MIL-OSI: NXP Semiconductors Reports Second Quarter 2025 Results

Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

EINDHOVEN, The Netherlands, July 21, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — NXP Semiconductors N.V. (NASDAQ: NXPI) today reported financial results for the second quarter, which ended June 29, 2025. “NXP delivered quarterly revenue of $2.93 billion, above the midpoint of our guidance, with all our focus end-markets performing above expectations. Our guidance for the third quarter reflects the combination of an emerging cyclical improvement in NXP’s core end markets as well as the performance of our company specific growth drivers. We continue to drive solid profitability and earnings, by strengthening our competitive portfolio and by aligning our wafer fabrication footprint consistent with our hybrid manufacturing strategy,” said Kurt Sievers, NXP Chief Executive Officer.

Key Highlights for the Second Quarter 2025:

Revenue was $2.93 billion, down 6 percent year-on-year;
GAAP gross margin was 53.4 percent, GAAP operating margin was 23.5 percent and GAAP diluted Net Income per Share was $1.75;
Non-GAAP gross margin was 56.5 percent, non-GAAP operating margin was 32.0 percent, and non-GAAP diluted Net Income per Share was $2.72;
Cash flow from operations was $779 million, with net capex investments of $83 million, resulting in non-GAAP free cash flow of $696 million;
Capital return during the quarter was $461 million, representing 66 percent of second quarter non-GAAP free cash flow. Share buybacks were $204 million and dividends paid during the quarter were $257 million;
On May 8, 2025, NXP announced its third generation imaging processors for Level 2+ to Level 4 Autonomous Driving. The new S32R47 imaging radar processors in 16 nm FinFET technology, delivers up to twice the processing power versus the previous generation, building upon NXP’s proven expertise and global market leadership in the automotive radar market;
On June 12, 2025, NXP and Rimac Technology announced the co-development of a software defined vehicle (SDV) architecture for advanced automotive domain and zonal control. The jointly developed solution features NXP’s S32E2 processors, which are part of NXP’s comprehensive S32 Automotive Processing Platform. The S32E addresses the vehicle’s need for high-performance deterministic real-time domain and zonal control in a multi-applications environment; and
On June 17, 2025, NXP announced the completion of the acquisition of TTTech Auto, a leader in innovating unique safety-critical systems and middleware for software-defined vehicles (SDVs), pursuant to the terms of the previously announced agreement from January 2025.

Summary of Reported Second Quarter 2025 ($ millions, unaudited) ⁽¹⁾

	Q2 2025			Q1 2025			Q2 2024			Q – Q		Y – Y
Total Revenue	$	2,926		$	2,835		$	3,127			3%		-6%
GAAP Gross Profit	$	1,562		$	1,560		$	1,792			—%		-13%
Gross Profit Adjustments⁽ⁱ⁾	$	(90	)	$	(31	)	$	(41	)
Non-GAAP Gross Profit	$	1,652		$	1,591		$	1,833			4%		-10%
GAAP Gross Margin		53.4	%		55.0	%		57.3	%
Non-GAAP Gross Margin		56.5	%		56.1	%		58.6	%
GAAP Operating Income (Loss)	$	687		$	723		$	896			-5%		-23%
Operating Income Adjustments⁽ⁱ⁾	$	(248	)	$	(181	)	$	(175	)
Non-GAAP Operating Income	$	935		$	904		$	1,071			3%		-13%
GAAP Operating Margin		23.5	%		25.5	%		28.7	%
Non-GAAP Operating Margin		32.0	%		31.9	%		34.3	%
GAAP Net Income (Loss) attributable to Stockholders	$	445		$	490		$	658			-9%		-32%
Net Income Adjustments⁽ⁱ⁾	$	(245	)	$	(183	)	$	(171	)
Non-GAAP Net Income (Loss) Attributable to Stockholders	$	690		$	673		$	829			3%		-17%
GAAP diluted Net Income (Loss) per Share⁽ⁱⁱ⁾	$	1.75		$	1.92		$	2.54			-9%		-31%
Non-GAAP diluted Net Income (Loss) per Share⁽ⁱⁱ⁾	$	2.72		$	2.64		$	3.20			3%		-15%

Additional information
	Q2 2025		Q1 2025		Q2 2024		Q – Q		Y – Y
Automotive	$	1,729	$	1,674	$	1,728		3%		—%
Industrial & IoT	$	546	$	508	$	616		7%		-11%
Mobile	$	331	$	338	$	345		-2%		-4%
Comm. Infra. & Other	$	320	$	315	$	438		2%		-27%
DIO		158		169		148
DPO		60		62		64
DSO		33		34		27
Cash Conversion Cycle		131		141		111
Channel Inventory (weeks)		9		9		7
Gross Financial Leverage⁽ⁱⁱⁱ⁾		2.4x		2.4x		1.9x
Net Financial Leverage^(iv)		1.8x		1.6x		1.3x

Additional Information for the Second Quarter 2025:

For an explanation of GAAP to non-GAAP adjustments, please see “Non-GAAP Financial Measures”.
Refer to Table 1 below for the weighted average number of diluted shares for the presented periods.
Gross financial leverage is defined as gross debt divided by trailing twelve months adjusted EBITDA.
Net financial leverage is defined as net debt divided by trailing twelve months adjusted EBITDA.

Guidance for the Third Quarter 2025: ($ millions, except Per Share data) ⁽¹⁾


	GAAP						Reconciliation		non-GAAP
	Low		Mid		High				Low		Mid		High
Total Revenue		$3,050		$3,150		$3,250				$3,050		$3,150		$3,250
Q-Q		4%		8%		11%				4%		8%		11%
Y-Y		-6%		-3%		—%				-6%		-3%		—%
Gross Profit		$1,691		$1,764		$1,837		$(32)		$1,723		$1,796		$1,869
Gross Margin		55.4%		56.0%		56.5%				56.5%		57.0%		57.5%
Operating Income (loss)		$818		$881		$944		$(180)		$998		$1,061		$1,124
Operating Margin		26.8%		28.0%		29.0%				32.7%		33.7%		34.6%
Financial Income (expense)		$(101)		$(101)		$(101)		$(10)		$(91)		$(91)		$(91)
Tax rate	18.3%-19.3%								17.0%-18.0%
Equity-accounted investees		$(5)		$(5)		$(5)		$(4)		$(1)		$(1)		$(1)
Non-controlling interests		$(14)		$(14)		$(14)				$(14)		$(14)		$(14)
Shares – diluted		253.8		253.8		253.8				253.8		253.8		253.8
Earnings Per Share – diluted		$2.22		$2.42		$2.62				$2.89		$3.10		$3.30

Note (1) Additional Information:

GAAP Gross Profit is expected to include Purchase Price Accounting (“PPA”) effects, $(7) million; Share-based Compensation, $(15) million; Other Incidentals, $(10) million;
GAAP Operating Income (loss) is expected to include PPA effects, $(40) million; Share-based Compensation, $(116) million; Restructuring and Other Incidentals, $(24) million;
GAAP Financial Income (expense) is expected to include Other financial expense $(10) million;
GAAP Results relating to equity-accounted investees is expected to include results relating to non-foundry equity-accounted investees $(4) million;
GAAP diluted EPS is expected to include the adjustments noted above for PPA effects, Share-based Compensation, Restructuring and Other Incidentals in GAAP Operating Income (loss), the adjustment for Other financial expense, the adjustment for results relating to non-foundry equity-accounted investees and the adjustment on Tax due to the earlier mentioned adjustments.

NXP has based the guidance included in this release on judgments and estimates that management believes are reasonable given its assessment of historical trends and other information reasonably available as of the date of this release. Please note, the guidance included in this release consists of predictions only, and is subject to a wide range of known and unknown risks and uncertainties, many of which are beyond NXP’s control. The guidance included in this release should not be regarded as representations by NXP that the estimated results will be achieved. Actual results may vary materially from the guidance we provide today. In relation to the use of non-GAAP financial information see the note regarding “Non-GAAP Financial Measures” below. For the factors, risks, and uncertainties to which judgments, estimates and forward-looking statements generally are subject see the note regarding “Forward-looking Statements.” We undertake no obligation to publicly update or revise any forward-looking statements, including the guidance set forth herein, to reflect future events or circumstances.

Non-GAAP Financial Measures

In managing NXP’s business on a consolidated basis, management develops an annual operating plan, which is approved by our Board of Directors, using non-GAAP financial measures, that are not in accordance with, nor an alternative to, U.S. generally accepted accounting principles (“GAAP”). In measuring performance against this plan, management considers the actual or potential impacts on these non-GAAP financial measures from actions taken to reduce costs with the goal of increasing our gross margin and operating margin and when assessing appropriate levels of research and development efforts. In addition, management relies upon these non-GAAP financial measures when making decisions about product spending, administrative budgets, and other operating expenses. We believe that these non-GAAP financial measures, when coupled with the GAAP results and the reconciliations to corresponding GAAP financial measures, provide a more complete understanding of the Company’s results of operations and the factors and trends affecting NXP’s business. We believe that they enable investors to perform additional comparisons of our operating results, to assess our liquidity and capital position and to analyze financial performance excluding the effect of expenses unrelated to core operating performance, certain non-cash expenses and share-based compensation expense, which may obscure trends in NXP’s underlying performance. This information also enables investors to compare financial results between periods where certain items may vary independent of business performance, and allow for greater transparency with respect to key metrics used by management.

These non-GAAP financial measures are provided in addition to, and not as a substitute for, or superior to, measures of financial performance prepared in accordance with GAAP. The presentation of these and other similar items in NXP’s non-GAAP financial results should not be interpreted as implying that these items are non-recurring, infrequent, or unusual. Reconciliations of these non-GAAP measures to the most comparable measures calculated in accordance with GAAP are provided in the financial statements portion of this release in a schedule entitled “Financial Reconciliation of GAAP to non-GAAP Results (unaudited).” Please refer to the NXP Historic Financial Model file found on the Financial Information page of the Investor Relations section of our website at https://investors.nxp.com for additional information related to our rationale for using these non-GAAP financial measures, as well as the impact of these measures on the presentation of NXP’s operations.

In addition to providing financial information on a basis consistent with GAAP, NXP also provides the following selected financial measures on a non-GAAP basis: (i) Gross profit, (ii) Gross margin, (iii) Research and development, (iv) Selling, general and administrative, (v) Amortization of acquisition-related intangible assets, (vi) Other income, (vii) Operating income (loss), (viii) Operating margin, (ix) Financial Income (expense), (x) Income tax benefit (provision), (xi) Results relating to non-foundry equity-accounted investees, (xii) Net income (loss) attributable to stockholders, (xiii) Earnings per Share – Diluted, (xiv) EBITDA, adjusted EBITDA and trailing 12 month adjusted EBITDA, and (xv) free cash flow, trailing 12 month free cash flow and trailing 12 month free cash flow as a percent of Revenue. The non-GAAP information excludes, where applicable, the amortization of acquisition related intangible assets, the purchase accounting effect on inventory and property, plant and equipment, merger related costs (including integration costs), certain items related to divestitures, share-based compensation expense, restructuring and asset impairment charges, extinguishment of debt, foreign exchange gains and losses, income tax effect on adjustments described above and results from non-foundry equity-accounted investments.

The difference in the benefit (provision) for income taxes between our GAAP and non-GAAP results relates to the income tax effects of the GAAP to non-GAAP adjustments that we make and the income tax effect of any discrete items that occur in the interim period. Discrete items primarily relate to unexpected tax events that may occur as these amounts cannot be forecasted (e.g., the impact of changes in tax law and/or rates, changes in estimates or resolved tax audits relating to prior year tax provisions, the excess or deficit tax effects on share-based compensation, etc.).

Conference Call and Webcast Information

The company will host a conference call with the financial community on Tuesday, July 22, 2025 at 8:00 a.m. U.S. Eastern Daylight Time (EDT) to review the second quarter 2025 results in detail.

Interested parties may preregister to obtain a user-specific access code for the call here.

The call will be webcast and can be accessed from the NXP Investor Relations website at www.nxp.com. A replay of the call will be available on the NXP Investor Relations website within 24 hours of the actual call.

About NXP Semiconductors

NXP Semiconductors N.V. (NASDAQ: NXPI) is the trusted partner for innovative solutions in the automotive, industrial & IoT, mobile, and communications infrastructure markets. NXP’s “Brighter Together” approach combines leading-edge technology with pioneering people to develop system solutions that make the connected world better, safer, and more secure. The company has operations in more than 30 countries and posted revenue of $12.61 billion in 2024. Find out more at www.nxp.com.

Forward-looking Statements

This document includes forward-looking statements which include statements regarding NXP’s business strategy, financial condition, results of operations, market data, as well as any other statements which are not historical facts. By their nature, forward-looking statements are subject to numerous factors, risks and uncertainties that could cause actual outcomes and results to be materially different from those projected. These factors, risks and uncertainties include the following: market demand and semiconductor industry conditions; our ability to successfully introduce new technologies and products; the demand for the goods into which NXP’s products are incorporated; global trade disputes, potential increase of barriers to international trade, including the imposition of new or increased tariffs, and resulting disruptions to our established supply chains; the impact of government actions and regulations, including as a result of executive orders, including restrictions on the export of products and technology; increasing and evolving cybersecurity threats and privacy risks; our ability to accurately estimate demand and match our production capacity accordingly or obtain supplies from third-party producers; our access to production capacity from third-party outsourcing partners, and any events that might affect their business or our relationship with them; our ability to secure adequate and timely supply of equipment and materials from suppliers; our ability to avoid operational problems and product defects and, if such issues were to arise, to correct them quickly; our ability to form strategic partnerships and joint ventures and to successfully cooperate with our strategic alliance partners; our ability to win competitive bid selection processes; our ability to develop products for use in customers’ equipment and products; our ability to successfully hire and retain key management and senior product engineers; global hostilities, including the invasion of Ukraine by Russia and resulting regional instability, sanctions and any other retaliatory measures taken against Russia and the continued hostilities and the armed conflict in the Middle East, which could adversely impact the global supply chain, disrupt our operations or negatively impact the demand for our products in our primary end markets; our ability to maintain good relationships with our suppliers; our ability to integrate acquired businesses in an efficient and effective manner; our ability to generate sufficient cash, raise sufficient capital or refinance corporate debt at or before maturity to meet both NXP’s debt service and research and development and capital investment requirements; and a change in tax laws could have an effect on our estimated effective tax rates. In addition, this document contains information concerning the semiconductor industry, our end markets and business generally, which is forward-looking in nature and is based on a variety of assumptions regarding the ways in which the semiconductor industry, our end markets and business will develop. NXP has based these assumptions on information currently available, if any one or more of these assumptions turn out to be incorrect, actual results may differ from those predicted. While NXP does not know what impact any such differences may have on its business, if there are such differences, its future results of operations and its financial condition could be materially adversely affected. Readers are cautioned not to place undue reliance on these forward-looking statements, which speak to results only as of the date the statements were made. Except for any ongoing obligation to disclose material information as required by the United States federal securities laws, NXP does not have any intention or obligation to publicly update or revise any forward-looking statements after we distribute this document, whether to reflect any future events or circumstances or otherwise. For a discussion of potential risks and uncertainties, please refer to the risk factors listed in our SEC filings. Copies of our SEC filings are available on our Investor Relations website, www.nxp.com/investor or from the SEC website, www.sec.gov.

