NewzIntel.com

Category: Ukraine

  • MIL-OSI Europe: At a Glance – Plenary round-up – March 2025 – 14-03-2025

    Source: European Parliament 2

    The future of European Union defence unsurprisingly topped the March 2025 plenary session agenda. Members held a debate on Europe’s security architecture and the EU’s unwavering support for Ukraine, in the presence of the Presidents of the European Council, and European Commission. Debates also took place on the conclusions of the 6 March special European Council meeting and preparation of the regular meeting on 20 21 March 2025. Members marked International Women’s Day with addresses from guests representing European women fighting for freedom and peace: Sviatlana Tsikhanouskaya, leader of Belarus’ democratic forces; Palina Sharenda-Panasiuk, a former political prisoner in Belarus; Leniie Umerova, a Crimean Tatar activist; and Tata Kepler, Ukrainian medical volunteer and activist. Members also discussed Council and Commission statements on the Roadmap for Women’s Rights. Debates followed Council and Commission statements on the deteriorating situation in Gaza and secessionist threats in Bosnia and Herzegovina, the clean industrial deal, and action plans for the automotive industry and affordable energy. Debates looked at the Commission’s vision for agriculture and food, and the first ‘omnibus’ simplification proposals, as well as on supporting EU regions vulnerable to the effects of climate change; the social and employment aspects of restructuring processes; EU Consumers Day, and the European Schools Alliance.

    MIL OSI Europe News –

  • MIL-OSI Global: Saudi Arabia’s role as Ukraine war mediator advances Gulf nation’s diplomatic rehabilitation − and boosts its chances of a seat at the table should Iran-US talks resume

    Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Kristian Coates Ulrichsen, Fellow for the Middle East at the Baker Institute, Rice University

    Saudi Arabia is 2,000 miles from Ukraine and even more politically distant, so at first glance it might seem like it has nothing to do with the ongoing war there. But the Gulf state has emerged as a key intermediary in the most serious ceasefire negotiations since Russia invaded its neighbor three years ago.

    While it is U.S. officials who are undoubtedly leading the efforts for an agreement, it is the Saudi capital of Riyadh that has been staging the crucial talks.

    In a flurry of diplomatic activity on March 10, 2025, Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, the country’s top political authority, hosted separate meetings with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy and a U.S. delegation led by Secretary of State Marco Rubio and national security adviser Mike Waltz.

    The following day, senior Saudi officials facilitated face-to-face meetings between U.S. and Ukrainian delegations.

    The resulting agreement, which is now being mulled in Moscow, is all the more notable given that it followed a diplomatic breakdown just weeks before at the Oval Office between Zelenskyy, President Donald Trump and Vice President JD Vance.

    Whether the proposed interim 30-day ceasefire materializes is still uncertain. On March 14, Russian President Vladimir Putin said he agreed with the proposal in principle, but he added that a lot of the details needed to be sorted out.

    Should a deal be reached, there is every reason to believe it will be inked in Saudi Arabia, which has hosted not only the latest U.S.-Ukrainian talks but earlier rounds of high-level Russian-U.S. meetings.

    But why is a Gulf nation playing mediator in a conflict in Eastern Europe? As an expert on Saudi politics, I believe the answer to that lies in the kingdom’s diplomatic ambitions and its desire to present a more positive image to the world. And in the background is the goal of better positioning the nation in the event of diplomatic maneuvers in its own region, notably in regards to any talks between U.S. and Iran.

    The diplomatic convertion of MBS

    Saudi Arabia’s growing diplomatic role has been a feature of the kingdom’s foreign policy since 2022.

    Crown Prince Mohammed, who that year succeeded his father as prime minister, views Saudi Arabia as the convening power in the Arab and Islamic world.

    Accordingly, officials in the kingdom have been directed to lead regional diplomacy over a number of pressing issues, including the conflicts in Gaza and Sudan.

    At the same time, Saudis have started the process of reconciliation with Iran, which has long been perceived as the chief regional rival to Saudi influence.

    This turn to diplomacy marks a shift away from the confrontational policies adopted by the crown prince during his rise to power in Saudi Arabia between 2015 and 2018. Policies such as Saudi Arabia’s military intervention in Yemen, its blockade of Qatar, the detention of Lebanon’s Prime Minister Saad Hariri and the conversion of the Ritz-Carlton hotel in Riyadh into a makeshift prison all fed an image of the young prince as an impulsive decision-maker. Then in 2018 came the murder of journalist Jamal Khashoggi in the Saudi Consulate in Istanbul.

    This approach brought little in the way of stability. Rather, it left the country ensnared in an unwinnable war in Yemen, a fruitless row with Qatar, and diplomatic isolation by Western officials.

    A friend to Ukraine and Russia

    In regards to the war in Ukraine, Saudi Arabia’s intermediary role is helped by a perception of the kingdom as a neutral nation on the conflict.

    Saudi officials, in common with their counterparts in the other Gulf states, have long sought to avoid taking sides in the emerging era of great power competition and strategic rivalry. As such, the kingdom has maintained working relations with both Russia and pro-Western Ukraine since the outbreak of war in Europe.

    In 2022, for example, Saudi Arabia and Russia – both leaders of OPEC+ – coordinated oil production cuts to cushion Moscow from the effects of global sanctions the West imposed after it invaded Ukraine. Yet just months later, Saudi Arabia invited Zelenskyy to address an Arab League summit in the Saudi city of Jeddah.

    It was a prelude to a 2023 international summit, also in Jeddah, which brought together representatives from 40 countries to discuss the ongoing war.

    Despite failing to produce a breakthrough, the meeting illustrated the convening reach of the crown prince and his intention to act as a diplomatic go-between in the Ukraine-Russia war.

    Saudi Arabia and neighboring United Arab Emirates later facilitated occasional prisoner exchanges between the two countries – rare diplomatic successes in three years of conflict.

    Staging ground for diplomacy

    Direct engagement in high-stakes international diplomacy over the largest war in Europe since 1945 is undoubtedly a step up in Saudi ambitions. But the country’s efforts aren’t purely altruistic. Riyadh believes there’s mileage to be gained in such diplomatic endeavors.

    The advent of a Trump presidency has fit Saudi desires. Trump has made his desire to be seen as a dealmaker and peacemaker clear, but he needs a neutral venue in which the hard work of diplomacy can flourish.

    Just weeks into the new U.S. administration, the Saudi capital hosted the first meeting between a U.S. secretary of state and Russian foreign minister since Russia invaded in 2022.

    It yielded an agreement to “re-establish the bilateral relationship” and establish a consultation mechanism to “address irritants” in ties.

    The two rounds of dialogue in Riyadh – first with Russia, then Ukraine – have positioned the Saudi leadership firmly in the diplomatic process. It has also gone some way to rehabilitate Mohammed bin Salman’s image.

    The sight of the crown prince warmly greeting Zelenskyy contrasted sharply with the images from a fractious White House meeting that went around the world, presenting the crown prince as a statesmanlike figure.

    Turning to Tehran

    Such positive optics would have seemed inconceivable as recently as 2019, when the crown prince was shunned and then presidential candidate Joe Biden labeled the country a “pariah” state.

    Changing this negative global perception of Saudi Arabia is crucial if the kingdom is to attract the tens of millions of visitors that are pivotal to the success of the “giga-projects” – sports, culture and tourism events that the Saudis hope will drive its economy and allow the kingdom to be less economically dependent on fossil fuel exports.

    Whereas easing tensions with Iran and supporting Yemen’s fragile truce are about derisking the kingdom’s vulnerability to regional volatility, facilitating diplomacy over Ukraine is a relatively cost-free way to reinforce the changing narratives about Saudi Arabia.

    After all, any breakdown in the Russia-U.S.-Ukraine negotiations is unlikely to be blamed on the Saudis.

    Indeed, Saudi officials may view their engagement with U.S. officials over Ukraine as the prelude to further diplomatic cooperation. And this will be especially true if Crown Prince Mohammed is able to establish himself as an indispensable partner in the eyes of Trump.

    Saudi officials were excluded from the last major talks between Iran and the U.S., which also involved several other major world powers and led to the 2016 Iran nuclear deal. Trump withdrew from the deal shortly after assuming office for the first time in 2017, and U.S.-Iranian relations have been moribund since then.

    The U.S. administration has already mooted the idea of a resumption of negotiations with Tehran over its nuclear capabilities.

    Placing Saudi Arabia in the middle of any attempts to secure a new nuclear agreement that would replace or supersede that earlier deal would be a high-risk move, given the intensity of feeling on both the U.S. and Iranian sides and the uneasy coexistence between Tehran and Riyadh.

    But doing so would give the kingdom what it most desires: a seat at the table.

    Kristian Coates Ulrichsen 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. Saudi Arabia’s role as Ukraine war mediator advances Gulf nation’s diplomatic rehabilitation − and boosts its chances of a seat at the table should Iran-US talks resume – https://theconversation.com/saudi-arabias-role-as-ukraine-war-mediator-advances-gulf-nations-diplomatic-rehabilitation-and-boosts-its-chances-of-a-seat-at-the-table-should-iran-us-talks-resume-252035

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI USA News: Remarks by President Trump and NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte Before Bilateral Meeting

    Source: The White House

    class=”has-text-align-center”>Oval Office

    12:33 P.M. EDT

         PRESIDENT TRUMP:  Hello, everybody.  It’s great to be with a friend of mine, who was prime minister of the Netherlands, so I got to know him very well.  We had a great relationship always.

    SECRETARY GENERAL RUTTE:  Absolutely.

    PRESIDENT TRUMP:  Mark Rutte.  Now he’s secretary general of NATO and doing a fantastic job.  Everybody — every report I’ve gotten is what a great job he did.  And I’m not at all surprised when I hear it.  We had to support him, and we supported him as soon as I heard the name.  

    SECRETARY GENERAL RUTTE:  Thank you.

    PRESIDENT TRUMP:  But he was a fantastic prime minister, and he’s doing a fantastic job. An even tougher job.  Which is tougher: being the prime minister of Netherlands or?

    SECRETARY GENERAL RUTTE:  This job is quite tough.  Yeah.  (Laughter.)

    PRESIDENT TRUMP:  I would think this is a little tougher.

    SECRETARY GENERAL RUTTE:  But — but Dutch politics is also brutal.  So — (laughter).

    PRESIDENT TRUMP:  Yeah.  But this is pretty tough. 

    SECRETARY GENERAL RUTTE:  Yeah.

    PRESIDENT TRUMP:  But you’re doing good. 

    SECRETARY GENERAL RUTTE:  Thank you.

    PRESIDENT TRUMP:  We’re going to be discussing a lot of things.  Obviously, we’ll be discussing what’s happening with respect to Ukraine and Russia. 

    At this moment, we have people talking in Russia.  We have representatives over there — Steve Witkoff and others.  And they’re in very serious discussions.  As you know, Ukraine has agreed, subject to this — what’s happening today — to a complete ceasefire, and we hope Russia will do the same. 

    Thousands of people are being killed — young people, usually, mostly young people.  We were just talking about it.  Thousands of young people are being killed a week, and we want to see that stop.  And they’re not Americans, and they’re not from the Netherlands for the most part.

    SECRETARY GENERAL RUTTE:  No.

    PRESIDENT TRUMP:  They’re not from — they’re from Russia and they’re from Ukraine, but they’re people.  And I think everybody feels the same way.  We want it to stop.

    It’s also a tremendous cost to the United States and to other countries.  And it’s something that would have never happened if I were president, and it makes me very angry to see that it did happen.  But it happened, and we have to stop it.  

    And Mark has done some really good work over the last week.  We’ve been working together, and he’s done some really good work.  So, I’m very happy about that. 

    We’ll also be talking about trade and various other things, and I think we’ll have a very, very strong day.  We’re going to have lunch afterwards.  That’ll go.  And then we’ll see you all later. 

    But, Mark, would you like to say something?

    SECRETARY GENERAL RUTTE:  Yeah.  First of all, thank you so much, Mr. President, dear Donald, again for hosting me and — but also for taking time in Florida a couple of weeks after you —

    PRESIDENT TRUMP:  Right.  That’s right.

    SECRETARY GENERAL RUTTE:  — you were reelected. 

    PRESIDENT TRUMP:  That’s right.

    SECRETARY GENERAL RUTTE:  And, of course, our phone call a couple of weeks ago.  And I must say, Trump 45 — you basically — you originated the fact that in Europe we are now spending, when you take it to aggregate, $700 billion more on defense —

    PRESIDENT TRUMP:  Yeah.

    SECRETARY GENERAL RUTTE:  — than when you came in office in 2016 — in 2017.

    But that was Trump 45.  But when look at Trump 47 —

    PRESIDENT TRUMP:  Going to be hard to top.  (Laughter.)

    SECRETARY GENERAL RUTTE:  — what happened the last couple of weeks is really staggering.  The Europeans committing to a package of $800 billion defense spending.  The Germans now —

    PRESIDENT TRUMP:  Yeah.

    SECRETARY GENERAL RUTTE:  — potentially up to half a trillion extra in defense spending.  And then, of course, you have Keir Starmer here, the British prime minister, and others all committing to much higher defense spending.  

    They’re not there.  We need to do more.  But I really want to work together with you in a run-up to The Hague summit to make sure that we will have a NATO which is really reinvigorated under your leadership.  And we are getting there.  

    We also discussed defense production, because we need to produce more weaponry.  We are not doing enough — not in the U.S., not in Europe.  And we are lagging behind when you compare to the Russians and the Chinese.  And you have a huge defense industrial base, Europeans buying mo- — four times more here than the other — the other way around, which is good, because you have a strong defense industry. 

    But we need to do more there to make sure that we ramp up production and kill the red tape.  So, I would love to work with you on that. 

    And finally, Ukraine — you broke the deadlock.  As you said, all the killing, the young people dying, cities getting destroyed.  The fact that you did that, that you started the dialogue with the Russians and the successful talks in Saudi Arabia now with the Ukrainians — I really want to commend you for this.

    So, well, The Hague is my hometown.  I’d love to host you there in the summer and work together to make sure that —

    PRESIDENT TRUMP:  We’ll do that.

    SECRETARY GENERAL RUTTE:  — that will be a splash, a real success, projecting American power on the world stage. 

    PRESIDENT TRUMP:  What Mark is saying is: When I first went to NATO, my first meeting, I noticed that very few people were paying.  And if they were, they weren’t paying their fair share.  There were only seven countries that were paying what they were supposed to be paying, which was —

    SECRETARY GENERAL RUTTE:  It’s even worse, there were three.

    PRESIDENT TRUMP:  Yeah.

    SECRETARY GENERAL RUTTE:  That’s even worse.

    PRESIDENT TRUMP:  It could be even worse. 

    SECRETARY GENERAL RUTTE:  Yeah.

    PRESIDENT TRUMP:  But there were just very few countries that were paying.  And even the paying, it was at 2 percent, which is too low.  It should be higher.  It should be quite a bit higher.

    But you had Poland and I remember Poland was actually paying a little bit more than they were supposed to, which I was very impressed with.  And they’ve been actually terrific and some of the others.  But most of them weren’t paying or they were paying very little.  

    And I didn’t think it was appropriate to bring it up there, but I said, “It’s going to be brought up at my next meeting.”  And my next meeting — you know, the first meeting, you want to give them a little break.  The second meeting, it began.

    And I was able to raise —

    SECRETARY GENERAL RUTTE:  You did.  (Laughs.)

    PRESIDENT TRUMP:  — hundreds of billions of dollars.  I just said, “We’re not going to be involved with you if you’re not going to pay.”  And the money started pouring in.  And NATO became much stronger because of my actions and working along with a lot of people, including Mark.

    But they would not pay for other presidents.  I don’t think other presidents even knew that they weren’t paid.  I asked, first question, “Has everybody paid up?”  And literally, I mean, they showed — they told me seven.  You could be right.  It could be three.  But — that makes it even worse — but they just weren’t paying. 

    And I said, “No, I won’t protect if you’re not paying.  If you’re delinquent or if the money isn’t paid, why would we do that?”

    And as soon as I said that, got a little hit from the press, because they said, “Oh, gee, that’s not very nice.”  But if you said the other, nobody would have paid.  And the money started coming in by the billions.  

    And, you know, hundreds of billions of dollars flowed into NATO, and NATO became strong.

    SECRETARY GENERAL RUTTE:  Yeah.

    PRESIDENT TRUMP:  And you remember that.  And your predecessor, who I thought was a very good man actually.

    SECRETARY GENERAL RUTTE:  Absolutely.  Jens Stoltenberg.  He sends his best greetings.

    PRESIDENT TRUMP:  Yeah.  He was terrific.

    SECRETARY GENERAL RUTTE:  Yeah.

    PRESIDENT TRUMP:  Stoltenberg, secretary general.

    SECRETARY GENERAL RUTTE:  Great man.

    PRESIDENT TRUMP:  And he made the statement that when Trump came in, the money started coming in like we never saw before.  Hundreds of billions — it was actually probably close to $600 billion came in.  And NATO became strong from that standpoint.

    And now, we have to use it wisely.  And we have to get this war over with.  And you’ll be back to a normal — much more normal life. 

    And maybe we’re close.  We’re getting words that things are going okay in Russia, and it doesn’t mean anything until we hear what the final outcome is. 

    But they have very serious discussions going on right now with President Putin and others.  And hopefully, they all want to end this nightmare.  It’s a nightmare.  It’s a horrible thing, when you look.  I get pictures every week.  They give me the pictures of the battlefield, which I almost don’t want to see.  It’s so horrible to see.

    SECRETARY GENERAL RUTTE:  It’s so terrible.

    PRESIDENT TRUMP:  Young people laying — arms and legs and heads laying all over the field.  It’s the most terrible thing that you’ll ever see. 

    And it’s got to stop.  These are young people with mothers and fathers and sisters and brothers and friends, and it’s got to stop. 

    So, we hopefully are going to be in a good position sometime today to have a good idea.  We’ll have — we know where we are with Ukraine, and we are getting good signals outside of Russia as to where we are with Russia, and hopefully they’ll do the right thing.  

    It’s a really — humanity — we’re talking about humanity.  We’re not talking about the money.  But then you add the money to it, and, you know, hundreds of billions of dollars is being spent and, really, wasted so unnecessarily.  It should have never happened.  

    So, it’s an honor to have you here.  They picked a great gentleman.  I’ll tell you, that was — I was so happy to hear, because you had somebody — Stoltenberg was really good.  And you have somebody that’s going to do an incredible job.  And I was so much in favor of you, you have no idea. 

    They had another person that I did not like.  (Laughter.)  I was not happy.  And I think I kept him from — you know what I’m talking about.  I said, “This is the right man to do it.”  And he really did.  He was a great prime minister of the Netherlands.  He did a great job.  And that’s what he’s doing right now. 

    So, thank you, everybody, for being here.  And very great honor to have you.  And we even have some of our great energy people here today, right?  We have the governor, and we have Chris.  You know Chris.

    SECRETARY GENERAL RUTTE:  Yeah.  Absolutely.

    PRESIDENT TRUMP:  He’s supposed to be the most talented man in the world of energy, according to the governor.  (Laughter.)  So, I don’t know if he’s right.

    And we have — General, you’ve been fantastic.  Thank you very much. 

    And we have a lot of good people that won’t be so much involved with this, but they wanted to see what was happening.  It’s become a little bit of a show — (laughter) — but they wanted to see what was happening.  And I think a lot of good things are happening.  

    So, with that, if anybody would have a question.

    (Cross-talk.) 

    Q    Mr. President, o- — on Russia. 

    PRESIDENT TRUMP:  Please, go ahead.

    Q    Vlad- —

         Q    Sorry.  Sorry, Mary.  Steve Witkoff’s trip to Moscow, you spoke about it.  What sort of agreement do you hope he comes away from there with?

    PRESIDENT TRUMP:  Well, we’d like to see a ceasefire from Russia.  And we have, you know, not been working in the dark.  We’ve been discussing with Ukraine land and pieces of land that would be kept and lost and all of the other elements of a final agreement.  

    There’s a power plant involved — you know, a very big power plant involved.  Who’s going to get the power plant and who’s going to get this and that.  And so, you know, it’s not an easy process.

    But phase one is the ceasefire.  A lot of the individual subjects have been discussed, though.  You know, we’ve been discussing concepts of land, because you don’t want to waste time with the ceasefire if it’s not going to mean anything.  So, we’re saying, “Look, this is what you can get.  This is what you can’t get.” 

    They discussed NATO and being in NATO, and everybody knows what the answer to that is.  They’ve known that answer for 40 years, in all fairness. 

    So, a lot of the details of a final agreement have actually been discussed.  Now we’re going to see whether or not Russia is there, and if they’re not, it’ll be a very disappointing moment for the world. 

    Yeah. 

    Q    And Vladimir Putin just said he is open to a ceasefire, but he does still have some concerns.  He suggested that you two should speak directly.  Do you have plans to speak to him soon?  If so, when?

    PRESIDENT TRUMP:  Well, I would.  Yeah, sure.

    Q    And are you confident you can get this across the finish line?

    PRESIDENT TRUMP:  Sure.  He did say that today.  It was a very promising statement, because other people are saying different things, and you don’t know if they have anything to really — if they have any meaning, or I don’t know.  I think some of them were making statements.  I don’t think they have anything to do with it.

    No, he put out a very promising statement, but it wasn’t complete.  And, yeah, I’d love to meet with him or talk to him, but we have to get it over with fast.  You know, every day people are being killed.  It’s not like — as we sit here, two people will be killed.  Think of it.  Two people are going to be killed during this little period of time. 

         Thousands of people a week are dying, so we really don’t have very much time.  We have to make this fast.  It shouldn’t be very complicated.

    (Cross-talk.) 

    Yes.

    Q    Thank you, Mr. President.  A representative of Canada, the finance minister, are in town and will meet members of your administration during the day. 

    PRESIDENT TRUMP:  Sure.  Yeah.

    Q    Any chances that you will ban on the tariffs on aluminum and — and the — the ones that are planned for April 2nd?

    PRESIDENT TRUMP:  No.

    Q    You are not going to change your mind? 

    PRESIDENT TRUMP:  No, I’m not.  Look, we’ve been ripped off for years, and we’re not going to be ripped off anymore.  No, I’m not going to bend at all on aluminum or steel or cars.  We’re not going to bend.  We’ve been ripped off as a country for many, many years.  We’ve been subjected to costs that we shouldn’t be subjected to. 

    In the case of Canada, we’re spending $200 billion a year to subsidize Canada.  I love Canada.  I love the people of Canada. I have many friends in Canada.  “The Great One,” Wayne Gretzky, the great.  Hey, how good is Wayne Gretzky?  He’s the Great One.  

    But we have — I know many people from Canada that are good friends of mine.  But, you know, the United States can’t subsidize a country for $200 billion a year.  We don’t need their cars.  We don’t need their energy.  We don’t need their lumber.  We don’t need anything that they give. 

    We do it because we want to be helpful, but it comes a point when you just can’t do that.  You have to run your own country.  And to be honest with you, Canada only works as a state.  We don’t need anything they have.  As a state, it would be one of the great states anywhere.  

    This would be the most incredible country visually.  If you look at a map, they drew an artificial line right through it — between Canada and the U.S.  Just a straight artificial line.  Somebody did it a long time ago — many, many decades ago — and makes no sense.  

    It’s so perfect as a great and cherished state, keeping “O Canada,” the national anthem.  I love it.  I think it’s great.  Keep it, but it’ll be for the state.  One of our greatest states.  Maybe our greatest state.  

    But why should we subsidize another country for $200 billion?  It costs us $200 billion a year.  And again, we don’t need their lumber.  We don’t need their energy.  We have more than they do.  We don’t need anything.  We don’t need their cars.  I’d much rather make the cars here.  

    And there’s not a thing that we need.  Now, there’ll be a little disruption, but it won’t be very long.  But they need us.  We really don’t need them.  And we have to do this.  I’m sorry, we have to do this.  

    Yes. 

    Q    Mr. President — 

    PRESIDENT TRUMP:  Yeah. 

    Q    — you have made it very clear that NATO needs to step up, although great progress —

    PRESIDENT TRUMP:  Yeah.

    Q    — has been made in your first mandate.  How do you envision this new transatlantic —

    PRESIDENT TRUMP:  Are you talking about NATO stepping up?

    Q    Yes.

    PRESIDENT TRUMP:  Well, NATO is stepping up through this man. This man is a man that only knows how to step up.  And we have the same goal in mind: We want the war ended.  And he’s doing his job.  He only knows how to do a good job.  That’s one thing.  That’s why I fought for him to get that job —

    SECRETARY GENERAL RUTTE:  Thank you so much.

