Drones are the next chapter in US-India’s defense partnership

LAUREN C. WILLIAMS

Source Link

The U.S. and India are launching a new alliance for autonomous systems, which builds on bipartisan groundwork laid by previous administrations and could be a stabilizing force for the democracies’ future tech exchanges.

Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi joined President Donald Trump in Washington on Feb. 13 to discuss tariffs, technology, and energy and defense initiatives.

The new Autonomous Systems Industry Alliance builds on existing bilateral defense agreements and framework between India and the U.S., with the goal of increasing production of AI-driven autonomous systems in the Indo-Pacific region, according to a joint India-U.S. statement.

“America plays an important role in India's defense preparedness. As strategic and trusted partners, we are moving forward actively towards joint development, joint production, and transfer of technology. In the times to come as well, new technologies and equipment will enhance our capacities,” Modi said during a joint press conference at the White House during his most recent visit.

The USAID Suspension: A Critical Blow To Bangladesh? – OpEd

Anik Dey

Source Link

The recent suspension of USAID funding globally has shocked the world. As a recipient, Bangladesh has experienced shockwaves in the country’s development sector.

This move, initiated by an executive order from U.S. President Donald Trump, not only affects ongoing projects but also poses significant challenges for the future of humanitarian and development initiatives in Bangladesh. As a major recipient of U.S. foreign assistance, ranking as the 20th largest globally with $550 million received in 2023, this sudden halt is particularly concerning for the country’s financial and social development. It has already faced a shock as many USAID contractors including NGOs and for-profit consultancy firms have left with no option but to lay off until the review process is completed.

Immediate Consequences on NGOs and Development Sector

The immediate impact on both the NGO sector and broader development assistance efforts is stark. Over 100 projects valued at approximately $550 million were suspended immediately following Trump’s executive order; upon receiving instructions from the local USAID office. This abrupt cessation has led to job losses among employees working on these projects, with many NGOs and consultancy firms forced to terminate contracts with employees who were on probationary periods without pay.

Getting Ready For Tomorrow’s Myanmar – Analysis

Nicholas Farrelly

Source Link

Myanmar’s top generals have had another bad year. Under relentless attack, their subordinates have surrendered regional military command headquarters, draconian conscription regulations were introduced to bolster the dwindling rank-and-file, and in the north, east and west, rebel armies are strangling access to valuable resources.

Old certainties on the battlefields have been overturned by the proliferation of armed groups, including nimble guerrilla squads in central Myanmar and the widespread use, by all sides, of new combat technologies, including drones.

The economy, under these conditions, is spluttering — with the national currency, the kyat, now worth only a quarter of its pre-COVID-19 value.

Regime officials have imposed price controls on essentials like rice, cooking oil, eggs, fish and meat. Even middle-class families struggle to survive, and flows of desperate migrants are continuing to flee to Thailand and Malaysia.

The junta is also clamping down in the digital sphere, limiting access to information and networks through the Internet. The top generals’ devastating misjudgement of the public mood in early 2021 means monitoring and coercing the population is a bigger job than ever.

Threat Perception in International Relations: The Neglected Dimension of Leaders’ On-Going Experience

Eitan Oren

Source Link

For a week after a massive earthquake hit northeastern Japan on March 11, 2011, the Japanese Prime Minister Kan Naoto slept in his office. As he was trying to close his eyes, images of the devastating tsunami and the escalating nuclear accident raced through his mind. Over the next days, as nuclear meltdown fears mounted and the potential for mass casualties loomed, Kan began to contemplate evacuating the entire Tokyo metropolitan area including the Imperial Palace and state institutions. Despite the palpable sense of danger, or perhaps because of it, he kept this apocalyptic scenario for himself. “This situation was so grave I felt I had to use the utmost discretion when putting it into words,” he wrote in his memoir “My Nuclear Nightmare: Leading Japan through the Fukushima Disaster to a Nuclear-Free Future” (2017).

Kan’s recollections of the aftermath of the triple disasters contain a few visceral descriptions of the dangers he felt during those dramatic days. And like other leaders who faced grave danger before, his subjective account of what it felt like to experience danger is helpful in gaining a crucial perspective on leaders, threat perception, and international relations. Over the past years, I examined many such ‘danger-descriptions’ given by leaders embedded in different cultures and contexts.

Strategic Imperatives in the U.S.-China Technology Race: Power, Hardware, and Engineering Expertise

Ismael Arciniegas Rueda

Source Link

The escalating technology competition between the United States and China is reshaping global dynamics. As artificial intelligence (AI) emerges as a critical frontier of this competition, the U.S. must strategically enhance its infrastructure to maintain technological leadership. Three interconnected policy areas—power grid enhancement, hardware innovation, and infrastructure expertise—are key components of a comprehensive plan to secure strategic advantage for the United States.

Revitalizing the U.S. power grid is critical to unlocking sustainable support for energy-intensive technologies. To do this, the U.S. will need to improve its access to needed hardware and develop the kind of infrastructure expertise China has been amassing in recent years.

The U.S. power grid is old, with at least 70% of transmission lines over 25 years old, and in need of large investments to maintain reliability standards. The grid is currently operating at capacity, with the demands of frontier technologies like AI exacerbating congestion issues. Reports indicate that grid congestion is already impeding technological advancement and the future development and adoption of AI could significantly increase energy needs, despite gains in energy consumption efficiency.

Power grid revitalization rests on sourcing key hardware domestically. Developing local manufacturing options hinges on a number of factors including raw material availability, capital mobilization for increased manufacturing and a dynamic local value chain, to name a few. There are already concerns about the sourcing of critical elements, such as power grid transformers.

