NewzIntel.com

    • Checkout Page
    • Contact Us
    • Default Redirect Page
    • Frontpage
    • Home-2
    • Home-3
    • Lost Password
    • Member Login
    • Member LogOut
    • Member TOS Page
    • My Account
    • NewzIntel Alert Control-Panel
    • NewzIntel Latest Reports
    • Post Views Counter
    • Privacy Policy
    • Public Individual Page
    • Register
    • Subscription Plan
    • Thank You Page

Category: Ukraine

  • MIL-OSI United Nations: ‘Don’t Agonize — Organize, Help Realize Change Our World Urgently Needs’, Deputy Secretary-General Tells Sciences Po Graduating Class

    Source: United Nations 4

    Following are UN Deputy Secretary-General Amina Mohammed’s remarks at the graduation ceremony for the Paris School of International Affairs, Sciences Po, in Paris today:

    Let me begin with the most important word of all:  congratulations.

    You now join a long line of Sciences Po alumni who have shaped our world — including some of whom are doing it every day at the United Nations as they work in my office supporting the Secretary-General.

    Let’s also take a moment to recognize your families, friends and loved ones — who have been with you every step of the way.  They deserve a round of applause.

    Students representing more than 120 nationalities come here to learn how the world works, and how it can work better.  That spirit of global curiosity and purpose has also carried me through every chapter of my own journey:  designing schools and hospitals in my home country of Nigeria; advising four Presidents on poverty reduction, development policy planning and public sector reform; supporting Member States to lead the process that transformed global aspirations into the Sustainable Development Goals; and now as the longest-serving Deputy Secretary-General in United Nations history, supporting the Secretary-General on some of the most complex situations in our history, from COVID to Ukraine to Sudan and Gaza and today’s continuing crisis in the Middle East.

    Today, I want to reflect on the lessons I have learned along the way.

    First, don’t agonize, organize.  We live in a world of hurt.  A world that is messy, complicated and often overwhelming.  And I know it might be easy to feel paralysed by the scale and hopelessness of today’s challenges.  Don’t. Because more than ever, those challenges are connected — and we solve them by seeing those connections and coming together.

    When I served as Nigeria’s Minister for Environment, my job was never just about the environment.  When Lake Chad was drying up, it wasn’t just an ecological crisis — it was a security crisis.  Boko Haram was born and abducted 200 schoolgirls.  When we faced population and urban sprawl and tensions rose between farmers and herders, it wasn’t just about water access — it was about food systems and growing cities. When I met girls walking hours to fetch water, missing school every day — it wasn’t just about resources — it was about gender equality.

    We didn’t work in siloes.  We built coalitions across sectors — civil society, young people, traditional leaders, the private sector — to find real solutions.  We didn’t agonize, we organized.  And, yes, there’s plenty to agonize about today — especially when multilateralism is under attack and international cooperation is on the back foot. But I have seen what’s possible when we find common ground and forge ahead.

    Just look at the last two months at the UN.:  a landmark Pandemic Treaty approved at the World Health Organization; major new protections for our oceans at the World Ocean Conference in Nice; and from Paris, I head to Sevilla — where the world is coming together to commit to better finance sustainable development.

    So, when the problems seem larger than life, too tangled, too tough — don’t agonize.  Organize.  Mobilize.   And help realize the change our world so urgently needs. Remember you did not fail for want of trying.

    The second lesson — keep learning and delivering.

    Graduation isn’t the end of learning.  In many ways, it’s just the start of your lifelong journey.

    When I joined the UN, I was not steeped in the intricacies of international diplomacy.  Throughout my career, I have had to learn fast — and deliver even faster.  So will you.

    Even now, I am learning every day — about artificial intelligence (AI), about geothermal energy, space debris, biotechnology, cybersecurity.  You will face even more change, even faster, especially in the new era of super technologies.  Regardless of the task that is put in front of you, get ahead of it. Learn more.  Do more.  Show your stuff and deliver.  Performance opens doors.  Yes, some of life is luck and privilege.  But I guarantee:  the harder you work, the luckier you will get.

    Third, make hope your most powerful asset.  The world is a cynical place.  And international affairs is not for the faint of heart.  There will be setbacks and critics.  There will be many days when the problems seem too big, and the politics too small.  When anxieties grip you like a fever.  Just look around:  war in Ukraine, atrocities in Sudan, catastrophe in Gaza, climate chaos everywhere.

    But never forget, hope is not a four-letter word.  Hope is the courage to build when others are tearing down.  Hope is the decision to get up one more time, to negotiate one more deal, even when the odds are against you.

    I have sat with young girls who survived the worst horrors of war and sexual violence.  And in their eyes, I saw not just pain — but power.  The power to heal, to lead, to hope, to survive and thrive.

    Hope is not the absence of fear.  It is the refusal to be defined by it.  So, carry it with you.  Guard it fiercely.  Because hope is not just a feeling.  It’s a force.

    Fourth, hold onto your moral compass.

    Your degree will open doors.  But your integrity will tell you which ones are worth walking through.  And in today’s world — where the global moral compass is spinning — that clarity matters more than ever.

    We live in a world where military spending is soaring, while development budgets shrink.  Where fossil fuel subsidies dwarf investments in climate action.  Where conflict and hardship has forced more people from their homes than at any time since the Second World War.

    In this world, your role as changemakers is not just to make the right deals.  It is to draw the right lines.  There will be pressure to stay silent.  There will be moments when abandoning principles may seem an easier choice.  But integrity matters most.

    As Deputy Secretary-General, I have had to tell hard truths to powerful people. To remind leaders of the many promises they made — and the people they made them to.  It is never easy to challenge power.  But we don’t serve power.  We serve people.  And if we truly serve people, we must use our superpower and stand for justice, dignity and solidarity.

    As we mark Beijing+30, we cannot talk about a future and leave women and girls behind.  Gender equality is not charity.  It powers our agency.  And human rights.  And everyone wins when we leave no one behind.  But let’s be honest, we are not there yet.  So, to the men here today, I say:  don’t stand in the way.  Don’t walk ahead.  Walk with.  Stand with. And speak up.  For the other half of your society, women.

    The final lesson is this:  invest time in what truly sustains you.

    Your career will have highs and lows.  Plans change.  Titles come and go.  But what will carry you through are the people who know you beyond your résumé.  Friends, families, mentors, partners.  Protect those bonds.  Nurture them.  Because in the toughest moments, those relationships will remind you of who you are, why you started and why you must keep going.  So, no matter how far you go, or how fast — never lose sight of what, and who, matters most.

    Today, you are not just stepping into the world.  You are inheriting its unfinished business, and its boundless possibilities.  As I look out, I see the next generation of climate champions, human rights defenders and world class diplomats.  And I am filled with hope.  Whatever path you choose, walk it with courage and conviction.

    Congratulations, Class of 2025.  The world is waiting.  And I, for one, can’t wait to see what you will do.

    MIL OSI United Nations News –

    July 1, 2025
  • MIL-OSI United Nations: Organization for Security and Co-operation’s Role in Strengthening Democracy ‘Essential’, Secretary-General Tells Parliamentary Assembly

    Source: United Nations General Assembly and Security Council

    Following is the text of UN Secretary-General António Guterres’ video message for the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) Parliamentary Assembly in Porto, Portugal today:

    Dear Parliamentarians, it is a privilege to address this OSCE Parliamentary Assembly as you meet in the beautiful city of Porto.

    You gather as our world faces great and grave challenges — from raging conflicts, to rising inequalities, to the out-of-control climate crisis.

    Trust is breaking down.  But you are standing up for something different.  By encouraging dialogue between Parliaments, you have helped strengthen democracy, advance cooperation and promote comprehensive security.

    Your leadership in observing elections has helped make them fairer and more trustworthy.  And your efforts played a critical role in inspiring important initiatives such as the OSCE Representative on Freedom of the Media.

    Fifty years after the Helsinki Accords, the principles of the OSCE are more important than ever.

    As the world’s largest regional security organization, you face rising security threats, especially with the Russian invasion of Ukraine.

    Your role in protecting human rights, strengthening democracy and promoting sustainable development is essential.

    We at the United Nations look forward to continuing that critical work together to guide the region and our world towards a more peaceful future.

    Thank you.

    MIL OSI United Nations News –

    July 1, 2025
  • MIL-Evening Report: Trump’s worldview is causing a global shift of alliances – what does this mean for nations in the middle?

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Dilnoza Ubaydullaeva, Lecturer in Government – National Security College, Australian National University

    Since US President Donald Trump took office this year, one theme has come up time and again: his rule is a threat to the US-led international order.

    As the US political scientist John Mearsheimer famously argued, the liberal international order

    was destined to fail from the start, as it contained the seeds of its own destruction.

    This perspective has gained traction in recent years. And now, Trump’s actions have caused many to question whether a new world order is emerging.

    Trump has expressed a desire for a new international order defined by multiple spheres of influence — one in which powers like the US, China and Russia each exert dominance over distinct regions.

    This vision aligns with the idea of a “multipolar” world, where no single state holds overarching global dominance. Instead, influence is distributed among several great powers, each maintaining its own regional sphere.

    This architecture contrasts sharply with earlier periods – the bipolar world of the Cold War, dominated by the US and the Soviet Union; and the unipolar period that followed, dominated by the US.

    What does this mean for the world order moving forward?

    Shifting US spheres of influence

    We’ve seen this shift taking place in recent months. For example, Trump has backed away from his pledge to end the war between Russia and Ukraine and now appears to be leaving it to the main protagonists, and Europe, to find a solution.

    Europe, which once largely spoke in a unified voice with the US, is also showing signs of policy-making which is more independent. Rather than framing its actions as protecting “Western democratic principles”, Europe is increasingly focused on defining its own security interests.

    In the Middle East, the US will likely maintain its sphere of influence. It will continue its unequivocal support for Israel under Trump.

    Amid shifting global alliances, the Trump administration will continue to support Israel, led by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.
    noamgalai/Shutterstock

    The US will also involve itself in the region’s politics when its interests are at stake, as we witnessed in its recent strikes on Iranian nuclear facilities.

    This, along with increasing economic ties between the US and Gulf states, suggests US allies in the region will remain the dominant voices shaping regional dynamics, particularly now with Iran weakened.

    Yet it’s clear Trump is reshaping US dynamics in the region by signaling a desire for reduced military and political involvement, and criticising the nation building efforts of previous administrations.

    The Trump administration now appears to want to maintain its sphere of influence primarily through strong economic ties.

    Russia and China poles emerging elsewhere

    Meanwhile, other poles are emerging in the Global South. Russia and China have deepened their cooperation, positioning themselves as defenders against what they frame as Western hegemonic bullying.

    Trump’s trade policies and sanctions against many nations in the Global South have fuelled narratives (spread by China and Russia) that the US does not consistently adhere to the rules it imposes on others.

    Trump’s decision to slash funding to USAID has also opened the door to China, in particular, to become the main development partner for nations in Africa and other parts of the world.

    And on the security front, Russia has become more involved in many African and Middle Eastern countries, which have become less trustful and reliant on Western powers.

    Russian President Vladimir Putin and Chinese leader Xi Xinping see opportunities to spread their influence in the Global South.
    plavi011/Shutterstock

    In the Indo-Pacific, much attention has been given to the rise of China and its increasingly assertive posture. Many of Washington’s traditional allies are nervous about its continued engagement in the region and ability to counter China’s rise.

    Chinese leader Xi Jinping has sought to take advantage of the current environment, embarking on a Vietnam, Malaysia and Cambodia push earlier this year. But many nations continue to be wary of China’s increasing influence, in particular the Philippines, which has clashed with China over the South China Sea.

    Strategic hedging

    Not all countries, however, are aligning themselves neatly with one pole or another.

    For small states caught between great powers, navigating this multipolar environment is both a risk and an opportunity.

    Ukraine is a case in point. As a sovereign state, Ukraine should have the freedom to decide its own alignments. Yet, it finds itself ensnared in great power politics, with devastating consequences.

    Other small states are playing a different game — pivoting from one power to another based on their immediate interests.

    Slovakia, for instance, is both a NATO and EU member, yet its leader, Robert Fico, attended Russia’s Victory Day Parade in May and told President Vladimir Putin he wanted to maintain “normal relations” with Russia.

    Then there is Central Asia, which is the centre of a renewed “great game,” with Russia, China and Europe vying for influence and economic partnerships.

    Yet if any Central Asian countries were to be invaded by Putin, would other powers intervene? It’s a difficult question to answer. Major powers are reluctant to engage in direct conflict unless their core interests or borders are directly threatened.

    As a result, Central Asian states are hedging their bets, seeking to maintain relations with multiple poles, despite their conflicting agendas.

    A future defined by regional power blocs?

    While it is still early to draw definitive conclusions, the events of the past few months underscore a growing trend. Smaller countries are expressing solidarity with one power, but pragmatic cooperation with another, when it suits their national interests.

    For this reason, regional power blocs seem to be of increasing interest to countries in the Global South.

    For instance, the China-led Shanghai Cooperation Organisation has become a stronger and larger grouping of nations across Eurasia in recent years.

    Trump’s focus on making “America Great Again,” has taken the load off the US carrying liberal order leadership. A multipolar world may not be the end of the liberal international order, but it may be a reshaped version of liberal governance.

    How “liberal” it can be will likely depend on what each regional power, or pole, will make of it.

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

    – ref. Trump’s worldview is causing a global shift of alliances – what does this mean for nations in the middle? – https://theconversation.com/trumps-worldview-is-causing-a-global-shift-of-alliances-what-does-this-mean-for-nations-in-the-middle-257113

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

    July 1, 2025
  • MIL-Evening Report: Trump’s worldview is causing a global shift of alliances – what does this mean for nations in the middle?

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Dilnoza Ubaydullaeva, Lecturer in Government – National Security College, Australian National University

    Since US President Donald Trump took office this year, one theme has come up time and again: his rule is a threat to the US-led international order.

    As the US political scientist John Mearsheimer famously argued, the liberal international order

    was destined to fail from the start, as it contained the seeds of its own destruction.

    This perspective has gained traction in recent years. And now, Trump’s actions have caused many to question whether a new world order is emerging.

    Trump has expressed a desire for a new international order defined by multiple spheres of influence — one in which powers like the US, China and Russia each exert dominance over distinct regions.

    This vision aligns with the idea of a “multipolar” world, where no single state holds overarching global dominance. Instead, influence is distributed among several great powers, each maintaining its own regional sphere.

    This architecture contrasts sharply with earlier periods – the bipolar world of the Cold War, dominated by the US and the Soviet Union; and the unipolar period that followed, dominated by the US.

    What does this mean for the world order moving forward?

    Shifting US spheres of influence

    We’ve seen this shift taking place in recent months. For example, Trump has backed away from his pledge to end the war between Russia and Ukraine and now appears to be leaving it to the main protagonists, and Europe, to find a solution.

    Europe, which once largely spoke in a unified voice with the US, is also showing signs of policy-making which is more independent. Rather than framing its actions as protecting “Western democratic principles”, Europe is increasingly focused on defining its own security interests.

    In the Middle East, the US will likely maintain its sphere of influence. It will continue its unequivocal support for Israel under Trump.

    Amid shifting global alliances, the Trump administration will continue to support Israel, led by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.
    noamgalai/Shutterstock

    The US will also involve itself in the region’s politics when its interests are at stake, as we witnessed in its recent strikes on Iranian nuclear facilities.

    This, along with increasing economic ties between the US and Gulf states, suggests US allies in the region will remain the dominant voices shaping regional dynamics, particularly now with Iran weakened.

    Yet it’s clear Trump is reshaping US dynamics in the region by signaling a desire for reduced military and political involvement, and criticising the nation building efforts of previous administrations.

    The Trump administration now appears to want to maintain its sphere of influence primarily through strong economic ties.

    Russia and China poles emerging elsewhere

    Meanwhile, other poles are emerging in the Global South. Russia and China have deepened their cooperation, positioning themselves as defenders against what they frame as Western hegemonic bullying.

    Trump’s trade policies and sanctions against many nations in the Global South have fuelled narratives (spread by China and Russia) that the US does not consistently adhere to the rules it imposes on others.

    Trump’s decision to slash funding to USAID has also opened the door to China, in particular, to become the main development partner for nations in Africa and other parts of the world.

    And on the security front, Russia has become more involved in many African and Middle Eastern countries, which have become less trustful and reliant on Western powers.

    Russian President Vladimir Putin and Chinese leader Xi Xinping see opportunities to spread their influence in the Global South.
    plavi011/Shutterstock

    In the Indo-Pacific, much attention has been given to the rise of China and its increasingly assertive posture. Many of Washington’s traditional allies are nervous about its continued engagement in the region and ability to counter China’s rise.

    Chinese leader Xi Jinping has sought to take advantage of the current environment, embarking on a Vietnam, Malaysia and Cambodia push earlier this year. But many nations continue to be wary of China’s increasing influence, in particular the Philippines, which has clashed with China over the South China Sea.

    Strategic hedging

    Not all countries, however, are aligning themselves neatly with one pole or another.

    For small states caught between great powers, navigating this multipolar environment is both a risk and an opportunity.

    Ukraine is a case in point. As a sovereign state, Ukraine should have the freedom to decide its own alignments. Yet, it finds itself ensnared in great power politics, with devastating consequences.

    Other small states are playing a different game — pivoting from one power to another based on their immediate interests.

    Slovakia, for instance, is both a NATO and EU member, yet its leader, Robert Fico, attended Russia’s Victory Day Parade in May and told President Vladimir Putin he wanted to maintain “normal relations” with Russia.

    Then there is Central Asia, which is the centre of a renewed “great game,” with Russia, China and Europe vying for influence and economic partnerships.

    Yet if any Central Asian countries were to be invaded by Putin, would other powers intervene? It’s a difficult question to answer. Major powers are reluctant to engage in direct conflict unless their core interests or borders are directly threatened.

    As a result, Central Asian states are hedging their bets, seeking to maintain relations with multiple poles, despite their conflicting agendas.

    A future defined by regional power blocs?

    While it is still early to draw definitive conclusions, the events of the past few months underscore a growing trend. Smaller countries are expressing solidarity with one power, but pragmatic cooperation with another, when it suits their national interests.

    For this reason, regional power blocs seem to be of increasing interest to countries in the Global South.

    For instance, the China-led Shanghai Cooperation Organisation has become a stronger and larger grouping of nations across Eurasia in recent years.

    Trump’s focus on making “America Great Again,” has taken the load off the US carrying liberal order leadership. A multipolar world may not be the end of the liberal international order, but it may be a reshaped version of liberal governance.

    How “liberal” it can be will likely depend on what each regional power, or pole, will make of it.

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

    – ref. Trump’s worldview is causing a global shift of alliances – what does this mean for nations in the middle? – https://theconversation.com/trumps-worldview-is-causing-a-global-shift-of-alliances-what-does-this-mean-for-nations-in-the-middle-257113

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

    July 1, 2025
  • MIL-OSI: Ellomay Capital Reports Results for the Three Months Ended March 31, 2025

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    TEL-AVIV, Israel, June 30, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Ellomay Capital Ltd. (NYSE American; TASE: ELLO) (“Ellomay” or the “Company”), a renewable energy and power generator and developer of renewable energy and power projects in Europe, USA and Israel, today reported its unaudited interim consolidated financial results for the three month period ended March 31, 2025.

    Financial Highlights

    • Total assets as of March 31, 2025 amounted to approximately €721.2 million, compared to total assets as of December 31, 2024 of approximately €677.3 million.
    • Revenues for the three months ended March 31, 2025 were approximately €8.9 million, compared to revenues of approximately €8.2 million for the three months ended March 31, 2024.
    • Profit for the three months ended March 31, 2025 was approximately €6.8 million, compared to loss of approximately €4.9 million for the three months ended March 31, 2024.
    • EBITDA for the three months ended March 31, 2025 was approximately €2.9 million, compared to EBITDA of approximately €1.6 million for the three months ended March 31, 2024. See below under “Use of Non-IFRS Financial Measures” for additional disclosure concerning EBITDA.

    Financial Overview for the Three Months Ended March 31, 2025

    • Revenues were approximately €8.9 million for the three months ended March 31, 2025, compared to approximately €8.2 million for the three months ended March 31, 2024. The increase in revenues mainly results from revenues generated from our 19.8 MW and 18.1 MW Italian solar facilities that were connected to the grid in February-May 2024 and in January 2025, respectively.
    • Operating expenses were approximately €4.6 million for the three months ended March 31, 2025, compared to approximately €4.6 million for the three months ended March 31, 2024. Depreciation and amortization expenses were approximately €4.2 million for the three months ended March 31, 2025, compared to approximately €4.1 million for the three months ended March 31, 2024.
    • Project development costs were approximately €1 million for the three months ended March 31, 2025, compared to approximately €1.4 million for the three months ended March 31, 2024. The decrease in project development costs is mainly due to projects that reached “ready to build” status, which results in the commencement of the capitalization of expenses related to such projects into fixed assets.
    • General and administrative expenses were approximately €1.7 million for the three months ended March 31, 2025, compared to approximately €1.6 million for the three months ended March 31, 2024.
    • The Company’s share of profits of equity accounted investee, after elimination of intercompany transactions, was approximately €1.2 million for the three months ended March 31, 2025, compared to approximately €1.3 million for the three months ended March 31, 2024.
    • Other income was approximately €0.2 million for the three months ended March 31, 2025, compared to €0 for the three months ended March 31, 2024. The income during the three months ended March 31, 2025 was recognized based on insurance compensation in connection with the fire near the Talasol and Ellomay Solar facilities in Spain in July 2024 due to loss of income in 2025.
    • Financing income, net, were approximately €7.2 million for the three months ended March 31, 2025, compared to financing expenses of approximately €3.3 million for the three months ended March 31, 2024. The change in financing expenses, net, was mainly attributable to higher income resulting from exchange rate differences that amounted to approximately €10.7 million for the three months ended March 31, 2025, compared to loss from exchange rate differences of approximately €0.6 million for the three months ended March 31, 2024, an aggregate change of approximately €11.3 million. The exchange rate differences were mainly recorded in connection with the New Israeli Shekel (“NIS”) cash and cash equivalents and the Company’s NIS denominated debentures and were caused by the 5.9% devaluation of the NIS against the euro during the three months ended March 31, 2025, compared to a revaluation of 0.8% during the three months ended March 31, 2024. The increase in financing income for the three months ended March 31, 2025 was partially offset by an increase in financing expenses of approximately €0.9 million in connection with derivatives and warrants for the three months ended March 31, 2025, compared to the three months ended March 31, 2024.
    • Tax benefit was approximately €0.9 million for the three months ended March 31, 2025, compared to tax benefit of approximately €0.8 million for the three months ended March 31, 2024.
    • Loss from discontinued operation (net of tax) was €0 for the three months ended March 31, 2025, compared to a loss from discontinued operation (net of tax) of approximately €0.3 million for the three months ended March 31, 2024.
    • Profit for the three months ended March 31, 2025 was approximately €6.8 million, compared to loss of approximately €4.9 million for the three months ended March 31, 2024.
    • Total other comprehensive loss was approximately €4.9 million for the three months ended March 31, 2025, compared to total other comprehensive income of approximately €12 million in the three months ended March 31, 2024. The change in total other comprehensive income (loss) is primarily as the result of foreign currency translation adjustments due to the change in the NIS/euro exchange rate and by changes in fair value of cash flow hedges, including a material decrease in the fair value of the liability resulting from the financial power swap that covers approximately 80% of the output of the Talasol solar plant (the “Talasol PPA”). The Talasol PPA experienced a high volatility due to the substantial change in electricity prices in Europe. In accordance with hedge accounting standards, the changes in the Talasol PPA’s fair value are recorded in the Company’s shareholders’ equity through a hedging reserve and not through the accumulated deficit/retained earnings. The changes do not impact the Company’s consolidated net profit/loss or the Company’s consolidated cash flows.
    • Total comprehensive income was approximately €1.9 million for the three months ended March 31, 2025, compared to total comprehensive income of approximately €7.1 million for the three months ended March 31, 2024.
    • EBITDA was approximately €2.9 million for the three months ended March 31, 2025, compared to approximately €1.6 million for the three months ended March 31, 2024.
    • Net cash from operating activities was approximately €0.3 million for the three months ended March 31, 2025, compared to approximately €1.2 million for the three months ended March 31, 2024.
    • On February 16, 2025, the Company issued in an Israeli public offering an aggregate principal amount of NIS 214,479,000 of newly issued Series G Debentures, due December 31, 2032. The net proceeds of the offering, net of related expenses such as consultancy fee and commissions, were approximately NIS 211.7 million (approximately €56.7 million as of the issuance date).

    CEO Review for the First Quarter of 2025

    In the first quarter, the Company’s revenues amounted to €8.9 million, an increase of approximately 9% in revenues compared to the corresponding quarter last year. These revenues do not include the Company’s share of Dorad’s revenues. The Company presented an increase of approximately 81% in EBITDA compared to the corresponding quarter last year (€2.9 million compared to €1.6 million in the corresponding quarter last year). The Company’s first quarter is a winter quarter and is characterized by low production and revenues compared to the other quarters of the year.

    In the first half of 2025, the Company recorded significant progress in the start of construction and connection to the grid of new projects, which are expected to contribute to revenue growth in the near future.

    In Italy – Financing agreements were signed for solar projects with a total capacity of 198 MW (of which 38 MW are already connected to the electricity grid), and a transaction was signed and consummated with Clal Insurance to enter as a partner (49%) in the aforementioned 198 MW. Construction work on 160 MW has begun and construction is progressing as planned. The remainder of the portfolio held by the Company (100%) is approximately 264 MW solar, of which 124 MW have received construction permits and the rest are expected to receive permits in the near future. These 264 MW are scheduled to begin construction in the last quarter of 2026.

    In the US – The Company is advancing additional solar projects with a capacity of approximately 50 MW (beyond the existing portfolio (49 MW) which has completed construction), which are expected to begin construction during 2025. The intention is that these projects will be able to enjoy the full tax benefit currently in effect. The addition of battery storage to each of the projects is also under planning.

    In the Netherlands – the Company received, after March 31, 2025, a license to increase production at the GGG facility by 64%. Licenses to increase production at the two additional facilities are in advanced stages. The new regulation for the obligation to blend green gas with fossil gas will commence according to the law in January 2027 (a delay of one year), but the targets for the first year have increased. Agreements have been signed for the sale of green certificates issued under the new regulation at a price of approximately €1 per certificate. The blending obligation is expected to significantly increase the profitability of operations in the Netherlands at current production capacity. The expected increase in production capacity from 16 million cubic meters of gas per year to around 24 million cubic meters of gas per year is expected to add significantly beyond that.

    In Israel – the Company is in negotiations with the Israeli Electricity Authority for compensation for delays and war damage to the Manara project. Ellomay Luzon (50% owned) provided a notice of exercise of its right of first refusal on the Zorlu-Phoenix transaction for the sale of Dorad’s shares. Ellomay Luzon and another shareholder exercised their right of first refusal with respect to all of the shares offered (15% of Dorad’s shares), and, subject to the timely fulfillment of the conditions to closing, Ellomay Luzon and the other shareholder are expected to share these shares in equal parts.

    In Spain – The Company’s development activity in Spain focuses on battery storage, due to the high volatility in electricity prices in Spain, which stems from an excess of renewable energy during the transition seasons and causes damage to the stability of the grid. In the Company’s assessment, the solution is a significant increase in storage capacity, which is currently at very low levels in Spain. Regulation in Spain is also starting to move in this direction.