For further information, please contact:

Investors:	Media:
Jeff Palmer	Paige Iven
jeff.palmer@nxp.com	paige.iven@nxp.com
+1 408 205 0687	+1 817 975 0602

NXP-CORP

NXP Semiconductors
Table 1: Condensed consolidated statement of operations (unaudited)

($ in millions except share data)	Three months ended
	June 29, 2025			March 30, 2025			June 30, 2024

Revenue	$	2,926		$	2,835		$	3,127
Cost of revenue		(1,364	)		(1,275	)		(1,335	)
Gross profit		1,562			1,560			1,792
Research and development		(573	)		(547	)		(594	)
Selling, general and administrative		(278	)		(281	)		(270	)
Amortization of acquisition-related intangible assets		(25	)		(27	)		(28	)
Total operating expenses		(876	)		(855	)		(892	)
Other income (expense)		1			18			(4	)
Operating income (loss)		687			723			896
Financial income (expense):
Other financial income (expense)		(86	)		(92	)		(75	)
Income (loss) before income taxes		601			631			821
Benefit (provision) for income taxes		(116	)		(130	)		(154	)
Results relating to equity-accounted investees		(28	)		(4	)		(3	)
Net income (loss)		457			497			664
Less: Net income (loss) attributable to non-controlling interests		12			7			6
Net income (loss) attributable to stockholders		445			490			658

Earnings per share data:
Net income (loss) per common share attributable to stockholders in $
Basic	$	1.76		$	1.93		$	2.58
Diluted	$	1.75		$	1.92		$	2.54

Weighted average number of shares of common stock outstanding during the period (in thousands):
Basic		252,418			253,709			255,478
Diluted		253,844			255,018			258,732

NXP Semiconductors
Table 2: Condensed consolidated balance sheet (unaudited)

($ in millions)	As of
	June 29, 2025		March 30, 2025		June 30, 2024
ASSETS
Current assets:
Cash and cash equivalents	$	3,170	$	3,988	$	2,859
Short-term deposits		—		—		400
Accounts receivable, net		1,071		1,060		927
Assets held for sale		294		—		—
Inventories, net		2,361		2,350		2,148
Other current assets		790		627		546
Total current assets		7,686		8,025		6,880

Non-current assets:
Deferred tax assets		1,306		1,284		1,067
Other non-current assets		1,909		1,942		1,223
Property, plant and equipment, net		3,130		3,210		3,289
Identified intangible assets, net		1,121		777		796
Goodwill		10,098		9,942		9,941
Total non-current assets		17,564		17,155		16,316

Total assets		25,250		25,180		23,196

LIABILITIES AND EQUITY
Current liabilities:
Accounts payable		892		863		929
Restructuring liabilities-current		65		75		62
Other current liabilities		1,471		1,412		1,622
Short-term debt		1,999		1,499		499
Total current liabilities		4,427		3,849		3,112

Non-current liabilities:
Long-term debt		9,479		10,226		9,681
Restructuring liabilities		60		4		7
Other non-current liabilities		1,348		1,424		1,051
Total non-current liabilities		10,887		11,654		10,739

Non-controlling interests		367		355		327
Stockholders’ equity		9,569		9,322		9,018
Total equity		9,936		9,677		9,345

Total liabilities and equity		25,250		25,180		23,196

NXP Semiconductors
Table 3: Condensed consolidated statement of cash flows (unaudited)

($ in millions)	Three months ended
	June 29, 2025			March 30, 2025			June 30, 2024
Cash flows from operating activities:
Net income (loss)	$	457		$	497		$	664
Adjustments to reconcile net income (loss) to net cash provided by (used for) operating activities:
Depreciation and amortization		207			209			213
Share-based compensation		117			127			114
Amortization of discount (premium) on debt, net		—			1			1
Amortization of debt issuance costs		2			1			1
Net (gain) loss on sale of assets		(6	)		(22	)		—
Results relating to equity-accounted investees		28			4			3
(Gain) loss on equity securities, net		(3	)		6			3
Deferred tax expense (benefit)		3			(27	)		(23	)
Changes in operating assets and liabilities:
(Increase) decrease in receivables and other current assets		(106	)		(29	)		10
(Increase) decrease in inventories		(90	)		6			(46	)
Increase (decrease) in accounts payable and other liabilities		33			(110	)		(220	)
(Increase) decrease in other non-current assets		131			(106	)		40
Exchange differences		9			4			5
Other items		(3	)		4			(4	)
Net cash provided by (used for) operating activities		779			565			761

Cash flows from investing activities:
Purchase of identified intangible assets		(37	)		(25	)		(55	)
Capital expenditures on property, plant and equipment		(83	)		(139	)		(185	)
Proceeds from the disposals of property, plant and equipment		—			1			1
Purchase of interests in businesses, net of cash acquired		(679	)		—			—
Purchase of investments		(93	)		(53	)		—
Net cash provided by (used for) investing activities		(892	)		(216	)		(239	)

Cash flows from financing activities:
Repurchase of long-term debt		(500	)		—			—
Proceeds from the issuance of long-term debt		—			370			—
Proceeds from the issuance of commercial paper notes		1,565			646			—
Repayment of commercial paper notes		(1,315	)		(146	)		—
Dividends paid to common stockholders		(257	)		(258	)		(260	)
Proceeds from issuance of common stock through stock plans		2			37			3
Purchase of treasury shares and restricted stock unit withholdings		(204	)		(303	)		(310	)
Other, net		—			(1	)		—
Net cash provided by (used for) financing activities		(709	)		345			(567	)

Effect of changes in exchange rates on cash positions		4			2			(4	)
Increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents		(818	)		696			(49	)
Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of period		3,988			3,292			2,908
Cash and cash equivalents at end of period		3,170			3,988			2,859

Net cash paid during the period for:
Interest		109			41			86
Income taxes, net of refunds		167			96			193
Net gain (loss) on sale of assets:
Cash proceeds from the sale of assets		6			31			1
Book value of these assets		—			(9	)		(1	)
Non-cash investing activities:
Non-cash capital expenditures		103			108			166

NXP Semiconductors
Table 4: Financial Reconciliation of GAAP to non-GAAP Results (unaudited)

($ in millions except share data)	Three months ended
	June 29, 2025			March 30, 2025			June 30, 2024
GAAP Gross Profit	$	1,562		$	1,560		$	1,792
PPA Effects		(7	)		(8	)		(12	)
Restructuring		(61	)		(4	)		(4	)
Share-based compensation		(14	)		(16	)		(15	)
Other incidentals		(8	)		(3	)		(10	)
Non-GAAP Gross Profit	$	1,652		$	1,591		$	1,833
GAAP Gross margin		53.4	%		55.0	%		57.3	%
Non-GAAP Gross margin		56.5	%		56.1	%		58.6	%
GAAP Research and development	$	(573	)	$	(547	)	$	(594	)
Restructuring		(3	)		(7	)		(4	)
Share-based compensation		(58	)		(64	)		(58	)
Other incidentals		(7	)		(1	)		—
Non-GAAP Research and development	$	(505	)	$	(475	)	$	(532	)
GAAP Selling, general and administrative	$	(278	)	$	(281	)	$	(270	)
PPA effects		—			—			(1	)
Restructuring		(3	)		(3	)		2
Share-based compensation		(45	)		(47	)		(41	)
Other incidentals		(15	)		(20	)		(2	)
Non-GAAP Selling, general and administrative	$	(215	)	$	(211	)	$	(228	)
GAAP Operating income (loss)	$	687		$	723		$	896
PPA effects		(32	)		(40	)		(41	)
Restructuring		(67	)		(14	)		(6	)
Share-based compensation		(117	)		(127	)		(114	)
Other incidentals		(32	)		—			(14	)
Non-GAAP Operating income (loss)	$	935		$	904		$	1,071
GAAP Operating margin		23.5	%		25.5	%		28.7	%
Non-GAAP Operating margin		32.0	%		31.9	%		34.3	%
GAAP Income tax benefit (provision)	$	(116	)	$	(130	)	$	(154	)
Income tax effect		32			13			15
Non-GAAP Income tax benefit (provision)	$	(148	)	$	(143	)	$	(169	)
GAAP Net income (loss) attributable to stockholders	$	445		$	490		$	658
PPA Effects		(32	)		(40	)		(41	)
Restructuring		(67	)		(14	)		(6	)
Share-based compensation		(117	)		(127	)		(114	)
Other incidentals		(32	)		—			(14	)
Other adjustments:
Adjustments to financial income (expense)		(1	)		(12	)		(8	)
Income tax effect		32			13			15
Results relating to equity-accounted investees, excluding Foundry investees¹		(28	)		(3	)		(3	)
Non-GAAP Net income (loss) attributable to stockholders	$	690		$	673		$	829


Additional Information:
Refer to Table 7 below for further information regarding the results relating to equity-accounted investees.

GAAP net income (loss) per common share attributable to stockholders – diluted	$	1.75		$	1.92		$	2.54
PPA Effects		(0.12	)		(0.16	)		(0.16	)
Restructuring		(0.27	)		(0.05	)		(0.02	)
Share-based compensation		(0.46	)		(0.50	)		(0.44	)
Other incidentals		(0.13	)		—			(0.06	)
Other adjustments:
Adjustments to financial income (expense)		—			(0.05	)		(0.03	)
Income tax effect		0.12			0.05			0.06
Results relating to equity-accounted investees, excluding Foundry investees¹		(0.11	)		(0.01	)		(0.01	)
Non-GAAP net income (loss) per common share attributable to stockholders – diluted	$	2.72		$	2.64		$	3.20


Additional Information:
Refer to Table 7 below for further information regarding the results relating to equity-accounted investees.

NXP Semiconductors
Table 5: Financial Reconciliation of GAAP to non-GAAP Financial income (expense) (unaudited)

($ in millions)	Three months ended
	June 29, 2025			March 30, 2025			June 30, 2024
GAAP Financial income (expense)	$	(86	)	$	(92	)	$	(75	)
Foreign exchange loss		(7	)		(3	)		(2	)
Other financial expense		6			(9	)		(6	)
Non-GAAP Financial income (expense)	$	(85	)	$	(80	)	$	(67	)

NXP Semiconductors
Table 6: Financial Reconciliation of GAAP to non-GAAP Other income (expense) (unaudited)

($ in millions)	Three months ended
	June 29, 2025			March 30, 2025			June 30, 2024
GAAP Other income (expense)	$	1		$	18		$	(4	)
PPA effects		—			(5	)		—
Other incidentals		(2	)		24			(2	)
Non-GAAP Other income (expense)	$	3		$	(1	)	$	(2	)

NXP Semiconductors
Table 7: Financial Reconciliation of GAAP to non-GAAP Results relating to equity-accounted investees (unaudited)

($ in millions)	Three months ended
	June 29, 2025			March 30, 2025			June 30, 2024
GAAP Results relating to equity-accounted investees	$	(28	)	$	(4	)	$	(3	)
Results of equity-accounted investees, excluding Foundry investees¹		(28	)		(3	)		(3	)
Non-GAAP Results relating to equity-accounted investees	$	—		$	(1	)	$	—

Additional Information:
We adjust our results relating to equity-accounted investees for those results from investments over which NXP has significant influence, but not control, and whose business activities are not related to the core operating performance of NXP. Our equity-investments in foundry partners are part of our long-term core operating performance and accordingly those results comprise the Non-GAAP Results relating to equity-accounted investees.

NXP Semiconductors
Table 8: Adjusted EBITDA and Free Cash Flow (unaudited)

($ in millions)	Three months ended
	June 29, 2025			March 30, 2025			June 30, 2024
GAAP Net income (loss)	$	457		$	497		$	664
Reconciling items to EBITDA (Non-GAAP)
Financial (income) expense		86			92			75
(Benefit) provision for income taxes		116			130			154
Depreciation and impairment		143			143			146
Amortization		64			66			67
EBITDA (Non-GAAP)	$	866		$	928		$	1,106
Reconciling items to adjusted EBITDA (Non-GAAP)
Results of equity-accounted investees, excluding Foundry investees¹		28			3			3
Purchase accounting effect on asset sale		—			5			—
Restructuring		67			14			6
Share-based compensation		117			127			114
Other incidental items²		25			(4	)		14
Adjusted EBITDA (Non-GAAP)	$	1,103		$	1,073		$	1,243
Trailing twelve month adjusted EBITDA (Non-GAAP)	$	4,745		$	4,885		$	5,297

Additional Information:
Refer to Table 7 above for further information regarding the results relating to equity-accounted investees.
2. Excluding from total other incidental items, charges included in depreciation, amortization or impairment reconciling items:
other incidental items		7			4			—



($ in millions)	Three months ended
	June 29, 2025			March 30, 2025			June 30, 2024
Net cash provided by (used for) operating activities	$	779		$	565		$	761
Net capital expenditures on property, plant and equipment		(83	)		(138	)		(184	)
Non-GAAP free cash flow	$	696		$	427		$	577
Trailing twelve month non-GAAP free cash flow	$	2,008		$	1,889		$	2,954
Trailing twelve month non-GAAP free cash flow as percent of Revenue		17	%		15	%		23	%

The MIL Network –

July 22, 2025

MIL-Evening Report: Africa’s minerals are being bartered for security: why it’s a bad idea

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Hanri Mostert, SARChI Chair for Mineral Law in Africa, University of Cape Town

A US-brokered peace deal between the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) and Rwanda binds the two African nations to a worrying arrangement: one where a country signs away its mineral resources to a superpower in return for opaque assurances of security.

The peace deal, signed in June 2025, aims to end three decades of conflict between the DRC and Rwanda.

A key part of the agreement binds both nations to developing a regional economic integration framework. This arrangement would expand cooperation between the two states, the US government and American investors on “transparent, formalized end-to-end mineral chains”.

Despite its immense mineral wealth, the DRC is among the five poorest countries in the world. It has been seeking US investment in its mineral sector.

The US has in turn touted a potential multi-billion-dollar investment programme to anchor its mineral supply chains in the traumatised and poor territory.

The peace that the June 2025 deal promises, therefore, hinges on chaining mineral supply to the US in exchange for Washington’s powerful – but vaguely formulated – military oversight.

The peace agreement further establishes a joint oversight committee – with representatives from the African Union, Qatar and the US – to receive complaints and resolve disputes between the DRC and Rwanda.

But beyond the joint oversight committee, the peace deal creates no specific security obligations for the US.

The relationship between the DRC and Rwanda has been marred by war and tension since the bloody First (1996-1997) and Second (1998-2003) Congo wars. At the heart of much of this conflict is the DRC’s mineral wealth. It has fuelled competition, exploitation and armed violence.

This latest peace deal introduces a resources-for-security arrangement. Such deals aren’t new in Africa. They first emerged in the early 2000s as resources-for-infrastructure transactions. Here, a foreign state would agree to build economic and social infrastructure (roads, ports, airports, hospitals) in an African state. In exchange, it would get a major stake in a government-owned mining company. Or gain preferential access to the host country’s minerals.

We have studied mineral law and governance in Africa for more than 20 years. The question that emerges now is whether a US-brokered resources-for-security agreement will help the DRC benefit from its resources.

Based on our research on mining, development and sustainability, we believe this is unlikely.

This is because resources-for-security is the latest version of a resource-bartering approach that China and Russia pioneered in countries such as Angola, the Central African Republic and the DRC.

Resource bartering in Africa has eroded the sovereignty and bargaining power of mineral-rich nations such as the DRC and Angola.

Further, resources-for-security deals are less transparent and more complicated than prior resource bartering agreements.

DRC’s security gaps

The DRC is endowed with major deposits of critical minerals like cobalt, copper, lithium, manganese and tantalum. These are the building blocks for 21st century technologies: artificial intelligence, electric vehicles, wind energy and military security hardware. Rwanda has less mineral wealth than its neighbour, but is the world’s third-largest producer of tantalum, used in electronics, aerospace and medical devices.

For almost 30 years, minerals have fuelled conflict and severe violence, especially in eastern DRC. Tungsten, tantalum and gold (referred to as 3TG) finance and drive conflict as government forces and an estimated 130 armed groups vie for control over lucrative mining sites. Several reports and studies have implicated the DRC’s neighbours – Rwanda and Uganda – in supporting the illegal extraction of 3TG in this region.

The DRC government has failed to extend security over its vast (2.3 million square kilometres) and diverse territory (109 million people, representing 250 ethnic groups). Limited resources, logistical challenges and corruption have weakened its armed forces.

This context makes the United States’ military backing enormously attractive. But our research shows there are traps.

What states risk losing

Resources-for-infrastructure and resources-for-security deals generally offer African nations short-term stability, financing or global goodwill. However, the costs are often long-term because of an erosion of sovereign control.

Here’s how this happens:

certain clauses in such contracts can freeze future regulatory reforms, limiting legislative autonomy
other clauses may lock in low prices for years, leaving resource-selling states unable to benefit when commodity prices surge
arbitration clauses often shift disputes to international forums, bypassing local courts
infrastructure loans are often secured via resource revenues used as loan security. This effectively ringfences exports and undermines sovereign fiscal control.

Examples of loss or near-loss of sovereignty from these sorts of deals abound in Africa.

For instance, Angola’s US$2 billion oil-backed loan from China Eximbank in 2004. This was repayable in monthly deliveries of oil, with revenues directed to Chinese-controlled accounts. The loan’s design deprived Angolan authorities of decision-making power over that income stream even before the oil was extracted.

These deals also fragment accountability. They often span multiple ministries (such as defence, mining and trade), avoiding robust oversight or accountability. Fragmentation makes resource sectors vulnerable to elite capture. Powerful insiders can manipulate agreements for private gain.

In the DRC, this has created a violent kleptocracy, where resource wealth is systematically diverted away from popular benefit.

Finally, there is the risk of re-entrenching extractive trauma. Communities displaced for mining and environmental degradation in many countries across Africa illustrate the long-standing harm to livelihoods, health and social cohesion.

These are not new problems. But where extraction is tied to security or infrastructure, such damage risks becoming permanent features, not temporary costs.

What needs to change

Critical minerals are “critical” because they’re hard to mine or substitute. Additionally, their supply chains are strategically vulnerable and politically exposed. Whoever controls these minerals controls the future. Africa must make sure it doesn’t trade that future away.

In a world being reshaped by global interests in critical minerals, African states must not underestimate the strategic value of their mineral resources. They hold considerable leverage.

But leverage only works if it is wielded strategically. This means:

investing in institutional strength and legal capacity to negotiate better deals
demanding local value creation and addition
requiring transparency and parliamentary oversight for minerals-related agreements
refusing deals that bypass human rights, environmental or sovereignty standards.

Africa has the resources. It must hold on to the power they wield.

Hanri Mostert receives funding from the National Research Foundation (NRF) of South Africa. She is a member of the Expropriation Expert Group and a steering committee member of the International Bar Association’s (IBA) Academic Advisory Group (AAG) in the Sector for Energy, Environmental, Resources and Infrastructure Law (SEERIL).

