Indian Strategic Studies

23 November 2025

Delhi terror attack heightens India-Pakistan tension

Rajeswari Pillai

A powerful car bombing near Delhi’s Red Fort Metro Station has ratcheted up existing tensions between Delhi and Islamabad. While a motive for the 10 November attack is yet to be specified, the perpetrator and a co-conspirator were from Kashmir, which is the subject of ongoing territorial disputes between India and Pakistan. The Indian government has been reluctant to explicitly link the attacks to Pakistan or Pakistan-based terrorist groups, such as Jaish-e-Mohammed (JeM), but some commentators have nonetheless drawn such connections.

The terror attack killed at least 13 people and injured around 20. While it remains to be seen how the government will respond to this attack, in May Prime Minister Narendra Modi said ‘any future act of terror will be treated as an act of war’. In that same month, India and Pakistan went through a short, intense aerial conflict following an April terrorist attack in Pahalgam, Kashmir, which killed 25 tourists and was linked to the Resistance Front, a Pakistan-based group.

In a major intelligence victory just hours prior to the blast, the Jammu and Kashmir police recovered about 3,000 kg of explosives from two rented apartments in Faridabad, linked to a medical professional working in a local hospital in the city. The confiscated materials included 350 kg of ammonium nitrate, commonly used in explosives for terror attacks. India’s national Forensic Science Laboratory has collected more than 40 samples from the blast sites. An official from the organisation said that one of the materials used in the blast was ammonium nitrate, but a second sample pointed to something more powerful.

Japan warns citizens in China about safety as diplomatic crisis deepens

"We have made judgments based on comprehensive consideration of the security situation in the country or region, as well as its political and social conditions," Chief Cabinet Secretary Kihara said on Tuesday (November 18, 2025) about the safety notice.

The Japanese embassy in China had on Monday (November 17, 2025) reminded citizens to respect local customs and be careful in their interactions with Chinese people. It also asked citizens to be aware of their surroundings when outside, advising them not to travel alone and urging extra caution when travelling with children.

"If you see a person or group that looks even slightly suspicious, do not approach them and leave the area immediately," the embassy notice said.

Film distributors have also suspended the screening of at least two Japanese films in China amid the deepening dispute between Tokyo and Beijing, in what Chinese state broadcaster CCTV said late Monday (November 17) was a "prudent decision" that took into account souring domestic audience sentiment.

130 Years Of Bad Blood! Why China Must Respect Japan’s Military Might As Tensions Soar Over Taiwan?

Sumit Ahlawat

The war rhetoric between China and Japan is once again reaching dangerous proportions. China reacted angrily after the new Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi’s comment that a hypothetical Chinese attack on Taiwan could trigger a military response from Tokyo.

Beijing responded by sending Coast Guard ships to the disputed Senkaku Islands and warning travelers and students about safety risks in Japan.

The uninhabited islands in the East China Sea are claimed by both countries and are known as Diaoyu in China and Senkaku in Japan. The islands are north of Japan’s westernmost islands and near Taiwan.

Chinese travellers are an important part of Japan’s tourism industry. In 2024, more than seven million Chinese nationals visited Japan, accounting for nearly one in five international tourists, according to Japan’s tourism bureau.

For many observers, trained in the Eurocentric view of history, the rising Sino-Japanese tensions could be a sideshow in the Indo-Pacific theatre, which is often described as a bipolar contest for influence between the US and China.

Working with Japan and Korea to Compete with China on AI

Scott W. Harold

china

As President Trump traveled to the Indo-Pacific in late October for his first summit with new Japanese Prime Minister Takaichi Sanae and the APEC Summit hosted by President Lee Jae-myung in South Korea, the U.S. signed agreements with both Japan and South Korea outlining plans for broadening cooperation aimed at outcompeting China on AI. What are the most promising areas for collaboration on AI with these countries, and what specific steps can Washington take with them? RAND examined these questions in a pair of recent reports, looking at what makes Japan and South Korea critical partners for the United States in seeking to shape a world safe for democracy by leveraging the power of AI.

The third pillar of the Trump administration’s AI Action Plan prioritizes exporting American AI to allies and partners, particularly in the Indo-Pacific, which the Pentagon has consistently identified as its “priority theater.” RAND found in examining the prospects for expanded AI cooperation between the United States, Japan, and South Korea, that the three sides share a common understanding of the threat to the region posed by authoritarian revisionists such as China, North Korea, and Russia. The U.S. and Japanese national security strategies, for example, prioritize supporting a free and open Indo-Pacific, while the Republic of Korea’s 2023 National Security Strategy referred to a ‘free, peaceful, and prosperous Indo-Pacific’ and the Lee Jae-myung administration’s initial policy moves have continued to prioritize the U.S. alliance, cooperation with Japan, and collaboration on (and investment in) artificial intelligence.

The Real Story Behind Trump’s F-35 Offer to Saudi Arabia

Seth Frantzman

The United States could move forward with a sale of F-35s to the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, President Donald Trump indicated on November 17. The comments came as Saudi Arabia’s Crown Prince, Mohammed bin Salman, was arriving in Washington for a meeting with the president.

