NewzIntel.com

Category: Ukraine

  • MIL-OSI Canada: Canada joins new NATO Defence Investment Pledge

    Source: Government of Canada – Prime Minister

    The world is increasingly dangerous and divided, with the rules-based international system under unprecedented pressure and global conflict becoming more frequent and volatile. To meet this moment, Canada and its Allies are building their defence capabilities to strengthen our collective security.

    Today, the Prime Minister, Mark Carney, announced that Canada and its North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) Allies have agreed to a new Defence Investment Pledge of investing 5 per cent of annual GDP by 2035 to ensure our individual and collective security. The commitment aligns with Canada’s own strategic defence and security goals.

    As part of this 5 per cent pledge, Canada will invest 3.5 per cent of GDP for core military capabilities, expanding on our recent investments. That means further investments in our Canadian Armed Forces, modernizing our military equipment and technology, building up Canada’s defence industries, and diversifying our defence partnerships. An additional 1.5 per cent of GDP will be dedicated to investments in critical defence and security-related expenditure, such as new airports, ports, telecommunication, emergency preparedness systems, and other dual-use investments which serve defence as well as civilian readiness. Importantly, the progress of this pledge will be reviewed in 2029 to ensure Allies’ expenditures align with the global security landscape.

    At the Summit, Canada and its Allies reaffirmed their support for Ukraine and the leaders agreed on the imperative for a just and lasting peace. Canada’s contributions to Ukraine’s defence and its defence industries, including Canada’s $2 billion in military assistance announced last week at the 2025 G7 Leaders’ Summit in Kananaskis, Alberta, are included in our NATO contributions, as the security of Ukraine is critical to our collective security.

    Quotes

    “The world is increasingly dangerous and divided. Canada must strengthen our defence to better protect our sovereignty, our interests, and our Allies. These investments won’t just build our military capacity – they will build our industries and create good, high-paying jobs at home. If we want a more secure world, we need a stronger Canada.”

    “Canada is a proud founding member of the Alliance. In an increasingly unstable and unpredictable world, we are making the critical investments needed to keep Canadians safe, support our Armed Forces, and strengthen our role in Europe and on the world stage. The renewed Defence Investment Pledge to invest 5 per cent of GDP by 2035 reaffirms Canada’s strong commitment to our security, to our sovereignty, and to NATO.”

    Related Product

    Associated Link

    MIL OSI Canada News –

  • MIL-OSI: Data443 Risk Mitigation Acquires TacitRed™ External Attack Surface Management SaaS Platform from Cogility

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    Advanced Cyber Threat Intelligence Platform Strengthens Data443’s Comprehensive Security Portfolio and Accelerates Market Expansion

    RESEARCH TRIANGLE PARK, N.C., June 25, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Data443 Risk Mitigation, Inc. (OTCPK: ATDS) (“Data443” or the “Company”), a data security and privacy software company for “All Things Data Security,” today announced its thirteenth acquisition – TacitRed™ threat intelligence SaaS product from Cogility, a premier continuous decision intelligence platform provider.

    TacitRed brings a sophisticated approach to threat detection and analysis, leveraging specialized network traffic sampling via NetFlow technology to deliver real-time threat intelligence at unprecedented scale. This acquisition adds advanced threat intelligence capabilities to Data443’s already robust portfolio of data security solutions.

    TacitRed has achieved remarkable success, surpassing one billion threat findings while continuously analyzing massive volumes of global attack signals and threat intelligence sources. TacitRed provides actionable intelligence on active exposures, attacks, and risks affecting over 13 million U.S. companies, delivering unparalleled, on-demand threat findings that enable rapid response and mitigation.

    “This acquisition represents an important addition to our comprehensive data security ecosystem,” commented Jason Remillard, Founder and CEO of Data443. “TacitRed’s high-volume, detailed sampling approach ensure our customers receive the most current and actionable threat intelligence available in the market. Its proven track record, combined with its strong customer pipeline, positions us for significant growth acceleration, and we anticipate this acquisition to be accretive to our financial performance in 2025.”

    Martin Artiano, CEO of Cogility, commented, “The cyber domain experts we hired to build TacitRed made excellent use of the advanced features of Cogynt and the results were impressive. Generating continuous, detailed and curated threat findings for 13M companies was a difficult task for such a small team. We are happy that Data443 recognized the value of the people, the findings and the platform.”

    Thomas Johnson, the leader of TacitRed and his team will join Data443 as part of the transaction. Thomas added, “When a group of us from Coalition cyber insurance saw the power of the Cogynt platform, we decided to join Cogility and build a real-time, population-scale extended attack surface management capability. Our product delivers actionable threat intelligence to both cyber insurance and corporate customers, helping them stay ahead of emerging risks. We’re incredibly excited for this next chapter as TacitRed joins forces with Data443. This acquisition gives us access to an even broader range of threat intelligence, which will accelerate our ability to enhance both platforms. The team is energized by what’s ahead, and we’re looking forward to what we can accomplish together.”

    More than simply providing a data lake capability, Cogynt surfaces data points as they occur within the platform.

    Jason Remillard continued, “The platform architecture and comprehensive data sets we have acquired are truly without match in the marketplace, making this a perfect strategic fit with our existing client base. The integration creates powerful synergies that will benefit both our current customers and TacitRed’s established user community.”

    This acquisition builds upon Data443’s recent strategic initiatives, including the Company’s partnership with leading datacenter solutions provider TierPoint as part of their new data center opening in the Research Triangle area..