China Advances To Second Place In Global Soft Power Ranking – OpEd

Lim Teck Ghee

Source Link

China has overtaken the UK to secure 2nd place globally, advancing one position from the previous year … in the Global Soft Power Index 2025.

The latest report of the Global Soft Power Index for 2025 by influential brand valuation consultancy, Brand Finance, highlights the remarkable progress of China in its index ranking the extent of power and influence in world politics and international relations wielded by countries of the world. It now sits at second place behind the US which, although ranking first, has seen its soft power standing undermined by global concerns of its political stability, reputation and governance.

The Global Soft Power Index report is based primarily on key indicators in economics and business. It also measures attributes related to culture and heritage, media and communication, education and science and sustainability. These together are increasingly seen as the other more influential and effective side of the power coin as compared with the flip side of hard power associated with military power and intervention, coercive diplomacy and economic sanction.

DeepSeek Reflects Both the Success and Failure of US Tech Containment Against China

Zhipei Chi

Source Link

In recent years, the United States has significantly expanded its use of export controls to contain China’s rise and maintain its own technological dominance. At the center of this tech containment are restrictions on the export of advanced semiconductors, which is explicitly aimed at “maintaining as large of a lead as possible” for the U.S. over China in artificial intelligence (AI). The Biden administration launched several rounds of comprehensive controls over China’s access to advanced AI chips, manufacturing equipment, software, and talent. The underlying rationale is straightforward: by denying access to advanced U.S. chips and the hardware and software China would need to develop its own, the United States can “choke off China’s access to the future of AI.”

This strategy initially appeared effective, with OpenAI and other leading U.S. companies maintaining a comfortable edge over their Chinese counterparts. Then came DeepSeek and its latest V3 and R1 models. They appear to have closed the performance gap with leading U.S. models, challenging the idea of a U.S. monopoly over advanced AI models. DeepSeek has thus sparked intense debate about the tech containment policy’s effectiveness. While AI leaders such as Dario Amodei and Miles Brundage quickly argued that DeepSeek’s success did not represent a failure of export controls but rather evidence that restrictions should be strengthened, the development has raised serious questions about the long-term viability of such policies.

China’s AI Breakthrough Signals a New Era of Tech Innovation

Grace Shao

Source Link

Amid discussions of multipolarity at the Munich Security Conference and calls for collaboration in artificial intelligence (AI) safety by Chinese leaders at the Paris AI Summit, tech firms and investors in China saw a volatile yet promising week in AI innovation. Both domestically, with Xi’s symposium with China’s top tech leaders, and internationally, China’s most senior leadership is taking a stance that they embrace AI and tech development and are open to global collaboration.

Chinese A share and ADRs responded with a rally this past week, largely driven by the confidence seen at these events and the news of governmental support for AI and big tech. This was coupled with strong signals from Chinese leadership encouraging entrepreneurship and technological advancement.

At the Munich Security Conference, Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi invoked a metaphor from Jin Yong’s martial arts novel “The Heaven Sword and Dragon Sabre”: “Let the strong do as they will; we remain as unperturbed as the gentle breeze caresses the hills. Let the fears act as they may; we maintain our poise as the bright moon illuminates the river.”

China Orders Military Changes To Prepare for 'Engaging in Warfare'

Mandy Taheri

Source Link

Chinese President Xi Jinping has approved military reforms aimed at boosting combat readiness and preparing the armed forces for "engaging in warfare," set to take effect this spring, according to the Chinese government's website.

A U.S. Department of State spokesperson told Newsweek that "we expect cross-Strait differences to be resolved by peaceful means."

Why It Matters

Tensions between the United States and China remain high over issues ranging from trade tariffs to military activity in the South China Sea, particularly with a focus on Taiwan.

Beijing claims Taiwan as its own territory—a claim the self-governing island rejects. Although Washington does not maintain formal diplomatic relations with Taipei, the U.S. remains Taiwan's largest supplier of foreign arms.

Xi has said that "reunification" with Taiwan is a national goal and has warned it may require the use of force.

What To Know

Xi, who serves as chairman of the Central Military Commission overseeing China's military, signed orders on regulations governing "the military's interior order, code of conduct and military formation" on Friday, the government said.

China’s Growing Role in Central Asia

Akanksha Meena

Source Link

In response to its recent retaliatory tariffs on US energy imports, a delegation of major Chinese energy firms visited Kazakhstan in February 2025 to explore new trade opportunities. It was led by the China Council for the Promotion of International Trade (CCPIT), which focused on diversifying supply chains and reducing dependence on western markets. The visit highlights Beijing’s commitment to deepening economic ties in Central Asia through trade, infrastructure investment, and energy cooperation amidst the escalating tensions between China and the West. Traditionally, Russia exerted a dominant influence in Central Asian countries due to its Soviet-era legacy and security ties. However, China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) and expanding economic partnerships with Central Asian nations have established Beijing as a key player in the region. As US presence has diminished, and Russia remains preoccupied with its conflict in Ukraine, China has leveraged economic partnerships, infrastructure projects, and strategic diplomacy.

A World Reordered

Nadia Schadlow

Source Link

Recently, I found myself going through some materials about President Richard Nixon—books and copies of old speeches. I reached for one of his post-presidency books, 1999: Victory Without War, and a picture slipped out. It was a snapshot from a dinner that I had attended at his home in Wood Cliff Lake, New Jersey. He had graciously hosted the interns who had worked on the book.

