Indian Strategic Studies: 08/13/25

13 August 2025

Putin Briefs Leaders of China and India on Talks With U.S. on Ukraine

Anatoly Kurmanaev

President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia on Friday briefed the leaders of China and India on his negotiations with the United States over Ukraine peace talks, according to the Kremlin. It is the latest example of the Kremlin’s overtures to major developing nations amid President Trump’s escalating global trade war. Mr. Putin has stepped up the pace of his public diplomacy since meeting Mr. Trump’s envoy Steve Witkoff in Moscow on Wednesday. That meeting led the White House and the Kremlin to announce separately that Mr. Trump and Mr. Putin could meet to discuss ending the war in Ukraine as soon as next week.

Ahead of the expected meeting, Mr. Putin appears to be shoring up support for his war strategy among global or regional powers that have either sided with Russia or remained neutral in the conflict. Mr. Putin spoke by telephone on Friday with President Xi Jinping of China and Prime Minister Narendra Modi of India, but neither Moscow nor Beijing disclosed the substance of their talks beyond offering vague promises to deepen cooperation.

On Thursday, Mr. Putin met an Indian national security official in Moscow and spoke by telephone with President Cyril Ramaphosa of South Africa. In that period, Mr. Putin also spoke by telephone or in person with the leaders of Belarus, Kazakhstan, the United Arab Emirates and Uzbekistan. China, India, Russia and South Africa, as well as Brazil, are the major members of the BRICS, a group of 10 developing nations. Those countries, apart from Russia, which already faces comprehensive American sanctions over the war in Ukraine, have seen their trade conditions with the United States worsen significantly since Mr. Trump returned to office in January.

Trump Directs Military to Target Foreign Drug Cartels

Helene CooperMaggie HabermanCharlie Savage and Eric Schmitt Leer en español

President Trump has secretly signed a directive to the Pentagon to begin using military force against certain Latin American drug cartels that his administration has deemed terrorist organizations, according to people familiar with the matter. The decision to bring the American military into the fight is the most aggressive step so far in the administration’s escalating campaign against the cartels. It signals Mr. Trump’s continued willingness to use military forces to carry out what has primarily been considered a law enforcement responsibility to curb the flow of fentanyl and other illegal drugs.

The order provides an official basis for the possibility of direct military operations at sea and on foreign soil against cartels. U.S. military officials have started drawing up options for how the military could go after the groups, the people familiar with the conversations said, speaking on the condition of anonymity to discuss the sensitive internal deliberations. But directing the military to crack down on the illicit trade also raises legal issues, including whether it would count as “murder” if U.S. forces acting outside of a congressionally authorized armed conflict were to kill civilians even criminal suspects who pose no imminent threat.

It is unclear what White House, Pentagon and State Department lawyers have said about the new directive or whether the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel has produced an authoritative opinion assessing the legal issues. Already this year Mr. Trump has deployed National Guard and active duty troops to the southwest border to choke off the flow of drugs as well as immigrants, and has increased surveillance and drug interdiction efforts.

Meet the New Middle East, Same as the Old Middle East

Stephen M. Walt,

Given the tumultuous events of the past several years, it is tempting to herald the emergence of a “new Middle East.” But how many times have we heard that? The Six-Day War was thought by some to be a critical turning point—surely Israel’s Arab opponents would make peace now? and it didn’t happen. Ditto the Egyptian-Israeli peace treaty, the first Gulf War, the Oslo Accords, the U.S. invasion of Iraq, and the Arab Spring. And yet events like the Sept. 11 attacks, the Syrian civil war, the Oct. 7, 2023, assault by Hamas, the ongoing genocide in Gaza, the recurring destruction of Lebanon, the Houthis’ attacks on Red Sea shipping, and the recent airstrikes on Iran keep happening.

We have seen extraordinary developments over the past decade—and especially since Oct. 7, 2023—but the underlying conditions that have made the region so conflict-ridden for so long remain unchanged. Some of the players are gone, others have gained or lost power, and several have embraced different policies, but the more fundamental sources ofinstability are still intact.

