Good morning,

This is the Monday morning edition of The Intel Brief. Let’s cover some critical updates from this weekend.

Reporting Period: 20-24 February 2025

Bottom-Line Up Front:

NATO’s Troop Disposition Could Shift To Promote Negotiations, Reach Peace Deal

Summary
Following U.S.-Russian talks in Saudi Arabia, speculations have persisted that the U.S. may remove troops from Europe’s eastern flank to appease Russian peace motivations. Despite this coverage in the media, Trump’s officials and foreign leaders have stated American troops will remain on NATO’s eastern front.

Findings

• Trump Rhetoric: This week President Trump stated that he and Russia want peace in Ukraine. Following criticism from media and various European leaders, Trump stated President Zelenskyy is a “dictator,” and called for national elections in Ukraine. Elections are paused in Ukraine due to it being under martial law since 2022.
  Following talks in Saudi Arabia, Trump stated that Russia “have the cards” due to the amount of Ukrainian territory they hold.

• Russian Demands: On 19 February, President Putin told Interfax — a Russian news agency — that he rates the U.S.-Russian talks in Saudi Arabia “highly,” and that “In my opinion, we made the first step to restore work in various areas of mutual interest.”
  The U.S. and Russia agreed to reopen embassies in Moscow and Washington, respectively. Officials also agreed to pursue closer bilateral relations, economic investment, and a possible joint energy venture.
  Putin and the Kremlin previously stated that good relations between the U.S. and Russia are the foundation for successful peace negotiations, indicating the meeting in Riyadh had a bilateral focus and less interest in Ukraine.
  Despite media coverage suggesting Trump’s team is abandoning Ukraine and EU interests, Putin publicly stated that Ukraine will not be cut out of negotiations.
  The Kyiv Independent reported that Foreign Minister Lavrov demanded NATO troops withdraw from NATO’s eastern flank in order to progress talks.

• NATO’s Position: On 18 February, Brigadier Watson of NATO’s Allied Reaction Force (ARF) stated that British troops — mere miles from Ukraine’s border — are ready to deploy for any operation in the region. Previously, Prime Minister Starmer (UK) stated that British forces are “ready and willing” to serve as peacekeepers in a post-peace Ukraine.
  Following a week of media coverage suggesting the Trump administration is preparing to fully abandon the EU and NATO, U.S. Envoy to Russia and Ukraine Keith Kellogg told Polish Prime Minister Duda that American personnel would not withdraw from Poland.

Why This Matters
A U.S. troop withdrawal from Europe would have significant geopolitical, military, and strategic consequences:

• Weakened NATO Deterrence: U.S. forces serve as a tripwire against Russian aggression. Their departure could embolden Moscow to test NATO’s resolve, particularly in Eastern Europe.

• European Defense Burden: European nations would need to rapidly expand their defense budgets, capabilities, and coordination to fill the gap left by the U.S., indicating a reason as to why Trump might pull some troops.

• Reduced Power Projection: U.S. bases in Europe provide logistical and operational hubs for operations in the Middle East, Africa, and beyond. A withdrawal would complicate rapid deployments back to Europe’s east.

• Stronger Russian Leverage: Moscow could exploit troop withdrawals to expand its influence in former Soviet states, pressure NATO’s eastern flank, and solidify control over contested regions. Russia’s GRU recently stood up a unit to oversee hybrid warfare operations, such as assassinations and sabotage.

• Fractured Alliances: A withdrawal could strain U.S.-European relations, leading allies to question Washington’s commitment to collective defense and seek alternative security arrangements, including greater reliance on EU-led defense initiatives. Some European leaders have called for the creation of a “European Army.”

Sources: Al Jazeera, The Kyiv Independent, Reuters, Euractiv, National Review, Newsweek, BBC

U.S. Flexes Nuclear Arsenal Following Russian Exercise

Summary
On 19 February, both the U.S. and Russia conducted nuclear exercises. The U.S. drill included the launch of an inert Minuteman III ICBM. The launch occurred shortly after Russia’s drill. The U.S. and South Koreans also conducted an aerial exercise that included at least one B1-B bomber.

Findings

• Russian Launch: On 19 February, the Russian military conducted an exercise to rehearse the deployment of RS-24 Yars Intercontinental Ballistic Missile (ICBM) launchers. The exercise was conducted at an undisclosed location and is being interpreted as a show of force ahead of possible peace negotiations with Ukraine.

• Yars RS-24: The Yars is a nuclear-capable ICBM. Once launched, the Yars deploys various reentry vehicles from a high-altitude orbit.
  The Missile Threat database by CSIS suggests the Yars can deploy three MIRV nuclear warheads up to 6,525 miles.

• American Launch: On 19 February, the U.S. Air Force launched an inert Minuteman III (ICBM) from a launch facility at Vandenberg Space Force Base, California. The launch occurred briefly after Russia’s and was intended to “demonstrate the readiness, reliability and effectiveness of the U.S. nuclear deterrent.”

• Minuteman III: This is a nuclear-capable ICBM with a range — according to the U.S. Air Force — of 6,000+ miles.

• U.S.-Korean Exercise: On 20 February, U.S. F-16s, and “at least” one B1-B bomber conducted the first aerial exercise with South Korea of Trump’s term. They flew alongside South Korean F-35s and F-15s.
  Despite a U.S. Air Force factsheet stating the B1-B eliminated its nuclear mission in 1994 and dropped its nuclear-capable designation in 2007, the B1-B could be converted to carry nuclear payloads.
  The exercise was intended to show a bilateral response and deterrence capability against North Korea.

Why This Matters
The Minuteman III launch from Vandenberg is a significant show of force as U.S. adversaries — like China, Iran, and North Korea — grow emboldened, Russia looks for concessions in negotiations, and European allies cast doubt on American commitments to NATO.

While the launch itself does not indicate an overt willingness to employ nuclear weapons, it is a stark reminder to regimes across the globe who are contemplating attacks or schemes against U.S. allies, facilities, personnel, and interests.

As I have alluded to in previous briefs, Trump’s administration appears to be adopting a realist foreign policy outlook — hence the “Peace Through Strength” concept — by which Washington can gain concessions through the threat (or use) of force.

Sources: UPI, AP News, USSF, Newsweek, USAF

Hegseth Outlines Defense Budget Cut Logic

Summary
On 20 February, the U.S. Department of Defense released an 8-minute video of Secretary Hegseth discussing the priorities of strengthening the U.S. military while overseeing sweeping budget cuts.

Findings

• Purpose: Hegseth stated the overall priority for budget cuts is to offer greater transparency to American taxpayers. The DOD wants to reestablish transparency as it carries out the voter’s “mandate” from President Trump.

Hegseth also addressed concerns regarding “bogus” media coverage of his proposed refocusing:

• DOGE Access: Hegseth stated DOGE will have “broad” access to DOD data so that analysts can identify waste and abuse.

• Reorienting the Budget: Following Trump’s inauguration, his administration inherited the Biden administration’s defense budget. Hegseth stated his DOD will “refocus” the budget to meet Trump’s priorities, build a “lethal fighting force,” and cut funding from scattered Biden-era priorities. Hegseth stated that media coverage is false and that these are not “cuts” but reorientation of funds to the services.

• Exemptions: In his memo, Hegseth read off some programs exempt from the changes.

  • Southwest border activities

  • Combating transnational criminal organizations

  • Audits

  • Nuclear modernization

  • Virginia-class submarines

  • Trump’s “Iron Dome for America” project

  • One-way attack drones and UAVs

  • Cyber security

  • [Corps] readiness

  • Training

  • Defense industrial base

  Hegseth’s demeanor and cadence suggest the list of programs exempt from the funding changes is much longer.

• Probationary Workforce: Hegseth stated the entire federal government is reviewing its probationary workforce in compliance with a Trump executive order. The DOD will comply. The ultimate goal is to remove redundant positions and practices and reestablish a system of meritocracy.

Why This Matters
Hegseth’s direct and simple explanation of his proposed budget management is in direct contradiction to mainstream media reports that suggest the military’s budget is severely cut and restricted. However, Hegeth’s changes do suggest that the DOD will experience some personnel turnover.

In fact, around the time of Hegseth’s announcement, both General C.Q. Brown (Chairman, Joint Chiefs of Staff) and Admiral Lisa Franchetti (Chief of Naval Operations, USN) were relieved of their positions.

However, identifying waste and abuse in the military budget is critical as it will also identify programs and practices that are overly bureaucratic, redundant, or place “red tape” over the military’s ability to carry out operations.

The exemptions should also indicate where the Trump administration’s security priorities are. In my opinion, there are three priorities:

• Nuclear strength and deterrence (including air defense modernization)

• Southern border security

• Indo-Pacific operations

While I do not think Trump’s administration will “abandon” Europe and NATO, I do think he is rightly shifting our focus to the Pacific while demanding Europe undertake greater responsibility for its own security.

Sources: U.S. Department of Defense, POLITICO,

German Election Results Favor Center, Far-Right

Summary
On 23 February, Germans took to the polls for snap elections. As polling estimated, the CDU/CSU Union and AfD secured the most seats. With no majority reached, parties will shop coalitions in the hopes of securing a majority to establish a government.

Findings

• Voter Turnout: Germany experienced a record-breaking voter turnout of 83.5%. That is the highest turnout since reunification in 1990.

• Results: Of the 83.5% of votes, the CDU/CSU Union received the most, with the AfD coming in second.

Why This Matters
This is the first time since World War II that a party considered to be far-right (i.e. the AfD) is in the federal government. What began as an anti-EU currency party, AfD soon developed into a neo-nationalist party that champions German monoculturalism, German ethnic preservation, EU and NATO skepticism, and anti-immigration. The party gained a lot of support, particularly among young Germans and residents of Germany’s east, due to its lucid and frank criticism of German issues like migrant violence, energy crises, security issues, housing, and the ongoing economic crisis.

Now that the AfD has a significant number of seats in the Bundestag, they will have a more direct impact on Germany’s governance. By holding more than 20% of seats, the AfD is more likely to find themselves in a coalition despite mainstream parties promising to exclude the AfD.

For example, the CDU/CSU Union is most likely to pair with the AfD, due to their bilateral cooperation being enough to secure a majority. Additionally, harsh and unfavorable media coverage of the CDU/CSU and Friedrich Merz, their frontman, may have isolated the party and enticed them to embrace the AfD. For these reasons, it is also unlikely that Merz would offer a coalition to Scholz and the SPD, but could do so to avoid being labeled neo-Nazi or having far-right sympathies.

Also note a final point of friction: Germany’s president — Frank-Walter Steinmeier (SPD) — will need to approve the formation of a government and chancellorship. This means if the AfD finds itself in a coalition, the president could dissolve it, appoint a caretaker government, and schedule more elections.

Regardless of what happens, this is a fascinating and critical time in German politics. Germany must develop policies to grow its depleted economy, control inflation and housing, and address illegal migration and migrant crime across Germany. Additionally, Germany will be expected to take a leading role in NATO given the European skepticism of President Trump.

Sources: CNN, DW, AfD

End Brief

That concludes this edition of The Intel Brief.

Thanks for reading!

You can provide comments or feedback to me directly: [email protected]

Nick