The F-35s are only one part of a much larger series of deals and discussions that Riyadh is seeking in Washington.

Asked about the F-35s, Trump said, “I will say that we will be doing that. We’ll be selling F-35s,” according to reports. The F-35 is a symbol of being a close ally and partner of the United States. When it comes to Riyadh, this is important because Saudi Arabia has been a key US partner for around 80 years. However, many things have changed over the last decades.

My Favorite Marshal: The US’ Bad Bet on Pakistan

Mohammed Ayoob

There is a strong sense of déjà vu among Pakistan-watchers these days. The country is on the verge of a rerun of the 1958 military coup. Field Marshal Asim Munir, the second to hold such an exalted rank in Pakistan’s history, struts around the political and military stage with his political minions, including Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif.

The newly minted field marshal’s powers were expanded and consolidated recently by a constitutional amendment that extended his control over all branches of the armed forces as the chief of defense forces. While ostensibly meant to “ensure greater coordination and unified command” among the three services, in reality, this is a consolidation of his authority over the political system. The amendment also provides Field Marshal Munir with lifelong legal immunity for all acts of omission or commission.

Field Marshal Munir’s popularity had risen to new heights during and after the brief and inconclusive war with India in May. The servile media portrayed him as the “savior” of Pakistan in the face of Indian “aggression.” No one raised questions about the Pakistani army’s alleged complicity with the perpetrators of the terrorist attack in Pahalgam in April that led to the Indian retaliation next month.

The glorification of the army chief and the military establishment stems from the perception that the military is the only institution holding the country together in the face of the Baluchistan and Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa regional insurgencies, terrorist attacks attributed to the Tehreek-i-Taliban Pakistan (TTP), and a chaotic civilian parliament.

Why Hasn’t the EU Given up on Turkey?

Robert Ellis

There are no limits to the extent some people are prepared to go to hold on to power. This is more apparent in an autocratic system than in a democratic one. Russian president Vladimir Putin’s hold on power is determined by the outcome of his war on Ukraine, and his new nuclear-powered Burevestnik cruise missile and Poseidon drone are indicators.

In Turkey, the aging autocrat, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, has his back to the wall, and now he has announced “a new juncture” in the Kurdish peace process. To hardened observers of the Turkish scene, this is old wine in a new bottle.

Turkey’s Kurds first became a problem with the Sheikh Said rebellion in 1925. Said was the head of an influential religious order, and Mustafa Kemal’s secular reforms (the abolition of the Caliphate and the abrogation of Sharia law) reduced their power.

The Treaty of Sèvres in 1920 partitioned Turkey and the creation of an autonomous Kurdistan. Still, after the War of Independence, this was superseded by the Lausanne treaty in 1923, which defined the borders of modern Turkey. Said called for an independent Kurdistan and the restoration of the Caliphate, but this incipient Kurdish nationalism consolidated Kemalist reforms and Turkish nationalism.

Does Al Jazeera Collaborate With Hamas?

Toby Dershowitz

Al Jazeera’s leadership shake-up has been in the headlines. Will its new executives direct the Qatari state-funded media arm to cease its cozy relationship with Hamas? Allegations have been swirling that the royal family’s soft power news outlet is not merely reporting what Hamas says but is actively collaborating with the terrorist organization.

Al Jazeera sells its content to major wire services like AP and Reuters. Al Jazeera has resource-sharing agreements that allow outlets like CNN to access Al Jazeera’s footage and Al Jazeera to use CNN’s news feed. Al Jazeera also has arrangements with BBC, France 24, and The Guardian that enable them to use Al Jazeera’s video footage and reports. Other media outlets, including Deutsche Welle and Euronews, have direct syndication arrangements, allowing them to use Al Jazeera’s content without intermediaries.

Credible reports indicate that Al Jazeera’s ties to Hamas extend well beyond journalism. Evidence points to coordination between the Qatari network and Hamas terrorists, raising serious reputational and policy questions for Al Jazeera and for media or corporate partners that cooperate with it.

What Will It Take for Europe to Defend Itself?

Benjamin Giltner

At the end of last month, the Romanian defense ministry announced that roughly 700 US troops would be withdrawn from its borders. Though some American senators expressed alarm over this withdrawal, the number of troops is negligible in the balance of forces between NATO and Russia on the European continent. Nevertheless, even if the United States were to withdraw all its ground forces from Europe, European countries have sufficient capabilities to deter a Russian ground invasion.

And they should. Europe is rediscovering the reality of international politics that effective statecraft will require its own efforts to deter Russian aggression.

The question is, what should they do to deter Russia? Though the war in Ukraine has proven Russia’s weaknesses, history is littered with cases of defeated armies learning from their mistakes and reconstituting themselves to become more formidable fighting forces.

First and foremost, European nations must define their military objectives. These objectives should include deterring Russia from attacking NATO territory and minimizing escalation should Russia decide to do so.

Zelensky remains a creature of the corruption plaguing Ukraine

Ian Proud

The $100 million corruption scandal around Ukraine’s energy system that broke this past week is critical to ordinary Ukrainians for its timing. Russia has been bombarding the country’s energy infrastructure on a daily basis to deny ordinary citizens heat and electricity during the cold and dark winter months.