Donald Trump Risks Tanking Twenty-Five Years of U.S.-India Relations

Evan A. Feigenbaum

First, as former assistant commerce secretary Ray Vickery has put it, the president blusters before making deals, so at some point a Trumpian “trade deal” is likely to reduce India’s 25 percent baseline tariff rate. Second, as my Carnegie colleague Rudra Chaudhuri has rightly written, the ecosystem of commercial, technology, and societal ties between Americans and Indians is deeper than Trump, with billions in two-way investment, numerous tech firms working together, and tens of thousands of Indian and American engineers and venture capitalists intensively engaged with one another.

Third, as leading strategic affairs analyst C. Raja Mohan notes, India needs structural reforms, so Trump’s hardnose tactics could even provide the impetus for India to reset. Fourth, as the Hudson Institute’s Walter Russell Mead suggests, there are persistent, enduring, and perhaps even permanent “pain points” that have caused rancor and throw up obstacles to cooperation even in the best of times.

Finally, in the real world, geopolitical threats still matter, so the shared concerns Secretary of State Marco Rubio has identified about the rise of Chinese power will invariably yield some strategic convergence. But these caveats ignore the two most fundamental facts: domestic politics nearly always trumps foreign policy, and foreign policy arguments almost never prevail unless they are anchored by a strong domestic political foundation.

How Modi Misread Trump

Salil Tripathi

Few leaders are as good at marketing themselves as India’s Narendra Modi. Since his election as Prime Minister in 2014, he has projected himself as the builder of a stronger and more assertive India, claimed credit for its robust economic growth, and has blamed his predecessors when things went wrong. A generation of voters believe India’s growing stature on the world stage is because of him.

But then comes Donald Trump, the disruptor par excellence, who on Wednesday threatened staggering 50% tariffs on imports from the world’s fourth largest economy. India now faces among the steepest U.S. levies of any nation.

The announcement is a remarkable development considering the past bonhomie between the two men. Modi and Trump are populists with ideological similarities and had previously campaigned for each other. And this year, Modi became one of the first world leaders to visit the White House following Trump’s return to office in January. He called him a “great friend” during the February visit and the two pledged to double U.S.-India trade to $500 billion by 2030.

But trouble boiled over in late July, when Trump announced a 25% tariff on Indian goods, which he doubled on Wednesday. The U.S. President has zeroed in on India’s significant purchase of Russian oil as a deadline for Moscow to agree to a cease-fire in Ukraine looms.

The new tariffs—which come into force on Aug. 27—won’t necessarily protect U.S. markets or businesses. But they will punish a country that currently imports 36% of its oil from Russia, up from a mere 0.2% before the Kremlin’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine over three years ago. Much of this bargain oil is used for domestic consumption—India imports more than 80% of the oil it needs, and quickly finding another supplier will be neither easy nor cheap.

Zelensky Rejects Trump’s Suggestion That Ukraine Should Give Up Territory to Russia in Peace Talks

Richard Hall

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky on Saturday bluntly rejected President Donald Trump’s suggestion that Kyiv would be required to give up territory as part of a peace deal with Russia. “Ukrainians will not give their land to the occupier,” Zelensky said, just hours after Trump announced that he would meet with Russian President Vladimir Putin next week in Alaska, without any Ukrainian representatives present, to discuss bringing an end to the war in Ukraine. Zelensky appeared to bristle at both the suggestion of ceding territory and at the prospect of talks being held without Ukraine.

“Any decisions made against us, any decisions made without Ukraine, are at the same time decisions against peace. They will bring nothing. These are dead decisions; they will never work,” Zelensky said in a video address. He added that Ukraine "will not give Russia any awards for what it has done."

President Trump announced at the White House on Friday that he would meet with Putin on August 15 in Alaska, which was once part of the Russian Empire before its purchase by the United States in 1867. He said that an eventual peace deal between Ukraine and Russia would include “some swapping of territories to the betterment of both.” “We’re going to get some back, and we’re going to get some switched,” Trump added. The talks in Alaska would be the first between sitting U.S. and Russian presidents since Joe Biden met Putin in Geneva in June 2021.

China's Evolving Nuclear Command and Control for Launch-on-Warning

Mike Casey

I recently had the pleasure of joining the Nuclecast podcast (episode out soon) to discuss China’s evolving nuclear C4ISR and the growing impact of AI on its capabilities and doctrine. I want to tackle these topics here now. This post is the first in a series that will explore China’s nuclear C4ISR, beginning with a deep dive into it’s nuclear C2. We will explore the communications and ISR (intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance) components in subsequent posts.

For over half a century, China’s nuclear strategy was defined by a doctrine of “assured retaliation.” Underpinned by a public No-First-Use (NFU) pledge, this posture was pragmatic. Facing the vastly larger arsenals of the United States and the Soviet Union, Beijing maintained a small, survivable force designed to absorb a nuclear first strike and then deliver a retaliatory blow sufficient to inflict unacceptable damage. This philosophy shaped a force structure that prioritized concealment and survivability, with warheads kept separate from missiles and a low overall state of alert.

Today, that doctrine is undergoing a major shift. China is moving toward what it calls “early warning counterstrike”a posture known in the West as launch-on-warning (LOW). This is a fundamental change in strategic thinking. Instead of waiting for nuclear detonations on its soil, China is building the capability to launch its own nuclear weapons upon receiving and confirming strategic warning of an incoming attack. The objective is to launch its retaliatory strike before its own arsenal can be destroyed on the ground, thereby ensuring the credibility of its deterrent.

Netanyahu divides Israelis and allies with plan for new military push in Gaza

Hugo Bachega

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's controversial plans for a new military push in the Gaza Strip have raised warnings from the army leadership, opposition from hostage families and concerns that more Palestinians will be killed. They also risk isolating his country even further.

In a meeting of the security cabinet that lasted 10 hours, ministers approved proposals for the "takeover of Gaza City", which is likely to be the first phase for the Israeli military to assume full control of Gaza, as Netanyahu says it is his intention. A statement released by his office did not use the word "occupation" but, effectively, that is what the plans mean.

It is not clear when the operations, which could take months, will start, as the military will have to call up thousands of reservists, exhausted after serving multiple times, and allow for the forced evacuation of residents from an area where around 800,000 Palestinians live. Many, if not most, have already been repeatedly displaced in this war.

The plans will spark fresh condemnation from countries which have expressed anger over the situation in Gaza and urged Israel to end the war, which started as a response to the Hamas attacks on Israel on 7 October 2023.

Will Palestine Action break Britain?The state can’t cope with 500 ‘terrorists

Today in Westminster, over 500 people plan to announce themselves as terrorists, all in full view of the police. Their methods are less molotovs-at-dawn and more Year 8 art project. All the protesters need to do is display a placard emblazoned with the words “I support Palestine Action”. This immediately invites arrest for an offence under the Terrorism Act 2000, with Section 13 outlawing the “wearing or displaying an article indicating support for a proscribed group”.

After passing legislation, you then have to apply it. This duty typically falls to beleaguered police services, who are blamed for laws conjured by their thoughtless political masters. Yet, if the issue at hand is Palestine Action’s proscription, after activists vandalised a pair of aircraft at RAF Brize Norton, the Terrorism Act 2000 is about so much more than the politics of Gaza. It speaks, rather, to 25 years of government failure, and how over-powered laws and under-powered cops collide to push Britain towards all-out chaos.

From a personal perspective, I’m sympathetic to banning Palestine Action. Whichever way you split it, breaking into an RAF base and deliberately disabling military aircraft isn’t just criminal damage, it’s a shameless assault on the armed forces. And besides, June’s attack came before the group’s campaign of industrial sabotage on companies it linked to Israeli interests. Reports suggest the total costs here could hit £55 million.

Digital frontlines: What the 12-day war revealed about the evolution of Iran’s cyber strategy

Amid the intense focus on missiles, escalation dynamics, and geopolitical fallout during the June 13-24 war between Iran and Israel, the cyber dimension — especially as it concerned Iranian actions — received comparatively little attention. Yet beneath the headlines, a quieter but significant battle played out in cyberspace, highlighting how Iran has refined its use of digital tools to shape the battlespace, control domestic narratives, and project influence abroad. While largely ineffective in operational terms, Iran’s cyber response marked a new phase in its strategic evolution characterized by greater coordination, doctrinal coherence, and integration across domains. From hacking surveillance systems and deploying artificial intelligence (AI)-driven disinformation in tandem with missile strikes to enforcing real-time digital repression at home, Tehran demonstrated that it now sees cyber capabilities as core instruments of warmaking and statecraft. Certainly, this evolution ought not to be mistaken for improved technical prowess given that Iran’s cyber defenses remain critically weak. Still, the observed shift in digital tool usage patterns a month and a half ago matters because it offers an important insight into the regime’s intent to embed cyber operations within a broader “hybrid warfare” doctrine.

What Iran did during the 12-day war

The 12-day war between Iran and Israel exposed a complex and multi-dimensional Iranian cyber campaign that extended far beyond isolated hacking incidents. The confrontation saw Iran-linked cyber actors execute a broad range of operations designed to exert psychological pressure, collect tactical intelligence, enforce deterrence against third countries, and maintain domestic control. The digital arena was a critical front in Iran’s hybrid strategy during the conflict — i.e., to more seamlessly meld conventional and unconventional instruments of power together with tools of subversion.

Russia 'perfecting' China's sabotage tactics for war against West

The West is dangerously exposed to a co-ordinated threat of sabotage attacks by Russia and China, a classified European Union intelligence report has warned. The assessment, sent to Brussels in the spring and seen in part by The i Paper, underscores increasing concerns from Western officials that Beijing and Moscow are working in parallel, learning from each other’s tactics to undermine Western democracies and sow chaos.

“What is innovated by China on one end of the globe will be perfected by Russia on the other,” according to a portion of the report. “[EU nations] need to respond jointly and globally to attacks – even (or especially) those countries who are only indirectly affected.” In a stark warning from EU diplomats to European commissioners, the document warns of “a gap” in Western thinking which China and Russia are seeking to “exploit”.

Experts consulted in the report, and anonymised before sharing with this newspaper, said that Russia is learning from Beijing’s so-called “grey zone” tactics in Taiwan, and perfecting them for use in Europe. The term “grey zone” is used to describe the situation which exists between peace and open warfare and hostile activities fall just below what might be considered traditional acts of war.

Trump orders India tariff hike to 50% for buying Russian oil

Ali Abbas Ahmadi, Soutik Biswas and Archana Shukla

US President Donald Trump has issued an executive order hitting India with an additional 25% tariff over its purchases of Russian oil. That will raise the total tariff on Indian imports to the United States to 50% - among the highest rates imposed by the US.

The new rate will come into effect in 21 days, so on 27 August, according to the executive order. A response from India's foreign ministry on Wednesday said Delhi had already made clear its stance on imports from Russia, and reiterated that the tariff is "unfair, unjustified and unreasonable".

"It is therefore extremely unfortunate that the US should choose to impose additional tariffs on India for actions that several other countries are also taking in their own national interest," the brief statement read. "India will take all actions necessary to protect its national interests," it added. The US president had earlier warned he would raise levies, saying India doesn't "care how many people in Ukraine are being killed by the Russian War Machine".

On Wednesday, the White House said in a statement that the "Russian Federation's actions in Ukraine pose an ongoing threat to US national security and foreign policy, necessitating stronger measures to address the national emergency". It said India's imports of Russian oil undermine US efforts to counter Russia's activities in Ukraine. It added that the US will determine which other countries import oil from Russia, and will "recommend further actions to the President as needed". Oil and gas are Russia's biggest exports, and Moscow's biggest customers include China, India and Turkey.

Trump’s demand that India stop buying Russian oil puts Modi in tight spot

Hannah Ellis-Petersen

Prime minister faces a choice between high tariffs or giving up cheap oil, putting New Delhi’s non-alignment policy under severe strain. The relationship between India and the US is facing one of its most significant challenges in decades, as the Trump administration doubles down on its demands that India stop buying Russian oil or face punitive tariffs.

The US president, Donald Trump, has refused to cut tariffs on Indian exports to the US, as he has for other countries, and on Monday said he would significantly raise them over its purchases of cheap Russian oil, which now account for one-third of its imported oil.

“They don’t care how many people in Ukraine are being killed by the Russian War Machine,” he said in a post to his Truth Social network, also accusing India of selling Russian oil “on the Open Market for big profits”. In a previous social media tirade last week, he said of Russia and India: “They can take their dead economies down together .

”The whiplash the last few days have caused in the corridors of New Delhi is palpable. It was only February when India’s prime minister, Narendra Modi, was one of the first world leaders to be hosted by Trump and the two men embraced each other and hailed their “great friendship”. Indian officials were adamant that Russia had not even come up in trade negotiations until Trump’s public outburst.

How India can win Trump’s trade game

President Donald Trump shakes hands with India's Prime Minister Narendra Modi during a news conference at the White House on Feb 13. (Jabin Botsford/For The Washington Post)

India desperately needs a trade deal with President Donald Trump — for both economic and strategic reasons. When rival Pakistan, with its far smaller economy, finalized an agreement first, it underscored just how badly India has misplayed its hand.

Make sense of the latest news and debates with our daily newsletter

India was among the first countries to enter trade negotiations with the Trump administration. Yet despite nearing an interim deal several times, there has been no breakthrough. And prospects for one have dimmed in recent weeks, with the president first slapping a 25 percent tariff on the country, then threatening further unspecified measures and 50 percent tariffs Wednesday morning if India does not stop buying Russian oil.

Trump threatens India with 50% tariff as negotiations fizzle and Modi keeps importing Russian oil

Kevin Liptak, Elisabeth Buchwald

Oil tanker trucks outside an oil refinery operated by Bharat Petroleum Corp. Ltd., in Mumbai, India. Dhiraj Singh/Bloomberg/Getty Images

President Donald Trump on Wednesday announced sweeping and substantial tariffs on India, one of America’s most important trading partners. In addition to a 25% tariff that is set to go into effect Thursday, Trump also announced an additional 25% tariff on India that will go into effect later this month as punishment for importing Russian oil and gas.

Those combined penalties would bring the total tariff on goods imported from the world’s fifth-largest economy to a whopping 50% – among the highest the US charges.

The latest executive order, according to a document posted on the White House website, represents an escalation of his trade battle with New Delhi and his first use of so-called secondary sanctions on countries the US says are fueling Moscow’s war machine.

The order finds India is “currently directly or indirectly importing Russian Federation oil,” and says it is “necessary and appropriate” to apply the new 25% tariff on Indian goods.

Trump's sweeping new tariffs take effect against dozens of countries

Osmond Chia

US President Donald Trump's sweeping new tariffs on more than 90 countries around the world have come into effect.

Moments before his deadline passed for countries to negotiate US trade deals, Trump posted on his Truth Social platform that billions of dollars were now flowing into his country as a result of his import taxes.

Trump is using tariffs to encourage jobs and manufacturing industries to return to America, among other political goals.

Separately on Wednesday, he threatened to raise the tariff on imports from India to 50%, unless that country stopped buying Russian oil. He also threatened a 100% tariff on foreign-made computer chips, to push tech firms to invest more in the US.

Trump's trade policies have been broadly aimed at reshaping the global trading system, which he sees as treating the US unfairly. One of his key pledges as he returned to the White House in January was to cut the trade deficit - the shortfall between what America buys and what it sells.

His tariffs work by charging US importers a tax on goods they buy from other countries. Those importers may pass some or all of the extra cost on to customers.

We Discovered How Ukraine is ‘Gamifying’ Its Drone War Against Russia

David Kirichenko

Bohdan, a drone pilot from the Unmanned Systems Battalion of Ukraine’s 110th Separate Mechanized Brigade, pilots an FPV drone in Donetsk Oblast during active battle operations. Photo: David Kirichenko

Russia expected an easy victory in Ukraine when Moscow launched its invasion in February 2022.

What it didn’t anticipate was that its army would become bogged down in years of grinding warfare, suffering over a million casualties by 2025.

Today, the war has evolved into a technological contest, with both sides constantly tinkering and seeking every advantage to overcome the other. For Kyiv, traditional methods of warfare had to be reimagined to confront a far larger adversary.

From the very first days of the invasion, Ukrainians began experimenting with all kinds of solutions to fight back. Many rushed to improve reconnaissance operations and started modifying off-the-shelf drones—devices once used by hobbyists before the war. Ukraine has now built entire procurement processes around unmanned systems and rebuilt its military acquisition system around commercial technologies. Ideas can be operational within months, instead of years.

Why the Joint Force Isn’t Very Joint

R.D. Hooker, Jr

The U.S. Department of Defense makes much of the Joint Force, stressing its overriding importance. Particularly since the advent of the 1986 Goldwater-Nichols legislation, “jointness” became a mantra, amplified by reams of joint doctrine and scores of “joint” organizations. The importance of a truly joint approach to warfighting is, or should be, obvious. In theory, the synergistic employment of all forms of military power across all domains generates effects greater than the sum of the parts, optimizing all military operations. In practice, however, the U.S. military often falls far short.

The evidence is everywhere around us and reaches back at least to the Second World War, if not before. In WWII, interservice rivalry was intense and pervasive. In the Pacific, Army and Navy disputes forced the bifurcation of the region into Army and Navy bailiwicks: MacArthur’s Southwest Pacific theater and Nimitz’s Pacific Ocean Areas theater. Arguments over Pacific strategy forced President Roosevelt to personally intervene by flying to Pearl Harbour in July 1944 to referee. In Europe, tensions between the nearly-independent Army Air Forces and General Eisenhower, the European theater commander, over strategic bombing permeated the campaign, at one point prompting Ike to threaten resignation.

Investigative report exposes Microsoft support for Israeli war crimes in Gaza and the West Bank

A joint investigation by The Guardian and +972 Magazine has revealed that Microsoft has been providing its Azure cloud computing infrastructure to Israeli military intelligence to store a vast archive of intercepted communications by Palestinians. The data stored and utilized by intelligence agents within Israel Defense Forces (IDF) Unit 8200 has facilitated deadly airstrikes and military operations in both Gaza and the West Bank.

This unprecedented integration of Microsoft with the war crimes of the Israeli military exposes the increasingly central role played by and correspondence of interests between giant global tech corporations and the strategic aims of US imperialism in the ongoing genocide and ethnic cleansing of the Palestinian people.

According to the investigative reports, the collaboration between Microsoft and Unit 8200 was brokered at the highest levels. In late 2021, a delegation from Israel’s military intelligence, led by then-commander Brigadier General Yossi Sariel, met at Microsoft’s Seattle headquarters with CEO Satya Nadella and other key executives.

Nadella personally committed Microsoft’s technological resources to the project, reportedly calling the partnership “critical” for Microsoft’s future, and approved the creation of a customized, segregated area within Azure for exclusive use by Unit 8200.

Ukraine shoots down two new Russian Shahed-type drones

Maria Tril

3 minute readA Russian Shahed-like drone in the sights of a Ukrainian UAV interceptor. August 2025. Credit: Serhiy SternenkoUkraine shoots down two new Russian Shahed-type drones

Ukrainian drone interceptor unit Posipaky has successfully shot down two new Russian Shahed-type unmanned aerial vehicles, volunteer Serhiy Sternenko reported, publishing video footage of one of the intercepts.

Ukrainian intelligence officials previously identified these drones as potential reconnaissance assets and decoy targets designed to reveal Ukrainian air defense positions or overload defense systems. The aircraft reportedly can also carry a warhead weighing up to 15 kilograms.

The drone’s fuselage features a delta-wing configuration similar to the Shahed-136 but significantly smaller in dimensions. Most components used in this Russian UAV are of Chinese origin, according to Ukraine’s Main Intelligence Directorate.

“Almost half of them: flight controller with autopilot, navigation modules and antennas, air speed sensor and Pitot tube – from one Chinese company CUAV Technology, which specializes in research, development and production of system modules and applications for UAVs,” according to the intelligence report.

The drone is also equipped with a Chinese copy of the Australian RFD900x data transmission module manufactured by RFDesign. Like the original sample, the Chinese product is designed for long-range data transmission up to 40 kilometers in direct line of sight, depending on the antenna.

China’s J-20 Stealth Fighter Allegedly Flies Undetected Over Tsushima Strait, Exposing Gaps in Japan and Korea’s Radar Defences

admin

(DEFENCE SECURITY ASIA) — In a stunning revelation that could redefine the balance of airpower in East Asia, China’s J-20 stealth fighter has reportedly flown a mission over the Tsushima Strait — without being detected by Japanese or South Korean radar systems.

The claim, while unconfirmed by Tokyo or Seoul, was strongly implied in a recent segment aired by Chinese state broadcaster CCTV, which spotlighted the elite First Fighter Brigade of the People’s Liberation Army Air Force (PLAAF).

Although the program did not explicitly name the aircraft involved, it featured uninterrupted footage of the J-20, China’s fifth-generation air superiority stealth jet, and described patrols over both the Bashi Channel and the Tsushima Strait — two of the most sensitive aerial corridors in the Indo-Pacific.

The broadcast, dated July 29, referred to flight operations conducted on Sunday, July 27, and boldly stated that “the 1st Aviation Brigade of the PLAAF now flies missions over the Bashi Channel and Tsushima Strait, and conducts patrols around Taiwan.”

This brigade was among the first PLAAF units to be equipped with the J-20, which is believed to be deployed in growing numbers, including a new two-seat J-20S variant that enhances command-and-control and potential loyal wingman drone coordination.

The Tsushima Strait — a narrow, strategic maritime chokepoint separating South Korea and Japan — links the Sea of Japan to the East China Sea and is among the most heavily surveilled airspaces in the world.

Ukraine’s drone war boosts its bargaining power with Russia

Marcel Plichta

New research shows Ukrainian drone attacks have caused significant damage in Russia. Image; Olena Bartienieva / Alamy via The Conversation

Donald Trump appears to be making another attempt to organise a three-way summit with Vladimir Putin and Ukraine’s president, Volodymyr Zelensky, to end the Russian invasion.

Putin’s reluctance to meet his Ukrainian counterpart so far has often made it appear that he doesn’t think Ukraine has enough bargaining power to enter direct negotiations. But one thing that may be helping to shift the balance in Zelensky’s favor at this stage in the war is Ukraine’s enhanced drone capability.

Ukrainian drones have made it impossible for the Russian population to isolate itself from the effects of a conflict fought mostly on Ukrainian soil. Attacks on Moscow, in particular, have caused disruptions to air travel within Russia and forced the Russian government to divert dozens of air defense systems to ensure that the capital is protected.

Cheap Ukrainian drones inflict costly damage to Russian war machine

Robert Sherman

This Saturday, NewsNation’s Robert Sherman reports live from Ukraine for a special report, “Ukraine: On the Frontlines.” The one-hour program will air 8p/7C. Find out how to watch.

(NewsNation) — It was the sneak attack that shocked the world. During “Operation Spiderweb” in June, dozens of Ukrainian drones smuggled behind Russian lines took out billions of dollars in aircraft at bases across the country.

Russia’s invasion of Ukraine began in February 2022 as a conventional war, but it has morphed into a new, unconventional arms race. Ukrainians estimate Russia launched more than 6,000 drones at their country in the month of July alone.

NewsNation spent the day with one of Ukraine’s top drone developers, Vyriy, which wasn’t even in the drone game when the war broke out.

Successful drone attack on Russia exposes US vulnerabilities: Lawmakers

“It would be near-impossible to fight a huge military machine like Russia, but with drones it becomes much easier,” one representative said.

Their drones are cheap, ranging in cost from less than $300 to $1,000.

Depending on the model, 80% to 100% of the parts are made in Ukraine — quick delivery to the front lines at a rock bottom price.

Russia is not Iran, India can’t cancel oil imports on U.S. demand

Suhasini Haidar

India cannot cancel oil imports from Russia as it did six years ago with Iran and Venezuela, given the difference in the scale and importance of the relationship, said experts, warning that the U.S.’s actions against India were damaging the relationship built over decades. In 2018, U.S. President Donald Trump had in his first term, demanded that India “zero out” its oil imports from Iran and Venezuela. India had eventually complied with the demand before the deadline in May 2019.

Donald Trump’s criticism of India for its oil and arms trade with Russia is factual but illogical: Data

On Wednesday, Mr. Trump signed an executive order levying a 25% penalty on top of 25% tariffs on Indian goods, unless India cut energy purchases from Russia, which currently make up more than 35% of its oil imports. The penalty would kick in by August 27 unless Russia stops the war in Ukraine. The threat is expected to add pressure on both India and Russia ahead of a meeting between Mr. Trump and President Vladimir Putin next week, and the upcoming visit by Mr. Putin to India for the annual summit with Mr. Modi.

“At the global level, Russia is not Iran,” former Indian Ambassador to the U.S. Arun Singh told The Hindu in an interview. “We want Russia, as one of the major powers in the international context, to be an important partner of India, and there’s a memory in India of Russia in the past having provided political support [and] ...defence technology that nobody else was willing to provide,” he added, also warning that if India were to cave in to Mr. Trump’s demands, this would only increase the U.S.’s appetite to demand more concessions from India.

Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)