What’s the Point of the Quad

John Lee

Source Link

Pageantry versus principle. China delivers on the first and we offer the second. That is what senior politicians from the four Quad countries tell me.

The leaders of the US, Japan, India and Australia will meet in Delaware this weekend. In their own words, they will discuss how to advance an open and stable Free and Open Indo-Pacific in practical ways. For Quad countries, nations have equal rights regardless of differences in size or power. Competition and commerce will be fair and transparent. What’s not to like about these principles?

Earlier this month, China hosted 51 African heads of state for the Ninth Forum on China-Africa Co-operation in Beijing. Unlike the Quad meeting, Chinese summits with African, Southeast Asian and Pacific nations are elaborate and ostentatious affairs. The show is plainly designed to impress leaders of smaller nations and reinforce China’s place at the top of an emerging Sino-centric hierarchical order.

Surely fair principle will trump cynical pageantry. Who wants a hierarchical order where China reserves special rights and privileges for itself? As it turns out, quite a few ruling elites from developing economies willingly fall for Chinese pageantry and what lies behind it. Many of the world’s rich democracies might be hardening their views of China. But in much of the developing world, the reverse is occurring. Principle is not winning the day.

India rules out joining world’s largest trade deal, accuses China of ‘very opaque’ trade practices

Lee Ying Shan

Source Link

India’s commerce minister rejected the idea of joining the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership, the world’s largest trade deal, maintaining that it is not in the country’s interest to be part of a free trade agreement with China.

“India is not going to join the RCEP because neither did it reflect the guiding principles on which ASEAN was started, nor is it in the nation’s interest to do a free trade agreement with China,” India’s Minister of Commerce and Industry Piyush Goyal told CNBC’s Tanvir Gill in an interview.

The RCEP deal was signed in 2020 by 15 Asia-Pacific countries — which makes up out 30% of global GDP — and came into force in January 2022. The countries are the 10 members of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations, and five of their largest trading partners, China, South Korea, Japan, Australia and New Zealand.

Negotiations for the RCEP started in 2013 and initially included India, which some members viewed as a counterbalance to China. However, in 2019, India chose not to join RCEP, citing unresolved “core interest” issues. Back then, India did not expand on what some of those core unresolved interests were.

Goyal noted that at that time, India already had a free trade agreement with ASEAN, Japan and Korea, as well as a bilateral trade with New Zealand worth $300 million.

Indian Army in Lebanon watches closely as Israel-Hezbollah hostilities intensify

Shivani Sharma

Source Link

As the situation in the Middle East turns grim with the escalating conflict between Israel and Hezbollah, the Indian Army, stationed at the Israel-Lebanon border under the United Nations peacekeeping forces, is closely monitoring the situation.

Nearly 600 Indian soldiers are deployed along the Israel-Lebanon border as part of the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL) mission.

Their role in this volatile region is focused on maintaining peace and preventing escalations, not on direct involvement in the conflict. According to defence sources, the Indian Army is closely observing the situation on the ground where Indian troops are stationed.

The conflict between Israel and Hezbollah intensified after a series of explosions in pagers and walkie-talkies used by Hezbollah. The Iran-backed militant group launched missiles at Israel, prompting Tel Aviv to announce extensive strikes across Lebanon.

The Israeli Defence Forces (IDF) targeted several areas in Lebanon, hitting Hezbollah strongholds and ammunition storage sites. The IDF claimed to have struck more than 300 Hezbollah targets, disrupting the group's plans to fire thousands of rockets into Israel.

Afghanistan’s Neighbors Don’t Want Another Civil War – Analysis

James Durso

Source Link

Ahmad Massoud, the leader of the National Resistance Front of Afghanistan, recently declared he will defeat the Taliban “no matter the odds.”

For Massoud to mount a military threat to the Taliban, he would need the cooperation of the Central Asian republics, Iran or Pakistan (among others) to do the job. However, Afghanistan’s neighbors have no interest in another civil war in Afghanistan, as the violence and refugees would spill over their borders and cause economic dislocation and unrest all the way to Europe.

After two decades of U.S.-sponsored mayhem in the Hindu Kush, all the region wants is to recoup the missed opportunities of the “lost decades” of 2001-2021.