    PRESIDENT TRUMP:  — because they had some other candidates that I’ll tell you would not have done a very good job.

    SECRETARY GENERAL RUTTE:  I need this part of the — of the movie for my family.  (Laughter.)

         PRESIDENT TRUMP:  That’s right.  That’s right.  We’ll get you a clip. 

         SECRETARY GENERAL RUTTE:  Yeah.  Exactly.  (Laughs.)

         PRESIDENT TRUMP:  We’re going to get him a clip of that — of that little last essay.  But the rest of the statements he doesn’t care about.

    Q    Sir, how does this new transatlantic cooperation — how do you envision it?  What is it going to look like?

    PRESIDENT TRUMP:  Well, we have — that’s one thing.  I mean, you know, we’re the other side of the ocean, and they’re right there.  And yet, we’re in for $350 billion because of Biden, and they’re in for $100 billion.  So, it’s a big difference, and it’s unfair.  

    And I said, “You have to equalize.”  They should equalize.  They should have — it should have never happened, where Biden just gave his money away. 

    Now, as you know, we have an agreement with Ukraine on the rare earths and other things, and that’ll get us

    something back — a lot back.  It’ll get us our money back.  We’re not doing it for that, though.  We’re doing — I’m just doing this to get the war stopped.  I’m doing it, really, to save lives.

    But, at the same time, we were treated very unfairly, as we always are by every country.  And we’re in for very substantially more than the European nations are in for, and that shouldn’t be.

    You know, they’re much more affected by it than we are, because we do have an ocean in between. 

    But I don’t know.  I think good things are going to happen.  I really do.  I think good things are going to happen. 

    I do say — we were talking before, and Mark was very nice.  He said, “If you wouldn’t get involved, there would be” — you’d just be going on.

    SECRETARY GENERAL RUTTE:  Yeah.

    PRESIDENT TRUMP:  This thing would have gone on for a long time.

    SECRETARY GENERAL RUTTE:  Breaking a deadlock.  It was crucial.

    PRESIDENT TRUMP:  Yeah, we broke a deadlock. 

    SECRETARY GENERAL RUTTE:  Yeah. 

    PRESIDENT TRUMP:  We did break a deadlock.  I hope it’s meaningful. 

    SECRETARY GENERAL RUTTE:  Yeah. 

    PRESIDENT TRUMP:  Yes, did you have one?

    Q    Mr. President — 

    PRESIDENT TRUMP:  Yeah, please.

    Q    Yes, sir.  Thank you, Mr. President.  Amanda Head with Just the News.  On the southern border, you’ve got DHS and ICE, who are reporting that there was a little bit of fudging of numbers during the Biden administration —

    PRESIDENT TRUMP:  Yeah.

    Q    — on both the catch and the release side with respect to reporting the number of illegals coming into the country who were released.

    PRESIDENT TRUMP:  They cheated on the numbers.  They were — the numbers were — I love that question.

    Q    Right.

    PRESIDENT TRUMP:  Who are you with?

    Q    Just the News.  Amanda Head.

    PRESIDENT TRUMP:  Very nice.  That’s good.  That’s good.

    Q    Do you know how many of those are criminal illegal aliens? 

    PRESIDENT TRUMP:  Many of them.

    Q    And Biden is out of office —

    PRESIDENT TRUMP:   Yeah.

    Q    — Alejandro Mayorkas.  Who gets held accountable?

    PRESIDENT TRUMP:  No, Biden fudged the numbers.  The numbers were totally fake, and he gave fake numbers.  I knew they were fake.  Everybody knew they were fake, but now it came out.  And terrible what — what they did.  That administration was a horror show for this country.

    Q    Can you hold anyone accountable?

    PRESIDENT TRUMP:  Well, I don’t know.  They gave phony numbers, and phony numbers are a very bad thing to give.  But I’m not sure about that.  I don’t know how it would play.  We want to get it straightened out.  

    We have — we’re after many, many bad people that were let into our country.  And Kristi Noem and my friend Homan — how good is Tom Homan doing, right?  And they’re after them.  And they — I mean, you see: They’re taking them out in record numbers.  Gang members, gang leaders, drug dealers. 

    This is a problem the Netherlands does not have.  The Netherlands never had this problem.  If you’d like to take —

    SECRETARY GENERAL RUTTE:  We have a few drug- — drug dealers, I’m afraid.  (Laughter.)

    PRESIDENT TRUMP:  I could deliver some people.  I could deliver some nice people to the Netherlands if you’d like.  (Laughter.)

    SECRETARY GENERAL RUTTE:  I’m not sure.  (Laughs.)

    PRESIDENT TRUMP:  No, what he did to this country, letting 21 million people flow through an open border — many of those people were hard criminals from prisons and jails, from mental institutions, and I always say “insane asylums,” because they were seriously deranged.  And they’re here from not South America, from all over the world.  From South America, but from all over the world.  And it’s so sad. 

    You’d say, “Why would anybody do this?  Why?”

    Yeah, go ahead.

    Q    And — and one more.  There’s some new internal Democrat polling that doesn’t look great for Democrats, but it also has 54 percent unfavorability for Republicans in swing states and battlegrounds for the midterms.  Do you consider those voters cap- — capturable for — for Republicans?

    PRESIDENT TRUMP:  Yeah, well, we did — you know, I won every swing state, as you know, by a lot, and I won the popular vote by a lot, and we won the counties.  If you look at the counties and district plan, we had 2,725, and they had 501.  That’s a real — that’s why the map is all red.  So, we had a great thing.

    Yeah, I think winning from the Democrats — I saw — if you looked the other night, I made a speech, and I introduced two young ladies who were killed.  Two killed.  Viciously, violently killed.  Young.  Unbelievable.  Both outstanding people.  They were killed by illegal aliens.  And the Democrats wouldn’t get up and applaud.  The mothers were, I mean, inconsolable.  They were crying, and everybody was crying.  The Democrats sat there with stone faces.  They didn’t clap, they didn’t stand, they didn’t do anything.  

    We had a young man with very serious cancer, wanted to — his dream is to be with the police department someday, and he was introduced. 

    SECRETARY GENERAL RUTTE:  That was very touching.

    PRESIDENT TRUMP:  They didn’t even clap.

    SECRETARY GENERAL RUTTE:  Yeah, I saw it.

    PRESIDENT TRUMP:  I mean, they were disgusting.  Frankly, they were disgusting.  There’s something wrong with them.  They’re deranged.  They’re deranged.  Like Jack Smith, they’re deranged people. 

    And I never saw anything like it.  I’m standing up, and I introduce the mother and the parents of these two young girls that were just recently, essentially, killed.  Violently killed.  And the Democrats are like this.  It’s so sad.  

    And I saw this morning where — one of them is pretty well-known — one is arguing, fighting like crazy over men being able to play in women’s sports.  I said, “Yeah, I thought that was tried.”  I thought that was about a 95 — I think it’s a 95 percent issue.  

    But, in a way, I want them to keep doing it, because I don’t think they can win a race.  I mean — and I tell the Republicans, I said, “Don’t bring that subject up, because there’s no election right now.  But about a week before the election, bring it up, because you can’t lose.”  

    And everything is “transgender this, transgender that.”  You know, they have bad politics. 

    But one thing: They stick together.  You know?

    I wish — and the Republicans stick together, mostly, but we have a couple that are grandstanders.  You know, you always have grandstanders in life.

    But the Democrats, they don’t seem — they have grandstanders, but when it comes to a vote, they do stick together, right?

    VICE PRESIDENT VANCE:  They get in line.  Yes, sir.

    PRESIDENT TRUMP:  So.

    Q    It seems like they’ll stick together on the shutdown.  Will that hurt Democrats going into midterms?

    PRESIDENT TRUMP:  Well, if they do a shutdown and, ultimately, that might lead to very, very high taxes, because we’re talking about a shutdown.  We’re talking about getting to work immediately on the greatest tax bill ever passed.  That was the one we did.  It’s a renewal, and it’s an addition to it.  And we’re going to cut people’s taxes. 

    And if we don’t open, the Democrats are stopping all of these good things that we’re providing.  We’re providing the greatest package of benefits that this country has ever provided. 

    The biggest part of that’s going to be tax cuts for the middle class and for businesses, small businesses, employers — people that hire people and jobs. 

    And if it’s shut down, it’s only going to be — if there’s a shutdown, it’s only because of the Democrats, and they would really be taking away a lot from our country and from the people of our country.

    Q    Mr. President, on — on tariffs.  You made clear you’re not backing down from this, but many American small-business owners say they are concerned that these tariffs are going to hurt them.  What’s your message to them?

    PRESIDENT TRUMP:  They’re going to be so much richer than they are right now.

    And we have many — yesterday, General Motors was in.  They want to invest $60 billion.  The people from Facebook were in yesterday.  They’re going to invest $60 billion by the end of the year.  Other people are talking about numbers.  

    Apple, as you know, a few days ago, announced $500 billion investment.  They’re going to build their plants in the United States, which, as you know, almost all of their plants are in China.  Now they’re building in the United States.

    Look, the reason is two things.  Number one, the election. November 5th.  And the other thing is tariffs.  I think, probably, in that order. 

    But Tim Cook came in and he announced 500 — think of it, $500 billion, not million.  Five hundred million is a lot, when you think about it, right?  But —

    VICE PRESIDENT VANCE:  Yes, sir.

    PRESIDENT TRUMP:  I would have been happy with $500 million.  But it’s $500 billion investment by Apple in the United States, and that’s because of the election result and it’s because of the tariffs and the tax incentives too.  You know, tariffs and tax incentives.  And I’ve never seen anything like it. 

    We have plants going up now in Indiana.  We have plants going up in Michigan.  A lot of plants going to be planned from — I’m trying to steer them to Michigan, because Michigan got so badly beaten by, you know, what happened with Europe.

    You know, if you look at Europe. Take a look at the EU.  We’re not allowed to sell cars there.  It’s prohibitive because of their policies, and also their nonmonetary tariffs.  They put obstacles in your way that you can do nothing about.  

    But if you take a look at what happens — so, we sell no cars to Europe — I mean, virtually no cars — and they sell millions of cars to us.  They don’t take our agriculture.  We take their agriculture. It’s like a one-way street with them.

    The European Union is very, very nasty. 

    They sue our companies.  Apple was forced to pay $16 billion on a case that — very much like my cases that I won.  They shouldn’t have been even cases.  But we felt they had no case, and they ended up having an extremely favorable judge and decision.  

    But they’re suing Google, they’re suing Facebook, they’re suing all of these companies, and they’re taking billions of dollars out of American companies, many more than the ones I just mentioned.  And I guess they’re using it to run Europe or something.  I don’t know what they’re using it for. 

    But they treat us very badly.  China obviously treats this very badly.  Almost everybody does.  And I blame past presidents, to be honest. 

    Because when I was president, I — we received, so far, about $700 billion from China, over the years, on the tariffs that I put in.  No other president got 10 cents from China.  And that was only beginning.  Except for COVID, it would have — I would have been able to finish the process.  But we had to fight the COVID thing, and we did really well with it.  But we had to fight.

    And then we had actually — as you remember, Mark, we actually handed over the stock market.  It was higher than just previous to COVID coming in, which was sort of a miracle, frankly.  We did a good job.

    But the tariffs are very important.  And I think the psychology — there’s great spirit.  When Mark came in, he said, “Congratulations.  There’s a whole new spirit.  There’s a whole new light over this country, and really over the world” —

    SECRETARY GENERAL RUTTE:  Yeah.

    PRESIDENT TRUMP:  — because you have somebody that — a whole group of people, really, because I talk about this whole group, that we know what we’re doing.  And a lot of great things are happening.

    But I’ve never seen investment like this.  Trillions of dollars is being invested in the United States now that would have never — our country could have failed.  Another four years of this, what happened in the last four years, our country would have been a crime-ridden mess.  

    And I don’t know if you noticed — a little thing, they call it, but it’s not a little thing if you don’t have — if you like eggs and you don’t have a lot of money — eggs have gone down 25 percent in the last couple of weeks.  We inherited that problem: eggs.  

    Groceries have gone down a little bit.  Energy has gone down. 

    Do you want to speak to that for a second, Governor?  Would you just say a couple of words, you and Chris, about energy, what’s happened?

    SECRETARY BURGUM:  Well, happy to, but I think that — Chris and I just came from CERAWeek, which is the largest conference in the world.  So, global leaders, people from the EU, officials from all the energy-producing countries all there.  And all the global nationals, all the U.S.  The — the spirit of that group is through the roof, because now they realize that in the United States, that President Trump’s policies are pro — pro developing more energy, as opposed to we’re trying to shut down energy.  

    And that pro-growth, pro-business, pro- — pro-energy approach is giving people the optimism.  So, then the markets are reacting to that, and energy prices on the futures market are going to go down because people know we’re — we’re not going to be killing off the energy we need for prosperity in all of our countries, but also for peace, because people have used energy to fuel these wars that President Trump is working so hard to end.  And — and we — we know that energy — high energy prices were driving the inflation that he talked about. 

    So, it accomplishes two goals for us — which is prosperity for the world, peace for the world — when we have smart energy policies.  And — and President Trump has brought common sense back to how we think about energy.

    PRESIDENT TRUMP:  And it’s brought down now $65 a barrel,  I saw this morning.  That’s phenomenal news, and that’s going to bring — that’s what brought it up.  The energy went — they took our beautiful energy policies and they just messed them up.  And then they went immediately back to them, because — but by that time, they lost it.  They lost that bronco, as the expression goes.

    Chris, do you have something to say?

    SECRETARY WRIGHT:  I think Doug said it well, but you just can’t overstate how important the return of common sense, the return of knowledge about energy and pro-American consumers, pro investment in our country.  I think, globally, that was welcomed.  It means capital flows.  It means more sobriety and lower energy prices, more economic opportunity for Americans. 

    So, yeah, it was elated atmosphere at a global energy conference. 

    PRESIDENT TRUMP:  Well, we’re working on one project, and it should be very easy.  It’s a pipeline going through a small section of New York.  New York has held it up for years, actually.  For years they’ve wanted to do it. For years and years.  And it will reduce — 

    The most expensive energy, almost, in the world is in New England, because they have no way of getting it there because it’s been held up by New York.  And the whole of New England and Connecticut and New York — the energy prices are through the roof.  And this one pipeline will save per family, $2,500 just on heating and another $2,500 on everything else.  So, the energy — by just a simple pipeline going through an area that wants it — an area that’s not a rich area; it’s actually a very poor area — would create jobs and everything else.

    And it’s going to be way underground.  Nobody’s going to see it.  Once they fill it up, nobody’s going to see it.  Nobody’s going to know it’s there. 

    And families in New York and Connecticut and New England are going to save $5,000 a family.  Think of that.  Because, right now, they have the highest energy prices maybe in the world, they say.  New England is a disaster.  

    So, we’re working on that.  In fact, the governor is coming in — governor of New York, Kathy Hochul, who’s a very nice woman.  She’s coming in tomorrow morning at 9 o’clock to meet me on that and other things — not only that, but other things.

    So, I hope we don’t have to use the extraordinary powers of the federal government to get it done, but if we have to, we will.  But I don’t think we’ll have to. 

    I can tell you, Connecticut wants it and all of New England wants it.  And who wouldn’t want it?  And it’s also jobs on top of everything else.  So, that’s going to be very exciting.  So, we’re meeting with the governor tomorrow morning. 

    (Cross-talk.)

    Yeah. 

    Q    Thank you, Mr. President.  Greenland.  What is your vision for the potential annexation of Greenland and getting them, potentially, to —

    PRESIDENT TRUMP:  Yeah.

    Q    — to statehood?

    PRESIDENT TRUMP:  Well, I think it’ll happen.  And I’m just thinking — I didn’t give it much thought before, but I’m sitting with a man that could be very instrumental.  You know, Mark, we need that for international security — not just security, international.  We have a lot of our favorite players, you know, cruising around the coast, and we have to be careful.  And we’ll be talking to you.

    And it’s a very appropriate — really, a very appropriate question. 

    SECRETARY GENERAL RUTTE:  It’s an —

    PRESIDENT TRUMP:  Thank you very much.

    SECRETARY GENERAL RUTTE:  — an issue in the high north, so the Arctic.  So, what you did —

    So, when it comes to Greenland, yes or no, joining the U.S., I would leave that outside, for me, this discussion, because I don’t want to drag NATO in that. 

    But when it comes to the high north in the Arctic, you are totally right.  The Chinese and — are using these routes.  We know that the Russians already arming.  We know we have a lack of icebreakers.  So, the fact that the seven — outside of Russia, there are seven Arctic countries — working together on this, under U.S. leadership — it’s very important to make sure that that region, that that a part of the world stays safe.  And — and we know things are changing there, and we have to be there.

    Q    Well, they just had an election there the other day.  I mean, do you see a referendum, a plebiscite where the people of Greenland would be in a position to decide if they want to become part of the United States? 

    PRESIDENT TRUMP:  Yeah, it was a good election for us, as you know.  It was not a referendum.  It wouldn’t be called that.  It was an individual election.  But the person that did the best is a very good person, as far as we’re concerned.  And so, we’ll be talking about it.  And it’s very important. 

    Mark mentioned the word “icebreaker.”  So, we’re in the process of ordering 48 icebreakers, and Canada wants to know if they could use them.  I said, “Well, you know, you got to pay for them.”  Think of it.  Canada.  We pay for their military.  You know, Canada pays very little for their military, because they think we’re going to protect them, but — even with the icebreakers. 

    So, we’re going to order 48, and Canada wants to be part of the deal.  I say, “You got to get your own icebreakers.  I mean, if you’re a state, you can be part of the deal, but if you’re a separate country, you’ve got to get your own icebreakers.”  

    Russia, as you know, has about 40 of them, and we have 1 big icebreaker.  But that whole area is becoming very important and for a lot of reasons.  The routes are, you know, very direct to Asia, to Russia, and you have ships all over the place.  And we have to have protection.  So, we’re going to have to make a deal on that.

    And Denmark is not able to do that.  You know, Denmark is very far away and really has nothing to do. 

    What happens?  A boat landed there 200 years ago or something, and they say they have rights to it.  I don’t know if that’s true.  I’m not — I don’t think it is, actually.

    But we’ve been dealing with Denmark.  We’ve been dealing with Greenland.  And we have to do it.  We really need it for national security.  I think that’s why NATO might have to get involved in a way, because we really need Greenland for national security.  It’s very important.  

    You know, we have a couple of bases on Greenland already, and we have quite a few soldiers that — maybe you’ll see more and more soldiers go there.  I don’t know.

    What do you think about that, Pete? Don’t answer that, Pete.  (Laughter.)  Don’t answer that question.  

    But we have bases, and we have quite a few soldiers on Greenland already. 

    Q    Mr. President, some people question your commitment to NATO.  Will everything — anything change?

    Your com- — your commitment to NATO, will anything change?  Same amount of money?

    PRESIDENT TRUMP:  Well, I think they made —

    Q    Same number of troops?

    PRESIDENT TRUMP:  — a great step by putting Mark in charge.  I think, to me, that’s a great step, because he and I have seen eye to eye on everything for a long time.  We’ve been doing this a long time now.

    SECRETARY GENERAL RUTTE:  Nine years now.

    PRESIDENT TRUMP:  And so, that’s a great step. 

    You have to keep NATO strong.  You have to keep it relevant. 

    But the biggest thing we have to worry about right now is what’s going on right now.  I think the rest is going to take care of itself. 

    I don’t see this having — this was a fluke.  This was something that if we had a competent president, it would not have happened.  The man was grossly incompetent.  All you have to do is look in — take a look at — he signs by autopen.

    Who was signing all this stuff by autopen?  Who would think you signed important documents by autopen?  You know, these are major documents you’re signing.  You’re proud to sign them.  You have your signature on something — in 300 years, they say, “Oh, look.”  Can you imagine?  Everything was signed by autopen — almost everything.  Nobody has ever heard of such a thing. 

    Q    Do you —

    PRESIDENT TRUMP:  So —

    Q    Sorry. 

    PRESIDENT TRUMP:  Should have never happened. 

    Q    You’re speaking tomorrow at the Justice Department about law and order.  Could you tell us a little bit about that? 

    PRESIDENT TRUMP:  Yeah, we’re going to be with the Justice Department.  We have a great Justice Department.  Pam Bondi is so fantastic.  And Todd Blanche and Emil — you got to know him a little bit; he was acting for a little while — and some other people are incredible in the Justice Department. 

    And I consider the FBI to be a part of it, in a sense, and Kash is going to be fantastic, and all the people he’s — Dan Bongino, I love that.  I mean, I love that.  I think Dan is great. 

    I think we have unbelievable people.  And all I’m going to do is set out my vision.  It’s going to be their vision, really, but it’s my ideas.  And basically, we don’t want to have crime in the streets.  We don’t want to have people pushed into subways and killed, and then the — the person that did the pushing ends up in a 15-year trial and gets off scot-free.  We want to have justice, and we want to have safety in our cities, as well as our communities. 

    And we’ll be talking about immigration.  We’ll be talking about a lot of things.  Just the complete gamut.  So, I look forward to that.  That will be tomorrow at the Justice Department. 

    Q    Mr. President, you are a man of peace.  You’ve said it several times and made it very clear.  A man of peace dealing with belligerent people. 

    PRESIDENT TRUMP:  Yeah.

    Q    And I’m thinking we saw you handled Zelenskyy in this very own room.  What is your leverage on Putin?  Are you thinking sanctions?  What if he refuses to —

    PRESIDENT TRUMP:  Well, I do have leverage, but I don’t want to talk about leverage now, because right now we’re talking to him.  And based on the statements he made today, they were pretty positive, I think, so I don’t want to talk about that.  

    I hope Russia is going to make the deal too.  And I think once that deal happens, you’re never going to be in a process.  I don’t think they’re going back to shooting again.  I really believe if we get a peace treaty, a ceasefire treaty, I think that leads to peace.  That’s going to really lead to a —

    I don’t think anyone wants to go back.  They’ve been doing this for a long time, and it’s vicious and violent.  And I think if President Putin agrees and does a ceasefire, I think we’re going to be in very good shape to get it done.  We want to get it over with.  That’s why — it was very important what I instructed everybody, including Steve, what we’re looking for: to discuss concepts of land, concepts of —

    MR. WALTZ:  Yes, sir.   

    PRESIDENT TRUMP:  — of power plants because it’s complicated.  You know, you have a whole — you’re sort of creating the edge of a country. 

    The sad part is that country, if they didn’t — if this didn’t happen — and it wouldn’t have happened — I don’t know if they would have to give anything back.  I guess Crimea? 

    You know, I said it last time, Crimea was given by Obama, Biden gave them the whole thing, and Bush gave them Georgia.  And Trump didn’t give them anything. 

    I gave them — you know what I gave them?  I gave them Javelins.  And the Javelins were very effective, as you know.  I gave them nothing —

    SECRETARY GENERAL RUTTE:  2019. 

    PRESIDENT TRUMP:  And then also, if you take a look, I was the one that stopped the pipeline going into Europe.  It was totally stopped: Nord Stream 2.  Nobody ever heard of Nord Stream 2 before I came along.

    But I got along very well with President Putin.  I got along with most of them.  I get along great with President Xi.  I got along great with Kim Jong Un.  I got along great with all of them.  And we had no wars.  We had no problems.  We wiped out ISIS in record time. General “Razin” Kane.  And he wiped them out. 

    And he is going to be our new chief, right?  He’s going to be —

    SECRETARY HEGSETH:  Yes, sir.

    PRESIDENT TRUMP:  — the head of Joint Chiefs of Staff, and he’s a highly respected man.  He’s going to be great. 

    Pete is going to be fantastic.  I have no doubt about it.  We have a great team.  A really great team. 

    Yeah, please.  Go ahead, please.

    Q    Mr. President, some of our allies have said that they’re worried that they could be the next to be attacked by Russia.  You’ve spoken directly with the Russian president.

    PRESIDENT TRUMP:  Yeah.

    Q    Do you think those fears are justified?

    PRESIDENT TRUMP:  No, I don’t.  I think when this gets done, it’s done.  They’re going to all want to go home and rest.  I don’t see it happening.  Nope, I don’t see that happening.  And we’ll make sure it doesn’t happen.  Not going to happen.  But we’ll make sure it doesn’t happen. 

    Yeah, go ahead, please. 

    Q    Leaders from Russia and Iran are heading to Beijing tomorrow to discuss nuclear programs.  What do you hope to get out of that?

