Category: Russian Federation

MIL-OSI China: China and neighboring countries expand cross-border railways for greater cooperation

Source: People’s Republic of China – State Council News

China and neighboring countries expand cross-border railways for greater cooperation

BEIJING, June 19 — The railway linking Ganqmod Port in north China’s Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region and Mongolia’s Gashuun Sukhait started construction in mid-June, marking the second cross-border railway between the two countries since the first one opened nearly 70 years ago.

As the global economy becomes increasingly integrated and the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) continues to advance, cross-border railway construction between China and its neighboring countries is ushering in new development opportunities.

Recently, multiple cross-border railway projects, including the Ganqmod-Gashuun Sukhait Railway, have achieved significant milestones. China is steadily building a modern railway network that connects it with neighboring countries such as Mongolia, Russia, Vietnam and Laos, boosting regional links, economic cooperation and cultural exchanges.

STRENGTHENING REGIONAL CONNECTIVITY

Planned for completion in 2027, the Chinese section of the Ganqmod-Gashuun Sukhait railway project is invested and being constructed by China Energy Investment Corporation Co., Ltd. (CHN Energy).

“The new railway is projected to transport approximately 30 million tonnes of cargo annually, significantly enhancing connectivity between the two countries and enabling more efficient transportation of mineral and energy resources,” said Wang Shangjun, chairman of the Ganqmod Railway Investment Co., Ltd. under CHN Energy.

Beyond the China-Mongolia railway breakthrough, 2025 has witnessed accelerated progress on multiple rail corridors. The mainline construction of the China-Kyrgyzstan-Uzbekistan railway project entered the substantive construction phase in late April.

Earlier in the year, Vietnam ratified a project to extend rail connectivity from Vietnam’s Haiphong to the China-Vietnam border. Meanwhile, Thailand approved Phase II of the China-Thailand high-speed rail project, with the tendering process expected to be completed within the year.

“These cross-border railways serve as vital corridors connecting China northward to Mongolia, westward to Central and West Asia, and southward to Southeast Asia,” said Fan Lijun, director of the BRI research institute at the Inner Mongolia Academy of Social Sciences.

“Their construction will enhance infrastructure connectivity and economic exchanges among participating countries, while upgrading cross-border logistics, industrial parks, and border trade services. This holds profound significance for advancing regional cooperation and development,” Fan added.

This vision has been vividly demonstrated across multiple cross-border railway projects. The China-Laos Railway, a model project under the BRI, has transported more than 52.7 million passengers since its launch over three years ago, including over 510,000 cross-border travelers, and carried over 59.4 million tonnes of cargo, with cross-border shipments exceeding 13.7 million tonnes.

The railway authorities of China and Laos have been actively exploring new models for international transportation. By linking the China-Laos Railway with the China-Europe Railway Express network, they have reduced the rail transit time from Laos, Thailand and other Southeast Asian countries to Europe to just 15 days.

This cross-border freight service now covers the 31 Chinese provinces, autonomous regions and municipalities, as well as 19 countries and regions including Laos, Thailand, Vietnam and Singapore, with transported goods expanding to over 3,000 categories.

CATALYST FOR SHARED PROSPERITY

Yu Chen, a staff member with the Erenhot railway station, has witnessed the remarkable changes in his hometown Erenhot in Inner Mongolia, the Chinese terminus of the first cross-border railway between China and Mongolia.

“It’s said that in its early years, Erenhot had just one main street, with only three major buildings in the whole area — the train station, the customs office, and the border inspection facility,” Yu said.

Now, leveraging the cross-border railway, Erenhot has emerged as a pivotal hub city along the BRI, with over 200 logistics companies, a crisscross network of urban streets, and towering high-rises.

The China-Mongolia railway has not only boosted Erenhot’s development but also driven industrial transformation and upgrading in the hinterland areas of the border port. In a national logistics hub park spanning Erenhot and Ulanqab, another border city in Inner Mongolia, export-oriented processing industries for specialty agricultural products including sunflower seeds, corn, fruits and vegetables, as well as import-processing industries for flaxseed, oats and meat products, are experiencing robust growth.

“By transforming our geographical advantages into competitiveness in logistics, we have laid a solid foundation for the development of specialty agricultural product industries,” said Zhao Dongyang, director of the economic development bureau under the management committee of the logistics hub park.

A growing number of cross-border railways are thriving as economic arteries, powering development in cities along their routes. A freight train carrying Russian rapeseed recently arrived at the border residents’ mutual trade zone of Manzhouli, a border city in Inner Mongolia profoundly shaped by the China-Russia railway.

Upon the cargo’s arrival, Manzhouli Xinfeng Grain and Oil Industry Co., Ltd. immediately initiated the production process of rapeseed oil. “Russian rapeseed boasts unique advantages such as low acid value and high smoke point, which enable the extraction of premium-quality rapeseed oil that is highly favored in China’s edible oil market,” said Yang Zhihong, deputy general manager of the company.

As China’s largest land port, Manzhouli is evolving from its traditional role as a “transit station” into a regional industrial hub by promoting local processing of grain, oil and timber.

“By sourcing raw materials through the border residents’ mutual trade channel, we have achieved significant cost reductions — saving approximately 500 yuan (about 69.71 U.S. dollars) per tonne on average, with cumulative savings exceeding 8 million yuan to date,” Yang said.

According to Xie Ruijie, deputy director of the management committee of the Manzhouli China-Russia mutual trade zone, border trade in Manzhouli had surpassed 100 million yuan as of April 20 this year, with more than 3,600 border residents participating, bringing in over 1 million yuan in income for locals and contributing nearly 2 million yuan in tax revenue to the city.

DEEPENING PEOPLE-TO-PEOPLE TIES

During the May Day holiday last year, despite the swirling snowflakes on the platform of Ulaanbaatar, capital of Mongolia, Kang Zhenning, chief conductor of the China-Mongolia international passenger train carefully assisted Mongolian passengers returning home after medical treatment in Inner Mongolia’s capital Hohhot.

To better serve Mongolian passengers, Kang mastered the Mongolian language through studying books and online videos and learning from Mongolian colleagues. He also led his crew in establishing a Mongolian-Chinese bilingual service station onboard, which offers translation services for international travelers.

“Thanks to the crew’s consistent and attentive service, this train has become like an ‘ambulance’ for patients like me,” said Mongolian passenger Urtu, who frequently takes this train to Hohhot for medical treatment.

While the China-Mongolia Railway serves as a lifeline for cross-border medical care, many railway services in southern China have become a vibrant corridor for cultural tourism, bringing peoples from China and its neighboring countries closer.

The waiting hall of Hekou North Railway Station, which is close to the China-Vietnam border, was bustling on an April afternoon. Vietnamese tour guide Hoang Tien waited there with a group of 11 Vietnamese tourists.

“The high-speed trains here are very punctual,” Hoang told his group, “With the streamlined boarding process, you only need to arrive at the station just 40 minutes before departure.”

As a frequent visitor to the railway station, Hoang leads tour groups here every few days. He marveled at how the China-Vietnam railway connects Yunnan’s picturesque landscapes, and had observed the growing number of Vietnamese tourists eager to explore China’s natural wonders and cultural heritage.

In 2024, the number of Vietnamese tour groups arriving at and departing from Hekou Port increased by 40.7 percent from 2023. In the first three months of this year, more than 10,000 group tourists traveled from Hekou North Railway Station to other Chinese destinations, a surge of more than 180 percent over the same period last year.

MIL OSI China News –

June 20, 2025
MIL-OSI China: Xi says ceasefire an urgent priority in Middle East during phone talks with Putin

Source: People’s Republic of China – State Council News

Xi says ceasefire an urgent priority in Middle East during phone talks with Putin

Chinese President Xi Jinping said on Thursday that ceasefire must be an urgent priority in the Middle East.

Xi made the remarks during his phone talks with Russian President Vladimir Putin. During the call, the two leaders exchanged views regarding the situation in the Middle East.

Xi outlined China’s principles and position, saying that the current Middle East situation is highly perilous, further proving that the world is entering a new period of turbulence and transformation.

If the conflict continues to escalate, not only will the parties directly involved suffer greater losses, but countries across the region will also be severely affected, Xi said.

He said the use of force is not a right way to resolve international disputes and only serves to deepen hatred and confrontation.

The parties involved in the conflict, especially Israel, should halt military operations as soon as possible to prevent a spiral of escalation and to firmly avoid the spread of war beyond the region, Xi said.

Xi also said that ensuring civilian safety must be a top priority, adding that the red line of protecting civilians in armed conflicts must not be crossed at any time, and indiscriminate use of force is unacceptable.

He called on the parties to the conflict to strictly adhere to international law, avoid harming innocent civilians, and facilitate the safe evacuation of third-country nationals.

Dialogue and negotiation are the fundamental solutions, Xi said, adding that communication and dialogue are the right ways to achieve lasting peace.

Xi urged the relevant parties to firmly support a political solution to the Iranian nuclear issue, and push the issue back to the track of political solution through dialogue and negotiation.

The international community’s peacemaking efforts are indispensable, Xi said, adding that without stability in the Middle East, there can hardly be peace in the world.

The conflict between Israel and Iran has led to a sudden escalation of tensions in the Middle East and severely impacted global security, Xi noted.

The international community, especially major countries that have a special influence on parties to the conflict, should make efforts to cool down the situation, not the opposite, he said, calling on the UN Security Council to play a bigger role in this regard.

Xi stressed that China stands ready to continue enhancing communication and coordination with all parties, pool their efforts, uphold justice, and play a constructive role in restoring peace in the Middle East.

Putin, for his part, outlined Russia’s views on the current situation in the Middle East, saying that Israel’s attack on Iran’s nuclear facilities is extremely dangerous.

The escalation of the conflict is in no one’s interests, said the Russian president, noting that the Iranian nuclear issue should be resolved through dialogue and negotiation.

He also said that both sides of the conflict should ensure the safety of citizens of the third countries, adding that as the current situation is evolving rapidly, Russia stands ready to maintain close communication with China, and make joint active efforts to cool down the situation, so as to safeguard regional peace and stability.

The two heads of state spoke highly of the political mutual trust and high-level strategic coordination between China and Russia, and agreed to maintain close high-level exchanges, advance cooperation in various fields, and deepen the development of the China-Russia comprehensive strategic partnership of coordination.

MIL OSI China News –

June 20, 2025
MIL-Evening Report: A new special tribunal will investigate Russia’s aggression against Ukraine. Will it be effective?

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Yvonne Breitwieser-Faria, Lecturer in Criminal Law and International Law, Curtin University

Earlier this year, the European Union, the Council of Europe, Ukraine and an international coalition of states agreed to establish a new special tribunal.

The tribunal will eventually be tasked with holding Russia accountable for the 2022 full-scale invasion of Ukraine. It’s expected to start operating in 2026.

Human rights organisations, international lawyers and some (mostly European) states have long been calling for the establishment of such a tribunal. Oleksandra Matviichuk, a Ukrainian human rights lawyer, called the establishment of the tribunal:

an important breakthrough for the international justice community and especially for the millions of Ukrainians who have been harmed by the Russian aggression.

However, important questions remain about if it could truly hold senior Russian officials accountable.

So, how will this new special tribunal work, and will it be effective – or necessary?

How does the special tribunal fill the gaps left by the ICC and ICJ?

This tribunal is separate to the International Criminal Court (ICC) and the International Court of Justice (ICJ).

The ICC can prosecute individuals charged with genocide, war crimes and crimes against humanity in the Russian war on Ukraine. So far, it has issued arrest warrants against four Russian senior officials, including President Vladimir Putin.

Because Russia is not a member state to the court, the court can’t exercise legal authority over what’s known in international law as a crime of aggression (when leaders of a state launch or plan a war). For the ICC to be able to exercise this jurisdiction, the aggressor state also must be a member state of the court.

The ICJ is a different court altogether. It primarily deals with and adjudicates disputes between states, not limited to war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide. It can’t hold individuals accountable, and can only exercise jurisdiction over a dispute if both states to a dispute agree.

While the ICC seeks to establish individual criminal responsibility, the ICJ may establish state responsibility for a violation of international law.

Currently, there are also two cases between Ukraine and Russia before the ICJ.

Neither deals with the question of the legality of Russia’s use of force in its invasion in February 2022. Both Ukraine and Russia would need to consent to bring this issue before the court.

So, is a new tribunal necessary?

Yes, because the crime of aggression currently can’t be addressed by any other international court or tribunal.

Given the limitations of what the ICJ and ICC can do, a dedicated tribunal seems the obvious solution to hold those responsible for the illegal use of force against Ukraine accountable.

And it’s not uncommon for specialised tribunals with limited jurisdiction over a specific situation to be created.

Other historical examples include the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia, the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda, the Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia and the Special Court for Sierra Leone.

Given the ICC’s lack of jurisdiction over the crime of aggression, the new special tribunal would complement the court’s existing investigations into war crimes and crimes against humanity.

Who is running the new tribunal and how will it work?

The exact content and specifics of this new tribunal will remain unknown until the draft statute of the tribunal is published. That’s a document that outlines details including the tribunal’s jurisdiction, the applicable definition of aggression and how the tribunal will function.

At this stage, the Council of Europe has confirmed the tribunal will work within its legal framework and principles. It will be funded by an international coalition of supportive states.

A management committee of members and associate members of the tribunal will be responsible for the election of the tribunal’s judges and prosecutors. The management committee is made up of the Council of Europe’s council of ministers and Ukraine.

Diplomatic discussions are still ongoing at this point, but the legal process for establishing the special tribunal can begin now.

Will this special tribunal be more effective?

Political, legal and practical challenges for the special tribunal remain. It’s unclear if the most senior Russian state officials can and will be able to be brought to trial for the crime of aggression.

Nothing, so far, suggests the statute of the tribunal will contain an exception to state immunity enjoyed by heads of state, heads of governments and foreign ministers while in power.

That means these office holders can only be prosecuted if they are no longer in power or the Russian government expressly waives their immunity.

It’s also unclear whether states will be willing to arrest those sought by the special tribunal.

The ICC has long faced this challenge trying to get states to act on its arrest warrants.

Hungary, for instance, did not arrest Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu when he visited in April, despite an ICC arrest warrant for alleged crimes against humanity in connection with the war in Gaza.

For the special tribunal to be effective, according to Oleksandra Matviichuk, it:

must not become a remote and hollow entity that does not engage with the Ukrainian victims.

Overall, much remains unclear. Will this new special tribunal be able to hold the likes of Putin accountable for the crime of aggression? Or will it become another empty promise?

