Hunter sits down with Luc Rombout to explore the readiness of Belgian defense and Belgian society. They discuss how political decisions, procurement timelines, and weak strategic communication can leave a country preparing for the wrong conflict, and why societal preparedness matters long before a crisis hits.

Luc draws on experience across the military, emergency management, academia, and crisis decision-making. Together, they examine what robustness, reactivity, and resilience mean in practice, and why local communities may need to become more prepared and self-reliant.

Luc Rombout brings 30 years of experience across emergency management, military service, humanitarian work in Ukraine and academic research. He is now completing a PhD on crisis-management decision-making. He speaks bluntly to what is needed to make Belgium stronger, safer and more ready for the future.

Follow Luc:

Twitter: https://x.com/RomboutLuc

Linkedin: https://www.linkedin.com/in/lucrombout/

De Tijd Article: https://www.tijd.be/opinie/algemeen/defensie-moet-leren-denken-als-een-start-up/10613316.html

• Luc Rombout’s background across the military, academia, and emergency management—and how it shapes his perspective on readiness.

• Belgium’s defense planning, including the Star 2 plan, and the risk of long procurement timelines locking the military into outdated assumptions.

• Why Belgium can be slow to turn decisions into capability, compared with countries such as the Netherlands, Lithuania, Finland, Germany, and Ukraine.

• The role of political risk aversion and why national security can become a party-political issue.

• How clear communication about military capabilities can help the public understand readiness gaps.

• Why emergency legislation and fast-track mechanisms matter in a crisis.

• The difference between societal robustness, reactivity, and resilience.

• How communities can prepare for disruptions such as blackouts, cyber incidents, or supply-chain failures.

• The role of local initiatives and municipalities in making practical plans and reducing dependence on a distant response.

• How small, everyday actions can help build stronger, better-prepared communities.

  
  

00:16 Two kinds of readiness in Belgium: defence and society

00:52 Who is Luc Rombout? "Between the free atom and the ugly duckling"

02:54 Still preparing for the war of 2020?

04:17 The STAR plan and Belgium's defence programming law

05:44 How Ukraine, Poland and Lithuania field air defence in months

08:41 Why Belgium lags: national security as party politics

10:48 A 35-year-old frigate, second-hand missiles and the Red Sea

12:04 The Dutch commanders who said "we stop"

14:06 Why defence disappeared from Belgian media

15:23 Could Belgium fight tonight?

16:22 No legal fast track for a national emergency

17:56 High Reliability Organisations: readiness at the push of a button

18:53 From the Cold War push-button army to peacekeeping, and back

21:23 The Dutch 24-hour alert and Germany's "fight tonight"

23:19 A daily readiness scorecard: from 17% to 20%

24:19 Bottom-up innovation, the Israeli way

25:42 Threat perception and political will

27:31 Risk aversion and the shadow of Rwanda

28:52 A few hundred euros to cripple the Port of Antwerp

30:37 Zeebrugge then and now: what's left of our emergency capacity

31:43 Readiness vs resilience

32:16 Why resilience is the last step, not the first

33:12 Robustness: taking the hit

34:18 Reactivity: a blackout in your street

35:47 No networks for a week: medication for elderly neighbours

37:39 Where communities should start

38:57 The pen-and-paper test: a week without electricity

40:16 What government should do: lift peacetime rules

41:37 Running a supermarket without electricity

43:38 Why preparedness can feel empowering

45:06 A sense of control: lessons from Switzerland and Finland

47:35 What Luc saw in Ukraine

48:46 Community groups as part of readiness

49:38 Closing thoughts

Fernando Tagle Valle is a former executive officer (XO) in the Chilean Navy with 21 years of service. He brings rare operational depth to one of today's most consequential and underreported military domains.

In this episode, Hunter and Fernando cover:

Submarine as a deterrence tool: The most powerful thing about a submarine isn't the weapon it carries, it's that no one can find it. Fernando explains why that uncertainty is itself a strategic asset, available to middle powers and great powers alike, and why a single conventional submarine can pose a serious threat to an entire carrier strike group.

The global procurement crisis: The submarine production line is full. If a nation wants one today, it's looking at a 10–15 year wait. Fernando walks through how countries like Canada, Poland, Brazil, and the UK are navigating this reality and why the decisions being made now will determine defence capability for the next 30–40 years.

Leadership and human performance underwater: Leading 40 people at 300 metres below the surface, with no communication to the outside world and no room for error, demands a specific kind of leadership. Fernando breaks down what it actually takes — starting with leading yourself.

Show Notes:

In this episode of Hunter’s War, Hunter speaks with Edoardo Giglio, among many things, the author of Tech Tides: How Innovation Shapes Global Power, to explore how innovation ecosystems are redefining the modern battlefield and the global balance of power.