The evening had begun in his library, which was just what one would imagine, filled with leather chairs, dark mahogany, and bookshelves overflowing with works of history. After appetizers, we were ushered into the dining room. It was my first “professional” dinner. The conversation was substantive: slightly formal but flowing. The former president asked us questions and seemed genuinely interested in what the twenty-somethings around the table thought, even though we didn’t know much about how the world worked.

We discussed the Strategic Defense Initiative, the START I treaty, which was then being negotiated, and Mikhail Gorbachev’s leadership of the Soviet Union.

As I continued to think about that evening, I reread his 1970 First Annual Report on U.S. Foreign Policy and realized that this month marks over a half-century since its delivery to Congress. The report, striking in clarity and realism, is remarkably relevant to today’s geopolitical environment. As the new administration gets underway, it’s worth considering the parallels.

The Three Pillars of U.S. Technological Leadership

Georgianna Shea

Source Link

The United States stands at a pivotal moment in the global technological race, facing an increasingly assertive China that leverages state-backed investments to dominate key industries. From artificial intelligence (AI) and quantum computing to semiconductors and space technologies, the stakes go beyond economic competition—a contest for information dominance resulting in strategic and national security superiority. To maintain global technological dominance and safeguard national security, the U.S. must implement aggressive policies focused on innovation-driven investment, cybersecurity fortification, and scalable infrastructure modernization to outpace China’s state-backed advancements.

Innovation-driven Investment

At the core of American technological leadership is its capacity for innovation. Unlike China’s state-controlled approach, the U.S. thrives on a dynamic ecosystem of private-sector ingenuity, academic research, and government collaboration. However, to sustain this edge, Washington must commit to bold investments in foundational technologies and establish policies reinforcing the country’s role as a global technology leader.

Trump’s Reciprocal Tariffs Of Trade Destruction – Analysis

Dan Steinbock

Source Link

At the wake of the 2008 financial crisis, investor Warren Buffett warned of derivatives as weapons of financial mass destruction. President Trump’s “reciprocal tariffs” could have a similar impact on world trade.

Last week, President Trump tasked his economic team with devising plans for “reciprocal tariffs” on every country taxing US imports. Designed in part as bargaining leverage with other countries, they are ramping up prospects for a global trade war with both American allies and adversaries. As Trump put it, “I will charge a reciprocal tariff, meaning whatever countries charge the United States of America, we will charge them. No more, no less.”

Since Trump did not impose new tariffs yet, Wall Street sighed in relief. Though the prime financiers of the Trump campaign, U.S. financial institutions are increasingly concerned that the administration’s new tariffs are broadening trade war, penalizing consumer and business confidence and risking accelerated inflation in America.

The financial institutions should be concerned. The only reason that Trump did not impose fresh tariffs was that he initiated investigations that could ignite a far worse global trade war toward the late spring.

Ukraine’s ground-based air defence: evolution, resilience and pressure

Giorgio Di Mizio & Dr Michael Gjerstad

Source Link

Ukraine’s air defences have proven resilient in countering three years of Russian air and missile attacks and have evolved in response to an ever-changing threat landscape. A key target of these attacks is Ukraine’s energy infrastructure, which, according to reports, is consequently unable to meet demand.

Western donations of air defence systems have enabled Ukraine to adapt, but the continued and increasing supply and support of these systems is critical given Russia’s plan to ramp up the production of missiles and one-way-attack uninhabited aerial vehicles (OWA-UAVs).

President Trump’s recent criticism of President Zelenskyy and the amount of aid the United States has supplied has made the future of continued support at current levels uncertain. Given Ukraine's reliance on Western aid, any reduction threatens its air defence capabilities, with Zelenskyy having recently raised the issue of shortages of Patriot interceptors.

War or Peace in Ukraine: US Moves and European Choices

Francois Heisbourg

Source Link

Some three years after Russia launched its full-scale invasion of Ukraine, the fate of that beleaguered country remains in the balance. It is difficult to overstate the pivotal consequences that the outcome of the largest armed conflict in Europe since the Second World War will have. The physical future, political freedom and economic well-being of Ukraine’s population is at stake, as is the existence, sovereignty and integrity of the Ukrainian state. At the European level, the outcome will either blunt or sharpen Russia’s pursuit of its broader aim to reverse the strategic effects of the break-up of the Soviet Union in 1991 and to recreate a latter-day Russian empire by limiting the sovereignty of the states lying east of the Oder–Neisse line. This was the clear objective in the draft treaties that Russia proffered to the United States and NATO in December 2021, in the run-up to the February 2022 invasion. A Russian victory against Ukraine would entail massive increases in the burden borne by NATO’s current members to preclude the fulfilment of the objectives laid out in those treaties. Notwithstanding the costs of the war, Russia’s armed forces are larger than they were at its onset, and battle-tested in a way that NATO’s armies are not.

At the global level, a territorially diminished Ukraine would likely put an end to successful post-Second World War efforts to counter the unilateral annexation of territory in Europe recognised as belonging lawfully to a separate state. Before 2014, Russia had recognised the borders of Ukraine as delineated in their bilateral accords, notably the Russo-Ukrainian treaty of 28 January 2003, in line with the international order established by the victorious powers in the Second World War, including the Soviet Union and the People’s Republic of China. Russia’s unlawful annexation of Crimea in 2014 laid the groundwork for the order’s unravelling, but had gone unrecognised by all but Russia itself and ten outlier states that did not include China. Today, Russia includes in its constitutional territory close to a fifth of Ukraine, including some land it does not control.

Army Transformation Takes ‘All of Us’

Source Link

In its bid to transform quickly to meet rapidly rising threats, the Army is expanding its “transforming in contact” initiative to get more new technology into soldiers’ hands.

