NewzIntel.com

Category: Ukraine

  • MIL-OSI Global: How King Charles is sending Canada subtle signals of support amid Trump’s threats

    Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Justin Vovk, Royal Historian, McMaster University

    It started as a joke. In December 2024, Donald Trump glibly told Justin Trudeau that Canada should become the 51st state. Three months later, the “joke” seems to have become an American foreign policy goal for the second Trump administration.



    Read more:
    How Donald Trump’s attacks on Canada are stoking a new Canadian nationalism

    Canadian Parliament has been unanimous in its response: “Canada is not for sale.” But Canada’s head of state, King Charles, has remained largely silent on the matter — until recently.

    Over the last several weeks, observers have started to pick up on subtle signs of support for Canadians from the King. But many people have no doubt been wondering why there’s not been a direct statement of support from King Charles.

    The answer to that question isn’t as simple as many people might think.

    King of Canada

    Since 1689, Britain has been a constitutional monarchy. The sovereign is the head of state, but the prime minister leads the government. As such, the King can’t interfere with politics. He is supposed to remain neutral and be the embodiment of the nation.

    This crucial separation between palace and Parliament was solidified in Canada and throughout the Commonwealth in 1931 with the Statute of Westminster. In 1954, the Royal Styles and Titles Act separated the British Crown from the other Commonwealth realms. Queen Elizabeth became the first sovereign to ever be called Queen of Canada.

    As a constitutional monarch, King Charles is bound by parliamentary limitations on his authority. He cannot act without taking advice from the prime ministers in his various realms.

    This means King Charles can’t make a political statement about the ongoing tensions between Canada and the U.S. without the green light from Ottawa. When asked about the situation in January, a palace official said simply that this is “not something we would comment on.”

    As former Alberta premier Jason Kenney later explained on social media:

    “For Canadians disappointed that King Charles has not commented on President Trump’s threats to annex Canada: in his capacity as King of Canada, he can only act on the advice of his Canadian first minister, i.e. Justin Trudeau.”

    Or, at this moment, Mark Carney.

    Signs of support

    The King met with Trudeau at Sandringham, the royal family’s private estate in Norfolk, England, on March 3. This meeting seems to have prompted a series of symbolic gestures demonstrating the monarchy’s solidarity with Canadians.

    The next day, the King conducted an inspection of the British aircraft carrier HMS Prince of Wales in his capacity as head of the Armed Forces. Canadian medals and honours adorned his naval dress uniform during the inspection.

    A week later, the King planted a red maple tree at Buckingham Palace to honour Queen Elizabeth’s commitment to the preservation of forests and the bonds among Commonwealth nations.

    On March 12, the King met with representatives from the Canadian Senate.

    He presented a ceremonial sword to Gregory Peters, the Usher of the Black Rod (one of the Senate’s chief protocol officers). Raymonde Gagné, the speaker of the Senate, was also present for that meeting.

    And on March 17, the King met with Carney as part of new prime minister’s whirlwind diplomatic tour of western Europe.

    Some observers even pointed to the Princess of Wales’s red dress at the Commonwealth Day Service of Celebration on March 10 as yet another nod of recognition for Canada.

    Soft power and the Royal Family

    These sorts of gestures are examples of what is known as “soft power.” Unlike the hard power of military and economic force used by governments, soft power describes any number of ways that people or groups can influence others through culture, personal diplomacy and even fashion.

    As one Buckingham Palace source remarked: “The King knows that seemingly small gestures can send a reassuring sign of recognition about what is going on around the world.”

    One of the best known forms of the monarchy wielding soft power is through the use of state visits. At the British prime minister’s request, world leaders are invited to London by the sovereign. The red carpet is rolled out for them, they’re wined and dined in lavish dinners at Buckingham Palace and they often make a speech to Parliament.

    These state visits are a way for the Royal Family to use their soft power to positively influence diplomatic relations.

    In February, British Prime Minister Keir Starmer presented Trump with an invitation from the King for a second state visit to the U.K.. So far, no date for the trip has been announced, but the King’s meetings with Trudeau and Ukraine’s Volodymyr Zelenskyy reportedly irritated Trump.

    It remains to be seen how King Charles navigates his constitutional role as both king of the United Kingdom and of Canada. Will Trump’s state visit only be about British interests? Or will Charles use it as a chance to address the concerns of his Canadian subjects?

    Justin Vovk received funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada. Justin Vovk is an advisory board member for the Institute of the Study of the Crown in Canada.

    – ref. How King Charles is sending Canada subtle signals of support amid Trump’s threats – https://theconversation.com/how-king-charles-is-sending-canada-subtle-signals-of-support-amid-trumps-threats-252142

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: Ukraine deal: Europe has learned from the failed 2015 Minsk accords with Putin. Trump has not

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Natalya Chernyshova, Senior Lecturer in Modern European History, Queen Mary University of London

    Germany’s ex chancellor, Angela Merkel, and France’s former president, François Hollande, were key to brokering the Minsk agreements. Sodel Vladyslav / Shutterstock

    The Russian president, Vladimir Putin, has agreed to pause attacks on Ukrainian energy infrastructure for 30 days following a phone call with his American counterpart, Donald Trump. On social media, Trump said the call was “very good and productive” and came “with an understanding that we will be working quickly to have a complete ceasefire”.

    This optimism is misplaced. The White House did not mention that Putin issued additional conditions for a ceasefire. The Kremlin demands that Ukraine be effectively disarmed, leaving it defenceless against a Russian takeover. Such terms would be unacceptable to Ukraine and its European partners.

    At this juncture, Trump and his negotiators would do well to ponder why previous attempts to restrain Russia and secure a lasting peace for Ukraine did not succeed.

    This war did not start when shells began to rain on Kyiv in February 2022. Russia had already been waging an undeclared war on its neighbour for nearly eight years in eastern Ukraine’s Donbas, where pro-Russian proxy forces have been stoking up trouble in the border regions of Luhansk and Donetsk.

    Attempts to end the fighting there were made in September 2014 and February 2015, when Russia and Ukraine signed ceasefire agreements during negotiations in Minsk, Belarus.

    Both sets of Minsk agreements proved to be non-starters. The fighting in the region rumbled on until it culminated in Moscow’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022. The accords stored problems for the future.

    Russia-backed separatists have controlled the south-eastern Ukrainian regions of Donetsk and Luhansk since 2015.
    Viacheslav Lopatin / Shutterstock

    Minsk-1 and Minsk-2

    The first Minsk protocols were signed in 2014 by Russia, Ukraine, separatists from Donbas and representatives from the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE). The agreement provided for an immediate ceasefire monitored by the OSCE, the withdrawal of “foreign mercenaries” from Ukraine and the establishment of a demilitarised buffer zone.

    But Moscow also insisted that Kyiv grant temporary “special status” to the Donetsk and Luhansk People’s Republics, the two separatist regions in Donbas. Instead of helping Ukraine regain control over its eastern territories, the agreement allowed the Russia-backed rebels to hold local elections and legalised them as a party to the conflict.

    The ceasefire collapsed within days of signing. The provisions that sought to demarcate the lines of the conflict and give Ukraine back control over its eastern border were not observed by the rebels, and fighting intensified during the winter.

    With the death toll rising, the leaders of France and Germany rushed to broker a fresh round of negotiations in February 2015. The resulting accords, which were known as Minsk-2, also failed to bring peace.

    Russia and its proxy militants in Donbas immediately and repeatedly violated its terms. Astonishingly, Minsk-2 did not even mention Russia, despite it signing the protocols. Moscow continued to deny its involvement in eastern Ukraine, while stepping up armed assistance to the rebels.

    Kyiv was saddled with peace terms that were impossible to implement unless Ukraine was prepared to throw away its sovereignty. Minsk-2 stipulated that the “special status” of the eastern separatist regions was to become permanent, and that the Ukrainian constitution was to be amended to allow for “decentralisation” of power from Kyiv to the rebel regions.

    These regions were to be granted autonomy in financial matters, responsibility for their stretch of the border with Russia, and the right to conclude foreign agreements and hold referenda. To undercut Ukrainian independence further, a neutrality clause inserted into its constitution would effectively bar the country’s entry into Nato.

    Understandably, no one in Kyiv rushed to implement these self-destructive terms. In an interview with German magazine Der Spiegel in 2023, Volodymyr Zelensky said that when he became Ukraine’s president in 2019 and examined Minsk-2, he “did not recognise any desire in the agreements to allow Ukraine its independence”.

    Russia-backed separatists in Sloviansk, a city in Donetsk Oblast, in 2014.
    Fotokon / Shutterstock

    Zelensky’s comment points to the fundamental flaw of the Minsk-2 agreement. Its western brokers failed to recognise that Russian war aims were irreconcilable with Ukrainian sovereignty. Moscow’s objective from the start was to use Donbas to destabilise the government in Kyiv and gain control over Ukraine.

    Western peacemakers searched for a compromise, but the Kremlin used Minsk-2 to advance its goals. As Duncan Allan of the Chatham House research institute noted in 2020: “Russia sees the Minsk agreements as tools with which to break Ukraine’s sovereignty.” The war in Donbas raged on and, by 2020, had claimed 14,000 lives, with 1.5 million people becoming refugees.

    Germany’s ex-chancellor, Angela Merkel, a key broker, subsequently defended the Minsk agreements. She said they bought Kyiv time to arm itself against Russia. It was a costly purchase. Minsk-2 froze the conflict in one locality rather than ended it. And it encouraged Russia, paving the way for a full-scale invasion.

    Emphasising Ukrainian sovereignty

    The existential differences between Ukraine and Russia that plagued the Minsk agreements remain today. Ukraine has demonstrated its resolve to defend its sovereignty, while Russia’s invasion in 2022 testifies to its determination to squash Ukrainian resolve. The timing of the attack so close to the seventh anniversary of Minsk-2 adds grim emphasis to that point.

    This clash of objectives must be addressed head-on in any peace negotiations. The only way to secure lasting peace in Europe is to avoid rewarding the aggressor and punishing its victim.

    The Kremlin has already openly declared that it sees Trump-led brokerage as the west’s acknowledgement of Russian strategic superiority. It needs to be disabused of this notion. As argued by Nataliya Bugayova, a fellow at the Institute for the Study of War, the war is not lost yet. Russia is far from invulnerable, and it can be made to accept defeat.

    But for any agreement to be effective, there can be no ambiguity or middle ground on the subject of Ukrainian sovereignty. It must be protected and backed by security guarantees.

    So far, the Trump administration has shown little understanding of this. But ten years down the line from Minsk-2, Europeans have finally grasped it.

    Finland’s president, Aleksander Stubbs, told reporters on March 19 that Ukraine must “absolutely” not lose sovereignty and territory. And, on the day Trump and Putin had their discussion, Germany’s parliament voted for a massive boost in defence spending – another indicator that Europeans are no longer taking Putin on trust.

    Natalya Chernyshova received funding from the British Academy during 2020-2022.

    – ref. Ukraine deal: Europe has learned from the failed 2015 Minsk accords with Putin. Trump has not – https://theconversation.com/ukraine-deal-europe-has-learned-from-the-failed-2015-minsk-accords-with-putin-trump-has-not-252540

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: If we fully engage with how generative AI works, we can still create original art

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Anthony Downey, Professor of Visual Culture, Birmingham City University

    Even before the recent protest by a group of well-known musicians at the UK government’s plans to allow AI companies to use copyright-protected work for training, disquiet around artists’ rights was already growing.

    In early February, an open letter from artists around the world called on Christie’s auction house to cancel a sale of art created with the assistance of generative AI (GenAI). This is a form of artificial intelligence that creates content – including text, images, or music – based on the patterns learned from colossal data sets.

    Without giving specific examples, the letter suggested that many of the works included in the sale, which was entitled “Augmented Intelligence” were “known to be trained on copyrighted work without a licence” and suggested that such sales further “incentivises AI companies’ mass theft of human artists’ work”.

    This article is part of our State of the Arts series. These articles tackle the challenges of the arts and heritage industry – and celebrate the wins, too.

    If we think about Dall-E, Midjourney, and Stable Diffusion, all of which use text prompts to generate images and are trained on data sets harvested from online sources, the letter raised significant issues about the nature of artistic creativity and how the legal concept of “fair use” and originality is applied in such cases.

    These are complex debates, encompassing perennial misgivings about machine automation, intellectual property (IP), and the cherished ideal that ingenuity and originality remain the sole preserve of humanity.

    How to think from within GenAI

    The impact of AI on the creative industries has become a major issue in the UK and elsewhere, so much so that we are faced with an existential question: how do we understand the evolving impact of AI on human creativity today?

    The scope of this enquiry reveals a simple fact: we need to develop more accessible and inclusive ways to think from within AI image processing models. This is exactly what my latest research, produced in collaboration with the acclaimed artist and photographer Trevor Paglen, proposes.

    How, this research asks, do we better understand the mechanisms behind the collation and labelling of the data sets that are used to train AI? And how, in turn, can we create new ways for understanding the extent to which AI image-production models inform our experience the world?

    It is, I argue, through the development of interdisciplinary research methods that draw upon the arts and humanities that we can critically engage with these concerns.

    Although the open letter addressed to Christie’s alluded to these topics, it did not, perhaps unsurprisingly, observe the degree to which some of the more prominent artists in the Augmented Intelligence sale had actively engaged in providing visual methods and insights into how GenAI functions.

    It is notable that Holly Herndon and Mat Dryhurst’s work xhairymutantx scrutinises how the data sets used in AI models of image production both define and transform images. For example, if you type the word “Holly Herndon” into Midjourney, it will produce images that are based on data sets derived from Herndon’s online presence.

    To draw attention to, and simultaneously disrupt, this process, the artists generated their own data sets of images and labelled them “Holly Herndon”. The images in these data sets had been previously manipulated to emphasise certain qualities associated with Herndon (her red hair, for example). Once fed back into the AI image processing model, the ensuing images of “Holly Herndon” became evermore outlandish and exaggerated.

    This clearly shows that AI image processing is a highly inconsistent and selective procedure that can be manipulated with ease.

    If we consider how models of AI image processing are used in facial recognition and drone technologies – often with fatal consequences – this is an urgent concern.

    Reflecting upon aerial photography in his work Machine Hallucinations – ISS Dreams, artist and data visualisation pioneer Refik Anandol used a data set of 1.2 million images collated by the International Space Station (ISS). Alongside other satellite images of Earth, he produced an AI-generated composition.

    Employing generative adversarial networks (GANs) – an AI model that trains neural networks to recognise, classify and, crucially, generate new images – Anandol effectively produced a unique landscape that changes over time and never seems to repeat itself.

    In both these examples, artists are not simply engaging in either “mass theft” or using AI models that have been trained on large data sets to mechanically produce images. They are explicitly drawing attention to how the data sets used to train AI can be both strategically engineered and actively disrupted.

    In our recent book (to which I contributed as editor and author), Trevor Paglen, whose work was not in the Christie’s sale, reveals how data sets regularly produce disquieting, hallucinatory allegories of our world.

    Given that GANs are trained on specific data sets and do not experience the world as such, they often produce hallucinatory and uncanny versions of it. Although often considered to be a fault or a glitch in the system, the event of hallucination, as Paglen demonstrates, is nevertheless central to GenAI.

    In images such as Rainbow, which was produced using a data set created and labelled by Paglen, we see a ghostly image of our world that discloses the inner, latent mechanics of image production in GANs.

    Paglen’s practice, alongside that of Dryhurst, Herndon and Anandol, defines a clear distinction between those artists who casually use AI to generate yet more images and those who critically investigate the operative logic of AI. The latter approach is precisely what is needed when it comes to thinking through GenAI and rendering it more accountable as a technology that has evolved to define significant aspects of our lives.

    If we allow that the internal workings of AI are opaque to users and programmers alike, it is all the more crucial that we explore how art practices – and the humanities more broadly – can encourage us to think from within these unaccountable systems. In doing so we could significantly improve levels of understanding and engagement with a technology that is defining the future and our relationship to it.

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

    – ref. If we fully engage with how generative AI works, we can still create original art – https://theconversation.com/if-we-fully-engage-with-how-generative-ai-works-we-can-still-create-original-art-251993

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: European defence spending: three technical reasons for political cooperation

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Francesco Grillo, Academic Fellow, Department of Social and Political Sciences, Bocconi University

    How much would it really cost the European Union to defend itself against aggression? In the immediate term, that question, of course makes us think of Russia, but we can no longer exclude multiple other possibilities, including the potential need to defend territory – say, Greenland – from a former ally.

    How much would it cost to defend Europe if we added in the need to defend the UK, Norway, Turkey or even Canada – and any other Nato country willing to pool resources to fill the void left by US disengagement? Is there an intelligent way to avoid painful trade-offs between this and, say, spending on healthcare or education?

    It looks like EU institutions are finally “doing something” (as former Italian prime minister Mario Draghi recently asked them to do). They may even break the taboo of raising common debt in order to increase spending on joint defence procurements.

    Yet, it also seems they are about to launch a plan that could change the very nature of the European Union without even tackling the question of its financial feasibility. The answer to how joint defence can be paid for certainly doesn’t come from the plan that the European Commission has unveiled on “rearming Europe”. At the very last line of that statement, a figure of €800 billion is posited, but it is not clear how the sum was calculated and quite a few critical qualifications are missing.

    The debate over how much it costs to prevent a war (which is a very different notion from fighting one), has been dominated by what I would call “the fallacy of the percentage of GDP”.

    In 2014 (at the time of Russia’s annexation of Crimea), the leaders of Nato countries agreed to spend at least 2% of their GDP on defence (specifying that retirement benefits to veterans should be included). Yet by 2022, the overall ratio for Nato defence spending had, in fact, shrunk from 2.58% of GDP to 2.51% (thanks to the sharp reduction in the percentage of GDP contributed by the US). And, according to the European Defence Agency, the EU is spending around €279 billion, which is 1.6% of its GDP. Most likely, the €800 billion figure that European Commission president Ursula von der Leyen was citing in her communique is simply an estimate of how much it would yield to increase that spending up to 2% of GDP for each of the next ten years.

    Politicians sometimes need to make back-of-the-envelope calculations, but I would argue that here it points to a much broader problem. Europe hasn’t yet bothered to try to develop a strategy for how this additional money would be spent. A proper strategy should, in fact, start from three key technical considerations. To which I would add a no-less important political one.

    1. Spending smart is better than spending big

    Technologies (including AI) are radically changing the equation. The conflicts in Ukraine and Gaza demonstrate that cheap drones are now the key to modern warfare – not super expensive F35 strike fighters. Why spend billions designing, building and maintaining 2,500 F35s when a drone the size of a mobile phone can cross enemy lines unnoticed?

    In a world in which data is a weapon, and a large-scale attack can be mounted by taking remote control of pagers, what generals call “supremacy” doesn’t necessarily belong to the biggest spender.

    Israel’s military budget is one-third that of Saudi Arabia, yet it dominates the Middle East because its perpetual state of conflict forces innovation. Russia spends less than half of the 27 EU member states, but it has much more experience in hacking other countries’ infrastructures. The EU spends as much as China, but China invests more than twice in research and development and is the world’s largest exporter of drones as a result.

    2. Spending together is better value

    The European parliament estimates that merging the 27 member states’ defence budgets would free up €56 billion (which is a third of what the defence bonds proposed by the Commission would raise).