    PRESIDENT TRUMP:  Well, maybe they’re going to talk about non-nuclear programs.  Maybe they’re going to be talking about the de-escalation of nuclear weapons, because, you know, I was talking about that with President Putin very strongly.  And we could have done something.  Had that election not been rigged, we would have had something.  I think I would have made a deal with Putin on de-escalation, denuclearization, as they say.  But we would have de-escalated nuclear weapons, because the power of nuclear weapons is so great and so devastating. 

    And, right now, Russia and us have by far the most, but China will catch us within five years.  China doesn’t have — but they’re in the process of building.

    SECRETARY GENERAL RUTTE:  Yeah.

    PRESIDENT TRUMP: And they build.  And within four or five years, they’ll probably have the same.

    SECRETARY GENERAL RUTTE:  And, by the way, you — this is a Republican tradition.  Ronald Reagan, when he negotiated with Gorbachev —

    PRESIDENT TRUMP:  Right. 

    SECRETARY GENERAL RUTTE:  — in the 1980s —

    PRESIDENT TRUMP:  That’s right.

    SECRETARY GENERAL RUTTE:  — about bringing down the number of nuclear weapons is what you have been doing your first term.  And it is important. 

    PRESIDENT TRUMP:  It would be a great achievement if we could bring down the number.  We have so many weapons, and the power is so great. 

    And we — number one, you don’t need them to that extent.  And then we’d have to get others, because, as you know, in a smaller way — Kim Jong Un has a lot of nuclear weapons, by the way — a lot — and others do also.  You have India.  You have Pakistan.  You have others that have them, and we’d get them involved. 

    But we started off with Russia and us.  We have, by far — actually, by far, the most.  And we were going to denuclearize, and that was going to happen. 

    And then we were going to China.  And I spoke to China.  I spoke to President Xi about it.  And he really liked the idea.  You know, he’d like not to spend trillions of dollars building weapons that, hopefully, he’s never going to have to use.  And — because they are very expensive also.  So, that would have been great. 

    Okay, one or two more. 

    (Cross-talk.)

    Yeah, go ahead.  

    Q    Thank you.  We are looking at an impending government shutdown Friday at midnight.

    PRESIDENT TRUMP:  Yeah. 

    Q    Democrats, for 30 years straight, have said, if there’s a shutdown, bad things happen.  Do you anticipate direct negotiations yourself with conference leader of the Democrats, Chuck Schumer?

         PRESIDENT TRUMP:  Yeah, if they need me, I’m there a hundred percent.  It’s — right now, it’s two or three people.  If it shuts down, it’s not the Republicans’ fault.  You know, we passed a bill where we had an incredible Republican vote.  We only had one negative vote, a grandstander.  You know, one grandstander.  There’s always a grandstander in the lot. 

         But it was amazing.  People were amazed that the Republicans were able to vote in unison like that so strongly. 

         If there’s a shutdown, even the Democrats admit it will be their fault.  And I’m hearing a lot of Democrats are going to vote for it, and I hope they do.  This is an extension. 

         But ultimately, we want to vote for one big, beautiful bill where we put the taxes in, we put everything in.  We’re going to have big tax cuts.  We’re going to have tremendous incentives for companies coming into our country and employing lots of people.  

         It’ll be — I called it, in a rare moment, one big, beautiful bill.  That’s what I like.  And it seems to be that’s where they’re heading.  And we’ll have to take care of something to do with Los Angeles. 

         A place called Los Angeles almost burned to the ground.  By the way, I broke into Los Angeles.  Can you believe it?  I had to break in. 

         SECRETARY GENERAL RUTTE:  Yeah?

         PRESIDENT TRUMP:  I invaded Los Angeles.  And we opened up the water, and the water is now flowing down.  They have so much water, they don’t know what to do.  They were sending it out to the Pacific for environmental reasons.  Okay?  Can you believe it?  And in the meantime, they lost 25,000 houses.  They lost — and nobody’s ever seen anything like it. 

         But we have the water.  I’d love to show you a picture.  You’ve seen the picture.  The water is flowing through the half pipes.  You know, we have the big half pipes that go down.  Used to — 25 years ago, they used to have plenty of water, but they turned it off for — again, for environmental reasons.  Well, I turned it on for environmental reasons and also fire reasons. 

         And I’ve been asking them to do that during my first term.  I said, “Do it.”  I didn’t think anything like — could happen like this, but they didn’t have enough water. 

         Now the farmers are going to have water for their land, and the water is in there. 

         But I actually had to break in.  We broke in to do it because we had people that were afraid to give water.

         SECRETARY GENERAL RUTTE:  Yeah.

         PRESIDENT TRUMP:  They were — in particular, they were trying to protect a certain little fish.  And I say, “How do you protect a fish if you don’t have water?”  They didn’t have any water, so they’re protecting a fish, and that didn’t work out too well, by the way.  

         So, they have a lot of water going down throughout California, all coming out from the Pacific Northwest, even some from Canada. 

         Thank you, Canada, very much.  I appreciate it. 

         Next thing you know, they’ll want to turn the water off.  They’ll want to charge us for the water.

         But it comes up from the Pacific Northwest, and it’s a beautiful thing to see.  I mean, it is brimming with water. 

         Now, if they would have had that done, you wouldn’t have had the damage, because the fire would have been put out.  The fire hydrants would have been loaded.  The sprinklers in people’s living rooms and bedrooms would have been loaded up with the — they had no water.  The government makes them put sprinklers in.  They had no water in the sprinklers because they had no water. 

         So, the water is flowing, and we’re going to have to give a lot of money to Los Angeles to help them, and the Democrats are going to want to do that.  So, that’s the one thing different. 

         And I frankly, I think that makes it a lot easier.  But one of the big thing is we have the big, beautiful bill.  We got to get that done.  And that will put our country in a position like it’s never been in. 

         It’s a reduction of taxes.  It’s tremendous incentives for companies to come from all over the world into our country.  It’s great environmentally, but it’s not this environmental scam that we went through — that we all went through.  It provides for everything.  

         It’s a big, beautiful bill, and I hope we can get it approved.  And that will be next. 

         But in the meantime, we have the continuing resolution, and the Republicans have approved it, and now the Democrats have to approve it.  And I hope they will. 

         And I think a lot of them — I can tell you, they want to.  I’ve spoken to some of them.  They really want to.  Their leadership may not want them to.  And if it closes, it’s purely on the Democrats. 

         All right, one more.

         Q    On Korea, sir.  We’ve seen tension increasing in the Peninsula.  You’ve talked about Kim Jong Un.  Do you have any plans of getting — of reestablishing the relationship you had during the first meeting?

         PRESIDENT TRUMP:  Yeah.  Well, I would.  I had a great relationship with Kim Jong Un, North Korea.  If I wasn’t elected, if Hillary got in, you would have had a nuclear war with North Korea.  He expected it.  He expected it.  And they said, “Oh, thousands of people.”  No, millions of people would have been killed.  

         But I got in.  We went to Singapore.  We met.  We went to — to Vietnam.  We met.  We got along really good.  We had a very good relationship.  And we still do.  We still do.  You don’t have that threat that you had.

         Q    You have talked with — have you talked to him?  

         PRESIDENT TRUMP:  I mean, look, when I was running the first time, it looked like there was going to be a war with North Korea.  You know that better than anyone.

         SECRETARY GENERAL RUTTE:  Tensions were high.  Yes.  Yeah.

         PRESIDENT TRUMP.  Yeah.  And it started off —

         SECRETARY GENERAL RUTTE:  And everybody was — was startled that you —

         PRESIDENT TRUMP:  Yeah.

         SECRETARY GENERAL RUTTE:  — invited him for talks. 

         PRESIDENT TRUMP:  Right.

         SECRETARY GENERAL RUTTE:  But you did, and it —

         PRESIDENT TRUMP:  It started out very rough.  

         SECRETARY GENERAL RUTTE:  Yeah.  Yeah.

         PRESIDENT TRUMP:  And he wouldn’t meet with Obama.  Wouldn’t take his calls.  I said, “How many times did you call?” They called a lot.  He wouldn’t take their call.  He told me, “I wouldn’t take his call.” 

         But with me, it did start off rough, if you remember.  Very rough, actually.  Very nasty.  And — 

         SECRETARY GENERAL RUTTE:  That was in Singapore, the first one?

         PRESIDENT TRUMP:  Yeah, but then — no, before that.  Then it stopped.  The rhetoric was extremely tough.  It was a little bit —

         SECRETARY GENERAL RUTTE:  You had it in your speech at the U.N. I remember.  (Laughs.)

         PRESIDENT TRUMP:  Yeah, that’s right.  It was a little bit dangerous.  

         And then we met.  They asked for a meeting, and then we met.  And the meeting caused the Olympics, which was in South Korea, to become a tremendous success.  Nobody was buying tickets for the Olympics because they didn’t want to be nuked.  

         And I met, and not only did the Olympics become successful, but North Korea participated in the Olympics.

         SECRETARY GENERAL RUTTE:  Yeah.  His sister visited.

         PRESIDENT TRUMP:  It was an amazing thing.

         SECRETARY GENERAL RUTTE:  Yeah.

         PRESIDENT TRUMP:  And that was something that was an achievement of the Trump administration. Great achievement.  And so, I have a great relationship with Kim Jong Un.  And we’ll see what happens. 

         But certainly, he’s a nuclear power.

         Okay?  Thank you very much, everybody.  Thank you.  Thank you very much.

                                      END            1:20 P.M. EDT

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI Canada: Joint statement of the G7 Foreign Ministers’ Meeting in Charlevoix

    Source: Government of Canada News

    March 14, 2025 – Charlevoix, Quebec – Global Affairs Canada

    1. We the G7 Foreign Ministers of Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the United Kingdom and the United States of America, and the High Representative of the European Union, met in Charlevoix on March 12 to 14, 2025.

    Ukraine’s long-term prosperity and security

    2. We reaffirmed our unwavering support for Ukraine in defending its territorial integrity and right to exist, and its freedom, sovereignty and independence.

    3. We welcomed ongoing efforts to achieve a ceasefire, and in particular the meeting on March 11 between the U.S. and Ukraine in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. We applauded Ukraine’s commitment to an immediate ceasefire, which is an essential step towards a comprehensive, just and lasting peace in line with the Charter of the United Nations.

    4. We called for Russia to reciprocate by agreeing to a ceasefire on equal terms and implementing it fully. We discussed imposing further costs on Russia in case such a ceasefire is not agreed, including through further sanctions, caps on oil prices, as well as additional support for Ukraine, and other means. This includes the use of extraordinary revenues stemming from immobilized Russian Sovereign Assets. We underlined the importance of confidence-building measures under a ceasefire including the release of prisoners of war and detainees—both military and civilian—and the return of Ukrainian children.

    5. We emphasized that any ceasefire must be respected and underscored the need for robust and credible security arrangements to ensure that Ukraine can deter and defend against any renewed acts of aggression. We stated that we will continue to coordinate economic and humanitarian support to promote the early recovery and reconstruction of Ukraine, including at the Ukraine Recovery Conference which will take place in Rome on July 10-11, 2025.

    6. We condemned the provision to Russia of military assistance by DPRK and Iran, and the provision of weapons and dual-use components by China, a decisive enabler of Russia’s war and of the reconstitution of Russia’s armed forces. We reiterated our intention to continue to take action against such third countries.

    7. We expressed alarm about the impacts of the war, especially on civilians and on civilian infrastructure. We discussed the importance of accountability and reaffirmed our commitment to work together to achieve a durable peace and to ensure that Ukraine remains democratic, free, strong and prosperous.   

    Regional peace and stability in the Middle East  

    8. We called for the release of all hostages and for the hostages’ remains held by Hamas in Gaza to be returned to their loved ones. We reaffirmed our support for the resumption of unhindered humanitarian aid into Gaza and for a permanent ceasefire. We underscored the imperative of a political horizon for the Palestinian people, achieved through a negotiated solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict that meets the legitimate needs and aspirations of both peoples and advances comprehensive Middle East peace, stability and prosperity. We noted serious concern over the growing tensions and hostilities in the West Bank and calls for de-escalation.

    9. We recognized Israel’s inherent right to defend itself consistent with international law. We unequivocally condemned Hamas, including for its brutal and unjustified terror attacks on October 7, 2023, and the harm inflicted on the hostages during their captivity and the violation of their dignity through the use of ‘handover ceremonies’ during their release. We reiterated that Hamas can have no role in Gaza’s future and must never again be a threat to Israel. We affirmed our readiness to engage with Arab partners on their proposals to chart a way forward on reconstruction in Gaza and build a lasting Israeli-Palestinian peace.

    10. We expressed our support for the people of Syria and Lebanon, as both countries work towards peaceful and stable political futures. At this critical juncture, we reiterated the importance of Syria’s and Lebanon’s sovereignty and territorial integrity. We called unequivocally for the rejection of terrorism in Syria. We condemned strongly the recent escalation of violence in the coastal regions of Syria, and called for the protection of civilians and for perpetrators of atrocities to be held accountable. We stressed the critical importance of an inclusive and Syrian-led political process. We welcomed the commitment by the Syrian interim government to work with the OPCW in eliminating all remaining chemical weapons.

    11. We stressed that Iran is the principal source of regional instability and must never be allowed to develop and acquire a nuclear weapon. We emphasized that Iran must now change course, de-escalate and choose diplomacy. We underscored the threat of Iran’s growing use of arbitrary detention and foreign assassination attempts as a tool of coercion.

    Cooperation to increase security and resilience across the Indo-Pacific  

    12. We reiterated our commitment to upholding a free, open, prosperous and secure Indo-Pacific, based on sovereignty, territorial integrity, peaceful resolution of disputes, fundamental freedoms and human rights.

    13. We remain seriously concerned by the situations in the East China Sea as well as the South China Sea and continue to oppose strongly unilateral attempts to change the status quo, in particular by force and coercion. We expressed concern over the increasing use of dangerous maneuvers and water cannons against Philippines and Vietnamese vessels as well as efforts to restrict freedom of navigation and overflight through militarization and coercion in the South China Sea, in violation of international law. We emphasized the importance of maintaining peace and stability across the Taiwan Strait. We encouraged the peaceful resolution of cross-Strait issues and reiterated our opposition to any unilateral attempts to change the status quo by force or coercion. We also expressed support for Taiwan’s meaningful participation in appropriate international organizations.  

    14. We remain concerned with China’s military build-up and the continued, rapid increase in China’s nuclear weapons arsenal. We called on China to engage in strategic risk reduction discussions and promote stability through transparency.

    15. We emphasized that China should not conduct or condone activities aimed at undermining the security and safety of our communities and the integrity of our democratic institutions.16. We expressed concerns about China’s non-market policies and practices that are leading to harmful overcapacity and market distortions. We further called on China to refrain from adopting export control measures that could lead to significant supply chain disruptions. We reiterated that we are not trying to harm China or thwart its economic growth, indeed a growing China that plays by international rules and norms would be of global interest.

    16. We demanded that the DPRK abandon all its nuclear weapons and any other weapons of mass destruction as well as ballistic missile programs in accordance with all relevant United Nations Security Council resolutions. We expressed our serious concerns over, and the need to address together, the DPRK’s cryptocurrency thefts. We called on DPRK to resolve the abductions issue immediately.

    17. We denounced the brutal repression of the people of Myanmar by the military regime and called for an end to all violence and for unhindered humanitarian access.

    Building stability and resilience in Haiti and Venezuela

    18. We strongly denounced the ongoing horrifying violence that continues to be perpetrated by gangs in Haiti in their efforts to seize control of the government. We reaffirmed our commitment to helping the Haitian people restore democracy, security and stability, including through support to the Haitian National Police and Kenya-led Multinational Security Support Mission and an increased role for the UN. We expressed support for Haitian authorities’ efforts to create a specialized anti-corruption jurisdiction that complies with the highest international standards.

    19. We reiterated our call for the restoration of democracy in Venezuela in line with the aspirations of the Venezuelan people who peacefully voted on July 28, 2024, for change, the cessation of repression and arbitrary or unjust detentions of peaceful protestors including youth by Nicolas Maduro’s regime, as well as the unconditional and immediate release of all political prisoners. We also agreed Venezuelan naval vessels threatening Guyana’s commercial vessels is unacceptable and an infringement of Guyana’s internationally recognized sovereign rights. We reaffirmed respect for the sovereignty and territorial integrity of all nations as an enduring value.

    Supporting lasting peace in Sudan and the Democratic Republic of the Congo

    20. We unequivocally denounced the ongoing fighting and atrocities in Sudan, including sexual violence against women and girls, which have led to the world’s largest humanitarian crisis and the spread of famine. We called for the warring parties to protect civilians, cease hostilities, and ensure unhindered humanitarian access, and urged external actors to end their support fueling the conflict.

    21. We condemned the Rwanda-backed M23 offensive in the eastern Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) and the resulting violence, displacement and grave human rights and international humanitarian law violations. This offensive constitutes a flagrant disregard of the territorial integrity of the DRC. We reiterated our call for M23 and the Rwanda Defence Force to withdraw from all controlled areas. We urged all parties to support the mediation led by the East African Community and the Southern African Development Community, to promote accountability for human rights abuses by all armed actors, including M23 and the FDLR, and to commit to a peaceful and negotiated resolution of the conflict, including the meaningful participation of women and youth.

    Strengthening sanctions and countering hybrid warfare and sabotage

    22. We welcomed efforts to strengthen the Sanctions Working Group focused on listings and enforcement. We also welcomed discussions on the establishment of a Hybrid Warfare and Sabotage Working Group, and of a Latin America Working Group.

    MIL OSI Canada News –

  • MIL-OSI Canada: G7 Foreign Ministers’ Declaration on Maritime Security and Prosperity

    Source: Government of Canada News

    March 14, 2025 – Charlevoix, Québec – Global Affairs Canada

    1. We, the Foreign Ministers of Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the United Kingdom, and the United States of America, and the High Representative of the European Union, reaffirm the G7’s steadfast commitment to contribute towards a free, open, and secure maritime domain based on the rule of law that strengthens international security, fosters economic prosperity, and ensures the sustainable use of marine resources.

    2. Maritime security and prosperity are fundamental to global stability, economic resilience, and the well-being of all nations, and the conservation and sustainable use of ocean ecosystems is essential to all life on Earth. Over 80% of global trade is transported by sea, and 97% of global data flows through submarine cables. Disruptions to maritime routes pose a direct threat to international food security, critical minerals, energy security, global supply chains, and economic stability. We express deep concern over the growing risks to maritime security, including strategic contestation, threats to freedom of navigation and overflight, and illicit shipping activities. State behaviour in these areas has increased the risk of conflict and environmental damage, and imperils all nations’ prosperity and living standards, especially for the world’s poorest. 

    3. We recognize the role of the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) as the legal framework for governing all activities in the oceans and the seas.

    4. We recall the G7 Statements on Maritime Security adopted in Lübeck (2015) and Hiroshima (2016). We welcome related work presently underway through other G7 ministerial tracks and working groups, on a range of issues including securing undersea cable networks and combating abandoned fishing gear. We welcome, as well, G7 work relating to transnational organized crime and terrorism that touches on the maritime domain, including in relation to piracy and armed robbery at sea, trafficking in persons, and strengthening the maritime law enforcement capabilities of coastal states. We acknowledge the importance of regional maritime security frameworks, to support coastal states to address collectively threats to their maritime security. We welcome existing initiatives, such as the G7++ Friends of the Gulf of Guinea (G7++ FoGG, that Canada chairs this year), which has been the primary forum for dialogue among G7 members and partners on maritime security in the Gulf of Guinea.

    Emerging Threat on Safe Seas and Freedom of Navigation and Overflight

    5. Enhancing Stability: We underscore the importance of freedom of navigation and overflight and other internationally lawful uses of the high seas and the exclusive economic zones as well as to the related rights and freedoms in other maritime zones, including the rights of innocent passage, transit passage and archipelagic sea lanes passage, as provided for under international law. We share a growing concern at recent, unjustifiable efforts to restrict such freedom and to expand jurisdiction through use of force and other forms of coercion, including across the Taiwan Strait, and the South China Sea, the Red Sea, and the Black Sea. We condemn China’s illicit, provocative, coercive and dangerous actions that seek unilaterally to alter the status quo in such a way as to risk undermining the stability of regions, including through land reclamations, and building of outposts, as well as their use for military purpose. In areas pending final delimitation, we underline the importance of coastal states refraining from unilateral actions that cause permanent physical change to the marine environment insofar as such actions jeopardize or hamper the reaching of the final agreement, as well as the importance of making every effort to enter into provisional arrangements of a practical nature, in those areas. We condemn, as well, dangerous vessel maneuvers, the indiscriminate attacks against commercial vessels and other maritime actions that undermine maritime order based on the rule of law and international law. We reiterate that the award rendered by the Arbitral Tribunal on 12 July 2016 is a significant milestone, which is legally binding upon the parties to those proceedings and a useful basis for peacefully resolving disputes between the parties. We reaffirm that our basic policies on Taiwan remain unchanged and emphasize the importance of peace and stability across the Taiwan Strait as indispensable to international security and prosperity. We welcome the resumption of exports from Ukraine’s Black Sea ports. Freedom of navigation for commercial shipping in the Black Sea must be upheld.

    6. Attempts to Change the Status Quo by Force: We oppose unilateral attempts to change the status quo, in particular by force or coercion including in the East and South China Seas. We undertake to implement means through which to track systematically and report on attempts to change the status quo by force and by the establishment of new geographical facts, including through coercive and dangerous actions on the oceans and seas that might threaten regional and international peace and security.

    7. Protecting Critical Maritime and Undersea Infrastructure: We are seized of the fact that vital energy and telecommunications infrastructure under the oceans and seas connects our economies and is vital to our prosperity. We recall the G7 Joint Statement on Cable Connectivity for Secure and Resilient Digital Communications Networks (2024) and the New York Joint Statement on the Security and Resilience of Undersea Cables in a Globally Digitalized World (2024). We share a growing concern that undersea communications cables, subsea interconnectors and other critical undersea infrastructure have been subject to critical damage through sabotage, poor seamanship or irresponsible behaviour which have resulted in potential internet or energy disruption in affected regions, delays in global data transmission, or compromised sensitive communications. We will enhance our cooperation with industry to mitigate risks, reduce bottlenecks to operational tasks while strengthening repair capacities in order to improve the overall resilience of critical undersea and maritime infrastructure. In this respect, we welcome the EU Action Plan on Cable Security adopted in February 2025 by the European Commission and the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy.

    8. Maritime Crime: Maritime crime, including piracy, armed robbery at sea, maritime arms trafficking and sanctions evasion, human trafficking, illegal drug trafficking and Illegal, Unreported, Unregulated (IUU) fishing, continues to impede maritime security, freedom of navigation, and our economy and prosperity. We have been working together to tackle these maritime crimes, but maritime illegal activities have extended into new areas, to become an urgent issue to be addressed. We welcome the G7 Action Plan to combat migrant smuggling adopted under Italy’s 2024 G7 Presidency.

    9. Protecting Freedom of Trade: In the past year, indiscriminate Houthi attacks in the Red Sea have endangered maritime security of vessels and their crews, disturbed international trade, and exposed neighboring countries to environmental hazards. Enabled by Iran’s military, financial, and intelligence support, these illegal attacks have also contributed to increased tension in the Middle East and Yemen, with severe repercussions on the intra-Yemeni peace process. The vessel “Galaxy Leader” seized by the Houthis must be released immediately. We appreciate the efforts of all those countries that have engaged to ensure freedom of navigation in the Red Sea, protecting crucial shipping lanes and helping to restore regular flows of trade through the Suez Canal connecting the Mediterranean Sea to the Indian and Pacific Oceans. In this regard, we commend the efforts of EU’s maritime operation “Aspides” and U.S.-led operation “Prosperity Guardian”.