    Use of Non-IFRS Financial Measures

    EBITDA is a non-IFRS measure and is defined as earnings before financial expenses, net, taxes, depreciation and amortization. The Company presents this measure in order to enhance the understanding of the Company’s operating performance and to enable comparability between periods. While the Company considers EBITDA to be an important measure of comparative operating performance, EBITDA should not be considered in isolation or as a substitute for net income or other statement of operations or cash flow data prepared in accordance with IFRS as a measure of profitability or liquidity. EBITDA does not take into account the Company’s commitments, including capital expenditures and restricted cash and, accordingly, is not necessarily indicative of amounts that may be available for discretionary uses. Not all companies calculate EBITDA in the same manner, and the measure as presented may not be comparable to similarly-titled measure presented by other companies. The Company’s EBITDA may not be indicative of the Company’s historic operating results; nor is it meant to be predictive of potential future results. The Company uses this measure internally as performance measure and believes that when this measure is combined with IFRS measure it add useful information concerning the Company’s operating performance. A reconciliation between results on an IFRS and non-IFRS basis is provided on page 17 of this press release.

    About Ellomay Capital Ltd.

    Ellomay is an Israeli based company whose shares are registered with the NYSE American and with the Tel Aviv Stock Exchange under the trading symbol “ELLO”. Since 2009, Ellomay focuses its business in the renewable energy and power sectors in Europe, USA and Israel.

    To date, Ellomay has evaluated numerous opportunities and invested significant funds in the renewable, clean energy and natural resources industries in Israel, Italy, Spain, the Netherlands and Texas, USA, including:

    • Approximately 335.9 MW of operating solar power plants in Spain (including a 300 MW solar plant in owned by Talasol, which is 51% owned by the Company) and 51% of approximately 38 MW of operating solar power plants in Italy;
    • 9.375% indirect interest in Dorad Energy Ltd., which owns and operates one of Israel’s largest private power plants with production capacity of approximately 850MW, representing about 6%-8% of Israel’s total current electricity consumption;
    • Groen Gas Goor B.V., Groen Gas Oude-Tonge B.V. and Groen Gas Gelderland B.V., project companies operating anaerobic digestion plants in the Netherlands, with a green gas production capacity of approximately 3 million, 3.8 million and 9.5 million Nm3 per year, respectively;
    • 83.333% of Ellomay Pumped Storage (2014) Ltd., which is involved in a project to construct a 156 MW pumped storage hydro power plant in the Manara Cliff, Israel;
    • 51% of solar projects in Italy with an aggregate capacity of 160 MW that commenced construction processes;
    • Solar projects in Italy with an aggregate capacity of 134 MW that have reached “ready to build” status; and
    • Solar projects in the Dallas Metropolitan area, Texas, USA with an aggregate capacity of approximately 27 MW that are connected to the grid and additional 22 MW that are awaiting connection to the grid.

    For more information about Ellomay, visit http://www.ellomay.com.

    Information Relating to Forward-Looking Statements

    This press release contains forward-looking statements that involve substantial risks and uncertainties, including statements that are based on the current expectations and assumptions of the Company’s management. All statements, other than statements of historical facts, included in this press release regarding the Company’s plans and objectives, expectations and assumptions of management are forward-looking statements. The use of certain words, including the words “estimate,” “project,” “intend,” “expect,” “believe” and similar expressions are intended to identify forward-looking statements within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. The Company may not actually achieve the plans, intentions or expectations disclosed in the forward-looking statements and you should not place undue reliance on the Company’s forward-looking statements. Various important factors could cause actual results or events to differ materially from those that may be expressed or implied by the Company’s forward-looking statements, including changes in electricity prices and demand, regulatory changes increases in interest rates and inflation, changes in the supply and prices of resources required for the operation of the Company’s facilities (such as waste and natural gas) and in the price of oil, the impact of the war and hostilities in Israel and Gaza and between Israel and Iran, the impact of the continued military conflict between Russia and Ukraine, technical and other disruptions in the operations or construction of the power plants owned by the Company, inability to obtain the financing required for the development and construction of projects, inability to advance the expansion of Dorad, increases in interest rates and inflation, changes in exchange rates, delays in development, construction, or commencement of operation of the projects under development, failure to obtain permits – whether within the set time frame or at all, climate change, and general market, political and economic conditions in the countries in which the Company operates, including Israel, Spain, Italy and the United States. and general market, political and economic conditions in the countries in which the Company operates, including Israel, Spain, Italy and the United States. These and other risks and uncertainties associated with the Company’s business are described in greater detail in the filings the Company makes from time to time with Securities and Exchange Commission, including its Annual Report on Form 20-F. The forward-looking statements are made as of this date and the Company does not undertake any obligation to update any forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise.

    Contact:
    Kalia Rubenbach (Weintraub)
    CFO
    Tel: +972 (3) 797-1111
    Email: hilai@ellomay.com

    Ellomay Capital Ltd. and its Subsidiaries
    Condensed Consolidated Statements of Financial Position
      March 31,   December 31,   March 31,
    2025   2024   2025
    Unaudited   Audited   Unaudited
    € in thousands
      Convenience Translation
    into US$ in thousands*
    Assets          
    Current assets:          
    Cash and cash equivalents 35,148   41,134   38,021
    Short term deposits 36,301   –   39,268
    Restricted cash 656   656   710
    Intangible asset from green certificates 195   178   211
    Trade and revenue receivables 5,911   5,393   6,394
    Other receivables 15,518   15,341   16,786
    Derivatives asset short-term 650   146   703
      94,379   62,848   102,093
    Non-current assets          
    Investment in equity accounted investee 40,107   41,324   43,385
    Advances on account of investments 547   547   592
    Fixed assets 487,100   482,747   526,914
    Right-of-use asset 41,276   34,315   44,650
    Restricted cash and deposits 15,569   17,052   16,842
    Deferred tax 8,525   9,039   9,222
    Long term receivables 13,882   13,411   15,017
    Derivatives 19,855   15,974   21,478
      626,861   614,409   678,100
               
    Total assets 721,240   677,257   780,193
               
    Liabilities and Equity          
    Current liabilities          
    Current maturities of long-term bank loans 20,761   21,316   22,458
    Current maturities of other long-term loans 5,866   5,866   6,345
    Current maturities of debentures 47,233   35,706   51,094
    Trade payables 9,928   8,856   10,738
    Other payables 8,913   10,896   9,642
    Current maturities of derivatives 40   1,875   43
    Current maturities of lease liabilities 733   714   793
    Warrants 1,740   1,446   1,882
      95,214   86,675   102,995
    Non-current liabilities          
    Long-term lease liabilities 32,673   25,324   35,344
    Long-term bank loans 242,177   245,866   261,972
    Other long-term loans 29,578   30,448   31,996
    Debentures 186,691   155,823   201,951
    Deferred tax 2,652   2,609   2,869
    Other long-term liabilities 950   939   1,028
    Derivatives 135   288   146
      494,856   461,297   535,306
    Total liabilities 590,070   547,972   638,301
               
    Equity          
    Share capital 25,613   25,613   27,707
    Share premium 86,275   86,271   93,327
    Treasury shares (1,736)   (1,736)   (1,878)
    Transaction reserve with non-controlling Interests 5,697   5,697   6,163
    Reserves 7,381   14,338   7,984
    Accumulated deficit (3,567)   (11,561)   (3,859)
    Total equity attributed to shareholders of the Company 119,663   118,622   129,444
    Non-Controlling Interest 11,507   10,663   12,448
    Total equity 131,170   129,285   141,892
    Total liabilities and equity 721,240   677,257   780,193

    * Convenience translation into US$ (exchange rate as at March 31, 2025: euro 1 = US$ 1.082)

                    

    Ellomay Capital Ltd. and its Subsidiaries
    Condensed Consolidated Interim Statements of Profit or Loss and Other Comprehensive Income (Loss)
      For the three months
    ended March 31,
    For the year
    ended
    December 31,
      For the three
    months ended
    March 31,
      2025   2024   2024   2025
      Unaudited
      Audited   Unaudited
      € in thousands (except per share data)
      Convenience Translation into US$*
    Revenues 8,860   8,243   40,467   9,584
    Operating expenses (4,627)   (4,563)   (19,803)   (5,005)
    Depreciation and amortization expenses (4,238)   (4,055)   (15,887)   (4,584)
    Gross profit (loss) (5)   (375)   4,777   (5)
                   
    Project development costs (1,045)   (1,415)   (4,101)   (1,130)
    General and administrative expenses (1,662)   (1,620)   (6,063)   (1,798)
    Share of profits of equity accounted investee 1,189   1,286   11,062   1,286
    Other income 198   –   3,409   214
    Operating profit (loss) (1,325)   (2,124)   9,084   (1,433)
                   
    Financing income 11,483   631   2,495   12,422
    Financing income (expenses) in connection with derivatives and warrants, net (376)   536   1,140   (407)
    Financing expenses in connection with projects finance (1,375)   (1,501)   (6,190)   (1,487)
    Financing expenses in connection with debentures (1,741)   (1,711)   (6,641)   (1,883)
    Interest expenses on minority shareholder loan (476)   (554)   (2,144)   (515)
    Other financing expenses (294)   (713)   (8,311)   (318)
    Financing income (expenses), net 7,221   (3,312)   (19,651)   7,812
    Profit (loss) before taxes on income 5,896   (5,436)   (10,567)   6,379
    Tax benefit 922   828   1,424   997
    Profit (loss) from continuing operations 6,818   (4,608)   (9,143)   7,376
    Profit (loss) from discontinued operation (net of tax) –   (312)   137   –
    Profit (loss) for the period 6,818   (4,920)   (9,006)   7,376
    Profit (loss) attributable to:              
    Owners of the Company 7,994   (3,613)   (6,524)   8,647
    Non-controlling interests (1,176)   (1,307)   (2,482)   (1,271)
    Profit (loss) for the period 6,818   (4,920)   (9,006)   7,376
                   
    Other comprehensive income items              
    That after initial recognition in comprehensive income were or will be transferred to profit or loss:              
    Foreign currency translation differences for foreign operations (9,538)   1,124   8,007   (10,318)
    Foreign currency translation differences for foreign operations that were recognized in profit or loss –   –   255    
    Effective portion of change in fair value of cash flow hedges 4,264   10,461   5,631   4,613
    Net change in fair value of cash flow hedges transferred to profit or loss 337   457   (813)   365
    Total other comprehensive income (4,937)   12,042   13,080   (5,340)
                   
    Total other comprehensive income (loss) attributable to:              
    Owners of the Company (6,957)   6,656   10,039   (7,526)
    Non-controlling interests 2,020   5,386   3,041   2,186
    Total other comprehensive income (loss) (4,937)   12,042   13,080   (5,340)
    Total comprehensive income for the period 1,881   7,122   4,074   2,036
                   
    Total comprehensive income for the period attributable to:              
    Owners of the Company 1,037   3,043   3,515   1,121
    Non-controlling interests 844   4,079   559   915
    Total comprehensive income for the period 1,881   7,122   4,074   2,036
                   

    * Convenience translation into US$ (exchange rate as at March 31, 2025: euro 1 = US$ 1.082)

    Ellomay Capital Ltd. and its Subsidiaries
    Condensed Consolidated Interim Statements of Profit or Loss and Other Comprehensive Income (Loss) (cont’d)
      For the three months
    ended March 31,
    For the year
    ended
    December 31,
      For the three months
    ended March 31,
    2025   2024   2024   2025
    Unaudited
      Audited   Unaudited
    € in thousands (except per share data)
      Convenience Translation into US$*
                   
    Basic profit (loss) per share 0.62   (0.28)   (0.51)   0.67
    Diluted profit (loss) per share 0.62   (0.28)   (0.51)   0.67
                   
    Basic profit (loss) per share continuing operations 0.62   (0.31)   (0.52)   0.67
    Diluted profit (loss) per share continuing operations 0.62   (0.31)   (0.52)   0.67
                   
    Basic profit (loss) per share discontinued operation –   (0.02)   0.01   –
    Diluted profit (loss) per share discontinued operation –   (0.02)   0.01   –

    * Convenience translation into US$ (exchange rate as at March 31, 2025: euro 1 = US$ 1.082)

    Ellomay Capital Ltd. and its Subsidiaries
    Condensed Consolidated Interim Statements of Changes in Equity
              Attributable to shareholders of the Company
      Non- controlling   Total
                                    Interests   Equity
    Share capital   Share premium   Accumulated Deficit   Treasury shares   Translation reserve from
    foreign operations
      Hedging Reserve   Interests Transaction reserve with
    non-controlling Interests
      Total        
    € in thousands
                                           
    For the three months                                      
    ended March 31, 2025 (unaudited):                                      
    Balance as at January 1, 2025 25,613   86,271   (11,561)   (1,736)   8,446   5,892   5,697   118,622   10,663   129,285
    Profit for the period –   –   7,994   –   –   –   –   7,994   (1,176)   6,818
    Other comprehensive income for the period –   –   –   –   (9,329)   2,372   –   (6,957)   2,020   (4,937)
    Total comprehensive income for the period –   –   7,994   –   (9,329)   2,372   –   1,037   844   1,881
    Transactions with owners of the Company, recognized directly in equity:                                      
    Share-based payments –   4   –   –   –   –   –   4   –   4
    Balance as at March 31, 2025 25,613   86,275   (3,567)   (1,736)   (883)   8,264   5,697   119,663   11,507   131,170
                                           
    For the three months                                      
    ended March 31, 2024 (unaudited):                                      
    Balance as at January 1, 2024 25,613   86,159   (5,037)   (1,736)   385   3,914   5,697   114,995   10,104   125,099
    Loss for the period –   –   (3,613)   –   –   –   –   (3,613)   (1,307)   (4,920)
    Other comprehensive income for the period –   –   –   –   1,088   5,568   –   6,656   5,386   12,042
    Total comprehensive income (loss) for the period –   –   (3,613)   –   1,088   5,568   –   3,043   4,079   7,122
    Transactions with owners of the Company, recognized directly in equity:                                      
    Share-based payments –   30   –   –   –   –   –   30   –   30
    Balance as at March 31, 2024 25,613   86,189   (8,650)   (1,736)   1,473   9,482   5,697   118,068   14,183   132,251
    Ellomay Capital Ltd. and its Subsidiaries
    Condensed Consolidated Interim Statements of Changes in Equity (cont’d)
              Attributable to shareholders of the Company
      Non- controlling   Total
                                    Interests   Equity
    Share capital   Share premium   Accumulated Deficit   Treasury shares   Translation reserve from
    foreign operations
      Hedging Reserve   Interests Transaction reserve with
    non-controlling Interests
      Total        
    € in thousands
    For the year ended                                      
    December 31, 2024 (audited):                                      
    Balance as at January 1, 2024 25,613   86,159   (5,037)   (1,736)   385   3,914   5,697   114,995   10,104   125,099
    Loss for the year –   –   (6,524)   –   –   –   –   (6,524)   (2,482)   (9,006)
    Other comprehensive income for the year –   –   –   –   8,061   1,978   –   10,039   3,041   13,080
    Total comprehensive income (loss) for the year –   –   (6,524)   –   8,061   1,978   –   3,515   559   4,074
    Transactions with owners of the Company, recognized directly in equity:                                      
    Share-based payments –   112   –   –   –   –   –   112   –   112
    Balance as at December 31, 2024 25,613   86,271   (11,561)   (1,736)   8,446   5,892   5,697   118,622   10,663   129,285
    Ellomay Capital Ltd. and its Subsidiaries
    Condensed Consolidated Interim Statements of Changes in Equity (cont’d)
              Attributable to shareholders of the Company
      Non- controlling
    Interests
      Total
    Equity
                                         
    Share capital   Share premium   Accumulated Deficit   Treasury shares   Translation reserve from
    foreign operations
      Hedging Reserve   Interests Transaction reserve with
    non-controlling Interests
      Total        
    Convenience translation into US$ (exchange rate as at March 31, 2025: euro 1 = US$ 1.082)
    For the three months                                      
    ended March 31, 2025 (unaudited):                                      
    Balance as at January 1, 2025 27,707   93,323   (12,506)   (1,878)   9,136   6,374   6,163   128,319   11,533   139,852
    Loss for the period –   –   8,647   –   –   –   –   8,647   (1,271)   7,376
    Other comprehensive income for the period –   –   –   –   (10,092)   2,566   –   (7,526)   2,186   (5,340)
    Total comprehensive income for the period –   –   8,647   –   (10,092)   2,566   –   1,121   915   2,036
    Transactions with owners of the Company, recognized directly in equity:                                      
    Share-based payments –   4   –   –   –   –   –   4   –   4
    Balance as at March 31, 2025 27,707   93,327   (3,859)   (1,878)   (956)   8,940   6,163   129,444   12,448   141,892
    Ellomay Capital Ltd. and its Subsidiaries
    Condensed Consolidated Interim Statements of Cash Flow
      For the three months
    ended March 31,
    For the year
    ended
    December 31,
      For the three months
    ended March 31,
    2025   2024   2024   2025
    Unaudited
      Audited   Unaudited
    € in thousands
      Convenience
    Translation into US$*
    Cash flows from operating activities              
    Profit (loss) for the period 6,818   (4,920)   (9,006)   7,376
    Adjustments for:              
    Financing expenses (income), net (7,221)   3,167   19,247   (7,812)
    Loss from settlement of derivatives contract –   –   316   –
    Impairment losses on assets of disposal groups classified as held-for-sale –   601   405   –
    Depreciation and amortization expenses 4,238   4,084   15,935   4,584
    Share-based payment transactions 4   30   112   4
    Share of profit of equity accounted investees (1,189)   (1,286)   (11,062)   (1,286)
    Payment of interest on loan from an equity accounted investee –   –   –   –
    Change in trade receivables and other receivables   6,178   (2,342)   (8,824)   6,683
    Change in other assets (496)   –   3,770   (537)
    Change in receivables from concessions project –   315   793   –
    Change in trade payables 1,267   (68)   (31)   1,371
    Change in other payables (5,538)   2,796   4,455   (5,796)
    Tax benefit (922)   (805)   (1,429)   (997)
    Income taxes refund (paid) –   564   623   –
    Interest received 351   907   2,537   380
    Interest paid (3,408)   (1,892)   (9,873)   (3,687)
      (6,556)   6,071   16,974   (7,093)
    Net cash from operating activities 262   1,151   7,968   283
                   
    Cash flows from investing activities              
    Acquisition of fixed assets (18,550)   (9,020)   (72,922)   (20,066)
    Interest paid capitalized to fixed assets (876)   –   (2,515)   (948)
    Proceeds from sale of investments –   –   9,267   –
    Advances on account of investments –   –   (163)   –
    Proceeds from advances on account of investments –   –   514   –
    Investment in settlement of derivatives, net –   14   (316)   –
    Proceed from restricted cash, net 1,307   1,153   689   1,414
    Proceeds from investment in short-term deposits (39,132)   (28)   1,004   (42,331)
    Net cash used in investing activities (57,251)   (7,881)   (64,442)   (61,931)
                   
    Cash flows from financing activities              
    Issuance of warrants –   3,735   2,449   –
    Cost associated with long term loans (658)   (638)   (2,567)   (712)
    Payment of principal of lease liabilities (372)   (299)   (2,941)   (402)
    Proceeds from long-term loans 306   380   19,482   331
    Repayment of long-term loans (1,792)   (2,357)   (11,776)   (1,938)
    Repayment of debentures —   –   (35,845)   –
    Proceeds from issuance of debentures, net 56,729   36,450   74,159   61,366
    Net cash from financing activities 54,213   37,271   42,961   58,645
                   
    Effect of exchange rate fluctuations on cash and cash equivalents (3,210)   1,667   3,092   (3,472)
    Increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents (5,986)   32,208   (10,421)   (6,475)
    Cash and cash equivalents at the beginning of year 41,134   51,555   51,127   44,496
    Cash from disposal groups classified as held-for-sale –   (1,041)   428   –
    Cash and cash equivalents at the end of the period 35,148   82,722   41,134   38,021

    * Convenience translation into US$ (exchange rate as at March 31, 2025: euro 1 = US$ 1.082)

    Ellomay Capital Ltd. and its Subsidiaries
    Operating Segments
      Italy   Spain
      USA   Netherlands   Israel
      Total        
        Subsidized   28 MV                       reportable       Total
    Solar   Plants   Solar   Talasol   Solar   Biogas   Dorad   Manara   segments   Reconciliations   consolidated
    For the three months ended March 31, 2025
    € in thousands
                                               
    Revenues 945   786   406   3,246   –   3,477   15,061   –   23,921   (15,061)   8,860
    Operating expenses (435)   (105)   (84)   (1,024)   (305)   (3,206)   (11,693)   –   (16,851)   12,224   (4,627)
    Depreciation expenses (225)   (229)   (252)   (2,839)   –   (676)   (1,268)   –   (5,489)   1,251   (4,238)
    Gross profit (loss) 313   452   84   (617)   (305)   (405)   2,100   –   1,623   (1,628)   (5)
                                               
    Adjusted gross profit (loss) 313   452   84   (617)   (305)   (405)   2,100   –   1,623   (1,628)   (5)
    Project development costs                                         (1,045)
    General and administrative expenses                                         (1,662)
    Share of loss of equity accounted investee                                         1,189
    Other income, net                                         198
    Operating profit                                         (1,325)
    Financing income                                         11,483
    Financing income in connection                                          
    with derivatives and warrants, net                                         (376)
    Financing expenses in connection with projects finance                                         (1,375)
    Financing expenses in connection with debentures                                         (1,741)
    Interest expenses on minority shareholder loan                                         (476)
    Other financing expenses                                         (294)
    Financing expenses, net                                         7,221
    Loss before taxes on income                                         5,896
                                               
    Segment assets as at March 31, 2025 87,185   13,242   19,475   223,844   60,458   32,801   108,858   180,504   726,366   (5,126)   721,240  
    Ellomay Capital Ltd. and its Subsidiaries
    Reconciliation of Profit (Loss) to EBITDA
      For the three months
    ended March 31,
    For the year
    ended
    December 31,
      For the three months
    ended March 31,
    2025   2024   2024   2025
    € in thousands
      Convenience Translation
    into US$*
    Net profit (loss) for the period 6,818   (4,920)   (9,006)   7,376
    Financing expenses (income), net (7,221)   3,312   19,651   (7,812)
    Tax benefit (922)   (828)   (1,424)   (997)
    Depreciation and amortization expenses 4,238   4,055   15,887   4,584
    EBITDA 2,913   1,619   25,108   3,151

    * Convenience translation into US$ (exchange rate as at March 31, 2025: euro 1 = US$ 1.082)

    Ellomay Capital Ltd. and its Subsidiaries
    Information for the Company’s Debenture Holders

    Financial Covenants

    Pursuant to the Deeds of Trust governing the Company’s Series C, Series D, Series E, Series F and Series G Debentures (together, the “Debentures”), the Company is required to maintain certain financial covenants. For more information, see Items 4.A and 5.B of the Company’s Annual Report on Form 20-F submitted to the Securities and Exchange Commission on April 30, 2025, and below.

    Net Financial Debt

    As of March 31, 2025, the Company’s Net Financial Debt, (as such term is defined in the Deeds of Trust of the Company’s Debentures), was approximately €170 million (consisting of approximately €3031 million of short-term and long-term debt from banks and other interest bearing financial obligations, approximately €241.42 million in connection with (i) the Series C Debentures issuances (in July 2019, October 2020, February 2021 and October 2021), (ii) the Series D Convertible Debentures issuance (in February 2021), (iii) the Series E Secured Debentures issuance (in February 2023), (iv) the Series F Debentures issuance (in January, April, August and November 2024) and (v) the Series G Debentures issuance (in February 2025)), net of approximately €71.4 million of cash and cash equivalents, short-term deposits and marketable securities and net of approximately €3033 million of project finance and related hedging transactions of the Company’s subsidiaries).

    Discussion concerning Warning Signs

    Upon the issuance of the Company’s Debentures, the Company undertook to comply with the “hybrid model disclosure requirements” as determined by the Israeli Securities Authority and as described in the Israeli prospectuses published in connection with the public offering of the company’s Debentures. This model provides that in the event certain financial “warning signs” exist in the Company’s consolidated financial results or statements, and for as long as they exist, the Company will be subject to certain disclosure obligations towards the holders of the Company’s Debentures.

    One possible “warning sign” is the existence of a working capital deficiency if the Company’s Board of Directors does not determine that the working capital deficiency is not an indication of a liquidity problem. In examining the existence of warning signs as of March 31, 2025, the Company’s Board of Directors noted the working capital deficiency as of March 31, 2025, in the amount of approximately €0.96 million. The Company’s Board of Directors reviewed the Company’s financial position, outstanding debt obligations and the Company’s existing and anticipated cash resources and uses and determined that the existence of a working capital deficiency as of March 31, 2025, does not indicate a liquidity problem. In making such determination, the Company’s Board of Directors noted the following: (i) the execution of the agreement to sell tax credits in connection with the US solar projects, which is expected to contribute approximately $19 million during the next twelve months, (ii) the Company’s positive cash flow from operating activities during 2023 and 2024, and (iii) funds received from the investment transaction with Clal Insurance Company Ltd. that was consummated in June 2025.

     

    Ellomay Capital Ltd.
    Information for the Company’s Debenture Holders (cont’d)


    Information for the Company’s Series C Debenture Holders

    The Deed of Trust governing the Company’s Series C Debentures (as amended on June 6, 2022, the “Series C Deed of Trust”), includes an undertaking by the Company to maintain certain financial covenants, whereby a breach of such financial covenants for two consecutive quarters is a cause for immediate repayment. As of March 31, 2025, the Company was in compliance with the financial covenants set forth in the Series C Deed of Trust as follows: (i) the Company’s Adjusted Shareholders’ Equity (as defined in the Series C Deed of Trust) was approximately €116.6 million, (ii) the ratio of the Company’s Net Financial Debt (as set forth above) to the Company’s CAP, Net (defined as the Company’s Adjusted Shareholders’ Equity plus the Net Financial Debt) was 59.3%, and (iii) the ratio of the Company’s Net Financial Debt to the Company’s Adjusted EBITDA,4 was 6.3.

    The following is a reconciliation between the Company’s profit and the Adjusted EBITDA (as defined in the Series C Deed of Trust) for the four-quarter period ended March 31, 2025:

        For the four-quarter period
    ended M
    arch 31, 2025
      Unaudited
      € in thousands
    Profit for the period   2,274
    Financing expenses, net   9,118
    Taxes on income   (1,641)
    Depreciation and amortization expenses   16,651
    Share-based payments   86
    Adjustment to revenues of the Talmei Yosef PV Plant due to calculation based on the fixed asset model   484
    Adjusted EBITDA as defined the Series C Deed of Trust   26,972

    The Series C Debentures were fully repaid on June 30, 2025 in accordance with their terms. 

    Ellomay Capital Ltd.
    Information for the Company’s Debenture Holders (cont’d)

    Information for the Company’s Series D Debenture Holders

    The Deed of Trust governing the Company’s Series D Debentures includes an undertaking by the Company to maintain certain financial covenants, whereby a breach of such financial covenants for the periods set forth in the Series D Deed of Trust is a cause for immediate repayment. As of March 31, 2025, the Company was in compliance with the financial covenants set forth in the Series D Deed of Trust as follows: (i) the Company’s Adjusted Shareholders’ Equity (as defined in the Series D Deed of Trust) was approximately €116.6 million, (ii) the ratio of the Company’s Net Financial Debt (as set forth above) to the Company’s CAP, Net (defined as the Company’s Adjusted Shareholders’ Equity plus the Net Financial Debt) was 59.3%, and (iii) the ratio of the Company’s Net Financial Debt to the Company’s Adjusted EBITDA5 was 6.1.

    The following is a reconciliation between the Company’s profit and the Adjusted EBITDA (as defined in the Series D Deed of Trust) for the four-quarter period ended March 31, 2025:

        For the four-quarter period
    ended M
    arch 31, 2025
      Unaudited
      € in thousands
    Loss for the period   2,274
    Financing expenses, net   9,118
    Taxes on income   (1,641)
    Depreciation and amortization expenses   16,651
    Share-based payments   86
    Adjustment to revenues of the Talmei Yosef PV Plant due to calculation based on the fixed asset model   484
    Adjustment to data relating to projects with a Commercial Operation Date during the four preceding quarters6   899
    Adjusted EBITDA as defined the Series D Deed of Trust   27,871
    Ellomay Capital Ltd.
    Information for the Company’s Debenture Holders (cont’d)


    Information for the Company’s Series E Debenture Holders

    The Deed of Trust governing the Company’s Series E Debentures includes an undertaking by the Company to maintain certain financial covenants, whereby a breach of such financial covenants for the periods set forth in the Series E Deed of Trust is a cause for immediate repayment. As of March 31, 2025, the Company was in compliance with the financial covenants set forth in the Series E Deed of Trust as follows: (i) the Company’s Adjusted Shareholders’ Equity (as defined in the Series E Deed of Trust) was approximately €116.6 million, (ii) the ratio of the Company’s Net Financial Debt (as set forth above) to the Company’s CAP, Net (defined as the Company’s Adjusted Shareholders’ Equity plus the Net Financial Debt) was 59.3%, and (iii) the ratio of the Company’s Net Financial Debt to the Company’s Adjusted EBITDA7 was 6.1.

    The following is a reconciliation between the Company’s profit and the Adjusted EBITDA (as defined in the Series E Deed of Trust) for the four-quarter period ended March 31, 2025:

        For the four-quarter period
    ended March 31, 2025
      Unaudited
      € in thousands
    Profit for the period   2,274
    Financing expenses, net   9,118
    Taxes on income   (1,641)
    Depreciation and amortization expenses   16,651
    Share-based payments   86
    Adjustment to revenues of the Talmei Yosef PV Plant due to calculation based on the fixed asset model   484
    Adjustment to data relating to projects with a Commercial Operation Date during the four preceding quarters8   899
    Adjusted EBITDA as defined the Series E Deed of Trust   27,871
         

    In connection with the undertaking included in Section 3.17.2 of Annex 6 of the Series E Deed of Trust, no circumstances occurred during the reporting period under which the rights to loans provided to Ellomay Luzon Energy Infrastructures Ltd. (formerly U. Dori Energy Infrastructures Ltd. (“Ellomay Luzon Energy”)), which were pledged to the holders of the Company’s Series E Debentures, will become subordinate to the amounts owed by Ellomay Luzon Energy to Israel Discount Bank Ltd.

    As of March 31, 2025, the value of the assets pledged to the holders of the Series E Debentures in the Company’s books (unaudited) is approximately €40.1 million (approximately NIS 161.3 million based on the exchange rate as of such date).

    Ellomay Capital Ltd. and its Subsidiaries
    Information for the Company’s Debenture Holders (cont’d)

    Information for the Company’s Series F Debenture Holders

    The Deed of Trust governing the Company’s Series F Debentures includes an undertaking by the Company to maintain certain financial covenants, whereby a breach of such financial covenants for the periods set forth in the Series F Deed of Trust is a cause for immediate repayment. As of March 31, 2025, the Company was in compliance with the financial covenants set forth in the Series F Deed of Trust as follows: (i) the Company’s Adjusted Shareholders’ Equity (as defined in the Series F Deed of Trust) was approximately €115.9 million, (ii) the ratio of the Company’s Net Financial Debt (as set forth above) to the Company’s CAP, Net (defined as the Company’s Adjusted Shareholders’ Equity plus the Net Financial Debt) was 59.4%, and (iii) the ratio of the Company’s Net Financial Debt to the Company’s Adjusted EBITDA9 was 6.1.

    The following is a reconciliation between the Company’s profit and the Adjusted EBITDA (as defined in the Series F Deed of Trust) for the four-quarter period ended March 31, 2025:

        For the four-quarter period
    ended March 31, 2025
      Unaudited
      € in thousands
    Profit for the period   2,274
    Financing expenses, net   9,118
    Taxes on income   (1,641)
    Depreciation and amortization expenses   16,651
    Share-based payments   86
    Adjustment to revenues of the Talmei Yosef PV Plant due to calculation based on the fixed asset model   484
    Adjustment to data relating to projects with a Commercial Operation Date during the four preceding quarters10   899
    Adjusted EBITDA as defined the Series F Deed of Trust   27,871
         
    Ellomay Capital Ltd. and its Subsidiaries
    Information for the Company’s Debenture Holders (cont’d)


    Information for the Company’s Series G Debenture Holders

    The Deed of Trust governing the Company’s Series G Debentures includes an undertaking by the Company to maintain certain financial covenants, whereby a breach of such financial covenants for the periods set forth in the Series G Deed of Trust is a cause for immediate repayment. As of March 31, 2025, the Company was in compliance with the financial covenants set forth in the Series G Deed of Trust as follows: (i) the Company’s Adjusted Shareholders’ Equity (as defined in the Series G Deed of Trust) was approximately €115.9 million, (ii) the ratio of the Company’s Net Financial Debt (as set forth above) to the Company’s CAP, Net (defined as the Company’s Adjusted Shareholders’ Equity plus the Net Financial Debt) was 59.4%, and (iii) the ratio of the Company’s Net Financial Debt to the Company’s Adjusted EBITDA11 was 6.1.

    The following is a reconciliation between the Company’s profit and the Adjusted EBITDA (as defined in the Series G Deed of Trust) for the four-quarter period ended March 31, 2025:

        For the four-quarter period ended March 31, 2025
      Unaudited
      € in thousands
    Profit for the period   2,274
    Financing expenses, net   9,118
    Taxes on income   (1,641)
    Depreciation and amortization expenses   16,651
    Share-based payments   86
    Adjustment to revenues of the Talmei Yosef PV Plant due to calculation based on the fixed asset model   484
    Adjustment to data relating to projects with a Commercial Operation Date during the four preceding quarters12   899
    Adjusted EBITDA as defined the Series G Deed of Trust   27,871
         

    ____________________________
    1 The amount of short-term and long-term debt from banks and other interest-bearing financial obligations provided above, includes an amount of approximately €4.5 million costs associated with such debt, which was capitalized and therefore offset from the debt amount that is recorded in the Company’s balance sheet.

    2 The amount of the debentures provided above includes an amount of approximately €6.7 million associated costs, which was capitalized and discount or premium and therefore offset from the debentures amount that is recorded in the Company’s balance sheet. This amount also includes the accrued interest as at March 31, 2025 in the amount of approximately €0.8 million.

    3 The project finance amount deducted from the calculation of Net Financial Debt includes project finance obtained from various sources, including financing entities and the minority shareholders in project companies held by the Company (provided in the form of shareholders’ loans to the project companies).

    4 The term “Adjusted EBITDA” is defined in the Series C Deed of Trust as earnings before financial expenses, net, taxes, depreciation and amortization, where the revenues from the Company’s operations, such as the Talmei Yosef solar plant, are calculated based on the fixed asset model and not based on the financial asset model (IFRIC 12), and before share-based payments. The Series C Deed of Trust provides that for purposes of the financial covenant, the Adjusted EBITDA will be calculated based on the four preceding quarters, in the aggregate. The Adjusted EBITDA is presented in this press release as part of the Company’s undertakings towards the holders of its Series C Debentures. For a general discussion of the use of non-IFRS measures, such as EBITDA and Adjusted EBITDA see above under “Use of NON-IFRS Financial Measures.”

    5 The term “Adjusted EBITDA” is defined in the Series D Deed of Trust as earnings before financial expenses, net, taxes, depreciation and amortization, where the revenues from the Company’s operations, such as the Talmei Yosef PV Plant, are calculated based on the fixed asset model and not based on the financial asset model (IFRIC 12), and before share-based payments, when the data of assets or projects whose Commercial Operation Date (as such term is defined in the Series D Deed of Trust) occurred in the four quarters that preceded the relevant date will be calculated based on Annual Gross Up (as such term is defined in the Series D Deed of Trust). The Series D Deed of Trust provides that for purposes of the financial covenant, the Adjusted EBITDA will be calculated based on the four preceding quarters, in the aggregate. The Adjusted EBITDA is presented in this press release as part of the Company’s undertakings towards the holders of its Series D Debentures. For a general discussion of the use of non-IFRS measures, such as EBITDA and Adjusted EBITDA see above under “Use of NON-IFRS Financial Measures.”

    6 The adjustment is based on the results of solar plants in Italy that were connected to the grid and commenced delivery of electricity to the grid during the year ended December 31, 2024 (two plants) and the three months ended March 31, 2025 (one plant). The Company recorded revenues and only direct expenses in connection with these solar plants from the connection to the grid and until PAC (Preliminary Acceptance Certificate – reached with respect to two of the three plants during the fourth quarter of 2024). However, for the sake of caution, the Company included the expected fixed expenses in connection with these solar plants in the calculation of the adjustment.

    7 The term “Adjusted EBITDA” is defined in the Series E Deed of Trust as earnings before financial expenses, net, taxes, depreciation and amortization, where the revenues from the Company’s operations, such as the Talmei Yosef PV Plant, are calculated based on the fixed asset model and not based on the financial asset model (IFRIC 12), and before share-based payments, when the data of assets or projects whose Commercial Operation Date (as such term is defined in the Series E Deed of Trust) occurred in the four quarters that preceded the relevant date will be calculated based on Annual Gross Up (as such term is defined in the Series E Deed of Trust). The Series E Deed of Trust provides that for purposes of the financial covenant, the Adjusted EBITDA will be calculated based on the four preceding quarters, in the aggregate. The Adjusted EBITDA is presented in this press release as part of the Company’s undertakings towards the holders of its Series E Debentures. For a general discussion of the use of non-IFRS measures, such as EBITDA and Adjusted EBITDA see above under “Use of NON-IFRS Financial Measures.”

    8 The adjustment is based on the results of solar plants in Italy that were connected to the grid and commenced delivery of electricity to the grid during the year ended December 31, 2024 (two plants) and the three months ended March 31, 2025 (one plant). The Company recorded revenues and only direct expenses in connection with these solar plants from the connection to the grid and until PAC (Preliminary Acceptance Certificate – reached with respect to two of the three plants during the fourth quarter of 2024). However, for the sake of caution, the Company included the expected fixed expenses in connection with these solar plants in the calculation of the adjustment.

    9 The term “Adjusted EBITDA” is defined in the Series F Deed of Trust as earnings before financial expenses, net, taxes, depreciation and amortization, where the revenues from the Company’s operations, such as the Talmei Yosef PV Plant, are calculated based on the fixed asset model and not based on the financial asset model (IFRIC 12), and before share-based payments, when the data of assets or projects whose Commercial Operation Date (as such term is defined in the Series F Deed of Trust) occurred in the four quarters that preceded the relevant date will be calculated based on Annual Gross Up (as such term is defined in the Series F Deed of Trust). The Series F Deed of Trust provides that for purposes of the financial covenant, the Adjusted EBITDA will be calculated based on the four preceding quarters, in the aggregate. The Adjusted EBITDA is presented in this press release as part of the Company’s undertakings towards the holders of its Series F Debentures. For a general discussion of the use of non-IFRS measures, such as EBITDA and Adjusted EBITDA see above under “Use of Non-IFRS Financial Measures.”

    10 The adjustment is based on the results of solar plants in Italy that were connected to the grid and commenced delivery of electricity to the grid during the year ended December 31, 2024 (two plants) and the three months ended March 31, 2025 (one plant). The Company recorded revenues and only direct expenses in connection with these solar plants from the connection to the grid and until PAC (Preliminary Acceptance Certificate – reached with respect to two of the three plants during the fourth quarter of 2024). However, for the sake of caution, the Company included the expected fixed expenses in connection with these solar plants in the calculation of the adjustment.

    11 The term “Adjusted EBITDA” is defined in the Series G Deed of Trust as earnings before financial expenses, net, taxes, depreciation and amortization, where the revenues from the Company’s operations, such as the Talmei Yosef PV Plant, are calculated based on the fixed asset model and not based on the financial asset model (IFRIC 12), and before share-based payments, when the data of assets or projects whose Commercial Operation Date (as such term is defined in the Series G Deed of Trust) occurred in the four quarters that preceded the relevant date will be calculated based on Annual Gross Up (as such term is defined in the Series G Deed of Trust). The Series G Deed of Trust provides that for purposes of the financial covenant, the Adjusted EBITDA will be calculated based on the four preceding quarters, in the aggregate. The Adjusted EBITDA is presented in this press release as part of the Company’s undertakings towards the holders of its Series G Debentures. For a general discussion of the use of non-IFRS measures, such as EBITDA and Adjusted EBITDA see above under “Use of Non-IFRS Financial Measures.”

    12 The adjustment is based on the results of solar plants in Italy that were connected to the grid and commenced delivery of electricity to the grid during the year ended December 31, 2024 (two plants) and the three months ended March 31, 2025 (one plant). The Company recorded revenues and only direct expenses in connection with these solar plants from the connection to the grid and until PAC (Preliminary Acceptance Certificate – reached with respect to two of the three plants during the fourth quarter of 2024). However, for the sake of caution, the Company included the expected fixed expenses in connection with these solar plants in the calculation of the adjustment.

    The MIL Network –

    July 1, 2025
  • MIL-OSI United Nations: UNDRR deepens support for local resilience at the 12th European Urban Resilience Forum

    Source: UNISDR Disaster Risk Reduction

    The 12th European Urban Resilience Forum (EURESFO), held in Rotterdam, the Netherlands from 25-27 June 2025, provided an important platform for urban resilience practitioners to reinforce their commitment to accelerating local action on resilience, climate adaptation, and disaster risk reduction in the context of growing urban challenges. 

    As urban areas in Europe and beyond face cascading risks-from heatwaves and floods to geopolitical instability and infrastructure stress-UNDRR used the platform to underscore the critical role of local governments in driving meaningful disaster risk reduction and climate adaptation. 

    In a video message to the Forum’s opening plenary, Kamal Kishore, Special Representative of the UN Secretary-General for Disaster Risk Reduction, emphasized three global priorities: strengthening local implementation of DRR strategies, unlocking resilience financing, and scaling up community-driven innovation. 

    “If we do not reduce risk at the local level, we will not succeed in reducing losses at the global level,” he stated, calling for stronger investment and partnerships to translate plans into action. 

    UNDRR’s active engagement throughout the Forum showcased its commitment to supporting cities through the Making Cities Resilient 2030 (MCR2030) initiative. Yigyeong Oh, MCR2030 Regional Focal Point for Europe and Central Asia, spoke in multiple sessions, including the opening plenary “Resilience in Crisis: Accelerating Action for a Just Future” and the panel discussion “Building Urban Resilience in an Era of Polycrisis: The Holistic Agenda.” She highlighted how MCR2030 has grown into a global movement of over 1,850 cities, supporting local governments with risk-informed governance, resilience assessments, and stakeholder collaboration. 

    “In a time of polycrisis, resilience is not a siloed agenda,” Oh noted. “Cities are facing overlapping challenges-climate shocks, economic pressures, and social inequality-and MCR2030 enables them to plan holistically, act collectively, and learn globally.” 

    UNDRR also co-moderated the workshop “Local Action to Address Extreme Heat – CitiesHitRefresh,” which addressed one of the fastest growing disaster risks in Europe. Zdravko Maxomovic from Kraljevo, an MCR2030 city from Serbia, shared its practical experiences in managing heat risks and contributing to the upcoming second edition of UNDRR’s Flames of Change report, a knowledge product documenting inclusive urban resilience solutions. 

    Nature-based solutions were another key theme. UNDRR supported the session “Collaborate, Educate, Transform: Building the Future of Nature-Based Solutions in Cities,” where Małgorzata Bartyna-Zielińska from the City of Wrocław, an MCR2030 Resilience Hub, presented its award-winning LifeCOOLCity project. The session underscored the power of peer learning through networks like MCR2030.

    Beyond technical sessions, UNDRR joined ICLEI and other partners for a side meeting with Ukrainian cities, including Lviv, an MCR2030 Resilience Hub, focused on the Ukraine Recovery Roadmap and aligning international support with local resilience priorities. 

    UNDRR also pitched the MCR2030 Climate Resilience Addendum to the Disaster Resilience Scorecard for Cities during the pitch session, offering cities a practical tool to assess and enhance resilience to climate-related risks. 

    As the Forum concluded, a common message resonated across sessions: Europe has a unique role in shaping standards, fostering multilevel governance, and investing in long-term resilience. UNDRR reaffirmed its commitment to advancing these goals by supporting local governments with tools, knowledge, and partnerships through MCR2030 and other initiatives. With the urgency of accelerating resilience action, the Forum reinforced the need for collective action-local leadership supported by global collaboration-to ensure no city is left behind.

    MIL OSI United Nations News –

    July 1, 2025
  • MIL-OSI Economics: Christine Lagarde: Strategy assessment: lessons learned

    Source: European Central Bank

    Introductory speech by Christine Lagarde, President of the ECB, at the opening reception of the ECB Forum on Central Banking 2025 “Adapting to change: macroeconomic shifts and policy responses”

    Sintra, 30 June 2025

    As Nietzsche once observed, “it is our future that lays down the law of our today.”

    When we last reviewed our strategy four years ago, our thinking was shaped – quite naturally – by the recent past: a decade of too-low inflation, compounded by the pandemic.

    But as Nietzsche warned, there is a danger in letting the past dominate our thinking. Sometimes, it is the future – still dimly understood – that is already shaping our present.

    And soon after that review, the world changed in ways we had not foreseen.

    The reopening of our economies after the pandemic brought about major sectoral shifts. Russia’s invasion of Ukraine triggered a fundamental shift in energy markets.

    The geopolitical landscape was upended, reshaping global trade. And structural changes in labour markets became increasingly apparent – driven by demographics, technological transformation, and evolving worker preferences.

    Given all these developments, the fundamentals of our strategy have held up well – as they should, because a sound strategy must be robust to a changing environment.

    Our symmetric 2% inflation target has proven effective in anchoring expectations – even through some of the most severe and persistent shocks in recent economic history.

    And our medium-term orientation has provided essential flexibility to absorb an extremely large shock – helping to reduce the overall cost of disinflation to the economy, while still enabling a timely return of inflation to target.

    We therefore saw no need to revisit these core pillars – which is why we refer to the exercise we have just concluded as a strategy assessment rather than a review.

    The central theme of our work has been to update the framework so that monetary policy can continue to deliver price stability in the face of the new types of shocks we are confronting.

    This evening, without downplaying the other lessons learned, I would like to highlight three key conclusions that have emerged from this work.

    They concern the nature of the new environment, how we assess the risks that arise from it, and how we have adjusted our reaction function to safeguard price stability in this new world.

    The changing environment

    One word has dominated the public debate in recent weeks: uncertainty.

    And this is one of the first key conclusions from our strategy assessment: the world ahead is more uncertain – and that uncertainty is likely to make inflation more volatile.

    First, we see clear signs that supply shocks are becoming more frequent.

    Model-based analysis by ECB staff shows that, during the recent inflation surge, such shocks played a much greater role in driving inflation than they had over the previous two decades. And even today, supply-side forces continue to generate inflation risks in both directions.

    Second, we see mounting evidence that more regular supply disruptions are leading firms to adjust prices more frequently – thereby contributing to greater inflation volatility.

    This is not simply an extrapolation from the most recent shock. Rather, it reflects a structural shift in how firms operate under conditions of permanently higher uncertainty.

    Research shows that, in such an environment, firms tend to react more quickly to shocks – especially supply ones – in order to protect against potential future losses.[1] At the same time, they are more likely to adopt more flexible pricing strategies, which means prices may respond not just to major shocks, but also to smaller frictions and local disruptions.[2]

    Third, if inflation becomes more volatile, we could see non-linearities on both sides.

    In our last strategy review, we rightly focused on the non-linear dynamics that emerge in a prolonged environment of too-low inflation – where interest rates are eventually pushed to their effective lower bound. That constraint can, in turn, feed into inflation expectations and risk creating a self-fulfilling low-inflation trap. And we remain alert to the possibility of renewed downside inflation shocks.

    But recent experience has also revealed non-linearities on the upside.

    Since firms are generally quicker to raise prices than to lower them, more frequent price adjustments mean inflation can rise quickly in response to large upside shocks. If wages then adjust only gradually to these price increases – as we saw in recent years – inflation may remain above target for longer as wage growth slowly catches up. This, in turn, can raise the risk of inflation expectations de-anchoring on the upside.[3]

    Assessing the distribution of risks

    The next question that follows is: if the economic environment becomes more volatile, how can we make our economic assessment more robust?

    Large shocks can trigger feedback loops and non-linear effects that inherently give rise to a broader range of possible outcomes. In a world of higher uncertainty, it is all the more important to augment the baseline with alternative risk scenarios.

    This is why the second key conclusion of our assessment is the need for monetary policy to take into account risks and uncertainty, using a systematic but context-specific approach.

    The ECB has used both scenario and sensitivity analysis for many years – deploying internal scenarios since the global financial crisis and publishing them for the first time during the pandemic.

    But our experience in recent years has underscored the particular strength of scenario analysis in times of elevated uncertainty.

    A clear example is Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and the resulting energy price shock. In that case, scenarios provided insights that neither our baseline projections nor standard sensitivity analyses around the baseline could fully capture.

    For instance, in March 2022 – just a few weeks after the invasion – our baseline projected inflation at around 5% for that year, based on market-implied energy futures. The sensitivity analysis suggested a slightly higher figure of about 5.5%. In contrast, the Ukraine war scenario already pointed to inflation exceeding 7% – close to the final annual figure of over 8%.

    At the same time, there were moments when – in hindsight – publishing scenarios could have supported both our policymaking and our communication.

    One example was the high uncertainty in 2021 about the speed of vaccine rollout and the nature of post-pandemic reopening, including the sectoral shifts in supply and demand across goods and services sectors, both in the euro area and globally.[4]

    Scenario analysis could have helped in illustrating that the range of possible inflation outcomes was unusually wide – and reduced the risk of projecting false certainty to the public.

    This is why our updated strategy commits to ensuring that our policy decisions account not only for the most likely path of inflation and the economy, but also for the surrounding risks and uncertainty – including through the appropriate use of scenario and sensitivity analyses.

    The reaction function

    So what should our reaction function be, if we know that the road ahead is likely to be more uncertain?

    In our last strategy review, we explicitly acknowledged the risks posed by the effective lower bound. Our strategy statement called for “especially forceful or persistent” action when policy rates are close to the lower bound.

    This “asymmetric” focus was grounded in the asymmetry of policy space and the downward inflation bias it can produce. The lower bound continues to constrain monetary policy in the face of large disinflationary shocks.

    But the recent inflation surge has revealed upside non-linearities – and with them, the need for a two-sided reaction function, both in terms of forcefulness or persistence. This is the third key conclusion of our strategy assessment.

    This is not about reacting to small or temporary deviations, but about a symmetric commitment to respond to inflation dynamics that could de-anchor inflation expectations in either direction.

    When disinflationary shocks risk pushing policy rates towards the lower bound, acting forcefully early on helps minimise the time spent near that constraint. Likewise, when inflation overshoots raise the risk of a feedback loop between frequent price adjustments and staggered wage responses, forceful tightening at the outset is key to anchoring expectations.

    We began our recent policy cycle with historically large rate hikes delivered at an unprecedented pace. Our analysis shows that, had we not acted, the probability of inflation expectations de-anchoring would have exceeded 30% in 2022 and 2023.[5]

    At the same time, this policy cycle also offered new perspectives on optimal policy paths.

    One insight from our last strategy review was that, when rates are near the lower bound, persistence can substitute for forcefulness – helping to deliver the necessary policy stance with fewer side effects. Until recently, however, this concept had not been widely applied to tightening cycles.

    Typically, forceful tightening follows an inverted V-shape – with rapid rate increases followed by relatively swift cuts. But as rates move deeper into restrictive territory, the costs and side effects of further tightening also grow.

    At that point, it can become optimal to shift the focus from forcefulness to persistence – even if, in principle, there is no upper bound constraining policy space.

    Model simulations support this insight: forcefulness and persistence can act as substitutes, both capable of delivering the necessary disinflation. But persistence, in particular, can help limit the economic and financial stability costs compared with continued rate increases.

    This was borne out in our own experience. When we entered what I described as the “holding phase”, we placed greater weight on the persistence dimension.[6] This allowed the disinflation process to advance at a steady pace, while the so-called “sacrifice ratio” remained historically low compared with previous disinflation episodes.[7]

    Reflecting this experience, the Governing Council considers that its reaction function is best described as requiring “appropriately forceful or persistent monetary policy action in response to large, sustained deviations of inflation from the target in either direction.”

    To this end, all our instruments remain available in our toolkit. But the word “appropriately” is important, as it underscores that the choice of instruments, and the intensity with which we use them, must reflect proportionality.

    Conclusion

    Let me conclude.

    Our strategy assessment has been an exercise in evolution, not revolution – and in fact, many of its conclusions are already reflected in our current policy conduct.

    We responded to the recent inflation shock with initially forceful and then persistent action, aiming to steer inflation back to target as swiftly as necessary, but as painlessly as possible.

    And scenario analysis is helping us to better understand the range of risks ahead – and how best to respond to them.

    For example, our scenarios on potential US import tariffs have helped us navigate an uncertain global trade landscape, while also enabling us to communicate more clearly the two-sided risks shaping our current monetary policy stance.

    At our last monetary policy press conference in June, I described our monetary policy stance as being “in a good place”.

    Following the conclusion of this strategy assessment, I would add that our monetary policy strategy is also in a good place – strengthened by experience, and better equipped for the challenges of the future.

    To close the circle with Nietzsche: “he who has a why to live can bear almost any how.”

    Even as the world changes around us, we know our purpose. And we will do whatever is necessary to deliver on it – ensuring price stability for the people of Europe.

    MIL OSI Economics –

    July 1, 2025
  • MIL-OSI Russia: IMF Executive Board Completes the Eighth Review of the Extended Arrangement under the Extended Fund Facility for Ukraine

    Source: IMF – News in Russian

    June 30, 2025

    • The IMF Board today completed the Eighth Review of the Extended Arrangement under the Extended Fund Facility (EFF) for Ukraine, enabling a disbursement of about US$0.5 billion (SDR 0.37 billion) to Ukraine, which will be channeled for budget support.
    • Ukraine’s economy remains resilient, and the authorities met all end-March and continuous quantitative performance criteria, the prior action, and two structural benchmarks for the review.
    • Despite the challenges, progressing with domestic revenue mobilization, strengthening the investment climate, improving governance, and completing the debt restructuring strategy are necessary to restore fiscal and debt sustainability and support growth. The full and timely disbursement of external support during the program period remains indispensable for macroeconomic stability

    Washington, DC: The Executive Board of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) today completed the Eighth Review of the EFF, enabling the authorities to draw US$0.5 billion (SDR 0.37 billion, which will be channeled for budget support. This will bring the total disbursements under the IMF-supported program to US$10.6 billion.

    Ukraine’s 48-month EFF, with access of SDR 11.6 billion (equivalent to about US$15.5 billion, or 577 percent of quota), was approved on March 31, 2023, and forms part of an international support package totaling US$152.9 billion in the program’s baseline scenario. Ukraine’s IMF-supported program helps anchor policies that sustain fiscal, external, and macro-financial stability at a time of exceptionally high uncertainty. The EFF aims to support Ukraine’s economic recovery, enhance governance, and strengthen institutions with the aim of promoting long-term growth and investment.

    For the Eighth Review, Ukraine met all end-March and continuous quantitative performance criteria as well as the prior action to submit to the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine a detailed reform plan for the State Customs Service (SCS). Two structural benchmarks on tax reporting for digital platform operators and publication of the external audit of NABU were also completed. Four new benchmarks were also established, including: measures to update the single project pipeline; preparation of a prioritized roadmap for financial market infrastructure; implementation of international valuation standards; and development of legislative proposals to align securitization and bonds with international standards. The timelines of some other structural benchmarks, including the appointment of the head of the SCS, have been reset by the IMF Executive Board to allow the authorities more time to complete these important reforms. The authorities also requested a rephasing of access to IMF financing over the remainder of 2025 to better align them with Ukraine’s updated balance of payments needs, while the overall size of the program remains unchanged.   

    The 2025 growth forecast has been maintained at 2–3 percent as a smaller electricity deficit is offset by lower gas production and weaker agricultural exports. Pressures from Russia’s war will require a supplementary budget for 2025, and the medium-term fiscal path has been revised to better reflect the authorities’ policy intentions on revenue mobilization and expenditure prioritization. The National Bank of Ukraine (NBU) has maintained a tight monetary policy to respond to the still high inflation, while inflation expectations remain anchored. FX reserves remain adequate, sustained by continued sizeable external support. Overall, the outlook remains subject to exceptionally high uncertainty.

    Following the Executive Board discussion on Ukraine, Ms. Gita Gopinath, First Deputy Managing Director of the IMF, issued the following statement[1]:

    “Russia’s war continues to take a devastating social and economic toll on Ukraine. Nevertheless, macroeconomic stability has been preserved through skillful policymaking as well as substantial external support. The economy has remained resilient, but the war is weighing on the outlook, with growth tempered by labor market strains and damage to energy infrastructure. Risks to the outlook remain exceptionally high and contingency planning is key to enable appropriate policy action should risks materialize.

    “The Fund-supported program remains fully financed, with a cumulative external financing envelope of US$153 billion in the baseline scenario and US$165 billion in the downside scenario, over the 4-year program period. This includes the full utilization of the approximately US$50 billion from the G7’s Extraordinary Revenue Acceleration Loans for Ukraine (ERA) initiative. Full, timely, and predictable disbursement of external support—on terms consistent with debt sustainability—remains essential to achieving program objectives.

    “The continuing war has necessitated a Supplementary Budget for 2025. Restoring fiscal sustainability and meeting elevated priority expenditures over the medium term will require continued decisive efforts to implement the National Revenue Strategy. This includes modernization of the tax and customs services (including the timely appointment of the customs head), reduction in tax evasion, and harmonization of legislation with EU standards. These reforms, combined with improvements in public investment management frameworks, medium-term budget preparation, and fiscal risk management, are critical to underpinning growth and investment. 

    “The authorities continue working to complete their debt restructuring strategy in line with the program’s debt sustainability objectives, which is essential to create room for priority expenditures, reduce fiscal risks, and restore debt sustainability.

    “Given still elevated inflation, the tight monetary policy stance is appropriate, and the NBU should stand ready to tighten further should inflation expectations deteriorate. Greater exchange rate flexibility will help strengthen economic resilience while safeguarding reserves.

    “The financial sector remains stable, though vigilance is needed given heightened risks. Operational and governance weaknesses in the security markets regulator need to be tackled urgently. Closing gaps in Ukraine’s capital markets infrastructure will be key to attracting foreign private capital for post-war reconstruction.

    “Sustained progress in anticorruption and governance reforms remains crucial. The completed audit of the National Anti-Corruption Bureau is an important step; additional efforts are required, including amending the criminal procedures code, appointing the new head of the Economic Security Bureau, and strengthening AML/CFT frameworks.”

    Table 1. Ukraine: Selected Economic and Social Indicators, 2021–27

    2021

     

    2022

     

    2023

    2024

    2025

    2026

    2027

    Act.

    Act.

    Act.

    Proj.

    Proj.

    Proj.

    Proj.

    Real economy (percent change, unless otherwise indicated)

    Nominal GDP (billions of Ukrainian hryvnias) 1/

    5,451

     

    5,239

     

    6,628

    7,659

    8,866

    10,192

    11,322

    Real GDP 1/

    3.4

     

    -28.8

     

    5.5

    2.9

    2-3

    4.5

    4.8

    Contributions:

                     

    Domestic demand

    12.8

     

    -19.0

     

    11.9

    3.8

    5.2

    3.4

    2.7

    Private consumption

    4.5

     

    -19.0

     

    3.0

    4.6

    2.8

    3.4

    2.7

    Public consumption

    0.1

     

    5.6

     

    3.0

    -1.5

    0.3

    -2.5

    -2.0

    Investment

    8.1

     

    -5.5

     

    5.8

    0.6

    2.1

    2.5

    2.0

    Net exports

    -9.3

     

    -9.8

     

    -6.3

    -0.8

    -3.2

    1.1

    2.1

    GDP deflator

    24.8

     

    34.9

     

    19.9

    12.3

    13.5

    10.0

    6.0

    Unemployment rate (ILO definition; period average, percent)

    9.8

     

    24.5

     

    19.1

    13.1

    11.6

    10.2

    9.4

    Consumer prices (period average)

    9.4

     

    20.2

     

    12.9

    6.5

    12.6

    7.6

    5.3

    Consumer prices (end of period)

    10.0

     

    26.6

     

    5.1

    12.0

    9.0

    7.0

    5.0

    Nominal wages (average)

    20.8

     

    1.0

     

    20.1

    23.1

    17.4

    13.7

    10.8

    Real wages (average)

    10.5

     

    -16.0

     

    6.4

    15.6

    4.2

    5.7

    5.3

    Savings (percent of GDP)

    12.5

     

    17.0

     

    12.8

    11.4

    4.4

    10.0

    18.3

    Private

    12.7

     

    30.2

     

    27.4

    23.3

    21.4

    15.9

    18.0

    Public

    -0.2

     

    -13.1

     

    -14.6

    -11.8

    -17.1

    -5.9

    0.3

    Investment (percent of GDP)

    14.5

     

    12.1

     

    18.1

    18.6

    20.9

    22.6

    23.7

    Private

    10.7

     

    9.6

     

    13.4

    13.3

    16.6

    18.3

    18.9

    Public

    3.8

     

    2.5

     

    4.7

    5.4

    4.3

    4.3

    4.9

                     

    General Government (percent of GDP)

                     

    Fiscal balance 2/

    -4.0

     

    -15.6

     

    -19.3

    -17.2

    -21.3

    -10.1

    -4.6

    Fiscal balance, excl. grants 2/

    -4.0

     

    -24.8

     

    -25.8

    -23.1

    -22.1

    -10.4

    -5.6

    External financing (net)

    2.5

     

    10.7

     

    16.2

    15.0

    24.5

    8.9

    1.7

    Domestic financing (net), of which:

    1.5

     

    5.0

     

    3.1

    0.3

    -3.1

    1.3

    2.8

    NBU

    -0.3

     

    7.3

     

    -0.2

    -0.2

    -0.1

    -0.1

    -0.1

    Commercial banks

    1.4

     

    -1.5

     

    2.5

    2.9

    2.7

    0.8

    3.4

    Public and publicly-guaranteed debt

    48.9

     

    77.7

     

    81.2

    89.7

    108.6

    110.4

    106.4

                     

    Money and credit (end of period, percent change)

                     

    Base money

    11.2

     

    19.6

     

    23.3

    7.7

    21.7

    13.1

    10.4

    Broad money

    12.0

     

    20.8

     

    23.0

    13.4

    14.4

    13.2

    10.4

    Credit to nongovernment

    8.4

     

    -3.1

     

    -0.5

    13.5

    10.6

    17.7

    18.6

                     

    Balance of payments (percent of GDP)

                     

    Current account balance

    -1.9

     

    4.9

     

    -5.3

    -7.2

    -16.5

    -12.6

    -5.4

    Foreign direct investment

    3.8

     

    0.1

     

    2.5

    1.8

    2.2

    4.0

    5.0

    Gross reserves (end of period, billions of U.S. dollars)

    30.9

     

    28.5

     

    40.5

    43.8

    53.4

    52.8

    55.6

    Months of next year’s imports of goods and services

    4.5

     

    3.8

     

    5.3

    5.1

    6.3

    6.3

    6.5

    Percent of short-term debt (remaining maturity)

    74.4

     

    83.3

     

    100.3

    130.9

    178.9

    171.5

    172.1

    Percent of the IMF composite metric (float)

    105.5

     

    110.3

     

    130.2

    125.4

    125.5

    114.0

    115.7

    Goods exports (annual volume change in percent)

    39.0

     

    -37.5

     

    -8.5

    16.8

    3.0

    14.9

    14.3

    Goods imports (annual volume change in percent)

    15.1

     

    -29.7

     

    18.5

    6.0

    19.3

    4.7

    5.5

    Goods terms of trade (percent change)

    -8.4

     

    -11.6

     

    3.6

    0.5

    1.3

    1.0

    0.4

                     

    Exchange rate

                     

    Hryvnia per U.S. dollar (end of period)

    27.3

     

    36.6

     

    38.0

    42.0

    …

    …

    …

    Hryvnia per U.S. dollar (period average)

    27.3

     

    32.3

     

    36.6

    40.2

    …

    …

    …

    Real effective rate (CPI-based, percent change)

    2.6

     

    3.2

     

    -6.7

    -6.5

    …

    …

    …

    Memorandum items:

    Per capita GDP / Population (2017): US$2,640 / 44.8 million

    Literacy / Poverty rate (2022 est 3/): 100 percent / 25 percent perpercentpercent

    Sources: Ukrainian authorities; World Bank, World Development Indicators; and IMF staff estimates.

    1/ GDP is compiled as per SNA 2008 and excludes territories that are or were in direct combat zones and temporarily occupied by Russia (consistent with the TMU).

    2/ The general government includes the central and local governments and the social funds.

    3/ Based on World Bank estimates.

    [1] At the conclusion of the discussion, the Managing Director, as Chairman of the Board, summarizes the views of Executive Directors, and this summary is transmitted to the country’s authorities. An explanation of any qualifiers used in summing up can be found here: http://www.IMF.org/external/np/sec/misc/qualifiers.htm.

    IMF Communications Department
    MEDIA RELATIONS

    PRESS OFFICER: Camila Perez

    Phone: +1 202 623-7100Email: MEDIA@IMF.org

    @IMFSpokesperson

    https://www.imf.org/en/News/Articles/2025/06/30/pr-25227-ukraine-imf-completes-8th-rev-of-ext-arrang-under-eff

    MIL OSI

    MIL OSI Russia News –

    July 1, 2025
  • MIL-OSI Video: FfD4, Gender Equality, Gaza & other topics – Daily Press Briefing (30 June 2025)

    Source: United Nations (video statements)

    Noon Briefing by Stéphane Dujarric, Spokesperson for the Secretary-General.

    Highlights:
    Secretary-General/Conference on Financing for Development
    Deputy Secretary-General/FfD4
    Gender Equality
    Gaza
    Occupied Palestinian Territory
    Security Council
    An Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL)
    Syria
    Ukraine
    Sudan
    DRC/Rwanda
    Afghanistan Refugees
    International Days
    Financial Contribution
    UNGA80
    Programming Note

    SECRETARY-GENERAL/CONFERENCE ON FINANCING FOR DEVELOPMENT
    The Secretary-General is in Sevilla, Spain, where he is attending the 4th International Conference on Financing for Development. This morning, at the opening of the Conference, he said that financing is the engine of development, and right now, this engine is sputtering.
    “As we meet,” the Secretary-General pointed out, “the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, our global promise to transform our world for a better, fairer future, is in danger. He stressed that the conference is not about charity, it’s about restoring justice and lives of dignity.”
    The Secretary-General also added that the conference is not about money, it’s about investing in the future we want to build, together.
    In the afternoon, at the launch of the Sevilla Platform for Action, the Secretary-General highlighted that the Platform offers an ambitious, action-oriented response to the global financing challenge.
    Soon after, at the opening of the International Business Forum, the Secretary-General underscored that by uniting public and private sector leaders, regulators and development banks, we can ensure that the conference is not an end, but rather a beginning.
    The Secretary-General also addressed that media in a joint press encounter with the President of the Government of Spain, Pedro Sánchez. He stressed that with the adoption of the Sevilla Commitment document, countries are proving their dedication to getting the engine of development revving again.
    Today, the Secretary-General also held a bilateral meeting with the President of the Government of Spain, and yesterday, he met His Majesty Don Felipe VI, King of Spain, He is also having a number of bilateral meetings with other delegation leaders who will be at the conference. We will share readouts of some of those meetings shortly.

    DEPUTY SECRETARY-GENERAL/FFD4
    Ms. Amina Mohammed, the Deputy Secretary-General, joined the Secretary-General for the opening ceremony of the conference and his meeting with the President of the Government of Spain.
    Later, she delivered remarks at side events focused on closing the SDG financing gap, including on the role of public-private cooperation, the centrality of gender equality in sustainable finance, and the leadership of African women in advancing the 2030 Agenda and Agenda 2063.
    She also held bilateral meetings with senior government officials and Heads of Government attending the conference.

    GENDER EQUALITY
    At the Fourth International Financing for Development conference in Spain, the adoption of the Compromiso de Sevilla reaffirmed the global commitment to inclusive sustainable development. However, UN Women is warning that chronic underfunding and unfair financial systems are hindering gender equality progress.
    Developing countries are falling short by an estimated $420 billion a year in the funding needed to achieve gender equality under the Sustainable Development Goals.
    UN Women is urging world leaders to match political commitments with the sustained, transparent, and accountable financing needed to deliver on promises to half the world’s population.

    Full Highlights:
    https://www.un.org/sg/en/content/noon-briefing-highlight?date%5Bvalue%5D%5Bdate%5D=30%20June%202025

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=svTsTXC1aiw

    MIL OSI Video –

    July 1, 2025
  • MIL-OSI Video: FfD4, Gender Equality, Gaza & other topics – Daily Press Briefing (30 June 2025)

    Source: United Nations (video statements)

    Noon Briefing by Stéphane Dujarric, Spokesperson for the Secretary-General.

    Highlights:
    Secretary-General/Conference on Financing for Development
    Deputy Secretary-General/FfD4
    Gender Equality
    Gaza
    Occupied Palestinian Territory
    Security Council
    An Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL)
    Syria
    Ukraine
    Sudan
    DRC/Rwanda
    Afghanistan Refugees
    International Days
    Financial Contribution
    UNGA80
    Programming Note

    SECRETARY-GENERAL/CONFERENCE ON FINANCING FOR DEVELOPMENT
    The Secretary-General is in Sevilla, Spain, where he is attending the 4th International Conference on Financing for Development. This morning, at the opening of the Conference, he said that financing is the engine of development, and right now, this engine is sputtering.
    “As we meet,” the Secretary-General pointed out, “the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, our global promise to transform our world for a better, fairer future, is in danger. He stressed that the conference is not about charity, it’s about restoring justice and lives of dignity.”
    The Secretary-General also added that the conference is not about money, it’s about investing in the future we want to build, together.
    In the afternoon, at the launch of the Sevilla Platform for Action, the Secretary-General highlighted that the Platform offers an ambitious, action-oriented response to the global financing challenge.
    Soon after, at the opening of the International Business Forum, the Secretary-General underscored that by uniting public and private sector leaders, regulators and development banks, we can ensure that the conference is not an end, but rather a beginning.
    The Secretary-General also addressed that media in a joint press encounter with the President of the Government of Spain, Pedro Sánchez. He stressed that with the adoption of the Sevilla Commitment document, countries are proving their dedication to getting the engine of development revving again.
    Today, the Secretary-General also held a bilateral meeting with the President of the Government of Spain, and yesterday, he met His Majesty Don Felipe VI, King of Spain, He is also having a number of bilateral meetings with other delegation leaders who will be at the conference. We will share readouts of some of those meetings shortly.

    DEPUTY SECRETARY-GENERAL/FFD4
    Ms. Amina Mohammed, the Deputy Secretary-General, joined the Secretary-General for the opening ceremony of the conference and his meeting with the President of the Government of Spain.
    Later, she delivered remarks at side events focused on closing the SDG financing gap, including on the role of public-private cooperation, the centrality of gender equality in sustainable finance, and the leadership of African women in advancing the 2030 Agenda and Agenda 2063.
    She also held bilateral meetings with senior government officials and Heads of Government attending the conference.

    GENDER EQUALITY
    At the Fourth International Financing for Development conference in Spain, the adoption of the Compromiso de Sevilla reaffirmed the global commitment to inclusive sustainable development. However, UN Women is warning that chronic underfunding and unfair financial systems are hindering gender equality progress.
    Developing countries are falling short by an estimated $420 billion a year in the funding needed to achieve gender equality under the Sustainable Development Goals.
    UN Women is urging world leaders to match political commitments with the sustained, transparent, and accountable financing needed to deliver on promises to half the world’s population.

    Full Highlights:
    https://www.un.org/sg/en/content/noon-briefing-highlight?date%5Bvalue%5D%5Bdate%5D=30%20June%202025

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=svTsTXC1aiw

    MIL OSI Video –

    July 1, 2025
  • MIL-OSI Europe: REPORT on the security of energy supply in the EU – A10-0121/2025

    Source: European Parliament

    MOTION FOR A EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT RESOLUTION

    on the security of energy supply in the EU

    (2025/2055(INI))

    The European Parliament,

    – having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Article 194 thereof,

    – having regard to Council Directive 2009/119/EC of 14 September 2009 imposing an obligation on Member States to maintain minimum stocks of crude oil and/or petroleum products[1] (Oil Stocks Directive),

    – having regard to the Commission communication of 28 May 2014 entitled ‘European Energy Security Strategy’ (COM(2014)0330),

    – having regard to Regulation (EU) 2017/1938 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 October 2017 concerning measures to safeguard the security of gas supply and repealing Regulation (EU) No 994/2010[2],

    – having regard to Directive (EU) 2019/944 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 5 June 2019 on common rules for the internal market for electricity and amending Directive 2012/27/EU[3],

    – having regard to Regulation (EU) 2019/943 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 5 June 2019 on the internal market for electricity[4],

    – having regard to Regulation (EU) 2019/941 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 5 June 2019 on risk-preparedness in the electricity sector and repealing Directive 2005/89/EC[5],

    – having regard to the Commission communication of 11 December 2019 entitled ‘The European Green Deal’ (COM(2019)0640),

    – having regard to the Commission communication of 8 July 2020 entitled ‘Powering a climate-neutral economy: An EU Strategy for Energy System Integration’ (COM(2020)0299),

    – having regard to Regulation (EU) 2021/1153 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 7 July 2021 establishing the Connecting Europe Facility and repealing Regulations (EU) 1316/2013 and (EU) No 283/2014[6],

    – having regard to Regulation (EU) 2021/1119 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 June 2021 establishing the framework for achieving climate neutrality and amending Regulations (EC) No 401/2009 and (EU) 2018/1999 (‘European Climate Law’)[7],

    – having regard to Regulation (EU) 2022/869 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 May 2022 on guidelines for trans-European energy infrastructure, amending Regulations (EC) No 715/2009, (EU) 2019/942 and (EU) 2019/943 and Directives 2009/73/EC and (EU) 2019/944, and repealing Regulation (EU) No 347/2013[8],

    – having regard to the joint communication from the Commission and the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy of 18 May 2022 entitled ‘EU external energy engagement in a changing world’ (JOIN(2022)0023),

    – having regard to the Commission communication of 18 May 2022 entitled ‘REPowerEU Plan’ (COM(2022)0230),

    – having regard to the Commission communication of 18 October 2022 entitled ‘Digitalising the energy system – EU action plan’ (COM(2022)0552),

    – having regard to the final assessment report on the EU-NATO Task Force on the resilience of critical infrastructure, published in June 2023,

    – having regard to Directive (EU) 2023/1791 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 September 2023 on energy efficiency and amending Regulation (EU) 2023/955 (recast)[9] (Energy Efficiency Directive),

    – having regard to the Euratom Supply Agency Annual Report 2023,

    – having regard to Directive (EU) 2023/2413 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 October 2023 amending Directive (EU) 2018/2001, Regulation (EU) 2018/1999 and Directive 98/70/EC as regards the promotion of energy from renewable sources, and repealing Council Directive (EU) 2015/652 (the Renewable Energy Directive)[10],

    – having regard to Directive (EU) 2024/1788 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 June 2024 on common rules for the internal markets for renewable gas, natural gas and hydrogen, amending Directive (EU) 2023/1791 and repealing Directive 2009/73/EC (recast)[11],

    –  having regard to Regulation (EU) 2024/1789 on the internal markets for renewable gas, natural gas and hydrogen, amending Regulations (EU) No 1227/2011, (EU) 2017/1938, (EU) 2019/942 and (EU) 2022/869 and Decision (EU) 2017/684 and repealing Regulation (EC) No 715/2009 (recast)[12],

    – having regard to Regulation (EU) 2024/1787 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 June 2024 on the reduction of methane emissions in the energy sector and amending Regulation (EU) 2019/942[13],

    – having regard to Directive (EU) 2024/1711 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 June 2024 amending Directives (EU) 2018/2001 and (EU) 2019/944 as regards improving the Union’s electricity market design[14],

    – having regard to Regulation (EU) 2024/1747 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 June 2024 amending Regulations (EU) 2019/942 and (EU) 2019/943 as regards improving the Union’s electricity market design (Electricity Market Design (EMD) Regulation)[15],

    – having regard to its resolution of 14 November 2024 on EU actions against the Russian shadow fleets and ensuring a full enforcement of sanctions against Russia[16],

    – having regard to the report by Sauli Niinistö entitled ‘Safer Together – Strengthening Europe’s Civilian and Military Preparedness and Readiness’ (Niinistö report), published on 30 October 2024,

    – having regard to European Court of Auditors Special Report 09/2024 entitled ‘Security of the supply of gas in the EU’[17],

    – having regard to the Commission communication of 29 January 2025 entitled ‘A Competitiveness Compass for the EU’ (COM(2025)0030),

    – having regard to the joint communication from the Commission and the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy of 21 February 2025 entitled ‘EU Action Plan on Cable Security’ (JOIN(2025)0009),

    – having regard to the Commission communication of 26 February 2025 entitled ‘Action Plan for Affordable Energy’ (COM(2025)0079),

    – having regard to the joint communication from the Commission and the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy of 26 March 2025 on the European Preparedness Union Strategy (JOIN(2025)0130),

    – having regard to Rule 55 of its Rules of Procedure,

    – having regard to the report of the Committee on Industry, Research and Energy (A10-0121/2025),

    A. whereas energy security is a key building block of a resilient, sustainable and competitive economy; whereas reliable and affordable energy supplies are essential for economic growth, industrial productivity and societal well-being;

    B. whereas in the context of a general security crisis and the need for preparedness against defence challenges, securing energy supply constitutes a priority;

    C. whereas despite the potential for developing domestic clean and renewable energy sources, the EU imports more than 60 % of its energy, including 90 % of its gas and 97 % of its oil[18], leaving it vulnerable to potential energy supply disruptions;

    D. whereas the EU has the potential to develop renewable resources, and since the publication of the Commission’s last Energy Security Strategy in 2014, the production of home-grown renewable energy has grown substantially – wind power by 98 %, solar photovoltaic by 314 %, solar thermal by 22 % and ocean energy by 244 %; whereas, over the same period, the EU’s domestic fossil fuel production has declined, with coal production falling by 53 %, oil by 31 % and gas by 73 %;

    E. whereas with a renewable energy-dominated grid, Europe will need to secure over 100 GW of new clean firm power capacity by 2035 to ensure reliability, energy security and lower costs[19];

    F. whereas the gap between energy production and EU demand negatively affects the EU’s trade balance, with energy imports amounting to EUR 427 billion in 2024 – down from a peak of EUR 602 billion in 2022 – for coal, oil and gas[20];

    G. whereas EU nuclear production has declined by 24 % since 2014[21]; whereas a number of Member States are demonstrating their commitment to expanding nuclear energy as a pillar of their energy strategies and advancing their nuclear power projects;

    H. whereas the diversification of energy sources contributes to the EU’s open strategic autonomy, energy security and resilience against external supply disruptions;

    I. whereas applying renewable and clean domestic energy production, energy efficiency and energy saving measures across the entire value chain decreases reliance on external energy sources and enhances the security of energy supply; whereas EU energy efficiency policies have yielded structural results, with energy demand peaking in 2006 and declining by 20 % in 2023[22], highlighting energy efficiency as the most cost-effective way to reduce emissions, enhance competitiveness, make energy consumption more affordable and improve energy security;

    J. whereas Member States differ in terms of natural and geographical characteristics, energy supply, security, sources and policies;

    K. whereas the Russian Federation has for decades weaponised its supplies of oil, coal, nuclear power and gas to the EU in order to create division among Member States and, since the summer of 2021, to fuel inflation and weaken Europe’s resolve to support Ukraine in its just fight for freedom; whereas Russia’s war against Ukraine started in 2014; whereas Russia has been carrying out an illegal, unprovoked and unjustified full-scale war of aggression against Ukraine since 24 February 2022; whereas Member States agreed in the Versailles Declaration[23] to reassess how to ensure the security of their energy supplies and to phase out their dependency on Russian gas, oil and coal imports ‘as soon as possible’ by, among other means, speeding up the development of renewables and the production of their key components and accelerating the reduction of overall EU reliance on fossil fuels, taking into account national circumstances and Member States’ energy mix choices; whereas the REPowerEU plan put forward a set of actions to stop importing Russian fossil fuels by 2027 at the latest;

    L. whereas while most Russian oil and coal imports have been sanctioned, Russian gas and nuclear imports have regrettably remained outside of the EU’s sanctions regime amid concerns over security of supply;

    M. whereas the share of Russian pipeline gas, both liquefied natural gas (LNG) and pipeline, in the EU’s total energy imports significantly decreased from 45 % in 2021 to approximately 19 % in 2024; whereas EU imports of Russian fossil fuels in the third year of the invasion have surpassed the EU financial aid sent to Ukraine in the same period (EUR 18.7 billion in 2024)[24]; whereas since the beginning of the war, Russia has earned a total of EUR 206 billion in revenue from fossil fuel exports to the EU; whereas global fossil fuel exports constitute the single largest source of revenue for Russia, amounting to EUR 250 billion per year[25] – equivalent to 160 % of the Russian military budget for this year[26];

    N. whereas among the 100 reactors operating in the EU, 18 are located in five EU countries and are of Russian or Soviet-design, each with varying levels of built-in reliance on Rosatom, which poses a particular risk to European energy security; whereas in 2024, Russia met around 23 % of the EU’s total demand for uranium conversion services and 24 % for uranium enrichment services;

    O. whereas Russia has been circumventing sanctions through its shadow fleet, which transports oil to willing buyers under false flags or without flags and which poses serious environmental risks; whereas Member States have yet to implement the effective measures adopted by the Council in the 15th sanctions package against sanctions evasion through the shadow fleet;

    P. whereas in its November 2024 resolution, Parliament called for the EU and its Member States to ban all imports of Russian energy, including LNG and nuclear, to require that ships exporting LNG from Russia be banned from entering EU ports and to refrain from concluding any new agreements with Rosatom or its subsidiaries;

    Q. whereas the absence of an updated robust EU energy security strategy is adversely affecting businesses, industries and households; whereas, among other contributing factors, this has led to a sharp rise in energy poverty with nearly one in ten households (10.6 %) unable to adequately heat their homes in 2023[27], an increase from 6.9 % in 2021[28];

    R. whereas attacks against critical energy infrastructure can lead to a loss of power affecting several Member States simultaneously and substantial economic damage, undermine public security and have implications for the EU’s defence capabilities; whereas Europe’s energy sector has been inundated with cyberattacks since Russia’s invasion of Ukraine; whereas the Baltic Sea’s critical energy infrastructure is under regular attack from Russia; whereas the growing number of perimeter harassment incidents against offshore energy infrastructure poses a serious concern;

    S. whereas NATO’s role in energy security was first defined at the 2008 Bucharest Summit and has since been strengthened; whereas NATO is strengthening the security of critical infrastructure to prevent sabotage, including through the recently launched Baltic Sentry initiative; whereas NATO is supporting national authorities in enhancing their resilience against energy supply disruptions that could affect national and collective defence;

    T. whereas the integration of the Baltic states’ electricity systems into the continental European network in February 2025 was a critical step towards enhancing their energy security, as it eliminated reliance on the Russian-controlled grid, thereby reducing geopolitical vulnerabilities and strengthening the resilience of the Baltic region;

    A new vision for energy security in a changing global landscape

    1. Recalls that the European Environment Agency defines energy security as ‘the availability of energy at all times in various forms, in sufficient quantities, and at reasonable and/or affordable prices’; considers that a comprehensive approach to energy security should take into account the physical infrastructure dimension, the availability, reliability, stability and affordability of supplies and their sustainability, and should place emphasis on the geopolitical and climate dimensions;

    2. Stresses that energy security is a cross-sectoral issue that underpins the functioning of all critical sectors, making it indispensable for economic stability, public safety and national resilience; underlines that integrating energy security considerations into relevant policies and their underlying impact assessments is crucial for enhancing the coherence, consistency and overall effectiveness of EU policymaking;

    3. Emphasises that the current geopolitical situation and continued perilous energy supply dependencies underscore the need to revise the understanding of energy security and recognises that the resilience of energy systems, understood as the ability to anticipate, withstand, adapt to, and quickly recover from possible disruptions, is now a strategic imperative;

    4. Stresses that as the energy system continues to decarbonise, the share of renewables increases and electrification advances, a well-functioning and integrated energy market, energy efficiency, the integration of flexibility sources (electricity and heat storage, hydrogen, comprehensively developed and resilient infrastructure, demand response, etc.), and sufficient dispatchable capacity will be crucial to successfully manage the intermittency of renewable energy sources and unlock the full potential of the energy transition;

    5. Highlights that energy security cannot work without adequacy; notes that ‘the scarcity issues tend to shift from the peripheral areas of Europe in 2025 to the central parts of the continent by 2033’[29]; believes that capacity remuneration mechanisms play a structural role in securing dispatchable backup capacity to ensure adequacy during peak times or periods of supply shortages and in helping to incentivise the necessary investments in generating capacity that market signals, relying solely on infrequent scarcity price hours, may fail to justify; underlines the need to ensure that the mechanisms are open to different types of resources (such as demand side, energy savings, aggregation, storage units and cross-border resources) capable of providing the necessary services, such as flexibility, do not create undue market distortions or limit cross-zonal trade, and reflect compatibility with a future decarbonised electricity system, including through coherence with defined emission limits as set out in Article 22 of the EMD Regulation; recalls that remuneration for capacity mechanisms only covers their availability; stresses the urgent need to simplify and streamline their approval processes, as requested by the EMD revision, while giving due consideration to the specific problems of the electricity market in the respective Member States in the Commission’s approval process; notes the Commission report on the assessment of possibilities of streamlining and simplifying the process of applying a capacity mechanism[30] and the ongoing works on the Clean Industrial Deal State Aid Framework with concrete proposals to accelerate the approval process; notes that while the balancing market provides essential short-term services, it is not yet investment-friendly and calls therefore on the Commission to develop incentives to build the flexible assets that balancing markets urgently need;

    6. Stresses that decarbonisation should take into account the specificities of Member States and their regions, including Europe’s outermost territories and Just Transition Fund regions and their level of access to different types of clean energy sources, the needs of their industries and the vulnerability of their citizens in order to ensure a just transition that maintains energy security by creating synergies between climate ambitions, geographical and natural conditions, and social and economic realities;

    7. Notes the need for a broader approach to non-fossil flexibility and energy storage that incorporates molecules and heat; highlights the potential of district heating systems that can use thermal storage to reduce the temperature of the loop and incorporate waste heat, solar, geothermal and other renewable sources, where appropriate, using natural gas and biomass in a transition period; draws attention to the important role that the optimal use of high-efficiency cogeneration, in line with the Energy Efficiency Directive, can play in contributing to balancing the electricity grid and to the competitiveness of some industrial sectors, especially those that do not have alternative ways of producing affordable heat in their industrial processes; stresses the need to modernise and expand district heating grids to this end;

    8. Emphasises that technological neutrality plays a key role in enhancing the security of energy supply while avoiding lock-in effects and fostering sustainability, economic efficiency and a just transition; recalls the need to invest in a diverse portfolio of clean technologies that allow regions to adopt technologies best suited to their needs in a cost-effective way, making energy more affordable and accessible;

    9. Notes that the Draghi report[31] highlights that a reduction in dependency on fossil fuel imports would enhance EU competitiveness and the affordability and security of supply; notes that natural gas is currently a component of the EU’s energy security, with demand of 320 bcm in 2024, and notes the International Energy Agency (IEA) forecasts indicating a moderate demand of 260 bcm annually by 2035[32], while a REpowerEU scenario projected a possible demand reduction of 184 bcm by 2030, implying an approximate 50 % slash in natural gas demand in less than five years, compared to demand of 356 bcm in 2022; recalls Draghi’s proposal to establish a comprehensive strategy for natural gas, managing its role during the transition and securing its supply, that should guide infrastructure choices, international partnerships and legislation; notes, with concern, that inconsistent policies on natural gas have weakened the trading position of EU companies, leaving them exposed to global spot market prices and potentially creating a gap between what the EU has contractually secured and what will be imported over time;

    10. Stresses that the development of nuclear energy remains a national prerogative in the framework of EU law; notes that for the Member States that choose to have nuclear power in their energy mix, it can have an important role to play in an integrated energy system with increasing penetration of renewables; notes that a number of Member States see a need to support the development and deployment of both existing and a new generation of nuclear technologies, as well as the entire nuclear fuel cycle, that will contribute to building a competitive technological supply chain in the EU so as to ensure open strategic autonomy; stresses the importance of assessing the full cost of the entire nuclear energy life cycle, including construction, operation, security, environmental and health impacts, waste management and decommissioning; notes the existing and ongoing reliance on foreign providers, with approximately 97 % of the EU’s natural uranium supply in 2022 coming from oversea sources[33] and stresses the need to diversify  uranium and nuclear fuel supply sources and to follow the Euratom Supply Agency’s recommendation in developing reliable supply chains to meet the growing demand for nuclear and new nuclear technologies; notes, in this regard, the European Investment Bank’s recent decision to renew its support for strengthening European uranium enrichment capacities; underlines that small modular reactors (SMRs) and advanced modular reactors (AMRs) have the potential to enhance energy security by providing low-carbon power; notes, however, that the technology is not yet fully developed; welcomes the announced assessment of the possibility of streamlining licensing practices for new nuclear energy technologies such as SMRs;

    11. Recognises that renewable energy constitutes an enabler of energy autonomy and long-term security of supply; stresses that renewables are essential in delivering energy security as they already constitute the main source of home-grown energy for the EU; highlights the importance of maximising the use of existing renewable capacities, particularly by tackling the issue of curtailment, as grid congestion in the EU curtailed over 12 TWh of renewable electricity in 2023, resulting in an additional 4.2 million tons of CO₂ emissions[34]; notes that renewables have already helped to reduce EU dependence on Russian gas as they accounted for 25 % of the energy and 45 % of the electricity consumed in the EU in 2023; reaffirms the importance of sustained EU support for the development and deployment of established renewable technologies, such as solar, wind power, geothermal and heat pumps; reiterates the necessity of policy and investment support for less developed or emerging sectors in order to accelerate the deployment of renewable technologies that are the most relevant given their national and local circumstances, such as innovative geothermal technologies, biomethane, solar thermal, marine energy, tidal energy, osmotic energy and concentrated solar power; expresses concern that, without targeted support policies, some innovative technologies may fail to reach commercialisation in a timely manner, and therefore calls on the Member States to support their research, demonstration, market adoption and scale-up; calls on the Commission to present an investment plan for these renewable technologies;

    12. Notes, in particular, the potential of geothermal energy, estimated to reach 510 GW by 2035 at a capacity factor of 80-90 %; highlights the vast untapped resources in certain EU regions and calls on the Commission to deliver on Parliament’s call to support the development of geothermal energy, including through the establishment of risk mitigation instruments;

    13. Asks the IEA to conduct an analysis to assess the possibilities for using EU natural gas resources; notes that domestic EU natural gas production dropped by more than a third between 2020 and 2023 and that this decline is expected to continue with no significant near-term increase in the production of green gases, including biogas and biomethane, in the EU; notes that Draghi’s report highlights that while progressively decarbonising and moving to hydrogen and green gases in line with RED III and REPowerEU as a transitional measure, domestic natural gas production – where deemed justified by individual Member States – could also play a role in contributing to security of supply and avoiding exposure to negative geopolitical developments;

    14. Highlights that diversification is vital to mitigate the risk of supplier dominance in a changing geopolitical context; believes the EU needs to strengthen international partnerships with reliable suppliers of energy, raw materials and clean-tech components in all regions of the world, and, in particular, with European Economic Area countries;

    15. Underlines that enhancing energy security requires a holistic approach, notably through improving energy efficiency in key end-use energy sectors, such as buildings and industry, promoting energy savings, boosting investment in research and development, and ensuring meaningful citizen participation, all of which are essential to achieving a resilient, sustainable and inclusive energy system;

    16. Calls on the Commission to be mindful of future military capability and mobility needs in the development of the EU’s energy system; notes, with concern, that the EU is highly import-dependent for crude oil and petroleum products; calls on the Commission to prepare a comprehensive strategy on liquid fuels in order to ensure their readily available access for the military in a crisis situation, and to reduce dependencies on vulnerable import chains and unreliable producers, particularly thorough the development of advanced synthetic fuels (such as sustainable aviation fuels and e-fuels) in Europe;

    17. Draws attention to the Niinistö report’s recommendation on the need for further work on priority dual-use transport corridors for civilian and defence-related logistical needs, and on the expansion of fuel supply chains for the armed forces along these corridors, as well as stockpiling and strategic reserves of energy, that could be particularly useful for the regions with insufficiently developed pipeline infrastructure and fuel storage; calls, in this respect, on the Commission to review the Oil Stocks Directive in the light of recent geopolitical shifts and the military readiness needs in order to strengthen energy security and resilience against emerging military risks;

    18. Acknowledges the rapidly accelerating energy demand driven by the digital sector, particularly the substantial energy requirements of data centres and artificial intelligence systems; stresses that this trend highlights the urgent need for robust energy efficiency policies and underscores the importance of the EU proactively pursuing sustainable, forward-looking solutions to meet this growing demand while safeguarding the resilience of its energy system;

    A resilient energy infrastructure

    19. Notes that infrastructure bottlenecks impede the benefits of sector integration and aggravate the threats to energy security; underlines the importance of investing in new energy networks, including cross-border interconnectors and offshore grids, and optimising existing infrastructure to increase capacity using grid-enhancing technologies (GETs) while reducing new infrastructure needs, in order to enable the integration of renewables and other new generation facilities, close price gaps, improve the overall system efficiency and foster solidarity among the Member States in the event of an energy crisis; emphasises the need for technically sound infrastructure planning that takes into account geographical and natural characteristics while ensuring long-term viability and avoiding the creation of stranded assets;

    20. Calls on the Commission to urgently assess areas where interconnectors are insufficient so as to achieve the current 15 % interconnection target as set out in Regulation (EU) 2018/1999[35]; stresses the importance of Projects of Common Interest (PCIs) in facilitating the efficient and secure flow of electricity across Member States and regions, thereby strengthening cross-border integration and energy solidarity within the EU; acknowledges the role of the Connecting Europe Facility for Energy (CEF-E) in completing the above investments and reiterates its call for its funding to be significantly increased when proposing the next multiannual financial framework;

    21. Calls on the Member States to accelerate permitting procedures for electricity installations and networks; notes that excessively long permitting procedures could create legal uncertainty, undermining resource adequacy by delaying the implementation of critical projects – whether for repowering or revamping existing generation sites, or for developing transmission, distribution, or storage infrastructure; welcomes the positive progress made regarding provisions adopted in the latest revision of the Renewable Energy Directive and the Emergency Regulation on Permitting[36] to accelerate, streamline and simplify permit-granting procedures;

    22. Recalls that climate change continues to worsen, placing increasing stress on the energy system due to extreme weather events, such as heat waves, that lead to thermal power plant shutdowns, droughts that reduce generation output, and severe storms, floods and fires that damage electricity grids and gas pipelines; stresses that the impact of climate change on generation assets, networks and consumption patterns should be better integrated into the modelling and preparedness of energy infrastructure; emphasises the need for resilient energy system planning, incorporating climate-adaptive strategies such as advanced cooling technologies, grid flexibility, decentralised renewable generation and strengthened infrastructure protections; highlights the importance of integrating a climate-proofing plan, grounded in an initial risk-based assessment, into energy projects from the earliest stages of development;

    23. Calls on the Commission to build on Directive (EU) 2022/2557[37] on the resilience of critical entities by facilitating its full and harmonised implementation through the provision of best practices, guidance materials and methodologies, and cross-border training activities and exercises to support Member States, competent authorities and critical energy entities;

    24. Emphasises the need to invest in the protection and resilience of energy infrastructure against human-caused threats, such as military, hybrid and cyber attacks; expresses concern about recent sabotage incidents in the Baltic Sea and calls for stronger EU-level action to protect the EU’s critical energy infrastructure, including cross-border connections with non-EU countries, such as subsea pipelines and cables, offshore wind farms and interconnections, designed to support the most impacted Member States, and to complement national measures; welcomes, in this regard, the joint communication on the EU Action Plan on Cable Security;

    25. Notes that the decentralisation of the energy system, that both strengthens resilience and facilitates the energy transition, and increased diversity of sources and autonomy, reduce reliance on centralised power plants, minimise outage risks, enhance grid stability, and enable quicker recovery from disruptions; emphasises at the same time that the increased number of remote and dispersed sources of energy, energy storage and new connections require enhanced measures to ensure robust infrastructure protection;

    26. Calls on the Commission to draw on the lessons learned from the war in Ukraine, particularly the critical role of electricity interconnection, microgrids, distributed solar power, wind power and battery storage in ensuring greater resilience of the electricity grid against military attacks, including cyberattacks, drones and missiles; commends Ukraine’s sustained efforts to maintain the functionality and safety of its energy system in the face of Russia’s war of aggression, and underscores that supporting Ukraine also entails helping to safeguard the soundness of its national electrical grid;

    27. Notes, with concern, that small distributed energy resources (DERs) connected to the internet, such as inverters, are not covered by appropriate conformity assessment procedures under cybersecurity legislation, such as the Cyber Resilience Act[38], and since they can be remotely controlled and their software updated by the manufacturer, which, in many cases, are non-trusted vendors, they could give these non-trusted vendors control over EU electricity grids; urges the Commission to establish mandatory risk assessments for DERs based on the country of origin, ensuring that devices controlled from jurisdictions with potential security concerns are subject to strict oversight and localisation requirements; calls for enhanced resilience in European supply chains by promoting EU-based manufacturing of DERs and fostering alliances with trusted international partners; highlights the need for an adequate number of professionals specialised in cybersecurity and close coordination among Member States to address these vulnerabilities;

    28. Calls on energy companies that manage critical infrastructure to work closely with the EU Agency for Cybersecurity and equip themselves with the most advanced cybersecurity tools; considers that cooperation with NATO in the field of cybersecurity should be strengthened in order to counter hybrid threats to Europe’s energy security;

    29. Notes that the Member States need to do their utmost to increase their resilience, which encompasses the ability to prevent, protect against, respond to, resist, mitigate, absorb, accommodate and recover from incidents, taking into full account the interdependence of the EU energy market and the potential domino effect that infrastructure failures in one country may have across the Union; underlines, in particular, the need to strengthen the recovery aspect, which could be achieved through an efficient European repair and response mechanism and national and regional operational plans, which could serve as an important element of the EU’s deterrence strategy; notes the importance of EU solidarity in responding to potential infrastructure incidents, ensuring coordinated action and mutual support among Member States;

    30. Recalls that energy infrastructure constitutes a particularly sensitive sector in need of protection against foreign interests; urges the Member States and the Commission to address security risks associated with foreign investment in and acquisitions of energy infrastructure; expresses concern about a series of potentially sensitive foreign investments, particularly in grids; welcomes, in this regard, the ongoing revision of the Foreign Investment Screening Regulation[39] as a timely step towards adopting a stringent strategic approach to the development and oversight of European energy infrastructure;

    31. Stresses that energy security should include the supply of key clean technologies, components and critical raw materials and notes the need for their diversified sourcing; calls for increased support for the EU’s grid manufacturing industry as a strategic pillar of the energy transition, with particular emphasis on ensuring a fair and competitive regulatory environment for European manufacturers, while exploring the potential for local content requirements to strengthen energy security, supply chain resilience and industrial competitiveness; calls for an update of the Public Procurement Framework to simplify and reduce the administrative burden for grid operators to access the needed grid technologies;

    32. Emphasises the importance of integrating circularity principles into the design of critical infrastructure and equipment, and calls for increased support for their implementation, with the goal of reducing the EU’s dependence on imports of foreign raw materials and enhancing resource efficiency;

    Phase out of Russian energy supplies

    33. Highlights that the challenges posed by a lack of solidarity in the EU and by some Member States prioritising particular interests have made the whole continent aware of the dangers of dependence on an unreliable energy supplier weaponising energy exports; underlines that the lessons learned from Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine need to be at the core of future EU actions, particularly highlighting the critical importance of a united European response in order to eliminate perilous dependencies in energy supplies;

    34. Underlines that the EU has made advances in reducing its energy dependence thanks largely to the REPowerEU plan and the 16 sanctions packages, leading to a decline in imports of Russian gas (pipeline and LNG) from 45 % of total EU gas imports in 2021 to 19 % as of 2024;

    35. Expresses deep concern that the EU still maintains its reliance on Russian gas and, moreover, has recently seen an increase, with imports rising by 18 % in 2024 and continuing to grow in 2025[40]; notes that in 2024 alone, Member States purchased an estimated EUR 7 billion worth of Russian LNG, and since Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, the EU has imported EUR 200 billion worth of Russian oil and gas – totally[41] fuelling Russia’s war machine;

    36. Welcomes the publication of a roadmap for phasing out Russian energy imports, which must pave the way for their definitive end as soon as possible;

    37. Welcomes the stepwise prohibition of Russian gas imports proposed by the Commission; stresses the need to introduce an EU-wide ban on all Russian natural gas imports by 2027 at the latest, and on new contracts and existing spot contracts by the end of 2025; insists that the Member States, including those currently benefiting from targeted derogations for Russian oil imports, should ultimately phase out these imports by 2027 at the latest; welcomes the upcoming legislative proposals in this regard and calls on the Commission to explore the use of all available transitional instruments that could lead to the end of Russian fossil fuel imports by 2027, such as the introduction of a regular quota system for Russian gas imports into the EU and the introduction of a ceiling price for Russian LNG, following an assessment of market and price impacts; calls on the Commission to provide EU companies with effective and legally sound toolkits to facilitate their efforts to get out of long-term contracts with Russian suppliers without incurring penalties;

    38. Calls on the Member States to include gas deliveries to the EU from the Yamal LNG and Arctic LNG 2 terminals in the scope of EU sanctions and the respective sanctioning of the singular fleet of ice-class LNG carriers linked to the Yamal LNG project; notes that sanctioning LNG carriers would be highly effective, as there is a limited number of ice-class LNG carriers in the world; stresses that the above actions would require adequate assessments of the legal and economic impacts on the European companies concerned and to ensure their ability to exit contracts;

    39. Commends the inclusion of the nuclear supply chain in the roadmap; notes, with concern, that Russian nuclear fuel remains present in the EU market, including through indirect supply chains, and that in 2023, 23.5 % of the uranium consumed in the EU came from Russia and 30.1 % of the uranium used in the EU’s nuclear fleet was enriched by Russia; notes that while domestic providers are ramping up capacity in their European facilities to meet increased demand, as utilities proactively move away from Russian supply, clear policy decisions are urgently required at EU and national level to address the above vulnerabilities in the nuclear supply chain; calls therefore for support for projects within the Union that contribute to greater autonomy and security of nuclear fuel supply;

    40. Expresses concern that official data does not provide a complete picture of Russian energy imports and their final destination, as relabelled Russian oil and gas continue to enter the EU market; notes with regret that this, in some cases, occurs with the acquiescence of the state actors involved;

    41. Agrees that an adequate assessment of the amount of Russian energy imports is a prerequisite for phasing out this dependence; regrets the continued whitewashing of Russian energy imports and stresses the need for greater transparency in the EU energy market; calls on the Member States to publish data on the origin of imported, exported and consumed Russian gas, and urges the application of all measures against the whitewashing of Russian energy imports; notes that relevant reporting obligations laid down under Regulation (EU) 2024/1787 on methane emissions reduction in the energy sector can contribute to achieving this goal;

    42. Welcomes the upcoming proposals for transparency, monitoring and traceability mechanisms, as the effective implementation of sanctions depends on compatible control mechanisms in all Member States; underscores the urgent need to develop a legal mechanism to ensure the transparency and traceability of natural gas originating in Russia and exported to the EU as liquefied natural gas and by pipeline, and eventually to cover oil imports; stresses that this mechanism should be extended to energy imports from other destinations in the future; considers that the mechanism would require cooperation between various services, including EU competition services, the Agency for the Cooperation of Energy Regulators (ACER) and national customs authorities; asks the Member States to consider strengthening the criminal investigation powers of national customs authorities to ensure the effectiveness of the above mechanism and introducing sufficient deterrent measures and fines, such as adequate financial penalties for sanctions evasion;

    43. Stresses the need to adopt a legal framework for diversification, requiring each Member State to prepare, in a coordinated manner and through the appropriate competent authorities, an exit plan for Russian energy sources and to support and oversee the preparation and implementation of specialised exit plans at the level of undertakings active in their respective energy sectors; considers that these plans should include domestic production and demand reduction dimensions;

    44. Strongly condemns the calls for a return to Russian energy imports as part of the peace settlement in Ukraine; firmly rejects the idea of the possible certification of the Nord Stream 2 pipeline and insists on the complete decommissioning of Nord Stream pipelines; warns against the EU falling back into dependency on an unreliable supplier and calls on the Commission and the Member States to develop safeguards against this, such as a countersignature by the Commission on any potential contracts with Russia or the mandatory use of the AggregateEU platform for this type of purchase;

    45. Recalls that energy is a fundamental necessity; emphasises that the phase out of Russian energy imports must be a collective effort, ensuring that no Member State, company or household is left behind; emphasises that Member States are not equally positioned to phase out Russian energy imports in the same manner, and therefore urges strong solidarity among them, alongside appropriate support measures from the Commission to ensure a fair and coordinated transition;

    46. Notes that, in the near-term, there is the need to replace phased out Russian energy imports with reliable non-EU sources and urges the Commission therefore to propose measures that ensure their sufficient substitution from trusted partners; stresses, however, that Russian energy supplies should not be replaced by new dependencies in supplies, and therefore that, in the long term, energy imports should be progressively reduced through effective measures to support decarbonisation, electrification and energy efficiency and savings in the sectors where it is possible and cost-efficient, as well as through the development of domestic energy production in line with the REPowerEU plan;

    47. Emphasises that energy dependence on Russia also should not be replaced by new dependencies on individual suppliers of energy technologies, components or critical raw materials;

    Revision of security of supply framework

    48. Welcomes the upcoming revision of the Security of Supply architecture including the Gas Security of Supply Regulation and the Electricity Risk Preparedness Regulation, and other relevant legislation; considers that the new EU security of supply architecture should reflect such fundamental shifts as increasing cross-sectoral integration of the energy system, the new geopolitical landscape, the profound changes in supply routes, the impact of climate change, as well as changes in the maturity of energy technologies reflected in shifts of levelised costs of energy and the opportunities this presents for the energy transition;

    49. Highlights that energy efficiency plays a critical role in enhancing the security of energy supply by reducing overall energy demand, lowering dependency on energy imports and increasing system resilience; considers that the new security of supply framework should be broadened to reflect a new way of looking at the security of energy supply, based not only on energy sources, but also on the energy efficiency first principle, energy savings, cost efficiency, as well as the ability to produce different types of energy domestically; notes that, in the near-term, the Union should concentrate on effective and solid weaning of Russian energy imports without loopholes, including through securing alternatives supplies from reliable partners and better use of existing infrastructure, while in parallel continuing to develop domestic alternatives to imported energy products, where possible; stresses, nevertheless, the imperative to develop a future-proof security of supply architecture that systematically reduces dependence on external actors, notably by advancing energy efficiency, promoting energy savings, enhancing circularity and ensuring the sustained growth of home-grown clean energy production and well-protected decentralised energy infrastructure;

    50. Emphasises the need to prioritise the resilience of energy infrastructure, drawing on the lessons learned from Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine, the targeted attacks on its energy systems and the benefits of decentralised energy systems; considers that new energy assets should be ‘resilient by design’, including to possible military threats and extreme weather events;

    51. Stresses the need for greater cooperation among all actors on the resilience of energy infrastructure to both climate impacts and human-caused threats; insists that the protection of this infrastructure requires greater involvement of governments, including through public-private partnerships; welcomes, in this regard, the Niinistö report recommendation to engage with the private sector in institutionalising de-risking efforts, cross-sector stress tests and proactive security measures; asks the Commission to ensure that such cooperation is reflected in plans covering incident management and recovery, and is subject to regular exercises; notes that the Union’s preparedness strategy includes actions to strengthen public-private partnerships and calls on the Commission to further develop relevant specific measures for the energy sector in the review of the security of supply architecture;

    52. Notes the need to accommodate in the security of supply architecture the integration of renewable and low-carbon gases, such as biomethane and hydrogen; recalls that the Hydrogen Strategy already recognised the role that renewable and low-carbon hydrogen production can play in providing flexibility and storage in an integrated energy system with a high share of renewables; calls on the Commission to recognise the complementarities between hydrogen and electricity in the future Electrification Action Plan, in line with energy sector integration, and to set clear conditions for the ramp-up of hydrogen to contribute to the energy transition, particularly in hard-to-abate sectors;

    53. Stresses the need to include affordability risks in national risk assessments; calls for transparency on the implementation of national risk-preparedness measures to increase trust between the Member States; notes the advantages of greater coherence on protected consumer categories (consistent categories and gradation of disconnection priority for grid users) to allow coordinated consumer load-shedding plans to be defined, including plans to support vulnerable households affected by, or at risk of, energy poverty during an energy crisis;

    54. Highlights the need for a unified, resilient and strategically coordinated energy policy; emphasises that as the EU energy markets become more integrated, energy security is increasingly becoming a shared responsibility of the Member States, thus requiring solidarity and coordination in order to prevent unilateral actions that could undermine the security of the entire EU; warns that a unilateral decision by a single actor to enter into a harmful energy agreement with a non-EU country could expose the whole EU to renewed energy crises, price volatility and geopolitical pressure;

    55. Notes the need for stronger coordination between the Member States on the decommissioning of ageing generation units with cross-border impact, as well as on withdrawal from the system of generation capacity in order to ensure that alternative installations have been completed and are in operation, as this affects the availability and affordability of energy in neighbouring countries;

    56. Underlines that data-driven technologies should positively impact energy security management; recognises the importance of comprehensive energy information and data in identifying and responding to evolving energy security threats and in infrastructure planning, and calls for improved coordination in the collection of such information and data;

    57. Calls on the Commission to include in the security of supply proposal technical provisions for the standardisation and interoperability of critical components of the EU’s energy system, particularly electrical transformers, to ensure that a lack of standardisation does not hinder European solidarity;

    58. Welcomes the establishment by the European Network of Transmission System Operators for Electricity (ENTSO-E) of a new Task Force on the Security of Critical Infrastructure, aimed at analysing and proposing recommendations on the topic of security of critical infrastructure; stresses the importance of incorporating lessons learned from Ukraine’s experience, including the valuable expertise of the dedicated unit within the Ukrainian Transmission System Operator (TSO) tasked with identifying and mitigating threats to critical infrastructure; calls on the Commission to collaborate closely with ENTSO-E in delivering a comprehensive and systemic assessment of threats to the EU electricity grid, to be completed by 2026;

    °

    ° °

    59. Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council and the Commission.

     

    MIL OSI Europe News –

    July 1, 2025
  • MIL-OSI Europe: Missions – AFET ad-hoc delegation to Uruguay and Argentina – 26-28 May 2025 – 26-05-2025 – Committee on Foreign Affairs

    Source: European Parliament

    AFET ad-hoc delegation to Uruguay and Argentina © Image used under license from Adobe Stock

    A delegation of seven Members of the Committee on Foreign Affairs (AFET), led by Chair David McAllister, travelled to Uruguay and Argentina from 26 to 29 May 2025. Members engaged in high-level discussions regarding the EU-Mercosur Partnership Agreement which was concluded last December in Montevideo, Uruguay. The findings from this visit will contribute to the preparatory work for the consent procedure on the political and cooperation aspects of the Agreement, for which AFET is responsible.

    More broadly, this mission allowed to exchange views on bilateral, regional and multilateral cooperation, as well as geopolitical issues such as Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine, the situation in the Middle East, and China’s expanding influence in Latin America.

    MIL OSI Europe News –

    July 1, 2025
  • MIL-OSI Europe: Missions – AFET ad-hoc delegation to the United Kingdom – 28-30 October 2024 – 28-10-2024 – Committee on Foreign Affairs

    Source: European Parliament

    European Union and UK © Image used under the license from Adobe Stock

    A seven-member strong delegation of the Committee on Foreign Affairs (AFET) travelled to the United Kingdom from 28 to 30 October 2024. This was the first official visit of the Committee abroad in this parliamentary term. The delegation discussed possibilities for strengthening of the EU-UK partnership, in particular in foreign and security affairs.

    This visit was also an opportunity to exchange views on issues of global and regional significance such as the Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine, the situation in the Middle East and tensions in the Indo-Pacific.

    MIL OSI Europe News –

    July 1, 2025
  • MIL-OSI Europe: Missions – AFET ad-hoc delegation to the United Kingdom – 28-30 October 2024 – 28-10-2024 – Committee on Foreign Affairs

    Source: European Parliament

    European Union and UK © Image used under the license from Adobe Stock

    A seven-member strong delegation of the Committee on Foreign Affairs (AFET) travelled to the United Kingdom from 28 to 30 October 2024. This was the first official visit of the Committee abroad in this parliamentary term. The delegation discussed possibilities for strengthening of the EU-UK partnership, in particular in foreign and security affairs.

    This visit was also an opportunity to exchange views on issues of global and regional significance such as the Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine, the situation in the Middle East and tensions in the Indo-Pacific.

    MIL OSI Europe News –

    July 1, 2025
  • MIL-OSI Europe: Answer to a written question – Assistance to Eastern Neighbourhood countries following the loss of USAID funding – E-001472/2025(ASW)

    Source: European Parliament

    The EU continues to monitor the impacts of the termination of the United States Agency for International Development (USAID)’s programmes as well as the US wider international support.

    The EU will also continue coordinating efforts on identifying and, where possible, meeting the most acute needs and key priorities in the region, including in Ukraine and Moldova .

    Regarding Ukraine, the impact has been significant in several areas including energy, capacity gaps in key institutions (where US-embedded experts were common), civil society and media, as well as social sectors (veterans’ mental health and psycho-social support, and economic reintegration).

    In Moldova, USAID programmes covered sectors such as justice, energy security, support to independent media, civil society and election monitoring.

    The EU will continue to support Moldova in these sectors with the aim to ensure there are no gaps for key priorities, notably for vetting and justice reform as well as energy security.

    The EU humanitarian funding for Ukraine and Moldova currently stands at EUR 1.214 billion (EUR 1.13 billion for Ukraine and EUR 84 million for Moldova) since February 2022.

    The EU will continue its humanitarian and emergency assistance to Ukraine for as long as needed, irrespective of the cuts in funding by other major donors.

    The Commission will not step back from its humanitarian commitments. On healthcare, it will continue supporting programmes related to primary healthcare, medical supplies and equipment, light repairs of health facilities, as well as sexual and reproductive health.

    MIL OSI Europe News –

    July 1, 2025
  • MIL-OSI USA: Representatives Norma Torres and Adriano Espaillat Relaunch the Congressional New Americans Caucus for the 119th Congress

    Source: United States House of Representatives – Congresswoman Norma Torres (35th District of California)

    June 30, 2025

    Honoring and Celebrating Immigrant Heritage Month

    Washington, D.C. –  In honor of Immigrant Heritage Month, Chair Congresswoman Norma Torres (CA-35) and Co-Chair Representative Adriano Espaillat (NY-13) have officially relaunched the bipartisan New Americans Caucus for the 119th Congress. This Caucus is composed of first-generation Members of Congress dedicated to advancing awareness and policies that uplift new Americans across the nation.

    “As the only Member of Congress born in Guatemala, I am committed to amplifying the voices of new and aspiring Americans,” said Congresswoman Torres. “Our immigrant communities are the backbone of our country’s growth and innovation. Many new Americans continue to face systemic obstacles on their journey toward citizenship and full participation in society, especially during these difficult times. This caucus will continue to serve as a powerful platform to educate Congress and advocate for meaningful reforms that ensure everyone has the chance to succeed.”

    “I’m proud to join Congresswoman Torres as Co-Chair of the New Americans Caucus during the 119th Congress and look forward to continuing our collective efforts to ensuring the rights of newly naturalized citizens to our nation,” said Rep. Espaillat, the first Dominican American and only formerly undocumented immigrant to serve in the U.S. House of Representatives. “Our nation is facing unprecedented challenges, which is exacerbated for immigrant families amid this current administration. For many, the path to becoming citizens can mean life or death. We must do all it takes to support new Americans and their families through the citizenship process in ways that will afford them equal opportunities in America today and for future generations.”

    The Caucus membership includes: Juan Ciscomani (AZ-06), Ted Lieu (CA-36), Salud Carbajal (CA-24), Robert Garcia (CA-42), Raul Ruiz (CA-25), Raja Krishnamoorthi (IL-08), Victoria Spartz (IN-05), Ilhan Omar (MN-05), and Marilyn Strickland (WA-10).

    The New Americans Caucus was founded in 2017 and honors the diverse origins of its members, who hail from countries including Guatemala, the Dominican Republic, India, Somalia, Taiwan, Ukraine, Mexico, South Korea, and Cuba.

    ###

    MIL OSI USA News –

    July 1, 2025
  • MIL-OSI United Nations: Secretary-General’s Joint Press Encounter with the President of Spain [scroll down for all-English and all-Spanish]

    Source: United Nations secretary general

    Querido Pedro Sánchez, Presidente del Gobierno de España quiero agradecerte y agradecer al Gobierno y al pueblo de España por la magnífica organización de esta Conferencia y por la extraordinaria hospitalidad que estamos recibiendo.
     
    España es un pilar del multilateralismo, un socio firme de las Naciones Unidas y un defensor del desarrollo – como demuestra, una vez más, al acoger esta importante conferencia.
     
    España es también una voz líder mundial por la paz – y comprende los profundos vínculos entre el desarrollo y la paz.
     
    At a time of profound global turmoil, we must keep working for peace, for peace in the Middle East.
     
    For an immediate ceasefire in Gaza, the immediate release of all hostages, and unimpeded humanitarian access as a first step to achieve the two-State solution.
     
    For the ceasefire between Iran and Israel to hold.
     
    For a just and lasting peace in Ukraine based on the UN Charter, international law and UN resolutions. 
     
    For an end to the horror and bloodshed in Sudan.
     
    We know that sustainable peace requires sustainable development.
     
    Ladies and gentlemen of the media.
     
    As I said in opening the Conference this morning, development is not just about numbers on a page.
     
    It’s about food, health care and education.
     
    It’s about jobs and social protection.
     
    It’s about infrastructure like water systems, internet access and climate-resilient buildings.
     
    It’s about providing equal opportunity for girls and women which moves all societies ahead.
     
    It’s about easing human suffering, and driving progress across every community, large and small.
     
    Development is about people.
     
    And we have collectively made great strides in development in recent decades.
     
    But progress doesn’t happen on its own. 
     
    It takes support and investment.
     
    As we meet, the world is falling behind in its commitments to advance the Sustainable Development Goals.
     
    Achieving them will take an investment of more than $4 trillion a year.
     
    And meanwhile, global growth is slowing, trade barriers are rising, and aid budgets are falling.
     
    Developing countries are drowning in debt service payments, which have skyrocketed to $1.4 trillion every year.
     
    And the great enabler of development — international cooperation — is being chipped away by geopolitical mistrust and division.
     
    Now, this Conference is about rebuilding that trust with concrete commitments.
     
    With the adoption of the Sevilla Commitment document, countries are proving their dedication to getting the engine of development revving again:
     
    Through new domestic and global commitments that can channel public and private finance to the areas of greatest need…
     
    By overhauling the world’s approach to debt to make borrowing work in service of sustainable development…
     
    And by reforming the global financial architecture to reflect today’s realities and the urgent needs of developing countries, that must have a much stronger voice and participation in the institutions of this financial architecture.
     
    The Sevilla Platform of Action being launched later today will help us move from words to action.
     
    It contains dozens of new practical initiatives to accelerate funding for development around the world.
     
    This includes the commitment to establish a borrowers forum for countries to learn from one another and coordinate their approaches in debt management and restructuring.
     
    This is one of 11 immediately actionable proposals to help resolve the debt crisis, backed by my group of experts on debt that will be publishing their report.
     
    I look forward to working closely with Member States — including the G20 — to bring this forum to life.
     
    Por encima de todo, Sevilla va de soluciones.
     
    Y de encontrar esas soluciones en un momento de dificultades y división para la familia humana.
     
    Espero que nuestros esfuerzos colectivos aquí en Sevilla puedan inspirar y motivar a los países del mundo a trabajar unidos para resolver otros desafíos globales.
     
    Y una vez más, quiero agradecer al Presidente del Gobierno y al pueblo español por dar la bienvenida al mundo aquí en Sevilla. 
     
    Muchas gracias.

    ****
    [all-English]

    Prime Minister Sánchez, my thanks to you and the government and people of Spain for your tremendous hospitality.

    Dear Pedro Sánchez, President of the Government of Spain, I would like to thank you and the Government and people of Spain for the magnificent organization of this Conference and for the extraordinary hospitality we are receiving.

    Spain is a pillar of multilateralism, a steadfast partner of the United Nations, and a champion of development as we see once again in your hosting of this major conference. 

    Spain is also a leading global voice for peace — and understands the deep linkages between development and peace.

    At a time of profound global turmoil, we must keep working for peace, for peace in the Middle East.

    For an immediate ceasefire in Gaza, the immediate release of all hostages, and unimpeded humanitarian access as a first step to achieve the two-State solution.

    For the ceasefire between Iran and Israel to hold.

    For a just and lasting peace in Ukraine based on the UN Charter, international law and UN resolutions. 

    For an end to the horror and bloodshed in Sudan.

    We know that sustainable peace requires sustainable development.

    Ladies and gentlemen of the media.

    As I said in opening the Conference this morning, development is not just about numbers on a page.

    It’s about food, health care and education.

    It’s about jobs and social protection.

    It’s about infrastructure like water systems, internet access and climate-resilient buildings.

    It’s about providing equal opportunity for girls and women which moves all societies ahead.

    It’s about easing human suffering, and driving progress across every community, large and small.

    Development is about people.

    And we have collectively made great strides in development in recent decades.

    But progress doesn’t happen on its own. 

    It takes support and investment.

    As we meet, the world is falling behind in its commitments to advance the Sustainable Development Goals.

    Achieving them will take an investment of more than $4 trillion a year.

    Meanwhile, global growth is slowing, trade barriers are rising, and aid budgets are falling.

    Developing countries are drowning in debt service payments, which have skyrocketed to $1.4 trillion every year.

    And the great enabler of development — international cooperation — is being chipped away by geopolitical mistrust and division.

    This Conference is about rebuilding that trust with concrete commitments.

    With the adoption of the Sevilla Commitment document, countries are proving their dedication to getting the engine of development revving again:

    Through new domestic and global commitments that can channel public and private finance to the areas of greatest need…

    By overhauling the world’s approach to debt to make borrowing work in service of sustainable development…

    And by reforming the global financial architecture to reflect today’s realities and the urgent needs of developing countries, that must have a much stronger voice and participation in the institutions of this financial architecture.

    The Sevilla Platform of Action being launched later today will help us move from words to action.

    It contains dozens of new practical initiatives to accelerate funding for development around the world.

    This includes the commitment to establish a borrowers forum for countries to learn from one another and coordinate their approaches in debt management and restructuring.

    This is one of 11 immediately actionable proposals to help resolve the debt crisis, backed by my group of experts on debt that will be publishing their report.

    I look forward to working closely with Member States — including the G20 — to bring this forum to life.

    Above all, Sevilla is about solutions.

    And finding these solutions at a divided and difficult moment for the human family.

    It is my hope that our collective efforts here in Sevilla can inspire and motivate the countries of the world to work as one to solve other global challenges.

    Once again, I’d like to thank Prime Minister Sánchez and the people of Spain for welcoming the world to Sevilla. 

    Thank you.

    *****
    [all-Spanish]

    Querido Pedro Sánchez, Presidente del Gobierno de España quiero agradecerte y agradecer al Gobierno y al pueblo de España por la magnífica organización de esta Conferencia y por la extraordinaria hospitalidad que estamos recibiendo.

    España es un pilar del multilateralismo, un socio firme de las Naciones Unidas y un defensor del desarrollo – como lo demuestra, una vez más, al acoger esta importante conferencia.

    España es también una voz líder mundial por la paz – y comprende los profundos vínculos entre el desarrollo y la paz.

    En estos momentos de profunda agitación mundial, debemos seguir trabajando por la paz, por la paz en Oriente Medio.

    Por un alto el fuego inmediato en Gaza, la liberación inmediata de todos los rehenes y un acceso humanitario sin trabas – como primer paso para lograr la solución de dos Estados.

    Por el mantenimiento del alto el fuego entre Irán e Israel.

    Por una paz justa y duradera en Ucrania, basada en la Carta de las Naciones Unidas, el derecho internacional y las resoluciones de la ONU. 

    Por el fin del horror y el derramamiento de sangre en Sudán.

    Sabemos que una paz sostenible requiere un desarrollo sostenible.

    Señoras y señores de los medios,

    Como he dicho esta mañana al inaugurar la Conferencia, el desarrollo no es solo números en un papel.

    El desarrollo tiene que ver con la alimentación, la atención sanitaria y la educación.

    Con los empleos y la protección social.

    Con las infraestructuras, como los sistemas de abastecimiento de agua, el acceso a Internet y los edificios resistentes al clima.

    Se trata de ofrecer igualdad de oportunidades a las niñas y las mujeres, que tan a menudo son las primeras a quienes se deja atrás.

    Se trata de aliviar el sufrimiento humano e impulsar el progreso en todas las comunidades, tanto grandes como pequeñas.

    El desarrollo se trata de las personas.

    Y colectivamente hemos hecho grandes progresos en materia de desarrollo en las últimas décadas.

    Pero los progresos no se producen por sí solos. 

    Se necesita apoyo e inversión.

    Mientras nos reunimos, el mundo se está quedando a la zaga en sus compromisos de impulsar los Objetivos de Desarrollo Sostenible.

    Para alcanzarlos, hará falta una inversión de más de 4 billones de dólares al año.

    Y mientras tanto, el crecimiento mundial se ralentiza, las barreras comerciales aumentan, y disminuyen los presupuestos para ayuda.

    Los países en desarrollo están ahogados por los pagos de servicio de la deuda, que se han disparado hasta los 1,4 billones de dólares anuales.

    Y la desconfianza y la división geopolíticas están minando el gran motor del desarrollo, que es la cooperación internacional.

    Esta Conferencia trata de reconstruir esa confianza con compromisos concretos.

    Con la adopción del documento del Compromiso de Sevilla, los países están demostrando que quieren volver a acelerar el motor del desarrollo:

    Con nuevos compromisos nacionales y globales que dirijan la financiación pública y privada a las esferas donde es más necesaria…

    Revisando el enfoque global de la deuda para hacer que el endeudamiento esté al servicio del desarrollo sostenible…

    Y reformando la arquitectura financiera mundial para que refleje las realidades actuales y las necesidades urgentes de los países en desarrollo que deben tener una voz y una participación mucho más fuertes en las instituciones de esta arquitectura financiera.

    La Plataforma de Acción de Sevilla, que se pondrá en marcha hoy, nos ayudará a pasar de las palabras a los hechos.

    Contiene docenas de nuevas iniciativas prácticas para acelerar la financiación del desarrollo en todo el mundo.

    Este incluye el compromiso de establecer un foro de prestatarios para que los países aprendan unos de otros y coordinen sus planteamientos en la gestión de la deuda y la reestructuración.

    Esta es una de las 11 propuestas de acción inmediata para ayudar a resolver la crisis de la deuda, respaldadas por mi grupo de expertos en deuda que publicará su informe.

    Espero trabajar en estrecha colaboración con los Estados miembros -incluido el G20 – para dar vida a este foro.

    Por encima de todo, Sevilla va de soluciones.

    Y de encontrar esas soluciones en un momento de dificultades y división para la familia humana.

    Espero que nuestros esfuerzos colectivos aquí en Sevilla puedan inspirar y motivar a los países del mundo a trabajar unidos para resolver otros desafíos globales.

    Y una vez más, quiero agradecer al Presidente del Gobierno y al pueblo español por dar la bienvenida al mundo aquí en Sevilla. 

    Muchas gracias.

    MIL OSI United Nations News –

    July 1, 2025
  • MIL-OSI United Kingdom: Security and trade at heart of Foreign Secretary visit to Ankara

    Source: United Kingdom – Executive Government & Departments 3

    Press release

    Security and trade at heart of Foreign Secretary visit to Ankara

    UK visit to Turkey to bolster defence and security ties

    • David Lammy will visit Ankara to underscore close trade and security links between UK and Turkey during first bilateral visit to the country.  
    • Foreign Secretary to meet with Turkish Foreign Minister Fidan to discuss the situation in the Middle East and Russia’s illegal war in Ukraine.  
    • Visit comes as negotiations begin over new free trade agreement to supercharge UK-Turkey trade and deliver growth through the Plan for Change.

    The UK’s deep security and trade links with Turkey are set to be further strengthened as the Foreign Secretary, David Lammy, visits Ankara today [Monday 30 June].  

    In his first bilateral visit to the country, the Foreign Secretary will seek to advance UK-Turkish efforts on shared priorities, including joint work on regional security and the deepening of UK-Turkey trade and defence ties. 

    While in Ankara, the Foreign Secretary will meet Turkish Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan to discuss stability in the Middle East and efforts to secure a just, lasting peace in Ukraine following Russia’s illegal invasion. As close NATO allies, the UK and Turkey are working together to push for diplomatic solutions and an end to ongoing violence which threatens regional and global security.   

    As set out in the recent National Security Strategy, security and defence collaboration with Turkey is imperative to UK security interests. This includes joint work on the prospective export of Eurofighter Typhoons to Turkey, and the government is clear that welcoming Turkey as a Typhoon operator will build on the bonds of friendship developed over many decades between key NATO Allies.  

    Our cooperation with Turkey also delivers our security objectives of tackling global challenges such as terrorism, serious organised crime and irregular migration.

    The strengthening of the UK-Turkey trading relationship will also be a key priority for the Foreign Secretary, with his visit coming as the UK and Turkey begin negotiations over a new Free Trade Agreement (FTA) designed to unlock more opportunities for British and Turkish businesses.   

    UK-Turkey trade was worth almost £28 billion in 2024 and directly supports tens of thousands of UK jobs – furthering strengthening this relationship is a priority for the Foreign Secretary and will help to stimulate UK economic growth, a key part of the Prime Minister’s Plan for Change.  

    Foreign Secretary, David Lammy, said:  

    In an increasingly volatile world, the UK and Turkey remain the closest of friends and partners as we work together to find peaceful solutions to conflict in the Middle East and Russia’s illegal invasion of Ukraine.  

    Ours is a relationship which delivers directly for Turkish and British citizens at home – trade between our nations is responsible for thousands of jobs, while our security and defence links help keep our people safe.  

    During his visit, the Foreign Secretary will see a range of Turkish produced armoured vehicles built using UK-made safety equipment and engines at the Nurol Makina factory.   

    Later, at Ankara Airport, he will meet with Country President Simon Ward from aerospace company, Airbus, to mark a recent deal between Airbus and Turkish cargo airline MNG Airlines for commercial aircraft containing British-made Rolls Royce engines, worth hundreds of millions to the UK and Turkish economies.

    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 30 June 2025

    MIL OSI United Kingdom –

    July 1, 2025
  • NATO fund backs biotech startup in push to counter biological threats

    Source: Government of India

    Source: Government of India (4)

    The NATO Innovation Fund has made its first investment in a biotechnology company, it said on Monday, seeking to enhance defences against biological threats

    The fund is co-leading a $35 million fundraising round for Portal Biotech, which uses protein sequencing to detect engineered threats and defend against biological warfare.

    UK-based Portal Biotech’s capability is essential for biosecurity defence and security, said Ana Bernardo-Gancedo, senior associate at NATO Innovation Fund.

    “We believe that it is absolutely imperative that we are able to detect, monitor and create countermeasures,” she said.

    The fund, created in 2022 after the Russian invasion of Ukraine, plans to invest more than $1 billion in technologies that would enhance NATO’s defences.

    Portal Biotech uses an AI-backed technology with biological sensors that can work at the single molecule level on-site, giving results within hours.

    “It’s for everything from measuring diseases to better pandemic prevention … you can take this out of large labs with long turnaround times and into the field,” CEO Andy Heron told Reuters.

    Heron said the company’s instruments can detect any pathogen and can be used for continuous monitoring of anything from a field to water supply.

    “It allows you not just to detect what you did know was out there, but it allows you to detect what you didn’t know,” he said.

    Beyond biosecurity, Portal Biotech expects its portable equipment to aid in drug discovery and precision medicine.

    The company’s investors include Earlybird Venture Capital, Science Creates VC, Pillar VC, 8VC, We VC and British Business Bank.

    (Reuters)

    July 1, 2025
  • MIL-OSI Submissions: Why bending over backwards to agree with Donald Trump is a perilous strategy

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Andrew Gawthorpe, Lecturer in History and International Studies, Leiden University

    Donald Trump is a difficult figure to deal with, both for foreign leaders and figures closer to home who find themselves in his crosshairs. The US president is unpredictable, sensitive and willing to break the rules to get his way.

    But in Trump’s second term, a variety of different leaders and institutions seem to have settled on a way to handle him. The key, they seem to think, is flattery. The most obvious example came at the recently concluded Nato summit in The Hague, Netherlands, where world leaders got together to discuss the future of the alliance.

    Previous summits with Trump have descended into recrimination and backbiting. The organisers were determined to avoid a repeat – and decided the best way to do it was to make Trump feel really, really good about himself.

    Even before the summit began, Nato secretary-general Mark Rutte had texted Trump to thank him for his “decisive action” in bombing Iran. This, he said, was something “no one else dared to do”.

    Then, when discussing Trump’s role in ending the war between Israel and Iran, Rutte referred to Trump as “daddy” – a name the White House has already transformed into a meme.

    The summit itself was light on the sort of contentious and detailed policy discussions that have historically bored and angered Trump.

    Instead, it was reduced to a series of photo opportunities and speeches in which other leaders lavished praise on Trump. Lithuania’s president, Gitanas Nausėda, even suggested the alliance ought to copy Trump’s political movement by adopting the phrase “make Nato great again”.

    Nato leaders aren’t the only ones trying this trick. British prime minister Keir Starmer has had a go at it too. Starmer has made sure that Trump will be the first US president to make a second state visit to the UK. He described the honour in Trump-like terms: “This has never happened before. It’s so incredible. It will be historic.”

    After Trump announced global trade tariffs earlier in the year, Starmer was the first leader to give Trump a much-needed victory by reaching a framework trade agreement. But it worked both ways, with Starmer able to land a political victory too.

    In his first term, flattery was also seen as a tool to be used to get Trump onside. Ukraine’s Volodymyr Zelensky tried it in phone conversations with the US president, calling him a “great teacher” from whom he learned “skills and knowledge”.

    Flattery and compliance clearly have their uses. Trump is extremely sensitive to criticism and susceptible to praise, however hyperbolic and transparent it might be. Buttering him up may be an effective way to get him to back off.

    But it doesn’t achieve much else. At the Nato summit, an opportunity was missed to make progress on issues of real importance, such as how to better support Ukraine in its war against Russia or to better coordinate European defence spending.

    A summit dedicated to the sole aim of making Trump feel good is one with very limited aims indeed. All it does is push the difficult decisions forward for another day.

    A missed opportunity

    Individual decisions to bow down to Trump also mean missing the opportunity to mount collective resistance. One country might not be able to stand up to the president, but the odds of doing so would be greatly improved if leaders banded together.

    For example, Trump’s trade tariffs will damage the US economy as well as those of its trading partners. That is especially the case if those partners impose tariffs of their own on US goods.

    If each country instead follows Britain’s lead in the hope of getting the best deal for itself, they will have missed the opportunity to force the president to feel some discomfort of his own – and possibly change course.

    But perhaps the greatest danger of flattering Trump is that it teaches him that he can get away with doing pretty much whatever he likes. For a president who has threatened to annex the territory of Nato allies Denmark and Canada to nevertheless be feted at a Nato summit sends a message of impunity.

    That’s a dangerous lesson for Trump to learn. He has spent much of his second term undermining democratic and liberal norms at home and key tenets of US foreign policy abroad, such as hostility to Russia. He is attempting to undermine all traditional sources of authority and expertise and instead make the world dance to his own tune.

    Given the expansive scope of his aims, which many experts already think is leading to a constitutional crisis that threatens democracy, the willingness to suck up to Trump normalises him in a menacing way.

    When his targets roll over, it sends a message to others that Trump is unstoppable and resistance is futile. It encourages not just the next presidential abuse of power, but also the next surrender from those he chooses to attack.

    Perhaps the best that can be said for this strategy is that maybe it will appease Trump enough to prevent him from doing too much actual harm. But when dealing with such an unpredictable and vindictive president, that is a thin reed of hope.

    It is much more likely to encourage him to press on – until the harm becomes too severe to ignore.

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

    – ref. Why bending over backwards to agree with Donald Trump is a perilous strategy – https://theconversation.com/why-bending-over-backwards-to-agree-with-donald-trump-is-a-perilous-strategy-259936

    MIL OSI –

    July 1, 2025
  • MIL-OSI Submissions: Why flattering Donald Trump could be dangerous

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Jonathan Este, Senior International Affairs Editor, Associate Editor

    This article was first published in The Conversation UK’s World Affairs Briefing email newsletter. Sign up to receive weekly analysis of the latest developments in international relations, direct to your inbox.


    Once again Donald Trump and his senior team are unhappy with their press coverage. Here’s the US president, fresh from his triumph in The Hague, having persuaded Nato’s leaders to open their wallets and agree to up their defence spending to 5% of GDP (apart from Spain, that is, which can expect to hear of triple-digit tariffs coming its way in the near future) – and do the media focus on Trump’s tour de force? Do they hell. Instead they focus on whether his strikes against Iran had been as successful as he claimed.

    As you can imagine, this would have been irksome in the extreme for the president, who might reasonably have expected that the story of the day would be his victory in getting pledges from virtually all Nato’s members to pull their weight in terms of their own defence. Certainly the Nato secretary-general, Mark Rutte, could appreciate the scale of his achievement. Even before the summit, Rutte was talking it up.

    “Donald, you have driven us to a really, really important moment for America and Europe, and the world,” he wrote in a message to Trump as the US president prepared to fly to The Netherlands. “You will achieve something NO American president in decades could get done.”

    The fact that Trump promptly posted this message to his TruthSocial website suggests how important praise is to the the US president. It’s something that many world leaders (including Benjamin Netanyahu and Vladimir Putin who have become past-masters at pouring honey in the president’s ear) have recognised and are willing to use as a diplomatic tool when dealing with the man Rutte calls “Daddy”.


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


    But while flattery as a tactic seems to be effective with the US president, Andrew Gawthorpe, a political historian from Leiden University, cautions that flattery, appeasement and compliance are a flawed approach when dealing with a man like Trump. For a start, he writes it means that not much actually gets done and that problems are often merely avoided rather than solved.

    But more worryingly, simply capitulating in the face of Trumpian pressure or ire risks giving this US president the idea that he can do anything he wants. “When his targets roll over, it sends a message to others that Trump is unstoppable and resistance is futile,” writes Gawthorpe. It encourages not just the next presidential abuse of power, but also the next surrender from its victims.




    Read more:
    Why bending over backwards to agree with Donald Trump is a perilous strategy


    We got a taste of what the US president’s anger at being defied sounds like as he prepared to fly to The Netherlands for the Nato summit. Asked about the ceasefire he had negotiated between Israel and Iran, he lashed out at both countries who had breached the peace within hours of agreeing to stop firing missiles at each other. “We basically have two countries that have been fighting so long and so hard that they don’t know what the fuck they’re doing,” he told reporters as he walked to the presidential helicopter.

    Psychologist Geoff Beattie, of Edge Hill University, believes this was no accidental verbal slip. Trump wanted to let the world know how angry he was and chose to use the “f-bomb” as a way of showing it. Beattie looks at what this can tell us about the character of the US president – and how it might reflect a tendency to make rapid decisions based on emotional reactions.




    Read more:
    Trump’s f-bomb: a psychologist explains why the president makes fast and furious statements


    And so to Nato

    What was remarkable about the Nato summit was that it was condensed to one fairly short session which focused solely on the issue of Nato members’ defence budgets. Usually there’s a much broader agenda. Over the past couple of years the issue of Ukraine has been fairly high on the list, but this time – perhaps to avoid any potential divisions – it was relegated to a side issue.

    Perhaps the biggest success for Nato, writes Stefan Wolff, is that they managed to get Trump to the summit and keep him in the room. After all, less than a fortnight previously he walked out of the G7 leaders’ meeting in Canada a day early before authorising the bombing raids on Iran’s nuclear installations (of which more later).

    Wolff, an expert in international security from the University of Birmingham (and a regular contributor to this newsletter) believes that the non-US members realised they had little choice but to comply – or at least to be seen to be complying. There’s a significant capability deficit: “European states also lack most of the so-called critical enablers, the military hardware and technology required to prevail in a potential war with Russia.”

    So keeping the US president onside – and inside Nato with a remaining commitment to America’s article 5 mutual defence pledge – was top of the list this year and something they appear to have pulled off.




    Read more:
    At June’s Nato summit, just keeping Donald Trump in the room will be seen as a victory


    The fact is, writes Andrew Corbett, a defence expert at King’s College London, that Europe and the US have different enemies these days. Europe is still focused on the foe it faced across the Iron Curtain after 1945, against which Nato was designed as a defensive bulwark.

    The US is now far more focused on the threat from China. This means it will increasingly shift the bulk of its naval assets to the Pacific (although the Middle East seems to be delaying this shift at present). This inevitably means downgrading its presence in Europe, something of which European leaders are all-too aware.

    The importance of continuing US involvement in European defence via Nato was underlined, as Corbett highlights, by a frisson of unease when it appeared that the US president might be preparing to reinterpret article 5, which requires that members come to the aid of another member if they are attacked.

    So there was relief all round when the US president reaffirmed America’s commitment to the principle of collective defence. But one feels Rutte will need to use all his diplomatic wiles to keep things that way.




    Read more:
    How Nato summit shows Europe and US no longer have a common enemy


    The trouble with Iran

    Rutte, who has the nickname “Trump whisperer”, is clever enough to know that emollient words will have been just what the US president was looking for given the stress of the past couple of weeks. The decision to launch strikes against Iran was controversial even within his own base as we noted last week.

    But by directly engaging in hostility against Iran, Trump risked embroiling the US in the “forever war” that he always promised his supporters he would avoid. The move was freighted with risk. Nobody knew how Iran might retaliate or how the situation could escalate. There was (and remains) the chance that an angry Iran could try to shut down the Strait of Hormuz. This is one of the world’s most important waterways though which 20% of the world’s oil transits. This would have huge ramifications for the global economy, seriously damaging Iran’s Gulf neighbours and angering China, which gets much of its oil from the region.




    Read more:
    Iran is considering closing the strait of Hormuz – why this would be a major escalation


    For now it appears that Iran has contented itself with performative strikes against US bases in Iraq and Qatar, having given advance warning. This token retaliation was made shortly before the ceasefire was negotiated. Despite a defiant message from Iran’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, Iran is reported to be making noises about coming to the negotiating table. A deal to restore calm to the region would be an achievement indeed.

    But legal questions remain about the US decision to launch strikes. For a start, Article 2(4) of the UN charter strictly forbids the use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of another state, or “in any other manner inconsistent with the purposes of the United Nations”.

    But, as Caleb Wheeler, an expert in international law from the University of Cardiff writes, it’s a rule that has rarely been either observed or enforced. He points out that the Korean War, when following a resolution of the UN security council, a number of countries went to war with North Korea to defend its southern neighbour which had been attacked in violation of article 2(4), was the high watermark of compliance with the UN on conflict.

    In most other international conflicts since, the use of vetoes by one or another of the permanent members of the security council has effectively prevented the UN acting the way it was supposed to.

    Now, writes Wheeler, there can be little doubt the US has violated article 2(4) by bombing Iran, particularly as Trump expressed his opinion that a regime change might be appropriate. Given that the US is one of the leading lights of the UN, Wheeler thinks you could reasonably expect a degree of condemnation from other world leaders. He worries that the absence of criticism could seriously lower the bar for aggression in the future.




    Read more:
    Bombing Iran: has the UN charter failed?


    And if, as remains unclear at present, Iran’s nuclear programme was not set back by years, as the US claims, but merely by months, then you could expect Tehran to redouble its efforts to acquire a bomb. The Islamic Republic will be mindful of the fact that there has been little talk of bombing North Korea in recent years, for example. Possession of a nuclear deterrent means exactly what it says.

    So, conclude David Dunn and Nicholas Wheeler, these strikes which were conducted on what they feel was the false premise of defence against an “imminent” threat from a nuclear Iran, could actually have the opposite effect of encouraging Iran to rapidly develop its own bomb.




    Read more:
    US attack on Iran lacks legal justification and could lead to more nuclear proliferation


    Elon Musk’s geopolitical eye in the sky

    After Israel began its latest campaign of airstrikes against Iran earlier this month, the government moved to restrict internet access around the country to discourage criticism of the regime and make it difficult for protesters to organise. But in June 14 in response to a plea over social media, Elon Musk announced, appropriately on X, that he would open up access to his Starlink satellite system.

    Joscha Abels, a political scientist at the University of Tübingen, recalls that Starlink became very popular in Iran during the protests that followed the killing of Mahsa Amini in 2022, and which really rocked the regime to its core. He also points to the use of Starlink by Ukraine as a vital communications tool in its defence against Russia over the past three years.

    But Abels warns that what is given is also too easily switched off, as Musk did in Ukraine in 2023. At the time a senior Starlink executive warned that the tool was “never intended to be weaponized”. The concern is that such an important tool, which can make or break a regime or cripple a country’s defence, could be a risk in the hands of a private individual.




    Read more:
    In the sky over Iran, Elon Musk and Starlink step into geopolitics – not for the first time


    World Affairs Briefing from The Conversation UK is available as a weekly email newsletter. Click here to get updates directly in your inbox.


    – ref. Why flattering Donald Trump could be dangerous – https://theconversation.com/why-flattering-donald-trump-could-be-dangerous-259940

    MIL OSI –

    July 1, 2025
  • MIL-OSI Submissions: Global crises have hit education hard: 24 years of research offers a way forward for southern Africa

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

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

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


    What are the global crises that have undermined education?

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

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

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

    Who suffers most, and in what ways?

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

    But the impact is not distributed equally.

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

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

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

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

    What makes southern African education systems fragile?

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

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

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

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

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

    How can southern Africa build education systems to withstand crises?

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

    Research points to a number of ways to do this:

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

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

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

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

    • Interdisciplinary and cross-national research collaborations.

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

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

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

    What’s the cost of doing nothing?

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

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

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

    Spending on educational resilience avoids those costs.

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

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

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

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

    MIL OSI –

    July 1, 2025
  • Which countries are quitting a key landmine treaty and why?

    Source: Government of India

    Source: Government of India (4)

    Ukraine has joined other countries bordering Russia in signalling that it will withdraw from the Ottawa Convention banning anti-personnel landmines, in the face of what they say are growing military threats from Russia.

    NATO members Finland, Poland and the three ex-Soviet Baltic states – Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania – have either withdrawn from the convention or indicated that they would do so, citing the increased military danger from their neighbour.

    The moves threaten to reverse decades of campaigning by activists who say there should be a global ban on a weapon that blights huge swathes of territory and maims and kills civilians long after conflicts have abated.

    Countries that quit the 1997 treaty – one of a series of international agreements concluded after the end of the Cold War to encourage global disarmament – will be able to start producing, using, stockpiling and transferring landmines once again.

    COUNTRIES EXITING

    All European countries bordering Russia have announced plans to quit the global treaty,apart from Norway which has only a 200 km (125 mile) border with Russia in its remote Arctic far north, andsaid it was important to maintain stigma around landmines.

    Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelenskiy said on Sunday that he had signed a decree to pull Ukraine out of the Convention because Russia has used anti-personnel mines extensively in parts of Ukraine during the 40-month-old war.

    Anti-personnel mines, Zelenskiy said, are “often the instrument for which nothing can be substituted for defence purposes”.

    Some European countries have said they fear that Russia could use any pause in fighting to re-arm and target them.

    Officials have suggested a withdrawal could put them on more of an equal footing with Russia which has not signed or ratified the treaty. Other major powers that have not signed include the United States and China.

    U.N. Secretary General Antonio Guterres in mid-June raised grave concerns about recent withdrawal announcements, and urged all states to adhere to existing treaties and immediately halt any steps towards their withdrawal.

    FUNDING CUTS

    As countries quit the convention, global demining efforts are also backsliding amid “crippling” U.S. funding cuts under President Donald Trump, according to the International Campaign to Ban Landmines. Washington had provided more than $300 million a year, or 40% of total international support for removing mines, according to the Landmine Monitor report in 2024.

    A State Department official said in March it had restarted some global humanitarian demining programmes and activities, without giving details. It has previously run major programmes in Iraq, Afghanistan and Laos.

    Anti-personnel landmines are generally hidden in the ground and designed to detonate automatically when someone steps on them or passes nearby. More than 80% of mine victims are civilians, according to the International Committee of the Red Cross.

    The convention includes provisions to assist victims, many of whom have lost limbs and suffer from other permanent disabilities.

    In June 2025 the U.N. reported that Ukraine had become the most mined country in the world. It said there had been around 800 civilian casualties due to unexploded ordnance.

    (Reuters)

    June 30, 2025
  • MIL-OSI Asia-Pac: President Lai meets Minister of State at UK Department for Business and Trade Douglas Alexander  

    Source: Republic of China Taiwan

    Details
    2025-06-27
    President Lai confers decoration on former Japan-Taiwan Exchange Association Chairman Ohashi Mitsuo
    On the morning of June 27, President Lai Ching-te conferred the Order of Brilliant Star with Grand Cordon upon former Chairman of the Japan-Taiwan Exchange Association Ohashi Mitsuo in recognition of his firm convictions and tireless efforts in promoting Taiwan-Japan exchanges. In remarks, President Lai stated that Chairman Ohashi cares for Taiwan like a family member, and expressed hope that Taiwan and Japan continue to deepen their partnership, bring about the early signing of an economic partnership agreement (EPA), and jointly build secure and stable non-red supply chains as we boost the resilience and competitiveness of our economies and jointly safeguard the values of freedom and democracy. A translation of President Lai’s remarks follows: Every meeting I have with Chairman Ohashi, with whom I have worked side by side for many years, is warm and friendly. I recall that when we met last year, Chairman Ohashi said that he often thinks about what Japan can do for Taiwan and what Taiwan can do for Japan, and that it is that mutual concern that makes us so close. This was a truly moving statement illustrating the relationship between Taiwan and Japan. Chairman Ohashi has also said numerous times that our bilateral relations may very well be the best in the entire world, and that in fact they may serve as a model to other countries. Indeed, Chairman Ohashi is himself an exemplary model for friendly relations between Taiwan and Japan. His spirit of always working tirelessly to promote Taiwan-Japan exchanges is truly admirable. Assuming the position of chairman of the Japan-Taiwan Exchange Association in 2011, he served during the terms of former Presidents Ma Ying-jeou and Tsai Ing-wen, continuously making positive contributions to Taiwan-Japan relations. Over these past 14 years, Taiwan and Japan have signed over 50 major agreements, spanning the economy and trade, fisheries, and taxes, among other areas. In 2017, the Taiwan-Japan Relations Association and the Japan-Taiwan Exchange Association underwent name changes, strengthening the essence and significance of Taiwan-Japan relations. These great achievements were all made possible thanks to the firm convictions and tireless efforts of Chairman Ohashi. On behalf of the people of Taiwan, I am delighted to confer upon Chairman Ohashi the Order of Brilliant Star with Grand Cordon to express our deepest thanks for his outstanding contributions. Chairman Ohashi is not just a good friend of Taiwan, but someone who cares for Taiwan like a family member. When a major earthquake struck in 2016, he personally went to Tainan to assess the situation and meet with the city government. This outpouring of friendship and support across borders was deeply moving. As we look to the future, I hope that Taiwan and Japan can continue to deepen our partnership. In addition to bringing about the early signing of an EPA, I also hope that we can expand collaboration in key areas such as semiconductors, energy, and AI, continue building secure and stable non-red supply chains, and boost the resilience and competitiveness of our economies as well as peace and stability in the Indo-Pacific. As Chairman Ohashi has said, the close bilateral relationship between Taiwan and Japan is one the world can be proud of. I would like to thank him once again for his contributions to deepening Taiwan-Japan ties. Taiwan will continue to forge ahead side by side with Japan, jointly safeguarding the values of freedom and democracy and mutually advancing prosperous development. I wish Chairman Ohashi good health, happiness, peace, and success in his future endeavors, and invite him to return to Taiwan often to visit old friends. Chairman Ohashi then delivered remarks, first thanking President Lai for his kind words. He stated that the Taiwan-Japan relationship is not only worthy of praise; it can also serve as a superb model in the world for bilateral relations that is worthy of study by other countries. He added that this is the result of the collective efforts of President Lai as well as many other individuals. Chairman Ohashi said that the current international situation is rather severe, with wars and conflicts occurring between many neighboring countries. He said that there is a growing trend of nuclear weapon proliferation, emphasizing that use of such weapons would cause significant harm between nations. He also pointed out that some countries even use nuclear weapons as a threat, leading to instability and impacting the global situation. Chairman Ohashi said that neither Taiwan nor Japan possesses nuclear weapons, which is something to be proud of. That is why, he said, we can declare that a world without nuclear weapons is a peaceful world. He also mentioned that during his tenure as chairman of the Japan-Taiwan Exchange Association, he consistently upheld this principle in his work. Chairman Ohashi said that the mission of the World Federalist Movement (WFM) is to promote world peace. He said that the WFM has branches in countries worldwide, with the WFM of Japan being one of the most prominent, and that it also aspires to achieve the goal of world peace. Having served as chairman of the Japan-Taiwan Exchange Association for 14 years, he said, he is now stepping down from this role and will serve as the chairman of the WFM of Japan, aiming to promote peace in countries around the world. Chairman Ohashi said that both Taiwan and Japan can take pride in our friendly bilateral relationship, emphasizing that if the good relationship between Japan and Taiwan could be offered as an example to countries around the world, there would be no more wars. He expressed his sincere hope that under President Lai’s leadership, Taiwan and Japan can work together to jointly promote world peace. Also in attendance at the ceremony was Japan-Taiwan Exchange Association Taipei Office Chief Representative Katayama Kazuyuki.

    Details
    2025-06-25
    President Lai meets Japan’s former Economic Security Minister Kobayashi Takayuki
    On the afternoon of June 25, President Lai Ching-te met with Kobayashi Takayuki, Japan’s former economic security minister and a current member of the House of Representatives. In remarks, President Lai expressed hope to combine the strengths of the democratic community to build resilient, reliable non-red supply chains, and ensure a resilient global economy and sustainable development. He also expressed hope that Taiwan and Japan can bring about the early signing of an economic partnership agreement (EPA), and that Japan will continue supporting Taiwan’s bid to join the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP), enhancing our own bilateral partnership, as doing so would create win-win situations and further contribute to regional economic security and stability. The following is a translation of President Lai’s remarks: I welcome Representative Kobayashi back to Taiwan for another visit after seven years. During his last visit, he was with a delegation from the Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) Youth Division, and we met at the Executive Yuan. I am very happy to see him again today. Representative Kobayashi has long paid close attention to matters involving economic security, technological innovation, and aerospace policy. He also made a stunning debut in last year’s LDP presidential election, showing that he is truly a rising star and an influential figure in the political sphere. With this visit, Representative Kobayashi is demonstrating support for Taiwan with concrete action, which is very meaningful. Taiwan and Japan are both part of the first island chain’s key line of defense. We thank the many Japanese prime ministers, including former Prime Ministers Abe Shinzo, Suga Yoshihide, and Kishida Fumio, as well as current Prime Minister Ishiba Shigeru, for the many times they have highlighted the importance of peace and stability in the Taiwan Strait at important international venues, and for expressing opposition to the use of force or coercion to unilaterally change the status quo in the Taiwan Strait. I hope that Taiwan and Japan can engage in more cooperation and exchanges to promote peace and prosperity in the Indo-Pacific region in all aspects. In particular, China in recent years has been actively expanding its red supply chains, which threaten the global free trade system and advanced technology markets. Taiwan hopes to combine the strengths of the democratic community to build resilient, reliable non-red supply chains. In the semiconductor industry, for example, Taiwan has excellent advanced manufacturing capabilities, while Japan plays an important role in materials, equipment, and key technologies. I am confident that, given the experience that Taiwan and Japan have in cooperating, we can build an industrial supply chain composed of democratic nations to ensure a resilient global economy and sustainable development. I hope that Taiwan and Japan can bring about the early signing of an EPA in order to deepen our bilateral trade and investment exchanges and cooperation. I also hope that Japan will continue supporting Taiwan’s bid to join the CPTPP, enhancing our own bilateral partnership, as doing so would create win-win situations and further contribute to regional economic security and stability. Taiwan and Japan are democratic partners that share the values of freedom, democracy, and respect for human rights. I firmly believe that so long as we work together, we can certainly address the challenges posed by authoritarianism, and bring prosperity and development to the Indo-Pacific region. In closing, I welcome Representative Kobayashi once again. I am certain that this visit will help enhance Taiwan-Japan exchanges and deepen our friendship. Representative Kobayashi then delivered remarks, first thanking President Lai for taking the time to meet with him, and noting that this was his second visit to Taiwan following a trip seven years prior, when he came with his good friend from college and then-Director of the LDP Youth Division Suzuki Keisuke, now Japan’s minister of justice. Representative Kobayashi mentioned a Japanese kanji that he is very fond of – 絆 (kizuna) – which means “deep ties of friendship.” He emphasized that a key purpose of this visit to Taiwan was to reiterate the deep ties of friendship between Taiwan and Japan. In addition to deep historical ties, he said, Taiwan and Japan also enjoy a like-minded partnership in terms of economic, personnel, and friendship-oriented exchanges. He went on to say that at the strategic level, Taiwan and Japan also have deep ties of friendship, and that for Japan, it is strategically important that Taiwan not be isolated under any circumstances. Representative Kobayashi emphasized that cooperation between Taiwan and Japan, and even cooperation among Taiwan, Japan, and the United States, are more important now than ever, and that another important focus of this visit is the non-red supply chains referred to earlier by President Lai. He said that as Japan’s first economic security minister and the person currently in charge of the LDP’s policy on economic security, he is acutely aware of the important impact of economic security on national interests, and therefore looks forward to further exchanging views regarding Taiwan’s concrete steps to build non-red supply chains. The delegation was accompanied to the Presidential Office by Japan-Taiwan Exchange Association Deputy Representative Takaba Yo.

    Details
    2025-06-16
    President Lai meets delegation led by Representative Bera, co-chair of US Congressional Taiwan Caucus
    On the morning of June 16, President Lai Ching-te met with a delegation led by Representative Ami Bera, co-chair of the US Congressional Taiwan Caucus. In remarks, President Lai thanked the representatives in Congress for actively voicing support for Taiwan and proposing numerous Taiwan-friendly initiatives to strengthen Taiwan-US ties, helping expand Taiwan’s international space and continuing to place focus on peace and stability across the Taiwan Strait. The president said that we will continue to strengthen bilateral investment and industrial cooperation and create a more comprehensive environment for economic and trade exchanges to jointly enhance economic and developmental resilience. A translation of President Lai’s remarks follows: I am delighted to meet with the delegation and welcome Congressman Bera back to the Presidential Office. Last January, he visited after the presidential election, demonstrating the steadfast backing of the US Congress for democratic Taiwan. This time, as head of a delegation of new members of the House Armed Services Committee and the Foreign Affairs Committee, he is continuing to foster US congressional support for Taiwan. On behalf of the people of Taiwan, I extend a sincere welcome to Congressman Bera and all our esteemed guests. Over the years, staunch bipartisan US congressional backing of Taiwan has been a key force for steadily advancing our bilateral relations. I thank the representatives in Congress for actively voicing support for Taiwan and proposing numerous Taiwan-friendly initiatives, thereby strengthening Taiwan-US ties, helping expand Taiwan’s international space, and continuing to place focus on peace and stability across the Taiwan Strait. I want to emphasize that Taiwan has an unwavering determination to safeguard peace and stability in the Indo-Pacific region. Over the past year, the government and private sector have been working together to enhance Taiwan’s whole-of-society defense resilience and accelerate reform of national defense. The government is also prioritizing special budget allocations to ensure that our defense budget exceeds three percent of GDP this year. I hope that Taiwan-US security cooperation will evolve beyond military procurement to a partnership that encompasses joint research and development and joint production, further strengthening cooperation and exchange in the defense industry. Regarding industrial exchanges, last month, Minister of Foreign Affairs Lin Chia-lung (林佳龍) and Minister of Economic Affairs Kuo Jyh-huei (郭智輝) each visited Texas to see firsthand Taiwan-US collaboration in AI and semiconductors. And the delegation led by Executive Yuan Secretary-General Kung Ming-hsin (龔明鑫) sent by Taiwan to this year’s SelectUSA Investment Summit in Washington, DC, was again the largest of those attending. All of this demonstrates Taiwan’s commitment to working alongside the US to create mutual prosperity. In the future, we will continue to strengthen bilateral investment and industrial cooperation. And I hope that the legislation addressing the issue of Taiwan-US double taxation will become law this year. I want to thank Congressman Bera for co-leading a joint letter last November signed by over 100 members of Congress calling for such legislation. I believe that by creating a more comprehensive environment for economic and trade exchanges, Taiwan and the US can enhance economic and developmental resilience. In closing, I thank you all for making the long journey here to advance Taiwan-US relations. Let us continue working together to promote the prosperous development of this important partnership. Congressman Bera then delivered remarks, saying that on behalf of the delegation, it is an honor for him to be here once again, it being last January that he and Congressman Mario Díaz-Balart visited and congratulated President Lai on his election victory, noting that theirs was the first congressional delegation to do so. Congressman Bera said that this is an important time, not just for the US and Taiwan relationship, but for all relationships around the world. When we look at conflicts in Europe and in the Middle East, he said, it is incumbent upon democracies to hold the peace in Asia. He emphasized that is why it is important for them to bring a delegation of members of the Foreign Affairs Committee and the Armed Services Committee, adding that he believes for all of them it is their first trip to Taiwan.  Congressman Bera said that while this is a delegation of Democratic members of Congress, in a bipartisan way all of Congress continues to support the people of Taiwan. As such, in this visit he brings support from his co-chairs on the Taiwan caucus, Congressman Díaz-Balart and Congressman Andy Barr. He also took a moment to recognize the passing of Congressman Gerald Connolly, who was a longtime friend of Taiwan and one of their co-chairs on the caucus. Congressman Bera mentioned that there is always a special bond between himself and President Lai because they are both doctors, and as doctors, their profession is about healing, keeping the peace, and making sure everybody has a bright, prosperous future. In closing, he highlighted that it is in that spirit that their delegation visits with the president. The delegation also included members of the US Congress Gabe Amo, Wesley Bell, Julie Johnson, Sarah McBride, and Johnny Olszewski.

    Details
    2025-06-13
    President Lai meets delegation led by French National Assembly Taiwan Friendship Group Chair Marie-Noëlle Battistel
    On the morning of June 12, President Lai Ching-te met a delegation led by Marie-Noëlle Battistel, chair of the French National Assembly’s Taiwan Friendship Group. In remarks, President Lai thanked the National Assembly for its long-term support for Taiwan’s international participation and for upholding security in the Taiwan Strait, helping make France the first major country in the world to enact legislation to uphold freedom of navigation in the Taiwan Strait. The president also said that exchanges and cooperation between Taiwan and France are becoming more frequent, and that he hopes this visit by the Taiwan Friendship Group will inject new momentum into Taiwan-France relations and help build closer partnerships in the economy, trade, energy, and digital security.  A translation of President Lai’s remarks follows: First, I would like to welcome Chair Battistel, who is once again leading a visiting delegation. Last year, Chair Battistel co-led a delegation to attend the inauguration ceremony for myself and Vice President Bi-khim Hsiao. This is her fourth visit, and first as chair of the Taiwan Friendship Group, which makes it especially meaningful. This delegation’s visit demonstrates strong support for Taiwan, and on behalf of the people of Taiwan, I want to express my sincerest welcome and thanks. France is a pioneer in promoting free and democratic values. These are values that Taiwan cherishes and is working hard to defend. I want to express gratitude to the French Parliament for their long-term support for Taiwan’s international participation, and for upholding security in the Taiwan Strait. The French Parliament’s two chambers have continued to strongly support Taiwan, with the passage of a resolution supporting Taiwan’s participation in international organizations in 2021, as well as the passage of the seven-year Military Programming Law in 2023. This has made France the first major country in the world to enact legislation to uphold freedom of navigation in the Taiwan Strait. Through it all, the Taiwan Friendship Group has played a key role, and I want to thank all of our distinguished guests for their efforts. Over the past few years, Taiwan and France have continued to deepen cooperation in areas including the economy, technology, culture, and sports. At the Choose France summit held in Paris last month, Taiwanese and French enterprises also announced they will launch cooperation in the semiconductor and satellite fields. The VivaTech startup exhibition, now being held in France, also has many Taiwanese vendors participating. Exchanges and cooperation between Taiwan and France, whether official or people-to-people, are becoming more and more frequent. I hope that this visit by the Taiwan Friendship Group will inject new momentum into Taiwan-France relations, building closer partnerships in the economy, trade, energy, and digital security.  To address current geopolitical and economic challenges, Taiwan will continue to join forces with France and other like-minded countries to jointly safeguard peace and stability in the Indo-Pacific region, and contribute our concerted efforts to global prosperity and development. Once again, I want to welcome our visitors to Taiwan. I hope to continue our joint efforts to create a more prosperous future for both Taiwan and France.   Chair Battistel then delivered remarks, thanking President Lai for extending this invitation. Last year on May 20, she said, she and her delegation attended the presidential inauguration ceremony, so she was delighted to visit Taiwan once again with the French National Assembly’s Taiwan Friendship Group and bear witness to their friendship with Taiwan. Chair Battistel noted that this visit has given them an opportunity to strengthen Taiwan-France relations in areas including the economy, culture, the humanities, and diplomacy, and conduct exchanges with numerous heads of government agencies and research institutes. It has also been an opportunity, she said, to witness the importance of exchanges and cooperation with Taiwan in areas including energy, semiconductors, youth, and culture, and the impact created by important issues of mutual concern, including AI and disinformation, on the security of many countries. Chair Battistel praised Taiwan for its youth development efforts, and said that under the Taiwan Global Pathfinders Initiative, 30 Taiwanese young people have embarked on a visit to France, with itineraries including the United Nations Ocean Conference and the VivaTech exhibition, as well as the city of Toulouse, which is strategically important for the aerospace industry. Members of the group are also conducting exchanges at the French National Assembly, she said.  Chair Battistel stated that the Taiwan-France partnership is growing closer, and that she hopes to continue to strengthen bilateral exchanges and cooperation, as supporting peace for Taiwan supports peace around the world.  The delegation also included Taiwan Friendship Group Vice Chair Éric Martineau, as well as National Assembly Committee on Foreign Affairs Vice Chair Laetitia Saint-Paul and Deputies Marie-José Allemand and Claudia Rouaux. The delegation was accompanied to the Presidential Office by French Office in Taipei Deputy Director Cléa Le Cardeur.

    Details
    2025-06-05
    President Lai hosts state banquet for President Bernardo Arévalo of Republic of Guatemala  
    At noon on June 5, President Lai Ching-te hosted a state banquet at the Presidential Office for President Bernardo Arévalo of the Republic of Guatemala and his wife. In his remarks, President Lai noted that Taiwan and Guatemala have both undergone an arduous democratization process, and therefore, in face of the continuous expansion of authoritarian influence, must join hands in brotherhood and come together in solidarity to safeguard our hard-earned freedom and democracy. President Lai also expressed hope that both countries will work together and continue to deepen various exchanges and cooperation, taking a friendship that has lasted over 90 years to new heights. A translation of President Lai’s remarks follows: Once again, I would like to offer a warm welcome to President Arévalo and First Lady Lucrecia Peinado, who are leading this delegation to Taiwan. President Arévalo’s previous visit to Taiwan was 31 years ago. Back then, Taiwan did not have direct presidential elections, and the nation was continuing to make progress toward democratization. Today, 31 years later, Taiwan has conducted direct presidential elections eight times, with three transfers of power between political parties. On this visit, I am sure that President Arévalo will gain a deep appreciation for Taiwan’s free and democratic atmosphere.  Taiwan and Guatemala have both undergone an arduous democratization process. A little over 200 years ago, the people of Guatemala took a stand against colonial oppression, seeking national dignity and the freedom of its people. Eighty-one years ago, President Arévalo’s father, Juan José Arévalo, became Guatemala’s first democratically elected president, establishing an important foundation for subsequent democratic development.  Our two peoples have democracy in their blood. Both know the value of freedom and democracy and are willing to take a stand for those values. Therefore, in face of the continuous expansion of authoritarian influence, our two countries must join hands in brotherhood to respond to threats and challenges, and come together in solidarity to safeguard our hard-earned freedom and democracy. I hope that both countries will work together to continue to deepen various exchanges and cooperation, taking a friendship that has lasted over 90 years to new heights. I hope that on this visit, in addition to gaining a deeper understanding of Taiwan’s political, economic, and social development, President Arévalo can also reacquaint himself with the democratic vitality and cultural diversity of Taiwan by sampling various gourmet delicacies and once again experiencing the beauty of our scenery and warmth of our people. Guatemala is a very beautiful country. In the future, I hope to have a chance to personally experience that beauty, explore Mayan civilization, and savor local Guatemalan coffee. In closing, I wish the visiting delegation a smooth and successful trip, and beautiful, unforgettable memories. May President Arévalo enjoy the best of health, and may the diplomatic friendship between our two countries endure. President Arévalo then delivered remarks, stating that at different times and by different means, the people of Taiwan and Guatemala have relentlessly sought to defend freedom and democracy. We share the same expectations, he said, and are walking the right path amid today’s complex international circumstances.  President Arévalo stated that Taiwan and Guatemala are true democratic nations, where the government’s goal is to serve all the people. He noted that this is far from easy under current circumstances, as many authoritarian regimes use their long-term hold on power to safeguard the interests of select groups and neglect the wellbeing of the population as a whole. President Arévalo said that last week Guatemala commemorated the 40th anniversary of its constitution, which was enacted in 1985 and is Guatemala’s ultimate guide, setting the foundation for democracy and clearly outlining the path ahead. He said that over the past 40 years, Guatemala has continued to follow the democratic blueprint established by the constitution and end the civil war so that the nation could make the transition to real democracy. Although more than a few ambitious people have attempted to destroy that process from within, he noted, the people of Guatemala have never given up the pursuit of democracy as an ideal. President Arévalo stated that our two sides’ coming together here is due to such shared values as freedom and democracy as well as the idea of serving all the people. He underlined that the governments of both countries will continue to work hard and provide mutual support to smooth out each other’s path of democracy, freedom, and justice. President Arévalo emphasized that the government of Guatemala will always be Taiwan’s ally, and that he firmly believes Taiwan is Guatemala’s most reliable partner on the path of democracy and economic prosperity and development. The president said he hopes this visit will be the first step towards setting a new course for the governments and peoples of both countries. Also in attendance at the banquet were Guatemala Minister of Foreign Affairs Carlos Ramiro Martínez, Minister of the Economy Gabriela García, and Guatemala Ambassador Luis Raúl Estévez López.  

    Details
    2025-05-20
    President Lai interviewed by Nippon Television and Yomiuri TV
    In a recent interview on Nippon Television’s news zero program, President Lai Ching-te responded to questions from host Mr. Sakurai Sho and Yomiuri TV Shanghai Bureau Chief Watanabe Masayo on topics including reflections on his first year in office, cross-strait relations, China’s military threats, Taiwan-United States relations, and Taiwan-Japan relations. The interview was broadcast on the evening of May 19. During the interview, President Lai stated that China intends to change the world’s rules-based international order, and that if Taiwan were invaded, global supply chains would be disrupted. Therefore, he said, Taiwan will strengthen its national defense, prevent war by preparing for war, and achieve the goal of peace. The president also noted that Taiwan’s purpose for developing drones is based on national security and industrial needs, and that Taiwan hopes to collaborate with Japan. He then reiterated that China’s threats are an international problem, and expressed hope to work together with the US, Japan, and others in the global democratic community to prevent China from starting a war. Following is the text of the questions and the president’s responses: Q: How do you feel as you are about to round out your first year in office? President Lai: When I was young, I was determined to practice medicine and save lives. When I left medicine to go into politics, I was determined to transform Taiwan. And when I was sworn in as president on May 20 last year, I was determined to strengthen the nation. Time flies, and it has already been a year. Although the process has been very challenging, I am deeply honored to be a part of it. I am also profoundly grateful to our citizens for allowing me the opportunity to give back to our country. The future will certainly be full of more challenges, but I will do everything I can to unite the people and continue strengthening the nation. That is how I am feeling now. Q: We are now coming up on the 80th anniversary of the end of World War II, and over this period, we have often heard that conflict between Taiwan and the mainland is imminent. Do you personally believe that a cross-strait conflict could happen? President Lai: The international community is very much aware that China intends to replace the US and change the world’s rules-based international order, and annexing Taiwan is just the first step. So, as China’s military power grows stronger, some members of the international community are naturally on edge about whether a cross-strait conflict will break out. The international community must certainly do everything in its power to avoid a conflict in the Taiwan Strait; there is too great a cost. Besides causing direct disasters to both Taiwan and China, the impact on the global economy would be even greater, with estimated losses of US$10 trillion from war alone – that is roughly 10 percent of the global GDP. Additionally, 20 percent of global shipping passes through the Taiwan Strait and surrounding waters, so if a conflict breaks out in the strait, other countries including Japan and Korea would suffer a grave impact. For Japan and Korea, a quarter of external transit passes through the Taiwan Strait and surrounding waters, and a third of the various energy resources and minerals shipped back from other countries pass through said areas. If Taiwan were invaded, global supply chains would be disrupted, and therefore conflict in the Taiwan Strait must be avoided. Such a conflict is indeed avoidable. I am very thankful to Prime Minister of Japan Ishiba Shigeru and former Prime Ministers Abe Shinzo, Suga Yoshihide, and Kishida Fumio, as well as US President Donald Trump and former President Joe Biden, and the other G7 leaders, for continuing to emphasize at international venues that peace and stability across the Taiwan Strait are essential components for global security and prosperity. When everyone in the global democratic community works together, stacking up enough strength to make China’s objectives unattainable or to make the cost of invading Taiwan too high for it to bear, a conflict in the strait can naturally be avoided. Q: As you said, President Lai, maintaining peace and stability across the Taiwan Strait is also very important for other countries. How can war be avoided? What sort of countermeasures is Taiwan prepared to take to prevent war? President Lai: As Mr. Sakurai mentioned earlier, we are coming up on the 80th anniversary of the end of WWII. There are many lessons we can take from that war. First is that peace is priceless, and war has no winners. From the tragedies of WWII, there are lessons that humanity should learn. We must pursue peace, and not start wars blindly, as that would be a major disaster for humanity. In other words, we must be determined to safeguard peace. The second lesson is that we cannot be complacent toward authoritarian powers. If you give them an inch, they will take a mile. They will keep growing, and eventually, not only will peace be unattainable, but war will be inevitable. The third lesson is why WWII ended: It ended because different groups joined together in solidarity. Taiwan, Japan, and the Indo-Pacific region are all directly subjected to China’s threats, so we hope to be able to join together in cooperation. This is why we proposed the Four Pillars of Peace action plan. First, we will strengthen our national defense. Second, we will strengthen economic resilience. Third is standing shoulder to shoulder with the democratic community to demonstrate the strength of deterrence. Fourth is that as long as China treats Taiwan with parity and dignity, Taiwan is willing to conduct exchanges and cooperate with China, and seek peace and mutual prosperity. These four pillars can help us avoid war and achieve peace. That is to say, Taiwan hopes to achieve peace through strength, prevent war by preparing for war, keeping war from happening and pursuing the goal of peace. Q: Regarding drones, everyone knows that recently, Taiwan has been actively researching, developing, and introducing drones. Why do you need to actively research, develop, and introduce new drones at this time? President Lai: This is for two purposes. The first is to meet national security needs. The second is to meet industrial development needs. Because Taiwan, Japan, and the Philippines are all part of the first island chain, and we are all democratic nations, we cannot be like an authoritarian country like China, which has an unlimited national defense budget. In this kind of situation, island nations such as Taiwan, Japan, and the Philippines should leverage their own technologies to develop national defense methods that are asymmetric and utilize unmanned vehicles. In particular, from the Russo-Ukrainian War, we see that Ukraine has successfully utilized unmanned vehicles to protect itself and prevent Russia from unlimited invasion. In other words, the Russo-Ukrainian War has already proven the importance of drones. Therefore, the first purpose of developing drones is based on national security needs. Second, the world has already entered the era of smart technology. Whether generative, agentic, or physical, AI will continue to develop. In the future, cars and ships will also evolve into unmanned vehicles and unmanned boats, and there will be unmanned factories. Drones will even be able to assist with postal deliveries, or services like Uber, Uber Eats, and foodpanda, or agricultural irrigation and pesticide spraying. Therefore, in the future era of comprehensive smart technology, developing unmanned vehicles is a necessity. Taiwan, based on industrial needs, is actively planning the development of drones and unmanned vehicles. I would like to take this opportunity to express Taiwan’s hope to collaborate with Japan in the unmanned vehicle industry. Just as we do in the semiconductor industry, where Japan has raw materials, equipment, and technology, and Taiwan has wafer manufacturing, our two countries can cooperate. Japan is a technological power, and Taiwan also has significant technological strengths. If Taiwan and Japan work together, we will not only be able to safeguard peace and stability in the Taiwan Strait and security in the Indo-Pacific region, but it will also be very helpful for the industrial development of both countries. Q: The drones you just described probably include examples from the Russo-Ukrainian War. Taiwan and China are separated by the Taiwan Strait. Do our drones need to have cross-sea flight capabilities? President Lai: Taiwan does not intend to counterattack the mainland, and does not intend to invade any country. Taiwan’s drones are meant to protect our own nation and territory. Q: Former President Biden previously stated that US forces would assist Taiwan’s defense in the event of an attack. President Trump, however, has yet to clearly state that the US would help defend Taiwan. Do you think that in such an event, the US would help defend Taiwan? Or is Taiwan now trying to persuade the US? President Lai: Former President Biden and President Trump have answered questions from reporters. Although their responses were different, strong cooperation with Taiwan under the Biden administration has continued under the Trump administration; there has been no change. During President Trump’s first term, cooperation with Taiwan was broader and deeper compared to former President Barack Obama’s terms. After former President Biden took office, cooperation with Taiwan increased compared to President Trump’s first term. Now, during President Trump’s second term, cooperation with Taiwan is even greater than under former President Biden. Taiwan-US cooperation continues to grow stronger, and has not changed just because President Trump and former President Biden gave different responses to reporters. Furthermore, the Trump administration publicly stated that in the future, the US will shift its strategic focus from Europe to the Indo-Pacific. The US secretary of defense even publicly stated that the primary mission of the US is to prevent China from invading Taiwan, maintain stability in the Indo-Pacific, and thus maintain world peace. There is a saying in Taiwan that goes, “Help comes most to those who help themselves.” Before asking friends and allies for assistance in facing threats from China, Taiwan must first be determined and prepared to defend itself. This is Taiwan’s principle, and we are working in this direction, making all the necessary preparations to safeguard the nation. Q: I would like to ask you a question about Taiwan-Japan relations. After the Great East Japan Earthquake in 2011, you made an appeal to give Japan a great deal of assistance and care. In particular, you visited Sendai to offer condolences. Later, you also expressed condolences and concern after the earthquakes in Aomori and Kumamoto. What are your expectations for future Taiwan-Japan exchanges and development? President Lai: I come from Tainan, and my constituency is in Tainan. Tainan has very deep ties with Japan, and of course, Taiwan also has deep ties with Japan. However, among Taiwan’s 22 counties and cities, Tainan has the deepest relationship with Japan. I sincerely hope that both of you and your teams will have an opportunity to visit Tainan. I will introduce Tainan’s scenery, including architecture from the era of Japanese rule, Tainan’s cuisine, and unique aspects of Tainan society, and you can also see lifestyles and culture from the Showa era.  The Wushantou Reservoir in Tainan was completed by engineer Mr. Hatta Yoichi from Kanazawa, Japan and the team he led to Tainan after he graduated from then-Tokyo Imperial University. It has nearly a century of history and is still in use today. This reservoir, along with the 16,000-km-long Chianan Canal, transformed the 150,000-hectare Chianan Plain into Taiwan’s premier rice-growing area. It was that foundation in agriculture that enabled Taiwan to develop industry and the technology sector of today. The reservoir continues to supply water to Tainan Science Park. It is used by residents of Tainan, the agricultural sector, and industry, and even the technology sector in Xinshi Industrial Park, as well as Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company. Because of this, the people of Tainan are deeply grateful for Mr. Hatta and very friendly toward the people of Japan. A major earthquake, the largest in 50 years, struck Tainan on February 6, 2016, resulting in significant casualties. As mayor of Tainan at the time, I was extremely grateful to then-Prime Minister Abe, who sent five Japanese officials to the disaster site in Tainan the day after the earthquake. They were very thoughtful and asked what kind of assistance we needed from the Japanese government. They offered to provide help based on what we needed. I was deeply moved, as former Prime Minister Abe showed such care, going beyond the formality of just sending supplies that we may or may not have actually needed. Instead, the officials asked what we needed and then provided assistance based on those needs, which really moved me. Similarly, when the Great East Japan Earthquake of 2011 or the later Kumamoto earthquakes struck, the people of Tainan, under my leadership, naturally and dutifully expressed their support. Even earlier, when central Taiwan was hit by a major earthquake in 1999, Japan was the first country to deploy a rescue team to the disaster area. On February 6, 2018, after a major earthquake in Hualien, former Prime Minister Abe appeared in a video holding up a message of encouragement he had written in calligraphy saying “Remain strong, Taiwan.” All of Taiwan was deeply moved. Over the years, Taiwan and Japan have supported each other when earthquakes struck, and have forged bonds that are family-like, not just neighborly. This is truly valuable. In the future, I hope Taiwan and Japan can be like brothers, and that the peoples of Taiwan and Japan can treat one another like family. If Taiwan has a problem, then Japan has a problem; if Japan has a problem, then Taiwan has a problem. By caring for and helping each other, we can face various challenges and difficulties, and pursue a brighter future. Q: President Lai, you just used the phrase “If Taiwan has a problem, then Japan has a problem.” In the event that China attempts to invade Taiwan by force, what kind of response measures would you hope the US military and Japan’s Self-Defense Forces take? President Lai: As I just mentioned, annexing Taiwan is only China’s first step. Its ultimate objective is to change the rules-based international order. That being the case, China’s threats are an international problem. So, I would very much hope to work together with the US, Japan, and others in the global democratic community to prevent China from starting a war – prevention, after all, is more important than cure.

    MIL OSI Asia Pacific News –

    June 30, 2025
  • MIL-OSI Europe: Switzerland and Ukraine launch private sector partnership for reconstruction

    Source: Switzerland – Department of Foreign Affairs in English

    On 23 January, at the World Economic Forum Annual Meeting in Davos, Switzerland and Ukraine signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) aimed at expanding the role of Swiss businesses operating in Ukraine in the country’s recovery. The MoU was signed by Federal Councillor Guy Parmelin and First Vice Prime Minister of Ukraine Yulia Svyrydenko.

    MIL OSI Europe News –

    June 30, 2025
  • MIL-OSI Europe: Ignazio Cassis highlights Europe, Ukraine and the Middle East at Davos 2025

    Source: Switzerland – Department of Foreign Affairs in English

    At the 2025 edition of the World Economic Forum, Federal Councillor Ignazio Cassis, head of the FDFA, placed particular emphasis on European policy and the situations in Ukraine and the Middle East. He also raised matters relating to security and cooperation, particularly as Switzerland prepares to chair the OSCE in 2026.

    MIL OSI Europe News –

    June 30, 2025
  • MIL-OSI Europe: Ignazio Cassis highlights Europe, Ukraine and the Middle East at Davos 2025

    Source: Switzerland – Department of Foreign Affairs in English

    At the 2025 edition of the World Economic Forum, Federal Councillor Ignazio Cassis, head of the FDFA, placed particular emphasis on European policy and the situations in Ukraine and the Middle East. He also raised matters relating to security and cooperation, particularly as Switzerland prepares to chair the OSCE in 2026.

    MIL OSI Europe News –

    June 30, 2025
  • MIL-OSI Europe: Written question – Backlash against financing aid to Ukraine – E-002495/2025

    Source: European Parliament

    Question for written answer  E-002495/2025
    to the Commission
    Rule 144
    Erik Kaliňák (NI)

    Following the Commission’s proposal to pledge up to EUR 40 billion in military assistance to Ukraine this year, with each country contributing according to the size of its economy, Spain and Italy voiced their opposition[1].

    In the light of the above:

    • 1.What further steps does the Commission plan to take?
    • 2.Is the Commission not aware that Member States are financially exhausted by the measures to support Ukraine that the Commission is continuously proposing?
    • 3.Does the Commission not feel that the EU should become more actively involved in pressing for a peaceful dialogue instead of endless military support and the associated need for continuous funding?

    Submitted: 23.6.2025

    • [1] https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/italy-spain-not-ready-back-eu-plan-boost-ukraine-military-aid-2025-03-17/
    Last updated: 30 June 2025

    MIL OSI Europe News –

    June 30, 2025
  • MIL-OSI Banking: World Chambers Federation announces new leadership for 2025–2028

    Source: International Chamber of Commerce

    Headline: World Chambers Federation announces new leadership for 2025–2028

    Mr. Marcelo Elizondo Secretary and Member of the Board, Argentine Chamber of Commerce and Services (Argentina) Mr. Andrew McKellar CEO, Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry (Australia) Mr. Atef Al Khaja CEO, Bahrain Chamber of Commerce and Industry (Bahrain)   Mr. Tom Laveren CEO, Voka Chamber of Commerce Mechelen-Kempen (Belgium)   Mr. Jean Pierre Antelo President, CAINCO (Bolivia) Ms. Maria Bustamante President, FIESC Chamber of Foreign Trade (Brazil)  Mr. Daniel Campos Caramori Vice-President, Canadian Chamber of Commerce (Canada)  Mr. José Ovidio Claros Polanco President, Bogota Chamber of Commerce (Colombia)  Ms. Rim Siam President of the Economic Business Women Council, Alexandria Chamber of Commerce (Egypt)   Ms. Leticia Escobar President, Chamber of Commerce and Industry of El Salvador (El Salvador)  Mr. Giorgi Pertaia President, Georgian Chamber of Commerce and Industry (Georgia)  Mr. Volker Treier Chief Executive of Foreign Trade and Board Member, German Chamber of Commerce and Industry (Germany)   Mr. Ashish Vaid Past President, IMC Chamber of Commerce and Industry (India)  Mr. Mohammad Khazaee Torshizi Senior Advisor to the President, Iran Chamber of Commerce, Industries, Mines and Agriculture (Iran) Ms. Gilit Rubinstein CEO, Federation of Israeli Chambers of Commerce (Israel)  Mr. Dario Gallina Past President, Torino Chamber of Commerce (Italy)  Mr. Aigars Rostovskis President, Latvian Chamber of Commerce and Industry (Latvia)   Mr. Katsuya Igarashi Executive Director, Japan Chamber of Commerce and Industry (Japan)  Dr. Erick Rutto President, Kenya National Chamber of Commerce and Industry (Kenya)  Mr. Rabih Sabra Director General, Chamber of Commerce, Industry and Agriculture of Beirut and Mount Lebanon (Lebanon)   Ms. Charlotte Parkhill Chair, Auckland Business Chamber (New Zealand)   Mr. Gabriel Idahosa President, Lagos Chamber of Commerce and Industry (Nigeria)  Mr. Trajan Angeloski President, Macedonian Chamber of Commerce (North Macedonia)  Ms. Tamader Al Thani Director of International Relations and Chamber Affairs, Qatar Chamber of Commerce and Industry (Qatar)  Mr. Ovidiu Ioan Silaghi Secretary General, Chamber of Commerce and Industry of Romania (Romania)  Mr. Marko Cadez President, Chamber of Commerce and Industry of Serbia (Serbia)   Ms. Melanie Veness CEO and Chairperson, PMCB and Association of South African Chambers (South Africa)  Mr. Seong Woo Lee Vice-President, Korea Chamber of Commerce and Industry (South Korea)  Mr. Adolfo Díaz-Ambrona Secretary General, Spain Chamber of Commerce (Spain)  Mr. Izzet Volkan Chairman of the Board, Corlu Chamber of Commerce and Industry (Türkiye)  Mr. Salem Al Shamsi Vice-President for International Relations, Dubai Chambers (United Arab Emirates)   Mr. Gennadiy Chyzhykov President, Ukrainian Chamber of Commerce (Ukraine)  Mr. Ahmed M. El Wakil President, Association of the Mediterranean Chambers of Commerce and Industry (ASCAME) (Transnational)  Mr. Yousef Khalawi Secretary General, Islamic Chamber of Commerce and Development (Transnational)  Mr. Natalio Mario Grinman President, Ibero-American Association of Chambers of Commerce (AICO) (Transnational)  Mr. Peter McMullin President, Confederation of Asia Pacific Chambers of Commerce and Industry (CACCI) (Transnational)  Mr. Ben Butters CEO, Eurochambres (Transnational)  Dr. Khaled Hanafy Secretary General, Union of Arab Chambers (Transnational) 

    MIL OSI Global Banks –

    June 30, 2025
  • MIL-OSI United Nations: Live Coverage – FFD4 (Sevilla, Spain, 30 June-3 July)

    Source: United Nations General Assembly and Security Council

    In Ukraine, food insecurity remains a concern in front-line and border regions. A recent assessment by the World Food Programme (WFP) and the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) found that the war has devastated livelihoods and quadrupled poverty levels, leaving those most vulnerable at greatest risk.

    MIL OSI United Nations News –

    June 30, 2025
←Previous Page
1 … 26 27 28 29 30 … 174
Next Page→
NewzIntel.com

NewzIntel.com

MIL Open Source Intelligence

  • Blog
  • About
  • FAQs
  • Authors
  • Events
  • Shop
  • Patterns
  • Themes

Twenty Twenty-Five

Designed with WordPress