None of Afghanistan’s neighbors prefer the Taliban to any other group, and they object to the regime’s unrepresentative government and policies toward women. That said, their leaders must solve today’s problems despite their distaste for the Taliban’s retrograde ways.

The Restrained US Weapon Supply to Taiwan: A Troubling Signal Amid Escalating Tensions

Hao Nan

Source Link

The China-U.S. tensions over Taiwan are not new, but recent events have cast a harsher light on the fragility of the situation. Despite attempts at dialogue, like National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan’s visit to Beijing in late August, the Chinese government’s reaction to U.S. arms sales to Taiwan has been swift and severe.

On September 18, China’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs imposed sanctions on nine U.S. defense companies over a $228 million arms sale, announced by the U.S. State Department on September 16, that involved the return, repair, and reshipment of spare parts for Taiwan. The announcement came just before a U.S. Navy P-8A Poseidon transited the Taiwan Strait on September 17.

In response, China’s Ministry of Defense doubled down on September 20, warning both Taiwan and the United States that U.S.-made weapons would not safeguard Taiwan’s Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), but would instead directly lead to “self-destruction” – a stark reminder of the increasing hostility and rhetoric surrounding Taiwan’s defense.

Uninhabited inroads in Myanmar’s civil war

Morgan Michaels

Source Link

After suffering multiple defeats at the hands of opposition forces using low-cost, uninhabited aerial vehicles (UAVs), Myanmar’s army is now increasingly adopting a similar approach. It has been undertaking a buying spree of commercial and military UAVs, including from China and Russia.

While regime forces were initially slow to grasp the offensive value of UAVs and suffered numerous losses to UAV-equipped insurgents, they have now acquired large numbers of low-cost systems to supplement a far smaller number of larger UAVs. Operations with UAVs and counter-UAV tactics have also been integrated into the basic training curriculum provided to conscripts, according to sources close to the junta.

The opposition forces’ use of UAVs had jeopardised the military regime’s basic approach to counter-insurgency, which was largely based on the garrisoning of towns and occupation of remote areas where opposition forces operate. The regime, however, has been unable to deploy enough countermeasures to the thousands of outposts, bases, checkpoints, offices and the critical infrastructure now under threat.

The Long Game: Understanding US and China’s Theories of Victory

Ngo Di Lan

Source Link

The strategic competition between the United States and China has become the defining geopolitical challenge of the current era. As tensions escalate across multiple domains – from trade and technology to military posturing – it is crucial to understand the underlying logic driving each nation’s approach.

At the core of this competition lie two distinct “theories of victory”: overarching visions of how each power aims to prevail in the long term. These theories fundamentally shape critical policy decisions, diplomatic maneuvers, and resource allocations. By examining how the U.S. and China perceive the nature of their contest and plot their paths to success, we can better anticipate the trajectory of this competition and its profound implications for the future global order.

Strategic Competition and Theory of Victory

Throughout history, major powers have engaged in sustained rivalries that fall short of outright war. The Cold War between the United States and Soviet Union is a classic example, but others include the 19th century “Great Game” between Britain and Russia in Central Asia, and the naval arms race between Britain and Germany before World War I.

Re-Balancing The Strategy Of Tech Containment – Analysis

Mohammed Soliman

Source Link

America has a limited window of opportunity in its rivalry with China. To exploit this, expanded export controls can be used to slow Chinese innovation. Time is therefore a strategic pillar of technology containment. It enables the sequenced implementation of actions, such as imposing export controls and pressuring allies. In turn, Washington could prioritize rebuilding its domestic industries and forging a Washington-centric, tech-economic coalition that is more resilient than the efficiency-focused approach of the 1990s and 2000s. The United States initiated its tech containment by targeting China’s tech champions, including Huawei and ZTE, forcing allies to remove Huawei from 5G networks. Subsequently, it moved from targeting Chinese companies to targeting the broader tech landscape in China by expanding export controls to hinder China’s AI development and military modernization, while simultaneously offering subsidies like the CHIPS and Science Act—and applying geopolitical pressure on Korea and Taiwan—to rebuild domestic chip capacity.