    Safe Shipping and Supply Chain Security

    10. Curtailing Unsafe and Illicit Shipping Practices: The rise of unsafe and illicit shipping practices, including fraudulent registration and registries, poses a significant threat to global trade and environmental sustainability.  We are concerned that unsafe and illicit shipping imposes heavy costs on industry, governments and citizens. Russia’s ability to earn revenue has been sustained through its extensive effort to circumvent the G7+ oil price cap policy through its shadow fleet of often older, underinsured, and poorly maintained ships that routinely disable their automatic identification systems or engage in “spoofing” to avoid detection and circumvent international safety, environmental, and liability rules and standards. North Korea continues to pursue its nuclear and ballistic missile programmes and evade sanctions, particularly through its illicit maritime activities, including prohibited ship-to-ship transfers of petroleum and other UN-banned commodities. Through G7 coordination, we have exposed North Korea uses of “dark” vessels – those that engage in illicit activity – to circumvent United Nations Security Council mandated sanctions. Russia and North Korea are strengthening their economic relations including through maritime routes, such as the reported transfer of petroleum products from Russia to North Korea. Unregulated, “dark” vessels undertake IUU fishing, destroying marine habitats and depleting fish stocks, with negative impacts for biodiversity and food security. Unregulated, inadequately insured “dark” vessels also pose a high risk of maritime accidents, including in fragile ecosystems such as the Arctic and Antarctic. We commit to strengthening our coordination, amongst the G7 and with other partners, to prevent the use of unregistered or fraudulently registered, uninsured and substandard vessels engaged in sanctions evasion, arms transfers, illegal fishing and illicit trade. We encourage relevant International Organizations to improve maritime domain awareness by expanding satellite-based vessel tracking and establishing comprehensive data records of the movement of individual ships and of ship-to-ship transfers, as a means of identifying and tracking illicit maritime activities. We are also committed to capacity building of the countries in the region in law enforcement and Maritime Domain Awareness.

    11. Shadow Fleet Task Force: We invite members of the Nordic-Baltic 8 (Denmark, Estonia, Finland, Iceland, Latvia, Lithuania, Norway, Sweden), and possibly others, to join participating G7 members in a Shadow Fleet Task Force to enhance monitoring and detection and to otherwise constrain the use of shadow fleets engaged in illegal, unsafe or environmentally perilous activities, building on the work of others active in this area. The Task Force will constitute a response by the participating States to the call by the International Maritime Organization in its Resolution A.1192(33) of 6 December 2023 for Members States and all relevant stakeholders to promote actions to prevent illegal operations in the maritime sector by shadow fleets and their flag states, including illegal operations for the purposes of circumventing sanctions, evading compliance with safety or environmental regulations, avoiding insurance costs, or engaging in other illegal activities.

    12. Enhancing Maritime Supply Chain Resilience and Energy and Food Security: Maritime supply chains will continue to underpin the global economy, but these face a variety of threats, both present and future, stemming from both geopolitical tensions and environmental factors.  Maritime disruptions raise consumer costs, increase transit times, and can reduce demand in importing countries, which in turn means lower revenues and diminished competitiveness for producers in exporting countries. Such vulnerabilities in maritime transport can undermine energy and food security, particularly for developing nations reliant on stable shipping routes, including Small Island Developing States (SIDS) and Least Developed Countries (LDCs). We welcome maritime initiatives involving and supported by G7 partners intended to promote energy and food security, such as the Grain from Ukraine scheme, and the ASEAN Outlook on the Indo-Pacific. We invite cooperation with the African Union (pursuant to Africa’s Integrated Maritime Strategy 2050) and other relevant International Organizations to identify best practices for enhancing maritime supply chain resilience and for safeguarding energy and food security, including in times of geopolitical crisis. 

    13. Promoting Safe and Resilient Ports and Strategic Waterways: Port ownership and operational control matter to national security, as foreign control or influence over critical port infrastructure can create vulnerabilities in trade, in defence and security, and in economic stability. Port resilience is also crucial to economic stability and global trade and yet ports face growing risks from environmental degradation, extreme weather events and geopolitical conflicts. Strengthening port security and modernizing infrastructure are essential to maintaining safe and efficient maritime trade. Ensuring that the ownership and management of strategic waterways and key maritime choke points are not vulnerable to undue influence by potential adversaries is also essential to national security. We underscore the importance of scrutiny of ownership structures and port management and resilience within our own national jurisdictions, including with regard to Information and Communications Technology (ICT) systems, to ensure that adversaries do not gain leverage over supply chains, military operations, or the flow of strategic resources. We will work with partners and with relevant International Organizations to encourage robust cybersecurity standards for port ICT infrastructure, to increase resilience against malicious cyber incidents on maritime logistical networks, to reduce monopolistic power over key supply chain nodes, to promote secure and transparent port ownership, to limit unsolicited or undue foreign influence over critical infrastructures and strategic waterways, and to otherwise encourage greater focus on such potential vulnerabilities.

    14. Unexploded Ordnance (UXO) at sea poses a significant hazard to the marine environment, to the safety of fishermen and other users of the maritime space, and to various marine economic activities. We commit to enhancing diplomatic efforts and to exchanging best practices among national authorities, relevant international and regional organizations, and relevant industry sectors to accelerate the clean-up of UXO from the seas and ocean.

    Sustainable Stewardship of Maritime Resources

    15. Strengthen Enforcement Against IUU Fishing: IUU fishing is a major contributor to declining fish stocks and to marine habitat destruction. It may account for a third of all fishing activity worldwide, at a cost to the global economy of more than US$23 billion per year and with negative consequences for fisheries as an enduring economic asset, including for developing countries. We welcome the Canadian-led Dark Vessel Detection System in Ecuador, Peru, Costa Rica, the Philippines, and members of the Pacific Islands Forum (PIF) and would see value in replicating the model to support other partners whose fisheries are under threat from IUU fishing. We recognize that data sharing and transparency play a key role in this fight by exposing bad actors and that technological advances can support a robust Monitoring, Control and Surveillance and enforcement landscape. We encourage further progress in addressing IUU fishing, working with and through relevant International Organizations to establish and strengthen rules to sustainably manage fish stocks on the high seas and to improve the enforcement of these measures, including through the further development of detection technologies, aircraft patrols and high seas boarding and inspection of vessels, building upon the 2022 G7 Ocean Deal.

    16. We welcome the Third UN Ocean Conference, in Nice, France, from 9 to 13 June 2025.

    PARTNERSHIPS

    17. This G7 Maritime Security and Prosperity Declaration provides a framework for cooperation with non-G7 partners, including countries hosting major ports, large merchant fleets, or extensive flag registries as well as relevant regional and International Organizations, such as the International Maritime Organization and ASEAN. We would welcome robust cooperation with partners to take forward the goals set out in this Declaration, consistent with the principles of sovereignty and territorial integrity, under the efforts of the G7 countries, including a free, open, prosperous and secure Indo-Pacific region, to build a free and open maritime order based on the rule of law, and of commitment to the sustainable development of the world’s maritime spaces.

    18. We welcome the cooperation on Coast Guard Functions, including the Global Coast Guard Forum hosted by Italy in 2025, as well as the Arctic Coast Guard Forum, which could also support the objectives of this Declaration.

    [14] March 2025

    Charlevoix, Canada

    MIL OSI Canada News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Chairman Wicker, Chairman Rogers Joint Statement on Putin’s Rejection of Immediate Ceasefire with Ukraine

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Mississippi Roger Wicker
    WASHINGTON – U.S. Senator Roger Wicker, R-Miss., the Chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, and U.S. Representative Mike Rogers, R-Ala., Chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, today responded to press reports citing Vladimir Putin visiting troops at the Kursk front and comments from the Kremlin that the proposed peace deal with Ukraine is “nothing other than a temporary time-out.”
    “President Trump and President Zelenskyy both have shown resolve by working toward an enduring peace, but dictator Putin has once again signaled no interest in that outcome.” Chairman Wicker and Chairman Rogers said. “President Biden failed to stop Russia’s full-scale invasion because Vladimir Putin responds only to strength. Thankfully, President Trump understands this reality. We agree with him that if Putin continues to obstruct an end to the war, the U.S. must impose large-scale sanctions. We must make clear that the costs of continuing the bloodshed will far exceed anything Putin has experienced to date. Toward that end, we applaud the Trump administration’s decision today to end the Biden banking sanctions loophole that allowed for the continued purchase of Russian energy and funded Putin’s war machine. Moreover, until Russia lays down its weapons, Ukraine must continue to receive intelligence and military tools from not only the United States but also our NATO allies.”

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI United Nations: ‘We must not normalise the war in Ukraine,’ warns country coordinator

    Source: United Nations 2-b

    Peace and Security

    On Wednesday UN Resident Coordinator in Ukraine Matthias Schmale briefed the press after visiting the war-ravaged eastern Donetsk region, sharing harrowing accounts of human resilience amid the chaos of Russia’s ongoing invasion.

    The UN’s top official in the country – who also coordinates all the organization’s humanitarian work there – emphasised the urgent need for peace, justice, and sustained international support.

    In October and November alone, over 2,180 civilian deaths and injuries were verified.

    The intense fighting has also led to a stream of evacuations, with nearly 40,000 people displaced from frontline areas in the past two months.

    Elderly and disabled worst hit

    Mr. Schmale highlighted the heightened vulnerability of marginalised groups while recounting meeting two elderly evacuees in Dnipro, who shared their despair after losing everything to the war.

    “Understandably, they expressed a pessimistic outlook for a better future,” he noted.

    He voiced concerns for people with disabilities as he observed firsthand their plight during a visit to a transit centre.

    “I observed how incredibly challenging it is for people with disabilities to cope with the traumas and disruptions caused by the ongoing war,” he underscored.

    Resilience in crisis

    Amid the devastation, frontline humanitarian workers have continued to serve communities in crisis.

    In Donetsk region, doctors and health staff, supported by the World Health Organization, provide essential healthcare in extremely harsh conditions.

    However, as Ukraine enters its third winter since the full-scale invasion, below-zero temperatures and systematic attacks on energy infrastructure pose significant risks.

    Recent strikes in late November and mid-December caused widespread blackouts, affecting millions and leaving vulnerable populations in high-rise buildings without heating, clean water, or functioning sewage systems.

    “The attacks have already severely worsened the dire situation for the most vulnerable populations,” the coordinator warned.

    Addressing the winter crisis

    The UN’s humanitarian winter response plan aims to address emergency needs, including providing solid fuel, cash assistance, and water system repairs.

    However, $500 million is required to fully implement these efforts by March 2025.

    Additionally, a broader humanitarian appeal for $2.2 billion is being prepared for 2025 to assist an estimated 12.7 million people.

    This includes sustaining early recovery programmes, such as education, while addressing critical emergency needs.

    Concluding his statement, the Resident Coordinator delivered a powerful message: “We must not normalise the war in Ukraine.”

    “The guns must fall silent and there must be peace with accountability and justice served in full respect of the UN Charter and the territorial integrity of Ukraine,” he emphasised.

    MIL OSI United Nations News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Senators Coons, Shaheen, Warner, Reed, Kelly, and Reps. Himes, Smith release joint statement on European Security Announcement

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Delaware Christopher Coons

    WASHINGTON – U.S. Senators Chris Coons (D-Del.), ranking member of the Senate Defense Appropriations Subcommittee, Mark Warner (D-Va.), vice chairman of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.), ranking member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Jack Reed (D-R.I), ranking member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, Mark Kelly (D-Ariz.), member of the Senate Armed Services and Intelligence Committees, Rep. Jim Himes (D-Conn.), ranking member of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, and Rep. Adam Smith (D-Wash.), ranking member of the House Armed Services Committee released the following statement about the announcement of a new European security agreement:

    “We applaud the bold new steps outlined by our European partners to strengthen their defense and stand with Ukraine on the frontlines of democracy. This historic announcement paves the way for more than $800b in additional defense investments across the continent and shows that the leaders of Europe are clear-eyed about the dangers we face and are willing to rise to the challenge. They understand that a Europe that is whole, free, and at peace rests on strengthening our collective defense and deterrence, particularly in the face of a growing alignment between our adversaries in China, Russia, Iran, and North Korea. 

    “This announcement also demonstrates Europe’s resolve in working to secure a just and lasting peace in Ukraine. Ukraine must come to the negotiating table from as strong a position as possible in pursuit of a deal that protects Ukrainian sovereignty, strengthens transatlantic security, and ensures that Putin and his fellow dictators understand that aggression will never triumph over the drive for freedom. Our own nation’s strategy towards Ukraine was driven by that reality. For the past three years, we’ve been helping Ukraine on the battlefield to ensure it has the strongest position at the negotiating table. We know Putin will only stop when we stop him, and Ukrainian troops have been bravely fighting and dying to achieve that goal without putting any of our own servicemembers in harm’s way. That must continue. Now, the Europeans, who have already contributed more to Ukraine’s war effort than we have, have pledged major increases in defense spending and investments and signaled that they will take the lead in crafting a package of security guarantees to give Ukraine the best chance to ensure their security and bring the war to an end. The United States is stronger and safer when we stand with our partners in Europe, and we must continue to do so.”

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI United Kingdom: PM call with Prime Minister Albanese of Australia: 8 March 2025

    Source: United Kingdom – Executive Government & Departments

    Press release

    PM call with Prime Minister Albanese of Australia: 8 March 2025

    The Prime Minister spoke to the Australian Prime Minister, Anthony Albanese, this morning.

    The Prime Minister spoke to the Prime Minister of Australia, Anthony Albanese this morning.

    The Prime Minister began by expressing his support for all Australians affected by the Cyclone and paid tribute to the strength of the partnership between the two countries.

    He welcomed Prime Minister Albanese’s commitment to consider contributing to a Coalition of the Willing for Ukraine and looked forward to the Chiefs of Defence meeting in Paris on Tuesday.

    The Prime Minister also reiterated the UK’s commitment to the AUKUS programme.

    The leaders agreed to stay in touch.

    Updates to this page

    Published 8 March 2025

    MIL OSI United Kingdom –

  • MIL-OSI Submissions: East Europe – Startup Moldova Summit 2025: The Biggest Startup & Investment Event in Moldova

    Source: Startup Moldova

    Chișinău, Moldova – March 06, 2025 –The Startup Moldova Summit is the country’s premier and most highly anticipated event, serving as the largest gathering for the startup ecosystem and business innovation. Unique in its scale, it attracts a diverse mix of international and local participants, startup founders, investors and industry leaders, offering a platform to showcase Moldova’s entrepreneurial and innovation potential.

    This year, the Startup Moldova Summit, now in its 5th edition, is expanding to twice the scale of last year, anticipating over 800 in-person attendees, 10,000+ online participants, and speakers from over 30 countries who will present on two dedicated stages. Over 50 investors and VC funds will be present for high-quality matchmaking and networking with startups.

    Startup Moldova Summit 2025 will focus on three key pillars essential for startup success: Talent, Scaling, and Investment. Attendees will have access to:

    Keynote Speeches, Presentations & Panel Discussions: Insights from top international investors, entrepreneurs, and industry leaders.
    Masterclasses & Practical Workshops: Practical sessions on fundraising, product development, scaling, and market expansion delivered by industry experts from around the world.
    Reverse Pitching Sessions: Investors will take the stage to pitch their offers to startups, giving founders a unique opportunity to align with investors expectations.
    Matchmaking & Networking: Facilitated B2B meetings between startups, investors, government and corporate partners.
    Post-Event Party: An informal gathering of top ecosystem players to combine business and wine tasting.

    For the first time, the Summit will host the Startup World Cup regional competition in Moldova. The founders will pitch their startups to local and foreign investors, and the winner will represent Moldova at the global Startup World Cup event in San Francisco later this year, competing for a $1,000,000 prize.

    Startup Moldova Summit 2025 is the must-attend event for:

    Entrepreneurs – looking to scale their businesses and attract investments.
    Investors – seeking the next big opportunity in Moldova’s emerging tech ecosystem.
    Corporate leaders – looking to stay ahead of innovation trend and connect with the next generation of disruptive startups.
    Tech and startup enthusiasts eager to gain insights from industry leaders, expand their networks, and be part of Moldova’s growing innovation movement

    Summit’s speakers lineup:  

    Fonz Morris, Design Lead, Global Conversion & Monetization at Netflix
    Sasha Vidiborskiy, Partner at Atomico
    Vasile Tofan, Senior Partner at Horizon Capital
    Marius Ghenea, Managing Partner at Catalyst Romania, Board Director at SeedBlink, ex-Jury at Arena Leilor
    Marius Istrate, Chairman of the Board at TechAngels Romania, ex-CPO at UiPAth
    Ashot Arzumanyan, Partner at SmartGateVC
    Irina Misca, Investment Manager at Fortech Investments

    About Startup Ecosystem in Moldova:

    Despite being a relatively young, with most startups still in the pre-seed and seed stages, 80% have already expanded beyond Moldova, successfully operating in regional and global markets. While no specific vertical dominates just yet, we’re seeing growing clusters in HealthTech, FinTech, MarTech, and EdTech.

    In 2024, Moldovan startups in our ecosystem generated over $40 million in revenue, created over 1,000 new jobs, with teams averaging just over nine members. 17% of startup co-founders are women. Moldovan startups raised over $44.5 million in investments over the last several years, out of which  $7.9 million —double the amount raised in 2023, was raised in 2024 by 30 startups. Most startups that secured investments in 2024 have raised multiple rounds, with a median of 2 rounds per startup.

    Top Performers 2024:

    NodeShift: a cloud service provider that enables companies to create and run safe applications on a budget – raised $3.2 million
    Greeno: a tool that offers accurate agronomic, financial, and sustainability insights for any specific field or farm – raised $1.325 million
    Fagura: a P2P platform for individuals and SMEs who borrow from and lend to each other – raised $1.1 million
    Aspect Health: a digital health platform dedicated to improving women’s metabolic health through innovative technology and lifestyle interventions – raised $1 million

    About Startup Moldova:

    Startup Moldova, the organiser of the summit, is a private foundation established in 2021, governed by a board of independent members from the IT, startup, and investment community. As the leading organization supporting Moldova’s startup ecosystem, Startup Moldova is committed to fostering innovation, entrepreneurship, and digital transformation. The Foundation actively engages with over 250 startups, tracking their progress in this database, and providing them with necessary expertise, funding, international exposure and other opportunities they need to thrive and contribute to the economic growth and prosperity of our nation.

    Although Moldova is one of the smallest countries in Europe, it is home to some of the most ambitious, innovative, and entrepreneurial individuals. The startup ecosystem of Moldova is rapidly growing, fueled by visionary founders and strong community support.

    The development of Moldova’s startup ecosystem began over 14 years ago. The Startup Moldova Summit has always been an integral part of this journey, initially organized within the ICT Moldova Summit. Five years ago, in response to the expanding startup community, the Startup Moldova Summit became an independent event organized by Startup Moldova in collaboration with key ecosystem partners: Moldova Innovation Technology Park, Dreamups, Technovator, XY Partners, Yep! Moldova, ATIC, Mozaic, and BAM.

    Startup Moldova Summit 2025 is organised with support from EU4Innovation East project, implemented by Expertise France, funded by the European Union and co-funded by the French Government. The event is also supported by Ukraine-Moldova American Enterprise Fund.

    Save your spot:

     Location: Chișinău, Moldova / Mediacor

     More details & registration: https://summit2025.startupmoldova.digital

    MIL OSI – Submitted News –

  • MIL-OSI Economics: Working group on MSMEs focuses on good regulatory practices and informal economy

    Source: WTO

    Headline: Working group on MSMEs focuses on good regulatory practices and informal economy

    Good regulatory practices and the informal economy
    The United Kingdom provided an overview of its Better Regulation Framework (BRF), launched in September 2023, which aims to manage the flow of regulation and assess its impact on business. The UK outlined its approach to regulatory impact assessment and stakeholder consultation to ensure MSMEs’ input is included in policy development and review to maintain regulatory effectiveness.
    Participants exchanged views on the involvement of MSMEs in trade regulation and legislative processes, the communication of regulatory changes, and whether impact studies have been conducted to assess the effects of new regulations on MSMEs. Discussions also covered the inclusion of good regulatory practices in regional trade agreements, particularly in relation to MSMEs and inclusive trade.
    As an outcome of the discussions, the Group agreed to develop a compendium on good regulatory practices for MSMEs.
    The session also featured presentations from the International Labour Organization (ILO), the International Trade Centre (ITC), the World Bank and Serviço Brasileiro de Apoio às Micro e Pequenas Empresas (SEBRAE, Brazil) on business informality, focusing on challenges faced by MSMEs in transitioning from the informal to the formal economy. Presentations also covered how informal trade takes place in practice in some regions. The discussion, initiated by a proposal from Mexico, highlighted key barriers to formalization and the role of legal frameworks and international cooperation in addressing these challenges.
    Global SME Ministerial Conference
    H.E. Dr. Mzukisi Qobo, Ambassador of South Africa, briefed the Group on the upcoming Global SME Ministerial Conference, which will take place in Durban, South Africa, from 22 to 24 July. He highlighted that the conference will provide opportunities to MSMEs to engage with investors, showcase success stories and learn from small businesses that have successfully entered global value chains.
    Ms Dorothy Tembo, Deputy Executive Director of International Trade Centre, stated that the conference aims to bring together 47 dedicated ministers on SMEs to exchange best practices and discuss key emerging issues that affect small businesses.
    Success stories
    In line with the Group’s efforts to strengthen private sector engagement, the meeting featured a presentation from Fairafric, a Ghanaian-German chocolate producer. The company shared insights on overcoming supply chain challenges in West Africa and at a global scale by prioritizing local value addition in Ghanaian communities and investing in capacity building and finding creative solutions. Fairafric operates the first solar-powered organic chocolate factory and utilizes biodegradable packaging, showcasing sustainability in its business model.
    Updates
    The World Customs Organisation provided an update on the joint report on the integration of MSMEs into Authorized Economic Operator Programmes. The joint report builds on the compendium on the topic and incorporates findings from a 2024 survey. The report is jointly prepared by the WCO, the WTO and the International Chamber of Commerce.
    Brunei Darussalam, Paraguay and Ukraine shared updates on the implementation of the December 2020 MSME package of recommendations. They highlighted how their latest trade policy reviews have incorporated information on measures taken to integrate their micro small and medium-sized enterprises into global trade.
    The Coordinator, Ambassador Matthew Wilson of Barbados, drew members’ attention to the 2025 Small Business Champions competition. The title of this year’s competition is “Completing the Loop: Helping small businesses contribute to the circular economy”.  The competition was launched on 28 January and is open for applications until 28 March.
    Preparations for MC14
    The Group exchanged views on advancing its work in preparation for the 14th Ministerial Conference (MC14) in March 2026. The Coordinator suggested drawing lessons from past thematic discussions. Other ideas included the development of a handbook based on private sector engagements organized by the Group. Members were encouraged to submit concrete proposals reflecting topics discussed in Group meetings. The Coordinator will consult further with members to determine the best way forward.

    Share

    MIL OSI Economics –

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Briefing – EU-UK relations on energy and climate – 07-03-2025

    Source: European Parliament

    Much of the relationship between the United Kingdom (UK) and the European Union (EU) is set out in the Trade and Cooperation Agreement (TCA), which came fully into force in May 2021. The depth and complexity of relations between the EU and the UK following the latter’s withdrawal on 31 January 2020 vary depending on the policy area concerned. For example, the TCA devotes many more articles to energy relations than to climate relations. This is due to a variety of reasons, but can often be partially explained by the depth of previous relationships, as well as physical infrastructure already in place (such as electricity and gas interconnectors between the UK and EU Member States). In the context of Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine, the UK and the EU have increased their coordination, particularly on energy. At the same time, both the EU and UK are moving ahead on energy and climate issues at different paces. Concerns therefore exist that differing regulatory approaches might result in discrepancies that could hamper trade between the EU and the UK. The TCA provisions on energy cooperation will expire on 30 June 2026, unless the UK and EU jointly decide to renew them. In that context, experts have proposed several areas where the parties could renew and deepen their cooperation. This updates an EPRS briefing first published in June 2023.

    MIL OSI Europe News –

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Answer to a written question – German version of Russia Today back on X despite EU sanctions – P-000391/2025(ASW)

    Source: European Parliament

    German edition of Russia’s leading propaganda outlet, Russia Today (RT), had re-established its presence on X as a part of a broader pro-Kremlin strategy to interfere with Europe’s democratic processes. As of now, the RT Germany account on X has been suspended[1].

    Since 1st March 2022, the EU has imposed restrictive measures on RT Germany for its role in systematically spreading disinformation justifying and in support of the Russian aggression against Ukraine.

    Its broadcasting license has been suspended and it is prohibited for operators in the EU to broadcast, enable or facilitate the broadcasting of any content by RT Germany by any means[2].

    It is the responsibility of national competent authorities to implement these measures and ensure that any breach is investigated. The Commission closely monitors compliance.

    On 18 December 2023, the Commission opened formal proceedings[3] to assess whether X may have breached the Digital Services Act (DSA)[4] including in relation to the dissemination of illegal content in the EU and the effectiveness of measures taken to combat information manipulation on the platform.

    On 12 July 2024, the platform was informed of the Commission’s preliminary view that it is in breach of the DSA[5]. On 17 January 2025, the Commission addressed further technical investigatory measures to X[6], including a request for access to certain of X’s commercial Application Programming Interfaces, technical interfaces to its content that allow direct fact-finding on content moderation and virality of accounts.