Army Chief of Staff Gen. Randy George announced “transforming in contact 2.0” on Oct. 15 in his keynote speech at the Dwight D. Eisenhower Luncheon during the Association of the U.S. Army’s Annual Meeting and Exposition.

The initiative puts new and emerging technology and equipment into soldiers’ hands for testing and feedback. Currently underway in three infantry brigade combat teams, the 2.0 version will include two divisions, two armored brigade combat teams, two Stryker brigade combat teams and additional formations in the Army National Guard and Army Reserve, George said.

“At the end of this [fiscal year], every warfighting function, including protection and sustainment, will be part of our transformation efforts,” he said. “The tech we will infuse in our formations are not years away, they are available now.”

In addition to expanding transformation in contact, the Army will “step on the gas” in three other areas in the coming year, George said. Army formations will “dramatically” improve their ability to counter enemy uncrewed systems; the service is doubling down on operational transformation by expanding the range and improving the accuracy of long-range precision fires; and the Army continues to modernize and strengthen its industrial base, he said.

Pentagon may break up tech offices in acquisition-policy shift

PATRICK TUCKER

Source Link

As part of a broader shift in acquisition philosophy, the Pentagon may combine parts of several innovation-fostering offices into a new one focused on buying cutting-edge products from companies, a senior defense official tells Defense One.

“We are going to create an organization that is the commercial-engineering version of DARPA,” using portions of the Strategic Capabilities Office, the Defense Innovation Unit, and the Chief Digital and Artificial Intelligence Office, the official said on condition of anonymity.

In another change, the official said, the Pentagon aims to spend less on research, and what the official described as “abstractions” and more on usable arms and gear. (The official did not describe any immediate plans for DARPA, the Defense Department’s primary basic and applied research arm.)

“This [Trump] administration cares about weapon systems and business systems and not ‘technologies,’” the official said. “We're not going to be investing in ‘artificial intelligence’ because I don’t know what that means. We're going to invest in autonomous killer robots.”

Urban Warfare Project Case Sutdy Series

Liam Collins and John Spencer

Source Link

The Battle of Kyiv occurred between February 24 and April 2, 2022, during the Russia-Ukraine War (February 2022–present). Kyiv is Ukraine’s capital and its largest city—with a prewar population of over three million—covering 839 square kilometers (324 square miles). Major urban areas along the capital’s periphery include the small cities of Brovary (population 110,000) to Kyiv’s east, and Irpin (70,000), Bucha (37,000), Hostomel (17,000), and the small village of Moshchun (794) to Kyiv’s northwest.

The Kyiv metropolitan area contains three large airports. Boryspil International Airport is located ten kilometers to the city’s east-southeast. Sikorsky International Airport is located within Kyiv and prior to the closure of Ukraine’s airspace due to the war was primarily used for domestic air travel. Antonov Airport—also called Hostomel Airport—is a former Soviet air base located ten kilometers northwest of the city. It has a 3,500-meter runway, typical of modern air bases, and is capable of handling large cargo planes.

The Dnipro River splits Kyiv into eastern and western sides. The dam at the Kyiv hydroelectric power plant just north of the city turns the river into a massive reservoir that stretches all the way to the Belarusian border. A robust network of natural and man-made waterways around Kyiv supports its agricultural industry. These rivers and the irrigation ditches that run perpendicular and parallel to them create significant obstacles for vehicular movement, especially during the spring rainy season, forcing vehicles to the roads and the bridges that cross the waterways. The Irpin River, just west of Kyiv, presents a significant obstacle to vehicular movement. Although only ten to twenty meters wide in many places, it is extremely difficult to ford but more easily crossed using pontoons.

Europe Can’t Do It Alone

Lawrence J. Haas

Source Link

Panicked by President Trump’s decision not to invite Europe to the table as his team discusses Russia-Ukraine peace with top Russian officials, French president Emmanuel Macron convened a meeting in Paris last Monday with British, German, and other European leaders to decide how to respond.

However, as European leaders chatted at the Elysee Palace, the rifts that plague Europe when it seeks a united front on military, diplomatic, or economic matters were already apparent. On the one hand, British prime minister Keir Starmer said he’d consider sending troops to Ukraine to guarantee its security after a peace agreement. On the other hand, German Chancellor Olaf Scholz called the idea “premature” and “highly inappropriate.” Polish officials also dismissed the idea of a Polish military role in Ukraine.

The differences between European leaders over a joint military presence in Ukraine and broader matters related to Trump’s diplomatic overtures to Russia highlight the perils of assuming that Europe has the political wherewithal to, as Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth urged the other day, “lead from the front.”

The Long Destruction of Gaza: Toxic Saturation, Health Decimation, and Climate Loss and Damage

Carly A. Krakow

Source Link

When a population’s collective health baseline is systematically lowered over decades, that population is forcibly made more vulnerable to rising temperatures, extreme weather events, and other challenges induced by the climate crisis. Israel’s fifteen-month assault on Gaza was in its early months and escalating in fall 2023, causing massive amounts of death and destruction. The International Court of Justice (ICJ) has since documented “a real and imminent risk that irreparable prejudice will be caused to the rights” of Palestinians in Gaza (para. 74), who are part of “a protected group” under the Genocide Convention (para. 45). The International Criminal Court (ICC) has since issued arrest warrants for Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former Minister of Defence Yoav Gallant. Also in fall 2023, countries including the United States and other major powers gathered at the UN Climate Change Conference (COP28) in Dubai, UAE, discussing the long-awaited climate loss and damage fund. The fund was finally operationalized at COP28’s opening on 30 November 2023.

