Category: Ukraine

  • MIL-OSI United Kingdom: PM meeting with Prime Minister Carney of Canada: 17 March 2025

    Source: United Kingdom – Prime Minister’s Office 10 Downing Street

    Press release

    PM meeting with Prime Minister Carney of Canada: 17 March 2025

    The Prime Minister met the Prime Minister of Canada Mark Carney this evening at Downing Street.

    The Prime Minister met the Prime Minister of Canada Mark Carney this evening at Downing Street.

    The Prime Minister began by saying he was delighted to host Prime Minister Carney at No10 at this early opportunity and underlined that the UK and Canada are the closest of sovereign allies and friends. 

    The leaders agreed that the UK-Canadian partnership is based on shared history and values, membership of the Commonwealth and a shared King and they both looked forward to strengthening ties. 

    Prime Minister Carney praised the Prime Minister’s leadership on Ukraine, and they discussed the Coalition of the Willing call on Saturday, which Prime Minister Carney said he was honoured to attend as his first international engagement in his role.

    They agreed that all must work together to put Ukraine in the strongest possible position to see a just and lasting peace. Both underscored the importance of global security, and the Prime Minister discussed his announcement to increase defence spending to 2.5% by 2027. 

    The Prime Minister welcomed Canada’s leadership on shared international priorities through their G7 Presidency and looked forward to working together on delivering growth for people in the UK and Canada ahead of the Leader’s Summit later this year. 

    They looked forward to speaking again soon.

    Updates to this page

    Published 17 March 2025

    MIL OSI United Kingdom

  • MIL-OSI: Greystone Housing Impact Investors LP Announces Regular Quarterly Cash Distribution

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    OMAHA, Neb., March 17, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — On March 17, 2025, Greystone Housing Impact Investors LP (NYSE: GHI) (the “Partnership”) announced that the Board of Managers of Greystone AF Manager LLC (“Greystone Manager”) declared a cash distribution to the Partnership’s Beneficial Unit Certificate (“BUC”) holders of $0.37 per BUC.

    The cash distribution will be paid on April 30, 2025 to all BUC holders of record as of the close of trading on March 31, 2025. The BUCs will trade ex-distribution as of March 31, 2025.

    Greystone Manager is the general partner of America First Capital Associates Limited Partnership Two, the Partnership’s general partner. Distributions to the Partnership’s BUC holders, including regular and any supplemental distributions, are determined by Greystone Manager based on a disciplined evaluation of the Partnership’s current and anticipated operating results, financial condition and other factors it deems relevant. Greystone Manager continually evaluates the factors that go into BUC holder distribution decisions, consistent with the long-term best interests of the BUC holders and the Partnership.

    About Greystone Housing Impact Investors LP

    Greystone Housing Impact Investors LP was formed in 1998 under the Delaware Revised Uniform Limited Partnership Act for the primary purpose of acquiring, holding, selling and otherwise dealing with a portfolio of mortgage revenue bonds which have been issued to provide construction and/or permanent financing for affordable multifamily, seniors and student housing properties. The Partnership is pursuing a business strategy of acquiring additional mortgage revenue bonds and other investments on a leveraged basis. The Partnership expects and believes the interest earned on these mortgage revenue bonds is excludable from gross income for federal income tax purposes. The Partnership seeks to achieve its investment growth strategy by investing in additional mortgage revenue bonds and other investments as permitted by its Second Amended and Restated Limited Partnership Agreement, dated December 5, 2022, (the “Partnership Agreement”), taking advantage of attractive financing structures available in the securities market, and entering into interest rate risk management instruments. Greystone Housing Impact Investors LP press releases are available at www.ghiinvestors.com.

    Safe Harbor Statement

    Certain statements in this press release are intended to be covered by the safe harbor for “forward-looking statements” provided by the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. These forward-looking statements generally can be identified by use of statements that include, but are not limited to, phrases such as “believe,” “expect,” “future,” “anticipate,” “intend,” “plan,” “foresee,” “may,” “should,” “will,” “estimates,” “potential,” “continue,” or other similar words or phrases. Similarly, statements that describe objectives, plans, or goals also are forward-looking statements. Such forward-looking statements involve inherent risks and uncertainties, many of which are difficult to predict and are generally beyond the control of the Partnership. The Partnership cautions readers that a number of important factors could cause actual results to differ materially from those expressed in, implied, or projected by such forward-looking statements. Risks and uncertainties include, but are not limited to: defaults on the mortgage loans securing our mortgage revenue bonds and governmental issuer loans; the competitive environment in which the Partnership operates; risks associated with investing in multifamily, student, senior citizen residential properties and commercial properties; general economic, geopolitical, and financial conditions, including the current and future impact of changing interest rates, inflation, and international conflicts (including the Russia-Ukraine war and the Israel-Hamas war) on business operations, employment, and financial conditions; uncertain conditions within the domestic and international macroeconomic environment, including monetary and fiscal policy and conditions in the investment, credit, interest rate, and derivatives markets; adverse reactions in U.S. financial markets related to actions of foreign central banks or the economic performance of foreign economies, including in particular China, Japan, the European Union, and the United Kingdom; the general condition of the real estate markets in the regions in which the Partnership operates, which may be unfavorably impacted by pressures in the commercial real estate sector, incrementally higher unemployment rates, persistent elevated inflation levels, and other factors; changes in interest rates and credit spreads, as well as the success of any hedging strategies the Partnership may undertake in relation to such changes, and the effect such changes may have on the relative spreads between the yield on investments and cost of financing; the aggregate effect of elevated inflation levels over the past several years, spurred by multiple factors including expansionary monetary and fiscal policy, higher commodity prices, a tight labor market, and low residential vacancy rates, which may result in continued elevated interest rate levels and increased market volatility; the Partnership’s ability to access debt and equity capital to finance its assets; current maturities of the Partnership’s financing arrangements and the Partnership’s ability to renew or refinance such financing arrangements; local, regional, national and international economic and credit market conditions; recapture of previously issued Low Income Housing Tax Credits in accordance with Section 42 of the Internal Revenue Code; geographic concentration of properties related to investments held by the Partnership; changes in the U.S. corporate tax code and other government regulations affecting the Partnership’s business; and the other risks detailed in the Partnership’s SEC filings (including but not limited to, the Partnership’s Annual Report on Form 10-K, Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q, and Current Reports on Form 8-K). Readers are urged to consider these factors carefully in evaluating the forward-looking statements.

    If any of these risks or uncertainties materializes or if any of the assumptions underlying such forward-looking statements proves to be incorrect, the developments and future events concerning the Partnership set forth in this press release may differ materially from those expressed or implied by these forward-looking statements. You are cautioned not to place undue reliance on these statements, which speak only as of the date of this document. We anticipate that subsequent events and developments will cause our expectations and beliefs to change. The Partnership assumes no obligation to update such forward-looking statements to reflect events or circumstances after the date of this document or to reflect the occurrence of unanticipated events, unless obligated to do so under the federal securities laws.

    MEDIA CONTACT:
    Karen Marotta
    Greystone
    212-896-9149
    Karen.Marotta@greyco.com
     
    INVESTOR CONTACT:
    Andy Grier
    Senior Vice President
    402-952-1235

    The MIL Network

  • MIL-OSI United Kingdom: PM call with Prime Minister Carney of Canada: 17 March 2025

    Source: United Kingdom – Government Statements

    Press release

    PM call with Prime Minister Carney of Canada: 17 March 2025

    The Prime Minister met the Prime Minister of Canada Mark Carney this evening at Downing Street.

    The Prime Minister met the Prime Minister of Canada Mark Carney this evening at Downing Street.

    The Prime Minister began by saying he was delighted to host Prime Minister Carney at No10 at this early opportunity and underlined that the UK and Canada are the closest of sovereign allies and friends. 

    The leaders agreed that the UK-Canadian partnership is based on shared history and values, membership of the Commonwealth and a shared King and they both looked forward to strengthening ties. 

    Prime Minister Carney praised the Prime Minister’s leadership on Ukraine, and they discussed the Coalition of the Willing call on Saturday, which Prime Minister Carney said he was honoured to attend as his first international engagement in his role.

    They agreed that all must work together to put Ukraine in the strongest possible position to see a just and lasting peace. Both underscored the importance of global security, and the Prime Minister discussed his announcement to increase defence spending to 2.5% by 2027. 

    The Prime Minister welcomed Canada’s leadership on shared international priorities through their G7 Presidency and looked forward to working together on delivering growth for people in the UK and Canada ahead of the Leader’s Summit later this year. 

    They looked forward to speaking again soon.

    Updates to this page

    Published 17 March 2025

    MIL OSI United Kingdom

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Written question – ENISA agreement with the Republic of Korea – E-001002/2025

    Source: European Parliament

    Question for written answer  E-001002/2025
    to the Commission
    Rule 144
    César Luena (S&D)

    Cyber threats have no borders and to combat them it is imperative to cooperate with regions and countries with which we share the values of defence of democracy and freedom and which respect human rights and the rule of law.

    In this regard, in 2023, the European Union Agency for Cybersecurity (ENISA) signed agreements in the areas of capacity building, exchange of best practices and increasing situational awareness with its counterparts in Ukraine as well as with the US Agency for Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security (CISA).

    In 2024, following the second Digital Partnership Council, the EU and the Republic of Korea agreed to continue cooperation in the area of cybersecurity. The 2024 review of the Republic of Korea’s cybersecurity strategy includes joint cybersecurity actions with like-minded countries.

    Given that Russia, China and North Korea are carrying out increasingly aggressive and sophisticated criminal cyber activities that also affect the EU:

    Does the Commission intend to encourage ENISA to sign an agreement with the Republic of Korea similar to those signed with Ukraine and the US?

    Submitted: 7.3.2025

    Last updated: 17 March 2025

    MIL OSI Europe News

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Written question – Need for a revision of the EU enlargement process and gradual integration of Ukraine – P-001053/2025

    Source: European Parliament

    Priority question for written answer  P-001053/2025
    to the Commission
    Rule 144
    Raphaël Glucksmann (S&D), Tobias Cremer (S&D), Reinier Van Lanschot (Verts/ALE), Thomas Pellerin-Carlin (S&D), Pina Picierno (S&D)

    Hungary is currently blocking the opening of cluster 1 of Ukraine’s accession negotiations. Coming back from Kyiv, we’ve witnessed the Ukrainian Government’s frustration facing this blackmail. This needs to change, and swiftly. In November 2022, Parliament recommended:

    abolishing the requirement for unanimity when deciding on the opening and closing of individual negotiating clusters and chapters;

    rewarding progress with the phasing-in of candidate countries into EU policies and the single market, as well as with access to EU funds and observer status in official EU bodies.

    Even though Ukrainians have been fighting for European security for three years while simultaneously conducting ambitious reforms, a single Member State can still arbitrarily block intermediary steps, including technical ones, on Ukraine’s accession path.

    • 1.Does the Commission recognise the urgent need to reduce the unanimity requirement in the Council for each step of the accession process, however technical, and will it act upon this need?
    • 2.Will it put forward steps for the gradual integration of Ukraine into the EU’s security and defence sector, the single market for defence and the common energy market, including enabling Ukraine to benefit from relevant EU funds and programmes?
    • 3.Will it enable Ukraine to participate in the work of EU bodies as an observer?

    Submitted: 12.3.2025

    Last updated: 17 March 2025

    MIL OSI Europe News

  • MIL-OSI Global: Plans to link electricity bills to where you live are unlikely to bring down prices – and that’s a big problem for net zero

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Nicholas Harrington, Research Associate in Electricity Market Reform, University of Glasgow

    Diana Mower/Shutterstock

    A proposed reform to the way electricity is priced in Britain could see households pay a different bill based on their postcode.

    Presently, Britain’s electricity system operates as a single market across England, Wales and Scotland. Around 30% of electricity is traded through half-hourly auctions, known as the spot market, while the remaining 70% is traded in forward markets via contracts covering weeks, months, or even years of demand in advance.

    The price of electricity is, broadly speaking, determined by the spot market, as forward market contracts are hedged on the basis of current and expected future spot market prices.

    “Zonal pricing” would divide the British market into multiple separate zones instead, each with its own spot and forward markets to serve demand within it. In effect, zonal pricing would split one large market into a series of smaller, interconnected markets.

    Whether it is the right approach depends on what you expect it to achieve, and where your interests lie. The UK’s Department for Energy Security and Net Zero, tasked with the decision, has three main objectives: decarbonising the country’s power sector, securing the supply of power and lowering the prices consumers pay.

    I’m an academic investigating the factors that influence the UK’s ability to decarbonise the housing sector, in particular, the way people heat their homes. I’m most concerned with the affordability of electricity, since I take the view that the lower the price of electricity, the easier our journey to net zero emissions will be – and vice versa.

    A lower electricity price would make clean heating systems (such as heat pumps, which run on electricity) more attractive to consumers and reduce the scale of insulation and draughtproofing required to make the running cost of these systems competitive with gas boilers. My research suggests that the UK’s high electricity price is behind the country’s comparably low rate of heat pump adoption.

    Zonal pricing, as an electricity market reform, seems unlikely to lower electricity prices and drive decarbonisation on its own. Closer scrutiny of the electricity system and its mechanisms suggests it may only make things more complicated.

    The root cause of high bills

    At €0.321 (£0.27) per kilowatt-hour (kWh), the UK has the second-highest electricity price when compared to European Union countries. The EU average is €0.218 per kWh, meaning UK electricity costs around 47% more than it does for most of our EU neighbours.

    Despite Russia’s invasion of Ukraine (which triggered a spike in energy prices) starting more than three years ago now, electricity prices across the UK remain about 53% higher than pre-crisis levels. If the UK is generating more electricity from renewables each year — and renewable electricity is the cheapest on the market — why do prices keep rising instead of falling, as one might expect?

    The UK’s high electricity prices are the result of system marginal pricing, which lies at the heart of the spot market. At the end of each half-hourly auction, all electricity that is bid into the market is purchased at the price of the last unit required to meet demand.

    Since total demand is rarely met by renewables, the much more expensive gas generators typically set the price. It’s like going to a fruit market to buy ten apples, finding the first nine for £1 each, the last one for £3, and then having to pay £30 for the lot, rather than the expected £13.

    Because forward markets follow the spot market, and the spot market operates under system marginal pricing, UK consumers end up paying gas-generated electricity prices 98% of the time.




    Read more:
    How gas keeps the UK’s electricity bills so high – despite lots of cheap wind power


    Will zonal pricing lower these prices? On its own, no. This is because all zones under the scheme will still have spot markets operating under the marginal pricing model. Zonal pricing doesn’t address the fundamental problem that’s keeping electricity prices in Britain so high.

    Advocates of zonal pricing argue that it will encourage investment in the infrastructure required to lower electricity prices – namely, storage and transmission.

    Grid-scale and home batteries, pumped hydro and thermal energy storage help reduce final electricity prices by storing excess renewable energy for use when the wind isn’t blowing or the sun isn’t shining, so grid operators don’t have to rely on expensive gas-generated electricity to fill supply gaps. Meanwhile, transmission lines and cables ensure that renewable electricity is delivered where it is needed.

    By creating price differences between zones, so the argument goes, the market receives clear signals about where such investments would be most profitable.

    Would zonal pricing help build more of these?
    EOSMan/Shutterstock

    This argument, however, assumes that electricity prices will fall in some zones, and that the market has a strong incentive to invest in high-price areas.

    I’m compelled to ask two questions. What prevents zones that generate a lot of renewable electricity from selling their supply at higher prices in other zones, which could prevent renewables from meeting total demand and lead to the same price distortions currently seen due to marginal pricing?

    And if investments in storage and transmission are underwhelming when electricity prices are high everywhere, why would they suddenly become more likely when prices are only high in specific areas?

    Overall, I think the argument in favour of zonal pricing is unconvincing as it doesn’t address the structural issue underlying the UK’s high electricity prices: spot markets that operate according to system marginal pricing.

    If zonal pricing neither lowers consumer electricity prices nor significantly stimulates investment in storage and transmission on its own — and does not alter the geographic and planning factors that determine wind and solar farm locations — then it is unclear what it would achieve beyond adding complexity to an already complex electricity system.


    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.


    Nicholas Harrington receives funding from the Engineering & Physical Sciences Research Council (EPSCR).

    ref. Plans to link electricity bills to where you live are unlikely to bring down prices – and that’s a big problem for net zero – https://theconversation.com/plans-to-link-electricity-bills-to-where-you-live-are-unlikely-to-bring-down-prices-and-thats-a-big-problem-for-net-zero-251922

    MIL OSI – Global Reports

  • MIL-Evening Report: Local newspapers are a lifeline in Ukraine, but USAID cuts may force many to close or become biased mouthpieces

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Galyna Piskorska, Associate Professor, Faculty of Journalism, Borys Grinchenko Kyiv University (Ukraine) and Honorary Principal Fellow at the Advanced Centre for Journalism, The University of Melbourne

    Three years into Russia’s full-scale war in Ukraine, Ukrainian journalists are facing enormously difficult challenges to continue their work.

    Since Russia’s invasion in 2022, 40% of Ukrainian media outlets have been forced to close down, mostly due to the Russian occupation or financial difficulties caused by the war. Many of these are in Russian-occupied eastern Ukraine.

    Ukrainian journalists and media outlets have also become targets. More than 100 media workers have been killed since the full-scale war began.

    Some, like 28-year-old journalist Viktoriya Roshchyna, were captured by Russian forces and died in brutal conditions in captivity. More than 30 media workers are still in Russian captivity.

    Others were killed by Russian missile and drone attacks, like Tetiana Kulyk, who died alongside her husband, a surgeon, after her home was hit by a drone in late February.

    For those journalists that remain, fatigue is a major issue. Many are emotionally exhausted. Some cannot cope and leave their jobs. The National Union of Journalists of Ukraine (NUJU) helps with seminars and psychological support.

    Despite the dangers, local media remains in high demand near the front lines of the war. These outlets have lost so much – advertising, subscribers and staff – but their journalists still have the passion and determination to continue their work documenting history.

    The role of local media on the front lines

    According to researchers who interviewed 43 independent local media outlets last year, the key challenges for newsrooms have not changed since the start of the war:

    • a shortage of employees (22% of respondents said this was a challenge in 2023, compared to 16% in 2022);

    • psychological stress (18% in 2023, 16% in 2022)

    • lack of funds (16% in both years).

    Often, journalists must perform different roles in their work, including being a driver, mail carrier and even a psychotherapist.

    Without working telephones or internet in areas near the front lines, print newspapers remain the only source of trusted information for many people. This includes up-to-date information on evacuation plans and humanitarian aid, as well as content not related to the war, such as public transport schedules and how to access medicines and necessary items for home repairs.

    Tetiana Velika, editor in chief of the Voice of Huliaipillia in southeastern Ukraine, was one of about 120 journalists who took part in a recent online conference organised by the National Union of Journalists of Ukraine to discuss the state of Ukraine’s media.

    She said media have remained connected with readers through both openness and authenticity. This includes having active social media networks, publishing journalists’ mobile phone numbers and allowing people to reach out anytime.

    Vasyl Myroshnyk, the editor in chief of Zorya, a newspaper in eastern Ukraine, described how he travelled 400 kilometres each week to deliver copies of his newspaper to even the most dangerous places.

    Svitlana Ovcharenko, editor of the newspaper Vpered in the city of Bakhmut, which was destroyed by Russian forces in the opening weeks of the war, said the paper has remained a lifeline for a displaced population.

    We have a unique situation — we don’t have a city. It’s virtual, it’s only on the map, it doesn’t physically exist. Not only is it destroyed, but it’s also been bombed with phosphorus bombs, and no one lives there.

    Ovcharenko, who now lives in the city of Odesa, said her newspaper’s readers are scattered all over the world. (There are 6,000 printed copies distributed each week across Ukraine.) The coverage focuses on how former Bakhmut residents have restarted their lives elsewhere, while also paying homage to the city’s past.

    Independent media is now at stake

    Funding remains a formidable challenge. Advertising revenue has dried up for many outlets, leaving international donors as the primary journalism funding source.

    Now, the Trump administration in the United States is gutting much of this funding through its dismantling of the US Agency for International Development (USAID). According to one estimate, 80% of Ukrainian media outlets received funding through USAID. As Oksana Romaniuk, director of the Institute of Mass Information, said:

    The problem is that almost everyone had grants. The question is that for some, these grants amounted to 100% of their income and they could only survive thanks to grants. These grants amounted to 40–60% for some, less for others.

    According to media researchers, without donor aid or state budget support in 2025, newspapers and magazines may decrease by a further 20% in Ukraine, while subscription circulation could drop by 25–30%.

    The heavy reliance on such funding has already led to the closure of some outlets, while others have been forced to launch public fundraising campaigns.

    Donor funding has also given Ukrainian outlets a measure of independence, allowing them to report on corruption within the Ukrainian government, for example. Many independent outlets are now vulnerable to being taken over by commercial or political entities. When these groups gain control, they can influence media coverage to benefit their own interests. This is known as “media capture”.

    Research shows how this has occurred in other post-conflict and developing countries where independent media outlets have been transformed into business entities more focused on profits and maintaining good relations with authorities than on producing quality journalism.

    This is a critical time for the future of Ukrainian media, to ensure it remains financially self-sufficient and free from the influence of both Russian propaganda and Ukrainian oligarchs. Without this funding, the preservation of Ukraine’s independent media and democracy remain under dire threat.

    Galyna Piskorska 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. Local newspapers are a lifeline in Ukraine, but USAID cuts may force many to close or become biased mouthpieces – https://theconversation.com/local-newspapers-are-a-lifeline-in-ukraine-but-usaid-cuts-may-force-many-to-close-or-become-biased-mouthpieces-250917

    MIL OSI AnalysisEveningReport.nz

  • MIL-OSI Canada: Prime Minister Carney meets with President of France Emmanuel Macron

    Source: Government of Canada – Prime Minister

    The Prime Minister, Mark Carney, today met with the President of France, Emmanuel Macron, during a visit to Paris to strengthen the economy and security of both of our countries.