Find Edoardo’s book at these links:

https://www.bloomsbury.com/us/tech-tides-9781538198766/

https://www.amazon.com/Tech-Tides-Innovation-Shapes-Global/dp/1538198762

From the "tanks vs. bytes" debate to the unique success of Silicon Valley and Israel, Giglio breaks down why some nations lead the future while others are left behind.

In this conversation we cover:

• The Shift in Warfare: How $200 commercial drones are neutralizing multi-million dollar Cold War assets and why "bytes are more important than bullets."

• Defining Innovation Ecosystems: The difference between basic, sustaining, disruptive, and moonshot innovation strategies.

• The "Silicon Shield": How Taiwan's accidental semiconductor dominance became its greatest geopolitical defense.

• Europe’s Innovation Crisis: Why a "buckshot approach" and fragmented regulations are causing the EU to lose the AI race.

• The Cost of Failure: Case studies on Nigeria’s "resource curse" and Ethiopia’s challenges in sustaining agricultural innovation.

• The Human Factor: Why human intuition and political will remain the ultimate driving forces behind any technological breakthrough.

Connect with Edoardo:

• LinkedIn: Edoardo Giglio: https://www.linkedin.com/in/edoardogiglio

• Substack: https://substack.com/@edobluntforce

  
  Keywords: Geopolitics, Innovation Strategy, Defense Tech, AI Act, Silicon Valley, Semiconductor Industry, Drone Warfare, TSMC, Tech Tides, warfare

On this episode of Hunter's War, guest Bardia Hariri, an Iranian-American academic and businessman, lays out a vision for Iran's future. With a deepening rift between the Iranian state and its people and the recent mass atrocity in which an estimated 33,000 citizens were killed, Hariri outlines the vision of Iranaissance. A decentralized platform of experts and diaspora, including CEOs and engineers, who are preparing for the eventual collapse of the regime. Central to this vision is a focus on economic reintegration over political sloganeering. Hariri identifies five non-negotiables that Iran must meet to attract the $150 billion in annual investment required for national redevelopment.

Finally, the episode explores Iran’s potential as a linchpin in the Global Value Chain (GVC). With over 50 million citizens under age 40 and immense energy reserves, a transparent and neutral Iran could transform from a regional destabilizer into a strategic trade crossroad connecting Europe and Asia. Hariri emphasizes that the success of this transition depends on empowering those within the country to ensure stability in the critical first 60 days following a regime collapse.

To learn more about the work Iranaissance, check out their website www.iranaissance.org

Is the West past the tipping point for civil conflict? In this episode of Hunter’s War, we sit down with Professor David Betz of King's College London for a challenging conversation about political legitimacy, insurgency, and the fragility of modern Western societies.

We explore the core concepts of insurgency as a social movement and why modern counterinsurgency often fails. Applying these lessons home, we discuss the indicators of domestic civil war currently flashing red in the West: polar factionalism, the fear of status loss, and the total collapse of institutional legitimacy. We also examine why economic wealth and elite overproduction contribute to the expectation gap and what strategies might exist to mitigate the fallout of internal conflict.

Referenced essays by Professor Betz:

Civil War Comes to the West: https://www.militarystrategymagazine.com/article/civil-war-comes-to-the-west/

Civil War Comes to the West Part II: https://www.militarystrategymagazine.com/article/civil-war-comes-to-the-west-part-ii-strategic-realities/

Professor David Betz is a Professor of War in the Modern World at King's College London, where he has taught in the Department of War Studies for over 20 years. His research focuses on insurgency, counterinsurgency, and the changing character of war.

Subscribe and follow Hunter’s War for more discussions on the intersection of geopolitics, war, and society.