Decolonising the IR Curriculum: Reflections from a Classroom

Ananya Sharma

Source Link

Across the globe, decolonising the curriculum (DtC) has been the buzzword in higher education institutions as a result of movements such as Rhodes Must Fall (2015) at the University of Cape Town, with similar iterations in the UK. The Black Lives Matter movement (2020) further pushed for challenging the centricity of whiteness in the narratives that have shaped how we come to learn about the world. Many universities in the global north addressed the probing question: ‘why is my curriculum white?’ by establishing toolkits for module convenors, drafting manifestos and holding meetings and seminars addressing demands of BAME (Black, Asian and Minority Ethnic) students. Scholars within the discipline of International Relations have been quite vocal in expressing concerns about the anglo-centric production and dissemination of knowledge claims in International Relations (Bhambra 2021; Go 2018; Santos 2014; Shilliam 2021; Smith 2012; Quijano 2007). Their attempts at decolonisation are based on acknowledging the racialised, capitalist and heteropatriarchal structures of power modeling global politics.

Decolonisation, entails challenging the intellectual mono-cultures stemming from positional superiority accorded to western knowledge systems that have treated (and continue to treat) indigenous and non-western knowledge(s) as raw materials and commodities to be discovered, extracted, appropriated and distributed (Smith 2012). Colonisation might be part of history but its afterlives model our classrooms in indelible ways. Whether engaging with international political economy through global financial imperialism or teaching security studies with reference to the Global War on Terror, the dominant frameworks of international politics remain tethered in western theories, histories and methodologies rooted in colonial legacies. The canon we teach as universal knowledge, the stories of conquest and echoes of empire are reflected in the hegemonic discourses taught in ‘standard’ courses.

Pentagon fast-tracks ‘Cyber Command 2.0’ review, requests authorities wish list

Martin Matishak

Source Link

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth recently backed a Biden-era plan to revamp U.S. Cyber Command but only gave the military’s top digital warfighting organization until next month to hammer out the details of how to do it.

Hegseth was briefed on the overhaul, known as “Cyber Command 2.0,” on February 5, according to three sources familiar with the matter. The plan was approved by his predecessor, Lloyd Austin, late last year, and the command immediately started work on an implementation plan to be delivered to the Pentagon within 180 days.

But after being apprised of the initiative, the Defense chief told the command to come back with a plan in 45 days, said these sources, who requested anonymity because they were not authorized to speak publicly about the process.

The new deadline, which surprised Cyber Command’s leadership, cuts the prep time in half and means the blueprint would need to be turned in on or before March 22.

The abbreviated timeline is in keeping with the Trump administration’s belief the U.S. must be more confrontational in cyberspace in the wake of unprecedented hacks and espionage campaigns by China, though what that entails has yet to be fully explained.

The Ultimate Betrayal

Francis Fukuyama

Source Link

Even though anyone with eyes could see this coming, Donald Trump’s recent moves with regard to Ukraine and Russia come as a huge blow. We are in the midst of a global fight between Western liberal democracy and authoritarian government, and in this fight, the United States has just switched sides and signed up with the authoritarian camp.

What Trump has said over the past few days about Ukraine and Russia defies belief. He has accused Ukraine of having started the war by not preemptively surrendering to Russian territorial demands; he has said that Ukraine is not a democracy; and he has said that Ukrainians were wrong to resist Russian aggression. These ideas are likely not ones he thought up himself, but come straight from the mouth of Vladimir Putin, a man Trump has shown great admiration for. Meeting in Saudi Arabia on Tuesday, the United States started a direct negotiation with Moscow that excludes both Ukraine and the Europeans, and has surrendered in advance two critical bargaining chips: acceptance of Russian territorial gains to date, and a commitment not to let Ukraine enter NATO. In return, Putin has not made a single concession.

I take this particularly personally since I and my colleagues at Stanford University and other institutions have been working hard since 2013 to support democracy in Ukraine. We have run a number of programs to train mid-career Ukrainian professionals in leadership skills and democratic values. I’ve visited the country many times, and have developed many friendships with a large group of very inspiring Ukrainians.

5 Key Lessons from Three Years of the Ukraine War

Robert Kelly

Source Link

Drones, NATO, and Russia: What the Ukraine War Taught the World

The third anniversary of the beginning of the Ukraine War is a useful moment to step back and consider the larger lessons of the war.

The conflict itself has mostly bogged down. Russia has made some advances in the last year, but the costs have been enormous. It is winning only in the sense of a pyrrhic victory – that is, it is losing so much in order to take small increments of territory that the war jeopardizes other Russian strategic interests.

Russia is no longer, for example, a credible peer competitor with China, the US, or the European Union. After three years of unexpectedly hard conflict, it is too economically backward and militarily reduced.

Ukraine, though, is in trouble too. Its manpower and munitions shortages are well-known. And US President Donald Trump has aggressively signaled that he wants the war over as soon as possible. So a deal seems likely soon. Thus, now is an opportune moment to consider the war’s larger story for the future of conflict.

Tech Imperialism Reloaded: AI, Colonial Legacies, and the Global South

Salvador Santino Regilme

Source Link

Artificial intelligence (AI) is often heralded as a force of progress, driving innovation, economic growth, and unprecedented efficiency. Tech giants boast of AI’s potential to revolutionize industries, boost productivity, and even tackle pressing global challenges like climate change. But beneath this utopian narrative lies a darker reality—one where the economic rewards of AI are concentrated in the Global North, while its labor exploitation and environmental destruction are outsourced to the Global South. From the exploited workers behind AI training datasets to the environmental costs of massive data centers, the expansion of AI is reinforcing historical patterns of inequality. Rather than creating a democratized technological future, AI is deepening the global divide—what I term AI colonialism—where the benefits accrue to a select few while the burdens are externalized to the most vulnerable.