Yvonne Breitwieser-Faria does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. A new special tribunal will investigate Russia’s aggression against Ukraine. Will it be effective? – https://theconversation.com/a-new-special-tribunal-will-investigate-russias-aggression-against-ukraine-will-it-be-effective-257823

MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

June 20, 2025
MIL-Evening Report: Keith Rankin Analysis – America’s imperial ‘gift’: ‘Crusader Democracy’ versus ‘Christian Nationalism’

Analysis by Keith Rankin.

Keith Rankin, trained as an economic historian, is a retired lecturer in Economics and Statistics. He lives in Auckland, New Zealand.

The United States has always fancied itself as the founder of modern democracy (aka ‘Democracy’). And, although that country has been self-absorbed for most of its history, it has always sensed that Democracy was its greatest export.

‘America’ became involved in Africa and the ‘Middle East’ very early in its history. There was the American–Algerian War (1785–1795); and the Barbary Wars (1801-1805,1815), featuring the heroic re-seizure and scuttling by fire of the USS Philadelphia in Tripoli Harbor in 1804. Then there was the reverse colonisation (aka ‘liberation’, ‘democratization’) of a small corner of Africa from 1822, leading to Liberia’s independence in 1862.

In the 1846, there was the small matter of the United States’ invasion of Mexico, resulting in the 1848 annexation of half of Mexico’s territory. ‘America’ brought Democracy to California, through annexation. And, in 1898, the United States appropriated Spain’s remaining worldwide empire, including the Philippines. And some other territories, including Hawaii. Upon his inauguration as the 47th President, Donald Trump explicitly invoked the memory of President William McKinley, America’s most notorious annexor of foreign territory.

And in 1889: “Three American warships then entered the Apia harbor and prepared to engage the three German warships found there. Before any shots were fired, a typhoon wrecked both the American and German ships.” After ten years of military/political stalemate – known as the Second Samoan Civil War – the Samoan ‘assets’ were split between the United States, the German Second Reich, and the United Kingdom. (The UK traded its share with Germany. Britain gave up all claims to Samoa and in return accepted the termination of German rights in Tonga, certain areas in the Solomon Islands, and Zanzibar.)

America’s imperial ‘burden’ in the last 125 years

Rudyard Kipling’s poem The White Man’s Burden was written in 1899; “a poem about the Philippine–American War (1899–1902) that exhorts the United States to assume colonial control of the Filipino people and their country”.

America’s empire today is partly formal, though mostly informal, with various grades of informality. Indeed, the recent acknowledgement by the European Union that it has free-ridden on the United States for its defence indicates that the United States has had a significant degree of imperial control over Europe; hegemony manifesting as control over foreign policy.

The name ‘America’ itself is an imperial grab. America is the name for two continents, yet even the Canadians call the United States ‘America’, and its citizens ‘Americans’. American exceptionalism represents the weaponisation of democracy. Democracy is packaged as ‘Democracy’, a secular faith like ‘Communism’ or ‘Economic Liberalism’; a faith which must be proselytised, spread across the world as some kind of holy or secular crusade.

The remaining territories on the ‘autocratic’ ‘Dark Side’ – ie territories not subject to United States’ ‘protection’ – are mainly in continental Asia: especially West Asia (much of which is imperialistically called the ‘Middle East’, which extends to North Africa), North Asia, and East Asia. Though there is also very much a contest for South Asia; a contest, which if successful for the White Man’s force, will bring secular Hindi along with secular Judaism fully into the imperial fold of secular Christianity. (We note that the labels Hindu and Jew have long been name-tags which confuse and conflate religion with ethnicity. So it may soon be with Christianity; with top-tier Christians behaving very much as top-tier Jews behave today, as supremacist gift-givers and bomb-throwers.)

We should note that Catholic Christianity is now uneasy about this crusader culture, having been the main perpetrator of such culture nearly a millennium ago. And Orthodox Christianity is even more uneasy. In its North Asian (ie Russian) form, Orthodox Christianity – like Islam, and Chinese atheist capitalism – is a target of the present Christian Soldiers, not a collaborator. (The decline of the Christian East came with the Fourth Crusade in 1204. Ostensibly a western invasion force going to re-recover the ‘Holy Land’, instead that Crusade turned on Orthodox Christian Constantinople. The result was a weak Latin empire in the east; easy prey for the Ottoman forces which in 1453 created a Muslim empire in West Asia and Southeast Europe; an empire that lasted until 1918.)

The modern American-led crusading mentality represents a schism of Protestant Evangelism (which dates back in particular to the Calvinist side of the sixteenth century Reformation) and Secular Liberalism. Protestant Evangelism (increasingly known today as Christian Nationalism) is the imperial currency of today’s Republican Party, whereas Secular Liberalism is the imperial currency of today’s Democratic Party (although secular Neoliberalism is presently teaming up with the Evangelists). What both have in common is a will to impose themselves upon the rest of the world. And to produce and export lots of big guns, military hardware; making money, and making American jobs.

There are some strange bedfellows. As these two American socio-cultural Gods – Republican and Democrat; protagonist and antagonist, and vice versa – have battled out their Americanisms on a world stage, we have seen a significant posse of very rich devout Economic Liberals taking the side of the Christian Nationalists. So do a number of working-class and other disempowered former ballot-box ‘Leftists’, who wish to cast an anti-establishment vote but don’t know which way to turn. This dabbling with new right-radicalism (not unlike leftist dabbling in New Zealand in 1984 with the recently late Bob Jones’ New Zealand Party) follows the slow but comprehensive gutting of the Left-project that was so buoyant in the 1960s and 1970s.

The name Christian Nationalism is a misnomer; a better name is Christian Extranationalism. Rather than being an internationalist movement – internationalism is a liberal concept – this is a movement to perpetuate and extend the global domination of American culture, through imperial merchant capitalism. The United States was born out of British merchant capitalism (and New York out of Dutch merchant capitalism); its values and institutions reflect those of eighteenth-century western Europe. Just as the British exacted tribute from their American colonies; imperial America seeks to extract tribute through the ‘negotiation’ of asymmetric ‘deals’. Are we today witnessing an American Napoleon?

Money, Lies and God: by Katherine Stewart (2025)

Katherine Stewart this year has written about the new eclectic rightwing coalition in the United States that is coalescing under the name of Christian Nationalism. Though I’ve only read the introduction so far, the book has a real strength, in particular in identifying five components of this new new-right coalition: funders, thinkers, sergeants, infantry, power-players.

Of particular interest to me is the “out-sourced” relationship between the funders and the thinkers. While Stewart emphasises the ‘thinkers’ in the well-funded (and mostly conservative) ‘Think Tanks’, the real issue is that of ‘selective truth’, in the Darwinian sense of ‘selection’. Our ‘intellectual’ careerists compete to publish ‘truths’, and the truths which prevail will be the truths purchased by the ‘funders’, given that the funders have most of the funds.

This kind of relationship with truth is somewhat like a ‘court-of-law’, where commonly two ‘truths’ are subject to a contest in which one will be declared ‘the winner’. Not uncommonly, both rival ‘truths’ are at least partially false, and there may be other (possibly truer) truths that are not even ‘on the table’. Evidence represents a part of the court process, but by no means the whole of that process. The truth-relationship between the funders and thinkers is a corrupt form of the ‘law court’ model; the more corrupt the more wealth the conservative funders control. Academic careers – indeed scientists’ careers – are built on perpetuating narratives acceptable to their patrons.

While Money, Lies and God represents a prescient and useful analysis, ultimately it is part of the problem. It represents one side of the great American divide calling out the other side. The process of belligerent finger-pointing – between, in American language, ‘liberals’ and ‘conservatives’ – is the bigger problem. Why bother talking about the world when you can talk about half of America instead? Indeed, too many American intellectuals talk and write about the United States as if America is the World; a kind of mental imperialism. (Another critique of American ‘Christian Nationalism’ can be found in a recent Upfront episode on Al Jazeera: The growing influence of Christian Nationalism and Christian Zionism in the United States.)

The problem of American imperialism belongs to both sides of the Divide; indeed, it is the Secular Liberalism of what has been exposed as the tone-deaf establishment – the Blinkens, Bidens and Nods – who represented the moral hypocrisy of America’s imperial democratic gift. (The sheer stupidity of the Biden re-election campaign is documented in Original Sin, 2025, by Jake Tapper and Alex Thompson.) That is, the belief that America created modern Democracy, and that those parts of the world – especially the ‘western’ world – have special rights accruing to them because they have been awarded the ‘tick of Democracy’. These countries – and only these countries – have the “right to defend themselves”, the right to make war (as ‘defence through attack’), and the “right to possess nuclear weapons”.

Contemporary American imperialism is mainly a ‘West on East’ phenomenon; Asia is the target. Ukraine and Anatolia (Türkiye) are border territories between Europe and Asia. Palestine, perhaps too, given its location on the Mediterranean Sea; though the Mediterranean littoral, from Istanbul to Morocco, is better understood as West Asia, not Europe. Iran is unambiguously a part of Asia. What we are seeing at present is nothing less than a Euro-American invasion of Asia. Imperialism. Nuclear imperialism; geopolitical imperialism; cultural imperialism. The gift that keeps on taking.

Note on the boundary between Europe and Asia

We should note that the core geopolitical boundary between Europe and Asia was set by Charlemagne in around the year 800; representing the border between the predominancies of Catholic Christianity and Orthodox Christianity (harking back to the Western and Eastern Roman Empires). There are other important historic geopolitical boundaries in Eurasia, of course, such as the eastern and southern borders of Orthodox Christianity; and the eastern and northern borders of Islam-dominated territories. Indeed there is perpetual tension on the Pakistan-India border.

The principal medieval-era departure from that Charlemagne-set geopolitical boundary was the Grand Duchy of Lithuania, which peaked in territory in the fifteenth century. The first significant modern-era fudge of that geopolitical boundary was the West’s acquisition of Greece over the long 19th century (essentially 1820s to 1920s). The Great World War started in 1914 very much as an East-West border conflict in the Balkans of southeast Europe. After a week or two of fudging, the anglosphere took the Eastern side; siding with Russia over Austria and Germany.

Post World War Two, the next main geopolitical border fudges were the ‘settlements’ which placed a number of mainly Catholic East European countries into Russia’s orb; and which placed Türkiye (then Turkey) into NATO. The current twenty first century fudge is one of European expansion, placing a number of predominantly Orthodox territories – most notably Ukraine – firmly into the European political realm.

This longstanding geopolitical boundary contrasts with the widely-accepted geographic boundary; the latter – based more on physical geography and ethnicity than on faith-culture – passes along the Ural and Caucasus mountain chains, and through the lower Volga River, the Black Sea and the Bosporus/Dardanelle channels. Geopolitically, Russia, Belarus and Türkiye should be understood today to be Asian countries; indeed, the lower Dnieper River and line of the military trenches in Zaporizhia, Donetsk and Luhansk constitute the current geopolitical boundary between West and East; between Europe and Asia. And the lines within Eretz Israel – separating Israel from Palestine – also represent geopolitical borders; and American geopolitical encroachment on Asia.

*******

Keith Rankin (keith at rankin dot nz), trained as an economic historian, is a retired lecturer in Economics and Statistics. He lives in Auckland, New Zealand.

MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

June 20, 2025
MIL-OSI Russia: Dmitry Grigorenko: Russia has entered an active phase of implementing artificial intelligence

Translation. Region: Russian Federal

Source: Government of the Russian Federation – An important disclaimer is at the bottom of this article.

The speed of implementation of artificial intelligence, interaction between business and government, timeliness of regulation, as well as international cooperation were discussed at the plenary session on AI at SPIEF-2025 with the participation of Deputy Prime Minister – Chief of the Government Staff Dmitry Grigorenko.

As Dmitry Grigorenko stated, Russia has entered an active phase of implementing artificial intelligence. AI-based solutions increase the efficiency of government agencies and improve the quality of services provided, opening up additional opportunities, including in public administration and the social sphere, from medicine to the budget process. Thus, the compulsory medical insurance program already includes diagnostic services using AI, and an intelligent agent is being integrated into the Electronic Budget system in test mode to speed up the budget process.

When asked what the government is doing to speed up the implementation of AI, the Deputy Prime Minister – Chief of the Government Staff spoke about the work on developing the necessary infrastructure within the framework of the national project “Data Economy”, training specialized personnel, as well as replicating the best practices of the regions on a national scale. At the same time, he emphasized that for success, the government and business need to combine efforts in these areas, without dividing areas of responsibility.

“We approach the issue of implementing AI technology systematically. For example, all digital development programs for regions and federal agencies have a mandatory clause – to implement an AI-based solution. All programs are very specific, with units of measurement of efficiency. At the same time, everyone determines for themselves the required number of such services – for their tasks. AI is a tool. With its help, we solve a very specific problem each time. Plus, we select existing best practices and replicate them taking into account the experience already acquired,” commented Dmitry Grigorenko.

As Chairman of the Board of PJSC Sberbank German Gref noted, the role of the state is critically important: from investments to education and total enlightenment of “where we are going”. At the same time, German Gref noted that unique conditions have already been created in Russia that allow the development of technology. Including due to the existing local experimental legal regimes.

“Right now, in my opinion, there is a consensus. There is moral regulation – the code of ethics of artificial intelligence, to which all the largest developers in Russia have joined. Among the signatories are over 900 companies, including foreign ones. There is technical regulation. And there is incentive regulation, for example, an experimental regime for the implementation of artificial intelligence has been created in Moscow. We cannot rush with regulation, so as not to negatively influence developers,” said German Gref.

According to the Deputy Speaker of the State Duma of the Federal Assembly Vladislav Davankov, sooner or later any industry faces issues of protecting the rights of citizens and equal access to the results of technological development.

“In difficult situations, people turn to the state for protection. That is why regulation is necessary. But it must be smart and created as a public agreement, in dialogue with business. We must develop these rules together,” commented Vladislav Davankov.

The Minister of Communications and Informatization of the Republic of Belarus Kirill Zalessky and the Minister of Digital Development, Innovation and Aerospace Industry of the Republic of Kazakhstan Zhaslan Madiyev also took part in the discussion.

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 –

June 20, 2025
MIL-OSI Russia: Alexander Novak: Russian fuel and energy complex has become more competitive and technologically advanced

Translation. Region: Russian Federal

Source: Government of the Russian Federation – An important disclaimer is at the bottom of this article.

