors on land and sea, mostly through intimidation, but that could change.
   20. MIKE: Then there’s the so-called “Davidson Window”, which I’ve discussed before.
   21. MIKE: The “Davidson Window” is named after Admiral Philip S. Davidson, and “the concept has become central to Indo-Pacific defense planning and S.-China strategic competition.”
   22. MIKE: His prediction was that based on political decisions being made in Beijing, the rapid development and modernization of Chinese military capabilities, and statements coming from President Xi Jinping, there was a real possibility that China would be capable of invading Taiwan by about 2030, and might be inclined to do so, one way or another.
   23. MIKE: Mainly in response to Russia and China — and now also thanks to Trump’s military adventurism — all the militaries of the world have started major arms buildups, expansions of their defense-industrial bases, and sped up development of newer, more powerful, and more effective offensive and defensive weaponry.
   24. MIKE: We’re even seeing Ai and robots participating in warfare to an ever greater degree. None of these war genies will be easy to put back into their bottles. Nor are they likely to be.
   25. MIKE: That magical date of 2030 is looking increasingly like a time when the world will be primed for a series of major regional wars that could easily morph into as a world war.
   26. MIKE: Stay tuned.

There’s always more to discuss, but that’s all we have time for today.

You’ve been listening to Thinkwing Radio with Mike Honig from KPFT Houston 90.1-HD2, Galveston 89.5-HD2, Livingston/Goodrich 89.9-HD2, and Huntsville 91.9-HD2. We are Houston’s Community radio. I hope you’ve enjoyed the show and found it interesting, and I look forward to sharing this time with you again next week. Y’all take care!