Despite the perception that AI operates autonomously, the technology relies heavily on human labor—specifically, low-wage workers in the Global South who perform data labeling, content moderation, and other tedious digital tasks. In countries like Kenya, India, and the Philippines, millions of workers sift through vast amounts of data to train AI models, earning as little as $1.50 per hour under precarious gig-economy conditions. The nature of their work can be grueling. Kenyan content moderators employed by subcontractors for platforms like Facebook and TikTok spend hours reviewing violent and disturbing material, often suffering from psychological trauma with little to no mental health support. In India, AI trainers annotate images, transcribe text, and flag inappropriate content—all essential for refining machine learning algorithms—yet they are treated as disposable, denied stable contracts, fair wages, and legal protections.

The Taliban’s Struggle for Legitimacy

Islomkhon Gafarov

Source Link

The ongoing power struggle between the Kandahari and Kabuli factions of the Taliban has garnered significant attention in post-Soviet media spaces. This internal conflict, which could potentially lead to a shift in Afghanistan’s leadership, reveals the complex dynamics at play within the organization.

Central to this struggle are the disagreements between the leader of the Taliban movement, Mullah Haibatullah Akhundzada, and Minister of Interior Sirajuddin Haqqani, concerning governance approaches and Afghanistan’s international role. These internal divisions highlight the lack of a cohesive vision among the Taliban’s top leadership. Such fragmentation at the highest levels of leadership has several significant implications, and serves to exacerbate the international community’s distrust toward Afghanistan’s current authorities.

However, the lack of international recognition for the Taliban government extends beyond this internal discord. Several factors contribute to this continued non-recognition, ranging from the Taliban’s problematic history and widespread global condemnation of its lack of inclusivity, to the shifting geopolitical landscape and the persistent presence of radical and terrorist elements in Afghanistan.

China’s Space Dream: No Limits, No End

Mathieu Duchâtel

Source Link

Even as global attention turned to DeepSeek, which put China at the forefront of artificial intelligence (AI), it is evident that China has yet to achieve its own “Sputnik moment” in the space sector. Some Chinese experts suggest that such a breakthrough could come with the Tianwen-3 mission (2028–2031), which aims to return rock samples from Mars, potentially placing China years ahead of the Euro-American Mars Sample Return mission. However, 2031 remains a distant milestone.

Meanwhile, the China-U.S. technological rivalry intensifies, and writing by Chinese experts about space is obsessed with the United States, seeing it as the only benchmark deserving attention. The efforts of Europe, India, and Japan in this area are not even seen as worth mentioning to Chinese analysts. Looking at China’s space sector in early 2025, a clear pattern emerges: a methodical, long-term strategy shaped by military ambitions, aspirations for technological dominance, ubiquitous commercial considerations, and the familiar guiding hand of the state in industrial policy. This is a vision, as top leader Xi Jinping has suggested, of space exploration with “no end.”

Over the past quarter century, China has transformed from a minor player in the global space industry into a major power. Two decades ago, China’s space industry was still describing itself modestly as learning through trial and error. Today, Chinese analysts describe its space prowess with positive terms often applied to other industrial sectors: “big but not strong,” “playing catch-up,” sometimes “running with the pack,” and, in certain areas, “leading the pack.”

How ASEAN Nations Shape South China Sea Policies Around China – Analysis

Source Link

Tensions between the Philippines and China in the South China Sea have been making more headlines in 2025 after escalating alarmingly last year.

Some other members of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), meanwhile, are trying to maintain good relations with their big neighbor to the north, whose economic and political influence is only growing in importance, while protecting their interests in the disputed waterway.

Reporters from RFA and BenarNews look at how three countries in the South China Sea are approaching relations with China.

INDONESIA: Growing openness toward China

In November 2024, Indonesia’s President Prabowo Subianto stunned South China Sea watchers with a sentence in a joint statement issued in China on his first overseas trip since becoming president.

The seemingly innocuous line explained that Jakarta and Beijing had reached an “important common understanding on joint development in areas of overlapping claims” in the South China Sea.

But analysts were quick to point out that by acknowledging overlapping maritime boundaries, Prabowo and his officials had effectively acknowledged the legitimacy of China’s claims, something Indonesia had never done before.

China’s Self-Defeating Strategy

Zack Cooper

Source Link

China’s armed forces are changing quickly. Over the last 15 years, Beijing has devoted significant resources to developing a military that can project power abroad. It now has three aircraft carriers and a growing fleet of amphibious assault ships. In 2017, China opened its first overseas military base in Djibouti. Chinese ships have also docked at ports scattered around the Indo-Pacific, from Cambodia to Sri Lanka. These changes should not be surprising since Chinese officials have spoken publicly about how they see their country as a great power on the rise, one that must project power overseas.

Is Donald Trump On The Brink Of Middle East Peace?

Brandon J. Weichert

Source Link

No one in the Middle East likes Trump’s plan to “own” Gaza. That may be the whole point.

President Donald J. Trump shocked audiences in the last two weeks when, standing before the press and alongside Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, he informed the world of his intention to have the United States “own” the decimated Gaza Strip.

The plan, according to Trump, would involve removing the Palestinian Arab population of Gaza, initiating a massive rebuild (making it the “Riviera of the Mideast” in his description), and having the U.S. maintain some degree of nominal control over the area.

Trump’s Comments Set the Hair of Arab and Israeli Leaders On Fire

Of course, the collective heads of the regional players—including the Israelis—caught fire over these pronouncements. Especially because the pronouncements by Trump lacked any specificity. It was the lack of specificity, though, that galvanized many people. As he says it, no one in the region likes what Trump is saying.

While visiting the White House immediately after the stunning Trump-Netanyahu press conference, Jordan’s King Abdullah II met with Trump at the White House and consented to taking in 2,000 sick Palestinian children immediately. However, the Jordanian king punted on a longer-term solution—deferring instead to Egypt, whose leadership he claimed was making a longer-term plan for the region that was forthcoming.

Dan Caine, Trump’s Joint Chiefs Pick, Had Unusual Path to Top Ranks

Helene Cooper and Eric Schmitt

Source Link

In President Trump’s telling, Dan Caine, the retired Air Force lieutenant general whom he wants to be his next chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, made an impression on him when the two men first met in 2018.

The general told the president that the Islamic State was not so tough and could be defeated in a week, not two years as senior advisers predicted, Mr. Trump recounted in 2019.

And at a Conservative Political Action Conference meeting last year, Mr. Trump said that General Caine put on a Make America Great Again hat while meeting with him in Iraq. (General Caine has told aides he has never put on a MAGA hat.)

On Friday, Mr. Trump said he would nominate General Caine after firing Gen. Charles Q. Brown Jr., a four-star fighter pilot known as C.Q.

“Today, I am honored to announce that I am nominating Air Force Lieutenant General Dan ‘Razin’ Caine to be the next Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff,” Mr. Trump said in a message on Truth Social. “General Caine is an accomplished pilot, national security expert, successful entrepreneur, and a ‘warfighter’ with significant interagency and special operations experience.”

Four Scenarios For Securing Peace In Ukraine – Analysis

Tatiana Vorozhko

Source Link

U.S. President Donald Trump is pushing for a peaceful resolution to Russia’s now three-year full-scale war in Ukraine. VOA examined several approaches floated by think tanks recently aimed at achieving a lasting peace to the war.

Maximum pressure strategy

A plan by the Center for European Policy Analysis, or CEPA, titled “How to Win: A Seven-Point Plan for Sustainable Peace in Ukraine,” calls for “a maximum pressure strategy to bring Russia to the negotiating table in good faith.”

It proposes that the U.S. and its allies:

• “Should provide immediate materiel support to Ukraine without caveats, aiming to wear down Russia’s military and thereby improve Ukraine’s negotiating position.”
• “Should increase sanctions on Russian financial institutions and energy sector entities, release frozen Russian assets to support Ukrainian defense and reconstruction and enact secondary sanctions to intensify economic pressure not only on Russia but also on the authoritarian regimes of China, Iran, and North Korea.”

Can The US And Russia Impose A Peace Deal On Ukraine? – Analysis

Ray Furlong

Source Link

A whirlwind week that has seen two emergency summits in Europe and worried comments from Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy underlines the gnawing fear in capitals from Kyiv to London.

Namely, that Washington and Moscow could try to make their own deal on the future of Ukraine without Kyiv and U.S. allies in Europe.

U.S. President Donald Trump has added to the angst with his post on Truth Social, accusing Zelenskyy of being a dictator and saying “we are successfully negotiating an end to the War with Russia.”

U.S. officials have denied they wish to exclude anyone from the process. But U.S. suggestions that Europe would not be at the negotiating table has caused widespread alarm, and the positive vibes from U.S.-Russia meeting in Riyadh on February 18 also set nerves on edge.

At this stage, there are two key questions: would Washington and Moscow even be able to agree on a mutually acceptable settlement to end the war in Ukraine, and if they did, what could anyone else do about it?

The White House clearly wants peace. It’s not clear that Moscow does. Trump’s special envoy for Ukraine and Russia, Keith Kellogg, arrived in Kyiv on February 19 just hours after overnight Russian strikes pounded Ukraine. Some 250,000 people were left without power in subzero temperatures in the port city of Odesa.

The Transformation Of Ukraine’s Arms Industry Amid War With Russia – Analysis

Kateryna Kuzmuk and Lorenzo Scarazzato

Source Link

Three years on from Russia’s escalation of its war on Ukraine with the full-scale invasion, Ukraine faces mounting military challenges. At the same time, there is growing uncertainty about future military assistance from the United States under the Trump administration. This makes the question of Ukraine’s ability to supply its own military needs and its reliance on aid all the more pertinent.

Since February 2022, Ukraine has relied heavily on foreign military aid for its defence against Russia. Its domestic arms industry has also been able to increase production and develop its capabilities significantly. In 2023 Ukraine’s largest arms producer, Joint-Stock Company Ukrainian Defense Industry (formerly UkrOboronProm), achieved a 69 per cent year-on-year increase in arms revenues to $2.2 billion—the fastest increase and highest revenues the company has ever recorded. As Ukraine seeks to rapidly strengthen and modernize its military capabilities amid the conflict, numerous smaller producers have appeared, along with emerging joint ventures with foreign companies, creating a more vibrant, diverse and innovative sector.

This topical backgrounder examines how Ukraine’s arms industry has transformed during the Russia-Ukraine war.

As Russia-Ukraine Peace Talks Begin, Who’s Winning The War?

Stavros Atlamazoglou

Source Link

When the peace talks about ending the war in Ukraine begin in earnest, they will undoubtedly be influenced by the conditions on the battlefield. After all, the gains of the two combatants and their strategic situation are the crucial leverage that will be used in any negotiation.

Here, the facts favor the Kremlin. The Russian military is on the offensive. Conversely, the Ukrainian forces are fighting a defensive campaign. Russia currently holds the strategic initiative and is largely dictating the moves on the battlefield. On the other hand, Ukraine is reacting to the movements of the Russian military in an attempt to stem its tactical advances.

A Tour of the Battlefield

There are currently five active fronts in the war. Russia maintains the initiative in four of them, while Ukraine controls one.

The main Russian effort is located in eastern Ukraine, in the direction of Kharkiv, Ukraine’s second-largest city. According to the Institute of the Study of War, the Kremlin’s objective on this front is to “push [the] Ukrainian forces back from the international border with Belgorod Oblast and approach to within tube artillery range of Kharkiv City.” In the initial stages of the conflict, the Russian military was within artillery range of Kharkiv. However, successful Ukrainian counterattacks relieved the city by the fall.

The Human Toll Of The Ukraine War

Stavros Atlamazoglou

Source Link

On February 24, 2022, Russia surprised the world by launching the large-scale invasion of its neighbor. The Russian military had been amassing forces along the border with Ukraine for months. However, many argued at the time that Russian President Vladimir Putin was bluffing and that he would recall his forces at the last minute.

Of course, Putin did not—and the largest conflict on European soil since the end of World War Two ensued.

After almost three years of brutal war, both combatants have taken heavy casualties in the fighting. According to all the available unclassified information, Russia has lost more than twice as many soldiers as Ukraine. However, given the two countries’ vast difference in size and population, Russia can deploy more men on the battlefield—and has a more robust strategic reserve than Ukraine.

The Casualties

An important consideration in any peace talks is the casualties both sides have sustained in almost three years of fighting.

According to the latest available data, the Russian military, paramilitary units, and pro-Russian separatist forces have suffered approximately 863,000 casualties killed and wounded. In addition, the Russian forces have lost tens of thousands of heavy weapon systems, including main battle tanks, armored personnel carriers, artillery pieces, infantry fighting vehicles, unmanned aerial systems, tactical vehicles, and aircraft. These data are based on daily estimates released by the Ukrainian Ministry of Defence, leading to suggestions of bias, but Western intelligence services and militaries have regularly corroborated the data.

'He's a real general': How Trump chose Dan Caine to be top US military officer

Idrees Ali and Phil Stewart

Source Link

Dan Caine may not have been on Washington's radar before Friday night. But President Donald Trump's fascination with the retired three-star general, his surprise pick to become the next chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, appears to go back to their first meeting in Iraq in 2018.

Caine, then the deputy commander of a special operations task force fighting Islamic State, told the president that the militant group could be destroyed in just a week, Trump recalled during a speech to the Conservative Political Action Conference in 2019.

Since then, he has retold the story about how he met "Razin" Caine multiple times - and the praise has only grown more effusive.

"He's a real general, not a television general," Trump said in Miami on Wednesday, two days before his Truth Social post catapulted Caine from retirement to a nomination to be the most senior active-duty officer in the U.S. military.

If approved by the Senate, Caine will take over a military that is undergoing change in the first 30 days of the Trump administration and will inherit a Joint Staff rattled by Trump's surprise firing of the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Air Force General C.Q. Brown.

Joint Chiefs Chair CQ Brown, CNO Franchetti Relieved, VCNO Kilby to Lead in Interim

Heather Mongilio and Sam LaGrone

Source Link

Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. C.Q. Brown and Chief of Naval Operations Adm. Lisa Franchetti were removed from their positions late Friday.

The Trump administration announced the reliefs in a series of messages on social media and a press statement from the Office of the Secretary of Defense. Two defense officials also confirmed their removals to USNI News.

In a post on the social media network Truth Social, President Donald Trump thanked Brown for his service and announced he would nominate Air Force Lt. Gen. Dan Caine to lead the Pentagon.

“I want to thank General Charles ‘CQ’ Brown for his over 40 years of service to our country, including as our current Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. He is a fine gentleman and an outstanding leader, and I wish a great future for him and his family,” Trump wrote in his Truth Social post.

“I am nominating Air Force Lieutenant General Dan ‘Razin’ Caine to be the next Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. General Caine is an accomplished pilot, national security expert, successful entrepreneur, and a ‘warfighter’ with significant interagency and special operations experience.”

A Russian View of the Ukraine Peace Talks

Ekaterina Zolotova

Source Link

The reports surrounding the Ukraine peace talks in Saudi Arabia held between the United States and Russia – but not Ukraine – suggest a reconciliation is underway. On Feb. 19, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said Russia and the U.S. have “started to move away from the brink of collapse” and that their bilateral relations now have a “positive atmosphere.” He praised U.S. President Donald Trump for being the first Western leader to understand Moscow’s position on Ukraine and NATO. Later, Washington condemned the use of the word “aggressor” in a G7 communique to describe Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.

Yet the road to true U.S.-Russia reconciliation, let alone to a lasting peace in Ukraine, is still a long way off. Commenting on the Saudi summit, Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov seemed to agree, saying that despite this first step in restoring relations, the meeting alone fails to guarantee a positive outcome.

This is partly a reflection of how Russia views the context in which the talks are taking place. Traditionally, Russia’s concept of the West was more about Europe – even the parts that often go overlooked by most Americans – than it was about the United States. Their relationship was often adversarial. But after the Soviet Union fell and the European Union emerged, Europe began to see the places vacated by the Soviets as opportunities for growth, and thus they became a more immediate military threat – or so the thinking in Moscow goes. Russian strategy, then, was oriented to the west of its borders. The U.S. embroilment in this strategy is due to its alliance with Europe. The war in Ukraine stems from this long-term standoff: Russia could not live side by side with the growing anti-Russian government in Ukraine, and it could not tolerate EU and U.S. support of Kyiv in the war.