    These steps will allow the Commission services to take all relevant facts into account in the complex assessment under the DSA of systemic risks and their mitigation by X.

    • [1] https://x.com/RTDE_OFFIZIELL
    • [2] Article 2f(2) of Council Regulation (EU) 2022/350 of 1 March 2022 amending Regulation (EU) No 833/2014 concerning restrictive measures in view of Russia’s actions destabilising the situation in Ukraine.
    • [3] https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_23_679
    • [4] Regulation (EU) 2022/2065 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 19 October 2022 on a Single Market For Digital Services and amending Directive 2000/31/EC (Digital Services Act) (Text with EEA relevance).
    • [5] https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_24_3761
    • [6] https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/news/commission-addresses-additional-investigatory-measures-x-ongoing-proceedings-under-digital-services
    Last updated: 7 March 2025

    MIL OSI Europe News –

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Written question – Commission President von der Leyen after three years of war in Ukraine – a proven troublemaker and failed dealmaker – E-000882/2025

    Source: European Parliament

    Question for written answer  E-000882/2025
    to the Commission
    Rule 144
    Petra Steger (PfE)

    For three years now, Commission President von der Leyen has strikingly demonstrated that she does not want to end the bloodshed in Ukraine, while, within a few weeks, US President Trump has restarted the peace engine that, in the EU, seems to have completely fallen apart. Instead, Brussels is constantly lusting after arms and war. At present, as a result of these developments, Europe is not playing an active role in the peace negotiations, which are taking place not on neutral ground, in Austria or Ireland, but, rather, in Saudi Arabia. Even though a great deal of damage has already been done and valuable opportunities have been thrown away, it is essential that the EU now immediately change tack and reposition itself as the driving force behind a diplomatic solution.

    • 1.Why has the Commission allowed the US to lead the peace process while the EU, as an immediate neighbour, is completely ignoring its responsibility for a diplomatic solution?
    • 2.How long does the Commission plan to continue Ukraine’s EU-taxpayer-funded military build-up?
    • 3.Does the Commission back the setting up of an EU army or the deployment of EU soldiers in Ukraine despite the fact that that could drag the EU into a military conflict and jeopardise Member States’ sovereignty?

    Submitted: 28.2.2025

    Last updated: 7 March 2025

    MIL OSI Europe News –

  • MIL-OSI Global: Why increasing rates of tuberculosis in the UK and US should concern everyone

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Tom Wingfield, Deputy Director of the Centre for Tuberculosis Research, Reader in Tuberculosis and Social Medicine, Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine, Liverpool, UK; and Honorary Research Associate at Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden, and, University of Liverpool

    pardi hutabarat/Shutterstock

    With one of the largest tuberculosis (TB) outbreaks in US history, Kansas has more to worry about than its recent Super Bowl defeat. During the past year, 67 people with TB have been detected. This comes on the back of increasing rates of TB in the US year on year since the start of the COVID pandemic.

    Rather than a relic of the Victorian era, TB is the world’s most enduring pandemic, killing more people each year than any other single infection. While more common in low-income countries, TB continues to be found in more deprived communities, cities, prisons, homeless populations, and in black, Asian and Indigenous people, including in wealthy countries such as the US and UK.

    TB outbreaks in wealthy countries act as a canary in a coalmine, reflecting cracks in national public health systems. More broadly, TB outbreaks in any setting have deeper implications for the struggle to end TB globally.

    TB is an airborne infection that doesn’t respect borders. With increasing mass movement, including due to climate change and war, the maxim “TB anywhere is TB everywhere” is more resonant today than ever.

    In the UK, TB rates consistently declined between 2011 and 2020. But, like the US, this decline reversed since COVID emerged in early 2020.

    In 2023, there was a 13% increase in the number of people who became unwell with TB in England, compared with 2022.

    At 9.5 people with TB per 100,000 people per year, England is in jeopardy of losing its “low TB incidence” status (less than ten people with TB per 100,000 people per year).

    Rates of TB in England have a stark social gradient, with the poorest 10% of people having five times higher rates of TB than the richest 10%.

    In the UK, there is a cost of living crisis. Many people, especially the poorest, are struggling to put food on the table. TB is a social disease of poverty that thrives where there is overcrowding, undernutrition and poor working and living conditions.

    But the increase in TB in the UK cannot be put down to greater risk of disease alone. The response of the health and social care system to prevent and cure TB is crucial.

    The BCG vaccine, currently the only TB vaccine, is not nearly as effective as we would like at preventing disease. There is hope on the horizon with several vaccines under development, but their effect may be impeded by vaccine hesitancy driven by misinformation.

    BCG is still the only TB vaccine, but it’s not highly effective.
    TuktaBaby/Shutterstock

    Other barriers to address include lack of TB awareness, continuing TB-related stigma, understaffing of vital TB community nursing teams, and a breach between health and social care sectors to support those vulnerable to TB.

    For countries with lower incidence of TB across Europe and North America, many TB policies are targeted at identifying and treating TB in groups who are most at risk of being exposed to the disease, including people moving from regions of the world where TB is more common.

    Patterns of migration to the UK changed significantly following Brexit. A need to expand the workforce, particularly in health and social care, has led to active recruitment and movement of people from higher TB burden countries. This is relevant because, in England, four in five people with TB were born outside the UK, and rates among this group increased by 15% between 2022 and 2023.

    Screening migrant populations as part of their visa application process pre-entry is effective at identifying people with infectious TB. But prevention is better than cure, and there remains a gap in screening for TB infection or TB disease without symptoms.

    Providing well-tolerated, preventive TB treatment can reduce the risk of developing active TB disease by 85% in the future. Yet the screening programme in the UK is under-resourced, with just 11.5% of eligible migrants screened for TB infection in 2023.

    We should not overlook the fact that rates of TB also increased, although to a lesser extent (3.9%), among people born in the UK – the first time this has happened for many years.

    Among both UK-born and non-UK-born populations, often overlapping social risk factors such as homelessness, asylum seeker status, drug or alcohol misuse, incarceration and mental health disorders continue to drive TB. These factors, which jumped by 27% between 2022 and 2023, not only increase the likelihood of TB disease but are associated with much lower rates of cure.

    Early diagnosis and treatment of TB are crucial to prevent long-term health issues or even death. The sooner someone starts effective treatment, the sooner they stop being infectious, helping to reduce the spread of TB. Improving access to diagnosis and care will lower TB transmission.

    Unacceptable delays in treatment

    Nearly a third of people with TB in the UK experience a delay of four months between the onset of their symptoms (commonly cough, fever, night sweats and weight loss) and taking their first anti-TB medicine. This unacceptable delay is similar to (or even longer than) the treatment delays we have documented in low- and middle-income countries with much higher TB burdens, including Peru, Nepal and Mozambique.

    In the UK, most people are entitled to free NHS care, and TB care and prevention is free to all. However, the NHS is overwhelmed and policies relating to healthcare recovery costs of visitors and migrants can prevent people with TB, wherever they are from, from getting timely care. This situation poses a public health threat to us all.

    Effective TB prevention and care is possible. While current tools are imperfect, albeit with recent progress in diagnostics and treatment, researchers around the world are further advancing science and innovation in the fight against TB. This includes the promise of nutritional supplementation, financial and social support, and a new TB vaccine. Providing timely support to everyone with TB remains fundamental to our response to this illness of poverty.

    To end TB, whether in the US, UK, or globally, we would do well to remember and apply the old medical adage: treat the person, not the disease.

    Tom Wingfield is supported by grants from: the Wellcome Trust, UK (209075/Z/17/Z); the Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC), the Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office (FCDO), the Medical Research Council (MRC) and Wellcome, UK (Joint Global Health Trials, MR/V004832/1); the Medical Research Council (Public Health Intervention Development Award “PHIND”, APP2293); the Medical Research Foundation (Dorothy Temple Cross International Collaboration Research Grant, MRF-131–0006-RG-KHOS-C0942); and UNITAID (2022-50-START-4-ALL). Tom is an honorary research associate at the Department of Global Public Health, Karolinksa Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden, and is also an ad hoc consultant for the World Health Organization and the Stop TB Partnership.

    Jessica Potter has previously received research funding from Medical Research Council UK. She chairs a grassroots network called UK Academics and Professionals to end TB and is an advisory member of the Innovations Constituency of the Stop TB Partnership.

    Kerry Millington receives funding from UK aid from the UK government for the research programme that she works on. Views expressed are those of her own and do not necessarily reflect the UK government’s official policies.

    – ref. Why increasing rates of tuberculosis in the UK and US should concern everyone – https://theconversation.com/why-increasing-rates-of-tuberculosis-in-the-uk-and-us-should-concern-everyone-249202

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Video: How Does the EU Help Ukraine?

    Source: Council of the European Union (video statements)

    How much aid has the EU provided to Ukraine?
    With various reports in the news and on social media, let’s clarify the facts:
    €135 billion – remember this figure.
    Since day one of Russia’s full-scale invasion, the EU and its member states have been Ukraine’s strongest supporters.
    In fact, this happens to be the largest aid operation in EU history.
    In this video, we’ll show how EU solidarity is helping Ukraine and its people.
    At almost €135 billion, the EU’s support is massive.
    And it’s more than just military aid – it’s a historic effort to help Ukraine now and prepare it for the future as a member of the European Union.

    ———————–

    Subscribe – www.youtube.com/user/eucouncil

    ———————–

    Follow us:
    Instagram – instagram.com/eucouncil
    Facebook – facebook.com/eucouncil
    X – https://x.com/EUCouncil

    To find out more, visit the Council’s web explainer on EU aid to Ukraine : https://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/policies/eu-solidarity-ukraine/

    Visit our channel for more informative videos – www.youtube.com/user/eucouncil
    ——————
    00:00 – Who’s given Ukraine the most financial support?
    00:38 – Military assistance: Strengthening Ukraine’s defense
    00:58 – Training Ukrainian soldiers: Strengthening Ukraine’s armed forces
    01:08 – Emergency relief: Addressing immediate humanitarian needs
    01:28 – Rebuilding Ukraine: Restoring critical infrastructure
    01:42 – Economic stability: Keeping Ukraine running
    01:59 – Supporting refugees: A safe haven in the EU
    02:11 – Russian immobilized assets
    02:22 – Preparing Ukraine for EU membership
    02:29 – The EU stands with Ukraine
    ——————

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=utSodYS8Ssg

    MIL OSI Video –

  • MIL-OSI Global: J.D. Vance has become Trump’s attack dog, but he’s yet to prove himself a worthy successor

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Richard Hargy, Visiting Research Fellow in International Studies, Queen’s University Belfast

    The US vice-presidency is famously rather dull and mostly frustrating, according to some of the people who have taken on the role.

    “I do not propose to be buried until I am dead,” Daniel Webster is believed to have said, after turning down the vice presidency in 1839. “I would a great deal rather be anything, say professor of history, than vice president,” said Theodore Roosevelt, just before taking the job.

    J.D. Vance, the current vice-president, appears to have little intention of sitting back in the shadows while waiting for his chance at the top job. Instead, the former marine turned politician is rapidly turning into Donald Trump’s high-profile attack dog.

    His aggressive questioning of Ukraine’s president Volodymyr Zelensky in a televised press conference at the White House on February 28, switched the tone of the whole event from uncomfortable to disastrous.

    “Offer some words of appreciation for the United States of America … and the president of the United States of America, who is trying to save your country,” Vance said to Zelensky, before pushing the Ukrainian president to respond.

    The press conference, which had been set up to sign a US-Ukraine mineral deal, descended into chaos, and ended with Donald Trump deciding that he was not prepared to go ahead, and Zelensky was not ready.

    The New York Times White House correspondent Michael Shear described the astonishing spectacle of a vice-president inserting himself into a tense diplomatic melee as both a sign of Vance’s “media savvy”, as well as his desire to not be “relegated to the B-team” and a determination not to be in the shadow of Elon Musk.

    It also demonstrated Vance’s awareness of something Trump expects from all subordinates: being publicly defended by them.

    Steadfast loyalty to Trump is a non-negotiable prerequisite. As Dartmouth College professor, Russell Muirhead, and Harvard professor emerita, Nancy L. Roenblum, have said: “Trump’s problem is not that he requires loyalty to his agenda … It is that he demands personal loyalty.”

    Vance understands this, which has been evidenced in acts such as publicly backing Trump’s argument that his executive power should not be challenged by the courts. On X, the vice-president argued that, “Judges aren’t allowed to control the executive’s legitimate power.”

    J.D. Vance on his role in the Zelensky press conference.

    Tough on allies

    On the foreign policy front, the vice-president has also come out fighting, and showing his willingness to be Trump’s rottweiler in all arenas. Last month in Munich Vance used a speech to reprimand the continent’s leaders for stepping away from fundamental values by suppressing free speech.

    Vance went on to criticise the US’s European allies some days later when he called out a UK-France plan for European troops to guarantee peace in Ukraine, stating the proposal was unworkable and could not be guaranteed by “some random country that hasn’t fought a war in 30 or 40 years”.

    A key advantage that Vance enjoys over his Republican predecessor, Mike Pence, is that he does not have to navigate between the Republican establishment and Maga factions of the party. Both these worlds have coalesced around Trump. Vance is also considered, like Trump, to be a spokesperson for Maga values.

    Where did Vance come from?

    Only a few years ago, however, Vance was far from a Trump loyalist. In 2016 he referred to Trump as “cultural heroin” and worried he could be “America’s Hitler”.

    Vance, 40, is the third youngest vice-president in US history. In his 2016 best-selling biography, Hillbilly Elegy, Vance told of his difficult upbringing in Ohio and Kentucky as well as offering his own personal insight into the struggles facing impoverished white working-class people. Vance’s memoir made him a coveted analyst during the first Trump administration to explain the president’s appeal to these communities.

    Vance appears in lockstep with Trump on almost all foreign policy issues, particularly Ukraine, and his pro-Russia position. Even before his election to the Senate in 2022, Vance had made known his opposition to US aid to the country in support of its military campaign against Russia. In a podcast interview he said, “I’ve got to be honest with you. I don’t really care what happens to Ukraine one way or the other.”

    One area of difference could be with his position on the western military alliance. In his address to the Munich Security Conference Vance said: “I don’t think that we should pull out of NATO, and no, I don’t think that we should abandon Europe. But yes, I think that we should pivot.”

    It is unclear if the same can be said of Donald Trump. Germany’s new chancellor-in-waiting, Friedrich Merz, issued a blunt warning: “We must prepare for the possibility that Donald Trump will no longer uphold NATO’s mutual defence commitment unconditionally”.

    John Bolton, a former National Security Advisor to Trump, believes the current commander-in-chief is shifting the goalposts on what he demands from fellow Nato members relating to defence spending and by setting targets that few European states can meet.

    In the early weeks of this second Trump administration, Vance has sought to remain a loyal subordinate and someone who will “reinforce (Trump’s) hard-right agenda”, according to Elaine Kamarck, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution, a research non-profit.

    Just over four weeks into his new role, however, Vance has yet to secure the total endorsement from his boss to be his heir apparent. During an interview on Fox News on February 10, when asked if he viewed Vance as his inevitable successor in 2028, Trump responded: “No, but he’s very capable.”

    The clearly ambitious Vance knows the next four years could make or break his ability to get the top job, and right now he is betting that his attack-dog status could help win him that role.

    Richard Hargy 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. J.D. Vance has become Trump’s attack dog, but he’s yet to prove himself a worthy successor – https://theconversation.com/j-d-vance-has-become-trumps-attack-dog-but-hes-yet-to-prove-himself-a-worthy-successor-250554

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI United Kingdom: UK-Japan Economic 2+2

    Source: United Kingdom – Executive Government & Departments 3

    News story

    UK-Japan Economic 2+2

    The UK and Japanese governments have met for the Economic 2+2 Ministers’ Meeting

    On March 7, from 6:30 p.m. to 8:30 p.m. for approximately 2 hours, the Japan-UK Economic 2+2 Ministers’ Meeting (“Economic 2+2”) was held. The meeting was attended by Mr. IWAYA Takeshi, Minister for Foreign Affairs of Japan, Mr. MUTO Yoji, Minister of Economy, Trade and Industry of Japan, the Rt. Hon. David Lammy MP, Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, and the Rt. Hon. Jonathan Reynolds MP, Secretary of State for Business and Trade of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. The overview of the meeting is as follows.

    At the outset, Minister Iwaya stated that it was his pleasure to host the first Japan-UK Economic 2+2 Ministers’ Meeting in Tokyo, the establishment of which was announced by the leaders of Japan and the UK to promote dialogue on how trade and economic security converges with foreign policy; and hoped that today’s meeting would be an opportunity for both countries, as each other’s closest security partners in Europe and Asia, to strengthen their economic ties, building on the strong foundations of the Japan-UK Global Strategic Partnership articulated by the Hiroshima Accord.

    Minister Muto stated that he welcomed holding the Japan-UK Economic 2+2 Ministers’ Meeting and expressed his expectations for enhanced cooperation in areas such as economic security, energy, and innovation between Japan and the UK, which share fundamental values and continue to build a strong relationship.

    Foreign Secretary Lammy thanked Japan for hosting this inaugural meeting and underscored the importance of the dialogue in addressing the increasing convergence between economic and foreign policy issues and the significance of UK-Japan collaboration to forge a path in an increasingly volatile world.

    Minister Reynolds stated national security and economic growth are mutually reinforcing, and that he looked forward to using the discussion to explore areas of cooperation where the UK and Japan can jointly mitigate global risks to economic growth and trade.

    The global economic order now faces significant challenges. With shared fundamental values including freedom, democracy, and rule of law, the four Ministers from Japan and the UK committed to work to uphold these values by sustaining and strengthening a free, fair, and rules-based global economic order, and discussed issues on Economic Security, Free and Open International Trade, Energy Security, Global South as follows.

    Economic Security

    The four Ministers concurred that, given challenges in global trade, enhancing economic resilience internationally is an important contributor to sustainable and stable global growth.

    The four Ministers affirmed that coordination between partners and like-minded countries is essential to bolster economic resilience. Ministers also confirmed that the relationship between Japan and the UK is increasingly important and expressed their joint ambition to strengthen cooperation on economic resilience and economic security, including sharing analysis and insights, enhancing supply chain resilience and cooperation on critical and emerging technology issues.

    The four Ministers instructed officials to have meetings to take forward discussions to address the economic security challenges facing Japan and the UK, including enhancing supply-chain resilience, developing a fair market, and other relevant issues – with a view to enhancing their economic security partnership.

    The four Ministers concurred that this would support the industrial strategy partnership as discussed in the Strategic Economic Policy and Trade Dialogue.

     The four Ministers expressed concern over economic coercion, non-market policies and practices including harmful industrial subsidies, market-distorting practices of state-owned enterprises, as well as forced technology transfer, and harmful non-market overcapacity and other market distortions resulting from the non-market policies and practices.

     The four Ministers also reconfirmed the importance of cooperating with like-minded countries to build resilient and reliable supply-chains, including those for critical minerals that are essential for net-zero transition and digitalisation.

     In this regard, the four Ministers concurred to explore criteria that take into account not only economic factors, but also factors linked to the Principles on Resilient and Reliable Supply Chains, comprising of transparency, diversification, security, sustainability, and trustworthiness and reliability.

     Furthermore, the four Ministers concurred on continuing discussions to strengthen the coordination of their respective policies to further promote and protect critical and emerging technologies, recognising the importance of strategic public-private partnership, information exchange on economic security and the value of our two countries’ like-mindedness. The four Ministers concurred on deepening cooperation on export controls and research security to further facilitate the exchange of controlled goods and technologies between the two countries.

     The four Ministers welcomed the signing of Memorandums of Understanding between Japanese and UK industry partners that will facilitate joint Japan-UK supply chains and collaboration in the development of next-generation quantum computing.

     The four Ministers concurred on further strengthening effective export controls on materials, technology, and research that could be used for military purposes in a way that keeps pace with rapid technological developments.

     The four Ministers expressed their desire to see a just and lasting peace in Ukraine which ensures its future sovereignty and security. The four Minister reaffirmed their continued support to Ukraine in pursuit of peace through strength, in line with Ukraine’s needs. The four Ministers expressed their resolve to continue our comprehensive sanctions and economic measures to restrict as far as possible the revenues, goods, and technology Russia uses to fund and conduct its illegal war of aggression against Ukraine.

     To that end, the four Ministers concurred to continue action against Russia and countries supporting the Russian military complex through technical discussions to prevent diversion of key critical, specialist and emerging technologies. They reiterated their concern for China’s increasing support to Russia and Russia’s defense industrial base, which is decisively enabling Russia to maintain its illegal war in Ukraine.

    Free and Open International Trade

     The four Ministers reaffirmed the importance of the rules-based multilateral trading system with the WTO at its core as an important structure that affords legal stability and predictability for businesses, and concurred on moving towards strengthening all of the WTO’s functions, including negotiation, monitoring, deliberation and dispute settlement, as it marks the 30th anniversary of its establishment with an eye to the outcome of the 14th WTO Ministerial Conference (MC14) scheduled for next March.

     The four Ministers recognised the role played by plurilateral discussions and negotiations within the WTO in advancing issues of interest and called for the early incorporation of the Investment Facilitation for Development Agreement and the Agreement on Electronic Commerce into the WTO’s legal framework.

     The four Ministers also confirmed that they will work closely together in WTO discussions, including addressing contemporary trade-related issues such as non-market policies and practices, as well as climate change.

     The four Ministers emphasised the importance of developing robust international rules and norms and effectively utilising existing tools to ensure a global level playing field.

     In addition, the Japanese Ministers welcomed the UK’s accession to the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP) last December, and the four Ministers recognised that the CPTPP is an important pillar in promoting a free and fair rules-based economic order in the Indo-Pacific region.

     The Ministers confirmed that they would continue to work closely together with other parties to ensure CPTPP remains a modern, high-standards agreement.

    Energy Security

     The four Ministers discussed energy security risks and opportunities for Japan-UK collaboration to support further development of clean energy supply-chains.

     Ministers welcomed the signing of the Memoranda of Cooperation on offshore wind cooperation among governments, organisations, companies and on cooperation in advanced robotics and autonomous systems, and welcomed the  civil-nuclear collaboration between companies and research institutions of both countries, including on advanced nuclear technologies, fusion energy, and  nuclear decommissioning.

     They reaffirmed that they would continue promoting energy cooperation between Japan and the UK to deliver energy security for their citizens.

     Furthermore, they acknowledged their collaboration in the clean energy sector and emphasised the importance of creating Japan-UK collaborative projects to accelerate the clean energy transition in third countries and to strengthen coordination in pursuit of this.  

     The four Ministers also reaffirmed their shared commitment to keeping a limit of 1.5C temperature rise within reach and achieving net zero by 2050.

     They confirmed the need to reduce reliance on energy supply from unreliable and hostile actors.

     All four Ministers concurred that Russia’s illegal, unjustifiable and unprovoked full-scale invasion of Ukraine threatens the security of the Euro-Atlantic and Indo-Pacific, which is inseparable.

    Engagement with Global South

     The four Ministers shared the recognition that it is important to further enhance cooperation with Global South countries to maintain and strengthen a rule-based international economic order and affirmed that they would engage with the Global South towards sustainable development and trade mechanisms that support economic development and poverty reduction.

     They noted the importance of the WTO 14th Ministerial Conference, which will be held in Cameroon – in supporting this.

    The four Ministers reaffirmed the need for Japan and the UK to remain advocates of a free, open, and rules-based international economic order in the face of growing risks of global economic fragmentation and concurred on continuing their bilateral cooperation in areas such as the economic policies of both countries and economic security, while deepening discussions and cooperation with like-minded countries in related fields.

    Updates to this page

    Published 7 March 2025

    MIL OSI United Kingdom –

  • MIL-OSI United Kingdom: PM call with President of the European Council and the President of the European Commission: 7 March 2025

    Source: United Kingdom – Executive Government & Departments

    Press release

    PM call with President of the European Council and the President of the European Commission: 7 March 2025

    The Prime Minister spoke to the President of the European Council, the President of the European Commission and the leaders of Canada, Turkey, Norway and Iceland this morning.

    The Prime Minister spoke to the President of the European Council, the President of the European Commission and the leaders of Canada, Turkey, Norway and Iceland this morning.

    The Prime Minister applauded the progress the European Union had made at the European Council yesterday, saying it was a historic step forward and another sign of Europe stepping up.

    Closer collaboration between the European Union, its partners and our combined defence industrial base was vital as Europe stepped up to counter egregious Russian aggression, the Prime Minister added.