Deputy Prime Minister Alexander Novak spoke at the panel session “The World Fuel and Energy Market in Search of a Balance between the Interests of Producers and Consumers” at the St. Petersburg International Economic Forum. The session was also attended by OPEC Secretary General Haitham al-Ghaith, Minister of Energy and Natural Resources of Turkey Alparslan Bayraktar, Minister of International Economic Relations under the Government of the Republic of Serbia, Chairman of the Serbian People’s Party Nenad Popovic, Minister of Foreign Affairs and Foreign Economic Relations of Hungary Peter Szijjarto, and Deputy Prime Minister of the Republic of Uzbekistan Jamshid Khodjaev.

Alexander Novak outlined the vector of Russia’s current strategy in the current conditions of the global energy market and spoke about the key steps being taken to ensure the sustainable development of the country’s oil and gas sector.

“The oil and gas industry is key to the Russian economy. It is a driver for investment, the economy, new inventions, and the implementation of modern research and development work. Over the past 20 years, our oil and gas industry has made a huge leap. Firstly, oil production has increased from 300 to over 500 million tons per year (80%). We have new production regions – we have begun to extract raw materials in Eastern Siberia, on the shelf. We have developed and learned to apply TRIZ technologies. This is important, since the lion’s share of future reserves are reserves that are located at greater depths, with more difficult-to-extract layers,” said Alexander Novak.

The Deputy Prime Minister added that the issue of technological development is key today.

“Despite numerous sanctions from unfriendly countries and the desire to stop the development of the Russian economy, including through the fuel and energy complex, we see that our industry has not only maintained its production indicators, but has also survived and become an order of magnitude more efficient. It has become more competitive and technologically advanced. The sanctions have forced us to ensure import substitution, and our own developments have appeared instead of technologies that were previously purchased abroad. Our industry has been loaded, and an impetus has been given to the development of the Russian economy as a whole,” said Alexander Novak.

He recalled that the key tasks for the development of the fuel and energy complex set by President Vladimir Putin include ensuring domestic energy security, increasing the share of high-value-added products through the development of oil and gas refining and petrochemicals, international cooperation, and the development of infrastructure for the supply of energy resources to domestic and foreign markets.

OPEC Secretary General Haitham al-Ghaith noted that global demand for oil is growing.

“We see that the world’s population is growing, and by 2050, there will be 2 billion new people on the planet, and the global economy will double compared to current parameters. By 2030, half a billion people will live in new cities that will be the size of 100 St. Petersburgs. And this means heating, air conditioning, and overall growth in energy consumption. In addition, new consumers are mining and data centers. By 2050, we predict a 24 percent increase in energy consumption compared to the current level, which requires additional investment in the sector. They need to be stimulated,” said OPEC Secretary General Haitham al-Gais. OPEC does not see peak demand for oil even by 2050.

Turkey is already seeing both gas consumption and the share of renewable energy sources grow. And the country’s main goal is to ensure the security and availability of energy supplies. “We are diversifying our portfolio by investing in renewable energy sources. By 2035, we want to quadruple the capacity of solar and wind energy components. We have ambitious plans for nuclear energy – to increase its production to at least 20 GW by 2050. To do this, we need four reactors, and we are working with Rosatom. There is also a focus on small-scale generation and a desire to build another 5 GW station,” said Turkish Minister of Energy and Natural Resources Alparslan Bayraktar about plans for energy development in the country.

According to him, Turkey has also begun developing offshore fields, which already supply energy to 4 million households in the country. By 2028, this number is planned to increase fourfold. Turkey is searching for oil and gas in developing countries, and is also investing in its own infrastructure and preparing to create large-scale capacities for gas export to Europe.

“Hungary will continue energy cooperation with the Russian Federation, because it is very important for us to keep prices low for all our citizens, for our families. Without Russian energy resources, this is impossible for us,” said Hungarian Foreign Minister Peter Szijjarto, commenting on the European Commission’s plan to have EU countries abandon Russian energy resources by 2027. In his opinion, Brussels and Kyiv have set the goal of cutting off Europe from the supplier of cheap and affordable oil and gas, which Russia has been for Hungary for many years. At the same time, the European Commission does not offer any alternative in the form of other equally reliable and inexpensive sources of energy resources.

The participants in the discussion agreed that in the context of growing energy consumption in the world, it is necessary to diversify its sources and international cooperation for the development and reliable supply of both traditional and alternative types of energy resources. This is especially important in a period of geopolitical instability and the aggravation of local conflicts in a number of regions of the world.

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 –

June 20, 2025
MIL-OSI Russia: Dmitry Chernyshenko: In recent years, the strategic partnership between Russia and Cuba has only strengthened

Translation. Region: Russian Federal

Source: Government of the Russian Federation – An important disclaimer is at the bottom of this article.

20 hours ago

At SPIEF-2025, Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Chernyshenko welcomed the participants of the first high-level business dialogue “Russia – Cuba”.

“Our countries are linked by strong, time-tested, friendly ties. President Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin and President of Cuba Miguel Diaz-Canel have repeatedly emphasized the importance of strategic partnership. In recent years, it has only strengthened.

Diplomatic, cultural and trade-economic relations are actively developing. Mutual trade turnover has grown by more than 13%. Last year alone, we achieved significant results in tourism, the agro-industrial complex and education.

Cuba was visited by 160 thousand Russian tourists, which is a record figure. The number of Cubans who visited Russia also increased by 50%. Deliveries of domestic cars to Cuba have resumed. A project to process Russian wheat at a Cuban flour mill is being successfully implemented. Cooperation in the fields of healthcare, education and science is expanding. Joint projects to exchange experience in medicine have been launched, and a Center for Targeted Training of Specialists for Energy and Electronics is operating.

Our strategic partnership in various areas will continue to develop. Therefore, the St. Petersburg Forum is an excellent platform for strengthening cooperation and finding new points of contact.

I am confident that through joint efforts we will achieve great success for the benefit of the economies of Russia and Cuba. Friends, I wish you fruitful work and productive dialogue on the sidelines of the forum!” the Deputy Prime Minister noted.

During the event, topics of development of the Caribbean state’s tourism industry were raised, including its digitalization, restoration of the sugar industry, achieving Cuba’s food sovereignty and much more.

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 –

June 20, 2025
MIL-OSI Russia: Alexander Novak: We are witnessing a global transformation in economic development

Translation. Region: Russian Federal

Source: Government of the Russian Federation – An important disclaimer is at the bottom of this article.

Deputy Prime Minister Alexander Novak took part in the opening session of the St. Petersburg International Economic Forum.

The Minister of Energy of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia Abdulaziz bin Salman Al Saud, the President of the New Development Bank of BRICS Dilma Rousseff, the President and Secretary General of the Organization of the Black Sea Economic Cooperation Lazar Comanescu, and the Deputy Prime Minister of Vietnam Nguyen Chi Dung also shared their vision of the development of the global economy and the prospects for international cooperation.

Alexander Novak noted that the main vector of development of the global economy in the next decade will be concentrated in countries where the birth rate is growing today and which are gaining new positions in global markets.

“The modern world has entered an era of fundamental changes. We are witnessing a global transformation in terms of economic development. Large countries of Southeast Asia such as China and India have become global participants in the world market in recent decades, the main drivers of demand and supply of goods to global world markets. Countries of South Asia and Africa are increasingly asserting themselves. They have a high birth rate and a still low level of urbanization. And this is the potential that will change the landscape of the global economy in the next decade. Growth will no longer be concentrated in the countries of Europe and North America, which are gradually losing their positions in the global economy, but in the BRICS countries and states that want to join the association,” said Alexander Novak. He added that since the 2000s, the share of the BRICS countries in the world economy was 22%, and today it has increased to 36%, which means growth of more than 50%. At the same time, the share of the G7 countries has decreased from 45% to 30% over the same period.

Minister of Energy of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia Abdulaziz bin Salman Al Saud spoke about the main mechanism for achieving balance in the global oil market. “The OPEC deal has proven itself to be an effective tool. OPEC has managed to achieve tremendous success in ensuring market stability and has become, in fact, the central regulator of oil markets,” Abdulaziz bin Salman Al Saud noted.

He also emphasized that the governments of Saudi Arabia and Russia are working to create favorable conditions for those wishing to invest in the economies of Saudi Arabia and the Russian Federation on the basis of various formats, including joint ventures. The Saudi Arabian authorities understand the situation and are willing to find ways to overcome existing restrictions.

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 –

June 20, 2025
MIL-OSI Russia: Alexander Novak: Cooperation between Russia and Turkey in the energy sector is truly strategic in nature

Translation. Region: Russian Federal

Source: Government of the Russian Federation – An important disclaimer is at the bottom of this article.

Deputy Prime Minister of Russia Alexander Novak held a meeting with Turkish Minister of Energy and Natural Resources Alparslan Bayraktar at the St. Petersburg International Economic Forum.

The parties discussed cooperation in the oil, gas, coal, electric power and nuclear industries. The discussion focused on the creation of a gas hub, the terms of Russian energy supplies to the Turkish market, and the construction of the Akkuyu NPP.

“Cooperation between Russia and Turkey in the energy sector is truly strategic. This is largely due to the principled sovereign line that Turkey pursues under the leadership of President Recep Tayyip Erdogan. Against the backdrop of the turbulent situation in the region and the world as a whole, cooperation in the energy sector is of particular importance. The driving force of the Turkish economy is industry, which cannot develop without stable supplies of energy resources and electricity production. Russia has been and remains a reliable supplier of gas, oil and other natural resources to the Turkish market,” said Alexander Novak.

The Deputy Prime Minister invited Alparslan Bayraktar and the Turkish delegation to take part in the annual forum “Russian Energy Week”, which will be held from October 15 to 17 in Moscow.

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 –

June 20, 2025
MIL-OSI Russia: Financial news: Cash or non-cash: Russians’ preferences in 2024

Translation. Region: Russian Federal

Source: Central Bank of Russia –

Approximately 10% of citizens have made a clear choice in favor of non-cash payments. Almost the same number, 9%, pay exclusively in cash.

People value cashless services for their speed, simplicity and convenience. Most often they pay with a bank card (77%), in second place are mobile transfers and online banks (44%), in third place is the Fast Payment System (34%).

Cash payments are chosen primarily because they can be made anywhere and at any time. A quarter of the citizens surveyed use cash in everyday payments – most often in small shops, markets, gas stations or when paying for public transport. Half of the respondents keep a supply of banknotes and coins in case they cannot pay cashlessly, a third keep their savings in cash.

Read more in the materials sociological research on the website of the Bank of Russia.

Preview photo: PalSand / Shutterstock / Fotodom

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.

Please Note; This Information is Raw Content Directly from the Information Source. It is access to What the Source Is Stating and Does Not Reflect

HTTPS: //vv. KBR.ru/Press/Event/? ID = 24716

MIL OSI Russia News –

June 20, 2025
MIL-OSI United Nations: Kyiv: UNESCO is deeply concerned about threats to World Heritage in Ukraine’s capital

Source: UNESCO World Heritage Centre

UNESCO expresses its grave concern over the increasing threats affecting the World Heritage site ‘Kyiv: Saint-Sophia Cathedral and Related Monastic Buildings, Kyiv-Pechersk Lavra’, following the attack on 10 June 2025 by the Russian Federation. This damage occurred amidst a surge of attacks on numerous Ukrainian cities, resulting in civilian casualties and damage to cultural and educational institutions.

Together with the UN Resident and Humanitarian Coordinator in Ukraine, UNESCO representative in Ukraine visited the Saint-Sophia Cathedral to assess the situation and discuss potential support for an in-depth structural analysis and emergency conservation measures. This preliminary inspection indicates that the eastern façade of Saint-Sophia Cathedral has been damaged. This iconic monument, dating back to the early 11th century, is a cornerstone of Eastern Christian architecture and monumental art.

UNESCO condemns any attack that could threaten World Heritage sites and reiterates the obligations of States Parties under the 1972 World Heritage Convention and the 1954 Hague Convention for the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict, which prohibits any deliberate actions that may cause damage to cultural and natural heritage located within the territory of another State Party.

Repeated attacks have led the World Heritage Committee to inscribe three Ukrainian sites on the List of World Heritage in Danger – located in Kyiv, Lviv and Odesa – recognizing both the risk of direct strikes and the cumulative impact of shockwaves.

Since 2022 and with the support of Japan, UNESCO has provided assistance to the National Conservation Area of Saint Sophia, to develop an emergency preparedness plan and advanced digital documentation of the buildings, and provide training of conservation staff in emergency response. Furthermore, through its World Heritage Fund, UNESCO supports the restoration of the Cathedral’s monumental paintings, as part of its broader cultural emergency response in Ukraine.

MIL OSI United Nations News –

June 20, 2025
MIL-OSI USA: ICYMI from the NYPost: FBI Emails Obtained by Grassley ‘Expose Biden DOJ’s Obsession with Piling on Trump Charges’

US Senate News:

Source: United States Senator for Iowa Chuck Grassley

Miranda Devine: FBI emails revealed to The Post expose Biden DOJ’s obsession with piling on Trump charges
June 18, 2025
New York Post

Internal FBI emails reveal that rogue agents and prosecutors in the Biden DOJ were looking for ways to pile on new criminal charges against Donald Trump over the Jan. 6 Capitol riot — this time over his involvement with the J6 prisoner choir, based on a single partisan news article.

The 2023 emails obtained by Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) and revealed exclusively to The Post are an example of the nitpicking malice of anti-Trump lawfare that tainted special counsel Jack Smith’s investigation, during Joe Biden’s presidency.

“Can we do some work to nail down Trump’s role in this,” writes prosecutor JP Cooney to DOJ colleagues on March 8, 2023, in an email with the subject line “J6 Prisoner Choir/DJT” and an attached Forbes.com article titled “Trump Collaborates On Song With Jan. 6 Defendants.”

Cooney was a deputy special counsel who worked on both the Robert Mueller and Smith get-Trump special counsel investigations.

‘Agent Zero’

“According to this Forbes article, Trump recorded the Pledge of Allegiance at MAL [Mar a Lago] and Kash Patel [now FBI director] and Ed Henry [a former Fox News host] were also involved,” Cooney wrote in the email chain.

“The profits are routed to an LLC run by Henry, and proceeds are intended for families of incarcerated J6 defendants — but there is apparently a vetting process that excludes families of defendants who assaulted police officers.

“I asked Ahmed [likely prosecutor Ahmed Baset, who was fired earlier this month] to preserve this last night. I’ll talk to Maria/Erin and Julia about doing some follow up here to nail down Trump’s role.”

Cooney also instructed colleagues to look at starting “some process on Ed Henry’s LLC,” presumably a legal process such as a subpoena, search warrant or other court-authorized actions to gather evidence.

His email was forwarded to eight agents and DOJ staff, including notorious anti-Trump FBI Special Agent Walter Giardina, who responded two days later to say he was investigating the claims in the Forbes article about Trump and the J6 prisoner choir: “Esther and I are working on this today. We’re going to put together our findings at 2 and get something to you shortly after that.”

Giardina was “Agent Zero” in a lot of overzealous FBI actions involving Trump and his allies, including the investigation of Trump White House adviser Dr. Peter Navarro on contempt of Congress charges for refusing to appear before the House committee investigating the J6 riot.

It was Giardina’s FBI team that arrested Navarro as he was about to board a plane at Reagan National Airport in 2022, put him in leg irons and threw him in jail instead of simply issuing a summons for him to come to court, as the federal judge overseeing the case later said while criticizing the heavy-handedness.

Giardina was also significantly involved in Operation Crossfire Hurricane (the debunked Russia collusion investigation against Trump), Mueller’s investigation and cases involving Trump allies Dan Scavino and Roger Stone, as well as the Hillary Clinton emails case.

According to Grassley, Giardina was an “initial recipient of the Steele Dossier” and falsely claimed that the bogus Clinton campaign smear sheet against Trump was corroborated as “true.”

Giardina also “electronically wiped the laptop he was assigned while working for Special Counsel Mueller outside of established protocol for record preservation, raising the possibility that he destroyed government records.”

Whistleblown away

Whistleblowers have told Grassley that Giardina “openly stated his desire to investigate Trump, even if it meant false predication,” because of his hostility to the past and future president.

Grassley believes this email chain is another “clear example” of how the federal law enforcement apparatus was weaponized to try to “get Trump” at all costs.

“Instead of focusing on DOJ and FBI’s core law enforcement responsibilities,” Grassley told The Post, “partisan prosecutors and agents were surfing the web to find any shred of information they could use to spin another baseless case against Trump. Their actions are a disservice to Americans, who pay their salaries and depend on DOJ and FBI to keep them safe…”

Read the rest HERE.

-30-

MIL OSI USA News –

June 20, 2025
MIL-OSI Russia: The photo exhibition “Their Feat is Immortal, Their Memory is Eternal,” dedicated to the 80th Anniversary of Victory in the World Anti-Fascist War, opened in St. Petersburg

Translation. Region: Russian Federal

Source: People’s Republic of China in Russian – People’s Republic of China in Russian –

Source: People’s Republic of China – State Council News

St. Petersburg, June 19 /Xinhua/ — “Their Feat is Immortal, Their Memory is Eternal” is the title of a joint photo exhibition dedicated to the 80th anniversary of the Victory in the World Anti-Fascist War, which opened in St. Petersburg on June 19. The photo exhibition, organized jointly by China’s Xinhua News Agency and Russia’s TASS News Agency, was opened by the heads of the agencies Fu Hua and Andrei Kondrashov.

The exhibition aims to promote the preservation of historical memory and, on this basis, continue the traditions of friendship between the two countries and their peoples, said Xinhua Director General Fu Hua. According to him, Xinhua intends to further strengthen exchanges and cooperation with TASS and explore the possibility of holding new events within the framework of cultural and humanitarian exchanges.

A. Kondrashov recalled that cooperation between TASS and Xinhua has a long history. As he emphasized, holding a joint photo exhibition not only once again reflects the high level of bilateral cooperation, but also proves that the two agencies preserve the memory of the common history of Russia and China.

“On the one hand, these are such great photographs, the great people they depict, and the great events they tell, that it is awkward and uncomfortable to stand with your back to them. But, on the other hand, it is also symbolic, because this is the generation that really stands behind us and reminds us that we are obliged to preserve the memory of those times,” said the official representative of the Russian Foreign Ministry, Maria Zakharova, who was present at the opening of the exhibition, adding that the Russian side will firmly stand on China’s side and protect historical memory together with it.

The exhibition presents vivid photographic evidence of how, during the World Anti-Fascist War, the peoples of China and Russia fought side by side, helped each other, and made the two countries’ historic contribution to the defense of peace and the progress of humanity.

On the same day, Fu Hua met with A. Kondrashov. The parties confirmed their readiness to further deepen practical cooperation. –0–

MIL OSI Russia News –

June 20, 2025
MIL-OSI Russia: The 19th General Assembly of the Organization of Asian and Pacific News Agencies opened in St. Petersburg

Translation. Region: Russian Federal

Source: People’s Republic of China in Russian – People’s Republic of China in Russian –

Source: People’s Republic of China – State Council News

ST. PETERSBURG, June 19 (Xinhua) — The 19th General Assembly of the Organization of Asia-Pacific News Agencies (OANA) opened in St. Petersburg on Thursday. During the two-day event, representatives of news agencies from the Asia-Pacific region (APR) will hold in-depth discussions on how news agencies can respond to global changes and technological challenges.

“Today, objective, timely information is in high demand for strengthening trust and mutual understanding between countries and peoples. Your largest association of news agencies on the planet has been creating a significant part of the global news flow for many years now, enjoying the attention of a multi-million audience,” says the greeting to the General Assembly from Russian President Vladimir Putin, which was read at the opening ceremony by the press secretary of the Russian President Dmitry Peskov.

“I am confident that constructive, meaningful discussions will take place during the General Assembly, and new, promising joint projects will be outlined that will serve the further development of mutually beneficial international cooperation,” says V. Putin’s greeting.

In his welcoming speech, Fu Hua, Director General of Xinhua News Agency, noted that the Asia-Pacific region is the engine of economic globalization, the center of world economic growth, the pillar of global development and stability, the outpost of international cooperation, and plays an important role in countering global challenges.

Xinhua calls on Asia-Pacific news agencies to work together to enhance mutual trust, promote inclusiveness, and advance cooperation and mutual benefit, Fu Hua said. He pledged that Xinhua will effectively fulfill its responsibilities, deepen partnerships with OANA member agencies, and develop multilateral mechanisms such as the World Media Summit, the Global South Media and Think Tank Forum, and the China-Central Asia News Agency Forum to write new chapters in the history of exchanges among news agencies.

TASS Director General Andrey Kondrashov pointed out that today’s world is going through a key period of profound changes and transformation of the information environment, when cyber threats and fake information undermine audience trust in the media. According to him, in-depth exchanges and cooperation between Asia-Pacific news agencies, joint discussions on the use of new technologies, such as artificial intelligence and big data, accelerate the transformation of the media industry, which not only helps the development of the news agencies themselves, but is also of great importance for protecting the security and prosperity of the region and the entire world.

UN Under-Secretary-General for Global Communications Melissa Fleming said in a video message that in today’s turbulent world, news organizations and their staff face many serious challenges. Strengthening dialogue and exchanges between media outlets is especially important in this context, she said.

Director General of the Vietnam News Agency Vu Viet Trang told Xinhua that the world is changing rapidly today and news agencies must improve the efficiency of information delivery through technological innovations while ensuring accuracy and speed. At the same time, news agencies in the Asia-Pacific region must strengthen their voice in addressing regional and international issues, “this is the overall mission of news agencies in the Asia-Pacific region,” Vu Viet Trang stressed.

Deputy Director of the Kazakh Presidential Television and Radio Complex Askar Dzhaldinov told Xinhua that the world’s media are currently facing many common challenges. He noted that the media should not only fulfill their responsibilities in disseminating information, but also actively influence social development and the implementation of state policy.

As part of the General Assembly, its participants visited the OANA photo exhibition, which included photographs by Xinhua.

OANA is a regional media organization that unites 41 news agencies from 33 countries. Its predecessor was the Organization of Asian News Agencies, founded in Thailand in December 1961. –0–

MIL OSI Russia News –

June 20, 2025
MIL-OSI Security: Update 297 – IAEA Director General Statement on Situation in Ukraine

Source: International Atomic Energy Agency – IAEA

The IAEA team based at Ukraine’s Zaporizhzhya Nuclear Power Plant (ZNPP) has been informed that challenges related to the availability of cooling water and off-site power will need to be fully resolved before any of its reactors can be restarted, Director General Rafael Mariano Grossi said today.

Those pre-conditions for any future decision to take the ZNPP’s six reactors from their current cold shutdown status were communicated to the IAEA team during discussions with the plant and Rostekhnadzor, the Russian regulator which is this week conducting pre-licensing inspection activities at reactor units 1 and 2. The current operating licenses – issued by the Ukrainian State regulator, SNRIU, – are due to expire in December this year and in February 2026, respectively.

Europe’s largest nuclear power plant (NPP) has not been generating electricity for almost three years now, and its location on the frontline of the conflict continues to put nuclear safety in constant jeopardy.

Its off-site power situation also remains extremely fragile, with only one power line currently functioning compared with ten before the conflict. In addition, the destruction of the Kakhovka dam in mid-2023 means the ZNPP does not have sufficient water to cool six operating reactors.

“Based on the discussions at the site this week, it is clear that there is a general consensus among all parties that the Zaporizhzhya Nuclear Power Plant cannot start operating again as long as this large-scale war continues to endanger nuclear safety at the site, which is what the IAEA has also been stating very clearly,” Director General Grossi said.

During this week’s meeting, the Rostekhnadzor representative said a team of its inspectors are currently conducting a two-week pre-licensing inspection scheduled to end on Friday. The results of the inspection – together with documentation submitted by the ZNPP – will subsequently be evaluated by Rostekhnadzor.

Also this week, the IAEA team has been observing various maintenance activities at the site, including on parts of the safety system of reactor unit 5 and on the unit 4 main transformer – which commenced its planned maintenance period this week.

The team was informed that a pump in one of the site’s 11 groundwater wells built after the destruction of the Kakhovka dam is currently not working and will be replaced. The ten remaining wells continue to supply the sufficient flow of water needed for the shutdown reactors.

The IAEA team reported hearing explosions at various distances from the site on most days over the past week.

At Ukraine’s other nuclear sites, the IAEA teams at the three operating NPPs – Khmelnytskyy, Rivne and the South Ukraine – and the Chornobyl site all reported hearing air raid alarms over the past week, with the IAEA team at the Khmelnytskyy NPP sheltering at the site yesterday.

The IAEA team based at the Khmelnytskyy NPP observed a two-day emergency exercise to test the response to a site blackout.

Over the past week, one of the three reactor units at the South Ukraine NPP completed its planned refuelling and maintenance outage and returned to full power generation, after which another unit was shut down for maintenance. The refuelling and maintenance outage of the third unit is still ongoing, as is the planned such outage of one Rivne NPP’s four reactors.

MIL Security OSI –

June 20, 2025
MIL-OSI Security: Update on Developments in Iran

Source: International Atomic Energy Agency – IAEA

The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) is continuing to closely monitor and assess the situation regarding the Israeli attacks on nuclear sites in the Islamic Republic of Iran, providing frequent public updates about developments and their possible consequences for human health and the environment, Director General Rafael Mariano Grossi said today.

Since the military attacks began almost a week ago, the IAEA has been reporting on damage at several of these facilities, including at nuclear-related sites located in Arak, Esfahan, Natanz and Tehran, and their potential radiological impact.

In his statement to the Board of Governors on 13 June, the morning of the attacks on Iranian nuclear facilities, the Director General recalled the numerous General Conference resolutions on the topic of military attacks against nuclear facilities, in particular, GC(XXIX)/RES/444 and GC(XXXIV)/RES/533, which provide, inter alia, that “any armed attack on and threat against nuclear facilities devoted to peaceful purposes constitutes a violation of the principles of the United Nations Charter, international law and the Statute of the Agency”.

He also stated that, furthermore, the IAEA has consistently underlined that “armed attacks on nuclear facilities could result in radioactive releases with grave consequences within and beyond the boundaries of the State which has been attacked”, as was stated in GC(XXXIV)/RES/533.

Later at the special session of the Board of Governors on 16 June 2025, in his statement, the Director General emphasized that, “For the second time in three years, we are witnessing a dramatic conflict between two IAEA Member States in which nuclear installations are coming under fire and nuclear safety is being compromised. The IAEA, just as has been the case with the military conflict between the Russian Federation and Ukraine, will not stand idly by during this conflict.”

“The IAEA is monitoring the situation very carefully,” he said. “The IAEA is ready to respond to any nuclear or radiological emergency.”

It was the Director General’s third comprehensive statement in four days about the situation in Iran, following the statement to the Board on 13 June and one to the United Nations Security Council later the same day. In addition, the Agency has provided regular updates on its official X account.

IAEA inspectors remain present in Iran, ready to be deployed at nuclear sites when possible, even though the number of Agency staff has been reduced somewhat in light of the security situation, Director General Grossi said.

He added: “The Agency is and will remain present in Iran. Safeguards inspections in Iran will continue as required by Iran’s safeguards obligations under its NPT (Non-Proliferation Treaty) Safeguards Agreement, as soon as safety and security conditions allow.”

Calling for maximum restraint to avoid further escalation, Director General Grossi stressed that he was ready “to travel immediately and engage with all relevant parties to help ensure the protection of nuclear facilities and the continued peaceful use of nuclear technology in accordance with the Agency mandate, including by deploying Agency nuclear safety and security experts, in addition to our safeguards inspectors in Iran, wherever necessary.”

“Military escalation threatens lives, increases the chance of a radiological release with serious consequences for people and the environment and delays indispensable work towards a diplomatic solution for the long-term assurance that Iran does not acquire a nuclear weapon,” he said.

The IAEA stands ready to act within its statutory mandate to assist in preventing a nuclear accident that could result in grave radiological consequences, he said, adding: “For the IAEA to act, a constructive, professional dialogue will have to ensue, and this must happen sooner rather than later.”

Based on information available to it, the IAEA has been reporting on the situation at the nuclear facilities and sites in Iran, including:

The Natanz Fuel Enrichment Plant site was targeted in attacks on 13 June that destroyed the above-ground part of the Pilot Fuel Enrichment Plant, one of the facilities at which Iran was producing uranium enriched up to 60% U-235.

Electricity infrastructure at the plant – including an electrical sub-station, a main electric power supply building, and emergency power supply and back-up generators – was also destroyed. The loss of power to the underground cascades may have damaged the centrifuges there, Director General Grossi told the Board on 16 June.

Later this week, the IAEA issued an update, saying that based on continued analysis of high- resolution satellite imagery collected after the attacks on the nuclear site at Natanz, the Agency has identified additional elements that indicate direct impacts also on the underground enrichment halls at Natanz.

There has been no radiological impact outside the Natanz site, but circumscribed radiological and chemical contamination inside the enrichment facility, Director General Grossi reported.

“It was limited to this facility. There was no radiological impact externally,” he said.

Considering the type of nuclear material at the Natanz facility, it is possible that uranium isotopes contained in uranium hexafluoride, uranyl fluoride and hydrogen fluoride are dispersed inside the facility, he said. The radiation, primarily consisting of alpha particles, poses a significant danger if uranium is inhaled or ingested. However, this risk can be effectively managed with appropriate protective measures, such as using respiratory protection devices while inside the affected facilities. The main concern inside the facility is the chemical toxicity of the uranium hexafluoride and the fluoride compounds generated in contact with water.

At the Esfahan nuclear site, four buildings were damaged in Friday’s attack: the central chemical laboratory, a uranium conversion plant, the Tehran reactor fuel manufacturing plant, and the enriched uranium metal processing facility, which was under construction. As in Natanz, off-site radiation levels remain unchanged at the Esfahan nuclear site.

On 18 June, the IAEA said in an update that it had information that two centrifuge production facilities in Iran – the TESA Karaj workshop and the Tehran Research Center – were hit. Both locations were previously under IAEA monitoring and verification under the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA).

At the Tehran Research Center, one building was hit where advanced centrifuge rotors were manufactured and tested. At the Karaj workshop, two buildings were destroyed where different centrifuge components were manufactured.

The Khondab Heavy Water Research Reactor, under construction, was hit on 19 June. As the reactor was not operational and did not contain any nuclear material, Director General Grossi said no radiological consequence was expected. While damage to the nearby Heavy Water Production Plant was initially not visible, it is now assessed that key buildings at the facility were damaged, including the distillation unit.

At present, no damage has been observed at Iran’s other nuclear sites.

While there so far has been no major radiological incident as a result of the attacks, Director General Grossi stressed the possible nuclear safety and security risks.

“There is a lot of nuclear material in Iran in different places, which means that the potential for a radiological accident with the dispersion in the atmosphere of radioactive materials and particles does exist,” he said.

Director General Grossi also emphasized the importance of cooperating and exchanging information with the Iranian authorities.

“Amid theses challenging and complex circumstances, it is crucial that the IAEA receives timely and regular technical information about the nuclear facilities and their respective sites. This information is needed to promptly inform the international community and ensure an effective response and assistance to any emergency situation in Iran,” he said, adding that he was also in constant contact with other countries in the region.

MIL Security OSI –

June 20, 2025
MIL-OSI NGOs: Update 297 – IAEA Director General Statement on Situation in Ukraine

Source: International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) –

The IAEA team based at Ukraine’s Zaporizhzhya Nuclear Power Plant (ZNPP) has been informed that challenges related to the availability of cooling water and off-site power will need to be fully resolved before any of its reactors can be restarted, Director General Rafael Mariano Grossi said today.

Those pre-conditions for any future decision to take the ZNPP’s six reactors from their current cold shutdown status were communicated to the IAEA team during discussions with the plant and Rostekhnadzor, the Russian regulator which is this week conducting pre-licensing inspection activities at reactor units 1 and 2. The current operating licenses – issued by the Ukrainian State regulator, SNRIU, – are due to expire in December this year and in February 2026, respectively.

Europe’s largest nuclear power plant (NPP) has not been generating electricity for almost three years now, and its location on the frontline of the conflict continues to put nuclear safety in constant jeopardy.

Its off-site power situation also remains extremely fragile, with only one power line currently functioning compared with ten before the conflict. In addition, the destruction of the Kakhovka dam in mid-2023 means the ZNPP does not have sufficient water to cool six operating reactors.

“Based on the discussions at the site this week, it is clear that there is a general consensus among all parties that the Zaporizhzhya Nuclear Power Plant cannot start operating again as long as this large-scale war continues to endanger nuclear safety at the site, which is what the IAEA has also been stating very clearly,” Director General Grossi said.

During this week’s meeting, the Rostekhnadzor representative said a team of its inspectors are currently conducting a two-week pre-licensing inspection scheduled to end on Friday. The results of the inspection – together with documentation submitted by the ZNPP – will subsequently be evaluated by Rostekhnadzor.

Also this week, the IAEA team has been observing various maintenance activities at the site, including on parts of the safety system of reactor unit 5 and on the unit 4 main transformer – which commenced its planned maintenance period this week.

The team was informed that a pump in one of the site’s 11 groundwater wells built after the destruction of the Kakhovka dam is currently not working and will be replaced. The ten remaining wells continue to supply the sufficient flow of water needed for the shutdown reactors.

The IAEA team reported hearing explosions at various distances from the site on most days over the past week.

At Ukraine’s other nuclear sites, the IAEA teams at the three operating NPPs – Khmelnytskyy, Rivne and the South Ukraine – and the Chornobyl site all reported hearing air raid alarms over the past week, with the IAEA team at the Khmelnytskyy NPP sheltering at the site yesterday.

The IAEA team based at the Khmelnytskyy NPP observed a two-day emergency exercise to test the response to a site blackout.

Over the past week, one of the three reactor units at the South Ukraine NPP completed its planned refuelling and maintenance outage and returned to full power generation, after which another unit was shut down for maintenance. The refuelling and maintenance outage of the third unit is still ongoing, as is the planned such outage of one Rivne NPP’s four reactors.

MIL OSI NGO –

June 20, 2025
MIL-OSI NGOs: Update 297 – IAEA Director General Statement on Situation in Ukraine

Source: International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) –

The IAEA team based at Ukraine’s Zaporizhzhya Nuclear Power Plant (ZNPP) has been informed that challenges related to the availability of cooling water and off-site power will need to be fully resolved before any of its reactors can be restarted, Director General Rafael Mariano Grossi said today.

Those pre-conditions for any future decision to take the ZNPP’s six reactors from their current cold shutdown status were communicated to the IAEA team during discussions with the plant and Rostekhnadzor, the Russian regulator which is this week conducting pre-licensing inspection activities at reactor units 1 and 2. The current operating licenses – issued by the Ukrainian State regulator, SNRIU, – are due to expire in December this year and in February 2026, respectively.

Europe’s largest nuclear power plant (NPP) has not been generating electricity for almost three years now, and its location on the frontline of the conflict continues to put nuclear safety in constant jeopardy.

Its off-site power situation also remains extremely fragile, with only one power line currently functioning compared with ten before the conflict. In addition, the destruction of the Kakhovka dam in mid-2023 means the ZNPP does not have sufficient water to cool six operating reactors.

“Based on the discussions at the site this week, it is clear that there is a general consensus among all parties that the Zaporizhzhya Nuclear Power Plant cannot start operating again as long as this large-scale war continues to endanger nuclear safety at the site, which is what the IAEA has also been stating very clearly,” Director General Grossi said.

During this week’s meeting, the Rostekhnadzor representative said a team of its inspectors are currently conducting a two-week pre-licensing inspection scheduled to end on Friday. The results of the inspection – together with documentation submitted by the ZNPP – will subsequently be evaluated by Rostekhnadzor.

Also this week, the IAEA team has been observing various maintenance activities at the site, including on parts of the safety system of reactor unit 5 and on the unit 4 main transformer – which commenced its planned maintenance period this week.

The team was informed that a pump in one of the site’s 11 groundwater wells built after the destruction of the Kakhovka dam is currently not working and will be replaced. The ten remaining wells continue to supply the sufficient flow of water needed for the shutdown reactors.

The IAEA team reported hearing explosions at various distances from the site on most days over the past week.

At Ukraine’s other nuclear sites, the IAEA teams at the three operating NPPs – Khmelnytskyy, Rivne and the South Ukraine – and the Chornobyl site all reported hearing air raid alarms over the past week, with the IAEA team at the Khmelnytskyy NPP sheltering at the site yesterday.

The IAEA team based at the Khmelnytskyy NPP observed a two-day emergency exercise to test the response to a site blackout.

Over the past week, one of the three reactor units at the South Ukraine NPP completed its planned refuelling and maintenance outage and returned to full power generation, after which another unit was shut down for maintenance. The refuelling and maintenance outage of the third unit is still ongoing, as is the planned such outage of one Rivne NPP’s four reactors.

MIL OSI NGO –

June 20, 2025
MIL-OSI NGOs: Update on Developments in Iran

Source: International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) –

The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) is continuing to closely monitor and assess the situation regarding the Israeli attacks on nuclear sites in the Islamic Republic of Iran, providing frequent public updates about developments and their possible consequences for human health and the environment, Director General Rafael Mariano Grossi said today.

Since the military attacks began almost a week ago, the IAEA has been reporting on damage at several of these facilities, including at nuclear-related sites located in Arak, Esfahan, Natanz and Tehran, and their potential radiological impact.

In his statement to the Board of Governors on 13 June, the morning of the attacks on Iranian nuclear facilities, the Director General recalled the numerous General Conference resolutions on the topic of military attacks against nuclear facilities, in particular, GC(XXIX)/RES/444 and GC(XXXIV)/RES/533, which provide, inter alia, that “any armed attack on and threat against nuclear facilities devoted to peaceful purposes constitutes a violation of the principles of the United Nations Charter, international law and the Statute of the Agency”.

He also stated that, furthermore, the IAEA has consistently underlined that “armed attacks on nuclear facilities could result in radioactive releases with grave consequences within and beyond the boundaries of the State which has been attacked”, as was stated in GC(XXXIV)/RES/533.

Later at the special session of the Board of Governors on 16 June 2025, in his statement, the Director General emphasized that, “For the second time in three years, we are witnessing a dramatic conflict between two IAEA Member States in which nuclear installations are coming under fire and nuclear safety is being compromised. The IAEA, just as has been the case with the military conflict between the Russian Federation and Ukraine, will not stand idly by during this conflict.”

“The IAEA is monitoring the situation very carefully,” he said. “The IAEA is ready to respond to any nuclear or radiological emergency.”

It was the Director General’s third comprehensive statement in four days about the situation in Iran, following the statement to the Board on 13 June and one to the United Nations Security Council later the same day. In addition, the Agency has provided regular updates on its official X account.

IAEA inspectors remain present in Iran, ready to be deployed at nuclear sites when possible, even though the number of Agency staff has been reduced somewhat in light of the security situation, Director General Grossi said.

He added: “The Agency is and will remain present in Iran. Safeguards inspections in Iran will continue as required by Iran’s safeguards obligations under its NPT (Non-Proliferation Treaty) Safeguards Agreement, as soon as safety and security conditions allow.”

Calling for maximum restraint to avoid further escalation, Director General Grossi stressed that he was ready “to travel immediately and engage with all relevant parties to help ensure the protection of nuclear facilities and the continued peaceful use of nuclear technology in accordance with the Agency mandate, including by deploying Agency nuclear safety and security experts, in addition to our safeguards inspectors in Iran, wherever necessary.”

“Military escalation threatens lives, increases the chance of a radiological release with serious consequences for people and the environment and delays indispensable work towards a diplomatic solution for the long-term assurance that Iran does not acquire a nuclear weapon,” he said.

The IAEA stands ready to act within its statutory mandate to assist in preventing a nuclear accident that could result in grave radiological consequences, he said, adding: “For the IAEA to act, a constructive, professional dialogue will have to ensue, and this must happen sooner rather than later.”

Based on information available to it, the IAEA has been reporting on the situation at the nuclear facilities and sites in Iran, including:

The Natanz Fuel Enrichment Plant site was targeted in attacks on 13 June that destroyed the above-ground part of the Pilot Fuel Enrichment Plant, one of the facilities at which Iran was producing uranium enriched up to 60% U-235.

Electricity infrastructure at the plant – including an electrical sub-station, a main electric power supply building, and emergency power supply and back-up generators – was also destroyed. The loss of power to the underground cascades may have damaged the centrifuges there, Director General Grossi told the Board on 16 June.

Later this week, the IAEA issued an update, saying that based on continued analysis of high- resolution satellite imagery collected after the attacks on the nuclear site at Natanz, the Agency has identified additional elements that indicate direct impacts also on the underground enrichment halls at Natanz.

There has been no radiological impact outside the Natanz site, but circumscribed radiological and chemical contamination inside the enrichment facility, Director General Grossi reported.

“It was limited to this facility. There was no radiological impact externally,” he said.

Considering the type of nuclear material at the Natanz facility, it is possible that uranium isotopes contained in uranium hexafluoride, uranyl fluoride and hydrogen fluoride are dispersed inside the facility, he said. The radiation, primarily consisting of alpha particles, poses a significant danger if uranium is inhaled or ingested. However, this risk can be effectively managed with appropriate protective measures, such as using respiratory protection devices while inside the affected facilities. The main concern inside the facility is the chemical toxicity of the uranium hexafluoride and the fluoride compounds generated in contact with water.

At the Esfahan nuclear site, four buildings were damaged in Friday’s attack: the central chemical laboratory, a uranium conversion plant, the Tehran reactor fuel manufacturing plant, and the enriched uranium metal processing facility, which was under construction. As in Natanz, off-site radiation levels remain unchanged at the Esfahan nuclear site.

On 18 June, the IAEA said in an update that it had information that two centrifuge production facilities in Iran – the TESA Karaj workshop and the Tehran Research Center – were hit. Both locations were previously under IAEA monitoring and verification under the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA).

At the Tehran Research Center, one building was hit where advanced centrifuge rotors were manufactured and tested. At the Karaj workshop, two buildings were destroyed where different centrifuge components were manufactured.

The Khondab Heavy Water Research Reactor, under construction, was hit on 19 June. As the reactor was not operational and did not contain any nuclear material, Director General Grossi said no radiological consequence was expected. While damage to the nearby Heavy Water Production Plant was initially not visible, it is now assessed that key buildings at the facility were damaged, including the distillation unit.

At present, no damage has been observed at Iran’s other nuclear sites.

While there so far has been no major radiological incident as a result of the attacks, Director General Grossi stressed the possible nuclear safety and security risks.

“There is a lot of nuclear material in Iran in different places, which means that the potential for a radiological accident with the dispersion in the atmosphere of radioactive materials and particles does exist,” he said.

Director General Grossi also emphasized the importance of cooperating and exchanging information with the Iranian authorities.

“Amid theses challenging and complex circumstances, it is crucial that the IAEA receives timely and regular technical information about the nuclear facilities and their respective sites. This information is needed to promptly inform the international community and ensure an effective response and assistance to any emergency situation in Iran,” he said, adding that he was also in constant contact with other countries in the region.

MIL OSI NGO –

June 20, 2025
MIL-OSI NGOs: Update on Developments in Iran

Source: International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) –

The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) is continuing to closely monitor and assess the situation regarding the Israeli attacks on nuclear sites in the Islamic Republic of Iran, providing frequent public updates about developments and their possible consequences for human health and the environment, Director General Rafael Mariano Grossi said today.

Since the military attacks began almost a week ago, the IAEA has been reporting on damage at several of these facilities, including at nuclear-related sites located in Arak, Esfahan, Natanz and Tehran, and their potential radiological impact.

In his statement to the Board of Governors on 13 June, the morning of the attacks on Iranian nuclear facilities, the Director General recalled the numerous General Conference resolutions on the topic of military attacks against nuclear facilities, in particular, GC(XXIX)/RES/444 and GC(XXXIV)/RES/533, which provide, inter alia, that “any armed attack on and threat against nuclear facilities devoted to peaceful purposes constitutes a violation of the principles of the United Nations Charter, international law and the Statute of the Agency”.

He also stated that, furthermore, the IAEA has consistently underlined that “armed attacks on nuclear facilities could result in radioactive releases with grave consequences within and beyond the boundaries of the State which has been attacked”, as was stated in GC(XXXIV)/RES/533.

Later at the special session of the Board of Governors on 16 June 2025, in his statement, the Director General emphasized that, “For the second time in three years, we are witnessing a dramatic conflict between two IAEA Member States in which nuclear installations are coming under fire and nuclear safety is being compromised. The IAEA, just as has been the case with the military conflict between the Russian Federation and Ukraine, will not stand idly by during this conflict.”

“The IAEA is monitoring the situation very carefully,” he said. “The IAEA is ready to respond to any nuclear or radiological emergency.”

It was the Director General’s third comprehensive statement in four days about the situation in Iran, following the statement to the Board on 13 June and one to the United Nations Security Council later the same day. In addition, the Agency has provided regular updates on its official X account.

IAEA inspectors remain present in Iran, ready to be deployed at nuclear sites when possible, even though the number of Agency staff has been reduced somewhat in light of the security situation, Director General Grossi said.

He added: “The Agency is and will remain present in Iran. Safeguards inspections in Iran will continue as required by Iran’s safeguards obligations under its NPT (Non-Proliferation Treaty) Safeguards Agreement, as soon as safety and security conditions allow.”

Calling for maximum restraint to avoid further escalation, Director General Grossi stressed that he was ready “to travel immediately and engage with all relevant parties to help ensure the protection of nuclear facilities and the continued peaceful use of nuclear technology in accordance with the Agency mandate, including by deploying Agency nuclear safety and security experts, in addition to our safeguards inspectors in Iran, wherever necessary.”

“Military escalation threatens lives, increases the chance of a radiological release with serious consequences for people and the environment and delays indispensable work towards a diplomatic solution for the long-term assurance that Iran does not acquire a nuclear weapon,” he said.

The IAEA stands ready to act within its statutory mandate to assist in preventing a nuclear accident that could result in grave radiological consequences, he said, adding: “For the IAEA to act, a constructive, professional dialogue will have to ensue, and this must happen sooner rather than later.”

Based on information available to it, the IAEA has been reporting on the situation at the nuclear facilities and sites in Iran, including:

The Natanz Fuel Enrichment Plant site was targeted in attacks on 13 June that destroyed the above-ground part of the Pilot Fuel Enrichment Plant, one of the facilities at which Iran was producing uranium enriched up to 60% U-235.

Electricity infrastructure at the plant – including an electrical sub-station, a main electric power supply building, and emergency power supply and back-up generators – was also destroyed. The loss of power to the underground cascades may have damaged the centrifuges there, Director General Grossi told the Board on 16 June.

Later this week, the IAEA issued an update, saying that based on continued analysis of high- resolution satellite imagery collected after the attacks on the nuclear site at Natanz, the Agency has identified additional elements that indicate direct impacts also on the underground enrichment halls at Natanz.

There has been no radiological impact outside the Natanz site, but circumscribed radiological and chemical contamination inside the enrichment facility, Director General Grossi reported.

“It was limited to this facility. There was no radiological impact externally,” he said.

Considering the type of nuclear material at the Natanz facility, it is possible that uranium isotopes contained in uranium hexafluoride, uranyl fluoride and hydrogen fluoride are dispersed inside the facility, he said. The radiation, primarily consisting of alpha particles, poses a significant danger if uranium is inhaled or ingested. However, this risk can be effectively managed with appropriate protective measures, such as using respiratory protection devices while inside the affected facilities. The main concern inside the facility is the chemical toxicity of the uranium hexafluoride and the fluoride compounds generated in contact with water.

At the Esfahan nuclear site, four buildings were damaged in Friday’s attack: the central chemical laboratory, a uranium conversion plant, the Tehran reactor fuel manufacturing plant, and the enriched uranium metal processing facility, which was under construction. As in Natanz, off-site radiation levels remain unchanged at the Esfahan nuclear site.

On 18 June, the IAEA said in an update that it had information that two centrifuge production facilities in Iran – the TESA Karaj workshop and the Tehran Research Center – were hit. Both locations were previously under IAEA monitoring and verification under the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA).

At the Tehran Research Center, one building was hit where advanced centrifuge rotors were manufactured and tested. At the Karaj workshop, two buildings were destroyed where different centrifuge components were manufactured.

The Khondab Heavy Water Research Reactor, under construction, was hit on 19 June. As the reactor was not operational and did not contain any nuclear material, Director General Grossi said no radiological consequence was expected. While damage to the nearby Heavy Water Production Plant was initially not visible, it is now assessed that key buildings at the facility were damaged, including the distillation unit.

At present, no damage has been observed at Iran’s other nuclear sites.

While there so far has been no major radiological incident as a result of the attacks, Director General Grossi stressed the possible nuclear safety and security risks.

“There is a lot of nuclear material in Iran in different places, which means that the potential for a radiological accident with the dispersion in the atmosphere of radioactive materials and particles does exist,” he said.

Director General Grossi also emphasized the importance of cooperating and exchanging information with the Iranian authorities.

“Amid theses challenging and complex circumstances, it is crucial that the IAEA receives timely and regular technical information about the nuclear facilities and their respective sites. This information is needed to promptly inform the international community and ensure an effective response and assistance to any emergency situation in Iran,” he said, adding that he was also in constant contact with other countries in the region.

MIL OSI NGO –

June 20, 2025
MIL-OSI Europe: At a Glance – Plenary round-up – June 2025 – 19-06-2025

Source: European Parliament

One focus of the June 2025 plenary session was the situation in the Middle East, with Members debating statements from Kaja Kallas, High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy and Vice-President of the Commission, on the risk of further instability in the Middle East following the Israel-Iran military escalation, and the review of the EU-Israel Association Agreement and the ongoing humanitarian crisis in Gaza. His Majesty King Abdullah II of Jordan addressed Parliament in a formal sitting, and spoke in particular on the implications of the crisis in the Middle East. Members held further debates on international questions, including debating with Kallas on the upcoming NATO summit, on 24-26 June 2025. They also debated the human cost of Russia’s war against Ukraine and the urgent need to end Russian aggression, the rise in violence and the deepening humanitarian crisis in South Sudan, and the assassination attempt on Senator Miguel Uribe and the threat to the democratic process and peace in Colombia. Inside the EU, Members debated the state of play on illegal use of spyware and the follow-up two years after the PEGA inquiry committee recommendations, freedom of assembly in Hungary and the need for the Commission to act, safeguarding the rule of law in Spain, the institutional and political implications of the EU enlargement process, and the latest developments on the revision of the air passenger rights and airline liability regulations. Roberta Metsola, the President of the European Parliament, opened the session with a statement marking the 40th anniversary of the Schengen Area agreement.

MIL OSI Europe News –

June 20, 2025
MIL-OSI Europe: Written question – EU Response to democratic backsliding and Russification in Georgia: sanctions on Bidzina Ivanishvili and other responsible actors – P-002424/2025
Source: European Parliament
Priority question for written answer P-002424/2025
to the Vice-President of the Commission / High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy
Rule 144
Krzysztof Brejza (PPE)

In recent years, Georgia has experienced a serious decline in democratic standards. Political leaders and civil society activists are being subjected to politically motivated prosecution, with trials lacking judicial independence. Citizens face intimidation and blackmail by state authorities. Free and independent media are being silenced, journalists harassed and dissent suppressed.

While Russia is not using direct military force, it exerts control through hybrid tactics – disinformation, support for authoritarian governance and institutional capture. This reflects the Kremlin’s broader regional strategy.

At the heart of this process is oligarch Bidzina Ivanishvili, who, despite holding no official role, exerts de facto control over the Georgian government. His influence is instrumental in undermining Georgia’s Euro-Atlantic path and aligning it with Russian interests. He is supported by a network of political actors complicit in democratic erosion and authoritarian consolidation.

In the light of this backsliding:

1.What concrete steps is the Commission taking to impose targeted sanctions on Ivanishvili and others responsible for obstructing Georgia’s European future?

2.How will the Commission respond to media repression, the erosion of judicial independence and the persecution of the opposition?

3.When does the Commission intend to act, and with what tools, to address those undermining democracy in Georgia?

Submitted: 16.6.2025
Last updated: 19 June 2025
MIL OSI Europe News –
June 20, 2025
MIL-OSI Russia: China’s Vice Premier Calls for Strengthening Poverty Alleviation Efforts

Translation. Region: Russian Federal

Source: People’s Republic of China in Russian – People’s Republic of China in Russian –

Source: People’s Republic of China – State Council News

YINCHUAN, June 19 (Xinhua) — Chinese Vice Premier Liu Guozhong has called for unremitting efforts to consolidate and expand China’s achievements in poverty alleviation and optimize policies to provide regular aid to rural areas.

Liu Guozhong, also a member of the Political Bureau of the CPC Central Committee, made the remarks during an inspection tour of Shanxi, Gansu and Ningxia Hui Autonomous Region from June 16 to 19.

Having announced that absolute poverty will be eradicated in 2021, China has set a five-year transition period to consolidate and build on the achievements of poverty alleviation and integrate these achievements into the process of rural revitalization.

Liu Guozhong reminded that there are only six months left until the end of the transition period, and called for strengthening monitoring of emergencies such as diseases and natural disasters, and taking measures to reduce potential risks. Efforts to combat poverty in production should take into account local conditions, he said, calling for more work to stabilize employment and increase the incomes of those lifted out of poverty.

According to the Deputy Prime Minister of the State Council, it is important to strengthen assistance to people who participated in the resettlement and settlement program in a new place, deepen cooperation between the eastern and western regions of the country and targeted assistance from the central government.

At a meeting held during the inspection tour, Liu Guozhong called for a diversified system of assistance to low-income rural residents and underdeveloped areas in the post-transition period. He pointed out the need to firmly maintain a lower limit on preventing large-scale poverty relapse or emergence, while stepping up efforts to revitalize rural areas in all areas.

The Deputy Prime Minister of the State Council also stressed the importance of effective work on harvesting the summer crop to ensure a rich grain harvest for the entire year. –0–

MIL OSI Russia News –

June 20, 2025
MIL-OSI Russia: China hopes that the US will implement President D. Trump’s statement on readiness to accept Chinese students in American universities – Chinese Foreign Ministry

Translation. Region: Russian Federal

Source: People’s Republic of China in Russian – People’s Republic of China in Russian –

Source: People’s Republic of China – State Council News

BEIJING, June 19 (Xinhua) — China opposes the politicization of cooperation in education and hopes that the United States will implement President Donald Trump’s statement on its readiness to accept Chinese students who want to study at American universities, Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Guo Jiakun said on Thursday.

Guo Jiakun made the remarks at a daily briefing for reporters, adding that China is closely monitoring the developments.

According to the diplomat, Chinese-American cooperation in the field of education is beneficial to both sides.

“We hope that the United States will implement President Trump’s statement on its readiness to accept Chinese students who wish to study in American universities, and also ensure effective protection of the reasonable and legitimate rights and interests of Chinese students and scholars in the United States,” the official representative said. –0–

MIL OSI Russia News –

June 20, 2025
MIL-OSI Global: What UK involvement in Iran could look like – and the political questions it raises

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Geraint Hughes, Reader in Diplomatic and Military History, King’s College London

Lauren Hurley / No 10 Downing Street, CC BY-NC-ND

At the time of writing, US President Donald Trump is deliberating over whether to join Israel’s air campaign to destroy Iran’s suspected nuclear weapons programme. This is already a contentious issue within Washington DC and the Trump administration. But if the president decides to take the US into a war with Iran, it will have significant implications for the US’s allies, not least the UK.

As the recent strategic defence review emphasises, the US is Britain’s main ally, an essential partner in defence and intelligence.

However, the Trump administration has made clear to its European allies that it no longer regards the defence of the continent as a US national security priority. And the president’s commitment to Nato is uncertain.

It is possible that Britain and other European allies could be publicly pressured by Trump to support any intervention on Israel’s side. The US may expect this in return for the US’s continued involvement in Nato and its readiness to honour article 5 (the collective defence principle, which obliges collective retaliation to aggression against one member) for its allies.

Get your news from actual experts, straight to your inbox. Sign up to our daily newsletter to receive all The Conversation UK’s latest coverage of news and research, from politics and business to the arts and sciences.

Given the importance of American military power in deterring wider Russian aggression in Europe – and Trump’s transactional character – this would present Keir Starmer with a particularly stark dilemma.

A purely US air campaign against Iran is feasible. The US Navy will soon have two carrier strike groups in the Middle East region. And the US Air Force’s B2 strategic bombers can launch raids across the globe from bases in the continental US.

The US also has several military bases in the region. However, as was the case with the 1991 and 2003 wars with Iraq, Washington DC will need permission from Gulf Arab allies to use them.

Nonetheless, the Trump administration could request authorisation from the UK’s Labour government to use US airbases in the UK and its overseas territories to support an air campaign against Iran. This would not involve the UK deploying forces, but would require the UK to approve the use of the airbases.

The Diego Garcia airbase in the Indian Ocean would be a useful asset in this case. But its employment would reopen the controversy over its establishment in the 1960s.

It could also call into question the diplomatic deal the UK made with Mauritius last month to cede sovereignty of the Chagos Islands, while keeping this base open. The Mauritians are likely to oppose US airstrikes on Iran.

Britain also has options for direct participation. RAF Typhoon jets stationed at Britain’s airbase in Akrotiri, Cyprus provided air defence support for Israel during the Iranian missile and drone strikes in April and October 2024. They could conduct similar missions now.

But from the Royal Navy’s perspective, it would be difficult to divert the aircraft carrier HMS Prince of Wales from its deployment to the Indo-Pacific, partly because the task group it sails with is a multinational one.

Given that the British armed forces are already overstretched, it is difficult to see whether the UK could provide more than basing rights and air support to the Israelis (if requested).

A discreet commitment of UK special forces (the 22nd Special Air Service regiment and the Special Boat Service) on the ground is conceivable. This can be – and indeed has been – authorised by previous governments without parliamentary debate. But any further British military commitment is likely to cause a political row.

Legal and political ramifications

The key question for Starmer and his ministers will not be whether Britain could back a US war against Iran but whether it should. After the debacle of the Iraq war and the ensuing Chilcot inquiry, it is difficult to see how any government – let alone a Labour one – can take Britain into a major interstate conflict on this scale without firm parliamentary support and a solid case in international law.

To this end, the Attorney General Richard Hermer has reportedly questioned the legality of Israel’s preemptive attack on Iran, and has argued that any British military intervention should be limited to the defence of its allies.

We should not forget that Starmer was a human rights lawyer and the head of the Crown Prosecution Service before he became a politician.

Another legacy of Iraq is that it is customary (though not a legal requirement) for prime ministers to seek parliamentary approval for any major military operation. David Cameron lost a vote in the House of Commons to approve airstrikes against Bashar al-Assad’s regime in Syria in August 2013. But he gained parliamentary support for Britain’s commitment to the fight against Islamic State in 2015.

A similar debate now is unlikely to lead to approval of British military intervention in this case. Within the Labour party, there is already widespread condemnation of Israeli tactics and Palestinian civilian casualties in Gaza.

There is little popular appetite for sending British sailors and airmen into a war with Iran. And, given the US vice-president’s own dismissive comments about the military experiences of European allies, the public is also entitled to ask why British servicemen should die or risk breaching international law for an administration that probably will not appreciate their sacrifice.

Geraint Hughes does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. What UK involvement in Iran could look like – and the political questions it raises – https://theconversation.com/what-uk-involvement-in-iran-could-look-like-and-the-political-questions-it-raises-259420

MIL OSI – Global Reports –

June 20, 2025
MIL-OSI Russia: HSE and RHB sign cooperation agreement

Translation. Region: Russian Federal

Source: State University Higher School of Economics – State University Higher School of Economics –

On June 19, as part of the St. Petersburg International Forum, Rector of the Higher School of Economics Nikita Anisimov and the founder of Wildberries, head of the RBB (United Company Wildberries

The company will give vouchers to the Summer Economic School “I Love Economics” (SES) to 10 talented schoolchildren from 10 regions of Russia: Penza, Voronezh, Moscow, Irkutsk, Ulyanovsk, Saratov, Tambov regions, St. Petersburg, Kaliningrad and the Chuvash Republic. SES is the largest Olympiad visiting economic school in Russia, organized with the participation of HSE.

“Our partnership with the Higher School of Economics opens up new opportunities for synergy between education, science and business. For us, this is an opportunity not just to share experience, but to provide HSE students with a real base for their research and ideas – access to our platforms, data, technologies and experts. I am confident that practice on real projects, where you can test the theory and immediately see the result, is the best way to prepare sought-after specialists,” said Tatyana Kim.

The cooperation between a large IT company and a university with a fundamental research base, a leader among Russian universities for talented and creative youth, will allow both parties to significantly expand their capabilities and competencies in educational and scientific activities, as well as in the field of development and support of professional personnel.

As part of the agreement, the Higher School of Economics and RVC plan to launch and develop joint educational programs, internships for university students within the walls of the united company, conduct joint scientific and educational events, organize scientific research, and support talented students and schoolchildren.

“The Higher School of Economics traditionally strives to provide the highest possible quality of education for its students through partnerships with the country’s industrial leaders. In the person of Wildberries

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 –

June 20, 2025
MIL-OSI Global: Trump’s unpredictable approach to Iran could seriously backfire

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Michelle Bentley, Professor of International Relations, Royal Holloway University of London

US president Donald Trump has now publicly approved a plan of attack against Iran, which includes a strike against its underground nuclear facility at Fordow (though, at the time of writing, a final decision to go ahead hasn’t been made).

The world is now waiting to see whether Trump will put this plan into action. And that’s exactly what Trump wants. This is not a case of indecision or buying time. Trump has long based his foreign policy on being unpredictable. Iran is another example of his strategy to be as elusive as possible. Yet, his approach has always been difficult – and now threatens to destabilise an already fractious conflict.

One interpretation of Trump’s new public threat towards Iran could be deterrence. Trump is warning Iran that there would be significant consequences if they do not reverse their nuclear ambitions. Change or you will regret it.

If this is Trump’s plan, then he is doing it badly. Successful deterrence relies on clearly communicating the exact penalties of not complying. While Trump has specified a possible attack on Fordow, the rest of the plan is extremely hazy. Trump said he wants “better than a ceasefire”.

Get your news from actual experts, straight to your inbox. Sign up to our daily newsletter to receive all The Conversation UK’s latest coverage of news and research, from politics and business to the arts and sciences.

But what does that mean? Just Fordow? Boots on the ground? Regime change? His ambiguity creates problems for deterrence because if your adversary doesn’t know what the outcomes of their actions will be, they can’t formulate a response or will think you just aren’t serious.

But current US foreign policy on Iran is more than bad deterrence. Trump’s vague rhetoric and his refusal to commit reflects his long-standing strategy of being unreliable when it comes to foreign policy.

Trump’s prevarication has all the hallmarks of his unpredictability doctrine – which states that you should never let anyone know what you will do. The doctrine is also about uncertainty. The idea being that you unnerve your opponents by making them unsure, allowing you to take the advantage while they have no idea what to do themselves.

Trump’s rhetoric on Iran reflects that unpredictability doctrine. Trump actively said of his future action: “I mean, nobody knows what I’m going to do.”

This would not be the first time he has used unpredictability in relation to Iran. In 2018, Trump withdrew the US from the joint comprehensive plan of action (JCPOA). This agreement – signed by the US, France, Germany, the UK, China, Russia and the EU – was designed to limit Iran’s nuclear activity in return for sanctions relief. The US withdrawal was seen as disruptive and creating unnecessary uncertainty, not just for Iran but also US allies.

Will the strategy work?

Being unpredictable is a dangerous way of doing foreign policy. Stable international politics depends on knowing what everyone else will do. You can’t do that with Trump.

The downsides of unpredictability will be even worse in a conflict. In the case of Iran, adding even more uncertainty to a fragile situation will only add fuel to what is already a massive fire.

Read more:
China positions itself as a stable economic partner and alternative to ‘unpredictable’ Trump

Trump’s refusal to specify exactly what the US response would be is more proverbial petrol. The insinuation that this could escalate to regime change may be true or not (or just unpredictable bluster).

It’s also the case that only 14% of Americans support military intervention and so a more aggressive policy may not be realistic. But if Iran is led to think that Trump is directly threatening their state, this could encourage them to hunker down as opposed to changing their nuclear policy – risking greater military action on both sides.

Donald Trump being unclear about whether the US is going to bomb Iran.

Even just the implicit threat of US military intervention will damage what little relations there are between America and Iran. Iran’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, has said: “Any US military intervention will undoubtedly cause irreparable damage.” Unpredictability then undermines any diplomatic negotiations or solution to the crisis.

Trump is also risking his foreign policy relations beyond Iran. While preventing a new member of the nuclear club is a laudable aim, any US attack on a state over weapons of mass destruction (WMD) will lie in the difficult shadow of the “war on terror”, the US-led military campaign launched after 9/11.

With the International Atomic Energy Agency questioning Iran’s capacity to build a nuclear bomb, the US’s legacy of intervention over the WMD in Iraq that never were still looms large. Trump will need to be fully transparent and clear if any action over nuclear arms is going to be seen as legitimate. Unpredictability does not allow for that.

Trump’s fellow state leaders are going to feel disrupted by yet another example of unpredictability. Even if they support curbing Iran, they may find it difficult to back someone they simply can’t depend on. And if they feel cautious about the Iran situation because they can’t rely on Trump, Trump needs to start asking whether he can rely on them for support in whatever his next move is.

Michelle Bentley does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. Trump’s unpredictable approach to Iran could seriously backfire – https://theconversation.com/trumps-unpredictable-approach-to-iran-could-seriously-backfire-259399

MIL OSI – Global Reports –

June 20, 2025
MIL-OSI Global: Trump’s unpredictable approach to Iran could seriously backfire

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Michelle Bentley, Professor of International Relations, Royal Holloway University of London

US president Donald Trump has now publicly approved a plan of attack against Iran, which includes a strike against its underground nuclear facility at Fordow (though, at the time of writing, a final decision to go ahead hasn’t been made).

The world is now waiting to see whether Trump will put this plan into action. And that’s exactly what Trump wants. This is not a case of indecision or buying time. Trump has long based his foreign policy on being unpredictable. Iran is another example of his strategy to be as elusive as possible. Yet, his approach has always been difficult – and now threatens to destabilise an already fractious conflict.

One interpretation of Trump’s new public threat towards Iran could be deterrence. Trump is warning Iran that there would be significant consequences if they do not reverse their nuclear ambitions. Change or you will regret it.

If this is Trump’s plan, then he is doing it badly. Successful deterrence relies on clearly communicating the exact penalties of not complying. While Trump has specified a possible attack on Fordow, the rest of the plan is extremely hazy. Trump said he wants “better than a ceasefire”.

Get your news from actual experts, straight to your inbox. Sign up to our daily newsletter to receive all The Conversation UK’s latest coverage of news and research, from politics and business to the arts and sciences.

But what does that mean? Just Fordow? Boots on the ground? Regime change? His ambiguity creates problems for deterrence because if your adversary doesn’t know what the outcomes of their actions will be, they can’t formulate a response or will think you just aren’t serious.

But current US foreign policy on Iran is more than bad deterrence. Trump’s vague rhetoric and his refusal to commit reflects his long-standing strategy of being unreliable when it comes to foreign policy.

Trump’s prevarication has all the hallmarks of his unpredictability doctrine – which states that you should never let anyone know what you will do. The doctrine is also about uncertainty. The idea being that you unnerve your opponents by making them unsure, allowing you to take the advantage while they have no idea what to do themselves.

Trump’s rhetoric on Iran reflects that unpredictability doctrine. Trump actively said of his future action: “I mean, nobody knows what I’m going to do.”

This would not be the first time he has used unpredictability in relation to Iran. In 2018, Trump withdrew the US from the joint comprehensive plan of action (JCPOA). This agreement – signed by the US, France, Germany, the UK, China, Russia and the EU – was designed to limit Iran’s nuclear activity in return for sanctions relief. The US withdrawal was seen as disruptive and creating unnecessary uncertainty, not just for Iran but also US allies.

Will the strategy work?

Being unpredictable is a dangerous way of doing foreign policy. Stable international politics depends on knowing what everyone else will do. You can’t do that with Trump.

The downsides of unpredictability will be even worse in a conflict. In the case of Iran, adding even more uncertainty to a fragile situation will only add fuel to what is already a massive fire.

Read more:
China positions itself as a stable economic partner and alternative to ‘unpredictable’ Trump

Trump’s refusal to specify exactly what the US response would be is more proverbial petrol. The insinuation that this could escalate to regime change may be true or not (or just unpredictable bluster).

It’s also the case that only 14% of Americans support military intervention and so a more aggressive policy may not be realistic. But if Iran is led to think that Trump is directly threatening their state, this could encourage them to hunker down as opposed to changing their nuclear policy – risking greater military action on both sides.

Donald Trump being unclear about whether the US is going to bomb Iran.

Even just the implicit threat of US military intervention will damage what little relations there are between America and Iran. Iran’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, has said: “Any US military intervention will undoubtedly cause irreparable damage.” Unpredictability then undermines any diplomatic negotiations or solution to the crisis.

Trump is also risking his foreign policy relations beyond Iran. While preventing a new member of the nuclear club is a laudable aim, any US attack on a state over weapons of mass destruction (WMD) will lie in the difficult shadow of the “war on terror”, the US-led military campaign launched after 9/11.

With the International Atomic Energy Agency questioning Iran’s capacity to build a nuclear bomb, the US’s legacy of intervention over the WMD in Iraq that never were still looms large. Trump will need to be fully transparent and clear if any action over nuclear arms is going to be seen as legitimate. Unpredictability does not allow for that.

Trump’s fellow state leaders are going to feel disrupted by yet another example of unpredictability. Even if they support curbing Iran, they may find it difficult to back someone they simply can’t depend on. And if they feel cautious about the Iran situation because they can’t rely on Trump, Trump needs to start asking whether he can rely on them for support in whatever his next move is.

Michelle Bentley does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. Trump’s unpredictable approach to Iran could seriously backfire – https://theconversation.com/trumps-unpredictable-approach-to-iran-could-seriously-backfire-259399

MIL OSI – Global Reports –

June 20, 2025
MIL-OSI Global: Israel’s conflict with Iran escalates as Trump considers US involvement

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Sam Phelps, Commissioning Editor, International Affairs

This article was first published in The Conversation UK’s World Affairs Briefing email newsletter. Sign up to receive weekly analysis of the latest developments in international relations, direct to your inbox.

Israel’s attack on Iranian nuclear facilities and military leadership last week has quickly escalated into the most severe conflict between the two foes in decades. They have been trading missile attacks, with Israel now hinting that it seeks to overthrow the government in Tehran.

On June 19, after an Iranian missile struck a hospital in the Israeli city of Beersheba, Israel’s defence minister, Israel Katz, announced that he had instructed the military to increase the intensity of attacks against Iran. The goal, he said, was to “undermine the regime”.

Israel has long made it clear that it would like to see a change of government in Tehran – though not necessarily through direct military action. Katz’s comments, which also involved saying that the Iranian supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, “will pay for his crimes”, are the first time Israel has claimed regime change as an official goal since the conflict with Iran began.

Sign up to receive our weekly World Affairs Briefing newsletter from The Conversation UK. Every Thursday we’ll bring you expert analysis of the big stories in international relations.

We asked Farhang Morady, a lecturer in international development at the University of Westminster, how precarious the Iranian government’s grip on power really is. He explains that, despite being under immense pressure, the regime is not at imminent risk of collapse.

Israeli strikes have inflicted significant damage, Morady says. But they have not caused the downfall of the regime’s core institutions. Khamenei has reshuffled Iran’s military leadership to maintain stability and control, swiftly appointing successors to replace assassinated commanders.

At least publicly, Morady writes, the Iranian elite is eager to demonstrate its position that the country is capable of enduring the crisis without giving in to foreign pressure. At the same time, the regime has been employing back-channel diplomacy to ensure its survival. It has even reportedly indicated that it is willing to suspend uranium enrichment to maintain itself.

Read more:
Israel’s attacks have exposed weaknesses in Iran, but it’s in little danger of collapsing

However, pressure on the regime could be set to intensify. US president Donald Trump has made it clear that he is considering joining Israel’s campaign against Iran.

As part of a string of social media posts, which followed his early exit from the G7 summit in Canada, Trump described Khamenei as an “easy target” who is safe “for now”. Then, on June 18, when asked a question about the US striking Iran, Trump said: “I may do it, I may not do it.”

Whether Trump’s antics are a bluff to force Iran to negotiate an end to the conflict – or, in his own words, an “unconditional surrender” – remains to be seen.

But in the view of Natasha Lindstaedt, a professor in the department of government at the University of Essex, Trump’s statements suggest he is being won over by the Israeli government’s pressure campaign to convince Washington that the time is right for a joint military assault on Iran.

The US possesses the 30,000-pound “bunker buster” bomb, and the B-2 stealth bomber to carry it, capable of destroying Iran’s deep-lying uranium enrichment sites. Lindstaedt sees a situation arising soon where Israel’s prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, convinces Trump to use this weapon against Iran.

Read more:
Trump breaks from western allies at G7 summit as US weighs joining Iran strikes

Any American military action in Iran has the potential to cause a split in Trump’s base of support, says Richard Hargy, an expert on US politics at Queen’s University Belfast. In this piece, Hargy details how Trump’s condemnation of former US presidents for leading the US into foreign wars won him plaudits with his “make America great again” (Maga) base.

These people remain fiercely opposed to US involvement in another conflict in the Middle East. Steve Bannon, an America-first backer and staunch Trump ally, has warned that US action in Iran would “blow up” Trump’s coalition of support.

At the same time, Hargy says Trump has several prominent Republican hawks urging him to take military action against Iran. Senator Lindsey Graham, for example, has this week called on Trump to go “all in” to help “Israel eliminate the [Iranian] nuclear threat”.

Whatever Trump decides over Iran will be a pivotal moment for his presidency.

Read more:
Iran air strikes: Republicans split over support for Trump and another ‘foreign war’

Confrontation was inevitable

A direct conflict between Israel and Iran has been a long time coming. Tensions between the two countries have been simmering for years. But why did Israel chose to act now? Matthew Moran and Wyn Bowen, professors of international security at King’s College London, say two factors have converged that made this confrontation all but inevitable.

First, Iran’s regime has been left exposed by events over the past 12 months or so. Israeli strikes in October 2024 seriously degraded Iran’s air defences, while Israel’s military response to the October 7 Hamas attacks has decimated Iran’s regional proxy network. These events have undermined Iran’s ability to deter adversaries and have emboldened Israel.

And second, Iran’s nuclear programme has advanced since Trump withdrew the US from a deal negotiated during Barack Obama’s presidency that greatly rolled back Iran’s nuclear capabilities.

Moran and Bowen point to a recent report by the Washington-based Institute for Science and International Security that suggests Iran could convert its current stock of 60% enriched uranium into enough weapons-grade uranium for seven nuclear weapons. This could be done in as little as three weeks.

US national intelligence and the International Atomic Energy Agency say there is no evidence to suggest Iran is, in fact, looking to build a nuclear bomb. Nevertheless, even the possibility that Iran was close to developing one crossed an Israeli red line and triggered action.

In the words of Moran and Bowen: “Iran’s brinkmanship around its effort to hedge its bets on a nuclear option meant it was always operating in a dangerous space.”

Read more:
Israeli aggression and Iranian nuclear brinkmanship made this confrontation all but inevitable

According to Brian Brivati of Kingston University, there is one other factor may have encouraged Israel to take action against Iran: the collapsing credibility of the international legal order.

In this piece, Brivati traces how the Israeli and US governments have systematically weakened the global institutions designed to uphold international law over the past few years. The Israeli government has ignored court rulings over its actions in Gaza, while the US has disabled the mechanisms of accountability.

This has created a situation in which states can act with impunity, confident that international mechanisms can be ignored. Israel’s initial attack on Iran, which was conducted without authorisation from the UN security council, is a symptom of this. And other global powers like Russia and China may now look to follow its lead.

We have arrived at a moment so stark, Brivati says, that it should be seen as a turning point for the international order.

Read more:
Israel, Iran and the US: why 2025 is a turning point for the international order

World Affairs Briefing from The Conversation UK is available as a weekly email newsletter. Click here to get updates directly in your inbox.

– ref. Israel’s conflict with Iran escalates as Trump considers US involvement – https://theconversation.com/israels-conflict-with-iran-escalates-as-trump-considers-us-involvement-259201

MIL OSI – Global Reports –

June 20, 2025
MIL-OSI Russia: Deepening the European Single Market
Source: IMF – News in Russian

Remarks by IMF Managing Director Kristalina Georgieva at the Eurogroup Meeting on Enhancing Competitiveness and Addressing Internal Barriers in the Single Market – Luxembourg

June 19, 2025

As prepared for delivery

Thank you, Paschal, for inviting me back to speak on the topic of Europe’s single market.

We have been urging all of our members that now is the time to get your own house in order given the global trade and other tensions and the uncertainty. Reforms delayed? Delay no more.

And our advice has been resonating. Across the globe, countries and regions are on the move, pushing to higher competitiveness, more dynamism, and faster technological transformation. For Europe it is very simple: either Europe acts, or Europe risks getting sidelined. Relative decline would not happen in a flash, it would creep in, but that would not make it less real.

There is no time for delay.

Here at the Eurogroup, I have two positive messages that I want to deliver upfront:
- First: with the Draghi and Letta reports, with the work of the Commission, and with your work, Europe has defined a strategic agenda with single market integration at its core, yet also bringing in national reforms and a bolder vision for the EU budget. Today I will sum this up in a three-point approach—single market, national reforms, and the EU budget—where the strength of each piece rests on the strength of the others.
- Second: Europe has all the assets it needs—the savings, the skills, and the technology. It falls to Europe’s policymakers to push—nationally, collectively, and decisively—to mobilize these assets to their full potential. The people want a Europe that creates high-value jobs, innovates, and generates cutting-edge products and services. They want opportunity. It is within reach.
I know it can be done because Europe has done it before. I think back, for instance, to the EU enlargement of 2004, which opened up many new avenues for households and firms. Today, GDP per capita in the new member states is 30 percent higher than it would have been without EU accession—30 percent! Even for the “old” member states, we estimate that GDP per capita today is some 10 percent higher, on average, thanks to the enlargement.

Our assessment is thus clear and grounded in hard data: the single market delivers.

And yet we know that internal trade barriers remain high. According to the European Commission, for every 100 euros of value added produced in EU countries, only around 20 euros of goods are flowing back and forth between EU countries. In contrast, for the United States, for every 100 dollars of value added produced, 45 dollars of goods are crossing state borders.

This shows how various factors are holding Europe back. What are they? Regrettably, the list is long: fragmented regulation, obstacles to financial integration, labor market rigidities, gaps in the energy market, parochial interests—all coming together to constrain growth.

Too many European firms remain too small. One in five EU workers works at a company with fewer than ten employees—twice the share we see in the United States. Fragmentation and regulatory differences across member states make it hard for firms to compete, expand, and thrive. Productivity has fallen behind.

So what can be done to inject new vibrancy? Our advice is: pick a few key priorities, make sure they are the right ones, and push hard.

Let me start with the first piece of our three-point agenda—the single market. In this first piece, we see four top priorities.

Priority one: create a predictable regulatory environment to help firms grow.

Reducing regulatory fragmentation is critical: firms need clarity. Harmonizing company law and insolvency law would be the first best, but this is difficult. That is why we at the Fund put our full support behind the so-called “28th regime”—a voluntary EU-wide corporate charter. It offers a pragmatic way to slash legal complexity and compliance costs for cross-border firms: one system, applicable everywhere in the EU, for firms that opt in.

We know that our colleagues at the European Commission are working on a proposal. I say: please write up a simple set of rules covering key phases of the corporate life cycle from entry to exit, and everything in between. Create the possibility of the European Firm, enjoying legal certainty so it can focus on innovation and growth rather than navigating a maze of 27 national systems.

The goal need not be uniformity in all things, but rather, uniformity where uniformity matters most. Sensible national variations can—and must—coexist.

And to those who say corporate law is so deeply rooted in national legal tradition that a 28th regime is impossible, let me repeat what I said here two years ago: you have already done it. I am referring to the Bank Recovery and Resolution Directive, which is nothing other than an EU-level carveout from national frameworks for selected banks. Please now create an alternative regime for European companies.

Priority two on our list is longstanding: putting European savings to work.

This point too I raised here two years ago: Europe has the money—many trillions in private savings—but it is lazy money. Savings work harder elsewhere. Europe’s bank-centric financial system is failing to support the kind of innovative, high-growth firms that will drive the next wave of productivity and innovation.

That’s why the capital markets union needs to move—now. Europe needs deeper, more integrated capital markets to channel savings to high-risk, high-reward investments. Europe needs more venture capital. Creating a 28th regime will be key, but let it be paired with better investor access to corporate information on all firms—so market discipline can work.

And importantly, energizing finance requires positive steps in banking too. Bank dominance in Europe will persist, and there is room for more bank credit. Let banks be nudged to embrace more risk taking—prudently—to support economic growth. Done right, this can strengthen internal capital generation, strengthen risk buffers, and boost bank soundness.

Let’s recognize also that large banks, especially, serve as key players in the capital markets, including by managing investment accounts for their clients. For them to serve most efficiently and in a pan-European way, Europe must shed its reluctance to accommodate cross-border bank mergers and acquisitions. Blocking mergers on non-economic grounds—and dropping the ball on banking union more broadly—will not deliver 21st century finance.

Priority three, very briefly: improving labor mobility and access to talent.

I am told it can take up to six months for a worker relocating within the EU to become legally employable in another member country—surely not optimal. Speeding up work authorizations and streamlining the cross-border recognition of professional qualifications will help ease skills mismatches and enable firms to hire appropriate talent. This is critical to allowing firms to grow.

Fourth priority: building an interconnected and affordable energy market.

Energy is a chokepoint. Just look at the dispersion of prices across European electricity hubs—it is some three times higher than in the United States and, yes, it presents a profitable arbitrage opportunity for European energy majors that they should be grabbing.

What can be done to help this happen? For a start, as we have been emphasizing in our work, Europe needs an energy blueprint that pulls together all the parts. One part, certainly, needs to be better interconnectors between national electricity grids. High and volatile energy costs inhibit corporate investment and expansion. Conversely, improving access to reliable, affordable energy spurs growth.

Across the four areas—regulatory overload, access to finance, labor mobility, and affordable energy—we have laid out ten specific policy actions in a new paper last week. And our simulations suggest that, even by implementing a few, the dividends could be substantial—an uplift to overall EU activity on the order of about 3 percent over ten years. And there would be no question of winners and losers—every country stands to win.

Next, the second piece of our three-point agenda: reforms at the national level.

EU-level reforms are essential, but to be effective they must be paired with national reforms in many areas—and it is vital that these two layers of reform pull in the same direction.

Three examples:
- First, capital markets union should make it easier for funds to flow to startups, but for the benefits to be fully realized national permitting processes must be streamlined.
- Second, EU-wide initiatives aimed at enhancing talent mobility are important, but to work they require complementary labor market reforms at the national level.
- Third, increasing the effectiveness of EU investment in cross-border infrastructure is key, but parallel actions are needed to address national infrastructure gaps.
Wherever one looks, there is a vital and complementary national element.

Finally, the third piece of the three-point agenda: making more of the EU budget.

This is about raising the level of ambition: more support from the EU budget for investments in shared priorities—European public goods—and, importantly, better coordination of national efforts around these priorities. And, if new EU borrowing could be agreed, it would help frontload investments, spread costs over time, and increase the supply of safe assets.

Bottom line: we recommend a doubling of EU budget expenditures on European public goods—electricity grids, digitalization, defense, and R&D—from 0.4 percent of EU gross national income to at least 0.9 percent, to help close investment gaps.

Not only would such investments accelerate single market deepening, they would also offer material cost savings. Our analysis shows that EU-level investments in energy infrastructure, for instance, can achieve savings of up to 7 percent relative to duplicative national efforts. With long-term spending pressures piling up, great deals like this one should be seized.

We also propose an expanded role for performance-linked disbursements to member states. I know from my time managing the EU budget that, done right, such schemes can play an important role in incentivizing necessary national reforms and investments, aligning them with shared EU priorities, and maximizing positive cross-border externalities. Famous case in point: the Recovery and Resilience Facility, with its formidable economic payoffs.

Let me conclude. My colleagues and I have put forward for your consideration a strategic agenda with three clear objectives:
- One, remove internal barriers to deepen the single market and let firms grow;
- Two, advance national reforms that align with and amplify EU-level initiatives; and
- Three, use the EU budget strategically to coordinate efforts and invest in public goods.
We do not underestimate the difficulty of delivering on this agenda and the political hurdles and vested interests to be encountered along the way. But the alternative of doing nothing will deliver nothing. Key, in our view, is to push hard.

Success will require you, the policy leaders, to explain reforms to the public and exert sustained pressure at the technical level. Regulators defend their missions but are not always tasked to consider connections and externalities. Like a football coach, you will need to make all the players play as a team.

And to our colleagues at the Commission who hold the legislative pen, our advice would be, first, to prioritize speed and not let the perfect be the enemy of the good and, second, to not let the legal mindset dominate the economic mindset. Economic rationale and economic objectives must drive Europe’s developments at this crucial time.

There is a saying that Europe is the “lifestyle superpower of the world.” Every time I return here—to my European home—I feel a sense of admiration. But please also hear this: for the European way of life to be sustained, Europe must also become a “productivity superpower.” Europe needs the growth potential that can come only from releasing its entrepreneurial energy.

And for that to happen, Europe needs its single market now more than ever. I’m told that at the Eurogroup Working Group last week one respected colleague described the internal market as “a treasure in the EU’s own hand, which now needs to be unwrapped.” I agree.

The stakes are high, the potential rewards are large, and—in this time of global tensions and uncertainty—the moment is surely now.

Thank you very much.

IMF Communications Department

MEDIA RELATIONS

PRESS OFFICER:

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

@IMFSpokesperson

https://www.imf.org/en/News/Articles/2025/06/19/sp061925-deepening-the-european-single-market

MIL OSI
MIL OSI Russia News –
June 20, 2025