Tracy-Lynn Field receives funding from the Claude Leon Foundation. She is a non-executive director of the Wildlife and Environment Society of South Africa.

– ref. Africa’s minerals are being bartered for security: why it’s a bad idea – https://theconversation.com/africas-minerals-are-being-bartered-for-security-why-its-a-bad-idea-260594

MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

July 22, 2025

MIL-OSI: Skillful Application of Fundamental Principles Yields Standout Results: TrustCo Announces Net Income Up 19.8%; Net Interest Income up 10.5%

Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

Executive Snapshot:

Bank-wide financial results:
- Key metrics for the second quarter 2025:
  - Net income of $15.0 million, or $0.79 diluted earnings per share, increased 19.8% compared to $12.6 million, or $0.66 diluted earnings per share for the second quarter 2024
  - Net interest income of $41.7 million, up 10.5% from $37.8 million for the second quarter 2024
  - Net interest margin of 2.71%, up 18 basis points from 2.53% in second quarter of 2024
  - Average loans were up $115.6 million for the second quarter 2025 compared to the second quarter 2024
  - Average deposits were up $173.4 million for the second quarter 2025 compared to the second quarter 2024
Capital position and key ratios:
- Consolidated equity to assets increased to 10.91% as of June 30, 2025 from 10.73% as of June 30, 2024
- Book value per share as of June 30, 2025 was $36.75, up from $34.46 as of June 30, 2024
- 169 thousand shares of TrustCo common stock were purchased under the stock repurchase program during the second quarter 2025

Trustco Financial Services and Wealth Management income:
- Fees increased to $1.8 million, or by 13.0%, compared to second quarter 2024
- Assets under management increased to $1.19 billion, or by 8.2%, compared to second quarter 2024

GLENVILLE, N.Y., July 21, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — TrustCo Bank Corp NY (TrustCo, NASDAQ: TRST) today announced strong financial results for the second quarter of 2025 underscored by rising net interest income, continued margin expansion, and accelerated loan growth across key portfolios. Net interest income increased 10.5% year over year to $41.7 million, driven by the ongoing repricing of the loan portfolio at higher yields and disciplined management of deposit costs, which remained well-controlled despite sustained competitive pressures. Net interest margin expanded to 2.71% from 2.53% in the prior year period, reflecting improved asset yields and prudent deposit pricing strategies. This resulted in second quarter 2025 net income of $15.0 million or $0.79 diluted earnings per share, compared to net income of $12.6 million or $0.66 diluted earnings per share for the second quarter 2024. Loan growth gained momentum during the quarter, with total average loans increasing $115.6 million or 2.3% for the second quarter 2025 over the same period in 2024. This growth signals increasing borrower confidence and supports the Bank’s strategic focus on high quality relationship lending.

Overview

Chairman, President, and CEO, Robert J. McCormick said “Part of our long-term strategy is having the right mix of products available so that we can sell the right thing, to the right customer, at the right time. It is our ability to do this with agility and skill that has produced the standout results announced today. We saw double digit growth in our return metrics year over year, as return on average assets improved 17%, and return on average equity grew 12.5%. Our margin improved 7% year over year, in tandem with a 12% year over year improvement in adjusted efficiency ratio. Our ability to sell home equity products at a time of high market demand for the flexibility they offer has been key to this success. Home equity credit lines are up 18% year over year. Likewise, we strategically grew commercial loans 11% year over year – which we have done without exposure to risky multi-family loans or other industry-specific concentrations. We lowered non-performing loans to total loans by 7% year over year, and booked a second consecutive quarter of net recoveries. These exceptional results in the first half of 2025 provide a foundation for positive momentum moving into 2026.”

Details

As the year continues to progress, we are seeing increased opportunities to deploy our resources effectively. Some efforts include loan originations, targeted investments in technology and digital banking infrastructure, and strategic growth in key markets. Average loans were up $115.6 million, or 2.3%, in the second quarter 2025 over the same period in 2024. Average residential loans and HECLs, our primary lending focus, were up $27.9 million, or 0.6%, and $64.7 million, or 17.8%, respectively, in the second quarter 2025 over the same period in 2024. Average commercial loans also increased $25.8 million, or 9.2%, in the second quarter 2025 over the same period in 2024. We believe that this upward trend reflects improving economic confidence among borrowers, strong credit quality, and the Bank’s focus on relationship lending. The sustained growth in the loan portfolio will likely enhance net interest income in the quarters ahead. Average deposits were up $173.4 million, or 3.3%, for the second quarter 2025 over the same period in 2024, primarily as a result of an increase in time deposits, interest bearing checking accounts, and demand deposits. The Bank’s continued emphasis on relationship banking, combined with competitive product offerings and digital capabilities, has contributed to a stable deposit base that supports ongoing loan growth and expansion.

During the second quarter of 2025, we remained committed to returning value to shareholders through a disciplined share repurchase program, which reflects our confidence in the long-term strength of the franchise and our focus on capital optimization. TrustCo purchased 169 thousand, or 0.9%, of total shares outstanding of TrustCo common stock under the previously announced stock repurchase program during the second quarter of 2025. Our approach ensures every dollar of capital is working to generate solid returns, strengthen customer relationships, and enhance shareholder value. As of June 30, 2025, our equity to asset ratio was 10.91%, compared to 10.73% as of June 30, 2024. Book value per share as of June 30, 2025 was $36.75, up 6.6% compared to $34.46 a year earlier.

Net interest income was $41.7 million for the second quarter 2025, an increase of $4.0 million, or 10.5%, compared to the second quarter of 2024, driven by loan growth at higher interest rates, increase in interest on federal funds sold and other short-term investments, and less interest expense on deposit products, partially offset by lower investment interest income. The net interest margin for the second quarter 2025 was 2.71%, up 18 basis points from 2.53% in the second quarter of 2024. The yield on interest earnings assets increased to 4.19% in the second quarter of 2025, up 13 basis points from 4.06% in the second quarter of 2024. The cost of interest bearing liabilities decreased to 1.91% in the second quarter 2025, down from 1.97% in the second quarter 2024. The Bank is well positioned to continue delivering strong net interest income performance even as the Federal Reserve signals a potential easing cycle in the months ahead. Our balance sheet is built for resilience and flexibility, with a favorable asset mix and a stable deposit base that we believe positions us to thrive across interest rate environments. In addition to new loan originations, we are seeing ongoing opportunities to reprice portions of our existing loan book as higher-rate loans replace paydowns and early payoffs, helping us maintain attractive yields. With loan demand accelerating and funding costs stabilizing, we believe there is meaningful upside to net interest income in the coming quarters. Our proactive asset-liability management strategy gives us confidence in sustaining margin strength and driving consistent profitable growth.

Non-interest income, net of net gains on equity securities, increased to $4.9 million as compared to $4.3 million for the second quarter of 2024. This increase was primarily attributable to wealth management and financial services fees, which increased by 13.0% to $1.8 million, driven by strong client demand and higher assets under management. These revenues represent 37.5% of non-interest income for the second quarter of 2025. The majority of this fee income is recurring, supported by long-term advisory relationships and a growing base of managed assets. Non-interest expense increased $236 thousand over the second quarter of 2024.

Asset quality remains strong and has been consistent over the past twelve months. The Company recorded a provision for credit losses on loans of $650 thousand in the second quarter of 2025. The ratio of allowance for credit losses on loans to total loans was 0.99% as of both June 30, 2025 and 2024. The allowance for credit losses on loans was $51.3 million as of June 30, 2025, compared to $49.8 million as of June 30, 2024. Nonperforming loans (NPLs) were $17.9 million as of June 30, 2025, compared to $19.2 million as of June 30, 2024. NPLs were 0.35% and 0.38% of total loans as of June 30, 2025 and 2024, respectively. The coverage ratio, or allowance for credit losses on loans to NPLs, was 286.2% as of June 30, 2025, compared to 259.4% as of June 30, 2024. Nonperforming assets (NPAs) were $19.0 million as of June 30, 2025, compared to $21.5 million as of June 30, 2024.

A conference call to discuss second quarter 2025 results will be held at 9:00 a.m. Eastern Time on July 22, 2025. Those wishing to participate in the call may dial toll-free for the United States at 1-833-470-1428, and for Canada at 1-833-950-0062, Access code 258501. A replay of the call will be available for thirty days by dialing toll-free for the United States at 1-866-813-9403, Access code 410483. The call will also be audio webcast at https://events.q4inc.com/attendee/979003710, and will be available for one year.

About TrustCo Bank Corp NY

TrustCo Bank Corp NY is a $6.3 billion savings and loan holding company and through its subsidiary, Trustco Bank, operated 136 offices in New York, New Jersey, Vermont, Massachusetts, and Florida as of June 30, 2025.

In addition, the Bank’s Wealth Management Department offers a full range of investment services, retirement planning and trust and estate administration services. The common shares of TrustCo are traded on the NASDAQ Global Select Market under the symbol TRST.

Forward-Looking Statements

All statements in this news release and the related earnings call that are not historical are forward-looking statements within the meaning of the “safe harbor” provisions of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Forward-looking statements can be identified by words such as “anticipate,” “intend,” “plan,” “goal,” “seek,” “believe,” “project,” “estimate,” “expect,” “strategy,” “future,” “likely,” “may,” “should,” “will” and similar references to future development, results or periods. Examples of forward-looking statements include, among others, statements we make regarding our expectations for our future performance, including our expectations regarding the impact of our loan portfolio’s growth, loan demand and funding cost on net interest income, and the anticipated effects of our capital management strategy, including our stock repurchase program. Forward-looking statements are based on management’s current expectations as well as certain assumptions and estimates made by, and information available to, management at the time the statements are made. Such forward-looking statements are subject to factors and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially for TrustCo from the views, beliefs and projections expressed in such statements, and many of the risks and uncertainties are heightened by or may, in the future, be heightened by volatility in financial markets and macroeconomic or geopolitical concerns related to inflation, changes in United States and foreign trade policy, continued elevated interest rates and ongoing armed conflicts (including the Russia/Ukraine conflict and the conflict in Israel and surrounding areas). TrustCo wishes to caution readers not to place undue reliance on any such forward-looking statements, which speak only as of the date made. The following important factors, among others, in some cases have affected and in the future could affect TrustCo’s actual results and could cause TrustCo’s actual financial performance to differ materially from that expressed in any forward-looking statement: future changes in interest rates; external economic factors, such as changes in monetary policy, ongoing inflationary pressures and continued elevated prices; exposure to credit risk in our lending activities; the risk of weakness in residential real estate markets; our increasing commercial loan portfolio; the sufficiency of our allowance for credit losses on loans to cover actual loan losses; our ability to meet the cash flow requirements of our depositors or borrowers or meet our operating cash needs to fund corporate expansion and other activities; claims and litigation pertaining to fiduciary responsibility and lender liability; the enforcement of federal cannabis laws and regulations and its impact on our ability to provide services in the cannabis industry; our dependency upon the services of the management team; our disclosure controls and procedures’ ability to prevent or detect errors or acts of fraud; the adequacy of our business continuity and disaster recovery plans; the effectiveness of our risk management framework; the impact of any expansion by us into new lines of business or new products and services; an increase in the prevalence of fraud and other financial crimes; the impact of severe weather events and climate change on us and the communities we serve, including societal responses to climate change; environmental, social and governance risks, as well as diversity, equity, and inclusion-related risks, and their impact on our reputation and relationships; the chance of a prolonged economic downturn, especially one affecting our geographic market area; instability in global economic conditions and geopolitical matters, as well as volatility in financial markets; the soundness of other financial institutions; U.S. government shutdowns, credit rating downgrades, or failure to increase the debt ceiling; fluctuations in the trust wealth management fees we receive as a result of investment performance; the impact of regulatory capital rules on our growth; changes in laws and regulations, including changes in cybersecurity or privacy regulations; restrictions on data collection and use; our compliance with the USA PATRIOT Act, Bank Secrecy Act, and other laws and regulations that could result in material fines or sanctions; changes in tax laws; limitations on our ability to pay dividends; TrustCo Realty Corp.’s ability to qualify as a real estate investment trust; changes in accounting standards; competition within our market areas; consumers and businesses’ use of non-banks to complete financial transactions; our reliance on third-party service providers; the impact of data breaches and cyber-attacks; the development and use of artificial intelligence; the impact of a failure in or breach of our operational or security systems or infrastructure, or those of third parties; the impact of an unauthorized disclosure of sensitive or confidential client or customer information; the impact of interruptions in the effective operation of our computer systems; the impact of anti-takeover provisions in our organizational documents; the impact of the manner in which we allocate capital; and other risks and uncertainties set forth in our public filings made with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”), including our most recent Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2024, our Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2025, and our Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended June 30, 2025 to be filed with the SEC. The forward-looking statements contained in this news release represent TrustCo management’s judgment as of the date of this news release. TrustCo disclaims, however, any intent or obligation to update forward-looking statements, either as a result of future developments, new information or otherwise, except as may be required by law.

TRUSTCO BANK CORP NY
GLENVILLE, NY

FINANCIAL HIGHLIGHTS

(dollars in thousands, except per share data)
(Unaudited)
	Three months ended
	6/30/2025			3/31/2025			6/30/2024
Summary of operations
Net interest income	$	41,746		$	40,373		$	37,788
Provision for credit losses		650			300			500
Net gains on equity securities		–			–			1,360
Noninterest income, excluding net gains on equity securities		4,852			4,974			4,291
Noninterest expense		26,223			26,329			26,459
Net income		15,039			14,275			12,551

Per share
Net income per share:
– Basic	$	0.79		$	0.75		$	0.66
– Diluted		0.79			0.75			0.66
Cash dividends		0.36			0.36			0.36
Book value at period end		36.75			36.16			34.46
Market price at period end		33.42			30.48			28.77

At period end
Full time equivalent employees		733			740			753
Full service banking offices		136			136			138

Performance ratios
Return on average assets		0.96	%		0.93	%		0.82	%
Return on average equity		8.73			8.49			7.76
Efficiency ratio (GAAP)		56.27			58.06			60.91
Adjusted Efficiency ratio (1)		55.15			58.00			62.84
Net interest spread		2.28			2.21			2.09
Net interest margin		2.71			2.64			2.53
Dividend payout ratio		45.27			47.97			54.57

Capital ratios at period end
Consolidated equity to assets		10.91	%		10.85	%		10.73	%
Consolidated tangible equity to tangible assets (1)		10.91	%		10.84	%		10.72	%

Asset quality analysis at period end
Nonperforming loans to total loans		0.35	%		0.37	%		0.38	%
Nonperforming assets to total assets		0.30			0.33			0.35
Allowance for credit losses on loans to total loans		0.99			0.99			0.99
Coverage ratio (2)		2.9x			2.7x			2.6x


(1) Non-GAAP Financial Measure, see Non-GAAP Financial Measures Reconciliation.
(2) Calculated as allowance for credit losses on loans divided by total nonperforming loans.

FINANCIAL HIGHLIGHTS, Continued

(dollars in thousands, except per share data)
(Unaudited)
	Six Months Ended
	06/30/25			06/30/24
Summary of operations
Net interest income	$	82,119			74,366
Provision for credit losses		950			1,100
Net gains on equity securities		–			1,360
Noninterest income, excluding net gains on equity securities		9,826			9,134
Noninterest expense		52,552			51,362
Net income		29,314			24,677

Per share
Net income per share:
– Basic	$	1.54			1.30
– Diluted		1.54			1.30
Cash dividends		0.72			0.72
Book value at period end		36.75			34.46
Market price at period end		33.42			28.77

Performance ratios
Return on average assets		0.94	%		0.81
Return on average equity		8.61			7.65
Efficiency ratio (GAAP)		57.16			60.53
Adjusted Efficiency ratio (1)		56.56			61.40
Net interest spread		2.24			2.05
Net interest margin		2.68			2.48
Dividend payout ratio		46.58			55.51

(1) Non-GAAP Financial Measure, see Non-GAAP Financial Measures Reconciliation.

CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF INCOME

(dollars in thousands, except per share data)
(Unaudited)
	Three months ended
	6/30/2025		3/31/2025		12/31/2024		9/30/2024			6/30/2024
Interest and dividend income:
Interest and fees on loans	$	54,557	$	53,450	$	53,024	$	52,112	$	50,660
Interest and dividends on securities available for sale:
U. S. government sponsored enterprises		614		596		680		718		909
State and political subdivisions		–		–		–		–		1
Mortgage-backed securities and collateralized mortgage
obligations – residential		1,613		1,483		1,418		1,397		1,451
Corporate bonds		210		260		358		361		362
Small Business Administration – guaranteed
participation securities		75		81		84		90		94
Other securities		8		7		6		2		2
Total interest and dividends on securities available for sale		2,520		2,427		2,546		2,568		2,819

Interest on held to maturity securities:
obligations – residential		54		57		59		62		65
Total interest on held to maturity securities		54		57		59		62		65

Federal Home Loan Bank stock		129		151		152		153		147

Interest on federal funds sold and other short-term investments		7,212		6,732		6,128		6,174		6,894
Total interest income		64,472		62,817		61,909		61,069		60,585

Interest expense:
Interest on deposits:
Interest-bearing checking		536		558		397		311		288
Savings		733		734		719		770		675
Money market deposit accounts		2,086		1,989		2,024		2,154		2,228
Time deposits		19,195		18,983		19,680		18,969		19,400
Interest on short-term borrowings		176		180		187		194		206
Total interest expense		22,726		22,444		23,007		22,398		22,797

Net interest income		41,746		40,373		38,902		38,671		37,788

Less: Provision for credit losses		650		300		400		500		500
Net interest income after provision for credit losses		41,096		40,073		38,502		38,171		37,288

Noninterest income:
Trustco Financial Services income		1,818		2,120		1,778		2,044		1,609
Fees for services to customers		2,266		2,645		2,226		2,482		2,399
Net gains on equity securities		–		–		–		23		1,360
Other		768		209		405		382		283
Total noninterest income		4,852		4,974		4,409		4,931		5,651

Noninterest expenses:
Salaries and employee benefits		11,876		11,894		12,068		12,134		12,520
Net occupancy expense		4,518		4,554		4,563		4,271		4,375
Equipment expense		1,918		1,944		2,404		1,757		1,990
Professional services		1,886		1,726		1,782		1,863		1,570
Outsourced services		2,460		2,700		3,051		2,551		2,755
Advertising expense		304		361		590		339		466
FDIC and other insurance		1,136		1,188		1,113		1,112		797
Other real estate expense, net		522		28		476		204		16
Other		1,603		1,934		2,118		1,969		1,970
Total noninterest expenses		26,223		26,329		28,165		26,200		26,459

Income before taxes		19,725		18,718		14,746		16,902		16,480
Income taxes		4,686		4,443		3,465		4,027		3,929

Net income	$	15,039	$	14,275	$	11,281	$	12,875	$	12,551

Net income per common share:
– Basic	$	0.79	$	0.75	$	0.59	$	0.68	$	0.66

– Diluted		0.79		0.75		0.59		0.68		0.66

Average basic shares (in thousands)		18,965		19,020		19,015		19,010		19,022
Average diluted shares (in thousands)		18,994		19,044		19,045		19,036		19,033

CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF INCOME, Continued

(dollars in thousands, except per share data)
(Unaudited)
	Six Months Ended
	06/30/25		06/30/24
Interest and dividend income:
Interest and fees on loans	$	108,007		100,464
Interest and dividends on securities available for sale:
U. S. government sponsored enterprises		1,210		1,815
State and political subdivisions		–		1
Mortgage-backed securities and collateralized mortgage
obligations – residential		3,096		2,945
Corporate bonds		470		838
Small Business Administration – guaranteed
participation securities		156		194
Other securities		15		5
Total interest and dividends on securities available for sale		4,947		5,798

Interest on held to maturity securities:
Mortgage-backed securities-residential		111		133
Total interest on held to maturity securities		111		133

Federal Home Loan Bank stock		280		299

Interest on federal funds sold and other short-term investments		13,944		13,644
Total interest income		127,289		120,338

Interest expense:
Interest on deposits:
Interest-bearing checking		1,094		528
Savings		1,467		1,387
Money market deposit accounts		4,075		4,570
Time deposits		38,178		39,077
Interest on short-term borrowings		356		410
Total interest expense		45,170		45,972

Net interest income		82,119		74,366

Less: Provision for credit losses		950		1,100
Net interest income after provision for credit losses		81,169		73,266

Noninterest income:
Trustco Financial Services income		3,938		3,425
Fees for services to customers		4,911		5,144
Net gains on equity securities		–		1,360
Other		977		565
Total noninterest income		9,826		10,494

Noninterest expenses:
Salaries and employee benefits		23,770		23,947
Net occupancy expense		9,072		8,986
Equipment expense		3,862		3,728
Professional services		3,612		3,030
Outsourced services		5,160		5,256
Advertising expense		665		874
FDIC and other insurance		2,324		1,891
Other real estate expense, net		550		90
Other		3,537		3,560
Total noninterest expenses		52,552		51,362

Income before taxes		38,443		32,398
Income taxes		9,129		7,721

Net income	$	29,314		24,677

Net income per common share:
– Basic	$	1.54		1.30

– Diluted		1.54		1.30

Average basic shares (in thousands)		18,992		19,023
Average diluted shares (in thousands)		19,019		19,033

CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION

(dollars in thousands)
(Unaudited)
	6/30/2025			3/31/2025			12/31/2024			9/30/2024			6/30/2024
ASSETS:

Cash and due from banks	$	45,218		$	48,782		$	47,364		$	49,659		$	42,193
Federal funds sold and other short term investments		668,373			707,355			594,448			473,306			493,920
Total cash and cash equivalents		713,591			756,137			641,812			522,965			536,113

Securities available for sale:
U. S. government sponsored enterprises		71,241			65,942			85,617			90,588			106,796
States and political subdivisions		18			18			18			26			26
Mortgage-backed securities and collateralized mortgage
obligations – residential		221,721			219,333			213,128			222,841			218,311
Small Business Administration – guaranteed
participation securities		12,945			13,683			14,141			15,171			15,592
Corporate bonds		29,943			24,779			44,581			54,327			53,764
Other securities		698			698			700			701			688
Total securities available for sale		336,566			324,453			358,185			383,654			395,177

Held to maturity securities:
Mortgage-backed securities and collateralized mortgage
obligations-residential		4,836			5,090			5,365			5,636			5,921
Total held to maturity securities		4,836			5,090			5,365			5,636			5,921

Federal Reserve Bank and Federal Home Loan Bank stock		6,601			6,507			6,507			6,507			6,507

Loans:
Commercial		314,273			302,753			286,857			280,261			282,441
Residential mortgage loans		4,394,317			4,380,561			4,388,302			4,382,674			4,370,640
Home equity line of credit		435,433			419,806			409,261			393,418			370,063
Installment loans		12,678			13,017			13,638			14,503			15,168
Loans, net of deferred net costs		5,156,701			5,116,137			5,098,058			5,070,856			5,038,312

Less: Allowance for credit losses on loans		51,265			50,606			50,248			49,950			49,772
Net loans		5,105,436			5,065,531			5,047,810			5,020,906			4,988,540

Bank premises and equipment, net		38,129			37,178			33,782			33,324			33,466
Operating lease right-of-use assets		36,322			34,968			36,627			37,958			38,376
Other assets		106,894			108,681			108,656			98,730			102,544

Total assets	$	6,348,375		$	6,338,545		$	6,238,744		$	6,109,680		$	6,106,644

LIABILITIES:
Deposits:
Demand	$	784,351		$	793,306		$	762,101		$	753,878		$	745,227
Interest-bearing checking		1,045,043			1,067,948			1,027,540			988,527			1,029,606
Savings accounts		1,082,489			1,094,968			1,086,534			1,092,038			1,144,427
Money market deposit accounts		467,087			478,872			465,049			477,113			517,445
Time deposits		2,111,344			2,061,576			2,049,759			1,952,635			1,840,262
Total deposits		5,490,314			5,496,670			5,390,983			5,264,191			5,276,967

Short-term borrowings		82,370			82,275			84,781			91,450			89,720
Operating lease liabilities		39,350			38,324			40,159			41,469			42,026
Accrued expenses and other liabilities		43,536			33,468			46,478			43,549			42,763

Total liabilities		5,655,570			5,650,737			5,562,401			5,440,659			5,451,476

SHAREHOLDERS’ EQUITY:
Capital stock		20,097			20,097			20,097			20,058			20,058
Surplus		259,490			259,182			258,874			257,644			257,490
Undivided profits		462,158			453,931			446,503			442,079			436,048
Accumulated other comprehensive income (loss), net of tax		1,663			(132	)		(3,861	)		(6,600	)		(14,268	)
Treasury stock at cost		(50,603	)		(45,270	)		(45,270	)		(44,160	)		(44,160	)

Total shareholders’ equity		692,805			687,808			676,343			669,021			655,168

Total liabilities and shareholders’ equity	$	6,348,375		$	6,338,545		$	6,238,744		$	6,109,680		$	6,106,644

Outstanding shares (in thousands)		18,851			19,020			19,020			19,010			19,010

NONPERFORMING ASSETS

(dollars in thousands)
(Unaudited)
	6/30/2025			3/31/2025			12/31/2024			9/30/2024			6/30/2024
Nonperforming Assets

New York and other states*
Loans in nonaccrual status:
Commercial	$	684		$	688		$	343		$	466		$	741
Real estate mortgage – 1 to 4 family		14,048			14,795			14,671			15,320			14,992
Installment		34			139			108			163			131
Total nonperforming loans		14,766			15,622			15,122			15,949			15,864
Other real estate owned		1,136			2,107			2,175			2,503			2,334
Total nonperforming assets	$	15,902		$	17,729		$	17,297		$	18,452		$	18,198

Florida
Loans in nonaccrual status:
Commercial	$	–		$	–		$	–		$	314		$	314
Real estate mortgage – 1 to 4 family		3,132			3,135			3,656			3,176			2,985
Installment		12			3			22			5			22
Total nonperforming loans		3,144			3,138			3,678			3,495			3,321
Other real estate owned		–			–			–			–			–
Total nonperforming assets	$	3,144		$	3,138		$	3,678		$	3,495		$	3,321

Total
Loans in nonaccrual status:
Commercial	$	684		$	688		$	343		$	780		$	1,055
Real estate mortgage – 1 to 4 family		17,180			17,930			18,327			18,496			17,977
Installment		46			142			130			168			153
Total nonperforming loans		17,910			18,760			18,800			19,444			19,185
Other real estate owned		1,136			2,107			2,175			2,503			2,334
Total nonperforming assets	$	19,046		$	20,867		$	20,975		$	21,947		$	21,519


Quarterly Net (Recoveries) Chargeoffs

New York and other states*
Commercial	$	–		$	(3	)	$	62		$	65		$	–
Real estate mortgage – 1 to 4 family		(121	)		41			(316	)		104			(74	)
Installment		18			4			41			11			(2	)
Total net chargeoffs (recoveries)	$	(103	)	$	42		$	(213	)	$	180		$	(76	)

Florida
Commercial	$	–		$	(315	)	$	314		$	–		$	–
Real estate mortgage – 1 to 4 family		–			–			–			–			17
Installment		94			15			1			42			7
Total net (recoveries) chargeoffs	$	94		$	(300	)	$	315		$	42		$	24

Total
Commercial	$	–		$	(318	)	$	376		$	65		$	–
Real estate mortgage – 1 to 4 family		(121	)		41			(316	)		104			(57	)
Installment		112			19			42			53			5
Total net (recoveries) chargeoffs	$	(9	)	$	(258	)	$	102		$	222		$	(52	)


Asset Quality Ratios

Total nonperforming loans (1)	$	17,910		$	18,760		$	18,800		$	19,444		$	19,185
Total nonperforming assets (1)		19,046			20,867			20,975			21,947			21,519
Total net (recoveries) chargeoffs (2)		(9	)		(258	)		102			222			(52	)

Allowance for credit losses on loans (1)		51,265			50,606			50,248			49,950			49,772

Nonperforming loans to total loans		0.35	%		0.37	%		0.37	%		0.38	%		0.38	%
Nonperforming assets to total assets		0.30	%		0.33	%		0.34	%		0.36	%		0.35	%
Allowance for credit losses on loans to total loans		0.99	%		0.99	%		0.99	%		0.99	%		0.99	%
Coverage ratio (1)		286.2	%		269.8	%		267.3	%		256.9	%		259.4	%
Annualized net (recoveries) chargeoffs to average loans (2)		0.00	%		-0.02	%		0.01	%		0.02	%		0.00	%
Allowance for credit losses on loans to annualized net chargeoffs (2)	N/A			N/A			123.2x			56.3x			N/A

* Includes New York, New Jersey, Vermont and Massachusetts.
(1) At period-end
(2) For the three-month period ended

DISTRIBUTION OF ASSETS, LIABILITIES AND SHAREHOLDERS’ EQUITY –
INTEREST RATES AND INTEREST DIFFERENTIAL

(dollars in thousands)
(Unaudited)	Three months ended							Three months ended
	June 30, 2025							June 30, 2024
	Average			Interest		Average		Average			Interest		Average
	Balance					Rate		Balance					Rate
Assets

Securities available for sale:
U. S. government sponsored enterprises	$	73,468		$	614	3.34	%	$	113,844		$	909	3.20	%
Mortgage backed securities and collateralized mortgage
obligations – residential		244,628			1,613	2.62			250,517			1,451	2.30
State and political subdivisions		18			0	6.77			26			1	6.75
Corporate bonds		25,707			210	3.26			55,065			362	2.63
Small Business Administration – guaranteed
participation securities		14,083			75	2.14			17,436			94	2.15
Other		697			8	4.59			694			2	1.15

Total securities available for sale		358,601			2,520	2.81			437,582			2,819	2.58

Federal funds sold and other short-term Investments		648,457			7,212	4.46			506,493			6,894	5.48

Held to maturity securities:
Mortgage backed securities and collateralized mortgage
obligations – residential		4,970			54	4.37			6,054			65	4.28

Total held to maturity securities		4,970			54	4.37			6,054			65	4.28

Federal Home Loan Bank stock		6,591			129	7.83			6,340			147	9.27

Commercial loans		306,373			4,261	5.56			280,559			3,765	5.37
Residential mortgage loans		4,387,181			43,236	3.94			4,359,232			40,819	3.75
Home equity lines of credit		428,933			6,830	6.39			364,210			5,814	6.42
Installment loans		12,523			230	7.35			15,395			262	6.86

Loans, net of unearned income		5,135,010			54,557	4.25			5,019,396			50,660	4.04

Total interest earning assets		6,153,629		$	64,472	4.19			5,975,865		$	60,585	4.06

Allowance for credit losses on loans		(50,777	)						(49,454	)
Cash & non-interest earning assets		204,006							181,688


Total assets	$	6,306,858						$	6,108,099


Liabilities and shareholders’ equity

Deposits:
Interest bearing checking accounts	$	1,039,242		$	536	0.21	%	$	1,009,048		$	288	0.11	%
Money market accounts		470,824			2,086	1.78			524,068			2,228	1.71
Savings		1,087,467			733	0.27			1,145,922			675	0.24
Time deposits		2,085,329			19,195	3.69			1,873,139			19,400	4.17

Total interest bearing deposits		4,682,862			22,550	1.93			4,552,177			22,591	2.00
Short-term borrowings		81,055			176	0.87			93,703			206	0.89

Total interest bearing liabilities		4,763,917		$	22,726	1.91			4,645,880		$	22,797	1.97

Demand deposits		777,956							735,262
Other liabilities		73,903							76,258
Shareholders’ equity		691,082							650,699

Total liabilities and shareholders’ equity	$	6,306,858						$	6,108,099

Net interest income				$	41,746						$	37,788

Net interest spread						2.28	%						2.09	%


Net interest margin (net interest income to
total interest earning assets)						2.71	%						2.53	%

DISTRIBUTION OF ASSETS, LIABILITIES AND SHAREHOLDERS’ EQUITY –
INTEREST RATES AND INTEREST DIFFERENTIAL, Continued

(dollars in thousands)
(Unaudited)	Six Months Ended							Six Months Ended
	June 30, 2025							June 30, 2024
	Average			Interest		Average		Average			Interest		Average
	Balance					Rate		Balance					Rate
Assets

Securities available for sale:
U. S. government sponsored enterprises	$	74,071			1,210	3.27	%	$	119,908			1,815	3.03	%
Mortgage backed securities and collateralized mortgage
obligations – residential		242,083			3,096	2.56			254,665			2,945	2.31
State and political subdivisions		18			–	6.77			26			1	6.82
Corporate bonds		32,823			470	2.86			64,345			838	2.60
Small Business Administration – guaranteed
participation securities		14,540			156	2.15			17,830			194	2.18
Mortgage backed securities and collateralized mortgage
obligations – commercial		–							–			–	–
Other		698			15	4.30			695			5	1.44

Total securities available for sale		364,233			4,947	2.72			457,469			5,798	2.53

Federal funds sold and other short-term Investments		631,148			13,944	4.46			502,072			13,644	5.47

Held to maturity securities:
Mortgage backed securities and collateralized mortgage
obligations – residential		5,101			111	4.35			6,192			133	4.29

Total held to maturity securities		5,101			111	4.35			6,192			133	4.29

Federal Home Loan Bank stock		6,549			280	8.55			6,271			299	9.54

Commercial loans		302,173			8,426	5.58			278,871			7,425	5.33
Residential mortgage loans		4,386,418			85,851	3.92			4,359,351			81,236	3.73
Home equity lines of credit		421,498			13,265	6.35			358,607			11,277	6.32
Installment loans		12,744			465	7.36			15,761			526	6.72

Loans, net of unearned income		5,122,833			108,007	4.22			5,012,590			100,464	4.01

Total interest earning assets		6,129,864			127,289	4.16			5,984,594			120,338	4.03

Allowance for credit losses on loans		(50,627	)						(49,139	)
Cash & non-interest earning assets		202,590							188,364


Total assets	$	6,281,827						$	6,123,819


Liabilities and shareholders’ equity

Deposits:
Interest bearing checking accounts	$	1,038,733			1,094	0.21	%	$	999,589			528	0.11	%
Money market accounts		469,952			4,075	1.75			534,378			4,570	1.72
Savings		1,088,408			1,467	0.27			1,152,241			1,387	0.24
Time deposits		2,069,998			38,178	3.72			1,881,535			39,077	4.18

Total interest bearing deposits		4,667,091			44,814	1.94			4,567,743			45,562	2.01
Short-term borrowings		82,125			356	0.87			93,510			410	0.88

Total interest bearing liabilities		4,749,216			45,170	1.92			4,661,253			45,972	1.98

Demand deposits		769,923							730,781
Other liabilities		76,308							83,105
Shareholders’ equity		686,380							648,680

Total liabilities and shareholders’ equity	$	6,281,827						$	6,123,819

Net interest income					82,119							74,366

Net interest spread						2.24	%						2.05	%


Net interest margin (net interest income to
total interest earning assets)						2.68	%						2.48	%

Non-GAAP Financial Measures Reconciliation

Tangible book value per share is a non-GAAP financial measure derived from GAAP-based amounts. We calculate tangible book value by excluding the balance of intangible assets from total shareholders’ equity divided by shares outstanding. We believe that this is consistent with the treatment by bank regulatory agencies, which exclude intangible assets from the calculation of risk-based capital ratios. Additionally, we believe that this measure is important to many investors in the marketplace who are interested in relative changes from period to period in equity exclusive of changes in intangible assets.

Tangible equity as a percentage of tangible assets at period end is a non-GAAP financial measure derived from GAAP-based amounts. We calculate tangible equity and tangible assets by excluding the balance of intangible assets from total shareholders’ equity and total assets, respectively. We calculate tangible equity as a percentage of tangible assets at period end by dividing tangible equity by tangible assets at period end. We believe that this is consistent with the treatment by bank regulatory agencies, which exclude intangible assets from the calculation of risk-based capital ratios. Additionally, we believe that this measure is important to many investors in the marketplace who are interested in relative changes from period to period in equity and total assets, each exclusive of changes in intangible assets.

Adjusted efficiency ratio is a non-GAAP measures of expense control relative to revenue from net interest income and non-interest fee income. We calculate the efficiency ratio by dividing total non-interest expense by the sum of net interest income and total non-interest income. We calculate the adjusted efficiency ratio by dividing total noninterest expenses as determined under GAAP, excluding other real estate expense, net, by net interest income and total noninterest income as determined under GAAP, excluding net gains on equity securities. We believe that this provides a reasonable measure of primary banking expenses relative to primary banking revenue. Additionally, we believe this measure is important to investors looking for a measure of efficiency in our productivity measured by the amount of revenue generated for each dollar spent.

We believe that these non-GAAP financial measures provide information that is important to investors and that is useful in understanding our financial results. Our management internally assesses our performance based, in part, on these measures. However, these non-GAAP financial measures are supplemental and not a substitute for an analysis based on GAAP measures. As other companies may use different calculations for these measures, this presentation may not be comparable to other similarly titled measures reported by other companies. A reconciliation of the non-GAAP measures of tangible book value to shares outstanding, tangible equity as a percentage of tangible assets, and efficiency ratio to the most directly comparable GAAP measures is set forth below.

NON-GAAP FINANCIAL MEASURES RECONCILIATION

(dollars in thousands)
(Unaudited)
		6/30/2025				3/31/2025				6/30/2024
Tangible Book Value Per Share

Equity (GAAP)		$	692,805			$	687,808			$	655,168
Less: Intangible assets			553				553				553
Tangible equity (Non-GAAP)		$	692,252			$	687,255			$	654,615

Shares outstanding			18,851				19,020				19,010
Tangible book value per share			36.72				36.13				34.44
Book value per share			36.75				36.16				34.46

Tangible Equity to Tangible Assets
Total Assets (GAAP)		$	6,348,375			$	6,338,545			$	6,106,644
Less: Intangible assets			553				553				553
Tangible assets (Non-GAAP)		$	6,347,822			$	6,337,992			$	6,106,091

Consolidated Equity to Assets (GAAP)			10.91	%			10.85	%			10.73	%
Consolidated Tangible Equity to Tangible Assets (Non-GAAP)			10.91	%			10.84	%			10.72	%

		Three months ended											Six Months Ended
Efficiency and Adjusted Efficiency Ratios		6/30/2025			3/31/2025				6/30/2024				6/30/2025				6/30/2024
Net interest income (GAAP)	A	$	41,746			$	40,373			$	37,788		$	82,119		$	74,366
Non-interest income (GAAP)	B		4,852				4,974				5,651			9,826			10,494
Less: Net gains on equity securities			–				–				1,360			–			1,360
Revenue used for efficiency ratio (Non-GAAP)	C	$	46,598			$	45,347			$	42,079		$	91,945		$	83,500

Total noninterest expense (GAAP)	D	$	26,223			$	26,329			$	26,459		$	52,552		$	51,362
Less: Other real estate expense, net	E		522				28				16			550			90
Expense used for efficiency ratio (Non-GAAP)	F	$	25,701			$	26,301			$	26,443		$	52,002		$	51,272

Efficiency Ratio (GAAP)	D/(A+B)		56.27	%			58.06	%			60.91	%		57.16	%		60.53	%
Adjusted Efficiency Ratio (Non-GAAP)	F/C		55.15	%			58.00	%			62.84	%		56.56	%		61.40	%

Subsidiary: Trustco Bank

Contact:	Robert Leonard
	Executive Vice President
	(518) 381-3693

The MIL Network –

July 22, 2025

MIL-OSI Russia: The main factor in the growth of exports from Georgia in the first half of 2025 was the re-export of passenger cars

Translation. Region: Russian Federal

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

An important disclaimer is at the bottom of this article.

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

Tbilisi, July 21 (Xinhua) — Georgia’s exports amounted to $3.2 billion in the first half of 2025, up 13 percent year-on-year, the National Statistics Office of Georgia reported on Monday.

According to published data, the main factor behind the growth was the active re-export of passenger cars, the volume of which increased by 30 percent year-on-year and reached $1.2 billion.

In terms of total exports, Kyrgyzstan remains Georgia’s largest sales market for the second year in a row. Exports to this country totaled $681 million, up 50 percent from the first half of last year. Kazakhstan ranked second with $414 million, and Azerbaijan third with $342 million.

As for the export of goods of Georgian origin, it increased by 6.4 percent year-on-year, amounting to $1.473 billion. The largest markets for Georgian goods in the first half of 2025 were Russia /310.6 million dollars/, China /162.3 million dollars/ and Turkey /150.4 million dollars/. The main export goods were ferroalloys, mineral and fresh waters, carbonated drinks containing sugar, wine, nitrogen fertilizers, packaged medicines, as well as unprocessed and semi-processed gold. –0–

Please note: This information is raw content obtained directly from the source of the information. It is an accurate report of what the source claims and does not necessarily reflect the position of MIL-OSI or its clients.

.

MIL OSI Russia News –

July 22, 2025

MIL-OSI Russia: Georgia records record international tourism revenues for first half of 2025

Translation. Region: Russian Federal

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

An important disclaimer is at the bottom of this article.

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

Tbilisi, July 21 (Xinhua) — Georgia’s revenue from international tourism in the first half of 2025 reached $1.971 billion, the Georgian National Tourism Administration reported on Monday.

According to official data, revenues from the tourism sector grew by 3.8 percent compared to the same period in 2024 and by 35.4 percent compared to the first half of pre-pandemic 2019. Thus, the tourism sector set a new record for revenues in the first six months.

Head of the National Tourism Administration of Georgia Maia Omiadze noted that the achieved results are a consequence of a targeted strategy for the development of tourism and the aviation sector.

“We have achieved unprecedented revenues – almost two billion dollars in six months. This confirms that our strategy is working. Where tourist flow increases, so do revenues. We have focused our efforts on key markets where the greatest growth is currently observed,” said M. Omiadze. -0-

Please note: This information is raw content obtained directly from the source of the information. It is an accurate report of what the source claims and does not necessarily reflect the position of MIL-OSI or its clients.

.

MIL OSI Russia News –

July 22, 2025

MIL-OSI Russia: Iran announces new round of talks with EU3 in Istanbul on July 25

Translation. Region: Russian Federal

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

An important disclaimer is at the bottom of this article.

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

TEHRAN, July 21 (Xinhua) — Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Esmail Baghaei said on Monday that a new round of talks between Tehran and the E3 group, comprising France, Britain and Germany, is planned to be held in Istanbul, Turkey on July 25.

The official said the talks would focus on lifting sanctions on Iran and issues related to the Iranian nuclear programme, with Tehran set out its demands “in all seriousness”. The meeting would be at deputy foreign minister level and would be attended by the EU deputy high representative for foreign affairs and security policy.

E. Baghaei criticized the three European countries that signed the 2015 nuclear deal for their “inappropriate” stance and silence in the face of Israel’s recent military “aggression” against Iran. The Iranian diplomat said these countries should be held accountable for their stance.

He also mentioned the E3’s threats to trigger the sanctions snapback mechanism, stressing that resorting to it is “senseless, illegal and immoral.”

The sanctions snapback mechanism is part of the Iran nuclear deal, formally known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA). It allows other parties to reimpose all international sanctions if Iran fails to comply with the agreement.

Iran and the EU3 have held six rounds of talks since September last year, when delegations began dialogue on a range of issues including Tehran’s nuclear program and sanctions relief on the sidelines of the annual UN General Assembly session in New York. The latest round took place in Istanbul in mid-May.

In July 2015, Iran signed the JCPOA with six countries – Britain, China, France, Germany, Russia and the United States. Under the deal, Tehran agreed to curb its nuclear program in exchange for sanctions relief. –0–

Please note: This information is raw content obtained directly from the source of the information. It is an accurate report of what the source claims and does not necessarily reflect the position of MIL-OSI or its clients.

.

MIL OSI Russia News –

July 22, 2025

MIL-OSI Russia: China urges EU to stop harming legitimate interests of Chinese companies

Translation. Region: Russian Federal

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

An important disclaimer is at the bottom of this article.

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

BEIJING, July 21 (Xinhua) — China on Monday called on the European Union to stop harming the legitimate rights and interests of Chinese enterprises without any factual basis, and warned that it will take all necessary measures to protect such rights and interests.

The corresponding statement was made by the official representative of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the People’s Republic of China, Guo Jiakun, at a daily briefing when he was asked to comment on the new sanctions of the European Union against Russia, affecting a number of Chinese companies and banks.

“I would like to emphasize that China has consistently opposed unilateral restrictive measures that are not based on international law and are not sanctioned by the UN Security Council,” Guo Jiakun said.

Touching on the Ukrainian crisis, the diplomat noted that China has made tireless efforts to promote peace talks, has never supplied lethal weapons to conflicting parties, and exercises strict control over its export of dual-use goods.

Normal business contacts and cooperation between Chinese and Russian enterprises should not be subject to any interference or influence, Guo Jiakun stressed. –0–

Please note: This information is raw content obtained directly from the source of the information. It is an accurate report of what the source claims and does not necessarily reflect the position of MIL-OSI or its clients.

.

MIL OSI Russia News –

July 22, 2025

MIL-OSI Russia: The Belarusian Parliament has declared its focus on building a strategic partnership with Iran

Translation. Region: Russian Federal

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

An important disclaimer is at the bottom of this article.

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

MINSK, July 21 /Xinhua/ — Belarus aims to build a strategic partnership with Iran, Deputy Chairman of the House of Representatives (lower house of parliament) of Belarus Vadim Ipatov said on Monday during a meeting in Minsk with the Iranian parliamentary delegation led by the head of the working group of the Islamic Consultative Assembly of Iran on cooperation with the National Assembly of Belarus Aliasghar Bagherzadeh. The relevant information was published by BELTA.

V. Ipatov noted that Belarus views Iran as an important partner in the region, an authoritative participant in international relations, and strives to establish a strategic partnership. “We have a common understanding of the processes taking place in the world and a desire to form a fair multipolar world order,” the deputy chairman of the lower house of the Belarusian parliament emphasized.

He recalled that the two countries signed a Roadmap for comprehensive cooperation for 2023-2026 and proposed concentrating bilateral efforts on its implementation.

In turn, A. Bagherzade stated that Iran is interested in developing relations with Belarus in all areas. “Since a free trade agreement was signed between Iran and the Eurasian Economic Union, and Iran is an observer in this union, very good additional opportunities for interaction with the union member countries, in particular with Belarus, are emerging,” he noted. –0–

Please note: This information is raw content obtained directly from the source of the information. It is an accurate report of what the source claims and does not necessarily reflect the position of MIL-OSI or its clients.

.

MIL OSI Russia News –

July 22, 2025

MIL-OSI Russia: Impressions and experience: how the summer internship of HSE history students went

Translation. Region: Russian Federal

Source: State University “Higher School of Economics” –

An important disclaimer is at the bottom of this article.

The site may not display correctly in older browser versions. For optimal site experience, we recommend using a modern browser.

We use cookies to improve the HSE website and make it more convenient to use. More detailed information about the use of cookies can be foundHere, our rules for processing personal data are –Here. By continuing to use the site, you confirm that you have been informed of the use of cookies by the HSE website and agree with our rules for processing personal data. You can disable cookies in your browser settings.

ABC ABC ABC A A A A A

Regular version of the site

Date

July 21

Headings

The article mentions

Please note: This information is raw content obtained directly from the source of the information. It is an accurate report of what the source claims and does not necessarily reflect the position of MIL-OSI or its clients.

.

MIL OSI Russia News –

July 22, 2025

MIL-OSI Russia: Indian Vice President Resigns Due to Health Issues

Translation. Region: Russian Federal

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

An important disclaimer is at the bottom of this article.

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

NEW DELHI, July 21 (Xinhua) — Indian Vice President Jagdeep Dhankhar on Monday resigned, citing health reasons.

In his resignation letter to President Draupadi Murmu, J Dhankhar said: “In view of the need to give top priority to my health and to follow medical advice, I hereby tender my resignation as Vice-President of India with immediate effect.”

J. Dhankhar became the country’s vice president in 2022. –0–

Please note: This information is raw content obtained directly from the source of the information. It is an accurate report of what the source claims and does not necessarily reflect the position of MIL-OSI or its clients.

.

MIL OSI Russia News –

July 22, 2025

MIL-OSI Russia: Death toll in Gaza exceeds 59,000: health ministry

Translation. Region: Russian Federal

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

An important disclaimer is at the bottom of this article.

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

GAZA, July 21 (Xinhua) — The number of Palestinians killed in Israeli attacks on the Gaza Strip since the conflict began on October 7, 2023 has exceeded 59,000, the health authority based in the Palestinian enclave said on Monday.

The ministry’s press release stated that a total of 59,029 Palestinians have been killed and another 142,135 injured in Israel’s ongoing military operations.

Since March 18, 8,196 deaths and 30,094 wounded have been recorded, reflecting an escalation in fighting in previous weeks, the report said.

According to the latest figures, 134 bodies have been delivered to hospitals in the Gaza Strip in the past 24 hours. In addition, 1,155 people have been injured to varying degrees of severity as a result of ongoing airstrikes and shelling over the past 24 hours. The ministry warned that the figures could rise as many victims are still under rubble.

The UN and a number of regional organizations have repeatedly called for an immediate ceasefire and the establishment of internationally monitored humanitarian corridors, but efforts to find a sustainable humanitarian solution have so far failed to produce results. –0–

Please note: This information is raw content obtained directly from the source of the information. It is an accurate report of what the source claims and does not necessarily reflect the position of MIL-OSI or its clients.

.

MIL OSI Russia News –

July 22, 2025

MIL-OSI Russia: China releases first national standard for school meal services

Translation. Region: Russian Federal

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

An important disclaimer is at the bottom of this article.

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

BEIJING, July 21 (Xinhua) — China has issued its first national standard for school meal services, which will take effect on Dec. 1 this year, the State Administration for Market Regulation announced Monday.

The School Food Service Business Management Guidelines regulate the activities of businesses providing food preparation and delivery services to primary and secondary schools and kindergartens.

There are currently more than 460,000 primary and secondary schools and kindergartens in China, attended by more than 237 million students.

According to the guidelines, businesses are required to appoint full-time employees responsible for ensuring and checking food safety.

Businesses are required to purchase key ingredients, including rice, flour and vegetable oil, from designated suppliers and maintain testing records for each batch of raw materials.

The food preparation process should be integrated into a kitchen monitoring system with online access, and key food processing operations should be openly demonstrated to schools, parents and students. –0–

Please note: This information is raw content obtained directly from the source of the information. It is an accurate report of what the source claims and does not necessarily reflect the position of MIL-OSI or its clients.

.

MIL OSI Russia News –

July 22, 2025

MIL-OSI Russia: The Chinese Foreign Ministry spoke about the Chinese side’s expectations from the 25th meeting of the leaders of China and the EU

Translation. Region: Russian Federal

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

An important disclaimer is at the bottom of this article.

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

BEIJING, July 21 (Xinhua) — China and the European Union will hold the 25th China-EU leaders’ meeting in Beijing, Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Guo Jiakun said at a daily briefing on Monday, during which he also outlined China’s expectations for the upcoming summit and current China-EU relations.

Guo Jiakun pointed out that this year marks the 50th anniversary of the establishment of diplomatic relations between China and the European Union, as well as the 80th anniversary of the founding of the United Nations.

As the diplomat noted, the world is currently undergoing changes at an accelerated pace that have not been seen in a century, the international situation is chaotically transforming, manifestations of unilateralism and bullying are dealing serious blows to international rules and international order, as a result of which humanity once again finds itself at a decisive crossroads.

The official stressed that it is at this moment that China and the EU, as two major forces promoting multipolarity, two major markets supporting globalization, and two major civilizations advocating diversity, are holding the 25th leaders’ meeting, which will be of great significance and will attract wide attention from the international community.

“Over the past half century, China-EU relations have gone through many tests and are now steadily moving towards maturity and stability, becoming one of the most influential bilateral relations in the world,” Guo Jiakun said.

China-EU cooperation, he continued, has yielded fruitful results, provided strong support for the development of both sides, brought tangible benefits to the nearly 2 billion people of China and the EU countries, made an important contribution to world peace and development, and set a model for mutually beneficial cooperation in the era of economic globalization.

Guo Jiakun noted that over the past 50 years, annual trade turnover between China and the EU has grown from $2.4 billion to $785.8 billion, while mutual investment has increased from near zero to nearly $260 billion. The Chinese diplomat added that bilateral humanitarian exchanges have become increasingly close, and the two sides have established effective cooperation on climate change and other issues.

“At the same time, China-EU relations are also facing challenges,” Guo Jiakun noted. According to him, some EU officials persistently characterize bilateral relations in terms of “partner-competitor-rival”, inflate private trade and economic issues, and make groundless accusations against China over the Ukraine issue, which creates unnecessary obstacles for China-EU relations.

The Chinese side believes that over its 50-year history, relations between China and the EU have accumulated sufficient experience and positive energy to withstand any “winds and storms”, difficulties and challenges, the official representative emphasized.

With the 25th China-EU leaders’ meeting coming up, China-EU relations are at an important stage where they inherit the traditions of the past and open a new path to the future, he said.

“The Chinese side expects the EU to meet China halfway, view its relations with China from a comprehensive, dialectical and long-term perspective, summarize the experience and lessons of the past 50 years of bilateral relations, follow the trend of the times, live up to the aspirations of the people of both sides and the international community, build consensus, overcome differences and jointly plan cooperation for the next 50 years, so as to jointly create an even better future for the China-EU comprehensive strategic partnership,” Guo Jiakun concluded. -0-

Please note: This information is raw content obtained directly from the source of the information. It is an accurate report of what the source claims and does not necessarily reflect the position of MIL-OSI or its clients.

.

MIL OSI Russia News –

July 22, 2025

MIL-OSI USA: Newly Declassified DOJ Watchdog Report Shows FBI Cut Corners in Clinton Email Investigation

US Senate News:

Source: United States Senator for Iowa Chuck Grassley

WASHINGTON – Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) today is bringing to light the Department of Justice (DOJ) Office of Inspector General’s (OIG) findings that the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) failed to fully investigate Hillary Clinton’s use of a private email server and mishandling of highly classified information during her time as Secretary of State. The newly declassified “Clinton annex” is an appendix to the DOJ OIG’s June 2018 report reviewing the DOJ and FBI’s handling of the Clinton investigation. DOJ, under the leadership of Attorney General Pam Bondi, and other agencies declassified and provided the Clinton annex to Grassley at his request. Grassley has sought information from DOJ and FBI about the document since 2018 and again submitted his request to then-Attorney General Bill Barr in 2019. He, along with Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.), requested President Donald Trump declassify the document in 2020, and Grassley reiterated the request in 2025.

“This document shows an extreme lack of effort and due diligence in the FBI’s investigation of former Secretary Clinton’s email usage and mishandling of highly classified information,” Grassley said. “Under Comey’s leadership, the FBI failed to perform fundamental investigative work and left key pieces of evidence on the cutting room floor. The Comey FBI’s negligent approach and perhaps intentional lack of effort in the Clinton investigation is a stark contrast to its full-throated investigation of the Trump-Russia collusion hoax, which was based on the uncorroborated and now discredited Steele dossier. Comey’s decision-making process smacks of political infection.”

“I warned years ago that the Clinton investigation failed to hit the mark, and I’m grateful the American people can finally see the facts for themselves,” Grassley continued. “After nearly a decade in the shadows, this information is now coming to light thanks to Attorney General Pam Bondi and FBI Director Kash Patel’s dedicated efforts to fulfill my congressional request. I appreciate their ongoing commitment to transparency and strongly urge them to continue to fully review this matter, including its national security impact.”

Read the Clinton annex HERE.

The DOJ OIG’s Clinton annex shows the FBI obtained thumb drives from a source during the Clinton investigation, but then-FBI Director James Comey, as well as then-Deputy FBI Director Andrew McCabe, former FBI Special Agent Peter Strzok and others, failed to perform additional, targeted searches of the drives, even though they contained information relevant to the inquiry. The DOJ OIG report illustrates that the FBI failed to thoroughly and completely investigate the Clinton matter as a result, as well as vet the serious national security risks created by Clinton’s careless handling of highly classified information. According to the DOJ OIG, the thumb drives contained highly sensitive information exfiltrated from U.S. government agencies, including the Department of State, as well as then-President Barack Obama’s emails and, potentially, congressional information. The thumb drives were never reviewed as part of the Clinton investigation, contrary to the recommendation of a draft FBI memorandum. The DOJ OIG report also shows the drives should have been immediately reviewed for foreign intelligence purposes, but were not.

The FBI also obtained intelligence reports discussing purported communications between Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-Fla.), who was chairwoman of the Democratic National Convention (DNC) at the time, and two different individuals who worked for the Soros Open Society Foundations. The intelligence reports alleged that the Obama administration took efforts to scuttle the investigation into Clinton and protect her candidacy. The DOJ OIG Clinton annex shows Comey, McCabe and Strzok, among others, did not make serious investigative efforts to determine the veracity, or lack thereof, regarding the intelligence reports.

On July 5, 2016, Comey exonerated Clinton in a public statement regarding the investigation and recommended DOJ take no legal action to hold her accountable. Grassley’s oversight revealed Comey planned to exonerate Clinton even before interviewing her. Weeks later, on July 31, 2016, Comey’s FBI formally opened the bogus Crossfire Hurricane investigation into President Trump’s disproven collusion with Russia. On that day, Strzok texted Lisa Page, an FBI lawyer, saying: “And damn this feels momentous. Because this matters. The other one did, too, but that was to ensure we didn’t F something up. This matters because this MATTERS. So super glad to be on this voyage with you.”

Grassley cited Comey’s handling of the Clinton investigation as evidence that Comey lacked the ability to maintain the public’s trust in the FBI, and was therefore rightfully terminated.

-30-

MIL OSI USA News –

July 22, 2025

MIL-OSI Russia: Shanghai’s Foreign Tourist Inflow Up More Than 50 Percent in First Half

Translation. Region: Russian Federal

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

An important disclaimer is at the bottom of this article.

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

SHANGHAI, July 21 (Xinhua) — Some 3.12 million foreign tourists visited the east Chinese city of Shanghai in the first half of 2025, up 53.3 percent year on year, the city’s Bureau of Culture and Tourism said Monday.

Rapid growth was driven by key Asian tourism markets, led by the Republic of Korea with 424,000 trips (up 130.7 percent), Thailand with 254,000 trips (up 140 percent), and Japan with 291,000 trips (up 58.5 percent).

The flow of tourists from distant countries such as the USA, Russia and Australia also showed significant growth.

Among the key factors that make Shanghai attractive to foreign tourists are the simplified visa regime and improved service quality, clean streets, efficient transportation and creative souvenirs. In addition, tourists are attracted by the new Legoland amusement park, the city’s cosmopolitan atmosphere, diverse attractions and modern infrastructure.

To strengthen its position as the “first stop” for inbound tourism in China, Shanghai has launched a tourism promotion initiative aimed at enhancing interactive engagement with travelers from around the world. The initiative is themed “This is Shanghai” and includes promotional films featuring “city ambassadors,” a “cultural passport” guidebook, and specially designed tourist routes.

Efforts are underway to integrate the “first-time experience” with immersive storytelling, which will help position Shanghai as a world-class tourism destination with global appeal, city officials said. –0–

Please note: This information is raw content obtained directly from the source of the information. It is an accurate report of what the source claims and does not necessarily reflect the position of MIL-OSI or its clients.

.

MIL OSI Russia News –

July 22, 2025

MIL-OSI Russia: Shanghai’s Foreign Tourist Inflow Up More Than 50 Percent in First Half

Translation. Region: Russian Federal

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

An important disclaimer is at the bottom of this article.

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

SHANGHAI, July 21 (Xinhua) — Some 3.12 million foreign tourists visited the east Chinese city of Shanghai in the first half of 2025, up 53.3 percent year on year, the city’s Bureau of Culture and Tourism said Monday.

Rapid growth was driven by key Asian tourism markets, led by the Republic of Korea with 424,000 trips (up 130.7 percent), Thailand with 254,000 trips (up 140 percent), and Japan with 291,000 trips (up 58.5 percent).

The flow of tourists from distant countries such as the USA, Russia and Australia also showed significant growth.

Among the key factors that make Shanghai attractive to foreign tourists are the simplified visa regime and improved service quality, clean streets, efficient transportation and creative souvenirs. In addition, tourists are attracted by the new Legoland amusement park, the city’s cosmopolitan atmosphere, diverse attractions and modern infrastructure.

To strengthen its position as the “first stop” for inbound tourism in China, Shanghai has launched a tourism promotion initiative aimed at enhancing interactive engagement with travelers from around the world. The initiative is themed “This is Shanghai” and includes promotional films featuring “city ambassadors,” a “cultural passport” guidebook, and specially designed tourist routes.

Efforts are underway to integrate the “first-time experience” with immersive storytelling, which will help position Shanghai as a world-class tourism destination with global appeal, city officials said. –0–

Please note: This information is raw content obtained directly from the source of the information. It is an accurate report of what the source claims and does not necessarily reflect the position of MIL-OSI or its clients.

.

MIL OSI Russia News –

July 22, 2025

MIL-OSI Russia: Lectures, workshops and horizontal connections: the Summer Engineering and Economics School 2025 has started at the State University of Management

Translation. Region: Russian Federal

Source: Official website of the State –

An important disclaimer is at the bottom of this article.

On July 21, 2025, the Summer School of Engineering and Economics started at the State University of Management.

The School brings together postgraduate students, young scientists and engineers from different Russian universities for the fourth time. The School’s research areas are engineering, unmanned aircraft systems, mechanical engineering, food security, artificial intelligence, and sustainable development.

At the opening ceremony, the rector of the State University of Management Vladimir Stroyev said that the first School was held in 2023 in Grozny on the basis of the GGNTU named after Academician M.D. Millionshchikov, but subsequently changed its location.

“Holding the School in different cities is a positive moment. This way, young scientists get to know the country, establish connections, because not everyone will necessarily work in one place their entire lives. Thanks to this, the geography of the School itself is also expanding. Three universities started the project, and today there are seven universities. The program includes lectures, workshops, master classes, but the main thing for you is communication. I wish you a productive time,” the rector said.

Deputy Chairman of the State Duma of the Russian Federation Boris Chernyshov noted that the Summer Engineering and Economics School, through the efforts of the rector and management of the State University of Management, shows excellent results not only in attracting funding for science, but also in terms of specific results.

“The topic of management in science is one of the key areas in achieving state strategic goals, including in a special military operation. Associations of young scientists can become a new milestone on the path of continuous development of public administration principles. And the State University of Management in this sense can create conditions for attracting new personnel. Science is the future today, and the ability to manage it is a key factor in success in any activity. I hope that the School will result in an attempt to look into the future and suggest new solutions to pressing issues,” Boris Chernyshov wished.

The following institutions will participate in the Summer School of Engineering and Economics – 2025: — BSTU named after V.G. Shukhov (Belgorod); — VlSU named after A.G. and N.G. Stoletov (Vladimir); — GGNTU named after academician M.D. Millionshchikov (Grozny); — GUU (Moscow); — DonNTU (Donetsk); — Moscow State University named after A.I. Kuindzhi (Mariupol); — NTU “Sirius” (federal territory “Sirius”).

Immediately after the opening ceremony, the School’s students were treated to a lecture entitled “Engineering Heritage: Russia – USSR – Russian Federation”. But before that, we managed to find out from the Chairman of the Council of Young Scientists and Specialists of the GGNTU named after academician M.D. Millionshchikov Temirlan Sultanbekov, who is participating in the program for the third time, what attracts him to the School.

“The school attracts with relevant and useful lectures, interesting master classes. It is not only interesting, but also undoubtedly useful. And the program changes and is updated every year. At my university, I do not only science, and the School helps to develop various skills. And with each visit, I notice that my level of personal and professional skills, which I can apply in my work, is increasing,” Temirlan Sultanbekov.

The Summer School of Engineering and Economics will last until July 25. Students will not only be able to attend lectures on artificial intelligence and workshops on the design of unmanned aerial vehicles, but also tours of production facilities, exhibition spaces, and the State Duma.

Please note: This information is raw content obtained directly from the source of the information. It is an accurate report of what the source claims and does not necessarily reflect the position of MIL-OSI or its clients.

.

MIL OSI Russia News –

July 22, 2025

Russia and Ukraine edge closer to first talks in seven weeks

Source: Government of India

Source: Government of India (4)

Russia and Ukraine appear close to agreeing to hold a new round of peace talks in Turkey this week, although the Kremlin said on Monday that the two sides held “diametrically opposed” positions on how to end the war.

Two days after Ukraine called for new talks in Istanbul this week, Russian state news agency TASS quoted an unidentified source as saying that negotiators – who have not sat down together for seven weeks – may meet there on Thursday and Friday.

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy told a gathering of his diplomats in Kyiv: “We need greater momentum in negotiations to end the war.”

He added: “The agenda from our side is clear: the return of prisoners of war, the return of children abducted by Russia, and the preparation of a leaders’ meeting.”

Russian President Vladimir Putin, who is under increasing pressure from U.S. President Donald Trump to show progress towards ending the conflict, turned down a previous challenge from Zelenskiy to meet him in person.

Putin has repeatedly said he does not see Zelenskiy as a legitimate leader because Ukraine, which is under martial law, did not hold new elections when his five-year mandate expired last year.

Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said that as soon as there was a definitive understanding of the date for the next round of talks, then Moscow would announce it.

“There is our draft memorandum, there is a draft memorandum that has been handed over by the Ukrainian side. There is to be an exchange of views and talks on these two drafts, which are diametrically opposed so far,” Peskov said.

Ukraine and Russia have held two rounds of talks in Istanbul, on May 16 and June 2, that led to the exchange of thousands of prisoners of war and the remains of dead soldiers. But the two sides have made no breakthrough towards a ceasefire or a settlement to end almost three and a half years of war.

Trump said last week he would impose new sanctions in 50 days on Russia and countries that buy its exports if there is no deal before then to end the conflict.

-Reuters

July 22, 2025

MIL-OSI: XRP rose strongly by more than 23%. Siton Mining launched a new XRP cloud mining solution, attracting global investors to join the craze!

Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

Houston, Texas, July 21, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — XRP has surged 23% in the past week, hitting a record high of $3.68, pushing the market’s daily trading volume to over $23 billion. This surge is closely related to the GENIUS Act and the Digital Financial Transparency Act passed by the U.S. Congress, which provide unprecedented compliance protection and growth space for blockchain technology and digital asset investments.

In this positive market context, Siton Mining, the world’s leading cloud mining platform, officially launched a new “double income” mining contract designed specifically for XRP users. This solution not only provides stable daily US dollar income, but also supports the use of mainstream cryptocurrencies such as XRP for recharge, settlement and withdrawal, allowing users to enjoy stable income while also benefiting from the value growth brought by the rise in currency prices.

Double income model opens a new era of XRP passive income
Siton Mining‘s innovative mining model allows users to:
Invest XRP (or other crypto assets) to activate the mining contract
Get a fixed dollar income every day (settled at the real-time exchange rate)
After the contract ends, if XRP appreciates, the withdrawal value will be further increased

Example: If a user invests $3,000 worth of XRP to activate a 13-day contract, the daily return is $41.4, and the total return is $538.2. If XRP rises by 10% during this period, the user will also enjoy the price appreciation of the same amount of XRP.

XRP recent market highlights
New high price: XRP rose more than 23% to $3.68, with a market value of over $219 billion
Policy-driven: The United States passed the GENIUS Act, which explicitly supports the development of digital assets and mining compliance
Institutional influx: XRP futures open interest exceeded $10.7 billion, and institutional funds continued to pour in

Popular contract examples:

MiningEquipment	Contract Amount	Net income	Total net profit
Zcash Miner	$100	$8	$108（$100 + $8）
ETC Miner	$500	$30	$530（$500 + $30）
IceRiver AE2	$1,200	$140.40	$1,340.40
Bitcoin Miner	$3,000	$538.20	$3,538.20
iPollo V2	$7,000	$1,839.60	$8,839.60
VOLCMINER D1 Pro	$10,000	$3,657.00	$13,657.00

For more information on contracts and returns, please visit the official website: https://www.sitonmining.com

Start mining without any threshold immediately
Download Siton Mining APP (supports iOS and Android)
Register and get 10-100 random system novice rewards, no equipment required, 0 cost to start easily!

Three simple steps to start your XRP earnings journey
Visit the official website SitonMining.com to register an account
Choose the appropriate contract and recharge to activate
Automatically obtain earnings every day and distribute them to your account balance in real time
You can also get a $0.6 USD reward for daily sign-in, and your earnings will continue to increase!
Green energy driven, global compliance operation
Siton Mining’s global mines are all operated with clean energy, and realize fully automatic profit settlement and one-click cash withdrawal functions, covering more than 150 countries and regions around the world, supporting multiple languages such as Chinese, English, Russian, and Portuguese.

About Siton Mining
Siton Mining is the world’s leading decentralized cloud mining platform, dedicated to helping users participate in mainstream crypto asset mining without the need for equipment and professional technology through AI intelligent computing power scheduling, green energy mining farms and flexible multi-currency settlement. The platform currently serves more than 9 million users and continues to promote the popularization, low threshold and compliance of cloud mining.

Siton Mining contact information
Official website: https://Sitonmining.com
Email: info@Sitonmining.com
APP download: https://yunquantum.com/download/

Attachment

Siton Mining

The MIL Network –

July 22, 2025

MIL-OSI Russia: Xinjiang’s Tianshan International Airport Becomes Key Cargo Gateway in Eurasia

Translation. Region: Russian Federal

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

An important disclaimer is at the bottom of this article.

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

URUMQI, July 21 (Xinhua) — Tianshan International Airport in Urumqi, capital of northwest China’s Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region, has expanded its international cargo air transportation network to 34 routes, linking 19 countries in Central and West Asia, Europe and Africa, airport operator Xinjiang Airport Group said Monday.

Following the commissioning of the new terminal on April 17, as of June the airport handled 46,000 tons of international cargo and mail, showing a 659 percent increase year-on-year and exceeding the figure for the whole of 2024.

Xinjiang Airport Group Chairman Tao Runwen emphasized the role of Tianshan Airport as one of the key air gateways of the Silk Road Economic Belt, noting that the rapid expansion of the international cargo route network is facilitated by the simultaneous development of both passenger and cargo transportation.

Key air routes served by the airport include a 10-hour flight to Zurich in Switzerland and a 7.5-hour direct flight to Addis Ababa in Ethiopia on the African continent. These routes have significantly increased logistics efficiency.

According to Xinjiang Airport Group, Tianshan Airport’s innovative measures, such as the implementation of a 24-hour pre-application customs clearance mechanism with priority inspection, have ensured “zero delay” for cargo containing perishable goods and high-precision equipment, and improved customs efficiency by more than 40 percent.

Further expansion of the air cargo network is currently planned, including the opening of new routes to Madrid and Paris in late 2025. By the end of this year, the airport is expected to serve a total of 40 international cargo routes. –0–

Please note: This information is raw content obtained directly from the source of the information. It is an accurate report of what the source claims and does not necessarily reflect the position of MIL-OSI or its clients.

.

MIL OSI Russia News –

July 22, 2025

MIL-OSI United Kingdom: UK hammers Putin’s energy revenues with fresh sanctions

Source: United Kingdom – Government Statements

Press release

UK hammers Putin’s energy revenues with fresh sanctions

Fresh sanctions ramp up pressure on Russia’s critical oil industry and hit Putin’s creaking shadow fleet operation. 

UK announces 137 sanctions targeting Putin’s critical energy and oil sectors. 
New sanctions will disrupt the flow of oil money into Putin’s war chest and strand more of his beleaguered shadow fleet. 
Today’s action comes as the UK and EU lowered the Crude Oil Price Cap further disrupting the flow of oil money into Putin’s war chest.

The 137 targets strike at the heart of Russia’s energy sector, restricting Putin’s access to key oil revenues bankrolling his illegal war in Ukraine. 

The new sanctions further crack down on Putin’s shadow fleet operations, targeting 135 oil tankers which form part of the fleet responsible for illicitly carrying $24 billion worth of cargo since the start of 2024.  

Today’s action also tightens the net around those enabling Russia’s illicit shadow fleet oil trade, hitting INTERSHIPPING SERVICES LLC, responsible for registering shadow fleet vessels under the banner of the Gabonese flag, resulting in these vessels transporting up to $10 billion worth of goods on behalf of the Russian state per year. Sanctions also target LITASCO MIDDLE EAST DMCC, which is linked to Russian oil major Lukoil, for its ongoing role in moving large volumes of Russian oil on shadow fleet vessels. 

Every attack we launch against Russia’s critical oil industry is another step towards securing a lasting peace in Ukraine, and a step towards security in the UK and beyond. Keeping the country safe is this government’s priority and is an integral part of the Prime Minister’s Plan for Change. 

Foreign Secretary David Lammy said:  

New sanctions will further dismantle Putin’s shadow fleet and drain Russia’s war chest of its critical oil revenues. 

As Putin continues to stall and delay on serious peace talks, we will not stand idly by. We will continue to use the full might of our sanctions regime to ratchet up economic pressure at every turn and stand side by side with Ukraine.   

This announcement further demonstrates the UK’s tough approach to those who continue to prop up Putin’s oil industry, enable his shadow fleet operation and aid and abet his illegal war in Ukraine. 

To date western sanctions have resulted in Russia’s oil and gas revenues falling every year since 2022 – losing over a third of its value in three years. Sanctions and the cost of Putin’s barbaric war are causing the Russian economy to stall – with the wealth fund hollowed out, inflation rising and government spend on defence and security spiralling. 

Today’s action comes as the UK and EU lowered the Crude Oil Price Cap disrupting the flow of oil money into Putin’s war chest and striking at the heart of his oil revenues.

Background  

A full list of today’s targets can be found here

Published 21 July 2025

MIL OSI United Kingdom –

July 22, 2025

MIL-OSI Russia: The State Council of the People’s Republic of China has made a number of appointments

Translation. Region: Russian Federal

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

An important disclaimer is at the bottom of this article.

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

BEIJING, July 21 (Xinhua) — China’s State Council announced on Monday new appointments to a number of ministries, departments and agencies.

Xie Yuansheng was appointed Vice Minister of Industry and Information Technology of the People’s Republic of China. Lin Zhifeng was appointed Vice Minister of Public Security of the People’s Republic of China.

Liu Jianqiao has been appointed deputy head of the State Administration of Science, Technology and Industry for National Defense.

Zhao Jianheng has been appointed deputy director of the China Research Institute of Engineering Physics. –0–

Please note: This information is raw content obtained directly from the source of the information. It is an accurate report of what the source claims and does not necessarily reflect the position of MIL-OSI or its clients.

.

MIL OSI Russia News –

July 22, 2025

MIL-OSI Russia: China unveils new regulations for rental housing sector

Translation. Region: Russian Federal

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

An important disclaimer is at the bottom of this article.

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

BEIJING, July 21 (Xinhua) — Chinese Premier Li Qiang signed a State Council regulation on issuing regulations for the high-quality development of the rental housing market to build a housing construction system that is favorable for both rental and purchase.

The new regulations, which will come into effect on September 15, emphasize the integration of the leading role of the market and the guiding role of the government in the development of the sector. They also encourage an increase in the supply of rental housing through multiple channels and promote the development of market-oriented professional rental housing enterprises.

The document sets out rules governing the rental business and the conduct of rental businesses and brokerage agencies. Rental brokerage agencies must verify and record information provided by authorized representatives, conduct on-site inspections of properties before listing them, and clearly state the prices for their services, the document states.

The document stresses the need to strengthen supervision and management of the rental housing sector. Local people’s governments at or above the city level with district divisions should establish a mechanism to monitor housing rents and regularly publish information on rental prices.

The document provides for strict legal liability for illegal actions of landlords, tenants, rental housing companies, brokerage agencies and employees of relevant government agencies. -0-

Please note: This information is raw content obtained directly from the source of the information. It is an accurate report of what the source claims and does not necessarily reflect the position of MIL-OSI or its clients.

.

MIL OSI Russia News –

July 22, 2025

MIL-OSI Russia: Russia and Ukraine’s ceasefire memoranda are diametrically opposed – Russian President’s press secretary

Translation. Region: Russian Federal

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

An important disclaimer is at the bottom of this article.

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

Moscow, July 21 /Xinhua/ — The delegations of Russia and Ukraine at the talks on the Ukrainian settlement have a lot of diplomatic work ahead of them, since the memorandums on a ceasefire proposed by the countries are diametrically opposed, Russian presidential press secretary Dmitry Peskov said on Monday.

“There is our draft memorandum, there is a draft memorandum that was submitted by the Ukrainian side. There is an exchange of opinions and, in fact, negotiations on these two projects, which are currently absolutely diametrically opposed. Therefore, a lot of diplomatic work is ahead,” TASS quotes D. Peskov as saying.

Commenting on media reports that a new round of talks between Russia and Ukraine could take place this week, he noted that the Kremlin would inform about this as soon as there is an understanding of the dates. “We are in favor of holding a third round. As soon as there is a final understanding of the dates, we will inform you immediately,” the Russian president’s press secretary assured. –0–

Please note: This information is raw content obtained directly from the source of the information. It is an accurate report of what the source claims and does not necessarily reflect the position of MIL-OSI or its clients.

.

MIL OSI Russia News –

July 22, 2025

MIL-OSI USA: Senator Marshall: America is Now the Hottest Country in the World

US Senate News:

Source: United States Senator for Kansas Roger Marshall

Senator Marshall Joins Newsmax to Discuss the First Six Months of President Trump’s Second Term & the Booming Economy
Washington – On Monday, U.S. Senator Roger Marshall, M.D. (R-Kansas), joined Marc Lotter and Sharla McBride on Newmax’s Wake Up America to discuss the first six months of President Trump’s second term, future spending cuts in Congress, DNI Tulsi Gabbard’s recent report, and the MAHA legislative package he is introducing.

Click HERE or on the image above to watch Senator Marshall’s full interview.
On the first six months of President Trump’s second term:
“Exactly. I told my wife this morning, you know, we’re part of the Trump chain gang. Let’s get to work up here. Congress doesn’t have any idea what it’s like out in the real world, where, as a physician, I worked every weekend. I didn’t take days off for years at a time. So, I’m used to this pace. I’m used to Trump Time.
“But I’m calling this economy the Lazarus Economy. A year ago, as President Trump said, the economy was dead, and now we’re the hottest country in the world. Trillions of dollars are being invested, jobs are growing, inflation is down, the price of gasoline is down, and the border is secure. And our military is being taken care of. We just passed the largest tax cut in American history and the largest cut in federal government spending as well. This was a bill that’s going to help middle-income Americans and small businesses. Very proud of the work we’ve done these last six months.”
On future spending cuts from the Senate:
“Well, we certainly need to prioritize them, and Congress needs to develop this memory. This is the first time… since President Bush, the first, we’ve actually done a rescissions package. So, this was a good start to learn. You know, the backdrop of this $37 trillion of national debt right now. We’re going to spend a trillion dollars on interest this year. This is the number one threat to my grandchildren’s future: this national debt.
“Look, I think what your listeners need to understand is the Government Accounting Office, the Office of Inspector General, has been saying for over a decade now that there is systemic risk for fraud, waste, and abuse in USAID. And that’s why I asked Elon to burn it to the ground and start over.
“Just give you a few more examples here… in Tanzania, Zambia … $50 million of medical equipment theft. In New Guinea, $100 million of scandals are going on. More recently, $500 million here in the United States, where people were skimming and taking bribes back; all USAID programs. Go back to an earthquake in Haiti. We gave them a billion dollars decades ago. They never did anything with it. They did not build the energy plant they were supposed to. So, we have a president standing up identifying fraud. Now Congress needs to do her job with 50 votes. We can continue this on the Senate side.”
On DNI Tulsi Gabbard’s report about Russia misinformation:
“Well, look, this is absolutely believable. This is new information that in the Oval Office, with the highest members of the FBI and the Intelligence Agency under Obama, they cooked up a plan to continue this ‘Russia, Russia, Russia’ hoax. You know, this is kind of the second chapter of the FISA court abuse that was done under the Obama administration as well. Those people never paid the price they should have paid as well. Judges should have been fired, and people within the FBI should have been fired over that. Maybe one person held accountable.
“So, this is the next chapter. We need total transparency. I think that’s what, you know, the beauty of President Trump’s cabinet is, they’re going to show America the whole truth here, nothing but the truth, and let the Justice Department do its job. And by the way, you’ll see Congress probably having more hearings on this as well.”
On the Make America Healthy Again package:
“Well, look, what I believe is that healthy soil meets healthy food, meets healthy people. That when agriculture can focus on soil health by growing more with less, by using less pesticides, using less water, and using modern-day agriculture, precision agriculture practices, we can make the soil healthier. That’s going to make the food more nutrient-rich, and that’s going to lead to healthier people.
“Look, 90% of the money spent on health care in this country is spent on seven chronic diseases, including hypertension, diabetes, obesity, Alzheimer’s, those types of things. So, we need to focus in on those chronic diseases, try to prevent them with healthy food, and then treat them with healthy food as well. And I’m so proud to work with Secretary Kennedy and Secretary Rollins to get this job done.”

MIL OSI USA News –

July 22, 2025

MIL-OSI USA: Senator Marshall: Congress Doesn’t Need a Vacation

US Senate News:

Source: United States Senator for Kansas Roger Marshall

Senator Marshall Joins Fox News Live
Washington – On Sunday, U.S. Senator Roger Marshall, M.D. (R-Kansas), joined Fox News to discuss Director of National Intelligence (DNI) Tulsi Gabbard’s recent report indicating that former President Obama’s administration manufactured the Russia misinformation scandal, the benefits of the $9 billion rescissions package, and the importance of the recently passed GENIUS Act for America’s financial stability.

Click HERE or on the image above to watch Senator Marshall’s full interview.
On DNI Tulsi Gabbard’s recent report:
“I think there’s a lot of new information coming to bear right now, information that I’d never heard of before, as far as what was happening in the old Oval Office, where there was a conspiracy to absolutely undermine President Trump as he took office as well. You recall back when the FISA court abuses started, you were covering that story as well.
“So, this just makes sense, after you understand what the FISA abuse that was going on. This was the next chapter of it. I think the Democrats never thought that President Trump could win. And now more of this is coming to light.”
On whether the Senate intelligence committee missed something in the original report:
“Look, I think that she’s uncovered new information since then. I think that there are new documents that are showing that President Obama was in the room and they did this conspiracy, working with lifetime people within the political agencies, within the FBI… there was a conspiracy to try to throw out this misinformation, to try to address [and] make this an illegitimate election. So, I think this is new information. I think it needs to be investigated. I think that’s the job of the Attorney General: to find the truth and deliver justice for America.”
On the necessity to pass the $9 billion rescissions package:
“Well, certainly the whole backdrop of this is the $37 trillion of national debt we have. $9 billion is still a lot of money back home. When the President discovers fraud, waste, and abuse, we need to go after it. I think what America doesn’t realize is that our own Government Accounting Office, our own Inspector General, has been saying for over a decade that USAID is rife with fraud and abuse.
“Just think back recently, $500 million bribery scheme with USAID dollars, $100 million of embezzlement in Zambia recently as well. So all over the world, there’s fraud, waste, and abuse. We need to go after all of it.
“But yes, at the end of the day, we need to go back to a regular budget process. We recently dropped a budget bill that would require and force Congress to go back and do its job. And just like you start at home with your family, a budget or a business, we need to go back and do a real budget.”
On the President signing the first major crypto currency bill:
“Well, I think that this is a great start. I’m a doctor, and the first thing we learned, even before med school, is the skeleton. So think of this as the skeleton to preserve and protect the stablecoin industry. This is really important for consumers. It’s going to make sure that when they’re investing in crypto, it’s pegged one-to-one with the US dollar. So, it’s good for consumers. I think it’s going to keep the US dollar dominant. It’s going to promote innovation.
“When you put a few rules around it, those people that are innovators are ready to move forward as well. And I know that you care a lot about national security, so I think that this is a step forward in preventing some of the money laundering schemes that we see going across the world as well.
“So, this is a great first step. Yes, it’s going to take more. Think back to the internet in 1996 – we wanted to put some guardrails around it, but not stifle the innovation.”
On what’s next for crypto legislation in Congress:
“You know, go back to my analogy of the skeleton. You learn the skeleton, and then you have to put muscles on it, and organs, and the nervous system. So, I think that how much more consumer protection do we need? What else can we do to make sure that these financial institutions that are issuing the coins are held up to the standards of, say, a bank, ‘know your customer type of philosophy as well.’
“So, there’s more to be done, but this was the low-hanging fruit. This is what we could get 60 votes in the Senate for. We may struggle doing any more this year, but we’ll see.”
On President Trump’s call to potentially end the August recess:
“You know, absolutely, and certainly, I want to agree with the President that Leader Thune is very talented, and he’s doing an incredible job. Right now, I’ve talked to many of the Secretaries, the Cabinet Members, Billy Long over at the IRS, and they’re drowning. They’re drowning because the swamp is so deep here, and they need more political appointees to help them get through this swamp and get their job done. So, I’m willing to do it. Look, I’ve worked weekends my whole life. I don’t know what a vacation even means. I’m happy to stay here as long as we’re working.”

MIL OSI USA News –

July 22, 2025

MIL-OSI Submissions: Africa’s minerals are being bartered for security: why it’s a bad idea

Source: The Conversation – Africa (2) – By Hanri Mostert, SARChI Chair for Mineral Law in Africa, University of Cape Town

A US-brokered peace deal between the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) and Rwanda binds the two African nations to a worrying arrangement: one where a country signs away its mineral resources to a superpower in return for opaque assurances of security.

The peace deal, signed in June 2025, aims to end three decades of conflict between the DRC and Rwanda.

A key part of the agreement binds both nations to developing a regional economic integration framework. This arrangement would expand cooperation between the two states, the US government and American investors on “transparent, formalized end-to-end mineral chains”.

Despite its immense mineral wealth, the DRC is among the five poorest countries in the world. It has been seeking US investment in its mineral sector.

The US has in turn touted a potential multi-billion-dollar investment programme to anchor its mineral supply chains in the traumatised and poor territory.

The peace that the June 2025 deal promises, therefore, hinges on chaining mineral supply to the US in exchange for Washington’s powerful – but vaguely formulated – military oversight.

The peace agreement further establishes a joint oversight committee – with representatives from the African Union, Qatar and the US – to receive complaints and resolve disputes between the DRC and Rwanda.

But beyond the joint oversight committee, the peace deal creates no specific security obligations for the US.

The relationship between the DRC and Rwanda has been marred by war and tension since the bloody First (1996-1997) and Second (1998-2003) Congo wars. At the heart of much of this conflict is the DRC’s mineral wealth. It has fuelled competition, exploitation and armed violence.

This latest peace deal introduces a resources-for-security arrangement. Such deals aren’t new in Africa. They first emerged in the early 2000s as resources-for-infrastructure transactions. Here, a foreign state would agree to build economic and social infrastructure (roads, ports, airports, hospitals) in an African state. In exchange, it would get a major stake in a government-owned mining company. Or gain preferential access to the host country’s minerals.

We have studied mineral law and governance in Africa for more than 20 years. The question that emerges now is whether a US-brokered resources-for-security agreement will help the DRC benefit from its resources.

Based on our research on mining, development and sustainability, we believe this is unlikely.

This is because resources-for-security is the latest version of a resource-bartering approach that China and Russia pioneered in countries such as Angola, the Central African Republic and the DRC.

Resource bartering in Africa has eroded the sovereignty and bargaining power of mineral-rich nations such as the DRC and Angola.

Further, resources-for-security deals are less transparent and more complicated than prior resource bartering agreements.

DRC’s security gaps

The DRC is endowed with major deposits of critical minerals like cobalt, copper, lithium, manganese and tantalum. These are the building blocks for 21st century technologies: artificial intelligence, electric vehicles, wind energy and military security hardware. Rwanda has less mineral wealth than its neighbour, but is the world’s third-largest producer of tantalum, used in electronics, aerospace and medical devices.

For almost 30 years, minerals have fuelled conflict and severe violence, especially in eastern DRC. Tungsten, tantalum and gold (referred to as 3TG) finance and drive conflict as government forces and an estimated 130 armed groups vie for control over lucrative mining sites. Several reports and studies have implicated the DRC’s neighbours – Rwanda and Uganda – in supporting the illegal extraction of 3TG in this region.

The DRC government has failed to extend security over its vast (2.3 million square kilometres) and diverse territory (109 million people, representing 250 ethnic groups). Limited resources, logistical challenges and corruption have weakened its armed forces.

This context makes the United States’ military backing enormously attractive. But our research shows there are traps.

What states risk losing

Resources-for-infrastructure and resources-for-security deals generally offer African nations short-term stability, financing or global goodwill. However, the costs are often long-term because of an erosion of sovereign control.

Here’s how this happens:

certain clauses in such contracts can freeze future regulatory reforms, limiting legislative autonomy
other clauses may lock in low prices for years, leaving resource-selling states unable to benefit when commodity prices surge
arbitration clauses often shift disputes to international forums, bypassing local courts
infrastructure loans are often secured via resource revenues used as loan security. This effectively ringfences exports and undermines sovereign fiscal control.

Examples of loss or near-loss of sovereignty from these sorts of deals abound in Africa.

For instance, Angola’s US$2 billion oil-backed loan from China Eximbank in 2004. This was repayable in monthly deliveries of oil, with revenues directed to Chinese-controlled accounts. The loan’s design deprived Angolan authorities of decision-making power over that income stream even before the oil was extracted.

These deals also fragment accountability. They often span multiple ministries (such as defence, mining and trade), avoiding robust oversight or accountability. Fragmentation makes resource sectors vulnerable to elite capture. Powerful insiders can manipulate agreements for private gain.

In the DRC, this has created a violent kleptocracy, where resource wealth is systematically diverted away from popular benefit.

Finally, there is the risk of re-entrenching extractive trauma. Communities displaced for mining and environmental degradation in many countries across Africa illustrate the long-standing harm to livelihoods, health and social cohesion.

These are not new problems. But where extraction is tied to security or infrastructure, such damage risks becoming permanent features, not temporary costs.

What needs to change

Critical minerals are “critical” because they’re hard to mine or substitute. Additionally, their supply chains are strategically vulnerable and politically exposed. Whoever controls these minerals controls the future. Africa must make sure it doesn’t trade that future away.

In a world being reshaped by global interests in critical minerals, African states must not underestimate the strategic value of their mineral resources. They hold considerable leverage.

But leverage only works if it is wielded strategically. This means:

investing in institutional strength and legal capacity to negotiate better deals
demanding local value creation and addition
requiring transparency and parliamentary oversight for minerals-related agreements
refusing deals that bypass human rights, environmental or sovereignty standards.

Africa has the resources. It must hold on to the power they wield.

Hanri Mostert receives funding from the National Research Foundation (NRF) of South Africa. She is a member of the Expropriation Expert Group and a steering committee member of the International Bar Association’s (IBA) Academic Advisory Group (AAG) in the Sector for Energy, Environmental, Resources and Infrastructure Law (SEERIL).

Tracy-Lynn Field receives funding from the Claude Leon Foundation. She is a non-executive director of the Wildlife and Environment Society of South Africa.

– ref. Africa’s minerals are being bartered for security: why it’s a bad idea – https://theconversation.com/africas-minerals-are-being-bartered-for-security-why-its-a-bad-idea-260594

MIL OSI –

July 22, 2025

MIL-OSI Africa: Africa’s minerals are being bartered for security: why it’s a bad idea

Source: The Conversation – Africa – By Hanri Mostert, SARChI Chair for Mineral Law in Africa, University of Cape Town

A US-brokered peace deal between the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) and Rwanda binds the two African nations to a worrying arrangement: one where a country signs away its mineral resources to a superpower in return for opaque assurances of security.

The peace deal, signed in June 2025, aims to end three decades of conflict between the DRC and Rwanda.

A key part of the agreement binds both nations to developing a regional economic integration framework. This arrangement would expand cooperation between the two states, the US government and American investors on “transparent, formalized end-to-end mineral chains”.

Despite its immense mineral wealth, the DRC is among the five poorest countries in the world. It has been seeking US investment in its mineral sector.

The US has in turn touted a potential multi-billion-dollar investment programme to anchor its mineral supply chains in the traumatised and poor territory.

The peace that the June 2025 deal promises, therefore, hinges on chaining mineral supply to the US in exchange for Washington’s powerful – but vaguely formulated – military oversight.

The peace agreement further establishes a joint oversight committee – with representatives from the African Union, Qatar and the US – to receive complaints and resolve disputes between the DRC and Rwanda.

But beyond the joint oversight committee, the peace deal creates no specific security obligations for the US.

The relationship between the DRC and Rwanda has been marred by war and tension since the bloody First (1996-1997) and Second (1998-2003) Congo wars. At the heart of much of this conflict is the DRC’s mineral wealth. It has fuelled competition, exploitation and armed violence.

This latest peace deal introduces a resources-for-security arrangement. Such deals aren’t new in Africa. They first emerged in the early 2000s as resources-for-infrastructure transactions. Here, a foreign state would agree to build economic and social infrastructure (roads, ports, airports, hospitals) in an African state. In exchange, it would get a major stake in a government-owned mining company. Or gain preferential access to the host country’s minerals.

We have studied mineral law and governance in Africa for more than 20 years. The question that emerges now is whether a US-brokered resources-for-security agreement will help the DRC benefit from its resources.

Based on our research on mining, development and sustainability, we believe this is unlikely.

This is because resources-for-security is the latest version of a resource-bartering approach that China and Russia pioneered in countries such as Angola, the Central African Republic and the DRC.

Resource bartering in Africa has eroded the sovereignty and bargaining power of mineral-rich nations such as the DRC and Angola.

Further, resources-for-security deals are less transparent and more complicated than prior resource bartering agreements.

DRC’s security gaps

The DRC is endowed with major deposits of critical minerals like cobalt, copper, lithium, manganese and tantalum. These are the building blocks for 21st century technologies: artificial intelligence, electric vehicles, wind energy and military security hardware. Rwanda has less mineral wealth than its neighbour, but is the world’s third-largest producer of tantalum, used in electronics, aerospace and medical devices.

For almost 30 years, minerals have fuelled conflict and severe violence, especially in eastern DRC. Tungsten, tantalum and gold (referred to as 3TG) finance and drive conflict as government forces and an estimated 130 armed groups vie for control over lucrative mining sites. Several reports and studies have implicated the DRC’s neighbours – Rwanda and Uganda – in supporting the illegal extraction of 3TG in this region.

The DRC government has failed to extend security over its vast (2.3 million square kilometres) and diverse territory (109 million people, representing 250 ethnic groups). Limited resources, logistical challenges and corruption have weakened its armed forces.

This context makes the United States’ military backing enormously attractive. But our research shows there are traps.

What states risk losing

Resources-for-infrastructure and resources-for-security deals generally offer African nations short-term stability, financing or global goodwill. However, the costs are often long-term because of an erosion of sovereign control.

Here’s how this happens:

Examples of loss or near-loss of sovereignty from these sorts of deals abound in Africa.

For instance, Angola’s US$2 billion oil-backed loan from China Eximbank in 2004. This was repayable in monthly deliveries of oil, with revenues directed to Chinese-controlled accounts. The loan’s design deprived Angolan authorities of decision-making power over that income stream even before the oil was extracted.

These deals also fragment accountability. They often span multiple ministries (such as defence, mining and trade), avoiding robust oversight or accountability. Fragmentation makes resource sectors vulnerable to elite capture. Powerful insiders can manipulate agreements for private gain.

In the DRC, this has created a violent kleptocracy, where resource wealth is systematically diverted away from popular benefit.

Finally, there is the risk of re-entrenching extractive trauma. Communities displaced for mining and environmental degradation in many countries across Africa illustrate the long-standing harm to livelihoods, health and social cohesion.

These are not new problems. But where extraction is tied to security or infrastructure, such damage risks becoming permanent features, not temporary costs.

What needs to change

Critical minerals are “critical” because they’re hard to mine or substitute. Additionally, their supply chains are strategically vulnerable and politically exposed. Whoever controls these minerals controls the future. Africa must make sure it doesn’t trade that future away.

In a world being reshaped by global interests in critical minerals, African states must not underestimate the strategic value of their mineral resources. They hold considerable leverage.

But leverage only works if it is wielded strategically. This means:

investing in institutional strength and legal capacity to negotiate better deals
demanding local value creation and addition
requiring transparency and parliamentary oversight for minerals-related agreements
refusing deals that bypass human rights, environmental or sovereignty standards.

Africa has the resources. It must hold on to the power they wield.

– Africa’s minerals are being bartered for security: why it’s a bad idea
– https://theconversation.com/africas-minerals-are-being-bartered-for-security-why-its-a-bad-idea-260594

MIL OSI Africa –

July 22, 2025

MIL-OSI Russia: SPbPU representatives took part in the cross-university examination of the Priority-2030 program

Translation. Region: Russian Federal

Source: Peter the Great St. Petersburg Polytechnic University –

An important disclaimer is at the bottom of this article.

The Sociocenter, with the support of the Ministry of Education and Science of Russia, has completed the selection of experts to conduct a cross-university examination of the implementation of the Priority-2030 program. Among them are the head of the SPbPU Office of Technological Leadership Oleg Rozhdestvensky, Vice-Rector for Continuing and Pre-University Education Dmitry Tikhonov and Director of the Department of Economics and Finance Elena Vinogradova.

In total, 156 representatives of universities participating in the Priority 2030 program and scientific organizations will be involved in the cross-university examination of the Priority 2030 program.

The selection of experts was a multi-stage process. At the correspondence stage, the selection committee assessed the professional experience and motivation of candidates based on their resumes and essays. As a result, 225 people received an invitation to an educational intensive course at Bauman Moscow State Technical University. There, the candidates’ leadership qualities, teamwork skills, ability to analyze information and formulate constructive proposals were assessed. The final stage was an online meeting with the participation of expert candidates, representatives of the Sociocenter and the Ministry of Education and Science of Russia, at which five strategically important areas of modern higher education were formulated:

target model and strategic positioning; university development management; strategic technology projects and change projects; knowledge production, transfer and application system for technological leadership; leadership and development team.

After the final list of experts was approved, the Sociocenter team began the final preparation of a large-scale expert work that will cover 113 universities participating in the Priority 2030 program. From September, experts will begin visiting universities across the country to assess their condition and develop recommendations for further development.

Cross-university assessment is an innovative format for assessing the activities of universities, in which the assessment is carried out by representatives of the professional community of university specialists themselves. This mechanism allows combining the principles of objective assessment with the possibility of mutual learning and dissemination of best practices.

“This is an excellent expert tool that has not only proven its effectiveness over the past couple of years, but has also ensured the formation of a community of qualified specialists in the field of university development,” commented Oleg Rozhdestvensky, Head of the SPbPU Office of Technological Leadership. “And the main difference this year is that such expert work is becoming systemic — more and more people and universities are getting involved. This is extremely important given the focus of most universities on the federal agenda of achieving technological leadership and the upcoming changes in the higher education system in the country.”

The Russian Ministry of Education and Science has been implementing the Priority 2030 program since 2021. Since 2025, the program has become part of the federal project Universities for a Generation of Leaders of the national project Youth and Children.

Based on materials from the Federal State Autonomous Institution “Sociocenter”

Please note: This information is raw content obtained directly from the source of the information. It is an accurate report of what the source claims and does not necessarily reflect the position of MIL-OSI or its clients.

.

MIL OSI Russia News –

July 22, 2025

MIL-OSI Russia: 2,139 freight trains passed through Manzhouli checkpoint in January-June this year

Translation. Region: Russian Federal

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

An important disclaimer is at the bottom of this article.

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

BEIJING, July 21 (Xinhua) — A total of 2,139 freight trains passed through Manzhouli Port on China-Europe international freight routes in the first half of this year, the press service of the people’s government of the city of the same name in the Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region said Monday.

These trains transported about 228 thousand standard containers /twenty-foot equivalent unit, TEU/. In particular, 1,360 similar trains passed through this border crossing in the opposite direction, delivering more than 141 thousand TEU to China. Compared to the same period last year, both indicators increased by 7.4 percent and 5.4 percent, respectively.

As of last month, in terms of the volume of freight train transportation on return trips through the Manzhouli border crossing, this border crossing has been ranked first in the country for six months in a row.

The Manzhouli checkpoint is located on the border of China with the Zabaikalsky Krai of Russia. Currently, China-Europe freight trains entering China connect Manzhouli with more than 60 cities in the country, including Harbin, Shanghai and Guangzhou. The range of products imported to China through this checkpoint includes essential goods, electronics, cars, edible oil, lumber, etc. -0-

Please note: This information is raw content obtained directly from the source of the information. It is an accurate report of what the source claims and does not necessarily reflect the position of MIL-OSI or its clients.

.

MIL OSI Russia News –

July 22, 2025

Category: Russian Federation

DRC’s security gaps

What states risk losing

What needs to change

UK hammers Putin’s energy revenues with fresh sanctions

Foreign Secretary David Lammy said:

Background

Share this page

Updates to this page

Invasion of Ukraine

DRC’s security gaps

What states risk losing

What needs to change

DRC’s security gaps

What states risk losing

What needs to change

Foreign Secretary David Lammy said:  

Background  