    Updating on the intensive diplomacy between the US, UK, France and Ukraine, the Prime Minister welcomed the potential for peace talks in Saudi Arabia next week.

    The leaders also discussed the Coalition of the Willing and looked ahead to the Chiefs of Defence meeting in Paris on Tuesday. It would be another important moment to drive forward planning, they agreed.

    The leaders agreed to stay in close touch.

    Updates to this page

    Published 7 March 2025

    MIL OSI United Kingdom –

  • MIL-OSI United Kingdom: First £752 million tranche of loan sent to Ukraine for military equipment

    Source: United Kingdom – Executive Government & Departments

    News story

    First £752 million tranche of loan sent to Ukraine for military equipment

    The first £752 million tranche of the UK’s Extraordinary Revenue Acceleration (ERA) loan to Ukraine has been transferred in demonstration of the UK’s commitment to Ukrainian defence.

    • UK has sent first third of its £2.26 billion loan to Ukraine for the country to spend on military equipment in its hour of need

    • Chancellor Rachel Reeves visited RAF Northolt to meet with UK suppliers sending equipment to Ukraine

    • Delivery of the UK’s contribution to the G7 $50 billion Extraordinary Revenue Acceleration loan is the latest step in support for Ukraine from the UK government, with national security key to the Plan for Change

    The ERA funding is on top of the £3 billion a year commitment by the UK to provide military aid for Ukraine. The Prime Minister has been clear that a strong Ukraine is vital to UK national security.

    The money transferred yesterday Thursday 6 March, is part of a £2.26 billion loan backed by the profits of immobilised Russian sovereign assets, and will help Ukraine buy military equipment to defend itself against Russia’s unprovoked aggression.

    It follows the Prime Minister’s commitment to increase defence spending to 2.5% of GDP from 2027, with an ambition to reach 3% in the next parliament as economic and fiscal conditions allow, and announcing an additional £1.6 billion of UK Export Finance to Ukraine. National security is fundamental to the government’s Plan for Change, and will help improve the lives of people across the UK by growing the economy.

    To mark this signal of UK support, Chancellor of the Exchequer Rachel Reeves, visited RAF Northolt to meet Armed Forces personnel. She also met suppliers sending vital equipment to the Armed Forces of Ukraine through UK MoD rapid procurement contracts.

    Companies at RAF Northolt yesterday included Malloy, MBDA and Thales, as well as UK-based SMEs including Greenjets, Kirintec and Windracers – displaying a range of defence equipment such as air defence missiles, bomb disposal suits and cargo drones.

    Increased defence spending will support highly skilled jobs and apprenticeships across the UK. Last year, defence spending supported over 430,000 UK jobs the equivalent to one in every 60, with 68% of defence spending going outside of London and the Southeast, benefitting every nation and region of the country.

    Rachel Reeves, Chancellor of the Exchequer, said:

    “Now more than ever in this changed world, Ukraine needs our support as a reliable partner to secure peace following Russia’s unprovoked invasion.

    “British excellence and innovation in defence was on display as I visited RAF Northolt yesterday. Our contribution to the war effort via increased defence spending is also supporting UK industries and jobs and putting money back in the pockets of hardworking British people.”

    The multibillion-pound funding is the UK’s contribution to the G7 ERA Loans to Ukraine Scheme, through which G7 countries will collectively provide $50 billion to support Ukraine. The UK’s contribution is earmarked for military procurement to bolster Ukraine’s defences, and is being delivered in three £752 million payments. A tranched approach will allow for greater flexibility in military procurement, and will provide the best value for money for both the UK and Ukraine.

    Chancellor Reeves and Ukraine’s Finance Minister Sergii Marchenko signed the UK-Ukraine bilateral loan agreement on Saturday in the presence of Prime Minister Keir Starmer and Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelenskyy in No.11 Downing Street.

    Last week, the Chancellor alongside the Business Secretary and the Defence Secretary confirmed that a new UK defence innovation organisation will work with innovative firms to rapidly get cutting-edge military technology into the hands of British troops, and harness the ingenuity of the UK’s leading tech and manufacturing sectors.

    The Prime Minister and President Zelenskyy also signed a historic 100 Year Partnership in Kyiv earlier this year. The landmark treaty formalised the unbreakable bonds between the UK and Ukraine, broadening and deepening the relationship across defence and non-military areas and enabling closer community links.

    Updates to this page

    Published 7 March 2025

    MIL OSI United Kingdom –

  • MIL-OSI Global: European leaders agree defence ramp-up to support Ukraine – but Hungary continues to block progress

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By David J. Galbreath, Professor of International Security, University of Bath

    Leaders of the 27 EU countries have agreed in principle to a massive increase in defence spending at a summit that was hastily organised in the wake of Donald Trump’s withdrawal of support for Ukraine.

    Talks over European Commission president Ursula von der Leyen’s €800 million (£670 million) military spending package went on for ten hours before an agreement could be reached. And while the deal is in place, leaders can’t agree on how to finance it.

    With pressure from the United States to increase their contribution to Nato, European states have also agreed to increase defence spending as a share of their GDP.

    Many EU countries wanting to spend more on defence argue they can’t afford to do so because they are already struggling with government debt. However, France has the largest debt as a proportion of its GDP in the EU and is still increasing defence spending.

    The challenge for nearly all EU member states has been how to go about spending more on defence without over-borrowing and putting the euro currency in danger through government defaults on existing loans.

    The European Commission has set out new funding for defence industries which could lower the cost of defence procurement for EU member states. However, the EU doesn’t have enough funds to sustain a high level of defence investment.

    Hungary and Slovakia have stated that they are not interested in an EU defence budget. They would rather see individual member states increase their budgets. Both Hungary and Slovakia are resistant to EU calls to further isolate Russia over the war in Ukraine.

    Hungarian president Viktor Orbán was the holdout at the Brussels meeting. Orbán has been far more lenient than others on Moscow since the start of the war.

    Slovakia’s prime minister, Robert Fico, wants a more constructive relationship with Russia and the return to the supply of natural gas that is piped through Ukraine. He did, however, ultimately fall in behind other member states at the Brussels meeting.

    Now that a package has been agreed, the challenge for European leaders and the EU is how to grow defence budgets without breaking the budget, forcing many governments into determining what they are not going to spend money on even before they can figure out how to grow defence spending.

    The nuclear dilemma

    At the summit, French president Emmanuel Macron also presented a plan to bring other European nations under France’s nuclear umbrella, effectively making France’s deterrent their joint deterrent.

    The rationale here is the concern that the US could withdraw from Nato or at least water down article five, the commitment by Nato countries to treat any attack on a member state as an attack on all member states. Doing so would mean Europe could no longer rely on the US nuclear deterrent for protection.

    But while European countries want to prepare for a potential US withdrawal, they also don’t want to signal to Washington that the US deterrent is no longer needed. In fact most European Nato countries would like the US to maintain its nuclear posture in Europe and are working hard on a diplomatic level with Washington to slow the retreat.

    At the same time, European member states want security guarantees so talks on Macron’s proposal will continue.

    European support for Ukraine

    The EU showed renewed commitment for Ukraine at the summit with meetings between Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelensky and several European and EU leaders.

    A joint statement was agreed, stressing that peace talks must include Ukraine and confirming the EU’s support. Orbán was, again, the only leader not to sign up to the statement.

    The hope is that, with these actions, Europe can pressure the Trump administration to continue to engage Ukraine as it seeks a peace with Russia. But it is unclear how much of an impact such European solidarity for Ukraine will have.

    Europe cannot be ready for a new defence reality overnight but this defence summit has been a good start. Now the really hard work begins.

    David J. Galbreath has received funding from the ESRC, AHRC, British Academy and Leverhulme Trust.

    – ref. European leaders agree defence ramp-up to support Ukraine – but Hungary continues to block progress – https://theconversation.com/european-leaders-agree-defence-ramp-up-to-support-ukraine-but-hungary-continues-to-block-progress-251656

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: Britain can still be a bridge between the US and Europe – here’s how Starmer can prove it

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Nick Whittaker, Subject Lead in Social Sciences & Law, University of Sussex

    The US-EU relationship is at its most fragile point since the build-up to the Iraq war in 2003. While President Donald Trump openly questions Nato and President Volodymyr Zelensky’s desire for peace, EU leaders have continued to voice their unequivocal support for Ukraine against Russian aggression.

    Between the two lies Britain. In a flurry of diplomacy, Keir Starmer has attempted to navigate the country’s tricky position: close to the US diplomatically, while staying aligned with the EU’s Ukraine policy.

    I argue that Starmer could use Britain’s island identity – separated from its closest neighbours just enough to allow a global outlook – to his advantage. Acting as an effective link between the US and the EU could turn this time of crisis into an opportunity. What Britain may lack in material capabilities, it can make up for in skilful diplomacy.

    Britain’s position as a “geopolitical bridge” stretches far back into the last century. As Britain was decolonising and reckoning with the growing power of the US and a uniting European continent, acting as a bridge was an effective way of ensuring relevance and maintaining alliances while its status as an imperial great power waned.

    This position was especially favoured by Labour politicians keen to emphasise how a socialist Britain could act as a link between the capitalist and communist worlds. In (sometimes reluctantly) arguing for Britain’s entry into the European Economic Community, some Conservatives posited membership as allowing Britain to bridge the Atlantic, given the UK’s strong postwar ties with the US.

    Even older is the idea of Britain as an “offshore balancer”. The UK’s proximity to the European continent meant it has always had an eye on political developments there. It has thus sought to maintain alliances in order to prevent Europe being dominated by one power (Napoleonic France, Nazi Germany, the Soviet Union) who could threaten the island sanctuary.

    With Britain no longer in the EU, this time of heightened transatlantic tensions provides an opportunity to reclaim these geopolitical stances (and some lost relevance) as a vital interlocutor between America and Europe.

    Nato on the brink

    Trump is notoriously erratic and unpredictable, yet one of his most consistent motifs has been to question Nato and “free-riding” allies. Herein lies the spectre of the most terrifying British nightmare: an American withdrawal from Nato.

    Britain and the US have, historically, both articulated their role as that of offshore balancer in relation to continental Europe. The threat against which they have been balancing since the end of the second world war is the Soviet Union and then Russia.

    If the Trump administration ceases to regard Russia as a threat or sees no utility in acting in its historic balancing role, the UK-US relationship will be placed under serious threat. For all of the importance of Anglo-Saxon identity tropes, kith and kin and the special relationship, alliances are best nurtured in conditions of shared interests.

    Want more politics coverage from academic experts? Every week, we bring you informed analysis of developments in government and fact check the claims being made.

    Sign up for our weekly politics newsletter, delivered every Friday.

    Nato has been the real cornerstone of UK foreign, defence and security policy since the North Atlantic treaty’s inking in 1949, and is beloved of both Labour and Conservative politicians. US abandonment would be devastating. Thus it is Starmer’s greatest challenge and opportunity.

    The reality is that Nato is centred on continental Europe and always has been. Starmer can gain common ground with Trump at this critical juncture by emphasising Britain’s islandness, and the US’s similar separation from the continent.

    Starmer could position Britain as a mid-Atlantic interlocutor, close to Europe but not of Europe – appealing to the antipathy of some in the Trump administration about the continent. And his government has already gained Trump’s approval by increasing defence spending, an act that will also please nervous European governments.

    Global Britain?

    At this moment, Britain seems closer to the EU than it has been since 2016. Foreign and defence policy remain, to some extent, unfulfilled gaps in the EU’s portfolio. If Starmer can forge a close relationship around these issues, he can undercut some of the disappointments around Brexit, such as Britain being viewed as less relevant internationally and losing a seat at European security discussions.

    Notwithstanding the latest increase in defence spending, the British Army is smaller than it has been for several hundred years. Cuts to foreign aid, along with the merging of international development with the Foreign Office have prompted questions around Britain’s international clout.

    Yet its leaders remain high profile and listened to, with Starmer managing to cut a dignified figure in an era of posturing strongmen. He will need to convince Trump and his team that Europe (and Nato) is worthy of their time and attention. He must emphasise their common ground as offshore balancers, capable of providing a counterweight to Russia.

    EU leaders will also need to be reassured of Britain’s commitment to the continent after Brexit. Pressing harder for a UK-EU security pact is one way Starmer could signal this.

    Starmer’s White House visit was seen as a diplomatic success, but the mood has changed after Zelensky’s visit.
    Number 10/Flickr, CC BY-NC-ND

    Trump repeatedly emphasises the personal aspect of politics, seeing states and alliances through a prism of which leaders are willing to flatter him or, at the very least, be “respectful”. Starmer grasped this early on and thus has a shot at forging a productive relationship with Trump, however painful it might be for some in his party.

    Yet the stakes are much higher than disgruntled backbenchers. The Labour party, with its internationalist roots, is deeply proud of the foreign policies of Clement Attlee and Ernest Bevin (although less so of Tony Blair’s). Although it may be stressed in different terms to their Conservative opponents, the party is just as concerned with retaining relevance and influence on the world stage.

    If this Labour government can find a way to successfully act as a bridge – by interesting Trump in Europe and convincing the EU that they are a reliable partner – then this not only salves some of the wounds of Brexit, it also potentially keeps Nato alive, for now.

    Nick Whittaker 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. Britain can still be a bridge between the US and Europe – here’s how Starmer can prove it – https://theconversation.com/britain-can-still-be-a-bridge-between-the-us-and-europe-heres-how-starmer-can-prove-it-251405

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: Why a US minerals deal with Ukraine won’t deter Russian aggression

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Patrick E. Shea, Senior Lecturer in International Relations and Global Governance, University of Glasgow

    The US vice-president, J.D. Vance, recently told Fox News that “the very best security guarantee” to prevent Russia from invading Ukraine again was “to give Americans economic upside in the future of Ukraine”.

    The implication is that the much-debated minerals deal, in which an investment fund managed by Kyiv and Washington would receive revenue from Ukraine’s natural resources, would create American economic interests in Ukraine. American security interests, it is suggested, could soon follow.

    Vance’s comments came with the deal hanging in the balance. A meeting at the White House on February 28, where the deal was expected to be signed, turned into a shouting match between Vance, the US president, Donald Trump, and his Ukrainian counterpart, Volodymyr Zelensky.

    Zelensky has since attempted to patch up relations with the Trump administration, announcing that he is ready to sign the deal at “any time and in any convenient format”. And Vance, when asked whether an agreement was still on the table, said Trump “is still committed” to reaching a deal.

    Having access to Ukrainian minerals is an important opportunity for America’s missile system electronics and electric vehicle industries. Ukraine is, for example, home to around one-third of all European lithium deposits, the key component in batteries.

    This access is particularly important now that China, which currently accounts for a high proportion of certain US mineral imports, has imposed a ban on exporting rare minerals to the US in retaliation for Trump’s tariff policies.

    But, while Ukraine’s minerals are tempting to the US and other world powers, a deal with Trump won’t help Ukraine’s security situation.

    Trump’s approach has two main flaws. First, research shows that investment typically follows security commitments, not the other way around. Investors seek markets that are stable and protected, rather than hoping their investments create those conditions.

    Previous US presidents have touted similar strategies without success. President William Howard Taft (1857-1930) championed “dollar diplomacy” in the early 20th century, promising that American investments would create stability across Latin America by “substituting dollars for bullets”.

    The reality proved quite different. Throughout this period, the US frequently used military force to protect oil interests in Latin America. But, because these interventions focused on extraction sites rather than defending entire countries, instability continued elsewhere in the region.

    Trump’s “America first” mantra suggests a similar pattern of defending American assets, and not necessarily the countries in which the assets reside.

    Second, the overall US commitment to protect American assets abroad is uncertain. The US has, since the end of the cold war, been selective about when and how it uses military force to protect overseas assets.

    Since 1991, the US military has intervened to protect American property in only four documented instances: Haiti in 2004, Lebanon in 2006, Egypt in 2011 and Yemen in 2012. These cases involved embassies and other smaller properties during periods of civil unrest, rather than defending economic interests.

    Recent presidents, including Trump, have been reluctant to use force to protect threatened American investments. US agribusiness giant Cargill, for example, had to close its operations in Ukraine’s eastern Donetsk region following Russia’s invasion in 2014.

    Building state capacity

    That said, economic relations with America can indeed bolster a partner state’s security. But my own research shows that this is largely through indirect channels, rather than the threat of military intervention.

    For example, US government departments, such as the US patent and trademark office, provide comprehensive training to partner states. Programmes involve training judges, police officers, prosecutors and policymakers to enforce intellectual property protections, administer land registries, combat counterfeiting and develop legal frameworks that protect investments.

    This capacity building not only helps American investors in these countries, but also improves the partner state’s overall capacity. More effective and capable bureaucracies are better able to manage and finance their military capabilities.

    Following Russia’s 2014 invasion of Ukraine, the US launched the agriculture and rural development support program. The initiative aimed to develop Ukraine’s institutional capacity for managing property rights and attracting diverse investments.

    The US Treasury brought in loan advisory firm First Financial Network to help Ukraine navigate its financial crisis after the invasion, while simultaneously building frameworks for foreign investment.

    By 2020, this partnership facilitated US investment firm Allrise Capital’s purchase of Odessa’s Chornomorets football stadium. This deal was described by John Morris, the president of First Financial Network, as demonstrating Ukraine’s ability “to sell assets to the international community”.

    These efforts did not deter Russia’s full-scale invasion in 2022. But they helped the Ukrainian government implement several administrative reforms in the years leading up to the invasion, including more efficient tax collection and professionalisation of civil servants. The government was better prepared for war than it would otherwise have been.

    The Ukrainian and Russian armies have been locked in battle for over three years.
    Kutsenko Volodymyr / Shutterstock

    If the US wants to enhance Ukraine’s security through economic means, the Trump administration would need to make two drastic changes.

    First, it would need to reinstate programmes that promote American investment abroad. After assuming office, Trump froze and began dismantling the United States Agency for International Development (USAid). The agency’s capacity-building efforts have security consequences.

    Second, for the US to have both an economic and security impact, Trump needs to reassure America’s allies. Assurances are not Trump’s speciality. On February 26, for example, Trump declined to say whether the US would defend Taiwan if it was attacked by China.

    Research suggests that investments follow alliances. But markets do not care about agreements alone. They respond to other signals too, like explicit statements of support. These statements of support also help to reassure allies and deter rivals.

    Unless Trump changes how he operates on the international stage, the economics of the mineral deal will not help Ukraine’s security situation.

    Patrick E. Shea 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. Why a US minerals deal with Ukraine won’t deter Russian aggression – https://theconversation.com/why-a-us-minerals-deal-with-ukraine-wont-deter-russian-aggression-251436

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI United Kingdom: Japan-UK Economic 2+2

    Source: United Kingdom – Government Statements

    News story

    Japan-UK Economic 2+2

    The UK and Japanese governments have met for the Economic 2+2 Ministers’ Meeting

    On March 7, from 6:30 p.m. to 8:30 p.m. for approximately 2 hours, the Japan-UK Economic 2+2 Ministers’ Meeting (“Economic 2+2”) was held. The meeting was attended by Mr. IWAYA Takeshi, Minister for Foreign Affairs of Japan, Mr. MUTO Yoji, Minister of Economy, Trade and Industry of Japan, the Rt. Hon. David Lammy MP, Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, and the Rt. Hon. Jonathan Reynolds MP, Secretary of State for Business and Trade of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. The overview of the meeting is as follows.

    At the outset, Minister Iwaya stated that it was his pleasure to host the first Japan-UK Economic 2+2 Ministers’ Meeting in Tokyo, the establishment of which was announced by the leaders of Japan and the UK to promote dialogue on how trade and economic security converges with foreign policy; and hoped that today’s meeting would be an opportunity for both countries, as each other’s closest security partners in Europe and Asia, to strengthen their economic ties, building on the strong foundations of the Japan-UK Global Strategic Partnership articulated by the Hiroshima Accord.

    Minister Muto stated that he welcomed holding the Japan-UK Economic 2+2 Ministers’ Meeting and expressed his expectations for enhanced cooperation in areas such as economic security, energy, and innovation between Japan and the UK, which share fundamental values and continue to build a strong relationship.

    Foreign Secretary Lammy thanked Japan for hosting this inaugural meeting and underscored the importance of the dialogue in addressing the increasing convergence between economic and foreign policy issues and the significance of UK-Japan collaboration to forge a path in an increasingly volatile world.

    Minister Reynolds stated national security and economic growth are mutually reinforcing, and that he looked forward to using the discussion to explore areas of cooperation where the UK and Japan can jointly mitigate global risks to economic growth and trade.

    The global economic order now faces significant challenges. With shared fundamental values including freedom, democracy, and rule of law, the four Ministers from Japan and the UK committed to work to uphold these values by sustaining and strengthening a free, fair, and rules-based global economic order, and discussed issues on Economic Security, Free and Open International Trade, Energy Security, Global South as follows.

    Economic Security

    The four Ministers concurred that, given challenges in global trade, enhancing economic resilience internationally is an important contributor to sustainable and stable global growth.

    The four Ministers affirmed that coordination between partners and like-minded countries is essential to bolster economic resilience. Ministers also confirmed that the relationship between Japan and the UK is increasingly important and expressed their joint ambition to strengthen cooperation on economic resilience and economic security, including sharing analysis and insights, enhancing supply chain resilience and cooperation on critical and emerging technology issues.

    The four Ministers instructed officials to have meetings to take forward discussions to address the economic security challenges facing Japan and the UK, including enhancing supply-chain resilience, developing a fair market, and other relevant issues – with a view to enhancing their economic security partnership.

    The four Ministers concurred that this would support the industrial strategy partnership as discussed in the Strategic Economic Policy and Trade Dialogue.

     The four Ministers expressed concern over economic coercion, non-market policies and practices including harmful industrial subsidies, market-distorting practices of state-owned enterprises, as well as forced technology transfer, and harmful non-market overcapacity and other market distortions resulting from the non-market policies and practices.

     The four Ministers also reconfirmed the importance of cooperating with like-minded countries to build resilient and reliable supply-chains, including those for critical minerals that are essential for net-zero transition and digitalisation.

     In this regard, the four Ministers concurred to explore criteria that take into account not only economic factors, but also factors linked to the Principles on Resilient and Reliable Supply Chains, comprising of transparency, diversification, security, sustainability, and trustworthiness and reliability.

     Furthermore, the four Ministers concurred on continuing discussions to strengthen the coordination of their respective policies to further promote and protect critical and emerging technologies, recognising the importance of strategic public-private partnership, information exchange on economic security and the value of our two countries’ like-mindedness. The four Ministers concurred on deepening cooperation on export controls and research security to further facilitate the exchange of controlled goods and technologies between the two countries.

     The four Ministers welcomed the signing of Memorandums of Understanding between Japanese and UK industry partners that will facilitate joint Japan-UK supply chains and collaboration in the development of next-generation quantum computing.

     The four Ministers concurred on further strengthening effective export controls on materials, technology, and research that could be used for military purposes in a way that keeps pace with rapid technological developments.

     The four Ministers expressed their desire to see a just and lasting peace in Ukraine which ensures its future sovereignty and security. The four Minister reaffirmed their continued support to Ukraine in pursuit of peace through strength, in line with Ukraine’s needs. The four Ministers expressed their resolve to continue our comprehensive sanctions and economic measures to restrict as far as possible the revenues, goods, and technology Russia uses to fund and conduct its illegal war of aggression against Ukraine.

     To that end, the four Ministers concurred to continue action against Russia and countries supporting the Russian military complex through technical discussions to prevent diversion of key critical, specialist and emerging technologies. They reiterated their concern for China’s increasing support to Russia and Russia’s defense industrial base, which is decisively enabling Russia to maintain its illegal war in Ukraine.

    Free and Open International Trade

     The four Ministers reaffirmed the importance of the rules-based multilateral trading system with the WTO at its core as an important structure that affords legal stability and predictability for businesses, and concurred on moving towards strengthening all of the WTO’s functions, including negotiation, monitoring, deliberation and dispute settlement, as it marks the 30th anniversary of its establishment with an eye to the outcome of the 14th WTO Ministerial Conference (MC14) scheduled for next March.

     The four Ministers recognised the role played by plurilateral discussions and negotiations within the WTO in advancing issues of interest and called for the early incorporation of the Investment Facilitation for Development Agreement and the Agreement on Electronic Commerce into the WTO’s legal framework.

     The four Ministers also confirmed that they will work closely together in WTO discussions, including addressing contemporary trade-related issues such as non-market policies and practices, as well as climate change.

     The four Ministers emphasised the importance of developing robust international rules and norms and effectively utilising existing tools to ensure a global level playing field.