In November 2024, a separate scandal broke that $1.6 billion set aside to build protective bunkers around electricity sub-stations had not led to any being built.

With this in mind, many have responded that the highly publicized nature of this latest scandal, which resulted in the resignations of both the energy and justice ministers, offers visible proof that progress is being made in tackling corruption in Ukraine. The National Anti-Corruption Bureau (NABU) of Ukraine, which is often at the spearhead of such investigations, was first established by Presidential Decree in April 2015. That it continues to function is indeed a positive sign.

It's not possible, however, to claim that corruption has emerged as a specifically wartime phenomena. This energy scandal is hardly a one-off. In September 2021, with Zelensky having already been in power for two and a half years, the European Court of Auditors reported that state corruption and capture were still widespread in Ukraine. It pointed out that “tens of billions of Euros are lost annually as a result of corruption,” and that EU support delivered over 20 years had not delivered the desired results.

Can the American Right Find Its Way Back?

MICHAEL R. STRAIN

Under the influence of Donald Trump and his MAGA movement, the American right has become unrecognizable to those who remain committed to the values espoused by Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher. The question now is whether the Republican Party can still recover their brand of dignified conservatism.

WASHINGTON, DC – When I speak to college students about the problems with democratic socialism and populism, I often quote then-British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher’s warning: With these economic policies, “you eventually run out of other people’s money.” Since this often produces quizzical looks, I then follow up with a quote from Thatcher’s 1983 address to the Conservative Party conference: “There is no such thing as public money, there is only taxpayers’ money.”

Children among 26 killed in one of Russia's deadliest strikes on western Ukraine

Jonathan Beale,

At least 26 people have been killed including three children in a Russian missile and drone attack that hit two blocks of flats in the western city of Ternopil, Ukrainian officials say.

They say another 93 people were wounded, 18 of them children, in the strike early on Wednesday - one of the deadliest in the region since Moscow launched its full-scale invasion in February 2022.

Ukraine's air force later said Russian X-101 cruise missiles had hit the residential flats.

The neighbouring Lviv and Ivano-Frankivsk regions were also struck, and a drone attack on three districts of the north-eastern city of Kharkiv wounded more than 30 people. Photos posted online showed buildings and cars ablaze.

Ukraine's air force said it had shot down 442 of 476 drones and 41 of 48 missiles launched by Russia, including 10 missiles destroyed by F-16 and Mirage 2000 fighter jets supplied to Kyiv by its Western allies.

But in a reference to how stretched Ukraine's air defences currently are, the air force pleaded for "the uninterrupted and timely supply of aviation weapons from Western partners".

Ternopil, a city closer to the Polish border than the capital Kyiv, has rarely faced attacks since the full-scale invasion. Social media footage of this strike shows missiles shooting across the sky towards the city, though very little sign of air defences reacting from the ground.

Myanmar military raids online scam hub, arrests nearly 350 on Thai border

Myanmar’s military says it has raided an internet scam hub on the Thai border, arresting nearly 350 people, as part of a highly publicised crackdown against the booming black-market compounds.

The army on Wednesday blamed armed opposition groups for allowing scam centres to operate under their protection but said it had taken action after wresting back territorial control.

Recommended Storieslist of 3 itemslist 1 of 3US sanctions companies and individuals behind Southeast Asian scam centers

Myanmar’s military descended on the gambling and fraud hub Shwe Kokko on Tuesday morning, according to state-run The Global New Light of Myanmar.

“During the operation, 346 foreign nationals currently under scrutiny were arrested,” the daily reported. “Nearly 10,000 mobile phones used in online gambling operations were also seized.”

Department of War Executive Order should prioritize readiness against space stalkers

Brian G. Chow

The administration has yet to follow up on its 200th Executive Order, which called for enhanced readiness. This silence represents a profound missed opportunity. Amidst a severe, persistent partisan divide, focusing on genuine military readiness offers a pathway for non-partisan decisions. To ensure this initiative cost-effectively achieves its goal of preparing for war so as to keep peace—not just for the United States but the free world—the administration must channel the Executive Order’s mandate into tangible action, starting with what I consider to be the most urgent threat: readiness against space stalkers, or spacecraft that can approach and attack satellites in orbit.

Thus far, the administration’s public argument has been focused on a politically charged but secondary issue, namely that the order will restore the warrior ethos, maximize lethality, not tepid lethality and change what the administration called a “woke” DoD. While this rhetoric satisfies its political base, it risks hardening Democrats’ opposition to the entire initiative. If the administration does not redirect, the long-term fate of this critical national security initiative beyond 2028 may ultimately depend more on partisan politics and which party controls the White House than on the readiness priorities themselves.

By deliberately recalling President George Washington’s 1790 address —“To be prepared for war is one of the most effective means of preserving peace” — the order, in effect, delivers a clear, uncompromising mandate: Unmatched power does not automatically guarantee adequate readiness. But true military readiness doesn’t come from renaming government institutions. True readiness requires us to understand the nature and characteristics of specific threats and tailor our defensive and deterrent resources to meet those threats in a timely and effective manner.