By slowing China’s military modernization and bolstering Taiwan’s defenses, America aims to delay a potential Chinese invasion, making things more difficult for Beijing. Building a domestic industry will enhance resilience against disruptions in the East Asian supply chain. Ultimately, then, time is the essence of America’s tech containment strategy. While it may not completely prevent China from developing its domestic tech industries, slowing China’s progress and gaining time for the United States is a crucial objective. By implementing a comprehensive strategy that includes industrial policy reforms, coordinated export controls with allies and partners, military and nuclear modernization, and a focused effort to reshape the geopolitical, geoeconomic, and technological landscape in the Indo-Pacific, the United States can use this valuable time to slow down China’s innovation. This temporary setback could be crucial for building up Taiwan’s military as tensions and the likelihood of a Chinese invasion increase. This is not to say that this approach is without risk. Washington should be mindful that excessive reliance on these controls could diminish US leverage over time, harm American businesses with a global technological presence, and strain relations with key allies.

Will Hezbollah Choose to Keep Its Word—or Its Arsenal?

Hanin Ghaddar

Source Link

In less than a week, Israel has managed to significantly degrade Hezbollah’s military capabilities, communications systems, and chain of command. First, exploding pagers and walkie-talkies undermined the group’s ability to communicate. Then came the assassination of operations commander Ibrahim Aqil on Friday—along with 14 top Radwan Force commanders—which was a major setback for the Lebanese militant group’s top leadership and command unit, the Jihad Council. From the founding members of Hezbollah’s military structure, only Ali Karaki survives today.

This escalation comes after Israeli leaders decided to confront the continuous threat to the country’s north posed by Hezbollah. Last Monday, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s security cabinet decided to set a new war goal: the safe return of Israeli residents to the country’s north.

Crisis in Sudan: War, Famine, and a Failing Global Response

Mariel Ferragamo

Source Link

The conflict between the Sudanese army and a paramilitary group known as the Rapid Support Forces (RSF) has engulfed the nation. No end is in sight.

Fighting appears to be only escalating across all eighteen of Sudan’s states. Its capital, Khartoum, is almost entirely in ruins. The RSF seizure of the city of Wad Madani, a critical supply hub, has suffocated the little external aid civilians were receiving. Health-care systems have collapsed, attacks on women and girls are rampant, and famine is setting in. UN officials have warned that more than two million Sudanese are at risk of death by starvation this fall.

“The most likely trajectory [PDF] forward is towards famine, fighting that takes on increasingly ethnic and regional aspects, and the possibility of a failed state of 50 million people on the strategic eastern gateway to the Sahel,” Tom Perriello, the U.S. envoy to Sudan, told Congress in May. Sudan is plunging into the worst famine the world has seen in at least forty years.

Despite these warnings, many observers are calling Sudan the world’s “forgotten war.” As the humanitarian situation deteriorates, sorely needed aid is not arriving, signaling a historic failure in the global aid system.

“There is no time to lose,” emphasized Clementine Nkweta-Salami, the United Nations’ humanitarian coordinator based in Port Sudan.

Raising the Stakes, Israel Gambles That Hezbollah Will Back Down

Patrick Kingsley

Source Link

Israel’s deadly strikes and evacuation warnings in Lebanon on Monday showed its determination to break the resolve of Hezbollah and force the militia, which controls scores of villages across southern Lebanon, to stop its cross-border attacks on Israel.

The moves also reflected how far Israel is from achieving that goal — and how close both sides are to an all-out war.

Israeli officials had hoped that by scaling up their attacks over the past week — striking Hezbollah’s communications tools, and killing several key commanders as well as Lebanese civilians — they would unnerve the group and persuade it to withdraw from the Israel-Lebanon border. The officials believed that if they increased the cost of Hezbollah’s campaign, it would be easier for foreign diplomats, like Amos Hochstein, a senior United States envoy, to get the group to stand down.

For now, the opposite has happened. Despite days of escalatory attacks from Israel, Hezbollah has pledged not to buckle under the pressure.

Israel and Hezbollah urged to step back as UN warns of 'catastrophe'

Orla Guerin & Henri Astier

Source Link

Israel and Hezbollah both threatened to increase their cross-border attacks on Sunday, despite international appeals for them to step back from all-out war.

