Category: Ukraine

MIL-OSI USA News: Adjusting Imports of Steel into The United States
Source: The White House
class=”has-text-align-center”>BY THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

A PROCLAMATION
1. On January 11, 2018, the Secretary of Commerce (Secretary) transmitted to me a report on the Secretary’s investigation into the effect of imports of steel mill articles (steel articles) on the national security of the United States under section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962, as amended (19 U.S.C. 1862) (section 232). The Secretary found and advised me of his opinion that steel articles are being imported into the United States in such quantities and under such circumstances as to threaten to impair the national security of the United States.
2. In Proclamation 9705 of March 8, 2018 (Adjusting Imports of Steel Into the United States), I concurred in the Secretary’s finding that steel articles, as defined in clause 1 of Proclamation 9705 (as amended by clause 8 of Proclamation 9711 of March 22, 2018 (Adjusting Imports of Steel Into the United States)), are being imported into the United States in such quantities and under such circumstances as to threaten to impair the national security of the United States, and decided to adjust the imports of steel articles by imposing a 25 percent ad valorem tariff on such articles imported from most countries. Proclamation 9705 further stated that any country with which the United States has a security relationship is welcome to discuss alternative ways to address the threatened impairment of the national security caused by imports from that country, and noted that, should the United States and that country arrive at a satisfactory alternative means to address the threat to the national security such that the President determines that imports from that country no longer threaten to impair the national security, I may remove or modify the restriction on steel articles imports from that country and, if necessary, adjust the tariff as it applies to other countries, as the national security interests of the United States require.
3. In Proclamation 9705, I also directed the Secretary to monitor imports of steel articles and inform me of any circumstances that in the Secretary‘s opinion might indicate the need for further action under Section 232, as amended, with respect to such imports. Pursuant to Proclamation 9705, the Secretary was authorized to provide relief from the additional duties, based on a request from a directly affected party located in the United States, for any steel article determined not to be produced in the United States in a sufficient and reasonably available amount or of a satisfactory quality, or based upon specific national security considerations.
In subsequent proclamations, I noted the conclusion of discussions or the agreement on certain measures with the Argentine Republic (Argentina), Proclamation 9759 of May 31, 2018 (Adjusting Imports of Steel Into the United States); the Commonwealth of Australia (Australia), Proclamation 9759; the Federative Republic of Brazil (Brazil), Proclamation 9759; Proclamation 10064 of August 28, 2020 (Adjusting Imports of Steel Into the United States); Canada, Proclamation 9894 of May 19, 2019 (Adjusting Imports of Steel Into the United States; the United Mexican States (Mexico), Proclamation 9894; and the Republic of Korea (South Korea), Proclamation 9740 of April 30, 2018 (Adjusting Imports of Steel Into the United States). President Biden noted the conclusion of discussions or the agreement on certain measures with the European Union (EU) on behalf of its member countries, Proclamation 10328 of December 27, 2021 (Adjusting Imports of Steel Into the United States); Proclamation 10691 of December 28, 2023 (Adjusting Imports of Steel Into the United States); Japan, Proclamation 10356 of March 31, 2022 (Adjusting Imports of Steel Into the United States); and the United Kingdom (UK), Proclamation 10406 of May 31, 2022 (Adjusting Imports of Steel Into the United States), on alternative ways to address the threat to the national security. In addition, then-President Biden acknowledged the close relationship with Ukraine and exempted steel articles from Ukraine from the tariff. Proclamation 10403 of May 27, 2022 (Adjusting Imports of Steel Into the United States); Proclamation 10588 of May 31, 2023 (Adjusting Imports of Steel Into the United States); Proclamation 10771 of May 31, 2024 (Adjusting Imports of Steel Into the United States). In Proclamation 10783 of July 10, 2024 (Adjusting Imports of Steel Into the United States), President Biden noted that imports of steel articles from Mexico had increased significantly as compared to their levels at the time of Proclamation 9894. Accordingly, he implemented a melt and pour requirement for imports of steel articles that are products of Mexico and increased the section 232 duty rate for imports of steel articles and derivative steel articles that are products of Mexico that are melted and poured in a country other than Mexico, Canada, or the United States.
- The Secretary has informed me that the initial 25 percent ad valorem tariff imposed by Proclamation 9705 has been an effective means of reducing imports, encouraging investment and expansion of production by domestic steel producers, and mitigating the threatened impairment of U.S. national security. Following the initial imposition of 25 percent ad valorem tariffs, the U.S. steel capacity utilization rate increased to above 80 percent.
- The Secretary has also informed me that, notwithstanding the impact of the tariff imposed by Proclamation 9705, imports of steel articles from certain countries exempted from the tariff or subject to alternative agreements have increased significantly, while excess capacity in the global steel industry has begun to increase again in recent years. For example, imports from Canada increased 18 percent since Canada was excluded from the section 232 tariffs. According to the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), global steel excess capacity is projected to reach approximately 630 million metric tons by 2026, more than total steel production in all OECD countries. At the same time, exports of steel from the People’s Republic of China (China) have recently surged, exceeding 114 million metric tons through November 2024 while displacing production in other countries and forcing them to export greater volumes of steel articles and derivative steel articles to the United States.
- Total steel imports as a share of U.S. consumption increased significantly in 2024, reaching nearly 30 percent, similar to the import share of U.S. consumption at the time the Secretary issued his January 11, 2018, report. Imports from countries with which the United States has reached alternative agreements have increased significantly as a share of total imports, from 74 percent in 2018 to 82 percent in 2024, while imports from countries subject to quantitative restrictions remain elevated regardless of changing U.S. demand conditions and the substantial investments made to expand the capabilities of the domestic industry. Increasing and persistently high import volumes from countries exempted from the duties or subject to other alternative agreements like quotas and tariff-rate quotas have captured the benefit of U.S. demand at the domestic industry’s expense and transmitted harmful effects onto the domestic industry. As steel import market share has increased, the domestic industry’s performance has been depressed, resulting in capacity utilization rates persistently lower than the 80 percent target level highlighted in the Secretary’s report.
- The Secretary has informed me that imports of steel articles from Canada and Mexico have increased significantly to levels that once again threaten to impair U.S. national security. Volumes from both Canada and Mexico increased overall, from 7.77 million metric tons in 2020 to 9.14 million metric tons in 2024. Imports have also surged in excess of historical norms of trade across numerous key product lines, such as long reinforcing bars, which have experienced import increases of 1,678 percent from Mexico and 564 percent from Canada. These surges have occurred while authorities in those countries have supported otherwise uncompetitive producers with subsidies and other interventions that have exacerbated the global excess capacity crisis. In addition, increasing import volumes and including Mexico’s imports from China, support a conclusion that there is transshipment or further processing of steel mill articles from countries that remain subject to the additional ad valorem tariff proclaimed in Proclamation 9705, or from countries seeking to evade quantitative restrictions.
- The Secretary has also informed me that alternative agreements with trading partners including Australia, the members of the EU, Japan, and the United Kingdom have been less effective in eliminating the threatened impairment of U.S. national security than the additional ad valorem tariff proclaimed in Proclamation 9705. As a result, imports of steel articles from these countries have increased as a share of total U.S. steel imports from 18.6 percent in 2020 to 20.7 percent in 2024. In addition, from 2022 to 2024, imports from countries subject to quotas (Argentina, Brazil, and South Korea) increased by approximately 1.5 million metric tons, even as U.S. demand declined by more than 6.1 million tons during the period. Argentina has continued to export steel to the United States at unsustainable quantities, especially a recent surge of semifinished products. Furthermore, Argentina’s lack of data transparency has continued to be of concern for the United States. From official trade statistics released by Argentina, it is difficult to assess the levels of steel being imported from places like China and Russia, and other potential sources of excess capacity. Brazilian imports from countries with meaningful levels of overcapacity, specifically China have grown tremendously in recent years, more than tripling since the institution of this quota arrangement.
- At the same time, these alternative agreements have not resulted in sufficient action by these trading partners to address non-market excess capacity caused primarily by China, or sufficient cooperation by these trading partners on issues like trade remedies and customs matters or monitoring bilateral steel trade. Some countries have also welcomed steel industry investments from non-market producers in countries like China seeking to exploit the agreements to obtain preferential access to the U.S. market. The agreements have therefore been detrimental to U.S. steel production and national security.
- The Secretary has informed me of similar problems with respect to the temporary exemption for imports of steel articles and derivative steel articles from Ukraine. Rather than supporting the Ukrainian steel industry and alleviating the economic harm caused by the ongoing conflict, the benefits of this temporary exemption have accrued primarily to producers in EU member countries, which have significantly increased duty-free exports to the U.S. market of steel articles processed from Ukrainian semi-finished steel. Since 2021, imports from Ukraine have remained steady at 0.5 percent of total U.S. imports, while imports from the European Union have increased 11.2 percent to 14.8 percent. As a result of the temporary exemption, these imports enter the U.S. market subject to neither the ad valorem tariff proclaimed in Proclamation 9705, nor the tariff-rate-quota system applicable to other imports of steel articles from EU producers as proclaimed in Proclamation 10328. This has facilitated evasion of both the section 232 measures and of antidumping duties that would be paid if the finished products were imported directly from Ukraine.
- The Secretary has informed me that producers in countries that remain subject to the program have continued to evade the measures by processing covered steel articles into additional downstream steel derivative products that were not included in the additional ad valorem tariffs proclaimed in Proclamation 9705 and Proclamation 9980 of January 24, 2020 (Adjusting Imports of Derivative Aluminum Articles and Derivative Steel Articles Into the United States). Imports of products such as fabricated structural steel, prestressed concrete strand, and others, have increased significantly since the issuance of Proclamation 9705 and Proclamation 9980, eroding the domestic industry’s customer base and resulting in depressed demand for steel articles produced in the United States.
- The Secretary has also informed me of certain ongoing challenges with the product exclusion process authorized by Proclamation 9705, Proclamation 9777 of August 29, 2018 (Adjusting Imports of Steel Into the United States), and Proclamation 9980 and implemented by subsequent regulations. This process has resulted in exclusions for a significant volume of imports, in a manner that undermines the purpose of the section 232 measures and threatens to impair national security. Certain general approved exclusions remain in effect for entire tariff lines of steel articles, notwithstanding the domestic industry’s potential to produce many excluded products.
- I determine that these developments and modifications to the tariffs announced in Proclamation 9705 have undermined the program’s national security objectives by preventing the domestic steel industry from achieving sustained production capacity utilization of at least 80 percent, as determined necessary in the Secretary’s report of January 11, 2018. I also determine that they have failed to achieve their articulated objectives. As a result, I determine that they have resulted in significantly increasing imports of steel articles that threaten to impair the national security.
- In light of the Secretary’s findings regarding the alternative agreements with South Korea proclaimed in Proclamation 9740; Argentina, Australia, and Brazil proclaimed in Proclamation 9759; Canada and Mexico proclaimed in Proclamation 9894; EU countries proclaimed in Proclamation 10328; Japan proclaimed in Proclamation 10356; and the United Kingdom proclaimed in Proclamation 10406, I have revisited the determinations in these proclamations. In my judgment, the arrangements with these countries have failed to provide effective, long-term alternative means to address these countries’ contribution to the threatened impairment to the national security by restraining steel articles exports to the United States from each of them, limiting transshipment and surges and distorted pricing, and discouraging excess steel capacity and excess steel production. Thus, I have determined that steel articles imports from these countries threaten to impair the national security, and I have decided that it is necessary to terminate these arrangements as of March 12, 2025. As of that date, all imports of steel articles and derivative steel articles from Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Canada, EU countries, Japan, Mexico, South Korea, and the United Kingdom shall be subject to the additional ad valorem tariff proclaimed in Proclamation 9705 with respect to steel articles and Proclamation 9980 with respect to derivative steel articles. In my judgment, these modifications are necessary to address the significantly increasing share of imports of steel articles and derivative steel articles from these sources, which threaten to impair U.S. national security. Replacing the alternative agreements with the additional ad valorem tariffs will be a more robust and effective means of ensuring that the objectives articulated in the Secretary’s January 11, 2018, report and subsequent proclamations are achieved.
- For the same reasons, I have also revisited the determinations in Proclamation 10403, Proclamation 10558, and Proclamation 10771. In my judgment, the arrangement with Ukraine has failed to provide effective, long-term alternative means to address Ukraine’s contribution to the threatened impairment to our national security by restraining steel articles exports to the United States from Ukraine, limiting transshipment and surges, and discouraging excess steel capacity and excess steel production. Thus, I have determined that steel articles imports from Ukraine threaten to impair the national security and have determined that it is necessary to terminate the temporary exemption for imports of steel articles and derivative steel articles from Ukraine as proclaimed in Proclamation 10403, Proclamation 10558, and Proclamation 10771. In my judgment, terminating this exemption will prevent abuses that have resulted in significantly increasing imports from sources other than Ukraine, will prevent evasion of antidumping duties, and will support the domestic steel industry without harming Ukraine’s economic recovery.
- In light of the information provided by the Secretary that significantly increasing imports of certain derivative steel articles have depressed demand for steel articles produced by domestic steel producers, I have determined that it is necessary and appropriate in light of U.S. national security interests to adjust the tariff proclaimed in Proclamation 9705 and Proclamation 9980 to apply to additional derivative steel articles. As of March 12, 2025, the additional derivative steel articles covered by this proclamation, as set out in Annex I to this proclamation, shall be subject to the ad valorem duties proclaimed in Proclamation 9705 and Proclamation 9980, except for derivative steel articles processed in another country from steel articles that were melted and poured in the United States. For any derivative steel article identified in Annex I that is not in Chapter 73 of the HTSUS, the additional ad valorem duty shall apply only to the steel content of the derivative steel article. The Secretary shall publish a notice in the Federal Register to this effect, including Annex I to this proclamation.
- The Secretary has informed me that his findings with regard to the product exclusion process present circumstances that in the Secretary’s opinion indicate the need for further action by the President under section 232. Accordingly, as of the date of this proclamation the Secretary is no longer authorized to provide relief from the additional duties set forth in clause 2 of Proclamation 9705 for any steel article determined not to be produced in the United States in a sufficient and reasonably available amount or a satisfactory quality or based on specific national security determinations, and the product exclusion process as authorized in clause 3 of Proclamation 9705, clause 1 of Proclamation 9777, and clause 2 of Proclamation 9980 is terminated, effective immediately. I have determined that terminating product exclusions is necessary to ensure that overly broad exclusions do not allow high volumes of imports to undermine the objectives articulated in the Secretary’s January 11, 2018, report and relevant subsequent proclamations. This change will also relieve the administrative burden that the process has created. Following this proclamation, and subject to any restrictions set forth in or pursuant to other provisions of applicable law, imports of any steel article or derivative steel article from any source and in any quantity will be available to U.S. importers, provided that the additional ad valorem tariffs are paid upon entry or withdrawal from warehouse for consumption.
- Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962, as amended, authorizes the President to take action to adjust the imports of an article and its derivatives if the President concurs with the Secretary’s finding that the article is being imported into the United States in such quantities or under such circumstances as to threaten to impair the national security.
- Section 604 of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended (19 U.S.C. 2483), authorizes the president to embody in the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) the substance of statutes affecting import treatment, and actions thereunder, including the removal, modification, continuance, or imposition of any rate of duty or other import restriction.
20. The United States will monitor the implementation and effectiveness of these actions in addressing our national security needs, and I may revisit this determination, as appropriate.

NOW, THEREFORE, I, DONALD J. TRUMP, President of the United States of America, by the authority vested in me by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, including section 301 of title 3, United States Code, section 604 of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended, and section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962, as amended, do hereby proclaim as follows:
- The provisions of Proclamation 9740 with respect to imports of steel articles from South Korea; Proclamation 9759 with respect to imports of steel articles from Argentina, Australia, and Brazil; Proclamation 10064 with respect to imports of steel articles from Brazil; Proclamation 9894 with respect to imports of steel articles from Canada and Mexico; Proclamation 10783 with respect to imports of steel articles from Mexico; Proclamation 10328 and Proclamation 10691 with respect to imports of steel articles and derivative steel articles from the EU; Proclamation 10356 with respect to imports of steel articles and derivative steel articles from Japan; Proclamation 10406 with respect to imports of steel articles and derivative steel articles from the United Kingdom; and Proclamation 10403, Proclamation 10558, and Proclamation 10771 with respect to steel articles and derivative steel articles from Ukraine shall be ineffective as of 12:01 a.m. eastern time on March 12, 2025. The provisions of clause 1 of Proclamation 9740 as applicable to imports of steel articles or derivative steel articles from Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Canada, Mexico, South Korea, and EU member countries shall be ineffective as of 12:01 a.m. eastern time on March 12, 2025. The provisions of clause 1 of Proclamation 9980 as applicable to imports of derivative steel articles from Argentina, Australia, Canada, Mexico, and South Korea shall be ineffective as of 12:01 a.m. eastern time on March 12, 2025. As of 12:01 a.m. eastern time on March 12, 2025, all imports of steel articles and derivative steel articles from these countries shall be subject to the additional ad valorem tariffs proclaimed in Proclamation 9705 and Proclamation 9980.
- Clause 2 of Proclamation 9705, as amended, is revised to read as follows:
“(2)(a) In order to establish certain modifications to the duty rate on imports of steel articles, subchapter III of chapter 99 of the HTSUS is modified as provided in the forthcoming annex to this proclamation set out in a subsequent Federal Register notice and any subsequent proclamations regarding such steel articles.

(b) Except as otherwise provided in this proclamation, or in notices published pursuant to clause 3 of this proclamation, all steel articles imports covered by heading 9903.80.01, in subchapter III of chapter 99 of the HTSUS, shall be subject to an additional 25 percent ad valorem rate of duty with respect to goods entered for consumption, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, as follows: (i) on or after 12:01 a.m. eastern time on March 23, 2018, from all countries except Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Canada, Mexico, South Korea, and the member countries of the European Union; (ii) on or after 12:01 a.m. eastern time on June 1, 2018, from all countries except Argentina, Australia, Brazil, and South Korea; (iii) on or after 12:01 a.m. eastern time on August 13, 2018, from all countries except Argentina, Australia, Brazil, South Korea, and Turkey; (iv) on or after 12:01 a.m. eastern time on May 20, 2019, from all countries except Argentina, Australia, Brazil, South Korea, and Turkey; (v) on or after 12:01 a.m. eastern time on May 21, 2019, from all countries except Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Canada, Mexico, and South Korea; (vi) on or after 12:01 a.m. eastern time on January 1, 2022, from all countries except Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Canada, Mexico, and South Korea, and except the member countries of the European Union through 11:59 p.m. eastern time on December 31, 2023, for steel articles covered by headings 9903.80.65 through 9903.81.19, inclusive; (vii) on or after 12:01 a.m. eastern time on April 1, 2022, from all countries except Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Canada, Mexico, and South Korea, and except the member countries of the European Union through 11:59 p.m. eastern time on December 31, 2023, for steel articles covered by headings 9903.80.65 through 9903.81.19, inclusive, and from Japan, for steel articles covered by headings 9903.81.25 through 9903.81.80, inclusive; (viii) on or after 12:01 a.m. eastern time on June 1, 2022, from all countries except Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Canada, Mexico, South Korea, and Ukraine through 11:59 p.m. eastern time on June 1, 2023, and except the member countries of the European Union through 11:59 p.m. eastern time on December 31, 2023, for steel articles covered by headings 9903.80.65 through 9903.81.19, inclusive, and from Japan and the United Kingdom (UK), for steel articles covered by subheadings 9903.81.25 through 9903.81.78 and heading 9903.81.80, and from the member countries of the European Union, for steel articles covered by heading 9903.81.81; (ix) on or after 12:01 a.m. eastern time on June 1, 2023, from all countries except Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Canada, Mexico, South Korea, and Ukraine through 11:59 p.m. eastern time on June 1, 2024, and except the member countries of the European Union through 11:59 p.m. eastern time on December 31, 2023, for steel articles covered by headings 9903.80.65 through 9903.81.19, inclusive, and from Japan and the UK, for steel articles covered by subheadings 9903.81.25 through 9903.81.78 and heading 9903.81.80, and from the member countries of the European Union, for steel articles covered by heading 9903.81.81, and from the member countries of the European Union where the steel used in the manufacture of the steel article is melted and poured in Ukraine through 11:59 p.m. eastern time on June 1, 2024, (x) on or after 12:01 a.m. eastern time on January 1, 2024, from all countries except Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Canada, Mexico, and South Korea, and except for Ukraine in accordance with the relevant proclamation as amended, and except the member countries of the European Union in accordance with the relevant proclamation as amended, for steel articles covered by headings 9903.80.65 through 9903.81.19, inclusive, and from Japan and the UK , in accordance the relevant proclamation as amended, for steel articles covered by subheadings 9903.81.25 through 9903.81.78 and heading 9903.81.80, and from the member countries of the European Union in accordance with the relevant proclamation as amended, for steel articles covered by heading 9903.81.81, and from the member countries of the European Union where the steel used in the manufacture of the steel article is melted and poured in Ukraine in accordance with the relevant proclamation as amended, and (xi) from all countries on or after 12:01 a.m. eastern time on March 12, 2025, unless suspended. Further, except as otherwise provided in notices published pursuant to clause 3 of this proclamation, all steel articles imports from Turkey covered by heading 9903.80.02, in subchapter III of chapter 99 of the HTSUS, shall be subject to a 50 percent ad valorem rate of duty with respect to goods entered for consumption, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or after 12:01 a.m. eastern time on August 13, 2018, and prior to 12:01 a.m. eastern time on May 21, 2019. These rates of duty, which are in addition to any other duties, fees, exactions, and charges applicable to such imported steel articles, shall apply to imports of steel articles from each country as specified in the preceding three sentences.“
- The first two sentences of clause 1 of Proclamation 9980 are revised to read as follows:
“In order to establish increases in the duty rate on imports of certain derivative articles, subchapter III of chapter 99 of the HTSUS is modified as provided in Annex I and Annex II to this proclamation. Except as otherwise provided in this proclamation, all imports of derivative aluminum articles specified in Annex I to this proclamation shall be subject to an additional 10 percent ad valorem rate of duty, and all imports of derivative steel articles specified in Annex II to this proclamation shall be subject to an additional 25 percent ad valorem rate of duty, with respect to goods entered for consumption, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, as follows: (i) on or after 12:01 a.m. eastern time on February 8, 2020, these rates of duty, which are in addition to any other duties, fees, exactions, and charges applicable to such imported derivative aluminum articles or steel articles, shall apply to imports of derivative aluminum articles described in Annex I to this proclamation from all countries except Argentina, the Commonwealth of Australia (Australia), Canada, and the United Mexican States (Mexico), and to imports of derivative steel articles described in Annex II to this proclamation from all countries except Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Canada, Mexico, and South Korea; (ii) on or after 12:01 a.m. eastern time on January 1, 2022, these rates of duty, which are in addition to any other duties, fees, exactions, and charges applicable to such imported derivative aluminum articles or steel articles, shall apply to imports of derivative aluminum articles described in Annex I to this proclamation from all countries except Argentina, Australia, Canada, the member countries of the European Union, and Mexico, and to imports of derivative steel articles described in Annex II to this proclamation from all countries except Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Canada, the member countries of the European Union, Mexico, and South Korea; (iii) on or after 12:01 a.m. eastern time on April 1, 2022, these rates of duty, which are in addition to any other duties, fees, exactions, and charges applicable to such imported derivative aluminum articles or steel articles, shall apply to imports of derivative aluminum articles described in Annex I to this proclamation from all countries except Argentina, Australia, Canada, the member countries of the European Union, and Mexico, and to imports of derivative steel articles described in Annex II to this proclamation from all countries except Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Canada, the member countries of the European Union, Japan, Mexico, and South Korea; (iv) on or after 12:01 a.m. eastern time on June 1, 2022, these rates of duty, which are in addition to any other duties, fees, exactions, and charges applicable to such imported derivative aluminum articles or steel articles, shall apply to imports of derivative aluminum articles described in Annex I to this proclamation from all countries except Argentina, Australia, Canada, the member countries of the European Union, Mexico, and the UK, and to imports of derivative steel articles described in Annex II to this proclamation from all countries except Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Canada, the member countries of the European Union, Japan, Mexico, South Korea, and the UK, and except from Ukraine through 11:59 p.m. eastern time on June 1, 2023; (v) on or after 12:01 a.m. eastern time on March 10, 2023, these rates of duty, which are in addition to any other duties, fees, exactions, and charges applicable to such imported derivative aluminum articles or steel articles, shall apply to imports of derivative aluminum articles described in Annex I to this proclamation from all countries except Argentina, Australia, Canada, the member countries of the European Union, Mexico, the UK, and Russia, and to imports of derivative steel articles described in Annex II to this proclamation from all countries except Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Canada, the member countries of the European Union, Japan, Mexico, South Korea, and the UK, and except from Ukraine through 11:59 p.m. eastern time on June 1, 2023; (vi) on or after 12:01 a.m. eastern time on June 1, 2023, these rates of duty, which are in addition to any other duties, fees, exactions, and charges applicable to such imported derivative aluminum articles or steel articles, shall apply to imports of derivative aluminum articles described in Annex I to this proclamation from all countries except Argentina, Australia, Canada, the member countries of the European Union, Mexico, the UK, and Russia, and to imports of derivative steel articles described in Annex II to this proclamation from all countries except Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Canada, the member countries of the European Union, Japan, Mexico, South Korea, and the UK, and except from Ukraine om accordance with the relevant proclamation as amended; and (vii) on or after 12:01 a.m. eastern daylight time on March 12, 2025, unless suspended, these rates of duty, which are in addition to any other duties, taxes, fees, exactions, and charges applicable to such imported derivative steel articles, shall apply to imports of derivative steel articles described in Annex II to this proclamation from all countries.”
- Except as otherwise provided in this proclamation, all imports of derivative steel articles specified in Annex I to this proclamation or in any subsequent annex to this proclamation, as set out in a subsequent notice in the Federal Register, shall be subject to an additional 25 percent ad valorem rate of duty, with respect to goods entered for consumption, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or after 12:01 a.m. eastern daylight time on the Commerce certification date in clause 8. These rates of duty, which are in addition to any other duties, taxes, fees, exactions, and charges applicable to such imported derivative steel articles, shall apply to imports of derivative steel articles described in Annex I to this proclamation from all countries, but shall not apply to derivative steel articles processed in another country from steel articles that were melted and poured in the United States. The Secretary shall continue to monitor imports of the derivative articles described in Annex I to this proclamation, and shall, from time to time, in consultation with the United States Trade Representative, review the status of such imports with respect to the national security of the United States.
- For purposes of implementing the requirements in this proclamation, importers of steel derivative articles shall provide to U.S. Customs and Border Patrol within the Department of Homeland Security (CBP) any information necessary to identify the steel content used in the manufacture of steel derivative articles imports, covered by this Proclamation. CBP shall implement the information requirements as soon as practicable.
- Within 90 days after the date of this proclamation, the Secretary shall establish a process for including additional derivative steel articles within the scope of the ad valorem duties proclaimed in Proclamation 9705, Proclamation 9980, and clause 4 of this proclamation. In addition to inclusions made by the Secretary, this process shall provide for including additional derivative steel articles at the request of a producer of a steel article or derivative steel article, or an industry association representing one or more such producers, where the request establishes that imports of a derivative steel article have increased in a manner that threatens to impair the national security or otherwise undermine the objectives set forth in the Secretary’s January 11, 2018, report or any Proclamation issued pursuant thereto. When the Secretary receives such a request from a domestic producer or industry association, the Secretary shall issue a determination regarding whether or not to include the derivative steel article or articles within 60 days of receiving the request.
- The provisions of clause 3 of Proclamation 9705, clause 1 of Proclamation 9777, clause 2 of Proclamation 9980, or any other provisions authorizing the Secretary to grant relief for certain products from the additional ad valorem duties or quantitative restrictions set forth in prior proclamations are hereby revoked. As of 11:59 p.m. eastern time on the date of this proclamation, the Secretary shall not consider any product exclusion requests or renew any product exclusion requests in effect as of that date. The Secretary shall take all necessary action to rescind the product exclusion process, including publication in the Federal Register. Granted product exclusions shall remain effective until their expiration date or until excluded product volume is imported, whichever occurs first. The Secretary shall terminate all existing general approved exclusions as of March 12, 2025.
- The modifications made by this proclamation in clause 4 shall be effective upon public notification by the Secretary of Commerce, that adequate systems are in place to fully, efficiently, and expediently process and collect tariff revenue for covered articles.
- Any steel article or derivative article, except those eligible for admission under “domestic status” as defined in 19 CFR 146.43, that is subject to the duty imposed by this proclamation and that is admitted into a U.S. foreign trade zone on or after 12:01 a.m. eastern daylight time on March 12, 2025, must be admitted as “privileged foreign status” as defined in 19 CFR 146.41, and will be subject upon entry for consumption to any ad valorem rates of duty related to the classification under the applicable HTSUS subheading. Any steel article or derivative steel article, except those eligible for admission under “domestic status” as defined in 19 CFR 146.43, that is subject to the duty imposed by this proclamation, and that was admitted into a U.S. foreign trade zone under “privileged foreign status” as defined in 19 CFR 146.41, prior to 12:01 a.m. eastern daylight time on March 12, 2025 , will likewise be subject upon entry for consumption to any ad valorem rates of duty related to the classification under the applicable HTSUS subheading added by this proclamation. Pursuant to clause 8, the duties on steel derivatives established by clause 4 of this Proclamation shall be suspended until public notification by the Secretary of Commerce that adequate systems are in place to fully, efficiently, and expediently process and collect tariff revenue applicable to covered articles.
- Any product listed in Annex Ito this proclamation or any subsequent annex published in the Federal Register pursuant to this Proclamation, that is subject to the additional duties imposed by this proclamation, and that is admitted into a U.S. foreign trade zone, except any product that is eligible for admission under “domestic status” as defined in 19 CFR 146.43, may only be admitted as “privileged foreign status,” as defined in 19 CFR 146.41, effective as of the date that the additional duties are imposed.
- The Secretary, in consultation with the Commissioner of CBP, Security, and the heads of other relevant executive departments and agencies, shall revise the HTSUS so that it conforms to the amendments and effective dates directed in this proclamation within ten days of March 12, 2025. The Secretary is authorized and directed to publish any such modification and future modifications to the HTSUS in the Federal Register.
- CBP shall prioritize reviews of the classification of imported steel articles and derivative steel articles and, in the event that it discovers misclassification resulting in non-payment of the ad valorem duties proclaimed herein, it shall assess monetary penalties in the maximum amount permitted by law and shall not consider any evidence of mitigating factors in its determination. In addition, CBP shall promptly notify the Secretary regarding evidence of any efforts to evade payment of the ad valorem duties proclaimed herein through processing or alteration of steel articles or derivative steel articles prior to importation. In such circumstances, the Secretary shall consider the processed or altered steel articles or derivative steel articles for inclusion as derivative steel articles pursuant to clause 5 of this proclamation.
- No drawback shall be available with respect to the duties imposed pursuant to this proclamation.
(14) The Secretary may issue regulations and guidance consistent with this proclamation, including to address operational necessity.

(15) Any provision of a previous proclamation or Executive Order that is inconsistent with the actions taken in this proclamation is superseded to the extent of such inconsistency.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this

tenth day of February, in the year of our Lord two thousand twenty-five, and of the Independence of the United States of America the two hundred and forty-ninth.
MIL OSI USA News –
February 11, 2025
MIL-OSI Submissions: Australia – New book tells the stories of second generation migrants – AMES

Source: AMES

A compelling new book tells the stories of second-generation migrant Australians, who share their families’ settlement journeys and their own search for identity.

Titled ‘At the Heart of Identity’, the book reveals the both inspirational and heart-wrenching stories of migrant families as well as the sense of hope and opportunity that characterises Australia’s migration history.

Contributors include South Australian Premier Peter Malinauskas, whose family hails from Lithuania, and former Socceroo Archie Thompson, who has a New Zealand-born father and mother from Papua New Guinea.

Also sharing their stories are federal MP Cassandra Fernando, whose parents are from Sri Lanka, and Victorian state MP Lee Tarlamis, who has Greek heritage.

Artist Saidin Salkic, whose father was victim of the Srebrenica massacre in Bosnia, is also a contributor, along with others from Africa, Kurdistan, Vietnam, Malta, Yugoslavia, Burma, Italy and Ukraine.

Published today as part of migrant and refugee settlement agency AMES Australia’s annual ‘Heartlands’ cultural project, the book is a reflection of Australia’s long and diverse history as a nation of migrants.

AMES CEO Cath Scarth said the book was timely at a point in history when polarisation and divisiveness are on the rise across the globe.

“Stories of settlement in Australia, no matter where you have come from, are things that unite us,” Ms Scarth said.

“These stories are reflection of how migrants have helped to build Australia and helped to create the successful brand of multiculturalism we enjoy along with the high levels of social cohesion that we have built,” she said.

One of the contributors is Carmen Capp-Calleya, who came to Australia from Malta with her parents in 1958 – surviving a shipwreck along the way.

“The tragic incident, the first major shipping disaster since the end of WW11, had an enduring impact on me and my family. It left us with an indelible sense that we were indeed migrants who had crossed the seas to make a new life,” she says in the book.

Former Socceroo Archie Thompson tells of his trouble childhood.

“I grew up in country town in NSW and I was pretty much the only dark-skinned kid in town. That made things difficult at times, but I was able to find a community through football,” he says.

SA Premier Peter Malinauskas’ family came to Australia in 1949 escaping war-torn Europe.

“When my grandparents got married, they bought a block of land on Trimmer Parade, Seaton, where they built their home and, for many years, operated a fish and chip shop. I distinctly remember as a young boy standing at that fish and chip shop my grandfather built with his own bare hands as he told me about the importance of taking opportunities,” he says.

Federal MP Cassandra Fernando tells of growing up in a vibrant multicultural community.

“I loved the diversity in South-East Melbourne, a cultural melting pot of Greeks, Italians, Vietnamese, and more. Here, I learned the true meaning of community as people from

different backgrounds came together,” she says.

Victorian MP Lee Tarlamis tells of reconnecting with his heritage.

“I became determined to reconnect with Greek culture. Embracing both the Greek community and my wife’s Vietnamese culture helped me value diversity and the importance of preserving it,” he says in the book.

Park Ranger James Brincat, whose parts came from Malta in the 1950s, says racism was part of his childhood.

“Growing up in a migrant family was challenging due to racism and being unsure of my identity because of the media’s mixed messages. These experiences strengthened me and now guide my work with refugee communities,” he says.

Architect and artist Maru Jarockyj’s parents fled Ukraine after WWII and settled in the UK. She came to Australia as a young woman.

“Russia’s illegal invasion of Ukraine and the subsequent devastating war has sparked some deep latent emotions in me and reignited a sense of patriotism. Ukrainian culture

has always been important to me, and I’ve been involved in folk music and art throughout my life,” she says.

‘At the Heart of Identity’ will go on sale early next year.

MIL OSI – Submitted News –

February 11, 2025
MIL-OSI China: Russia-US ties ‘on verge of rupture’

Source: China State Council Information Office

Russian national flag waves at the Kremlin in Moscow, Russia, Jan. 6, 2023. [Photo/Xinhua]

Relations between Russia and the United States are “on the verge of rupture,” Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov said on Monday.

Moscow has repeatedly warned that bilateral relations were on the brink of rupture, Ryabkov said, adding that U.S. President Donald Trump’s return to the White House could lead to a change in U.S. foreign policy.

At a press briefing, the diplomat also said there were currently no plans for contact between Russian President Vladimir Putin and Trump.

“However, the topic does exist, and as the situation becomes clearer, I believe there will be agreements on this matter and they will be announced … at the appropriate time,” Ryabkov said.

At the same time, Ryabkov said that the new U.S. administration has expressed interest in resuming dialogue with Moscow.

“Trump’s team, despite the conflicting statements made by him and his people, has at least shown interest in resuming dialogue with Russia, which was interrupted by the Democrats,” Ryabkov said.

He reiterated that Moscow remains ready for dialogue, including discussions on a potential settlement of the Ukraine crisis, however, such dialogue would only be possible based on equality and mutually acceptable terms.

“A small window of opportunity” has emerged under the Trump administration for normalizing bilateral ties, he said, adding that Washington must decide whether to take advantage of this.

The use of ultimatums, provocative remarks, or attempts to pressure Moscow into accepting unreasonable demands will not be effective for Russia-U.S. relations or dialogue between the two countries, he added.

The New York Post reported late Saturday that Trump said he had discussed the settlement of the conflict in Ukraine by phone with Putin.

However, Kremlin Spokesman Dmitry Peskov said Sunday he could “neither confirm nor deny” that Putin and Trump had been in touch when asked by reporters if the two leaders had spoken by phone.

MIL OSI China News –

February 11, 2025
MIL-Evening Report: Do men and women agree on how easy it is for each other to find a job or a date?

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Stephen Whyte, Deputy Director – Behavioural Economics, Society and Technology (BEST) Research Group. Chief-Investigator – ARC ITTC Centre for Behavioural Inisghts for Technology Adoption (BITA).), Queensland University of Technology

The Conversation, DenPhotos/Shutterstock, Mehaniq/Shutterstock

Typically, you don’t have to write a cover letter before attending a candlelit dinner. But there are some eerie emotional parallels between finding a job and finding a date.

Both can require you to put yourself “out there” in uncomfortable ways, brace yourself for repeated rejection and grapple with heartache.

On the flip side, success in either pursuit can significantly boost your confidence and sense of wellbeing – especially if it feels like a good fit.

This raises the question: do Australians really believe they have equal access to the labour and dating markets?

Our study, published in the journal Evolutionary Psychology, examined this question in depth, shining a light on how these beliefs are linked, and where they differ.

Whether Australians’ perceptions of job and dating market access are completely accurate or not, they can certainly have a big impact on the choices we make and the way we behave in both our personal and professional lives.

Finding a job versus finding a date

We surveyed more than 1,000 online daters aged between 18 and 81. Our sample only included participants who described their sexual orientation as heterosexual and who identified as either male or female.

Our study looked at people’s beliefs about how easy it was to find a job or find a date.
Arthur Bargan/Shutterstock

It’s important to understand that we were looking specifically at people’s perceptions of their access to these markets.

That is, we looked at what men and women believed about their own (and the opposite sex’s) ability to find a job or find a date.

We also examined what both sexes believed about women’s economic dependence on men.

On average, we found women think it’s easier for men to find a decently paying job. Women also think they’re less economically dependent on male partners than men think women are.

Both sexes agree it’s easier for women to find a date than men. But men think they have it much worse off on this metric than women think they do.

Where beliefs diverge

These perceptions begin to vary significantly with factors such as age, education, number of children and political orientation.

There are some big differences in how women perceive women’s economic dependence and ease of dating access at different stages of life.

Middle-aged men and women (aged 35 to 55 years) share similar perspectives on women’s economic dependence. This contrasts with younger and older women, who believe women are significantly less economically dependent on men.

Women believe they have an easier time finding a date as they age from 18 to 35 years old. This perception then declines sharply from 40 to 75 years or older.

These patterns align with evolutionary theories, suggesting that access to resources and shifting household dynamics at different life stages influence how men and women view the labour and dating markets.

Shifting beliefs about access at different age levels may reflect changing household dynamics.
aijiro/Shutterstock

Intertwined ‘markets’

Importantly, we found that perceptions of labour and dating market access are intrinsically linked, and they tend to reflect broader economic conditions.

For instance, men in high-income areas think they have better job and dating opportunities, while those in areas with greater gender income disparities see women as more economically dependent.

On the flipside, women in higher-income areas think they are less economically dependent. And those in areas with lower gender gaps in income perceive women’s dating access to be greater.

This interplay of beliefs is also reflected in participants’ own dating preferences. Women who believe they are more economically dependent on men tend to seek a long-term male partner with greater earning potential than them.

On the other hand, men who expect to earn more than their ideal partner think it’s easier for men to find a date.

Beliefs about how easy it is to find a job and find a date are linked.
Drazen Zigic/Shutterstock

Why does this all matter?

Economic growth is the way economists and politicians measure increases in our standard of living. It is primarily driven by consumption.

That’s everyday Australians buying their morning coffees at work, leg hams at Christmas time or splurging on a new cabana for the beach.

Historically, more consumers meant more consumption, which meant higher economic growth and an increased standard of living.

Many governments have recognised and acted on this link, encouraging Australians to have more children. Back in the early 2000s, for instance, the Howard government implemented the so-called “baby bonus”.

Then-Treasurer Peter Costello famously asked the nation to “Have one for mum, one for dad, and one for the country”.

It worked, sort of. Australia’s birth rates increased modestly.

Fast forward to today, and these issues are just as relevant. Dating and job market choices still have a significant impact on Australian society, both economically and socially.

Khandis R Blake receives funding from the Australian Research Council (DE210100800 and DP220101023).

Benno Torgler, Ho Fai Chan, Rachel Hall, and Stephen Whyte do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. Do men and women agree on how easy it is for each other to find a job or a date? – https://theconversation.com/do-men-and-women-agree-on-how-easy-it-is-for-each-other-to-find-a-job-or-a-date-247235

MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

February 11, 2025
MIL-OSI Global: As Trump abandons the old world order, NZ must find its place in a new ‘Pax Autocratica’

Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Chris Ogden, Associate Professor in Global Studies, University of Auckland, Waipapa Taumata Rau

Donald Trump is moving rapidly to change the contours of contemporary international affairs, with the old US-dominated world order breaking down into a multipolar one with many centres of power.

The shift already includes the US leaving the World Health Organization and the Paris Climate Accords, questioning the value of the United Nations, and radical cuts to the US Agency for International Development (USAID).

Such a new geopolitical age also involves an assertion of raw power, with Trump using the threat of tariffs to assert global authority and negotiating positions.

While the US is not significantly less powerful, this new era may see it wield that power in more openly self-interested and isolationist ways. As new US Secretary of State Marco Rubio put it in January, “the post-war global order is not just obsolete – it is now a weapon being used against us”.

With global democracy in retreat, the emerging international order looks to be moving in an authoritarian direction. As it does, the position of New Zealand’s vibrant democracy will come under mounting pressure.

But world orders have come and gone for millennia, reflecting the ebb and flow of global economic, political and military power. Looking back to previous eras, and how countries and cultures responded to shifting geopolitical realities, can help us understand what is happening more clearly.

An evolving world order

Previous orders have often focused on specific centres – or “poles” – of power. These include the Concert of Europe from 1814 to 1914, the bipolar world of the Cold War between the US and the Soviet Union, and the unipolar world of American dominance after the end of the Cold War and since the September 11 attacks in 2001.

Periods of single-power dominance (or hegemony) are referred to as a “pax”, from the Latin for “peace”. We have seen the Pax Romana of the Roman Empire (27 BCE to 180 AD), multiple Pax Sinicas around China (most recently the Qing Dynasty 1644 to 1912), Pax Mongolica (the Mongol Empire from 1271 to 1368) and Pax Britannica (the British Empire from 1815 to 1924).

It is the Pax Americana of the US, from 1945 to the present, that Trump seems bent on dismantling. We now live in an international order that is visibly in flux. With autocracy on the rise and the US at its vanguard, a “Pax Autocratica” is emerging.

This is accentuated by the rapid rise of Asia as the main sphere of economic and military growth, particularly China and India. The world’s two most populous countries had the world’s largest and third largest economies respectively in 2023, and the second and fourth highest levels of military spending.

The simultaneous rise of multiple power centres was already challenging the Pax Americana. Now, a new international order appears to be a certainty, with Trump openly adapting to multipolarity. Several major powers now compete for global influence, rather than any one country dominating.

China’s preference for a multipolar international order is shared by India and Russia. Without one dominant entity, it will be the political and social basis of this order, as determined by its major actors, that matters most – not who leads it.

Pax Democratica

The current (now waning) international order has been underpinned by specific social, political and economic values stemming from the national identity and historical experience of the US.

According to US political expert G. John Ikenberry, former president Woodrow Wilson’s agenda for peace after the first world war sought to “reflect distinctive American ideas and ideals”.

Woodrow imagined an order based on collective security and shared sovereignty, liberal principles of democracy and universal human rights, free trade and international law.

As its dominance and military strength increased in the 20th century, the US also provided security to other countries. Such power enabled Washington to create open global trade markets, as well as build core global institutions like the World Bank, International Monetary Fund, World Trade Organization, United Nations and NATO.

For Ikenberry, this Pax Americana (we might call it a Pax Democratica) rested on consent to the US’s “provision of security, wealth creation, and social advancement”. This was aided by the its more than 800 military bases in over 80 countries.

The democratic deficit

Trump undercuts the central tenets of this liberal world order and accelerates a slide towards authoritarianism. Like Russia, India and China, the US is also actively constraining human rights, attacking minorities and weakening its electoral system.

This democratic retreat leaves a country such as New Zealand in a global minority. If Trump targets the region or country with economic tariffs, that precariousness might increase.

On the other hand, previous world orders have not been truly hegemonic. Pax Britannica did not encompass the entire world. Nor did Pax Americana, which didn’t include China, India, the former Soviet bloc, much of the Islamic world and many developing countries.

This suggests pockets of democracy can survive within a Pax Autocratica, especially in a multipolar world which is more tolerant of political independence.

The Economist Intelligence Unit’s 2023 Democracy Index ranked New Zealand, the Nordic countries, Switzerland, Iceland and Ireland highest because their citizens

choose their political leaders in free and fair elections, enjoy civil liberties, prefer democracy over other political systems, can and do participate in politics, and have a functioning government that acts on their behalf.

It is these countries that can be at the vanguard of democratic resilience.

Chris Ogden is a Senior Research Fellow with The Foreign Policy Centre, London.

– ref. As Trump abandons the old world order, NZ must find its place in a new ‘Pax Autocratica’ – https://theconversation.com/as-trump-abandons-the-old-world-order-nz-must-find-its-place-in-a-new-pax-autocratica-249358

MIL OSI – Global Reports –

February 11, 2025
MIL-Evening Report: As Trump abandons the old world order, NZ must find its place in a new ‘Pax Autocratica’

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Chris Ogden, Associate Professor in Global Studies, University of Auckland, Waipapa Taumata Rau

Donald Trump is moving rapidly to change the contours of contemporary international affairs, with the old US-dominated world order breaking down into a multipolar one with many centres of power.

The shift already includes the US leaving the World Health Organization and the Paris Climate Accords, questioning the value of the United Nations, and radical cuts to the US Agency for International Development (USAID).

Such a new geopolitical age also involves an assertion of raw power, with Trump using the threat of tariffs to assert global authority and negotiating positions.

While the US is not significantly less powerful, this new era may see it wield that power in more openly self-interested and isolationist ways. As new US Secretary of State Marco Rubio put it in January, “the post-war global order is not just obsolete – it is now a weapon being used against us”.

With global democracy in retreat, the emerging international order looks to be moving in an authoritarian direction. As it does, the position of New Zealand’s vibrant democracy will come under mounting pressure.

But world orders have come and gone for millennia, reflecting the ebb and flow of global economic, political and military power. Looking back to previous eras, and how countries and cultures responded to shifting geopolitical realities, can help us understand what is happening more clearly.

An evolving world order

Previous orders have often focused on specific centres – or “poles” – of power. These include the Concert of Europe from 1814 to 1914, the bipolar world of the Cold War between the US and the Soviet Union, and the unipolar world of American dominance after the end of the Cold War and since the September 11 attacks in 2001.

Periods of single-power dominance (or hegemony) are referred to as a “pax”, from the Latin for “peace”. We have seen the Pax Romana of the Roman Empire (27 BCE to 180 AD), multiple Pax Sinicas around China (most recently the Qing Dynasty 1644 to 1912), Pax Mongolica (the Mongol Empire from 1271 to 1368) and Pax Britannica (the British Empire from 1815 to 1924).

It is the Pax Americana of the US, from 1945 to the present, that Trump seems bent on dismantling. We now live in an international order that is visibly in flux. With autocracy on the rise and the US at is vanguard, a “Pax Autocratica” is emerging.

This is accentuated by the rapid rise of Asia as the main sphere of economic and military growth, particularly China and India. The world’s two most populous countries had the world’s largest and third largest economies respectively in 2023, and the second and fourth highest levels of military spending.

The simultaneous rise of multiple power centres was already challenging the Pax Americana. Now, a new international order appears to be a certainty, with Trump openly adapting to multipolarity. Several major powers now compete for global influence, rather than any one country dominating.

China’s preference for a multipolar international order is shared by India and Russia. Without one dominant entity, it will be the political and social basis of this order, as determined by its major actors, that matters most – not who leads it.

Pax Democratica

The current (now waning) international order has been underpinned by specific social, political and economic values stemming from the national identity and historical experience of the US.

According to US political expert G. John Ikenberry, former president Woodrow Wilson’s agenda for peace after the first world war sought to “reflect distinctive American ideas and ideals”.

Woodrow imagined an order based on collective security and shared sovereignty, liberal principles of democracy and universal human rights, free trade and international law.

As its dominance and military strength increased in the 20th century, the US also provided security to other countries. Such power enabled Washington to create open global trade markets, as well as build core global institutions like the World Bank, International Monetary Fund, World Trade Organization, United Nations and NATO.

For Ikenberry, this Pax Americana (we might call it a Pax Democratica) rested on consent to the US’s “provision of security, wealth creation, and social advancement”. This was aided by the its more than 800 military bases in over 80 countries.

The democratic deficit

Trump undercuts the central tenets of this liberal world order and accelerates a slide towards authoritarianism. Like Russia, India and China, the US is also actively constraining human rights, attacking minorities and weakening its electoral system.

This democratic retreat leaves a country such as New Zealand in a global minority. If Trump targets the region or country with economic tariffs, that precariousness might increase.

On the other hand, previous world orders have not been truly hegemonic. Pax Britannica did not encompass the entire world. Nor did Pax Americana, which didn’t include China, India, the former Soviet bloc, much of the Islamic world and many developing countries.

This suggests pockets of democracy can survive within a Pax Autocratica, especially in a multipolar world which is more tolerant of political independence.

The Economist Intelligence Unit’s 2023 Democracy Index ranked New Zealand, the Nordic countries, Switzerland, Iceland and Ireland highest because their citizens

choose their political leaders in free and fair elections, enjoy civil liberties, prefer democracy over other political systems, can and do participate in politics, and have a functioning government that acts on their behalf.

It is these countries that can be at the vanguard of democratic resilience.

Chris Ogden is a Senior Research Fellow with The Foreign Policy Centre, London.

– ref. As Trump abandons the old world order, NZ must find its place in a new ‘Pax Autocratica’ – https://theconversation.com/as-trump-abandons-the-old-world-order-nz-must-find-its-place-in-a-new-pax-autocratica-249358

MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

February 11, 2025
MIL-OSI USA: ICYMI: Sen. Joni Ernst in WSJ: USAID Is a Rogue Agency

US Senate News:

Source: United States Senator Joni Ernst (R-IA)
WASHINGTON – In case you missed it, U.S. Senator Joni Ernst (R-Iowa) detailed in the Wall Street Journal how the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) acts against our nation’s best interests and stonewalled her oversight of where tax dollars are going and why.
As Senate DOGE Caucus chair and founder, Senator Ernst will continue to work with President Trump’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) to examine how taxpayers’ money is spent and put an end to any waste, fraud, and abuse.
WSJ: Sen. Joni Ernst: USAID Is a Rogue Agency
It dodges congressional questions about money that went to sex traffickers and the Wuhan virus lab.
By: Senator Joni Ernst
In moments of crisis, America can be counted on for leadership. Our nation’s compassionate giving has saved millions of lives around the world that were at risk from starvation or disease. All Americans should be able to take great pride in our generosity. And the government agencies coordinating aid efforts should be eager to share details about how they’re using taxpayers’ money to make the world a better place.
Yet the U.S. Agency for International Development, entrusted with disbursing tens of billions of aid dollars to other nations annually, is a rogue bureaucracy. I’ve uncovered that the agency often acts at odds with our nation’s best interests and uses intimidation and shell games to hide where money is going, how it’s being spent and why.
USAID repeatedly rebuffed my requests for a list of recipients of U.S. tax dollars sent to Ukraine, claiming that the information was classified. Despite the pushback, I persisted. Eventually, USAID permitted my staff to review documents under surveillance in a highly secure room at USAID headquarters, with note-taking prohibited.
What warranted such secrecy? We learned that the aid that was supposed to alleviate economic distress in the war-torn nation was spent on such frivolous activities as sending Ukrainian models and designers on junkets to New York City, London Fashion Week, Paris Fashion Week and South by Southwest in Austin, Texas.
I faced the same stonewalling from USAID when I asked about tax dollars being diverted from project missions for largely unrelated costs, known as the negotiated indirect cost rate. The agency claimed that it wasn’t possible to track. My team debunked that by providing USAID staff with a link to a public database. The agency fired back, warning that divulging this information would violate federal laws, including the Economic Espionage Act.
When I launched a formal investigation in cooperation with the House Foreign Affairs Committee, USAID relented. Turns out, the agency is allowing grantees to skim significant amounts of money, up to and even beyond half of the total, for themselves.
We need guarantees that U.S. assistance is helping people in need, but a recent review by the agency’s own inspector general found USAID still “does not have proper documentation to support indirect costs charged” by grant recipients.
I shouldn’t have to ask these questions. All federal spending is required to be publicly available on the website USAspending.gov, a searchable database created nearly two decades ago by a bipartisan law.
USAID’s sketchy spending schemes were the impetus for this law aimed at making federal funding more transparent. Congressional investigators in 2005 caught the agency supporting an organization involved with the trafficking of teenage girls in Asia. USAID staff called the claims “destructive” and vehemently denied them. The evidence proved otherwise. A pass-through group, set up with the help of former agency employees, was found funneling U.S. tax dollars into abetting the sex trade operation.
The agency has learned to exploit loopholes in the law, as my investigation into the origins of the pandemic exposed. The watchdog organization White Coat Waste Project was the first to release evidence that both USAID and Anthony Fauci’s National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases were financing bat studies involving coronaviruses at the Wuhan Institute of Virology. Yet no grants to the Chinese lab appeared in USAspending.gov. Audits later uncovered that more than a million dollars from the U.S. government were paying for the dangerous research. The bulk of the money was provided by USAID, not Dr. Fauci.
USAID evaded the obligation to report this transaction to USAspending.gov by using multiple pass-through organizations, including the nefarious EcoHealth Alliance, which is now barred from receiving U.S. government grants.
What was our international development agency developing at China’s Wuhan Institute of Virology? If the Central Intelligence Agency and Federal Bureau of Investigation are correct that the Covid virus likely originated from a lab leak, USAID may have had a hand in a once-in-a-century pandemic that claimed the lives of millions.
There’s no shortage of other questionable USAID projects. More than $9 million intended for civilian food and medical supplies in Syria ended up in the hands of violent terrorists. Another $2 million was spent promoting tourism to Lebanon, a nation the State Department warns against traveling to due to the risks of terrorism, kidnapping and unexploded land mines.
USAID spent millions of dollars paying people to dig irrigation ditches in Afghanistan and encouraging farmers to grow food crops instead of poppies for opium. The result: Poppy cultivation nearly doubled.
Many other groups supported by USAID are doing great work, such as caring for orphans and people living with HIV. Imagine how much more good work could be supported with the dollars that instead ended up enriching terrorists, sex traffickers, mad scientists and drug cartels.
After keeping its spending records hidden from Congress and taxpayers, USAID employees are now protesting the review of the agency’s records by President Trump’s Department of Government Efficiency. It’s no surprise that Washington insiders are more upset at DOGE for trying to stop wasteful spending than at USAID for misusing tax dollars.
The question we should be asking isn’t why USAID’s grants are being scrutinized, but why it took so long.
Ms. Ernst, an Iowa Republican, is founder and chairwoman of the Senate DOGE Caucus.

MIL OSI USA News –

February 11, 2025

MIL-OSI: Astera Labs Announces Financial Results for the Fourth Quarter of Fiscal Year 2024

Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

Record quarterly revenue of $141.1 million, up 25% QoQ and up 179% YoY
Fiscal 2024 record revenue of $396.3 million, up 242% versus the prior year
Ramping across diverse set of customers and platforms with four product families in fiscal 2025

SANTA CLARA, Calif., Feb. 10, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Astera Labs, Inc. (Nasdaq: ALAB), a global leader in semiconductor-based connectivity solutions for cloud and AI infrastructure, today announced preliminary financial results for the fourth quarter and full fiscal year 2024, ended December 31, 2024.

“Astera Labs delivered strong Q4 results, with revenue growing 25% versus the previous quarter, and capped off a stellar 2024 with 242% revenue growth year-over-year,” said Jitendra Mohan, Astera Labs’ Chief Executive Officer. “The revenue growth in 2024 was largely driven by Aries PCIe Retimer products, with Taurus Smart Cable Modules for Ethernet coming in strongly in Q4. We expect 2025 to be a breakout year as we enter a new phase of growth driven by revenue from all four of our product families to support a diverse set of customers and platforms. This includes our flagship Scorpio Fabric products for head-node PCIe connectivity and backend AI accelerator scale-up clustering.”

Fourth Quarter of Fiscal 2024 Financial Highlights

GAAP Financial Results:

Revenue of $141.1 million, up 25% sequentially and up 179% year-over-year
GAAP gross margin of 74.0%
GAAP operating income of $0.1 million
GAAP operating margin of 0.1%
GAAP net income of $24.7 million
GAAP diluted net earnings per share of $0.14

Non-GAAP Financial Results (excluding the impact of stock-based compensation expense and the income tax effects of non-GAAP adjustments):

Non-GAAP gross margin of 74.1%
Non-GAAP operating income of $48.4 million
Non-GAAP operating margin of 34.3%
Non-GAAP net income of $66.5 million
Non-GAAP diluted earnings per share of $0.37

Full Year Fiscal 2024 Financial Highlights

GAAP Financial Results:

Revenue of $396.3 million, up 242% year-over-year
GAAP gross margin of 76.4%
GAAP operating loss of $116.1 million
GAAP operating margin of (29.3%)
GAAP net loss of $83.4 million
GAAP diluted net loss per share of $0.64

Non-GAAP and Non-GAAP Financial Results (excluding the impact of stock-based compensation expense and the income tax effects of non-GAAP adjustments):

Non-GAAP gross margin of 76.6%
Non-GAAP operating income of $119.6 million
Non-GAAP operating margin of 30.2%
Non-GAAP net income of $143.3 million
Pro forma non-GAAP diluted earnings per share of $0.84

Full Year Fiscal 2024 Business Highlights

Introduced new portfolio of Scorpio Smart Fabric Switches purpose-built for AI infrastructure at cloud-scale. The Scorpio Smart Fabric Switch family features two application-specific product lines with a multi-generational roadmap, including the P-Series for GPU-to-CPU/NIC/SSD PCIe Gen 6 connectivity and the X-Series for platform-specific, back-end AI accelerator clustering. Scorpio is currently shipping in pre-production quantities.
Joined the Ultra Accelerator Link Consortium as a promoting member on the Board of Directors. UALink technology will be used to enable efficient high-speed scale-up connectivity between AI accelerators within large and growing cluster sizes for AI workloads. Astera Labs is well positioned to quickly contribute to this new and compelling industry initiative to develop and advance UALink technology.
Demonstrated the industry’s first end-to-end PCIe optical connectivity link to provide extended reach for larger, disaggregated GPU clusters. PCIe over optics expands Astera Labs’ widely deployed and field-tested Aries family of Smart DSP retimers and Smart Cable Modules (SCMs) to deliver robust PCIe and CXL connectivity in chip-to-chip, box-to-box, and rack-to-rack topologies throughout the data center.
Expanded the widely deployed and field-tested Aries PCIe/CXL Smart DSP Retimer portfolio with the introduction and initial shipment of Aries 6 Retimers, the industry’s lowest power PCIe 6.x/CXL 3.x Retimer solution, to achieve higher bandwidth and extended reach across complex AI and compute topologies.
Shipped Aries PCIe/CXL Smart Cable Modules for Active Electrical Cable applications to enable multi-rack GPU clustering and low-latency memory fabric connectivity within AI infrastructure. The solution drives seven meters of reach over flexible copper cables to seamlessly and affordably interconnect clusters of GPUs across rack enclosures.
Showcased the first public demonstration of end-to-end interoperability between a PCIe 6.x Switch and a PCIe 6.x SSD at DesignCon 2025. The PCIe 6.x link-up was between an Astera Labs Scorpio P-Series Fabric Switch and Micron’s PCIe 6.x SSDs and showcased remarkable sequential read speeds exceeding 26GB/s.

First Quarter of Fiscal 2025 Financial Outlook

Based on current business trends and conditions, Astera Labs estimates the following:

GAAP Financial Outlook:

Revenue within a range of $151 million to $155 million
GAAP gross margin of approximately 74%
GAAP operating expenses within a range of approximately $113 million to $114 million
GAAP tax expense of approximately $3 million
GAAP diluted earnings per share within a range of approximately $0.03 to $0.04 on weighted-average diluted shares outstanding of approximately 180 million

Non-GAAP Financial Outlook (excluding the impact of approximately $47 million of stock-based compensation and including approximately $3 million of additional income taxes):

Non-GAAP gross margin of approximately 74%
Non-GAAP operating expenses within a range of approximately $66 million to $67 million
Non-GAAP tax rate of approximately 10%
Non-GAAP diluted earnings per share within a range of approximately $0.28 to $0.29 on non-GAAP weighted-average diluted shares outstanding of approximately 180 million

Earnings Webcast and Conference Call
Astera Labs will host a conference call to review its financial results for the fourth quarter and full year of fiscal 2024 and to discuss our financial outlook today at 1:30 p.m. Pacific Time. Interested parties may join the conference call by dialing 1-800-715-9871 and using conference ID 5908687. The call will also be webcast and can be accessed at the Astera Labs website at https://ir.asteralabs.com/. The webcast will be recorded and available for replay on the company’s website for the next six months.

Discussion of Non-GAAP Financial Measures
We use certain non-GAAP financial measures to supplement the performance measures in our consolidated financial statements, which are presented in accordance with GAAP. A reconciliation of these non-GAAP measures to the closest GAAP measure can be found later in this release. These non-GAAP financial measures include non-GAAP gross profit, non-GAAP gross margin, non-GAAP operating expenses, non-GAAP operating income (loss), non-GAAP operating margin, non-GAAP tax rate, non-GAAP net income (loss), non-GAAP diluted earnings (loss) per share, and non-GAAP weighted-average share count. We use these non-GAAP financial measures for financial and operational decision-making and as a means to assist us in evaluating period-to-period comparisons. By excluding certain items that may not be indicative of our recurring core operating results, we believe that, non-GAAP gross profit, non-GAAP gross margin, non-GAAP operating expenses, non-GAAP operating income (loss), non-GAAP operating margin, non-GAAP tax rate, non-GAAP net income (loss), non-GAAP pro forma diluted earnings (loss) per share, and non-GAAP pro forma weighted-average share count provide meaningful supplemental information regarding our performance. Accordingly, we believe these non-GAAP financial measures are useful to investors and others because they allow for additional information with respect to financial measures used by management in its financial and operational decision-making and they may be used by our institutional investors and the analyst community to help them analyze the health of our business. However, there are a number of limitations related to the use of non-GAAP financial measures, and these non-GAAP measures should be considered in addition to, not as a substitute for or in isolation from, our financial results prepared in accordance with GAAP. Other companies, including companies in our industry, may calculate these non-GAAP financial measures differently or not at all, which reduces their usefulness as comparative measures.

No reconciliation is provided with respect to the forward-looking non-GAAP financial measures included in our non-GAAP financial outlook, as the GAAP measures are not accessible on a forward-looking basis. As a result, we cannot reliably predict all necessary components or their impact to reconcile such financial measures without unreasonable effort. The events necessitating a non-GAAP adjustment are inherently unpredictable and may have a significant impact on our future GAAP financial results.

We adjust the following items from one or more of our non-GAAP financial measures:

Stock-based compensation expense
We exclude stock-based compensation expense, which is a non-cash expense, from certain of our non-GAAP financial measures because we believe that excluding this item provides meaningful supplemental information regarding operational performance. In particular, companies calculate non-cash stock-based compensation expense using a variety of valuation methodologies and subjective assumptions. Moreover, stock-based compensation expense is a non-cash charge that can vary significantly from period to period for reasons that are unrelated to our core operating performance, and therefore excluding this item provides investors and other users of our financial information with information that allows meaningful comparisons of our business performance across periods.

Employer payroll taxes related to stock-based compensation resulting from our IPO
We exclude employer payroll taxes related to the time-based vesting and net settlement of restricted stock units in connection with our initial public offering (the “IPO”), because this does not correlate to the operation of our business. We believe that excluding this item provides meaningful supplemental information regarding operational performance given the amount of employer payroll tax-related items on employee stock transactions was immaterial prior to our IPO.

Income tax effect
This represents the impact of the non-GAAP adjustments on an after-tax basis and one-off discrete tax adjustments that are unrelated to our core operating performance in connection with the presentation of non-GAAP net income (loss) and non-GAAP net income (loss) per diluted share. This approach is designed to enhance investors’ ability to understand the impact of our non-GAAP tax expense on our current operations, provide improved modeling accuracy, and substantially reduce fluctuations caused by GAAP to non-GAAP adjustments.

Non-GAAP pro forma weighted-average shares to compute non-GAAP pro forma net income (loss) per share
We present non-GAAP pro forma weighted-average shares, assuming our redeemable convertible preferred stock is converted from the beginning of each respective periods presented, to provide meaningful supplemental information regarding EPS trend on a consistent basis. All of our outstanding redeemable preferred stock converted into the equivalent number of shares of common stock in connection with our IPO.

Cautionary Note Regarding Forward-Looking Statements
This press release contains forward-looking statements based on Astera Labs’ current expectations. The words “believe”, “estimate”, “expect”, “intend”, “may”, “anticipate”, “plan”, “project”, “will”, and similar phrases as they relate to Astera Labs are intended to identify such forward-looking statements. These forward-looking statements reflect the current views and assumptions of Astera Labs and are subject to various risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially from expectations. These forward-looking statements include but are not limited to, statements regarding our future operating results, financial position and guidance, including for the first quarter of fiscal 2025, our business strategy and plans, our objectives for future operations, our development or delivery of new or enhanced products and anticipated results of those products for our customers, our competitive positioning, including to meet the connectivity market opportunity in the future and initiative to advance UALink technology, technological capabilities and plans, our plans to add R&D talent and strategic IP blocks, and macroeconomic trends in cloud and AI infrastructure. A variety of risks and factors that are beyond our control could cause actual results to differ materially from those in the forward-looking statements including, without limitation: the competitive and cyclical nature of the semiconductor industry; the concentration of our customer base; the changes in demand for AI; the macroeconomic environment; risks that demand and the supply chain may be adversely affected, including by the imposition of tariffs by the United States and any corresponding retaliatory tariffs, changes in political policies, military conflict (such as between Russia/Ukraine and Israel/Hamas), terrorism, sanctions or other geopolitical events globally (including conflict between Taiwan and China); quarterly fluctuations in revenues and operating results; difficulties developing new products that achieve market acceptance; risks associated with managing international activities (including trade barriers, particularly with respect to China); absence of long-term commitments from customers; risks that Astera Labs may not be able to manage strains associated with its growth; credit risks associated with its accounts receivable; stock price volatility; information technology risks, including cyber-attacks against Astera Labs’ products and its networks; and other risks and uncertainties that are detailed under the caption “Risk Factors” and elsewhere in our Annual Report on 10-K that will be filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”) and in Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q filed with the SEC and the other SEC filings and reports Astera Labs may make from time to time. Moreover, we operate in a very competitive and rapidly changing environment, and new risks may emerge from time to time. It is not possible for our management to predict all risks, nor can we assess the impact of all factors on our business or the extent to which any factor(s) may cause actual results or outcomes to differ materially from those contained in any forward-looking statements we may make. Accordingly, you should not rely on any of the forward-looking statements. Astera Labs disclaims any intention or obligation to update or revise any forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information, future events, or otherwise, except as required by law.

About Astera Labs
Our PCIe, CXL and Ethernet semiconductor-based connectivity solutions are purpose-built to unleash the full potential of accelerated computing at cloud-scale. Inspired by trusted partnerships with hyperscalers and the data center ecosystem, we are an innovation leader of products that are customizable, interoperable, and reliable. Discover how we are transforming AI and modern data-driven applications at www.asteralabs.com.


ASTERA LABS, INC.CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS (Unaudited) (In thousands)

	December 31, 2024			December 31, 2023
Assets
Current assets
Cash and cash equivalents	$	79,551		$	45,098
Marketable securities		834,750			104,215
Accounts receivable, net		38,811			8,335
Inventory		43,215			24,095
Prepaid expenses and other current assets		16,652			4,064
Total current assets		1,012,979			185,807
Property and equipment, net		35,651			4,712
Other assets		5,878			5,773
Total assets	$	1,054,508		$	196,292

Liabilities, Redeemable Convertible Preferred Stock and Stockholders’ Equity (Deficit)
Current liabilities
Accounts payable	$	26,918		$	6,337
Accrued expenses and other current liabilities		59,624			28,742
Total current liabilities		86,542			35,079
Other liabilities		3,167			3,787
Total liabilities		89,709			38,866
Commitments and contingencies
Redeemable convertible preferred stock		–			255,127
Stockholders’ equity (deficit)
Common stock		16			4
Additional paid-in capital		1,173,153			27,411
Accumulated other comprehensive income		426			259
Accumulated deficit		(208,796	)		(125,375	)
Total stockholders’ equity (deficit)		964,799			(97,701	)
Total liabilities, redeemable convertible preferred stock and stockholders’ equity (deficit)	$	1,054,508		$	196,292


ASTERA LABS, INC.CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS (Unaudited) (In thousands, except per share amounts)

	Three Months Ended									Years Ended
	December 31, 2024			September 30, 2024			December 31, 2023			December 31, 2024			December 31, 2023
Revenue	$	141,096		$	113,086		$	50,514		$	396,290		$	115,794
Cost of revenue		36,648			25,209			11,489			93,591			35,967
Gross profit		104,448			87,877			39,025			302,699			79,827

Operating expenses
Research and development		56,524			50,659			19,654			200,830			73,407
Sales and marketing		22,818			23,248			4,995			123,652			19,992
General and administrative		24,962			22,866			5,356			94,283			15,925
Total operating expenses		104,304			96,773			30,005			418,765			109,324
Operating income (loss)		144			(8,896	)		9,020			(116,066	)		(29,497	)
Interest income		10,558			10,912			1,674			34,288			6,549
Income (loss) before income taxes		10,702			2,016			10,694			(81,778	)		(22,948	)
Income tax (benefit) provision		(14,011	)		9,609			(3,631	)		1,643			3,309
Net income (loss)	$	24,713		$	(7,593	)	$	14,325		$	(83,421	)	$	(26,257	)

Net income (loss) per share attributable to common stockholders:
Basic	$	0.15		$	(0.05	)	$	—		$	(0.64	)	$	(0.71	)
Diluted	$	0.14		$	(0.05	)	$	—		$	(0.64	)	$	(0.71	)
Weighted-average shares used in calculating net income (loss) per share attributable to common stockholders:
Basic		159,895			156,831			38,627			131,262			37,131
Diluted		177,559			156,831			47,636			131,262			37,131


ASTERA LABS, INC.CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS (Unaudited) (In thousands)

	Years Ended December 31,
		2024			2023
Cash flows from operating activities
Net loss	$	(83,421	)	$	(26,257	)
Adjustments to reconcile net loss to net cash provided by (used in) operating activities
Stock-based compensation		234,588			10,679
Depreciation		3,154			1,781
Non-cash operating lease expense		2,428			1,232
Warrants contra revenue		1,395			805
Inventory write-downs		168			10,343
Accretion of discounts on marketable securities		(8,341	)		(1,624	)
Changes in operating assets and liabilities:
Accounts receivable, net		(30,480	)		2,386
Inventory		(19,287	)		(5,564	)
Prepaid expenses and other assets		(13,031	)		(720	)
Accounts payable		20,887			(4,264	)
Accrued expenses and other liabilities		31,018			(167	)
Operating lease liability		(2,402	)		(1,346	)
Net cash provided by (used in) operating activities		136,676			(12,716	)

Cash flows from investing activities
Purchases of property and equipment		(34,245	)		(2,761	)
Purchases of marketable securities		(930,575	)		(126,225	)
Sales and maturities of marketable securities		208,665			111,214
Other investing activities		(1,413	)		—
Net cash used in investing activities		(757,568	)		(17,772	)

Cash flows from financing activities
Proceeds from issuance of common stock in connection with initial public offering, net of underwriting discounts and commissions		672,198			—
Payment of deferred offering costs		(4,801	)		(1,407	)
Proceeds from exercises of stock options		5,458			1,115
Proceeds from employee stock purchase plan		4,160			—
Tax withholding related to net share settlements of restricted stock units		(20,111	)		—
Repurchase of common stock upon termination		(1,066	)		(210	)
Net cash provided by (used in) financing activities		655,838			(502	)
Net increase (decrease) in cash, cash equivalents, and restricted cash		34,946			(30,990	)
Cash, cash equivalents, and restricted cash
Beginning of the period		45,098			76,088
End of the period	$	80,044		$	45,098


ASTERA LABS, INC.RECONCILIATION OF GAAP TO NON-GAAP FINANCIAL MEASURES (Unaudited) (In thousands, except percentages and per share amounts)

	Three Months Ended									Years Ended
	December 31, 2024			September 30, 2024			December 31, 2023			December 31, 2024			December 31, 2023
GAAP gross profit	$	104,448		$	87,877		$	39,025		$	302,699		$	79,827
Stock-based compensation expense upon IPO ⁽¹⁾		—			—			—			516			—
Stock-based compensation expense		131			102			8			329			24
Non-GAAP gross profit	$	104,579		$	87,979		$	39,033		$	303,544		$	79,851

GAAP gross margin		74.0	%		77.7	%		77.3	%		76.4	%		68.9	%
Stock-based compensation expense upon IPO ⁽¹⁾		—			—			—			0.1			—
Stock-based compensation expense		0.1			0.1			—			0.1			0.1
Non-GAAP gross margin		74.1	%		77.8	%		77.3	%		76.6	%		69.0	%

GAAP operating income (loss)	$	144		$	(8,896	)	$	9,020		$	(116,066	)	$	(29,497	)
Stock-based compensation expense upon IPO ⁽¹⁾		—			—			—			88,873			—
Stock-based compensation expense		48,218			45,535			3,299			145,715			10,679
Employer payroll tax related to stock-based compensation from IPO ⁽²⁾		—			—			—			1,072			—
Non-GAAP operating income (loss)	$	48,362		$	36,639		$	12,319		$	119,594		$	(18,818	)

GAAP operating margin		0.1	%	(7.9)%				17.9	%	(29.3)%			(25.5)%
Stock-based compensation expense upon IPO ⁽¹⁾		—			—			—			22.4			—
Stock-based compensation expense		34.2			40.3			6.5			36.8			9.2
Employer payroll tax related to stock-based compensation from IPO ⁽²⁾		—			—			—			0.3			—
Non-GAAP operating margin		34.3	%		32.4	%		24.4	%		30.2	%	(16.3)%

GAAP net income (loss)	$	24,713		$	(7,593	)	$	14,325		$	(83,421	)	$	(26,257	)
Stock-based compensation expense upon IPO ⁽¹⁾		—			—			—			88,873			—
Stock-based compensation expense		48,218			45,535			3,299			145,715			10,679
Employer payroll tax related to stock-based compensation from IPO ⁽²⁾		—			—			—			1,072			—
Income tax effect ⁽³⁾		(6,439	)		2,340			—			(8,910	)		—
Non-GAAP net income (loss)	$	66,492		$	40,282		$	17,624		$	143,329		$	(15,578	)

Net income (loss) per share attributable to common stockholders:
GAAP – basic	$	0.15		$	(0.05	)	$	—		$	(0.64	)	$	(0.71	)
GAAP – diluted	$	0.14		$	(0.05	)	$	—		$	(0.64	)	$	(0.71	)
Non-GAAP pro forma – diluted	$	0.37		$	0.23		$	0.12		$	0.84		$	(0.12	)

Weighted average shares used to compute net income (loss) per share attributable to common stockholders:
GAAP – basic		159,895			156,831			38,627			131,262			37,131
GAAP – diluted		177,559			156,831			47,636			131,262			37,131
Non-GAAP pro forma – diluted ⁽⁴⁾		177,559			173,832			138,527			168,913			128,022

____________________

(1) Stock-based compensation expense recognized in connection with the time-based vesting and settlement of RSUs that had previously met the time-based vesting condition and for which the liquidity event vesting condition was satisfied in connection with our IPO.

(2) Employer payroll taxes related to the time-based vesting and settlement of RSUs, that had previously met the time-based vesting condition and for which the liquidity event vesting condition was satisfied in connection with our IPO.

(3) Income tax effect is calculated based on the tax laws in the jurisdictions in which we operate and is calculated to exclude the impact of stock-based compensation expense and one-off discrete tax adjustments that are unrelated to our core operating performance. For the three months ended December 31, 2024 and September 30, 2024, the non-GAAP tax benefit rate was 13% and tax expense rate of 15%, respectively. The adjustments for the three months ended December 31, 2023 were not material. For the years ended December 31, 2024, the non-GAAP tax expense rate was 7% compared to a tax benefit rate of 27% for the year ended December 31, 2023.

(4) We present the non-GAAP pro forma weighted average shares to provide meaningful supplemental information of comparable shares for each periods presented. The non-GAAP pro forma weighted average shares is calculated as follows:

	Three Months Ended			Years Ended
	December 31, 2024	September 30, 2024	December 31, 2023	December 31, 2024	December 31, 2023
Shares used to compute GAAP net income (loss) per share attributable to common stockholders – diluted	177,559	156,831	47,636	131,262	37,131
Weighted average effect of the assumed conversion of redeemable convertible preferred stock from the beginning of the periods	—	—	90,891	19,165	90,891
Effect of dilutive equivalent shares	—	17,001	—	18,486	—
Shares used to compute non-GAAP pro forma net income (loss) per share- diluted	177,559	173,832	138,527	168,913	128,022


ASTERA LABS, INC.SUPPLEMENTAL FINANCIAL INFORMATIONSTOCK-BASED COMPENSATION EXPENSE (Unaudited) (In thousands)

	Three Months Ended						Years Ended
	December 31, 2024		September 30, 2024		December 31, 2023		December 31, 2024		December 31, 2023
Cost of revenue	$	131	$	102	$	8	$	845	$	24
Research and development		18,808		14,641		2,303		76,427		7,360
Sales and marketing		14,671		16,200		681		95,887		2,067
General and administrative		14,608		14,592		307		61,429		1,228
Total stock-based compensation expense ⁽¹⁾	$	48,218	$	45,535	$	3,299	$	234,588	$	10,679

____________________

(1) Stock-based compensation expense recognized during the year ended December 31, 2024 included $88.9 million of cumulative stock-based compensation expense related to the time-based vesting and settlement of RSUs that had previously met the time-based vesting condition and for which the liquidity event vesting condition was satisfied in connection with our IPO.

IR CONTACT: Leslie Green
leslie.green@asteralabs.com

The MIL Network –

February 11, 2025

MIL-OSI United Nations: Noting Terrorist Groups’ Resilience, UN Counter-Terrorism Chief Tells Security Council Lasting Global Collaboration Key to Address Conditions Conducive to Lawlessness

Source: United Nations General Assembly and Security Council

Speakers Discuss Risk ISIL/Da’esh, Their Affiliates Pose in Syria, Afghanistan, Across Africa

The resilience of terrorist groups underscores the need for sustained international collaboration and comprehensive, long-term responses that address the conditions conducive to terrorism, the Security Council heard today during a briefing on the threat posed by Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant (ISIL/Da’esh).

Vladimir Voronkov, Under-Secretary-General of the United Nations Office of Counter-Terrorism, discussing the Secretary-General’s twentieth biannual strategic-level report on the topic, highlighted the volatile situation in Syria, and “the risk that stockpiles of advanced weapons could fall into the hands of terrorists”. An estimated 42,500 individuals, some with alleged links to Da’esh, remain in detention camps in the north-east. Member States must “facilitate the safe, voluntary and dignified repatriation of their nationals still stranded in those camps and facilities”, he said.

Providing details on the global terrorism landscape during the past six months, he said that, in Afghanistan, ISIL-Khorasan continued to pose a significant threat noting that its supporters plotted attacks in Europe and were actively seeking to recruit individuals from Central Asian States. In West Africa and the Sahel, Da’esh affiliates and other terrorist groups intensified attacks, including against schools in Burkina Faso, Mali and Niger, while in Somalia, the organization successfully recruited foreign terrorist fighters.

Sub-Saharan Africa has become the epicenter of global terrorism, he said, noting that the United Nations has prioritized capacity-building support to the continent. His office increased its delivery of technical assistance by 16 per cent, relying notably on the work of its Rabat Office. Highlighting the Fusion Cells programme which delivered specialized training to 124 analysts from 21 African Member States, he stressed the need to further strengthen border security to counter movements of terrorists. His office partnered with the Governments of Kuwait and Tajikistan to organize a conference on this.

The Countering Terrorist Travel programme, he said, continued to expand with 63 beneficiary Member States who are increasingly relying on the goTRAVEL software to collect and process passenger data to detect and prevent terrorist movements. Noting that the Pact for the Future renewed the international community’s commitment to a future free from terrorism, he urged Member States to translate these commitments into action, prioritizing inclusive, networked and sustainable responses.

Approach Centered on Prevention, Respect for Human Rights Key to Countering Terrorist Threat

Also briefing the Council was Natalia Gherman, Executive Director of Counter-Terrorism Committee Executive Directorate, who voiced concern over the humanitarian and security crisis in north-eastern Syria, with over 40,000 individuals confined in camps and detention facilities, under conditions marked by overcrowding, inadequate shelter and limited access to clean water and sanitation. Beyond the Middle East, Da’esh remains agile, taking advantage of ongoing conflicts and regions experiencing growing instability, she continued. The group now poses a threat to security and sustainable development across the African continent.

Armed terrorist groups, such as Islamic State West Africa Province, are exploiting fragile conditions to recruit children, commit abductions and attack schools and hospitals. In the Sahel and the Lake Chad Basin, Da’esh’s centralized operations continue to proliferate as regional cooperation declines, she said, adding that the role of the regional financial hubs used by the group and its affiliates has also expanded.

“Addressing these threats requires an approach centered on prevention, grounded in respect for human rights, and with regional cooperation as the linchpin,” she stressed, noting the Committee’s visits to Côte d’Ivoire, Ghana, Malawi, Mauritania and the United Republic of Tanzania. Assessments revealed gaps in border security and the need for stronger regional collaboration to counter the transnational nature of Da’esh’s activities. For its part, the Executive Directorate has recently adopted the non-binding guiding principles on preventing, detecting and disrupting the use of new and emerging financial technologies for terrorist purposes — the so-called “Algeria Guiding Principles”, she said.

Council Members Concerned Over Terrorists’ Adeptness at Expanding Operations, Attractomg New Recruits

In the ensuing discussion, Council members expressed concern that, despite decades of counter-terrorism efforts, the phenomenon has transformed adeptly, taking advantage of new technology and financial innovations. Sierra Leone’s delegate said that ISIL/Da’esh and their affiliates “continue to demonstrate resilience and adapt their modus operandi with extensive propaganda, as well as increased finances, fighters’ expertise and technology”. 14,000 fatalities were recorded on the African continent alone in 2024, he said, noting the impact on women and girls. A security-centered approach alone is insufficient, he stressed.

Along similar lines, Algeria’s delegate said that terrorist groups use the lack of development and marginalization to recruit and expand — therefore, security arrangements and development initiatives are equally necessary to combat this. Highlighting the Sahel, he said that well-equipped armed groups are adopting advancing military strategies as well as using organized crime, narcotic trafficking, kidnapping and new technologies to finance such operations.

France’s speaker noted that Da’esh, Al-Qaida and their affiliates are misappropriating new technology — such as drones — to carry out more targeted and lethal attacks. “These groups thrive on the soil where basic human rights are being violated, where women are marginalized,” she stated, adding that their use of sexual violence as a means of sowing terror has been documented.

“Our work is far from complete,” said Somalia’s representative, spotlighting “patterns of expansion” across regions, with groups establishing networks that transcend national borders. For its part, his Government has successfully conducted military operations with international partners to neutralize foreign Da’esh affiliates and implement joint security initiatives.

The representative of the United States highlighted her Government’s “precision air strikes” against ISIS in Somalia on 1 February. Her country “stands ready to find and eliminate terrorists who threaten the United States and our allies,” she said. She also urged Council members to list more ISIL and Al-Qaida affiliates in the 1267 Sanctions Committee list so that they will be subject to its worldwide assets travel ban and arms embargo. While the Sahel has become “the global epicenter for fatalities from terrorist attacks”, ISIS-Khorasan is increasing its capabilities to conduct attacks and recruit in Afghanistan and Pakistan, she said.

Counter-terrorism Policies Must Oppose Double Standards and Selectivity

Pakistan’s delegate drew attention to the need to address white supremacy and far-right extremism, as well. Counter-terrorism policies have so far singled out only one religion — Islam — but they must address the negative impact of stigmatizing Muslims and fanning the flames of Islamophobia, he said. His country is at the forefront of counter-terrorism efforts, fighting not only Da’esh, but also TTP [Tehrik-e Taliban Pakistan] and Majid Brigade. Further, “the international community has failed to address State terrorism, including the use of State power to suppress legitimate struggles for self-determination or to continue foreign occupation”, he said.

It was the North Atlantic Treaty Organization’s (NATO) invasion into Libya and the invasion of Iraq which spawned ISIL, the Russian Federation’s delegate said. Further, the United Nations’ counter-terrorism officials must “study the facts” on assistance to terrorists provided by Western countries, he said, adding that Ukraine, for instance, has become a logistic hub from which weapons disseminate across the world. NATO troops who hastily left Afghanistan also abandoned vast quantities of weapons which fell into the hands of ISIL and affiliates, he said.

The Council should oppose double standards and selectivity in counter-terrorism efforts, China’s representative, Council President for the month, speaking in his national capacity, underscored. He also voiced concern over the Turkistan Islamic Party in Syria, and called on Damascus to fulfil its counter-terrorism obligations and prevent any terrorist forces from using the Syrian territory to threaten the security of other countries.

Calls to Ensure Terrorist Groups Do Not Take Advantage of Instability in Syria

Several speakers, including the delegates of Denmark and Slovenia, stressed the need to ensure that terrorist groups do not take advantage of the instability in Syria. Greece’s delegate underlined the need for a political road map in that country that includes constitutional reform, free and fair elections and inclusive governance. “This is the only way towards the eradication not only of Da’esh, but terrorism in general,” he added. The United Kingdom’s delegate spotlighted the Global Coalition’s efforts to reduce the risk Da’esh poses as Syria embarks on its historical political transition. However, “we cannot fight terrorism with force alone”, he emphasized, calling for a whole-of-society approach — with the meaningful participation of women — to address the long-term drivers of terrorism.

Terrorists’ Increased Use of Information and Communications Technology Draws Concern

Delegates also considered how to tackle terrorist groups’ increased use of information and communications technology (ICT), with Guyana’s representative noting that gaming and social media platforms bolster resources and recruitment. The Analytical Support and Sanctions Monitoring Team has reported extensively on the increased risk of online radicalization and recruitment targeting youth and minors and the increasing use of cryptocurrencies by Da’esh, she said.

Also noting Da’esh’s use of cryptocurrencies, Panama’s delegate said: “Terrorism thrives on secrecy and underground flows of money.” His country is the only Latin American nation to participate in the Global Coalition against Da’esh and is committed to preventing terrorists from using the Panamanian banking system for their financing.

The Republic of Korea’s speaker stressed that the international community must respond by leveraging artificial-intelligence-driven analytics to improve threat detection, disrupt terrorist narratives and bolster information integrity. Seoul’s new “AI and Preventing and Countering Violent Extremism” project, designed in collaboration with the United Nations Office of Counter-Terrorism, seeks to map out how terrorists exploit AI and build States’ capacity to counter these tactics by incorporating AI solutions, he said.

MIL OSI United Nations News –

February 11, 2025
MIL-OSI Europe: EIB Group President Calviño in Kyiv on first official visit outside EU to announce new major projects for critical energy infrastructure, basic services for citizens and investment in SMEs across Ukraine
Source: European Investment Bank
- The EIB President is leading the EIB delegation to Ukraine on her first visit outside the EU since taking up office last year.
- Calviño stressed the EIB Group’s long-term commitment to Ukraine in talks with the government and business leaders in Kyiv.
- The projects announced under EU’s €50 billion Ukraine Facility include €420 million in investment for the public sector to restore and protect energy supplies, and for water, heating, housing and other critical infrastructure.
- The support also includes new loan and guarantees for SMEs, unlocking almost €500 million of new finance.
- The EU 112 emergency call system will be rolled out in Ukraine with EIB backing.
- A €16.5 million grant provided by the German Ministry for Economic Affairs and Climate Action to an EIB International Climate Initiative Trust Fund has been signed for renewable energy in Ukraine.
- There are plans for close cooperation to advance social housing in the country.
On her first official visit outside the European Union since taking up office a year ago, European Investment Bank (EIB) Group President Nadia Calviño is visiting Kyiv today to meet top Ukrainian officials, including President Volodymyr Zelenskyy and Prime Minister Denys Shmyhal. The objective of the visit is to agree on new financing operations for Ukraine and stress Europe’s long-term commitment to the country. President Calviño is leading the delegation that also features EIB Vice-President Teresa Czerwińska and EU Ambassador to Ukraine Katarína Mathernová.

The package – part of the European Union’s €50 billion Ukraine Facility – includes €420 million for new public-sector projects to restore and protect energy supplies, heating systems and other critical infrastructure that has been damaged since Russia’s full-scale invasion in February 2022. The EIB and the European Commission are set to finalise the approval of a €2 billion EIB contribution under the Facility.

The latest round of European funding announced today will also benefit Ukraine’s private sector, with the aim of bolstering thousands of small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), which form the backbone of the country’s economy. It combines a €100 million loan and guarantees aimed at unlocking around €400 million in lending to SMEs through key Ukrainian banks – including Ukreximbank, ProCredit Bank and Ukrgasbank – with which the EIB has signed agreements today.

Another element of the package is the planned rollout of the European Union’s common 112 emergency number and call system across Ukraine to enhance public safety. President Calviño visited an operating centre in Kyiv that will run the new system to mark the signing of a €40 million EIB loan for the initiative, which is complemented by a €12 million EU grant and funding from Member States under the EU for Ukraine Fund.

“This is my first official visit outside the European Union since taking up office as President of the EIB Group last year. Support for Ukraine is a top priority and that is why I am so pleased to be here to announce new major projects for SMEs, energy, water and other essential services that will help people to continue with their daily lives and support the country’s economic resilience, while also laying the foundation for a stronger Ukraine on its path to EU membership,” said EIB Group President Nadia Calviño.”

“The financing package that we have announced reflects our ongoing and unwavering commitment, since the very first day of this war, to help Ukraine recover, rebuild, and thrive despite the immense challenges it faces. This is a joint effort of Team Europe made possible through close collaboration with the European Commission and EU Member States,” added EIB Vice-President Teresa Czerwińska, who oversees the Bank’s operations in Ukraine.

“This support package, developed with the EIB, further demonstrates the European Union’s unwavering commitment to Ukraine’s recovery and reconstruction. With the Ukraine Facility, we are restoring vital infrastructure and helping businesses grow – crucial projects as Ukraine defends itself against Russian aggression. Together, we will continue to support Ukraine, working on key areas, such as energy, housing, and public safety to build a stronger and more sustainable future,” said EU Ambassador to Ukraine Katarína Mathernová.

Today, four projects worth €420 million were announced under the EU’s Ukraine Facility. They will help to restore critical infrastructure and services and ensure a stable energy supply. The projects include the €100 million “Ukraine Recovery III”, €100 million “Ukraine Water Recovery”, and the €100 million “Ukraine District Heating”, which will be channelled through Ukreximbank. These initiatives aim to ensure that millions of Ukrainians in more than 100 communities across the country have access to heating, water, hospitals, schools and housing for internally displaced people. The €120 million “Support of Ukrhydroenergo Stability and Recovery” loan to the largest hydropower generating company in Ukraine will help to restore hydropower plants and thus reinforce the Ukrainian energy system.

Deputy Prime Minister for Restoration of Ukraine — Minister for Development of Communities and Territories of Ukraine Oleksii Kuleba said: “We deeply value the strong cooperation with the European Investment Bank, in particular under the recovery programmes, which are playing, since 2014 a key role in supporting more than 100 communities across the country. We are grateful for the support to the communities that are de-occupied or close to the front line. The provision of social, medical, logistical, educational and other infrastructure is essential to ensuring our communities remains strong and resilient. Today we sign €100 million of the multi-sector Ukraine Recovery III loan for the restoration and modernization of critical infrastructure, such as heating, hospitals and housing for IDPs and we sign €100 million of Ukraine Water Recovery dedicated to water and wastewater. Our collaboration on social housing is another key component, reflecting our shared commitment to providing essential infrastructure and stability for those in need. The grant for renewable energy, which we also signed today, will play a vital role in ensuring that critical buildings, like hospitals, can continue serving the population amidst power cuts. Together, these initiatives not only accelerate our recovery but also help us build a more resilient and sustainable future for our country.”

The financing provided for the 112 call system in Ukraine will expand data centres across the country and upgrade their technological capacity, ensuring that critical services are reliable and efficient.

“Implementing and developing the 112 emergency call system has become a crucial component in enhancing public safety in Ukraine and in aligning our infrastructure to European standards. Thanks to the EIB loan and support from European partners, we will be able to improve cooperation between emergency services, particularly through the automatic detection of the caller’s geolocation. We will strengthen our ability to assist individuals with hearing and speech impairments, as well as foreign citizens. This project is about enhancing the safety of our citizens and providing timely assistance to those in need,” said Minister of Internal Affairs of Ukraine Ihor Klymenko.

The EIB is also signing a €16.5 million grant from the German government with the Ministry for Development of Communities and Territories of Ukraine to promote renewable energy. The grant comes through the EIB’s International Climate Initiative Fund and is part of the Ukraine Energy Rescue Plan announced by the EIB in October 2024.

The grant will help integrate renewable energy systems into public buildings undergoing renovation works under EIB municipal loans. This will upgrade social infrastructure and make energy more reliable, cleaner and less costly. The grant will also help to decentralise energy generation, ensuring that critical public buildings in towns and villages are less reliant on electricity supplies from large power stations, making them less vulnerable to blackouts in the event of an airstrike.

Berthold Goeke, Director-General for Climate Action, German Federal Ministry for Economic Affairs and Climate Action (BMWK) said: “Through the Renewable Energy Solutions Programme, the International Climate Initiative (IKI) is helping smaller Ukrainian communities — those most affected by the war and in urgent need — to implement climate-friendly technologies. This support enables Ukraine to reduce energy costs and modernize outdated infrastructure in public buildings, laying the foundation for a stable and renewable energy future. In this way, the German government is addressing two critical challenges in Ukraine’s energy system. First, we are supporting the development of a decentralized and resilient energy supply, particularly for essential public infrastructure such as hospitals, schools, and kindergartens. Given the ongoing Russian aggression and the destruction of central energy infrastructure, this is vital for ensuring stability and security. Second, our initiative contributes to Ukraine’s long-term energy transition by promoting renewable energy and energy efficiency measures, paving the way for a climate-neutral energy system.”

Social housing is one of the most pressing issues in Ukraine, with 10% of the country’s housing stock damaged as a result of the war. The EIB is supporting the government in drafting a new housing code and exploring the possibility of financing the construction of homes that are publicly owned.

Background information

EIB in Ukraine

The EIB Group has been supporting Ukraine’s resilience, economy and efforts to rebuild since the very first day of Russia’s full-scale invasion. In 2024, we supported projects aimed at securing Ukraine’s energy supply, repairing critical infrastructure that has been damaged, and ensuring that essential services continue to be delivered across the country. This brings the total amount of aid we have disbursed since the start of the war to over €2.2 billion. This funding has played a crucial role in ensuring that vital services continue to be delivered to people in Ukraine. For example, this year we inaugurated the water supply facility in Bucha that was rebuilt, and which provides clean water to 9 000 residents. We also opened five new schools in Vinnytsia, Dnipropetrovsk, and Ternopil Oblasts, helped build a department for children’s infectious diseases at a hospital in Zhytomyr Oblast, and significantly improved sanitation through the upgraded sewerage collector in Vinnytsia Oblast. Furthermore, our investments have helped modernise street lighting in Dnipro, benefitted the reclamation of the Hrybovychi landfill in Lviv, and helped to upgrade water infrastructure in Mykolaiv. We have also strengthened Ukraine’s transport networks to ensure resilient and sustainable mobility for businesses and residents. With our support, cities such as Lviv, Kyiv, Mykolaiv, Ivano-Frankivsk, Odesa, and Sumy have purchased new buses, trolleybuses, and trams. In addition, we have funded the reconstruction of the M01 Kyiv-Chernihiv-Novi Yarylovychi section of road that had been damaged in the war. To enhance Ukraine’s energy resilience, we have launched the Energy Rescue Plan, securing €600 million in EU-backed financing, including €86 million to build anti-drone shelters to protect critical electricity transmission infrastructure. These measures are crucial to maintaining stable power supply across the country amid ongoing challenges. In 2024, we signed over €250 million in new investment for projects to further enhance social infrastructure and support businesses that are the backbone of Ukraine’s economy.

The EU for Ukraine Fund (EU4U) was established in 2023 as part of a larger EU for Ukraine initiative. The fund aims to accelerate EIB Global’s support for Ukraine’s most urgent infrastructure needs and help sustain its economy. The Fund supports both public and private sector projects to rebuild critical municipal infrastructure and improve access to finance for entrepreneurs.

The International Climate Initiative (IKI) Fund was established in 2019 in partnership with the government of Germany, with the aim of catalysing investment for ambitious climate change mitigation and adaptation projects in developing and emerging countries. The IKI Fund seeks to do this by providing investment grants, financial instruments and technical assistance to public and private sector beneficiaries, as well as advisory services to central banks and financial institutions.
MIL OSI Europe News –
February 11, 2025

MIL-OSI Europe: Agenda – Tuesday, 11 February 2025 – Strasbourg

Source: European Parliament

Agenda

Strasbourg

Monday, 10 February 2025 – Thursday, 13 February 2025

Tuesday, 11 February 2025

Version: Monday, 10 February 2025, 17:33

12:00 – 12:30 Formal sitting

Address by Ruslan Stefanchuk, Speaker of the Verkhovna Rada

09:00 – 11:50 Debates

Council (including replies)

20′

Commission (including replies)

20′

“Catch the eye” (2×5′)

10′

Members

104′

13:30 – 22:00 Debates (or at the end of the votes)

Council (including replies)

50′

Commission (including replies)

65′

Author (committee)

5′

“Catch the eye” (7×5′)

35′

Members

239′

32		Continuing the unwavering EU support for Ukraine, after three years of Russia’s war of aggression
17		European Central Bank – annual report 2024 Anouk Van Brug (A10-0003/2025)
	–	Amendments	Wednesday, 5 February 2025, 13:00
50		Escalation of violence in the eastern Democratic Republic of the Congo
	–	Motion for a resolution	Monday, 10 February 2025, 19:00
	–	Amendments to motions for resolutions; joint motions for resolutions	Tuesday, 11 February 2025, 19:00
	–	Amendments to joint motions for resolutions	Tuesday, 11 February 2025, 20:00
	–	Requests for “separate”, “split” and “roll-call” votes	Wednesday, 12 February 2025, 16:00
Separate votes – Split votes – Roll-call votes
Texts put to the vote on Tuesday			Friday, 7 February 2025, 12:00
Texts put to the vote on Wednesday			Monday, 10 February 2025, 19:00
Texts put to the vote on Thursday			Tuesday, 11 February 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 February 2025, 19:00

MIL OSI Europe News –

February 11, 2025

MIL-OSI United Kingdom: Support for Ukrainians continues as government extends driving licence and vehicle exemptions
Source: United Kingdom – Executive Government & Departments

Ukrainian licence holders will be able to drive on Great Britain’s roads for up to 4.5 years from when they arrive in the UK.
rules to allow Ukrainians to drive in the UK using their Ukrainian license extended

Ukrainians will also remain exempt from registering and paying vehicle excise duty in the UK on Ukrainian-registered vehicles

additional support comes as UK and Ukraine sign historic 100-year partnership to bolster maritime security and deepen trade ties

Ukrainian nationals who have fled Russia’s illegal invasion will continue being able to drive, as the government extends rules to support them.

The Future of Roads Minister, Lilian Greenwood, has announced an 18-month extension for Ukrainian licence holders, allowing them to drive mopeds, motorcycles and cars – meaning these motorists will be able to drive on Great Britain’s roads for up to 4.5 years from arriving here in the UK.

In addition, certain Ukrainians on visa schemes will be exempt for a further 18 months from registering their vehicles or paying vehicle excise duty (VED) for their Ukrainian-registered vehicles in the UK. This reduces financial pressure and avoids unnecessary costs and complications.

Future of Roads Minister, Lilian Greenwood, said:

The government stands firmly with the people of Ukraine, and it’s important those in the UK who’ve fled Putin’s illegal invasion are able to get about with ease for work or education.

This may seem like a small thing, but I’m pleased our country is taking action to help make day-to-day life that little bit easier for those who have endured unimaginable hardship for 3 years now.

The UK and Ukraine have an unbreakable bond reflected through the recently announced 100 Year Partnership, which ensures closer communities are supported for generations to come.

These exemptions align with the launch of the Ukraine Permission Extension scheme, which enables certain Ukrainians to stay in the UK for a further 18 months from the end of their current permission. These measures will help avoid obstacles that may make it harder for Ukrainians to return home after the war to support reconstruction efforts.

The UK is steadfast in its commitment to supporting Ukraine, with £12.8 billion in humanitarian, economic and military support since the invasion started in February 2022. The Prime Minister committed £3 billion a year of military support for Ukraine for as long as it takes.

Roads media enquiries

Media enquiries 0300 7777 878

Switchboard 0300 330 3000

Share this page

The following links open in a new tab

Share on Facebook (opens in new tab)

Share on Twitter (opens in new tab)

Updates to this page

Published 10 February 2025
MIL OSI United Kingdom –
February 11, 2025
MIL-OSI Europe: Press release – President Metsola: “Örebro shooting was a senseless act of violence”
Source: European Parliament 3

President Metsola opened the 10-13 February session with a minute’s silence for the victims of last week’s shooting in Örebro – the worst in Sweden’s history.
Örebro Shooting

Calling on MEPs to observe a minute’s silence for the victims of the mass shooting at Risbergska school in Örebro on Tuesday 4 February 2025, President Metsola called the tragedy “a senseless act of violence that claimed innocent lives, shattering families, and scarring communities. Europe mourns those who have been lost, and our thoughts are with their loved ones, with all those who have been injured, and with the people of Sweden in this moment of profound sorrow.” She added that “hatred and violence have no place in Europe. The values that unite us – peace, democracy, and the dignity of human life – will always prevail.”

Three years since Russian invasion of Ukraine

President Metsola marked the third anniversary of Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine by saying that “Ukraine remains resilient. And this Parliament stands with it.” President Metsola informed MEPs that Parliament will welcome Chairman Ruslan Stefanchuk of the Verkhovna Rada on Tuesday 11 February to mark this sombre anniversary.

Interruptions during International Holocaust Remembrance Day

Referring to interruptions that took place during Parliament’s solemn session on 29 January 2025 to honour International Holocaust Remembrance Day, President Metsola extended her deepest apologies for the “disgraceful” incident. “The gravity of such behaviour cannot be overstated. It is a stark reminder of why remembrance is not just a symbolic act, but a fundamental duty that this Parliament – that we all must – uphold,” she said. “The appropriate consequences will be drawn after the relevant procedures are followed. I thank all of you for being present that day.”

Changes to the agenda

MONDAY

Parliament’s statements on the Situation in Sweden in the midst of the recent mass shooting in Örebro, with one round of political group speakers, is added as the first point today.

TUESDAY

A formal sitting with an address by Ruslan Stefanchuk, Speaker of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine, is added at 12:00. As a consequence, the voting session will start at 12:30.

THURSDAY

The order of debates in the morning is changed as follows:

the debate on EU-Mercosur Trade Agreement is taken as the first point on the agenda, whereas

the debate on Threats to EU sovereignty through strategic dependencies in communication infrastructure follows as the second point.

Request by several committees to start negotiations with Council and Commission

Decisions by committees to enter into inter-institutional negotiations (Rule 71) are published on the plenary website.

If no request for a vote in Parliament on the decision to enter into negotiations is made by Tuesday at midnight, the committees may start negotiations.
MIL OSI Europe News –
February 11, 2025
MIL-OSI Global: While the world is distracted by Trump, here’s how Putin and Musk are weakening European democracies

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

In an unprecedented decision on December 6 2024, the Romanian constitutional court annulled the November 25 presidential elections after it received credible intelligence of large-scale external interference rigging the results of the first round in favour of a hardly-known far-right candidate, Calin Georgescu.

Georgescu’s massive last-minute surge was largely blamed on the creation of thousands of paid-for Russian-controlled bots on TikTok and illegal campaign financing.

This may seem like last year’s news, but with elections coming up in Germany, Poland, the Czech Republic, and possibly even Ukraine, there’s plenty to worry about – apart from a new US president who is disrupting Washington (and the world) with a flurry of executive orders and foreign policy initiatives that feel more like real estate sales pitches.

Concerns about Russian election interference are nothing new, but so far the picture of Moscow’s success is rather mixed.

Back in January 2017, the US intelligence community was confident that Russia had interfered in the 2016 presidential elections to get Donald Trump elected. The following year, similar accusations arose in the context of presidential elections in France. But in France, the Kremlin failed to prevent the victory of Emmanuel Macron.

More recently, in Georgia, the incumbent government of the Georgian Dream party won the parliamentary elections in October 2024 after alleged Russian interference. This sparked widespread protests and a government crackdown on media and civil society.

By contrast, despite alleged Russian interference in Moldova, the country’s pro-western president won a second term in November 2024. A referendum on a constitutional commitment to EU membership was supported by a razor-thin majority of voters.

Read more:
Maia Sandu’s victory in second round of Moldovan election show’s limits to Moscow’s meddling

Opinion polls on perceptions of Russia and Vladimir Putin across western democracies also offer some solace. According to a survey by the Pew Research Center in 2024, positive views of Russia and its leader remain very low across EU and Nato member countries. At the same time, approval ratings of the EU and Nato remained high among member countries’ citizens.

But these relatively comforting headline figures mask important, and somewhat worrying, trends. In Germany, which holds early parliamentary elections on February 23, positive views of Putin more than doubled from 8% in 2023 to 17% in 2024. This is still a far cry from the 76% who approved of Putin in 2003 or even the 36% who did so in 2019, according to the same survey. The German increase is an outlier among the 13 EU members, but in only one of them – Italy – did support for Putin drop, compared with the previous year.

Read more:
Why Romania’s election was annulled – and what happens next?

The same goes for support for the EU and Nato. The median level of support for the EU across nine member states surveyed stands at 63%, with 36% of participants holding unfavourable views. Germany, with 63% favourable views, however, recorded the second consecutive decline, down from 78% in 2022 and 71% in 2023. And Germany is less of an outlier here – favourable views of the EU among member states have generally declined somewhat over the past two years.

Musk speaks at an AfD rally.

When it comes to Nato, 63% of survey participants in 13 member countries thought more positively of the alliance, while 33% had more negative views. But again, with the exception of Hungary and Canada (where favourability went up), the share of those with favourable views had declined by between two and eight percentage points since last year.

Does this mean that Putin is winning? No, at least not yet. Attitude surveys are less important than election results.

Russia appears to have had some recent success in changing election outcomes, for instance in Romania where Romanian intelligance services discovered evidence of voter manipulation. But the Romanian example (in annulling the election) is also illustrative of how important it is for democracies to fight back – and even more importantly to take preventive action.

And this is a lesson that seems to have sunk in. On January 30, the foreign ministers of 12 EU member states sent a joint letter to Brussels urging the European Commission to make more aggressive use of its powers under the Digital Services Act to protect the integrity of democratic elections in the bloc. Article 25 of that act, crucially, establishes an obligation on online platforms to design their services free from deception and manipulation and ensure that users can make informed decisions.

While the commission has yet to demonstrate its resolve under the Digital Services Act, a Berlin court on February 7 2025, ordered that X must hand over data needed to track disinformation to two civil society groups who had requested it.

Musk and Putin: shared values?

If Putin is winning, he is not winning on his own. Democracies are not only under threat from Russia. Musk – an unelected billionaire wielding unprecedented influence under Donald Trump – has repeatedly been accused of interfering in European debates and election campaigns. Of his comments on the German election, Musk has argued that as he has significant investments in Germany he has the right to comment on its politics and that the AfD “resonates with many Germans who feel their concerns are ignored by the establishment”.

What Musk and Putin have in common is their deep dislike of open liberal democracies and a cunning ability to employ technology to further their goals by promoting political parties and movements that share their illiberal views.

Where they differ is that Musk focuses on the far right – Germany’s AfD or the UK’s Tommy Robinson. But Putin tends to back whoever he sees as serving Russian interests in weakening western unity and influence. This leads to the Kremlin lending support to leaders on both the far right and far left.

But often Putin’s and Musk’s proteges are the same. In the case of the German AfD, it was no accident that Putin echoed comments from a speech Musk gave at an AfD election rally, saying that Germans should move beyond their war guilt. Both were keen to remove the stain of being too close to Germany’s Nazi past from the AfD and make it not just electable but also respectable enough to bring into a coalition, much like Austria’s far-right Freedom Party which has a long history of friendly relations with Putin.

And what Musk can do openly on X, Putin tries to achieve with a campaign of his bot army on the platform.

Perhaps the most significant similarity between Musk and Putin – and others who have been accused of election interference – is that they tap into a growing reservoir of discontent with liberal democracy.

According to a 2024 survey of 31 democracies worldwide, 54% of participants were dissatisfied with how they saw democracy working. In 12 high-income countries – Canada, US, and 10 EU member states – dissatisfaction was even higher with 64% and has been increasing for the fourth consecutive year.

Pushing back against the kind of blatant election interference by the likes of Putin and Musk is clearly important. But it will not be enough to reverse persistent trends of decline in the support for democracy and its standard bearers including the EU and Nato. It is right to resist and prosecute election rigging. But it is also crucial to ask why people are dissatisfied with democracy – and to do something about it.

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

– ref. While the world is distracted by Trump, here’s how Putin and Musk are weakening European democracies – https://theconversation.com/while-the-world-is-distracted-by-trump-heres-how-putin-and-musk-are-weakening-european-democracies-249400

MIL OSI – Global Reports –

February 11, 2025
MIL-OSI USA: Durbin Warns Defense Secretary Hegseth Against Politicization Of U.S. Military After Numerous Concerning Actions By Trump Administration

US Senate News:

Source: United States Senator for Illinois Dick Durbin
February 10, 2025
“I am deeply alarmed that these actions may not only erode trust in our military as an institution, but also dangerously distract from where our focus ought to be on foreign adversaries and their capabilities,” Durbin wrote in his letter to Secretary Hegseth
WASHINGTON – U.S. Senate Democratic Whip Dick Durbin (D-IL), a member of the Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Defense (SACD), yesterday sent a letter to Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth to warn him against the politicization of the Department of Defense (DoD). Durbin’s letter comes after several thinly-veiled political orders by the Trump Administration related to the nation’s military, including removing protection from former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General Mark Milley, using the military for immigration enforcement, and impounding congressional approved DoD funding.
“I write to express my concern that President Trump’s personal agenda is counter to defending against our country’s serious national security threats. Since the President’s inauguration less than one month ago, the Trump Administration has pursued several dubious executive actions that threaten our military’s long-standing ethos to remain nonpartisan and promote merit, both of which you spoke to the importance of during your hearing before the Senate Armed Services Committee (SASC) prior to your confirmation,” Durbin began his letter.
“I am deeply alarmed that these actions may not only erode trust in our military as an institution, but also dangerously distract from where our focus ought to be on foreign adversaries and their capabilities,” Durbin wrote. “With China rapidly building its nuclear and naval forces, Russia fighting a war of aggression on the border of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, and North Korea and Iran pursuing nuclear weapons and destabilizing actions, these erratic pursuits distract from the real threats to our nation.”
Durbin then laid out the troublesome and political actions that the Trump Administration has taken since January 20.
Durbin referenced the “targeting [of] military officers such as… former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General Mark Milley… as part of an effort to go after individuals unceremoniously deemed unfit or considered political adversaries.”
In January, Secretary Hegseth removed General Milley’s security detail despite ongoing threats related to the 2020 drone strike that killed Iranian General Qusem Soleimani. DoD also announced that there will be an investigation into General Milley for “undermining the chain of command,” but there has been no clear indication of what conduct would be investigated. Rather, the investigation and threat of demotingGeneral Milley’s four-star rank appears to be a political reaction to General Milley’s public comments about being photographed at Lafayette Square after President Trump cleared the area of protestors using National Guard troops. Similarly, Coast Guard Commandant Linda Fagan, the first woman to lead a military service, was removed from her post on President Trump’s second day in office without warning and ahead of her scheduled departure.
Durbin also emphasized that the Trump Administration is “diverting DoD resources and critical warfighting personnel for contentious immigration enforcement, compromising our military assets and distracting from national security threats.”
Immediately upon being sworn in, President Trump signed an executive order stating that DoD would deploy troops to the southern border despite federal law prohibiting the use of military for law enforcement. At the end of January, DoD announced that Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) would use facilities at Buckley Space Force Base in Aurora, Colorado, as a detention center forundocumented immigrants. Further, military planes typically used for missions such as providing security assistance to Ukraine and Israel or hunting Russian and Chinese submarines have been used to deport immigrants and provide surveillance on our southern border. In addition, in an unprecedented move, the Trump administration began flying migrants on military aircraft from the U.S. for detention at Naval Station Guantanamo Bay.
In addition, Durbin decried the administration’s efforts to freeze congressionally-appropriated funding for programs such as defense medical research, which supports lifesaving treatment and prevention of illnesses for service members, veterans, and the civilian population. Since Fiscal Year 2015, Durbin has boosted defense medical research funding by more than $1.4 billion or 82 percent through SACD.
Durbin also noted that administration efforts to overturn policies that “remove barriers and enhance opportunities for qualified recruits” ultimately “[undermines] force strength and readiness—in the midst of unprecedented recruitment and retention challenges.” On January 27, President Trump issued an Executive Order effectively banning transgender troops from the military. And on January 31, the Pentagon eliminated a Biden-era policy that would provide reimbursements for service members who travel out of state to get reproductive health care after the Supreme Court’s overturning of Roe v. Wade.
“America’s national security depends on the Department of Defense functioning as a stable institution that supports its personnel rather than being thrown into disarray. Further, increasing politicization of our military risks diminishing the role of the United States on the international stage, sending a dangerous signal to our allies and adversaries alike,” Durbin said.
“In the spirit of your promise before SASC to be a faithful partner to Congress, I urge you to defend the principles of the Department of Defense,” Durbin concluded his letter.
Prior to Secretary Hegseth’s confirmation, Durbin made his concerns about his nomination clear. In January, Durbin delivered a speech on the Senate floor explaining his objections to Hegseth’s nomination, including his inability to articulate a defense strategy in addressing threats to the U.S., his disparaging comments about women serving in the military, and troubling reports of financial mismanagement, alcohol abuse, and personal misconduct.
The full text of the letter can be found here and below:
February 9, 2025
Dear Secretary Hegseth,
I write to express my concern that President Trump’s personal agenda is counter to defending against our country’s serious national security threats. Since the President’s inauguration less than one month ago, the Trump Administration has pursued several dubious executive actions that threaten our military’s long-standing ethos to remain nonpartisan and promote merit, both of which you spoke to the importance of during your hearing before the Senate Armed Services Committee (SASC) prior to your confirmation. I am deeply alarmed that these actions may not only erode trust in our military as an institution, but also dangerously distract from where our focus ought to be on foreign adversaries and their capabilities. With China rapidly building its nuclear and naval forces, Russia fighting a war of aggression on the border of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, and North Korea and Iran pursuing nuclear weapons and destabilizing actions, these erratic pursuits distract from the real threats to our nation.
The Trump Administration’s troubling actions have included, but are not limited to:
Targeting military officers such as Coast Guard Commandant Admiral Linda Fagan and former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General Mark Milley, as well as civilian federal government employees within the Department of Defense (DoD), such as the Senate-confirmed Inspector General, as part of an effort to go after individuals unceremoniously deemed unfit or considered political adversaries;
Diverting DoD resources and critical warfighting personnel for contentious immigration enforcement, compromising our military assets and distracting from national security threats;
Unconstitutionally impounding congressionally approved DoD funding from a myriad of programs that protect and support our service members, including projects that boost defense medical research, reduce civilian casualties, provide infrastructure grants to municipalities near military installations, and promote investments in critical technologies, sowing mass confusion and chaos; and
Undermining force strength and readiness—in the midst of unprecedented recruitment and retention challenges—by arbitrarily weaponizing programs and policies designed to remove barriers and enhance benefits and opportunities for qualified recruits.
As you know, DoD is the largest federal government agency in the United States. Your responsibilities include overseeing a nearly $900 billion budget, more than 3.5 million service members and civilian employees, and 750 military installations around the world. America’s national security depends on the Department of Defense functioning as a stable institution that supports its personnel rather than being thrown into disarray. Further, increasing politicization of our military risks diminishing the role of the United States on the international stage, sending a dangerous signal to our allies and adversaries alike.
In the spirit of your promise before SASC to be a faithful partner to Congress, I urge you to defend the principles of the Department of Defense.
Sincerely,
-30-

MIL OSI USA News –

February 11, 2025
MIL-OSI Global: Russia’s shrinking world: The war in Ukraine and Moscow’s global reach

Source: The Conversation – USA – By Ronald H. Linden, Professor Emeritus of Political Science, University of Pittsburgh

Russia President Vladimir Putin sent a guarded message of congratulations to Donald Trump on inauguration day, but then held a long direct call with his “dear friend,” Chinese leader Xi Jinping.

From Putin’s perspective, this makes sense. Russia gets billions of dollars from energy sales to China and technology from Beijing, but from Washington, until recently, mostly sanctions and suspicion.

Moscow is hoping for a more positive relationship with the current White House occupant, who has made his desire for a “deal” to end the Ukraine war well known.

But talk of exit scenarios from this 3-year-old conflict should not mask the fact that since the invasion began, Putin has overseen one of the worst periods in Russian foreign policy since the end of the Cold War.

Transatlantic unity

The war in Ukraine has foreclosed on options and blunted Russian action around the world.

Unlike the annexation of Crimea in 2014, the 2022 invasion produced an unprecedented level of transatlantic unity, including the expansion of NATO and sanctions on Russian trade and finance. In the past year, both the U.S. and the European Union expanded their sanction packages.

And for the first time, the EU banned the re-export of Russian liquefied natural gas and ended support for a Russian LNG project in the Arctic.

EU-Russian trade, including European imports of energy, has dropped to a fraction of what it was before the war.

The two Nordstrom pipelines, designed to bring Russian gas to Germany without transiting East Europe, lie crippled and unused. Revenues from energy sales are roughly one-half of what they were two years ago.

At the same time, the West has sent billions in military and humanitarian aid to Ukraine, enabling a level of resilience for which Russia was unprepared. Meanwhile, global companies and technical experts and intellectuals have fled Russia in droves.

While Russia has evaded some restrictions with its “shadow fleet” – an aging group of tankers sailing under various administrative and technical evasions – the country’s main savior is now China. Trade between China and Russia has grown by nearly two-thirds since the end of 2021, and the U.S. cites Beijing as the main source of Russia’s “dual use” and other technologies needed to pursue its war.

Since the start of the war in Ukraine, Russia has moved from an energy-for-manufactured-goods trade relationship with the West to one of vassalage with China, as one Russia analyst termed it.

Hosting an October meeting of the BRICS countries – now counting 11 members, including the five original members: Brazil, Russia, India, China and South America – is unlikely to compensate for geopolitical losses elsewhere.

Russian President Vladimir Putin and China President Xi Jinping toast their friendship in March 2023.
Pavel Byrkin/AFP via Getty Images

Problems at home …

The Russian economy is deeply distorted by increased military spending, which represents 40% of the budget and 25% of all spending. The government now needs the equivalent of US$20 billion annually in order to pay for new recruits.

Russian leaders must find a way to keep at least some of the population satisfied, but persistent inflation and reserve currency shortages flowing directly from the war have made this task more difficult.

On the battlefield, the war itself has killed or wounded more than 600,000 Russian soldiers. Operations during 2024 were particularly deadly, producing more than 1,500 Russian casualties a day.

The leader who expected Kyiv’s capitulation in days now finds Russian territory around Kursk occupied, its naval forces in the Black Sea destroyed and withdrawn, and its own generals assassinated in Moscow.

But probably the greatest humiliation is that this putative great power with a population of 144 million must resort to importing North Korean troops to help liberate its own land.

… and in its backyard

Moscow’s dedication to the war has affected its ability to influence events elsewhere, even in its own neighborhood.

In the Caucasus, for example, Russia had long sided with Armenia in its running battle with Azerbaijan over boundaries and population after the collapse of the Soviet Union.

Moscow has brokered ceasefires at various points. But intermittent attacks and territorial gains for Azerbaijan continued despite the presence of some 2,000 Russian peacekeepers sent to protect the remaining Armenian population in parts of the disputed territory of Nagorno-Karabakh.

In September 2023, Azerbaijan’s forces abruptly took control of the rest of Nagorno-Karabakh. More than 100,000 Armenians fled in the largest ethnic cleansing episode since the end of the Balkan Wars. The peacekeepers did not intervene and later withdrew. The Russian military, absorbed in the bloody campaigns in Ukraine, could not back up or reinforce them.

The Azeris’ diplomatic and economic position has gained in recent years, aided by demand for its gas as a substitute for Russia’s and support from NATO member Turkey.

Feeling betrayed by Russia, the Armenian government has for the first time extended feelers toward the West — which is happy to entertain such overtures.

Losing influence and friends

Russia’s loss in the Caucasus has been dwarfed by the damage to its military position and influence in the Middle East. Russia supported the Syrian regime of Bashar al-Assad against the uprisings of the Arab Spring in 2011 and saved it with direct military intervention beginning in 2015.

Yet in December 2024, Assad was unexpectedly swept away by a mélange of rebel groups. The refuge extended to Assad by Moscow was the most it could provide with the war in Ukraine having drained Russia’s capacity to do more.

Russia’s possible withdrawal from the Syrian naval base at Tartus and the airbase at Khmeimim would remove assets that allowed it to cooperate with Iran, its key strategic partner in the region.

More recently, Russia’s reliability as an ally and reputation as an armory has been damaged by Israeli attacks not only on Hezbollah and other Iranian-backed forces in Lebanon and Syria, but on Iran itself.

Russia’s position in Africa would also be damaged by the loss of the Syrian bases, which are key launch points for extending Russian power, and by Moscow’s evident inability to make a difference on the ground across the Sahel region in north-central Africa.

Dirty tricks, diminishing returns

Stalemate in Ukraine and Russian strategic losses in Syria and elsewhere have prompted Moscow to rely increasingly on a variety of other means to try to gain influence.

Disinformation, election meddling and varied threats are not new and are part of Russia’s actions in Ukraine. But recent efforts in East Europe have not been very productive. Massive Russian funding and propaganda in Romania, for example, helped produce a narrow victory for an anti-NATO presidential candidate in December 2024, but the Romanian government moved quickly to expose these actions and the election was annulled.

Nearby Moldova has long been subject to Russian propaganda and threats, especially during recent presidential elections and a referendum on stipulating a “European course” in the constitution. The tiny country moved to reduce its dependency on Russian gas but remains territorially fragmented by the breakaway region of Transnistria that, until recently, provided most of the country’s electricity.

Despite these factors, the results were not what Moscow wanted. In both votes, a European direction was favored by the electorate. When the Transnistrian legislature in February 2024 appealed to Moscow for protection, none was forthcoming.

When Moldova thumbs its nose at you, it’s fair to say your power ranking has fallen.

Wounded but still dangerous

Not all recent developments have been negative for Moscow. State control of the economy has allowed for rapid rebuilding of a depleted military and support for its technology industry in the short term. With Chinese help and evasion of sanctions, sufficient machinery and energy allow the war in Ukraine to continue.

And the inauguration of Donald Trump is likely to favor Putin, despite some mixed signals. The U.S. president has threatened tariffs and more sanctions but also disbanded a Biden-era task force aimed a punishing Russian oligarchs who help Russia evade sanctions. In the White House now is someone who has openly admired Putin, expressed skepticism over U.S. support for Ukraine and rushed to bully America’s closest allies in Latin America, Canada and Europe.

Most importantly, Trump’s eagerness to make good on his pledge to end the war may provide the Russian leader with a deal he can call a “victory.”

The shrinking of Russia’s world has not necessarily made Russia less dangerous; it could be quite the opposite. Some Kremlin watchers argue that a more economically isolated Russia is less vulnerable to American economic pressure. A retreating Russia and an embattled Putin could also opt for even more reckless threats and actions – for example, on nuclear weapons – especially if reversing course in Ukraine would jeopardize his position. It is, after all, Putin’s war.

All observers would be wise to note that the famous dictum “Russia is never as strong as she looks … nor as weak as she looks” has been ominously rephrased by Putin himself: “Russia was never so strong as it wants to be and never so weak as it is thought to be.”

Ronald H. Linden has in the past received funding from Fulbright, DAAD, German Marshall Fund, National Council for Eurasian and East European Research, Woodrow Wilson Center, US Institute of Peace.

– ref. Russia’s shrinking world: The war in Ukraine and Moscow’s global reach – https://theconversation.com/russias-shrinking-world-the-war-in-ukraine-and-moscows-global-reach-247754

MIL OSI – Global Reports –

February 11, 2025
MIL-OSI Global: The EU was built for another age – here’s how it must adapt to survive

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

Shutterstock/gopixa

To European Commission president Ursula von der Leyen, Europe is like a Volkswagen Beetle – an iconic car produced by a once-mighty German manufacturer which has been struggling to adapt to a new world.

“Europe must shift gears,” she urged in a speech to business executives gathered in Davos, Switzerland at the beginning of the year. Yet, her call to arms failed to raise more than an eyebrow. After all, she has repeated the same call many times since she was elected six years ago. So far, there has been little result.

The US president, Donald Trump, may now even be tempted to finish off the EU (the most developed of the world’s multilateral organisations) by dividing its members over the single market for trade. This arrangement is the cornerstone upon which the union was built, but can it withstand Trump’s attempts to play European nations off against each other in order to get the best deal for himself?

The problem is that Trump is simply bringing to its most extreme consequences the weakness of a system that was built for stable times which are long gone. We urgently need a new idea, and it cannot be for a “United States of Europe”. That is a dream from the past that could not be more at odds with Europe’s current political climate.

Mini unions

Europe is unable to chart a path forward because it needs unanimity among its member states in order to make any major decision. Votes are not even weighted to reflect the different sizes of each of the club’s members.

This is a weakness that would gradually cause the deterioration of any international organisation. But in the case of the EU, the crisis is more serious because member states have surrendered part of their decision power. As a result, if the EU cannot move quickly, even member states turn out to be paralysed.

Viktor Orbán, the prime minister of Hungary, has often been singled out as the bad guy especially – this has happened every time the EU has tried to approve sanctions against Russia or aid to Ukraine. But examples of free riding abound even among the founding parties.

For decades, France has resisted any attempt to reorganise the common agricultural policy that sends a third of the EU’s budget to farmers, many of them French. Italy has halted the ratification of the reform of the European stability mechanism that should protect states from financial instability, out of the assumption among part of the Italian electorate that this may compromise further sovereignty.

Elsewhere, Germany’s constitutional court has derailed the reform of the EU electoral law that divides the election of the European parliament into a dysfunctional system of 27 national contests, because of the resistance of the German political system to any electoral law which is not proportional.

We need to find a way to change all this. And the solution cannot be the rather abstract idea of a union that proceeds at different speeds, where the older members are supposed to be part of an inner circle. Nor is it feasible to expect the abolition of unanimous voting for the simple reason that to forgo unanimity, you need a unanimous vote.

Instead, the EU should become the coordinator of multiple unions, each formed by the member states themselves around specific policies. A union might form around defence, for example, among member states which are ready for such a partnership, such as Poland, the Baltics and Finland.

Another might bring together countries that wish to collaborate on large projects such as a pan-European high-speed train, or a fully integrated energy market that may allow Italy, France and Spain to save billions of euros and decarbonise more quickly.

This is not entirely new. Arrangements like the euro and the free circulation of people (the Schengen area) follow this principle. Only a subset of EU nations are part of these projects, and offers have even been extended to join beyond the EU’s borders. Monaco is in the euro, for example, while Norway is in Schengen, despite neither being an EU member state.

The problem with these unions is that they are incomplete. The complement to the monetary union is a recently reformed “stability pact” that leaves so many loopholes that 11 out of its 20 members do not comply. And even within Schengen, there are still no proper common borders. The result is continuous reciprocal accusations of exporting each other’s illegal migrants.

The solution here is to fully share the levers within a certain policy area on terms which are more flexible and voluntary for the union’s members.

The possibility of calm divorce

Resilience is achieved through adaptability. Therefore, these new arrangements must make divorce between union members possible from the outset – and establish the terms of such a rupture in advance.

And in the event of an extreme case, the other parties should also be able to ask one of the members to leave their union (so as to avoid being systematically held to ransom by a free rider). The current union treaty does contain a provision (article 50) that enables a member to leave, as the UK did – but if Brexit showed anything, it was that this mechanism has limited use at preventing a divorce from descending into chaos.

People should always be part of these decisions, of course. When states decide to surrender some of their sovereignty to a larger organisation such as the EU, it changes the nature of the pact between the citizens of a country and the people who make decisions on their behalf. This evident truth has been ignored for decades as the EU has gradually been built from the top down.

The European Union currently resembles the marriages we once had in Europe (until well into the 20th century), before it was acknowledged that they are a civil (not necessarily religious) contract that can be dissolved through divorce – not some divine construct that can never be undone.

The marriage between EU countries is blighted by cheating and empty rhetoric. This is an issue we can no longer avoid if Europe wants to do more than just “shift gears”. The EU was the most successful political project of the 20th century. If it wants to continue to be so in the 21st, it has to learn to be flexible. Only those who can adapt survive.

Francesco Grillo is Director of the think tank Vision. Vision is convenor of three global conferences on the future of the EU, climate change and AI .

– ref. The EU was built for another age – here’s how it must adapt to survive – https://theconversation.com/the-eu-was-built-for-another-age-heres-how-it-must-adapt-to-survive-248811

MIL OSI – Global Reports –

February 11, 2025
MIL-OSI Global: How the war in Ukraine has made flying worse for the climate

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Viktoriia Ivannikova, Assistant Professor in Aviation Management, Dublin City University

UladzimirZuyeu/Shutterstock

Some long-haul flights connecting Europe and Asia are emitting 40% more CO₂ since the Russian invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, my new study shows. The spike is largely due to airspace closures above conflict zones which are forcing airlines to seek alternative routes, significantly increasing flight times. Longer flights consume more fuel and increase the operating costs for airlines, quite apart from their contribution to climate change.

The research I led with colleagues highlights how conflicts contribute to climate change in unexpected ways. Understanding this is crucial for tackling aviation’s environmental footprint.

The war in Ukraine closed the country’s airspace and limited access to the airspace of the Russian Federation and Belarus. This amounts to the biggest closure of airspace since the cold war, spanning 18 million km².

Airlines that previously flew in Russian or Ukrainian airspace on routes between Europe and Asia, North America and Asia, and North America and the Middle East now take significant detours. For example, Finnair’s flight AY73 from Helsinki to Tokyo now covers an additional 3,131 kilometres, extending flight times by up to 3.5 hours. North American flights to Asia have been rerouted over the Arctic and Central Asia.

Safety concerns and geopolitical sanctions have forced airlines to carefully navigate around restricted zones.

The situation is further complicated by restrictions in other conflict regions – including the Middle East, where the airspaces of Syria, Yemen and Iraq are also considered no-fly zones for many airlines. The global aviation map has been redrawn, forcing airlines to adapt quickly to a new and challenging reality.

Several international flights now skirt war zones.
Viktoriia Ivannikova

This has been accompanied by significant costs, both financially and to the climate. We analysed 14 long-haul routes between Europe and Asia that were affected by airspace restrictions and operated by three European airlines: Finnair, LOT Polish and Lufthansa.

The findings are striking: rerouted flights burn an additional 23 to 28.5 tonnes of fuel per journey, releasing an extra 72 to 90 metric tonnes of CO₂. That’s equivalent to the annual emissions of several cars for a single flight.

Airlines have also reported significant operating cost increases due to the extra flight hours, including higher fuel consumption, air navigation charges and crew salary increases. Our analysis showed that on certain routes between Europe and Asia, costs have risen by between 19% and 39%, while emissions have increased by between 18% and 40%, depending on the airline.

On routes from Warsaw to Beijing, Warsaw to Tokyo and Warsaw to Seoul, LOT Polish Airlines has reported an increase of 23% in average aircraft operating costs following flight restrictions. CO₂ emissions on these routes have increased by 24% and ticket prices have also risen.

Finnair, which historically relied on Russian airspace for efficient Europe-Asia connections, appears to be the most affected carrier. Following flight restrictions, aircraft operating costs on the routes from Helsinki to Shanghai, Helsinki to Tokyo and Helsinki to Seoul have risen by 39%, while average CO₂ emissions on these routes have increased by 40%.

Our findings shed new light on the massive carbon footprint of war, which is often overlooked in climate policy. Using a forecasting model with specialised software, we found that continued avoidance of the airspaces of Russia and Ukraine could increase all aviation-related CO₂ emissions globally by up to 29% in 2025, compared with 2022.

Aviation already accounts for 2.5% of global CO₂ emissions, and this figure is expected to grow as air travel expands.

Aeroplanes seed heat-trapping clouds that amplify their climate impact.
Peter Gudella/Shutterstock

Our findings demonstrate that the need to decarbonise transport cannot be separated from broader geopolitical issues. As wars and conflicts reshape airspace availability, they also worsen aviation’s carbon footprint. It’s not just the airline industry that bears these costs – we all do, in the form of rising temperatures and a changing climate.

What action needs to be taken?

While the challenges are significant, there are solutions.

Upgrading airline fleets with more fuel-efficient aircraft, such as the Airbus A350 and Boeing 787, can help to reduce CO₂ emissions by roughly 20%–25% compared with older aircraft models, such as the Boeing 777-200ER or Airbus A330-200.

Optimising flight paths using advanced air traffic management systems could help too. These systems, allow aircraft to choose the shortest and most efficient paths and can reduce unnecessary detours.

International agreements to manage airspace collectively during times of conflict can keep essential flight corridors open and ensure airlines avoid inefficient rerouting.

Airlines are investing in sustainable aviation fuels, which emits less than traditional kerosene – but insufficient supplies, high costs and other challenges make this an expensive and partial solution. With no viable low-carbon alternatives for aircraft, reducing air travel should be the priority.

As researchers, we see our findings as a call to action. By understanding the environmental consequences of conflict, we can work towards a more sustainable future for aviation and the planet.

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

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

Viktoriia Ivannikova 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. How the war in Ukraine has made flying worse for the climate – https://theconversation.com/how-the-war-in-ukraine-has-made-flying-worse-for-the-climate-249039

MIL OSI – Global Reports –

February 11, 2025
MIL-OSI Europe: VATICAN – Pope Francis: Jesus puts encounter first in his mission

Source: Agenzia Fides – MIL OSI

Sunday, 9 February 2025

Vatican Media

Vatican City (Agenzia Fides) – “Jesus is not concerned with showing off to the crowds, with doing a job, with following a timetable in carrying out his mission. On the contrary, he always makes it his priority to encounter others, to relate to them, and to sympathize with the struggles and setbacks that often burden hearts and take away hope”.With these words, Pope Francis presided this morning in St. Peter’s Square over a solemn Eucharistic concelebration, which marked the conclusion of the Jubilee events dedicated to the Armed Forces and Police.The Pontiff did not read the full text of the homily: “Excuse me, I will now ask the Master [of Liturgical Celebrations] to continue reading due to my difficulty in breathing”, he said after reading the first part of the text and adding a few spontaneous words. Last Thursday, the Holy See Press Office announced in a statement that the Pope was suffering from bronchitis, which is why the weekend audiences were held at the Casa Santa Marta.Archbishop Diego Ravelli, Master of Pontifical Liturgical Celebrations, then continued reading the text. In his reflection, the Pope highlighted three key words, taken from the passage of the Gospel according to Luke proclaimed in the liturgy of the day, which tells of the call of the first Apostles: “he saw”, “he went aboard ” and “he sat down”. Christ – the papal homily stressed – “looks with compassion at the expressions of those men, sensing their discouragement and frustration after having worked all night and caught nothing, their hearts as empty as the nets they haul”. But Jesus “does not simply stand by and watch as things go wrong, as we often do, and then complain bitterly. Rather, taking the initiative, he approaches Simon, spends time with him at that difficult moment and chooses to board the boat of his life, which that night had seemed fraught with failure”.Jesus “boards the boat in order to proclaim the good news, to tell of the beauty of God even amid the struggles of life, and to reaffirm that hope endures even when all seems lost.Then the miracle happens: when the Lord gets into the boat of our lives to bring us the good news of God’s love that constantly accompanies and sustains us, then life begins anew, hope is reborn, enthusiasm revives, and we can once again cast our nets into the sea”.In his homily, read by Archbishop Ravelli, the Bishop of Rome also expressed his gratitude to “all the military” who daily carry out their service to protect security and justice: “We are grateful for what you do, at times at great personal risk”.At the end of the celebration, in the words pronounced before the Angelus, in front of the multitude of women and men in uniform gathered in St. Peter’s Square, Pope Francis renewed his appeal for peace, citing the conciliar constitution Gaudium et Spes: “This armed service is to be exercised only for legitimate defence, never to impose dominion over other nations, always observing the international conventions on matters of conflict, and before that, in sacred respect for life and creation”. The Pontiff also recalled the conflicts that continue to tear peoples and nations apart: “Let us pray for peace, in tormented Ukraine, in Palestine, in Israel and throughout the Middle East, in Myanmar, in Kivu, and in Sudan. Let arms be silent everywhere, and let the cry of the peoples, who are asking for peace, be heard!” (F. B.) (Agenzia Fides, 9/2/2025)
Share:

MIL OSI Europe News –

February 10, 2025
MIL-Evening Report: ‘America First’ trade policy is pushing economic self-sufficiency – but history shows this is harder than it seems

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Garritt C. Van Dyk, Senior Lecturer in History, University of Waikato

The day he took office for his second term, United States President Donald J. Trump unveiled his “America First” trade policy, including tariffs on imported goods from Mexico, Canada (both of which have since been paused) and China.

President Trump’s reasoning for the tariffs included revitalising the American economy by bringing manufacturing and business back within US borders. Essentially, pushing the country towards greater self-sufficiency.

Considering the cost of the tariffs, a number of countries have begun to question their dependence on foreign trade. But there are very clear hurdles including access to precious metals and raw materials.

In a global market that relies on international trade, is it possible to be totally self-sufficient?

The history of self-seficiency

The economic term for self-sufficiency is “autarky”, borrowed from the ancient Greek word autarkeia, meaning “to suffice”. Ideally, this meant that a state could supply the needs of its people without foreign trade. Autarky, in its purest form, isolates the state from foreign economic, political and cultural influence.

There are numerous historical examples of attempts to achieve complete economic autonomy.

In 17th century Japan the Tokugawa Shogunate closed the borders to foreigners and prohibited Japanese from travelling abroad.

There was limited private trade with China through Nagasaki and with Europe through Dutch merchants. They were confined to an artificial island, Deshima, off Nagasaki, to ensure their isolation. These restrictions remained for 265 years, until the threat of US gunboats forced Japan to sign a trade treaty in 1854.

Self-sufficiency was also a goal of Benito Mussolini’s fascist dictatorship, aiming to lift Italy’s post-war economy in the 1920s. One initiative was the “Battle for Wheat”, an attempt to produce enough wheat to meet domestic demand and “free the Italian people from the slavery of foreign bread”.

Italy imported more than one third of the flour needed to make bread and pasta, the two main foodstuffs. Pasta was targeted as a “backwards” food to promote consumption of local rice and reduce agricultural imports.

Tariffs were levied on all imported goods in 1931. These were raised again in 1935 after sanctions were imposed on Italy following the invasion of Ethiopia. Mussolini declared in 1935 that Italy “would manage alone”.

While imports of food, machinery and raw materials dropped, oil imports increased. Mussolini recognised the limits of autarky in 1934:

Let us not delude ourselves about autarky. All the modern nations, thanks to the prodigious development of the sciences, can move towards a partial autarky. But we, until the contrary is proven, will have to import liquid combustibles.

In response to Donald Trump’s America First policy, countries increasingly have to consider certain levels of self-sufficiency.
Sven Hansche/Shutterstock

A modern push to self-sufficiency

Even with reduced reliance on fossil fuels, the scarcity of some natural resources, such as rare earth minerals, still poses a challenge to achieving autarky.

Even the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (North Korea), a centrally planned economy subject to United Nations Security Council sanctions for its nuclear and ballistic missile testing since 2006, is not completely self-sufficient.

China is North Korea’s largest trading partner, with plastics, tobacco, soybean oil, rubber tires and packaged medicines as the top imports. The economic isolation of North Korea also makes it more vulnerable to global price fluctuations, as the movements are magnified due to the limited number of trading partners.

Supply chain disruptions were highlighted during the pandemic, continued in 2021 with shortages in microchips, followed by Russia’s war in Ukraine.

Some nations, such as the US and the United Kingdom, have responded to this logistical risk by shifting to local production, or reshoring, of certain critical industries, such as semiconductors and pharmaceuticals.

This inward turn requires significant investment and lead time and may involve higher local energy and labour costs, or additional environmental restrictions. For industries that involve national security or essential goods, reducing dependence on potential adversaries may be necessary. But for other sectors the higher costs will create inflationary pressure.

There are also implicit costs in cutting economic ties with the outside world. Foreign investment is reduced and innovation lags as there are fewer incentives for the cross-border flow of ideas.

Embracing friendshoring

As the push for self-reliance increases, vulnerable countries will need new strategies to remain resilient.

Identifying alternative supply chain relationships and increasing inventory stockpiles in advance will minimise disruptions.

Another tactic is “friendshoring” – relocating supply chains to countries where the risk of disruption from political chaos is low.

It is likely that geopolitical instability will increase and global fragmentation will continue. While straightforward autarky may not be possible, countries will need to consider how to survive the political and economic volatility of the next four years – and beyond.

Garritt C. Van Dyk 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. ‘America First’ trade policy is pushing economic self-sufficiency – but history shows this is harder than it seems – https://theconversation.com/america-first-trade-policy-is-pushing-economic-self-sufficiency-but-history-shows-this-is-harder-than-it-seems-248530

MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

February 10, 2025
MIL-Evening Report: PSNA’s Minto hits back at Gaza ‘genocide hotline’ critics, insists NZ should deny Israeli soldiers entry

Asia Pacific Report

A national Palestine advocacy group has hit back at critics of its “genocide hotline” campaign against soldiers involved in Israel’s war against Gaza, saying New Zealand should be actively following international law.

The Palestine Solidarity Network Aotearoa (PSNA) dismissed a “predictable lineup of apologists for Israel” for their criticisms of the PSNA campaign.

“Why is concern for the sensitivities of soldiers from a genocidal Israeli campaign more important than condemning the genocide itself?,” asked PSNA national chair John Minto in a statement.

The Minister of Foreign Affairs Winston Peters, the Chief Human Rights Commissioner Stephen Rainbow and the New Zealand Jewish Council have made statements “protecting” Israeli soldiers who come to New Zealand on “rest and recreation” from the industrial-scale killing of 47,000 Palestinians in Gaza until a truce went into force on January 19.

“We are not surprised to see such a predictable lineup of apologists for Israel and its genocide in Gaza from lining up to attack a PSNA campaign with false smears of anti-semitism,” Minto said.

He said that over 16 months Peters had done “absolutely nothing” to put any pressure on Israel to end its genocidal behaviour.

“But he is full of bluff and bluster and outright lies to denounce those who demand Israel be held to account.”

Deny illegal settler visas
Minto said that if Peters was doing his job as Foreign Minister, he would not only stop Israeli soldiers coming to Aotearoa New Zealand — as with Russian soldiers in the Ukraine war — he would also deny visas to any Israeli with an address in an illegal Israeli settlement in the Occupied Palestinian Territories.

The Human Rights Commission had issued a “disingenuous media release”, he said.

Whlle the commission said it had received 90 complaints about the hotline, it had also received eight complaints about immigration policy allowing Israeli soldiers to enter New Zealand under the visa waiver scheme that applies to Israel.

“Our campaign has nothing to do with Israelis or Jews — it is a campaign to stop Israeli soldiers coming here for rest and recreation after a campaign of wholesale killing of Palestinians in Gaza,” Minto said.

“To imply the campaign is targeting Jews is disgusting and despicable.

“Some of the soldiers will be Druse, some Palestinian Arabs and others will be Jews.”

The five-year-old Palestinian girl Hind Rajab, shot 355 times by Israeli soldiers on 29 January 2024. Image: @Onlyloren/Instagram

Israeli soldiers are facing a growing risk of being arrested abroad for alleged war crimes committed in Gaza, with around 50 criminal complaints filed so far in courts in several countries around the world.

Earlier this month, a former Israeli soldier abruptly ended his holiday in Brazil and was “smuggled” out of the country after a Federal Court ordered police to open a war crimes investigation against him. The man fled to Argentina.

A complaint lodged by the Belgium-based Hind Rajab Foundation (HRF) included more than 500 pages of court records linking the suspect to the demolition of civilian homes in Gaza.

‘Historic’ court ruling against soldier
The foundation called the Brazilian court’s decision “historic”, saying it marked a significant precedent for a member country of the International Criminal Court (ICC) to enforce Rome Statute provisions domestically in the 15-month Israeli war on Gaza.

The foundation is named in honour of five-year-old Palestinian girl Hind Rajab who was killed on 29 January 2024 by Israel soldiers while pleading for help in a car after her six family members were dead.

According to The New Arab, the foundation has so far tracked and sent the names of 1000 Israeli soldiers to the ICC and Interpol, and has been pursuing legal cases in a number of countries, including Belgium, Brazil, Cyprus, France, Thailand, Sri Lanka, Thailand, the Netherlands, and the United Kingdom.

In November, the ICC issued arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former Defence Minister Yoav Gallant, together with a former Hamas commander, citing allegations of war crimes and crimes against humanity.

Minto accused the New Zealand Jewish Council of being “deeply racist” and said it regularly “makes a meal of false smears of anti-semitism”.

“It’s deeply problematic that this Jewish Council strategy takes attention away from the real anti-semitism which exists in New Zealand and around the world.

“The priority of the Jewish Council is to protect Israel from criticism and protect it from accountability for its apartheid policies, ethnic cleansing and genocide.

“We are demanding that accountability.”

NZ ‘going through the motions’
In a later statement, PSNA said the government had begun to “go through the motions” of questioning Israeli soldiers at the border but it was just a “look busy policy – too little too late”.

NZ requires Israelis to disclose IDF service details as condition for entry – a similar policy to Australia. Image: Times of Israel screenshot APR

Immigration questioning Israeli of soldiers about their military service in Gaza at the New Zealand border was revealed in a Times of Israel report today which said:

“New Zealand’s government immigration authority has begun to require Israelis applying for a visa to report details of their military service as a condition for entry, and at least one person has been denied admission after doing so.”

PSNA’s Minto said the government must also uphold the ICJ advisory opinion of 19 July 2024 which called on global governments to end support for Israel’s illegal occupation.

“This means we should also deny entry to every Israeli wanting to visit here who has an address in an illegal Israeli settlement in the Occupied Palestinian Territories,” Minto added.

MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

February 9, 2025
MIL-Evening Report: ‘Journalism has become a blood sport. It is harder and harder to tell the truth’

A investigative journalism programme — Organised Crime and Corruption Reporting Project (OCCRP) — that has pubiished exposes about the South Pacific and has not been impacted on by the “freeze” of USAID funding has hit back in an editorial calling for support of independent media.

EDITORIAL: By the OCCRP editors

“OCCRP is a deep state operation.
“OCCRP is connected to the CIA.
“OCCRP was tasked by USAID to overthrow President Donald Trump.”

How did we end up getting this kind of attention? Old fashioned investigative journalism.

We wrote a simple story in 2019 about how Rudy Giuliani went to Ukraine for some opposition research and ended up working with people connected to organised crime who misled him.

Unbeknown to us, a whistleblower found the story online and added it to a complaint that was the basis of President Trump’s first impeachment. We also wrote a story about Hunter Biden‘s business partners and their ties to organised crime but that hasn’t received the same attention.

Journalism has become a blood sport. It’s harder and harder to tell the truth without someone’s interests getting stepped on.

OCCRP prides itself on being independent and nonpartisan. No donor has any say in our reporting, but we often find ourselves under attack for our funding.

It’s not just political interests but organised crime, businesses, enablers, and other journalists who regularly attack us. What’s common in all of these attacks is that the truth doesn’t matter and it will not protect you.

Few attack the facts in our reporting. Instead we’re left perplexed by how to respond to wild conspiracy theories, outright disinformation, and hyperbolic hatred.

At the same time, we’ve lost 29 percent of our funding because of the US foreign aid freeze. This includes 82 percent of the money we give to newsrooms in our network, many of which operate in places [Pacific Media Watch: Such as in the Pacific] where no one else will support them.

This money did not only fund groundbreaking, prize-winning collaborative journalism but it also trained young investigative reporters to expose wrongdoing. It’s money that kept journalists safe from physical and digital attacks and supported those in exile who continued to report on crooks and dictators back in their home countries.

OCCRP now has 43 less journalists and staff to do our work.

No attack or funding freeze will stop us from trying to fulfill our mission. Just in the past week, OCCRP and its partners revealed how Russia’s shadow fleet sources its ships, how taxes haven’t been paid on Roman Abramovich’s yachts, and how Syrian intelligence spied on journalists.

Next week, we’ll take on another set of powerful actors to defend the public interest. And another set the week after that.

We are determined to stay in the fight and keep reporting on organised crime and the corrupt who enable and benefit from it. But it’s getting harder and we need help.

MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

February 8, 2025
MIL-Evening Report: Trump’s foreign aid freeze throws independent journalism into chaos

Pacific Media Watch

President Donald Trump has frozen billions of dollars around the world in aid projects, including more than $268 million allocated by Congress to support independent media and the free flow of information.

Reporters Without Borders (RSF) has denounced this decision, which has plunged NGOs, media outlets, and journalists doing vital work into chaotic uncertainty — including in the Pacific.

In a statement published on its website, RSF has called for international public and private support to commit to the “sustainability of independent media”.

Since the new American president announced the freeze of US foreign aid on January 20, USAID (United States Agency for International Development) has been in turmoil — its website is inaccessible, its X account has been suspended, the agency’s headquarters was closed and employees told to stay home.

South African-born American billionaire Elon Musk, an unelected official, whom Trump chose to lead the quasi-official Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), has called USAID a “criminal organisation” and declared: “We’re shutting [it] down.”

Later that day, Secretary of State Marco Rubio announced that he was named acting director of the agency, suggesting its operations were being moved to the State Department.

Almost immediately after the freeze went into effect, journalistic organisations around the world — including media groups in the Pacific — that receive American aid funding started reaching out to RSF expressing confusion, chaos, and uncertainty.

Large and smaller media NGOs affected
The affected organisations include large international NGOs that support independent media like the International Fund for Public Interest Media and smaller, individual media outlets serving audiences living under repressive conditions in countries like Iran and Russia.

“The American aid funding freeze is sowing chaos around the world, including in journalism. The programmes that have been frozen provide vital support to projects that strengthen media, transparency, and democracy,” said Clayton Weimers, executive director of RSF USA.

President Donald Trump . . . “The American aid funding freeze is sowing chaos around the world, including in journalism,” says RSF. Image: RSF

“President Trump justified this order by charging — without evidence — that a so-called ‘foreign aid industry’ is not aligned with US interests.

“The tragic irony is that this measure will create a vacuum that plays into the hands of propagandists and authoritarian states. Reporters Without Borders (RSF) is appealing to the international public and private funders to commit to the sustainability of independent media.”

USAID programmes support independent media in more than 30 countries, but it is difficult to assess the full extent of the harm done to the global media.

Many organisations are hesitant to draw attention for fear of risking long-term funding or coming under political attacks.

According to a USAID fact sheet which has since been taken offline, in 2023 the agency funded training and support for 6200 journalists, assisted 707 non-state news outlets, and supported 279 media-sector civil society organisations dedicated to strengthening independent media.

The USAID website today . . . All USAID “direct hire” staff were reportedly put “on leave” on 7 February 2025. Image: USAID website screenshot APR

Activities halted overnight
The 2025 foreign aid budget included $268,376,000 allocated by Congress to support “independent media and the free flow of information”.

All over the world, media outlets and organisations have had to halt some of their activities overnight.

“We have articles scheduled until the end of January, but after that, if we haven’t found solutions, we won’t be able to publish anymore,” explains a journalist from a Belarusian exiled media outlet who wished to remain anonymous.

In Cameroon, the funding freeze forced DataCameroon, a public interest media outlet based in the economic capital Douala, to put several projects on hold, including one focused on journalist safety and another covering the upcoming presidential election.

An exiled Iranian media outlet that preferred to remain anonymous was forced to suspend collaboration with its staff for three months and slash salaries to a bare minimum to survive.

An exiled Iranian journalist interviewed by RSF warns that the impact of the funding freeze could silence some of the last remaining free voices, creating a vacuum that Iranian state propaganda would inevitably fill.

“Shutting us off will mean that they’ll have more power,” she says.

USAID: the main donor for Ukrainian media
In Ukraine, where 9 out of 10 outlets rely on subsidies and USAID is the primary donor, several local media have already announced the suspension of their activities and are searching for alternative solutions.

“At Slidstvo.Info, 80 percent of our budget is affected,” said Anna Babinets, CEO and co-founder of this independent investigative media outlet based in Kyiv.

The risk of this suspension is that it could open the door to other sources of funding that may seek to alter the editorial line and independence of these media.

“Some media might be shut down or bought by businessmen or oligarchs. I think Russian money will enter the market. And government propaganda will, of course, intensify,” Babinets said.

RSF has already witnessed the direct effects of such propaganda — a fabricated video, falsely branded with the organisation’s logo, claimed that RSF welcomed the suspension of USAID funding for Ukrainian media — a stance RSF has never endorsed.

This is not the first instance of such disinformation.

Finding alternatives quickly
This situation highlights the financial fragility of the sector.

According to Oleh Dereniuha, editor-in-chief of the Ukrainian local media outlet NikVesti, based in Mykolaiv, a city in southeast Ukraine, “The suspension of US funding is just the tip of the iceberg — a key case that illustrates the severity of the situation.”

Since 2024, independent Ukrainian media outlets have found securing financial sustainability nearly impossible due to the decline in donors.

As a result, even minor budget cuts could put these media outlets in a precarious position.

A recent RSF report stressed the need to focus on the economic recovery of the independent Ukrainian media landscape, weakened by the large-scale Russian invasion of February 24, 2022, which RSF’s study estimated to be at least $96 million over three years.

Moreover, beyond the decline in donor support in Ukraine, media outlets are also facing growing threats to their funding and economic models in other countries.

Georgia’s Transparency of Foreign Influence Law — modelled after Russia’s legislation — has put numerous media organisations at risk. The Georgian Prime Minister welcomed the US president’s decision with approval.

This suspension is officially expected to last only 90 days, according to the US government.

However, some, like Katerina Abramova, communications director for leading exiled Russian media outlet Meduza, fear that the reviews of funding contracts could take much longer.

Abramova is anticipating the risk that these funds may be permanently cut off.

“Exiled media are even in a more fragile position than others, as we can’t monetise our audience and the crowdfunding has its limits — especially when donating to Meduza is a crime in Russia,” Abramova stressed.

By abruptly suspending American aid, the United States has made many media outlets and journalists vulnerable, dealing a significant blow to press freedom.

For all the media outlets interviewed by RSF, the priority is to recover and urgently find alternative funding.

How Fijivillage News reported the USAID crackdown by the Trump administration. Image: Fijivillage News screenshot APR

Fiji, Pacific media, aid groups reel shocked by cuts
In Suva, Fiji, as Pacific media groups have been reeling from the shock of the aid cuts, Fijivillage News reports that hundreds of local jobs and assistance to marginalised communities are being impacted because Fiji is an AUSAID hub.

According to an USAID staff member speaking on the condition of anonymity, Trump’s decision has affected hundreds of Fijian jobs due to USAID believing in building local capacity.

The staff member said millions of dollars in grants for strengthening climate resilience, the healthcare system, economic growth, and digital connectivity in rural communities were now on hold.

The staff member also said civil society organisations, especially grantees in rural areas that rely on their aid, were at risk.

Pacific Media Watch and Asia Pacific Report collaborate with Reporters Without Borders.

MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

February 8, 2025
MIL-OSI Asia-Pac: Presidential Office thanks US and Japan for joint leaders’ statement

Source: Republic of China Taiwan

Details
2025-01-31
President Lai’s response to Pope Francis’s 2025 World Day of Peace message
President Lai Ching-te recently sent a letter to Pope Francis of the Catholic Church in response to his message marking the 58th World Day of Peace. The following is the full text of the president’s letter to the pope: Your Holiness, In your message for the 2025 World Day of Peace entitled Forgive us our trespasses: grant us your peace, you called for a cultural change that would bring an end to the governance of interpersonal and international relations by a logic of exploitation and oppression and herald true and lasting peace. I wholeheartedly admire and identify with your point of view. Since transitioning from a medical career to politics, I have remained true to my original intentions in the sense that, while a doctor can help only one person at a time, a public servant can simultaneously assist many people in resolving the difficulties affecting their lives. In my inaugural address in May 2024, I pledged that every day of my term, I would strive to act justly, show mercy, and be humble, which accord with the teachings of the Bible. I promised to treat the Taiwanese people as family and prove myself worthy of their trust and expectations. With an unwavering heart, I have accepted the people’s trust and taken on the solemn responsibility of leading the nation forward and building a democratic, peaceful, and prosperous new Taiwan. In this new year, the changing international landscape continues to present many grave challenges to democratic nations around the world. As the Russia-Ukraine war persists, the steady convergence of authoritarian regimes, including China, Russia, North Korea, and Iran, threatens the rules-based international order and severely impacts peace and stability in the Indo-Pacific and the world at large. Your Holiness has stated that war is a defeat for everyone. I, too, firmly believe that peace is priceless and that war has no winners. A high level of consensus has formed in the international community on upholding peace and stability across the Taiwan Strait. The Taiwanese people also maintain an unyielding commitment to safeguarding a way of life that encompasses freedom, equality, democracy, and human rights. Taiwan will continue to spare no effort in preserving regional peace and stability and serving as a pilot for global peace. In your World Day of Peace message, you urged prosperous countries to assist poorer ones. This compassion is truly touching. Taiwan is proactively implementing values-based diplomacy and, under the Diplomatic Allies Prosperity Project, enhancing allies’ development through a range of initiatives. Over many years, Taiwan has accumulated abundant and unique experience of providing foreign assistance. Seeking to foster self-reliance among disadvantaged countries, we have extended genuine support to help alleviate poverty through such avenues as strengthening basic infrastructure, transferring technology, and cultivating talent. In your message, you reminded countries worldwide that assistance should not be merely an isolated act of charity and pointed to the need to devise a new global financial framework so that food crises, climate change, and other challenges could be jointly addressed. I hold this view in high regard. I therefore earnestly hope that international organizations will stop excluding Taiwan for political reasons. Taiwan is willing to shoulder its international responsibilities so that it can contribute and share its valuable experience through many global platforms. On behalf of the government and people of the Republic of China (Taiwan), I again express our interest in collaborating with the Holy See to advance world peace through concrete action. We also aspire to demonstrate Taiwanese values and the Taiwanese spirit and work together with the Holy See to uphold the core values of justice, democracy, freedom, and peace. Please accept, Your Holiness, the renewed assurances of my highest consideration, as well as my best wishes for your good health and the continued growth of the Catholic Church.

Details
2025-01-31
President Lai meets former US Vice President Mike Pence
On the afternoon of January 17, President Lai Ching-te met with former Vice President of the United States Mike Pence. In remarks, President Lai thanked former Vice President Pence for his contributions to the deepening of Taiwan-US relations, noting that he actively helped to strengthen Taiwan-US cooperation and facilitate the normalization of military sales to Taiwan, and did his utmost to deepen the Taiwan-US economic partnership. The president indicated that former Vice President Pence also spoke up for Taiwan on numerous occasions at international venues, backing Taiwan’s international participation. President Lai expressed hope for a stronger Taiwan-US partnership to maintain peace and stability throughout the world, and that the two sides can advance bilateral exchanges in such areas as the economy, trade, and industry. A translation of President Lai’s remarks follows: I am delighted to welcome former Vice President Pence and Mrs. Karen Pence to the Presidential Office. Former Vice President Pence is not only an outstanding political leader in the US, but also a staunch supporter of Taiwan on the international stage. On behalf of the people of Taiwan, I would like to take this opportunity to extend our deepest gratitude to former Vice President Pence for his contributions to the deepening of Taiwan-US relations. Thanks to former Vice President Pence’s strong backing, ties between Taiwan and the US rose to unprecedented heights during President Donald Trump’s first administration. Former Vice President Pence actively helped to strengthen Taiwan-US security cooperation and facilitate the normalization of military sales to Taiwan, helping Taiwan reinforce its self-defense capabilities. He also did his utmost to deepen the Taiwan-US economic partnership. Former Vice President Pence also paid close attention to the military threats and diplomatic isolation faced by Taiwan. He spoke up for Taiwan on numerous occasions at international venues, taking concrete action to back Taiwan’s international participation. We were truly grateful for this. As we speak, China’s political and military intimidation against Taiwan persist. China and other authoritarian regimes, such as Russia, North Korea, and Iran, are continuing to converge and present serious challenges to democracies around the globe. At this moment, free and democratic nations must come together to bolster cooperation. I believe that a stronger Taiwan-US partnership can be an even more powerful force in maintaining peace and stability throughout the world. Former Vice President Pence has previously supported the signing of a trade agreement between Taiwan and the US. Taiwan looks forward to continuing to work with the new US administration and Congress to advance bilateral exchanges in such areas as the economy, trade, and industry. This is the first time that former Vice President Pence and Mrs. Pence are visiting Taiwan, and their visit is significantly meaningful for Taiwan-US exchanges. On behalf of the people of Taiwan, I want to extend a warm welcome. Moving forward, I hope we will jointly realize even more fruitful achievements through Taiwan-US cooperation. Former Vice President Pence then delivered remarks, thanking President Lai for his hospitality on his and his wife’s first visit to Taiwan, saying that it is an honor to be here to reaffirm the bonds of friendship between the people of America and the people of Taiwan, which are strong and longstanding. The former vice president indicated that the American people admire the people of Taiwan and all that has been accomplished in a few short decades for Taiwan to rise to one of the world’s preeminent economic powers and free societies. He said that he is grateful for President Lai’s courageous and bold leadership of Taiwan, and grateful to be able to express the support of the overwhelming majority of the American people for this alliance. Former Vice President Pence indicated that the values shared by Taiwan and the US, including freedom, the rule of law, and respect for human rights, bind us together in a partnership that transcends geographic boundaries and cultures. He then assured President Lai that China’s increasingly aggressive posture in the Taiwan Strait and across the Indo-Pacific, for the values and interests that both sides share, is deeply concerning to the American people. Former Vice President Pence stated that America is a Pacific nation, and is committed to the status quo, adding that they recognize it is China that wants to change the status quo that America, Taiwan, and other allies in the region want to preserve, which has created an environment of extraordinary growth and prosperity. The former vice president concluded by once again thanking President Lai and his team for their gracious hospitality and conveying best wishes to him and the people of Taiwan. Former Vice President Pence then assured President Lai that just as Taiwan will never surrender its freedom, he will continue to be a voice for a strong US-Taiwan relationship in the defense and the benefit of Taiwan, the US, and the free world. Later that day, Vice President Bi-khim Hsiao hosted a banquet for former Vice President Pence and his delegation at Taipei Guest House to thank him for his longstanding friendship and staunch support for Taiwan-US ties.

Details
2025-01-31
President Lai meets delegation to 60th Inaugural Ceremonies of US president and vice president
On the morning of January 16, President Lai Ching-te met with Taiwan’s delegation to the 60th Inaugural Ceremonies of the President and Vice President of the United States. In remarks, President Lai stated that democratic Taiwan stands united, working hard to deepen Taiwan-US ties together. He then entrusted the delegation with three missions: to convey best wishes from the people of Taiwan, convey our firm commitment to democracy, and help Taiwan-US relations reach a new milestone. A translation of President Lai’s remarks follows: The 60th Inaugural Ceremonies of the President and Vice President of the US will be held on January 20. I want to thank Speaker Han Kuo-yu (韓國瑜), president of the Legislative Yuan, for accepting my invitation to lead our nation’s representative delegation to the event. I also thank Legislative Yuan Members Ko Chih-en (柯志恩), Wang Ting-yu (王定宇), Ko Ju-chun (葛如鈞), Lee Yen-hsiu (李彥秀), Chen Kuan-ting (陳冠廷), Kuo Yu-ching (郭昱晴), and Chen Gau-tzu (陳昭姿) for joining this visit to the US to attend the inauguration of President Donald Trump and Vice President J.D. Vance. We have gathered together today despite differences in party affiliation because in democratic Taiwan, while parties may compete domestically, when it comes to engagement externally, they stand united and share responsibility, working hard to deepen Taiwan-US ties and strive for the best interests of the nation. We share the value of defending freedom and democracy, and we share the goal of advancing peace and prosperity. Today, we engage with the world together as those from the same country – the Republic of China (Taiwan). In this complex and volatile new international landscape, and as the nation faces difficulties and challenges, I want to stress that in Formosa, there is no hostility that cannot be let go, and no hardship that cannot be overcome. Unity is the most important, and I hope that Taiwan can stand united, because there is true strength in unity. Democratic Taiwan must stand united in engaging with the world and initiate exchanges with confidence. On that ground, I am entrusting this delegation with three key missions. First, convey best wishes from the people of Taiwan. Just last year, Taiwan and the US celebrated the 45th anniversary of the passage of the Taiwan Relations Act. And on May 20, the US sent a senior bipartisan delegation to congratulate me and Vice President Bi-khim Hsiao on our inauguration. As the leader of this cross-party delegation, Speaker Han must clearly convey the well-wishes of the people of Taiwan, congratulate President Trump and Vice President Vance on their inauguration, and wish success to the new administration and prosperity to the US. Second, clearly convey the firm commitment of the people of Taiwan to democracy. The theme of these inaugural ceremonies is “Our Enduring Democracy: A Constitutional Promise.” Taiwan and the US share the universal value of democracy and are staunch allies. I hope that the delegation can faithfully convey the firm commitment to democracy that the people of Taiwan have, which will not change even in the face of authoritarian threats. Taiwan is willing to stand side by side with the US and other members of the democratic community to defend the sustainable development of global democracy and prevent the expansion of authoritarianism. Third, help Taiwan-US relations reach a new milestone. In recent years, Taiwan-US relations have continued to grow, with the first agreement under the Taiwan-US Initiative on 21st Century Trade having formally taken effect last month. This morning, the House of Representatives also passed the US-Taiwan Expedited Double-Tax Relief Act. I hope that the delegation can help Taiwan-US relations reach a new milestone through these exchanges so that our relations continue to grow, our cooperation expands even more, and so that we can achieve even greater success after the new administration takes office. Four years ago, Taiwan’s representative to the US inaugural ceremonies was Vice President Hsiao, who was then our representative to the US. Everyone has a lot to learn from her. I have specially invited everyone here to converse so that you can draw from Vice President Hsiao’s experience and ensure an even smoother visit. Washington, DC was also hit by a rare blizzard recently, and the weather has been very cold, so make sure to stay warm. I am sending everyone off with hand warmers and thermoses so that you can bring some warmth from Taiwan with you on your journey. And I ask that Speaker Han exercise his wisdom to help generate some warmth between the ruling and opposition parties through cooperation, which they can then bring back to Taiwan. Let us unite to give our all for diplomacy so that we can unite to give our all for Taiwan. I wish the delegation a smooth and safe trip, and hope your missions can be carried out successfully. Speaker Han then delivered remarks, stating that it was an honor to be invited by President Lai to organize a delegation to represent our nation at the 60th Inaugural Ceremonies of the President and Vice President of the US in Washington, DC, and express the Republic of China’s sincere and cordial best wishes. The Legislative Yuan’s president has assumed this important task numerous times in the past, he said, not only to represent the government of the Republic of China, but also to take on the mission of conveying the voices of 23 million people. He went on to say that he is honored to take up the baton, lead eight legislators to the US to attend this celebration that will attract global attention, and express sincere best wishes to newly elected President Trump, Vice President Vance, and the new administration’s team. As enjoined by President Lai, he hopes the delegation’s trip will help open a new chapter in Taiwan-US exchanges. Speaker Han stated that the US is the most free and democratic country in the world. He noted that in 1776 in the US Declaration of Independence, founding father Thomas Jefferson propounded the concept of “unalienable rights,” and emphasized that the people have a right to freedom and the pursuit of happiness, democratic ideas that have long been rooted in the people’s hearts. Today, he said, democracy is also embedded in the DNA of Taiwan’s 23 million people, and this hard-won democratic achievement is a result of the concerted efforts of our pioneering predecessors, thinkers, and activists over the past 100 years. Speaker Han stated that during this visit, the Legislative Yuan delegation hopes to convey the voice of Taiwan as a democratic country. Taiwan’s security, he said, is like the four legs of a table: The first leg is defending the Republic of China, the second is defending freedom and democracy, the third is maintaining Taiwan-US relations, and the fourth is maintaining cross-strait peace. The delegation will travel to the US amidst severe cold weather to show that we value our relationship with the US, and our citizens have great hopes and expectations. Speaker Han stated that this will be a cross-party delegation of eight legislators, all of whom have a strong sense of mission. He hopes that all democratic nations will acknowledge Taiwan’s importance, and pay attention to Taiwan’s 23 million people. The delegation, he said, will do its utmost to convey the goodwill and warmth that the people of Taiwan give to each and every one of our good friends.

Details
2025-01-31
President Lai confers decoration on former Lithuanian Foreign Minister Gabrielius Landsbergis
On the morning of January 14, President Lai Ching-te conferred the Order of Brilliant Star with Special Grand Cordon upon former Minister of Foreign Affairs Gabrielius Landsbergis of the Republic of Lithuania in recognition of his remarkable contributions to deepening Taiwan-Lithuania relations. In remarks, President Lai thanked former Minister Landsbergis for standing firmly with Taiwan and remaining a staunch defender of democratic values, yielding fruitful cooperative results. The president expressed hope that the two countries will engage in even more cooperation and exchanges in such areas as the economy, trade, technology, and culture, and continue to advocate for the values of freedom and democracy so that together we can contribute even more to our nations’ development and to peace and prosperity throughout the world. A translation of President Lai’s remarks follows: Today, by conferring the Order of Brilliant Star with Special Grand Cordon upon former Minister Landsbergis, we recognize his outstanding contributions during his time as foreign minister of Lithuania. On behalf of the people of Taiwan, I thank him for the key role he has played in deepening Taiwan-Lithuania relations. During the COVID-19 pandemic, thanks to the efforts of former Minister Landsbergis, Lithuania was the first European nation to donate vaccines to Taiwan. On that occasion, he stated that “freedom-loving people should look out for each other.” His statement was very moving and left a deep impression on many Taiwanese people. We will never forget it. Former Minister Landsbergis has continued to express the spirit of those words through his concrete actions. With his staunch support, Taiwan and Lithuania have mutually established representative offices. Moreover, our representative office in Lithuania was the first in Europe to incorporate “Taiwan” in its name. As for bilateral cooperation, Taiwan and Lithuania have seen fruitful results in such fields as semiconductors, laser technology, finance, and medicine. Be it overcoming the challenges posed by the pandemic or resisting expanding authoritarianism, former Minister Landsbergis has stood firmly with Taiwan and remained a staunch defender of democratic values. We greatly admire and appreciate his spirit. Today, authoritarian regimes continue to converge, posing threats and challenges to democracies around the world. Taiwan, Lithuania, and other democratic countries must come closer together, drawing on the strength of unity, so as to jointly safeguard freedom and democracy and uphold the rules-based international order. Looking ahead, we hope that Taiwan and Lithuania will engage in even more cooperation and exchanges in such areas as the economy, trade, technology, and culture. Let us continue to advocate for the values of freedom and democracy. Together, we can contribute even more to our nations’ development and to peace and prosperity throughout the world. In closing, I once again thank you, former Minister Landsbergis, for your support and for all that you have done for Taiwan. We welcome you and your wife to visit often. I wish you both a smooth and successful visit in Taiwan, and hope you leave with lasting memories. Former Minister Landsbergis then delivered remarks, saying that it is a great honor to receive the decoration today. He noted that only partially can he accept the honor, as there have been many people who worked together with him in the ministry and in the whole country who support the people of Taiwan and see the benefit of supporting democracy in Taiwan. He often says that in Lithuania they remember well the fight for their freedom, and just today, he mentioned, he was shown the permanent exhibition in the Presidential Office, where he saw similar pictures of Taiwanese people fighting for democracy. He emphasized that not even one generation has passed since these events took place here in Taipei or similar events took place in Vilnius. Former Minister Landsbergis said that decision-makers in the Lithuanian government are either people who were themselves fighting for freedom, or, as in his case, those who were sitting on the shoulders of parents who were fighting for freedom. So for them, he underlined, freedom, democracy, liberty, and sovereignty are very real concepts that they cherish, not just things read about in a history book. He said that this is the main connector between Lithuania and Taiwan, a feeling of freedom and support for each other. Former Minister Landsbergis stated that in the face of authoritarians who do not wish us prosperity, who do not wish us freedom and future achievements, what he expects from the future is that the friendship, collaboration, and mutual support between Lithuania and Taiwan will inspire others to join in. This, he said, will make other countries not be afraid to support freedom and democracy, and will allow our group of friends to continue to grow. Lithuanian history, the former minister said, is difficult, and a big part of it was fighting for their freedom. He explained that during the 19th century when Lithuania was part of Russia’s empire, they had several revolutions and uprisings with the aim of becoming free, and that they were fighting for that freedom alongside Poland and Belarus. He then applied a phrase that they used in the revolution of 1864 – “for your freedom and ours,” meaning that they will continue to fight for their freedom while helping Taiwan fight for ours. Also in attendance at the ceremony were former Minister Landsbergis’ wife Dr. Austėja Landsbergienė and Lithuanian Representative to Taiwan Paulius Lukauskas.

Details
2025-01-31
Presidential Office thanks White House for its statement on enduring US commitment to Indo-Pacific region
On January 10 (US EST), the US White House released a statement on the United States’ Enduring Commitment to the Indo-Pacific Region, in which it reaffirms its position of using a range of methods to help Taiwan maintain a sufficient self-defense capability so as to maintain peace and stability in the Indo-Pacific region and across the Taiwan Strait. Presidential Office Spokesperson Karen Kuo (郭雅慧) on January 11 expressed sincere gratitude to the US government for taking concrete actions to fulfill its security commitments to Taiwan, advancing the close Taiwan-US security partnership, and supporting Taiwan in its efforts to enhance its self-defense capabilities and resilience. Spokesperson Kuo stated that the deepening Taiwan-US security partnership is a critical cornerstone for peace and stability in the Indo-Pacific region. She noted that Taiwan, as a force for good and regional stability, will continue to work alongside like-minded countries to strengthen defense resilience as we jointly defend the values of freedom and democracy and ensure the peace, stability, and prosperity of the Indo-Pacific region.

Details
2025-01-01
President Lai delivers 2025 New Year’s Address
On the morning of January 1, President Lai Ching-te delivered his 2025 New Year’s Address, titled “Bolstering National Strength through Democracy to Enter a New Global Landscape,” in the Reception Hall of the Presidential Office. President Lai stated that today’s Taiwan is receiving international recognition for its performance in many areas, among them democracy, technology, and economy. In this new year, he said, Taiwan must be united, and we must continue on the right course. The president expressed hope that everyone in the central and local governments, regardless of party, can work hard together, allowing Taiwan sure footing as it strides forward toward ever greater achievements. President Lai emphasized that in 2025, we must keep firm on the path of democracy, continue to bolster our national strength, make Taiwan more economically resilient, enhance the resilience of supply chains for global democracies, and continue working toward a Balanced Taiwan and generational justice, ensuring that the fruits of our economic growth can be enjoyed by all our people. The president said that Taiwan will keep going strong, and we will keep walking tall as we enter the new global landscape. A translation of President Lai’s address follows: Today is the first day of 2025. With a new year comes new beginnings. I wish that Taiwan enjoys peace, prosperity, and success, and that our people lead happy lives. Taiwan truly finished 2024 strong. Though there were many challenges, there were also many triumphs. We withstood earthquakes and typhoons, and stood firm in the face of constant challenges posed by authoritarianism. We also shared glory as Taiwan won the Premier12 baseball championship, and now Taiwanese people around the world are all familiar with the gesture for Team Taiwan. At the Paris Olympics, Wang Chi-lin (王齊麟) and Lee Yang (李洋) clinched another gold in men’s doubles badminton. Lin Yu-ting (林郁婷) took home Taiwan’s first Olympic gold in boxing. At the International Junior Science Olympiad, every student in our delegation of six won a gold medal. And Yang Shuang-zi’s (楊双子) novel Taiwan Travelogue, translated into English by King Lin (金翎), became a United States National Book Award winner and a tour de force of Taiwan literature on the international level. Our heroes of Taiwan are defined by neither age nor discipline. They have taken home top prizes at international competitions and set new records. They tell Taiwan’s story through their outstanding performances, letting the world see the spirit and culture of Taiwan, and filling all our citizens with pride. My fellow citizens, we have stood together through thick and thin; we have shared our ups and downs. We have wept together, and we have laughed together. We are all one family, all members of Team Taiwan. I want to thank each of our citizens for their dedication, fueling Taiwan’s progress and bringing our nation glory. You have given Taiwan even greater strength to stand out on the global stage. In this new year, we must continue bringing Taiwan’s stories to the world, and make Taiwan’s successes a force for global progress. In 2025, the world will be entering a new landscape. Last year, over 70 countries held elections, and the will of the people has changed with the times. As many countries turn new pages politically, and in the midst of rapid international developments, Taiwan must continue marching forward with steady strides. First, we must keep firm on the path of democracy. Taiwan made it through a dark age of authoritarianism and has since become a glorious beacon of democracy in Asia. This was achieved through the sacrifices of our democratic forebears and the joint efforts of all our citizens. Democracy’s value to Taiwan lies not just in our free way of life, or in the force driving the diverse and vigorous growth of our society. Democracy is the brand that has earned us international trust in terms of diplomacy. No matter the threat or challenge Taiwan may face, democracy is Taiwan’s only path forward. We will not turn back. Domestic competition among political parties is a part of democracy. But domestic political disputes must be resolved democratically, within the constitutional system. This is the only way democracy can continue to grow. The Executive Yuan has the right to request a reconsideration of the controversial bills passed in the Legislative Yuan, giving it room for reexamination. Constitutional institutions can also lodge a petition for a constitutional interpretation, and through Constitutional Court adjudication, ensure a separation of powers, safeguard constitutional order, and gradually consolidate the constitutional system. The people also have the right of election, recall, initiative, and referendum, and can bring together even greater democratic power to show the true meaning of sovereignty in the hands of the people. In this new year, the changing international landscape will present democratic nations around the world with many grave challenges. Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and conflict between Israel and Hamas rage on, and we are seeing the continued convergence of authoritarian regimes including China, Russia, North Korea, and Iran, threatening the rules-based international order and severely affecting peace and stability in the Indo-Pacific region and the world at large. Peace and stability in the Taiwan Strait are essential components for global security and prosperity. Taiwan needs to prepare for danger in times of peace. We must continue increasing our national defense budget, bolster our national defense capabilities, and show our determination to protect our country. Everyone has a responsibility to safeguard Taiwan’s democracy and security. We must gather together every bit of strength we have to enhance whole-of-society defense resilience, and build capabilities to respond to major disasters and deter threats or encroachment. We must also strengthen communication with society to combat information and cognitive warfare, so that the populace rejects threats and enticements and jointly guards against malicious infiltration by external forces. Here at home, we must consolidate democracy with democracy. Internationally, we must make friends worldwide through democracy. This is how we will ensure security and peace. The more secure Taiwan, the more secure the world. The more resilient Taiwan, the sounder the defense of global democracy. The global democratic community should work even closer together to support the democratic umbrella as we seek ways to resolve the war in Ukraine and conflict between Israel and Hamas. Together, we must uphold stability in the Taiwan Strait and security in the Indo-Pacific, and achieve our goal of global peace. Second, we must continue to bolster our national strength, make Taiwan more economically resilient, and enhance the resilience of supply chains for global democracies. In the first half of 2024, growth in the Taiwan Stock Index was the highest in the world. Our economic growth rate for the year as a whole is expected to reach 4.2 percent, leading among the Four Asian Tigers. Domestic investment is soaring, having exceeded NT$5 trillion, and inflation is gradually stabilizing. Export orders from January to November totaled US$536.6 billion, up 3.7 percent from the same period in 2023. And compared over the same period, exports saw a 9.9 percent increase, reaching US$431.5 billion. Recent surveys also show that in 2024, the average increase in salaries at companies was higher than that in 2023. Additionally, over 90 percent of companies plan to raise salaries this year, which is an eight-year high. All signs indicate that Taiwan’s economic climate continues to recover, and that our economy is growing steadily. Our overall economic performance is impressive; still, we must continue to pay attention to the impact on Taiwan’s industries from the changing geopolitical landscape, uncertainties in the global economic environment, and dumping by the “red supply chain.” For a nation, all sectors and professions are equally important; only when all our industries are strong can Taiwan be strong as a nation. Our micro-, small-, and medium-sized enterprises (MSMEs) are the lifeblood of Taiwan, and the development of our various industrial parks has given Taiwan the impetus for our prosperity. We must carry the spirit of “Made in Taiwan” forward, bringing it to ever greater heights. Thus, beyond just developing our high-tech industry, our Executive Yuan has already proposed a solution that will help traditional industries and MSMEs comprehensively adopt technology applications, engage in the digital and net-zero twin transition, and develop channels, all for better operational structures and higher productivity. Taiwan must continue enhancing its economic resilience. In recent years, Taiwan has significantly increased its investments in the US, Japan, Europe, and the New Southbound countries, and such investment has already surpassed investment in China. This indicates that our efforts in diversifying markets and reducing reliance on any single market are working. Moving forward, we must keep providing assistance so that Taiwan industries can expand their global presence and market internationally from a solid base here in Taiwan. At the same time, Taiwan must use democracy to promote economic growth with the rest of the world. We must leverage our strengths in the semiconductor and AI industries. We must link with democratic countries so that we can together enhance the resilience of supply chains for global democracies. And through international cooperation across many sectors, such as UAVs, low-orbit communications satellites, robots, military, security and surveillance, or biopharmaceuticals, renewable energy technology, new agriculture, and the circular economy, we must keep abreast of the latest cutting-edge technology and promote diverse development. This approach will help Taiwan remain a leader in advancing global democratic supply chains, ensuring their security and stability. Third, we must continue working toward a Balanced Taiwan and generational justice, ensuring that the fruits of our economic growth can be enjoyed by all our people. Democracy means the people have the final say. Our nation belongs to all 23 million of us, without regard for ethnic group, generation, political party, or whether we live in urban or rural areas. In this new year, we must continue to pursue policies that promote the well-being of the nation and the people. But to that end, the central government needs adequate financial resources to ensure that it can enact each of these measures. Therefore, I hope that the ruling and opposition parties can each soberly reconsider the amendments to the Act Governing the Allocation of Government Revenues and Expenditures and find a path forward that ensures the lasting peace and stability of our country. For nine consecutive years, the minimum wage has continued to rise. Effective today, the minimum monthly salary is being raised from NT$27,470 to NT$28,590, and the hourly salary from NT$183 to NT$190. We hope by raising the pay for military personnel, civil servants, and educators for two consecutive years, coupled with benefits through wage increases and tax reductions, that private businesses will also raise wages, allowing all our people to enjoy the fruits of our economic growth. I know that everyone wants to pay lower taxes and rent. This year, we will continue to promote tax reductions. For example, unmarried individuals with an annual income of NT$446,000 or less can be exempt from paying income tax. Dual-income families with an annual income of NT$892,000 or less and dual-income families with two children aged six or younger with an annual income of NT$1,461,000 or less are also exempt from paying income tax. Additionally, the number of rent-subsidized housing units will also be increased, from 500,000 to 750,000 units, helping lighten the load for everyone. This year, the age eligibility for claiming Culture Points has been lowered from 16 to 13 years, so that now young people aged between 13 and 22 can receive government support for experiencing more in the arts. Also, our Taiwan Global Pathfinders Initiative is about to take effect, which will help more young people in Taiwan realize their dreams by taking part in education and exchange activities in many places around the world. We are also in the process of establishing a sports ministry to help young athletes achieve their dreams on the field, court, and beyond. The ministry will also be active in developing various sports industries and bringing sports and athletics more into the lives of the people, making our people healthier as a result. This year, as Taiwan becomes a “super-aged society,” we will launch our Long-term Care 3.0 Plan to provide better all-around care for our seniors. And we will expand the scope of cancer screening eligibility and services, all aimed at creating a Healthy Taiwan. In addition, Taiwan will officially begin collecting fees for its carbon fee system today. This brings us closer in line with global practices and helps us along the path to our goal of net-zero emissions by 2050. We will also continue on the path to achieving a Balanced Taiwan. Last month, the Executive Yuan launched the Trillion NT Dollar Investment National Development Plan and its six major regional flagship projects. Both of these initiatives will continue to expand the investment in our public infrastructure and the development of local specialty industries, narrowing urban-rural and wealth gaps so that all our people can live and work in peace and happiness. My fellow citizens, today’s Taiwan is receiving international recognition for its performance in many areas, among them democracy, technology, and economy. This tells us that national development is moving in the right direction. In this new year, Taiwan must be united, and we must continue on the right course. We hope that everyone in the central and local governments, regardless of party, can work hard together to ensure that national policies are successfully implemented, with the people’s well-being as our top priority. This will allow Taiwan sure footing as it strides forward toward ever greater achievements. In this new year, we have many more brilliant stories of Taiwan to share with the world, inspiring all Taiwanese, both here and around the world, to cheer time and again for the glory of Taiwan. Taiwan will keep going strong. And we will keep walking tall as we enter the new global landscape. Thank you.

MIL OSI Asia Pacific News –

February 8, 2025
MIL-OSI USA: Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth Town Hall at the Pentagon

Source: United States Department of Defense

SECRETARY OF DEFENSE PETE HEGSETH: Well, good afternoon. Thank you very much for your time.

I want to echo what the chaplain said, All Glory to God. I wake up every morning, praying for the wisdom to see what is right and good true and the courage to do it. And I know many of you do the same.

It is an absolute honor to stand in front of all of you. I’m grateful. I’m humbled. Just the two weeks that I’ve been here is a solemn reminder, and a couple of instances, a solemn reminder of the very special nature of what the department of the defense does.

And I’ve seen it in the office of OSD. I’ve seen it across so many I’ve had a chance to interact with, and so many more I want to interact with, the solemn commitment to the constitutional duty that we all have, to protect and defend the Constitution.

That one administration leaves and another administration comes in, and that can mean a lot of changes in the course of that based on elections that happened and new leaders and new executive orders and new directives and lawful orders.

But what I’ve been so incredibly impressed by, is the professionalism of the men and women throughout the ranks who recognize who we work for, which is the American people, in the defense of our nation.

So, I want to thank everybody watching, everybody here for a part of that, being a part of that transition, which I’ve certainly recognized a great deal.

I spent a lot of my career in the military, which is not as much as so many of you trying to run away from the flagpole as quick as possible.

Now it appears I am the flagpole [laughter].

I recognize and understand that distinction. But what I what I want to bring to this job and to the ethos, is a recognition of the men and women who do the dirty work all day long for us here, across the world.

Every time I speak, or every time in my previous procession, profession, I was on television, and I got the bright lights and spotlight and people are looking to me, I always step back for a second to think about the men and women that I served with.

The folks that are never going to be introduced, never going to have a microphone. Never going to be heard from. The men and women that you know that you served with who are the best of the best in our country. That’s who we serve.

I was on the phone late into the night last night, talking to families of two soldiers who had a rollover at Fort Stewart. I was on the phone with the three, the families of the three that were lost in the UH60 outside of the airport here in Washington, DC.

The costs and the consequences are very real, and you know that.

One of the things I wasn’t prepared for is, every couple of weeks, we do an orders book at OSD where we literally approve the orders that go out. It sounds like a formality but having been on the other end of those orders where those dates really mattered and what the mission was really mattered, I stare at my orders and say, where am I going and what does it mean and how long am I there?

That struck me like a thud.

Every one of those signatures affects a human being whose mission needs to be important and vital to the national interest and to our department before I sign that book. And that’s very much my commitment to you.

It’s also my job to be — as President Trump asked me, to not maintain the status quo.

We’re going to take unconventional approaches. We’re going to move fast, think outside the box, be disruptive on purpose to create a sense of urgency that I want to make sure exists inside this department. And that’s not to impugn anybody who’s been here or anybody who’s sitting here who anybody who’s watching.

I don’t have to tell you all that we live in very dangerous times in a world with ascendant powers who, if they had their way, would love to be on the rise and reject the forces and capabilities and beliefs of the West.

America is at the forefront of that.

And wearing the uniform here at the department, it’s our job to ensure we create the deterrent effect that maintains American dominance in the world.

And there’s a lot of folks, namely — and I’ve name checked it in public as well, the communist Chinese who seek through their ascension a very different view of the world. And so, we have to be urgent, and we have to be ready about what that means. And we’re going to do that.

A part of how we’re applying that is I’ve come in with three pillars that I’ve repeated before, but I want to say again of how we’re approaching this from my level.

Number one is restore the warrior ethos. Make sure that we get back to basics. Our job is to deter conflict and, if necessary, defeat and completely destroy, demoralize and defeat our enemies. That’s what we do. We do war fighting here at the Department of Defense, and we want to restore that through a laser focus on readiness, lethality and warfighting across the spectrum.

I was on with the superintendents of West Point, Annapolis in the Air Force Academy yesterday, hey, what are we doing there to drive those core principles? What are we doing here to drive those core principles from E-1 to — I guess is it O-10, I’ve never even said that. And I know this room is O-6 and below, which I was told was junior. Where I come from an O-6 ain’t junior.

So, this is a new role for me too in that perspective.

And I went out to Fort Bliss, met with — intentionally said, hey, E-7 and above and O-3 and above or O-4 and above move out. I want to hear from the folks out here on this border mission, how is it impacting you and your family? What is your mission? Are you being utilized? How does it affect — I actually think it adds to readiness and — because you’re doing a real-world mission, but how does it affect all those aspects?

Restoring the warrior ethos is critical, and I think we’ve seen that already in the recruiting numbers. I think we’ve seen an enthusiasm and excitement from young men and women who want to join the military actively because they are interested in being a part of the finest fighting force the world has to offer and not doing a lot of other things that serve oftentimes, too often, to divide or distract.

It’s about readiness, it’s about staying focused, and I think you’ve seen that from a lot of the executive orders the president has issued that we have echoed. And there can be confusion about that. But from our perspective, why do you get rid of something like DEI? Because from our perspective, it’s served a purpose of dividing the force as opposed to uniting the force.

And this is something I’ve said quite publicly, and what I want to be is transparent with this building and everyone who serves here, say the same thing in public that we say in private, which I hope you’ll find from us.

I think the single dumbest phrase in military history is Our Diversity is Our Strength.

I think our strength is our unity, our strength is our shared purpose, regardless of our background, regardless of how we grew up, regardless of our gender, regardless of our race, in this department we will treat everyone equally. We will treat everyone with fairness. We will treat everyone with respect. And we will judge you as an individual by your merit and by your commitment to the team and the mission.

That’s how it has been. That’s how it will be.

Any inference otherwise is meant to divide or create complications that otherwise should not and do not exist.

I’ve served across my career with amazing men and women from all backgrounds. They were at my congressional testimony, they’ve been in my office, they work with me and for me now. Their contributions are immense to this nation and are appreciated equally as with everybody else and that’s the approach we’re going to take. So, restore the warrior ethos.

The second one is rebuild our military.

Our defense industrial base, our acquisitions process, how we rapidly field new technologies, how we learn from conflicts around the globe, how we match what we fund to capabilities and effects. There’s a lot of programs around here that we’ve spent a lot of money on that, when you actually wargame it, don’t have the impact you want them to.

One of the benefits I have is I don’t come from — I don’t have any special interests. I don’t have a background invested in any systems or services. I’m agnostic to that.

I want — that means I’m going to take a lot of arrows, and I’m prepared to do so. That’s fine. We need the best systems in the hands of warfighters where they need it, to the COCOMs to deter and send the signals that when that fight comes, we’re ready to win and win decisively.

That includes a Pentagon audit, which to the Marines out there, y’all got it figured out and we appreciate that, lean and mean. We are going to focus heavily to ensure that at a bare minimum by the end of four years, the Pentagon passes a clean audit.

The American taxpayers deserve that. They deserve to know where their $850 billion go, how it’s spent and make sure it’s spent wisely.

It used to be that if you called for an audit, somehow you were undermining the department. I believe the exact opposite.

I believe we are accountable for every dollar we spend and every dollar of waste we find, or redundancy, is a dollar we can invest somewhere else, as President Trump has committed, directly to rebuilding our nation’s military. So, rebuilding our military is key.

And then third is reestablishing deterrence.

Unfortunately, over the last couple of years, we’ve seen events that have occurred that have created the perception — reality or perception, but I would argue more perception of American weakness, whether it’s what happened in Afghanistan by the way, which we’re going to have accountability for, deserve accountability for what occurred in Afghanistan, for what happened on October 7th, the war that was unleashed in Ukraine.

Chaos happens when the perception of American strength is not complete. And so, we aim to reestablish that deterrence, and it starts with our own southern border. It starts with the defense of our homeland.

I think in some ways this department over time has felt like that’s somebody else’s mission. We’ve spent a lot of time, decades, my generation and yours, defending other people’s borders across the world yet we’ve seen an invasion of our own.

From people all around the world who I’m sure many of them want to seek a better life. I understand that. But we also don’t know who millions of them are, what their intentions are, why they’re here — that creates a very real national security threat to the country.

Border security is national security and, as the president has told us, we’re going to get 100 percent operational control of our southern border and that will — needs to be and will be a focus of this department.

I want to tip my hat to NORTHCOM, they’ve done an amazing job in the first couple of weeks here, taking that executive order, which talked about the territorial defense of our country being core to the defense mission, and implementing it.

In some ways, using existing processes that we have, which frankly are not robust enough, but also planning and looking forward to how we transition into a more permanent effective defense, repel and seal at our southern border, so that we know exactly who’s coming in and when they come in, they’re coming in lawfully.

And then also around-the-world prioritization. We have a lot of assets; we don’t have unlimited assets. And so, part of prioritizing is empowering our allies and partners. We need to lead the world, there’s no doubt. And President Trump has been clear about that.

America first means we’re taking care of America first. But part of America First is empowering allies and partners to be combat multipliers, to add to the capabilities that we have.

I mean that’s foreign military sales, that’s exercises, that’s defense partnerships. But it’s also reminding certain countries and certain regions of the world that America can’t be the guarantor of everything forever in a world where we have to prioritize shifting to larger threats in certain moments.

So, you’re going to see that kind of prioritization from us, which we believe will empower, invigorate, incentivize more burden sharing from allies who are beloved to us, who we support, who also need to be prepared to step up.

President Trump, led on that with NATO in his first administration. We’re going to do it again. We’re going over to Europe next week for the NATO ministerial to talk to our friends who have been and will continue to be our allies.

But we also need to encourage them to continue to step up in their defense industrial base in spending. The kind of things we need to do here at home also.

So, sort of to wrap it up, and I’ve already gone longer than I should have. It really is a back — from our perspective a back-to-basics moment.

When President Trump chose me and he said, Pete, I want you to run the Defense Department. His charge to me was return that department to its warfighting mission at its core.

Warfighting, lethality meritocracy, accountability, and readiness. The things we — the — I — the bedrock of what we all understand our basic mission to be.

You know, I was at the Sergeant Major’s Academy down at Fort Bliss just a couple of days ago talking to 500 future sergeants major. Um, they’re the standard bearers. What are the standards? I mean, and it starts with the basic stuff, right? It’s grooming standards and uniform standards and training standards, fitness standards.

All of that matters. It’s almost like the broken windows theory of policing. When you ignore the small stuff from criminals, and I’m not — I’m not saying if you violate grooming standards, you’re a criminal.

The analogy is incomplete.

But if you violate the small stuff and you allow it to happen, the big stuff, it creates a culture where big stuff you’re not held accountable for. I think the same thing exists inside our services. And making sure at every level there is standards and accountability. And that — that we live it at the highest levels as well.

Which is why we are going to, you know, look back at what happened in Afghanistan and hold people accountable. Not to be retrospective not for retribution, but to understand what went wrong and why there was no accountability for it. Those types of things are examples.

But I just appreciate the service so many of you give. I know so many people are watching. It’s the honor of a lifetime to come alongside you. No one will work harder. No one’s going to be more — attempt to be more transparent with the American people and with you.

We do want to hear your feedback. Um, and we’re going to hit the ground running. And I’m grateful to President Trump for his leadership. We’re going to rebuild the military and focus on the troops. So, I’m happy to take any questions anybody might have.

And you can ask questions. It’s okay.

I think there’s a microphone here and here. If you want to come up, sir, to the microphone.

So, everybody can hear you. There’s one right here.

Yes, sir. I’m going to grab a water.

Q: Thank you, sir. You talked about deterrence. Do you see the department becoming more aggressive, more assertive in the gray zone to further deter China and Russia?

SECRETARY OF DEFENSE PETE HEGSETH: That’s a good question. I hope that it’s been noticed and it’s intentional that a lot of our outreach — my outreach early on to defense ministers has been in the Indo-Pacific, strengthening those alliances even more.

There’s gray zone activities that exist, some of which you can acknowledge, some of which you cannot. But certainly, we want to send the signals to China that that area will be and continues to be contested.

Our allies and partners, we will stand with them robustly in real time with defense capabilities. And we’re not just going to allow them to perpetually sort of de facto gobble up more of that contested space by the routines that they conduct to sort of demonstrate that all is normal in an increasingly escalating way, maybe even to mask efforts they might be undertaking.

So, we’re definitely, keeping an eye on that. We’re clear eyed about the communist Chinese, the PRC, but we’re also not attempting to initiate conflict or create conflict where it otherwise doesn’t need to exist. We’re going to stand strong with our partners.

And then President Trump, at his strategic level, is the one who’s having the conversations to sort of ensure that we don’t ever have a conflict.

We don’t want that; they don’t want that. We just have to remain strong in order to be in the best possible position.

Q: Thank you, sir.

SECRETARY OF DEFENSE PETE HEGSETH: Thank you.

Q: Sir, Army IG. So, I’m really happy to hear you say standards, going back to standards. That’s critically important.

I’m involved in senior official investigations for headquarters DA. By and large, our military leadership is doing the right thing. I’m proud to say that as an Army IG.

What can we do with the service across the board to better the standards across the whole formation?
So, we have some examples of improprieties and things that have metastasized over the last decade. How do we get at those kinds of things? What is the department doing to look at those kinds of cancers that are within our ranks?

SECRETARY OF DEFENSE PETE HEGSETH: It’s a good question.

First of all, I think in some cases there’s simplification that needs to be had at least from my perspective. And by that I mean — and that goes back to kind of our initial charge, which is culture. The intentional crafting of culture. That there are a lot of reasons why we could look at each other and create differences or caveats or special categories that I think create unnecessary differences and ripples that lead to conflation points that lead to accusations or disagreements or inability to enforce standards.

I just wrote a book called The War on Warriors, which was used for me and against me in my hearing [laughter].

But in writing that book, for six months, I was on the phone, off the record, with active-duty service members with — at all ranks, right — junior enlisted, senior officers, NCOs, warrant officers, all services, all ranks, because I wanted to get a sense of what their feeling was.

And I wrote this down and it’s true, a lot of commanders were expressing they felt like they were walking on eggshells inside their own formations. And this is company commanders, battalion commanders, brigade commanders.

Sorry, sometimes I only use army speak for formations, I’m learning the rest in real time, but you know what I mean as far as formations.

Because the standards have become opaque and loose, or there’s such an emphasis on differences that treating someone one way is offensive to somebody else as opposed to treating somebody this way and is offensive to somebody else.

By simplifying that and saying you are an individual who’s put it on the uniform of our nation, who’s sworn an oath to defend the Constitution, and you will be treated by your capabilities, your commitment to the mission, how — your work ethic and what you deliver. You.

That’s it. It has nothing to do with your race or your ethnicity or your gender or your sexual orientation.

That’s not how we’re reviewing the environment for your consideration.

When you’re looking at all these other categories as sort of a tapestry, it creates a serious amount of complications. I think by simplifying and focusing on standards, I think a lot of that — I don’t want to say washes away because you still have plenty of complications and you still have problems. Everyone needs to be treated equally, those things to be recognized, sexual harassment, not tolerated.

All of those things remain true, which have been true and need to be enforced at the highest levels, but hopefully by some level of uniform simplification that can be addressed.

Yes.

Q: Great, thanks for taking the time to come and speak with us.

Recognizing the president’s intent to streamline the federal workforce, I was hoping you could provide a little bit of your process and your thinking of what that means for the department, where there will be identified areas to be cut or streamlined? And if you have a sense of also the timeline?

SECRETARY OF DEFENSE PETE HEGSETH: Sure, thank you for the question. It is — the way I look at it or I’ve thought about it is from the flagpole to the front lines. There are thousands of additional — and I’m not saying that just because we’re here in the Pentagon, but there are thousands of additional Pentagon positions, headquarters positions, other positions that have been created over the last 20 years that don’t necessarily translate to battlefield success.

Additional staff, additional layers of bureaucracy, additional flag officer positions, that we are — we would be remiss if we did not review. We also live in a budget constrained environment and that’s politics that I thankfully don’t have to worry about anymore.

I have my opinions, but that’s not my job. My job is a ready force.

We will have to live inside the constraints of the past. I mean, I just — we were down at Fort Bliss recently and the unit there, the armored Cav unit there relayed that they’ve had to cut an FTX, a series of training exercises coming up because of budget constraints.

Well, when you’re living off of continuing resolutions and caps, and then you have contingency operations and things that change, suddenly you have shortfalls and now unit training falls by the wayside.

From my perspective, that’s — I mean, that’s completely unacceptable.

What are we spending elsewhere that can be targeted efficiently? And it’s not just the fraud, waste and abuse stuff, it’s systems, it’s hierarchies, it’s layers that we can review, reduce, recommend those reductions. That then allows us to ensure that training and readiness in the frontline units and the COCOMs is even increased.

I want more of that.

So, it’s interesting. Former Secretary Rumsfeld gave a speech on September 10th, 2001, that was about acquisitions and reform and Pentagon bureaucracy that — overtaken by events the next day, September 11th, 2001 — was quickly forgotten and really never addressed.

I feel like I could give about 85 percent of the same speech today, that Secretary Rumsfeld gave on September 10th, because a lot of those processes have become even more systemic in taking root here that cause delays, redundancies, and bureaucratic red tape.

That’s — we’re looking at the headquarters level. We’re looking at the highest levels.

I said this in my hearing as well. We won World War II with seven four-star generals. Today we have 44. Do all of those directly contribute to warfighting success? Maybe they do, I don’t know, but it’s worth reviewing to make sure they do.

So, we’re looking at all options. What we’re not going to be is hasty about it because we’re in the business of national security. And something that may not look like it’s contributing may be incredibly important to the effort and so whatever we do is going to be done carefully.

Q. Thank you.

SECRETARY OF DEFENSE PETE HEGSETH: Yes, sir.

Q: Good morning, sir. Based on what you said about maintaining American dominance in the world, our adversaries, especially Chinese and Russians, they have a 20-year strategy, a 30-year strategy and they look that far ahead. How do we change our approach to maintain US dominance abroad? That strategy is more than five years, more than 10 years. And also ensuring that our resources are prioritized and allocated to maintaining our US dominance in decades, sir, not in years.

SECRETARY OF DEFENSE PETE HEGSETH: You tell me [laughter]. It sounds like you need to come work for me — or maybe you already do and thank you [laughter].

I’m figuring it out. I found out where the bathroom was.

That, sir, indeed is the key question. Autocracies have an advantage, not just because of the top-down nature in which they organize.

I mean they have disadvantages for obvious reasons. But because they have the convenience of planning without political — you know, the pesky people problem of voting and ballots, they can plan 15, 20 years and then drive that plan without consequence to their own population, which does have strategic advantages, no doubt.

I actually think that system loses in the long haul because of its inherent weaknesses. But that militarily has advantages.

I think you’re going to see a defense strategy coming out of our office that tries to look that far down the line, tries to make disruptive changes to how we acquire and rapidly field and look at systems that are not about congressional districts or budget line items for FY26 or FY27.

But try to look toward what strategically we’re going to need five, ten years down the line looking ahead at what the emerging threats are, and what a shifting in the balance of power would mean.

I mean, when — we’re in a different world than we were at the end of the Cold War. We’re now at a near peer or peer environment, which changes a lot of the dynamics of how we need to plan specifically to maintain American strength around the world.

Because it is not hyperbole to say without America, the rest of the world acknowledges there’s nowhere else to look as far as actual leadership and capabilities in the defense space.

It’s us or us.

And then our robust allies and partners who we incentivize to come alongside us. And that’s how you create a Western force capable of ensuring not just our country and our hemisphere, but the world remains free to trade, travel, all the things that we share.

So, our — I think we have to be willing to look further than any time this president would be in office or I would be in office and set the department up to do that. Knowing that at any time, two years from now or four years from now, the American people can make a different choice and that can lead to different views of that.

But we’re trying to take an America First strategic perspective at how we maintain our dominance.

And I think you see some things already changing in that — our southern border, the focus on making sure we have control over the Panama Canal and making sure that there’s not a scenario in an emergency where our ships couldn’t transit because you have foreign ownership on either side.

Those are sort of America First views that we’re willing to look into that look further into the future than just that should there be a contingency, while looking to the Indo-Pacific and realizing the aspirations of the CCP, which are real and could drive a decision point vis-a-vis something like Taiwan.

So, you’re right, we are trying to think that way, with how we — because dollars drive a lot of those decisions. And so, the budget — as much as I thought this was a job about strategy and people, it’s a job about budgets. And what you fund is what you — is a reflection of what your priority is.
And so, we’re spending a lot of time looking at that. But thank you. That’s the key question, sir. Yes, sir.

One more. All right. Yes, sir.

Q: Hi, sir, thank you for your time today. My question is more about the families of the military and the civilians that support the family of the Department of Defense. So often the frequency of moves, the unsettled nature of what we do impacts the families. I’m looking for your comments on how we plan to continue to take care of those.

SECRETARY OF DEFENSE PETE HEGSETH: Oh, my goodness. You’re 100 percent right.

By the way, we’re in a reconciliation process right now, which is a unique funding situation, not just looking at budget cycles.

As a former O-4 who spent most of his time as an O-2 and an O-3, I spent most of my time with E-4s and E-5s and E-6s and have heard robustly the frustrations they and their families have, which is a massive readiness and retention issue and a morale issue.

So, as we’ve driven budgets, I have said to the team, that needs to be — I don’t — funding one more multi-billion-dollar system is not as important as funding the families and the capabilities of our human systems that make it all happen.

So, I want that to be — and I applaud the previous administration’s increase in E-1 to E-4 pay. That stuff is really important. We need to do more of that. That trickles to the family and how they’re cared for.

And then yeah, we have to look at all aspects of how we interact with families from childcare to DOD schools. And the president signed an EO talking about choice in schools. Military families should have choice — if it’s great on post or on base, great. If not, do they have a robust opportunity to seek education or childcare for their kids elsewhere? That matters a lot.

Making sure BAH matches. All of these things are important.

And my wife’s going to be traveling with me to — we’re going to the NATO ministerial to — we’re not going to the Munich Security Conference. We’re instead going to Poland to see the troops out there and we’re going to Germany to see EUCOM and AFRICOM.

I would much rather talk to troops than go to cocktail parties. That’s my job.

And we’re going to meet with military families. She’s going to meet with husbands, wives and spouses on that trip. Go see schools go, go see faith groups, childcare centers to get a real pulse of what that is and then make sure we’re funding it.

So, I want you to know that’s something that matters a lot to us. I appreciate the question.

So, we have one more — oh, go ahead. Let’s do one more. Ricky told me I couldn’t, but why not?

Q: Good morning, sir. I appreciate you taking the time. I’m from OSD CAPE. And my question follows up on your point about the acquisition process. We’re in a day right now that we have a lot of dangerous powers that are rising and we’re trying to figure out what to focus on in the acquisition process.

And us as civilians, we want to be there to support the warfighters and get them the capabilities that they need fielded in the fastest time possible, but with the appropriate amount of testing and making sure everything works when it gets to the battlefield.

So, I guess my real question for you is what’s your focus when it comes to the acquisition process and reforms and the trade-off between faster capabilities that are probably smaller and could be fielded quicker versus these larger scale capabilities that we really need for that deterrent effect?

SECRETARY OF DEFENSE PETE HEGSETH: In a perfect world, I would say both, right?

I mean, first of all listening to the COCOMs, listening to the people on the pointy end of the spear, watching what’s happening in real time on the battlefield, take Ukraine as an example.

A lot of people — we’re learning a lot about what low-cost systems UAVs can do to high-cost systems that we have invested a great deal in. And the question is do you keep investing in those or not going forward.

Listening to the services also making balances — and it’s not necessarily choosing between services but recognizing capabilities of services vis-a-vis prospective upcoming fights. And then I think we have a unique opportunity to tap into industry, Silicon Valley, other — I mean, obviously we’ve got massive organizations that have helped create big platforms that are incredibly important for deterrence.

We also have some really fast-moving newer contractors that are willing to work, that have already put a lot of money into R&D that want to help us rapidly field these new systems that we’re going to need for fights in the future.

So, funding even more robustly, and I don’t want to name check anything and say that’s the only route, but things like DIU and others where you can experimentally rapidly field new technologies and then find a way to make sure they’re funded so that they can be scaled and tested even in real time out with COCOMs, as opposed to an 18-month testing process to kind of move things, merge things together so they’re happening more quickly.

And we’re hearing a lot of that from commanders in the field who are saying, hey skip this, this, this and that process. Let us figure out how it works and then we can scale it once we know it does or does not.

But I also want — I want to underscore that a lot of these major platforms — and that was a wonderful part of doing the advise-and-consent process in the US Senate.

Yes, there are senators that are invested in certain platforms or systems from their home state or their district.

But when you actually dig underneath it, they understand the strategic deterrence effect of these big systems we spend a lot of money on, oftentimes too much money, over budget and too long. And that’s something we are definitely going to address for reasons of urgency and for reasons of taxpayer — respect for taxpayers.

But we need and want those systems because without them we don’t have the umbrella that allows us to do so many other things. So, we’re looking at both, but we’re trying to get outside the box and be disruptive on both, recognizing we won’t be able to do everything in every way. But thank you for the question.

I just want to thank everybody for your time. I appreciate what you do.

We’ll let you get back to work. I know — I mean, again, I can’t even fathom the size and scope of this building and what everybody does. I know that — I know what I don’t know.

But we’re trying to hire the best and brightest to come alongside all of you in the work that you’re already doing. And I’m just honored to be a small part of it.

So, thank you very much [applause].

STAFF: Ladies and gentlemen, this concludes today’s town hall. Thank you for joining us. Please remain in place for the departure of the official party.

MIL OSI USA News –

February 8, 2025
MIL-OSI China: Ukraine presidential aide, US envoy hold phone talks

Source: China State Council Information Office

Ukrainian President’s Office chief Andriy Yermak said Friday that he held a phone conversation with Keith Kellogg, the U.S. special envoy for Ukraine and Russia.

The two sides discussed Kellogg’s upcoming visit to Ukraine, the situation at the battlefield and the security of Ukrainian civilians, Yermak said on Telegram.

Achieving a just and sustainable peace remains a priority for Ukraine, he said, adding that another key topic of the conversation was the upcoming meetings at the Munich Security Conference.

Yermak said earlier that Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky would lead a Ukrainian delegation to the conference scheduled for Feb. 14-16 in the German city of Munich.

MIL OSI China News –

February 8, 2025
MIL-OSI Security: All Extradited Distributors of ANOM Hardened Encrypted Devices Plead Guilty to Racketeering Conspiracy
Source: Office of United States Attorneys

SAN DIEGO – Alexander Dmitrienko of Finland became the last of eight defendants extradited so far to admit participating in the worldwide conspiracy to distribute ANOM hardened encrypted communication devices to criminal syndicates. The ANOM enterprise facilitated drug trafficking, money laundering, and obstruction of justice crimes.

The eight defendants were among 17 indicted in San Diego in 2021 in connection with Operation Trojan Shield, a first-of-its-kind, international law enforcement effort in which the FBI secretly operated an encrypted messaging network. The ANOM criminal enterprise was responsible for the distribution of more than 12,000 devices in 100 countries. While ANOM’s criminal users unknowingly communicated on the system operated by law enforcement, agents catalogued more than 27 million messages between users around the world whose criminal discussions were covertly obtained and reviewed by the FBI.

ANOM devices were sold to and used by over 300 criminal syndicates, including outlaw motorcycle gangs, Italian and Balkan organized crime groups, and international drug trafficking organizations. The investigation culminated in a worldwide takedown on June 7, 2021. During the takedown, more than 10,000 law enforcement officers made over 500 arrests and searched over 700 locations around the world.

Of the 17 indicted in San Diego, eight have been extradited to date. Dmitrienko pleaded guilty in federal court yesterday; defendants Seyyed Hossein Hosseini and Aurangzeb Ayub of the Netherlands and Shane Ngakuru of New Zealand entered their guilty pleas on January 23, 2025; Dragan Nikitovic, Edwin Harmendra Kumar, Miwand Zakhimi, and Osemah Elhassen pleaded guilty between May and September 2024. All pleaded guilty to Count 1 of a superseding indictment charging them with a racketeering conspiracy in connection with the ANOM enterprise.

Prior to their guilty pleas, the defendants filed motions to dismiss the indictment and a motion to suppress the ANOM evidence. The District Court denied those motions, concluding the Fourth Amendment did not apply to the defendants and the ANOM data collection did not violate the U.S. Constitution.

In total, the investigation resulted in approximately 1,200 arrests; the seizure of more than 12 tons of cocaine, three tons of methamphetamine or amphetamines; 17 tons of precursor chemicals, 300 firearms, and $58 million in various currencies. Dozens of public corruption investigations, too, have been pursued, and more than 50 drug labs have been dismantled. Further, over 150 threats to life were prevented.

According to their plea agreements, the defendants promoted the ANOM platform as “Built by criminals for criminals,” and touted security features such as the ability to wipe devices remotely when seized by law enforcement. The defendants admitted that the conspiracy’s purposes included money laundering and laundering with cryptocurrency. As to drugs, specifically, the four defendants who pleaded guilty in January and February 2025—Hosseini, Dmitrienko, Ayub, and Ngakuru—all admitted that they sold ANOM devices knowing that they would be used to traffic at last 50 kilograms of cocaine; Ngakuru also admitted the importation, exportation, and distribution of at least five kilograms of methamphetamine. Based on their plea agreements and other court filings, what these defendants also did as part of the conspiracy included:
- Hosseini was a part of a team of ANOM distributors, “Team Wijzijn,” based in the Netherlands. He and Dmitrienko discussed the distribution of “90% pure, Peruvian” cocaine, for example, and he and Kumar messaged each other about bringing “kilos” from Belgium and getting drugs to Australia by “Fisher boats.” Hosseini promoted ANOM’s security features and told other distributors about vulnerabilities of competitors SkyECC and No. 1 BC. Hosseini also admitted to obstructing justice through wiping ANOM devices when they were seized by law enforcement.
- Dmitrienko distributed ANOM devices from Spain. He frequently used ANOM for cocaine and other drug distribution: “5 blocks of colombian coke” and “32 blocks,” he offered in two instances, in addition to conversations about “cook[ing] cocaine.” Dmitrienko wrote about “gateways” and “interesting opportunities” for the enterprise in Russia and Ukraine, including through Latvia and Lithuania. He also promoted money laundering through a company he had in Delaware, telling Hosseini that it involved “0% tax and no book[k]eeping…Yes this is pure moneylaund[e]ring 😂.”
- Ayub was an ANOM distributor in Europe, who also sold encrypted communications devices in the U.A.E.—and he had been imprisoned in Dubai for distributing these types of platforms. Ayub was involved in cocaine distribution as he talked about “top” (cocaine) from Colombia, and delivery to London, and sending “100k at a time” to pay for the drugs. He promoted ANOM through his own experience and contrasts with Encrochat and SkyECC, both of which were taken down by law enforcement in 2020 and 2021. Ayub, too, admitted to the obstruction of justice through wiping ANOM devices.
- Ngakuru was based in Thailand, distributing ANOM devices there and in New Zealand and Australia. He used the platform for extensive cocaine and methamphetamine distribution and money laundering. He was tied to two seizures of methamphetamine; discussed quality, repressing, and prices for “rack” and “bird” (cocaine); and detailed in messages how seven kilograms of methamphetamine was concealed in boxes of “full scan proof” “commercial lights.” Among other times he laundered proceeds, Ngakuru coordinated cash pickup in Sydney, Australia and directed deposits into “Thai accounts.”
“The statistics of this case are staggering,” said U.S. Attorney Tara McGrath. “The FBI led this unprecedented collaboration for years, harnessing the evidence to bring down cocaine, meth, and cash traffickers across the globe. These guilty pleas underscore the impact of international partnerships in dismantling organized crime.”

“Operation Trojan Shield was a massive, innovative, and unprecedented case having immeasurable implications to criminal organizations across the globe,” said FBI San Diego Special Agent in Charge Stacey Moy. “This extraordinary impact came from an investigative strategy that relied on ingenuity, partnerships, and perseverance, designing a blueprint for disrupting organized crime within the United States and abroad. The guilty pleas of all extradited defendants highlight the effectiveness of this strategy and reinforces the FBI’s collaborative approach aimed at dismantling Transnational Criminal Organizations worldwide.”

Matthew Allen, Special Agent in Charge of the DEA Los Angeles Field Division, said, “The triumph of this vast-scale operation demonstrates the immense value of partnerships, both domestic and international. Expert investigators in the DEA Los Angeles Division, working alongside innovative and exceptionally experienced federal and foreign-based partners, took an intricate investigation to the next level. Our multi-agency alliance managed to infiltrate these transnational criminal organizations, ultimately exposing and pummeling their schemes. DEA will continue to foster this type of unprecedented collaboration and offer a core presence.”

Elhassen and Zakhimi were previously sentenced to 63 and 60 months in prison, respectively. The other six defendants who have pleaded guilty are scheduled to be sentenced in February, April, and May, 2025. They were extradited to the Southern District of California from Australia (Kumar), Colombia (Elhassen), The Netherlands (Hosseini, Ayub, and Zakhimi), Spain (Dmitrienko and Nikitovic), and Thailand (Ngakuru). Eight other defendants in the case have been arrested in locations outside the United States and are yet to be extradited, and one remains a fugitive.

This case is being prosecuted by Assistant U.S. Attorneys Joshua C. Mellor, Mikaela L. Weber, and Peter S. Horn.

For further information on investigations and prosecutions of encrypted communication providers, see https://www.justice.gov/usao-sdca/pr/fbi-s-encrypted-phone-platform-infiltrated-hundreds-criminal-syndicates-result-massive (ANOM), https://www.justice.gov/usao-sdca/pr/sky-global-executive-and-associate-indicted-providing-encrypted-communication-devices (Sky Global), and https://www.justice.gov/usao-sdca/pr/chief-executive-communications-company-sentenced-prison-providing-encryption-services (Phantom Secure).

Operation Trojan Shield is part of an Organized Crime Drug Enforcement Task Forces (OCDETF) investigation. OCDETF identifies, disrupts, and dismantles the highest-level drug traffickers, money launderers, gangs, and transnational criminal organizations that threaten the United States by using a prosecutor-led, intelligence-driven, multi-agency approach that leverages the strengths of federal, state, and local law enforcement agencies against criminal networks.

The Justice Department’s Office of International Affairs provided significant assistance in securing the arrests and extraditions of the defendants to the United States.

DEFENDANTS                                 Case Number 21cr1623-JLS

Seyyed Hossein Hosseini                   Age: 41                       The Netherlands

Alexander Dmitrienko                        Age: 49              Finland

Aurangzeb Ayub                     Age: 48            The Netherlands

Dragan Nikitovic                       Age: 50                       Croatia and Switzerland

aka Dr. Djek

Shane Ngakuru                  Age: 45                       New Zealand

Edwin Harmendra Kumar,                 Age: 37                       Australia

aka Edwin Harmendra Valentine

Miwand Zakhimi,                     Age: 30                       The Netherlands

aka Maiwand Zakhimi

Osemah Elhassen                                Age: 52                       Australia

SUMMARY OF CHARGES

Count 1: Racketeering Conspiracy – Title 18, United States Code, Section 1962(d)

Maximum penalty: Twenty years in prison, and fine of up to $250,000 or twice the gain or loss

INVESTIGATING AGENCIES

Federal Bureau of Investigation

Drug Enforcement Administration

United States Marshals Service

Department of Justice, Office of International Affairs

Australian Federal Police

Swedish Police Authority

Lithuanian Criminal Police Bureau

National Police of the Netherlands

Office of the Attorney General of Thailand

Royal Thai Police

EUROPOL

MIL Security OSI –
February 8, 2025
MIL-OSI USA: Ernst Blasts USAID for Obstructing Investigations

US Senate News:

Source: United States Senator Joni Ernst (R-IA)

WASHINGTON – After the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) repeatedly stonewalled her investigations, U.S. Senator Joni Ernst (R-Iowa) blasted the rogue agency’s history of obstruction and waste.
Senate DOGE Caucus Chair Ernst detailed how USAID had misled, lied, and deceived Americans by blocking her extensive efforts to get answers into how tax dollars were spent at the agency.
In the letter to Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Ernst outlined her experience beginning with how USAID falsely claimed aid data was classified.
“However, after accepting the requested accommodations and waiting weeks for available SCIF space at USAID’s headquarters, my staff discovered the documents were not classified. The documents my staff reviewed, on their face, failed to comply with standard classifications protocols. Only after demanding to speak to your USAID Office of Security, my staff uncovered that this data was, in fact, unclassified. In a desperate attempt to limit congressional oversight of public information, USAID demonstrated intentional abuse of a system designed to keep our nation’s secret information secure,” wrote Ernst.
Next, she explained how the agency attempted to mislead Congress about the true cost of aid hidden through Negotiated Indirect Cost Agreements (NICRA).
“It was absurd that USAID failed to share NICRA rates on the grounds that the agency can refuse any congressional oversight unless they originate from a ‘committee of jurisdiction.’ Nevertheless, on April 24, 2023, former House Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman Michael McCaul and I requested access to the NICRA data. After that, USAID finally allowed my staff to review,” Ernst continued.
She concluded by illustrating USAID’s failures to use tax dollars responsibly.
“In the wake of this series of significant misjudgments and oversight obstruction by USAID, it is of the utmost importance to conduct a full and independent analysis of the recipients of USAID assistance. Congress must pay particular attention to the activities of USAID’s implementing partners, including Chemonics, to verify whether USAID erred in selecting them to manage this funding,” Ernst concluded.
Click here to view the letter.
Background:
While the full extent of waste at USAID remains shrouded in mystery, Senator Ernst exposed a series of jaw-dropping examples, including, sending Ukrainians to Paris Fashion Week, risky research in Wuhan, tourism in Lebanon, and much more.
After being stonewalled, Ernst and Congressman Michael McCaul (R-Texas) launched an official congressional investigation to get answers in April 2023.
In November 2023, Ernst began investigating USAID’s assistance to small businesses in Ukraine.
In March 2024 she led a bipartisan effort to eliminate waste at the agency.
In May 2024, USAID’s obstruction of her oversight efforts led Ernst to call for a probe of the agency’s implementing partners and recipients of aid by the Inspector General.

MIL OSI USA News –

February 8, 2025
MIL-OSI Europe: Answer to a written question – EU counter-disinformation strategy – E-002504/2024(ASW)
Source: European Parliament
The High Representative/ Vice-President and the European External Action Service (EEAS) are aware of Russia’s use of disinformation in its hybrid campaigns against the EU and its partners.

The EEAS has been instrumental for EU level efforts to counter this external security threat since 2015. It built up capability to detect, analyse and respond in collaboration with EU institutions, Member States and international partners, including via its Rapid Alert System.

Building on this experience and aligned with the European Democracy Action Plan[1], Council conclusions on democratic resilience[2] and objectives set out in the Strategic Compass for Security and Defence[3], the Foreign Information Manipulation and Interference (FIMI) Toolbox[4] reinforces EU situational awareness, resilience and response, and international partnerships to tackle this threat. Exposing and responding to Russian FIMI operations and restrictive measures are part of the FIMI Toolbox.

Regulation 2022/2065 (Digital Services Act)[5] along with the EU Code of Practice on Disinformation[6] provide tools to address FIMI while upholding fundamental rights including freedom of expression.

The Commission and the EEAS conduct proactive information campaigns, including on EU support to Ukraine and countering Russia’s narratives on food security and energy issues.

The Commission operates an internal Network Against Disinformation. The EEAS exposed Russian FIMI activities[7] and coordinates with international partners in G7, the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation and Ukraine.

The new Democracy Shield[8] will strengthen EU situational awareness and its collective ability to detect, analyse and proactively counter threats.

[1] https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_20_2250

[2] https://data.consilium.europa.eu/doc/document/ST-10119-2024-INIT/en/pdf

[3] https://data.consilium.europa.eu/doc/document/ST-1-2022-INIT/en/pdf

[4] https://www.eeas.europa.eu/eeas/tackling-disinformation-foreign-information-manipulation-interference_en

[5] 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), OJ L 277, 27.10.2022, p. 1-102.

[6] https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/policies/code-practice-disinformation

[7] See for instance https://www.eeas.europa.eu/eeas/1st-eeas-report-foreign-information-manipulation-and-interference-threats_en; https://www.eeas.europa.eu/eeas/2nd-eeas-report-foreign-information-manipulation-and-interference-threats_en

[8] https://www.europarl.europa.eu/thinktank/en/document/EPRS_BRI(2024)767153
Last updated: 7 February 2025
MIL OSI Europe News –
February 8, 2025
MIL-OSI United Nations: High Commissioner for Human Rights: Civilians in the East Democratic Republic of the Congo are Trapped in a Spiral of Violence in this Crushing Conflict

Source: United Nations – Geneva

Human Rights Council Opens Special Session on the Situation of Human Rights in the Democratic Republic of the Congo

The Human Rights Council this morning opened its thirty-seventh special session on the situation of human rights in the Democratic Republic of the Congo.

Volker Türk, United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, said since the beginning of the year, the M23 armed group, supported by the Rwanda Defence Forces, had intensified its offensive in the provinces of North and South Kivu. If nothing was done, the worst may be yet to come for the people of the eastern Democratic Republic of the Congo, but also beyond the country’s borders. Once again, civilians were trapped in a spiral of violence in this crushing conflict. Since 26 January, nearly 3,000 people had lost their lives and 2,880 had been wounded. Sexual violence had been an appalling feature of this conflict for a long time and was likely to worsen in the current circumstances.  The fighting had exacerbated a chronic humanitarian crisis, which was the upshot of persistent human rights violations.

Mr. Türk called on all parties to lay down their weapons and resume dialogue within the framework of the Luanda and Nairobi processes. In the meantime, all parties to the conflict must respect international human rights law and international humanitarian law. The M23, Rwandan forces and all those supporting them must facilitate access to humanitarian aid.  Air, land and lake routes must be reopened to establish humanitarian corridors and guarantee the safety of humanitarian actors. In these circumstances, it was crucial to establish the facts and bring the perpetrators to justice. An independent and impartial investigation must be opened up into human rights violations and abuses, and violations of international humanitarian law, committed by all parties

Surya Deva, Chair of the Coordination Committee of the Special Procedures, said the intensification of hostilities, particularly in North Kivu, following the renewed offensive by the Rwandan-backed M23 armed group, had led to widespread violence, forced displacement and serious violations of international human rights and humanitarian law. The scale and severity of the violence had reached unprecedented levels. The humanitarian consequences were devastating. Mr. Deva called for all parties to the conflict to adhere to their obligations under international humanitarian and human rights law; for the immediate cessation of attacks against civilians; for the protection of civilian infrastructure; and for unimpeded access for humanitarian actors to deliver assistance to those in need.

Bintou Keita, Special Representative of the Secretary-General in the Democratic Republic of the Congo and Chief of the United Nations Organization Stabilisation Mission in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (MONUSCO), said this conflict had continued for 30 years, and the population continued to live in fear. The attacks and pillaging against the United Nations and the Blue Helmets were condemned. It was urgent to restore peace and allow for a lasting rebuilding of the region. The Democratic Republic of the Congo and Rwanda must pursue diplomatic negotiations, particularly in the context of the Luanda process. Unless compelling measures were taken to cease the escalation of violence, there would be grave consequences. Ms. Keita hoped the session would pave the way to an end to the conflict and inclusive and sustainable development.

Patrick Muyaya Katembwe, Minister of Communication and Media of the Democratic Republic of the Congo, speaking as a country concerned, expressed deep gratitude to the Human Rights Council for holding the Special Session, a response to the urgent situation and massive human rights violations and attacks on civilians in North and South Kivu. Acts of unacceptable brutality compounded by unspeakable brutalities, like attacks against civilians, forced displacement, murders, rape, forced conscription of children and others were the responsibility of Rwanda as it supported its proxies. Peacekeeping forces, as well as humanitarian facilities, had been targeted, undermining their ability to protect civilians. The Democratic Republic of the Congo called for the establishment of an international commission of inquiry to investigate the human rights violations in the country, establish the truth as to who was responsible, and issue recommendations for holding them to account.

James Ngango, Permanent Representative of Rwanda to the United Nations Office at Geneva, speaking as a country concerned, said the current session was called for at a time when the situation was evolving rapidly. A chance should be given to regional initiatives to bear fruit before taking up the situation in the United Nations. The Democratic Republic of the Congo had unilaterally decided to expel the East African Community Force, a peacekeeping force, replacing it with the Southern African Development Community Mission with an offensive mandate. The current situation was due to imposing a military solution to a political problem. Rwanda opposed the attempts of the Democratic Republic of the Congo at portraying Rwanda as being responsible for the instability in that country, as this was a well-known deflection tactic used to escape being accountable for the atrocities Kinshasa and its allied armed forces were perpetrating against its own citizens. Rwanda would respond appropriately to the actions of the Democratic Republic of the Congo.

Speaking in the discussion, some speakers said they were deeply concerned about the escalating violence in the eastern Democratic Republic of the Congo and urged the M23 to stop its advance and withdraw immediately. Alarm was expressed about reports of widespread violations and abuses of human rights and international humanitarian law by multiple actors, including sexual and gender-based violence, the recruitment and use of child soldiers, and extrajudicial executions. Innocent civilians, including women and children, were enduring extreme suffering due to widespread violence, displacement, and deprivation of essential services such as food, water, and healthcare. Many speakers spoke in support of the establishment of an independent fact-finding mission to investigate serious human rights violations and breaches of international humanitarian law.

Speaking in the discussion were Sweden on behalf of the Nordic-Baltic countries, European Union, Morocco, Kenya, France, North Macedonia, Spain, Ghana, Germany, Switzerland, Albania, Cyprus, Belgium, Costa Rica, Burundi, Japan, Brazil, Republic of Korea, China, Ethiopia, Mexico, Netherlands, South Africa, Algeria, Gambia, Kyrgyzstan, Bulgaria, Malawi, Bolivia, Colombia, Liechtenstein, Luxembourg, Ireland, Russian Federation, Republic of Moldova, United Kingdom, Egypt, Sierra Leone, Italy, Holy See, Austria, Ukraine, Cameroon, Uruguay, Uganda, Canada, Australia, Paraguay, Türkiye, Guatemala, Zambia, Pakistan, India, Mauritania, Angola, Malta, Peru, Zimbabwe, Timor-Leste, Slovenia, Tanzania, and South Sudan.

Also speaking were Human Rights Watch, International Federation for Human Rights Leagues, World Organization against Torture, Rencontre Africaine pour la defense des droits de l’homme, Interfaith International, Centre du Commerce International pour le Développement, Amnesty International, International Bar Association, International Federation of ACAT (Action by Christians for the Abolition of Torture), International Catholic Child Bureau, International Human Rights Council, and TRIAL International.

The session was called for by the Democratic Republic of the Congo and was supported by 27 Member States of the Council and 21 Observer States.

The next meeting of the special session of the Human Rights Council will be at 3 p.m. on Friday, 7 February, when it will conclude the session after adopting a resolution on the situation of human rights in the east of the Democratic Republic of the Congo.

Keynote Statements

VOLKER TÜRK, United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, said his Office had long been sounding the alarm about this crisis, and he was deeply disturbed to see the violence escalate once again. Since the beginning of the year, the M23 armed group, supported by the Rwanda Defence Forces, had intensified its offensive in the provinces of North and South Kivu. If nothing was done, the worst may be yet to come, for the people of the eastern Democratic Republic of the Congo, but also beyond the country’s borders. There had been attacks by the M23 and their allies, with heavy weapons used in populated areas, and intense fighting against the armed forces of the Democratic Republic of the Congo and their allies. This raised serious concern in terms of respect for human rights and international humanitarian law.

Once again, civilians were trapped in a spiral of violence in this crushing conflict. Since 26 January, nearly 3,000 people had lost their lives and 2,880 had been wounded. Sexual violence had been an appalling feature of this conflict for a long time and was likely to worsen in the current circumstances. According to judicial authorities, during the prison break from Muzenze Prison in Goma on 27 January, at least 165 female prisoners were raped. Most of them were subsequently killed in a fire, the circumstances of which remain unclear. The High Commissioner said his team was also currently verifying multiple allegations of rape, gang rape and sexual slavery throughout the conflict zones. Hundreds of human rights defenders, journalists and members of civil society had reported that they had been threatened or were being pursued by the M23 and Rwandan forces.

Mr. Türk was also very concerned about the proliferation of weapons and the high risk of forced recruitment and conscription of children. The fighting had exacerbated a chronic humanitarian crisis, which was the upshot of persistent human rights violations. More than 500,000 people had been displaced since the beginning of January, in addition to the more than 6.4 million already displaced. The risk of violence escalating throughout the sub-region had never been higher. All those with influence over the parties involved, be they States or non-state actors, must step up their efforts to avert a conflagration and to support peace processes.

Mr. Türk called on all parties to lay down their weapons and resume dialogue within the framework of the Luanda and Nairobi processes. In the meantime, all parties to the conflict must respect international human rights law and international humanitarian law. The M23, Rwandan forces and all those supporting them must facilitate access to humanitarian aid. Air, land and lake routes must be reopened to establish humanitarian corridors and guarantee the safety of humanitarian actors.

In these circumstances, it was crucial to establish the facts and bring the perpetrators to justice. An independent and impartial investigation must be opened up into human rights violations and abuses, and violations of international humanitarian law, committed by all parties. The military path was not the answer to the roots of this conflict. States must ensure that any support, financial or otherwise, did not fuel serious human rights violations. All those with influence must act urgently to put an end to this tragic situation.

SURYA DEVA, Chair of the Coordination Committee of the Special Procedures, said the intensification of hostilities, particularly in North Kivu, following the renewed offensive by the Rwandan-backed M23 armed group, had led to widespread violence, forced displacement, and serious violations of international human rights and humanitarian law. The scale and severity of the violence had reached unprecedented levels. The humanitarian consequences were devastating, as those displaced often found themselves with no access to shelter, water, sanitation, food, medical care or education. Women and children were particularly at risk, facing heightened exposure to gender-based violence and trafficking for purposes of sexual slavery. There was also concern for the devastating impact on children, who were at serious risk of all six grave violations against children in armed conflict.

Mr. Deva called for all parties to the conflict to adhere to their obligations under international humanitarian and human rights law; for the immediate cessation of attacks against civilians; for the protection of civilian infrastructure; and for unimpeded access for humanitarian actors to deliver assistance to those in need. All parties involved in the conflict should refrain from supporting or using mercenary-related actors, as they would prolong the conflict.

The international community had a moral and legal obligation to act decisively. Member States should increase humanitarian funding to ensure the continued provision of essential services and assistance to displaced populations. Coordinated diplomatic efforts must be intensified to support peace negotiations and to hold accountable those responsible for violations of international human rights and humanitarian law.

The international community should step up efforts to support humanitarian operations, ensuring that adequate resources were allocated to assist displaced populations and those affected by violence. Women should be fully included in conflict resolution and peacebuilding efforts. There must be independent investigations into all reported human rights violations, including attacks on civilians, sexual and gender-based violence, and other abuses perpetrated during the conflict.

BINTOU KEITA, Special Representative of the Secretary-General in the Democratic Republic of the Congo and Chief of the United Nations Organization Stabilisation Mission in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (MONUSCO), said this conflict had continued for 30 years, and the population continued to live in fear. The attacks and pillaging against the United Nations and the Blue Helmets were condemned. Since the beginning of the year, an unprecedented advance of the M23 and the Rwandan forces had been seen, preceded by violent clashes between the two sides, injuring thousands, and with alarming mid- and long-term consequences. The risks of gender-based violence and violence against children were of great concern. Violations and abuse of human rights had increased, and the humanitarian situation declined. Agricultural and mining activities were paralysed.

Fighting impunity against the serious crimes committed could be impeded due to the damage done to the judicial forces in Goma. It was urgent to restore peace and allow for a lasting rebuilding of the region. The Democratic Republic of the Congo and Rwanda must pursue diplomatic negotiations, particularly in the context of the Luanda process. Unless compelling measures were taken to cease the escalation of violence, there would be grave consequences.

The clashes in densely settled areas, including Goma, had had devastating consequences on the human population, with an increase in crime and violence. Civil society actors and human rights defenders were a major population at risk. The suspension of social networks was an infringement of the right to information. In a region with a sensitive history, ethnically motivated attacks remained a serious concern. The humanitarian situation in Goma was catastrophic. The international community must advocate for humanitarian access to Goma immediately. Ms. Keita hoped the session would pave the way to an end to the conflict and inclusive and sustainable development.

Statements by Countries Concerned

PATRICK MUYAYA KATEMBWE, Minister of Communication and Media of the Democratic Republic of the Congo, speaking as a country concerned, expressed deep gratitude to the Human Rights Council for holding the special session, a response to the urgent situation and massive human rights violations and attacks on civilians in North and South Kivu, the result of attacks and offenses by the Rwandan Defence Forces and their M23 and AFC proxies. Indiscriminate attacks had deliberately targeted the vulnerable, a flagrant violation of international obligations. Areas of shelter had been turned into military targets, imperilling the lives of thousands of innocent people.

Acts of unacceptable brutality compounded by unspeakable brutalities, like attacks against civilians, forced displacement, murders, rape, forced conscription of children and others were the responsibility of Rwanda as it supported its proxies. Peacekeeping forces, as well as humanitarian facilities, had been targeted, undermining their ability to protect civilians. The Democratic Republic of the Congo called for the establishment of an international commission of inquiry to investigate the human rights violations in the country, establish the truth as to who was responsible, and issue recommendations for holding them to account.

It was vital to strengthen early-warning mechanisms and prevent further escalations of violence. There must be immediate and unfettered humanitarian access to evacuate the injured and reduce the risk of the spread of epidemics. The Council must hold Rwanda accountable for its war crimes and crimes against humanity. It was vital that international pressure be applied to Rwanda so that it ceased to support the armed groups and withdrew from Congolese territory.

The Democratic Republic of the Congo remained ready to work with all regional and international actors to put a stop to this crisis and an end to the suffering in the east of the country, calling on Rwanda to act responsibly and take immediate measures to cease supporting armed groups.

JAMES NGANGO, Permanent Representative of Rwanda to the United Nations Office at Geneva, speaking as a country concerned, said the current session was called for at a time when the situation was evolving rapidly. A chance should be given to regional initiatives to bear fruit before taking up the situation in the United Nations. The Democratic Republic of the Congo had unilaterally decided to expel the East African Community Force, a peacekeeping force, replacing it with the Southern African Development Community Mission with an offensive mandate. The current situation was due to imposing a military solution to a political problem. This was due to the preservation of the Democratic Forces for the Liberation of Rwanda that had perpetrated genocide in Rwanda and then fled to the Democratic Republic of the Congo, where they continued to spread their genocidal ideology, and also to the marginalisation of the Kinyarwanda-speaking Congolese communities, particularly Tutsi, by the Democratic Republic of the Congo.

There had been no condemnation of the Democratic Republic of the Congo leadership. There was no special session of the Human Rights Council when a Special Rapporteur had warned about war crimes and crimes against humanity in the Democratic Republic of the Congo previously. Rwanda opposed the attempts of the Democratic Republic of the Congo at portraying Rwanda as being responsible for the instability in that country, as this was a well-known deflection tactic used to escape being accountable for the atrocities Kinshasa and its allied armed forces were perpetrating against its own citizens. Rwanda would respond appropriately to the actions of the Democratic Republic of the Congo.

Discussion

Some speakers said they were deeply concerned about the escalating violence in eastern Democratic Republic of the Congo and urged the M23 to stop its advance and withdraw immediately. Rwanda must cease its support for the M23 and withdraw its armed forces. Rwanda’s military presence in the Democratic Republic of the Congo was strongly condemned as a clear violation of international law, the United Nations Charter, and the territorial integrity of the Democratic Republic of the Congo.

Alarm was expressed about reports of wide-spread violations and abuses of human rights and international humanitarian law by multiple actors, including sexual and gender-based violence, the recruitment and use of child soldiers, and extrajudicial executions. Innocent civilians, including women and children, were enduring extreme suffering due to widespread violence, displacement, and deprivation of essential services such as food, water, and healthcare. Reports of explosive weapons used in populated areas and attacks on internally displaced person sites were particularly alarming.

Some speakers said all sides must prioritise the protection of civilians, ensure safe and unhindered humanitarian access, and fully respect their obligations under international law, including human rights law and international humanitarian law. For decades, the area had witnessed instability and conflict, for a range of causes. Reports of grave human rights violations, including summary executions, demanded immediate attention. The attacks on peacekeepers constituted violations of international law. The Rwandan Government must respect the territorial integrity of the Democratic Republic of the Congo, which latter must cease cooperation with the Democratic Forces for the Liberation of Rwanda.

All parties must reopen negotiations, respect international law, and honour their commitments made under the Nairobi and Luanda process, committing fully to the peace process. All allegations of human rights violations and abuses must be investigated, and perpetrators held accountable for their crimes. An independent fact-finding mission must be established to investigate all accounts. Acts of violence targeting civilians and civilian infrastructure were condemned, and must come to an end.

The role of the Blue Helmets was essential, speakers said, and they must be protected, with several speakers expressing condolences to the families of those Blue Helmets who paid the ultimate price in defence of the fundamental rights of the Congolese people. The United Nations Organization Stabilisation Mission in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (MONUSCO) must ensure the protection of civilians, and a speaker called for its mandate to be supported and renewed further. The international community must strengthen its support for peacekeeping operations and humanitarian assistance. A sustainable solution demanded coordinated efforts, including dialogue, reconciliation, and development initiatives that fostered stability and social cohesion.

A number of speakers said this was a critical juncture in the region, with a potential for over-spill in the region as a whole. Dialogue and cooperation must be encouraged and supported, including through the Luanda and Nairobi processes. The deliberations in the Council must not undermine these, and instead support a return to peace, with the discussions aimed at building consensus and agreement. Political fragmentation must be addressed in Rwanda, with an end put to public negative ethnic discourse, and the international community must work together to build a just and peaceful world. The Council must address the challenges under its mandate. Members of the Council must work to ensure that there was no further deterioration of the situation.

The M23 must immediately withdraw from the territories under its control, a speaker said, and there must be a return to the negotiating table: all efforts must be made to put an end to the humanitarian disaster. All those involved in the conflict must put an end to human rights violations and protect the rights and lives of civilians. The population was exhausted from the decades of suffering. Rwanda must withdraw its support for the M23, which must immediately cease its attacks and withdraw.

Some speakers said the sovereignty and territoriality of the Democratic Republic of the Congo must be protected and supported, and many speakers supported this, urging all sides to respect it and for the international community to support it. All armed groups must lay down their weapons and withdraw from the sovereign territory of the Democratic Republic of the Congo, and respect the United Nations Charter, engage in dialogue, and work towards re-establishing peace and stability in the country. There was a risk of this igniting the Great Lakes region, a speaker said, supporting the peaceful coexistence of nations.

Many speakers spoke in support of the establishment of an independent fact-finding mission to investigate serious human rights violations and breaches of international humanitarian law committed in North and South Kivu, in the eastern Democratic Republic of the Congo, as stipulated in the proposed resolution. The humanitarian community must rally support to protect the most vulnerable segments of the population, in particular women and children. The fact-finding mission must be fully funded and staffed appropriately, a speaker urged. Given the sheer scale of human suffering, the Council could not afford to turn a blind eye to the earnest appeal of the country concerned to ensure that the perpetrators of these heinous crimes were held accountable.

Profound alarm was expressed with regard to the increasing risk of violence against women and girls and the recruitment of children into the conflict. It was imperative that those responsible for human rights violations and atrocities were brought to justice. There was no military solution to the crisis, and only a political, negotiated solution could bring an end to the situation. Those who put their economic interests above human dignity must cease to do so. Peace and security must be brought to the region.

At this critical juncture, all parties must exercise restraint, de-escalate tensions, and prioritise dialogue to prevent further loss of life, uphold international humanitarian law and human rights, ensure the protection of civilians, and safeguard fundamental freedoms. It was vital to ensure immediate and unimpeded access to humanitarian aid for the civilian population.

It was crucial that the Human Rights Council provided necessary support for thorough investigations into grave human rights violations and abuses, with a view to bringing the perpetrators to justice and ensuring comprehensive accountability. A sustained and inclusive dialogue was crucial to achieving a long-term and peaceful resolution to the crisis. Diplomatic negotiations were, a speaker said, the only way to resolve the situation. All parties must respect international humanitarian law, and must support the mediation efforts made both internationally and regionally. A political solution must be found that respected the independence and territoriality of the Democratic Republic of the Congo.

The need for the Council to make efforts to alleviate the sufferings of victims of human rights violations and abuses was crucial, and all parties involved must respect their obligations under international humanitarian law and international human rights law. There must be an immediate end to hostilities and a permanent solution found through peaceful means and inclusive dialogue among all parties concerned, and speakers pointed out the need for “African solutions to African problems”, supporting the Luanda and Nairobi processes. African regional solutions were fully supported by several speakers, who spoke of the efforts of the Southern African Development Community Mission.

Produced by the United Nations Information Service in Geneva for use of the media;
not an official record. English and French versions of our releases are different as they are the product of two separate coverage teams that work independently.

HRC25.002E

MIL OSI United Nations News –

February 8, 2025

Category: Ukraine

Finding a job versus finding a date

Where beliefs diverge

Intertwined ‘markets’

Why does this all matter?

An evolving world order

Pax Democratica

The democratic deficit

An evolving world order

Pax Democratica

The democratic deficit

Speakers Discuss Risk ISIL/Da’esh, Their Affiliates Pose in Syria, Afghanistan, Across Africa

Share this page

Updates to this page

Musk and Putin: shared values?

Transatlantic unity

Problems at home …

… and in its backyard

Losing influence and friends

Dirty tricks, diminishing returns

Wounded but still dangerous

Mini unions

The possibility of calm divorce

What action needs to be taken?

The history of self-seficiency

A modern push to self-sufficiency

Embracing friendshoring