Jake Broe Stayed the Course: Ten Days on from His A+ Scorecard
- john raymond
- Sep 10
- 4 min read
Ten days ago I gave Jake Broe what I called an A+ scorecard. At the time, I made it clear that the real test for him would not be whether he could name the pillars of this conflict—regime security, asymmetric warfare, and the traitor-general dynamic—but whether he could hold to them when the headlines shifted, when the noise intensified, and when the easy exits into accident narratives or superficial optimism beckoned.
This week, in the aftermath of Russia’s mass strike on Ukraine and deliberate drone incursions into Poland, Jake passed that test. He has not slid back. He has stayed the course, using his full analytic muscles.
The NATO Problem Begins With Minimax
The starting point is not “What just happened?” but “What harm does this enable?” That is the minimax corollary. In asymmetric war, you must assume that your enemy has already red-teamed your structures for weaknesses and is already exploiting them.
That is exactly what the Russians are doing to NATO through gray-zone probing. Article 5, the cornerstone of the alliance, has two faces:
Its strength is that if invoked, its alliance-wide activation would be devastating for Russia in asymmetric terms. One probe against one member becomes a collective counterblow.
Its weakness is that activation is not automatic. It is political. It depends on consensus and will.
If there were a way for Putin to sabotage Article 5, he would dearly love to. And the sober conclusion is that he already has: by designing deliberate but deniable incursions—drones in Poland, missiles brushing NATO airspace—he forces the West into paralysis. Each probe is one more mini-declaration of war, but one that democratic capitals hesitate to recognize as such.
The lesson of minimax is that you must assume this is intentional. It is not “off course.” It is the latest salvo in a long, long war aimed at breaking the alliance from within.
Case Study One: Russian Drones Over Poland
Jake’s handling of this episode shows why he deserves credit. Nineteen Russian drones crossed into Polish airspace. Poland’s air defenses performed poorly, intercepting only four. NATO activated Article 4, which is code for “let’s have a meeting.”
Jake did not take the easy out. He did not call it a navigational glitch. He said plainly: this was deliberate. It was a Kremlin provocation, designed to test what NATO and the United States would do. He recognized that the incursions were not about tactical damage to a farmhouse—they were about strategic damage to deterrence credibility.
This is full application of the pillars:
Pillar One (Regime Security): Putin escalates abroad to secure himself at home.
Pillar Two (Asymmetric Warfare): The drone incursions were calibrated to maximize alliance paralysis without triggering full war.
By rejecting the “accident” frame, Jake kept focus on the hinge point: NATO’s political will to defend itself. That is exactly where it belongs.
Case Study Two: Trump’s Tariff Gambit
The second example is Jake’s treatment of President Trump’s proposal to levy 100% tariffs on EU imports from China and India as a supposed measure to pressure Russia.
Here again Jake did not let himself be distracted. He called it what it is: a fake solution that punishes allies, spares Russia, and sows disunity. He tied it directly to Trump’s simultaneous withdrawal from anti-disinformation compacts—moves that enable Kremlin aims by dismantling Western defenses.
This is Pillar Three, Traitor-General in its pure form: the insider who substitutes empty gestures for real action, all while protecting the adversary. Many analysts would soften it by speaking of “incompetence” or “miscalculation.” Jake did not. He named the operational effect: sabotage of Western cohesion.
Why This Matters
Analysts will always get tactical details wrong—no one can predict every target hit or every system downed. The true test is whether they keep their eyes on the hinge points: regime security, asymmetric probing, and internal treachery. Jake has.
That matters because the Ukraine war is the hinge of the entire Western order. If Ukraine falls, NATO’s Article 5 is gutted. If NATO fractures, the EU follows. And if the EU collapses, the United States could easily follow it into darkness.
This is the rupture point. And it is why Russia’s probing of Article 5 is not incidental—it is the main effort. It is also why Trump’s sabotage of sanctions, tariffs, and disinformation defenses is not random—it is the necessary inside game that makes Putin’s probing possible.
And while Putin is actively attacking the alliance, Trump, his asset in the White House, is gobbling up oxygen by offering up even more tariff self-sabotage like he expects people to take him seriously.
Steadiness Is the Measure
Ten days on from the A+ scorecard, Jake Broe has demonstrated what steadiness looks like. He has not backed away from the pillars. He has not been distracted by noise. He has kept his focus on the hinge points that matter and translated them into operational clarity.
That is the real measure of analysis in a long war. It is not perfection in detail but consistency in structure. And on that score, Jake Broe has stayed the course.
Comments