Israel’s military said about 150 rockets, missiles and other projectiles were fired at its territory overnight on Saturday and early on Sunday – mostly from within Lebanon.

Some reached further than previous strikes, sending thousands of Israelis to bomb shelters and damaging homes near the city of Haifa.

Israel launched its own strikes on targets in southern Lebanon, which it said destroyed thousands of Hezbollah's rocket launchers.

On Sunday, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said Israel would take "whatever action is necessary to restore security" and return people safely to their homes along the Israel-Lebanon border.

He said Israel had dealt "a series of blows on Hezbollah that it could have never imagined". But the group's deputy leader Naim Qassem declared: “Threats will not stop us... We are ready to face all military possibilities".

Israel Launches Intense Airstrikes on Hezbollah, Killing Hundreds in Lebanon

Patrick Kingsley, Aaron Boxerman and Ronen Bergman

Source Link

Israeli airstrikes against Hezbollah in Lebanon killed hundreds of people and injured more than 1,000 others on Monday, Lebanon’s health ministry said, in the deadliest day of Israeli attacks there since at least 2006, when Israel last fought a war with the Iranian-backed militant group.

The Israeli military said in a statement after midnight, early on Tuesday, that its Air Force had struck about 1,600 Hezbollah targets in Lebanon on Monday and was continuing to attack.

The main roads to Beirut, Lebanon’s capital, were clogged with people on Monday fleeing to what they hoped would be the safety of the metropolis, witnesses said.

The pace and intensity of the airstrikes on Monday outstripped that of the devastating 2006 war, when more than 1,000 Lebanese were killed over an entire month. The health ministry, which compiles casualties reported by hospitals, said at least 492 people had been killed on Monday and about 1,640 were wounded. Officials did not indicate how many of the dead were Hezbollah fighters but said that dozens of women and children were among the casualties. The casualty numbers could not be independently confirmed.

Hizbullah on the back foot in spiralling conflict with Israel

Emile Hokayem

Source Link

Over the past few days, the conflict between Israel and Lebanese Hizbullah has grown considerably in scale and intensity. While Israel is still debating the merits of a ground campaign, its decision to step up its air attacks against the Lebanese militant organisation has opened a new phase in what can now be called a war.

Hizbullah joined the fight against Israel out of solidarity with Hamas after the latter’s large-scale 7 October 2023 attacks against Israel. Hizbullah remained unwilling to risk an all-out war, however, calibrating its military response – by primarily firing rockets at Israeli military facilities in limited quantity – to an explicit goal of forcing a ceasefire in Gaza before agreeing to one in Lebanon. This, Hizbullah hoped, would allow it to claim a victory and to present itself as the chief defender of the Palestinians.

Things have not gone Hizbullah’s way. Driven by the fear of a repeat of the 7 October attacks on its northern border and intent on returning Israeli civilians driven out of their homes, Israel has outmatched Hizbullah’s firepower even as it first focused its efforts on Gaza. It has gradually intensified an attritional air campaign to degrade Hizbullah’s rocket and missile arsenal and debilitate its command-and-control. Instead of the controlled and regulated escalation Hizbullah leaders counted on, Israel has made full use of its intelligence and air dominance. Between October and August, Israel mounted four times as many attacks on Lebanon as Hizbullah did on Israel.

Everything short of war: Hizbollah’s strategy lies in ruins

John Raine

Source Link

Israel has shifted gear in Lebanon. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s statement that making the north of Israel safe for Israelis to return is now his nation’s war aim was followed by a wave of exploding Hizbollah communication devices targeted at commanders and members in Lebanon. While Hizbollah and Lebanon were reeling, Israel moved two IDF Divisions to its north and intensified bombardments of targets into southern Lebanon. Its actions as much as its statements have confirmed that it is entering a new phase of its war with Hizbollah.

All this may or may not be a precursor to all-out war, in which the IDF enters Lebanon and seeks to inflict permanent, debilitating damage on Hizbollah, not only in southern Lebanon, but in the Beqaa valley and Beirut. Whatever shape the next phase takes it is now clear that Israel is rendering obsolete the paradigm of violent co-existence within which it has fought Hizbollah for decades.

That is a problem for the Hizbollah leadership, which has relied on being able to fight a limited war in which they exercised control over the levels of violence through careful calibration of their operations. They may no longer have that lever, and they and their patrons, Iran, may now need a new strategy to ensure their own survival. What are their options?

Global Diplomatic Intervention Key To Stopping Israel-Hezbollah Violence – OpEd

Simon Hutagalung

Source Link

The September 2024 escalation between Israel and Hezbollah underscores the precarious volatility of the Middle East and highlights the urgent necessity for international intervention.

The conflict intensified on 17 and 18 September, when thousands of communication devices—specifically pagers and walkie-talkies—acquired by Hezbollah detonated across Lebanon and Syria, resulting in 42 fatalities and over 3,500 injuries, affecting both civilians and Hezbollah personnel. These devices, procured by Hezbollah, had been rigged with explosives by Israeli intelligence as part of a covert operation involving Mossad and the Israel Defence Forces (IDF). This incident represents Hezbollah’s most significant security breach since hostilities escalated in October 2023, marking a new phase in the protracted conflict.

In the aftermath of the explosions, Hezbollah retaliated with rocket attacks directed at Israeli cities, including Nazareth and Kiryat Bialik, resulting in injuries to numerous civilians. In response, Israel escalated its airstrikes against Hezbollah targets within Lebanon. These developments have exacerbated the conflict and further aggravated Lebanon’s humanitarian crisis, overwhelming hospitals and contributing to substantial civilian casualties. Growing international concern has emerged as the likelihood of a broader regional conflict becomes increasingly apparent.

The Brilliance Of ‘Operation Grim Beeper’ – Analysis

Michael Doran

Source Link

This is one of the most astonishing intelligence operations in history. It is a reworking of the story of the Trojan Horse for the digital age, and it deserves to become nearly as legendary as its iconic predecessor. If we are not utterly astounded, it is because we have seen too many James Bond and Black Mirror movies for our own good. In real life, operations like this just don’t happen. It is at least four operations in one.

First, the Israelis thoroughly mapped Hezbollah’s supply chain.

Second, they invented a special explosive charge small enough to be inserted inside a handheld device, sophisticated enough to be remotely activated, big enough to do real harm, and yet not so prominent, physically or electronically, to call attention to itself.

Third, the Israelis turned themselves into a big enough link in Hezbollah’s procurement network to take physical control of the devices and rig them.

Fourth, they activated the charges simultaneously and across a very wide geographic area.

If any one of these sub-operations had been botched, the operation as a whole would have fizzled. Who else in the world could pull off such an imaginative, technically sophisticated, and audacious plot?

Israel, Hezbollah Trade Hundreds Of Missile Strikes

Source Link

Hezbollah militants in Lebanon and Israeli forces traded hundreds of missile strikes on Sunday as their conflict along the border between the two counties threatened to erupt into an all-out war.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu vowed to do “whatever it takes” to restore safety in the country’s north after Hezbollah retaliated to an Israeli attack that killed Hezbollah military leaders in Beirut on Friday and the militants blamed Israel for remotely detonating explosives in pagers and walkie-talkies inside Lebanon, killing at least 32 and injuring thousands.

Netanyahu said Israel in recent days had “dealt Hezbollah a series of blows they never imagined,” calling it a “message.” He spoke after Hezbollah launched dozens of missiles toward the Ramat David air base in northern Israel, near Haifa, early Sunday. The militant group said it was responding to the Israeli offensive this past week.

Hezbollah deputy secretary-general Naim Qassem said Hezbollah had started a new phase of its fight against Israel, which he described as an “open-ended battle of reckoning.” He spoke at a funeral for a top commander killed in the Israeli strike on Beirut’s southern suburbs on Friday.

White House national security spokesman John Kirby said on ABC News’ “This Week” show that Israel and Hezbollah must restrain themselves to keep the conflict from escalating into an all-out war.

After Centuries, Ukraine Cuts Religious Ties With Russia

Alexey Kovalev

Source Link

On Aug. 24, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky signed a new law that aims to deny Russia one of its major avenues of influence. It explicitly bans the Russian Orthodox Church, which has long been entangled with the Russian security state, in Ukraine. But in a more contentious move, the law also bans religious entities “affiliated” with Moscow. This will mainly affect parishes of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church (UOC), the nominally independent Ukrainian branch of the Russian Orthodox Church that, despite various name and governance changes, is still formally subservient to the patriarch in Moscow. The UOC’s parishes and priests could be deemed insufficiently disentangled from Moscow by an expert commission that will be appointed by the government to implement the new law.

Determining the degree of any such affiliation will surely be a messy business—in line with the messy history of Orthodoxy in Ukraine since the Russian conquest that began in the 17th century. Until 2019, there were three separate Orthodox church organizations in Ukraine, which had emerged from a long series of repressions, schisms, and refoundings: the Moscow-aligned UOC; the Ukrainian Autocephalous Orthodox Church, founded and dissolved three times between 1921 and 2019; and a new Orthodox Church of Ukraine directly subordinate to the patriarch of Constantinople, established in 1992 after Ukraine restored its independence. It’s all rather ironic considering that what later became Russian Orthodoxy first emerged in 10th-century Kyiv, when Moscow was nothing but a swamp and a state named Russia still centuries away.

Wake Up Sleeping Europe

Kayvan Hazemi-Jebelli

Source Link

European Commission President Ursula Von der Leyen designated a slate of new Commissioners and delivered each a specific Mission Letter. The letters reveal Von der Leyen’s political will — Brussels is waking up.

Out is a crusade to regulate. In is the need to increase European competitiveness. Former Italian Prime Minister and European Central Bank president Mario Draghi’s long-awaited report on European Competitiveness provided the needed wake-up call. It’s an indictment of the past two decades of European industrial policy, which has left Europe trailing both the US and China in growth and innovation. Europe finds itself plagued by regulatory fragmentation, stagnant productivity, and lagging tech investment.

The Draghi Report offers clear solutions. It calls for unifying the fragmented continental capital markets and cutting administrative friction. A one-stop shop should be created for corporate compliance, business creation, and investment. Europe needs to end its obsession with measures guarding against “potential yet undetermined risks.” Instead, innovation must be prioritized.

President Von der Leyen’s mission letters to her new designated commissioners show that Brussels accepts the dire diagnosis, and is ready to take the medicine.

Mark Robinson’s Top Aides Resign After His Reported Online Remarks: Sept. 22 Campaign News

Maggie Astor and Neil Vigdor

Source Link

Senior campaign aides to Lt. Gov. Mark Robinson of North Carolina, the Republican nominee for governor, stepped down on Sunday, three days after CNN reported that he had made a series of disturbing comments on an online pornography site.

The resignations, described by Mr. Robinson’s top campaign consultant, came after an explosive CNN report that Mr. Robinson had called himself a “black NAZI” and defended slavery years ago on a pornographic forum. Mr. Robinson, a fiery acolyte of former President Donald J. Trump, has denied making the remarks and insisted that he would stay in the race. But Mr. Robinson was conspicuously absent during a rally Mr. Trump held Saturday in Wilmington, N.C., and some of Mr. Trump’s supporters there said Mr. Robinson’s candidacy no longer seemed viable.

Josh Stein, the attorney general of North Carolina and Democratic nominee for governor, told CNN that Mr. Robinson was “absolutely unfit” to lead the state.

The shake-up in the Robinson campaign came as hundreds of current and former national security officials, including retired members of the military, endorsed Vice President Kamala Harris, the latest example of defense and diplomatic officials from both parties pledging her their support.

‘We’re not going fast enough’: Sherri Goodman on climate change as security threat

Jessica McKenzie

Source Link

One of Goodman’s first responsibilities was overseeing the nation’s nuclear weapons plants at a particularly fraught moment. Within a year of joining the Armed Services Committee, the New York Times was running front-page stories about safety lapses at nuclear weapons plants on an almost weekly basis. Goodman’s work was thrust into the Congressional hot seat. She was tasked with drafting legislation for a new oversight mechanism, which eventually became (after a legislative wrestling match with the Governmental Affairs Committee) the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board.

In 1993, Goodman was appointed the first-ever deputy undersecretary of defense (environmental security). She oversaw the Defense Department’s environmental programs, including the projects to clean up pollution at the roughly 100 military bases on the list of toxic Superfund sites. Many of the stories from this period of her career are about fighting tooth and nail for barely adequate funding from defense officials who would rather spend dollars on more equipment or weapons than on cleaning up their messes—even if those messes posed environmental health threats to American citizens. “There always seemed to be a faction who saw environmental stewardship and military readiness as opposing forces, instead of two sides of the same coin,” Goodman writes.

Ukraine bans Telegram on state and military devices

Daryna Antoniuk

Source Link

Ukraine has banned the Telegram messaging app on official devices used by state and security officials, military personnel and employees of critical infrastructure facilities. The decision came amid concerns that the Russia-founded app poses a threat to Ukraine’s national security.

According to Kyrylo Budanov, head of Ukraine’s defense intelligence, officials assessed that Russian special services could have access to the personal data of Telegram users, as well as their correspondence and deleted messages.

"I have always stood up and continue to stand up for freedom of speech, but the issue of Telegram is not a matter of freedom of speech; it is a matter of national security," Budanov said during a meeting of Ukraine’s security officials on Friday.

The new Telegram restrictions are limited to official devices used by individuals employed in state, defense or other critical sectors. The ban doesn’t apply to those who use the messenger as part of their official duties, according to Ukraine’s National Security and Defense Council (NSDC), which did not provide further details.

In a statement on Friday, the NSDC said that Telegram is “actively used by the enemy” to launch cyberattacks, spread phishing messages and malicious software, identify users’ geolocation, and gather information that helps the Russian military target Ukraine’s facilities with drones and missiles.

How To Help Ukraine Succeed In Its Kursk Offensive – Analysis

Luke Coffey and Can Kasapoğlu

Source Link

Russia’s large-scale invasion of Ukraine will soon enter its third winter, and there is no end in sight. A war that Russian military planners had hoped would last for only a few days has become a quagmire that has cost Russia hundreds of thousands of soldiers, thousands of pieces of heavy armor, hundreds of aircraft, and approximately one-third of its Black Sea Fleet. There are only two possible explanations for this failure: either Russia’s intelligence preparation of the battlefield (IPB) was grossly inaccurate; or the Kremlin’s generals caved under political pressure from President Vladimir Putin and invaded Ukraine with hardly any real military assessment.

This summer, the war took another unexpected twist. For the first time in more than 80 years, an outside power has invaded and controlled Russian territory. On August 6, thousands of Ukrainian troops and hundreds of armored vehicles began a surprise raid into Russia’s Kursk Oblast (see map 1). Reports indicate that Ukraine has captured more than 100 settlements and now controls substantial Russian territory. At the time of this publication, Russian forces have started counteroffensive operations. But open-source intelligence suggests that the Ukrainian military has the manpower, engineering capabilities, and logistics support to stabilize the front.

Georgian Legion Commander Mamuka Mamulashvili, whose forces are currently fighting in Ukraine, once said that “the fight for Ukraine will end on the territory of Russia.” The long-term battlefield impact of Ukraine’s military operation in Kursk remains to be seen. But if the operation is successful, it could dramatically change the direction of the war.

Ukraine: the West’s clumsy missile diplomacy

Nigel Gould-Davies

Source Link

In recent weeks the United States and United Kingdom signalled, very publicly, that they would lift restrictions on Ukraine’s use of Western precision missiles. Doing so would allow Kyiv to strike targets inside Russia. But no change of policy followed UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer’s 13 September visit to the White House to discuss this issue. This clumsy episode offers two lessons in how the West should, and should not, use diplomacy to serve its strategy.

The first lesson is that public indecision cedes the initiative. Russian President Vladimir Putin has been able to both prepare for, and try to prevent, a decision. Militarily, he has protected assets by moving them beyond the range of Western missiles. Politically, he is threatening severe escalation if the West goes ahead. Putin has every incentive to issue such threats. If his bluff is called, this only adds to a long list of empty threats he has made since Russia's February 2022 invasion. But if it succeeds – as it seems, for now, to have done – it shows to Russia and the world that the West’s fear of war can be manipulated to impose restraint.

Some will say this begs the question: is Putin bluffing, or will he really consider Russia to be at war with the West if Ukraine is allowed to use Western weapons as it wishes? This fear should be addressed, not dismissed. But it should not be exaggerated. For there are strong reasons to believe that Putin’s threat is not credible.