    Yet the trend is to spend more alone than together. According to the European Defence Agency, the bloc has more than doubled its expenditure on new digital technologies; yet the percentage of that going into joint projects between member states fell from 11% before Ukraine’s invasion to 6.5% in 2023.

    Joint tech spending in Europe.
    Vision, CC BY-ND

    3. Homegrown suddenly looks safer

    Any common defence would also have to rely on “buying European” as much as possible. The F35 fighter jet is another good example here. Denmark agreed to buy 27 of them (to the tune of around €3 billion) with an idea to station four of them in Greenland. The problem is that, according to the former president of the Munich security conference Wolfgang Ischinger, they cannot even take off if remotely disabled by the US. Again, Europe is not walking the walk. The share of equipment that European nations import from the US has massively increased in the last five years.

    A new era for the union

    Defence is probably the most important issue when talking about the Europe of the future. It provides a concrete opportunity to fill a technological gap out of the necessity to do so. Spending on defence in the interests of self-protection may have longer-term benefits beyond the military arena. It has been often the case that military research leads to major breakthroughs that can applied in public services. Who knows. Military innovations with drone or AI technology on today’s battlefields could lead to beneficial uses in peace time.

    The historic opportunity to transform the way we protect ourselves may even force a radical rethinking of not just the EU treaties but of the nature of the EU. The idea of the “coalition of the willing” may, indeed, push Europe towards an alliance which does not include some of its members (such as Hungary) but does include non-members like the UK, Norway and even Turkey. New arrangements will need to be pragmatically flexible.

    Europeans need much more strategy, whereas we now largely have rhetorical announcements with little substance. And we need much more democracy. After all, defence is one of the defining dimensions of the state. Having a common defence policy in Europe could make people feel more like European citizens. But that cannot happen without engaging citizens in an intelligent debate.

    Francesco Grillo is affiliated with the think tank Vision.

    – ref. European defence spending: three technical reasons for political cooperation – https://theconversation.com/european-defence-spending-three-technical-reasons-for-political-cooperation-252410

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: Ukraine deal: Europe has learned from the failed 2014 Minsk accords with Putin. Trump has not

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Natalya Chernyshova, Senior Lecturer in Modern European History, Queen Mary University of London

    Germany’s ex chancellor, Angela Merkel, and France’s former president, François Hollande, were key to brokering the Minsk agreements. Sodel Vladyslav / Shutterstock

    The Russian president, Vladimir Putin, has agreed to pause attacks on Ukrainian energy infrastructure for 30 days following a phone call with his American counterpart, Donald Trump. On social media, Trump said the call was “very good and productive” and came “with an understanding that we will be working quickly to have a complete ceasefire”.

    This optimism is misplaced. The White House did not mention that Putin issued additional conditions for a ceasefire. The Kremlin demands that Ukraine be effectively disarmed, leaving it defenceless against a Russian takeover. Such terms would be unacceptable to Ukraine and its European partners.

    At this juncture, Trump and his negotiators would do well to ponder why previous attempts to restrain Russia and secure a lasting peace for Ukraine did not succeed.

    This war did not start when shells began to rain on Kyiv in February 2022. Russia had already been waging an undeclared war on its neighbour for nearly eight years in eastern Ukraine’s Donbas, where pro-Russian proxy forces have been stoking up trouble in the border regions of Luhansk and Donetsk.

    Attempts to end the fighting there were made in September 2014 and February 2015, when Russia and Ukraine signed ceasefire agreements during negotiations in Minsk, Belarus.

    Both sets of Minsk agreements proved to be non-starters. The fighting in the region rumbled on until it culminated in Moscow’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022. The accords stored problems for the future.

    Russia-backed separatists have controlled the south-eastern Ukrainian regions of Donetsk and Luhansk since 2015.
    Viacheslav Lopatin / Shutterstock

    Minsk-1 and Minsk-2

    The first Minsk protocols were signed in 2014 by Russia, Ukraine, separatists from Donbas and representatives from the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE). The agreement provided for an immediate ceasefire monitored by the OSCE, the withdrawal of “foreign mercenaries” from Ukraine and the establishment of a demilitarised buffer zone.

    But Moscow also insisted that Kyiv grant temporary “special status” to the Donetsk and Luhansk People’s Republics, the two separatist regions in Donbas. Instead of helping Ukraine regain control over its eastern territories, the agreement allowed the Russia-backed rebels to hold local elections and legalised them as a party to the conflict.

    The ceasefire collapsed within days of signing. The provisions that sought to demarcate the lines of the conflict and give Ukraine back control over its eastern border were not observed by the rebels, and fighting intensified during the winter.

    With the death toll rising, the leaders of France and Germany rushed to broker a fresh round of negotiations in February 2015. The resulting accords, which were known as Minsk-2, also failed to bring peace.

    Russia and its proxy militants in Donbas immediately and repeatedly violated its terms. Astonishingly, Minsk-2 did not even mention Russia, despite it signing the protocols. Moscow continued to deny its involvement in eastern Ukraine, while stepping up armed assistance to the rebels.

    Kyiv was saddled with peace terms that were impossible to implement unless Ukraine was prepared to throw away its sovereignty. Minsk-2 stipulated that the “special status” of the eastern separatist regions was to become permanent, and that the Ukrainian constitution was to be amended to allow for “decentralisation” of power from Kyiv to the rebel regions.

    These regions were to be granted autonomy in financial matters, responsibility for their stretch of the border with Russia, and the right to conclude foreign agreements and hold referenda. To undercut Ukrainian independence further, a neutrality clause inserted into its constitution would effectively bar the country’s entry into Nato.

    Understandably, no one in Kyiv rushed to implement these self-destructive terms. In an interview with German magazine Der Spiegel in 2023, Volodymyr Zelensky said that when he became Ukraine’s president in 2019 and examined Minsk-2, he “did not recognise any desire in the agreements to allow Ukraine its independence”.

    Russia-backed separatists in Sloviansk, a city in Donetsk Oblast, in 2014.
    Fotokon / Shutterstock

    Zelensky’s comment points to the fundamental flaw of the Minsk-2 agreement. Its western brokers failed to recognise that Russian war aims were irreconcilable with Ukrainian sovereignty. Moscow’s objective from the start was to use Donbas to destabilise the government in Kyiv and gain control over Ukraine.

    Western peacemakers searched for a compromise, but the Kremlin used Minsk-2 to advance its goals. As Duncan Allan of the Chatham House research institute noted in 2020: “Russia sees the Minsk agreements as tools with which to break Ukraine’s sovereignty.” The war in Donbas raged on and, by 2020, had claimed 14,000 lives, with 1.5 million people becoming refugees.

    Germany’s ex-chancellor, Angela Merkel, a key broker, subsequently defended the Minsk agreements. She said they bought Kyiv time to arm itself against Russia. It was a costly purchase. Minsk-2 froze the conflict in one locality rather than ended it. And it encouraged Russia, paving the way for a full-scale invasion.

    Emphasising Ukrainian sovereignty

    The existential differences between Ukraine and Russia that plagued the Minsk agreements remain today. Ukraine has demonstrated its resolve to defend its sovereignty, while Russia’s invasion in 2022 testifies to its determination to squash Ukrainian resolve. The timing of the attack so close to the seventh anniversary of Minsk-2 adds grim emphasis to that point.

    This clash of objectives must be addressed head-on in any peace negotiations. The only way to secure lasting peace in Europe is to avoid rewarding the aggressor and punishing its victim.

    The Kremlin has already openly declared that it sees Trump-led brokerage as the west’s acknowledgement of Russian strategic superiority. It needs to be disabused of this notion. As argued by Nataliya Bugayova, a fellow at the Institute for the Study of War, the war is not lost yet. Russia is far from invulnerable, and it can be made to accept defeat.

    But for any agreement to be effective, there can be no ambiguity or middle ground on the subject of Ukrainian sovereignty. It must be protected and backed by security guarantees.

    So far, the Trump administration has shown little understanding of this. But ten years down the line from Minsk-2, Europeans have finally grasped it.

    Finland’s president, Aleksander Stubbs, told reporters on March 19 that Ukraine must “absolutely” not lose sovereignty and territory. And, on the day Trump and Putin had their discussion, Germany’s parliament voted for a massive boost in defence spending – another indicator that Europeans are no longer taking Putin on trust.

    Natalya Chernyshova received funding from the British Academy during 2020-2022.

    – ref. Ukraine deal: Europe has learned from the failed 2014 Minsk accords with Putin. Trump has not – https://theconversation.com/ukraine-deal-europe-has-learned-from-the-failed-2014-minsk-accords-with-putin-trump-has-not-252540

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: A ‘golden age’ of global free trade is over. Smaller alliances can meet the moment

    Source: The Conversation – France – By Armin Steinbach, Professor of Law and Economics, HEC Paris Business School

    The global trade landscape is shifting, and not in the way free traders had hoped. For decades, the belief that economic openness could foster peace and stability reigned supreme. Trade, it was argued, could transform authoritarian regimes into more peaceful players. But Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has shattered this way of thinking. Rather than mourning the end of a multilateralism based on states’ commitments to jointly agreed trade rules, we should see it as a necessary adjustment to a world where economic security takes precedence over market efficiency, and resilience over cost minimization.

    The World Trade Organization (WTO), which has constrained protectionism since its inception in 1995, is no longer the linchpin of global trade it once was. Multilateral trade talks have stagnated, and the WTO’s dispute settlement system is in paralysis. The US, once a champion of rules-based trade, now finds strategic advantage in a world where power dynamics outweigh legal frameworks. Years of negotiations on agriculture and fisheries subsidies have yielded little progress, underscoring the difficulty of reaching consensus among increasingly divergent national interests.


    A weekly e-mail in English featuring expertise from scholars and researchers. It provides an introduction to the diversity of research coming out of the continent and considers some of the key issues facing European countries. Get the newsletter!

    Consider the Uruguay Round negotiations in the 1990s that led to the establishment of the WTO – a rare moment when 123 countries found common ground on liberalizing trade in goods, services and intellectual property. That success stemmed from a broad agenda that offered enough variety to create win-win scenarios for all. Today, narrow negotiation agendas make compromise far harder to achieve.

    Free trade agreements are emerging less frequently: the average number of new trade agreements per year since 2020 is less than half the average of the previous decade. Meanwhile, protectionist measures have proliferated: there were about five times as many in 2023 as in 2015. Regardless of US President Donald Trump’s tariff frenzy, governments are erecting trade barriers and adopting policies that favour domestic industries, driven by the need to secure critical supply chains.

    The trend is clear: trade liberalization is no longer the top priority for most countries. Instead, security concerns are reshaping trade policy, echoing the arguments of the 18th-century philosopher Adam Smith. In The Wealth of Nations, Smith argued that national defence is more valuable than economic wealth. (“Defence,” he wrote, “is of much more importance than opulence”). This idea feels particularly relevant today. In a world of geopolitical conflict, trade is often yielding to strategic concerns.

    The United Nations, despite its mission to maintain peace, has struggled to prevent conflict. If international law cannot deter aggression, economic policy must step in.

    Security-driven trade

    For the EU, this translates into using its trade policy instruments, especially vis-à-vis China, on the basis of a careful dependency analysis that identifies strategic commodities and products. As the European Commission sets self-sufficiency benchmarks for green technologies following the bloc’s Net-Zero Industry Act, it errs if it sees the substitution of domestic products for imports as the right way to reduce dependencies. In most cases, reducing import concentration will require diversifying suppliers rather than European self-production.

    Security-driven trade requires shifting away from fragile multilateralism toward more selective, regional alliances. These “trade clubs” would align economic interests with shared security priorities. The EU’s strengthening ties with the South American Mercosur states, a group of non-hegemonic countries reliant on open trade, exemplify this approach. Intensifying trade with targeted countries could be the best response to Trump’s tariffs, avoiding the lose-lose outcome of tit-for-tat tariff wars. The goal of autonomy from an unpredictable US offers a good framework for crafting new bilateral relationships.

    Another example is the idea of a “climate club”, which policy-makers have discussed for some time. Climate clubs would consist of countries that agree on joint strategies to reduce carbon emissions while fostering energy security and protecting their economies from competitors without adequate carbon pricing.



    À lire aussi :
    Trump protectionism and tariffs: a threat to globalisation, or to democracy itself?

    The challenge is to distinguish between “legitimate” and “illegitimate” security claims. The latter refer to countries’ growing abuse of the national security card to justify trade policies. WTO dispute settlement panels ruled against the “self-judging” character of national security claims, hence subjecting them to legal scrutiny, but this “rule of law” approach has only heightened rejection of the WTO system on the US side. To limit abuse, the EU should seek alignment with the US on issues of common concern, such as responding to industrial overcapacity or preventing technology leaks. A joint approach could avert nationalist unilateralism.

    A new focus for the WTO

    Some worry this shift away from multilateralism could disadvantage poorer nations, leaving them vulnerable to the whims of powerful ones. However, regional trade alliances can empower smaller states. For example, the African Continental Free Trade Area (AfCFTA) gives African nations collective bargaining power they might lack individually. Since its inception with 22 signatories, AfCFTA has grown to include 48 countries, enhancing the continent’s influence in global trade.

    Abandoning multilateralism doesn’t mean sidelining the WTO entirely. Instead, the WTO can refocus on smaller, “plurilateral” agreements among like-minded countries. This “coalition of the willing” approach has already proven effective in areas like e-commerce and investment facilitation. The WTO can remain a forum for building consensus, but its future lies in fostering flexible partnerships rather than pursuing grand, all-encompassing trade deals. In a fragmented world, these smaller agreements could yield the most meaningful progress. Nascent but promising plurilateral efforts are under way to tackle fossil fuel subsidies and environmentally sustainable plastics trade.

    The golden age of global free trade may be over, but that doesn’t spell disaster. As nations grapple with security challenges, trade policy must evolve to reflect new priorities. Strategic alliances, diversified supply chains and targeted trade agreements will shape the future of global commerce. Rather than lament the decline of multilateralism, we should embrace this shift as a necessary response to a more volatile world. In doing so, we can craft a trade policy that prioritizes resilience and security, safeguarding both economic stability and national interests.

    Armin Steinbach ne travaille pas, ne conseille pas, ne possède pas de parts, ne reçoit pas de fonds d’une organisation qui pourrait tirer profit de cet article, et n’a déclaré aucune autre affiliation que son organisme de recherche.

    – ref. A ‘golden age’ of global free trade is over. Smaller alliances can meet the moment – https://theconversation.com/a-golden-age-of-global-free-trade-is-over-smaller-alliances-can-meet-the-moment-251438

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: Only 15 countries have met the latest Paris agreement deadline. Is any nation serious about tackling climate change?

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Doug Specht, Reader in Cultural Geography and Communication, University of Westminster

    Svet Foto/Shutterstock

    The latest deadline for countries to submit plans for slashing the greenhouse gas emissions fuelling climate change has passed. Only 15 countries met it – less than 8% of the 194 parties currently signed up to the Paris agreement, which obliges countries to submit new proposals for eliminating emissions every five years.

    Known as nationally determined contributions, or NDCs, these plans outline how each country intends to help limit average global temperature rise to 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels, or at most 2°C. This might include cutting emissions by generating more energy from wind and solar, or adapting to a heating world by restoring wetlands as protection against more severe floods and wildfires.

    Each new NDC should outline more stringent emissions cuts than the last. It should also show how each country seeks to mitigate climate change over the following ten years. This system is designed to progressively strengthen (or “ratchet up”) global efforts to combat climate change.

    The February 2025 deadline for submitting NDCs was set nine months before the next UN climate change conference, Cop30 in Belém, Brazil.

    Without a comprehensive set of NDCs for countries to compare themselves against, there will be less pressure on negotiators to raise national ambitions. Assessing how much money certain countries need to decarbonise and adapt to climate change, and how much is available, will also be more difficult.

    While countries can (and some will) continue to submit NDCs, the poor compliance rate so far suggests a lack of urgency that bodes ill for avoiding the worst climate outcomes this century.

    Who submitted?

    The 15 countries that submitted NDCs on time include the United Arab Emirates, the UK, Switzerland, Ecuador and a number of small states, such as Andorra and the Marshall Islands.

    Cop30 host Brazil submitted a pledge to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 59-67% by 2035, compared to 2005 levels. This is up from its previous commitment, a 37% reduction by 2025 and 43% by 2030. Unfortunately, Brazil is not on track to meet its 2025 target and has set a more recent emissions baseline that will make any reductions more modest than they’d otherwise be.

    Japan aims to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 60% in 2035 and 73% in 2040, compared to 2013 levels. Japan’s previous target was for a 46% reduction by 2030. This demonstrates how the ratchet system is supposed to work.

    The UK’s NDC, which pledges to reduce all greenhouse gas emissions by at least 81% by 2035, compared to 1990 levels, was described by independent scientists as “compatible” with limiting global heating to 1.5°C.

    The US submitted a plan to reduce net greenhouse gas emissions by 61-66% below 2005 levels by 2035. However, this was before Donald Trump pulled the US out of the Paris agreement (for the second time), so the commitment of one of the world’s largest polluters is in doubt.

    Who didn’t submit?

    Some of the world’s largest emitters failed to submit new NDCs, including China, India and Russia.

    India pledged to reduce its emissions by 35% below 2005 levels by 2030 at the signing of the Paris agreement. All of the country’s subsequent NDCs have been rated as “insufficient” by independent scientists. India’s recent national budget announcement offered scant additional funding for climate mitigation and adaptation measures.

    China also made big promises in 2015 with its aim to lower its CO₂ emissions by 65% by 2030, from a 2005 baseline. However, China has been responsible for over 90% of global CO₂ emissions growth since the Paris agreement was signed. China and the US also suspended formal discussions on climate change in 2022. Increased economic competition between these two nations has resulted in export control restrictions and tariffs which have made green technologies like electric vehicles more expensive, which is certain to slow down the shift from fossil fuels.

    Russia joined the Paris agreement in 2019. Its first NDC was labelled “critically insufficient” by scientists, and its follow-up in 2020 did not include increased targets. Russia is maximising the extraction of resources such as oil, gas and minerals and its 2035 strategy for the Arctic included plans to sink several oil wells on the continental shelf.

    With the USA’s 2025 NDC in limbo, President Trump is eyeing mineral reserves in Ukraine and Greenland, further ramping up oil production and cutting international climate research funding.

    The European Union could have positioned itself as a leader of global climate action, in lieu of US involvement. But the EU, which submits NDCs as a bloc alongside individual country submissions, also failed to submit on time.

    Global shifts

    The failure of most nations to submit new emission plans suggests that the era of cooperation on climate change is over. The largest and most powerful of these nations are growing their military and diplomatic presence around the world, particularly in countries with large reserves of critical minerals for electric vehicles and other technology relevant to decarbonisation. The lack of NDCs from these nations may be less a matter of middling green ambitions, more an attempt to disguise their planned exploitation of other countries’ resources.

    If countries keep failing to submit enhanced NDCs, or even withdraw from their commitments entirely, scientists warn that global heating could reach a catastrophic 4.4°C by 2100. This scenario assumes the continued, unabated use of fossil fuels, with little regard for the climate.