    Prime Minister Carney and President Macron discussed their intention to build stronger economies and defence and commercial ties between Canada and France – including in the areas of responsible and safe artificial intelligence, critical minerals, and clean energy – and to defend rules-based free trade.

    The Prime Minister and the President highlighted the launch of a new bilateral partnership on intelligence and security. The partnership will focus on enhancing cybersecurity and intelligence sharing on significant threats. Key topics will include economic security, violent extremism, counter-proliferation, interference, espionage, sabotage, and threats associated with advanced technologies.

    Prime Minister Carney and President Macron reaffirmed their unwavering support for Ukraine as it continues to resist Russia’s unjustifiable war of aggression. The Prime Minister thanked the President for his leadership in organizing several important meetings regarding Ukraine over the past few weeks.

    The leaders emphasized the rich and strong relationship between Canada and France, rooted in a shared history and common language, strong ties between our cultures and our peoples, as well as shared values such as democracy, human rights, and the rule of law.

    Associated Links

    MIL OSI Canada News

  • MIL-OSI Global: Thirty years ago Ukraine got rid of its nuclear arsenal – now some people regret that decision

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Jennifer Mathers, Senior Lecturer in International Politics, Aberystwyth University

    Around 73% of Ukrainians now want their country to “restore” its nuclear weapons, according to a recent opinion poll. Most Ukrainians (58%) were in favour of their country owning nuclear weapons, even if it meant losing western allies.

    This suggests an underlying regret that Ukraine agreed to relinquish the world’s third largest nuclear arsenal as part of the Budapest Memorandum around 30 years ago. This agreement, signed in December 1994, provided security guarantees for Ukraine from the US, the UK and Russia in return for giving up the weapons. Ukraine also agreed it would not acquire nuclear weapons in the future.

    The focus on nuclear weapons is intensifying all over Europe. This week the Polish president, Andrzej Duda, called on the US to station its nuclear weapons in his country to deter Russian attacks. He cited Moscow’s decision to deploy nuclear weapons just across the border in Belarus during 2023 as part of his reasoning.

    Trump’s apparent weakening commitment to Nato has also prompted the French president, Emmanuel Macron, to suggest that France could extend protection of its own nuclear weapons to its allies.

    It’s clear that some Ukrainians now believe that their country would have been less likely to have experienced a Russian invasion if it had held on to its nuclear capacity. Ukrainians now question how much they can rely on other states after the failure of security guarantees that were central to the 1994 agreement.

    The pledges by the US, UK and Russia to protect the sovereignty and independence of Ukraine were put to the test in 2014 when Russia invaded and then annexed Crimea and began providing financial and military backing for militia leaders in eastern Ukraine who claimed to lead pro-Russian separatist movements.




    Read more:
    Are Ukrainians ready for ceasefire and concessions? Here’s what the polls say


    The US and UK imposed economic sanctions against Russia and provided training, equipment and non-lethal weapons to the Ukrainian armed forces. But these measures fell well short of ensuring Ukraine’s sovereignty and were insufficient to help Ukraine retake its territory.

    Similarly, US and UK support for Ukraine since the start of Russia’s full-scale invasion in 2022, although valuable and much appreciated by the Ukrainians, has not been enough to allow Kyiv to completely expel Russian troops from Ukrainian territory.

    What was the Budapest Memorandum?

    What if Ukraine still had nuclear weapons?

    But what if Ukraine had never given up its nuclear weapons? The logic of deterrence suggests that Putin would have not have invaded and attacked a nuclear-armed Ukraine. But the argument that Ukraine should not have surrendered the Soviet nuclear weapons on its territory overlooks the specific circumstances. For while physical components of a nuclear weapons capability – delivery vehicles and nuclear warheads – were within Ukraine’s grasp, the launch codes remained in Moscow, and Russian leaders showed no willingness to relinquish them.

    So, Kyiv would have had no control over whether, when or against whom those weapons might have been used. The risk to Ukraine of becoming the target of another state’s nuclear strike would have been considerable, and the Kyiv government would have been unable to do anything to reduce that risk. Retaining nuclear weapons left over from the Soviet period would have probably made Ukrainians less rather than more secure.




    Read more:
    What is the value of US security guarantees? Here’s what history shows


    Ukraine also lacked the economic resources to maintain the nuclear weapons on its territory, or develop them into a credible deterrent force. In exchange for giving up nuclear weapons, Ukraine received much-needed economic assistance from the west.

    In the 1990s Ukrainian views were shaped by the 1986 accident at the Chernobyl nuclear power plant. This had a devastating and lasting impact on the land and the people in that part of Ukraine, highlighting the risks of the nuclear sector. In 1994, when the Budapest Memorandum was being negotiated, only 30% of Ukrainians were in favour of Ukraine possessing nuclear weapons.

    What now?

    Ukraine would face considerable technical challenges in developing nuclear weapons today, both in creating the necessary quantities of fissile material for warheads and manufacturing delivery vehicles.

    Kyiv would also need to pay for an expensive nuclear weapons development programme at a time when the Ukrainian economy is struggling to supply its soldiers with conventional weapons and meet the needs of civilians.

    And unless Ukraine’s international supporters were on board, Kyiv might face the withdrawal of economic and military aid at a crucial juncture. If Moscow detected any move on Ukraine’s part to develop nuclear weapons, there would be a strong motive for a preemptive Russian strike to put an end to that plan.

    But even though it may not be feasible for Ukraine to develop an independent nuclear deterrent in the short term, Kyiv may feel compelled to pursue a nuclear weapons programme unless Ukraine is provided with serious and reliable security guarantees. With the Trump administration apparently ruling out Nato membership for Ukraine, the onus is on the country’s international supporters to come up with an alternative unless they want to see further nuclear proliferation in Europe.

    Jennifer Mathers 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. Thirty years ago Ukraine got rid of its nuclear arsenal – now some people regret that decision – https://theconversation.com/thirty-years-ago-ukraine-got-rid-of-its-nuclear-arsenal-now-some-people-regret-that-decision-251733

    MIL OSI – Global Reports

  • MIL-Evening Report: What is the rules-based order? How this global system has shifted from ‘liberal’ origins − and where it could be heading next

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Andrew Latham, Professor of Political Science, Macalester College

    Global order? Put a pin in it. Getty Images

    The phrase “international rules-based order” has long been a fixture in global politics.

    Western leaders often use it to describe a framework of rules, norms and institutions designed to guide state behavior. Advocates argue that this framework has provided the foundation for decades of stability and prosperity, while critics question its fairness and relevance in today’s multipolar world.

    But what exactly is the international rules-based order, when did it come about, and why do people increasingly hear about challenges to it today?

    The birth of a universal vision

    The rules-based international order, initially known as the “liberal international order,” emerged from the devastation of World War II. The vision was ambitious and universal: to create a global system based on liberal democratic values, market capitalism and multilateral cooperation.

    At its core, however, this project was driven by the United States, which saw itself as the unmatched leader of the new order.

    The idea was to replace the chaos of great power politics and shifting alliances with a predictable world governed by shared rules and norms.

    Central to this vision was the establishment of institutions such as the United Nations, the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank. These institutions, alongside widely accepted norms and formalized rules, aimed to promote political cooperation, the peaceful resolution of disputes, and economic recovery for countries damaged by war.

    However, the vision of a truly universal liberal international order quickly unraveled. As the Cold War set in, the world split into two competing blocs. The Western bloc, led by the United States, adhered to the principles of the liberal international order.

    Meanwhile, the Soviet-led communist bloc established a parallel system with its own norms, rules and institutions. The Warsaw Pact provided military alignment, while the Council for Mutual Economic Assistance managed economic cooperation. The communist bloc emphasized state-led economic planning and single-party rule, rejecting the liberal order’s emphasis on democracy and free markets.

    Emerging cracks

    When the Soviet Union collapsed in the early 1990s, the liberal international order appeared to have triumphed. The United States became the world’s sole superpower, and many former communist states integrated into Western institutions. For a brief period, the order’s universal vision seemed within reach.

    By the 1990s and early 2000s, however, new cracks began to appear.

    NATO expansion, the creation of the World Trade Organization and greater emphasis on human rights through institutions such as the International Criminal Court all closely aligned with Western liberal values. The spread of these norms and the institutions enforcing them appeared, to many outside the West, as Western ideology dressed up as universal principles.

    In response to mounting criticism, Western leaders began using the term rules-based international order instead of liberal international order. This shift aimed to emphasize procedural fairness – rules that all states, in theory, had agreed upon – rather than a system explicitly rooted in liberal ideological commitments. The focus moved from promoting specific liberal norms to maintaining stability and predictability.

    New challenges to the status quo

    China’s rise has brought these tensions into sharp relief. While China participates in many institutions underpinning the rules-based international order, it also seeks to reshape them.

    The Belt and Road Initiative and the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank illustrate Beijing’s efforts to establish alternative frameworks more aligned with its interests. These initiatives challenge existing rules and norms by offering new institutional pathways for economic and political influence.

    Meanwhile, Russia’s actions in Ukraine – especially the annexation of Crimea in 2014 and the 2022 invasion – challenge the order’s core principles of sovereignty and territorial integrity.

    Western inconsistencies have long undermined the credibility of the rules-based order. The 2003 U.S.-led invasion of Iraq, widely criticized for bypassing international norms and institutions, exemplified a selective application of the rules. This double standard extends toward Washington’s selective engagement with international legal bodies and its inconsistent approach to sovereignty and intervention.

    An uncertain future

    Supporters argue that the rules-based order remains vital for addressing global challenges such as climate change, pandemics and nuclear proliferation.

    However, ambiguity surrounds what these “rules” actually entail, which norms are genuinely universal, and who enforces them.

    This lack of clarity, coupled with shifting global power dynamics, complicates efforts to sustain the system.

    The future of the rules-based international order is uncertain. The shift from “liberal” to “rules-based” reflected an ongoing struggle to adapt a complex web of rules, norms and institutions to a rapidly changing international environment.

    Whether it evolves further, splinters or endures as is will depend on how well it balances fairness, inclusivity and stability in an increasingly multipolar world.

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

    ref. What is the rules-based order? How this global system has shifted from ‘liberal’ origins − and where it could be heading next – https://theconversation.com/what-is-the-rules-based-order-how-this-global-system-has-shifted-from-liberal-origins-and-where-it-could-be-heading-next-250978

    MIL OSI AnalysisEveningReport.nz

  • MIL-OSI USA: Sens. Warner, Reed, Coons, and Kelly joined by Reps. Smith, Meeks, and Himes, Release Statement on Putin Rejecting Trump Administration’s 30-Day Ceasefire Agreement

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Commonwealth of Virginia Mark R Warner
    WASHINGTON –Today, U.S. Sens. Mark R. Warner (D-VA), Vice Chairman of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, Jack Reed (D-RI), Ranking Member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, Chris Coons (D-DE), Ranking Member of the Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Defense, and Mark Kelly (D-AZ), Member of the Senate Armed Services and Foreign Relations Committees, and U.S. Reps. Adam Smith (D-WA), Ranking Member of the House Armed Services Committee, Gregory W. Meeks (D-NY), Ranking Member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, and Jim Himes (D-CT), Ranking Member of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, issued the following statement in response to Russia rejecting a joint U.S. and Ukrainian agreement for a 30-day ceasefire.
    “Make no mistake—Putin is stringing the world along but his answers amount to a no while President Zelensky responded with a clear and unambiguous yes. President Trump is making a major mistake by continuing to put all the pressure on President Zelensky and none on Putin.
    “Putin continues to push his demands to subjugate Ukraine. He has manipulated and rejected President Trump’s efforts to negotiate a ceasefire and to achieve peace. He has indicated that a monthlong ceasefire might even give Ukraine’s forces a chance to retreat, regroup, and rearm, saying, ‘Does that mean Ukraine will use those 30 days to continue forced mobilization, get weapons supplies, and prepare its mobilized units?’ This comment proves that Putin is still trying to weaken Ukraine so that he is in a better position to win the war, not achieve a just peace.
    “Remember, Putin started this war and only he can stop it. He won’t stop until it can be shown that he cannot achieve his maximalist goals. Ukraine needs security guarantees to continue defending itself and the Administration should be working to that end. This includes providing arms and intelligence support to Ukraine to deter Russia and working with allies and partners to support lasting security for Ukraine in the future.
    “We all want peace. We’re not going to get to peace unless the president starts putting pressure on Putin and demonstrates strength and support for Ukraine so that they are able to pursue a ceasefire with Russia and negotiate a just and sustainable end to Putin’s war.”

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI United Kingdom: Minister Thomas-Symonds speech at the UK-EU Parliamentary Partnership Assembly

    Source: United Kingdom – Executive Government & Departments

    Speech

    Minister Thomas-Symonds speech at the UK-EU Parliamentary Partnership Assembly

    Minister Thomas-Symonds speech at the UK-EU Parliamentary Partnership Assembly

    It really is a pleasure to be here with you all today.

    But I do want to just begin, by joining Maros in wishing all our Irish friends a very happy St Patricks Day. 

    I’d also like to thank the Assembly…

    …especially the Chairs, Sandro and Marsha…

    …for giving Maros and I this opportunity to speak to you all today.

    And it is that idea of opportunity that I want to talk about…

    …because we have a chance to strengthen the strategic alliance between the UK and the EU…

    …and I want to talk about how – by being ruthlessly pragmatic – we can harness this opportunity, for the benefit of the people that we are all elected to serve.  

    Now this is the very first meeting of the reconstituted Assembly…

    … and I know that you are welcoming members, both new and old.

    Since this Government came into power, we have worked tirelessly to change the UK’s approach. 

     In the recent past, we have been too focused on what divides us…

    …and it’s those differences that have too often defined the agenda.

    But I believe these groups and these meetings must be used for our collective good.

    This Assembly was set up under the Trade and Cooperation Agreement…

    …to ensure the voices of parliamentarians – and, in turn, our citizens – can be heard. 

    You’re all serving the interests of the people who voted for you…

    …and we must use every opportunity available to us to build trust…

    …and improve cooperation.

    And all of you here today – through your membership in the Assembly – are essential to that work.

    Now, I have already met members of both delegations – and I am committed to maintaining that engagement.

    The UK and EU’s future will be defined by how we both tackle our shared challenges together.

    We are living through a period of generational challenge…

    …and I know as political leaders – we all feel the scale of this moment. 

    War in Ukraine…

    …people smuggled in treacherous conditions by treacherous criminals…

    …the price of energy and the cost of inflation…

    …achieving growth and prosperity to boost living standards for our citizens… 

    …all of these challenges are exacerbated by a mindset of division.

    They are problems across our continent…

    …and they require a coordinated response.

    Just look at the actions of our Prime Minister this year.

    He was delighted to be a part of the European Leaders retreat last month…

     …where he made the case for greater cooperation between the EU and the UK.

    On 2 March, he hosted European leaders, as well as the NATO Secretary General and the Presidents of the EU Commission, EU Council and indeed welcomed Canada… 

    …for a summit focused on Ukraine.

    The importance of these meetings cannot be overstated.

    They are emblematic of how seriously this Government takes European security.

    And there is no greater imperative to this than supporting Ukraine.

    In the face of Russia’s illegal and barbaric invasion, we must be resilient.

    It is why we recently announced an increase in UK defence spending to 2.5% of GDP.

    We are stepping up, and we know that the EU is stepping up, too.

    It was heartening to see – on the anniversary of the invasion – that the EU reaffirmed its unwavering support.

    And at the European Council meeting earlier this month, where EU leaders agreed a significant increase in defence spending. 

    I know that, together, we are determined to help Ukraine prevail…

    …and rebuild.

    We must keep pushing – together – to find new ways to achieve this.

    At a time of such intense global change, I believe it is vital to recognise what unites the UK and the EU…

    …and understand how our mutual priorities can be realised through teamwork.

    We saw that in action this January…

    …where, on the same day, the UK Chancellor and the President of the European Commission gave speeches about the challenges facing them.

    Both spoke about their desire for growth…

    …both spoke about how their potential had been held back…

    …and both spoke too about the importance of trade openness.

    In fact, both our Prime Minister’s ‘Plan for Change’ and the President’s ‘Competitiveness Compass’ focused on the same priorities…

    …like reducing red tape, improving skills and a more resilient economy.

    The UK government was elected on a mandate to increase our security, keep our citizens safe and to encourage growth.

    Europe is a crucial partner in these priorities…

    …and, indeed, Europe shares those concerns.

    That is why we are living up to the obligations we have in existing Agreements and Frameworks…

    …that is how trust is earned. 

    No more threats to break international law in ‘limited and specific ways’… 

    …and no more undermining of the ECHR.

    So we are respectful of the TCA and the Windsor Framework… 

    …and we want to build on that structure to address emerging challenges and opportunities.

    The Prime Minister has tasked me with leading these discussions with Maros…

    …supported by our new EU Sherpa Micheal Ellam. 

    And I want to thank Maros – not only for the way he has been so constructive in his relationship with me…

    …but for the many years – and no doubt late nights – that he has dedicated to the EU – UK relationship…

    …but also the pragmatism he is known and respected for.  

    And in our discussions I have always been clear about our desire to strengthen our alliance – and I focus on the three priorities I mentioned…

    …on security, safety and prosperity…

    …where I believe there is much benefit to be gained.

    And it’s these priorities I would like to focus on.

    First, security.

    Now, I’ve already spoken about how seriously we’re taking this…

    …and I know that it is a topic you will be discussing later today.

    But it bears repeating: to keep Europe secure, we need to support allies like Ukraine…

    …and work with NATO on security and defence.

    As the Prime Minister said in the UK Parliament recently, we have: 

    “A recognition of the fact that once again, we live in an era where peace in Europe depends upon strength and deterrence.”

    So, we are seeking a broad UK-EU cooperation on security and defence matters…

    …and we’re ready to negotiate a Security and Defence Partnership.

    This has been central to the Prime Minister’s approach with European leaders.

    When he visited the informal European Leaders’ Summit, he discussed what this partnership could include…

    …and what it could address.

    He suggested a focus on R&D…

    …improved military mobility across Europe …

    …greater co-operation on missions and operations…

    …and building on our industrial collaboration.

    Building on that commitment, let me turn to the next pillar: safety.

    I am clear that if we want to protect our respective borders…

    …and keep our citizens safe…

    …then we need to work together.

    The criminals that we all try and combat pay no respect to our borders…

    …whether they’re taking part in the vile global trade in human trafficking…

    …or planning a terrorist attack to push their agenda and terrify our citizens.

    These challenges plague us all…

    …and I believe that it is only through greater cooperation that we can remain safe.

    It’s why we have already increased the UK’s presence at Europol…

    …but I believe we should be going further.

    We need to think of new ways to coordinate our security…

    …and ensure we have the intelligence and skills to combat cross-Europe criminal enterprises.

    And finally, prosperity.

    The European Union is the UK’s biggest trading partner…

    …with trade totalling over £800bn in 2023.

    And while that figure is still impressive, we know it is not as good as it could be.

    A study published last year by Aston University Business School showed that between 2021 and 2023, the goods EU businesses export to the UK were down by 32%…

    …while UK goods exports to the EU were down by 27%.

    What I’m hearing from businesses that I speak to is that this drop is down to them facing more barriers and more costs.

    They’re frustrated, and I can understand why.

    As ‘Businesseurope’ set out in a report this Autumn, and I quote: “There remain many unnecessary barriers to trade and investment. Following the elections of new governments in the EU and UK, there is a clear opportunity to upgrade the relationship to deliver for businesses and citizens.”

    And that is why we want to build on the structures we have – the TCA and the Windsor Framework…

    …to tear down trade barriers and make Brexit work better for the British and European people.

    We have already said that we will seek to negotiate a sanitary and phytosanitary agreement…

    …to help boost trade… 

    and deliver benefits to businesses and consumers in both the UK and the EU. 

    Now, all these issues have been at the forefront of our Government’s discussions with the EU.

    In fact, since the UK election, there have been over 70 direct engagements between UK ministers and their EU Counterparts.

    We have agreed to hold regular UK-EU Summits…

    …with the very first one, as Maros has said, being hosted in London on 19th May…

    …which will be a great opportunity to strengthen this work further.

    But ultimately, this is all about building trust…

    …and this Government wants to keep its word…

    …and become a trusted and stable partner.

    Our discussions continue on the full implementation of the TCA and the Withdrawal Agreement …

    …with almost all of our Specialised Committees meeting last year…

    …and there are plans in place to meet again in the coming months.

    The co-chairs continually update each other on their progress…

    …whilst monitoring and reporting on their passage to full and faithful implementation.

    We fully believe in these structures…

    …but we also fully believe in the opportunities to improve the status quo.

    So, ladies and gentlemen, the time for ideologies is over.

    The time for ruthless pragmatism is now.

    And it is the only way we can seek a closer, more cooperative relationship.

    After all, a stronger UK-EU relationship means a stronger Europe.

    This Assembly will be a vital part of that journey…

    …where that mutual interest will be demonstrated and discussed.

    I also know that many of you have deep expertise, insights and passion for this agenda…

    … and I am sure that this forum will be a fantastic way to bring these to bear. 

    I want to thank you for the time you have given me to discuss my work. To say how much that I am looking forward together. 

    This forum, this Assembly is such an important part of hat shared future and what a pleasure it is to discuss this with you today. 

    Thank you.

    Updates to this page

    Published 17 March 2025

    MIL OSI United Kingdom

  • MIL-OSI: Intesa Sanpaolo has partnered with the EIB to provide nearly €660m to promote economic growth in the CEE region since 2020

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    Paola Papanicolaou, Head of Intesa Sanpaolo’s International Banks Division

    MILAN, March 17, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Speaking at the EIB Forum in Luxembourg this month, Paola Papanicolaou, the head of Intesa Sanpaolo’s International Banks Division (IBD), outlined the significant contribution to economic growth in Central and Eastern Europe that the bank has made over the last five years.

    Intesa Sanpaolo has signed deals worth nearly €660m in the CEE region over the past five years, in partnership with the EIB. This includes some €370m dedicated to EU candidate countries, such as Serbia, Bosnia-Herzegovina and Ukraine.

    In Serbia, Intesa Sanpaolo’s subsidiary, Banca Intesa Beograd, recently partnered with EIB Global to provide €160m from the EU to support investment in the energy transition at Serbian SMEs, fostering sustainable economic growth.

    The transaction will benefit around 240 companies and protect approximately 25,000 jobs. Banca Intesa Beograd is Serbia’s leading banking group.

    “We believe that our role goes beyond that of a financial institution that just operates transactions, to that of a partner,” Papanicolaou said at the recent EIB Forum. “Intesa Sanpaolo advises and supports the growth of individual companies as well as the wider national economies in which we operate.”

    Intesa Sanpaolo’s IBD is deeply embedded in the CEE region through a network of twelve fully-owned banks.

    “It’s very important to be on the ground, as we are, to fully understand each country’s needs,” Papanicolaou said. “For example, we are working closely with some countries to support public finance and significant infrastructure projects”.

    Another agreement signed in November 2024 saw Intesa Sanpaolo’s Croatian bank, Privredna Banka Zagreb (PBZ), receive €169m from the EIB to finance the green transition at Croatian companies. Of this total amount, €100m was earmarked by the EIB as a guarantee line for large enterprises and mid-cap companies, and an extension of an EIF guarantee of up to €69m was made for small businesses in the country. Intesa Sanpaolo’s PBZ is the second-largest bank in Croatia by assets.

    Italy is a key trading partner for many EU candidate countries. As the leading Italian financial institution, Intesa Sanpaolo acts as a natural financial bridge between Italy — the second-largest manufacturing economy in Europe — and CEE markets.

    Intesa Sanpaolo facilitates international trade, supports SMEs in expanding beyond domestic markets, and fosters cross-border collaborations that drive economic progress. In particular, the bank believes that helping SMEs to expand internationally is a vital contribution to the development of an economy.

    The 12 home markets of Intesa Sanpaolo’s IBD are Croatia, Slovakia and Czech Republic, Serbia, Hungary, Egypt, Slovenia, Ukraine, Albania, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Romania and Moldova.

    These banks together serve 7.4m customers, with a combined loan book of €45bn and €61bn in deposits.

    Intesa Sanpaolo plays a crucial role in these economies, serving individuals, SMEs, corporates, and public sector entities while driving investment and growth.

    Contact: international.media@intesasanpaolo.com

    A photo accompanying this announcement is available at https://www.globenewswire.com/NewsRoom/AttachmentNg/b9897a34-ccf2-4423-8cc4-3d0427433a18

    The MIL Network

  • MIL-OSI NGOs: MSF vehicles shot during hospital evacuation amid escalating violence in Port-au-Prince Haiti

    Source: Médecins Sans Frontières –

    Port au Prince  Four Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF) vehicles were fired upon in Port-au-Prince, Haiti, as we were evacuating our staff from Turgeau emergency centre. We strongly condemn this intentional shooting, in which our staff suffered minor injuries. The evacuation from the centre was taken as a precautionary measure after brutal street fighting moved closer to the centre and we were forced to suspend our activities on 15 March. This MSF convoy was clearly identified, and we had coordinated the movement with authorities.

    “This attack serves as stark reminder that no one is safe amidst the ongoing violence between armed groups and law enforcement,” says Benoit Vasseur, head of mission for MSF in Haiti. “Despite our precautions, we have been targeted, and this is unacceptable. We urgently call on all parties for the respect of medical staff, facilities and patients at all times.”

    Since end of February, the situation in Turgeau, where MSF runs a referral and emergency centre, has sharply worsened. On 12 March alone, our emergency centre treated 27 victims of violence, including women and children, from the surrounding area. During the night of 14-15 March, the violence escalated further. Armed groups moved within metres of the hospital, threatening to turn it into a frontline.

    One of the four MSF vehicles shot while evacuating Turgeau emergency centre in Port-au-Prince, Haiti, March 2025.
    MSF

    “We had to make the painful decision to suspend activities at the MSF Turgeau emergency centre to protect our staff and patients. Currently, it is impossible to continue operations at the hospital, but we are committed to reopening our facility as soon as the situation allows us to do so safely,” says Benoit Vasseur.

    Before suspending activities, MSF successfully referred all patients from the emergency centre to other medical facilities. Between 24 February 24 and 2 March, our teams at the Turgeau emergency centre treated 314 patients. In February 2025 alone, our teams conducted over 2,500 medical consultations and more than 400 physiotherapy sessions at the Turgeau emergency centre.

    This is the second time in less than four months that MSF has been forced to suspend operations at the health facility. On 22 November 2024, MSF halted all activities in Port-au-Prince following multiple attacks and repeated threats against medical staff. After months of engagement with authorities and assurances from all parties regarding the protection of MSF’s medical mission, we partially resumed operations in January, reopening the Turgeau hospital on 20 January 2025.

    However, the resurgence of violence and the deliberate attack on our vehicles during this evacuation make it clear that these assurances and engagements with authorities have failed to translate into real safety for our staff and patients.

    Our MSF team has been providing emergency medical care in Turgeau since 2021. MSF maintains multiple medical programmes in other areas of Port au Prince and Haiti, notably for maternal and newborn care, severe burns, trauma and sexual violence. Continuing these vital medical services requires clear guarantees about the security of our movements.

    MSF is an international medical humanitarian organisation that delivers medical care to people in need, regardless of their origin, religion, or political affiliation. MSF has been working in Haiti for over 30 years, offering general healthcare, trauma care, burn wound care, maternity care, and care for victims and survivors of sexual violence.

    MIL OSI NGO

  • MIL-OSI Global: Thirty years ago Ukraine got rid of its nuclear arsenal – now the people regret that decision

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Jennifer Mathers, Senior Lecturer in International Politics, Aberystwyth University

    Around 73% of Ukrainians now want their country to “restore” its nuclear weapons, according to a recent opinion poll. A majority of Ukrainians (58%) were in favour of Ukraine owning nuclear weapons, even if this meant losing western allies.

    This suggests an underlying regret that Ukraine agreed to relinquish the world’s third largest nuclear arsenal as part of the Budapest Memorandum around 30 years ago. This agreement, signed in December 1994, provided security guarantees for Ukraine from the US, the UK and Russia in return for giving up the weapons. Ukraine also agreed it would not acquire nuclear weapons in the future.

    The focus on nuclear weapons is intensifying all over Europe. This week the Polish president, Andrzej Duda, called on the US to station its nuclear weapons in his country to deter Russian attacks. He cited Moscow’s decision to deploy nuclear weapons just across the border in Belarus during 2023 as part of his reasoning.

    Trump’s apparent weakening commitment to Nato has also prompted the French president, Emmanuel Macron, to suggest that France could extend protection of its own nuclear weapons to its allies.

    It’s clear that some Ukrainians now believe that their country would have been less likely to have experienced a Russian invasion if it had held on to its nuclear capacity. Ukrainians now question how much they can rely on other states after the failure of security guarantees that were central to the 1994 agreement.

    The pledges by the US, UK and Russia to protect the sovereignty and independence of Ukraine were put to the test in 2014 when Russia invaded and then annexed Crimea and began providing financial and military backing for militia leaders in eastern Ukraine who claimed to lead pro-Russian separatist movements.




    Read more:
    Are Ukrainians ready for ceasefire and concessions? Here’s what the polls say


    The US and UK imposed economic sanctions against Russia and provided training, equipment and non-lethal weapons to the Ukrainian armed forces. But these measures fell well short of ensuring Ukraine’s sovereignty and were insufficient to help Ukraine retake its territory.

    Similarly, US and UK support for Ukraine since the start of Russia’s full-scale invasion in 2022, although valuable and much appreciated by the Ukrainians, has not been enough to allow Kyiv to completely expel Russian troops from Ukrainian territory.

    What was the Budapest Memorandum?

    What if Ukraine still had nuclear weapons?

    But what if Ukraine had never given up its nuclear weapons? The logic of deterrence suggests that Putin would have not have invaded and attacked a nuclear-armed Ukraine. But the argument that Ukraine should not have surrendered the Soviet nuclear weapons on its territory overlooks the specific circumstances. For while physical components of a nuclear weapons capability – delivery vehicles and nuclear warheads – were within Ukraine’s grasp, the launch codes remained in Moscow, and Russian leaders showed no willingness to relinquish them.

    So, Kyiv would have had no control over whether, when or against whom those weapons might have been used. The risk to Ukraine of becoming the target of another state’s nuclear strike would have been considerable, and the Kyiv government would have been unable to do anything to reduce that risk. Retaining nuclear weapons left over from the Soviet period would have probably made Ukrainians less rather than more secure.




    Read more:
    What is the value of US security guarantees? Here’s what history shows


    Ukraine also lacked the economic resources to maintain the nuclear weapons on its territory, or develop them into a credible deterrent force. In exchange for giving up nuclear weapons, Ukraine received much-needed economic assistance from the west.

    In the 1990s Ukrainian views were shaped by the 1986 accident at the Chernobyl nuclear power plant. This had a devastating and lasting impact on the land and the people in that part of Ukraine, highlighting the risks of the nuclear sector. In 1994, when the Budapest Memorandum was being negotiated, only 30% of Ukrainians were in favour of Ukraine possessing nuclear weapons.

    What now?

    Ukraine would face considerable technical challenges in developing nuclear weapons today, both in creating the necessary quantities of fissile material for warheads and manufacturing delivery vehicles.

    Kyiv would also need to pay for an expensive nuclear weapons development programme at a time when the Ukrainian economy is struggling to supply its soldiers with conventional weapons and meet the needs of civilians.

    And unless Ukraine’s international supporters were on board, Kyiv might face the withdrawal of economic and military aid at a crucial juncture. If Moscow detected any move on Ukraine’s part to develop nuclear weapons, there would be a strong motive for a preemptive Russian strike to put an end to that plan.

    But even though it may not be feasible for Ukraine to develop an independent nuclear deterrent in the short term, Kyiv may feel compelled to pursue a nuclear weapons programme unless Ukraine is provided with serious and reliable security guarantees. With the Trump administration apparently ruling out Nato membership for Ukraine, the onus is on the country’s international supporters to come up with an alternative unless they want to see further nuclear proliferation in Europe.

    Jennifer Mathers 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. Thirty years ago Ukraine got rid of its nuclear arsenal – now the people regret that decision – https://theconversation.com/thirty-years-ago-ukraine-got-rid-of-its-nuclear-arsenal-now-the-people-regret-that-decision-251733

    MIL OSI – Global Reports

  • MIL-OSI Africa: Global crises have hit education hard: 24 years of research offers a way forward for southern Africa

    Source: The Conversation – Africa – By Emmanuel Ojo, Associate Professor, University of the Witwatersrand

    Global crises have shaped our world over the past two decades, affecting education systems everywhere. Higher education researcher Emmanuel Ojo has studied the impact of these disruptions on educational opportunities, particularly in southern Africa.

    He looked at 5,511 peer-reviewed articles published between 2000 and 2024 to explore what the research suggests about making education systems more resilient. Here, he answers some questions about his review.


    What are the global crises that have undermined education?

    In my review I drew up a table documenting how multiple crises have disrupted education systems worldwide.

    The cycle began with the 2000-2002 dot-com bubble collapse, which reduced education funding and slowed technological integration. This was followed by the 2001 terrorist attacks, Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS) outbreak (2002-2004), Iraq War (2003-2011), Indian Ocean tsunami (2004), and Hurricane Katrina (2005). The Israeli-Palestinian conflict since 2000, global food crisis (2007-2008), financial crisis (2007-2008), and European debt crisis (2010-2012) continued this pattern of disruption.

    More recently, the Ebola epidemic, COVID-19 pandemic, and Russia-Ukraine war have destabilised education systems. Meanwhile, the ongoing climate crisis creates challenges, particularly in southern Africa where environmental vulnerability is high.

    Who suffers most, and in what ways?

    Education has consistently been among the hardest-hit sectors globally. According to Unesco, the COVID pandemic alone affected more than 1.6 billion students worldwide.

    But the impact is not distributed equally.

    My research shows crises have put vulnerable populations at a further disadvantage through school closures, funding diversions, infrastructure destruction and student displacement. Quality and access decline most sharply for marginalised communities. Costs rise and mobility is restricted. Food insecurity during crises reduces attendance among the poorest students.

    In southern Africa, the Covid-19 disruption highlighted existing divides. Privileged students continued learning online. Those in rural and informal settlements were completely cut off from education.

    Climate change compounds these inequalities. Unicef highlights that climate disasters have a disproportionate impact on schooling for millions in low-income countries, where adaptive infrastructure is limited.

    What’s at stake for southern Africa is the region’s development potential and social cohesion. The widening of educational divides threatens to create a generation with unequal opportunities and capabilities.

    What makes southern African education systems fragile?

    My review focused on the 16 countries of the Southern African Development Community, revealing what makes them vulnerable to crisis impacts.

    Southern Africa’s geographic exposure to climate disasters combines with pre-existing economic inequalities. The region’s digital divide became starkly visible during the Covid-19 pandemic. Some students were excluded from learning by limited connectivity and unreliable electricity.

    The region’s systems also rely on external funding. The Trump administration’s sudden foreign aid freeze was a shock to South Africa’s higher education sector. It has affected public health initiatives and university research programmes.

    Research representation itself is unequal. Within the region, South African researchers dominate and other nations make only limited contributions. This creates blind spots in understanding context-specific challenges and solutions.

    Each successive crisis deepens educational divides, making recovery increasingly difficult and costly. Weaker education systems make the region less able to respond to other development challenges, too.

    How can southern Africa build education systems to withstand crises?

    One striking finding from my review was the surge in educational research after the Covid-19 pandemic began – from 229 studies in 2019 to nearly double that in 2020, with continued rapid growth thereafter. This indicates growing recognition that education systems must be redesigned to withstand future disruptions, not merely recover from current ones.

    Research points to a number of ways to do this:

    • Strategic investment in educational infrastructure, particularly digital technologies, to ensure learning continuity.

    • Equipping educators with skills to adapt teaching methods during emergencies.

    • Innovative, context-appropriate teaching approaches that empower communities.

    • Integration of indigenous knowledge systems into curricula, enhancing relevance, adaptability and community ownership.

    • Interdisciplinary and cross-national research collaborations.

    • Protection of education budgets, recognising education’s role in crisis recovery and long-term stability.

    • Community engagement in education, ensuring interventions are culturally appropriate and widely accepted.

    In my view, African philanthropists have a duty to provide the independent financial base that education systems need to withstand external funding fluctuations.

    What’s the cost of doing nothing?

    The economic and social costs of failing to build resilient education systems are profound and long-lasting. Each educational disruption creates negative effects that extend far beyond the crisis period.

    When students miss critical learning periods, it reduces their chances in life. The World Bank estimates that learning losses from the Covid-19 pandemic alone could result in up to US$17 trillion in lost lifetime earnings for affected students globally.

    Social costs are equally severe. Educational disruptions increase dropout rates, child marriage, early pregnancy, and youth unemployment. These outcomes create broader societal challenges that require costly interventions across multiple sectors.

    Spending on educational resilience avoids those costs.

    The question isn’t whether southern African nations can afford to invest in educational resilience, but whether they can afford not to.

    The choices made today will determine whether education systems merely survive crises or make society better. Evidence-based policies and regional cooperation are essential for building education systems that can fulfil Southern Africa’s human potential.

    – Global crises have hit education hard: 24 years of research offers a way forward for southern Africa
    – https://theconversation.com/global-crises-have-hit-education-hard-24-years-of-research-offers-a-way-forward-for-southern-africa-251833

    MIL OSI Africa

  • MIL-OSI Global: Global crises have hit education hard: 24 years of research offers a way forward for southern Africa

    Source: The Conversation – Africa – By Emmanuel Ojo, Associate Professor, University of the Witwatersrand

    Global crises have shaped our world over the past two decades, affecting education systems everywhere. Higher education researcher Emmanuel Ojo has studied the impact of these disruptions on educational opportunities, particularly in southern Africa.

    He looked at 5,511 peer-reviewed articles published between 2000 and 2024 to explore what the research suggests about making education systems more resilient. Here, he answers some questions about his review.


    What are the global crises that have undermined education?

    In my review I drew up a table documenting how multiple crises have disrupted education systems worldwide.

    The cycle began with the 2000-2002 dot-com bubble collapse, which reduced education funding and slowed technological integration. This was followed by the 2001 terrorist attacks, Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS) outbreak (2002-2004), Iraq War (2003-2011), Indian Ocean tsunami (2004), and Hurricane Katrina (2005). The Israeli-Palestinian conflict since 2000, global food crisis (2007-2008), financial crisis (2007-2008), and European debt crisis (2010-2012) continued this pattern of disruption.

    More recently, the Ebola epidemic, COVID-19 pandemic, and Russia-Ukraine war have destabilised education systems. Meanwhile, the ongoing climate crisis creates challenges, particularly in southern Africa where environmental vulnerability is high.

    Who suffers most, and in what ways?

    Education has consistently been among the hardest-hit sectors globally. According to Unesco, the COVID pandemic alone affected more than 1.6 billion students worldwide.

    But the impact is not distributed equally.

    My research shows crises have put vulnerable populations at a further disadvantage through school closures, funding diversions, infrastructure destruction and student displacement. Quality and access decline most sharply for marginalised communities. Costs rise and mobility is restricted. Food insecurity during crises reduces attendance among the poorest students.

    In southern Africa, the Covid-19 disruption highlighted existing divides. Privileged students continued learning online. Those in rural and informal settlements were completely cut off from education.

    Climate change compounds these inequalities. Unicef highlights that climate disasters have a disproportionate impact on schooling for millions in low-income countries, where adaptive infrastructure is limited.

    What’s at stake for southern Africa is the region’s development potential and social cohesion. The widening of educational divides threatens to create a generation with unequal opportunities and capabilities.

    What makes southern African education systems fragile?

    My review focused on the 16 countries of the Southern African Development Community, revealing what makes them vulnerable to crisis impacts.

    Southern Africa’s geographic exposure to climate disasters combines with pre-existing economic inequalities. The region’s digital divide became starkly visible during the Covid-19 pandemic. Some students were excluded from learning by limited connectivity and unreliable electricity.

    The region’s systems also rely on external funding. The Trump administration’s sudden foreign aid freeze was a shock to South Africa’s higher education sector. It has affected public health initiatives and university research programmes.

    Research representation itself is unequal. Within the region, South African researchers dominate and other nations make only limited contributions. This creates blind spots in understanding context-specific challenges and solutions.

    Each successive crisis deepens educational divides, making recovery increasingly difficult and costly. Weaker education systems make the region less able to respond to other development challenges, too.

    How can southern Africa build education systems to withstand crises?

    One striking finding from my review was the surge in educational research after the Covid-19 pandemic began – from 229 studies in 2019 to nearly double that in 2020, with continued rapid growth thereafter. This indicates growing recognition that education systems must be redesigned to withstand future disruptions, not merely recover from current ones.

    Research points to a number of ways to do this:

    • Strategic investment in educational infrastructure, particularly digital technologies, to ensure learning continuity.

    • Equipping educators with skills to adapt teaching methods during emergencies.

    • Innovative, context-appropriate teaching approaches that empower communities.

    • Integration of indigenous knowledge systems into curricula, enhancing relevance, adaptability and community ownership.

    • Interdisciplinary and cross-national research collaborations.

    • Protection of education budgets, recognising education’s role in crisis recovery and long-term stability.

    • Community engagement in education, ensuring interventions are culturally appropriate and widely accepted.

    In my view, African philanthropists have a duty to provide the independent financial base that education systems need to withstand external funding fluctuations.

    What’s the cost of doing nothing?

    The economic and social costs of failing to build resilient education systems are profound and long-lasting. Each educational disruption creates negative effects that extend far beyond the crisis period.

    When students miss critical learning periods, it reduces their chances in life. The World Bank estimates that learning losses from the Covid-19 pandemic alone could result in up to US$17 trillion in lost lifetime earnings for affected students globally.

    Social costs are equally severe. Educational disruptions increase dropout rates, child marriage, early pregnancy, and youth unemployment. These outcomes create broader societal challenges that require costly interventions across multiple sectors.

    Spending on educational resilience avoids those costs.

    The question isn’t whether southern African nations can afford to invest in educational resilience, but whether they can afford not to.

    The choices made today will determine whether education systems merely survive crises or make society better. Evidence-based policies and regional cooperation are essential for building education systems that can fulfil Southern Africa’s human potential.

    Emmanuel Ojo receives funding from National Research Foundation (NRF).

    ref. Global crises have hit education hard: 24 years of research offers a way forward for southern Africa – https://theconversation.com/global-crises-have-hit-education-hard-24-years-of-research-offers-a-way-forward-for-southern-africa-251833

    MIL OSI – Global Reports

  • MIL-OSI Economics: Luis de Guindos: Interview with The Sunday Times

    Source: European Central Bank

    Interview with Luis de Guindos, Vice-President of the ECB, conducted by Jon Ihle

    16 March 2025

    The progress of annual inflation, at least up until February, looked like it was going in the wrong direction. Are you still confident that it will converge towards 2% sometime this year?

    The disinflation process is on track. There was a small pick-up inflation in recent months, but this had been expected, mostly on account of unfavourable base effects in November, December and January.

    The main reason for our confidence that inflation will come down to 2% is that all indicators for services and underlying inflation are moving in the right direction. A very important one is compensation per employee. According to recent data and in line with our projections, wage growth is moderating, which will help services inflation to gradually decline.

    At the same time, we need to keep in mind that factors like tariffs and fiscal policy are causing a lot of uncertainty. But taking this into account, we are confident that headline inflation will converge on a sustainable basis towards our 2% medium-term target towards the end of this year or the beginning of next.

    Let’s talk about some of the factors in this uncertain environment. What are the specific factors that are influencing the Governing Council’s thinking about the rate path right now, and how has that changed since the start of the easing cycle?

    We have already reduced interest rates by a total of 150 basis points. This is what we refer to in our monetary policy statement as a “meaningfully less restrictive” stance than at the beginning of the cycle.

    Our projections now show that inflation will converge towards our target in the medium term. But again, we need to consider the uncertainty of the current environment, which is even higher than it was during the pandemic. For instance, our projections don’t include the definitive level of the tariffs imposed by the United States and its trade partners, since the current situation is so volatile.

    Nevertheless, we are confident that inflation is moving towards our target on a sustainable basis, for example due to the moderation in wage growth I mentioned earlier. Even energy prices, which had also resulted in a small pick-up in inflation, have started to decline.

    Markets in the last few weeks have had some very strong reactions to the external environment. I’m thinking of the increase in German bond yields, changing expectations for fewer rate cuts from the ECB and the stock market correction in the United States. Does any of that feed into the ECB’s thinking on the rate path?

    We look at a wide range of indicators, all of which have an impact on our analysis. These include the evolution of wages and of the economy in terms of domestic demand and growth. And we of course look at financing conditions, for which our bank lending survey is very useful.

    It’s true that bond yields have increased due to the new German Government’s budgetary plans and that we have seen a correction in US equities from very high levels. But we also need to try to look through the short-term evolution of markets and distinguish between short-term volatility and permanent or medium-term forces. If we were to be as volatile as the markets, that wouldn’t be very reassuring.

    You said the uncertainty now is even greater than during the pandemic. How would you characterise it? What are the big unknowns at the moment?

    First, the policies of the new US Administration. There’s a lot of talk about tariffs, but it’s not just about that. The new Administration has also been quite clear about deregulating banks, non-banks and crypto-assets. And beyond that, they have announced that they want to modify corporate tax, which could affect capital flows across the Atlantic. In general, what we’re seeing is that the new US Administration isn’t very open to continuing with multilateralism, which is about cooperation across jurisdictions and finding common solutions for common problems. This is a very important change, and a big source of uncertainty.

    Second, and as a result of the new Administration’s attitude towards defence, we have the European Commission’s proposal to increase national defence spending by 1.5% of GDP. This is certainly a decision in the right direction, and it will have an impact on the macroeconomic outlook. We don’t know enough details about the package to make an accurate assessment about its impact on the economy, but it will likely be positive for growth and have a limited impact on inflation.

    Let’s focus on defence. Are you comfortable with national budget rules being relaxed to accommodate more defence spending? Will you need to adjust your monetary policy as those changes in fiscal policy come through?

    We always take fiscal policy into account because it interacts with monetary policy. In this case, we need to know the concrete details of the package before we can make an accurate assessment. How will spending be distributed across items? In terms of economic impact, spending more on military wages is not the same as spending more on weapons. How much will be spent outside of the EU? How is it going to be financed? One part will be common debt, but the package is much larger than that. The rest could be covered by taxes or a reduction in public spending. All of these factors are important to know in order to assess the impact of the package on the economy.

    It looks like we may be moving closer towards a resolution of the war in Ukraine, or at least a ceasefire. Would that be beneficial for the euro area economy? Would it change anything of what you’ve outlined so far?

    From a human standpoint, a peace agreement would obviously be very positive. And in general, it would be beneficial for the economy as well. But we would need to see the exact terms of a potential settlement to know for sure.

    Turning to the United States, what role do you see for the ECB in terms of managing trade shocks and the overall approach of the Trump administration?

    We need to keep in mind that the current situation is very volatile. It seems like every day a new tariff is imposed or one that has already been announced is removed. Hopefully we’ll soon have more clarity on the US Administration’s plans for the time ahead.

    Obviously, a trade war would be a lose-lose situation for everybody. It would have a much worse impact on growth than on inflation. This is because increasing tariffs raises prices at first, but lower growth subsequently offsets this initial price increase. We also need to look not only at bilateral tariffs between the United States and Europe but also at what economists call “trade diversion”. This means that, for example, tariffs imposed by the United States on Chinese goods could redirect trade flows to Europe, along with whatever economic impact that may have.

    Once we have all the details of the final policies, we will be able to better assess their impact based on all these factors. We are now using a baseline scenario and several alternative scenarios with different trade distortions to try to calibrate the impact as best as we can.

    Another aspect of the uncertainty in the United States is the way Trump is changing the relationship of the White House to many of the independent agencies in Washington. One of those might be the Federal Reserve. What would it mean for the ECB if its independence were to erode under President Trump? Has that scenario been discussed at all in the Governing Council?

    No, we haven’t discussed that because we can’t imagine it happening. The independence of the Federal Reserve is enshrined in law. We will always defend the independence of central banks, which is crucial to ensure they can fulfil their mandates.

    There are a lot of question marks over the predictability of the United States. Does Europe need to start thinking about making the euro more of a global reserve currency, if the dollar becomes less reliable?

    The euro is already a reserve currency, and strengthening its role in that respect is not part of our mandate. But keeping inflation low, increasing the potential growth of the European economy, signalling openness to trade agreements with different jurisdictions and making the European Union a model for free trade all over the world – all of this would strengthen the role of the euro as a reserve currency.

    But do you see a need for Europe to step more into that role ahead of the United States?

    I wouldn’t make comparisons with the United States. What Europe should do is maintain the position that it has always had as an open economy, in favour of free trade, the free flow of capital and multilateralism.

    Earlier you said that a trade war would be very detrimental to growth, but we don’t know all the details yet. How has the ECB’s view on euro area growth evolved in the last few months?

    We have downgraded our growth outlook for 2025 and 2026 by 0.2 percentage points. There are two main drivers behind that downward revision. First, uncertainty about the economy in the coming months has clearly dented confidence, and this is having an impact on investment. And second, a possible trade war would reduce net exports.

    Philip Lane has said recently that the conditions in the euro area are right for a pick-up in household consumption. Do you share his optimism that it can increase and maybe drive economic growth?

    All the factors that Philip indicated are correct. Real wages have increased, inflation is declining, interest rates are coming down and financing conditions are better. But still, the reality is that consumption is not picking up.

    This is because consumers don’t always react to developments in their short-term real disposable income. They also consider what might happen with the economy over the medium term, which is clouded in uncertainty. The possibility of a trade war or wider geopolitical conflict has an impact on consumer confidence.

    Eventually, the increase in the factors that Philip pointed out will prevail. But right now, the lack of consumer confidence due to the uncertainty of the world economy is offsetting that effect.

    European households have enormous cash savings at the moment, especially since the pandemic. Christine Lagarde has spoken frequently about turning those cash savings into investment to drive innovation and growth. Are you optimistic that this can become a reality?

    The capital markets union is certainly very important, but looking at the current economic situation in Europe, it’s crucial to put structural reforms in place to make it more productive and competitive. This is also what the Letta and Draghi reports argued.

    Fully integrating the internal market will be key here. It’s very difficult to have a capital markets union if you don’t have an integrated economy for goods and services. There are certainly concrete actions we can take to complete the capital markets union, but we should also focus on removing the internal obstacles to a real single market in Europe.

    There are three key elements here: fully integrating the Single Market, completing the banking union and completing the capital markets union. We must make progress on these three elements in parallel; it will be very difficult to make progress on one of them in isolation.

    Which of those elements would you say the ECB has the most influence on? And what can it do?

    Our mandate is price stability, but we also have an advisory role and produce expert opinions. Our economists and researchers carry out a lot of analytical work on Europe. The European Council and the Commission listen to what we have to say, and we are also accountable to the European Parliament. So we continuously use our voice to make the points that we believe are key to making the European economy more productive and competitive.

    Are you happy with the levels of credit flow from European banks to households and businesses?

    They are on the rise, following the rate cuts and the improvement in financing conditions. Demand for credit is not very strong, at least from a corporate standpoint, although it’s gradually increasing. This has to do with the lack of investor confidence. If you have doubts about the future and you’re waiting to see what will happen with trade, fiscal policy and geopolitical risk, you don’t invest, so you also don’t borrow. But in the case of households, we have started to see a significant increase in demand for mortgages.

    Speaking of housing: in several countries of the euro area, housing is in crisis. There’s an undersupply, and financing isn’t available to everybody that wants to buy a house. Do you think at this stage, nearly 15 years after the financial crisis, that lending rules are still too tight? Have regulators overcorrected on capital rules for banks, harming consumers and households?

    The current situation is very different to the one that we had 15 years ago. As a finance minister in Spain, I was dealing with the burst of a big housing and credit bubble, similar to what we saw in Ireland. Now, residential real estate prices are a big problem, but the drivers aren’t the same as the ones we had back then. From a financing standpoint, the situation is very different because the banks’ solvency is not in question.

    That being said, current developments in house prices are having a very negative impact on young people, who have a lot of trouble accessing housing. In some countries, this may have to do with issues with the rental market and how it is regulated. Policies should be put in place to make housing, mainly in the rental market, much more affordable. At the European level, improving the performance of the rental market will be very important in the near future. We should foster common action to achieve this, because it’s a significant source of social upset.

    But this is for national governments to do, not the ECB. We do need to analyse the situation, however, because not all countries are in the same position with respect to their rental markets. And there are lessons to be learned from the policies some countries have put in place.

    MIL OSI Economics

  • MIL-OSI Global: Trump’s potential embrace of ‘continentalist geopolitics’ poses grave risks to Canada

    Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Michael Williams, Professor of International Politics, L’Université d’Ottawa/University of Ottawa

    In the few weeks since United States President Donald Trump returned to the White House, world leaders and commentators have struggled to make sense of his approach to foreign policy, including tariffs, alliance renegotiations and threats of territorial appropriation.

    No one is sure how much is bluff or negotiating tactics, nor how much is deadly serious.

    For some, Trump’s foreign policy is simply incoherent, but most try to fit his approach into the familiar choice between isolationism and internationalism.

    But there’s a third possibility: Trump’s second presidency marks a contemporary twist on an older form of continentalist geopolitics with important implications for Canada and the world.

    ‘Great Powers’

    Although it has been largely missing from foreign policy debates in the post-Second World War era, continentalist geopolitics has a long and often controversial history.

    In the 19th century and the first half of the 20th, it envisioned a world divided into “great spaces,” each dominated by a different “Great Power.” According to this perspective, not all regions are equally important, and continentalist geopolitics does not require a choice between internationalism and isolationism.

    Instead, continentalism recommends that Great Powers like the U.S. — with its massive financial, natural and industrial resources — concentrate on controlling territory, the regions surrounding it and the crucial transportation routes on its continental fringes.

    Pressure is placed on countries whose importance is determined by their geopolitical proximity, and those that are least able to resist due to their dense connections and relative dependence on the U.S.

    The objective is not just to gain specific advantages; it’s to force neighbours into even tighter economic and infrastructural connections and dependence. The obvious countries in this scenario are Canada and Mexico, and it’s therefore unsurprising that both have been the targets of Trump’s significant tariff threats and other coercive measures.

    When Ontario Premier Doug Ford talks about the need for tighter continental ties through a continental AmCan arrangement, he provides exactly the desired reaction.

    Pressuring neighbours

    Beyond geographically contiguous states, continentalist geopolitics also focuses on areas that command key strategic passages and trade routes, especially those currently controlled by weaker powers.

    For the U.S., Panama, with its canal, fits the bill. Danish-administered Greenland, with its natural resources and geographic importance in a rapidly thawing Arctic region, is another. It’s unsurprising that these countries, along with Canada, were a Trump focus in the first weeks of his second administration.

    Today, continentalist geopolitics recognizes the multi-polarity and “multi-alignment” in world politics.

    It’s not isolationist, but it recognizes that waning American power in an inter-connected world gives more distant states the ability to resist U.S. pressure by making deals with a wide range of other countries. In this setting, an interventionist global role is neither possible nor desirable, and the U.S. should refrain from global commitments.

    As U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio stated in one of his first interviews after taking office:

    “It’s not normal for the world to simply have a unipolar power… that was an anomaly. It was a product of the end of the Cold War, but eventually you were going to reach back to a point where you had a multi-polar world, multi-great powers in different parts of the planet. We face that now with China and to some extent Russia.”

    No commitment to global stability

    The continentalist perspective does not require a complete separation from the world economic or security order. Trade, financial and technology flows can be encouraged, but their basis would be a re-industrialized and more self-sufficient core, well-insulated from economic and security threats.

    Extended interests, such as European stability, could be minimized by increasing the cost burden to allies and minimizing fixed commitments. A powerful global capacity with a “light” geographic footprint is the preferred posture.

    Calls for increased defence spending by NATO allies and for European responsibility in enforcing a post-war settlement in Ukraine logically follow.

    The continentalist playbook is content to leave the management of distant regions to other powers, each pre-eminent in their part of the world. That means participation in international organizations is minimized.

    Foreign aid should reflect American interests, with involvement depending on the costs and benefits, not any automatic commitment to global stability. Feeding the world’s most extensive development agency, USAID, “into the wood-chipper” — to quote Elon Musk — is a page taken straight from this kind of geopolitician’s handbook.

    Unsavoury history

    The possibility that a continentalist geopolitics underpins recent U.S. foreign policy initiatives has received too little attention in Canada.

    It’s not yet clear that the actions of America’s new administration represent the rise, much less the triumph, of Trumpian geopolitics. Nor is there any guarantee that such a vision would or will succeed.

    But there is enough evidence to suggest we should take the possibility seriously. Since 1945, America’s foreign policy options have resided somewhere between internationalism and isolationism. But a geopolitical vision of world politics as a diverse canvas of large territory dominated by different Great Powers have a long, if often unsavoury, history in foreign policy.

    A southern neighbour pursuing a such a geopolitical approach would mark a radical transformation in world order and pose huge challenges for Canada. Canadians should at least be prepared for the possibility.

    Michael Williams receives funding from the Social Science Research Council of Canada

    ref. Trump’s potential embrace of ‘continentalist geopolitics’ poses grave risks to Canada – https://theconversation.com/trumps-potential-embrace-of-continentalist-geopolitics-poses-grave-risks-to-canada-251545

    MIL OSI – Global Reports

  • MIL-OSI Asia-Pac: Prime Minister Shri Narendra Modi interacts with Lex Fridman in a podcast

    Source: Government of India (2)

    Posted On: 16 MAR 2025 10:03PM by PIB Delhi

    The Prime Minister Shri Narendra Modi interacted with Lex Fridman in a podcast about various topics today. In a candid conversation, when asked about why he fasts and how he manages, the Prime Minister expressed gratitude to Lex Fridman for his gesture of fasting as a mark of respect for the PM. “In India, religious traditions are deeply intertwined with daily life”, said Shri Modi, adding that Hinduism is not merely about rituals but a philosophy guiding life, as interpreted by the Honorable Supreme Court of India. He emphasized that fasting is a tool for cultivating discipline and balancing the inner and outer self. The Prime Minister noted that fasting heightens the senses, making them more sensitive and aware. He observed that during fasting, one can perceive even subtle aromas and details more vividly. He also highlighted that fasting accelerates the thinking process, providing fresh perspectives and encouraging out-of-the-box thinking. Shri Modi clarified that fasting is not just about abstaining from food; it involves a scientific process of preparation and detoxification. He emphasized that he prepares his body for fasting by following Ayurvedic and yoga practices for several days beforehand and stressed the importance of hydration during this period. Once fasting begins, he views it as an act of devotion and self-discipline, allowing for deep introspection and focus. The Prime Minister shared that his practice of fasting originated from personal experience, starting with a movement inspired by Mahatma Gandhi during his school days. He felt a surge of energy and awareness during his first fast, which convinced him of its transformative power. He highlighted that fasting does not slow him down; instead, it often increases his productivity. He noted that during fasting, his thoughts flow more freely and creatively, making it an incredible experience for expressing himself.

    On being asked how he carried out his role as a leader on the world stage, all fasted, and sometimes nine days, Shri Modi highlighted the ancient Indian tradition of Chaturmas, observed during the monsoon season when digestion naturally slows. He remarked that during this period, many Indians follow the practice of consuming only one meal a day. For him, this tradition begins around mid-June and continues until after Diwali in November, spanning four to four and a half months. He added that during the Navratri Festival in September or October, which celebrates strength, devotion, and spiritual discipline, he completely abstains from food and consumes only hot water for nine days. He further shared that during the Chaitra Navratri in March or April, he follows a unique fasting practice by consuming only one specific fruit once a day for nine days. For instance, if he chooses papaya, he eats only papaya throughout the fasting period. He emphasized that these fasting practices are deeply ingrained in his life and have been followed consistently for 50 to 55 years.

    The Prime Minister remarked that his fasting practices were initially personal and not publicly known. However, they became more widely recognized after he became Chief Minister and Prime Minister, he added noting that he does not mind sharing his experiences now, as they might be beneficial to others, aligning with his life’s dedication to the well-being of others. He also shared an instance during a bilateral meeting at the White House with former President of USA, Mr. Barack Obama when he was fasting. 

    On being asked about his early life, the Prime Minister reflected on his birthplace, Vadnagar, Mehsana district in North Gujarat, highlighting its rich historical significance. He noted that Vadnagar was a major center for Buddhist learning, attracting figures like the Chinese philosopher Hiuen Tsang. He mentioned that the town was also a prominent Buddhist educational hub around the 1400s, highlighting that his village had a unique environment where Buddhist, Jain, and Hindu traditions co-existed harmoniously. He emphasized that history was not confined to books, as every stone and wall in Vadnagar told a story. During his tenure as Chief Minister, he initiated large-scale excavation projects that uncovered evidence dating back 2,800 years, proving the city’s continuous existence. Shri Modi remarked that these findings have led to the establishment of an international-level museum in Vadnagar, which is now a major area of study, especially for archaeology students. He expressed gratitude for being born in such a historically significant place, seeing it as his good fortune. The Prime Minister also shared aspects of his childhood, describing his family’s life in a small house without windows, where he grew up in extreme poverty. However, he added that they never felt the burden of poverty, as they had no basis for comparison. His father was disciplined and hardworking, known for his punctuality, he said. Shri Modi highlighted his mother’s hard work and her spirit of caring for others, which instilled in him a sense of empathy and service. He recalled how his mother would treat children with traditional remedies early in the morning, gathering them at their home, and emphasized that these experiences shaped his life and values. The Prime Minister noted that his journey into politics brought his humble beginnings to light, as media coverage during his oath-taking as Chief Minister revealed his background to the public. He expressed that his life’s experiences, whether seen as fortune or misfortune, have unfolded in a way that now informs his public life.

    Shri Modi encouraged young people to remain patient and self-confident, emphasizing that challenges are part of life but should not define one’s purpose, when asked for his advice to the young people. He highlighted that difficulties are tests of endurance, meant to strengthen individuals rather than defeat them, adding that every crisis presents an opportunity for growth and improvement. The Prime Minister remarked that there are no shortcuts in life, using the analogy of railway station signs that warn against crossing tracks, stating, “Shortcut will cut you short.” He emphasized the importance of patience and perseverance in achieving success. He also stressed the need to pour one’s heart into every responsibility and live life with passion, finding fulfillment in the journey. Highlighting that abundance alone does not guarantee success, as even those with resources must continue to grow and contribute to society, the Prime Minister emphasized the importance of never stopping learning, as personal growth is essential throughout life. He shared his own experience of learning from interactions at his father’s tea shop, which taught him the value of continuous learning and self-improvement. He noted that many people set big targets and feel disappointed if they fall short. He advised focusing on doing something rather than just becoming something, as this mindset allows for continued determination and progress toward goals. He emphasized that true contentment comes from what one gives, rather than what one gets, and encouraged young people to cultivate a mindset centered on contribution and service.

    On being asked about his journey in the Himalayas, Shri Modi reflected on his upbringing in a small town, where community life was central. He often visited the local library, finding inspiration in books about figures like Swami Vivekananda and Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj. This sparked a desire to shape his life similarly, leading him to experiment with his physical limits, such as sleeping outside in cold weather to test his endurance, he added. Highlighting the influence of Swami Vivekananda’s teachings, particularly a story where Vivekananda, despite needing help for his ill mother, could not bring himself to ask Goddess Kali for anything during meditation, an experience which instilled in Vivekananda a spirit of giving, Shri Modi said that this left an impression on him, stressing that true contentment comes from giving and serving others. He recalled an incident where he chose to stay behind and care for a saint during a family wedding, demonstrating his early inclination towards spiritual pursuits. He noted that seeing soldiers in his village inspired him to serve the nation, though he didn’t have a clear path at the time. The Prime Minister mentioned his deep longing to understand life’s meaning and his journey in exploring it. He highlighted his connection with saints like Swami Atmasthanandji, who guided him on the importance of serving society. He shared that during his time in the mission, he met remarkable saints who showered him with love and blessings. Shri Modi also spoke about his experiences in the Himalayas, where solitude and encounters with ascetics helped shape him and discover his inner strength. He emphasized the role of meditation, service, and devotion in his personal growth.

    Sharing his experience with Swami Atmasthanandaji in Ramakrishna Mission which led him to a decision to live a life of service at every scale, Shri Modi said that while others may view him as the Prime Minister or Chief Minister, he remains deeply committed to spiritual principles, highlighting that his inner consistency is rooted in serving others, whether through helping his mother care for children, wandering in the Himalayas, or working from his current position of responsibility. The Prime Minister remarked that to him, there is no real difference between a saint and a leader, as both roles are guided by the same core values. He emphasized that while external aspects like attire and work may change, his dedication to service remains constant. He underlined that he carries out every responsibility with the same sense of calm, focus, and dedication.

    Discussing about the impact that the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) has had on his early life, Prime Minister mentioned his childhood fascination with patriotic songs, particularly those sung by a man named Makoshi, who would visit his village with a tambourine. He said that these songs deeply touched him and played a role in his eventual involvement with RSS. He highlighted that the RSS instilled in him core values such as doing everything with a purpose, whether studying or exercising, to contribute to the nation. Shri Modi remarked that the RSS provides a clear direction toward a purpose in life, emphasizing that serving people is akin to serving God. He noted that the RSS is nearing its 100th anniversary and is a massive volunteer organization with millions of members worldwide. Highlighting various initiatives inspired by the RSS, such as Seva Bharati, which runs over 1,25,000 service projects in slums and settlements without government assistance, Shri Modi also mentioned Vanvasi Kalyan Ashram, which has established over 70,000 one-teacher schools in tribal regions, and Vidya Bharati, which operates nearly 25,000 schools educating around 30 lakh students. He emphasized that the RSS prioritizes education and values, ensuring students remain grounded and learn skills to avoid becoming a burden on society. He highlighted the Indian Labor Union, which has millions of members across the country, adopting a unique approach by focusing on “workers unite the world,” contrasting with traditional labor movements. The Prime Minister expressed gratitude for the life values and purpose he gained from the RSS and the spiritual guidance he received from saints like Swami Atmasthananda.

    On the topic of India, Shri Modi said that India is a cultural identity and a civilization that dates back thousands of years. Highlighting the vastness of India, with over 100 languages and thousands of dialects, emphasizing the saying that every 20 miles, the language, customs, cuisine, and clothing styles change, he said that despite this immense diversity, there is a common thread that unites the country. The Prime Minister highlighted the stories of Lord Ram, which resonate across India, and pointed out how names inspired by Lord Ram are found in every region, from Rambhai in Gujarat to Ramachandran in Tamil Nadu and Ram Bhau in Maharashtra. He remarked that this unique cultural bond unites India as one civilization. Shri Modi emphasized the ritual of remembering all the rivers of India during bathing, where people chant the names of rivers like Ganga, Yamuna, Godavari, Saraswati, Narmada, Sindhu, and Kaveri. He noted that this sentiment of unity is deeply ingrained in Indian traditions and is reflected in the resolutions made during important events and rituals, which also serve as historical records. Underlining the meticulous guidance of Indian scriptures in practices such as invoking the universe during ceremonies, starting from Jambudweep and narrowing down to the family deity, the Prime Minister remarked that these practices are still alive and observed daily across India. He observed that while Western and global models view nations as administrative systems, India’s unity lies in its cultural bonds. He noted that India has had varied administrative systems throughout history, but its unity has been preserved through cultural traditions. Shri Modi also underscored the role of pilgrimage traditions in maintaining India’s unity, mentioning Shankaracharya’s establishment of four pilgrimage sites. He remarked that even today, millions of people travel for pilgrimage, such as bringing water from Rameshwaram to Kashi and vice versa. He also pointed out the richness of India’s Hindu calendar, which reflects the country’s diverse traditions.

    Discussing Mahatma Gandhi’s Legacy and India’s Struggle for Independence, the Prime Minister reiterated that he was born in Gujarat, with Gujarati as his mother tongue, just like Mahatma Gandhi. He highlighted that Gandhi, despite having opportunities abroad as an attorney, chose to devote his life to serving the people of India, guided by a deep sense of duty and family values. He emphasized that Gandhi’s principles and actions continue to influence every Indian to this day. Underlining Gandhi’s advocacy for cleanliness, noting that he practiced it himself and made it a central topic in his discussions, Shri Modi remarked on India’s long struggle for independence, during which the flame of freedom burned brightly across the nation despite centuries of colonial rule. Millions sacrificed their lives, enduring imprisonment and martyrdom, to ensure India’s freedom, he added. Shri Modi observed that while many freedom fighters made lasting impacts, it was Mahatma Gandhi who awakened the nation by leading a mass movement rooted in truth. He highlighted Gandhi’s ability to involve every individual in the freedom struggle, from sweepers to teachers, spinners, and caregivers. He remarked that Gandhi transformed ordinary citizens into soldiers for freedom, creating a movement so immense that the British could not fully comprehend it. He noted the significance of the Dandi March, where a pinch of salt sparked a revolution. The Prime Minister shared an anecdote from a Roundtable Conference, where Gandhi, dressed in his breechcloth, met King George at Buckingham Palace. He highlighted Gandhi’s witty remark, “Your king is wearing enough clothes for the both of us,” showcasing his whimsical charm. Shri Modi reflected on Gandhi’s call for unity and recognition of people’s strength, which continues to resonate. He emphasized his own commitment to including the common man in every initiative and fostering social change, rather than relying solely on the government.

    Shri Modi further mentioned that Mahatma Gandhi’s legacy transcends centuries, emphasizing that his relevance endures to this day. He highlighted his own sense of responsibility, stating that his strength lies not in his name but in the backing of 140 crore Indians and thousands of years of timeless culture and heritage. “When I shake hands with a world leader, it’s not Modi, but 140 crore Indians doing so”, he added humbly. Recalling the widespread criticism he faced in 2013 when he was declared his party’s prime ministerial candidate, Shri Modi said that critics questioned his understanding of foreign policy and global geopolitics. He responded at the time, “India will neither allow itself to be looked down upon, nor will it ever look up to anyone. India will now see eye-to-eye with her counterparts.” He reaffirmed that this belief remains central to his foreign policy, emphasizing that the country always comes first. Prime Minister highlighted India’s long-standing advocacy for global peace and brotherhood, rooted in the vision of the world as one family. He remarked on India’s contributions to global initiatives, such as the concept of “One Sun, One World, One Grid” for renewable energy and “One Earth, One Health” for global healthcare, which extends to all flora and fauna. He emphasized the importance of fostering global well-being and called for collective efforts from the international community. Touching upon India’s hosting of the G20 Summit with the motto, “One Earth, One Family, One Future,” Shri Modi underscored the duty to share India’s timeless wisdom with the world. He remarked on the interconnected nature of today’s world, stating, “No country can thrive in isolation. We all depend upon one another.” He emphasized the need for synchronization and collaboration to propel global initiatives forward. He also addressed the relevance of global organizations like the United Nations, noting that their inability to evolve with the times has sparked a global debate on their effectiveness.

    On the topic of the path to peace in Ukraine, Shri Modi said that he represents the land of Lord Buddha and Mahatma Gandhi, great souls whose teachings and actions were entirely dedicated to peace. He emphasized that India’s strong cultural and historical background ensures that when India speaks of peace, the world listens. He highlighted that Indians are not hardwired for conflict but instead espouse harmony, standing for peace and embracing the responsibility of peacemaking wherever possible. The Prime Minister reflected on his close relationships with both Russia and Ukraine, stating that he can engage with President Putin to emphasize that this is not the time for war and can also convey to President Zelensky that resolutions will not be achieved on the battlefield but through negotiations. He added that discussions must include both parties to be fruitful and noted that the current situation presents an opportunity for meaningful talks between Ukraine and Russia. Highlighting the suffering caused by the conflict, including its impact on the global south, which has faced crises in food, fuel, and fertilizer, the Prime Minister called for the global community to unite in the pursuit of peace. He reaffirmed his stance, stating, “I am not neutral. I have a stance, and that is peace, and peace is what I strive for.”

    Discussing the topic of India and Pakistan relations, the Prime Minister touched upon the painful reality of India’s partition in 1947, highlighting the grief and bloodshed that followed. He described the harrowing sight of trains arriving from Pakistan filled with wounded people and corpses. He noted that despite expectations of harmonious coexistence, Pakistan chose a path of hostility, waging a proxy war against India. The Prime Minister questioned the ideology that thrives on bloodshed and terror, emphasizing that terrorism is a menace not just for India but for the world. He pointed out that the trail of terror often leads to Pakistan, citing the example of Osama bin Laden, who was found taking refuge there. He remarked that Pakistan has become an epicenter of turmoil and urged them to abandon state-sponsored terrorism. “What do you hope to gain by surrendering your nation to lawless forces?”, he questioned. Shri Modi shared his personal efforts to foster peace, including his visit to Lahore and the invitation extended to Pakistan for his swearing-in ceremony as Prime Minister. He highlighted this diplomatic gesture as a testament to India’s commitment to peace and harmony, as captured in the memoir of former President Shri Pranab Mukherjee. However, he noted that these efforts were met with hostility and betrayal. 

    Stressing on the unifying power of sports, Shri Modi said that they connect people on a deeper level and energize the world. He stated, “Sports play a major role in human evolution. They’re not just games; they bring people together across nations.” He noted that while he is not an expert in sports techniques, results often speak for themselves, as seen in a recent cricket match between India and Pakistan. The Prime Minister also highlighted India’s strong football culture, noting the impressive performance of the women’s football team and the progress of the men’s team. Reflecting on the past, he remarked that for the 1980s generation, Maradona was a true hero, while today’s generation immediately mentions Messi. Shri Modi shared a memorable visit to Shahdol, a tribal district in Madhya Pradesh, where he encountered a community deeply dedicated to football. He recounted meeting young players who proudly referred to their village as “mini Brazil,” a name earned through four generations of football tradition and nearly 80 national-level players. He noted that their annual football matches attract 20,000 to 25,000 spectators from nearby villages. He expressed optimism about the growing passion for football in India, stating that it not only fuels enthusiasm but also builds true team spirit.

    On being asked about the President of the USA, H.E. Mr. Donald Trump, the Prime Minister reminisced about a memorable event, the “Howdy Modi” rally in Houston, where he and President Trump addressed a packed stadium. He remarked on President Trump’s humility, noting how he sat in the audience during Modi’s speech and later agreed to walk around the stadium with him, showcasing mutual trust and a strong bond. He highlighted President Trump’s courage and decision-making, recalling his resilience even after being shot during a campaign. Shri Modi reflected on his first visit to the White House, where President Trump broke formal protocols to personally give him a tour. He mentioned Trump’s deep respect for American history, as he shared details about past Presidents and significant moments without notes or assistance. He emphasized the strong trust and communication between them, which remained unshaken even during Trump’s absence from office. Remarking on President Trump’s graciousness in calling him a great negotiator, attributing it to Trump’s humility, the Prime Minister stated that his negotiation approach always prioritizes India’s interests, advocating positively without causing offense. He emphasized that his nation is his high command, and he honors the responsibility entrusted to him by the people of India. Highlighting his productive meetings with individuals like Elon Musk, Tulsi Gabbard, Vivek Ramaswamy, and JD Vance during his recent visit to the United States, Shri Modi spoke of the warm, family-like atmosphere and shared his long-standing acquaintance with Elon Musk. He expressed happiness over Musk’s excitement about the DOGE mission and drew parallels to his own efforts to eliminate inefficiencies and harmful practices in governance since taking office in 2014. Prime Minister shared examples of governance reforms, including the removal of 10 crore fake or duplicate names from welfare schemes, saving massive amounts of money. He introduced direct benefit transfers to ensure transparency and eliminate middlemen, saving nearly three lakh crore rupees. He also launched the GeM portal for government purchases, reducing costs and improving quality. Additionally, he eliminated 40,000 unnecessary compliances and removed 1,500 outdated laws to streamline governance. He added that these bold changes have made India a topic of global discussion, just as innovative missions like DOGE capture worldwide attention.

    On being asked about the bilateral relations with India and China, the Prime Minister emphasised their shared history of learning from each other and contributing to global good, highlighting that at one point, India and China together accounted for over 50% of the world’s GDP, showcasing their massive contributions. He noted the deep cultural connections, including the profound influence of Buddhism in China, which originated in India. Shri Modi stressed the importance of maintaining and strengthening the relationship between the two nations. He acknowledged that differences are natural between neighbors but stressed the need to prevent these differences from escalating into disputes. “Dialogue is the key to building a stable and cooperative relationship that benefits both nations”, he added. Addressing the ongoing border disputes, Prime Minister acknowledged the tensions that arose in 2020 but noted that his recent meeting with President Xi has led to a return to normalcy at the border. He highlighted efforts to restore conditions to pre-2020 levels and expressed optimism that trust, enthusiasm, and energy would gradually return. He emphasized that cooperation between India and China is essential for global stability and prosperity, advocating for healthy competition rather than conflict. 

    On global tensions, the Prime Minister reflected on the lessons from COVID-19, which exposed the limitations of every nation and underscored the need for unity. He remarked that instead of moving toward peace, the world has become more fragmented, leading to uncertainty and worsening conflicts. He highlighted the irrelevance of international organizations like the UN due to a lack of reforms and the disregard for international laws. Shri Modi called for a shift from conflict to cooperation, advocating for a development-driven approach as the way forward. He reiterated that expansionism will not work in an interconnected and interdependent world, emphasizing the need for nations to support one another. He expressed hope for the restoration of peace, noting the deep concern shared by global forums over ongoing conflicts.

    On the topic of 2002 Gujarat riots, Shri Modi provided a detailed account of the volatile atmosphere leading up to it, highlighting a series of global and national crises, including the Kandahar hijacking, the Red Fort attack, and the 9/11 terror attacks. He remarked on the tense environment and the challenges he faced as a newly appointed Chief Minister, including overseeing rehabilitation after a devastating earthquake and managing the aftermath of the tragic Godhra incident. The Prime Minister addressed misconceptions about the 2002 riots, noting that Gujarat had a long history of communal violence before his tenure. He emphasized that the judiciary thoroughly investigated the matter and found him completely innocent. He highlighted that Gujarat has remained peaceful for 22 years since 2002, attributing this to a governance approach focused on development for all and trust from all. Talking about criticism, Shri Modi stated, “Criticism is the soul of democracy”, emphasising the importance of genuine, well-informed criticism, which he believes leads to better policy making. However, he expressed concern over the prevalence of baseless allegations, which he distinguished from constructive criticism. He remarked, “Allegations benefit no one; they just cause unnecessary conflicts.” The Prime Minister shared his perspective on journalism, advocating for a balanced approach. He recounted an analogy he once shared, comparing journalism to a bee that collects nectar and spreads sweetness but can also sting powerfully when necessary. He expressed disappointment over selective interpretations of his analogy, emphasizing the need for journalism to focus on truth and constructive impact rather than sensationalism. 

    Discussing his extensive experience in politics, highlighting his early focus on organizational work, managing elections, and strategizing campaigns, Shri Modi stated that for 24 years, the people of Gujarat and India have placed their trust in him, and he remains committed to honoring this sacred duty with unwavering dedication. He emphasized his government’s commitment to ensuring welfare schemes reach every citizen without discrimination based on caste, creed, faith, wealth, or ideology. He remarked that fostering trust is the cornerstone of his governance model, ensuring that even those not directly benefiting from schemes feel included and assured of future opportunities. “Our governance is rooted in the people, not the polls, and is dedicated to the well-being of citizens and the nation”, said the Prime Minister, sharing his perspective of revering the nation and its people as manifestations of the Divine, likening his role to that of a devoted priest serving the people. He emphasized his lack of conflicts of interest, noting that he has no friends or relatives who stand to gain from his position, which resonates with the common man and builds trust. The Prime Minister expressed pride in belonging to the world’s largest political party, which he credited to the tireless efforts of millions of dedicated volunteers. He remarked that these volunteers, devoted to the welfare of India and its citizens, have no personal stakes in politics and are widely recognized for their selfless service. He highlighted that this trust in his party is reflected in election results, which he attributes to the blessings of the people.

    Further talking about the incredible logistics of conducting elections in India, citing the 2024 general elections as an example, Shri Modi highlighted that there were 98 crore registered voters, surpassing the population of North America and the European Union combined. Out of these, 64.6 crore voters braved intense heat to cast their votes, he added. He noted that India had over one million polling booths and more than 2,500 registered political parties, showcasing the scale of its democracy. He emphasized that even the remotest villages had polling stations, with helicopters used to transport voting machines to inaccessible areas. He shared anecdotes, such as a polling booth set up in Gujarat’s Gir Forest for a single voter, underscoring India’s commitment to democracy. The Prime Minister praised the Election Commission of India for setting a global benchmark in conducting free and fair elections. He remarked that the management of Indian elections should be studied as a case study by top universities worldwide, given the immense depth of political awareness and logistical excellence involved.

    Reflecting on his leadership, Shri Modi stated that he identifies himself as a “prime servant” rather than a Prime Minister, with service as the guiding principle of his work ethic. He emphasized that his focus is on productivity and bringing positive change to people’s lives, rather than seeking power. He remarked, “I entered politics not to play power games, but to serve.” 

    Addressing the notion of loneliness, the Prime Minister shared that he never experiences it, as he believes in the philosophy of “one plus one,” representing himself and the Almighty. He remarked that serving the nation and its people is akin to serving the divine. During the pandemic, he stayed engaged by designing a governance model through videoconferencing and personally connecting with party volunteers aged 70 and above, inquiring about their well-being and reliving old memories, he added.

    On being asked the secret about hard work, Shri Modi remarked that his motivation comes from observing the hard work of people around him, including farmers, soldiers, laborers, and mothers who tirelessly dedicate themselves to their families and communities. He stated, “How can I sleep? How can I relax? The motivation is right in front of my eyes.” He emphasized that the responsibilities entrusted to him by his fellow citizens push him to give his absolute best. He recalled the promises he made during his 2014 campaign: to never fall behind in hard work for the country, to never act with bad intentions, and to never do anything for personal gain. He affirmed that he has upheld these standards throughout his 24 years as head of government. Prime Minister highlighted that his inspiration comes from serving 140 crore people, understanding their aspirations, and addressing their needs. He remarked, “I am always determined to do as much as I can, work as hard as possible. Even today, my energy remains just as strong.”

    Expressing his deep respect for Srinivasa Ramanujan, widely regarded as one of the greatest mathematicians of all time, Shri Modi remarked that Ramanujan’s life and work exemplify the profound connection between science and spirituality. He highlighted Ramanujan’s belief that his mathematical ideas were inspired by the goddess he worshiped, emphasizing that such ideas emerge from spiritual discipline. He stated, “Discipline is more than just hard work; it means fully devoting yourself to a task and completely immersing yourself into it so much that you become one with your work.” The Prime Minister underscored the importance of being open to diverse sources of knowledge, noting that this openness fosters the emergence of new ideas. He emphasized the distinction between information and knowledge, stating, “Some people mistakenly confuse information with knowledge. Knowledge is something deeper; it gradually evolves through processing, reflection, and understanding.” He highlighted the need to recognize this difference in order to handle both effectively.

    Discussing the factors influencing his decision-making, Shri Modi highlighted his extensive travel across 85-90% of India’s districts before his current role. He emphasized that these experiences provided him with firsthand knowledge of grassroots realities. He stated, “I carry no baggage that weighs me down or forces me to act a certain way.” He shared that his guiding principle is “My country first,” and he draws inspiration from Mahatma Gandhi’s wisdom of considering the poorest person’s face when making decisions. The Prime Minister highlighted his well-connected administration, noting that his numerous and active information channels provide him with diverse perspectives. He remarked, “When someone comes to brief me, that’s not my only source of information.” He also emphasized maintaining a learner’s mindset, asking questions like a student and playing devil’s advocate to analyze issues from multiple angles. Shri Modi shared his decision-making process during the COVID-19 crisis, where he resisted pressure to follow global economic theories blindly. He stated, “I wouldn’t let the poor sleep hungry. I wouldn’t allow social tensions to arise over basic daily needs.” He emphasized that his approach, rooted in patience and discipline, helped India avoid severe inflation and emerge as one of the fastest-growing major economies in the world. The Prime Minister highlighted his risk-taking capacity, stating, “If something is right for my country, for the people, I’m always prepared to take the risk.” He emphasized taking ownership of his decisions, remarking, “If something goes wrong, I don’t shift blame to others. I stand up, take responsibility, and own the outcome.” He noted that this approach fosters deep commitment within his team and builds trust among citizens. “I can make mistakes, but I won’t act with bad intentions”, he added, emphasising that society accepts him for his honest intentions, even if outcomes do not always go as planned.

    “Artificial Intelligence (AI) development is fundamentally a collaborative effort, no nation can develop AI entirely on its own”, emphasised Shri Modi when asked about the role of India in promoting AI. He stated, “No matter what the world does with AI, it will remain incomplete without India.” He highlighted India’s active work on AI-driven applications for specific use cases and its unique marketplace-based model to ensure broad accessibility. He noted that India’s vast talent pool is its greatest strength, remarking, “Artificial intelligence is fundamentally powered, shaped, and guided by human intelligence, and that real intelligence exists abundantly in India’s youth.” The Prime Minister shared an example of India’s rapid progress in 5G rollout, which surpassed global expectations. He highlighted the cost-effectiveness of India’s space missions, such as Chandrayaan, which cost less than a Hollywood blockbuster, showcasing India’s efficiency and innovation. He emphasized that these achievements generate global respect for Indian talent and reflect India’s civilizational ethos. Shri Modi also reflected on the success of Indian-origin leaders in global tech, attributing it to India’s cultural values of dedication, ethics, and collaboration. He remarked, “People raised in India, especially those from joint families and open societies, find it easier to lead complex tasks and large teams effectively.” He highlighted the problem-solving abilities and analytical thinking of Indian professionals, which make them globally competitive. Addressing concerns about AI replacing humans, the Prime Minister remarked that technology has always advanced alongside humanity, with humans adapting and staying a step ahead. He stated, “Human imagination is the fuel. AI can create many things based on that, but no technology can ever replace the boundless creativity and imagination of the human mind.” He emphasized that AI challenges humans to reflect on what it truly means to be human, highlighting the innate human ability to care for one another, which AI cannot replicate.

    Touching upon the topic of Education, Exams, and Student Success, Shri Modi said that the societal mindset places undue pressure on students, with schools and families often measuring success by rankings. He emphasized that this mentality has led children to believe their entire lives depend on 10th and 12th-grade exams. He highlighted the significant changes introduced in India’s new education policy to address these issues and shared his commitment to easing students’ burdens through initiatives like Pariksha Pe Charcha. The Prime Minister emphasized that exams should not be the sole measure of a person’s potential, stating, “Many people may not score high academically, yet can hit a century in cricket because that’s where their true strength lies.” He shared anecdotes from his school days, highlighting innovative teaching methods that made learning enjoyable and effective. He noted that such techniques have been incorporated into the new education policy. Shri Modi advised students to perform every task with dedication and sincerity, emphasizing that enhanced skills and capabilities open doors to success. He encouraged young people not to feel discouraged, stating, “There’s certainly some task out there destined just for you. Focus on enhancing your skills, and opportunities will come.” He highlighted the importance of connecting one’s life to a greater purpose, which brings inspiration and meaning. Addressing stress and difficulties, the Prime Minister urged parents to stop using their children as status symbols and to understand that life is not just about exams. He advised students to prepare well, trust their abilities, and approach exams with confidence. He emphasized the importance of systematic time management and regular practice to overcome challenges during exams. He reaffirmed his belief in every individual’s unique capabilities, encouraging students to maintain trust in themselves and their abilities to succeed.

    Prime Minister also shared his approach to learning, emphasizing the importance of being fully present in the moment. He remarked, “Whenever I meet someone, I am fully present in the moment. This complete focus allows me to grasp new concepts quickly.” He encouraged others to embrace this habit, stating that it sharpens the mind and improves learning ability. He highlighted the value of practice, remarking, “You cannot master driving merely by reading the life stories of great drivers. You must get behind the wheel and take the road yourself.” Shri Modi reflected on the certainty of death, emphasizing the importance of embracing life, enriching it with purpose, and letting go of the fear of death, as it is inevitable. He remarked, “Commit to enriching, refining, and elevating your life so you can live fully and with a purpose before death comes knocking.” 

    Prime Minister expressed his optimism about the future, stating that pessimism and negativity are not part of his mindset. He highlighted humanity’s resilience in overcoming crises and embracing change throughout history. He remarked, “In every era, it is in human nature to adapt to the ever-flowing current of change.” He emphasized the potential for extraordinary breakthroughs when people break free from outdated thinking patterns and embrace transformation.

    Speaking on the topics of Spirituality, Meditation, and Universal Well-Being, Shri Modi highlighted the significance of the Gayatri Mantra, describing it as a powerful tool for spiritual enlightenment dedicated to the radiant power of the sun. He remarked that many Hindu mantras are deeply intertwined with science and nature, bringing profound and lasting benefits when chanted daily. The Prime Minister emphasised that meditation was about freeing oneself from distractions and being present in the moment. He recounted an experience from his time in the Himalayas, where a sage taught him to focus on the rhythmic sound of water droplets falling onto a bowl. He described this practice as “divine resonance,” which helped him develop concentration and evolve into meditation. Reflecting on Hindu philosophy, Shri Modi quoted mantras emphasizing the interconnectedness of life and the importance of universal well-being. He remarked, “Hindus never focus solely on individual well-being. We wish for the well-being and prosperity of all.” He highlighted that every Hindu mantra concludes with the invocation of peace, symbolizing the essence of life and the spiritual practices of sages. The Prime Minister concluded by expressing gratitude for the opportunity to share his thoughts, noting that the conversation allowed him to explore and articulate ideas he had long kept within himself.

     

     

    ***

    MJPS/SR

    (Release ID: 2111673) Visitor Counter : 7

    MIL OSI Asia Pacific News

  • MIL-OSI Asia-Pac: India – New Zealand Joint Statement

    Source: Government of India

    Posted On: 17 MAR 2025 2:39PM by PIB Delhi

    At the invitation of the Prime Minister of India, Shri Narendra Modi, the Prime Minister of New Zealand, Rt Hon Christopher Luxon, is on an Official Visit to India on 16-20 March 2025. Prime Minister Luxon, who is on his first visit to India in his current capacity, is visiting New Delhi and Mumbai, and is accompanied by Hon. Louise Upston, Minister for Tourism and Hospitality, Hon. Mark Mitchell, Minister for Ethnic Communities, and Sport and Recreation, and Hon. Todd McClay, Minister for Trade and Investment, Agriculture, and Forestry, and a high-level delegation comprising of officials, and representatives of businesses, community diaspora, media and cultural groups.

    Prime Minister Luxon was accorded a warm and traditional welcome in New Delhi. Prime Minister Modi held bilateral talks with Prime Minister Luxon. Prime Minister Modi will inaugurate the 10th edition of the Raisina Dialogue on 17 March 2025 in New Delhi with Prime Minister Luxon as the Chief Guest delivering the Inaugural Keynote Address. The Prime Minister laid a wreath at Raj Ghat Mahatma Gandhi Memorial and also called on President Droupadi Murmu.

    The Prime Ministers reaffirmed their shared desire to further strengthen the growing bilateral relationship between India and New Zealand which is anchored in shared democratic values and robust people-to-people ties. Both leaders recognized that there remains significant potential for further growth in the bilateral relationship and agreed to cooperate closely in diverse areas, including trade and investment, defence and security, education and research, science and technology, agri-tech, space, mobility of people and sports.

    The Prime Ministers exchanged views on regional and global developments of mutual interest and agreed to strengthen multilateral cooperation. The Prime Ministers recognised that we face an increasingly uncertain and dangerous world. They noted that, as maritime nations, India and New Zealand have a strong and common interest in an open, inclusive, stable and prosperous Indo-Pacific, where the rules-based international order is upheld.

    The Prime Ministers reaffirmed the right of freedom of navigation and overflight and other lawful uses of the seas in accordance with international law, particularly the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS). The Prime Ministers reaffirmed the need to pursue peaceful resolution of disputes in accordance with international law, particularly UNCLOS.

    The Prime Ministers noted with satisfaction the strong connections between the people of the two countries, with Indian-origin people making up almost six percent of New Zealand’s population. They appreciated the significant contribution of the Indian diaspora in New Zealand and their positive role in facilitating people-to-people ties between the two countries. Both leaders agreed on the significance of ensuring the safety and security of the Indian community, including students, in New Zealand, and of New Zealanders in India and visitors to India.

    Cooperation in trade, investment and financial matters:

    The Prime Ministers welcomed sustained trade and investment flows between India and New Zealand and called for further exploring the potential to expand bilateral trade. They encouraged businesses on both sides to cultivate links; explore emerging economic and investment opportunities to build upon the complementarities of the two economies.

    The Leaders called for greater two-way investment, reflective of the ongoing strong momentum in bilateral cooperation.

    The Prime Ministers agreed to enhance the trade and investment relationship between India and New Zealand to realise its untapped potential and to contribute to inclusive and sustainable economic growth.

    The Prime Ministers welcomed the launch of FTA negotiations for a balanced, ambitious, comprehensive, and mutually beneficial trade agreement to achieve deeper economic integration. The Leaders agreed that a comprehensive trade agreement offers a significant opportunity to enhance trade and economic cooperation. By leveraging each country’s strengths, addressing their respective concerns, and tackling challenges, a bilateral trade agreement can foster mutually beneficial trade and investment growth, ensuring equitable gains and complementarities for both sides. The Leaders committed to designate senior representatives to steer these negotiations to resolution as soon as reasonably possible.

     Within the context of FTA negotiations, the Leaders agreed to discussions between respective authorities on both sides to explore early implementation of cooperation in the digital payments sector.

    The Prime Ministers welcomed the signing of the Authorized Economic Operators Mutual Recognition Arrangement (AEO-MRA) under the aegis of the Customs Cooperation Arrangement (CCA) signed in 2024, which would facilitate easier movement of goods between the two countries by our respective trusted traders through close cooperation between customs authorities, thereby boosting bilateral trade.

    The Leaders welcomed new cooperation on horticulture and forestry, including: the signing of the Memorandum of Cooperation on Horticulture which would enhance bilateral cooperation by promoting knowledge and research exchanges, development of post-harvest and marketing infrastructure; and the signing of a Letter of Intent on Forestry Cooperation that encourages policy dialogues and technical exchanges.

    The Leaders recognized the positive role played by tourism in generating economic growth, increasing business engagements and generating greater understanding between people of the two countries. They welcomed the growing flows of tourists between India and New Zealand. They appreciated the update to the India-New Zealand Air Services Agreement and agreed to encourage their carriers for commencement of direct (non-stop) flight operations between the two countries.

    Political, defence and security cooperation:

    The Prime Ministers recognised the significance of parliamentary exchanges and encouraged regular visits of parliamentary delegations between the two countries.

    The Prime Ministers acknowledged the shared history of sacrifice of Indian and New Zealand service personnel who fought and served alongside one another around the world over the past century.

    The Prime Ministers welcomed sustained progress in defence engagements, including through participation in military exercises, staff college exchanges, regular port calls by naval ships, and exchange of high-level defence delegations. They recalled that the Indian Naval sailing vessel Tarini made a port call at Lyttelton, Christchurch, New Zealand in December 2024. They also referred to the upcoming port call in Mumbai by the Royal New Zealand Navy Ship HMNZS Te Kaha.

    Both Leaders welcomed the signing of the India-New Zealand Memorandum of Understanding for Defence Cooperation. This will further strengthen bilateral defence cooperation and establish regular bilateral defence engagement. Both sides noted the need for ensuring the safety and security of sea lanes of communication and agreed there needs to be regular dialogue to discuss enhancement of maritime safety.

    New Zealand welcomed India joining the Combined Maritimes Forces. Both Leaders welcomed advancement in defence ties during New Zealand command of Command Task Force 150.

    Both Leaders appreciated the regular training exchanges of officers, including at Defence Colleges on reciprocal basis. Both sides agreed for enhanced capacity building cooperation.

    Prime Minister Luxon expressed New Zealand’s interest in joining the Indo-Pacific Oceans Initiative (IPOI). Prime Minister Modi welcomed New Zealand into this partnership with like-minded countries which seek to manage, conserve and sustain the maritime domain. Further cooperation as maritime nations is also being explored between India and New Zealand with discussions taking place between experts on the National Maritime Heritage Complex (NMHC) which is being established at Lothal, Gujarat.

    Cooperation in science & technology and disaster management:

    The two Leaders noted the significance of research, scientific connections, technology partnerships and innovation as an important pillar of the bilateral partnership and called for exploring such opportunities in mutual interest. Both sides stressed the need for stronger collaboration to develop and commercialize technologies in identified areas through closer collaboration between businesses, and industries.

    The two sides recognized the challenges for their economies presented by climate change and the transition to low emissions climate resilient economies. Prime Minister Luxon welcomed India’s leadership in the International Solar Alliance (ISA) and reiterated New Zealand’s strong support as a member since 2024. Prime Minister Modi welcomed New Zealand joining the Coalition for Disaster Resilient Infrastructure (CDRI), which aims at making systems and infrastructure resilient in order to achieve the objectives of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), the Paris Climate Agreement and the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction.

    The two Leaders welcomed work towards a Memorandum of Cooperation on earthquake mitigation cooperation between relevant authorities of India and New Zealand, which would facilitate inter alia exchange of experiences in earthquake preparedness, emergency response mechanism, and capacity building.

    Education, mobility, sports and people to people ties:

    Both Prime Ministers agreed that there exists great potential to further strengthen the growing education and community links between India and New Zealand. They encouraged academic institutions of both countries to build future-oriented partnerships focused on areas of mutual interest including in areas of science, innovation, new and emerging technologies.

    The Leaders encouraged the creation of further opportunities for Indian students seeking quality education programmes in New Zealand. They noted the significance of skill development and mobility of skilled personnel to support expanded engagement in sectors, including science, innovation, and new and emerging technologies. The two Leaders agreed, within the context of the trade agreement negotiations, which the Leaders have agreed to launch, to also launch negotiations on an arrangement facilitating the mobility of professionals and skilled workers between the two countries, while also addressing the issue of irregular migration.

    The Leaders welcomed the signature of the refreshed Education Cooperation Arrangement between the Indian Ministry of Education and the New Zealand Ministry of Education. This Arrangement will facilitate the continued exchange of information on India’s and New Zealand’s respective education systems as the basis for strengthening the bilateral education relationship.

    The Leaders noted that India and New Zealand enjoy close sporting links, particularly in cricket, hockey and other Olympic sports. They welcomed the signing of the Memorandum of Cooperation on Sports to foster greater sporting engagement and collaboration between countries. They also welcomed the “Sporting Unity” events planned in 2026, to recognise and celebrate 100 years of sporting contact between India and New Zealand.

    The Prime Ministers acknowledged the importance of robust systems of traditional medicine in India and New Zealand, and welcomed discussions between experts, including science and research experts, on both sides to understand and explore possible areas of cooperation, including through sharing of information and best practices and visits of experts.

    Both Prime Ministers noted the growing interest among New Zealanders in Yoga and Indian music and dance, as well as the free observance of Indian festivals. They encouraged further promotion of bilateral ties including through music, dance, theatre, films, and festivals.

    Cooperation in regional and multilateral fora:

    Both Prime Ministers reaffirmed their commitment to supporting an open, inclusive, stable and prosperous Indo-Pacific where sovereignty and territorial integrity are respected.

    The Leaders noted cooperation between India and New Zealand in various regional fora, including ASEAN-led fora such as the East Asia Summit, the ASEAN Defence Ministers’ Meeting Plus and the ASEAN Regional Forum. The Leaders reaffirmed the importance of these regional bodies and ASEAN centrality for furthering security and prosperity of the Indo-Pacific region and emphasised the importance of all parties maintaining peace and stability in the region.

    Both Leaders emphasized on the importance of an effective multilateral system, centered on a United Nations that is reflective of contemporary realities, as a key factor in tackling global challenges. The two sides stressed the need for UN reforms, including of the Security Council through expansion in its membership, to make it more representative, credible and effective. New Zealand endorsed India’s candidature for permanent membership in a reformed UN Security Council. The two sides agreed to explore the possibility of extending mutual support to each other’s candidatures at the multilateral fora.

    Both Leaders emphasized the importance of upholding the global nuclear disarmament and non-proliferation regime, and acknowledged the value of India joining the Nuclear Suppliers Group in context of predictability for India’s clean energy goals and its non-proliferation credentials.

    Both Leaders reaffirmed their firm support for peace and stability in the Middle East and welcomed the agreement for the release of hostages and ceasefire of January 2025. They reiterated their call for continued negotiations to secure a permanent peace, which includes the release of all hostages and the rapid, safe and unimpeded humanitarian access throughout Gaza. Both Leaders stressed the importance of a negotiated two-State solution, leading to the establishment of a sovereign, viable and independent state of Palestine, and living within secure and mutually recognized borders, side by side in peace and security with Israel.

    The Leaders exchanged views on the war in Ukraine and expressed support for a just and lasting peace based on respect for international law, principles of the UN charter, and territorial integrity and sovereignty.

    The two Leaders reiterated their absolute condemnation of terrorism in all its forms and manifestations, and the use of terrorist proxies in cross-border terrorism. Both stressed the urgent need for all countries to take immediate, sustained, measurable, and concrete action against UN-proscribed terrorist organizations and individuals. They called for disrupting of terrorism financing networks and safe havens, dismantling of terror infrastructure, including online, and bringing perpetrators of terrorism to justice swiftly. The two leaders agreed to cooperate in combating terrorism and violent extremism through bilateral and multilateral mechanisms.

    The two Prime Ministers noted with satisfaction the progress in ongoing bilateral cooperation and reaffirmed their commitment to further strengthen and deepen the bilateral partnership for mutual benefit as well as for the benefit of the Indo-Pacific Region. They called for exploring the potential to deepen bilateral engagement and explore new avenues of cooperation, including in the fields of green and agriculture technologies.

    Prime Minister Luxon thanked Prime Minister Modi and the Government and the people of India for the warmth and hospitality extended to him and to the members of his delegation during his Official Visit to India. Prime Minister Luxon invited Prime Minister Modi to undertake a reciprocal visit to New Zealand.

     

    ***

    MJPS/ST

    (Release ID: 2111753) Visitor Counter : 107

    MIL OSI Asia Pacific News

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Luis de Guindos: Interview with The Sunday Times

    Source: European Central Bank

    Interview with Luis de Guindos, Vice-President of the ECB, conducted by Jon Ihle

    16 March 2025

    The progress of annual inflation, at least up until February, looked like it was going in the wrong direction. Are you still confident that it will converge towards 2% sometime this year?

    The disinflation process is on track. There was a small pick-up inflation in recent months, but this had been expected, mostly on account of unfavourable base effects in November, December and January.

    The main reason for our confidence that inflation will come down to 2% is that all indicators for services and underlying inflation are moving in the right direction. A very important one is compensation per employee. According to recent data and in line with our projections, wage growth is moderating, which will help services inflation to gradually decline.

    At the same time, we need to keep in mind that factors like tariffs and fiscal policy are causing a lot of uncertainty. But taking this into account, we are confident that headline inflation will converge on a sustainable basis towards our 2% medium-term target towards the end of this year or the beginning of next.

    Let’s talk about some of the factors in this uncertain environment. What are the specific factors that are influencing the Governing Council’s thinking about the rate path right now, and how has that changed since the start of the easing cycle?

    We have already reduced interest rates by a total of 150 basis points. This is what we refer to in our monetary policy statement as a “meaningfully less restrictive” stance than at the beginning of the cycle.

    Our projections now show that inflation will converge towards our target in the medium term. But again, we need to consider the uncertainty of the current environment, which is even higher than it was during the pandemic. For instance, our projections don’t include the definitive level of the tariffs imposed by the United States and its trade partners, since the current situation is so volatile.

    Nevertheless, we are confident that inflation is moving towards our target on a sustainable basis, for example due to the moderation in wage growth I mentioned earlier. Even energy prices, which had also resulted in a small pick-up in inflation, have started to decline.

    Markets in the last few weeks have had some very strong reactions to the external environment. I’m thinking of the increase in German bond yields, changing expectations for fewer rate cuts from the ECB and the stock market correction in the United States. Does any of that feed into the ECB’s thinking on the rate path?

    We look at a wide range of indicators, all of which have an impact on our analysis. These include the evolution of wages and of the economy in terms of domestic demand and growth. And we of course look at financing conditions, for which our bank lending survey is very useful.

    It’s true that bond yields have increased due to the new German Government’s budgetary plans and that we have seen a correction in US equities from very high levels. But we also need to try to look through the short-term evolution of markets and distinguish between short-term volatility and permanent or medium-term forces. If we were to be as volatile as the markets, that wouldn’t be very reassuring.

    You said the uncertainty now is even greater than during the pandemic. How would you characterise it? What are the big unknowns at the moment?

    First, the policies of the new US Administration. There’s a lot of talk about tariffs, but it’s not just about that. The new Administration has also been quite clear about deregulating banks, non-banks and crypto-assets. And beyond that, they have announced that they want to modify corporate tax, which could affect capital flows across the Atlantic. In general, what we’re seeing is that the new US Administration isn’t very open to continuing with multilateralism, which is about cooperation across jurisdictions and finding common solutions for common problems. This is a very important change, and a big source of uncertainty.

    Second, and as a result of the new Administration’s attitude towards defence, we have the European Commission’s proposal to increase national defence spending by 1.5% of GDP. This is certainly a decision in the right direction, and it will have an impact on the macroeconomic outlook. We don’t know enough details about the package to make an accurate assessment about its impact on the economy, but it will likely be positive for growth and have a limited impact on inflation.

    Let’s focus on defence. Are you comfortable with national budget rules being relaxed to accommodate more defence spending? Will you need to adjust your monetary policy as those changes in fiscal policy come through?

    We always take fiscal policy into account because it interacts with monetary policy. In this case, we need to know the concrete details of the package before we can make an accurate assessment. How will spending be distributed across items? In terms of economic impact, spending more on military wages is not the same as spending more on weapons. How much will be spent outside of the EU? How is it going to be financed? One part will be common debt, but the package is much larger than that. The rest could be covered by taxes or a reduction in public spending. All of these factors are important to know in order to assess the impact of the package on the economy.

    It looks like we may be moving closer towards a resolution of the war in Ukraine, or at least a ceasefire. Would that be beneficial for the euro area economy? Would it change anything of what you’ve outlined so far?

    From a human standpoint, a peace agreement would obviously be very positive. And in general, it would be beneficial for the economy as well. But we would need to see the exact terms of a potential settlement to know for sure.

    Turning to the United States, what role do you see for the ECB in terms of managing trade shocks and the overall approach of the Trump administration?

    We need to keep in mind that the current situation is very volatile. It seems like every day a new tariff is imposed or one that has already been announced is removed. Hopefully we’ll soon have more clarity on the US Administration’s plans for the time ahead.

    Obviously, a trade war would be a lose-lose situation for everybody. It would have a much worse impact on growth than on inflation. This is because increasing tariffs raises prices at first, but lower growth subsequently offsets this initial price increase. We also need to look not only at bilateral tariffs between the United States and Europe but also at what economists call “trade diversion”. This means that, for example, tariffs imposed by the United States on Chinese goods could redirect trade flows to Europe, along with whatever economic impact that may have.

    Once we have all the details of the final policies, we will be able to better assess their impact based on all these factors. We are now using a baseline scenario and several alternative scenarios with different trade distortions to try to calibrate the impact as best as we can.

    Another aspect of the uncertainty in the United States is the way Trump is changing the relationship of the White House to many of the independent agencies in Washington. One of those might be the Federal Reserve. What would it mean for the ECB if its independence were to erode under President Trump? Has that scenario been discussed at all in the Governing Council?

    No, we haven’t discussed that because we can’t imagine it happening. The independence of the Federal Reserve is enshrined in law. We will always defend the independence of central banks, which is crucial to ensure they can fulfil their mandates.

    There are a lot of question marks over the predictability of the United States. Does Europe need to start thinking about making the euro more of a global reserve currency, if the dollar becomes less reliable?

    The euro is already a reserve currency, and strengthening its role in that respect is not part of our mandate. But keeping inflation low, increasing the potential growth of the European economy, signalling openness to trade agreements with different jurisdictions and making the European Union a model for free trade all over the world – all of this would strengthen the role of the euro as a reserve currency.

    But do you see a need for Europe to step more into that role ahead of the United States?

    I wouldn’t make comparisons with the United States. What Europe should do is maintain the position that it has always had as an open economy, in favour of free trade, the free flow of capital and multilateralism.

    Earlier you said that a trade war would be very detrimental to growth, but we don’t know all the details yet. How has the ECB’s view on euro area growth evolved in the last few months?

    We have downgraded our growth outlook for 2025 and 2026 by 0.2 percentage points. There are two main drivers behind that downward revision. First, uncertainty about the economy in the coming months has clearly dented confidence, and this is having an impact on investment. And second, a possible trade war would reduce net exports.

    Philip Lane has said recently that the conditions in the euro area are right for a pick-up in household consumption. Do you share his optimism that it can increase and maybe drive economic growth?

    All the factors that Philip indicated are correct. Real wages have increased, inflation is declining, interest rates are coming down and financing conditions are better. But still, the reality is that consumption is not picking up.

    This is because consumers don’t always react to developments in their short-term real disposable income. They also consider what might happen with the economy over the medium term, which is clouded in uncertainty. The possibility of a trade war or wider geopolitical conflict has an impact on consumer confidence.

    Eventually, the increase in the factors that Philip pointed out will prevail. But right now, the lack of consumer confidence due to the uncertainty of the world economy is offsetting that effect.

    European households have enormous cash savings at the moment, especially since the pandemic. Christine Lagarde has spoken frequently about turning those cash savings into investment to drive innovation and growth. Are you optimistic that this can become a reality?

    The capital markets union is certainly very important, but looking at the current economic situation in Europe, it’s crucial to put structural reforms in place to make it more productive and competitive. This is also what the Letta and Draghi reports argued.

    Fully integrating the internal market will be key here. It’s very difficult to have a capital markets union if you don’t have an integrated economy for goods and services. There are certainly concrete actions we can take to complete the capital markets union, but we should also focus on removing the internal obstacles to a real single market in Europe.

    There are three key elements here: fully integrating the Single Market, completing the banking union and completing the capital markets union. We must make progress on these three elements in parallel; it will be very difficult to make progress on one of them in isolation.

    Which of those elements would you say the ECB has the most influence on? And what can it do?

    Our mandate is price stability, but we also have an advisory role and produce expert opinions. Our economists and researchers carry out a lot of analytical work on Europe. The European Council and the Commission listen to what we have to say, and we are also accountable to the European Parliament. So we continuously use our voice to make the points that we believe are key to making the European economy more productive and competitive.

    Are you happy with the levels of credit flow from European banks to households and businesses?

    They are on the rise, following the rate cuts and the improvement in financing conditions. Demand for credit is not very strong, at least from a corporate standpoint, although it’s gradually increasing. This has to do with the lack of investor confidence. If you have doubts about the future and you’re waiting to see what will happen with trade, fiscal policy and geopolitical risk, you don’t invest, so you also don’t borrow. But in the case of households, we have started to see a significant increase in demand for mortgages.

    Speaking of housing: in several countries of the euro area, housing is in crisis. There’s an undersupply, and financing isn’t available to everybody that wants to buy a house. Do you think at this stage, nearly 15 years after the financial crisis, that lending rules are still too tight? Have regulators overcorrected on capital rules for banks, harming consumers and households?

    The current situation is very different to the one that we had 15 years ago. As a finance minister in Spain, I was dealing with the burst of a big housing and credit bubble, similar to what we saw in Ireland. Now, residential real estate prices are a big problem, but the drivers aren’t the same as the ones we had back then. From a financing standpoint, the situation is very different because the banks’ solvency is not in question.

    That being said, current developments in house prices are having a very negative impact on young people, who have a lot of trouble accessing housing. In some countries, this may have to do with issues with the rental market and how it is regulated. Policies should be put in place to make housing, mainly in the rental market, much more affordable. At the European level, improving the performance of the rental market will be very important in the near future. We should foster common action to achieve this, because it’s a significant source of social upset.

    But this is for national governments to do, not the ECB. We do need to analyse the situation, however, because not all countries are in the same position with respect to their rental markets. And there are lessons to be learned from the policies some countries have put in place.

    MIL OSI Europe News

  • MIL-OSI Europe: AMENDMENTS 024-030 – JOINT MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION on continuing the unwavering EU support for Ukraine, after three years of Russia’s war of aggression – RC-B10-0156/2025(024-030)

    Source: European Parliament

    AMENDMENTS 024-030
    JOINT MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION
    pursuant to Rule 136(2) and (4) of the Rules of Procedure
    replacing the following motions:
    B10-0156/2025 (S&D)
    B10-0159/2025 (Verts/ALE)
    B10-0161/2025 (PPE)
    B10-0163/2025 (Renew)
    B10-0168/2025 (ECR)
    on continuing the unwavering EU support for Ukraine, after three years of Russia’s war of aggression
    (2025/2528(RSP))
    Michael Gahler, Andrzej Halicki, Sebastião Bugalho, David McAllister, Siegfried Mureşan, Željana Zovko, Isabel Wiseler-Lima, Nicolás Pascual de la Parte, Mika Aaltola, Wouter Beke, Krzysztof Brejza, Daniel Caspary, Lena Düpont, Mircea-Gheorghe Hava, Rasa Juknevičienė, Sandra Kalniete, Ondřej Kolář, Andrey Kovatchev, Miriam Lexmann, Reinhold Lopatka, Antonio López-Istúriz White, Danuše Nerudová, Mirosława Nykiel, Ana Miguel Pedro, Paulius Saudargas, Davor Ivo Stier, Michał Szczerba, Alice Teodorescu Måwe, Ingeborg Ter Laak, Riho Terras, Matej Tonin, Pekka Toveri, Inese Vaidere, Oliver Schenk
    on behalf of the PPE Group
    Yannis Maniatis, Nacho Sánchez Amor, Thijs Reuten
    on behalf of the S&D Group
    Adam Bielan, Jadwiga Wiśniewska, Rihards Kols, Ondřej Krutílek, Veronika Vrecionová, Cristian Terheş, Alexandr Vondra, Jaak Madison, Reinis Pozņaks, Sebastian Tynkkynen, Joachim Stanisław Brudziński, Małgorzata Gosiewska
    on behalf of the ECR Group
    Petras Auštrevičius, Abir Al-Sahlani, Malik Azmani, Dan Barna, Benoit Cassart, Olivier Chastel, Veronika Cifrová Ostrihoňová, Engin Eroglu, Gerben-Jan Gerbrandy, Karin Karlsbro, Ľubica Karvašová, Michał Kobosko, Nathalie Loiseau, Jan-Christoph Oetjen, Urmas Paet, Marie-Agnes Strack-Zimmermann, Eugen Tomac, Hilde Vautmans, Emma Wiesner, Lucia Yar, Dainius Žalimas, Moritz Körner
    on behalf of the Renew Group
    Villy Søvndal, Markéta Gregorová
    on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group
    Jonas Sjöstedt, Hanna Gedin, Per Clausen, Li Andersson, Jussi Saramo, Merja Kyllönen

    Source : © European Union, 2025 – EP

    MIL OSI Europe News

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Angelus of the Second Sunday of Lent

    Source: The Holy See

    The following is the text prepared by the Holy Father Francis for the Angelus of this second Sunday of Lent:

    Text prepared by the Holy Father

    Dear brothers and sisters, happy Sunday!
    Today, the second Sunday of Lent, the Gospel tells us about the Transfiguration of Jesus (Lk 9:28-36). Having climbed to the top of a mountain with Peter, James and John, Jesus immerses Himself in prayer and becomes radiant with light. In this way, He shows the disciples what is hidden behind the gestures He performs in their midst: the light of His infinite love.
    I am sharing these thoughts with you while I am facing a period of trial, and I join with so many brothers and sisters who are sick: fragile, at this time, like me. Our bodies are weak but, even like this, nothing can prevent us from loving, praying, giving ourselves, being for each other, in faith, shining signs of hope. How much light shines, in this sense, in hospitals and places of care! How much loving care illuminates the rooms, the corridors, the clinics, the places where the humblest services are performed! That is why I would like to invite you, today, to join me in praising the Lord, who never abandons us and who, in times of sorrow, places people beside us who reflect a ray of His love.
    I thank you all for your prayers, and I thank those who assist me with such dedication. I know that many children are praying for me; some of them came here today to “Gemelli” as a sign of closeness. Thank you, dearest children! The Pope loves you and is always waiting to meet you.
    Let us continue to pray for peace, especially in the countries wounded by war: tormented Ukraine, Palestine, Israel, Lebanon, Myanmar, Sudan, and the Democratic Republic of the Congo.
    And let us also pray for the Church, required to translate into concrete choices the discernment made in the recent Synodal Assembly. I thank the General Secretariat of the Synod, which over the coming three years will accompany the local Churches in this undertaking.
    May the Virgin Mary keep you and help you to be, like Her, bearers of Christ’s light and peace.

    MIL OSI Europe News

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Angelus – Pope Francis from the Gemelli Hospital: “I join with so many brothers and sisters who are sick: Our bodies are weak but, even like this, nothing can prevent us from loving and praying”

    Source: Agenzia Fides – MIL OSI

    Sunday, 16 March 2025

    Vatican Media

    Rome (Agenzia Fides) – In the Transfiguration, “Jesus shows the disciples what is hidden behind the gestures He performs in their midst: the light of His infinite love,” reads Pope Francis’s text for the Angelus prayer, published by the Vatican this Sunday, referring to the Gospel for the second Sunday of Lent.”I am sharing these thoughts with you,” the Pope writes, “while I am facing a period of trial, and I join with so many brothers and sisters who are sick: fragile, at this time, like me. Our bodies are weak but, even like this, nothing can prevent us from loving, praying, giving ourselves, being for each other, in faith, shining signs of hope.””How much light shines,” the Bishop of Rome continues in his reflections, “in this sense, in hospitals and places of care! How much loving care illuminates the rooms, the corridors, the clinics, the places where the humblest services are performed! That is why I would like to invite you, today, to join me in praising the Lord, who never abandons us and who, in times of sorrow, places people beside us who reflect a ray of His love.”The Pope, whose condition is slowly but steadily improving according to medical reports, thanks “everyone for your prayers” and, he writes, “those who assist me with such dedication. I know that many children are praying for me; some of them came here today to “Gemelli” as a sign of closeness. Thank you, dearest children! The Pope loves you and is always waiting to meet you.”In the morning, around 500 children gathered in the square forecourt of the Gemelli Hospital, where the statue of John Paul II stands. This was a delegation of children of many nationalities, supported by UNICEF and the Caritas office of the Diocese of Aversa, who expressed their affection for the Pope in this way.From the hospital, Pope Francis asked again to continue “to pray for peace, especially in the countries wounded by war: tormented Ukraine, Palestine, Israel, Lebanon, Myanmar, Sudan, and the Democratic Republic of the Congo”. (F.B.) (Agenzia Fides, 16/3/2025)
    Share:

    MIL OSI Europe News

  • MIL-Evening Report: Trump is surveying Australian academics about gender diversity and China – what does this mean for unis and their research?

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Brendan Walker-Munro, Senior Lecturer (Law), Southern Cross University

    Shortly after taking office, US President Donald Trump issued executive orders banning federal funding on so-called “woke” research.

    This is part of his broader ban on all diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) policies, grants and programs in the US government.

    These orders are massive in scope, impacting studies as varied as stroke recovery, computing and ancient languages.

    The impact in the United States so far has been dramatic. Some universities are already cutting student admissions and looking at ways to shed academic staff and researchers.

    Now the ban has impacted Australian researchers who have links to US government-funded projects. The Trump Administration is asking for information on how their research fits in with US foreign and domestic policy.

    What has happened?

    The US government has sent a 36-point questionnaire to some Australian researchers who are working on joint projects with US colleagues.

    ABC Radio National reports at least eight Australian universities are involved. Their research areas include foreign aid, medicine, vaccines and defence. The New York Times reports a similar document has also been sent to other overseas organisations with US funding links.

    The questions are wide-ranging and cover academics’ links to China as well as their projects’ focus on topics such as diversity, inclusion and gender identity, as well as climate change.

    Some of the specific questions include:

    Can you confirm that your organisation has not received ANY funding from PRC People’s Republic of China, Russia, Cuba or Iran?

    Can you confirm that this is no DEI [diversity, equity and inclusion] project or DEI elements of the project? [sic]

    Does this project take appropriate measures to protect women and to defend against gender ideology as defined in the below Executive Order?

    Can you confirm this is not a climate or “environmental justice” project or include such elements?

    The survey also covers issues such as secure borders with Mexico, ending government waste, terrorism, the war on opioids, and “eradicating anti-Christian bias”.

    Concern and anger

    In response, the Group of Eight (which represents Australia’s top research universities) and Australian Academy of Science have separately raised concerns with the Australian government about the survey and its impact on Australian research.

    The Group of Eight says the US has already suspended or terminated research grants with six of its eight member universities.

    The National Tertiary Education Union also labelled the survey “blatant foreign interference”.

    A spokesperson for Education Minister Jason Clare says Australia is
    “engaging with the US government to understand what these measures mean for future funding and collaboration”.

    Are Trump’s orders legal?

    Trump’s executive orders are currently the subject of numerous lawsuits in the US. Plaintiffs say Trump’s orders violate the First and Fifth Amendments – those dealing with protection of free speech, equal protection and “due process of law” when depriving a citizen of property.

    Whether Trump’s orders are legal or not is a tricky question, and will likely come down the judges hearing each case.

    In the meantime, US government agencies are withholding funding anyway. Reports also suggests Trump has instructed his administration to ignore court orders – hardly surprising, given Trump’s history of contempt of US courts.

    What does this mean for Australia?

    US involvement in Australian research is significant. According to the Academy of Science, US government research funding involving Australian research organisations was $A386 million in 2024.

    It is arguable Trump’s orders infringe Australian sovereignty. But the US has always had the capacity to interfere in Australian university research – it just hasn’t actually done it until now.

    Research contracts signed between universities and funding bodies can contain all kinds of requirements, so US law can end up applying to Australian researchers. When the AUKUS deal was announced in 2021, a huge question was how universities would comply with notoriously harsh US export control laws.

    The survey indicates it was issued by the US Office of Management and Budget and appears to be supported by the US CHIPS and Science Act (which authorises certain research investments) and National Science Foundation policies. So, while Australian researchers could potentially ignore these questionnaires, that would legally give a US funding body grounds to cancel the funding contract.

    Our foreign interference laws also weren’t designed for situations like this. Even if they did, Trump is the current head of the US government, and is likely to be immune from prosecution

    Statutory tests for foreign interference – including criteria that such acts are covert, and/or involve threats of harm – simply don’t apply to a US president like Trump.

    So legally, it doesn’t look like there is much Australia can do about Trump’s orders.

    What can Australia do?

    Some newly unemployed researchers are now poised to leave the US, taking their research with them. This poses a potential security risk, with countries such as China and Russia both keen to capitalise on Trump’s decisions.

    But other nations are also aware of the possibilities. The European Union has already offered displaced US scientists a more “sympathetic place to work”. South Korea and Canada are also marketing themselves as attractive options. Australia could follow suit.

    The federal government is currently doing a strategic review of Australia’s research and development system. This could make diversifying our research partners a national priority.

    This could include revisiting a 2023 decision, not to join Horizon Europe – the European Union’s key research fund.

    Either way, given such radical changes in the US, Australia needs to seriously reconsider how it is funding and structuring research.

    Brendan Walker-Munro has consulted for the Australian Strategic Policy Institute (ASPI) and the Independent National Security Legislation Monitor, and is also an Adjunct Expert Associate of the National Security College. He has received funding from the Social Cyber Institute and Active Cyber Defence Alliance.

    ref. Trump is surveying Australian academics about gender diversity and China – what does this mean for unis and their research? – https://theconversation.com/trump-is-surveying-australian-academics-about-gender-diversity-and-china-what-does-this-mean-for-unis-and-their-research-252282

    MIL OSI AnalysisEveningReport.nz

  • MIL-Evening Report: Australia’s defence – navigating US-China tensions in changing world

    SPECIAL REPORT: By Peter Cronau for Declassified Australia

    Australia is caught in a jam, between an assertive American ally and a bold Chinese trading partner. America is accelerating its pivot to the Indo-Pacific, building up its fighting forces and expanding its military bases.

    As Australia tries to navigate a pathway between America’s and Australia’s national interests, sometimes Australia’s national interest seems to submerge out of view.

    Admiral David Johnston, the Chief of the Australia’s Defence Force, is steering this ship as China flexes its muscle sending a small warship flotilla south to circumnavigate the continent.

    He has admitted that the first the Defence Force heard of a live-fire exercise by the three Chinese Navy ships sailing in the South Pacific east of Australia on February 21, was a phone call from the civilian Airservices Australia.

    “The absence of any advance notice to Australian authorities was a concern, notably, that the limited notice provided by the PLA could have unnecessarily increased the risk to aircraft and vessels in the area,” Johnston told Senate Estimates .

    Johnston was pressed to clarify how Defence first came to know of the live-fire drill: “Is it the case that Defence was only notified, via Virgin and Airservices Australia, 28 minutes [sic] after the firing window commenced?”

    To this, Admiral Johnston replied: “Yes.”

    If it happened as stated by the Admiral — that a live-fire exercise by the Chinese ships was undertaken and a warning notice was transmitted from the Chinese ships, all without being detected by Australian defence and surveillance assets — this is a defence failure of considerable significance.

    Sources with knowledge of Defence spoken to by Declassified Australia say that this is either a failure of surveillance, or a failure of communication, or even more far-reaching, a failure of US alliance cooperation.

    And from the very start the official facts became slippery.

    What did they know and when did they know it
    The first information passed on to Defence by Airservices Australia came from the pilot of a Virgin passenger jet passing overhead the flotilla in the Tasman Sea that had picked up the Chinese Navy VHF radio notification of an impending live-fire exercise.

    The radio transmission had advised the window for the live-fire drill commenced at 9.30am and would conclude at 3pm.

    We know this from testimony given to Senate Estimates by the head of Airservices Australia. He said Airservices was notified at 9.58am by an aviation control tower informed by the Virgin pilot. Two minutes later Airservices issued a “hazard alert” to commercial airlines in the area.

    The Headquarters of the Defence Force’s Joint Operations Command (HJOC), at Bungendore 30km east of Canberra, was then notified about the drill by Airservices at 10.08am, 38 minutes after the drill window had commenced.

    When questioned a few days later, Prime Minister Anthony Albanese appeared to try to cover for Defence’s apparent failure to detect the live-fire drill or the advisory transmission.

    “At around the same time, there were two areas of notification. One was from the New Zealand vessels that were tailing . ..  the [Chinese] vessels in the area by both sea and air,” Albanese stated. “So that occurred and at the same time through the channels that occur when something like this is occurring, Airservices got notified as well.”

    But the New Zealand Defence Force had not notified Defence “at the same time”. In fact it was not until 11.01am that an alert was received by Defence from the New Zealand Defence Force — 53 minutes after Defence HQ was told by Airservices and an hour and a half after the drill window had begun.

    The Chinese Navy’s stealth guided missile destroyer Zunyi, sailing south in the Coral Sea on February 15, 2025, in a photograph taken from a RAAF P-8A Poseidon surveillance plane. Image: Royal Australian Air Force/Declassified Australia

    Defence Minister Richard Marles later in a round-about way admitted on ABC Radio that it wasn’t the New Zealanders who informed Australia first: “Well, to be clear, we weren’t notified by China. I mean, we became aware of this during the course of the day.

    “What China did was put out a notification that it was intending to engage in live firing. By that I mean a broadcast that was picked up by airlines or literally planes that were commercial planes that were flying across the Tasman.”

    Later the Chinese Ambassador to Australia, Xiao Qian, told ABC that two live-fire training drills were carried out at sea on February 21 and 22, in accordance with international law and “after repeatedly issuing safety notices in advance”.

    Eyes and ears on ‘every move’
    It was expected the Chinese-navy flotilla would end its three week voyage around Australia on March 7, after a circumnavigation of the continent. That is not before finally passing at some distance the newly acquired US-UK nuclear submarine base at HMAS Stirling near Perth and the powerful US communications and surveillance base at North West Cape.

    Just as Australia spies on China to develop intelligence and targeting for a potential US war, China responds in kind, collecting data on US military and intelligence bases and facilities in Australia, as future targets should hostilities commence.

    The presence of the Chinese Navy ships that headed into the northern and eastern seas around Australia attracted the attention of the Defence Department ever since they first set off south through the Mindoro Strait in the Philippines and through the Indonesian archipelago from the South China Sea on February 3.

    “We are keeping a close watch on them and we will be making sure that we watch every move,” Marles stated in the week before the live-fire incident.

    “Just as they have a right to be in international waters . . .  we have a right to be prudent and to make sure that we are surveilling them, which is what we are doing.”

    Around 3500 km to the north, a week into the Chinese ships’ voyage, a spy flight by an RAAF P-8A Poseidon surveillance plane on February 11, in a disputed area of the South China Sea south of China’s Hainan Island, was warned off by a Chinese J-16 fighter jet.

    The Chinese Foreign Ministry responded to Australian protests claiming the Australian aircraft “deliberately intruded” into China’s claimed territorial airspace around the Paracel Islands without China’s permission, thereby “infringing on China’s sovereignty and endangering China’s national security”.

    Australia criticised the Chinese manoeuvre, defending the Australian flight saying it was “exercising the right to freedom of navigation and overflight in international waters and airspace”.

    Two days after the incident, the three Chinese ships on their way to Australian waters were taking different routes in beginning their own “right to freedom of navigation” in international waters off the Australian coast. The three ships formed up their mini flotilla in the Coral Sea as they turned south paralleling the Australian eastern coastline outside of territorial waters, and sometimes within Australia’s 200-nautical-mile (370 km) Exclusive Economic Zone.

    “Defence always monitors foreign military activity in proximity to Australia. This includes the Peoples Liberation Army-Navy (PLA-N) Task Group.” Admiral Johnston told Senate Estimates.

    “We have been monitoring the movement of the Task Group through its transit through Southeast Asia and we have observed the Task Group as it has come south through that region.”

    The Task Group was made up of a modern stealth guided missile destroyer Zunyi, the frigate Hengyang, and the Weishanhu, a 20,500 tonne supply ship carrying fuel, fresh water, cargo and ammunition. The Hengyang moved eastwards through the Torres Strait, while the Zunyi and Weishanhu passed south near Bougainville and Solomon Islands, meeting in the Coral Sea.

    This map indicates the routes taken by the three Chinese Navy ships on their “right to freedom of navigation” voyage in international waters circumnavigating Australia, with dates of way points indicated — from 3 February till 6 March 2025. Distances and locations are approximate. Image: Weibo/Declassified Australia

    As the Chinese ships moved near northern Australia and through the Coral Sea heading further south, the Defence Department deployed Navy and Air Force assets to watch over the ships. These included various RAN warships including the frigate HMAS Arunta and a RAAF P-8A Poseidon intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance plane.

    With unconfirmed reports a Chinese nuclear submarine may also be accompanying the surface ships, the monitoring may have also included one of the RAN’s Collins-class submarines, with their active range of sonar, radar and radio monitoring – however it is uncertain whether one was able to be made available from the fleet.

    “From the point of time the first of the vessels entered into our more immediate region, we have been conducting active surveillance of their activities,” the Defence chief confirmed.

    As the Chinese ships moved into the southern Tasman Sea, New Zealand navy ships joined in the monitoring alongside Australia’s Navy and Air Force.

    The range of signals intelligence (SIGINT) that theoretically can be intercepted emanating from a naval ship at sea includes encrypted data and voice satellite communications, ship-to-ship communications, aerial drone data and communications, as well as data of radar, gunnery, and weapon launches.

    There are a number of surveillance facilities in Australia that would have been able to be directed at the Chinese ships.

    Australian Signals Directorate’s (ASD) Shoal Bay Receiving Station outside of Darwin, picks up transmissions and data emanating from radio signals and satellite communications from Australia’s near north region. ASD’s Cocos Islands receiving station in the mid-Indian ocean would have been available too.

    The Jindalee Operational Radar Network (JORN) over-the-horizon radar network, spread across northern Australia, is an early warning system that monitors aircraft and ship movements across Australia’s north-western, northern, and north-eastern ocean areas — but its range off the eastern coast is not thought to presently reach further south than the sea off Mackay on the Queensland coast.

    Of land-based surveillance facilities, it is the American Pine Gap base that is believed to have the best capability of intercepting the ship’s radio communications in the Tasman Sea.

    Enter, Pine Gap and the Americans
    The US satellite surveillance base at Pine Gap in Central Australia is a US and Australian jointly-run satellite ground station. It is regarded as the most important such American satellite base outside of the USA.

    The spy base – Joint Defence Facility Pine Gap (JDFPG) – showing the north-eastern corner of the huge base with some 18 of the base’s now 45 satellite dishes and covered radomes visible. Image: Felicity Ruby/Declassified Australia

    The role of ASD in supporting the extensive US surveillance mission against China is increasingly valued by Australia’s large Five Eyes alliance partner.

    A Top Secret ‘Information Paper’, titled “NSA Intelligence Relationship with Australia”, leaked from the National Security Agency (NSA) by Edward Snowden and published by ABC’s Background Briefing, spells out the “close collaboration” between the NSA and ASD, in particular on China:

    “Increased emphasis on China will not only help ensure the security of Australia, but also synergize with the U.S. in its renewed emphasis on Asia and the Pacific . . .   Australia’s overall intelligence effort on China, as a target, is already significant and will increase.”

    The Pine Gap base, as further revealed in 2023 by Declassified Australia, is being used to collect signals intelligence and other data from the Israeli battlefield of Gaza, and also Ukraine and other global hotspots within view of the US spy satellites.

    It’s recently had a significant expansion (reported by this author in The Saturday Paper) which has seen its total of satellite dishes and radomes rapidly increase in just a few years from 35 to 45 to accommodate new heightened-capability surveillance satellites.

    Pine Gap base collects an enormous range and quantity of intelligence and data from thermal imaging satellites, photographic reconnaissance satellites, and signals intelligence (SIGINT) satellites, as expert researchers Des Ball, Bill Robinson and Richard Tanter of the Nautilus Institute have detailed.

    These SIGINT satellites intercept electronic communications and signals from ground-based sources, such as radio communications, telemetry, radar signals, satellite communications, microwave emissions, mobile phone signals, and geolocation data.

    Alliance priorities
    The US’s SIGINT satellites have a capability to detect and receive signals from VHF radio transmissions on or near the earth’s surface, but they need to be tasked to do so and appropriately targeted on the source of the transmission.

    For the Pine Gap base to intercept VHF radio signals from the Chinese Navy ships, the base would have needed to specifically realign one of those SIGINT satellites to provide coverage of the VHF signals in the Tasman Sea at the time of the Chinese ships’ passage. It is not known publicly if they did this, but they certainly have that capability.

    However, it is not only the VHF radio transmission that would have carried information about the live-firing exercise.

    Pine Gap would be able to monitor a range of other SIGINT transmissions from the Chinese ships. Details of the planning and preparations for the live-firing exercise would almost certainly have been transmitted over data and voice satellite communications, ship-to-ship communications, and even in the data of radar and gunnery operations.

    But it is here that there is another possibility for the failure.

    The Pine Gap base was built and exists to serve the national interests of the United States. The tasking of the surveillance satellites in range of Pine Gap base is generally not set by Australia, but is directed by United States’ agencies, the National Reconnaissance Office (NRO) together with the US Defense Department, the National Security Agency (NSA), and Central Intelligence Agency (CIA).

    Australia has learnt over time that US priorities may not be the same as Australia’s.

    Australian defence and intelligence services can request surveillance tasks to be added to the schedule, and would have been expected to have done so in order to target the southern leg of the Chinese Navy ships’ voyage, when the ships were out of the range of the JORN network.

    The military demands for satellite time can be excessive in times of heightened global conflict, as is the case now.

    Whether the Pine Gap base was devoting sufficient surveillance resources to monitoring the Chinese Navy ships, due to United States’ priorities in Europe, Russia, the Middle East, Africa, North Korea, and to our north in the South China Sea, is a relevant question.

    It can only be answered now by a formal government inquiry into what went on — preferably held in public by a parliamentary committee or separately commissioned inquiry. The sovereign defence of Australia failed in this incident and lessons need to be learned.

    Who knew and when did they know
    If the Pine Gap base had been monitoring the VHF radio band and heard the Chinese Navy live-fire alert, or had been monitoring other SIGINT transmissions to discover the live-fire drill, the normal procedure would be for the active surveillance team to inform a number of levels of senior officers, a former Defence official familiar with the process told Declassified Australia.

    Inside an operations room at the Australian Signals Directorate (ASD) head office at the Defence complex at Russell Hill in Canberra. Image: ADF/Declassified Australia

    Expected to be included in the information chain are the Australian Deputy-Chief of Facility at the US base, NSA liaison staff at the base, the Australian Signals Directorate head office at the Defence complex at Russell Hill in Canberra, the Defence Force’s Headquarters Joint Operations Command, in Bungendore, and the Chief of the Defence Force. From there the Defence Minister’s office would need to have been informed.

    As has been reported in media interviews and in testimony to the Senate Estimates hearings, it has been stated that Defence was not informed of the Chinese ships’ live-firing alert until a full 38 minutes after the drill window had commenced.

    The former Defence official told Declassified Australia it is vital the reason for the failure to detect the live-firing in a timely fashion is ascertained.

    Either the Australian Defence Force and US Pine Gap base were not effectively actively monitoring the Chinese flotilla at this time — and the reasons for that need to be examined — or they were, but the information gathered was somewhere stalled and not passed on to correct channels.

    If the evidence so far tendered by the Defence chief and the Minister is true, and it was not informed of the drill by any of its intelligence or surveillance assets before that phone call from Airservices Australia, the implications need to be seriously addressed.

    A final word
    In just a couple of weeks the whole Defence environment for Australia has changed, for the worse.

    The US military announces a drawdown in Europe and a new pivot to the Indo-Pacific. China shows Australia it can do tit-for-tat “navigational freedom” voyages close to the Australian coast. US intelligence support is withdrawn from Ukraine during the war. Australia discovers the AUKUS submarines’ arrival looks even more remote. The prime minister confuses the limited cover provided by the ANZUS treaty.

    Meanwhile, the US militarisation of Australia’s north continues at pace. At the same time a senior Pentagon official pressures Australia to massively increase defence spending. And now, the country’s defence intelligence system has experienced an unexplained major failure.

    Australia, it seems, is adrift in a sea of unpredictable global events and changing alliance priorities.

    Peter Cronau is an award-winning, investigative journalist, writer, and film-maker. His documentary, The Base: Pine Gap’s Role in US Warfighting, was broadcast on Australian ABC Radio National and featured on ABC News. He produced and directed the documentary film Drawing the Line, revealing details of Australian spying in East Timor, on ABC TV’s premier investigative programme Four Corners. He won the Gold Walkley Award in 2007 for a report he produced on an outbreak of political violence in East Timor. This article was first published by Declassified Australia and is republished here with the author’s permission.

    MIL OSI AnalysisEveningReport.nz

  • MIL-OSI USA News: SUNDAY SHOWS: American Strength Is Back Under President Trump

    Source: The White House

    This morning, the Trump Administration took to the TV networks to make clear to the country and world that American strength is back – and no longer will terrorist attacks on U.S. troops and vital international commerce be tolerated.

    Here’s what you missed:

    President Trump on Full Measure

    • On securing the border: “You just needed a new president … I said, ‘close the border’ — and they closed the border.”
    • On tariffs: “We have companies moving into the United States at levels that has never been seen before.”

    Secretary of State Marco Rubio on Face the Nation

    • On Houthi terrorist attacks in the Red Sea: “In the last 18 months, the Houthis have struck or attacked … the U.S. Navy 174 times, and 145 times, they’ve attacked commercial shipping. So, we basically have a band of pirates with guided precision anti-ship weaponry exacting a toll system in one of the most important shipping lanes in the world. That’s just not sustainable.”
    • On revoking visas for terrorist sympathizers: “When you apply to enter the United States and you get a visa, you are a guest … If you tell us when you apply for a visa, ‘I’m coming to the U.S. to participate in pro-Hamas events,’ that runs counter to the foreign policy interest of the United States … If you had told us you were going to do that, we never would have given you the visa.”
    • On tariffs: “I understand why these countries don’t like it — because the status quo of trade is good for them. It benefits them … We are going to set a new status quo … We have de-industrialized the United States of America. There are things we can no longer make.”

    Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth on Sunday Morning Futures

    • On U.S. strikes against Houthi terrorists: “An era of peace through strength is back … This campaign is about freedom of navigation and restoring deterrence … The minute the Houthis say ‘we’ll stop shooting at your ships, we’ll stop shooting at your drones,’ this campaign will end. But until then, it will be unrelenting.”
    • On President Trump’s agenda: “Shipbuilding, long-range munitions, hypersonics, long-range drones, a Golden Dome, southern border – the president has laid out very clearly his agenda to rebuild the U.S. military … We have revived the warrior ethos.”

    National Security Advisor Mike Waltz on This Week

    • On U.S. strikes against Houthi terrorists: “These were not pinprick, back and forth, what ultimately proved to be feckless attacks. This was an overwhelming response that actually targeted multiple Houthi leaders and took them out.”

    National Security Advisor Mike Waltz on Fox News Sunday

    • On negotiations for peace in Ukraine: “As both President Putin and Zelensky said on our first call just a few weeks ago, only President Trump could drive this to an end … We know who we’re dealing with on all sides.”

    Secretary of the Treasury Scott Bessent on Meet the Press

    • On President Trump’s economic agenda: “One week does not the market make… It would have been very easy for us to come in, run these reckless policies that have been happening before. We’ve got these large government deficits… We are bringing those down in a responsible way.”
    • On tariffs: “Chinese manufacturers will eat the price … I believe that the currency adjusts … If we’re de-regulating, if we’re getting energy prices down, then if we look across the spectrum, Americans will realize lower prices and better affordability.”

    Special Envoy Steve Witkoff on State of the Union

    • On negotiations to end the war in Ukraine: “Before this visit, there was another visit, and before that visit, the two sides were miles apart … The two sides are, today, a lot closer … We’ve narrowed the differences.”
    • On when a deal to end the war could be possible: “The president uses the timeframe weeks — and I don’t disagree with him. I am really hopeful that we’re going to see some real progress here.”
    • On dealing with Hamas: “What happened with the Houthis yesterday, what happened with our strike, ought to inform as to where we stand with the regard to terrorism and our tolerance level for terrorist actions — and I would encourage Hamas to get much more sensible.”

    Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt on Sunday Morning Futures

    • On securing our homeland: “The president signed a proclamation invoking the Alien Enemies Act against Tren de Aragua members who have invaded our country … The president invoked this authority to deport nearly 300 of them who are now in El Salvador, where they will be behind bars where they belong.”
    • On activist legal challenges: “President Trump is not shy of resistance … Clearly, there are left-wing activists who sit behind a bench in a courthouse who don’t like this president and his policies, but the fact is everything President Trump is doing is within his executive authority.”

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI China: China will continue to work closely with Jordan to promote common development: ambassador

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

    China will continue to work closely with Jordan to promote common development: ambassador

    AMMAN, March 16 — China will continue to work closely with Jordan to promote common development and contribute to regional and global peace, stability, and development, Chinese Ambassador to Jordan Chen Chuandong said here on Sunday.

    Chen made the remarks during a press conference held in Amman on the outcome of China’s recently concluded “two sessions” — the annual sessions of the National People’s Congress, China’s national legislature, and the National Committee of the Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference, the top political advisory body.

    Hailing the “strong complementarity” of both countries in economic structure and calling Jordan a “close partner,” Chen said some of China’s reform and development policies and measures are consistent with Jordan’s modernization drive.

    The Chinese ambassador called on Jordan to make use of Chinese exhibitions to promote its products, particularly dates and olive oil, emphasizing the vast opportunities for agricultural cooperation between the two countries.

    He stressed that China will uphold global governance based on extensive consultation, joint contribution, and shared benefits.

    This year, China will continue to offer initiatives and solutions for hot-spot issues, promote the political settlement of the Ukraine crisis, and strive for a comprehensive, just, and lasting solution to the Palestinian issue, contributing to peace and stability in the Middle East, he said.

    MIL OSI China News

  • MIL-Evening Report: Gains for Labor as they lead in three of last five polls

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Adrian Beaumont, Election Analyst (Psephologist) at The Conversation; and Honorary Associate, School of Mathematics and Statistics, The University of Melbourne

    A national Freshwater poll for The Financial Review, conducted March 13–15 from a sample of 1,051, gave the Coalition a 51–49 lead by respondent preferences, a one-point gain for Labor since the late February Freshwater poll.

    Primary votes were 39% Coalition (down two), 31% Labor (steady), 14% Greens (up one) and 16% for all Others (up one). By 2022 election preference flows, this would be about a 50–50 tie.

    Anthony Albanese’s net approval improved one point to -10, while Peter Dutton’s slid four points to -12. In the last two months, Albanese is up eight and Dutton down eight. It’s the first time since May 2024 that Albanese has had a better net approval than Dutton in this poll.

    Albanese led Dutton by 45.9–42.5 as preferred PM, his best lead in this poll since last September. By 42–40, respondents thought Dutton better suited to negotiate with US President Donald Trump than Albanese (47–36 in November).

    The Coalition leads on important issues, but Labor has gained seven points on economic management and three points on cost of living since February.

    There has been improvement for Labor across a range of polls in the last few weeks, and the graph below has Labor leads in three of the last five national polls (two YouGovs and a Morgan), with the Coalition still ahead in Newspoll and Freshwater.

    In analyst Kevin Bonham’s aggregate, Labor now leads by 50.5–49.5 using 2022 election flows, while it’s a 50–50 tie adjusting for a likely pro-Coalition shift in One Nation preferences.

    Last Wednesday Trump imposed 25% tariffs on steel and aluminium imports into the US, including on Australia. I believe this will assist Labor as the tariff imposition will appear unjustified to most Australians, and the Coalition is the more pro-Trump party. If the stock market continues to fall, this will undermine support for Trump’s economic agenda.

    Trump has been threatening Canada with tariffs for much longer than Australia, and the centre-left governing Liberals have surged back in the polls to a near-tie with the Conservatives from over 20 points behind, and have taken the lead since Mark Carney’s March 9 election as Liberal leader.

    Labor retains lead in YouGov

    A national YouGov poll, conducted March 7–13 from a sample of 1,526, gave Labor a 51–49 lead, unchanged from the February 28 to March 6 YouGov poll. YouGov is conducting weekly polls, and the previous poll was the first Labor lead in YouGov since July 2024.

    Primary votes were 36% Coalition (steady), 31% Labor (steady), 13.5% Greens (up 0.5), 7.5% One Nation (up 0.5), 1% Trumpet of Patriots (steady), 9% independents (down one) and 2% others (steady). YouGov is using weaker preference flows for Labor than occurred in 2022, and by 2022 flows Labor would have a lead above 52–48.

    Albanese’s net approval improved three points to -6, with 49% dissatisfied and 43% satisfied, while Dutton’s net approval slid two points to -6. Albanese led Dutton as better PM by an unchanged 45–39.

    Since the first weekly YouGov poll in late February, Albanese has gained six points on net approval while Dutton has slid four points. This is the first time Dutton has not had a better net approval than Albanese in YouGov since March 2024.

    On the ongoing conflict caused by Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, 69% of Australians thought we should stand with Ukraine President Zelensky, while 31% wanted us to stand with Trump.

    Labor regains lead in Morgan poll

    A national Morgan poll, conducted March 3–9 from a sample of 1,719, gave Labor a 51.5–48.5 lead by headline respondent preferences, a two-point gain for Labor since the February 24 to March 2 poll. This is Labor’s second lead in the last three Morgan polls, after they had trailed in this poll since November.

    Primary votes were 37% Coalition (down three), 30% Labor (up 1.5), 13.5% Greens (steady), 5% One Nation (up one), 10.5% independents (steady) and 4% others (up 0.5). By 2022 election flows, Labor led by 52–48, a two-point gain for Labor.

    By 51.5–33, respondents said the country was going in the wrong direction (52–31.5 previously). Morgan’s consumer confidence index was down 0.8 points to 86.9.

    Poll of teal-held seats has the teals struggling

    Freshwater took a poll for the News Corporation tabloids of six seats held by teal independents. These are Curtin in WA, Goldstein and Kooyong in Victoria and Mackellar, Warringah and Wentworth in NSW. The poll was conducted March 5–7 from an overall sample of 830.

    Across the six seats polled, the Liberals had a 51–49 lead, representing a 5% swing to the Liberals since the 2022 election. On these figures, the Liberals would gain four of these teal seats (Curtin, Goldstein, Kooyong and Mackellar).

    Primary votes were 41% Liberals (up two since 2022), 33% teals (steady), 7% Labor (down six), 7% Greens (down two) and 12% others (up six). Albanese and Dutton were tied at 39–39 on better PM. By 47–42, respondents opposed their local MP backing an Albanese Labor minority government.

    The YouGov MRP poll that was conducted between late January and mid-February from a sample of over 40,000 had all the teals holding their seats. At the March 8 Western Australian election, swings to the Liberals were lowest in affluent Perth seats.

    WA election late counting

    With 70% of enrolled voters counted for the WA election, the ABC is calling 43 of the 59 lower house seats for Labor, six for the Liberals, four for the Nationals and six seats remain undecided. The Poll Bludger has Labor ahead in 47 seats, with the Liberals and Nationals ahead in six seats each.

    On election night, it had appeared likely that an independent would win Labor-held Fremantle. However, the independent has performed badly on absent and postal votes, and Labor will retain.

    In the upper house, all 37 seats are elected by statewide proportional representation with preferences, and a quota for election is just 2.63%. With 63% of enrolled counted, Labor has 15.8 quotas, the Liberals 10.5, the Greens 4.1, the Nationals 2.1, One Nation 1.35, Legalise Cannabis and the Australian Christians 1.0 each, an independent group 0.48 and Animal Justice 0.43.

    On current figures, Labor will win 16 seats, the Liberals ten, the Greens four, the Nationals two, One Nation, Legalise Cannabis and the Christians one each and two seats are unclear (Liberals, independent group and Animal Justice contesting). Counting of absents in the lower house has hurt the Liberals, so their vote is likely to drop further. Labor and the Greens will have a combined upper house majority.

    Liberals hold Port Macquarie at NSW byelection

    A byelection occurred on Saturday in the New South Wales Liberal-held state seat of Port Macquarie. Labor did not contest after finishing third behind the Nationals and Liberals at the 2023 NSW election with 19.2%.

    With 59% of enrolled counted, The Poll Bludger is projecting that the Liberals will defeat the Nationals by 52.8–47.2, a 7.9% swing to the Nationals since 2023. Current primary votes are 34.2% Liberals (down 4.1%), 31.2% Nationals (up 5.5%), 12.8% for an independent (new), 10.7% Greens (up 3.7%) and 7.9% Legalise Cannabis (up 3.4%).

    Adrian Beaumont 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. Gains for Labor as they lead in three of last five polls – https://theconversation.com/gains-for-labor-as-they-lead-in-three-of-last-five-polls-252016

    MIL OSI AnalysisEveningReport.nz