This week, I’m joined by Michelle Haas, a PhD researcher at the University of Ghent focusing on NATO and European defense policy. She is also a fellow at the Egmont Institute, a board member of the Royal Higher Institute for Defense, and an active reservist in the Special Forces.For Dutch speakers, I highly recommend her podcast, de Paniekzaaiers: https://open.spotify.com/show/133zoy8FpiOehF5WA47KLy?si=80af5952da0e4addThe episodes with Jan Balliauw on Russia and, before that, discussing the US potential withdrawal from Europe are great. In this episode, we discuss the precarious state of the transatlantic security relationship, the lessons Europe can learn from the Nordic and Baltic states about societal resilience, and the critical lack of strategic communication from political leaders about evolving threats.The Transatlantic AllianceOur conversation started with the transatlantic security relationship, the cornerstone of European defense for the last century. Michelle argues that while the alliance is not dead, it is under "immense pressure". She believes the possibility of a US withdrawal of troops from Europe is "very likely" and that Europe is simply not prepared for.A sudden, unpredictable withdrawal would be a "shock to Europe" and could cause a "serious break" in the relationship. This isn't a new development; the US has been signaling its pivot to Asia for 10-15. However, Europe's strategic disunity, stemming from different threat perceptions among member states, has prevented it from developing genuine strategic autonomy.Lessons from the Nordics & BalticsWe then turned to the Nordic and Baltic countries to learn lessons from their defense approaches. Michelle notes that these countries have greater "strategic clarity" regarding the Russian threat. For them, the war didn't begin in 2022 but in 2014, and there is a sense of frustration with Western Europe's delayed reaction. Key aspects of their approach include:Total Defense: They embrace a "whole of society" approach, understanding that defense is more than just a military matter and that the entire population must be included and prepared. Finland is a prime example, with hundreds of thousands of reservists and an extensive civil defense infrastructure.Societal Resilience: The goal is to build a society that can withstand disruption. This includes practical measures like ensuring the population can take care of itself for at least 72 hours in a crisis, a standard that should apply across Europe.Deterrence by Punishment: Estonia, for example, is investing in long-range missiles to demonstrate an ability to strike back at Russia, shifting from a strategy of deterrence by denial to deterrence by punishment.The Strategic Communication GapA major theme of our discussion was the failure of strategic communication. There is a "disconnect" between political leaders and the public, who often don't understand what threats they are preparing for or why massive defense investments are needed.Michelle argues that political messaging in Western Europe is often alarmist ("we are not prepared," "we have zero stocks"), which is counterproductive. The Nordic and Baltic approach is more constructive and empowering: "we are prepared and we are preparing and everyone can take a part in this". She points to recent examples of Belgian politicians calling increased defense spending a "social bloodbath" and creating "collective hysteria," which only serves to increase the polarization our adversaries want to achieve. The goal should be to balance realism with an optimistic story that gives people a sense of agency, rather than creating fear.Photo by Thomas Nolf.

In this conversation, Hunter interviews Jerome Drevon, a senior analyst at the International Crisis Group, about his book 'From Jihad to Politics,' which explores the transformation of Syrian jihadi organizations into political entities. Drevon discusses the complexities of the Syrian Civil War, the evolution of groups like HTS and Ahrar Al-Sham, and the importance of understanding these organizations within their social and political contexts. He emphasizes the significance of field research and the need for a nuanced approach to studying insurgent groups, highlighting the challenges they face in balancing radical ideologies with the demands of governance and political legitimacy.

His book is available for purchase (if you can, support the research this way!): https://a.co/d/eBBZaJz (Amazon) or

Or publicly via the PDF: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/382491710_From_Jihad_to_Politics_How_Syrian_Jihadis_Embraced_Politics

Order Jerome’s new book “ Transformed by the People” : https://a.co/d/0xYkWih

Keywords: Syria, Jihad, Politics, HTS, Ahrar Al-Sham, Al-Qaeda, Institutionalization, Field Research, Jihadi Organizations, Middle East

Notes from the discussion:

Jerome shares his surprise at the speed of the HTS-led offensive that led to the collapse of the Assad regime. While he and his colleagues had observed significant transformations within HTS in Northwest Syria, the swiftness of their victory was unexpected even for the group itself. The international community had largely ignored the evolving situation in Syria, making the outcome all the more shocking.

Hunter asks why Jerome focused on Ahrar Al-Sham and Jabhat al-Nusra (which became HTS) out of the hundreds of groups in the Syrian conflict. Jerome explains that unlike ISIS, which he found less interesting due to its reliance on "violence for the sake of it," these two groups had to adapt their radical ideas to survive. Their evolution and willingness to learn from their environment presented a more complex and compelling case study.

A key concept from Jerome's book is institutionalization, which he breaks down into internal and external dimensions.

• Internal Institutionalization: This refers to how a group organizes itself beyond its initial leaders, creating structures for recruitment, decision-making, and providing basic services. This allows a group to survive the loss of key figures.

• External Institutionalization: This involves how a group coordinates with other armed factions, governs civilian populations, and interacts with foreign states.

Jerome argues that this process of institutionalization, rather than simple centralization, constrains a group and forces it to make concessions, a step ISIS was never willing to take.

Jerome prefers the term "politicization" over "moderation" to describe the transformation of groups like HTS. He argues that "moderate" is a subjective term, and these groups were still committed to violence. Instead, they became more political by recognizing that military action is a means to a political end, not the end itself. This involves making alliances, dealing with foreign states, and making concessions to the local population.

Jerome explains the "jihadi paradox": the very factors that make transnational jihadi groups successful (like their global networks and clear ideology) also prevent them from achieving ultimate political victory. Their transnational nature inevitably draws international opposition. Groups like the Taliban and HTS understood that to win, they had to distance themselves from transnational jihad and focus on becoming national governing bodies.

Hunter asks about Jerome's personal experience interviewing the now-interim president of Syria. Jerome describes al-Sharaa as a decisive commander and leader who commands respect, rather than a deep intellectual thinker. He notes that al-Sharaa was willing to learn and adapt, representing a younger generation poised to do things differently in Syria