     In addition, the Japanese Ministers welcomed the UK’s accession to the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP) last December, and the four Ministers recognised that the CPTPP is an important pillar in promoting a free and fair rules-based economic order in the Indo-Pacific region.

     The Ministers confirmed that they would continue to work closely together with other parties to ensure CPTPP remains a modern, high-standards agreement.

    Energy Security

     The four Ministers discussed energy security risks and opportunities for Japan-UK collaboration to support further development of clean energy supply-chains.

     Ministers welcomed the signing of the Memoranda of Cooperation on offshore wind cooperation among governments, organisations, companies and on cooperation in advanced robotics and autonomous systems, and welcomed the  civil-nuclear collaboration between companies and research institutions of both countries, including on advanced nuclear technologies, fusion energy, and  nuclear decommissioning.

     They reaffirmed that they would continue promoting energy cooperation between Japan and the UK to deliver energy security for their citizens.

     Furthermore, they acknowledged their collaboration in the clean energy sector and emphasised the importance of creating Japan-UK collaborative projects to accelerate the clean energy transition in third countries and to strengthen coordination in pursuit of this.  

     The four Ministers also reaffirmed their shared commitment to keeping a limit of 1.5C temperature rise within reach and achieving net zero by 2050.

     They confirmed the need to reduce reliance on energy supply from unreliable and hostile actors.

     All four Ministers concurred that Russia’s illegal, unjustifiable and unprovoked full-scale invasion of Ukraine threatens the security of the Euro-Atlantic and Indo-Pacific, which is inseparable.

    Engagement with Global South

     The four Ministers shared the recognition that it is important to further enhance cooperation with Global South countries to maintain and strengthen a rule-based international economic order and affirmed that they would engage with the Global South towards sustainable development and trade mechanisms that support economic development and poverty reduction.

     They noted the importance of the WTO 14th Ministerial Conference, which will be held in Cameroon – in supporting this.

    The four Ministers reaffirmed the need for Japan and the UK to remain advocates of a free, open, and rules-based international economic order in the face of growing risks of global economic fragmentation and concurred on continuing their bilateral cooperation in areas such as the economic policies of both countries and economic security, while deepening discussions and cooperation with like-minded countries in related fields.

    Updates to this page

    Published 7 March 2025

    MIL OSI United Kingdom –

  • MIL-OSI Global: Exhausted by the news? Here are 6 strategies to stay informed without getting overwhelmed − or misled by misinformation

    Source: The Conversation – USA – By Seth Ashley, Professor of Communication and Media, Boise State University

    Not all news sources are created equal. Noah Berger/AP Images

    Political spin is nothing new, and identifying reliable news and information can be hard to do during any presidency. But the return of Donald Trump to the White House has reignited debates over truth, accountability and the role of media in a deeply divided America.

    Misinformation is an umbrella term that covers all kinds of false and misleading content, and there is lots of it out there.

    During Trump’s chaotic first presidency, the president himself promoted false claims about COVID-19, climate change and the 2020 election.

    Now, in his second term, Trump is again using the bully pulpit of the presidency to spread false claims – for example, on Ukraine and Canada as well as immigration, inflation and, still, the 2020 election.

    Meanwhile, social media platforms such as Meta have ended fact-checking programs created after Trump’s first election win, and presidential adviser Elon Musk continues to use social media platform X to amplify Trump’s false claims and his own conspiracy theories.

    To stay informed while also arming yourself against misinformation, it’s crucial to practice what I call good “news hygiene” by developing strong news literacy skills.

    News literacy, as I argue in my open-access 2020 book “News Literacy and Democracy” and in recent research with colleagues, is about more than fact-checking and detecting AI-generated fakes. It’s about understanding how modern media works and how content is influenced, from TikTok “newsfluencers” to FOX News to The New York Times.

    Here are six ways to become a smarter, saner news consumer.

    1. Recognize the influence of algorithms

    Algorithms are the hidden computer formulas that mediate everything news consumers read, watch, click on and react to online. Despite the illusion of neutrality, algorithms shape people’s perceptions of reality and are designed to maximize engagement.

    Algorithmic recommendation engines that power everything from X to YouTube can even contribute to a slow-burn destabilization of American society by shoving consumers into partisan echo chambers that increase polarization and erode social trust.

    Sometimes, algorithms can feed falsehoods that warp people’s perceptions or tell them to engage in dangerous behavior. Facebook groups spreading “Stop the Steal” messages contributed to the Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol insurrection. TikTok algorithms had people drinking laundry detergent in the “borax challenge.” Dylann Roof killed nine Black people based on falsehoods from hate groups he found in search results.

    Rather than passively consuming whatever appears in your feeds – allowing brain rot to set in – actively seek out a variety of sources to inform you about current events. The news shouldn’t just tell you what you want to hear.

    And spread the word. People who simply understand that algorithms filter information are more likely to take steps to combat misinformation.

    2. Understand the economics of corporate news

    Media outlets operate within economic systems that shape their priorities.

    For-profit newsrooms, which produce the bulk of news consumed in the U.S., rely heavily on advertising revenue, which can reduce the quality of news and create a commercial bias. Places such as ABC, CNN and FOX, as well as local network TV affiliates, can still do good work, but their business model helps to explain sensational horse-race election coverage and false-balance reporting that leaves room for doubt on established facts about climate change and vaccines.

    At the same time, the economic outlook for news is not good. Declining revenues and staff cuts also reduce the quality of news.

    Nonprofit newsrooms and public media provide alternatives that generally prioritize public interest over profit. And if you have the budget, paying for quality journalism with a subscription can help credible outlets survive.

    Traditional journalism has never been perfect, but the collapse of the news business is unquestionably bad for democracy. Countries with better funding for public media tend to have stronger democracies, and compared with other rich nations, the U.S. spends almost nothing on public service broadcasting.

    3. Focus on source evaluation and verification

    Particularly with AI-generated content on the rise, source evaluation and verification are essential skills. Here are some ways to identify trustworthy journalism:

    • Quality of evidence: Are claims verified with support from a variety of informed individuals and perspectives?

    • Transparency about sources: Is the reporter clear about where their information came from and who shared it?

    • Adherence to ethical guidelines: Does the outlet follow the basic journalistic principles of accuracy and independence?

    • Corrections: Does the outlet correct its errors and follow up on incomplete reporting?

    Be cautious with content that lacks the author’s name, relies heavily on anonymous sources – or uses no sources at all – or is published by outlets with a clear ideological agenda. These aren’t immediate disqualifiers – some credible news magazines such as The Economist have no bylines, for example, and some sources legitimately need anonymity for protection – but watch out for news operations that routinely engage in these practices and obscure their motive for doing so.

    A good online verification practice is called “lateral reading.” That’s when you open new browser tabs to verify claims you see on news sites and social media. Ask: Is anyone else covering this, and have they reached similar conclusions?

    4. Examine your emotional reactions

    One of the hallmarks of misinformation is its ability to provoke strong emotional responses, whether outrage, fear or validation.

    These reactions, research shows, can cloud judgment and make people more susceptible to false or misleading information. The primitive brains of humans are wired to reject information that challenges our beliefs and to accept information we like, a phenomenon known as confirmation bias.

    When encountering content that sparks an emotional reaction, ask yourself: Who benefits from this narrative? What evidence supports it? Is this information informative or manipulative?

    If the answers make you suspicious, investigate further before acting or sharing.

    5. Guard against propaganda

    Everyone in politics works to shape narratives in order to gain support for their agenda. It’s called spin.

    But Trump goes further, spreading documented lies to pump up his followers and undermine the legitimacy of basic democratic institutions.

    He also targets media he doesn’t like. From discrediting critical outlets as “fake news” or calling journalists the “enemy of the people,” these tactics silence dissent, undermine public trust in journalism and alter perceptions around acceptable public discourse and behavior.

    Meanwhile, he amplifies information and people who support his political causes. This is called propaganda.

    Understanding the mechanics of propaganda – its use of repetition, emotional appeal, scapegoating, scare tactics and unrealistic promises – can help inoculate people against its influence.

    6. Stay engaged

    Democracy relies on an informed and active citizenry to hold accountable their government and the officials who work in it as well as other powerful players in society. Yet the sheer volume of misinformation and bad news these days can feel overwhelming.

    Rather than tuning out – what scholars call “news avoidance” – you can practice critical consumption of news.

    Read deeply, look beyond headlines and short video clips, question the framing of stories, and encourage discussions about the role of media in society. Share reliable information with your friends and colleagues, and model good news hygiene for others.

    Correcting misinformation is notoriously hard, so if someone you know shares it, start a dialogue by asking – privately and gently – where they heard it and whether they think it’s really true.

    Finally, set goals for your consumption. What are your information needs at any given moment, and where can you meet that need? Some experts say 30 minutes a day is enough. Don’t waste your time on garbage.

    Touch grass

    While it’s important to stay engaged, so is getting outside and connecting with nature to calm and soothe your busy brain. Logging off and connecting with people in real life will keep your support system strong for when things are tough. Protect your mental health by turning off notifications and taking breaks from your phone.

    Practicing good news hygiene isn’t just about protecting ourselves – it’s about fostering a media environment that supports democracy and informed participation.

    Seth Ashley 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. Exhausted by the news? Here are 6 strategies to stay informed without getting overwhelmed − or misled by misinformation – https://theconversation.com/exhausted-by-the-news-here-are-6-strategies-to-stay-informed-without-getting-overwhelmed-or-misled-by-misinformation-248807

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

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

    Source: European Parliament

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

    MIL OSI Europe News –

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

    Source: Universities – Science Po in English

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

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

    The first casualty is Ukraine

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

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

    The second casualty is Europe

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

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

    The harsh truth about Trump’s pivot to Russia

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

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

    A defining moment for Europeans

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

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

    Who will be part of it?

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

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

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

    MIL OSI Europe News –

  • MIL-OSI: ING to nominate Petri Hofsté and Stuart Graham as members of the Supervisory Board

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    ING to nominate Petri Hofsté and Stuart Graham as members of the Supervisory Board

    ING announced today that it will propose to appoint Petri Hofsté and Stuart Graham to the Supervisory Board at the Annual General Meeting (AGM) to be held on 22 April 2025. The proposed appointments are part of the agenda for ING’s 2025 AGM that has been published today. Upon decision by the AGM, the appointments will be effective as of 1 July 2025.

    Petri Hofsté (Dutch, 1961) has extensive experience in the financial and corporate sector, including as auditor, controller and CFO. She served as division director of Banking Supervision at De Nederlandsche Bank and held board positions at various financial institutions. Currently she is a member of the supervisory board at Achmea (until 15 April 2025), Royal Friesland Campina and Pon Holdings and is chair of the Nyenrode Foundation. Petri holds a master’s degree in Business Economics, Finance and Accounting from the Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, as well as a degree as chartered accountant.

    Stuart Graham (British/German, 1967) has more than three decades of experience in the financial sector. He is the co-founder and prior CEO of Autonomous Research, a leading global financial services research firm. Before that, he was a banking analyst at JP Morgan and Merrill Lynch and was regularly ranked as a leading equity research analyst on European banks. He currently is consultant to Trade Republic. Stuart holds a master’s degree in Modern History from Cambridge University.

    Karl Guha, chairman of the Supervisory Board of ING said: “The addition of Petri Hofsté and Stuart Graham to our board will allow ING to benefit greatly from their experience and insights as we execute our strategy to be the best European bank by accelerating growth, increasing impact and delivering value. I look forward to working with them.”

    The AGM agenda also includes the proposals to reappoint Steven van Rijswijk and Ljiljana Čortan for a term of four years to the Executive Board, and to reappoint Lodewijk Hijmans van den Bergh for a term of four years and Margarete Haase for a term of two years to the Supervisory Board. All four were (re)appointed at the AGM in 2021. All proposed (re)appointments have been approved by the European Central Bank.

    It will also be proposed to appoint Deloitte Accountants BV as the external auditor to provide assurance on the Sustainability Statement for a term of four years starting on 1 January 2026. At the 2024 AGM, Deloitte was appointed as external auditor for the audit of the financial statements for a term of four years starting on 1 January 2026.

    Full details of all agenda items are included in the proxy materials for our AGM. The proxy materials also include the 2024 Annual Report of ING, including the Annual Accounts and the reports of the Executive Board and the Supervisory Board, as published on 6 March 2025, as well as other information and documents as required by law. The proxy materials, including the agenda for the AGM, are available on our website (ing.com/agm).

    Registered shareholders may attend the AGM starting at 2 p.m., either in person at Muziekgebouw aan ’t IJ (Piet Heinkade 1, 1019 BR Amsterdam, the Netherlands) or remotely, by logging on to the electronic platform ‘Evote by ING’, available via ing.com/agm. The supporting materials published today provide further details on how to register, participate and vote. The AGM will also be webcast live via ing.com. Shareholders are advised to check the information on the website regularly for any updates, including details on admission requirements.

    Note for editors
    For more on ING, please visit www.ing.com. Frequent news updates can be found in the Newsroom. Photos of ING operations, buildings and its executives are available for download at Flickr.

    ING PROFILE

    ING is a global financial institution with a strong European base, offering banking services through its operating company ING Bank. The purpose of ING Bank is: empowering people to stay a step ahead in life and in business. ING Bank’s more than 60,000 employees offer retail and wholesale banking services to customers in over 100 countries.

    ING Group shares are listed on the exchanges of Amsterdam (INGA NA, INGA.AS), Brussels and on the New York Stock Exchange (ADRs: ING US, ING.N).

    ING aims to put sustainability at the heart of what we do. Our policies and actions are assessed by independent research and ratings providers, which give updates on them annually. ING’s ESG rating by MSCI was reconfirmed by MSCI as ‘AA’ in August 2024 for the fifth year. As of December 2023, in Sustainalytics’ view, ING’s management of ESG material risk is ‘Strong’. Our current ESG Risk Rating, is 17.2 (Low Risk). ING Group shares are also included in major sustainability and ESG index products of leading providers. Here are some examples: Euronext, STOXX, Morningstar and FTSE Russell. Society is transitioning to a low-carbon economy. So are our clients, and so is ING. We finance a lot of sustainable activities, but we still finance more that’s not. Follow our progress on ing.com/climate.

    IMPORTANT LEGAL INFORMATION

    Elements of this press release contain or may contain information about ING Groep N.V. and/ or ING Bank N.V. within the meaning of Article 7(1) to (4) of EU Regulation No 596/2014 (‘Market Abuse Regulation’).
    ING Group’s annual accounts are prepared in accordance with International Financial Reporting Standards as adopted by the European Union (‘IFRS- EU’). In preparing the financial information in this document, except as described otherwise, the same accounting principles are applied as in the 2024 ING Group consolidated annual accounts. All figures in this document are unaudited. Small differences are possible in the tables due to rounding.
    Certain of the statements contained herein are not historical facts, including, without limitation, certain statements made of future expectations and other forward-looking statements that are based on management’s current views and assumptions and involve known and unknown risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results, performance or events to differ materially from those expressed or implied in such statements. Actual results, performance or events may differ materially from those in such statements due to a number of factors, including, without limitation: (1) changes in general economic conditions and customer behaviour, in particular economic conditions in ING’s core markets, including changes affecting currency exchange rates and the regional and global economic impact of the invasion of Russia into Ukraine and related international response measures (2) changes affecting interest rate levels (3) any default of a major market participant and related market disruption (4) changes in performance of financial markets, including in Europe and developing markets (5) fiscal uncertainty in Europe and the United States (6) discontinuation of or changes in ‘benchmark’ indices (7) inflation and deflation in our principal markets (8) changes in conditions in the credit and capital markets generally, including changes in borrower and counterparty creditworthiness (9) failures of banks falling under the scope of state compensation schemes (10) non- compliance with or changes in laws and regulations, including those concerning financial services, financial economic crimes and tax laws, and the interpretation and application thereof (11) geopolitical risks, political instabilities and policies and actions of governmental and regulatory authorities, including in connection with the invasion of Russia into Ukraine and the related international response measures (12) legal and regulatory risks in certain countries with less developed legal and regulatory frameworks (13) prudential supervision and regulations, including in relation to stress tests and regulatory restrictions on dividends and distributions (also among members of the group) (14) ING’s ability to meet minimum capital and other prudential regulatory requirements (15) changes in regulation of US commodities and derivatives businesses of ING and its customers (16) application of bank recovery and resolution regimes, including write down and conversion powers in relation to our securities (17) outcome of current and future litigation, enforcement proceedings, investigations or other regulatory actions, including claims by customers or stakeholders who feel misled or treated unfairly, and other conduct issues (18) changes in tax laws and regulations and risks of non-compliance or investigation in connection with tax laws, including FATCA (19) operational and IT risks, such as system disruptions or failures, breaches of security, cyber-attacks, human error, changes in operational practices or inadequate controls including in respect of third parties with which we do business and including any risks as a result of incomplete, inaccurate, or otherwise flawed outputs from the algorithms and data sets utilized in artificial intelligence (20) risks and challenges related to cybercrime including the effects of cyberattacks and changes in legislation and regulation related to cybersecurity and data privacy, including such risks and challenges as a consequence of the use of emerging technologies, such as advanced forms of artificial intelligence and quantum computing (21) changes in general competitive factors, including ability to increase or maintain market share (22) inability to protect our intellectual property and infringement claims by third parties (23) inability of counterparties to meet financial obligations or ability to enforce rights against such counterparties (24) changes in credit ratings (25) business, operational, regulatory, reputation, transition and other risks and challenges in connection with climate change, diversity, equity and inclusion and other ESG-related matters, including data gathering and reporting and also including managing the conflicting laws and requirements of governments, regulators and authorities with respect to these topics (26) inability to attract and retain key personnel (27) future liabilities under defined benefit retirement plans (28) failure to manage business risks, including in connection with use of models, use of derivatives, or maintaining appropriate policies and guidelines (29) changes in capital and credit markets, including interbank funding, as well as customer deposits, which provide the liquidity and capital required to fund our operations, and (30) the other risks and uncertainties detailed in the most recent annual report of ING Groep N.V. (including the Risk Factors contained therein) and ING’s more recent disclosures, including press releases, which are available on www.ING.com.
    This document may contain ESG-related material that has been prepared by ING on the basis of publicly available information, internally developed data and other third-party sources believed to be reliable. ING has not sought to independently verify information obtained from public and third-party sources and makes no representations or warranties as to accuracy, completeness, reasonableness or reliability of such information.
    Materiality, as used in the context of ESG, is distinct from, and should not be confused with, such term as defined in the Market Abuse Regulation or as defined for Securities and Exchange Commission (‘SEC’) reporting purposes. Any issues identified as material for purposes of ESG in this document are therefore not necessarily material as defined in the Market Abuse Regulation or for SEC reporting purposes. In addition, there is currently no single, globally recognized set of accepted definitions in assessing whether activities are “green” or “sustainable.” Without limiting any of the statements contained herein, we make no representation or warranty as to whether any of our securities constitutes a green or sustainable security or conforms to present or future investor expectations or objectives for green or sustainable investing. For information on characteristics of a security, use of proceeds, a description of applicable project(s) and/or any other relevant information, please reference the offering documents for such security.
    This docuent may contain inactive textual addresses to internet websites operated by us and third parties. Reference to such websites is made for information purposes only, and information found at such websites is not incorporated by reference into this document. ING does not make any representation or warranty with respect to the accuracy or completeness of, or take any responsibility for, any information found at any websites operated by third parties. ING specifically disclaims any liability with respect to any information found at websites operated by third parties. ING cannot guarantee that websites operated by third parties remain available following the publication of this document, or that any information found at such websites will not change following the filing of this document. Many of those factors are beyond ING’s control.
    Any forward-looking statements made by or on behalf of ING speak only as of the date they are made, and ING assumes no obligation to publicly update or revise any forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information or for any other reason.
    This document does not constitute an offer to sell, or a solicitation of an offer to purchase, any securities in the United States or any other jurisdiction.

    Attachment

    The MIL Network –

  • MIL-OSI United Kingdom: New evidence reveals that all Londoners are now breathing cleaner air following the first year of the expanded Ultra Low Emission Zone (ULEZ)

    Source: Mayor of London

    1. Roadside Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2) levels, a toxic gas that exacerbates asthma, impedes lung development, and raises the risk of lung cancer, have decreased by a record 27% across the entire capital [1].
    2. Particle emissions (PM 2.5) from vehicle exhausts, are 31% lower in outer London in 2024 than they would have been without the ULEZ expansion. [2]
    3. The environmental impact of ULEZ has been substantial, with carbon emissions equivalent to nearly three million one-way passenger trips between Heathrow and New York saved [3]
    4. Air quality has improved at 99% of air quality monitoring sites across London since 2019, and London’s air quality is improving at a faster rate than the rest of England [4, 5]

    In London, around 4,000 premature deaths per year were previously attributed to toxic air [6]. Air pollution increases the risk of developing asthma, lung cancer, heart disease and stroke, and there is growing evidence that air pollution exposure increases the risk of developing dementia [7]. 

    In April 2019, the Mayor of London launched the world’s first 24-hour Ultra Low Emission Zone (ULEZ) in central London. The zone was expanded across inner London in 2021, and finally to cover the whole capital In August 2023, bringing the air quality and associated health benefits to the five million people living in outer London.

    A new City Hall report, extensively reviewed by an independent advisory group of experts* shows that the ULEZ has led to substantial improvements in air quality in outer London and across the capital. [1]

    Particle emissions (PM2.5) from vehicle exhausts are estimated to be 31% lower in outer London in 2024 than they would have been without the ULEZ expansion. Alongside NO2 and PM2.5 reductions, NOx (Nitrogen Oxides) emissions from cars and vans are also estimated to be 14 per cent lower in outer London. [2]

    The biggest reductions in NO2 levels have been in central London (54%) but there have also been substantial reductions in inner London (29%) and outer London (24%) [1].

    The boroughs that have seen the biggest reductions in NOx emissions due to the ULEZ expansion are Sutton, Merton, Croydon, Harrow and Bromley, where harmful emissions are estimated to be around 15 per cent lower in 2024 than would be expected without the expansion to outer London, which covers a large area of around 1250km2.

    Thanks to all phases of the ULEZ, NOx emissions from road transport are estimated to be 36 per cent lower across London in 2024, a saving of around 3400 tonnes – the equivalent of approximately one year of emissions from all passenger car trips in Los Angeles [8]. 

    The report also shows that the ULEZ has led to savings in carbon emissions.

    Cumulatively between 2019 and 2024, the equivalent of nearly three million one-way passenger trips between Heathrow and New York has been saved in carbon due to ULEZ as a whole [3]. 

    Deprived communities are seeing some of the biggest benefits. For some of the most deprived communities living near London’s busiest roads, there was an estimated 80 per cent reduction in people exposed to illegal levels of pollution in 2023 – this increases to 82 per cent in outer London, compared to a scenario without the ULEZ [9]. 

    Data from the report [2], alongside independent analysis [10] has found that the ULEZ expansion has not impacted footfall or retail and leisure spending in either outer London or London as a whole [8]. Visitor footfall in outer London increased by almost 2 per cent in the year after the London-wide ULEZ expansion.

    The Mayor of London, Sadiq Khan, said: “When I was first elected, evidence showed it would take 193 years to bring London’s air pollution within legal limits if the current efforts continued. However, due to our transformative policies we are now close to achieving it this year. Today’s report shows that ULEZ works, driving down levels of pollution, taking old polluting cars off our roads and bringing cleaner air to millions more Londoners. 

    “The decision to expand the ULEZ was not something I took lightly, but this report shows it was the right one for the health of all Londoners. It has been crucial to protect the health of Londoners, support children’s lung growth, and reduce the risk of people developing asthma, lung cancer and a host of other health issues related to air pollution.   

    “With boroughs in outer London seeing some of the biggest reductions in harmful emissions and London’s deprived communities also seeing greater benefits, this report shows why expanding ULEZ London-wide was so important. 

    “Thanks to ULEZ and our other policies, all Londoners are now breathing substantially cleaner air – but there is still more to do, and I promise to keep taking action as we build a greener, fairer London for everyone.”    