    In a more optimistic scenario, countries could limit warming to around 1.8°C by 2100. This will require global cooperation and significant investment in green technology, and entail a transition to net zero emissions by mid-century. This is a process that must include everyone. Simply having the most powerful nations decarbonise by exploiting and hoarding resources will imperil this critical target.

    The actual outcome will probably fall somewhere between these two scenarios, depending on forthcoming NDCs and how quickly and thoroughly they are implemented. All of the scenarios envisaged by climate scientists will involve warming continuing for decades.

    The effects of this warming will vary, however, based on the path we choose today.

    Don’t have time to read about climate change as much as you’d like?

    Get a weekly roundup in your inbox instead. Every Wednesday, The Conversation’s environment editor writes Imagine, a short email that goes a little deeper into just one climate issue. Join the 40,000+ readers who’ve subscribed so far.

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

    – ref. Only 15 countries have met the latest Paris agreement deadline. Is any nation serious about tackling climate change? – https://theconversation.com/only-15-countries-have-met-the-latest-paris-agreement-deadline-is-any-nation-serious-about-tackling-climate-change-250847

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI United Kingdom: UK Reaffirms Support for Ukraine, Emphasizes Ceasefire and Accountability Amid Ongoing Conflict: UK Statement to the OSCE

    Source: United Kingdom – Executive Government & Departments

    Speech

    UK Reaffirms Support for Ukraine, Emphasizes Ceasefire and Accountability Amid Ongoing Conflict: UK Statement to the OSCE

    UK Military Advisor, Lt Col Joby Rimmer, says Ukraine’s long-term security depends on a multifaceted approach of immediate ceasefire efforts, robust security arrangements, and economic and humanitarian support.

    Thank you, Mr Chair. As we reaffirm our unwavering support for Ukraine in defending its territorial integrity and right to exist, we continue to emphasise the importance of its freedom, sovereignty, and independence. These principles are critical to securing Ukraine’s long-term prosperity and security and are paramount to ensuring stability and peace in the region.

    Recent efforts to achieve a ceasefire have rightly dominated the strategic narrative. The meeting on March 11 between the USA and Ukraine in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia was promising. We applaud Ukraine’s commitment to an immediate ceasefire, which is an essential step towards a comprehensive, just, and lasting peace in line with the Charter of the United Nations. A ceasefire is not only a cessation of hostilities but also a foundation for rebuilding trust and fostering long-term stability.

    Although we don’t have the full details from the dialogue between the USA and Russia yesterday, we understand that Putin has repeated his ‘Yes but No’ approach to a ceasefire, expressing concerns regarding the monitoring of the line of conflict and Ukraine’s ability to mobilise and re-arm in the interim. Russia’s demand for the complete cessation of provision of foreign military aid and intelligence to Kyiv is likely to prevent rapid progress. We repeat that any ceasefire must be respected, and that robust and credible security arrangements are necessary to ensure that Ukraine can deter and defend against any renewed acts of aggression.

    The UK welcomes the proposed agreement on a cessation of kinetic strikes on energy infrastructure, but again, we call on Russia to fully reciprocate by explicitly agreeing to a ceasefire in all areas and implementing it completely. Should Russia fail to agree to such a ceasefire, we remain prepared to impose further costs, including additional sanctions, caps on oil prices, and increased support for Ukraine. The use of extraordinary revenues stemming from immobilised Russian Sovereign Assets will also be considered.

    The devastating impact of the war continues. Russian attacks on civilians and civilian infrastructure are deeply alarming. The destruction of homes, schools, hospitals, and other critical infrastructure has caused immense suffering and displacement. A Russian attack on Pokrovsk on March 17 severely injured three children. A Russian drone attack on a hospital in Kharkiv Oblast caused a 1500 square yard building fire, and the subsequent assault targeted rescue workers. On March 8, a coordinated strike on apartment buildings in Dobropillia killed 11 people and injured 30. We must emphasise the importance of accountability for these actions and reaffirm our commitment again to work together to achieve a durable peace.

    In conclusion, Ukraine’s long-term prosperity and security depend on a multifaceted approach that includes immediate ceasefire efforts, robust security arrangements, economic and humanitarian support, and accountability for actions taken during the conflict. By standing together with Ukraine, we can achieve a durable peace and ensure that Ukraine remains democratic, free, strong and prosperous. The path to peace and prosperity is challenging, but it is achievable. Thank you, Mr Chair.

    Updates to this page

    Published 19 March 2025

    Invasion of Ukraine

    MIL OSI United Kingdom –

  • MIL-OSI: Expansion in Nickel Mining Market Thriving from Heightened Demand Around the Globe

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    PALM BEACH, Fla., March 19, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — FN Media Group News Commentary – According to a report from Grand View Research, the nickel mining industry worldwide is expected to reach a projected revenue of US$83.813 Billion by 2030. A compound annual growth rate of 6.6% is expected of the worldwide nickel mining industry from 2023 to 2030.Growth in end-use industries such as construction, consumer durables, and machinery & equipment are propelling the growth of the stainless steel industry. Nickel is one of the key raw materials of stainless steel. Hence, development in the stainless steel industry is contributing to the growth of the market. According to the Nickel Institute, over two-thirds of the world’s nickel is utilized in the production of stainless steel. It acts as an alloying agent, enhancing essential properties such as formability, ductility, and weldability while also increasing corrosion resistance for specific applications. Another Grand View Research report said: “The nickel mining industry is highly competitive and to gain an edge, major players are acquiring their competitors. The batteries segment is anticipated to register the fastest CAGR of 7.2% in terms of revenue, over the forecast period (2030). Nickel batteries offer a cost-effective solution for achieving higher energy density and storage capabilities.” Active Companies in the market today include: First Atlantic Nickel Corp. (OTCQB: FANCF) (TSX-V: FAN), Ballard Power Systems (NASDAQ: BLDP), First Hydrogen Corp. (OTCPK: FHYDF) (TSX-V: FHYD), Bloom Energy Corporation (NYSE: BE), FuelCell Energy, Inc. (NASDAQ: FCEL).

    Grand View Research continued: “Based on region, Asia Pacific held the largest revenue share of over 57.0% in 2022. The growth in various industries, such as battery manufacturing, automotive & defense, and petrochemicals, is increasing the demand for nickel, which is positively influencing its mining activity. The Russia-Ukraine war has benefitted the Philippines’ nickel industry, as Russia’s output has been declining in the past few years coupled with the aversion it is receiving in trade. Europe is anticipated to register a CAGR of 7.8% in terms of revenue over the forecast period (2030). The EU has recognized the importance of nickel in the energy transition and has added it to the list of critical minerals. To ensure a diversified supply chain, the EU has set benchmarks for the extraction of at least 10% of the annual consumption of nickel within the boundary of Europe. This move is expected to have a positive impact on the mining activity in the region. North America is anticipated to register the fastest CAGR of 8.1% over the forecast period (2030). The increasing demand for nickel-based products in aerospace and defense industries has raised its significance as a critical mineral. In addition, the growing emphasis on accomplishing a domestic supply chain for the EV battery segment is anticipated to boost production in the region.”

    First Atlantic Nickel Corp. (OTCQB: FANCF) (TSX-V: FAN) AND COLORADO SCHOOL OF MINES LAUNCH RESEARCH PARTNERSHIP TO EXPLORE GEOLOGIC HYDROGEN POTENTIAL IN NEWFOUNDLAND OPHIOLITES – First Atlantic Nickel Corp. (FSE: P21) (“First Atlantic” or the “Company”) is pleased to announce a strategic research partnership with Colorado School of Mines to explore geologic hydrogen as an energy source. This collaboration will focus on two significant ophiolite complexes in Newfoundland, Canada: the St. Anthony Ophiolite Complex (Atlantis Project, 103 km²) and the Pipestone Ophiolite Complex (Atlantic Nickel Project, 71 km²). Both projects are 100% owned by First Atlantic and encompass extensive ultramafic rock formations, characterized by awaruite-bearing serpentinized peridotites, which are key indicators of geologic hydrogen.

    First Atlantic Nickel is primarily focused on exploring awaruite nickel-iron alloy mineralization. Additionally, it is partnering with Colorado School of Mines to conduct secondary research on geological hydrogen produced during serpentinization. This collaborative research will leverage data collected by First Atlantic during its ongoing exploration for awaruite nickel deposits. Notably, awaruite serves as an indicator mineral of geologic hydrogen within serpentinized peridotites found in ophiolites. Colorado School of Mines will carry out this hydrogen research component, enhancing the overall exploration program while leveraging First Atlantic’s extensive geological assets and expertise.

    Geologic Hydrogen: Ophiolites and Peridotite

    Ophiolites—sections of oceanic crust and upper mantle thrust onto continental crust—are globally recognized as prime sources of geologic hydrogen, often referred to as “white hydrogen” or “gold hydrogen.” These formations are dominated by ultramafic rocks, notably peridotite, which consists primarily of olivine and pyroxene minerals rich in nickel, chromium, magnesium, and iron. When peridotite interacts with water, it triggers serpentinization—a hydrothermal reaction in which iron oxidizes and water is reduced, releasing molecular hydrogen gas (H₂). This natural process can be represented by the equation:

    3FeO (in olivine) + H₂O → Fe₃O₄ (magnetite) + H₂ – During serpentinization, awaruite (Ni₃Fe) forms as a secondary mineral when liberated nickel (Ni2+) and iron (Fe2+) from the olivine, pyroxene, and chromite minerals react with the abundant hydrogen (H2) present. This natural process can be represented by the equation:

    3(Ni²⁺) + (Fe²⁺) + 4(H₂) → (Ni₃Fe) + 8(H⁺) – The formation of awaruite could not happen without the presence of hydrogen. This process occurs readily in ophiolitic peridotites at depth, where water saturated rocks in oxygen-poor, reducing conditions produce this exothermic reaction, generating heat that sustains further reactions. According to the Geological Survey of Finland, “In Europe and in regions outside the crystal shield, only ophiolites are often referred to as a source of geological hydrogen.” Within these ophiolite settings, serpentinized peridotites are the most promising targets, with peridotites producing significantly more hydrogen than other rocks, up to 4 kg per cubic meter. Ophiolites represent large potential sources of geologic hydrogen, with some of the most significant global geologic hydrogen discoveries occurring in ophiolites.

    “Geologic hydrogen systems are a combination of mineral systems and natural gas systems. In our group, we have the unique combination of expertise from both the mining industry and oil and gas industry to advance geologic hydrogen exploration and stimulated hydrogen monitoring,” said Dr. Yaoguo Li from Colorado School of Mines. CONTINUED… Read this and more news for First Atlantic Nickel at: https://www.fanickel.com/archive

    In other market news of interest:

    Ballard Power Systems (NASDAQ: BLDP) recently announced a multi-year supply agreement from Manufacturing Commercial Vehicles (‘MCV’, www.mcv-eg.com), a leading commercial vehicle manufacturer based in Egypt, for fuel cell engines totaling approximately 5 MW.

    The supply agreement for 50 FCmove®-HD+ engines, and initial order of 35 units, represents the continued growth of the relationship with MCV which started in 2022 with fuel cell engine integration support and the first fuel cell engine order placed in 2023. Deliveries of the 50 engines are expected between 2025 and 2026 and will initially support projects in the EU.

    First Hydrogen Corp. (TSXV: FHYD) (OTCPK: FHYDF) recently announced the launch of its subsidiary, First Nuclear Corp., an initiative dedicated to advancing clean energy through the innovative use of Small Modular Reactors (SMRs). First Nuclear Corp. (“First Nuclear”) aims to revolutionize green hydrogen production, supporting global decarbonization efforts and paving the way for a sustainable, zero-emission future.

    Harnessing the Power of SMRs for Green Hydrogen – First Nuclear seeks to integrate advanced nuclear technology with green hydrogen production. SMRs, known for their compact design, scalability, and ability to provide a continuous, weather-independent power supply, are the cornerstone of this initiative. By leveraging SMRs, First Nuclear ensures a stable, cost-effective, and efficient process for producing green hydrogen, addressing the growing demand for clean energy solutions worldwide. IDTechEx anticipates the installation rate of SMRs to grow significantly addressing the climate crisis. They project the global market for SMRs to reach US$72.4 billion by 2033 and US$295 billion by 2043, reflecting a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 30%.

    Bloom Energy Corporation (NYSE: BE), a global leader in power solutions, announced recently an expansion of its longstanding relationship with Equinix, the world’s digital infrastructure company®. The collaboration now exceeds 100MW of electricity capacity to support Equinix’s International Business Exchange™ (IBX®) data centers across the United States.

    With approximately 75MW already operational and another 30MW under construction, this latest expansion marks a significant milestone in the companies’ decade-long collaboration. What began as a pilot program in 2015 with just 1MW of fuel cells at a single IBX data center in Silicon Valley has scaled one hundredfold, supporting the critical digital infrastructure needed to meet increasing energy needs of AI-driven computing.

    FuelCell Energy, Inc. (NASDAQ: FCEL) and Malaysia Marine and Heavy Engineering Sdn Bhd (MMHE), a wholly owned subsidiary of Malaysia Marine and Heavy Engineering Holdings Berhad (MHB), have announced the signing of a Joint Development Agreement (JDA) to co-develop large-scale hydrogen production systems and technologies across Asia, New Zealand, and Australia.

    Building on a memorandum of understanding signed in February 2023, the JDA represents a pivotal step for the two companies, driven by a shared vision to make clean hydrogen production easily accessible and viable. The collaboration underscores FuelCell Energy and MHB’s commitment to advancing green energy solutions and supporting global decarbonization and energy transition goals.

    About FN Media Group:
    At FN Media Group, via our top-rated online news portal at www.financialnewsmedia.com, we are one of the very few select firms providing top tier one syndicated news distribution, targeted ticker tag press releases and stock market news coverage for today’s emerging companies. #tickertagpressreleases #pressreleases

    Follow us on Facebook to receive the latest news updates: https://www.facebook.com/financialnewsmedia
    Follow us on Twitter for real time Market News: https://twitter.com/FNMgroup
    Follow us on Linkedin: https://www.linkedin.com/in/financialnewsmedia/

    DISCLAIMER: FN Media Group LLC (FNM), which owns and operates FinancialNewsMedia.com and MarketNewsUpdates.com, is a third party publisher and news dissemination service provider, which disseminates electronic information through multiple online media channels. FNM is NOT affiliated in any manner with any company mentioned herein. FNM and its affiliated companies are a news dissemination solutions provider and are NOT a registered broker/dealer/analyst/adviser, holds no investment licenses and may NOT sell, offer to sell or offer to buy any security. FNM’s market updates, news alerts and corporate profiles are NOT a solicitation or recommendation to buy, sell or hold securities. The material in this release is intended to be strictly informational and is NEVER to be construed or interpreted as research material. All readers are strongly urged to perform research and due diligence on their own and consult a licensed financial professional before considering any level of investing in stocks. All material included herein is republished content and details which were previously disseminated by the companies mentioned in this release. FNM is not liable for any investment decisions by its readers or subscribers. Investors are cautioned that they may lose all or a portion of their investment when investing in stocks. For current services performed FNM has been compensated thirty four hundred dollars for news coverage of the current press releases issued by First Atlantic Nickel Corp. by a non-affiliated third party. FNM HOLDS NO SHARES OF ANY COMPANY NAMED IN THIS RELEASE.

    This release contains “forward-looking statements” within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, and Section 21E the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended and such forward-looking statements are made pursuant to the safe harbor provisions of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. “Forward-looking statements” describe future expectations, plans, results, or strategies and are generally preceded by words such as “may”, “future”, “plan” or “planned”, “will” or “should”, “expected,” “anticipates”, “draft”, “eventually” or “projected”. You are cautioned that such statements are subject to a multitude of risks and uncertainties that could cause future circumstances, events, or results to differ materially from those projected in the forward-looking statements, including the risks that actual results may differ materially from those projected in the forward-looking statements as a result of various factors, and other risks identified in a company’s annual report on Form 10-K or 10-KSB and other filings made by such company with the Securities and Exchange Commission. You should consider these factors in evaluating the forward-looking statements included herein, and not place undue reliance on such statements. The forward-looking statements in this release are made as of the date hereof and FNM undertakes no obligation to update such statements.

    Contact Information:
    Media Contact email: editor@financialnewsmedia.com – +1(561)325-8757

    SOURCE: FN Media Group

    The MIL Network –

  • MIL-OSI: Global Interest in Nickel Mining Booming as Demand Skyrockets Around the World

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    PALM BEACH, Fla., March 19, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — FN Media Group News Commentary – According to a report from Grand View Research, the global nickel mining market size was estimated at USD 50.40 billion in 2022 and is estimated to grow at a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 6.6% from 2023 to 2030. Growth in end-use industries such as construction, consumer durables, and machinery & equipment are propelling the growth of the stainless steel industry. Nickel is one of the key raw materials of stainless steel. Hence, development in the stainless steel industry is contributing to the growth of the market. According to the Nickel Institute, over two-thirds of the world’s nickel is utilized in the production of stainless steel. It acts as an alloying agent, enhancing essential properties such as formability, ductility, and weldability while also increasing corrosion resistance for specific applications. The report said: “The nickel mining industry is highly competitive and to gain an edge, major players are acquiring their competitors.   The batteries segment is anticipated to register the fastest CAGR of 7.2% in terms of revenue, over the forecast period (2030). Nickel batteries offer a cost-effective solution for achieving higher energy density and storage capabilities.” Active Companies in the markets today include: First Atlantic Nickel Corp. (OTCQB: FANCF) (TSX-V: FAN), Vale S.A. (NYSE: VALE), Chevron Corporation (NYSE: CVX), Glencore plc (OTCPK: GLNCY) (OTCPK: GLCNF), Quebec Innovative Materials Corp. (OTCQB: QIMCF) (CSE: QIMC).

    Grand View Research continued: “Based on region, Asia Pacific held the largest revenue share of over 57.0% in 2022. The growth in various industries, such as battery manufacturing, automotive & defense, and petrochemicals, is increasing the demand for nickel, which is positively influencing its mining activity. The Russia-Ukraine war has benefitted the Philippines’ nickel industry, as Russia’s output has been declining in the past few years coupled with the aversion it is receiving in trade.   Europe is anticipated to register a CAGR of 7.8% in terms of revenue over the forecast period (2030). The EU has recognized the importance of nickel in the energy transition and has added it to the list of critical minerals. To ensure a diversified supply chain, the EU has set benchmarks for the extraction of at least 10% of the annual consumption of nickel within the boundary of Europe. This move is expected to have a positive impact on the mining activity in the region.   North America is anticipated to register the fastest CAGR of 8.1% over the forecast period (2030). The increasing demand for nickel-based products in aerospace and defense industries has raised its significance as a critical mineral.   In addition, the growing emphasis on accomplishing a domestic supply chain for the EV battery segment is anticipated to boost production in the region.”

    First Atlantic Nickel Corp. (OTCQB: FANCF) (TSX-V: FAN) AND COLORADO SCHOOL OF MINES LAUNCH RESEARCH PARTNERSHIP TO EXPLORE GEOLOGIC HYDROGEN POTENTIAL IN NEWFOUNDLAND OPHIOLITES – First Atlantic Nickel Corp. (FSE: P21) (“First Atlantic” or the “Company”) is pleased to announce a strategic research partnership with Colorado School of Mines to explore geologic hydrogen as an energy source. This collaboration will focus on two significant ophiolite complexes in Newfoundland, Canada: the St. Anthony Ophiolite Complex (Atlantis Project, 103 km²) and the Pipestone Ophiolite Complex (Atlantic Nickel Project, 71 km²). Both projects are 100% owned by First Atlantic and encompass extensive ultramafic rock formations, characterized by awaruite-bearing serpentinized peridotites, which are key indicators of geologic hydrogen.

    First Atlantic Nickel is primarily focused on exploring awaruite nickel-iron alloy mineralization. Additionally, it is partnering with Colorado School of Mines to conduct secondary research on geological hydrogen produced during serpentinization. This collaborative research will leverage data collected by First Atlantic during its ongoing exploration for awaruite nickel deposits. Notably, awaruite serves as an indicator mineral of geologic hydrogen within serpentinized peridotites found in ophiolites. Colorado School of Mines will carry out this hydrogen research component, enhancing the overall exploration program while leveraging First Atlantic’s extensive geological assets and expertise.

    Geologic Hydrogen: Ophiolites and Peridotite

    Ophiolites—sections of oceanic crust and upper mantle thrust onto continental crust—are globally recognized as prime sources of geologic hydrogen, often referred to as “white hydrogen” or “gold hydrogen.” These formations are dominated by ultramafic rocks, notably peridotite, which consists primarily of olivine and pyroxene minerals rich in nickel, chromium, magnesium, and iron. When peridotite interacts with water, it triggers serpentinization—a hydrothermal reaction in which iron oxidizes and water is reduced, releasing molecular hydrogen gas (H₂). This natural process can be represented by the equation:

    3FeO (in olivine) + H₂O → Fe₃O₄ (magnetite) + H₂ – During serpentinization, awaruite (Ni₃Fe) forms as a secondary mineral when liberated nickel (Ni2+) and iron (Fe2+) from the olivine, pyroxene, and chromite minerals react with the abundant hydrogen (H2) present. This natural process can be represented by the equation:

    3(Ni²⁺) + (Fe²⁺) + 4(H₂) → (Ni₃Fe) + 8(H⁺) – The formation of awaruite could not happen without the presence of hydrogen. This process occurs readily in ophiolitic peridotites at depth, where water saturated rocks in oxygen-poor, reducing conditions produce this exothermic reaction, generating heat that sustains further reactions. According to the Geological Survey of Finland, “In Europe and in regions outside the crystal shield, only ophiolites are often referred to as a source of geological hydrogen.” Within these ophiolite settings, serpentinized peridotites are the most promising targets, with peridotites producing significantly more hydrogen than other rocks, up to 4 kg per cubic meter. Ophiolites represent large potential sources of geologic hydrogen, with some of the most significant global geologic hydrogen discoveries occurring in ophiolites.

    “Geologic hydrogen systems are a combination of mineral systems and natural gas systems. In our group, we have the unique combination of expertise from both the mining industry and oil and gas industry to advance geologic hydrogen exploration and stimulated hydrogen monitoring” said Dr. Yaoguo Li from Colorado School of Mines. CONTINUED… Read this and more news for First Atlantic Nickel at:   https://www.fanickel.com/archive

    In other market news of interest:

    Vale S.A. (NYSE: VALE) noted the Company leads the production of nickel metal that is considered one of the most versatile. Hard but also malleable, it is corrosion resistant and retains its properties even when subjected to extreme temperatures. It is part of everyday life: it is used in the production of batteries and items ranging from coins to cars.

    Highlights: The ore obtained from our mines contains more than just nickel. Therefore, by extracting and processing it, we also produce cobalt, copper and precious metals. Where we operate: Brazil, Canada and Indonesia.

    Chevron Corporation (NYSE: CVX) recently announced senior leadership changes as part of the company’s efforts to simplify its organizational structure, execute faster and more effectively, and be positioned for stronger long-term competitiveness.   The company’s Oil, Products & Gas organization will be consolidated into two segments: Upstream and Downstream, Midstream & Chemicals. Mark Nelson will continue to lead this organization as vice chairman and executive vice president, Oil, Products & Gas.

    The Upstream organizational model will drive value through greater standardization across Shale & Tight, Base Assets & Emerging Countries, Offshore, Eurasia and Australia.

    Ceibo, a clean copper extraction technology company, and Glencore plc‘s (OTCPK: GLNCY) (OTCPK: GLCNF) Lomas Bayas Mining Company have recently entered into a partnership to deploy Ceibo’s proprietary leaching technologies that enable a more effective extraction of copper from low-grade sulfides at one of Chile’s leading mines. Lomas Bayas has validated Ceibo’s technology and is moving toward scaling up to assess this as an alternative to extend the life of their mining operations. This partnership follows two years of testing by Glencore, an important contributor to Chile’s position as the world’s largest copper producer.

    Under the terms of the memorandum of understanding, Ceibo’s technology will scale up with on-site testing through the Lomas Lab, a Glencore world-scale test site, and the company’s research and development branch. This agreement opens a significant commercial avenue for Ceibo, demonstrating its unique approach with a major mining company and affirming the value that Ceibo’s advanced leaching technologies bring to copper assets globally.

    Quebec Innovative Materials Corp. (OTCQB: QIMCF) (CSE: QIMC) recently announced the signing of a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with Black Tree Energy Group Sàrl (BTEG), a Swiss-based energy infrastructure and project development firm. This partnership reinforces QIMC’s strategic expansion into the U.S., a key market for accelerating the commercialization of natural hydrogen. Together, QIMC and BTEG will drive large-scale hydrogen projects by integrating technical expertise with financial strategy, project development, and execution capabilities.

    With strong support for clean natural hydrogen initiatives, the United States presents a substantial opportunity for natural hydrogen development. Through this Memorandum of Understanding (MOU), QIMC intends to capitalize on its established expertise in natural renewable hydrogen—encompassing geological and geophysical analyses, project evaluation, and hydrogen fieldwork and drilling—to identify high-potential U.S. sites and accelerate the path to commercial production.

    About FN Media Group:

    At FN Media Group, via our top-rated online news portal at www.financialnewsmedia.com, we are one of the very few select firms providing top tier one syndicated news distribution, targeted ticker tag press releases and stock market news coverage for today’s emerging companies. #tickertagpressreleases #pressreleases

    Follow us on Facebook to receive the latest news updates: https://www.facebook.com/financialnewsmedia

    Follow us on Twitter for real time Market News: https://twitter.com/FNMgroup

    Follow us on Linkedin: https://www.linkedin.com/in/financialnewsmedia/

    DISCLAIMER:  FN Media Group LLC (FNM), which owns and operates FinancialNewsMedia.com and MarketNewsUpdates.com, is a third party publisher and news dissemination service provider, which disseminates electronic information through multiple online media channels.  FNM is NOT affiliated in any manner with any company mentioned herein.  FNM and its affiliated companies are a news dissemination solutions provider and are NOT a registered broker/dealer/analyst/adviser, holds no investment licenses and may NOT sell, offer to sell or offer to buy any security.  FNM’s market updates, news alerts and corporate profiles are NOT a solicitation or recommendation to buy, sell or hold securities.  The material in this release is intended to be strictly informational and is NEVER to be construed or interpreted as research material.  All readers are strongly urged to perform research and due diligence on their own and consult a licensed financial professional before considering any level of investing in stocks.  All material included herein is republished content and details which were previously disseminated by the companies mentioned in this release.  FNM is not liable for any investment decisions by its readers or subscribers.  Investors are cautioned that they may lose all or a portion of their investment when investing in stocks.  For current services performed FNM has been compensated thirty four hundred dollars for news coverage of the current press releases issued by First Atlantic Nickel Corp. by a non-affiliated third party.  FNM HOLDS NO SHARES OF ANY COMPANY NAMED IN THIS RELEASE.

    This release contains “forward-looking statements” within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, and Section 21E the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended and such forward-looking statements are made pursuant to the safe harbor provisions of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. “Forward-looking statements” describe future expectations, plans, results, or strategies and are generally preceded by words such as “may”, “future”, “plan” or “planned”, “will” or “should”, “expected,” “anticipates”, “draft”, “eventually” or “projected”. You are cautioned that such statements are subject to a multitude of risks and uncertainties that could cause future circumstances, events, or results to differ materially from those projected in the forward-looking statements, including the risks that actual results may differ materially from those projected in the forward-looking statements as a result of various factors, and other risks identified in a company’s annual report on Form 10-K or 10-KSB and other filings made by such company with the Securities and Exchange Commission. You should consider these factors in evaluating the forward-looking statements included herein, and not place undue reliance on such statements. The forward-looking statements in this release are made as of the date hereof and FNM undertakes no obligation to update such statements.

    Contact Information:

    Media Contact email: editor@financialnewsmedia.com – +1(561)325-8757

    SOURCE: FN Media Group

    The MIL Network –

  • MIL-OSI Global: Trump’s phone call with Putin fails to deliver ceasefire – here’s what could happen next

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Stefan Wolff, Professor of International Security, University of Birmingham

    After more than two hours on the phone on Tuesday, March 17, the US president, Donald Trump, and his Russian counterpart, Vladimir Putin, agreed agreed only to confidence-building measures, not a ceasefire between Ukraine and Russia. The two leaders came away from the call having agreed on a limited prisoner exchange, a suspension of attacks on energy infrastructure, and the creation of working groups to explore further steps towards a ceasefire and ultimately a peace agreement.

    A less charitable way of looking at the outcome of the second call between the two presidents since Trump returned to the White House would be that the ball is now back in America’s court. Putin made it crystal clear to Trump that he is not (yet) in the mood for any compromise.

    This is hardly surprising given recent events.

    The US has pressured Ukraine mercilessly into accepting a proposal for a 30-day ceasefire, which Trump hoped Russia would also agree to. But apart from a vague statement by Trump that he might consider sanctions against Russia, he has so far seemed unwilling to contemplate putting any meaningful equivalent pressure on Putin.

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

    On the ground, Russia has gained the upper hand in the Kursk region where Ukrainian troops have ceded most of the territory they captured after a surprise offensive last summer. Once Putin’s forces, assisted by thousands of North Korean soldiers, have succeeded in driving the Ukrainians out of Russia, Kyiv will have lost its most valuable bargaining chip in negotiations with Moscow.

    Meanwhile, Russia has also made further gains on the frontlines inside Ukraine especially in parts of Kherson and Zaporizhzhia. These are two of the four regions (the other two are Donetsk and Luhansk) that Putin has claimed for Russia in their entirety since sham referendums in September 2022, despite not yet having full control of them.

    If Russia were to capture yet more Ukrainian territory, Putin would probably find it even easier to convince Trump that his demands are reasonable. The fact that Trump already hinted at a “dividing of assets”, including the nuclear power plant at Zaporizhzhia – Europe’s largest before its forced shutdown in September 2022 – is a worrying indication of how far the Russian president has already pushed the envelope.

    Ukraine war: territory occupied by Russia as at March 18 2025.
    Institute for the Study of War

    But a deal solely between Russia and the US is not going to work. In that sense, time is not only on Putin’s side but also on Zelensky’s.

    The Russian readout of the call between the two presidents claimed that they had discussed “the complete cessation of foreign military assistance and the provision of intelligence information to Kyiv” as a key condition for moving forward – something that Trump subsequently denied in an interview with Fox. This means that, for now, Kyiv is likely to continue to receive US aid.

    Europe at the ready

    Perhaps more importantly in the long term, Europe is also doubling down on support for Ukraine. While Trump and Putin were discussing a carve-up of Ukraine over the phone, the president of the European Commission, Ursula von der Leyen, left no doubt on where the EU stands.

    In a speech at the Royal Danish Military Academy foreshadowing the publication of the commission’s Readiness 2030 white paper on bolstering European defences, she recommitted to developing European “capabilities to have credible deterrence” against a hostile Russia.

    A few hours later, the German parliament passed a multi-billion Euro package that loosens the country’s tight borrowing rules to enable massive investments in defence. This follows announcements of increased defence elsewhere on the continent, including in the UK, Poland, and by the EU itself.

    Meanwhile, the UK and France are leading efforts to assemble a coalition of the willing to help Ukraine. Representatives of the 30-member group gathered in London on March 15 for further talks.

    Afterwards, the UK prime minister, Keir Starmer, released a statement saying that Ukraine’s western partners “will keep increasing the pressure on Russia, keep the military aid flowing to Ukraine and keep tightening the restrictions on Russia’s economy”.

    Undoubtedly, these measures would be more effective if they had Washington’s full buy-in – but they send a strong signal to both the Kremlin and the White House that Ukraine is not alone in its fight against Russia’s continuing aggression.

    Putin’s options

    Putin, meanwhile, may have time on his side in the short term – but he should take note of this. Russian manpower and firepower may dwarf that of Ukraine, but it would be no match for a Ukraine backed by such a coalition of the willing.

    Putin’s apparent plan to drag Trump into the minutiae of negotiating a comprehensive deal may eventually backfire in more ways than one. For a start, really detailed discussions will test the US president’s notoriously short attention span.

    But this will also buy time for Ukraine and its supporters to strengthen Kyiv’s position in future negotiations. And it will continue to strain – but not immediately break – Russia’s economy.

    For now, Trump’s efforts to end the war in Ukraine have stalled. He is attempting to broker a complex ceasefire deal that involves separate agreements with Kyiv and Moscow, pressure on Nato allies, and an attempt to drive a wedge between Russia and China. It’s not clear how this will succeed or indeed where it will end.

    The only certainty is that they are not bringing a just and stable peace for Ukraine any closer.

    Stefan Wolff is a past recipient of grant funding from the Natural Environment Research Council of the UK, the United States Institute of Peace, the Economic and Social Research Council of the UK, the British Academy, the NATO Science for Peace Programme, the EU Framework Programmes 6 and 7 and Horizon 2020, as well as the EU’s Jean Monnet Programme. He is a Trustee and Honorary Treasurer of the Political Studies Association of the UK and a Senior Research Fellow at the Foreign Policy Centre in London.

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

    – ref. Trump’s phone call with Putin fails to deliver ceasefire – here’s what could happen next – https://theconversation.com/trumps-phone-call-with-putin-fails-to-deliver-ceasefire-heres-what-could-happen-next-252417

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI United Kingdom: UN Human Rights Council 58: UK Statement for Interactive Dialogue with the Group of Experts on Belarus

    Source: United Kingdom – Executive Government & Departments

    Speech

    UN Human Rights Council 58: UK Statement for Interactive Dialogue with the Group of Experts on Belarus

    UK Statement for the Interactive Dialogue with the Group of Experts on Belarus. Delivered by the UK’s Human Rights Ambassador, Eleanor Sanders.

    Thank you, Experts, for your report.

    We continue to condemn human rights violations and the systematic repression of fundamental freedoms in Belarus.

    We share your concern over the more than 1,200 political prisoners who are denied a fair trial, held in inhumane conditions, subject to ill-treatment, and denied adequate medical care. We acknowledge the pardoning of over 250 political prisoners since July 2024. However, arrests and political repression continue.

    The reported increase of digital surveillance in Belarus, which has further restricted civil society and freedom of expression in both online and physical spaces, is troubling. As your report notes, the regime’s repression extends beyond its own borders. The UK condemns reports of trials in absentia of Belarusian nationals.

    On 27 January, the UK imposed new sanctions on six individuals and three entities, targeting leaders of institutions responsible for serious human rights violations and companies in the Belarusian defence sector supporting Russia’s war of aggression in Ukraine.

    We stand with the Belarusian people and their right to live in a genuinely free and democratic environment, without fear or oppression.

    Experts, how can we best demonstrate solidarity with those facing trials in absentia?

    Updates to this page

    Published 19 March 2025

    MIL OSI United Kingdom –

  • MIL-OSI Africa: Deputy President stresses importance of coordinated approach to challenges

    Source: South Africa News Agency

    Deputy President Paul Mashatile has stressed the need for a coordinated approach to peacebuilding and economic resilience.

    This as he highlighted that the conflicts between Russia and Ukraine and conflicts in the eastern Democratic Republic of Congo, Sudan, in the Sahel, and in Gaza, continue to exert a heavy human toll while heightening global insecurity. 

    The Deputy President was speaking at the United Nations University (UNU) in Tokyo, Japan on Tuesday. 

    The UNU, in partnership with the Embassy of South Africa in Japan, is co-hosting a symposium exploring South Africa’s G20 Presidency and steps to ensure solidarity, equality and sustainability for all. 

    Touching on the deepening conflict and instability across Africa and the world, the Deputy President said this requires coordinated preventive action including dedicated intervention on peace building that is programmatic in nature.

    “We are encouraged by the partnership between the United Nations University and the University of South Africa (UNISA) in cooperation with other relevant partner organisations to co-design and co-deliver required capacity building programmes for African leaders and mediators for resolving conflicts and blazing a path towards achieving peace, security and prosperity, “the Deputy President explained.

    He further emphasised the urgent need for comprehensive, African-centred peace-building research and training programmes that span throughout Africa to address the urgent demand for capacity for conflict management and resolution, as well as society reconstruction.

    G20 Presidency

    “In our G20 Presidency, South Africa will continue to advocate for diplomatic solutions. Inclusive dialogue is the foremost guarantor of sustainable peace.
    “South Africa has shown a firm resolve in its foreign policy by promoting principles of justice, solidarity, equality, peace, and respect, underpinned by its commitment to human dignity and leaving no one behind,” he said. 

    This was the reason South Africa has placed solidarity, equality, sustainability at the centre of its G20 Presidency.

    As part of South Africa’s G20 intention to place Africa’s development at the top of the agenda, Mashatile outlined four key priorities which are strengthening disaster resilience, ensuring debt sustainability for developing economies, mobilising finance for a just energy transition, and harnessing critical minerals for sustainable growth. 

    “Our hosting of the G20 Finance Ministers and Central Bank Governors Meeting, and the Business 20 provided an opportunity for us to promote South Africa and Africa as a business and investment destination and for the country to take the lead on providing solutions to global economic challenges,” he said. 

    He emphasised the country’s commitment to driving economic reforms, increasing investor confidence, and enhancing structural efficiencies in energy, water, and transport sectors.

    “We believe that addressing structural concerns is essential to maintaining investor confidence and ensuring long-term economic stability. It is only by accelerating structural reforms and harnessing the power of the private sector that the country can sustain economic momentum and attract further foreign investment.

    “As the South African government, we are implementing extensive structural, policy, and regulatory reforms to enhance the economy’s performance,” he said. 

    AI role in shaping Africa’s economic future

    The Deputy President also emphasised the role of artificial intelligence (AI) and digital transformation in shaping Africa’s economic future, calling for greater collaboration between African institutions and international organisations. 

    Quoting Professor Tshilidzi Marwala, he noted the need for South Africa to embrace AI while also ensuring ethical considerations remain central to its deployment. 

    He urged institutions like UNU to partner with African universities to foster digital skills development and AI-driven innovation.

    As the G20 Presidency has shifted to South Africa, the Deputy President said that AI has emerged as a key area of focus.

    Through the G20 Presidency, he said the country aims to harness AI to advance the Sustainable Development Goals agenda and address global challenges.

    “We encourage the United Nations University to work alongside Africa in the development of AI, which has the potential to considerably boost the continent’s economies. You must cooperate with additional universities in South Africa and throughout Africa to help overcome digital barriers, promote equality, and support inclusive sustainable development,” he said. 

    Mashatile added that African governments are also recognising the importance of the digital economy, which is heavily influenced by artificial intelligence. He noted that the digital economy and AI are becoming more important drivers of economic and social value creation throughout the world. 

    “We are investing in digital infrastructure, skills development, and entrepreneurship to assist Africa’s digital economy to expand,” he said. – SAnews.gov.za

    MIL OSI Africa –

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Statement by the High Representative on behalf of the EU on the alignment of certain countries with Council Decision concerning restrictive measures in response to the illegal recognition, occupation or annexation by the Russian Federation of certain non-government controlled areas of Ukraine

    Source: Council of the European Union

    Statement by the High Representative on behalf of the EU on the alignment of certain third countries with Council Decision (CFSP) CFSP) 2025/338 concerning restrictive measures in response to the illegal recognition, occupation or annexation by the Russian Federation of certain non-government controlled areas of Ukraine.

    MIL OSI Europe News –

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Statement by the High Representative on behalf of the EU on the alignment of certain countries with Council Decision concerning restrictive measures in view of the situation in Belarus and the involvement of Belarus in the Russian aggression against Ukraine

    Source: Council of the European Union

    Statement by the High Representative on behalf of the EU on the alignment of certain third countries with Council Decision (CFSP) 2025/385 of 24 February 2025 amending Decision 2012/642/CFSP concerning restrictive measures in view of the situation in Belarus and the involvement of Belarus in the Russian aggression against Ukraine.

    MIL OSI Europe News –

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Statement by the High Representative on behalf of the EU on the alignment of certain countries with Council Decision concerning restrictive measures directed against certain persons, entities and bodies in view of the situation in Ukraine

    Source: Council of the European Union

    Statement by the High Representative on behalf of the EU on the alignment of certain third countries with Council Decision (CFSP) 2025/437 of 28 February 2025 concerning restrictive measures directed against certain persons, entities and bodies in view of the situation in Ukraine.

    MIL OSI Europe News –

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Briefing – Conscription as an element in European Union preparedness – 19-03-2025

    Source: European Parliament

    Once considered an issue of the past, conscription has increasingly made its way back onto European, EU and global policy agendas in recent years, mainly since Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in 2022. As EU defence policy has steadily progressed, with new procurement initiatives and defence industry reinforcement, a parallel discussion on the EU’s armed forces is evolving in the context of the EU’s common security and defence policy (CSDP). Europe’s civilian and military preparedness and readiness has also come under the spotlight recently, as highlighted by the report presented in October 2024 by former Finnish President Sauli Niinistö. Opinion polls in some Member States also show growing support for the reintroduction of national service or conscription. Mounting threats to European security, fears of transatlantic disengagement, as well as the position of the new United States administration and potential peace plans for Ukraine involving the presence of European troops, has raised awareness of the need to ready Member States’ armed forces for the most extreme military contingencies. The conscription landscape across the EU is diverse. National defence is primarily carried out by professional armed forces, but conscription is becoming increasingly relevant. Some EU countries retained conscription practices beyond the end of the Cold War, while others reintroduced conscription modalities following Russia’s 2022 invasion. Peacetime conscription policies differ among Member States in, among other things, the number of conscripts, the length of service, the level of compensation provided, and the size of the reserve forces. The Niinistö report underscored the potential importance of conscription in developing a holistic ‘total defence’ concept that connects military and civil defence, while promoting a ‘whole-of-society’ approach to crisis response and preparedness. It also proposes increasing structured exchanges between Member States to identify national service and conscription model best practices, potentially facilitated by the EU. Some experts have highlighted the benefits of implementing conscription, while others are sceptical of poorly trained and ill-equipped conscript armies. The European Parliament has repeatedly underlined the limited number of personnel devoted to CSDP missions and operations, highlighting issues related to force generation.

    MIL OSI Europe News –

  • MIL-OSI United Kingdom: UN Human Rights Council 58: UK Statement for the Commission of Inquiry on Ukraine

    Source: United Kingdom – Executive Government & Departments

    Speech

    UN Human Rights Council 58: UK Statement for the Commission of Inquiry on Ukraine

    UK Statement for the Interactive Dialogue with the Commission of Inquiry on Ukraine. Delivered by the UK’s Permanent Representative to the WTO and UN, Simon Manley.

    Thank you, Mr Vice-President.

    Welcome Commissioners. Your reporting has made clear that, for as long as Russia pursues its aggression against Ukraine, the Ukrainian people will be subject to immense suffering. We are of course shocked by your latest report, which lays bare Russia’s brutal treatment of detainees. 

    You conclude that Russia has committed torture, including sexual violence. And, for the first time, that enforced disappearances committed by Russia amount to a crime against humanity. 

    We are deeply disturbed by the systematic use of sexual violence against male detainees, and by new evidence of the war crimes of rape and sexual violence perpetrated against female detainees.

    Detainees are subjected to abuses and, tragically, some have died. Their families are, understandably, in anguish. 

    This mistreatment is directed from the highest levels, pursuant to a coordinated Russian state policy. Evidence shows that Russian commanders gave orders to kill rather than take prisoners. 

    Commissioners, justice must be done.  

    We do, of course, encourage Ukraine to investigate fully your allegations against its authorities and armed forces.

    But let there be no doubt: there is no equivalence between Russia and Ukraine. As a direct result of Russian aggression, Ukrainians across the country have faced violations and abuses of their right to life.

    Russia must be held to account. We will stand with Ukraine for as long as this takes.

    Updates to this page

    Published 19 March 2025

    MIL OSI United Kingdom –

  • MIL-OSI Global: Putin made Trump wait, then strung him along – it’s clear his war aims in Ukraine have not changed

    Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Jon Richardson, Visiting Fellow, Centre for European Studies, Australian National University

    US President Donald Trump’s phone call with his Russian counterpart, Vladimir Putin, didn’t take a tangible step towards ending the hostilities in Ukraine, let alone finding an enduring peace. Rather, it provided further evidence of Putin’s ability to string along and outsmart Trump.

    For starters, Putin sent a signal by making Trump wait for more than an hour to talk. Putin was speaking at a televised conference with Russian businesspeople and even made a joke about the delay when told the time for his call was approaching.

    This was clearly designed to show his alpha status, both to Trump and the Russian public. Steve Witkoff, Trump’s special envoy, was reportedly made to wait eight hours by Putin when he arrived in Moscow last week for talks.

    And after Tuesday’s call, Putin only agreed to pause attacks on Ukraine’s energy infrastructure for 30 days, rather than the total ceasefire proposed by Trump and agreed to by Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky.

    And even this agreement lacked clarity. The lengthy Kremlin statement on the call said the pause would only apply to attacks on energy infrastructure, while the vaguer White House read-out said it included a much broader “energy and infrastructure” agreement. The Kremlin will doubtless stick to the narrow concept.

    The Kremlin’s statement also said Trump proposed this idea and Putin reacted positively. This seems implausible given that pausing attacks on energy infrastructure would be the least costly partial ceasefire for Russia to agree to.

    It seems more likely this proposal came from Putin as a “compromise”, even though Trump was earlier threatening fire and brimstone if Russia did not agree to a proper ceasefire.

    Russia will still be able to continue its ground offensive in Ukraine, where it has the upper hand thanks to Ukrainian manpower shortages (despite its own horrendous losses). It will also be able to maintain its bombardment of Ukrainian civilian targets that has already cost possibly as many as 100,000 civilian lives and half a trillion US dollars in mooted reconstruction costs.

    Ukraine, meanwhile, has only rarely hit residential areas in Russia. However, it has achieved considerable success with long-distance drone attacks on Russian oil refineries and energy infrastructure, threatening one of the main funding sources of Moscow’s war effort.

    Putin’s war aims remain unchanged

    The Kremlin’s read-out of the call also noted that various sticking points remain to achieve a full ceasefire in Ukraine.

    These included the Kyiv regime’s “inability to negotiate in good faith”, which has “repeatedly sabotaged and violated the agreements reached.” The Kremlin also accused Ukrainian militants of “barbaric terrorist crimes” in the Kursk region of Russia that Ukraine briefly occupied.

    This is not new language, but shows breathtaking chutzpah. It’s Russia, in fact, that has broken several agreements vowing to respect Ukraine’s borders, as well as numerous provisions of the Geneva Conventions on treatment of civilian populations and prisoners of war. It has even violated the Genocide Convention in the eyes of some scholars.

    That a US president could let this kind of statement go unchallenged underscores the extent of the White House’s volte-face on Ukraine.

    The Kremlin also asserted that a “key principle” for further negotiations must be the cessation of foreign military aid and intelligence to Ukraine.

    Given Trump has already frozen arms and intelligence support to Ukraine to make Zelensky more compliant, Putin no doubt thinks he might do so again. This, in turn, would strengthen Russia’s leverage in negotiations.

    Trump has already given away huge bargaining chips that could have been used to pressure Russia towards a just and enduring outcome. These include:

    • holding talks with Russia without Ukraine present
    • ruling out security guarantees for Ukraine and NATO membership in the longer term, and
    • foreshadowing that Ukraine should cede its sovereign territory in defiance of international law.

    Putin may be content to string out the ceasefire talks as long as he can in the hopes Russian troops can consolidate their hold on Ukrainian territory and completely expel Ukrainian forces from the Kursk region inside Russia.

    He shows no sign of resiling from his key aims since the beginning of the war – to reimpose Russian dominance over Ukraine and its foreign and domestic policies, and to retain the territories it has illegally annexed.

    The fact Moscow has signed treaties to formally incorporate and assimilate these Ukrainian regions fully into Russia – rather than merely occupying them – underlines how this has always been a war of imperial reconquest rather than a response to perceived military threat.

    At the same time, if he can get much of what he wants, Putin may just be tempted to end the war to further a more business-as-usual relationship with the US. Trump has dangled various carrots to encourage Putin to do this, from renewed US investment in Russia to easing sanctions to ice hockey games.

    Ukraine’s lines in the sand

    Ukraine’s immediate reaction to the Trump-Putin call appears to be cautiously accepting of a limited ceasefire on energy infrastructure. This is no doubt to avoid incurring Trump’s wrath.

    At the same time, Ukraine’s bottom line remains firm:

    • Ukraine’s territorial integrity and sovereignty are non-negotiable
    • it must be able to choose its own foreign alliances and partnerships, and
    • it must be able to defend itself, without limits on the size of its army or its weaponry.

    The only way to square the circle would be to freeze the conflict at the current front lines in Ukraine and leave the status of the annexed Ukrainian regions to be resolved in future negotiations.

    But even this would have little credibility unless Russia revoked its annexations and allowed international organisations and observers to enter the region to encourage a modicum of compliance with international law.

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

    – ref. Putin made Trump wait, then strung him along – it’s clear his war aims in Ukraine have not changed – https://theconversation.com/putin-made-trump-wait-then-strung-him-along-its-clear-his-war-aims-in-ukraine-have-not-changed-252497

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI China: China responds to Putin-Trump call

    Source: China State Council Information Office

    China has advocated resolving the Ukraine crisis through dialogue and negotiation from the very beginning, and is pleased to see all efforts towards a ceasefire as a necessary step towards peace, Chinese foreign ministry spokesperson Mao Ning said on Wednesday.

    Mao made the remarks at a regular news briefing when asked to comment on the phone call between U.S. President Donald Trump and his Russian counterpart Vladimir Putin on Tuesday.

    The White House said in a statement that the two leaders agreed that the three-year Ukraine conflict needs to end with a lasting peace, and the two leaders stressed the need for improved U.S.-Russia relations.

    MIL OSI China News –

  • MIL-OSI Asia-Pac: President Lai meets Arizona Governor Katie Hobbs  

    Source: Republic of China Taiwan

    Details
    2025-03-18
    President Lai meets delegation led by Minister of Foreign Affairs Denzil Douglas of Saint Christopher and Nevis
    On the afternoon of March 18, President Lai Ching-te met with a delegation led by Minister of Foreign Affairs Denzil Douglas of the Federation of Saint Christopher and Nevis. In remarks, President Lai thanked St. Kitts and Nevis for speaking up for Taiwan at major international venues and supporting Taiwan’s international participation. The president expressed hope that our two countries continue to achieve remarkable results through cooperation in such fields as education and training, agricultural development, women’s empowerment, and environmental sustainability, and create even greater well-being for our peoples. A translation of President Lai’s remarks follows: I welcome Minister Douglas and our esteemed guests to Taiwan. Last June, Minister Douglas accompanied Prime Minister Terrance Drew and his wife on their trip to Taiwan. I am delighted to be able to meet and exchange views with Minister Douglas again less than one year later. Your presence fully demonstrates the profound bond between Taiwan and St. Kitts and Nevis. I look forward to the further deepening of our partnership through our exchanges during this visit. Although our two nations are separated by a great distance, we share such universal values as democracy, freedom, and respect for human rights. We also continue to achieve remarkable results through cooperation in such fields as education and training, agricultural development, women’s empowerment, and environmental sustainability. Given that Prime Minister Drew, Minister Douglas, and I all share medical backgrounds, we deeply understand the importance of people’s health. I thus look forward to St. Kitts and Nevis’s climate-smart JNF General Hospital commencing operations as soon as possible thanks to our cooperation. The provision of even higher-quality public health and medical services will yield benefits for many more people. I also believe that by having Taiwan share its experiences in renewable energy and energy-saving technologies, our two countries will jointly drive green industrial transformation and stimulate sustainable development together. I would like to take this opportunity to thank St. Kitts and Nevis for actively speaking up for Taiwan and supporting Taiwan’s participation at such major international venues and organizations as the United Nations General Assembly, the World Health Organization, and the International Civil Aviation Organization. In the future, Taiwan will continue to make critical contributions to the international community. With the support of Minister Douglas and our guests, I look forward to our two countries backing each other on the global stage and continuing to build an even stronger foundation for bilateral cooperation. Let us work together to address the various challenges we face and create even greater well-being for our peoples. Minister Douglas then delivered remarks, first conveying greetings from Prime Minister Drew to President Lai, the government, and the people of Taiwan. He then stated that over the last 41 years since the dawn of their nationhood, the Republic of China Taiwan has steadfastly walked beside St. Kitts and Nevis as a strong and immovable partner. As we reflect on four decades of our journey together, he said, we recognize the unswerving and unwavering spirit that has guided both our nations through trials and challenges. The minister then acknowledged the generous support of Taiwan’s government that has helped St. Kitts and Nevis in its own economic and social development. He went on to say that Taiwan’s partnership with St. Kitts and Nevis has been instrumental in helping them achieve the goals of their sustainable island state agenda. Whether in enhancing food security through the diversification of their agricultural sector, fostering clean energy solutions through the solar PV farm, or advancing healthcare through assistance in building their smart hospital, he said, Taiwan has been a steadfast partner in shaping a much more resilient and sustainable future for the people of their federation. In the spirit of reciprocity and solidarity, Minister Douglas said, St. Kitts and Nevis continues to leverage opportunities on the global stage to request incessantly that Taiwan be given its rightful place in international organizations, where it can make a meaningful contribution to resolving the world’s most critical issues. Minister Douglas indicated that the global challenges we face today demand collective action, and that Taiwan has the innovation, the technology, the knowledge, and the expertise to make a tremendous positive impact on some of the world’s most urgent issues. He said that St. Kitts and Nevis will never grow weary in their own support, but shall continue to sound the clarion call of “let Taiwan in,” as well as advocate for peace to be maintained in the Taiwan Strait. To close, Minister Douglas expressed gratitude for the warm hospitality bestowed upon him and his delegation by Taiwan’s government, remarking that the engagements they had thus far were pregnant with promise, and that they are confident in witnessing a fruitful outcome as we work together to build a prosperous and sustainable future for our peoples. The delegation also included Permanent Secretary in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs Kaye Bass, Permanent Secretary of Economic Development and Investment Adina Richards, and Director in the Ministry of International Trade Sean Lawrence. The delegation was accompanied to the Presidential Office by St. Kitts and Nevis Ambassador Donya L. Francis.

    Details
    2025-03-18
    President Lai meets 2025 Yushan Forum participants
    On the afternoon of March 18, President Lai Ching-te met with participants in the 2025 Yushan Forum. In remarks, President Lai thanked the guests for gathering here in Taiwan and discussing ways to enhance regional cooperation, demonstrating that our democratic allies and friends are standing together as we take on the challenges of a new world and a new era. The president reiterated that Taiwan will continue to engage with the world, and we welcome the world to come closer to Taiwan. He stated that Taiwan will continue to work with international partners to deepen cooperation, exchanges, and partnership in various domains and resist the expansion of authoritarianism. Together, the president emphasized, we can pursue regional peace and security and realize a new vision for a free and open, stable and prosperous Indo-Pacific. A translation of President Lai’s remarks follows: I would like to begin by thanking Anders Fogh Rasmussen, former prime minister of Denmark and chairman of the Alliance of Democracies Foundation, for inviting then-President Tsai Ing-wen to address the Copenhagen Democracy Summit via video over five consecutive years since 2020, and for inviting myself to give remarks via video last year. Those opportunities allowed Taiwan to share with the world our motivation for, and our work toward, safeguarding freedom and democracy. I would also like to thank Mr. Janez Janša, former prime minister of the Republic of Slovenia, who has visited Taiwan many times already, for actively elevating the cordial ties between Taiwan and Slovenia during his term as prime minister, helping expand friendship for Taiwan throughout Europe. Today’s guests have traveled a long way to show their strong backing for Taiwan. For this, I express my deepest gratitude. Yesterday was my first time attending the Yushan Forum as president. I saw political leaders and representatives gather here in Taiwan and discuss ways to enhance regional cooperation. The event demonstrated that our democratic allies and friends are standing together as we take on the challenges of a new world and a new era. It was truly moving. As I stated at the opening ceremony, Taiwan will continue to engage with the world, and we welcome the world to come closer to Taiwan. Our government will help guide Taiwanese small- and medium-sized enterprises as they expand into the international market and extend Taiwan’s economic power. I hope that during this visit, our guests will be able to explore more opportunities for cooperation in such fields as AI, smart healthcare, and advanced technologies, and join hands in contributing to the prosperity and development of our democratic allies and friends. Taiwan will continue to work with international partners, building upon the shared values of freedom and democracy, to deepen cooperation, exchanges, and partnership in various domains and resist the expansion of authoritarianism. Together, we can pursue regional peace and security and realize a new vision for a free and open, stable and prosperous Indo-Pacific. And I hope, with the assistance of our guests here today, that we can further strengthen the ties between Taiwan and Europe so that we can all take up the work of maintaining global peace and stability. Once again, I welcome our guests to Taiwan. I look forward to hearing your thoughts in a few moments. I also hope you will visit Taiwan often in the future and continue to experience our vibrant democratic society and culture. Chairman Rasmussen then delivered remarks, saying that it is a great pleasure to be back here in Taipei after meeting with President Lai in 2023. He then thanked President Lai for the Taiwanese hospitality on behalf of the Yushan Forum international visitors and participants, who represent four continents and very different political parties but who are united by one thing – the commitment to democracy. Chairman Rasmussen mentioned that over the past few days, they have met with members of the government, legislature, and civil society in Taiwan. He said that he is more convinced than ever that in a very uncertain world, Taiwan continues to stand as a beacon of democracy, from which people in Europe and in the rest of the world have a lot to learn. Over the past eight years, he has been proud to step up his engagement with Taiwan, he said, as he has always subscribed to the view that freedom must advance everywhere, or else it is in decline everywhere. Chairman Rasmussen noted that they have many interests in making sure Taiwan remains free and that we must always stand up for freedom when it is under assault by a dictator. This is why Ukraine’s fight is also everyone’s fight, he explained. He then praised Taiwan for all of the support it has given to Ukraine since Russia’s invasion and honored the two Taiwanese volunteer soldiers who gave their lives for freedom in Ukraine. Chairman Rasmussen remarked that Taiwan is a strong feature of the Copenhagen Democracy Summit that he convenes each year. His foundation, the Alliance of Democracies, has even been sanctioned by the Chinese government due to its support of Taiwan, he said, which is something he takes as a badge of honor. He added that this year’s Copenhagen Democracy Summit in May will be no different, as they plan to focus on the new world order, urgent measures to strengthen Europe’s military, and the situation in Ukraine. But as the United States pulls back from the transatlantic alliance and Europe focuses more on its own defense, he said, Europe should not retreat from the world. He added that to ensure European security, we need more Europe in the Indo-Pacific, and that is why he has been making the argument for more political and economic cooperation with Taiwan. Chairman Rasmussen praised President Lai’s recent decision to increase Taiwan’s national defense budget to more than 3 percent of GDP, adding that it is important that each nation does what it can for its own defense. The chairman once again thanked President Lai for meeting with them today and for the opportunity to visit Taiwan, a beacon of democracy and liberty in Asia. Also in attendance at the meeting were Chairman of the Czech Senate Committee on Foreign Affairs, Defence and Security Pavel Fischer; Member of the National Security Advisory Board to India’s National Security Council Anshuman Tripathi; former Minister of Foreign Affairs of Poland Anna Fotyga; former Minister of Health of Canada Tony Clement; and former Vice-Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Lithuania and current Secretary General of the Polish-based Community of Democracies Mantas Adomėnas.

    Details
    2025-03-17
    President Lai meets Japan-ROC Diet Members’ Consultative Council Chairman Furuya Keiji
    On the afternoon of March 17, President Lai Ching-te met with a delegation led by Japanese House of Representatives Member and Japan-ROC Diet Members’ Consultative Council Chairman Furuya Keiji. In remarks, President Lai thanked the Consultative Council for doing its utmost to strengthen the relationship between Taiwan and Japan. He also stated that Taiwan and Japan are both part of the first island chain’s key line of defense, and in addition to continuing to bolster its economic strength and enhance its self-defense capabilities, Taiwan will work together with Japan and other like-minded countries to promote regional and global democracy, peace, and prosperity. A translation of President Lai’s remarks follows: I would like to extend a warm welcome to Chairman Furuya, who is visiting us once again. I am also delighted to meet House of Councillors Member Yamamoto Junzo and House of Representatives Member Hiranuma Shojiro today. Although the Japanese Diet is currently in session, our distinguished guests overcame many hurdles and organized a delegation to attend the 2025 Yushan Forum and deliver speeches, providing valuable insights into issues of mutual concern in the Indo-Pacific region and demonstrating the support for Taiwan in the Diet. Here, I would like to express my deepest gratitude. During the Yushan Forum, it was especially inspiring when Chairman Furuya spoke Taiwanese when he emphasized that “if Taiwan has a problem, then Japan has a problem.” Over the past few years under Chairman Furuya’s leadership, the Consultative Council has done its utmost to strengthen the relationship between Taiwan and Japan. In addition to passing resolutions every year supporting Taiwan’s participation in the World Health Organization and Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP), the council has established four internal research groups regarding the CPTPP, exchanges for women legislators, encouraging local-level exchanges, and the Taiwan Relations Act, using an issue-oriented approach to deepen Taiwan-Japan relations. Thanks to the Consultative Council’s long-term assistance and promotional efforts, the Japanese Ministry of Justice has announced that beginning this May, members of the Taiwanese overseas community in Japan included in the country’s family registry system may list “Taiwan” in the field designating their nationality or region of origin. This demonstrates the friendly relations between Taiwan and Japan, and the Taiwanese people will always remember the council’s continued concrete actions in support of Taiwan. In his remarks at the Yushan Forum today, Chairman Furuya mentioned that there are many areas in which Taiwan and Japan can engage in industrial cooperation. We can continue to deepen our partnership in semiconductors, energy, AI, unmanned aerial vehicles, and other areas related to economic security and supply chain resilience, all of which have significant room for cooperation, creating win-win situations for both Taiwan and Japan. As authoritarianism consolidates, democratic nations must come closer in solidarity. Taiwan and Japan are both part of the first island chain’s key line of defense. In addition to bolstering our economic strength and enhancing our self-defense capabilities, Taiwan will also work with Japan and other like-minded countries to promote regional and global democracy, peace, and prosperity. All of our distinguished guests are good friends of Taiwan, and are very familiar with Taiwan. I hope to continue working together with you all to carry Taiwan-Japan relations to an even higher level. Chairman Furuya then delivered remarks, first thanking President Lai for taking time out of his busy schedule to see them. He then noted that Japan, Taiwan, and quite a few other nations around the world changed leaders last year, and conditions around the world are becoming increasingly unstable. One cannot see what the world will be like a few years from now, he said, which is why he is counting so heavily on the strong leadership of President Lai. Chairman Furuya said that, in addition to collaboration in foreign affairs and security matters, economic cooperation between Taiwan and Japan is also very important. He mentioned new technologies, and said he had spoken quite a bit on the topic that very morning at the Yushan Forum. The clearest example, he said, is the establishment by Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company of a wafer plant in Japan’s Kumamoto Prefecture, which has sparked robust economic activity. He added that cooperation addressing such matters as cyberattacks and supply chain resilience is also very important. Chairman Furuya noted that President Lai had mentioned in his remarks that beginning from May, Taiwanese overseas community members in Japan will be able to list “Taiwan” on their family registers. The chairman expressed his view that this is not a foreign affairs issue, but rather a human rights issue for the Taiwanese people, and an excellent way to show respect for Taiwan. He further noted President Lai’s mentioning of the four research groups that the Consultative Council has established, and said that these groups will ramp up their work. He also expressed hope that Taiwan and Japan will work together to address challenges that face both countries, such as issues pertaining to democracy and peace in the Taiwan Strait, so that they can together push for international peace and stability. Chairman Furuya stated that reciprocal visits by Taiwanese and Japanese people reached an all-time high last year. He said that in the future, in addition to further promoting local exchanges between the two countries, he also hopes that Japanese middle school and high school students planning to go on overseas study trips will choose Taiwan as their destination, because he feels that any student who visits Taiwan will become a fan of this place. Also in attendance was Japan-Taiwan Exchange Association Taipei Office Chief Representative Katayama Kazuyuki.

    Details
    2025-03-17
    President Lai addresses opening of 2025 Yushan Forum
    On the morning of March 17, President Lai Ching-te attended the opening of the 2025 Yushan Forum, the theme of which was “New Southbound Policy+: Taiwan, the Indo-Pacific, and a New World.” In remarks, President Lai stated that the New Southbound Policy has led to great success in economic and trade cooperation, professional exchanges, resource sharing, and building regional links. He said that in the past, Taiwanese industries went from moving westward across the Taiwan Strait, to shifting southbound, to working closer with the north, but that now, Taiwan is confidently stepping across the Pacific, reaching eastward, to the Americas and other regions. While staying firmly rooted in Taiwan, he said, Taiwan’s enterprises are expanding their global presence and marketing worldwide. The president stated that Taiwan will strive alongside its partners in democracy to bolster non-red supply chains and digital solidarity, and together respond to the threats and challenges posed by expanding authoritarianism. He indicated that the Yushan Forum is a place to share experiences, and more importantly, lay down firm foundations for exchanges and cooperation among participants’ countries to create greater stability for the region and greater prosperity for the world. A transcript of President Lai’s remarks follows: On behalf of all the people of Taiwan, I want to welcome our good friends joining us from around the world. Your presence shows support for a peaceful and stable Taiwan and a free and open Indo-Pacific region. The Yushan Forum has become more than just an important platform for the New Southbound Policy. Over these eight years, more than 3,600 participants from Taiwan and 28 other countries have helped deepen Taiwan’s connections with nations around the world. The New Southbound Policy has led to great success in economic and trade cooperation, professional exchanges, resource sharing, and building regional links. Looking ahead, the Yushan Forum will be taking on the important mission of carrying its legacy forward and transforming it into action. Not only must we turn consensus into action plans for close cooperation among countries in the region; we must also work with partners around the world to forge ahead with cooperative plans for mutual prosperity. We hope to envision a new world from Taiwan – and see Taiwan in this new world. We are also embracing an era of smart technology. The government sessions of this Yushan Forum are therefore centered around topics including smart healthcare, smart transportation, and resilient supply chains for semiconductors. Taiwan is intent on working side by side with other countries to face the challenges of this new era. Today’s Taiwan celebrates not only the democratic achievements that are recognized by the international community, but also our strengths in the semiconductor and other tech industries, which enable us to play a key role in restructuring global democratic supply chains and the economic order. We are building on Taiwan as a “silicon island” for semiconductors while accelerating innovation and AI applications for industry. These efforts will help Taiwan become an “AI island” as well. We are also developing forward-looking fields such as quantum technology and precision medicine, which will create an industry ecosystem that is highly competitive and innovative. The government will also develop economic models powered by innovation. This will help SMEs (small- and medium-sized enterprises) upgrade and transform through the power of digital transformation and net-zero transition. In the past, Taiwanese industries went from moving westward across the Taiwan Strait, to shifting southbound, to working closer with the north. But now, we are confidently stepping across the Pacific, reaching eastward, to the Americas and other regions. While staying firmly rooted in Taiwan, our enterprises are expanding their global presence and marketing worldwide. Taiwan will continue to engage with the world, and we welcome the world to come closer to Taiwan. As we gather here today, I am confident that we share the same goal: Through international cooperation, we hope to build an even more inclusive, resilient, prosperous Indo-Pacific, while jointly defending the democracy, freedom, and peace we so firmly believe in. I want to thank you all once again for supporting Taiwan. We will strive alongside our partners in democracy to bolster non-red supply chains and digital solidarity, and together respond to the threats and challenges posed by expanding authoritarianism. Yushan is also known as Jade Mountain. It is Taiwan’s highest peak and stands as firm as our unwavering spirit. During this critical time of global change and transformation, the Yushan Forum is a place where we can share our experiences, and more importantly, lay down firm foundations for exchanges and cooperation among our countries. This way, we can create greater stability for the region and greater prosperity for the world. I wish everyone a successful forum. Thank you. Also in attendance at the event were former Prime Minister of Denmark and Alliance of Democracies Foundation Chairman Anders Fogh Rasmussen, former Prime Minister of the Republic of Slovenia Janez Janša, Japan-ROC Diet Members’ Consultative Council Chairman Furuya Keiji, and American Institute in Taiwan Taipei Office Director Raymond Greene.

    Details
    2025-03-13
    President Lai attends Ministry of Foreign Affairs 2025 Spring Banquet  
    On the evening of March 13, President Lai Ching-te attended the Ministry of Foreign Affairs 2025 Spring Banquet for foreign ambassadors and representatives stationed in Taiwan. In remarks, President Lai thanked our diplomatic allies and like-minded countries for continuing to demonstrate their high regard and support for Taiwan at international venues. The president stated that a stronger Taiwan will be able to contribute even more to the world, explaining that is why he established the National Climate Change Committee, the Whole-of-Society Defense Resilience Committee, and the Healthy Taiwan Promotion Committee. He added that he hopes to pool our strengths so as to formulate national development strategies and enhance Taiwan’s international collaboration. The president also expressed hope of developing opportunities for cooperation with other countries across many domains to jointly advance democracy, peace, and prosperity throughout the region and around the world. A translation of President Lai’s remarks follows: Today is my first time attending the Ministry of Foreign Affairs Spring Banquet since becoming president. It is a pleasure to be able to meet and socialize with esteemed guests from other countries and good friends from all sectors of Taiwan. The global landscape has changed rapidly over the past year. Geopolitical volatility, the restructuring of supply chains, technological advancements, and other factors have had a profound impact on nations’ strategic plans. I want to take this opportunity to thank our diplomatic allies and like-minded countries for continuing to demonstrate their high regard and support for Taiwan at international venues. Last month, the leaders of the United States and Japan, the US secretary of state and the foreign ministers of Japan and the Republic of Korea, and the G7 foreign ministers all issued joint statements emphasizing the importance of peace and stability across the Taiwan Strait, underscoring Taiwan’s vital role in global progress and prosperity.  I would especially like to thank members of the diplomatic corps for working with us to build even closer partnerships between our countries. I have always believed that a stronger Taiwan will be able to contribute even more to the world. That is why, after taking office, I established the National Climate Change Committee, the Whole-of-Society Defense Resilience Committee, and the Healthy Taiwan Promotion Committee under the Office of the President. These committees continue to address global concerns and seek to solve important issues that impact our own people. I hope to pool our strengths so as to formulate national development strategies and enhance Taiwan’s international collaboration.  Last year, I visited our Pacific allies – the Republic of the Marshall Islands, Tuvalu, and the Republic of Palau. I deeply appreciated our friends’ warm hospitality and came to feel very deeply that we are like a family. Through local visits and mutual exchanges, we deepened our diplomatic alliances and cooperation, creating win-win outcomes. We also showed Taiwan’s determination to work with allies to tackle the many challenges related to climate change, net-zero transition, and digital transformation. At the start of this month, Taiwan hosted the first-ever workshop on whole-of-society defense resilience under the Global Cooperation and Training Framework. Experts and scholars from 30 countries participated in the discussions. I once again thank the diplomatic corps for their support and assistance. In the future, we look forward to developing opportunities for cooperation with other countries across many domains to jointly advance democracy, peace, and prosperity throughout the region and around the world. In the face of authoritarian expansion, Taiwan will continue to bolster its national defense capabilities. We will stand shoulder to shoulder with fellow democracies to demonstrate the strength of deterrence. We will also join hands to build non-red supply chains, strengthen our economic resilience, and promote an initiative on semiconductor supply chain partnerships for global democracies. All of this will ensure steady technological and economic development.  In my New Year’s Day address, I said that in this new year, we have many more brilliant stories of Taiwan to share with the world. Everyone gathered here tonight is a dear friend of Taiwan. And each of you plays an important role in the stories this land has to tell.  I am deeply grateful to you all for the incredible efforts you make in support of Taiwan. In so many ways, you connect Taiwan to the rest of the world and allow the world to see the many different sides of this amazing nation. I believe that through even deeper and more extensive cooperation, we will create many more wonderful stories of Taiwan and build an even brighter future together. I wish you all a pleasant evening. Also in attendance at the event were Dean of the Diplomatic Corps and Saint Vincent and the Grenadines Ambassador Andrea Clare Bowman and other members of the foreign diplomatic corps in Taiwan.

    Details
    2025-03-13
    President Lai holds press conference following high-level national security meeting
    On the afternoon of March 13, President Lai Ching-te convened a high-level national security meeting, following which he held a press conference. In remarks, President Lai introduced 17 major strategies to respond to five major national security and united front threats Taiwan now faces: China’s threat to national sovereignty, its threats from infiltration and espionage activities targeting Taiwan’s military, its threats aimed at obscuring the national identity of the people of Taiwan, its threats from united front infiltration into Taiwanese society through cross-strait exchanges, and its threats from using “integrated development” to attract Taiwanese businesspeople and youth. President Lai emphasized that in the face of increasingly severe threats, the government will not stop doing its utmost to ensure that our national sovereignty is not infringed upon, and expressed hope that all citizens unite in solidarity to resist being divided. The president also expressed hope that citizens work together to increase media literacy, organize and participate in civic education activities, promptly expose concerted united front efforts, and refuse to participate in any activities that sacrifice national interests. As long as every citizen plays their part toward our nation’s goals for prosperity and security, he said, and as long as we work together, nothing can defeat us. A translation of President Lai’s remarks follows: At many venues recently, a number of citizens have expressed similar concerns to me. They have noticed cases in which members of the military, both active-duty and retired, have been bought out by China, sold intelligence, or even organized armed forces with plans to harm their own nation and its citizens. They have noticed cases in which entertainers willingly followed instructions from Beijing to claim that their country is not a country, all for the sake of personal career interests. They have noticed how messaging used by Chinese state media to stir up internal opposition in Taiwan is always quickly spread by specific channels. There have even been individuals making careers out of helping Chinese state media record united front content, spreading a message that democracy is useless and promoting skepticism toward the United States and the military to sow division and opposition. Many people worry that our country, as well as our hard-won freedom and democracy and the prosperity and progress we achieved together, are being washed away bit by bit due to these united front tactics. In an analysis of China’s united front, renowned strategic scholar Kerry K. Gershaneck expressed that China plans to divide and conquer us through subversion, infiltration, and acquisition of media, and by launching media warfare, psychological warfare, and legal warfare. What they are trying to do is to sow seeds of discord in our society, keep us occupied with internal conflicts, and cause us to ignore the real threat from outside. China’s ambition over the past several decades to annex Taiwan and stamp out the Republic of China has not changed for even a day. It continues to pursue political and military intimidation, and its united front infiltration of Taiwan’s society grows ever more serious. In 2005, China promulgated its so-called “Anti-Secession Law,” which makes using military force to annex Taiwan a national undertaking. Last June, China issued a 22-point set of “guidelines for punishing Taiwan independence separatists,” which regards all those who do not accept that “Taiwan is part of the People’s Republic of China” as targets for punishment, creating excuses to harm the people of Taiwan. China has also recently been distorting United Nations General Assembly Resolution 2758, showing in all aspects China’s increasingly urgent threat against Taiwan’s sovereignty. Lately, China has been taking advantage of democratic Taiwan’s freedom, diversity, and openness to recruit gangs, the media, commentators, political parties, and even active-duty and retired members of the armed forces and police to carry out actions to divide, destroy, and subvert us from within. A report from the National Security Bureau indicates that 64 persons were charged last year with suspicion of spying for China, which was three times the number of persons charged for the same offense in 2021. Among them, the Unionist Party, Rehabilitation Alliance Party, and Republic of China Taiwan Military Government formed treasonous organizations to deploy armed forces for China. In a democratic and free society, such cases are appalling. But this is something that actually exists within Taiwan’s society today. China also actively plots ways to infiltrate and spy on our military. Last year, 28 active-duty and 15 retired members of the armed forces were charged with suspicion of involvement in spying for China, respectively comprising 43 percent and 23 percent of all of such cases – 66 percent in total. We are also alert to the fact that China has recently used widespread issuance of Chinese passports to entice Taiwanese citizens to apply for the Residence Permit for Taiwan Residents, permanent residency, or the Resident Identity Card, in an attempt to muddle Taiwanese people’s sense of national identity. China also views cross-strait exchanges as a channel for its united front against Taiwan, marking enemies in Taiwan internally, creating internal divisions, and weakening our sense of who the enemy really is. It intends to weaken public authority and create the illusion that China is “governing” Taiwan, thereby expanding its influence within Taiwan. We are also aware that China has continued to expand its strategy of integrated development with Taiwan. It employs various methods to demand and coerce Taiwanese businesses to increase their investments in China, entice Taiwanese youth to develop their careers in China, and unscrupulously seeks to poach Taiwan’s talent and steal key technologies. Such methods impact our economic security and greatly increase the risk of our young people heading to China. By its actions, China already satisfies the definition of a “foreign hostile force” as provided in the Anti-Infiltration Act. We have no choice but to take even more proactive measures, which is my purpose in convening this high-level national security meeting today. It is time we adopt proper preventive measures, enhance our democratic resilience and national security, and protect our cherished free and democratic way of life. Next, I will be giving a detailed account of the five major national security and united front threats Taiwan now faces and the 17 major strategies we have prepared in response. I. Responding to China’s threats to our national sovereignty We have a nation insofar as we have sovereignty, and we have the Republic of China insofar as we have Taiwan. Just as I said during my inaugural address last May, and in my National Day address last October: The moment when Taiwan’s first democratically elected president took the oath of office in 1996 sent a message to the international community, that Taiwan is a sovereign, independent, democratic nation. Among people here and in the international community, some call this land the Republic of China, some call it Taiwan, and some, the Republic of China Taiwan. The Republic of China and the People’s Republic of China are not subordinate to each other, and Taiwan resists any annexation or encroachment upon our sovereignty. The future of the Republic of China Taiwan must be decided by its 23 million people. This is the status quo that we must maintain. The broadest consensus in Taiwanese society is that we must defend our sovereignty, uphold our free and democratic way of life, and resolutely oppose annexation of Taiwan by China. (1) I request that the National Security Council (NSC), the Ministry of National Defense (MND), and the administrative team do their utmost to promote the Four Pillars of Peace action plan to demonstrate the people’s broad consensus and firm resolve, consistent across the entirety of our nation, to oppose annexation of Taiwan by China. (2) I request that the NSC and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs draft an action plan that will, through collaboration with our friends and allies, convey to the world our national will and broad social consensus in opposing annexation of Taiwan by China and in countering China’s efforts to erase Taiwan from the international community and downgrade Taiwan’s sovereignty. II. Responding to China’s threats from infiltration and espionage activities targeting our military (1) Comprehensively review and amend our Law of Military Trial to restore the military trial system, allowing military judges to return to the frontline and collaborate with prosecutorial, investigative, and judicial authorities in the handling of criminal cases in which active-duty military personnel are suspected of involvement in such military crimes as sedition, aiding the enemy, leaking confidential information, dereliction of duty, or disobedience. In the future, criminal cases involving active-duty military personnel who are suspected of violating the Criminal Code of the Armed Forces will be tried by a military court. (2) Implement supporting reforms, including the establishment of a personnel management act for military judges and separate organization acts for military courts and military prosecutors’ offices. Once planning and discussion are completed, the MND will fully explain to and communicate with the public to ensure that the restoration of the military trial system gains the trust and full support of society. (3) To deter the various types of controversial rhetoric and behavior exhibited by active-duty as well as retired military personnel that severely damage the morale of our national military, the MND must discuss and propose an addition to the Criminal Code of the Armed Forces on penalties for expressions of loyalty to the enemy as well as revise the regulations for military personnel and their families receiving retirement benefits, so as to uphold military discipline. III. Responding to China’s threats aimed at obscuring the national identity of the people of Taiwan (1) I request that the Ministry of the Interior (MOI), Mainland Affairs Council (MAC), and other relevant agencies, wherever necessary, carry out inspections and management of the documents involving identification that Taiwanese citizens apply for in China, including: passports, ID cards, permanent residence certificates, and residence certificates, especially when the applicants are military personnel, civil servants, or public school educators, who have an obligation of loyalty to Taiwan. This will be done to strictly prevent and deter united front operations, which are performed by China under the guise of “integrated development,” that attempt to distort our people’s national identity. (2) With respect to naturalization and integration of individuals from China, Hong Kong, and Macau into Taiwanese society, more national security considerations must be taken into account while also attending to Taiwan’s social development and individual rights: Chinese nationals applying for permanent residency in Taiwan must, in accordance with the law of Taiwan, relinquish their existing household registration and passport and may not hold dual identity status. As for the systems in place to process individuals from Hong Kong or Macau applying for residency or permanent residency in Taiwan, there will be additional provisions for long-term residency to meet practical needs. IV. Responding to China’s threats from united front infiltration into Taiwanese society through cross-strait exchanges  (1) There are increasing risks involved with travel to China. (From January 1, 2024 to today, the MAC has received reports of 71 Taiwanese nationals who went missing, were detained, interrogated, or imprisoned in China; the number of unreported people who have been subjected to such treatment may be several times that. Of those, three elderly I-Kuan Tao members were detained in China in December of last year and have not yet been released.) In light of this, relevant agencies must raise public awareness of those risks, continue enhancing public communication, and implement various registration systems to reduce the potential for accidents and the risks associated with traveling to China. (2) Implement a disclosure system for exchanges with China involving public officials at all levels of the central and local government. This includes everyone from administrative officials to elected representatives, from legislators to village and neighborhood chiefs, all of whom should make the information related to such exchanges both public and transparent so that they can be accountable to the people. The MOI should also establish a disclosure system for exchanges with China involving public welfare organizations, such as religious groups, in order to prevent China’s interference and united front activities at their outset. (3) Manage the risks associated with individuals from China engaging in exchanges with Taiwan: Review and approval of Chinese individuals coming to Taiwan should be limited to normal cross-strait exchanges and official interactions under the principles of parity and dignity, and relevant factors such as changes in the cross-strait situation should be taken into consideration. Strict restrictions should be placed on Chinese individuals who have histories with the united front coming to Taiwan, and Chinese individuals should be prohibited from coming to Taiwan to conduct activities related in any way to the united front. (4) Political interference from China and the resulting risks to national security should be avoided in cross-strait exchanges. This includes the review and management of religious, cultural, academic, and education exchanges, which should in principle be depoliticized and de-risked so as to simplify people-to-people exchanges and promote healthy and orderly exchanges. (5) To deter the united front tactics of a cultural nature employed by Chinese nationals to undermine Taiwan’s sovereignty, the Executive Yuan must formulate a solution to make our local cultural industries more competitive, including enhanced support and incentives for our film, television, and cultural and creative industries to boost their strengths in democratic cultural creation, raise international competitiveness, and encourage research in Taiwan’s own history and culture. (6) Strengthen guidance and management for entertainers developing their careers in China. The competent authorities should provide entertainers with guidelines on conduct while working in China, and make clear the scope of investigation and response to conduct that endangers national dignity. This will help prevent China from pressuring Taiwanese entertainers to make statements or act in ways that endanger national dignity. (7) The relevant authorities must adopt proactive, effective measures to prevent China from engaging in cognitive warfare against Taiwan or endangering cybersecurity through the internet, applications, AI, and other such tools. (8) To implement these measures, each competent authority must run a comprehensive review of the relevant administrative ordinances, measures, and interpretations, and complete the relevant regulations for legal enforcement. Should there be any shortcomings, the legal framework for national security should be strengthened and amendments to the National Security Act, Anti-Infiltration Act, Act Governing Relations between the People of the Taiwan Area and the Mainland Area, Laws and Regulations Regarding Hong Kong & Macao Affairs, or Cyber Security Management Act should be proposed. Communication with the public should also be increased so that implementation can happen as soon as possible. V. Responding to threats from China using “integrated development” to attract Taiwanese businesspeople and youth (1) I request that the NSC and administrative agencies work together to carry out strategic structural adjustments to the economic and trade relations between Taiwan and China based on the strategies of putting Taiwan first and expanding our global presence while staying rooted in Taiwan. In addition, they should carry out necessary, orderly adjustments to the flow of talent, goods, money, and skills involved in cross-strait economic and trade relations based on the principle of strengthening Taiwan’s foundations to better manage risk. This will help boost economic security and give us more power to respond to China’s economic and trade united front and economic coercion against Taiwan. (2) I request that the Ministry of Education, MAC, Ministry of Economic Affairs, and other relevant agencies work together to comprehensively strengthen young students’ literacy education on China and deepen their understanding of cross-strait exchanges. I also request these agencies to widely publicize mechanisms for employment and entrepreneurship for Taiwan’s youth and provide ample information and assistance so that young students have more confidence in the nation’s future and more actively invest in building up and developing Taiwan. My fellow citizens, this year marks the 80th anniversary of the end of the Second World War. History tells us that any authoritarian act of aggression or annexation will ultimately end in failure. The only way we can safeguard freedom and prevail against authoritarian aggression is through solidarity. As we face increasingly severe threats, the government will not stop doing its utmost to ensure that our national sovereignty is not infringed upon, and to ensure that the freedom, democracy, and way of life of Taiwan’s 23 million people continues on as normal. But relying solely on the power of the government is not enough. What we need even more is for all citizens to stay vigilant and take action. Every citizen stands on the frontline of the defense of democracy and freedom. Here is what we can do together: First, we can increase our media literacy, and refrain from spreading and passing on united front messaging from the Chinese state. Second, we can organize and participate in civic education activities to increase our knowledge about united front operations and build up whole-of-society defense resilience. Third, we can promptly expose concerted united front efforts so that all malicious attempts are difficult to carry out. Fourth, we must refuse to participate in any activities that sacrifice national interests. The vigilance and action of every citizen forms the strongest line of defense against united front infiltration. Only through solidarity can we resist being divided. As long as every citizen plays their part toward our nation’s goals for prosperity and security, and as long as we work together, nothing can defeat us.

    MIL OSI Asia Pacific News –

  • MIL-OSI Submissions: Global Bodies – 150th IPU Assembly to take place in Uzbekistan

    Source: Inter-Parliamentary Union (IPU)

    Geneva, Switzerland, 18 March 2025 – The Inter-Parliamentary Union (IPU) will hold its 150th Assembly in Tashkent, Uzbekistan, from 5 to 9 April 2025, hosted by the Parliament of Uzbekistan.

    The overall theme Parliamentary action for social development and justice will cover topics such as eradicating poverty, promoting decent work, fostering social inclusion, and increasing the participation of marginalized groups in decision-making.

    Key highlights will include the following:

    The IPU will celebrate its milestone 150th Assembly, which will include a keynote address from the President of Uzbekistan, Shavkat Mirziyoyev.

    The IPU Forum of Women Parliamentarians will also celebrate its 40th anniversary, a significant milestone against the backdrop of new challenges to women’s rights in some countries and the stagnation of the proportion of MPs who are women at 27.2%, according to the latest IPU report.
    All the IPU’s other bodies will convene, including its four thematic Standing Committees, the Forum of Young Parliamentarians, the Committee on the Human Rights of Parliamentarians, the Committee on Middle East Questions and the Task Force on the peaceful resolution of the war in Ukraine.

    The IPU is poised to move closer to universality with its membership expected to grow to 182 Member Parliaments as Belize joins.

    MPs are expected to adopt resolutions on advancing a two-State solution in Palestine, and mitigating the impact of conflicts on sustainable development.

    The Assembly will feature workshops on climate action, parliamentary diplomacy, and social norms impacting women’s health.

    During the Assembly, the IPU will also open nominations for the 2025 edition of the Cremer-Passy Prize, recognizing parliamentarian(s) with exceptional records in gender equality, the IPU’s theme of the year.

    Historical background

    The first IPU meeting took place in 1889 in Paris, France with MPs representing nine countries. Since then, the IPU Assembly has grown to become a global platform, the parliament of parliaments, with hundreds of MPs attending from around the world, along with staff, partner organizations and experts.

    Practical details

    Venue: Tashkent City Congress Centre in Tashkent, Uzbekistan.

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

    MIL OSI – Submitted News –

  • MIL-OSI Global: Trump-Putin ceasefire conversation shows no initial signs of bringing peace to Ukraine

    Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By James Horncastle, Assistant Professor and Edward and Emily McWhinney Professor in International Relations, Simon Fraser University

    Russian President Vladimir Putin agreed to a proposal by United States President Donald Trump for Russia and Ukraine to stop attacking each other’s energy infrastructure for 30 days, according to statements by both the White House and the Kremlin.

    Yet within hours of a Trump-Putin phone call about a U.S. ceasefire proposal, Russia was reportedly attacking Ukrainian energy facilities again, leading Ukraine’s Volodymyr Zelenskyy to accuse Putin of effectively rejecting the terms.

    The deal falls short of an unconditional 30-day ceasefire proposed by U.S. and Ukrainian officials earlier this month.

    In fact, Trump’s latest phone call with Putin seemingly didn’t amount to any substantive changes, except for an apparently short-lived Russian agreement to refrain from targeting Ukraine’s energy infrastructure — a concession that might actually benefit Russia.

    The winter, when Ukraine is most vulnerable to Russian attacks on its energy infrastructure, is almost done. Russia’s dependence on energy exports to support its war effort, however, remains constant, and any Ukrainian attacks on Russian energy facilities will be framed as a breach by Russian authorities.

    Russia exploiting Trump’s desire for peace at any cost will probably be an ongoing trend.

    Given the earlier proposal was highly vague, this leads to one conclusion. Russia is playing for time to maximize its negotiating position.

    Trump’s goal

    The U.S. is playing an important role in peace negotiations. Under former president Joe Biden, this was due to the fact that the U.S. provided Ukraine with arms and moral support.

    Like most aspects of American policy, however, Trump dramatically pivoted, even attacking Zelenskyy in an infamous White House meeting in February. Now Trump is seeking a ceasefire, no matter what form it takes, to build a reputation as a statesman and distract Americans from domestic policy issues.



    Read more:
    What the U.S. ceasefire proposal means for Ukraine, Russia, Europe – and Donald Trump

    This development places Zelenskyy in a political bind. The U.S. in the past provided most of the military aid to Ukraine and the relationship between the Ukrainian leader and Trump is acrimonious.

    As such, even if Zelenskyy doesn’t agree with American ceasefire proposals, he must give the appearance of agreement or risk permanently alienating the mercurial Trump. Putin, in the meantime, will exploit any Ukrainian-American tensions.

    Current military situation

    The first year of the current phase of the Ukraine-Russia war was marked by mobility as both Russia and Ukraine made considerable advances and counteroffensives.

    Since the start of 2023, however, the conflict is increasingly defined as a war of attrition and a stalemate.

    Many analysts argue that such a war favours Russia. Wars of attrition are defined by slow, grinding advances whereby large casualties are a necessary byproduct for success. Given Russia’s material and personnel advantages, it can afford to suffer higher casualties.

    For the past several months, Russian forces have been making slow, steady advances against Ukrainian positions. Russia has suffered significant casualties in these advances, and they may not be sustainable over the long term.

    Putin is gambling that Ukraine’s and the international community’s will to fight will be broken by the time this is an issue. Trump’s push for a ceasefire at any cost suggests Putin may have a point.

    Any immediate ceasefire agreement between Russia and Ukraine would leave Ukraine occupying Russian soil in the Kursk region, which Russia cannot accept.

    Russia’s immediate goal

    Ukraine’s 2024 incursion into the Kursk region provided the country and its people with a necessary respite from the war of attrition. Ukrainian forces, attacking an under-defended and unprepared part of the Russian front line, made significant advances into Russia.

    Ukraine’s ability to maintain territory around Kursk has also proven to be an embarrassment for Putin and the Russian establishment.

    Putin recently said Russian forces encircled Ukrainian forces in the salient, although Ukraine denies it. Regardless of the statement’s validity, it speaks to the importance both parties attach to the battle.

    Russia’s reputation

    This issue highlights a particular problem for the Russian leadership. Russia has done its utmost to frame its so-called “special military operation” in Ukraine as a success. An example is Russia’s formal annexation of four Ukrainian areas in 2022, despite not actually possessing the territory at the time.

    Any perception of the invasion of Ukraine as a failure is a non-starter for a Russian government concerned about its domestic standing.

    Ukraine possessing Russian territory, however, leads to questions in Russia about the war’s success. Ukraine, in exchange for relinquishing any Russian territory it seized during the war, would undoubtedly seek the return of Ukrainian territory.

    Russia has not even achieved its minimal goals of seizing the four Ukrainian regions it’s officially annexed. Therefore, it’s unlikely Putin would ever agree to the exchange of the territory it has actually already seized in exchange for the Kursk salient.

    Putin is following the Russian playbook of negotiating from strength. So long as Ukraine maintains Kursk, Russia will not negotiate in good faith.

    While Kursk is the most prominent area of Russia concern, there are other conditions that will become important in the future as Putin seeks to improve Russia’s negotiating position.

    It’s a lesson that Trump will soon learn, despite any and all efforts he or his administration make to frame things positively.

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

    – ref. Trump-Putin ceasefire conversation shows no initial signs of bringing peace to Ukraine – https://theconversation.com/trump-putin-ceasefire-conversation-shows-no-initial-signs-of-bringing-peace-to-ukraine-252368

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI China: Trump, Putin agree ‘energy and infrastructure ceasefire’ in Ukraine

    Source: China State Council Information Office

    U.S. President Donald Trump and his Russian counterpart Vladimir Putin agreed in a phone call on Tuesday that the peace in Ukraine “will begin with an energy and infrastructure ceasefire.”

    Meanwhile, they agreed to “immediately” launch technical negotiations on the implementation of a maritime ceasefire in the Black Sea, as well as on the full ceasefire and permanent peace in Ukraine, the White House said in a statement.

    “These negotiations will begin immediately in the Middle East,” said the statement, noting the two leaders agreed that the three-year Ukraine conflict needs to end with a lasting peace.

    The two leaders stressed the need for improved U.S.-Russia relations, said the statement. Further details are not immediately available, but U.S. media outlets, citing Russian sources, said they spoke in favor of normalizing relations between the two countries.

    It is not immediately clear the response of Ukraine to the limited and phrased ceasefire plan. Kiev has said it is ready to accept the 30-day truce proposed by Trump.

    Ahead of the phone talk, Trump said, “Many elements of a Final Agreement have been agreed to, but much remains.”

    The mess over Ukraine “will almost certainly not be resolved in a phone call, if at all,” an analyst with the Fox News said. 

    MIL OSI China News –

  • MIL-OSI China: China willing to jointly uphold genuine multilateralism with France

    Source: China State Council Information Office

    Wang Yi, director of the Office of the Foreign Affairs Commission of the Communist Party of China (CPC) Central Committee, said Tuesday that China is willing to maintain close high-level exchanges with France, strengthen strategic coordination, and jointly uphold genuine multilateralism.

    Wang, also a member of the Political Bureau of the CPC Central Committee, made the remarks when having a phone conversation with Emmanuel Bonne, diplomatic adviser to the French President, at the latter’s request.

    During the phone conversation, Wang requested Bonne to convey Chinese President Xi Jinping’s greetings to French President Emmanuel Macron.

    The current international situation is increasingly complex and intertwined, with significant rises in uncertainty and instability, said Wang.

    Noting that this year marks the 80th anniversary of the victory in World War II, Wang said that it is essential for China and France, as permanent members of the United Nations Security Council and comprehensive strategic partners, to enhance strategic communication at this significant historical juncture.

    Wang said that China is willing to maintain close high-level exchanges with France, strengthen strategic coordination, jointly uphold genuine multilateralism, uphold the status of the United Nations, protect the international trade order, ensure the stability of global industrial and supply chains, oppose unipolar hegemony, reject placing one country’s self-interest above the common interests of all nations, and prevent the world from returning to the law of the jungle.

    In the current situation, it is of important and positive significance for China and Europe to resolve specific economic and trade frictions through consultation. China hopes that France will work with China to send a positive signal of unity and cooperation and promote the healthy and stable development of China-France and China-Europe relations, noted Wang.

    Bonne requested Wang to convey Macron’s greetings to Xi. He said that France attaches great importance to and cherishes the friendship and mutual trust between France and China. Under the current complex international situation in particular, France looks forward to maintaining high-level exchanges and close strategic communication with China to jointly resist camp confrontation.

    Bonne said that France opposes trade wars and tariff wars, and is willing to properly resolve economic and trade frictions through consultations with China, promote balanced and sustainable development of economic and trade relations between France and China and also between Europe and China, and maintain the international economic and trade system based on World Trade Organization’s rules.

    The two sides exchanged in-depth views on the Ukraine issue.

    Bonne briefed Wang on the position of the French side, saying that France is willing to strengthen coordination with China and expects China to play an important role in reaching a just, stable and sustainable peace agreement on Ukraine.

    Wang said that China has advocated resolving the crisis through dialogue and negotiation from the very beginning, and welcomes all efforts towards a ceasefire, which is a necessary step towards peace. At the same time, this process should respect the will of the parties concerned, should not be imposed by a third party, and should not only serve the interests of any one country.

    China supports the achievement of a fair, lasting and binding peace agreement acceptable to all parties concerned, and believes that all parties and stakeholders should participate in the peace talks process in due course.

    He also noted that China’s position has been recognized and supported by the parties concerned and most other countries, and China is ready to work with all parties, including Europe, to continue to make efforts for peace.

    The two sides also exchanged views on the Iranian nuclear issue.

    MIL OSI China News –

  • MIL-OSI Global: Trump-Putin ceasefire conversation shows no initial signs of ending the war in Ukraine

    Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By James Horncastle, Assistant Professor and Edward and Emily McWhinney Professor in International Relations, Simon Fraser University

    Russian President Vladimir Putin agreed to a proposal by United States President Donald Trump for Russia and Ukraine to stop attacking each other’s energy infrastructure for 30 days, according to statements by both the White House and the Kremlin.

    Yet within hours of a Trump-Putin phone call about a U.S. ceasefire proposal, Russia was reportedly attacking Ukrainian energy facilities again, leading Ukraine’s Volodymyr Zelenskyy to accuse Putin of effectively rejecting the terms.

    The deal falls short of an unconditional 30-day ceasefire proposed by U.S. and Ukrainian officials earlier this month.

    In fact, Trump’s latest phone call with Putin seemingly didn’t amount to any substantive changes, except for an apparently short-lived Russian agreement to refrain from targeting Ukraine’s energy infrastructure — a concession that might actually benefit Russia.

    The winter, when Ukraine is most vulnerable to Russian attacks on its energy infrastructure, is almost done. Russia’s dependence on energy exports to support its war effort, however, remains constant, and any Ukrainian attacks on Russian energy facilities will be framed as a breach by Russian authorities.

    Russia exploiting Trump’s desire for peace at any cost will probably be an ongoing trend.

    Given the earlier proposal was highly vague, this leads to one conclusion. Russia is playing for time to maximize its negotiating position.

    Trump’s goal

    The U.S. is playing an important role in peace negotiations. Under former president Joe Biden, this was due to the fact that the U.S. provided Ukraine with arms and moral support.

    Like most aspects of American policy, however, Trump dramatically pivoted, even attacking Zelenskyy in an infamous White House meeting in February. Now Trump is seeking a ceasefire, no matter what form it takes, to build a reputation as a statesman and distract Americans from domestic policy issues.



    Read more:
    What the U.S. ceasefire proposal means for Ukraine, Russia, Europe – and Donald Trump

    This development places Zelenskyy in a political bind. The U.S. in the past provided most of the military aid to Ukraine and the relationship between the Ukrainian leader and Trump is acrimonious.

    As such, even if Zelenskyy doesn’t agree with American ceasefire proposals, he must give the appearance of agreement or risk permanently alienating the mercurial Trump. Putin, in the meantime, will exploit any Ukrainian-American tensions.

    Current military situation

    The first year of the current phase of the Ukraine-Russia war was marked by mobility as both Russia and Ukraine made considerable advances and counteroffensives.

    Since the start of 2023, however, the conflict is increasingly defined as a war of attrition and a stalemate.

    Many analysts argue that such a war favours Russia. Wars of attrition are defined by slow, grinding advances whereby large casualties are a necessary byproduct for success. Given Russia’s material and personnel advantages, it can afford to suffer higher casualties.

    For the past several months, Russian forces have been making slow, steady advances against Ukrainian positions. Russia has suffered significant casualties in these advances, and they may not be sustainable over the long term.

    Putin is gambling that Ukraine’s and the international community’s will to fight will be broken by the time this is an issue. Trump’s push for a ceasefire at any cost suggests Putin may have a point.

    Any immediate ceasefire agreement between Russia and Ukraine would leave Ukraine occupying Russian soil in the Kursk region, which Russia cannot accept.

    Russia’s immediate goal

    Ukraine’s 2024 incursion into the Kursk region provided the country and its people with a necessary respite from the war of attrition. Ukrainian forces, attacking an under-defended and unprepared part of the Russian front line, made significant advances into Russia.

    Ukraine’s ability to maintain territory around Kursk has also proven to be an embarrassment for Putin and the Russian establishment.

    Putin recently said Russian forces encircled Ukrainian forces in the salient, although Ukraine denies it. Regardless of the statement’s validity, it speaks to the importance both parties attach to the battle.

    Russia’s reputation

    This issue highlights a particular problem for the Russian leadership. Russia has done its utmost to frame its so-called “special military operation” in Ukraine as a success. An example is Russia’s formal annexation of four Ukrainian areas in 2022, despite not actually possessing the territory at the time.

    Any perception of the invasion of Ukraine as a failure is a non-starter for a Russian government concerned about its domestic standing.

    Ukraine possessing Russian territory, however, leads to questions in Russia about the war’s success. Ukraine, in exchange for relinquishing any Russian territory it seized during the war, would undoubtedly seek the return of Ukrainian territory.

    Russia has not even achieved its minimal goals of seizing the four Ukrainian regions it’s officially annexed. Therefore, it’s unlikely Putin would ever agree to the exchange of the territory it has actually already seized in exchange for the Kursk salient.

    Putin is following the Russian playbook of negotiating from strength. So long as Ukraine maintains Kursk, Russia will not negotiate in good faith.

    While Kursk is the most prominent area of Russia concern, there are other conditions that will become important in the future as Putin seeks to improve Russia’s negotiating position.

    It’s a lesson that Trump will soon learn, despite any and all efforts he or his administration make to frame things positively.

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

    – ref. Trump-Putin ceasefire conversation shows no initial signs of ending the war in Ukraine – https://theconversation.com/trump-putin-ceasefire-conversation-shows-no-initial-signs-of-ending-the-war-in-ukraine-252368

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: Putin makes self-serving concession to Ukraine as Trump tries unsuccessfully to become a statesman

    Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By James Horncastle, Assistant Professor and Edward and Emily McWhinney Professor in International Relations, Simon Fraser University

    Russian President Vladimir Putin agreed to a proposal by United States President Donald Trump for Russia and Ukraine to stop attacking each other’s energy infrastructure for 30 days, according to statements by both the White House and the Kremlin.

    Yet within hours of a Trump-Putin phone call about the U.S. ceasefire proposal, Russia was reportedly attacking Ukrainian energy facilities again, leading Ukraine’s Volodymyr Zelenskyy to accuse Putin of effectively rejecting the terms.

    The deal falls short of an unconditional 30-day ceasefire proposed by U.S. and Ukrainian officials earlier this month.

    In fact, Trump’s latest phone call with Putin seemingly didn’t amount to any substantive changes, except for Russia’s agreement to refrain from targeting Ukraine’s energy infrastructure — a concession that might actually benefit Russia.

    The winter, when Ukraine is most vulnerable to Russian attacks on its energy infrastructure, is almost done. Russia’s dependence on energy exports to support its war effort, however, remains constant, and any Ukrainian attacks on Russian energy facilities will be framed as a breach by Russian authorities.

    Russia exploiting Trump’s desire for peace at any cost will probably be an ongoing trend.

    Given the earlier proposal was highly vague, this leads to one conclusion. Russia is playing for time to maximize its negotiating position.

    Trump’s goal

    The U.S. is playing an important role in peace negotiations. Under former president Joe Biden, this was due to the fact that the U.S. provided Ukraine with arms and moral support.

    Like most aspects of American policy, however, Trump dramatically pivoted, even attacking Zelenskyy in an infamous White House meeting in February. Now Trump is seeking a ceasefire, no matter what form it takes, to build a reputation as a statesman and distract Americans from domestic policy issues.



    Read more:
    What the U.S. ceasefire proposal means for Ukraine, Russia, Europe – and Donald Trump

    This development places Zelenskyy in a political bind. The U.S. in the past provided most of the military aid to Ukraine and the relationship between the Ukrainian leader and Trump is acrimonious.

    As such, even if Zelenskyy doesn’t agree with American ceasefire proposals, he must give the appearance of agreement or risk permanently alienating the mercurial Trump. Putin, in the meantime, will exploit any Ukrainian-American tensions.

    Current military situation

    The first year of the current phase of the Ukraine-Russia war was marked by mobility as both Russia and Ukraine made considerable advances and counteroffensives.

    Since the start of 2023, however, the conflict is increasingly defined as a war of attrition and a stalemate.

    Many analysts argue that such a war favours Russia. Wars of attrition are defined by slow, grinding advances whereby large casualties are a necessary byproduct for success. Given Russia’s material and personnel advantages, it can afford to suffer higher casualties.

    For the past several months, Russian forces have been making slow, steady advances against Ukrainian positions. Russia has suffered significant casualties in these advances, and they may not be sustainable over the long term.

    Putin is gambling that Ukraine’s and the international community’s will to fight will be broken by the time this is an issue. Trump’s push for a ceasefire at any cost suggests Putin may have a point.

    Any immediate ceasefire agreement between Russia and Ukraine would leave Ukraine occupying Russian soil in the Kursk region, which Russia cannot accept.

    Russia’s immediate goal

    Ukraine’s 2024 incursion into the Kursk region provided the country and its people with a necessary respite from the war of attrition. Ukrainian forces, attacking an under-defended and unprepared part of the Russian front line, made significant advances into Russia.

    Ukraine’s ability to maintain territory around Kursk has also proven to be an embarrassment for Putin and the Russian establishment.

    Putin recently said Russian forces encircled Ukrainian forces in the salient, although Ukraine denies it. Regardless of the statement’s validity, it speaks to the importance both parties attach to the battle.

    Russia’s reputation

    This issue highlights a particular problem for the Russian leadership. Russia has done its utmost to frame its so-called “special military operation” in Ukraine as a success. An example is Russia’s formal annexation of four Ukrainian areas in 2022, despite not actually possessing the territory at the time.

    Any perception of the invasion of Ukraine as a failure is a non-starter for a Russian government concerned about its domestic standing.

    Ukraine possessing Russian territory, however, leads to questions in Russia about the war’s success. Ukraine, in exchange for relinquishing any Russian territory it seized during the war, would undoubtedly seek the return of Ukrainian territory.

    Russia has not even achieved its minimal goals of seizing the four Ukrainian regions it’s officially annexed. Therefore, it’s unlikely Putin would ever agree to the exchange of the territory it has actually already seized in exchange for the Kursk salient.

    Putin is following the Russian playbook of negotiating from strength. So long as Ukraine maintains Kursk, Russia will not negotiate in good faith.

    While Kursk is the most prominent area of Russia concern, there are other conditions that will become important in the future as Putin seeks to improve Russia’s negotiating position.

    It’s a lesson that Trump will soon learn, despite any and all efforts he or his administration make to frame things positively.

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

    – ref. Putin makes self-serving concession to Ukraine as Trump tries unsuccessfully to become a statesman – https://theconversation.com/putin-makes-self-serving-concession-to-ukraine-as-trump-tries-unsuccessfully-to-become-a-statesman-252368

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI United Kingdom: PM call with President Zelenskyy of Ukraine: 18 March 2025

    Source: United Kingdom – Executive Government & Departments

    Press release

    PM call with President Zelenskyy of Ukraine: 18 March 2025

    Prime Minister Keir Starmer spoke to President Zelenskyy.

    The Prime Minister spoke to President Zelenskyy this evening. They discussed progress President Trump had made towards a ceasefire in talks with Russia. 

    President Zelenskyy updated on the situation on the frontline and the Prime Minister reiterated the UK’s unwavering support.

    Updates to this page

    Published 18 March 2025

    MIL OSI United Kingdom –

  • MIL-OSI Global: Putin makes paltry concession to Ukraine in Trump’s self-aggrandizing ceasefire effort

    Source: The Conversation – Canada – By James Horncastle, Assistant Professor and Edward and Emily McWhinney Professor in International Relations, Simon Fraser University

    Russian President Vladimir Putin has agreed to a proposal by United States President Donald Trump for Russia and Ukraine to stop attacking each other’s energy infrastructure for 30 days, according to statements by both the White House and the Kremlin.

    The deal, however, falls short of an unconditional 30-day ceasefire proposed by U.S. and Ukrainian officials earlier this month.

    Russia’s response to the initial U.S. ceasefire proposal has been predictable. Putin has argued that considerable changes need to be made to the original proposal, though he didn’t outright reject it.

    Given the earlier proposal is highly vague, this leads to one conclusion. Russia is playing for time to maximize its negotiating position.

    Trump’s latest phone call with Putin seemingly didn’t amount to any substantive changes, except for Russia’s agreement to refrain from targeting Ukraine’s energy infrastructure — a concession that might actually benefit Russia.

    The winter, when Ukraine is most vulnerable to Russian attacks on its energy infrastructure, is almost done. Russia’s dependence on energy exports to support its war effort, however, remains constant, and any Ukrainian attacks on Russian energy facilities will be framed as a breach by Russian authorities.

    Russia exploiting Trump’s desire for peace at any cost will probably be an ongoing trend.

    Trump’s goal

    The U.S. is playing an important role in peace negotiations. Under former president Joe Biden, this was due to the fact that the U.S. provided Ukraine with arms and moral support.

    Like most aspects of American policy, however, Trump dramatically pivoted, even attacking Ukraine’s Volodymyr Zelenskyy in an infamous White House meeting in February. Now Trump is seeking a ceasefire, no matter what form it takes, to build a reputation as a statesman and distract Americans from domestic policy issues.



    Read more:
    What the U.S. ceasefire proposal means for Ukraine, Russia, Europe – and Donald Trump

    This development places Zelenskyy in a political bind. The U.S. in the past provided most of the military aid to Ukraine and the relationship between the Ukrainian leader and Trump is acrimonious.

    As such, even if Zelenskyy doesn’t agree with American ceasefire proposals, he must give the appearance of agreement or risk permanently alienating the mercurial Trump. Putin, in the meantime, will exploit any Ukrainian-American tensions.

    Current military situation

    The first year of the current phase of the Ukraine-Russia war was marked by mobility as both Russia and Ukraine made considerable advances and counteroffensives.

    Since the start of 2023, however, the conflict is increasingly defined as a war of attrition and a stalemate.

    Many analysts argue that such a war favours Russia. Wars of attrition are defined by slow, grinding advances whereby large casualties are a necessary byproduct for success. Given Russia’s material and personnel advantages, it can afford to suffer higher casualties.

    For the past several months, Russian forces have been making slow, steady advances against Ukrainian positions. Russia has suffered significant casualties in these advances, and they may not be sustainable over the long term.

    Putin is gambling that Ukraine’s and the international community’s will to fight will be broken by the time this is an issue. Trump’s push for a ceasefire at any cost suggests Putin may have a point.

    Any immediate ceasefire agreement between Russia and Ukraine would leave Ukraine occupying Russian soil in the Kursk region, which Russia cannot accept.

    Russia’s immediate goal

    Ukraine’s 2024 incursion into the Kursk region provided the country and its people with a necessary respite from the war of attrition. Ukrainian forces, attacking an under-defended and unprepared part of the Russian front line, made significant advances into Russia.

    Ukraine’s ability to maintain territory around Kursk has also proven to be an embarrassment for Putin and the Russian establishment.

    Putin recently said Russian forces encircled Ukrainian forces in the salient, although Ukraine denies it. Regardless of the statement’s validity, it speaks to the importance both parties attach to the battle.

    Russia’s reputation

    This issue highlights a particular problem for the Russian leadership. Russia has done its utmost to frame its so-called “special military operation” in Ukraine as a success. An example is Russia’s formal annexation of four Ukrainian areas in 2022, despite not actually possessing the territory at the time.

    Any perception of the invasion of Ukraine as a failure is a non-starter for a Russian government concerned about its domestic standing.

    Ukraine possessing Russian territory, however, leads to questions in Russia about the war’s success. Ukraine, in exchange for relinquishing any Russian territory it seized during the war, would undoubtedly seek the return of Ukrainian territory.

    Russia has not even achieved its minimal goals of seizing the four Ukrainian regions it’s officially annexed. Therefore, it’s unlikely Putin would ever agree to the exchange of the territory it has actually already seized in exchange for the Kursk salient.

    Putin is following the Russian playbook of negotiating from strength. So long as Ukraine maintains Kursk, Russia will not negotiate in good faith.

    While Kursk is the most prominent area of Russia concern, there are other conditions that will become important in the future as Putin seeks to improve Russia’s negotiating position.

    It’s a lesson that Trump will soon learn, despite any and all efforts he or his administration make to frame things positively.

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

    – ref. Putin makes paltry concession to Ukraine in Trump’s self-aggrandizing ceasefire effort – https://theconversation.com/putin-makes-paltry-concession-to-ukraine-in-trumps-self-aggrandizing-ceasefire-effort-252368

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Written question – Fresh protests from European farmers – E-001000/2025

    Source: European Parliament

    Question for written answer  E-001000/2025
    to the Commission
    Rule 144
    Daniel Buda (PPE)

    Farmers in Czechia, Slovakia, Hungary and Austria started protesting against the EU’s unfair agricultural policies on 27 February 2025. European farmers, including those in Romania, have been hit by large-scale duty-free imports from Ukraine, the impact of the EU-Mercosur agreement, excessive red tape and the lack of a clear budget for the CAP for 2028-2034. Romania’s Alliance for Agriculture and Cooperation (AAC) has called for the cancellation of the EU-Mercosur agreement, the renegotiation of trade relations with Ukraine, fair agricultural policies and less over-regulation. These protests send a strong message to EU decision-makers on the need for urgent changes in agriculture.

    Since the farmers’ protests are indicative of serious problems such as the uncontrolled imports from third countries, the impact of the EU-Mercosur agreement on the competitiveness of EU produce, excessive red tape and the lack of a clear budget for the CAP for 2028-2034, what concrete measures will the Commission take to prevent a fresh agricultural crisis and ensure a fair framework for European farmers so that they can compete on equal terms and maintain the EU’s food security?

    Submitted: 7.3.2025

    Last updated: 18 March 2025

    MIL OSI Europe News –