A readiness-focused project, championed by both sides, is the perfect vehicle for this reframing. The immediate priority must now be to help the administration select its first readiness project. This project should demonstrate the initiative’s potential to cost-effectively produce timely and effective readiness against existing and future threats in all operational domains: land, sea, air, cyber and space.

Should Hitler's DNA have been studied – or just left alone?

Tiffany Wertheimer

Painstaking scientific testing by a team of international experts has been able to debunk a rumour on whether Hitler had Jewish ancestry (he didn't) and determine that he had a genetic disorder which affects the development of sexual organs - all from an old blood-stained swatch of fabric.

While clickbait headlines have focused on whether the Nazi dictator had a micropenis and only one testicle, more serious are the findings that his DNA showed "very high" scores - in the top 1% - for a predisposition to autism, schizophrenia and bipolar disorder.Does this mean he had these neurological conditions? Absolutely not, say the experts - it's not a diagnosis.

But nevertheless, concerns have been raised about stigmatisation and how ethical the research was, prompting the question - should it have been done at all? "I agonised over it," says Prof Turi King within the first few minutes of Saturday's Channel 4 documentary on the research, Hitler's DNA: Blueprint of a Dictator.The genetics expert told the BBC that when she was first approached to take part in the project several years ago, she was very aware of the potential implications on studying the DNA of someone like Adolf Hitler - "I'm not interested in sensationalising things".

Mysterious drones have been spotted at night at airports across Europe. How worried should we be?

Frank Gardnert

First comes the warning, that disembodied voice over the tannoy: "Your attention please. Air siren in the city. Please move to the shelter on the minus second floor." Then comes the mosquito-like whine of the incoming Russian drones, massing in their hundreds just above the clouds.

It's followed immediately by the rattle of anti-aircraft fire, the distant thud of explosions, then finally the ominous klaxon call of ambulance and fire sirens.

This is the grim reality of night time in Kyiv and other cities across Ukraine.

These are attack drones that explode on impact.

Drones are now an integral part of modern warfare, but they are not confined to the battlefield.

Across western Europe, far from Ukraine, unarmed drones have also been found buzzing around airports, military bases and power plants, all part of a suspected programme of "hybrid warfare" being waged by Russia, with some speculating they're arriving to test the resilience of certain Nato countries that are helping Ukraine.

In Europe, the Problem Is Deterrence, Not Drones

Ann Marie Dailey

Since multiple Russian drones crossed into Poland in September, European leaders have expedited the idea of a “drone wall” and rushed to discuss the need to invest in countering drones.

But when it comes to European defense, Russian attack drones are not the true problem. The problem is an erosion of the pillars of nuclear and conventional deterrence.

This erosion has myriad causes, but the impact is that Russia feels emboldened to test NATO's political will by, among other things, flying attack drones at or over a NATO nation. Over-investing in a “drone wall” would be a waste of precious resources that would be better spent on other defense priorities. It would not deter Russia, and perhaps most importantly, it wouldn't even defend against pressing vectors of drone-use violence that Europe is likely to face.

Europe and the United States should be working with Ukraine and investing in research and development to improve what are currently a host of inadequate options for countering uncrewed aerial systems. But instead of focusing on defending against drones from the east, Europe should invest in its ability to strike back at Russia and take steps to demonstrate a willingness to use these capabilities.

crown prince over Khashoggi killing

Bernd Debusmann Jrat

US President Donald Trump said Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman "knew nothing" about the 2018 killing of journalist Jamal Khashoggi, as he welcomed the kingdom's de facto ruler to the White House.

Trump's comments appeared to contradict a US intelligence assessment in 2021 which determined the crown prince had approved the operation that led to Khashoggi's death at the Saudi consulate in Istanbul in 2018.

The crown prince, who has denied any wrongdoing, said at the White House that Saudi Arabia "did all the right things" to investigate Khashoggi's death, which he called "painful".

It was his first US visit since the assassination, which sent shockwaves through the US-Saudi relationship.

In the Oval Office on Tuesday, Trump shot back at a reporter who asked a question about the killing.

"You're mentioning someone that was extremely controversial," the US president said.

"A lot of people didn't like that gentleman that you're talking about. Whether you like him or didn't like him, things happen."

"But he [the Crown Prince] knew nothing about it," Trump added. "You don't have to embarrass our guests."

The Oct. 7 Warning for the U.S. on China

Mike Gallagher

WSJ Opinion: Pete Hegseth and the GeneralsPlay video: WSJ Opinion: Pete Hegseth and the Generals

Review & Outlook: After summoning hundreds of U.S. Generals to Quantico, VA, the U.S. Defense Secretary announced ten directives focusing on combat readiness—but where are the weapons?

Hamas’s shock troops poured across Israel’s border two years ago, kidnapping, raping and killing civilian men, women and children. Israel’s bitter experience offers lessons America should learn before our own moment of reckoning.