    TfL data also shows that Londoners have continued to upgrade their vehicles to cleaner models with 96.7 per cent of vehicles seen driving in London now ULEZ compliant, up from 91.6 per cent in June 2023 and 39 per cent in February 2017, when changes associated with the ULEZ began. Van compliance in outer London is over 90 per cent for the first time (90.7 per cent). In February 2017, just 12 per cent of vans met the ULEZ standards, demonstrating the schemes’ impact on reducing the number of more polluting older vans driving in London. [2]

    The data also shows there were nearly 100,000 fewer non-compliant vehicles detected in London on an average day in September 2024 compared to June 2023, when the Mayor announced his plans to extend the ULEZ to outer London – a 58 per cent reduction in non-compliant vehicles. This has been aided by the Mayor’s scrappage scheme, which provided around £200m to support Londoners to switch to cleaner vehicles. The scrappage schemes that supported the introduction of the ULEZ to central London, and the expansion to inner London, were successful in removing 15,232 older and more polluting vehicles from London’s roads. Over 54,700 further applications were approved before the scheme closed in September 2024, including over 400 vehicles donated to humanitarian and medical efforts in Ukraine. A ULEZ scrappage scheme evaluation report to be published shortly will set out the full impact of the scheme, including the total numbers of vehicles scrapped, replaced and donated. 

    The ULEZ is the centrepiece of a range of measures the Mayor and TfL is implementing to tackle London’s toxic air, including putting a record number of 1900 zero-emission buses on the roads. Since 2019, air quality has improved in 99 per cent of air quality monitoring sites included in the analysis (8) across London, thanks to these measures and wider transport policies, with 80 per cent of monitoring locations showing average NO2 concentration reductions of more than 10 µg/m3, which is a quarter of the legally permitted annual NO2 concentration.   

    London’s air quality is improving at a faster rate compared to the rest of England (2017-2024). This is particularly notable in outer London where concentrations have improved more rapidly over recent years and are now similar to the rest of England average, which has historically been lower than London [9].  

    Dr Maria Neira, Director, Department of Environment, Climate Change and Health at the World Health Organization: “Improving air quality through initiatives like the Ultra Low Emission Zone in London is crucial for protecting public health and reducing the burden of disease. Cleaner air leads to healthier communities, lower rates of respiratory and cardiovascular illnesses, and a better quality of life for all residents. The World Health Organization commends the efforts of cities like London in implementing measures to reduce emissions from vehicles and improve air quality, which ultimately contribute to a healthier and more sustainable urban environment.”

    Anne Hidalgo, Mayor of Paris, said: “Reducing car traffic is one of our greatest opportunities to address the climate emergency. Under the leadership of Mayor Khan, London is showing us what safer, healthier, and greener communities look like, and the results of London’s clean air zone speaks for itself. I commend Mayor Khan for his commitment, leadership and vision to addressing the climate crisis and protecting the lives and health of city residents. London is demonstrating once again that cities lead the fight against climate change.”

    Rosamund Adoo-Kissi-Debrah CBE, Global Heath Advocate and Founder of the Ella Roberta Foundation said: “I am delighted that the latest analysis since the expansion of ULEZ to outer London shows that air pollution has reduced.  My daughter Ella died from emissions from the South Circular Road close to where we live, and I will not stop until everyone in London can breathe safe, clean air, regardless of where they live in the city.  People’s health, particularly children’s, should always be prioritised by society, and I look forward to hearing what further plans the Mayor has to continue to clean up the air for all Londoners.  ULEZ was an important step, but there is so much more to do, and I will ensure that politicians and decision-makers are held to account, and do all they can to protect people’s health and clean up the air we breathe.”

    Christina Calderato, TfL’s Director of Strategy, said: “Bold and ambitious environmental schemes like the ULEZ are pivotal to making tangible long-term air quality improvements to tackle a public health crisis, as shown in this new report. Everyone in the capital is now breathing cleaner air because of ULEZ. Harmful NO2 concentrations are 27 per cent lower across the city than if there had been no ULEZ. There’s less PM2.5 exhaust emissions and NOx pollutants from cars and vans in outer London – an even greater reduction than reported in the first six months of ULEZ showing the continued success of the scheme.  

    “It is great to see it making a real difference to the air Londoners breathe, and together with our efforts to decarbonise the public transport network, will see generations to come reaping the benefits of a greener, cleaner London.” 

    Dr Gary Fuller, Imperial College London, and Chair of the ULEZ Advisory Group, said: “Each phase of the ULEZ has led to clear improvements in the air pollution next to London’s roads. This is good news for the current and future health of Londoners, as well as those who travel to London for work or leisure.   

    “The analysis in this report benefited from an international advisory group of scientists, all with experience in assessing the impacts of urban clean air policies. We worked with the Mayor’s team to stress-test key parts of the analysis and concluded that the core methodology used in this report, and in previous ULEZ reports, was appropriate and robust. The ULEZ is one of over 300 such schemes across the UK and Europe, and many cities are looking to London’s ULEZ results to inform their own plan.”

    Jemima Hartshorn, Director, Mums for Lungs said: “Today is a good day for children, and all of us: Air pollution has been reduced due to the pioneering measures of our Mayor and we are so glad about that. But air pollution across the country and even London remains too high. Hopefully, the national Government will learn from this success and support Mayors and councils in stopping pollution from diesel and wood burning making us sick.”

    Larissa Lockwood, Director of Policy and Campaigns at Global Action Plan said: “Clean air is a health and social justice issue. This report shows that bold, pro-environment policies can be successful – both in terms of health benefits and electoral success. We celebrate the air quality improvements from ULEZ, urge the Mayor to continue cleaning up the air in London and hope that other political leaders across the UK and the world will be inspired to implement bold measures to tackle air pollution.”

    Izzy Romilly, Sustainable Transport Manager at Possible said: “The largest clean air zone in the world has been a triumph. We’ve slashed pollution, and we’ve protected the lungs of the most vulnerable Londoners, with the biggest benefits being felt in areas of highest deprivation. Now, national government and leaders around the world should learn the lessons of ULEZ and show the same ambition to clean up toxic air. Here in London, these findings should give the Mayor the courage to go further and faster on tackling harmful emissions. We need to see more action on transport and traffic, a serious tax on SUVs, and a diesel phase out by 2030.”

    Jane Burston, CEO at Clean Air Fund said: “The new data shows how the ULEZ is making a real difference to the quality of the air Londoners breathe. It’s especially encouraging to see that the communities living near the busiest roads are seeing substantial benefits one year on. London’s progress provides an inspiring blueprint for others, including those in our Breathe Cities initiative, by showing how tackling air pollution can improve lives, boost public health and address the climate crisis.”

    Barbara Stoll, Senior Director at Clean Cities Campaign said: “Despite fierce opposition – even from the government of the time – the Mayor stood firm, and the results speak for themselves. The ULEZ shows that when city leaders have vision and determination, they can reduce inequities and transform urban life for the better. We urge the Mayor to continue his leadership in championing healthy, climate-friendly transport and to stay committed to making London the world’s first truly electric-vehicle-ready global city.”

    Michael Solomon Williams from Campaign for Better Transport said: “This report shows that clean air zones work and other cities should take encouragement from London’s experience. Reducing the harmful effects of road transport and ensuring there are good public transport, walking and cycling options are key to creating healthier, happier communities.”

    Livi Elsmore, Campaign Manager, Healthy Air Coalition said: “Over a year on from the expansion of the Ultra Low Emission Zone (ULEZ) in London, we are delighted to see significant progress made in cleaning up the capital’s air to protect the health of everyone who lives and works in the capital, and future generations of Londoners.

    “Contributing to as many as 4,000 deaths each year in London, air pollution poses the greatest environmental threat to our health. Measures like the ULEZ are among the most effective tools we have to tackle toxic air and protect public health.

    “And the impact of ULEZ is now clear: toxic nitrogen dioxide emissions are 27% lower than they would be without the scheme.

    “We call on the Mayor of London to continue showing leadership through building a pathway for London to meet the air pollution levels recommended by the WHO, meet London’s transport targets, and take concerted action on unnecessary wood burning in the capital.”

    Henry Gregg, Director of External Affairs, Asthma + Lung UK said: “A year on it’s great to see the ULEZ expansion is having a positive impact on improving the capital’s air quality and helping protect the lung health of millions of people, every day. Expanding ULEZ reduced the number of polluting vehicles on the road and is helping every Londoner, regardless of age, ethnicity or background, breathe cleaner air. Air pollution is a public health emergency that affects us all – particularly the estimated 585,000 people in Greater London who have asthma or Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD). Air pollution can worsen the symptoms of people with existing lung conditions, such as breathlessness, wheezing and coughing, and potentially lead to life-threating asthma attacks or serious flare-ups. In some cases it can lead to hospitalisation and even death – up to 4,000 early deaths a year in the capital are linked to air pollution. Unfairly, it is often those living in the most deprived communities who are affected the most by breathing in toxic air. There are no safe levels of air pollution and the government must commit to an ambitious Clean Air Act, which could protect people, wherever they live, from the dangers of polluted air.”

    Yvonne Aki-Sawyerr OBE, Mayor of Freetown and Co-Chair of C40 Cities: “Clean air is not a privilege, it’s a fundamental right. The success of London’s clean air zone serves as a powerful testament to the impact of bold action in protecting public health, especially for our most vulnerable communities. As his fellow Co-Chair of C40 Cities, I am proud to stand alongside him, and I urge leaders everywhere to take note of these transformative policies.”

    Giuseppe Sala, Mayor of Milan: “The impact of London’s clean air zone is clear: better air, fewer emissions, and a healthier future for all Londoners. Milan supports and celebrates this achievement, as we work on similar policies to protect the health of our residents and make our cities greener and more liveable for all.” 

    Martin Lutz, formerly Berlin City Government, and member of the ULEZ Advisory Group, said: “With the latest step of extending the ULEZ to the whole city, London has set a global benchmark for how access restrictions for high emission vehicles can effectively reduce air pollution from cars.    

    “This one year report makes a very strong case for the success and health benefits of the ULEZ for Londoners, thanks to the wealth of data and measurements that have been painstakingly collected over the years of the zone’s gradual expansion.”   

    Ludo Vandenthoren, Mutualités Libres (a Belgian mutual health insurance firm), and member of the ULEZ Advisory Group, said: “It was an honour to work on this project alongside experts in the field. The GLA and TfL, with their commitment to the citizens of London, demonstrated great receptiveness to the feedback we provided. We were able to contribute information on the socio-economic aspects and health effects of air quality, offer input on the statistical methodology specific to this topic, and share valuable references for their reports. I am particularly proud that the study from the Belgian Independent Health Insurance Funds on air quality is seen as an inspiring model for their own approach. The London ULEZ is an ambitious initiative that will undoubtedly inspire other cities.”  

    Professor David Carslaw, University of York, and member of the ULEZ Advisory Group, said: “This report represents a detailed evaluation of the emissions and air quality impacts of the London ULEZ. London and its surrounding areas are fortunate in having one of the world’s most comprehensive air quality networks, which provides a strong basis for the evaluation of the air quality impacts of the ULEZ as it has expanded in recent years. The results show the benefits of the ULEZ are widely distributed and have accelerated the improvement in London’s air quality.”  

    Dr Chinthika Piyasena, Consultant Neonatologist in London said: “As a Londoner and clinician, I’ve long advocated for bold action on air pollution because the science is clear: toxic air harms babies before they even take their first breath. Nitrogen dioxide exposure has been linked to an increased risk of stillbirth, babies being born too early or too small, and even impacts brain development. So a year after the full expansion of ULEZ, it’s incredible to see real progress in reducing this pollutant. Every step we take towards cleaner air, is a step toward healthier pregnancies, healthier babies and a healthier future for all Londoners.”   

    Simon Birkett, Founder and Director of Clean Air in London said: “I have campaigned for low emission zones since April 2006 – almost two years before the first phase was implemented in London. I was also the first to call for an inner London low emission zone. It is particularly pleasing therefore that the Mayor’s One-Year report on ULEZ expansion – the ninth phase of low and ultra-low emission zones in London – has shown again that these big solutions work. In fact, together with related measures such as cleaner buses and taxis, they have almost single handedly helped London to slash nitrogen dioxide (“NO2”) concentrations by 2/3 near busy roads, and nearly comply with legal limits and the WHO’s 2005 air quality guideline of 40 micrograms per cubic metre (“mg/m3”) by 2025, probably ahead of smaller UK cities.” 

    Professor Kevin Fenton, London Regional Director, Office for Health Improvement and Disparities and Regional Director of Public Health, NHS London said: “As well as reducing air pollution in outer London, this report also shows that ULEZ and its expansions continue to have a positive impact on air quality across the city. Londoners are now benefiting from improved air quality, and this is particularly true for those communities who live in more deprived areas of London.  

    “In a city where over 480,000 Londoners have a diagnosis of asthma and are more vulnerable to the impacts of air pollution, a 27% reduction in harmful roadside NO2 concentrations across the whole city will bring about invaluable health benefits. And I’m optimistic that Londoners will continue to benefit from better air quality, and subsequently, better health, due to the ULEZ and its expansions.”

    Chris Streather, Medical Director and Chief Clinical Information Officer, NHS England London, said: “It’s encouraging to see that all Londoners have experienced a significant improvement in air quality, and this reduction in pollutants directly contributes to better health outcomes.

    “Vital initiatives like the ULEZ create a healthier urban environment, reducing the risks of respiratory conditions such as asthma and lung cancer, and ultimately lessen the burden on our health system.”

    MIL OSI United Kingdom –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Trump has ‘declared war against the American people’, says Ralph Nader

    Democracy Now!

    AMY GOODMAN: President Trump addressed a joint session of Congress in a highly partisan 100-minute speech, the longest presidential address to Congress in modern history on Wednesday.

    Trump defended his sweeping actions over the past six weeks.

    PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP: We have accomplished more in 43 days than most administrations accomplished in four years or eight years, and we are just getting started.

    AMY GOODMAN: President Trump praised his biggest campaign donor, the world’s richest man, Elon Musk, who’s leading Trump’s effort to dismantle key government agencies and cut critical government services.

    PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP: And to that end, I have created the brand-new Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE). Perhaps you’ve heard of it. Perhaps.

    Which is headed by Elon Musk, who is in the gallery tonight. Thank you, Elon. He’s working very hard. He didn’t need this. He didn’t need this. Thank you very much. We appreciate it.

    AMY GOODMAN: Some Democrats laughed and pointed at Elon Musk when President Trump made this comment later in his speech.

    PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP: It’s very simple. And the days of rule by unelected bureaucrats are over.

    AMY GOODMAN: During his speech, President Trump repeatedly attacked the trans and immigrant communities, defended his tariffs that have sent stock prices spiraling, vowed to end Russia’s war on Ukraine and threatened to take control of Greenland.

    PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP: We also have a message tonight for the incredible people of Greenland: We strongly support your right to determine your own future, and if you choose, we welcome you into the United States of America. We need Greenland for national security and even international security, and we’re working with everybody involved to try and get it.

    But we need it, really, for international world security. And I think we’re going to get it. One way or the other, we’re going to get it.


    ‘A declaration of war against the American people.’  Video: Democracy Now!

    AMY GOODMAN: During Trump’s 100-minute address, Democratic lawmakers held up signs in protest reading “This is not normal,” “Save Medicaid” and “Musk steals.”

    One Democrat, Congressmember Al Green of Texas, was removed from the chamber for protesting against the President.

    PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP: Likewise, small business optimism saw its single-largest one-month gain ever recorded, a 41-point jump.

    REPUBLICAN CONGRESSMEMBER 1: Sit down!

    REPUBLICAN CONGRESSMEMBER 2: Order!

    SPEAKER MIKE JOHNSON: Members are directed to uphold and maintain decorum in the House and to cease any further disruptions. That’s your warning. Members are engaging in willful and continuing breach of decorum, and the chair is prepared to direct the sergeant-at-arms to restore order to the joint session.

    Mr Green, take your seat. Take your seat, sir.

    DEMOCRAT CONGRESS MEMBER AL GREEN: He has no mandate to cut Medicaid!

    SPEAKER MIKE JOHNSON: Take your seat. Finding that members continue to engage in willful and concerted disruption of proper decorum, the chair now directs the sergeant-at-arms to restore order, remove this gentleman from the chamber.

    AMY GOODMAN: That was House Speaker Mike Johnson, who called in security to take Texas Democratic Congressmember Al Green out. Afterwards, Green spoke to reporters after being removed.

    Democrat Congressman Al Green (Texas) . . . “I have people who are very fearful. These are poor people, and they have only Medicaid in their lives when it comes to their healthcare.” Image: DN screenshot APR

    DEMOCRAT CONGRESS MEMBER AL GREEN: The President said he had a mandate, and I was making it clear to the President that he has no mandate to cut Medicaid.

    I have people who are very fearful. These are poor people, and they have only Medicaid in their lives when it comes to their healthcare. And I want him to know that his budget calls for deep cuts in Medicaid.

    He needs to save Medicaid, protect it. We need to raise the cap on Social Security. There’s a possibility that it’s going to be hurt. And we’ve got to protect Medicare.

    These are the safety net programmes that people in my congressional district depend on. And this President seems to care less about them and more about the number of people that he can remove from the various programmes that have been so helpful to so many people.

    AMY GOODMAN: Texas Democratic Congressmember Al Green.

    We begin today’s show with Ralph Nader, the longtime consumer advocate, corporate critic, former presidential candidate. Ralph Nader is founder of the Capitol Hill Citizen newspaper. His most recent lead article in the new issue of Capitol Hill Citizen is titled “Democratic Party: Apologise to America for ushering Trump back in.”

    He is also the author of the forthcoming book Let’s Start the Revolution: Tools for Displacing the Corporate State and Building a Country That Works for the People.

    Medicaid, Social Security, Medicare, all these different programmes. Ralph Nader, respond overall to President Trump’s, well, longest congressional address in modern history.

    Environmentalist and consumer protection activist Ralph Nader . . . And he’s taken Biden’s genocidal policies one step further by demanding the evacuation of Palestinians from Gaza. Image: DN screenshot APR

    RALPH NADER: Well, it was also a declaration of war against the American people, including Trump voters, in favour of the super-rich and the giant corporations. What Trump did last night was set a record for lies, delusionary fantasies, predictions of future broken promises — a rerun of his first term — boasts about progress that don’t exist.

    In practice, he has launched a trade war. He has launched an arms race with China and Russia. He has perpetuated and even worsened the genocidal support against the Palestinians. He never mentioned the Palestinians once.

    And he’s taken Biden’s genocidal policies one step further by demanding the evacuation of Palestinians from Gaza.

    But taking it as a whole, Amy, what we’re seeing here defies most of dictionary adjectives. What Trump and Musk and Vance and the supine Republicans are doing are installing an imperial, militaristic domestic dictatorship that is going to end up in a police state.

    You can see his appointments are yes people bent on suppression of civil liberties, civil rights. You can see his breakthrough, after over 120 years, of announcing conquest of Panama Canal.

    He’s basically said, one way or another, he’s going to take Greenland. These are not just imperial controls of countries overseas or overthrowing them; it’s actually seizing land.

    Now, on the Greenland thing, Greenland is a province of Denmark, which is a member of NATO. He is ready to basically conquer a part of Denmark in violation of Section 5 of NATO, at the same time that he has displayed full-throated support for a hardcore communist dictator, Vladimir Putin, who started out with the Russian version of the CIA under the Soviet Union and now has over 20 years of communist dictatorship, allied, of course, with a number of oligarchs, a kind of kleptocracy.

    And the Republicans are buying all this in Congress. This is complete reversal of everything that the Republicans stood for against communist dictators.

    So, what we’re seeing here is a phony programme of government efficiency ripping apart people’s programmes. The attack on Social Security is new, complete lies about millions of people aged 110, 120, getting Social Security cheques.

    That’s a new attack. He left Social Security alone in his first term, but now he’s going after [it]. So, what they’re going to do is cut Medicaid and cut other social safety nets in order to pay for another tax cut for the super-rich and the corporation, throwing in no tax on tips, no tax on Social Security benefits, which will, of course, further increase the deficit and give the lie to his statement that he wants a balanced budget.

    So we’re dealing with a deranged, unstable pathological liar, who’s getting away with it. And the question is: How does he get away with it, year after year? Because the Democratic Party has basically collapsed.

    They don’t know how to deal with a criminal recidivist, a person who has hired workers without documents and exploited them, a person who’s a bigot against immigrants, including legal immigrants who are performing totally critical tasks in home healthcare, processing poultry, meat, and half of the construction workers in Texas are undocumented workers.

    So, as a bully, he doesn’t go after the construction industry in Texas; he picks out individuals.

    I thought the most disgraceful thing, Amy, yesterday was his use of these unfortunate people who suffered as props, holding one up after another. But they were also Trump’s crutches to cover up his contradictory behavior.

    So, he praised the police yesterday, but he pardoned over 600 people who attacked violently the police [in the attack on the Capitol] on 6 January 2021 and were convicted and imprisoned as a result, and he let them out of prison. I thought the most —

    JUAN GONZÁLEZ: Ralph? Ralph, I —

    RALPH NADER: — the most heartrending thing was that 13-year-old child, who wanted to be a police officer when he grew up, being held up twice by his father. And he was so bewildered as to what was going on. And Trump’s use of these people was totally reprehensible and should be called out.

    Now, more basically, the real inefficiencies in government, they’re ignoring, because they are kleptocrats. They’re ignoring corporate crimes on Medicaid, Medicare, tens of billions of dollars every year ripping off Medicare, ripping off government contracts, such as defence contracts.

    He’s ignoring hundreds of billions of dollars of corporate welfare, including that doled out to Elon Musk — subsidies, handouts, giveaways, bailouts, you name it. And he’s ignoring the bloated military budget, which he is supporting the Republicans in actually increasing the military budget more than the generals have asked for. So, that’s the revelation —

    JUAN GONZÁLEZ: Ralph? Ralph, if I — Ralph, if I can interrupt? I just need to —

    RALPH NADER: — that the Democrats need to pursue.

    JUAN GONZÁLEZ: Ralph, I wanted to ask you about — specifically about Medicaid and Medicare. You’ve mentioned the cuts to these safety net programmes. What about Medicaid, especially the crisis in this country in long-term care? What do you see happening in this Trump administration, especially with the Republican majority in Congress?

    RALPH NADER: Well, they’re going to slash — they’re going to move to slash Medicaid, which serves over 71 million people, including millions of Trump voters, who should be reconsidering their vote as the days pass, because they’re being exploited in red states, blue states, everywhere, as well.

    Yeah, they have to cut tens of billions of dollars a year from Medicaid to pay for the tax cut. That’s number one. Now they’re going after Social Security. Who knows what the next step will be on Medicare? They’re leaving Americans totally defenceless by slashing meat and poultry and food inspection laws, auto safety.

    They’re exposing people to climate violence by cutting FEMA, the rescue agency. They’re cutting forest rangers that deal with wildfires. They’re cutting protections against pandemics and epidemics by slashing and ravaging and suppressing free speech in scientific circles, like CDC and National Institutes of Health.

    They’re leaving the American people defenseless.

    And where are the Democrats on this? I mean, look at Senator Slotkin’s response. It was a typical rerun of a feeble, weak Democratic rebuttal. She couldn’t get herself, just like the Democrats in 2024, which led to Trump’s victory — they can’t get themselves, Juan, to talk specifically and authentically about raising the minimum wage, expanding healthcare, cracking down on corporate crooks that are bleeding out the incomes of hard-pressed American workers and the poor.

    They can’t get themselves to talk about increasing frozen Social Security budgets for 50 years, that 200 Democrats supported raising, but Nancy Pelosi kept them, when she was Speaker, from taking John Larson’s bill to the House floor.

    That’s why they lose. Look at her speech. It was so vague and general. They chose her because she was in the national security state. She was a former CIA. They chose her because they wanted to promote the losing version of the Democratic Party, instead of choosing Elizabeth Warren or Bernie Sanders, the most popular polled politician in America today.

    That’s who they chose. So, as long as the Democrats monopolise the opposition and crush third-party efforts to push them into more progressive realms, the Republican, plutocratic, Wall Street, war machine declaration of war against the American people will continue.

    We’re heading into the most serious crisis in American history. There’s no comparison.

    AMY GOODMAN: Ralph Nader, we’re going to have to leave it there, but, of course, we’re going to continue to cover these issues. And I also wanted to wish you, Ralph, a happy 91st birthday. Ralph Nader —

    RALPH NADER: I wish people to get the Capitol Hill Citizen, which tells people what they can really do to win democracy and justice back. So, for $5 or donation or more, if you wish, you can go to Capitol Hill Citizen and get a copy sent immediately by first-class mail, or more copies for your circle, of resisting and protesting and prevailing over this Trump dictatorship.

    AMY GOODMAN: Ralph Nader, longtime consumer advocate, corporate critic, four-time presidential candidate, founder of the Capitol Hill Citizen newspaper. This is Democracy Now!

    The original content of this programme is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 United States Licence. Republished by Asia Pacific Report under Creative Commons.

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –