Category: Middle East

  • MIL-OSI NGOs: UK: JSO judgment shows anti-protest laws must be ‘revised immediately’

    Source: Amnesty International –

    Responding to the Court of Appeal’s judgment on the appeal made by 16 Just Stop Oil protesters against their prison sentences for a range of peaceful protests, Kerry Moscogiuri, Amnesty International UK’s Director of Campaigns, said:

    “Today’s ruling highlights the urgent need for the UK’s protest laws to be revised.

    “It’s good the Court confirmed that the fundamental rights to freedom of expression and assembly will always be relevant to the sentencing of peaceful protesters, and it is welcome that some of the sentences in this case have been reduced. But we are in danger of having laws that only allow for protests that don’t bother anybody, and that treat peaceful protest worse than many violent offences. It’s incredibly unjust that peaceful protesters face being locked up for years.

    “We call on the UK government to drop the new anti-protest laws that they have just tabled themselves and institute a fully independent and public review of the protest laws that have been passed in recent years.”

    Policing protest in the UK

    Today’s ruling involved 16 JSO activists from four separate cases. The decision by the court to conduct the hearing as a single, mass two-day event highlighted the significance of this case – it is rare for so many different appeals to be combined.  

    The right to protest in England and Wales has been eroded in recent years, despite being protected under international law. In 2022, the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Act handed police in England and Wales broad powers to shut down protests and expanded criminal offences and punishments for peaceful protest activities, including a maximum 10-year prison sentence for causing ‘public nuisance’ – the offence at the heart of many of the cases decided today.

    This was followed by the even more draconian Public Order Act 2023 and the particularly controversial Serious Disruption Regulations 2023, regulations that were recently found by the High Court to be unlawful, but which remain in place while the Government pursues an appeal.

    Thanks to this authoritarian legislation, police can define almost any demonstration as “seriously disruptive” and impose restrictions on it. Peaceful tactics like locking on, tunnelling and even causing “serious annoyance” were criminalised. New powers were created to issue orders banning people from even attending protests.  

    There has also been a steep rise in the use of facial recognition technology in the policing of protest. This is despite the UK Court of Appeal concluding in 2020 that the legal framework in place at the time for this technology violated human rights.

    Hundreds of protesters have been arrested. Some have received long custodial sentences and many prosecutions remain pending. Following his visit to the UK in January 2024, the UN Special Rapporteur on Environmental Defenders warned that environmental activists face a “severe crackdown” due to the repressive legislative framework and introduction of new criminal charges.

    New stop and search powers, including suspicionless stop and search, can be used against people at or on the way to protests. Existing evidence highlights that stop-and-search powers are disproportionately used against Black and other minoritised people, itself a feature of an institutionally racist policing and criminal justice system. The expansion of these powers serves as a gateway for further racialised police encounters.

    Anti-protest rhetoric and stigmatisation

    Climate change and pro-Palestine protesters in the UK have been heavily stigmatised and their actions used in part as justification for further anti-protest legislation. High-ranking officials labelled disruption created by environmental protests as “a threat to our way of life” and described activists as “using guerilla tactics”.

    Now the new government seems intent on following its predecessor, by introducing yet more anti protest measures in its new Crime and Policing bill. These include a power to criminalise the wearing of facial coverings at a protest, risking discrimination against Muslim women and people with health conditions, and the power for police to require foreign nationals such as student protesters to leave the country as a condition of issuing a caution, without any of the due process protections that apply to enforced removals.

    Existing international human rights standards require Governments not to introduce any measures that place disproportionate restrictions on people’s freedom of expression and assembly – it is accepted that protest by its very nature can be disruptive. 

    As well as calling for the scrapping of recently passed laws, Amnesty hopes the Government will move away from previously used stigmatising discourse and rhetoric, fuelling harmful stereotypes and portraying peaceful protesters in a way that fuels hostility. This includes characterising protesters as criminals, terrorists, threats to public order and security, or a nuisance to be crushed. Amnesty also recommends that regular and systematised data collection and reporting on restrictions imposed by authorities, including the police, is undertaken.

    MIL OSI NGO

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Final draft agenda – Tuesday, 11 March 2025 – Strasbourg

    Source: European Parliament

    28 Establishing the Reform and Growth Facility for the Republic of Moldova
    Siegfried Mureşan, Sven Mikser (A10-0006/2025     – Amendments; rejection Thursday, 6 March 2025, 13:00 22 European Social Fund Plus post-2027
    Marit Maij (A10-0014/2025     – Amendments by the rapporteur, 71 MEPs at least; Alternative motions for resolutions Wednesday, 5 March 2025, 13:00     – Joint alternative motions for resolutions Thursday, 6 March 2025, 12:00 25 Assessment of the implementation of Horizon Europe in view of its interim evaluation and recommendations for the 10th Research Framework Programme
    Christian Ehler (A10-0021/2025     – Amendments by the rapporteur, 71 MEPs at least; Alternative motions for resolutions Wednesday, 5 March 2025, 13:00     – Joint alternative motions for resolutions Thursday, 6 March 2025, 12:00 48 White paper on the future of European defence     – Motions for resolutions Wednesday, 5 March 2025, 13:00     – Amendments to motions for resolutions; joint motions for resolutions Monday, 10 March 2025, 19:00     – Amendments to joint motions for resolutions Monday, 10 March 2025, 20:00     – Requests for “separate”, “split” and “roll-call” votes Tuesday, 11 March 2025, 16:00 42 The need for EU support towards a just transition and reconstruction in Syria     – Motions for resolutions Friday, 7 March 2025, 12:00     – Amendments to motions for resolutions; joint motions for resolutions Tuesday, 11 March 2025, 12:00     – Amendments to joint motions for resolutions Tuesday, 11 March 2025, 13:00     – Requests for “separate”, “split” and “roll-call” votes Tuesday, 11 March 2025, 19:00 Separate votes – Split votes – Roll-call votes Texts put to the vote on Tuesday Friday, 7 March 2025, 12:00 Texts put to the vote on Wednesday Monday, 10 March 2025, 19:00 Texts put to the vote on Thursday Tuesday, 11 March 2025, 19:00 Motions for resolutions concerning debates on cases of breaches of human rights, democracy and the rule of law (Rule 150) Wednesday, 12 March 2025, 19:00

    MIL OSI Europe News

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Final draft agenda – Wednesday, 12 March 2025 – Strasbourg

    Source: European Parliament

    20 European Semester for economic policy coordination 2025
    Fernando Navarrete Rojas (A10-0022/2025     – Amendments Wednesday, 5 March 2025, 13:00 17 European Semester for economic policy coordination: employment and social priorities for 2025
    Maravillas Abadía Jover (A10-0023/2025     – Amendments Wednesday, 5 March 2025, 13:00 62 Action Plan for the Automotive Industry     – Motion for a resolution Wednesday, 26 March 2025, 13:00     – Amendments to motions for resolutions; joint motions for resolutions Friday, 28 March 2025, 12:00     – Amendments to joint motions for resolutions Friday, 28 March 2025, 13:00     – Requests for “separate”, “split” and “roll-call” votes Monday, 31 March 2025, 19:00 61 Parliament’s calendar of part-sessions – 2026     – Amendments Monday, 10 March 2025, 19:00     – Requests for “separate”, “split” and “roll-call” votes Tuesday, 11 March 2025, 16:00 38 Continuing the unwavering EU support for Ukraine, after three years of Russia’s war of aggression     – Motions for resolutions Friday, 7 March 2025, 12:00     – Amendments to motions for resolutions; joint motions for resolutions Tuesday, 11 March 2025, 12:00     – Amendments to joint motions for resolutions Tuesday, 11 March 2025, 13:00     – Requests for “separate”, “split” and “roll-call” votes Tuesday, 11 March 2025, 19:00 48 White paper on the future of European defence     – Motions for resolutions Wednesday, 5 March 2025, 13:00     – Amendments to motions for resolutions; joint motions for resolutions Monday, 10 March 2025, 19:00     – Amendments to joint motions for resolutions Monday, 10 March 2025, 20:00     – Requests for “separate”, “split” and “roll-call” votes Tuesday, 11 March 2025, 16:00 42 The need for EU support towards a just transition and reconstruction in Syria     – Motions for resolutions Friday, 7 March 2025, 12:00     – Amendments to motions for resolutions; joint motions for resolutions Tuesday, 11 March 2025, 12:00     – Amendments to joint motions for resolutions Tuesday, 11 March 2025, 13:00     – Requests for “separate”, “split” and “roll-call” votes Tuesday, 11 March 2025, 19:00 51 Social and employment aspects of restructuring processes: the need to protect jobs and workers’ rights     – Motion for a resolution Wednesday, 5 March 2025, 13:00     – Amendments to motions for resolutions; joint motions for resolutions Friday, 7 March 2025, 12:00     – Amendments to joint motions for resolutions Friday, 7 March 2025, 13:00 60 Democracy and human rights in Thailand, notably the lese-majesty law and the deportation of Uyghur refugees     – Motion for a resolution Monday, 10 March 2025, 20:00     – Amendments to motions for resolutions; joint motions for resolutions Wednesday, 12 March 2025, 13:00     – Amendments to joint motions for resolutions Wednesday, 12 March 2025, 14:00 63 Severe political, humanitarian and human rights crisis in Sudan, in particular the sexual violence and child rape     – Motion for a resolution Monday, 10 March 2025, 20:00     – Amendments to motions for resolutions; joint motions for resolutions Wednesday, 12 March 2025, 13:00     – Amendments to joint motions for resolutions Wednesday, 12 March 2025, 14:00 64 Unlawful detention and sham trials of Armenian hostages, including high-ranking political representatives from Nagorno-Karabakh, by Azerbaijan     – Motion for a resolution Monday, 10 March 2025, 20:00     – Amendments to motions for resolutions; joint motions for resolutions Wednesday, 12 March 2025, 13:00     – Amendments to joint motions for resolutions Wednesday, 12 March 2025, 14:00 Separate votes – Split votes – Roll-call votes Texts put to the vote on Tuesday Friday, 7 March 2025, 12:00 Texts put to the vote on Wednesday Monday, 10 March 2025, 19:00 Texts put to the vote on Thursday Tuesday, 11 March 2025, 19:00 Motions for resolutions concerning debates on cases of breaches of human rights, democracy and the rule of law (Rule 150) Wednesday, 12 March 2025, 19:00

    MIL OSI Europe News

  • MIL-OSI: Bybit Web3 Expands bbSOL Utility with Jito Restaking for Enhanced Rewards and Liquidity

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    DUBAI, United Arab Emirates, March 07, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Bybit, the world’s second-largest cryptocurrency exchange by trading volume, has partnered with P2P to introduce rstSOL, a token minted when users stake their bbSOL through Jito’s restaking protocol. With this collaboration, bbSOL holders can now deposit their tokens into the rstSOL vault on Jito, unlocking additional restaking rewards and enhanced capital efficiency. Bybit Web3 expands bbSOL utility in 10 DeFi use cases such as liquidity provision, lending, restaking, and yield trading. 

    Jito (Re) staking is a multi-asset staking protocol designed for Node Consensus Networks (NCNs). It allows staked assets to be tokenized into Vault Receipt Tokens (VRTs), improving liquidity and flexibility. With Jito (Re)staking, NCNs can customize staking rules, penalties, and rewards to optimize security and tokenomics. Due to its unique features, this restaking module is an ideal choice for launching new networks by leveraging shared security. This integration enables users to maximize staking rewards, maintain liquidity, and gain exposure to potential airdrops within the Solana ecosystem.

    “At Bybit, we’re always looking for ways to unlock more opportunities for our users in the Web3 space,” said Emily Bao, Head of Spot and Web3 at Bybit. “Through our partnership with P2P and integration with Jito, bbSOL holders can now access restaking rewards and optimize their staking strategies without losing liquidity. This marks another step forward in our mission to offer cutting-edge financial solutions within the crypto ecosystem.”

    How Jito Restaking Works for bbSOL Holders

    Users can amplify their staking returns in three simple steps:

    1. Obtaining bbSOL involves staking SOL on Bybit Web3, which provides bbSOL in return. Alternatively, bbSOL acquired on Bybit can be transferred to a Web3 wallet.
    2. Connecting to Jito Restaking requires navigating to the Jito platform, using a compatible wallet, and accessing the rstSOL vault.
    3. Restaking bbSOL allows deposits into the rstSOL vault, where additional rewards are generated.

    Bybit’s continued expansion into Web3 staking solutions strengthens its position as a leading innovator in blockchain finance. With Jito restaking, bbSOL holders can enhance their staking strategies, benefiting from increased liquidity, higher returns, and greater flexibility within the Solana ecosystem.

    For more details, users can refer to Bybit’s official guide on utilizing bbSOL with Jito restaking.

    #Bybit / #TheCryptoArk / #BybitWeb3

    About Bybit

    Bybit is the world’s second-largest cryptocurrency exchange by trading volume, serving a global community of over 60 million users. Founded in 2018, Bybit is redefining openness in the decentralized world by creating a simpler, open and equal ecosystem for everyone. With a strong focus on Web3, Bybit partners strategically with leading blockchain protocols to provide robust infrastructure and drive on-chain innovation. Renowned for its secure custody, diverse marketplaces, intuitive user experience, and advanced blockchain tools, Bybit bridges the gap between TradFi and DeFi, empowering builders, creators, and enthusiasts to unlock the full potential of Web3. Discover the future of decentralized finance at Bybit.com.

    For more details about Bybit, please visit Bybit Press

    For media inquiries, please contact: media@bybit.com 

    For updates, please follow: Bybit’s Communities and Social Media

    Discord | Facebook | Instagram | LinkedIn | Reddit | Telegram | TikTok | X | Youtube

    Contact

    Head of PR

    Tony Au

    Bybit

    media@bybit.com

    A photo accompanying this announcement is available at https://www.globenewswire.com/NewsRoom/AttachmentNg/1399478d-0b70-4131-8d33-c2cba527d5d5

    The MIL Network

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Assessing the Damage of a Trump-Putin Deal

    Source: Universities – Science Po in English

    This is not the “end of history” heralded by some after 1989, but certainly the end of an era marked by the post-war transatlantic alliance of Western democracies. The Alliance was created at the instigation of the United States; it is being undone by the United States. Trump’s pivot to Russia in dealing with the war in Ukraine closes a 75-year-old chapter in our history. It leaves behind a series of casualties’, not just collateral damage.

    Jacques Rupnik, Research Professor Emeritus at Sciences Po Center for International Studies (CERI) briefly sketched the most important. An article originally published by our partner The Conversation.

    The first casualty is Ukraine

    After the Alliance, first and most obvious is Ukraine. After the roasting given to president Zelensky in the White House, broadcast live to the world, the message is clear: there will be a ‘peace’ negotiated by Trump and Putin (their foreign ministers’ meeting was held in Ryiad) and imposed on the Ukrainians. It’s not a “give and take” negotiation, it is “take it or leave it”. Trump branded as a minor trophy in his speech to the Congress on 4 March 2025, the letter received from the Ukrainian president, revising his defiant stance: “I want peace quickly and am prepared to negotiate now”. “Negotiate”? He has not so far been invited to a negotiation which will be about Ukraine without Ukraine. Chose your historical analogy: Munich where Britain and France abandoned Czechoslovakia to Hitler in 1938 or the Hitler-Stalin pact of August 1939 which divided East European spheres of influence between them.

    In accepting the would-be ‘peace deal’ Ukraine would also give the US access to rare earth in Ukraine (some of it happens to be in Donbas controlled by Russia). In short, Ukraine’s choice, now deprived of US military backing (including intelligence and the capacity to strike in Russian territory), is: do you want to continue fighting on your own with the risk of being gradually exhausted and occupied by Russia or are you willing to cede, say, half of your territory – to the “Donald Trump & Co” mining company? Make-up your mind fast as the US president promised the deal would be settled within hundred days.

    The second casualty is Europe

    The second casualty is Europe or more precisely the political and security predicament inherited from the cold-war era and confirmed during America’s “unipolar moment” (Charles Krauthammer) which followed 1989. The moment was just that, a moment. Until now, the overwhelming majority of EU member-states cherished as an article of faith the idea that the American security umbrella was there and would stay there. That meant clinging to US foreign and security agenda and provide support to US international adventures including the 2003 war in Iraq. The East Europeans in particularly were adamant: you follow the US in the Mesopotamian desert, whether or not you believed the case made for it, but because you considered it as the best investment in your own security just as you were joining NATO. America was and remained the “indispensable nation” as Madeleine Albright put it. For many, particularly in Germany, Trump’s first term in office was seen as a mere parenthesis. Now it is Biden’s presidency which looks like a parenthesis between Trump I and Trump II.

    Macron’s call for European “strategic autonomy” or “European sovereignty” were seen with some suspicion as perhaps another neo-Gaullist ploy to distance Europeans from their American allies. A misperception as what was Macron was proposing was “Eurogaullism”, i.e. not French but European “strategic autonomy”.

    The harsh truth about Trump’s pivot to Russia

    Now the Europeans in a state of shock have to confront some harsh truths about Trump’s pivot to Russia and the Alliance losing its most precious asset: trust. The Nato article 5 guarantee – the principle of collective defence, which means that an attack against one Ally is considered as an attack against all Allies – is still formally there, but the faith in the American guarantee is gone.

    What we have just witnessed is the ‘de-coupling’ between the European and American allies. That had been a long-term objective of Soviet foreign policy during the cold war; it now comes true under Putin. In the 1980’s when the Soviet SS20 medium range missiles were deployed (could hit Western Europe, not the US), West Europeans supported the deployment of American Pershing missiles. French president Mitterrand went to the Bundestag to make the case in the face of a strong pacifist reaction in Germany: “Les missiles sont à l’Est, les pacifistes sont à l’Ouest” (“Missiles are in the East, pacifists are in the West”), Mitterrand said.

    A defining moment for Europeans

    This is now a defining moment for Europeans and it remains to be seen if and how they will rise to the occasion. The Munich conference displayed one, not very encouraging version. J. D. Vance first surprised his audience saying he was more worried about the threat from within (liberalism and its liberal and/or progressive values) than from without (Putin). He chastised the Europeans for not living up to the democratic values, leaving the European establishment present at the conference baffled and amazed: not just the war in Ukraine, but democracy too was now explictly part of the new Atlantic divide. Tensions between popular sovereignty as expressed in elections, and the rule of law with the separation of powers and its constitutional constraints, has been at the center of a more than two centuries old debate on both sides of the Atlantic (back to Tocqueville and his warnings about the “tyrany of the majority”). Vance made the case for the Trumpian version of “populist democracy” attacking the prevailing European version of liberal democracy based on the rule of law. Instead of responding in kind, as Vance rushed off to his meeting with the leader of the extreme right AfD, the president of the Munich conference, Christoph Heussgen, an experienced German diplomat, collapsed in tears. The whipping boy vs the weeping boy. A sad symbolic moment for Europe.

    However, in response to Trump’s pivot to Russia, the Europeans are coming to terms with the fact that they are now on their own. The meeting organised in London on 2 March 2025, suggests that a coalition of the willing is in the making in support of Ukraine and determined to give substance to a European “common security and defense policy” long discussed, now to be implemented.

    Who will be part of it?

    Who will be part of it? France and Britain, because of their military capacity, their nuclear power status and their old strategic culture. The Weimar triangle Paris-Berlin Warsaw is likely be its crucial axis within the EU. Macron has taken an increasingly tough stance on Russia and can claim to be a forerunner in terms of Europe’s “strategic autonomy”. The new German chancellor, Friedrich Merz, has for the first time openly suggested that defense spending should not be constrained by outdated spending limits and that German/European security will have to be envisaged independently of the US.

    Poland’s Donald Tusk, now in charge of EU’s rotating presidency, has been a forerunner in his warnings about Russian expansionist ambitions and is the most explicit among Europeans concerning the effort needed in terms of building a European defense capacity (Poland spends 4,5% of the GDP for defense). The coalition will also include the Nordic countries: Danmark, mobilised in defense of… Greenland (!), Finland and Sweden who know a thing or two about the Russian threat and have now joined Nato only to discover that its founder is on the way out…

    As Tusk aptly put it: “500 million Europeans expect 340 million Americans to protect them against 140 million Russians”. Time for Europeans to take charge of their own destiny.

    MIL OSI Europe News

  • MIL-OSI USA: ICYMI: Secretaries Wright and Burgum Join American Energy Workers in Applauding President Trump’s Leadership & Historic Investment in American Energy Infrastructure

    Source: US Department of Energy

    PLAQUEMINES PARRISH, LOUISIANA—U.S. Secretary of Energy Chris Wright and U.S. Secretary of the Interior Doug Burgum, both leaders of the National Energy Dominance Council (NEDC), today joined more than a thousand American energy workers at Venture Global’s Plaquemine LNG Export facility to highlight the impacts of President Trump’s energy agenda. The secretaries joined Louisiana Governor Jeff Landry and Venture Global CEO Mike Sabel in delivering remarks before touring the facility and speaking to the press.

    Thanks to President Trump’s commitment to restoring American energy dominance and day one reversal of the Biden-Harris LNG export permit ban, Sabel announced today that Venture Global would be making an additional $18 billion expansion to the Plaquemine LNG Export facility – making the facility the largest in the United States.

    Less than 50 days into the Trump administration, American energy companies are producing more energy here in the U.S. – lowering prices, providing good-paying jobs, strengthening local communities, and bolstering America’s national security.

    In case you missed it, remarks from Secretary Wright and Burgum are below:

    Secretary Wright:

    America is back.

    You, all of you here today, are bringing America back, making us greater and making us stronger. I could not be more humbled and proud to stand among you today. God bless what you do today and what you do every day.

    I want to also thank President Trump. He worked tirelessly, even putting his own life at risk to go back to Washington to become our president again, to bring commonsense back to Washington, DC. It all left the city. He brought back common sense with a simple agenda unleash American energy, unleash American business, and unleash the American spirit.

    And I see it here today with all of you. He’s from the East Coast. He’s a real estate developer. But instinctually he gets energy. He knows that energy is not one sector of the economy. It’s the sector of the economy that enables everything else, everything else.

    I want to thank the governor of Louisiana. Giant projects like this, they’re not getting built in California, where I lived many years. They’re not getting built in a lot of places. This takes leadership and boldness. This governor of Louisiana has allowed a flourishing in the Louisiana Gulf Coast and across the state. Louisiana today exports more LNG than every state in the United States. This is number one.

    That that that bar is going to be raised even higher because in the next several years, Louisiana will become a larger exporter of liquefied natural gas than any nation on Earth. You could be your own country and be number one.

    Venture global, as we heard from Mike Sable, the great, bold founding CEO, has taken huge risk. They raised money from all across America, from American like us, to build this business and make a bet. Make a bet on American energy production.

    The United States 15 years ago was the largest importer of natural gas in the world. And with bold entrepreneurs and leadership like President Trump, our governor in Louisiana, and Venture Global, today, the United States is the largest net exporter of natural gas in the world and growing strong, growing strong.

    What’s the fastest growing source of energy on the planet by far is natural gas. I looked at this over the last 15 years. Nothing else is close. Oil is second, by the way. The fastest growing sense source of energy in the planet is natural gas. The largest producer of natural gas on the planet is the United States.

    And so hence we’re growing our exports because of your work, because of your efforts, we’re going to increase the prosperity of America, increase the strength of America, increase the opportunities for Americans and for the citizens of the world.

    Where does this gas go? What’s this gas going to do? It’s going to make fertilizer so farmers can grow more food and feed everyone. It’s by far the largest source of electricity in the United States. Natural gas is. It’s to make petrochemicals. All the clothes were wearing the toys. Our cars are our computers. Our phones. Those are all made of natural gas.

    All the uses of natural gas, you can say. In short, they make our lives possible. They allow us to have a modern world and live these wonderful lives we live.

    But that doesn’t fall from heaven. That doesn’t just fall on earth. It has to be made, produced and delivered. And that only happens with hard working people like you. You are changing the world. You are changing people’s lives.

    I’ll end there. I just am humbled to be among you. I’m proud to be among you. I cannot overstate how important what you’re doing is and how aligned it is with the agenda of President Donald Trump. This guy wants America to be great. He wants America to be strong. He wants to lower our cost and expand opportunities for Americans.

    A strong, energized, empowered America is not just good for Americans. It’s good for the world. God bless you. God bless America and God bless President Trump.

    Secretary Burgum:

    What a gorgeous day we have here today. And today is a day of gratitude. And it’s a day of celebration.

    You’ve heard from the great speakers up here, my friend, Governor Jeff Landry. We’ve got two amazing entrepreneurs, Mike and Bob and the amazing Chris Wright. But we’re celebrating today American innovation, American entrepreneurship, and American workers. I stand here before you humbled because I can’t think of anything more patriotic.

    There’s no place I’d rather be than here looking at all of you standing here among this, this creation that you’ve built. And it started with two guys that said, hey, maybe we can do something that’s never been done before. Maybe we can invent a new way to think about how we want to process natural gas. Maybe we can figure out that the U.S., instead of being a net importer, is going to be a net exporter.

    And it was a couple of guys just sitting around a table that came up with the idea of Venture Global. Then you hear, it’s like when only in America, now is going to be one of the most important and influential energy companies in the world. That happens in our country only when we get the government out of the way.

    It happens when we cut red tape. One of our pathways to energy dominance is just unleashing the incredible resources that we have in this country. Getting the red tape, getting the federal government off the back of the worker, off the back of companies, and so that everybody can do the amazing work and build projects like this.

    And so, we’re celebrating that today. But I also said today is a day of gratitude. And I want to bring a message from President Trump to all of you, because President Trump fights for all of you every day. This guy I know everybody here, you work hard, you put in a long day, you go home, you get up and you do it the next day. He respects that. And you know what? He does that too.

    This guy didn’t take a day off for the last 90 days before the election. Then the next day he got up and he didn’t. He didn’t take a day off. He just started jamming all the way through to January 20th. And then since January 20th, he’s gotten more done than any president in the history of the United States ever has in their first month and a half.

    And somebody asked me, what’s it like working for the president? And I said, well said, you guys, you watch football. And they said, yeah, I watch football. I said, well, think about this. Think about the best football team ever assembled. The President Trump is the team owner and he’s the manager, and he’s the head coach, and he’s playing quarterback and he’s running a no huddle offense. And everybody that’s working for him has got to scramble back to the line for the next play, because we’re just going that fast every single day. And the change that he’s driving, the red tape that he’s cutting, it’s absolutely incredible. And one of the things that we’re here today, the announcement today is happening.

    The prior administration had a full-on attack against U.S. energy. They literally were stopping the permitting, killing jobs, killing capital formation, the money to come together to build something like this. And you know what that did that hurt every American and it helped our adversaries. President Trump is fighting for you every day. And he’s fighting because he believes in the we have U.S. energy dominance. It does two things. It builds American prosperity, and it brings peace abroad.

    We’re in two proxy wars right now. And both of our adversaries in those wars, Russia and Iran, Iran funding 24 terrorist groups. They’re funding those wars against us with energy production. With a facility like this where we can sell LNG around the world, we’re literally going to stop war.

    So, when you guys go to work every day, tell yourselves you’re just not doing a job building the most amazing, most technological plant in the planet. The biggest construction project in North America. You’re also building world peace. And the other thing you’re also doing is you’re building prosperity here at home for everybody that’s here.

    And it all starts with one thing, and that’s American energy. And you’re going to say it with me because with energy dominance part of our job is to cut red tape. And the other is we got to get more things flowing through those pipes heading towards Louisiana. And how are we going to do that?

    You know, how we are going to do it is three words. What are we going to do. We’re going to drill, baby drill one more time. What are we going to do. We’re going to drill, baby drill. And when we do that, we’re also going to mine baby, mine. We’re going to get critical minerals going. So, we’re stop buying critical minerals from China. We’re going to map baby, map, and we get the US Geological Survey going back and actually discovering all the resources we have on America’s balance sheet.

    People talk about America’s debt, $36 trillion in debt. Our assets could be 3 to 5 times more than that. But we don’t even know that because we’ve stopped looking for all the resource assets in this country. And we’re going to become an energy powerhouse. And with that, we’re going to bring inflation down for you and your families. And here at home, prosperity in America and world peace abroad.

    That’s what you’re working on every day. How exciting is it to be here with all of you? And again, a message of gratitude for President Trump to you. Nothing more patriotic than American worker that’s working to build energy dominance for this country. Your impact? It carries far and wide. It touches people all over the world. And it certainly helps your kids and your grandkids, and it helps our country reduce our debt, do everything that we’re doing.

    So, a big thank you from President Trump and a big thank you to the innovators and entrepreneurs that built this place and came up with the idea. And none of it happens without all of you. But let’s go. And what’s at the end? I want to say, I will say one thing when you’re doing when we’re doing this today, what are we doing together?

    We’re making America great again. One more time. What are we doing? Making America great again. Thank you. Way to go, venture global. Thank you all.

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Academic freedom and democracy under siege: how a Nobel peace prize could help defend them

    Source: Universities – Science Po in English

    Echoing the Stand Up for Science movement, which was organised in the US to defend academic freedom, a call to mobilise in France has been launched for Friday, 7 March. Conferences, rallies and marches are being organised on the initiative of scientists united under the banner of Stand Up for Science France. Sciences Po, along with its partner The Conversation, has been committed from the outset to supporting those who advance research.

    March 7 has been recognized as the “Day of the Stand Up for Science Movement”, launched in 2017 in response to the anti-science actions of the first Trump administration. Under the second, attacks on scientists and scientific inquiry have escalated into a systematic assault–tantamount to a coup d’Etat against science itself.

    While Donald Trump is often portrayed as erratic, his policies in this area have followed a consistent trajectory. His new administration has once again declared ‘war’ on evidence-based national policymaking and science diplomacy in foreign affairs as evidenced by several early actions. Immediately after taking office, Donald Trump issued executive orders freezing or canceling tens of billions in research funding. All National Science Foundation projects have been halted pending review, while the National Institutes of Health faces suspensions under Health and Human Services directives. The US has withdrawn from the Paris Agreement and the World Health Organization, alongside a sweeping review of 90% of USAID-funded projects, signaling a major retreat from climate and global health diplomacy. Federal agencies and universities are in turmoil, leaving thousands of research-professors in limbo amid a politically driven funding freeze. The 2025 March simply calls for the restoration of federal research funding and an end to government censorship and political interference in science.

    The US is the world’s undisputed scientific superpower–for now

    While the Trump administration is not the sole force undermining academia worldwide, its actions are particularly striking coming from the world’s leading scientific superpower. Moreover, the situation is especially concerning because developments in the United States often have a ripple effect, shaping policies in other regions in the years that follow.

    Neither of the world’s top two scientific superpowers–Washington and Beijing–is positioned to champion academic freedom. China, having failed a liberal constitutional tradition and academic independence since the 1920s, restricts academic freedom to the confines of one-party rule. Caught between these rival scientific giants–both partners and competitors–the “old” Europe and like-minded coutries remain the only actors capable of setting new standards for academic freedom.

    A Nobel prize for academic freedom

    A decisive step toward its legal protection would be formal recognition by the Nobel Committees for Peace and Science of academic freedom’s fundamental role–both in ensuring scientific excellence and as a pillar of free, democratic societies.

    For the past decade, the Scholars at Risk association (SAR) has documented a broader global decline in academic freedom in its annual Free to Think Report. The 2024 edition highlights particularly alarming situations in 18 countries and territories (including the United States), which recorded 391 attacks on scholars, students, or institutions across 51 regions in a year. Data from the Academic Freedom Index in Berlin confirm that more than half of the world’s population lives in regions where academic freedom is either entirely or severely restricted. Some of the most concerning conditions are in emerging scientific ecosystems such as Turkey, Brazil, Egypt, South Africa, or Saudi Arabia. The overall trend is deteriorating: only 10 out of 179 countries have improved, while many democratic regimes are increasingly affected.

    Academic freedom in the European Union remains relatively high compared to the rest of the world. However, nine EU member states fall below the regional average, and in eight of them, it has declined over the past decade–signaling a gradual erosion of this fundamental value. Hungary ranks the lowest among EU countries, placing in the bottom 20–30% worldwide. Recent laws have further weakened university autonomy across the EU: financial autonomy in Austria, Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, and Slovakia; organizational autonomy in Slovenia, Estonia, and Denmark; staffing autonomy in Croatia and Slovakia; and academic autonomy in Denmark and Estonia. Moreover, the European Parliament’s first report on academic freedom (2023) highlights emerging threats in France–political, educational, and societal–that impact the freedom of research, teaching, and study.

    Academic freedom, a professional right granted to a few for the benefit of all

    Freedom of expression, a fundamental pillar of academic freedom, has long been established as a human right, overcoming centuries of censorship and authoritarian control. In contrast, academic freedom is a more recent principle, granting scholars–recognized by their peers–the right and responsibility to research and teach freely in pursuit of knowledge. Like press freedom for journalists, it is a right granted to a few for the benefit of all.

    Rooted in medieval Europe, academic freedom has evolved from a privilege granted to students in the Quartier Latin to a recognized principle in international rights frameworks. It gained a collective and concrete dimension in the late 18th and early 19th centuries with the rise of the modern university. Wilhelm von Humboldt, founder of the modern public university in Berlin (1810), articulated the concept of ‘freedom of science’ (Wissenschaftsfreiheit), later enshrined in the Weimar Constitution of 1919, which declared that “art, science, and education are free.” The rise of American universities around the same time reshaped the concept, giving rise to “professional academic freedom.” This was formalized in the American Association of University Professors’ 1915 Declaration of Principles on Academic Freedom and Tenure, which affirmed the scholar’s primary duty to seek and establish truth. Though its roots lie in Germany, academic freedom ultimately became a cornerstone of American academic discourse.

    In the United States, academic freedom draws from multiple sources, with its protection varying by state laws, customs, institutional practices, and the status of higher education institutions. However, U.S. Supreme Court rulings have gradually reinforced its constitutional foundation, particularly after the McCarthy era, by invoking the First Amendment. Landmark cases such as Adler v. Board of Education (1952), Wieman v. Updegraff (1952), and Sweezy v. New Hampshire (1957) helped establish a constitutional doctrine on academic freedom. Finally, Keyishian v. Board of Regents (1967) extended First Amendment protections to academia, ruling that mandatory loyalty oaths violated both academic freedom and freedom of association.

    Interestingly, the American interpretation of academic freedom is currently more restrictive than the German model in certain respects. Article 5(3) of the 1989 Basic Law affirms the “right to adopt public organizational measures essential to protect a space of freedom, fostering independent scientific activity”. In contrast, the U.S. places greater emphasis on prohibitions and prioritizing individual rights over institutional autonomy.

    The ‘right to be wrong’

    Despite local variations, academic freedom is fundamentally tied to a shared vision of the university that upholds freedom of thought, with rationality and pluralism at its core. It includes the genuine “right to be wrong”–the understanding that a scientific opinion may be incorrect or even proven so does not diminish its protection. This stands in stark contrast to the anti-science, scientistic, or techno-nationalist approach, which views knowledge as a tool of power to serve a predetermined truth and objective of dominance. Authoritarian science, driven by power interests, seeks to diminish critical humanities and social sciences while elevating religion. It tends to reject interdisciplinary work, is exclusively mathematized, and is oriented toward a centralized yet deregulated autocratic tech-utopian state model.

    Since 1945, we have operated under the illusion that academic freedom is an indispensable condition for scientific excellence. However, we have recently learned that no systematic link exists between academic freedom and breakthrough scientific innovation in our era of new technologies. Given these circumstances, this proposal advocates for a nomination for the Nobel Peace Prize, for the first time in its history, in recognition of academic freedom.

    The Nobel Prize Committees for Science and Peace share the responsibility of using their prestigious platforms to uphold fundamental scientific and democratic values. They are uniquely positioned to champion humanist science, reinforcing its importance for scholars, students, and civil societies worldwide. Since the 1950s, around 90% of Nobel Prize laureates in scientific fields have either been US citizens or have studied and worked at Ivy League research institutions.

    While some US scientists are contesting actions of the Trump administration in court, academics worldwide should stand in solidarity with their American colleagues in resisting the erosion of science. To strengthen their efforts, they require the support of the Nobel Prize Committees.

    MIL OSI Europe News

  • MIL-OSI Russia: SPbPU presented Russian education at the exhibition in Ankara

    Translartion. Region: Russians Fedetion –

    Source: Peter the Great St Petersburg Polytechnic University – Peter the Great St Petersburg Polytechnic University –

    Peter the Great St. Petersburg Polytechnic University took part in a major educational exhibition The Conference 2025 Spring Turkey Fair, organized by the leading exhibition operator A2.

    SPbPU was the only Russian university at the exhibition. The event also included universities from Europe, the USA, China, Azerbaijan, and some Middle Eastern countries.

    The visitors were especially interested in SPbPU’s educational programs in English. The Polytechnic University was represented by Albina Bakurina, Deputy Head of the Department for Work with Foreign Students. She spoke about the possibilities of receiving scholarships from the Government of the Russian Federation, as well as about admission to contract education. The Polytechnic stand was very popular: queues formed at it throughout the exhibition.

    It was gratifying to note that applicants and their parents showed interest in Russia and, in particular, in SPbPU. Some visitors to the exhibition said that they were considering only Russia for higher education. Therefore, we hope for an influx of Turkish students to the Polytechnic University, – noted Albina Bakurina.

    During her visit to Ankara, Albina Bakurina also visited the Rossotrudnichestvo representative office. The meeting with the head of the representative office, Lyudmila Çalışkan, was devoted to issues of promoting Russian education and the Polytechnic brand in Turkey.

    SPbPU’s participation in the exhibition is an opportunity to present our educational programs to Turkish applicants, and we see their growing interest in Russian education, especially in the Polytechnic University. This confirms that our university is recognizable and in demand abroad. We hope that such events will help attract talented students from Turkey and strengthen our presence in the international educational market, – noted the head of the SPbPU International Education Department Evgeniya Satalkina.

    Please note: This information is raw content directly from the source of the information. It is exactly what the source states and does not reflect the position of MIL-OSI or its clients.

    MIL OSI Russia News

  • MIL-OSI: DNO to Acquire Sval Energi in Transformative Transaction; Quadruples North Sea Output

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    Oslo, 7 March 2025 – DNO ASA, the Norwegian oil and gas operator, today announced it has reached agreement to acquire 100 percent of the shares of Sval Energi Group AS from HitecVision for a cash consideration of USD 450 million based on an enterprise value of USD 1.6 billion.

    The Sval Energi assets are complementary to DNO’s North Sea portfolio and will add scale and diversification to solidify the Company’s position as a leading listed European independent oil and gas company. The acquisition will be financed from existing liquidity including available credit facilities. The Company will set in place the optimal capital structure prior to completion.

    “This is a rare opportunity to acquire a portfolio of high-quality oil and gas assets on the Norwegian Continental Shelf,” said DNO’s Executive Chairman Bijan Mossavar-Rahmani, “and we have moved fast to capture it.” He continued that “given low unit production costs and limited near-term investment requirements, the Sval Energi portfolio is highly cash generative and will help underpin development of the numerous discoveries we have made in Norway recently,” he added.

    This transaction will:

    • Boost DNO’s global net production by two thirds to around 140,000 barrels of oil equivalent per day (boepd) on a 2024 pro forma basis and proven and probable (2P) reserves by 50 percent to 423 million barrels of oil equivalent (boe)
    • Increase North Sea 2P reserves from 48 million boe to 189 million boe post-closing and 2C resources from 144 million boe to 246 million boe
    • Quadruple North Sea production to around 80,000 boepd, propelling the Company to the upper ranks of Norwegian Continental Shelf players
    • Turn the North Sea into the biggest contributor to Company’s net production with some 60 percent of the total (with the balance coming predominantly from two operated fields in the Kurdistan region of Iraq)
    • Provide tax synergies, G&A savings and lower DNO’s borrowing costs
    • Strengthen presence in core areas on the Norwegian Continental Shelf where the Company has unparalleled exploration success since 2020 with 14 discoveries including Bergknapp/Åre, Bergknapp, Carmen, Cuvette, Heisenberg, Kveikje, Mistral, Norma, Ofelia, Othello, Overly, Ringand, Røver Nord and Røver Sør, together adding contingent resources (2C) of around 100 million boe net to DNO
    • Capitalize on Sval Energi’s extensive portfolio which includes interests in hubs and existing tiebacks that provide potential development synergies with DNO’s discoveries

    Sval Energi in brief:

    • Non-operated interest in 16 producing fields offshore Norway, with net production of 64,100 boepd in 2024
    • 141 million boe in net 2P reserves and 102 million boe of net 2C resources
    • Largest assets (measured by net 2P reserves) are Nova, Martin Linge, Kvitebjørn, Eldfisk, Maria, Symra and Ekofisk
    • Portfolio is highly cash generative (cash flow from operations totaled USD 565 million in 2024) with low production cost (USD 14 per boe) and limited near-term investments
    • Balanced portfolio split about equally between liquids and gas
    • Additional upside and production potential from organic growth in producing assets, fields under development (Maria Revitalization, Symra, Dvalin North) and discoveries (Cerisa, Ringhorne North, Beta), as well as redevelopment opportunities (Albuskjell, West Ekofisk)
    • The MLK wind farm will be carved out prior to closing and is not part of the transaction
    • A team of 93 employees to be integrated into the DNO organization

    The acquisition will be financed with existing cash and other debt financing facilities available to DNO. At yearend 2024, the Company held USD 900 million in cash and a further USD 100 million liquidity under its reserve-based lending (RBL) facility. Additional funding sources include new bond and RBL debt as well as offtake-based financing.

    The effective date of the transaction is 1 January 2025, with expected completion mid-year 2025, subject to customary regulatory approvals from the Norwegian Ministry of Energy, the Norwegian Ministry of Finance and competition authorities.

    Pareto Securities is acting as financial advisor to DNO and Advokatfirmaet Thommessen as legal counsel.

    DNO’s executive management will participate in a videoconference call, including a question-and-answer session, today at 10:00 CET.

    Please visit www.dno.no to participate in the call.

    A presentation of the transaction is attached to this release.

    – 

    For further information, please contact:
    Media: media@dno.no
    Investors: investor.relations@dno.no

    – 

    DNO ASA is a leading Norwegian oil and gas operator active in the Middle East, the North Sea and West Africa. Founded in 1971 and listed on the Oslo Stock Exchange, the Company holds stakes in onshore and offshore licenses at various stages of exploration, development and production in the Kurdistan region of Iraq, Norway, the United Kingdom, Côte d’Ivoire, Netherlands and Yemen. More information is available at www.dno.no

    This announcement is considered to include inside information pursuant to the EU Market Abuse Regulation and is subject to the disclosure requirements pursuant to section 5-12 of the Norwegian Securities Trading Act. This announcement was published by Gudmund Hartveit, Manager Corporate Development and IR DNO ASA, at the date and time set out above.

    This information is subject to the disclosure requirements pursuant to Section 5-12 the Norwegian Securities Trading Act

    Attachment

    The MIL Network

  • MIL-OSI China: China supports peace restoration plan for Gaza initiated by Egypt and other Arab nations: FM

    Source: China State Council Information Office

    Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi, also a member of the Political Bureau of the Communist Party of China Central Committee, attends a press conference on China’s foreign policy and external relations on the sidelines of the third session of the 14th National People’s Congress (NPC) in Beijing, capital of China, March 7, 2025. [Photo by Lun Xiaoxuan/China.org.cn]

    China supports the plan for restoring peace in Gaza initiated by Egypt and other Arab countries, Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi said on Friday.

    Gaza belongs to the Palestinian people, and is an inseparable part of the Palestinian territory. Changing the status of Gaza by forceful means will not bring about peace, but only new chaos, Wang told a press conference held on the sidelines of the ongoing annual session of the national legislature.

    Wang called for efforts to promote a comprehensive and lasting ceasefire, ramp up humanitarian assistance, observe the principle of “the Palestinians governing Palestine,” and contribute to the reconstruction in Gaza.

    Noting that the Palestinian question has always been at the heart of the Middle East issue, the foreign minister called on the international community to focus more on the two-state solution and give more support to independent statehood for Palestine.

    All Palestinian factions need to deliver on the Beijing Declaration to achieve unity and self-strengthening, all parties in the Middle East need to rise above differences to support Palestinian statehood, and the international community needs to build consensus and promote peace between Palestine and Israel, Wang noted.

    “We will continue to strive resolutely for justice, peace and development for the Middle East people,” Wang said.

    MIL OSI China News

  • MIL-OSI China: Trump’s threats complicate Gaza ceasefire deal: Hamas

    Source: China State Council Information Office

    Members of the Al-Qassam Brigades, the armed wing of Hamas, and an Israeli hostage are seen during the handover of three Israeli hostages to the International Committee of the Red Cross in the al-Nuseirat refugee camp, central Gaza, on Feb. 22, 2025. [Photo/Xinhua]

    Hamas on Thursday condemned U.S. President Donald Trump’s recent threats against the group, saying they complicate matters regarding the Gaza ceasefire agreement and encourage Israel not to implement its terms.

    “There is an agreement that was signed, and Washington was the mediator in it,” Hamas spokesman Hazem Qassem said in a statement, adding that the deal “includes the release of all (hostages and) prisoners in three stages. Hamas has implemented what it was required to do in the first stage, while Israel is evading the second stage.”

    The statement noted that the U.S. administration is required to pressure Israel to enter negotiations on the second phase as stipulated in the ceasefire agreement.

    Trump issued what he called the “last warning” to Hamas on his Truth Social platform on Wednesday, saying, “Release all of the hostages now, not later, and immediately return all of the dead bodies of the people you murdered, or it is OVER for you.”

    “I am sending Israel everything it needs to finish the job, not a single Hamas member will be safe if you don’t do as I say,” he said in the post.

    Trump’s warning came after the White House confirmed Wednesday that the U.S. administration is having direct talks with Hamas aimed at releasing hostages being held in Gaza.

    The talks, first reported by the American news website Axios, were held in Qatar’s Doha in recent weeks, with the U.S. side led by presidential envoy for hostage affairs Adam Boehler.

    White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt told reporters that “Israel was consulted on this matter” but refused to disclose further information.

    A Gaza ceasefire and hostage release agreement, brokered by Egypt, Qatar, and the United States, took effect on Jan. 19. During the initial 42-day phase of the deal, dozens of Israeli hostages and hundreds of Palestinian prisoners and detainees were freed.

    A total of 59 hostages are still in Hamas captivity, according to the Israel Defense Forces, which confirmed 35 of them are dead. Among those hostages, five are Americans, including just one who is believed to be alive.

    MIL OSI China News

  • MIL-OSI China: Samarra Archaeological City in Iraq

    Source: China State Council Information Office 3

    This photo taken on March 3, 2025 shows the spiraling minaret of Abu Dulaf Mosque on the outskirts of Samarra, in Salahuddin province, Iraq. Samarra Archaeological City, located about 130 km north of Iraqi capital Baghdad, contains the remains of an iconic Islamic city that during most of the 9th century served as the capital of the Abbasid Empire, and has been on UNESCO’s list of World Heritage in Danger since 2007. [Photo/Xinhua]

    1   2   3   4   5   6   7   >  

    MIL OSI China News

  • MIL-Evening Report: Jonathan Cook: Yes, Trump is vulgar. But the US global shakedown is the same one as ever

    Report by Dr David Robie – Café Pacific.

    ANALYSIS: By Jonathan Cook

    If there is one thing we can thank US President Donald Trump for, it is this: he has decisively stripped away the ridiculous notion, long cultivated by Western media, that the United States is a benign global policeman enforcing a “rules-based order”.

    Washington is better understood as the head of a gangster empire, embracing 800 military bases around the world. Since the end of the Cold War, it has been aggressively seeking “global full-spectrum domination”, as the Pentagon doctrine politely terms it.

    You either pay fealty to the Don or you get dumped in the river. Last Friday, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky was presented with a pair of designer concrete boots at the White House.

    The US president looked like a gangster as he roughed up Zelensky. But he wasn’t the one who stoked a war that’s killed huge numbers of Ukrainians and Russians. Image: www.jonathan-cook.net

    The innovation was that it all happened in front of the Western press corps, in the Oval Office, rather than in a back room, out of sight. It made for great television, Trump crowed.

    Pundits have been quick to reassure us that the shouting match was some kind of weird Trumpian thing. As though being inhospitable to state leaders, and disrespectful to the countries they head, is unique to this administration.

    Take just the example of Iraq. The administration of Bill Clinton thought it “worth it” – as his secretary of state, Madeleine Albright, infamously put it — to kill an estimated half a million Iraqi children by imposing draconian sanctions through the 1990s.

    Under Clinton’s successor, George W Bush, the US then waged an illegal war in 2003, on entirely phoney grounds, that killed around half a million Iraqis, according to post-war estimates, and made four million homeless.

    Those worrying about the White House publicly humiliating Zelensky might be better advised to save their concern for the hundreds of thousands of mostly Ukrainian and Russian men killed or wounded fighting an entirely unnecessary war — one, as we shall see, Washington carefully engineered through Nato over the preceding two decades.

    Henchman Zelensky
    All those casualties served the same goal as they did in Iraq: to remind the world who is boss.

    Uniquely, Western publics don’t understand this simple point because they live inside a disinformation bubble, created for them by the Western establishment media.

    Henry Kissinger, the long-time steward of US foreign policy, famously said: “It may be dangerous to be America’s enemy, but to be America’s friend is fatal.”

    Zelensky just found that out the hard way. Gangster empires are just as fickle as the gangsters we know from Hollywood movies. Under the previous Joe Biden administration, Zelensky had been recruited as a henchman to do Washington’s bidding on Moscow’s doorstep.

    The background — the one Western media have kept largely out of view — is that, following the collapse of the Soviet Union, the US tore up treaties crucial to reassuring Russia of Nato’s good intent.

    Viewed from Moscow, and given Washington’s track record, Nato’s European security umbrella must have looked more like preparation for an ambush.

    Keen though Trump now is to rewrite history and cast himself as peacemaker, he was central to the escalating tensions that led to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in 2022.

    In 2019, he unilaterally withdrew from the 1987 Treaty on Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces. That opened the door to the US launching a potential first strike on Russia, using missiles stationed in nearby Nato members Romania and Poland.

    He also sent Javelin anti-tank weapons to Ukraine, a move avoided by his predecessor, Barack Obama, for fear it would be seen as provocative.

    Repeatedly, Nato vowed to bring Ukraine into its fold, despite Russia’s warnings that the step was viewed as an existential threat, that Moscow could not allow Washington to place missiles on its border, any more than the US accepted Soviet missiles stationed in Cuba back in the early 1960s.

    Washington pressed ahead anyway, even assisting in a colour revolution-style coup in 2014 against the elected government in Kyiv, whose crime was being a little too sympathetic to Moscow.

    With the country in crisis, Zelensky was himself elected by Ukrainians as a peace candidate, there to end a brutal civil war — sparked by that coup — between anti-Russian, “nationalistic” forces in the country’s west and ethnic Russian populations in the east. The Ukrainian President soon broke that promise.

    Trump has accused Zelensky of being a “dictator”. But if he is, it is only because Washington wanted him that way, ignoring the wishes of the majority of Ukrainians.

    Reddest of red lines
    Zelensky’s job was to play a game of chicken with Moscow. The assumption was that the US would win whatever the outcome.

    Either Russian President Vladimir Putin’s bluff would be called. Ukraine would be welcomed into Nato, becoming the most forward of the alliance’s forward bases against Russia, allowing nuclear-armed ballistic missiles to be stationed minutes from Moscow.

    Or Putin would finally make good on his years of threats to invade his neighbour to stop Nato crossing the reddest of red lines he had set over Ukraine.

    Washington could then cry “self-defence” on Ukraine’s behalf, and ludicrously fearmonger Western publics about Putin eyeing Poland, Germany, France and Britain next.

    Those were the pretexts for arming Kyiv to the hilt, rather than seeking a rapid peace deal. And so began a proxy war of attrition against Russia, using Ukrainian men as cannon fodder.

    The aim was to wear Russia down militarily and economically, and bring about Putin’s overthrow.

    Zelensky did precisely what was demanded of him. When he appeared to waver early on, and considered signing a peace deal with Moscow, Britain’s prime minister of the time, Boris Johnson, was dispatched with a message from Washington: keep fighting.

    That is the same Boris Johnson who now breezily admits that the West is fighting a “proxy war” against Russia.

    His comments have generated precisely no controversy. That is particularly strange, given that critics who pointed this very obvious fact out three years ago were instantly denounced for spreading “Putin disinformation” and Kremlin “talking points”.

    For his obedience, Zelensky was feted a hero, the defender of Europe against Russian imperialism. His every “demand” — demands that originated in Washington — was met.

    Ukraine has received at least $250 billion worth of guns, tanks, fighter jets, training for his troops, Western intelligence on Russia, and other forms of aid.

    Meanwhile, hundreds of thousands of Ukrainian and Russian men have paid with their lives — as have the families they leave behind.

    Mafia etiquette
    Now the old Don in Washington is gone. The new Don has decided Zelensky has been an expensive failure. Russia isn’t lethally wounded. It’s stronger than ever. Time for a new strategy.

    Zelensky, still imagining he was Washington’s favourite henchman, arrived at the Oval Office only to be taught a harsh lesson in mafia etiquette.

    Trump is spinning his stab in the back as a “peace agreement”. And in some sense, it is. Rightly, Trump has concluded that Russia has won — unless the West is ready to fight World War III and risk a potential nuclear war.

    Trump has faced up to the reality of the situation, even if Zelensky and Europe are still struggling to.


    Trump’s overt ‘genocidal’ warning over Gaza.   Video: TRT World News

    But his plan for Ukraine is actually just a variation of his other peace plan — the one for Gaza. There he wants to ethnically cleanse the Palestinian population and, on the bodies of the enclave’s many thousands of dead children, build the “Riviera of the Middle East” — or “Trump Gaza” as it is being called in a surreal video he shared on social media.

    Similarly, Trump now sees Ukraine not as a military battlefield but as an economic one where, through clever deal-making, he can leverage riches for himself and his billionaire pals.

    He has put a gun to Zelensky and Europe’s head. Make a deal with Russia to end the war, or you are on your own against a far superior military power. See if the Europeans can help you without a supply of Washington’s weapons.

    Not surprisingly, Zelensky, Britain’s Prime Minister Keir Starmer and French President Emmanuel Macron huddled together at the weekend to find a deal that would appease Trump. All Starmer has revealed so far is that the plan will “stop the fighting”.

    That is a good thing. But the fighting could have been stopped, and should have been stopped, three years ago.

    Money, not peace
    It is deeply unwise to be lulled into tribalism by all this — the very tribalism Western elites seek to cultivate among their publics to keep us treating international affairs no differently from a high-stakes football match.

    No one here has behaved, or is behaving, honourably.

    A ceasefire in Ukraine is not about peace. It’s about money, just as the earlier war was. As all wars are, ultimately.

    An acceptable ceasefire for Trump, as well as for Putin, will involve a carve-up of Ukraine’s goodies. Rare earth minerals, land, agricultural production will be the real currency driving the agreement.

    Zelensky now understands this. He knows that he, and the people of Ukraine, have been scammed. That is what tends to happen when you cosy up to the mafia.

    If anyone doubts Washington’s insincerity over Ukraine, look to Palestine for clarity.

    In his earlier presidency, Trump tried to bring about what he termed the peace “deal of the century” whose centrepiece was the annexation of much of the Occupied West Bank.

    The hope was that the Gulf states would ultimately fund an incentivisation programme — the carrot to Israel’s stick — to encourage Palestinians to make a new life in a giant, purpose-built industrial zone in Sinai, next to Gaza.

    That plan is still simmering away in the background. At the weekend, Israel received a green light from Washington to revive its genocidal starvation of Gaza’s population, after Israel refused to negotiate the second phase of the original ceasefire agreement.

    The Trump administration and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu are now spinning their own bad faith as Hamas “rejectionism”.

    They and the echo chamber that is the Western media are blaming the Palestinian group for refusing to be gulled into an “extension” of what was never more than a phoney ceasefire — Israel’s fire never ceased. Israel wants all the hostages back, without having to leave Gaza, so that Hamas has no leverage to stop Israel reviving the full genocide.

    The people of Gaza are still being fed into the Washington mafia’s meatgrinder, just as the Ukrainian people have been.

    Trump wants them out of the way so he can develop a Mediterranean playground for the rich, paid for with Gulf oil money and the so-far untapped natural gas reserves just off Gaza’s coast.

    Unlike his predecessors, Trump doesn’t pretend that Ukraine and Gaza are anything more than geostrategic real estate for Washington.

    The big shakedown
    Zelensky’s shakedown did not come out of the blue. Trump and his officials had been flagging it well in advance.

    Two weeks ago, the industrial correspondent for Britain’s Daily Telegraph wrote an article headlined “Here’s why Trump wants to make Ukraine a US economic colony”.

    Trump’s team believes that Ukraine may have rare-earth minerals under the ground worth some $15 trillion — a treasure trove that will be critical to the development of the next generation of technology.

    In their view, controlling the exploration and extraction of those minerals will be as important as control over the Middle East’s oil reserves was more than a century ago.

    And most important of all, the US wants China, its chief economic — if not military — rival excluded from the plunder. China currently has an effective monopoly on many of these critical minerals.

    Or as the Telegraph puts it, Ukraine’s “minerals offer a tantalising promise: the ability for the US to break its dependence on Chinese supplies of critical minerals that go into everything from wind turbines to iPhones and stealth fighter jets”.

    A draft of the plan seen by the Telegraph would, in its words, “amount to the US economic colonisation of Ukraine, in legal perpetuity”.

    Washington wants first refusal on all deposits within the country.

    At their Oval Office confrontation, Trump reiterated this goal: “So we’re going to be using that [Ukraine’s rare earth minerals], taking it, using it for all of the things we do, including AI, and including weapons, and the military. And it’s really going to very much satisfy our needs.”

    All of this means that Trump has a keen incentive to get the war finished as quickly as possible, and Russia’s territorial advance halted. The more territory Moscow seizes, the less territory is left for the US to plunder.

    Self-sabotage
    The battle against China over rare-earth minerals isn’t a Trump innovation either — and adds an additional layer of context for why Washington and Nato have been so keen over the past two decades to prise Ukraine away from Russia.

    Last summer, a Congressional select committee on competition with China announced the formation of a working group to counter Beijing’s “dominance of critical minerals”.

    The chairman of the committee, John Moolenaar, noted that the current US dependence on China for these minerals “would quickly become an existential vulnerability in the event of a conflict”.

    Another committee member, Rob Wittman, observed: “Dominance over global supply chains for critical mineral and rare earth elements is the next stage of great power competition.”

    What Trump appears to appreciate is that Nato’s proxy war against Russia in Ukraine has, by default, driven Moscow deeper into Beijing’s embrace. It has been self-sabotage on a grand scale.

    Together, China and Russia are a formidable opponent, and one at the centre of the ever-growing Brics group — comprised of Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa. They have been seeking to expand their alliance by adding emerging powers to become a counterweight to Washington and Nato’s bullying global agenda.

    But a deal with Putin over Ukraine would provide an opportunity for Washington to build a new security architecture in Europe — one more useful to the US — that places Russia inside the tent rather than outside it.

    That would leave China isolated — a long-time Pentagon goal.

    And it would also leave Europe less central to the projection of US power, which is why European leaders — led by Keir Starmer — have been looking and sounding so unnerved over the past few weeks.

    The danger is that Trump’s “peacemaking” in Ukraine simply becomes a prelude to the fomenting of a war against China, using Taiwan as the pretext in the same way Ukraine was used against Russia.

    As Moolenaar implied, US control over critical minerals — in Ukraine and elsewhere — would ensure the US was no longer vulnerable in the event of a war with China to losing access to the minerals it would need to continue the war. It would free Washington’s hand.

    Trump may be behaving in a vulgar manner. But the gangster empire he now heads is conducting the same global shakedown as ever.

    Jonathan Cook is an award-winning British journalist. He was based in Nazareth, Israel, for 20 years and returned to the UK in 2021. He is the author of three books on the Israel-Palestine conflict, including Disappearing Palestine: Israel’s Experiments in Human Despair (2008). In 2011, Cook was awarded the Martha Gellhorn Special Prize for Journalism for his work on Palestine and Israel. This article was first published in Middle East Eye and is republished with the author’s permission.

    This article was first published on Café Pacific.

    MIL OSI AnalysisEveningReport.nz

  • MIL-OSI China: Israeli army kills 3 Palestinians in Gaza City

    Source: China State Council Information Office

    People try to receive food relief during Ramadan in Gaza City, on March 4, 2025. [Photo/Xinhua]

    The Israeli army on Thursday killed three Palestinians in the east of Gaza City, according to Palestinian sources and eyewitnesses.

    “The attack targeted a group of people near the Al-Tawfiq Mosque in the Al-Shuja’iyya neighborhood, in the northern Gaza Strip,” the sources told Xinhua.

    “One person was killed instantly, while three others were critically wounded. They were taken to the Baptist Hospital in central Gaza City, where two later died from their injuries,” the sources added.

    Israeli army spokesman Avichay Adraee confirmed the strike, saying that the army had identified individuals “attempting to plant an explosive device” near its forces in northern Gaza and launched an airstrike to eliminate the threat.

    Palestinian sources rejected the Israeli claims, saying the victims were civilians returning to check on and repair their homes, which had been damaged during the war.

    The incident came amid ongoing tensions in Gaza as negotiations for the second phase of a ceasefire agreement between Israel and Hamas remain stalled.

    According to Gaza-based health authorities, since the Israel-Hamas conflict began on Oct. 7, 2023, the reported death toll has reached 48,446, with 111,852 injured.

    MIL OSI China News

  • MIL-OSI USA: Cortez Masto Leads Bipartisan Legislation to Ban Foreign Adversaries from Buying American Farmland

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Nevada Cortez Masto
    Washington, D.C. – Today, U.S. Senators Catherine Cortez Masto (D-Nev.) and Mike Rounds (R-S.D.) reintroduced the Promoting Agriculture Safeguards and Security (PASS) Act, bipartisan legislation to ban individuals and entities controlled by China, Russia, Iran, and North Korea from purchasing agricultural land and businesses located near U.S. military installations or sensitive sites. The PASS Act is cosponsored by Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) and Senators John Hoeven (R-N.D.) and Cynthia Lummis (R-Wyo.).
    “Nevada is home to many sensitive sites that are critical to our national security,” said Senator Cortez Masto. “It is common sense that we should not allow our foreign adversaries to buy agricultural land next to these locations. This bipartisan bill will keep Nevadans safe and protect American national security.”
    “Our near-peer adversaries such as China are looking for any possible opportunity to surveil our nation’s capabilities and resources,” said Senator Rounds. “One example occurred in 2021 when the Fufeng Group purchased 300 acres of land in North Dakota, located near the Grand Forks Air Force Base. We can’t risk this happening again. The PASS Act would prevent entities of foreign adversaries from purchasing agricultural land and businesses near our military bases and sensitive sites. I am hopeful that with President Trump’s recent National Security Presidential Memorandum on this issue, we can finally get it across the finish line.”
    Specifically, the PASS Act would:
    Ban purchases of agricultural land near military installations and sensitive sites by individuals/entities controlled by North Korea, China, Russia and Iran.
    Make the Secretary of Agriculture a voting member of the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS) for transactions involving the purchase of agricultural land, biotechnology, and any other transaction related to the agriculture industry in the United States.
    Give the U.S. Department of Agriculture the ability to refer cases to CFIUS for review if there is reason to believe an agriculture land transaction may raise a national security concern.
    The full text of the bill can be found here.
    Senator Cortez Masto has consistently advocated for strengthening American national security and standing up to our foreign adversaries. She recently introduced legislation to promote innovative businesses in direct competition with Communist China. Earlier this year, she introduced the HONOR Act to prevent businesses from claiming a foreign tax credit or deduction against taxes paid to fund the Russian government’s war machine. Cortez Masto has also led legislation to strengthen American partnership with Pacific Island nations to counter growing Chinese influence in the region.

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI USA: Fischer Questions Expert Witnesses on Defense Mobilization

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Nebraska Deb Fischer
    Today, U.S. Senator Deb Fischer (R-Neb.), a senior member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, questioned expert witnesses about the use of the Defense Protection Act (DPA) for defense mobilization. She asked the witnesses about ensuring that the DPA is invoked only for situations that truly relate to national defense.
    During the hearing, Senator Fischer questioned Founder and Chief Executive Officer of MMR Defense Solutions Dr. Christine Michienzi on whether she recommends any statutory changes to better define what qualifies as national defense.
    Additionally, Senator Fischer asked Dr. John McGinn, Executive Director of the Greg and Camille Baroni Center for Government Contracting at George Mason University’s Costello College of Business, for his assessment of the Department of Defense’s National Defense Industrial Strategy and any recommendations he would propose for implementation.
    Click the image above to watch a video of Senator Fischer’s questioning
    Click here to download audio
    Click here to download video
    Fischer Questions Expert Witnesses:
    Senator Fischer: I strongly believe the administration should maximize its use of the Defense Production Act. They have the authority to address challenges in our defense industrial base. However, I am concerned by the expanding definition of what qualifies as national defense. For example, in 2022 President Biden invoked the Defense Production Act to ramp up domestic production of clean energy technologies. Dr. McGinn, how should the Defense Production Act be used for defense mobilization? Should the DPA investments be focused on areas clearly related to the national defense of this country?
    Dr. McGinn: Thank you very much, Senator Fischer. Yes, the Defense Production Act is an incredibly powerful tool, and it is best used for national security defense purposes. And that’s how it’s been used during the development of the MRAP during the Afghanistan and Iraq War. That’s how it was used during COVID, and that’s how it’s being used to rebuild our defense industrial base in areas such as rare earth processing, castings, and forgings and the like, specialty chemicals. So, that is how it is best used. And the more it is focused on national defense, it is not a political issue, therefore it’s a national security issue.Senator Fischer: Thank you. And how should the Act be used for defense mobilization? Should the investments be focused on areas clearly related to being able to get that done?Dr. Michienzi: Thank you. I just wanted to make sure, it should absolutely be focused on mobilization efforts. But some of the efforts that DPA is funding now, it’s difficult sometimes to realize that those go towards mobilization—so things that Jerry mentioned, such as rare earth processing and critical chemicals.Senator Fischer: Would you look at any statutory changes to be able to make it work and make it identify, truly, what is national defense? Is there anything we need to be looking at here?
    Dr. Michienzi: I think making sure that it is centered on national defense issues and national security is critically important, as Dr. McGinn mentioned, because we don’t want to dilute the efforts of the DPA that are being very successfully used currently and can be used going forward. 
    Senator Fischer: Thank you. Dr. McGinn, in January of 2024, the Department released its first National Defense Industrial Strategy, and later in October, released an implementation plan. What’s your assessment of the strategy?
    Dr. McGinn: Well, I think the strategy did a very good job at kind of bringing together a lot of efforts that have been led across recent administrations. One of the good things about this area is it’s very bipartisan. There’s been a lot of similar themes being addressed across the Obama administration, through the Trump administration first, through Biden and today’s. So, I think that the strategy did a good job at identifying the progress that has been made, but also setting a vector for the future. And I think that there were a number of good things in that report. I particularly like the focus on importance of production as well as the importance of working with allies and partners. The key will be kind of how that’s instantiated in the FY26 budget submission.
    Senator Fischer: Are there any additional areas that you’d recommend the Department would consider that maybe were lacking from the previous strategies?
    Dr. McGinn: I think two things I would recommend. One is mobilization. I mean it’s mentioned briefly in the strategy, but there’s no talking about restarting mobilization planning. I mean there actually are program elements in the Army, Navy, and Air Force, Marines for mobilization, but they’re really all about pre-positioning equipment and the like. There’s no planning function that’s being done today; that all stopped and that needs to be restarted. And then the other area that is on—the strategy talks a lot about it—building exportability in systems. That is building systems so that we can share them with our partners and allies. That requires investment in terms of—because you’re going to have different capability levels—of different missiles going to different partners, depending on how close they are. So that requires investment up front, and that’s a big priority that needs to be invested in, in terms of making exportability a priority in acquisition and also investing in the technology needed to build that capability.Senator Fischer: Thank you.

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI USA: Budd Hosts Bipartisan Meeting with Keith Siegel and Recently Released Hostages

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator Ted Budd (R-North Carolina)
    Washington, D.C. — A day after President Donald Trump met with eight hostages released from Gaza, U.S. Senator Ted Budd (R-NC) met privately in his office with North Carolina native Keith Siegel and his wife, Aviva. Following their private meeting, Senator Budd hosted a bipartisan group of Senators who met with recently released hostages and family members who are still awaiting the return of their loved ones.
    Joining Budd for the bipartisan meeting were Senators Joni Ernst (R-IA), Richard Blumenthal (D-CT), Thom Tillis (R-NC), and Jackie Rosen (D-NV).
    Former hostages Keith and Aviva Siegel, Iair Horn, Doron Steinbrecher, and Naama Levy as well as Moshe Lavi, the brother-in-law of Omri Miran, who is still being held in Gaza, told their stories and advocated for the release of the remaining 59 hostages.
    In a statement, Senator Budd said:
    “We rejoice in Keith’s return, but we also weep for what he and his fellow hostages endured and for what the 59 remaining hostages and their families are still enduring. For 484 days, Keith’s family, particularly his wife Aviva, his children, siblings, family and friends, worked tirelessly to secure his release.
    “Our work is not over. We must continue pressuring Hamas to release the remaining hostages in Gaza, especially the five Americans. I will continue working alongside my colleagues on a bipartisan basis, with President Trump, and with world leaders until all of the hostages are home and Hamas is destroyed.”
    Click here to download full resolution photos
    Senator Budd has been working for the release of American hostages since October 2023:
    On October 25, 2023, Senator Budd first spoke about the hostage situation in Gaza on the Senate floor, where he announced his intention “to hold all humanitarian aid to Gaza until each and every American hostage is home and is safe.”
    On November 6, 2023, Senator Budd met with Qatari Ambassador Meshal Al Thani in Senator Budd’s Washington, D.C. office. In that meeting, he strongly urged the Qatari government to use their leverage on Hamas leaders currently residing in Doha to immediately release all hostages, and hold those same Hamas leaders accountable once the hostage situation is fully resolved.
    On November 26, 2023, Senator Budd reacted to the release of Keith Siegel’s wife, Aviva, saying, “While we are encouraged by the government of Qatar’s efforts to mediate the release of some of the hostages, we renew our call to their government to exert pressure on Hamas leadership to release each and every hostage immediately and unconditionally.”
    On November 28, 2023, Senator Budd spoke on the Senate floor and called out Qatar for its continued hosting of Hamas terrorist leaders, saying, “We need to tell our friends in Doha loudly and clearly: Qatar is accepting a significant liability with its pro-Hamas policy.”
    On December 13, 2023, Senator Budd sent a holiday message of support to the hostages and their families in a speech on the Senate floor, saying, “I want every one of these family members to know that our country is behind them, we support them, and we are praying for them.”
    On January 10, 2024, Senator Budd returned from a congressional delegation (CODEL) to the Middle East, which included stops in Israel, Egypt, Qatar, and Bahrain. The focus of the delegation’s meetings across the region was on securing the release of hostages.
    On the trip, Senator Budd and his colleagues toured one of the communities devastated by the October 7th massacre by Hamas terrorists. He personally spoke with former hostage Aviva Siegel, and met with top Israeli officials including Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Mossad Director David Barnea.
    Senator Budd then met with Egyptian President Abdel Fattah El-Sisi and the Prime Minister of Qatar, to whom Senator Budd sent a strong message that Qatar must do more to secure the immediate and safe release of all of the hostages.
    On January 15, 2024, Senators Budd and Joni Ernst (R-IA) published an op-ed marking the 100th day of captivity for the hostages, writing, “As long as Americans remain captive to these barbaric thugs, the latter is the victor. Allowing Americans to suffer under the yoke of terrorists is a win for evil around the world and a boon for Iran’s proxies.”
    On January 25, 2024, Senator Budd spoke on the Senate floor and delivered a sharp message to the government of Qatar: “Our patience has run out. Time is up. Either pressure Hamas leaders to release the hostages now, or expel them from your land. It’s that simple. The United States of America will be watching.”
    On March 7, 2024, Senators Budd and Tillis invited the family of Keith Siegel to be their guests at the president’s State of the Union Address. Keith’s sister Lucy and niece Hanna have accepted the Senators’ invitation.
    On March 15, 2024, Senator Budd joined a joint statement from Senators Ben Cardin (D-MD) and Jim Risch (R-ID), Chairman and Ranking Member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, as well as five other Senators stating, “If Hamas refuses reasonable negotiations, there is no reason for Qatar to continue hosting Hamas’ political office or any of its members in Doha.”
    On March 26, 2024, Senator Budd and Senator Ernst issued a joint statement calling on the State of Qatar to immediately expel all members of Hamas’ political office currently residing in Doha.
    On April 9, 2024, Senator Budd introduced the ‘Reviewing Qatar’s Major Non- NATO Ally Status Act’, which would require the Secretary of State to formally certify that Qatar has expelled or agreed to extradite to the United States any individuals bearing responsibility for the terror attack on October 7, 2023. If the Secretary of State cannot make this certification in good faith, then the President is required to immediately terminate the designation of the State of Qatar as a major non-NATO ally.
    On April 10, 2024, Senator Budd attempted to invoke unanimous consent on the Senate floor to pass the ‘Reviewing Qatar’s Major Non- NATO Ally Status Act’, but was blocked. He said, “The time for talking is over, and the time for action is now. If we don’t see action, then Qatar must face consequences. At the end of the day, this bill represents another step towards securing the freedom of our fellow Americans.”
    On May 7, 2024, Senators Budd and Ernst returned from a congressional delegation (CODEL) to the Middle East, which included stops in Israel, Iraq, Syria, and the United Arab Emirates (UAE).
    On the trip, Senators Budd and Ernst received first-hand updates on the state of the hostage negotiations from top U.S. and Israeli officials including Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. They also hosted the families of American hostages, including the family of North Carolina native, Keith Siegel.
    On July 31, 2024, Senator Budd released a statement after Hamas’s political leader was killed, saying that it “sends a clear and resounding message to terrorists that those who kill and kidnap Americans will ultimately face justice.”
    On September 1, 2024, Senator Budd released a statement condemning the Hamas murder of American hostage Hersh Goldberg-Polin along with five other Israeli hostages, saying, “This is yet another act of cold-blooded barbarism from Hamas terrorists. It must not be excused or downplayed. The U.S. government must leave no stone unturned until all those responsible for Hersh’s kidnapping and murder are brought to justice, and until we bring every American hostage home.”
    On October 7, 2024, Senator Budd disclosed that the Biden administration had ignored a bipartisan request from Senator Budd and 11 other Senators to authorize a reward of up to $25 million for information that brings Hamas leaders to justice.
    On October 17, 2024, Senator Budd released a statement after Israeli Defense Forces killed Yahya Sinwar, the leader of Hamas and the mastermind behind the October 7, 2023 attacks, saying, “[Sinwar] was a terrorist leader who had American blood on his hands. To the remaining Hamas leaders: release the hostages, renounce terrorism, and recognize Israel’s right to exist. There is no future for Hamas or its ideology.”
    On November 8, 2024, Senator Budd joined a letter to the Department of Justice and Department of State requesting an immediate freeze on the assets of Hamas officials living in Qatar, the extradition of several senior Hamas officials currently residing in Qatar, and that Qatar end its hospitality of Hamas’ senior leadership.
    On November 8, 2024, Senator Budd released a statement after the State of Qatar decided to expel the remaining Hamas terrorist leadership from Doha, calling the move, “welcome, but long overdue.”
    On November 22, 2024, Senator Budd, along with Senate Armed Services Committee Ranking Member Roger Wicker and Senator Joni Ernst, released a statement calling on Turkey to extradite the Hamas terrorist leaders who fled there after being expelled from Qatar.
    On December 2, 2024, Senator Budd released a statement after the Israeli Defense Forces confirmed that U.S.-Israeli citizen Omer Neutra was killed by Hamas terrorists during the October 7, 2023 attacks. His body remains in Gaza, saying in-part, “this news is further proof of the true evil of Hamas terrorists. The U.S. government must not relent until all those responsible for Omer’s murder are brought to justice, and until we bring every American hostage home.”
    On February 1, 2025, Senator Budd issued a statement following the release of North Carolina Native Keith Siegel from Gaza.

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI Europe: “Ukraine has a right to peace and security, and it is in our interest”

    Source: France-Diplomatie – Ministry of Foreign Affairs and International Development

    President Emmanuel Macron addresses the French people from the Élysée Palace (March 5, 2025)

    Men and women of France, my fellow citizens,

    I am speaking to you this evening because of the international situation and its consequences for France and Europe, following several weeks of diplomatic activity.

    You are rightfully concerned by the historic events under way that are disrupting the world order.

    The war in Ukraine, which has killed or injured nearly a million people, is continuing at the same level of intensity.

    The United States of America, our ally, has changed its position on this war, lessening its support for Ukraine and raising doubts about what is to come. At the same time, the United States intends to impose tariffs on products from Europe.

    Meanwhile, the world continues to be ever more violent, and the terrorist threat has not lessened.

    All in all, our prosperity and our security have become increasingly uncertain. Clearly, we are entering a new era.

    The war in Ukraine has gone on for more than three years now. We decided on day one to support Ukraine and to sanction Russia, and it was the right thing to do, because not only are the Ukrainian people bravely fighting for their freedom, but our own security is under threat as well.

    Indeed, if a country can invade its European neighbor with impunity, we can no longer be certain of anything. Might makes right and peace can no longer be guaranteed on our own continent. History has taught us this.

    The Russian threat goes beyond Ukraine and affects every country in Europe. It affects us.

    Russia has already made the Ukrainian conflict a global conflict. It has deployed North Korean soldiers and Iranian equipment on our continent, while helping those countries to further rearm. President Putin’s Russia violates our borders to murder his opponents and manipulates elections in Romania and Moldova. It organizes digital attacks against our hospitals to keep them from functioning. Russia is attempting to manipulate our opinions, spreading lies on social media. Basically, it is testing our limits in the air, on the seas, in space and behind our screens. Its aggressiveness seems to know no bounds. At the same time, Russia is continuing to rearm, spending more than 40% of its budget for that purpose. By 2030, it plans to have further expanded its army – to have an additional 300,000 troops, 3,000 tanks and 300 fighter planes. So how believable is it, then, that today’s Russia will stop at Ukraine? Russia has become a threat to France and Europe now and for years to come. I deeply regret it and I am convinced that in the long term, peace will return to our continent, with a once-again peaceable and peaceful Russia, but this is where we are today and we have to deal with it.

    In this world fraught with danger, it would be madness to stand back and watch from the sidelines. We must make decisions about Ukraine and about the security of the French people and the people of Europe without further delay.

    About Ukraine, first of all. All initiatives that help bring about peace are a step in the right direction, and I want to applaud them this evening. We must continue helping the Ukrainians to resist until they can negotiate a deal with Russia that ensures a solid peace for themselves and for all of us. That’s why we can’t abandon Ukraine on the road to peace – on the contrary. A peace deal can’t be signed at any price on orders from Russia. Peace can’t mean Ukraine’s capitulation. It can’t mean its collapse. Nor can it come about through a ceasefire, which would be too fragile. Why? Because once again, we’ve learned from the past. We can’t forget that Russia began its invasion of Ukraine in 2014, that we negotiated a ceasefire in Minsk, that Russia did not abide by that ceasefire and that we were unable to maintain it due to a lack of solid guarantees. We can no longer take Russia at its word.

    Ukraine has a right to peace and security, and it is in our interest – the interest of European security. It is with this in mind that we are working with our British and German friends, as well as several other European countries. That’s why over the past few weeks, you saw me bring together several of them in Paris, and that’s why I met with them again a few days ago in London, to solidify the necessary commitments to Ukraine. Once a peace deal has been signed, ensuring that Ukraine will not be invaded again by Russia, we have to prepare for it. That will most certainly require long-term support for the Ukrainian army. It may also involve the deployment of European forces. They wouldn’t immediately go off to fight – they wouldn’t be fighting on the front lines – but they would be there once a peace deal is signed in order to ensure full compliance. Next week, the joint chiefs of the countries that wish to shoulder their responsibilities in this regard will meet in Paris. What we prepared together with the Ukrainians and several European partners is a plan for a solid, lasting, verifiable peace. It’s the plan I championed in the United States two weeks ago, and around Europe. I want to believe that the United States will stand with us, but we must be ready if that’s not the case.

    Whether or not peace is achieved quickly in Ukraine, the European nations must be able to better defend themselves and to deter any new aggression, given the Russian threat I just described. Yes, whatever happens, we must be better equipped; we must improve our defense posture for the sake of peace and for the purpose of deterrence. In that regard, we remain committed to NATO and to our partnership with the United States, but we must do more – we must increase our independence in the areas of security and defense. Europe’s future cannot be decided in Washington or Moscow. And yes, the threat is back in the East, and the innocence, as it were, of the last 30 years, since the fall of the Berlin Wall, is now a thing of the past.

    In Brussels tomorrow, at the extraordinary meeting with the 27 heads of state and government, the Commission and the Council President, we will take decisive steps. We will make several decisions that France has been proposing for years. Member states will be able to increase their military spending without adding to their deficit. We will decide on large-scale, joint funding for the purchase and production in Europe of ammunition, tanks, weapons and some of the most innovative equipment that exists. I have asked my administration to work to make sure that this strengthens our military as quickly as possible and accelerates the reindustrialization of every region in France. I will be holding a meeting with the relevant ministers and industry representatives in the coming days.

    Now, the Europe of Defense that we have been championing for eight years has become a reality. That means European countries that are better able to defend and protect themselves, that work together to produce the equipment that they need in their own countries, and that are willing to cooperate more and reduce their dependence on the rest of the world, and that’s a good thing. Germany, Poland, Denmark, the Baltic states and many other partners of ours have announced plans for unprecedented military spending.

    Now, at this long-awaited time for action, France is in a unique position. We have the most effective military in Europe and, thanks to the decisions made by our predecessors after World War II, we possess nuclear deterrence capabilities. That affords us much better protection than a number of our neighbors. Moreover, we didn’t wait for the invasion of Ukraine to understand that the world was in trouble, and, thanks to the two military programming laws that I put forth, which were passed by two successive Parliaments, our military budget will have doubled over close to ten years. However, given the way that threats are evolving and in light of the acceleration I just described, we will need to make new budgetary decisions and additional, henceforward essential investments.

    I have asked my administration to get to work on this as quickly as possible. These new investments will require us to mobilize both private and public funding without raising taxes. To achieve this, we will need reforms, choices and courage.

    Our nuclear deterrence protects us. It is thorough, sovereign and French from start to finish. Since 1964, it has played a clear role in the preservation of peace and security in Europe. However, in response to the historic call sounded by the future Chancellor of Germany, I decided to launch a strategic debate on using our deterrence to protect our allies on the European continent. Whatever happens, that decision has always been, and will always be, up to the President and Commander in Chief of France.

    In order to control our destiny and increase our independence, we must step up our military efforts, as well as our economic efforts. Economic, technological, industrial and financial independence are critical. We must be prepared for the United States to impose tariffs on European goods, just as they confirmed they are doing with Canada and Mexico. This decision, which is just as incomprehensible for the U.S. economy as it is for our own, will bear consequences for some of our sectors. It makes these times more difficult but we will not let these tariffs go unanswered. Therefore, as we prepare to respond with our European colleagues, as I did two weeks ago, we will continue trying to convince them by every means possible that this decision will hurt us all. And yes, I hope that I can convince and dissuade the President of the United States of America.

    In sum, this time calls for decisions that have no precedent going back for many decades. When it comes to our agriculture, our research, our industrial sector, and all of our public policies, we cannot keep having the same debates as before. That is why I asked the Prime Minister and his cabinet to make proposals in light of this new context. I invite all the political, economic and union representatives of France to do the same. Tomorrow’s solutions cannot be yesterday’s habits.

    My fellow citizens,

    Faced with these challenges and these irreversible changes, we must not give in to any form of excess: neither excessive warmongering, nor excessive defeatism. France will follow only one course: that of the desire for peace and freedom, true to its history and its principles. Yes, that is what we believe in for our security, and that is also what we believe in when it comes to defending democracy, a certain idea of the truth, a certain idea of free research, a certain idea of respect in our society, a certain idea of freedom of expression that eschews hate speech, and a certain idea of humanism. That is what we believe in and that is what is at stake. Our Europe has the economic strength, the power and the talent to rise to meet our time. We have the means to hold our own in comparison with the United States of America and, to an even greater extent, Russia. Therefore, we must take action, united as Europeans and determined to protect ourselves. That is why our country needs you and your commitment. Political decisions, military equipment and budgets are important, but they can never replace a nation’s strength of character. No longer will our generation enjoy the peace dividends. It is up to us to ensure that one day, our children will enjoy the dividends of our efforts.

    So we will face this together.

    Vive la République.

    Vive la France

    MIL OSI Europe News

  • MIL-OSI USA: Remarks by President Trump in Joint Address to Congress

    US Senate News:

    Source: The White House
    class=”has-text-align-center”>U.S. Capitol
    Washington, D.C.
    9:19 P.M. EST
    (March 4, 2025)
         THE PRESIDENT:  Thank you.  (Applause.)  Thank you very much.  Thank you very much.  It’s a great honor.  Thank you very much. 
    Speaker Johnson, Vice President Vance, the first lady of the United States — (applause) — members of the United States Congress, thank you very much.  
    And to my fellow citizens, America is back.  (Applause.)
    AUDIENCE:  USA!  USA!  USA! 
    THE PRESIDENT:  Six weeks ago, I stood beneath the dome of this Capitol and proclaimed the dawn of the golden age of America.  From that moment on, it has been nothing but swift and unrelenting action to usher in the greatest and most successful era in the history of our country. 
    We have accomplished more in 43 days than most administrations accomplished in four years or eight years, and we are just getting started.  (Applause.)  Thank you. 
    I return to this chamber tonight to report that America’s momentum is back, our spirit is back, our pride is back, our confidence is back, and the American dream is surging bigger and better than ever before.  (Applause.)  The American dream is unstoppable, and our country is on the verge of a comeback, the likes of which the world has never witnessed and perhaps will never witness again.  There’s never been anything like it.  (Applause.)
    The presidential election of November 5th was a mandate like has not been seen in many decades.  We won all seven swing states, giving us an electoral college victory of 312 votes.  (Applause.)  We won the popular vote —
    REPRESENTATIVE GREEN:  (Inaudible.)
    THE PRESIDENT:  — by big numbers and won counties in our country —
    AUDIENCE:  Booo —
    AUDIENCE:  USA!  USA!  USA!
    REPRESENTATIVE GREEN:  You are — you have no right to cut Medicaid.
    AUDIENCE:  USA!  USA!  USA! 
    THE PRESIDENT:  — and won counties in our country 2,700 to 525 on a map that reads almost completely red for Republican.  (Applause.) 
    Now, for the first time in modern history, more Americans believe that our country is headed in the right direction than the wrong direction.  In fact, it’s an astonishing record: 27-point swing, the most ever.  (Applause.)
    Likewise, small-business optimism saw its single largest one-month gain ever recorded. 
    SPEAKER JOHNSON:  Mr. President —
    THE PRESIDENT:  A 41-point jump.
    (Speaker Johnson strikes the gavel.) 
         SPEAKER JOHNSON:  Members are directed to uphold and maintain decorum in the House and to cease any further disruptions.  That’s your warning.
    REPRESENTATIVE GREEN:  He has no mandate to cut Medicaid.
    SPEAKER JOHNSON:  Members are engaging in willful and continuing breach of decorum, and the chair is prepared to direct the sergeant at arms to restore order to the joint session.  (Applause.)
    Mr. Green, take your seat.  Take your seat, sir. 
    REPRESENTATIVE GREEN:  He has no mandate to cut Medicaid.
    SPEAKER JOHNSON:  Take your seat.
    (Cross-talk.) 
    Finding that members continue to engage in willful and concerted disruption of proper decorum, the chair now directs the sergeant at arms to restore order.  (Applause.)  Remove this gentleman from the chamber.  (Applause.)
    REPRESENTATIVE GREEN:  Shame on all of you.
         (Members of the audience sing “Na Na Hey Hey Kiss Him Goodbye.”)
         (Cross-talk.)
         You have no mandate.
    SPEAKER JOHNSON:  Members are directed to uphold and maintain decorum in the House.
    Mr. President, you can continue.
    THE PRESIDENT:  Thank you.
    Over the past six weeks, I have signed nearly 100 executive orders and taken more than 400 executive actions — a record — to restore common sense, safety, optimism, and wealth all across our wonderful land.  The people elected me to do the job, and I’m doing it.  (Applause.)
    In fact, it has been stated by many that the first month of our presidency — it’s our presidency — (applause) — is the most successful in the history of our nation by many.  (Applause.)  And what makes it even more impressive is that — do you know who number two is?  George Washington.  How about that?  (Laughter and applause.)  How about that?  I don’t know about that list, but we’ll take it. 
    Within hours of taking the oath of office, I declared a national emergency on our southern border — (applause) — and I deployed the U.S. military and Border Patrol to repel the invasion of our country.  And what a job they’ve done. 
    As a result, illegal border crossings last month were, by far, the lowest ever recorded. Ever.  (Applause.)  They heard my words, and they chose not to come.  Much easier that way. 
    In comparison, under Joe Biden, the worst president in American history — (applause) — there were hundreds of thousands of illegal crossings a month, and virtually all of them, including murderers, drug dealers, gang members, and people from mental institutions and insane asylums, were released into our country.  Who would want to do that?
    This is my fifth such speech to Congress, and, once again, I look at the Democrats in front of me, and I realize there is absolutely nothing I can say to make them happy or to make them stand or smile or applaud.  Nothing I can do.  I could find a cure to the most devastating disease — a disease that would wipe out entire nations, or announce the answers to the greatest economy in history or the stoppage of crime to the lowest levels ever recorded, and these people sitting right here will not clap, will not stand, and certainly will not cheer for these astronomical achievements.  They won’t do it no matter what.
    Five times I’ve been up here.  It’s very sad, and it just shouldn’t be this way.  (Applause.)
    So, Democrats sitting before me, for just this one night, why not join us in celebrating so many incredible wins for America?  For the good of our nation, let’s work together and let’s truly make America great again.  (Applause.)
    Every day, my administration is fighting to deliver the change America needs, to bring a future that America deserves, and we’re doing it.  This is a time for big dreams and bold action. 
    Upon taking office, I imposed an immediate freeze on all federal hiring, a freeze on all new federal regulations, and a freeze on all foreign aid.  (Applause.)  I terminated the ridiculous Green New Scam.  I withdrew from the unfair Paris Climate Accord, which was costing us trillions of dollars that other countries were not paying.  (Applause.)  I withdrew from the corrupt World Health Organization.  (Applause.)  And I also withdrew from the anti-American U.N. Human Rights Council.  (Applause.)
    We ended all of Biden’s environmental restrictions that were making our country far less safe and totally unaffordable.  And importantly, we ended the last administration’s insane electric vehicle mandate, saving our autoworkers and companies from economic destruction.  (Applause.)
    To unshackle our economy, I have directed that for every 1 new regulation, 10 old regulations must be eliminated, just like I did in my very successful first term.  (Applause.)  And in that first term, we set records on ending unnecessary rules and regulations like no other president had done before. 
    We ordered all federal workers to return to the office.  They will either show up for work in person or be removed from their job.  (Applause.)  
    And we have ended weaponized government, where, as an example, a sitting president is allowed to viciously prosecute his political opponent, like me.  How did that work out? (Laughter.)  Not too good.  (Applause.)  Not too good. 
    And I have stopped all government censorship and brought back free speech in America.  It’s back.  (Applause.) 
    And two days ago, I signed an order making English the official language of the United States of America.  (Applause.)  
    I renamed the Gulf of Mexico the Gulf of America.  (Applause.) 
    And, likewise, I renamed — for a great president, William McKinley — Mount McKinley again.  (Applause.)  Beautiful Alaska.  We love Alaska.
    We’ve ended the tyranny of so-called diversity, equity, and inclusion policies all across the entire federal government and, indeed, the private sector and our military.  (Applause.)  And our country will be woke no longer.  (Applause.)
    We believe that whether you are a doctor, an accountant, a lawyer, or an air traffic controller, you should be hired and promoted based on skill and competence, not race or gender.  Very important.  (Applause.)  You should be hired based on merit.  And the Supreme Court, in a brave and very powerful decision, has allowed us to do so.
    Thank you.  Thank you very much.  Thank you.  (Applause.)
    We have removed the poison of critical race theory from our public schools.  And I signed an order making it the official policy of the United States government that there are only two genders: male and female.  (Applause.) 
    I also signed an executive order to ban men from playing in women’s sports.  (Applause.) 
         Three years ago, Payton McNabb was an all-star high school athlete — one of the best — preparing for a future in college sports.  But when her girls’ volleyball match was invaded by a male, he smashed the ball so hard in Payton’s face, causing traumatic brain injury, partially paralyzing her right side, and ending her athletic career.  It was a shot like she’s never seen before.  She’s never seen anything like it.
    Payton is here tonight in the gallery.  And, Payton, from now on, schools will kick the men off the girls’ team or they will lose all federal funding.  (Applause.) 
    And if you really want to see numbers, just take a look at what happened in the woman’s boxing, weightlifting, track and field, swimming, or cycling, where a male recently finished a long-distance race five hours and 14 minutes ahead of a woman for a new record by five hours.  Broke the record by five hours. 
    It’s demeaning for women, and it’s very bad for our country.  We’re not going to put up with it any longer.  (Applause.) 
    What I have just described is only a small fraction of the commonsense revolution that is now, because of us, sweeping the entire world.  Common sense has become a common theme, and we will never go back.  Never.  Never going to let that happen.  (Applause.)
    Among my very highest priorities is to rescue our economy and get dramatic and immediate relief to working families.  As you know, we inherited from the last administration an economic catastrophe and an inflation nightmare.  Their policies drove up energy prices, pushed up grocery costs, and drove the necessities of life out of reach for millions and millions of Americans.  They’ve never had anything like it. 
    We suffered the worst inflation in 48 years but perhaps even in the history of our country. They’re not sure.  As president, I’m fighting every day to reverse this damage and make America affordable again.  (Applause.)
    Joe Biden especially let the price of eggs get out of control.
    AUDIENCE:  Booo —
    THE PRESIDENT:  The egg price is out of control, and we’re working hard to get it back down. 
    Secretary, do a good job on that.  You inherited a total mess from the previous administration.  Do a good job.  (Applause.) 
    A major focus of our fight to defeat inflation is rapidly reducing the cost of energy.  The previous administration cut the number of new oil and gas leases by 95 percent, slowed pipeline construction to a halt, and closed more than 100 power plants.  We are opening up many of those power plants right now.  (Applause.) 
    And, frankly, we have never seen anything like it.  That’s why, on my first day in office, I declared a national energy emergency.  (Applause.)  As you’ve heard me say many times, we have more liquid gold under our feet than any nation on Earth and by far.  And now I’ve fully authorized the most talented team ever assembled to go and get it.  It’s called drill, baby, drill.  (Applause.) 
    My administration is also working on a gigantic natural gas pipeline in Alaska — among the largest in the world — where Japan, South Korea, and other nations want to be our partner with investments of trillions of dollars each.  There’s never been anything like that one.  It will be truly spectacular.  It’s all set to go.  The permitting is gotten.
    And later this week, I will also take historic action to dramatically expand production of critical minerals and rare earths here in the USA.  (Applause.)  
    To further combat inflation, we will not only be reducing the cost of energy, but we’ll be ending the flagrant waste of taxpayer dollars.  (Applause.)  And to that end, I have created the brand-new Department of Government Efficiency – DOGE. (Applause.) Perhaps you’ve heard of it — perhaps — which is headed by Elon Musk, who is in the gallery tonight.  (Applause.)
    Thank you, Elon.  He’s working very hard.  He didn’t need this.  (Laughs.)  He didn’t need this.  Thank you very much.  We appreciate it.  Everybody here, even this side, appreciates it, I believe.  (Applause.)  They just don’t want to admit that.
    Just listen to some of the appalling waste we have already identified.
    $22 billion from HHS to provide free housing and cars for illegal aliens.
    $45 million for diversity, equity, and inclusion scholarships in Burma.
    $40 million to improve the social and economic inclusion of sedentary migrants.  Nobody knows what that is.  (Laughter.) 
    $8 million to promote LGBTQI+ in the African nation of Lesotho, which nobody has ever heard of.  (Laughter.)
    $60 million for Indigenous peoples and Afro-Colombian empowerment in Central America.  $60 million.
    $8 million for making mice transgender.  (Laughter.)  This is real.
    $32 million for a left-wing propaganda operation in Moldova.
    $10 million for male circumcision in Mozambique.
    $20 million for the Arab “Sesame Street” in the Middle East.  It’s a program.  $20 million for a program.
    $1.9 billion to recently created decarbonization of homes committee, headed up — and we know she’s involved — just at the last moment, the money was passed over — by a woman named Stacey Abrams.  Have you ever heard of her?
    AUDIENCE:  Booo —
    THE PRESIDENT:  A $3.5 million consulting contract for lavish fish monitoring.
    $1.5 million for voter confidence in Liberia.
    $14 million for social cohesion in Mali.
    $59 million for illegal alien hotel rooms in New York City. 
    AUDIENCE:  Booo —
    THE PRESIDENT:  He’s a real estate developer.  He’s done very well.
    $250,000 to increase vegan local climate action innovation in Zambia.
    $42 million for social and behavior change in Uganda.
    $14 million for improving public procurement in Serbia.
    $47 million for improving learning outcomes in Asia.  Asia is doing very well with learning.  (Laughter.)  Don’t know what we’re doing.  We should use it ourselves.
    And $101 million for DEI contracts at the Department of Education, the most ever paid.  Nothing even like it.
    Under the Trump administration, all of these scams — and there are far worse, but I didn’t think it was appropriate to talk about them.  They’re so bad.  Many more have been found out and exposed and swiftly terminated by a group of very intelligent, mostly young people, headed up by Elon.  And we appreciate it.  We’ve found hundreds of billions of dollars of fraud.  (Applause.)
    And we’ve taken back the money and reduced our debt to fight inflation and other things.  Taken back a lot of that money.  We got it just in time. 
    AUDIENCE MEMBERS:  (Inaudible.)
    THE PRESIDENT:  This is just the beginning.  The Government Accountability Office, a federal government office, has estimated annual fraud of over $500 billion in our nation, and we are working very hard to stop it.  We’re going to.
    We’re also identifying shocking levels of incompetence and probable fraud in the Social Security program for our seniors and that our seniors and people that we love rely on.  Believe it or not, government databases list 4.7 million Social Security members from people aged 100 to 109 years old.
    THE PRESIDENT:  It lists 3.6 million people from ages 110 to 119.  I don’t know any of them.  I know some people that are rather elderly, but not quite that elderly.  (Laughter.) 
    3.47 million people from ages 120 to 129. 
    3.9 million people from ages 130 to 139.
    3.5 million people from ages 140 to 149.
    And money is being paid to many of them, and we’re searching right now. 
    In fact, Pam, good luck.  Good luck.  You’re going to find it.
    But a lot of money is paid out to people because it just keeps getting paid and paid, and nobody does — and it really hurts Social Security and hurts our country.
    1.3 million people from ages 150 to 159.  And over 130,000 people, according to the Social Security databases, are age over 160 years old.  
    We have a healthier country than I thought, Bobby.  (Laughter and applause.)
    Including, to finish, 1,039 people between the ages of 220 and 229; one person between the age of 240 and 249; and one person is listed at 360 years of age.
    AUDIENCE MEMBER:  Joe Biden!  (Laughter.)
    THE PRESIDENT: More than 100 years older than our country. 
    But we’re going to find out where that money is going, and it’s not going to be pretty. 
    By slashing all of the fraud, waste, and theft we can find, we will defeat inflation, bring down mortgage rates, lower car payments and grocery prices, protect our seniors, and put more money in the pockets of American families.  (Applause.) 
    And today, interest rates took a beautiful drop — big, beautiful drop.  It’s about time.
    And in the near future, I want to do what has not been done in 24 years: balance the federal budget.  We’re going to balance it.  (Applause.) 
    With that goal in mind, we have developed in great detail what we are calling the gold card, which goes on sale very, very soon.  
         For $5 million, we will allow the most successful, job-creating people from all over the world to buy a path to U.S. citizenship.  It’s like the green card but better and more sophisticated.  (Laughter.)  And these people will have to pay tax in our country.  They won’t have to pay tax from where they came.  The money that they’ve made, you wouldn’t want to do that, but they have to pay tax, create jobs.
    They’ll also be taking people out of colleges and paying for them so that we can keep them in our country, instead of having them being forced out.  Number one at the top school, as an example, being forced out and not being allowed to stay and create tremendous numbers of jobs and great success for a company out there.
    So, while we take out the criminals, killers, traffickers, and child predators who were allowed to enter our country under the open border policy of these people — the Democrats, the Biden administration — the open border, insane policies that you’ve allowed to destroy our country — we will now bring in brilliant, hardworking, job-creating people.  They’re going to pay a lot of money, and we’re going to reduce our debt with that money.  (Applause.)
    Americans have given us a mandate for bold and profound change.  For nearly 100 years, the federal bureaucracy has grown until it has crushed our freedoms, ballooned our deficits, and held back America’s potential in every possible way.  The nation founded by pioneers and risk-takers now drowns under millions and millions of pages of regulations and debt. 
    Approvals that should take 10 days to get instead take 10 years, 15 years, and even 20 years before you’re rejected.  Meanwhile, we have hundreds of thousands of federal workers who have not been showing up to work. 
    My administration will reclaim power from this unaccountable bureaucracy, and we will restore true democracy to America again. (Applause.)  Any federal bureaucrat who resists this change will be removed from office immediately — (applause) — because we are draining the swamp.  It’s very simple.  And the days of rule by unelected bureaucrats are over.  (Applause.)
    And the next phase of our plan to deliver the greatest economy in history is for this Congress to pass tax cuts for everybody.  They’re in there.  They’re waiting for you to vote.  (Applause.) 
    And I’m sure that the people on my right — I don’t mean the Republican right, but my right right here — I’m sure you’re going to vote for those tax cuts, because, otherwise, I don’t believe the people will ever vote you into office.  So, I’m doing you a big favor by telling you that.  (Applause.)
    But I know this group is going to be voting for the taxes.  (Applause.)
    Thank you.  It’s a very, very big part of our plan.  We had tremendous success in our first term with it.  A very big part of our plan.  We’re seeking permanent income tax cuts all across the board.
    And to get urgently needed relief to Americans hit especially hard by inflation, I’m calling for no tax on tips, no tax on overtime, and no tax on Social Security benefits for our great seniors.  (Applause.) 
    (Addressing Speaker Johnson.)  Good luck.
    And I also want to make interest payments on car loans tax deductible but only if the car is made in America.  (Applause.)  
    And, by the way, we’re going to have growth in the auto industry like nobody has ever seen.  Plants are opening up all over the place.  Deals are being made.  Never seen. That’s a combination of the election win and tariffs. 
    It’s a beautiful word, isn’t it? 
    That, along with our other policies, will allow our auto industry to absolutely boom.  It’s going to boom.  Spoke to the majors today — all three — the top people, and they’re so excited.  In fact, already, numerous car companies have announced that they will be building massive automobile plants in America, with Honda just announcing a new plant in Indiana, one of the largest anywhere in the world.  (Applause.) 
    And this has taken place since our great victory on November 5th, a date which will hopefully go down as one of the most important in the history of our country.  (Applause.)  
    In addition, as part of our tax cuts, we want to cut taxes on domestic production and all manufacturing.  And just as we did before, we will provide 100 percent expensing.  It will be retroactive to January 20th, 2025, and it was one of the main reasons why our tax cuts were so successful in our first term, giving us the most successful economy in the history of our country.  First term — we had a great first term.  (Applause.) 
    If you don’t make your product in America, however, under the Trump administration, you will pay a tariff and, in some cases, a rather large one.  Other countries have used tariffs against us for decades, and now it’s our turn to start using them against those other countries.
    On average, the European Union, China, Brazil, India, Mexico, and Canada — have you heard of them? — and countless other nations charge us tremendously higher tariffs than we charge them.  It’s very unfair.  India charges us auto tariffs higher than 100 percent.  China’s average tariff on our products is twice what we charge them.  And South Korea’s average tariff is four times higher.  Think of that: four times higher.  And we give so much help militarily and in so many other ways to South Korea, but that’s what happens.
    This is happening by friend and foe.  This system is not fair to the United States and never was.  And so, on April 2nd — I wanted to make it April 1st, but I didn’t want to be accused of April Fool’s Day.  (Laughter.)  Just one day, which cost us a lot of money.  (Laughter.)  But we’re going to do it in April. I’m a very superstitious person. April 2nd, reciprocal tariffs kick in.  And whatever they tariff us — other countries — we will tariff them.  That’s reciprocal, back and forth.  (Applause.)  Whatever they tax us, we will tax them.
    If they do non-monetary tariffs to keep us out of their market, then we will do non-monetary barriers to keep them out of our market.  There’s a lot of that too.  They don’t even allow us in their market.
    We will take in trillions and trillions of dollars and create jobs like we have never seen before.  I did it with China, and I did it with others.  And the Biden administration couldn’t do anything about it because it was so much money.  They couldn’t do anything about it.
    We have been ripped off for decades by nearly every country on Earth, and we will not let that happen any longer.  (Applause.) 
    Much has been said over the last three months about Mexico and Canada, but we have very large deficits with both of them.  But even more importantly, they have allowed fentanyl to come into our country at levels never seen before, killing hundreds of thousands of our citizens and many very young, beautiful people — destroying families.  Nobody has ever seen anything like it. 
    They are, in effect, receiving subsidies of hundreds of billions of dollars.  We pay subsidies to Canada and to Mexico of hundreds of billions of dollars.  And the United States will not be doing that any longer.  We’re not going to do it any longer.  (Applause.)
    Thanks to our America First policies we’re putting into place, we have had $1.7 trillion of new investment in America in just the past few weeks.  (Applause.)  The combination of the election and our economic policies — the people of SoftBank, one of the most brilliant anywhere in the world, announced a $200 billion investment.  OpenAI and Oracle — Larry Ellison — announced $500 billion investment, which they wouldn’t have done if Kamala had won.  (Applause.)
    Apple announced $500 billion investment.  Tim Cook called me.  He said, “I cannot spend it fast enough.”  It’s going to be much higher than that, I believe.  They’ll be building their plants here, instead of in China. 
    And just yesterday, Taiwan Semiconductor — the biggest in the world, most powerful in the world, has a tremendous amount — 97 percent of the market, announced a $165 billion investment to build the most powerful chips on Earth right here in the USA.  (Applause.) 
    And we’re not giving them any money.  Your CHIPS Act is a horrible, horrible thing.  We give hundreds of billions of dollars, and it doesn’t mean a thing.  They take our money, and they don’t spend it.  All that meant to them — we’re giving them no money.  All that was important to them was they didn’t want to pay the tariffs, so they came and they’re building.  And many other companies are coming.  
    We don’t have to give them money.  We just want to protect our businesses and our people.  And they will come because they won’t have to pay tariffs if they build in America.  And so, it’s very amazing.
    You should get rid of the CHIP Act.  And whatever is left over, Mr. Speaker, you should use it to reduce debt or any other reason you want to.  (Applause.) 
    Our new trade policy will also be great for the American farmer — I love the farmer — (applause) — who will now be selling into our home market, the USA, because nobody is going to be able to compete with you.  Because those goods that come in from other countries and companies, they’re really, really in a bad position in so many different ways.  They’re uninspected.  They may be very dirty and disgusting, and they come in and they pour in, and they hurt our American farmers.
    The tariffs will go on agricultural product coming into America.  And our farmers, starting on April 2nd — it may be a little bit of an adjustment period.  We had that before, when I made the deal with China.  Fifty billion dollars of purchases, and I said, “Just bear with me,” and they did.  They did.  Probably have to bear with me again, and this will be even better.  
    That was great.  The problem with it was that Biden didn’t enforce it.  He didn’t enforce it.  Fifty billion dollars of purchases, and we were doing great, but Biden did not enforce it.  And it hurt our farmers, but our farmers are going to have a field day right now.
    So, to our farmers, have a lot of fun.  I love you too.  I love you too.  (Applause.)  It’s all going to happen.
    And I have also imposed a 25 percent tariff on foreign aluminum, copper, lumber, and steel, because if we don’t have, as an example, steel and lots of other things, we don’t have a military and, frankly, we just won’t have a country very long.
    Here today is a proud American steelworker, fantastic person from Decatur, Alabama.  Jeff Denard has been working at the same steel plant for 27 years in a job that has allowed him to serve as the captain of his local volunteer fire department; raise seven children with his beautiful wife, Nicole; and over the years, provide a loving home for more than 40 foster children.  So great, Jeff.  (Applause.) 
    Thank you, Jeff.  Thank you, Jeff.  (Applause.)
    Stories like Jeff’s remind us that tariffs are not just about protecting American jobs.  They’re about protecting the soul of our country.  Tariffs are about making America rich again and making America great again.  And it’s happening, and it will happen rather quickly.
    There will be a little disturbance, but we’re okay with that.  It won’t be much. 
    AUDIENCE MEMBER:  No, we’re not!
    THE PRESIDENT:  No, you’re not.  Oh.  (Laughter.)
    And look — and look where Biden took us.  Very low.  The lowest we’ve ever been.
    Jeff, I want to thank you very much.
    And I also want to recognize another person who has devoted herself to foster care community.  She worked so hard on it.  A very loving person.  Our magnificent first lady of the United States.  (Applause.)
    Melania’s work has yielded incredible results, helping prepare our nation’s future leaders as they enter the workforce.  
    Our first lady is joined by two impressive young women — very impressive: Haley Ferguson, who benefited from the first lady’s Fostering the Future initiative and is poised to complete her education and become a teacher, and Elliston Berry, who became a victim of an illicit deepfake image produced by a peer.  With Elliston’s help, the Senate just passed the Take It Down Act — 
    This is so important.  Thank you very much, John.  John Thune, thank you.  (Applause.)  Stand up, John.  Thank you, John.  (Applause.)  Thank you all very much.  Thank you.
    And thank you to John Thune and the Senate.  A great job.
    — to criminalize the publication of such images online.  This terrible, terrible thing.  And once it passes the House, I look forward to signing that bill into law.  Thank you.  
    And I’m going to use that bill for myself too, if you don’t mind — (laughter) — because nobody gets treated worse than I do online.  Nobody.  (Laughter.) 
    That’s great.  Thank you very much to the Senate.  Thank you.
    But if we truly care about protecting America’s children, no step is more crucial than securing America’s borders.  Over the past four years, 21 million people poured into the United States.  Many of them were murderers, human traffickers, gang members, and other criminals from the streets of dangerous cities all throughout the world.  Because of Joe Biden’s insane and very dangerous open border policies, they are now strongly embedded in our country, but we are getting them out and getting them out fast.  (Applause.)
    And I want to thank Tom Homan.  And, Kristi, I want to thank you.  And Paul of Border Patrol, I want to thank you.  What a job they’ve all done.  Everybody.  Border Patrol, ICE.  Law enforcement, in general, is incredible.  We have to take care of our law enforcement.  (Applause.)  We have to. 
    Last year, a brilliant 22-year-old nursing student named Laken Riley — the best in her class, admired by everybody — went out for a jog on the campus of the University of Georgia.  That morning, Laken was viciously attacked, assaulted, beaten, brutalized, and horrifically murdered.  Laken was stolen from us by a savage illegal alien gang member who was arrested while trespassing across Biden’s open southern border and then set loose into the United States under the heartless policies of that failed administration.  It was indeed a failed administration.
    He had then been arrested and released in a Democrat-run sanctuary city — a disaster — before ending the life of this beautiful young angel.
    With us this evening are Laken’s beloved mother, Allyson, and her sister, Lauren.  (Applause.)
    Last year, I told Laken’s grieving parents that we would ensure their daughter would not have died in vain.  That’s why the very first bill I signed into law as your 47th president mandates the detention of all dangerous criminal aliens who threaten public safety.  It’s a very strong, powerful act.  (Applause.)  It’s called the Laken Riley Act.  (Applause.) 
    So, Allyson and Lauren, America will never, ever forget our beautiful Laken Hope Riley.  (Applause.)
    Thank you very much.
    Since taking office, my administration has launched the most sweeping border and immigration crackdown in American history, and we quickly achieved the lowest numbers of illegal border crossers ever recorded.  Thank you.  (Applause.)
    The media and our friends in the Democrat Party kept saying we needed new legislation.  “We must have legislation to secure the border.”  But it turned out that all we really needed was a new president.  (Applause.) 
    AUDIENCE:  Trump!  Trump!  Trump!
    THE PRESIDENT:  Thank you.
    Joe Biden didn’t just open our borders.  He flew illegal aliens over them to overwhelm our schools, hospitals, and communities throughout the country.  Entire towns, like Aurora, Colorado, and Springfield, Ohio, buckled under the weight of the migrant occupation and corruption like nobody has ever seen before.  Beautiful towns destroyed.
    Now, just as I promised in my Inaugural Address, we are achieving the great liberation of America.  (Applause.)
    But there still is much work to be done. 
    Here tonight is a woman I have gotten to know: Alexis Nungaray from Houston.  Wonderful woman.  Last June, Alexis’s 12-year-old daughter, her precious Jocelyn, walked to a nearby convenience store.  She was kidnapped, tied up, assaulted for two hours under a bridge, and horrifically murdered.  Arrested and charged with this heinous crime are two illegal alien monsters from Venezuela, released into America by the last administration through their ridiculous open border.
    The death of this beautiful 12-year-old girl and the agony of her mother and family touched our entire nation greatly. 
    Alexis, I promised that we would always remember your daughter — your magnificent daughter.  And earlier tonight, I signed an order keeping my word to you.  
    One thing I have learned about Jocelyn is that she loved animals so much.  She loved nature.  Across Galveston Bay from where Jocelyn lived in Houston, you will find a magnificent national wildlife refuge. A pristine, peaceful, 34,000-acre sanctuary for all of God’s creatures on the edge of the Gulf of America.
    Alexis, moments ago, I formally renamed that refuge in loving memory of your beautiful daughter, Jocelyn.
    So, Mr. Vice President, if you would, may I have the order?  (Applause.)
    (The president holds up the executive order.)
    Thank you very much. 
    All three savages charged with Jocelyn and Laken’s murders were members of the Venezuelan prison gang — the toughest gang, they say, in the world — known as Tren de Aragua.  Two weeks ago, I officially designated this gang, along with MS-13 and the bloodthirsty Mexican drug cartels, as foreign terrorist organizations.  (Applause.)  They are now officially in the same category as ISIS, and that’s not good for them. 
    Countless thousands of these terrorists were welcomed into the U.S. by the Biden administration, but now every last one will be rounded up and forcibly removed from our country, or, if they’re too dangerous, put in jails, standing trial in this country, because we don’t want them to come back ever.
    With us this evening is a warrior on the front lines of that battle, Border Patrol agent Roberto Ortiz.  Great guy.  (Applause.)  
    In January, Roberto and another agent were patrolling by the Rio Grande, near an area known as Cartel Island — doesn’t sound too nice to me — when heavily armed gunmen started shooting at them.  Roberto saw that his partner was totally exposed, in great danger, and he leapt into action, returning fire and providing crucial seconds for his fellow agent to seek safety, and just barely.  I have some of the prints of that event, and it was not good. 
    Agent Ortiz, we salute you for your great courage and for your line of fire that you took and for the bravery that you showed.  We honor you, and we will always honor you.  Thank you, Roberto, very much.  (Applause.)  Thank you, Roberto. 
    And I actually got to know him on my many calls to the border.  He’s a great, great gentleman.
    The territory to the immediate south of our border is now dominated entirely by criminal cartels that murder, rape, torture, and exercise total control — they have total control over a whole nation — posing a grave threat to our national security.  The cartels are waging war in America, and it’s time for America to wage war on the cartels, which we are doing.  (Applause.)
    Five nights ago, Mexican authorities, because of our tariff policies being imposed on them — think of this — handed over to us 29 of the biggest cartel leaders in their country.  That has never happened before.  They want to make us happy.  (Applause.)  First time ever.
    But we need Mexico and Canada to do much more than they’ve done, and they have to stop the fentanyl and drugs pouring into the USA.  They’re going to stop it.  
    I have sent Congress a detailed funding request laying out exactly how we will eliminate these threats to protect our homeland and complete the largest deportation operation in American history, larger even than current record holder, President Dwight D. Eisenhower, a moderate man but someone who believed very strongly in borders.  Americans expect Congress to send me this funding without delay so I can sign it into law. 
    So, Mr. Speaker, John Thune, both of you, I hope you’re going to be able to do that.  Mr. Speaker, thank you.  Mr. Leader, thank you.  Thank you very much.  And let’s get it to me.  I’ll sign it so fast, you won’t even believe it.  (Applause.)
    And as we reclaim our sovereignty, we must also bring back law and order to our cities and towns.  (Applause.)  In recent years, our justice system has been turned upside down by radical-left lunatics.  Many jurisdictions virtually ceased enforcing the law against dangerous repeat offenders while weaponizing law enforcement against political opponents like me.
    My administration has acted swiftly and decisively to restore fair, equal, and impartial justice under the constitutional rule of law, starting at the FBI and the DOJ.  
    Pam, good luck.  Kash, wherever you may be, good luck.  (Applause.)  Good luck.  Pam Bondi, good luck.  So important.  Going to do a great job.  (Applause.)  
    Kash, thank you.  Thank you, Kash.  (Applause.)
    They have already started very strong.  They’re going to do a fantastic job.  You’re going to be very proud of them. 
    We’re also, once again, giving our police officers the support, protection, and respect they so dearly deserve.  They have to get it.  They have such a hard, dangerous job, but we’re going to make it less dangerous.  The problem is the bad guys don’t respect the law, but they’re starting to respect it, and they soon will respect it.
    (Cross-talk.)
    This also includes our great fire departments throughout the country.  Our firemen and women are unbelievable people, and I will never forget them.  And besides that, they voted for me in record numbers, so I have no choice.  (Applause.)
    One year ago this month, 31-year-old New York police officer Jonathan Diller — unbelievably wonderful person and a great officer — was gunned down at a traffic stop on Long Island.  I went to his funeral.  The vicious criminal charged with his murder had 21 prior arrests, and they were rough arrests too.  He was a real bad one.
    The thug in the seat next to him had 14 prior arrests and went by the name of “Killer.”  He was Killer.  He killed other people.  They say a lot of them. 
    I attended Officer Diller’s service, and when I met his wife and one-year-old son, Ryan, it was very inspirational, actually.  His widow’s name is Stephanie, and she is here tonight.  Stephanie, thank you very much, Stephanie.  Thank you very much.  (Applause.)
    Stephanie, we’re going to make sure that Ryan knows his dad was a true hero — New York’s Finest.  And we’re going to get these cold-blooded killers and repeat offenders off our streets, and we’re going to do it fast.  Got to stop it. 
    They get out with 28 arrests.  They push people into subway trains.  They hit people over the back of the head with baseball bats.  We got to get them out of here. 
    I’ve already signed an executive order requiring a mandatory death penalty for anyone who murders a police officer.  And, tonight, I’m asking Congress to pass that policy into permanent law.  (Applause.)
    I’m also asking for a new crime bill, getting tough on repeat offenders while enhancing protections for America’s police officers so they can do their jobs without fear of their lives being totally destroyed.  They don’t want to be killed.  We’re not going to let them be killed.
    Joining us in the gallery tonight is a young man who truly loves our police.  His name is D.J. Daniel.  He is 13 years old, and he has always dreamed of becoming a police officer.  (Applause.)
    But in 2018, D.J. was diagnosed with brain cancer.  The doctors gave him five months at most to live.  That was more than six years ago.  (Applause.)
    Since that time, D.J. and his dad have been on a quest to make his dream come true, and D.J. has been sworn in as an honorary law enforcement officer, actually, a number of times.  Pec- — the police love him.  The police departments love him. 
    And tonight, D.J., we’re going to do you the biggest honor of them all.  I am asking our new Secret Service director, Sean Curran, to officially make you an agent of the United States Secret Service.  (Applause.)
    (Director Curran presents Mr. Daniel with a Secret Service Agent credential.)
    AUDIENCE:  D.J.!  D.J.!  D.J.!
    THE PRESIDENT:  Thank you, D.J. 
    D.J.’s doctors believe his cancer likely came from a chemical he was exposed to when he was younger.  Since 1975, rates of child cancer have increased by more than 40 percent.  Reversing this trend is one of the top priorities for our new presidential commission to make America healthy again, chaired by our new secretary of Health and Human Services, Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.  (Applause.) 
    AUDIENCE MEMBER:  MAHA, baby!
    THE PRESIDENT:  With the name “Kennedy,” you would have thought everybody over here would have been cheering.  (Laughter.)  How quickly they forget.  
    Our goal is to get toxins out of our environment, poisons out of our food supply, and keep our children healthy and strong.  
    As an example, not long ago — you can’t even believe these numbers — 1 in 10,000 children had autism. 1 in 10,000.  And now it’s 1 in 36.  There’s something wrong.  One in 36.  Think of that. 
    So, we’re going to find out what it is, and there’s nobody better than Bobby and all of the people that are working with you — you have the best — to figure out what is going on.  
    Okay, Bobby?  Good luck.  It’s a very important job.  Thank you.  (Applause.)  Thank you.  Thank you.
    My administration is also working to protect our children from toxic ideologies in our schools. 
         A few years ago, January Littlejohn and her husband discovered that their daughter’s school had secretly socially transitioned their 13-year-old little girl.  Teachers and administrators conspired to deceive January and her husband, while encouraging her daughter to use a new name and pronouns — “they/them” pronouns, actually — all without telling January, who is here tonight and is now a courageous advocate against this form of child abuse.  January, thank you.  Thank you.  Thank you very much.  (Applause.)  Thank you.  Thank you. 
    Stories like this are why, shortly after taking office, I signed an executive order banning public schools from indoctrinating our children with transgender ideology.  (Applause.) 
    I also signed an order to cut off all taxpayer funding to any institution that engages in the sexual mutilation of our youth.  (Applause.)  And now I want Congress to pass a bill permanently banning and criminalizing sex changes on children and forever ending the lie that any child is trapped in the wrong body.  This is a big lie.  (Applause.)
    And our message to every child in America is that you are perfect exactly the way God made you.  (Applause.)
         Because we’re getting wokeness out of our schools and out of our military, and it’s already out, and it’s out of our society.  We don’t want it.  Wokeness is trouble.  Wokeness is bad.  It’s gone.  It’s gone.  And we feel so much better for it, don’t we?  Don’t we feel better?  (Applause.)  
         Our service members won’t be activists and ideologues.  They will be fighters and warriors.  They will fight for our country.           And, Pete, congratulations.  Secretary of Defense, congratulations.  (Applause.)
         And he’s not big into the woke movement, I can tell you.  (Laughter.)  I know him well. 
         I am pleased to report that, in January, the U.S. Army had its single best recruiting month in 15 years and that all armed services are having among the best recruiting results ever in the history of our services.  (Applause.)  What a difference.
         And you know it was just a few months ago where the results were exactly the opposite.  We couldn’t recruit anywhere.  We couldn’t recruit.  Now we’re having the best results, just about, that we’ve ever had.  What a tremendous turnaround.  It’s really a beautiful thing to see.  People love our country again.  It’s very simple.  They love our country, and they love being in our military again.  So, it’s a great thing.  And thank you very much.  Great job.  Thank you.  (Applause.)
         We’re joined tonight by a young man, Jason Hartley, who knows the weight of that call of duty.  Jason’s father, grandfather, and great-grandfather all wore the uniform. 
         Jason tragically lost his dad, who was also a Los Angeles County sheriff’s deputy, when he was just a boy, and now he wants to carry on the family legacy of service.  Jason is a senior in high school, a six-letter varsity athlete — a really good athlete, they say — a brilliant student, with a 4.46 — that’s good — GPA.  (Laughter.)  And his greatest dream is to attend the U.S. Military Academy at West Point.  (Applause.) 
         And, Jason, that’s a very big deal getting in.  That’s a hard one to get into.  But I’m pleased to inform you that your application has been accepted.  You will soon be joining the Corps of Cadets.  (Applause.) 
         Thank you.  Jason, you’re going to be on the Long Gray Line, Jason. 
         As commander in chief, my focus is on building the most powerful military of the future.  As a first step, I’m asking Congress to fund a state-of-the-art Golden Dome missile defense shield to protect our homeland, all made in the USA.  (Applause.) 
         And Ronald Reagan wanted to do it long ago, but the technology just wasn’t there, not even close.  But now we have the technology.  It’s incredible, actually.  And other places, they have it: Israel has it.  Other places have it.  And the United States should have it too.  Right, Tim?  Right?  (Applause.)  They should have it too.  So, I want to thank you. 
         But it’s a very important.  This is a very dangerous world.  We should have it.  We want to be protected.  And we’re going to protect our citizens like never before.
         To boost our defense industrial base, we are also going to resurrect the American shipbuilding industry, including commercial shipbuilding and military shipbuilding.  (Applause.)
         And for that purpose, I am announcing tonight that we will create a new Office of Shipbuilding in the White House and offer special tax incentives to bring this industry home to America, where it belongs. 
         We used to make so many ships.  We don’t make them anymore very much, but we’re going to make them very fast, very soon.  It will have a huge impact.          To further enhance our national security, my administration will be reclaiming the Panama Canal, and we’ve already started doing it.  (Applause.)
         Just today, a large American company announced they are buying both ports around the Panama Canal and lots of other things having to do with the Panama Canal and a couple of other canals. 
         The Panama Canal was built by Americans for Americans, not for others, but others could use it.  But it was built at tremendous cost of American blood and treasure.  Thirty-eight thousand workers died building the Panama Canal.  They died of malaria.  They died of snake bites and mosquitoes.  Not a nice place to work.  They paid them very highly to go there, knowing there was a 25 percent chance that they would die.  The most expensive project, also, that was ever built in our country’s history, if you bring it up to modern-day costs.
         It was given away by the Carter administration for $1, but that agreement has been violated very severely.  We didn’t give it to China.  We gave it to Panama, and we’re taking it back.  (Applause.)
         And we have Marco Rubio in charge.  Good luck, Marco.  (Laughter and applause.)  Now we know who to blame if anything goes wrong.  (Laughter.) 
    No, Marco has been amazing, and he’s going to do a great job.  Think of it.  He got a hundred votes.  (Applause.)  You know, he was approved with, actually, 99, but the 100th was this gentleman, and I feel very certain — so, let’s assume he got 100 votes.  And I’m either very, very happy about that or I’m very concerned about it.  (Laughter.) 
         But he’s already proven — I mean, he’s a great gentleman.  He’s respected by everybody.  And we appreciate you voting for Marco.  He’s going to do a fantastic job.  Thank you.  (Applause.)  Thank you.  He’s doing a great job.  Great job. 
         And I also have a message tonight for the incredible people of Greenland.  (Laughter.)  We strongly support your right to determine your own future, and, if you choose, we welcome you into the United States of America. 
         We need Greenland for national security and even international security, and we’re working with everybody involved to try and get it.  But we need it, really, for international world security.  And I think we’re going to get it.  One way or the other, we’re going to get it.  
    We will keep you safe.  We will make you rich.  And together, we will take Greenland to heights like you have never thought possible before.  
         It’s a very small population but very, very large piece of land and very, very important for military security.
         America is once again standing strong against the forces of radical Islamic terrorism. 
         Three and a half years ago, ISIS terrorists killed 13 American service members and countless others in the Abbey Gate bombing during the disastrous and incompetent withdrawal from Afghanistan — not that they were withdrawing; it was the way they withdrew.  Perhaps the most embarrassing moment in the history of our country.  
         Tonight, I am pleased to announce that we have just apprehended the top terrorist responsible for that atrocity, and he is right now on his way here to face the swift sword of American justice.  (Applause.)
         And I want to thank, especially, the government of Pakistan for helping arrest this monster. 
         This was a very momentous day for those 13 families, who I actually got to know very well, most of them, whose children were murdered, and the many people that were so badly — over 42 people — so badly injured on that fateful day in Afghanistan.  What a horrible day.  Such incompetence was shown that when Putin saw what happened, I guess he said, “Wow, maybe this is my chance.”  That’s how bad it was.  Should have never happened.  Grossly incompetent people. 
         I spoke to many of the parents and loved ones, and they’re all in our hearts tonight.  Just spoke to them on the phone.  We had a big call.  Every one of them called, and everybody was on the line, and they did nothing but cry with happiness.  They were very happy — as happy as you can be under those circumstances.  Their child, brother, sister, son, daughter was killed for no reason whatsoever. 
         In the Middle East, we’re bringing back our hostages from Gaza.  In my first term, we achieved one of the most groundbreaking peace agreements in generations: the Abraham Accords.  (Applause.) 
    And now we’re going to build on that foundation to create a more peaceful and prosperous future for the entire region.  A lot of things are happening in the Middle East.  People haven’t been talking about that so much lately with everything going on with Ukraine and Russia, but a lot of things are happening in the Middle East.  It’s a rough neighborhood, actually.
         I’m also working tirelessly to end the savage conflict in Ukraine.  Millions of Ukrainians and Russians have been needlessly killed or wounded in this horrific and brutal conflict with no end in sight. 
         The United States has sent hundreds of billions of dollars to support Ukraine’s defense with no security, with no anything.  (Applause.)
         Do you want to keep it going for another five years? 
         SENATOR WARREN:  Yes!
         THE PRESIDENT:  Yeah.  Yeah, you would say — Pocahontas says, “Yes.”  (Laughter.)
         AUDIENCE MEMBERS:  Booo —
         THE PRESIDENT:  Two thousand people are being killed every single week — more than that.  They’re Russian young people.  They’re Ukrainian young people.  They’re not Americans.  But I want it to stop.
         Meanwhile, Europe has sadly spent more money buying Russian oil and gas than they have spent on defending Ukraine, by far.  Think of that.  They’ve spent more buying Russian oil and gas than they have defending.  And we’ve spent, perhaps, $350 billion.  Like taking candy from a baby, that’s what happened.  And they’ve spent $100 billion.  What a difference that is.  And we have an ocean separating us, and they don’t. 
         But we’re getting along very well with them, and lots of good things are happening. 
         Biden has authorized more money in this fight than Europe has spent by billions and billions of dollars.  It’s hard to believe that they wouldn’t have stopped it and said, at some point, “Come on.  Let’s equalize.  You got to be equal to us.”  But that didn’t happen.
         Earlier today, I received an important letter from President Zelenskyy of Ukraine.  The letter reads, “Ukraine is ready to come to the negotiating table as soon as possible to bring lasting peace closer.”  “Nobody wants peace more than the Ukrainians,” he said.  (Applause.)  “My team and I stand ready to work under President Trump’s strong leadership to get a peace that lasts.  We do really value how much America has done to help Ukraine maintain its sovereignty and independence.  Regarding the agreement on minerals and security, Ukraine is ready to sign it at any time that is convenient for you.” 
         I appreciate that he sent this letter.  Just got it a little while ago.  
         Simultaneously, we’ve had serious discussions with Russia and have received strong signals that they are ready for peace.  Wouldn’t that be beautiful?  Wouldn’t that be beautiful?  (Applause.)  Wouldn’t that be beautiful?
         It’s time to stop this madness.  It’s time to halt the killing.  It’s time to end this senseless war.  If you want to end wars, you have to talk to both sides. 
         Nearly four years ago, amid rising tensions, a history teacher named Marc Fogel was detained in Russia and sentenced to 14 years in a penal colony.  Rough stuff. 
         The previous administration barely lifted a finger to help him.  They knew he was innocent, but they had no idea where to begin.  But last summer, I promised his 95-year-old mother, Malphine, that we would bring her boy safely back home.          After 22 days in office, I did just that, and they are here tonight.  (Applause.) 
         To Marc and his great mom, we are delighted to have you safe and sound and with us. 
         As fate would have it, Marc Fogel was born in a small, rural town — in Butler, Pennsylvania — have you heard of it? — where his mother has lived for the past 78 years.
         I just happened to go there last July 13th for a rally. That was not pleasant.  (Laughter.)  And that is where I met his beautiful mom, right before I walked onto that stage.  And I told her I would not forget what she said about her son.  And I never did, did I?  Never forgot.  
         Less than 10 minutes later, at that same rally, gunfire rang out, and a sick and deranged assassin unloaded eight bullets from his sniper’s perch into a crowd of many thousands of people.           My life was saved by a fraction of an inch, but some were not so lucky.  Corey Comperatore was a firefighter, a veteran, a Christian, a husband, a devoted father, and, above all, a protector. 
         When the sound of gunshots pierced the air — it was a horrible sound — Corey knew instantly what it was and what to do.  He threw himself on top of his wife and daughters and shielded them from the bullets with his own body.
         Corey was hit really hard.  You know the story from there.  He sacrificed his life to save theirs. 
         Two others — very fine people — were also seriously hit.  But thankfully, with the help of two great country doctors, we thought they were gone, and they were saved.  So, those doctors had great talent. 
         We’re joined by Corey’s wife, Helen, who was his high school sweetheart, and their two beloved daughters, Allyson and Kaylee.  Thank you.  (Applause.)
         To Helen, Allyson, and Kaylee, Corey is looking down on his three beautiful ladies right now, and he is cheering you on.  He loves you.  He is cheering you on. 
         Corey was taken from us much too soon, but his destiny was to leave us all with a shining example of the selfless devotion of a true American patriot.  It was love like Corey’s that built our country, and it’s love like Corey’s that is going to make our country more majestic than ever before.  
         I believe that my life was saved that day in Butler for a very good reason.  I was saved by God to make America great again.  I believe that.  (Applause.)  Thank you. 
         Thank you.  Thank you very much.  
         From the patriots of Lexington and Concord to the heroes of Gettysburg and Normandy, from the warriors who crossed the Delaware to the trailblazers who climbed the Rockies, and from the legends who soared at Kitty Hawk to the astronauts who touched the Moon, Americans have always been the people who defied all odds, transcended all dangers, made the most extraordinary sacrifices, and did whatever it took to defend our children, our country, and our freedom.
         And as we have seen in this chamber tonight, that same strength, faith, love, and spirit is still alive and thriving in the hearts of the American people.  Despite the best efforts of those who would try to censor us, silence us, break us, destroy us, Americans are today a proud, free, sovereign, and independent nation that will always be free, and we will fight for it till death. 
         We will never let anything happen to our beloved country, because we are a country of doers, dreamers, fighters, and survivors. 
         Our ancestors crossed a vast ocean, strode into the unknown wilderness, and carved their fortunes from the rock and soil of a perilous and very dangerous frontier.  They chased our destiny across a boundless continent.  They built the railroads, laid the highways, and graced the world with American marvels, like the Empire State Building, the mighty Hoover Dam, and the towering Golden Gate Bridge. 
         They lit the world with electricity, broke free of the force of gravity, fired up the engines of American industry, vanquished the communists, fascists, and Marxists all over the world, and gave us countless modern wonders sculpted out of iron, glass, and steel.  
         We stand on the shoulders of these pioneers who won and built the modern age, these workers who poured their sweat into the skylines of our cities, these warriors who shed their blood on fields of battle and gave everything they had for our rights and for our freedom.  
         Now it is our time to take up the righteous cause of American liberty, and it is our turn to take America’s destiny into our own hands and begin the most thrilling days in the history of our country. 
         This will be our greatest era.  
         With God’s help, over the next four years, we are going to lead this nation even higher, and we are going to forge the freest, most advanced, most dynamic, and most dominant civilization ever to exist on the face of this Earth. 
         We are going to create the highest quality of life, build the safest and wealthiest and healthiest and most vital communities anywhere in the world. 
         We are going to conquer the vast frontiers of science, and we are going to lead humanity into space and plant the American flag on the planet Mars and even far beyond.  (Applause.)
         And, through it all, we are going to rediscover the unstoppable power of the American spirit, and we are going to renew unlimited promise of the American dream. 
         Every single day, we will stand up and we will fight, fight, fight for the country our citizens believe in and for the country our people deserve.  (Applause.)  Thank you.  Thank you.
         AUDIENCE MEMBERS:  Fight!  Fight!  Fight!
         THE PRESIDENT:  My fellow Americans, get ready for an incredible future, because the golden age of America has only just begun.  It will be like nothing that has ever been seen before. 
         Thank you.  God bless you.  And God bless America.  (Applause.)
         Thank you.  Thank you, everybody.  Thank you.  Thank you very much.  Thank you very much.  Thank you. 
    Thank you very much.  Appreciate it.
    Thank you very much.
                                 END                11:00 P.M. EST

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI United Nations: With Yemen Poised for Renewed Conflict, Insufficient Aid and Environmental Crisis, Security Council Hears Political Process, Humanitarian Funding Urgently Needed

    Source: United Nations General Assembly and Security Council

    “Numbers in My Next Briefings Will Be Worse,” Says Emergency Relief Coordinator

    Fear of Yemen plunging back into widespread conflict is “palpable”, the United Nations’ top official in that country told the Security Council today, calling on the parties to refrain from military posturing and instead agree on a nationwide ceasefire.

    “I see and hear the deep frustration of the Yemeni people who continue to bear the heavy burden of a decade of war” and whose grinding hardship “only deepens”, said Hans Grundberg, Special Envoy of the Secretary-General for Yemen.  He added that gross domestic product (GDP) per capita has more than halved, the Yemeni rial in Government-controlled areas has fallen by 50 per cent in the last year and poverty has surged across the country.

    Even though large-scale ground operations have not resumed since the UN-mediated truce was implemented in April 2022, he reported that military activity continues.  On that, he voiced concern over recent reports of shelling, drone attacks, infiltration attempts and mobilization campaigns recently witnessed in Ma’rib, Al Jawf, Shabwa and Ta’iz.  Relatedly, he warned against a rise in rhetoric from the parties, who are pre-positioning themselves publicly for military confrontation.  Words, intent and signals matter, and “escalatory discourse can have real consequences”, he added.

    Stressing that his team remains “undeterred” amid enormous challenges, he highlighted its recent, relentless engagement with both Yemeni and international stakeholders.  To settle the conflict, the parties must agree on a nationwide ceasefire and a mechanism to implement it.  Furthermore, he underlined the need for a political process that includes “a broad spectrum of Yemenis that will allow this conflict to settle once and for all”.

    While welcoming the continued cessation of attacks by Ansar Allah on vessels in the Red Sea and targets in Israel during the last month, he emphasized that “enabling environments for peace can be fragile and fleeting” and “positive developments must be put on a more-permanent footing”.  Reiterating his determination to convene the parties at any opportunity to end this decade-long conflict, he stated:  “We owe it to the millions of Yemenis not to waver or falter in our determination on this.”

    “I am not here to defend programmes, spreadsheets and institutions, but people,” said Tom Fletcher, Under-Secretary-General for Humanitarian Affairs and Emergency Relief Coordinator.  Severe funding cuts are a “body blow”, he stressed.  Humanitarian coordinators are analysing where to make dramatic cuts, as well as “the implications of the tough choices we are making on which lives not to save”, he added.  On the United States’ designation of the Houthis as a foreign terrorist organization, he said that it is vital to ensure civilians in Yemen have access to essential food and medicine — whether through commercial or humanitarian channels.

    Continuing, he observed that 9.6 million women and girls in Yemen are in severe need of life-saving humanitarian assistance, while 1.5 million girls remain out of school — preventing them from breaking cycles of discrimination.  “As your funding for Yemen evaporates, the numbers in my next briefings will be worse,” he warned, adding that more women will die and more will be forced into survival sex, begging, coerced prostitution, human trafficking and selling their children.  And yet, he noted, women remain on the frontlines of survival and recovery — 40 per cent of the Yemen Humanitarian Fund goes to women-led organizations, most of which are local.

    Also briefing the Council today was Nesmah M. Ali, civil-society representative from the Peace Track Initiative, who said that Yemen’s myriad crises have weakened State institutions, collapsed social protection systems and created multidimensional insecurities.  Recalling that she was forced to leave her hometown in 2020, she stated:  “I am a migrant of conflict and climate change.”  The war has devastated Yemen’s environment, she said, adding that attacks on oil refineries and ports, landmines in fields and coastal areas and destruction of power stations and water systems have left that country in ruins.

    And climate change is deepening Yemen’s crisis, she stressed, as floods displace landmines, complicate demining actions and exacerbate pre-war intertribal conflicts over scarce resources.  While women are disproportionately affected by climate change and more vulnerable to natural disasters, their stories of determination — “amid vanishing fish, ruined crops and deferred dreams” — highlight their unwavering strength, and she urged the Council to prioritize the impact of climate change and conflict on gender equality.

    Council Members Condemn Detentions

    In the ensuing discussion, many Council members condemned the ongoing detention by the Houthis — officially known as Ansar Allah — of UN personnel and the tragic death of a World Food Programme (WFP) staff member in their captivity.

    Among them was Panama’s delegate, who called for the immediate and unconditional release of all humanitarian and diplomatic personnel, as well as respect for their fundamental human rights.  The representative of France urged the Houthis to end all threats and disinformation campaigns against humanitarian actors.  Picking up that thread, the United Kingdom’s delegate expressed support for the UN’s decision to pause humanitarian operations in Saada, describing this pause as “a direct consequence” of the Houthi threat undermining the security and safety of aid workers.

    United States Designates Houthis as Terrorist Organization, Others Urge Dialogue

    The representative of the United States said that her country is taking concrete steps to eliminate the Houthis’ capabilities by designating them as a foreign terrorist organization and using targeted sanctions to deprive them of illicit revenues.  “Our sanctions seek to preserve space for legitimate activities that support Yemenis living in Houthi-controlled territory who bear no responsibility for the Houthis’ malign actions,” she stressed.  Washington, D.C., will also take steps to stop Iran’s support for Houthi terrorism, and she added:  “We will take action against the Houthis should they resume their reckless attacks in the Red Sea and surrounding waterways and on Israel.”

    However, her counterpart from the Russian Federation called on the United States Government to reconsider its decision to designate Ansar Allah as a terrorist organization, stressing that “openly antagonising one of the key sides to the conflict will do no good”.  The voices of all political forces must be considered, and the ineffective logic of maximum pressure abandoned, he stressed, drawing attention to Moscow’s proposal to create a framework for collective security in the Persian Gulf.

    Pakistan’s delegate also emphasized the critical role of dialogue, highlighting regional initiatives led by Saudi Arabia and Oman.  He also noted that there have been no new attacks on commercial shipping since the onset of the ceasefire in Gaza.  “While we unequivocally condemn such attacks,” he added that it is crucial to acknowledge that “the absence of the attacks coincides with the maintenance of the ceasefire in Gaza”. 

    While also welcoming the pause in attacks in the Red Sea and on Israel, the representative of the Republic of Korea voiced concern over the Houthis’ “repeatedly declared” readiness to resume such attacks if the hard-won ceasefire and hostage deal in Gaza breaks down.  “This is simply unacceptable,” he asserted.

    Speakers Underline Nexus between Conflict and Environment

    On the fragile situation on the ground, the speaker for Greece said that “the risk of military escalation has not eclipsed”.  As a historic seafaring nation, Greece supports the freedom of navigation and is committed to safeguarding maritime security in the region.  Highlighting the interconnectedness of climate, peace and security, he said that the FSO Safer and the Greek-flagged MV Sounion cases demonstrated the conflict’s environmental and humanitarian consequences.

    The convergence of prolonged conflict, environmental degradation and climate change has created a perfect storm of crises in Yemen, echoed Denmark’s delegate, Council President for March, speaking in her national capacity.  As the world’s third-most vulnerable country to climate change, Yemen is highly affected by climate-induced disasters, she observed, urging the Council to ensure that climate considerations are integrated into peacebuilding strategies, local mediation efforts and a future peace settlement process.

    Also highlighting the impact of climate change and conflict on food and water insecurity, the representative of Slovenia — whose country is a founding member of the Global Alliance to Spare Water from Armed Conflicts — called for the protection and development of water resources and infrastructure in Yemen.  “We strongly believe that water issues can be an entry point for grassroots dialogue and mutual understanding between parties, as well as empowering women,” he added. 

    Painting a grim picture of the dire humanitarian situation in Yemen, Sierra Leone’s delegate — who also spoke for Algeria, Guyana and Somalia — called for increased support for the 2025 Humanitarian Response Plan. “Despite shrinking aid budgets, we recognize the tireless efforts of humanitarian organizations and their personnel to meet the urgent needs of the Yemeni people,” he said.  China’s representative also urged States to increase humanitarian assistance and prioritize food security, emphasizing that “a political solution is a fundamental way out of the Yemeni issue”.

    Yemen’s Speaker Urges Aid Organizations Relocate to Aden

    As the conflict enters its eleventh year, the Yemeni people aspire to peace, said that country’s representative. However, these aspirations could not materialize due to the destructive approach of Iran-backed Houthi militias who rejected all efforts to that end, he said, welcoming the United States’ designation of the Houthis as a terrorist organization.  He underscored the importance of strategic partnerships to support the Government’s efforts to end the coup, restore State institutions and extend State authority over all Yemeni soil. 

    He further stressed that, despite the economic, humanitarian, social and institutional challenges caused by the war, the Government is making “tremendous efforts” to address currency depreciation and unemployment.  Condemning the ongoing detention of international personnel, he cautioned that the militias “will not stop their blackmailing of the international community”.  Accordingly, he urged the UN and other international organizations to transfer their headquarters to Aden, the temporary capital.

    MIL OSI United Nations News

  • MIL-OSI Global: Why Ukraine still holds the winning hand

    Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Aisha Ahmad, Associate Professor, Political Science, University of Toronto

    Days after United States President Donald Trump publicly humiliated Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy at the White House, the U.S. paused military aid and cut off intelligence-sharing with Kyiv.

    Zelenskyy is now scrambling to salvage a deal with Trump, offering him Ukraine’s rich natural resources even without a firm security guarantee.

    What if Zelenskyy is getting scammed? Trump is notorious for violating agreements, and so dealing with him is risky. Does Ukraine have a choice? As Trump ominously told Zelenskyy: “You don’t have the cards.”

    It’s true Ukraine is the weaker party in the enduring conflict with Russia, but that doesn’t mean it has to surrender its freedom, territory and wealth to foreign invaders. Even if Trump’s deal turns out to be a con job, the Ukrainian people can still defeat Russia, and they can do it without America’s help.

    If the absolute worst should happen, Ukrainian fighters could choose to play a different hand: insurgency.

    Insurgents often hold the advantage

    I have studied asymmetric wars around the world for 20 years, and insurgency is the ultimate death trap for foreign powers that invade weaker countries. Insurgencies reverse the asymmetry of conventional wars: the weaker player has the battlefield advantage, while the stronger party slowly bleeds out and goes bankrupt.

    This is not a scenario that anyone in Ukraine wants, but if Trump and Russia’s Vladimir Putin refuse to deal fairly with Zelenskyy, they may unwittingly unleash this hell upon the world.

    If it turns out the peace deal is a scam, Ukrainian fighters could be forced to switch from conventional to irregular warfare.

    How?

    First, as Russia rapidly advances, Ukrainian fighters would disband regular armed forces and form covert, decentralized militia units. They would hide all military and cash assets, and blend into local communities. Civilian clothes only.

    From the outside, it would look like the defending military has dissolved and given up. The invaders will foolishly believe they have achieved total victory.

    Insurgents do this to lure the enemy deeper into their territory and stretch them thin. They let them put up their “Mission Accomplished” banners. They go to the invader’s victory celebrations and applaud them. They ensure their invaders feel comfortable, and that overconfidence makes them lazy and careless.

    Insurgents wait and watch

    In the first year, insurgents lay low, develop covert networks and watch every move, every detail.

    Within six months, they know how the enemy takes his morning coffee, and they have a perfect record of the critical supply lines feeding the invader’s army. They also join the enemy’s puppet security forces, using this as an opportunity to gather intelligence and plan raids. The first phase is all about reconnaissance and infiltration.

    Time is the great advantage of the insurgent. Smart insurgents measure their success over the course of decades, not months. The fact is, counterinsurgency operations are exponentially more expensive than the cost of waging a successful insurgency, and so the longer insurgents can embroil the invader in their trap, the more the invader goes bankrupt.




    Read more:
    Why annexing Canada would destroy the United States


    Insurgents allow invaders to spend tens of billions of dollars on pipelines and mining projects, and then they spend a few thousand dollars to blow up those investments. Or they co-opt those projects, tax them and use the revenue to destroy other enemy assets. Disorder is much easier to sow than order.

    Playing the long game

    Insurgents can play this game forever, while the invader drowns itself in futility and debt. Remember the Taliban’s old adage: “The Americans have all the watches, but we have all the time.”

    Conventional wars also typically have higher military casualties than insurgencies, so pivoting to irregular warfare will likely reduce soldiers’ casualty rates.

    In three years, the Ukrainian military is estimated to have lost at least 70,000 soldiers in its conventional war. That’s more than the Afghan Taliban lost in 20 years of insurgency.

    Holding a front line is a much bloodier business than blowing up a gas pipeline or supply convoy. Effective hit-and-run attacks are designed to keep insurgents alive, allowing them to blend back into civilian communities unnoticed.

    Unfortunately, because insurgents must blend into civilian populations to be effective, invaders typically retaliate by striking civilians targets, which may increase casualties. Russia would most certainly attack Ukrainian civilians, just as it is doing in the conventional war.

    Ukraine’s geographical advantage

    But Ukraine’s vast rural terrain makes it impossible for Russia to do to Ukrainians what Israel has done to Gazans.

    The Ukrainian landscape is comprised of expansive plains, forests and mountains in the west. Although it lacks jungles, a Ukrainian insurgency could deploy a combination of urban insurgency and guerrilla war tactics, using its vast rural territory to evade capture.

    Ukraine’s territorial advantages and military capacity would make it very hard for Russia to successfully repress an insurgency like it did in Chechnya.

    Attacks on civilian targets also inevitably draw more people into insurgency, thus creating an ever-expanding crisis for the invader. Whether through drone or missile strikes, this strategy is known to make insurgencies worse over time. Putin will inevitably scream about Ukrainian “terrorists,” but by then, Russia will be ensnared in the death trap.

    Nobody in their right mind would want to live in this grim and miserable future scenario. To avoid this calamity, Trump and Putin must realize that a Ukrainian insurgency could disembowel Russian power and destabilize Europe for decades. Unless they deal fairly with Zelenskyy today, they are gambling with European security, and playing a game where nobody wins.

    Aisha Ahmad receives funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada.

    ref. Why Ukraine still holds the winning hand – https://theconversation.com/why-ukraine-still-holds-the-winning-hand-251549

    MIL OSI – Global Reports

  • MIL-OSI Economics: Transcript of COM Regular Press Briefing, March 6, 2025

    Source: International Monetary Fund

    March 6, 2025

    SPEAKER:  Ms. Julie Kozack, Director of the Communications Department, IMF

     *  *  *  *  *

    MS. KOZACK: Good morning, everyone, and welcome to this IMF press briefing. It is very good to see you all, both those of you who are here in person and, of course, our colleagues online as well.

    I am Julie Kozak, Director of the Communications Department. As usual, this briefing is embargoed until 11 a.m. Eastern Time in the U.S. I will start with a short announcement and then take your questions in person on Webex and via the Press Center. 

    The 2025 Spring Meetings of the IMF and World Bank Group will take place from Monday, April 21 through Saturday, April 26. Press registration to attend the spring meetings in person in Washington D.C. is now open and you can register through www.IMFconnect.org. 

    And with that, I will now open the floor for your questions. For those connecting virtually, please turn on both your camera and microphone when speaking. And with that, over to you. 

    QUESTIONER: If the Congress does not approve the future agreement, as it is established by the local law, does the IMF give the money to Argentina? 

    MS. KOZACK: Okay, so that is a question on Argentina. Any other questions on Argentina? I do not see any hands up in the room. Let us go online. QUESTIONER: Do you think we are already in the final stage? And what remains to announce the Staff Agreement with the IMF?

    QUESTIONER: Good morning. I was wondering about also there have been versions of a new loan up to $20 billion and the first deployment of $8 billion this year. Can you confirm that, or can you give us an insight into the fresh funds that could be coming in the new agreement? And also, when can we expect a signing of the letter of intent? 

    QUESTIONER: So, my question is about the Congress. President Milei confirmed that the staff-level agreement must be approved by the Parliament as indicated by the Argentine law. So, is that also a requirement from the IMF itself or could the President sign a decree avoiding the current law that requires the staff-level agreement to be approved by Parliament. 

    QUESTIONER: I want to ask about the scope of the potential agreement with Argentina. There are reports out saying it could be as high, or there is an expectation it could be as high as $20 billion.

    QUESTIONER: I think a few people have already asked, but when [do] you expect to reach a staff-level agreement, whether, as the Argentine government has said, it is only the final numbers that need to be agreed and not other technical aspects? And whether the IMF requires that the entirety of the SLA be reviewed by Congress for approval or if whether a general outline produced by the government will be enough? 

    MS. KOZACK: Okay, very good. So, with that, let me go ahead and talk about Argentina. So, first, I just want to start by saying, as I think many of you know, both the Managing Director and the First Deputy Managing Director recently met with the Argentine authorities. And as they recently emphasized, we are continuing to make good progress toward a program, and we are working constructively with the Argentine authorities in this regard. The authorities’ stabilization and growth plan is delivering significant results.

    It has made notable strides in reducing inflation, stabilizing the economy, and fostering a return to growth in the country, and poverty is finally beginning to decline in Argentina. To sustain these early gains, there is a shared understanding about the need to continue to adopt a consistent set of fiscal, monetary and exchange rate policies, while very importantly, advancing growth enhancing reforms. And the new program would build on the progress achieved so far while also addressing Argentina’s remaining challenges. 

    Now, with respect to some of the questions regarding Congressional approval, we do take note of President Milei’s commitment to seek congressional support for a new IMF supported program. As we have often said in the past, strong ownership and broad support are key to the program’s success, 

    Here, I want to emphasize, though, that securing congressional support is a decision of the authorities as legislated in Argentine domestic law. And at the same time, of course, as I just noted, broad political and social support can enhance program implementation. Questions regarding the specific process on achieving or seeking congressional support should be addressed really to the Argentine authorities because it is a matter of domestic law. 

    From our side, as I noted, the negotiations are continuing in a constructive manner. In terms of the process from the IMF side. Once the negotiations are completed, as with any IMF program or proposed program, the final arrangement, the documents, will require approval of the IMF’s Executive Board. And we will provide further updates as we have them. 

    With respect to some of the questions about the details of the negotiations, the potential size of the program. All I can say right now is this is still under discussion as part of the ongoing and constructive dialogue that we are having with the authorities. And we will provide an update when we have more information that we can share with you. 

    QUESTIONER: On Lebanon, so following recent reports that the Lebanese government is in discussions with IMF over a potential deal on its financial default in public debt. I just want to see if the IMF can confirm these reports. If so, what does it look like? Are there any contingencies to this? And will there be an IMF mission visiting Lebanon? Thank you. 

    MS. KOZACK: So, what I can share on Lebanon is that an IMF team will visit Lebanon very soon, March 10th to 14th. This mission is aimed at, of course, meeting the new authorities, discussing Lebanon’s recent economic developments, its reconstruction needs, and the authorities’ economic priorities in the near-term. This is a fact-finding mission that will take place. But beyond this fact-finding mission, as we look ahead, future next steps could include helping the authorities to formulate a comprehensive economic reform program.

    Our staff continues to be closely engaged with the authorities. We are providing policy advice and capacity development to help the authorities’ efforts to rebuild Lebanon’s economy and institutions in coordination with other international partners. And that is what I have for now on Lebanon. 

    QUESTIONER: I wanted to ask you about what is happening in the United States. The trade wars have begun, and we are seeing some impact already, both in terms of market reaction and a lot of volatility in the markets, ups, and downs. We are also seeing some interesting developments in terms of bond markets and yields; it is going to increase the cost of borrowing. So, I wanted to ask you if you, at this point, I know we’ve asked this question before, but I wonder if you’ve got an additional assessment, as we’re now seeing some of these policies that had been promised taking effect, and whether you can say now whether you’re expecting an impact on the global economy and also on the U.S. economy and the affected economies that have been targeted thus far — China, Canada, Mexico. 

    QUESTIONER: As a follow up to [that] question, does the IMF consider that the ongoing developments of the U.S. tariffs and trade wars would push other nations to seek more trade relations and more alliances with other economic organizations and trade organizations such as BRICS, for example, or others? And broadly speaking, what is the IMF assessment of the global fragmentation that is going on right now? Do you see that it is slowing down or opposite it is moving faster, taking into account the latest developments in the United States?

    QUESTIONER: I would like to focus on the development of 10 years of U.S. bond yield movement. The 10-year bond yield now decreased, dropping substantially. And what does it mean? What is the implication of the movement? Does it represent some U.S. recession or U.S. economy? 

    QUESTIONER: With the tariffs actually now in place, has the IMF undertook a study to determine the potential impact on small island states that are heavily dependent on flows and goods and commodities coming out of the United States, more specifically, those countries within the Caribbean region who are very much dependent and could face significant inflationary pressures based on these tariffs?

    MS. KOZACK: So, first I want to just step back a little bit to recognize that we have seen now several new and significant developments over the past few days. The U.S. has imposed tariffs on Canada and Mexico as well as additional tariffs on China. Canada and China have, in response, announced tariffs on some U.S. goods and other measures. And Mexico has indicated that it will provide more details in the coming days.

    And as we have said before, you know, while assessing the full impact of tariffs on economic activity and inflation will depend on many factors, we do expect to provide an analysis of this, certainly at the global level and for the most affected countries at the time of our World Economic Outlook update in April. And of course we will also cover this issue, I imagine, in some of the regional updates where relevant. And I want to also emphasize that as part of our bilateral surveillance with countries, the individual Article IV reports this topic will also be covered to the extent that the countries are affected. 

    What I can say today is that if sustained the impact of the U.S. tariffs on Canada and Mexico can be expected to have a significant adverse economic impact on those countries given their very strong integration and exposure to the U.S. market. 

    Now, more broadly, there were some questions about financial market movements. So let me also just step back for a moment on some of these, and here I want to refer to some remarks that our Managing Director has been making recently. As she’s been saying, we are now in the midst of significant transformations, and these include the rapid advance of AI to changing patterns of capital flows and trade. She has also been mentioning that trade is no longer the engine of global growth that it used to be. 

    For example, during the period of 2000 to 2019, global trade growth reached nearly 6 percent on an annual basis, whereas over the more recent period of 2022 to 2024, global trade is growing closer to 3 percent. So global trade growth has been on a downward — has declined. And of course, it is in this more global context that governments are recalibrating their approaches and adjusting policies. 

    I also want to recognize, of course, that we have seen increased volatility in financial markets. We see that in indicators such as the VIX. We also have seen indicators of global uncertainty showing an increase. And what will be critical to assess what the economic impact of this will be — will be whether these trends are short-lived or whether they are sustained. Generally speaking, our research shows that both historically and across countries, sustained periods of elevated uncertainty can be associated with both households and firms holding back on consumption and investment decisions. And as I said, we will be providing a comprehensive analysis of our views on the global economy and individual economies as part of the World Economic Outlook that will be released in April. 

    On the specific question on U.S. bond yields, we do recognize of course, that U.S. bond yields have moved lower since the beginning of the year. And it does seem that on that basis markets may be reappraising or reassessing their views, particularly on the outlook for monetary policy. I will stop there and move on.

    QUESTIONER: When is the IMF Board expected to review and approve the next disbursement for Ukraine? Are there any remaining conditions or procedural steps that Ukraine must fulfill before approval? And the Ukrainian government is engaging in debt restructuring efforts with its creditors. How does the IMF assess Ukraine’s debt sustainability and what role does this play in bord’s decision making process regarding future disbursement announcements?

    QUESTIONER: So, to follow up on previous question. In February, you stated, that Ukraine would have access to about U.S. $900 million for the next review. Now we are speaking about $400 million. So, why the IMF has made a decision to adjust to the total sum of disbursement that will be provided to Ukraine?

    QUESTIONER: And do you think that it can impact financial stability of Ukrainian economy or there is no risk for them? 

    QUESTIONER: How do you expect the freezing of the U.S. aid for Ukraine might impact the program you have already on course right now? And how does this affect the global plan that had been made like a year ago or two years ago now? 

    QUESTIONER: I just want to follow up the last question about the impact — what the impact Trump administration is doing. Does this impact the IMF projections on Ukraine this and next year? 

    QUESTIONER: An adjacent question, maybe related to the prospect for ending the war. And, you know, we have seen economic developments in Russia continue to percolate along even though the war has been going on and there have been sanctions. Have you started to look at what the end of the war could mean for both the Russian and Ukrainian economies in terms of, you know, perhaps, you know, assuming that there would be an end of sanctions once there was a cessation of hostilities, whether that would give a boost to the Russian economy, maybe the European economy in general could lower costs, things like that? So just kind of walk us through what you are seeing there. 

    MS. KOZACK: Okay, let me go ahead on Ukraine. So, just to bring everyone up to speed. So, on February 28th, the IMF staff, and the Ukrainian authorities reached a staff-level agreement on the Seventh Review of the four-year EFF arrangement. This is subject to approval of the IMF’s Executive Board. Ukraine is expected to draw, as noted, about U.S. $400 million, and that would bring total disbursements under the program to U.S. $10.1 billion.

    I just want to note that program performance in Ukraine remains strong. All of the end December quantitative performance criteria were met, and understandings were reached between the Ukrainian authorities and IMF staff on a set of policies and reforms to sustain macroeconomic stability. The structural reform agenda in Ukraine is continuing to make good progress, and there are strong commitments from the Ukrainian authorities in a number of other areas. 

    Now on some of the specific questions, first on the matter of the disbursement, what I can say there is that it is not unusual over the life of a program for the pattern of disbursements to shift based on evolving balance of payments needs. And that is what has happened in this case. It is also important to emphasize that the overall size of the program, which is $15.6 billion, remains unchanged. And so that shift in disbursement pattern reflects the shifting balance of payments pattern for Ukraine. 

    So, on the issue the debt restructuring and debt process, what I can say there is that restoring debt sustainability in Ukraine hinges on continued implementation of the authority’s debt restructuring strategy, where completing the treatment of the GDP warrants remains important. And it also hinges very much on continuation of the revenue-based fiscal adjustment strategy, which is supported under the program. And as you know, Ukraine’s debt has been assessed in the last review to be sustainable on a forward-looking basis contingent on these two areas that I just mentioned. And of course, there will be a revised debt sustainability assessment as part of the ongoing review. 

    With respect to the other question, what I can say here is that the Ukrainian economy, you know, has shown continued resilience despite the challenges arising from the war. At the time of the Seventh Review, the last review, we estimated GDP growth to be 3.5 percent in 2024. But we did expect it at that time to moderate to 2 to 3 percent in 2025. And that was reflecting some headwinds from labor constraints and damage to energy infrastructure, given the ongoing war. It is the case in general for Ukraine, and we have been saying this throughout the life of the program, that the outlook remains exceptionally uncertain, especially as the war continues and it is taking a heavy toll on Ukraine’s people, economy, and infrastructure. 

    On the more recent developments that you were referring to, we are following these developments very closely. It is premature at the moment to comment on them, but we are following them, and we will make an assessment in due course.

    And on your question, the answer is essentially the same. We are following the developments very closely, and we will, as developments evolve, be undertaking obviously an assessment of what a peace deal could potentially look like and what would be the implications for all of the involved parties. 

    QUESTIONER: Julie, can you on the basis of having studied previous conflicts ending, can you just give us divorced from Ukraine and Russia, but just can you give us an indication of what generally happens when a conflict ends, what that means? And is there anything that we can draw on, at least just from history? 

    MS. KOZACK: So, I do not have, you know, off the top of my head a piece of research that I can kind of point to in terms of the interest analysis. What I certainly can say is that we always, for all of our member countries, hope for peace and stability in all of our member countries. And I think at that moment this is really what I can say. But I take note of the importance of your point, and we will, I have no doubt, in due course be conducting all of the necessary analysis as events unfold.

    QUESTIONER: I have two questions mainly on Egypt. as Egypt is scheduled for 10th of March for the discussion of the Fourth Review of the EFF for the country, what are we expecting from this meeting? And if you please, could you update us on the RSF facility worth $1.2 billion for the country? Thank you so much. 

    QUESTIONER: I would second exactly those questions. And just to add to that, I know it says on the IMF Executive Board calendar that the Board will be discussing waivers of non-observance for some of the performance criteria related to Egypt’s loan program and modifications for others. Are you able to tell us any more about exactly which criteria the Board will be looking at? And on the RSF, if you are able to give us any more detail about the prospective value of that. I know it has been put at $1 billion before. A related question, not on Egypt but on Gaza. I would be interested to know if the IMF has begun to think, whether internally or with partners in the region, about what its potential role would be in funding a reconstruction plan for Gaza given the $50 billion, upwards of $50 billion, cost of any reconstruction. 

    QUESTIONER: I may repeat questions about the value of current tranche to be given to Egypt and the timing of when the central bank of Egypt to receive it. And also, I have another question about the program of state assets selling. Will we witness some steps, new steps in that program? Could it be connected with the decision to be taken in March?

    MS. KOZACK: And any other questions on Egypt? All right. And then I have a question that came in through the Press Center. I am going to read it out loud – ’Does the IMF’s approval of the fourth tranche to Egypt require Egypt to implement some reforms? And when will the Fifth Review of the loan be held? What is the estimated size of the loan allocated to Egypt, and here will it be dispersed in installments or in one lump sum?’

    On Egypt – on March 10th, our Executive Board will be discussing Egypt’s Article IV consultation and the fourth review under the EFF. It will also be discussing at the same time Egypt’s request for an RSF, the Resilience and Sustainability Facility. Subject to completion by the Executive Board, the authorities, would have access to $1.2 billion under the EFF. So, under the EFF program. And then in addition, subject again to approval by our Executive Board, the size of the RSF would be about U.S. $1.3 billion. Regarding the RSF, like all of the IMF programs, the RSF is also delivered in tranches. So, it is not one lump sum up front. It is a phased program where tranches are dispersed on the basis of conditions being met. 

    And with respect to some of the other questions, what I can say today is just that we will provide, of course, more details following the Board meeting and on the question of waivers and modifications and also the questions on the state-owned enterprises. And again, the board meeting will be on March 10th. 

    QUESTIONER: I have two questions related to Japan. Firstly, amid rising uncertainty due to President Trump’s tariff policy, I would like to ask you — ask your thoughts on whether the Bank of Japan, currently in a rate hike phase, should continue raising rate or take more cautious approach in assessing the impact. And secondly, President Trump recently made remarks suggesting that Japan and China are engaging in currency devaluation. I would appreciate it if you share your views on Japan’s foreign exchange policy. Thank you. 

    MS. KOZACK: So, maybe just stepping back to give a bit of context on Japan. What I can say on Japan is that on the growth side, growth this year is expected to strengthen, and we also expect inflation to converge to the Bank of Japan’s 2 percent target by the end of 2025. 

    In 2024, growth in Japan slowed due to some temporary supply disruptions. But since then, we have seen a strengthening in growth driven by domestic demand, particular — particularly private consumption in Japan and rising wages. And we expect this to continue into 2025, where we project growth, at the time of the January WEO, we projected growth at 1.1 percent for Japan in 2025. And of course, just to say that we will be updating this projection as part of the April forecast. 

    Looking at inflation — headline and core inflation, as I said, are expected to decline gradually toward the 2 percent target. We have been supportive of the Bank of Japan’s recent monetary policy decisions. We believe that these decisions will help anchor inflation expectations at the 2 percent target but also given balance risks around inflation, our assessment has been that further hikes in the policy interest rate should continue to be data dependent, and they should proceed at a gradual pace over time. 

     With respect to the question on the exchange rate, what I can say there is that the Japanese authorities have affirmed their commitment to a flexible exchange rate regime. Japan’s flexible exchange rate regime has helped the country or has helped the economy absorb the impact of shocks. And it also supports the focus of monetary policy on price stability. And at the same time, what I can say is that that flexible exchange rate regime is helping maintain an external position that is in line with fundamentals. 

    QUESTIONER: Could you give us an update on the negotiations for Ethiopia, please? And on El Salvador, the deal that you agreed on in December and was approved a couple of weeks ago involves the government not increasing its exposure to Bitcoin. Government has continued to buy through the Office of Bitcoin, which is linked to the presidential palace. But yesterday the Fund said that these purchases do not increase the government’s exposure to Bitcoin. Could you please explain that? 

    QUESTIONER: Also on El Salvador, obviously he was saying to not to not buy it as a government reserve. I just wanted to, I guess, contrast to the U.S. I mean, President Trump has very much announced a digital assets reserve, including Ethereum and other coins, as well as Bitcoin. And I wondered if the IMF could – can you comment on the U.S. program or how would you distinguish the two countries and why the IMF might be taking a different approach?

    MS. KOZACK: All right, let me go ahead and take the El Salvador question in Ethiopia and then we will go back. I see many hands up online. 

    So, on El Salvador, as you know, last week our Executive Board approved a 40-month Extended Fund Facility, EFF, for U.S. $1.4 billion and with an immediate disbursement of $113 million. The program is expected to catalyze financial and technical support from other IFIs. And this will lead to a combined total over the program period of about U.S. $3.5 billion of support for El Salvador. The goals of the program are to restore fiscal sustainability, rebuild external and financial buffers, strengthen governance and transparency, and ultimately create the conditions for stronger and more resilient growth. 

    Regarding Bitcoin, in particular, the program aims to address the risks associated with the Bitcoin project to protect consumers and investors, as well as to limit potential fiscal costs. So, to start, there were recent legal reforms that have made the acceptance of Bitcoin voluntary, and taxes can be paid only in U.S. dollars. Under the program, the government has committed to not accumulate for their Bitcoins at the level of the overall public sector. 

    Regarding the recent increase in Bitcoin holding by the Strategic Bitcoin Reserve Fund, the authorities have confirmed that these are consistent with the agreed program conditionality, and we do remain engaged with the authorities on this important issue. 

    And then, to your question. We are obviously closely monitoring President Trump’s announcement in this area. The Presidential Working Group on Digital Asset Markets has not yet completed its work. So, we do not yet have details on the implementation of this proposal, but we will come back in due course. 

    And then turning to the question on Ethiopia. So just an update on Ethiopia. On January 17th, the IMF Executive Board completed the Second Review of the arrangement, the ECF arrangement for Ethiopia, and that allowed for a drawdown of about U.S. $245 million. The ECF arrangement supports the authorities’ reforms to address macroeconomic imbalances, restore external debt sustainability, and lay the foundation for strong private sector-led growth. 

    I can also just remind you that the Managing Director recently traveled to Ethiopia. She was there February 8th and 9th. She met with Prime Minister Abiy and his team to take stock of the economic reforms and the progress that is being made in the country. And she also took the opportunity to meet with other stakeholders, including representatives of the private sector. 

    QUESTIONER: My question is on USAID. USAID has now totally stopped its business. And to what extent do you see the impact, especially on lower income countries at the global level? And should you consider using your facility to support them just in case? 

    MS. KOZACK: So, on this issue, we are obviously again paying close attention to developments, and we are working with our country authorities. But it is, at the same time, it is too early to really say what the precise impact may be. And so, we will come back in due course. For now, we are monitoring.

    QUESTIONER: I have a question on Senegal. Following a recent audit of the country’s debt, it was found to be 99.7 percent of GDP. That was in 2023. And I know that IMF has said before that Senegal debt was stable even though it was high. I am wondering if that is the figure that you still consider sustainable. And then also with regards on talks of a new IMF program, I am wondering if Senegal could be asked to reimburse previous dispersion under this reporting period. 

    QUESTIONER: Still on Senegal, as soon as the report from the Audit Supreme Court was released, we saw rating agency downgrading Senegal sovereign notes. So, the country is now stuck. It cannot raise funds from the internal market, and it cannot go in a very comfortable position in international markets while they still face a lot of challenges. So, I am wondering why the IMF is working fast and bold to find a solution for Senegal in the midterm or even long-term. Is there any situation where IMF can provide a short-term, I mean, short-term relief to the country so they can go through these hard moments in a very soft way? 

    MS. KOZACK: So, on Senegal, what I can say is that we are actively engaged in discussions with the authorities with respect to the Court of Auditors Report and the associated misreporting under the IMF program. The Court of Auditors Report was released on February 12th. The Court confirmed that the fiscal deficit and debt were under reported during the period of 2019 to 2023.

    So, what we are doing is working closely with the authorities in their efforts to preserve fiscal and debt sustainability. We are working actively to advance on our discussions following the publication of the report, and we are also working with the authorities on measures to correct and remedy the misreporting that took place. What I can add is that the resolution of the misreporting in line with IMF policy is a precondition for discussions of any future financial assistance by the IMF.

    And with respect to potential consequences, I can say that the IMF does not impose any sanctions for misreporting cases. It is up to our Executive Board to decide on the next steps. And those next steps, you know, could include a waiver. And that waiver could — it could also include; it could be a waiver without a request for reimbursement. So, all of those discussions on Senegal are now underway. We are actively, very much working with the authorities, supporting as much as possible their efforts on fiscal and debt sustainability, as I said. And we will come back and report back when we have more information on Senegal. 

    I have a question here online that I am going to read. It came from the Press Center on Thailand. And the question is – ‘The upcoming World Bank IMF Annual Meetings in Thailand will bring significant attention to Southeast Asia’s economic outlook. From the from IMF’s perspective, how can Thailand best leverage this opportunity to address regional challenges such as digital transformation, climate change adaptation, and income inequality? And what collaborative initiatives between the IMF and Thailand are being planned to ensure lasting economic benefits for the country beyond the meetings themselves?’ 

    So, on this very important question, a very nice question, actually, what I can say is that we are very much looking forward to having Thailand host the annual meetings in 2026. So, this will be in October of 2026. Every three years, we do our Annual Meetings abroad. 2026, October will be Thailand. So, mark your calendar. I can also add that preparations are underway. The Fund, the IMF staff are working hand in hand with the Thai authorities to make this a highly successful event and showcasing the significant strides that Thailand has made since it last hosted our annual meetings in 1991. So, it will be 25 years when we get to 2026. 

    The Managing Director recently met with Bank of Thailand’s Governor Sethaput at the AlUla Conference in Saudi Arabia. They discussed the preparations for the annual meetings and agreed that it would be a very good opportunity to showcase on the global stage the region’s dynamism and economic activities. And of course, the meetings will also allow Thailand to position itself as a key contributor to the international economic dialogue and to gather views and experiences from countries throughout the membership of the IMF and the World Bank. 

    This ongoing close relationship leading up to and beyond, we hope, the Annual Meetings will focus on prioritizing reform reforms that are necessary to ensure the lasting benefits for Thailand and building the relationships and the shared policy, dialogue and experiences we hope will deepen our engagement, our excellent engagement and relationship with Thailand and will be sustained even past the Annual Meetings in 2026.

    QUESTIONER: My question is, what are the IMF growth projections for Jordan amid the ongoing impact of the Gaza war? And when will the Third Review under the EFF begin? And are any adjustments expected to the war’s region effect on Jordan’s economy? 

    MS. KOZACK: So, what I can share on Jordan is that the Executive Board on December 12th completed the Article IV Consultation with Jordan and the Second Review under the EFF arrangement. The mission for the next review, which will be the Third Review, is expected to take place in April.

    What I can also say is that Jordan has demonstrated resilience and maintained macroeconomic stability throughout the prolonged regional conflict. This resilience reflects the authority’s continued implementation of sound macroeconomic policies and progress with reforms. While recent developments in the region, particularly the ceasefire agreements, give rise to some cautious optimism, uncertainty, of course, in Jordan does remain high. And with respect to the growth projections, what I can say is that growth in 2024 was 2.3 percent. We are projecting growth at 2.5 percent in 2025 and a further increase in growth in 2026 to 3 percent. But like in all countries, we will be updating these projections as both part of our April World Economic Outlook Global Forecast, and also, of course, the team will be doing a full assessment of the Jordanian economy as part of their mission in April 

    And so, with this, I’m going to bring this press briefing to a close. Thank you all very much. Thank you very much for participating today. As a reminder, the briefing is embargoed until 11 a.m. Eastern Time in the U.S. The transcript, as always, will be made available later today on IMF.org. And in case of clarifications or additional questions, please reach out to my colleagues at media@IMF.org. And I wish everyone a wonderful day, and I look forward to seeing you next time. Thank you very much. 

     

    * * * * *

     

    IMF Communications Department
    MEDIA RELATIONS

    PRESS OFFICER: Boris Balabanov

    Phone: +1 202 623-7100Email: MEDIA@IMF.org

    MIL OSI Economics

  • MIL-OSI USA: Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth Greets the United Kingdom’s Secretary of State for Defence John Healey and Takes Questions From the Press

    Source: United States Department of Defense

    SECRETARY OF DEFENSE PETE HEGSETH: Well, Mr. Secretary, your entire delegation, welcome to the Pentagon. It’s great to see you. It was wonderful to meet you the first time in Brussels, and have some great interactions about our mutual interest, no doubt. And your prime minister, it was a privilege to meet him as well. He was here last week. Our nations, as you know, share a long and special relationship. Stronger today than ever before. I experienced that firsthand myself, as many of our generation has, on the battlefield, shoulder-to-shoulder with British troops in Afghanistan. I know how capable they are, how tough they are, and how close our bond is as brothers across the Atlantic, full stop.

    And so we are grateful for oh the many years that we have stood by each other’s side. And at the same, we are in the middle of a dynamic security environment, where on that continent, President Trump is calling on our European allies to take the lead, and you have done just that, sir. In fact, you chaired the first meeting of the Ukraine defense contact group that I had a pleasure to speak to. That was your first time as chair, and you’ll continue to it. And that’s, again, the United Kingdom stepping up.

    And then, once again, when your prime minister was here, you called me, we had a chance to speak briefly about the increase in defense spending that the U.K. is undertaking. So U.K. leadership is absolutely critical, and we very much appreciate it. We want to work together to achieve peace and security in Europe by working to bring an end to the war in Ukraine, building sustainable deterrence on the continent, and then increasing our allied capabilities and interoperability.

    And European leadership of NATO, led by the U.K., led by others, is, we believe, the future of defense on the continent, ensuring we provide a peaceful future for your kids and my kids and your grandkids and my grandkids. That’s ultimately what it’s about. I also want to thank the British people for the warm support they give to US forces stationed in the U.K. as well. It’s a long-standing relationship that we are very grateful for. So, you’re true allies, longtime friends. We’re new friends, but we’re getting there, and fellow warriors, so thank you very much for being here, Mr. Secretary.

    SECRETARY OF STATE FOR DEFENCE JOHN HEALEY: Mr. Secretary, thank you for such a warm welcome and such warm words. It’s great to be back in Washington, and it’s good to see you again. We last met last month in NATO, and then you challenged Europe to step up. You challenged us to step up on Ukraine, on defense spending, on European security. And I say to you that we have, we are, and we will further. And last week, the British prime minister announced the biggest increase in defense spending since the end of the Cold War, and we will go further.

    You also asked the U.K. to step up on leadership on Ukraine alongside the U.S., and indeed, you were with me when we had the 46 nations round the table at a week’s notice at the Ukraine Contact Group. Our meeting today follows very good discussions between President Trump and Prime Minister Starmer a week ago today, in which they both pledged to work together, our nations would work together to secure lasting peace in Ukraine. And we have a chance today to discuss the progress on that path to peace, with the opportunity that President Trump has created now since the 20th of January.

    When your president and my prime minister met last week, your president also said that the U.K. and the U.S. have a relationship like no other, and I think for me, that was exemplified last night at the British Embassy, when we were able to lay on a party to celebrate the 250th birthday of the U.S. Marine Corps. And for more than a century, your U.S. Marines and our Royal Marines have trained together. They fought together, and too often they’ve died together, defending the values that our two free nations share.

    And Pete, as you say, you know that from your own experience and your own service. And in many ways, for me, they embody the sort of warrior force that both you and I as defense secretaries are dedicated in our roles to strengthen because we know that we have to strengthen together with allies, deterrence in the face of rising threats.

    And finally, if I may, you’ve spoken about the deep bond between our two nations, and I’d say to you, I’m here today to strengthen that defense and security bond between our two nations. It’s needed now more than ever in this new era that we must face together. So thank you for receiving us and thank you for welcoming our delegation and I look forward to the discussions ahead.

    SECRETARY HEGSETH: And to that, I say, amen. Thank you. Appreciate you being here. If it’s OK, we’ll take a few questions for either myself or the secretary.

    Pentagon Press Secretary John Ullyot : We’ll take two from the U.S. press, and we’ll take two from the British press. Go with the U.S.

    Q: Mr. Secretary, you have said that Europe needs to do more to contribute to defense. Is a security guarantee of troops from France and the U.K. enough for Ukraine?

    SECRETARY HEGSETH: I think it’s been very encouraging to watch our friends in the U.K. and in France step up to say they are prepared to take the lead to ensure an enduring peace in Ukraine. What the president has also said time and time again is, let’s not get ahead of ourselves. Let’s get both sides to the table. Let’s get a commitment to peace, and that is what President Trump is actively doing, both with the Russians and Vladimir Putin and also the Ukrainians and Zelenskyy. So, there will be…in order to maintain enduring peace, there’s a security aspect to it. The U.K. and France have pledged, along with others, to be the core part of that, there will be other aspects that are part of further terms of the negotiation.

    Mr. Ullyot: British press. Go ahead.

    Q: Mr. Secretary, there are reports that a negotiating team will be going to Saudi Arabia next week. Given a renewed push for peace, will you reconsider resupplying Ukraine with weapons, or have the taps been turned off permanently?

    SECRETARY HEGSETH: As the president has pointed out, it is a pause. Exactly what he said from the beginning, pause pending a true commitment to a path to peace. The president is paying a very keen eye to precisely what the Ukrainians are saying and doing about committing to that peace process, and we’re very encouraged by the signs we’re seeing. Ultimately, he will make the determination, but it is a pause for now.

    Q: Thank you.

    Mr. Ullyot: U.S. press.

    Q: Missy Ryan, Washington Post. Secretary Healey, a question for you. Obviously, you both have referenced this strong, historic relationship. At the same time, what does it mean for the U.K. that its closest ally is now voicing the same narrative that Russia is voicing, vis a vis the war in Ukraine and seeming to align itself more closely with Russia versus what it has done in the past?

    SECRETARY HEALEY: Look, first of all, I don’t believe as members of government and decision takers, we’re the people to comment on every twist and turn in this process. I’m fixed on the historic opportunity the president has created to bring a lasting and secure peace to Ukraine. That’s what he and my prime minister dedicated themselves to do last week. And you’ve seen since then, the British prime minister pulled together in London, leaders of 18 nations to discuss the detail of a path to peace. And the president also has asked Europe to step up, and we are.

    The U.K. is ready to take on a leadership in that task. You saw that from Keir Starmer at the weekend, in the way that he is pulling the parties together, ensuring that we take Ukraine with us and that we work closely alongside the United States. And it’s the detail of those discussions which are rightly behind the scenes that the defense secretary and I will now pursue this afternoon.

    Mr. Ullyot: Last question from Danielle with the U.K. press.

    Q: Yeah. Thank you so much. Danielle [inaudible] Daily Telegraph. This is for both secretaries. What’s the plan if the Ukrainian Front line falls apart in the next couple of days? Does Britain, Europe have permission to intervene and help? And secondly, if I may, does Britain have the ability to use its nuclear deterrent by itself?

    SECRETARY HEALEY: Nobody who has been to Ukraine, who has talked with Ukraine, who has worked with the Ukrainian leaders, or met the Ukrainian servicemen and women, or the civilians, believe that they will not fight, nor do I or the prime minister doubt that as President Zelenskyy has said, they are ready to sign the important economic deal with the U.S. They are ready for a ceasefire. They want the guarantees and the security that must follow to ensure that they will not again face Russian invasion and Russian aggression. But they, like we, are willing to work to make the most of this unique opportunity that we now have, and that’s a responsibility on all of us. And that is very clear from our prime minister. It’s clear from the president. It’s also clear from President Zelenskyy, too.

    And as far as your question about nuclear, it is a question that it will be unthinkable and unprecedented for any defense secretary or any government to start commenting on or speculating on.

    SECRETARY HEGSETH: We are watching, obviously very closely, the front line of troops. I mean, our chairman our defense department, of course, we monitor that very closely. But ultimately, we’re interested in creating the conditions for peace. I mean, to the previous question from the Washington Post, the press is interested in narratives. Our president is interested in peace. So, we will get characterized one way or another, oh, your stance is pro Russia or pro…it’s all garbage. The president got elected to bring peace in this conflict, and he is working with both sides in a way that only President Trump can. Let’s be clear, only President Trump can, to bring them to the table to end the killing. And I can tell you from being behind the scenes, he is laser-focused on making that happen, and we’re closer today than we’ve ever been because of his leadership. Thank you very much.

    Mr. Ullyot: Thank you very much, press.

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI Russia: Transcript of COM Regular Press Briefing, March 6, 2025

    Source: IMF – News in Russian

    March 6, 2025

    SPEAKER:  Ms. Julie Kozack, Director of the Communications Department, IMF

     *  *  *  *  *

    MS. KOZACK: Good morning, everyone, and welcome to this IMF press briefing. It is very good to see you all, both those of you who are here in person and, of course, our colleagues online as well.

    I am Julie Kozak, Director of the Communications Department. As usual, this briefing is embargoed until 11 a.m. Eastern Time in the U.S. I will start with a short announcement and then take your questions in person on Webex and via the Press Center. 

    The 2025 Spring Meetings of the IMF and World Bank Group will take place from Monday, April 21 through Saturday, April 26. Press registration to attend the spring meetings in person in Washington D.C. is now open and you can register through www.IMFconnect.org. 

    And with that, I will now open the floor for your questions. For those connecting virtually, please turn on both your camera and microphone when speaking. And with that, over to you. 

    QUESTIONER: If the Congress does not approve the future agreement, as it is established by the local law, does the IMF give the money to Argentina? 

    MS. KOZACK: Okay, so that is a question on Argentina. Any other questions on Argentina? I do not see any hands up in the room. Let us go online. QUESTIONER: Do you think we are already in the final stage? And what remains to announce the Staff Agreement with the IMF?

    QUESTIONER: Good morning. I was wondering about also there have been versions of a new loan up to $20 billion and the first deployment of $8 billion this year. Can you confirm that, or can you give us an insight into the fresh funds that could be coming in the new agreement? And also, when can we expect a signing of the letter of intent? 

    QUESTIONER: So, my question is about the Congress. President Milei confirmed that the staff-level agreement must be approved by the Parliament as indicated by the Argentine law. So, is that also a requirement from the IMF itself or could the President sign a decree avoiding the current law that requires the staff-level agreement to be approved by Parliament. 

    QUESTIONER: I want to ask about the scope of the potential agreement with Argentina. There are reports out saying it could be as high, or there is an expectation it could be as high as $20 billion.

    QUESTIONER: I think a few people have already asked, but when [do] you expect to reach a staff-level agreement, whether, as the Argentine government has said, it is only the final numbers that need to be agreed and not other technical aspects? And whether the IMF requires that the entirety of the SLA be reviewed by Congress for approval or if whether a general outline produced by the government will be enough? 

    MS. KOZACK: Okay, very good. So, with that, let me go ahead and talk about Argentina. So, first, I just want to start by saying, as I think many of you know, both the Managing Director and the First Deputy Managing Director recently met with the Argentine authorities. And as they recently emphasized, we are continuing to make good progress toward a program, and we are working constructively with the Argentine authorities in this regard. The authorities’ stabilization and growth plan is delivering significant results.

    It has made notable strides in reducing inflation, stabilizing the economy, and fostering a return to growth in the country, and poverty is finally beginning to decline in Argentina. To sustain these early gains, there is a shared understanding about the need to continue to adopt a consistent set of fiscal, monetary and exchange rate policies, while very importantly, advancing growth enhancing reforms. And the new program would build on the progress achieved so far while also addressing Argentina’s remaining challenges. 

    Now, with respect to some of the questions regarding Congressional approval, we do take note of President Milei’s commitment to seek congressional support for a new IMF supported program. As we have often said in the past, strong ownership and broad support are key to the program’s success, 

    Here, I want to emphasize, though, that securing congressional support is a decision of the authorities as legislated in Argentine domestic law. And at the same time, of course, as I just noted, broad political and social support can enhance program implementation. Questions regarding the specific process on achieving or seeking congressional support should be addressed really to the Argentine authorities because it is a matter of domestic law. 

    From our side, as I noted, the negotiations are continuing in a constructive manner. In terms of the process from the IMF side. Once the negotiations are completed, as with any IMF program or proposed program, the final arrangement, the documents, will require approval of the IMF’s Executive Board. And we will provide further updates as we have them. 

    With respect to some of the questions about the details of the negotiations, the potential size of the program. All I can say right now is this is still under discussion as part of the ongoing and constructive dialogue that we are having with the authorities. And we will provide an update when we have more information that we can share with you. 

    QUESTIONER: On Lebanon, so following recent reports that the Lebanese government is in discussions with IMF over a potential deal on its financial default in public debt. I just want to see if the IMF can confirm these reports. If so, what does it look like? Are there any contingencies to this? And will there be an IMF mission visiting Lebanon? Thank you. 

    MS. KOZACK: So, what I can share on Lebanon is that an IMF team will visit Lebanon very soon, March 10th to 14th. This mission is aimed at, of course, meeting the new authorities, discussing Lebanon’s recent economic developments, its reconstruction needs, and the authorities’ economic priorities in the near-term. This is a fact-finding mission that will take place. But beyond this fact-finding mission, as we look ahead, future next steps could include helping the authorities to formulate a comprehensive economic reform program.

    Our staff continues to be closely engaged with the authorities. We are providing policy advice and capacity development to help the authorities’ efforts to rebuild Lebanon’s economy and institutions in coordination with other international partners. And that is what I have for now on Lebanon. 

    QUESTIONER: I wanted to ask you about what is happening in the United States. The trade wars have begun, and we are seeing some impact already, both in terms of market reaction and a lot of volatility in the markets, ups, and downs. We are also seeing some interesting developments in terms of bond markets and yields; it is going to increase the cost of borrowing. So, I wanted to ask you if you, at this point, I know we’ve asked this question before, but I wonder if you’ve got an additional assessment, as we’re now seeing some of these policies that had been promised taking effect, and whether you can say now whether you’re expecting an impact on the global economy and also on the U.S. economy and the affected economies that have been targeted thus far — China, Canada, Mexico. 

    QUESTIONER: As a follow up to [that] question, does the IMF consider that the ongoing developments of the U.S. tariffs and trade wars would push other nations to seek more trade relations and more alliances with other economic organizations and trade organizations such as BRICS, for example, or others? And broadly speaking, what is the IMF assessment of the global fragmentation that is going on right now? Do you see that it is slowing down or opposite it is moving faster, taking into account the latest developments in the United States?

    QUESTIONER: I would like to focus on the development of 10 years of U.S. bond yield movement. The 10-year bond yield now decreased, dropping substantially. And what does it mean? What is the implication of the movement? Does it represent some U.S. recession or U.S. economy? 

    QUESTIONER: With the tariffs actually now in place, has the IMF undertook a study to determine the potential impact on small island states that are heavily dependent on flows and goods and commodities coming out of the United States, more specifically, those countries within the Caribbean region who are very much dependent and could face significant inflationary pressures based on these tariffs?

    MS. KOZACK: So, first I want to just step back a little bit to recognize that we have seen now several new and significant developments over the past few days. The U.S. has imposed tariffs on Canada and Mexico as well as additional tariffs on China. Canada and China have, in response, announced tariffs on some U.S. goods and other measures. And Mexico has indicated that it will provide more details in the coming days.

    And as we have said before, you know, while assessing the full impact of tariffs on economic activity and inflation will depend on many factors, we do expect to provide an analysis of this, certainly at the global level and for the most affected countries at the time of our World Economic Outlook update in April. And of course we will also cover this issue, I imagine, in some of the regional updates where relevant. And I want to also emphasize that as part of our bilateral surveillance with countries, the individual Article IV reports this topic will also be covered to the extent that the countries are affected. 

    What I can say today is that if sustained the impact of the U.S. tariffs on Canada and Mexico can be expected to have a significant adverse economic impact on those countries given their very strong integration and exposure to the U.S. market. 

    Now, more broadly, there were some questions about financial market movements. So let me also just step back for a moment on some of these, and here I want to refer to some remarks that our Managing Director has been making recently. As she’s been saying, we are now in the midst of significant transformations, and these include the rapid advance of AI to changing patterns of capital flows and trade. She has also been mentioning that trade is no longer the engine of global growth that it used to be. 

    For example, during the period of 2000 to 2019, global trade growth reached nearly 6 percent on an annual basis, whereas over the more recent period of 2022 to 2024, global trade is growing closer to 3 percent. So global trade growth has been on a downward — has declined. And of course, it is in this more global context that governments are recalibrating their approaches and adjusting policies. 

    I also want to recognize, of course, that we have seen increased volatility in financial markets. We see that in indicators such as the VIX. We also have seen indicators of global uncertainty showing an increase. And what will be critical to assess what the economic impact of this will be — will be whether these trends are short-lived or whether they are sustained. Generally speaking, our research shows that both historically and across countries, sustained periods of elevated uncertainty can be associated with both households and firms holding back on consumption and investment decisions. And as I said, we will be providing a comprehensive analysis of our views on the global economy and individual economies as part of the World Economic Outlook that will be released in April. 

    On the specific question on U.S. bond yields, we do recognize of course, that U.S. bond yields have moved lower since the beginning of the year. And it does seem that on that basis markets may be reappraising or reassessing their views, particularly on the outlook for monetary policy. I will stop there and move on.

    QUESTIONER: When is the IMF Board expected to review and approve the next disbursement for Ukraine? Are there any remaining conditions or procedural steps that Ukraine must fulfill before approval? And the Ukrainian government is engaging in debt restructuring efforts with its creditors. How does the IMF assess Ukraine’s debt sustainability and what role does this play in bord’s decision making process regarding future disbursement announcements?

    QUESTIONER: So, to follow up on previous question. In February, you stated, that Ukraine would have access to about U.S. $900 million for the next review. Now we are speaking about $400 million. So, why the IMF has made a decision to adjust to the total sum of disbursement that will be provided to Ukraine?

    QUESTIONER: And do you think that it can impact financial stability of Ukrainian economy or there is no risk for them? 

    QUESTIONER: How do you expect the freezing of the U.S. aid for Ukraine might impact the program you have already on course right now? And how does this affect the global plan that had been made like a year ago or two years ago now? 

    QUESTIONER: I just want to follow up the last question about the impact — what the impact Trump administration is doing. Does this impact the IMF projections on Ukraine this and next year? 

    QUESTIONER: An adjacent question, maybe related to the prospect for ending the war. And, you know, we have seen economic developments in Russia continue to percolate along even though the war has been going on and there have been sanctions. Have you started to look at what the end of the war could mean for both the Russian and Ukrainian economies in terms of, you know, perhaps, you know, assuming that there would be an end of sanctions once there was a cessation of hostilities, whether that would give a boost to the Russian economy, maybe the European economy in general could lower costs, things like that? So just kind of walk us through what you are seeing there. 

    MS. KOZACK: Okay, let me go ahead on Ukraine. So, just to bring everyone up to speed. So, on February 28th, the IMF staff, and the Ukrainian authorities reached a staff-level agreement on the Seventh Review of the four-year EFF arrangement. This is subject to approval of the IMF’s Executive Board. Ukraine is expected to draw, as noted, about U.S. $400 million, and that would bring total disbursements under the program to U.S. $10.1 billion.

    I just want to note that program performance in Ukraine remains strong. All of the end December quantitative performance criteria were met, and understandings were reached between the Ukrainian authorities and IMF staff on a set of policies and reforms to sustain macroeconomic stability. The structural reform agenda in Ukraine is continuing to make good progress, and there are strong commitments from the Ukrainian authorities in a number of other areas. 

    Now on some of the specific questions, first on the matter of the disbursement, what I can say there is that it is not unusual over the life of a program for the pattern of disbursements to shift based on evolving balance of payments needs. And that is what has happened in this case. It is also important to emphasize that the overall size of the program, which is $15.6 billion, remains unchanged. And so that shift in disbursement pattern reflects the shifting balance of payments pattern for Ukraine. 

    So, on the issue the debt restructuring and debt process, what I can say there is that restoring debt sustainability in Ukraine hinges on continued implementation of the authority’s debt restructuring strategy, where completing the treatment of the GDP warrants remains important. And it also hinges very much on continuation of the revenue-based fiscal adjustment strategy, which is supported under the program. And as you know, Ukraine’s debt has been assessed in the last review to be sustainable on a forward-looking basis contingent on these two areas that I just mentioned. And of course, there will be a revised debt sustainability assessment as part of the ongoing review. 

    With respect to the other question, what I can say here is that the Ukrainian economy, you know, has shown continued resilience despite the challenges arising from the war. At the time of the Seventh Review, the last review, we estimated GDP growth to be 3.5 percent in 2024. But we did expect it at that time to moderate to 2 to 3 percent in 2025. And that was reflecting some headwinds from labor constraints and damage to energy infrastructure, given the ongoing war. It is the case in general for Ukraine, and we have been saying this throughout the life of the program, that the outlook remains exceptionally uncertain, especially as the war continues and it is taking a heavy toll on Ukraine’s people, economy, and infrastructure. 

    On the more recent developments that you were referring to, we are following these developments very closely. It is premature at the moment to comment on them, but we are following them, and we will make an assessment in due course.

    And on your question, the answer is essentially the same. We are following the developments very closely, and we will, as developments evolve, be undertaking obviously an assessment of what a peace deal could potentially look like and what would be the implications for all of the involved parties. 

    QUESTIONER: Julie, can you on the basis of having studied previous conflicts ending, can you just give us divorced from Ukraine and Russia, but just can you give us an indication of what generally happens when a conflict ends, what that means? And is there anything that we can draw on, at least just from history? 

    MS. KOZACK: So, I do not have, you know, off the top of my head a piece of research that I can kind of point to in terms of the interest analysis. What I certainly can say is that we always, for all of our member countries, hope for peace and stability in all of our member countries. And I think at that moment this is really what I can say. But I take note of the importance of your point, and we will, I have no doubt, in due course be conducting all of the necessary analysis as events unfold.

    QUESTIONER: I have two questions mainly on Egypt. as Egypt is scheduled for 10th of March for the discussion of the Fourth Review of the EFF for the country, what are we expecting from this meeting? And if you please, could you update us on the RSF facility worth $1.2 billion for the country? Thank you so much. 

    QUESTIONER: I would second exactly those questions. And just to add to that, I know it says on the IMF Executive Board calendar that the Board will be discussing waivers of non-observance for some of the performance criteria related to Egypt’s loan program and modifications for others. Are you able to tell us any more about exactly which criteria the Board will be looking at? And on the RSF, if you are able to give us any more detail about the prospective value of that. I know it has been put at $1 billion before. A related question, not on Egypt but on Gaza. I would be interested to know if the IMF has begun to think, whether internally or with partners in the region, about what its potential role would be in funding a reconstruction plan for Gaza given the $50 billion, upwards of $50 billion, cost of any reconstruction. 

    QUESTIONER: I may repeat questions about the value of current tranche to be given to Egypt and the timing of when the central bank of Egypt to receive it. And also, I have another question about the program of state assets selling. Will we witness some steps, new steps in that program? Could it be connected with the decision to be taken in March?

    MS. KOZACK: And any other questions on Egypt? All right. And then I have a question that came in through the Press Center. I am going to read it out loud – ’Does the IMF’s approval of the fourth tranche to Egypt require Egypt to implement some reforms? And when will the Fifth Review of the loan be held? What is the estimated size of the loan allocated to Egypt, and here will it be dispersed in installments or in one lump sum?’

    On Egypt – on March 10th, our Executive Board will be discussing Egypt’s Article IV consultation and the fourth review under the EFF. It will also be discussing at the same time Egypt’s request for an RSF, the Resilience and Sustainability Facility. Subject to completion by the Executive Board, the authorities, would have access to $1.2 billion under the EFF. So, under the EFF program. And then in addition, subject again to approval by our Executive Board, the size of the RSF would be about U.S. $1.3 billion. Regarding the RSF, like all of the IMF programs, the RSF is also delivered in tranches. So, it is not one lump sum up front. It is a phased program where tranches are dispersed on the basis of conditions being met. 

    And with respect to some of the other questions, what I can say today is just that we will provide, of course, more details following the Board meeting and on the question of waivers and modifications and also the questions on the state-owned enterprises. And again, the board meeting will be on March 10th. 

    QUESTIONER: I have two questions related to Japan. Firstly, amid rising uncertainty due to President Trump’s tariff policy, I would like to ask you — ask your thoughts on whether the Bank of Japan, currently in a rate hike phase, should continue raising rate or take more cautious approach in assessing the impact. And secondly, President Trump recently made remarks suggesting that Japan and China are engaging in currency devaluation. I would appreciate it if you share your views on Japan’s foreign exchange policy. Thank you. 

    MS. KOZACK: So, maybe just stepping back to give a bit of context on Japan. What I can say on Japan is that on the growth side, growth this year is expected to strengthen, and we also expect inflation to converge to the Bank of Japan’s 2 percent target by the end of 2025. 

    In 2024, growth in Japan slowed due to some temporary supply disruptions. But since then, we have seen a strengthening in growth driven by domestic demand, particular — particularly private consumption in Japan and rising wages. And we expect this to continue into 2025, where we project growth, at the time of the January WEO, we projected growth at 1.1 percent for Japan in 2025. And of course, just to say that we will be updating this projection as part of the April forecast. 

    Looking at inflation — headline and core inflation, as I said, are expected to decline gradually toward the 2 percent target. We have been supportive of the Bank of Japan’s recent monetary policy decisions. We believe that these decisions will help anchor inflation expectations at the 2 percent target but also given balance risks around inflation, our assessment has been that further hikes in the policy interest rate should continue to be data dependent, and they should proceed at a gradual pace over time. 

     With respect to the question on the exchange rate, what I can say there is that the Japanese authorities have affirmed their commitment to a flexible exchange rate regime. Japan’s flexible exchange rate regime has helped the country or has helped the economy absorb the impact of shocks. And it also supports the focus of monetary policy on price stability. And at the same time, what I can say is that that flexible exchange rate regime is helping maintain an external position that is in line with fundamentals. 

    QUESTIONER: Could you give us an update on the negotiations for Ethiopia, please? And on El Salvador, the deal that you agreed on in December and was approved a couple of weeks ago involves the government not increasing its exposure to Bitcoin. Government has continued to buy through the Office of Bitcoin, which is linked to the presidential palace. But yesterday the Fund said that these purchases do not increase the government’s exposure to Bitcoin. Could you please explain that? 

    QUESTIONER: Also on El Salvador, obviously he was saying to not to not buy it as a government reserve. I just wanted to, I guess, contrast to the U.S. I mean, President Trump has very much announced a digital assets reserve, including Ethereum and other coins, as well as Bitcoin. And I wondered if the IMF could – can you comment on the U.S. program or how would you distinguish the two countries and why the IMF might be taking a different approach?

    MS. KOZACK: All right, let me go ahead and take the El Salvador question in Ethiopia and then we will go back. I see many hands up online. 

    So, on El Salvador, as you know, last week our Executive Board approved a 40-month Extended Fund Facility, EFF, for U.S. $1.4 billion and with an immediate disbursement of $113 million. The program is expected to catalyze financial and technical support from other IFIs. And this will lead to a combined total over the program period of about U.S. $3.5 billion of support for El Salvador. The goals of the program are to restore fiscal sustainability, rebuild external and financial buffers, strengthen governance and transparency, and ultimately create the conditions for stronger and more resilient growth. 

    Regarding Bitcoin, in particular, the program aims to address the risks associated with the Bitcoin project to protect consumers and investors, as well as to limit potential fiscal costs. So, to start, there were recent legal reforms that have made the acceptance of Bitcoin voluntary, and taxes can be paid only in U.S. dollars. Under the program, the government has committed to not accumulate for their Bitcoins at the level of the overall public sector. 

    Regarding the recent increase in Bitcoin holding by the Strategic Bitcoin Reserve Fund, the authorities have confirmed that these are consistent with the agreed program conditionality, and we do remain engaged with the authorities on this important issue. 

    And then, to your question. We are obviously closely monitoring President Trump’s announcement in this area. The Presidential Working Group on Digital Asset Markets has not yet completed its work. So, we do not yet have details on the implementation of this proposal, but we will come back in due course. 

    And then turning to the question on Ethiopia. So just an update on Ethiopia. On January 17th, the IMF Executive Board completed the Second Review of the arrangement, the ECF arrangement for Ethiopia, and that allowed for a drawdown of about U.S. $245 million. The ECF arrangement supports the authorities’ reforms to address macroeconomic imbalances, restore external debt sustainability, and lay the foundation for strong private sector-led growth. 

    I can also just remind you that the Managing Director recently traveled to Ethiopia. She was there February 8th and 9th. She met with Prime Minister Abiy and his team to take stock of the economic reforms and the progress that is being made in the country. And she also took the opportunity to meet with other stakeholders, including representatives of the private sector. 

    QUESTIONER: My question is on USAID. USAID has now totally stopped its business. And to what extent do you see the impact, especially on lower income countries at the global level? And should you consider using your facility to support them just in case? 

    MS. KOZACK: So, on this issue, we are obviously again paying close attention to developments, and we are working with our country authorities. But it is, at the same time, it is too early to really say what the precise impact may be. And so, we will come back in due course. For now, we are monitoring.

    QUESTIONER: I have a question on Senegal. Following a recent audit of the country’s debt, it was found to be 99.7 percent of GDP. That was in 2023. And I know that IMF has said before that Senegal debt was stable even though it was high. I am wondering if that is the figure that you still consider sustainable. And then also with regards on talks of a new IMF program, I am wondering if Senegal could be asked to reimburse previous dispersion under this reporting period. 

    QUESTIONER: Still on Senegal, as soon as the report from the Audit Supreme Court was released, we saw rating agency downgrading Senegal sovereign notes. So, the country is now stuck. It cannot raise funds from the internal market, and it cannot go in a very comfortable position in international markets while they still face a lot of challenges. So, I am wondering why the IMF is working fast and bold to find a solution for Senegal in the midterm or even long-term. Is there any situation where IMF can provide a short-term, I mean, short-term relief to the country so they can go through these hard moments in a very soft way? 

    MS. KOZACK: So, on Senegal, what I can say is that we are actively engaged in discussions with the authorities with respect to the Court of Auditors Report and the associated misreporting under the IMF program. The Court of Auditors Report was released on February 12th. The Court confirmed that the fiscal deficit and debt were under reported during the period of 2019 to 2023.

    So, what we are doing is working closely with the authorities in their efforts to preserve fiscal and debt sustainability. We are working actively to advance on our discussions following the publication of the report, and we are also working with the authorities on measures to correct and remedy the misreporting that took place. What I can add is that the resolution of the misreporting in line with IMF policy is a precondition for discussions of any future financial assistance by the IMF.

    And with respect to potential consequences, I can say that the IMF does not impose any sanctions for misreporting cases. It is up to our Executive Board to decide on the next steps. And those next steps, you know, could include a waiver. And that waiver could — it could also include; it could be a waiver without a request for reimbursement. So, all of those discussions on Senegal are now underway. We are actively, very much working with the authorities, supporting as much as possible their efforts on fiscal and debt sustainability, as I said. And we will come back and report back when we have more information on Senegal. 

    I have a question here online that I am going to read. It came from the Press Center on Thailand. And the question is – ‘The upcoming World Bank IMF Annual Meetings in Thailand will bring significant attention to Southeast Asia’s economic outlook. From the from IMF’s perspective, how can Thailand best leverage this opportunity to address regional challenges such as digital transformation, climate change adaptation, and income inequality? And what collaborative initiatives between the IMF and Thailand are being planned to ensure lasting economic benefits for the country beyond the meetings themselves?’ 

    So, on this very important question, a very nice question, actually, what I can say is that we are very much looking forward to having Thailand host the annual meetings in 2026. So, this will be in October of 2026. Every three years, we do our Annual Meetings abroad. 2026, October will be Thailand. So, mark your calendar. I can also add that preparations are underway. The Fund, the IMF staff are working hand in hand with the Thai authorities to make this a highly successful event and showcasing the significant strides that Thailand has made since it last hosted our annual meetings in 1991. So, it will be 25 years when we get to 2026. 

    The Managing Director recently met with Bank of Thailand’s Governor Sethaput at the AlUla Conference in Saudi Arabia. They discussed the preparations for the annual meetings and agreed that it would be a very good opportunity to showcase on the global stage the region’s dynamism and economic activities. And of course, the meetings will also allow Thailand to position itself as a key contributor to the international economic dialogue and to gather views and experiences from countries throughout the membership of the IMF and the World Bank. 

    This ongoing close relationship leading up to and beyond, we hope, the Annual Meetings will focus on prioritizing reform reforms that are necessary to ensure the lasting benefits for Thailand and building the relationships and the shared policy, dialogue and experiences we hope will deepen our engagement, our excellent engagement and relationship with Thailand and will be sustained even past the Annual Meetings in 2026.

    QUESTIONER: My question is, what are the IMF growth projections for Jordan amid the ongoing impact of the Gaza war? And when will the Third Review under the EFF begin? And are any adjustments expected to the war’s region effect on Jordan’s economy? 

    MS. KOZACK: So, what I can share on Jordan is that the Executive Board on December 12th completed the Article IV Consultation with Jordan and the Second Review under the EFF arrangement. The mission for the next review, which will be the Third Review, is expected to take place in April.

    What I can also say is that Jordan has demonstrated resilience and maintained macroeconomic stability throughout the prolonged regional conflict. This resilience reflects the authority’s continued implementation of sound macroeconomic policies and progress with reforms. While recent developments in the region, particularly the ceasefire agreements, give rise to some cautious optimism, uncertainty, of course, in Jordan does remain high. And with respect to the growth projections, what I can say is that growth in 2024 was 2.3 percent. We are projecting growth at 2.5 percent in 2025 and a further increase in growth in 2026 to 3 percent. But like in all countries, we will be updating these projections as both part of our April World Economic Outlook Global Forecast, and also, of course, the team will be doing a full assessment of the Jordanian economy as part of their mission in April 

    And so, with this, I’m going to bring this press briefing to a close. Thank you all very much. Thank you very much for participating today. As a reminder, the briefing is embargoed until 11 a.m. Eastern Time in the U.S. The transcript, as always, will be made available later today on IMF.org. And in case of clarifications or additional questions, please reach out to my colleagues at media@IMF.org. And I wish everyone a wonderful day, and I look forward to seeing you next time. Thank you very much. 

     

    * * * * *

     

    IMF Communications Department
    MEDIA RELATIONS

    PRESS OFFICER: Boris Balabanov

    Phone: +1 202 623-7100Email: MEDIA@IMF.org

    https://www.imf.org/en/News/Articles/2025/03/06/tr030625-transcript-of-com-regular-press-briefing

    MIL OSI

    MIL OSI Russia News

  • MIL-OSI United Nations: Readout of the Secretary-General’s meeting with Mr. Ahmad Hussein al-Sharaa of Syria

    Source: United Nations secretary general

    The Secretary-General met with Mr. Ahmad Hussein al-Sharaa of Syria. They exchanged views about the historic opportunity to chart a new course for Syria as well as the challenges facing the country.

    The Secretary-General took note of the important steps taken on the path of a political transition in Syria. He stressed the need for an inclusive transition, in the spirit of the key principles of Security Council resolution 2254 (2015).

    The Secretary-General pledged UN support to the country’s recovery and to the people of Syria to meet their humanitarian needs.

    The Secretary-General expressed concern about violations of the 1974 Disengagement Agreement.
     

    MIL OSI United Nations News

  • MIL-OSI Global: Money laundering plays a key role in every part of the illegal drugs industry – here’s how it works

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Mark Berry, Lecturer In Criminology, Bournemouth University

    R Mendoza/Shutterstock

    The global illicit drugs trade is estimated to be worth at least half a trillion US dollars each year. Drugs such as cocaine, methamphetamine and heroin generate large revenues all along their supply chains, from where the products (and precursor materials) are grown or made – principally Colombia and Bolivia, China, Afghanistan, and the “golden triangle” of Myanmar, Laos and Thailand – to wherever the finished drugs are consumed.

    Earnings in the illicit drug trade are variable. Few people will make the kind of money that once put the Mexican former cartel boss Joaquín “El Chapo” Guzmán on the Forbes list of global billionaires. But while drug “kingpins” are the industry’s biggest individual earners, they do not hold the majority of the drug money that is generated throughout the global supply chain.

    Despite their frequent glamorisation in film and TV portrayals, drug cartels are basically international logistics companies. They work with distributors in different countries who deliver the drugs to regional wholesalers, who in turn supply the local retailers (dealers) who sell drugs to individuals.

    Everyone along the supply chain takes their cut, with most people making much more modest incomes than the millionaire drug traffickers of narcocorrido lore. In our interviews with illicit drug entrepreneurs in the US and UK, we routinely spoke to sellers whose incomes ranged from pocket money to providing a moderately comfortable life.



    Illicit drug use is damaging large parts of the world socially, politically and environmentally. Patterns of supply and demand are changing rapidly. In our longform series Addicted, leading experts bring you the latest insights on drug use and production as we ask: is it time to declare a planetary emergency?


    Around 70% to 80% of the overall revenue generated by illicit drugs is shared among the many wholesale and street-level dealers in destination countries such as the UK and US, where the price per gram is at its highest. How this money moves and is used to sustain the illicit drug trade should be an important part of any worthwhile counter-narcotics strategy. But it rarely is.

    Professional money launderers

    The people and organisations responsible for laundering drug revenues – that is, transforming them into untraceable money that can easily be spent, or into assets that can be held or sold – often exist under the radar of law enforcement and the media.

    Yet the ways illicit drug money is laundered are hardly a mystery. Techniques include wire transfers to offshore bank accounts, investments in shell companies or deposits in cash businesses, and buying foreign currencies or (to a small extent) cryptocurrencies. In addition, the straightforward physical transportation of cash across national borders is an often-used method known as a “bulk cash transfer”.

    The largest players in the illicit drugs industry, such as international cartels, national distributors and large-scale wholesalers, often use professional money launderers – some of whom have seemingly reputable jobs in the financial sector. In one recent case, US financial regulators fined TD Bank US$3 billion (£2.4 billion) – a record penalty for a bank – for facilitating the laundering of millions of dollars of drug cartel money.

    Over six years, more than 90% of the bank’s transactions went unmonitored, enabling “three money laundering networks to collectively transfer more than US$670 million through TD Bank accounts”. Then-US attorney general Merrick Garland commented: “By making its services convenient for criminals, [TD Bank] became one.”

    Video: CBC News.

    Some money laundering networks are as global as the drug supply chains they service. In June 2024, the US Department of Justice’s (DoJ) multi-year “Operation Fortune Runner” investigation saw LA-based associates of Mexico’s Sinaloa drug cartel charged with conspiring with money-laundering groups linked to a Chinese underground banking network. According to the IRS’s head of criminal investigation, Guy Ficco:

    Drug traffickers generate immense amounts of cash through their illicit operations. This case is a prime example of Chinese money launderers working hand-in-hand with drug traffickers to try to legitimise profits generated by drug activities.

    According to the DoJ, “many wealthy Chinese nationals” barred from transferring large amounts to the US by the Chinese government’s capital flight restrictions seek informal alternatives to the conventional banking system – including via schemes to launder illicit drug money. The DoJ explained how this works:

    The China-based investor contacts an individual who has US dollars available to sell in the United States. This seller of US dollars provides identifying information for a bank account in China, with instructions for the investor to deposit Chinese currency (renminbi) in that account. Once the owner of the account sees the deposit, an equivalent amount of US dollars is released to the buyer in the United States.

    These arrangements are not unique to Chinese actors. Similar arrangements occur throughout the world, including schemes to leverage the black market peso exchange and the Hawala international money transfer system.

    Professional launderers are both creating and exploiting vulnerabilities in the global financial system. Such corruption allows suspicious transactions to occur without proper checks or oversight. This not only reduces transparency in the financial system but erodes public trust in it.

    How cartels launder their money

    International drug cartels and national wholesalers have a smaller markup on their transactions, compared with retailers. But because they are responsible for moving enormous quantities of illicit drugs, they still generate millions of dollars worth of revenue.

    The most prolific known drug distributors in US history, Margarito Flores Jr and his twin brother Pedro, delivered billions of dollars worth of cocaine, heroin and methamphetamines to their US and Canadian wholesale clients between 1998 and 2009. They were working for Guzmán and Ismeal “El Mayo” Zambada García, then leaders of the Sinaloa cartel, as well as the Mexican Beltrán Leyva brothers whose cartel bore their surname.

    Today, Margarito Flores Jr trains law enforcement across the US in the methods he and his brother used to traffic drugs and run their business. In January 2015, both men were sentenced to 14 years for drug trafficking – Margarito Flores Jr would later reach out to one of this article’s authors (R.V. Gundur) after reading his book, Trying to Make It: The Enterprises, Gangs, and People of the American Drug Trade, which includes a comprehensive account of the Flores crew’s activities.

    In a subsequent interview, he told us: “My brother and I estimate that, if we added up all of the money we sent back to Mexico over the decade we sold drugs, it was probably more than US$3.5 billion.”

    The billions they remitted to Mexico were used by Guzmán, Zambada and the Beltrán Levya brothers not only to expand their drug businesses, but to corrupt powerful figures such as Mexico’s former secretary of public security, Genaro García Luna.

    García Luna, who was Mexico’s highest-ranking law enforcement official from 2006 to 2012, was sentenced to nearly 40 years in prison in October 2024 after being found guilty of taking millions of dollars in bribes from the Sinaloa cartel, as well as enabling the trafficking of more than a million kilograms of cocaine into the US. Flores explained to us:

    It’s important to understand that corruption impacts people at all levels of government. Our payoffs included local police and other people in the community, up to higher-positioned people in government. Lots of that money ended up funding the violent conflicts between cartels.

    While there has been widespread coverage of cartel drug money being laundered through high-profile businesses and banks such as Wachovia and HSBC, Flores suggested that “the money involved in the drug trade is a lot more than anybody really can understand”. The reason for this, he said, is that it’s very hard to track the flow of hard cash via lorries, boats, planes and even drones. Flores told us:

    It’s a misconception that everyone who makes a lot of money in drugs or other illegal business makes an effort to launder their money. My brother and I held much of what we earned in cash. We knew the government could eventually take everything [else].

    The twins were right: in time, that’s exactly what the US government did.

    ‘Everyday’ money laundering

    In our study of money laundering strategies used by people involved in the illicit drug trade in the UK and US, we found that street dealers do not typically undertake sophisticated laundering processes. Rather, they spend their cash on food and other routine living expenses. One independent UK drug dealer, whose experience was typical of many, used the money earned from his cocaine sales to buy groceries and pay bills for himself and his daughter.

    Spending money, even small amounts, gained through illegal activities is a money laundering offence – albeit one that is seldom prosecuted. As a result, these everyday activities that return illicit drug money to the legal economy are not well accounted for – even though the street value of drugs drives global market value estimates.

    Business-savvy street dealers can earn gross revenues that approach the earnings of high-paid white-collar workers. But they must disguise their earnings’ origins before they can spend them, of course, and various tactics are used to do this.

    Some dealers solicit close friends or family members to act as “strawmen”. These are people willing to put assets paid for by illicit drug money – such as cars, properties or even businesses – in their names on behalf of the dealer. Idris Elba’s character Stringer Bell in HBO’s The Wire was an accurate portrayal of someone investing in legal enterprises using illicit drug money.

    A guide to Stringer Bell’s character in The Wire. Video: Just an Observation.

    These strategies occur wherever illegal enterprise exists, and have done for well over a century. In the US, we interviewed wholesalers who had used family members to own houses and other properties on their behalf. This is done to mitigate against the risk of asset forfeiture should they be convicted of a crime. If an illicit enterprise can create a plausible beneficial owner who is not involved in crime, then the asset is harder to seize. This is why the Donald Trump administration’s recent suspension of beneficial owner oversight is problematic from a drug enforcement perspective.

    In liberal democracies, governments cannot investigate someone’s finances simply because they are related to criminals. The dirty money that is put into their accounts can also be disguised as legitimate income making it difficult to identify, although thorough investigations may uncover it.

    In the UK, we also talked to successful drug retailers who had set up local businesses in their own names. The EU’s law enforcement agency, Europol, has reported similar activities throughout Europe.

    Legal businesses are a common – and often hard-to-detect – vehicle to launder drug money. Bars, clubs, gyms, and hair, nail and tanning salons can be readily set up with drug money, as large cash infusions to establish a business are often not well scrutinised. These businesses are comparatively easy to run with significant cash flows, providing suitable cover for dirty money.

    For example, a beauty salon, especially one that offers high-value boutique services, could easily incorporate drug revenue into its financial accounts by reporting sales that do not occur. Tanning salons can be set up with little expense since they require only sunbeds and the rental of a property.

    Along with bars, clubs and salons, construction companies and restaurants stand out as other cash-intensive businesses with high volumes of transactions – characteristics that make good fronts for laundering money.

    It’s hard to spot a ‘dirty’ business

    There is no surefire way to tell whether a business is a laundering front. While some may look like enterprises struggling to stay afloat, others develop into viable operations that eventually no longer need dirty money to sustain them.

    Some drug dealers incorporate laundering practices within their legitimate jobs. Tradespeople such as electricians or plumbers, for example, can launder money by generating invoices for fake jobs, then reporting the income on their tax returns.

    In both the UK and US, tax authorities are not charged with evaluating the veracity of the funds reported, and are generally satisfied once tax is paid. In other words, they generally trust declared income as proof of legal business activity. Moreover, they, along with the police, lack the resources to investigate these businesses for money laundering.

    Through their legal businesses, many drug dealers pay significant taxes on their illegal revenue, and thus contribute to the economy.

    Paying income tax effectively renders this income laundered. It can be invested and used to set up other businesses, or to purchase cars and properties without suspicion. It can also bolster credit ratings, and improve access to legal financial services such as bank loans.

    Many small-time drug dealers start legal businesses in order to exit the illicit drug trade. We interviewed one cocaine dealer who had used his drug money to set up a retail electronics store; once it was successful, he stopped dealing. Similarly, the person behind a semi-legitimate nitrous oxide enterprise used his proceeds to set up a legitimate alcohol delivery service.

    Through self-laundering, these modest drug dealers transform their proceeds of crime into spendable cash – and may eventually leave criminality behind altogether.

    The (losing) battle against laundered money

    Across the world, anti-money laundering efforts against organised criminal gangs are notoriously ineffective.

    The Financial Action Task Force (FATF) – an intergovernmental organisation formed in 1999 to combat money laundering and the financing of terrorism – assesses financial regulators’ anti-money laundering controls all over the world. Countries designated as a risk that require monitoring are placed on the task force’s “grey list”, while severe, high-risk countries go on its “black list”. Being put on these lists can result in a withdrawal of international investment and implementation of sanctions by other countries.

    Although developing countries have often scored badly in their assessments, there has been some progress. While Kenya remained on the grey list in 2024, for example, it was found to have strengthened its measures to tackle both money laundering and terrorist financing. In the same year, though, Lebanon was added to the grey list over concerns on both counts.

    The FATF’s evaluation processes are designed to provide an objective assessment of whether a country has implemented its anti-money laundering and counter-terrorist financing recommendations. However, the success of the FATF’s anti-money laundering controls remains unclear.

    Video: The Financial Action Task Force.

    Often lost in the criminal financing narrative is the role of bulk cash transfers. Even in a world that is moving to cashless transactions, cash generally remains the primary currency of both the illicit drug trade and corruption.

    The biggest and most successful drug traffickers have significant cash reserves which are used to pay workers, replace drugs that are lost or seized, accrue assets, and bribe key officials.

    Reflecting on his former illicit enterprise, Margarito Flores observed: “For every kilo of cocaine or heroin or methamphetamine we sold in the US, at least a kilo of cash went back to Mexico.” For deals in Europe, Flores said: “Given the markup the further away you trade, the amount of cash sent back could be even higher – I would estimate it to be a kilo and a half.”

    Flores described the ineptitude of law enforcement in policing cash that was leaving the US:

    No matter how careful we were, my brother and I lost a handful of loads of drugs heading north [from Mexico into the US]. Heading south was different: we just had the money put on tractor trailers and had it driven it across the border. We never lost a dollar. That’s where politicians don’t pay enough attention. That cash lets traffickers keep doing business.

    Focus on the money as well as the drugs

    So long as demand for illicit drugs exists, the industry will continue – and the revenue it generates will be laundered.

    We believe that to curb the drugs trade, enforcement strategies need to go beyond simply capturing drugs and focus much more on capturing the money. Governments should go after reserves held not only by drug cartels but high-level distributors, such as those who replaced the Flores twins, and also wholesalers. People like these – comparatively high earners in destination countries – are the backbone of the illicit drugs trade.

    Transnational law enforcement should prioritise detecting and seizing bulk cash transfers. These high-volume proceeds underwrite the wellbeing of drug trafficking organisations. Digital tools, such as machine learning and artificial intelligence, can be developed to create new techniques to track and trace suspicious transactions, although they alone won’t solve all laundering problems.

    Corruption of officials also remains a problem. Governments need to ensure their officials are well paid and sufficiently monitored in their roles – be they working in government, border control, banks, police departments or prisons. Unfortunately, the US has shirked its leadership in global anti-corruption efforts with the recent halting of the enforcement of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, which bans the bribing of foreign officials.




    Read more:
    Mexico’s drug corruption has more to do with US demand than crooked politicians


    Anti-money laundering efforts need to be consistently supported and required. Lamentably, the US has undermined its anti-money laundering toolkit by suspending the enforcement of beneficial ownership information reporting requirements. Establishing beneficial ownership helps financial institutions to identify parties that are hiding their financial interests, which can be an indication of money laundering or other criminal activity.

    Similarly, foreign investment in producer countries can strengthen their capacity to counter laundering by supporting intelligence infrastructure and improved training. Recent cuts to USAid and the reduction of US State Department efforts in these areas is another indication that the US will no longer lead in these domains.

    As cash businesses provide an easy mechanism for cleaning money, moving to a cashless society that uses digital transactions may help ensure that money is traceable. At the same time, cryptomarkets provide a minor, but potentially increasing, pathway to hiding dirty money digitally.

    Ultimately, we should recognise the decades-long “war on drugs” for what it is: a policy costing trillions of dollars that combined mass incarceration with insufficient public health investment, and which has harmed the very communities the illicit drug trade affects the most. It is a difficult balance, but the pathway forward needs to reorient the objectives regarding drugs: invest in people, then go after the money that keeps the cartels, distributors and wholesalers afloat.


    For you: more from our Insights series:

    To hear about new Insights articles, join the hundreds of thousands of people who value The Conversation’s evidence-based news. Subscribe to our newsletter.

    Mark Berry received funding from the Dawes Trust for a prestigious PhD scholarship to undertake work that informs the contents of this article.

    R.V. Gundur received funding from the Economic and Social Research Council to undertake work that informs the contents of this article. He is also a professional member of the International Compliance Association.

    The authors wish to thank Margarito Flores Jr (kingpintoeducator.com) for his help with this article.

    ref. Money laundering plays a key role in every part of the illegal drugs industry – here’s how it works – https://theconversation.com/money-laundering-plays-a-key-role-in-every-part-of-the-illegal-drugs-industry-heres-how-it-works-251288

    MIL OSI – Global Reports

  • MIL-OSI: Global-e to Host 2025 Investor Day

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    PETAH-TIKVA, Israel, March 06, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Global-e (Nasdaq: GLBE), the platform powering global direct-to-consumer e-commerce, today announced it will host its 2025 Investor Day on Tuesday, March 11, 2025, beginning at 9:30 a.m. ET.

    A live webcast of the event will be available in the Investor Relations section of Global-e’s website at https://investors.global-e.com/news-events/events-presentations. A replay of the webcast will also be available on the website after the event.

    About Global-e Online Ltd.

    Global-e (Nasdaq: GLBE) is the world’s leading platform enabling and accelerating global, Direct-To-Consumer e-commerce. The chosen partner of over 1,000 brands and retailers across the United States, EMEA and APAC, Global-e makes selling internationally as simple as selling domestically. The company enables merchants to increase the conversion of international traffic into sales by offering online shoppers in over 200 destinations worldwide a seamless, localized shopping experience. Global-e’s end-to-end e-commerce solutions combine best-in-class localization capabilities, big-data best-practice business intelligence models, streamlined international logistics and vast global e-commerce experience, enabling international shoppers to buy seamlessly online and retailers to sell to, and from, anywhere in the world. For more information, please visit: www.global-e.com.

    Investor Contact:
    Erica Mannion or Mike Funari
    Sapphire Investor Relations, LLC
    IR@global-e.com
    +1 617-542-6180

    Press Contact:
    Sarah Schloss
    Headline Media
    sarah.schloss@headline.media
    +1 914-506-5104

    The MIL Network

  • MIL-OSI Submissions: Global Bodies – IPU report: Parliamentary gender gap narrowed over the past 30 years but progress stalled in 2024

    Source: Inter-Parliamentary Union

    Geneva, Switzerland, Thursday 6 March 2025 – A new IPU report analysing three decades of women in national parliaments reveals that the percentage of seats held by women has risen from 11.3% in 1995 to 27.2% in 2025.

    The IPU report Women in parliament 1995-2025 commemorates 30 years since the 1995 Beijing Declaration and Platform for Action, the landmark UN framework which set out a roadmap for gender equality and women’s rights. (ref. https://www.ipu.org/resources/publications/reports/2025-03/women-in-parliament-1995-2025 )

    The report shows that, from 2000 to 2015, the proportion of women in parliament rose steadily. However, in recent years, this progress has slowed.

    And in 2024, despite a high number of elections with 73 chamber renewals globally, women’s parliamentary representation increased by only 0.3 percentage points, marking the slowest rate of progress since 2017.

    Parity achieved in six countries

    In 1995, no parliament had achieved gender parity.

    In 2025, six parliaments have parity or more women than men in their single or lower chambers (Rwanda, Cuba, Nicaragua, Mexico, Andorra and the United Arab Emirates).

    Regional differences

    The Americas have seen the most significant increase in women’s parliamentary participation, with a 22.7 percentage point gain across all chambers combined over 30 years. The region now has the highest average, with 35.4% of seats held by women.

    From leading the world 30 years ago for gender equality in parliament, Asia now lags behind; the region recorded the slowest growth with a gain of just 8.9 points since 1995.

    2024 elections: More diversity and prominence for gender issues

    Despite the current pushback against diversity in the United States, the November 2024 elections saw two Black women elected to the Senate for the first time and the first openly transgender person to be elected to Congress.

    The United Kingdom Parliament elected in 2024 is also the most ethnically diverse in the country’s history with Black, Asian and ethnic minorities, both men and women, comprising around 13% of the House of Commons.

    The report notes that gender issues, particularly abortion rights and issues of gender identity, had a polarizing effect on many of the elections last year, in some cases spurring an anti-feminist backlash and in others serving to mobilize female voters.

    Violence against women in politics

    The report also points to political violence against women in 2024 elections:

    Mexico’s 2024 election was one of its most violent, with an estimated 130 candidates, including 30 women, allegedly attacked, according to Data Cívica.

    In the Republic of Korea, a woman MP was physically attacked during the election campaign.

    In the United Kingdom, the 2024 election saw an “alarming rise” in candidate abuse according to a report by the country’s Electoral Commission, disproportionately affecting women.

    However, some countries, with IPU support, have taken noteworthy steps to address gender-based violence in elections and parliaments, including Australia and the United Republic of Tanzania.

    Proactive steps towards gender parity

    Countries which have taken steps towards ensuring greater gender balance have seen the most laudable progress.

    These steps include implementing well-designed quotas, making parliaments more gender-sensitive and addressing violence against women.

    The report underlines that two factors have made a significant difference in the share of women elected to parliaments: electoral systems – especially proportional representation or mixed systems – and gender quotas in any form.

    In countries with gender quotas in place, the proportion of women elected or appointed was 31.2% in 2024 compared to 16.8% in countries without.

    Quotes

    IPU President, Tulia Ackson: “True progress in women’s political representation requires political will, intentional steps and a long-term commitment. At a time when women’s rights are on the backfoot in some regions of the world, women’s leadership is more important than ever.”

    President of the IPU Forum of Women Parliamentarians, Cynthia López Castro: “The journey from 11% to 27% women in parliaments over 30 years shows us that change is possible, but also that our work is far from done as we aim for gender parity. We need to encourage the next generation to come forward and continue the fight.”

    IPU Secretary General, Martin Chungong: “IPU analysis shows that the gender glass ceiling in parliaments has cracked but is far from shattered. There has been progress but the backlash against women’s rights in some countries is extremely worrying. It will take both women and men to overcome these challenges and accelerate progress towards gender parity.”

    The IPU is the global organization of national parliaments. It was founded in 1889 as the first multilateral political organization in the world, encouraging cooperation and dialogue between all nations. Today, the IPU comprises 181 national Member Parliaments and 15 regional parliamentary bodies. It promotes peace, democracy and sustainable development. It helps parliaments become stronger, younger, greener, more innovative and gender-balanced. It also defends the human rights of parliamentarians through a dedicated committee made up of MPs from around the world.

    MIL OSI – Submitted News

  • MIL-OSI United Nations: Scaling-up disaster risk reduction in humanitarian action at the Humanitarian Networks and Partnerships Weeks 2025

    Source: UNISDR Disaster Risk Reduction

    Venue

    International Conference Centre Geneva (CICG) and virtually

    The 2025 Humanitarian Networks and Partnerships Weeks (HNPW) will take place from 17 to 28 March in a hybrid format, bringing together humanitarian practitioners from across the globe. This annual event serves as a unique platform for collaboration, knowledge-sharing and advancing humanitarian action. Participants from various sectors, including UN agencies, NGOs, Member States, the private sector, media, academia and beyond, come together to address key humanitarian challenges.

    This year, UNDRR is organizing three sessions at the HNPW that explore how disaster risk reduction can be better integrated into humanitarian response. Join us for these dynamic discussions aimed at strengthening the role of disaster risk reduction and environment in humanitarian action and explore ways to improve preparedness, fostering a more resilient response to crises worldwide.

    Our sessions will be held in-person at the International Conference Centre Geneva (CICG) and online. Read descriptions and click through to register for individual sessions below.

    1. Reducing disaster risk reduction in humanitarian response: lessons from the field

    Date: 19 March 2025 (Remote), 13:00-14:00 CEST

    Organizers: Global Shelter Cluster, IFRC, UNHCR Yemen, UNDRR

    As overlapping and increasing disasters and crises strain lives and livelihoods, integrating disaster risk reduction into humanitarian response remains challenging. This session explores how humanitarian and development actors are collaborating to mainstream disaster risk reduction and environmental considerations in crisis settings, sharing field examples and key actions to scale up impact.

    Click here to access the event portal and registration link

    2. Optimizing emergency preparedness for effective anticipatory action and response

    Date: 27 March (Hybrid, Room 14), 9:00-10:30 CEST

    Organizers: UNDRR, OCHA, WFP, FAO, UNDP, UNEP

    As climate and disaster risks continue to escalate, effective preparedness for anticipatory action and response becomes crucial. This session will share findings from a recent study on emergency preparedness in humanitarian contexts, focusing on the Humanitarian Programme Cycle countries, and explore collaborative approaches between development and humanitarian actors.

    Click here to access the event portal and registration link

    3. Mainstreaming environment and disaster risk reduction into humanitarian response: concepts and practice

    Date: 28 March (Hybrid, Room 1), 9:00-10:30 CEST

    Organizers: Global Shelter Cluster, UNDRR, UNHCR

    Increasingly frequent climate-related hazards highlight the need for a stronger focus on preparedness and recovery in humanitarian response. This session explores how to integrate disaster risk reduction and environmental considerations in conflict and non-conflict settings, sharing experiences to date and practical strategies.

    Click here to access the event portal and registration link

    MIL OSI United Nations News

  • MIL-OSI Europe: MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION on the white paper on the future of European defence – B10-0149/2025

    Source: European Parliament

    Reinis Pozņaks, Adam Bielan, Rihards Kols, Cristian Terheş, Alberico Gambino, Alexandr Vondra, Aurelijus Veryga, Jadwiga Wiśniewska, Joachim Stanisław Brudziński, Michał Dworczyk, Roberts Zīle, Sebastian Tynkkynen, Bogdan Rzońca, Carlo Fidanza, Ondřej Krutílek, Veronika Vrecionová, Geadis Geadi
    on behalf of the ECR Group

    B10‑0149/2025

    European Parliament resolution on the white paper on the future of European defence

    (2025/2565(RSP))

    The European Parliament,

     having regard to the ‘Strategic Compass for Security and Defence – For a European Union that protects its citizens, values and interests and contributes to international peace and security’, which was approved by the Council on 21 March 2022 and endorsed by the European Council on 25 March 2022,

     having regard to the national security strategies of the Member States,

     having regard to Council Decision (CFSP) 2017/2315 of 11 December 2017 establishing permanent structured cooperation (PESCO) and determining the list of participating Member States[1],

     having regard to Regulation (EU) 2021/697 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2021 establishing the European Defence Fund and repealing Regulation (EU) 2018/1092[2],

     having regard to Regulation (EU) 2023/1525 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 July 2023 on supporting ammunition production (ASAP)[3],

     having regard to Regulation (EU) 2023/2418 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 October 2023 on establishing an instrument for the reinforcement of the European defence industry through common procurement (EDIRPA)[4],

     having regard to European Court of Auditors (ECA) special report 04/2025 of 6 February 2025 entitled ‘EU military mobility – Full speed not reached due to design weaknesses and obstacles en route’[5],

     having regard to the report by Enrico Letta of 18 April 2024 entitled ‘Much more than a market’, and in particular the section ‘Promoting peace and enhancing security: towards a Common Market for the defence industry’,

     having regard to the report by Mario Draghi of 9 September 2024 entitled ‘The future of European competitiveness’, and in particular chapter four thereof, ‘Increasing security and reducing dependencies’,

     having regard to the report by Sauli Niinistö of 30 October 2024 entitled ‘Safer Together – Strengthening Europe’s Civilian and Military Preparedness and Readiness’,

     having regard to the North Atlantic Treaty,

     having regard to the Madrid Summit Declaration issued by NATO heads of state or government participating in the meeting of the North Atlantic Council in Madrid on 29 June 2022,

     having regard to the NATO 2022 Strategic Concept of 29 June 2022 and the Vilnius Summit Communiqué issued by NATO heads of state and government participating in the meeting of the North Atlantic Council in Vilnius on 11 July 2023,

     having regard to the three joint declarations on EU-NATO cooperation signed on 8 July 2016, 10 July 2018 and 10 January 2023,

     having regard to the Washington Summit Declaration issued by the NATO heads of state or government participating in the North Atlantic Council in Washington, D.C. on 10 July 2024,

     having regard to Rule 136(2) of its Rules of Procedure,

    A. whereas, following the deteriorating geopolitical context and security environment in recent years, the strengthening of European defence, the bolstering of Europe’s operational capabilities and the ramping up of defence production are key initiatives that must be undertaken for ensuring peace, fostering development and strengthening unity between citizens and the Member States, and will contribute decisively to peace on our continent and towards ensuring the long-term security of Ukraine;

    B. whereas the recognition that Russia is the most significant threat to Europes security for the foreseeable future is paramount, and all Member States must therefore ensure a widespread increase in defence production and operational capabilities in order to ensure that credible deterrence is restored on the European continent, while simultaneously recognising that the instability in the southern neighbourhood must be fully taken into consideration;

    C. whereas, in light of the worsening external environment and despite the efforts made in recent years to enhance the EU’s crisis preparedness through new legislation, mechanisms and tools across various policy areas, the EU and its Member States remain vulnerable to multiple crisis scenarios;

    D. whereas the Commissioner for Defence and Space, Andrius Kubilius, and the Vice-President of the Commission / High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, Kaja Kallas, have been jointly tasked with producing a white paper on the future of European defence within the first 100 days of the mandate of the new Commission; whereas this paper aims to move from political objectives expressed in general terms to specific and quantifiable objectives, and to constitute an element of defence planning;

    E. whereas the timing of the white paper may coincide with a review of the Strategic Compass threat analysis, as well as with possible proposals for a revision of the Strategic Compass, as the majority of its commitments are due for completion by 2025;

    F. whereas the white paper’s principal focus must be to outline a clear plan for how the Member States can address and overcome their growing need for greater financial, operational and logistical resources for their national armed forces and intelligence services;

    G. whereas the white paper must ensure that an effective and financeable strategy that counters hybrid warfare can be realised, particularly one that counters the ongoing attacks on subsea infrastructure that are essential for global energy transport and digital communications, as approximately 99 % of global data traffic is reliant on undersea fibre-optic cables;

    H. whereas the undersea network of the Member States consists of 39 such cables, ensuring connectivity across the Mediterranean, North Sea and Baltic Sea; whereas recent undersea cable disruptions are often dismissed as maritime accidents; whereas emerging technologies and rapid advancements in autonomous underwater drones and deep-sea espionage capabilities create key vulnerabilities that are being exploited by hostile state and non-state actors;

    I. whereas the white paper must ensure complementarity with NATO’s Strategic Concept as NATO is and must remain the principal security guarantor for the Euro-Atlantic area;

    1. Reiterates its firm support for initiatives aimed at strengthening the European defence and deterrence capacity, addressing hybrid and cyber threats, promoting industrial cooperation in the defence sector, and providing the Member States and their allies with high-quality defence products in the required quantities and at short notice; underlines that these objectives require vision, concreteness and shared commitments, both in the strictly military field and in the industrial, technological and intelligence sectors;

    2. Emphasises that the EU must adopt a comprehensive, all-encompassing approach to civilian and military preparedness and readiness, involving both government and society as a whole, as European defence is confronted with increasingly complex challenges that demand a shift in approach, in particular regarding artificial intelligence (AI), cybersecurity and multi-domain operational strategies; considers the importance of strengthening cooperation with NATO and like-minded countries and engaging with the United States to increase the resilience of the transatlantic relationship;

    3. Expects the white paper on the future of European defence to differentiate between short-term and long-term plans and objectives, to predominantly address defence sector capability issues, industrial competitiveness and investment needs, as well as to frame the overall approach to EU defence integration, with the aim of strengthening the Member States’ abilities to respond to threats – particularly in the context of Russia’s continuing war of aggression in Ukraine, combined with evolving geopolitical challenges to Europe’s southern flank, and increased military capabilities of hostile state and non-state actors – reinforce EU-NATO cooperation, ensure more efficient Member State defence spending, improve coordination between the Member States, and strengthen strategic partnerships while prioritising the transatlantic relationship;

    4. Underlines that Europe must take on greater responsibility and welcomes the fact that higher Member State investment in defence is already accelerating the consolidation of the EU’s Defence Technological and Industrial Base (EDTIB), which includes a number of large multinational companies, mid-caps and over 2 000 small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs); stresses that the different EU initiatives and regulations should work together to incentivise this process, rather than presenting obstacles; underlines the importance of improving coherence and coordination between EU instruments and programmes of common European interest for defence;

    5. Reiterates, in this regard, that it will also be important to promptly adopt the European defence industry programme (EDIP), in order to support the European defence industrial strategy (EDIS), adopted in March 2024, which aims to enhance the EU’s defence readiness and specifically its industrial capacity;

    6. Encourages the expansion of financial support to future European defence spending initiatives that promote the mass development of operational capabilities and strategic enablers, along with a robust enhancement of civil defence infrastructure to ensure the national resilience of the Member States;

    7. Welcomes the announcement of the proposal for the exemption of defence spending from EU limitations on public spending – a first, fundamental step in the right direction;

    8. Recalls that on 31 January 2025, 19 of the Member States sent a letter urging the European Investment Bank (EIB) to take a stronger role in financing security and defence, in particular re-evaluating the EIB’s list of excluded activities, increasing funding for defence-related investments and exploring the issuance of ‘defence bonds’;

    9. Calls on the EIB to further review its policy on defence investment; welcomes the EIB’s decision to update the definition of eligible dual-use projects, but notes that its lending policy still excludes the financing of ammunition and weapons, as well as equipment or infrastructure exclusively dedicated to military use; underlines that more should be done to enable access to financing and facilitate the de-risking of defence projects across the financial institutions;

    10. Urges the Member States to support the establishment of a defence, security and resilience bank to serve as a multilateral lending institution designed to provide low-interest, long-term loans that can support key national security priorities such as rearmament, defence modernisation, rebuilding efforts in Ukraine and the buying back of critical infrastructure currently owned by hostile non-EU countries;

    11. Encourages EU defence actions aimed at supporting, initiating and incentivising better Member State coordination as Member States are the principal customers of defence equipment, and stresses that any EU initiative for defence must aim to reach a critical mass of capability development, support an appreciable share of Europe’s overall defence investments and support its defence industrial tools with financial means that have a structural effect, without coming at the expense of national defence spending;

    12. Encourages the Member States to promote cooperation between different European defence firms to encourage the combining of resources and competencies, in order to spur innovation and the development of modern military equipment;

    13. Considers that the strategic environments in which many EU common security and defence policy (CSDP) missions are present are radically deteriorating, with an ongoing war of aggression by Russia in Ukraine and its spillover effect into Moldova and the South Caucasus, a wave of coup d’états in the Sahel region and renewed terrorist campaigns in Somalia and Mozambique, all of which demonstrate the need for the white paper to ensure flexibility in a 360 degree approach to European security that strives towards building a credible and capable deterrence capacity for the Member States, and ensures that Member State civilian and military personnel can deter and respond rapidly to the growing threat environment;

    14. Recognises that the current geopolitical paradigm is the result of decades of underinvestment in European security and over-reliance on allies and partners; considers it a key priority of the white paper to outline an actionable plan to revitalise and advance deterrence along the periphery of Europe with a combination of joint civilian and military training missions that specialise in combined arms training, counter-unmanned aerial vehicle (C-UAV) and counter-improvised explosive device (C-IED) capabilities, and enhance interoperability and interchangeability among the Member States and non-EU countries;

    15. Calls for the white paper to ensure that the CSDP’s access to planning, resources and logistics is utilised in a manner that permits the CSDP to become the primary enabler of civilian crisis management during emergencies, and can be used as a practice hub for societal resilience and recovery in the face of both human-induced and natural disasters;

    16. Stresses that the white paper should promote close coordination between the EU and NATO to aid our collective defence and deterrence efforts, as well as the alliance’s effort to promote cooperative security through defence capacity-building and its open door policy;

    17. Calls for the white paper to outline how the EU and NATO should collaborate on building an integrated approach to the Black Sea, with a view to strengthening partnership in the areas of security, energy and connectivity; calls for the EU to redouble joint efforts by the EU and NATO to strengthen the deterrence and resilience of the Eastern Partnership countries by developing maritime defence capabilities, enhancing maritime interoperability, providing capabilities to deter and defend against cyber intrusions and attacks, expanding intelligence-sharing and maintaining modern outfitting of national armed forces;

    18. Highlights that Russia’s aggression against Ukraine and Iran’s aggression against Israel have demonstrated the use of drones at an unprecedented scale in modern warfare, urges the Member States to utilise the European Peace Facility, Permanent Structured Cooperation, the European Defence Agency and other available and future instruments to ensure that investment, development and joint procurement of counter unmanned aerial systems (C-UAS) and airborne electronic attack (AEA) equipment are prioritised, and to integrate C-UAS and AEA into the strategic doctrine of CSDP military training missions;

    19. Concurs with the ambition of enhancing the European pillar within NATO, with a view to augmenting strategic complementarity, by increasing the amount and range of NATO advanced training courses between European allies and partners to ensure that the Member States close the gap with the United States in operational capabilities and effectiveness; stresses that the development of EU operational capabilities can go hand in hand with the deepening of EU-NATO cooperation;

    20. Emphasises that the rise of asymmetric transnational threats has increasingly blurred the distinction between external and internal security, as well as between military and non-military security, and that this shifting landscape necessitates a comprehensive and adaptive approach to security at EU level; underlines that the Member States’ increases in defence spending should be complementary to the EU’s overall security strategy, which must evolve in response to changes in the strategic environment;

    21. Recognises that NATO and leading allies such as the United States and the United Kingdom are playing a crucial role in coordinating and leading the efforts to support Ukraine militarily not only with weapons, ammunition and equipment, but also intelligence and data; considers Russia’s ongoing war of aggression as further evidence that the most important countries for European security remain the United States and United Kingdom, as the war continues to reveal profound structural faults in EU security and defence architecture and unacceptable shortfalls in its capabilities;

    22. Highlights the need to ensure the security of the Black Sea region by assisting in the demining of Ukraine’s seawaters and to encourage the Member States to offer joint training exercises in this regard, with an emphasis on the development of maritime mine counter measure capabilities and critical seabed infrastructure protection;

    23. Underlines the importance of undersea cables and in this regard expresses worry about the recent series of cable disruptions in the Baltic Sea, which raise concerns about hybrid warfare tactics, particularly plausible deniability in state-sponsored sabotage; recalls that Russia’s increased naval presence, also through its shadow fleet, in European waters, highlights the vulnerabilities of seabed infrastructure; stresses the need to expand NATO and EU naval coordination for Baltic Sea patrols, enhance surveillance and defensive capabilities, increase investment in undersea surveillance technologies and strengthen partnerships with private telecom and energy companies for real-time monitoring of undersea threats;

    24. Encourages the Member States to provide specialised opportunities for SMEs in the European defence sector so they have the capacity to participate in the bidding process via measures such as creating a pre-approved list of companies to facilitate a speedier engagement process, introducing private equity firms that invest in SMEs into the procurement process, assisting SME growth through incubation and capital investment, reducing the complexities of bidding for contracts, and devising an internal effort to reform the amount of time taken to address contract details;

    25. Encourages the Member States to support binding commitments in their defence budgets that ensure a minimum expenditure in the field of research and development spending, in order to ensure that SME engagement and a spillover effect into the civilian marketplace can be tangibly supported;

    26. Emphasises that the Member States’ ambitions to achieve defence readiness should also be advanced through partnerships and prioritise, where possible, the integration of the Ukrainian Defence Technological and Industrial Base into the wider European Defence Technological and Industrial Base (EDTIB) and transatlantic defence technological and industrial cooperation, with a particular emphasis on joint drone and munitions development;

    27. Encourages initiatives such as the EU’s Act in Support of Ammunition Production (ASAP) to serve as a standard for advancing the much-needed increase in munitions and capabilities required for our armed forces, using ASAP as a basis for combining credible and effective multi-domain conventional force capabilities, missile defences, space support, drone development and various other key capabilities as outlined in the EDA’s Capability Development Plan;

    28. Stresses that the white paper must include an outline of institutional reforms that reinforce changes in procurement regulations and intellectual property frameworks, as well as leveraging tax incentives to promote defence-related innovation; emphasises that any such changes must be designed to ensure speed and efficiency within the procurement process and management life cycle of Member State weapons systems;

    29. Encourages speedy financing for enhancing military mobility in a manner that guarantees the upgrading of infrastructure for dual-use military and civilian purposes, contributes to the EU’s defence capabilities and realises a fully operational military Schengen area; underlines that such investments offer significant economic and security benefits; calls on the Commission to act on the recommendations of the 2025 ECA special report on military mobility and to give greater importance to the military assessment during the selection process for dual-use projects;

    30. Stresses that military mobility requires the elimination of regulatory bottlenecks that hinder the delivery of capabilities and limit the investment required to modernise defence capabilities and improve military mobility; emphasises, therefore, that the removal of obstacles, implementation of flow-monitoring and optimisation of systems for addressing cross-border threats are crucial and must be reflected in the white paper;

    31. Urges the Commission to consider financing that ensures that anti-access/area denial capabilities and civil-military fusion are prioritised within any infrastructure development objectives, particularly along the eastern flank;

    32. Supports initiatives for industrial reinforcement actions that benefit SMEs or mid-caps, demonstrate a contribution to the creation of new forms of cross-border cooperation or involve the creation of new infrastructure, facilities or production lines, or the establishment of new or the ramping-up of existing manufacturing capacities of crisis-relevant products;

    33. Encourages the Member States to prioritise the pre-deployment of personnel and capabilities in support of the eastern flank, combined with a follow-on forces and rapid deployment capability that ensures effective border security and deterrence against both hybrid warfare and Russian military manoeuvres;

    34. Underlines the Arctic’s strategic importance within the EU’s defence framework, underscoring the need for strengthened deterrence and defence capabilities in close coordination with NATO; emphasises that this cooperation is essential to address the intensifying militarisation and resource competition operated by Russian and Chinese activities in the region, and to counterbalance their expanding influence and military presence;

    35. Encourages the Member States to ensure closer synergies with national joint training and evaluation centres in Eastern Partnership countries, while also ensuring that there is widespread Member State representation in CSDP missions throughout the Eastern Partnership region, and to encourage greater participation of non-EU countries in these missions, particularly non-EU countries that have hosted successfully completed CSDP missions;

    36. Considers outer space to be an increasingly contested area, with the weaponisation of space on the rise, space security becoming an ever more critical and contested issue, and a growing rush to militarise space infrastructure; highlights the need to prioritise the defence and security of space as a critical part of Europe’s defence, and underscores the importance of securing Europe’s space capabilities and infrastructure, both on land and in orbit, to ensure continuous, secure access to data and communications;

    37. Recognises the important role that emerging disruptive technologies such as quantum computing and AI will play in our future relations with Russia and China, and calls for increasing Europe’s resilience to emerging disruptive technologies in all CSDP missions and operations;

    38. Considers that hybrid threats in the years to come will see the systematic combination of information warfare, agile combat manoeuvres, mass cyber warfare and emerging and disruptive technologies from seabed to space, with both advanced air-breathing and space-based surveillance and strike systems deployed, all of which will be enabled by advanced AI, quantum computing, increasingly ‘intelligent’ drone swarm technologies, offensive cyber capabilities, hypersonic missile systems, and nanotech and bio-warfare;

    39. Underlines the importance of civil defence and preparedness in the medium and long term, including the need to establish adequate civil protection infrastructure and planning for emergency situations; calls for the EU, its Member States and local governments to ensure the necessary investments for those purposes and a dedicated investment guarantee programme within the EIB for crisis-proofing and civil defence infrastructure;

    40. Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the European Council, the Council, the Commission, in particular the President of the Commission, the Commissioner for Defence and Space and the other competent Commissioners, the Vice-President of the Commission / High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, the UN Secretary-General, the NATO Secretary General, the President of the NATO Parliamentary Assembly, the EU security and defence agencies and the governments and parliaments of the Member States and partner countries.

     

    MIL OSI Europe News