The most important is that the hypothetical war can actually happen. Even if we’re intellectually prepared, there’s a risk that years of relative peace has lulled us into a false sense of security. The Israeli defense establishment never truly believed Hamas would launch a full-scale invasion. They viewed Gaza as a chronic but manageable problem—one for diplomats and intelligence officers, distant from the daily concerns of citizens. Israeli politicians and generals also spoke of open conflict with the Iran-led Islamist axis much like their American counterparts speak of China and a Taiwan crisis—the pacing threat and the most likely test, yes, but ultimately a question for tomorrow. Then tomorrow came.

The Logic of Trump’s Neutralization Strategy

Zineb Riboua

For half a century, American policy toward Israel remained stagnant. Successive administrations spoke of peace, but treated Israel’s strength as a diplomatic problem to be managed rather than a foundation for regional stability. The vocabulary of diplomacy shifted from one administration to another, but the substance remained unchanged. Washington pressed Israel to yield, comforted Arab leaders with gestures, and preserved a peace process that produced neither peace nor progress.

The modern framework of U.S. policy toward Israel began under President Jimmy Carter in 1978 with the Camp David Accords. The peace between Egypt and Israel was an extraordinary achievement; however, it also established a pattern that would define American diplomacy. From that moment, Washington began to view itself less as Israel’s strategic partner and more as a neutral intermediary, pressing Jerusalem to make concessions in pursuit of regional stability.

In fact, under President George H. W. Bush, this mindset became policy. In 1991, his administration withheld ten billion dollars in loan guarantees to pressure Israel over settlements. What started as a posture of neutrality gradually turned into a policy of pressure, with Washington using its influence not to deter Israel’s enemies but to restrain Israel itself.

Donald Trump Gave War a Chance—and It Worked

Aaron MacLean

It does not matter what happens next; President Donald Trump really does deserve the Nobel Peace Prize. His achievement will stand whether renewed hostilities break out in Gaza, or Benjamin Netanyahu joins Bono and Qatar’s Tamim bin Hamad Al Thani to sing about peace onstage in Khan Younis. Compelling the release of all living hostages held by Hamas in return for a ceasefire and tolerable concessions is as close as one gets to a miracle in the business of diplomacy. Trump, along with Steve Witkoff, Jared Kushner, Marco Rubio, and their teams, deserve the world’s admiration.

Barely a week ago, Israel appeared trapped. It had three options in Gaza, each of them unattractive. It could level what was left of the place, probably causing the deaths of many of the remaining hostages, and finally defeat Hamas on the battlefield in a conventional sense while signing up for further isolation and endless trouble in whatever came next. It could attempt to wash its hands of Gaza somehow, the least likely choice, inasmuch as the presence of the hostages would perpetually deny Israel the freedom to move on. A third path, perhaps the worst, seemed the most probable: an endless rope-a-dope in which Hamas would dribble out limited concessions and groups of hostages here and there as it played for time.

The AI Bubble’s Shaky Math

CARL BENEDIKT FREY

OXFORD – When OpenAI recently committed $1.4 trillion to securing future computing capacity, it was merely the latest indication of irrational exuberance in 2025. By some estimates, US GDP growth in the first half of this year came almost entirely from data centers, prompting a flood of commentary about when the bubble will burst and what it may leave behind. While the late 1990s dot-com party ended with a hangover for Wall Street, Main Street kept what mattered: the infrastructure. Productivity rose, and the fiber laid during the boom years still works today. US President Bill Clinton’s vow to build a “bridge to the 21st century” was one of those rare campaign promises that is actually fulfilled.

Today’s AI investments could well pay off like the internet did. For now, though, the gains look more muted, and the macro downsides larger, than in the case of the dot-com bubble. Consider the potential benefits. In the late 1990s, the internet’s payoff showed up while the bubble was still inflating: US labor productivity growth averaged about 2.8% from 1995 to 2004, roughly double the previous two decades’ pace, before fading in the mid-2000s. You could see the gains in the national accounts even as Pets.com was buying up its ill-fated Super Bowl ads.

This time, US labor productivity growth has picked up after two sluggish decades – reaching around 2.7% last year – but it’s too soon to say that AI is the reason. In fact, AI adoption is slipping, with a recent US Census Bureau survey showing lower use among large firms. If the recent uptick in productivity was mostly an AI story, it could be expected to fade as adoption ebbs – another reminder of how fleeting these waves can be. As visible as the 1990s information-technology boom was in real time, it petered out within a decade or so.

Gemini 3 Is Here—and Google Says It Will Make Search Smarter

Will Knight

Google has introduced Gemini 3, its smartest artificial intelligence model to date, with cutting-edge reasoning, multimedia, and coding skills. As talk of an AI bubble grows, the company is keen to stress that its latest release is more than just a clever model and chatbot—it’s a way of improving Google’s existing products, including its lucrative search business, starting today.

“We are the engine room of Google, and we're plugging in AI everywhere now,” Demis Hassabis, CEO of Google DeepMind, an AI-focused subsidiary of Google’s parent company, Alphabet, told WIRED in an interview ahead of the announcement.

Hassabis admits that the AI market appears inflated, with a number of unproven startups receiving multibillion-dollar valuations. Google and other AI firms are also investing billions in building out new data centers to train and run AI models, sparking fears of a potential crash.

Google boss says trillion-dollar AI investment boom has 'elements of irrationality'

Faisal Islam,

Every company would be affected if the AI bubble were to burst, the head of Google's parent firm Alphabet has told the BBC.Speaking exclusively to BBC News, Sundar Pichai said while the growth of artificial intelligence (AI) investment had been an "extraordinary moment", there was some "irrationality" in the current AI boom.It comes amid fears in Silicon Valley and beyond of a bubble as the value of AI tech companies has soared in recent months and companies spend big on the burgeoning industry.

Asked whether Google would be immune to the impact of the AI bubble bursting, Mr Pichai said the tech giant could weather that potential storm, but also issued a warning.I think no company is going to be immune, including us," he said.In a wide-ranging exclusive interview at Google's California headquarters, he also addressed energy needs, slowing down climate targets, UK investment, the accuracy of his AI models, and the effect of the AI revolution on jobs.

The interview comes as scrutiny on the state of the AI market has never been more intense. Alphabet shares have doubled in value in seven months to $3.5tn (£2.7tn) as markets have grown more confident in the search giant's ability to fend off the threat from ChatGPT owner OpenAI.

Collective Seapower: NATO’s New Maritime Strategy

Emma Salisbury

NATO has finally unveiled its new Alliance Maritime Strategy, refreshing a document that had not been publicly updated since 2011. While high-level strategy texts of this kind tend not to be riveting reads, the new strategy stands out in its sense of renewed urgency. It not only frames the maritime domain as a decisive front in our era of revived great-power competition but also centers maritime power as the backbone of NATO’s ability to “fight tonight” and “fight tomorrow.”

At its core, the strategy acknowledges that the oceans are the global commons of competition. Sea lanes, undersea cables, pipelines, and ports no longer serve merely as trade and communications arteries—they are strategic pressure points. NATO’s vision is to bind its maritime posture into a coherent whole, integrating naval forces, industrial bases, and emerging technologies into a system capable of deterrence, resilience, and warfighting at scale. It’s a maritime strategy built not for the expeditionary policing of 2011 but for high-end, sustained combat in defense of allied territory.

The strategy’s vision is crisp yet expansive—credible maritime power is indispensable to collective defense. This power is based on four pillars: readiness, advanced technology, the protection of sea lines of communication, and the ability to prevail in conflict. NATO’s navies must be able to surge and sustain operations at a moment’s notice, supported by ships and systems that are not only numerous but networked, fueled by emerging technologies like artificial intelligence, autonomy, and uncrewed systems. The strategy’s repeated emphasis that the alliance must be able to “prevail” signals a shift from deterrence as posture to deterrence through capability. It is a vision grounded in the realism of a more dangerous world—a world where Western maritime dominance is no longer assured but must be continually earned.

22 November 2025

India: The Red Fort Blast A Singular Shock

Ajit Kumar Singh

On November 10, 2025, at least 10 civilians were killed and another 32 injured when a slow-moving car exploded near the iconic Red Fort in Delhi at around 6:52 pm [IST]. Two days later, on November 12, the Government officially termed the suicide blast a “terror attack”.

In a press release, the Government stated, “The country has witnessed a heinous terror incident, perpetrated by anti-national forces, through a car explosion near the Red Fort on the evening of 10 November 2025. The explosion resulted in multiple fatalities, and caused injuries to several others… The Cabinet directs that the investigation into the incident be pursued with the utmost urgency and professionalism so that the perpetrators, their collaborators, and their sponsors are identified and brought to justice without delay.”

In a related incident on November 14, 2025, at around 11 pm [IST], a blast occurred at the Nowgam Police Station in Srinagar, Jammu and Kashmir (J&K), while authorities were extracting samples from a large cache of explosives confiscated from Faridabad, Haryana, in connection with an inter-State terrorist module suspected to be linked to the Delhi blast.

Why Pakistan’s New Chinese-Made Submarines Should Terrify India

Brandon J. Weichert

The first Hangor-class submarine was launched in China in April 2024. The second was launched in March of this year, with a third, PNS Mangro, floated out in August. The submarines have not been commissioned into the Pakistan Navy yet, but according to its leadership, the first batch is expected to enter service in 2026.

Naval News, a trade publication, assesses that the Hangor-class sub uses a Stirling-based air-independent propulsion (AIP) system, which lets it remain submerged longer without surfacing. Army Recognition claims that it is using Chinese CHG620 diesel engines. Earlier plans reportedly involved German engines, but this had to be changed as there were export restrictions imposed upon those German engines going to China.

Pakistan’s new Chinese-made subs have high-strength hull steel and modular construction. These boats are designed with low acoustic signatures to enhance stealth. Six 533mm torpedo tubes are on each Hangor-class. Naval Today believes that these submarines can launch anti-ship cruise missiles.

It is likely that Pakistani Babur-3 submarine-launched cruise missiles (SLCMs) are compatible with these submarines. The Babur-3 would give each Hangor-class a deep strike potential—enhancing the reach and capabilities of Pakistan’s Navy.

China’s Approach to AI Development and Governance

Ren Xiao

Artificial intelligence (AI) is a new technological frontier that has wide-ranging economic, political, and military implications that could lead to changes in the global balance of power. The People’s Republic of China has embraced AI and enthusiastically attempted to advance it as part of the country’s drive to become a self-strengthening scientific and technological power. As a result, China is in many areas at or near the forefront of AI development and application. However, as global AI governance becomes a higher priority in the international community, China, like others, is grappling with the question of how to govern AI and its advancement, both domestically and internationally.

China’s Embrace of AI

In May 2015, China released the Made in China 2025 plan, which provided a blueprint for the next decade to establish the country as an advanced manufacturing powerhouse. The plan identifies nine strategic tasks and key areas, including enhancing manufacturing innovation, promoting integration of information technology and industry, strengthening the country’s industrial base, and building quality and brand development. Almost all of these priorities are directly related to or impacted by the development of AI. Thus, AI has become the core technology indispensable for future intelligent manufacturing and China’s economic plans in this space. The Made in China 2025 plan, together with the subsequent “Robotics Industry Development Plan (2016–2020),” released in April 2016, and the “‘Internet Plus’ Artificial Intelligence Three-Year Action and Implementation Plan,” released in May 2016, demonstrated that China has elevated developing AI technology to a level of national strategy.

Russia and China in the Gray Zone

Ariane Tabatabai

A number of European nations, including Poland, Estonia, Denmark, and Norway, have experienced Russian manned and unmanned aircraft incursions into their airspaces. NATO allies responded with immediate defensive measures such as shooting down the Russian unmanned assets and have also reportedly started to revisit and refine their own approach and rules of engagement in the face of such incursions. They are doing so to telegraph their resolve and showcase their combined capabilities to Russia in the face of what Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk has characterized as “the closest we have been to open conflict since World War Two.”

Though Russia has a long history of gradually pushing the envelope to achieve its aims, its recent activities are similar to the recent Chinese playbook on incrementally increasing pressure on Taiwan. To be sure, these two campaigns have significant differences (for example, while Moscow’s most recent activities have thus far been limited to air incursions, Beijing’s have also spanned the maritime domain). Russia’s recent activities have also been more ad hoc, and limited in their breadth and depth, while China’s have been sustained for several years, and gradually grown in scope, intensity, occurrence, and complexity. More fundamentally, China’s campaign should be understood in the context of its wish to reunify with Taiwan, which is not the case with Russia’s activities against NATO. But they share a number of similarities and are occurring against the backdrop of increased cooperation between the two countries in their “gray-zone campaigns,” a term used by the intelligence community to describe the “deliberate use of coercive or subversive instruments of power by, or on behalf of, a state to achieve its political or security goals at the expense of others, in ways that exceed or exploit gaps in international norms but are intended to remain below the perceived threshold for direct armed conflict.” Such cooperation has implications for NATO in Europe as well as U.S. allies and partners in the Indo-Pacific region. This is especially true as Beijing seeks to attain readiness to militarily seize Taiwan by 2027 even as its preference likely remains to do so without the use of force.

China’s carrier capabilities – Fujian adds a new boost

Nick Childs

The commissioning on 5 November of China’s new aircraft carrier, the Fujian (Type-003), is a milestone for the People’s Liberation Army Navy (PLAN) and its maturing carrier force. But while the ship brings with it new capabilities, more work lies ahead for the PLAN in learning how to operate it. Lessons learned will undoubtedly feed into the further development of China’s carrier capability.

Catapulting capability

This third Chinese aircraft carrier represents a considerable step up in potential performance from the previous two vessels, owing to its greater size and electromagnetic catapults and arrester gear, as opposed to a ‘ski-jump’ and arrester wires. This will allow it to operate a wider range of aircraft and more of them, as well as enabling those aircraft to operate at longer range and with greater payload.

Shenyang J-15 Flanker K and J-35 combat aircraft, and the Xi’an KJ-600 airborne early warning and control (AEW&C) aircraft have been observed taking off from and landing on the carrier. But these basic trials are still a far cry from these aircraft operating as an effective and integrated air group. The greater potential for carrier operations provided by the combination of catapults and arrester gear also adds to operational complexity. Hence, the new ship’s extensive pre-commissioning trials programme.

Has China Weaponized Geosynchronous Orbit?

Brandon J. Weichert

China is committed to competing with the United States for dominance in space—notably in the strategic orbits around the Earth. Not only are these orbits required for successful satellite operations (which can be used to enhance a nation’s power projection on the Earth below), but they are key for controlling the entire Earth-Moon strategic system.

In this case, China operates the Tongxin Jishu Shiyan (TJS) constellation of satellites. This system comprises China’s mystery fleet in geostationary orbit (GEO), which is the highest orbit around the Earth.

What Is the TJS Satellite Constellation?

This network of Chinese satellites in GEO is giving the Americans real heartburn as they cannot confirm what, precisely, the Chinese are utilizing these satellites for.

Officially, Beijing describes their JTS constellation as merely being “communications satellites.” But, China has long ago mastered the art of “Military-Civil Fusion” (MCF). What can be used in civilian times as a communications satellite could easily be fashioned into a weapon of war during a period of conflict on Earth. What’s more, China has led the world in developing co-orbital satellites—satellite-killing satellites—under the guise of normal civilian satellite development.

Iran: Surrounded By Water With Nothing To Drink

A.J. Caschetta

“Water water, every where, Nor any drop to drink,” from Samuel Taylor Coleridge’s Rime of the Ancient Mariner, is a suitable motto for the Islamic Republic of Iran. With the Persian Gulf in the Southwest, the Sea of Oman in the South, and the Caspian Sea (an inland brackish water lake) in the North, Iran is surrounded by water, yet there is very little to drink. Iran’s experts, of course, blame Israel and the U.S, for manipulating the weather and causing a drought so severe that the Islamic Republic’s president says he may “have to evacuate Tehran.”

If only Khomeini, Khamenei, and the many Mullahs had spent their money on desalination plants instead of nuclear facilities, the people of Iran would not be facing death from dehydration.

According to a new report by the Middle East Forum, Iran is at the precipice of “water bankruptcy” stemming from “the regime’s profound failure to adapt in a region where other arid states have successfully implemented sustainable water management strategies.” Whereas its neighbors have long planned for the absence of rainy days, investing in the infrastructure to provide water for its subjects, the Islamic Republic has wasted all its resources foolishly pursuing nuclear weapons.

Looking Back At More Than 80 Years Of Saudi-US Economic Cooperation

Saudi Arabia and the US have seen steadily growing economic ties throughout a relationship spanning more than 80 years, beginning with oil and expanding to defense and technology in recent years.What began as a reliance on oil and gas has expanded to more diverse economic collaboration built on Vision 2030 initiatives.Economic cooperation between the two nations was solidified in the early 1930s when King Abdulaziz granted the right of oil exploration to the American company Standard Oil through a 66-year contract. This led to the formation of the Arabian-American Oil Company, better known as Aramco.Saudi Arabia and the US signed an interim diplomatic trade agreement in 1932, establishing an initial framework for trade, according to the Saudi Press Agency.

Aramco’s Dammam Well No. 7 struck commercial quantities of oil in 1938, ushering in a new age in the Kingdom’s development.In the early 1970s the two countries deepened their trading relationship. In 1972, the value of the Kingdom’s imported goods and materials from the US was $314 million, and the Kingdom’s exports were $194 million.Economic relations between the two countries were underlined in June 1974 through the formation of the US-Saudi Arabian Joint Commission on Economic Cooperation, which provided US expertise to develop infrastructure to advance Saudi Arabia’s non-oil economic development.

Rising Threats to Critical Infrastructure in the U.S

Dan Cronin

Modern conflict is evolving faster than our preparations. Today’s emerging battlefields are digital, silent, and without borders – where cyber warfare can be waged with a single keystroke from virtually anywhere. The next battle may not begin with explosions, but with a silent strike: a data breach, a blackout, or a system compromise. If we continue to train solely for yesterday’s wars, we risk being blindsided by tomorrow’s threats.

Leaders in AI and Defense understand the danger of uninvited access and surveillance by adversaries. The most potent weapons now travel through fiber-optic networks and cloud systems—advanced cyber tools engineered to disrupt and destabilize critical infrastructure, with devastating ripple effects on the public. Here’s a closer look at the new realities shaping modern infrastructure security.

AI: The New Front in Infrastructure Security

America’s July 2025 AI Action Plan casts AI as the next great strategic terrain—“a race to achieve global dominance in artificial intelligence,” where the nation that builds the largest AI ecosystem will set the technical, economic, and military rules of the road. To win, the White House has introduced a roadmap for industry, government, and allies built on three pillars: Innovation, Infrastructure, and International AI Diplomacy & Security.

In Washington, MBS Is Focused on Normalization—but Not With Israel

Aaron David Miller

In February 1945, an ailing President Franklin Roosevelt returning from the Yalta Conference went out of his way to meet with Abdul Aziz ibn Saud, founder of the modern kingdom of Saudi Arabia, at the Great Bitter Lake along the Suez Canal. FDR may have been the first U.S. president to be enamored by Saudi royalty, compelled by its oil reserves or taken with its purported leadership in the Arab world—but he wouldn’t be the last. Six of his successors would host Saudi kings in Washington. But perhaps no president’s relationship with a Saudi leader would be more consequential or worrisome than Donald Trump’s with Mohammed bin Salman, the forty-year-old crown prince who Trump will host in Washington this week for economic and security discussions, including a bilateral security pact and normalizing relations between Saudi Arabia and Israel.

Like his predecessors, Trump is besotted by Saudi Arabia. But he also is comfortable with its authoritarians, oblivious to its terrible human rights record, compelled by the financial opportunities there, and driven by the desire for an Israeli-Saudi deal that could offer him a chance at the Nobel Peace Prize. During the Washington meetings, Trump won’t press MBS on human rights nor expect too much on normalization. Trump should understand that for MBS, this visit isn’t about normalization with Israel; it’s about normalizing his reputation as a serious international leader and valued U.S. partner.

Subscribe to: Comments (Atom)