    As well Data443 acquired AI-powered email privacy and categorization platform Breezemail.ai for work in conjunction with its Cyren By Data443 platform. These strategic relationships position Data443 to capitalize on the growing demand for comprehensive data security and threat intelligence solutions

    About Cogility

    Cogility provides continuous decision intelligence solutions for real-time risk and opportunity assessment at scale through its advanced Cogynt™ platform. The platform enables continuous risk and opportunity assessment, allowing organizations to make decisions and take action with greater confidence, resulting in a competitive advantage.

    Cogility’s decision intelligence platform integrates event stream processing, real-time behavioral analytics, no-code modeling, and business process integration, enabling organizations to transform massive, diverse data sets into predictive and actionable intelligence. Government and commercial organizations trust the platform for its robust real-time data processing, no-code authoring, and advanced analytics capabilities. For more information, visit: https://cogility.com/

    About TacitRed™

    TacitRed™ provides tactical attack surface intelligence through continuous cyber threat and attack analysis. The platform continuously analyzes massive amounts of global attack signals and threat intelligence sources to pinpoint active exposures, attacks, and risks affecting organizations worldwide.

    The platform has achieved significant scale, surpassing one billion threat findings while providing unparalleled, on-demand intelligence. TacitRed’s core value proposition centers on unlocking fully curated, prioritized, and actionable threat findings within external attack surfaces instantly, requiring only a company domain for comprehensive analysis. For more information, visit: https://tacitred.com/

    About Data443 Risk Mitigation, Inc.

    Data443 Risk Mitigation, Inc. (OTCPK: ATDS) provides software and services to enable secure data across devices and databases, at rest and in flight/in transit, locally, on a network or in the cloud. We are All Things Data Security™. With over 10,000 customers in over 100 countries, Data443 provides a modern approach to data governance and security by identifying and protecting all sensitive data regardless of location, platform or format. Data443’s framework helps customers prioritize risk, identify security gaps and implement effective data protection and privacy management strategies. For more information, visit: https://data443.com.

    Forward-Looking Statements 

    This press release contains forward-looking statements. These statements are made under the “safe harbor” provisions of the U.S. Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Forward-looking statements may be identified by use of terms such as “expect,” “believe,” “anticipate,” “may,” “could,” “will,” “should,” “plan,” “project,” “intend,” “estimate,” “predict,” “potential,” “pursuant,” “target,” “continue” or the negative of these words or other comparable terminology. Statements in this press release that are not historical statements, including statements regarding Data443’s plans, objectives, future opportunities for Data443’s services, future financial performance and operating results, and any other statements regarding Data443’s future expectations, beliefs, plans, objectives, financial conditions, assumptions or future events or performance, or regarding the anticipated consummation of any transaction, are forward-looking statements. These statements are not guarantees of future performance and are subject to numerous risks, uncertainties and assumptions, many of which are difficult to predict or are beyond Data443’s control. These risks, uncertainties and assumptions could cause actual results to differ materially from the results expressed or implied by the statements. They may relate to the outcome of litigation, settlements and investigations; actions by third parties, including governmental agencies; volatility in customer spending; global economic conditions; inability to hire and retain personnel; loss of, or reduction in business with, key customers; difficulty with growth and integration of acquisitions; product liability; cybersecurity risk; anti-takeover measures in the Company’s charter documents; and the uncertainties created by global health issues, such as the ongoing outbreak of COVID, and political unrest and conflict, such as the invasion of Ukraine by Russia. These and other important risk factors are described more fully in the Company’s reports and other documents filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“the SEC”), including in Part I, Item 1A of the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K filed with the SEC on April 17, 2024, and subsequent filings with the SEC. Undue reliance should not be placed on the forward-looking statements in this press release, which are based on information available to the Company on the date hereof. Except as otherwise required by applicable law, Data443 undertakes no obligation to publicly update or revise any forward-looking statements, whether because of new information, future events or otherwise.

    “DATA443” is a registered trademark of Data443 Risk Mitigation, Inc.

    All product names, trademarks and registered trademarks are property of their respective owners. All company, product and service names used in this press release are for identification purposes only. Use of these names, trademarks and brands does not imply endorsement.

    For further information:        
    Follow us on LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/data443-risk-mitigation-inc/
    Follow us on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCZXDhJcx-XgMBhvE9aFHRdA
    Sign up for our Investor Newsletter: https://data443.com/investor-email-alerts/

    To learn more about Data443, please watch the Company’s video introduction on its YouTube channel: https://youtu.be/1Fp93jOxFSg

    Investor Relations Contact:
    Matthew Abenante
    ir@data443.com
    919.858.6542

    The MIL Network –

  • MIL-OSI Canada: The Hague Summit Declaration

    Source: Government of Canada – Prime Minister

    1. We, the Heads of State and Government of the North Atlantic Alliance, have gathered in The Hague to reaffirm our commitment to NATO, the strongest Alliance in history, and to the transatlantic bond. We reaffirm our ironclad commitment to collective defence as enshrined in Article 5 of the Washington Treaty – that an attack on one is an attack on all. We remain united and steadfast in our resolve to protect our one billion citizens, defend the Alliance, and safeguard our freedom and democracy. 
       
    2. United in the face of profound security threats and challenges, in particular the long-term threat posed by Russia to Euro-Atlantic security and the persistent threat of terrorism, Allies commit to invest 5% of GDP annually on core defence requirements as well as defence-and security-related spending by 2035 to ensure our individual and collective obligations, in accordance with Article 3 of the Washington Treaty. Our investments will ensure we have the forces, capabilities, resources, infrastructure, warfighting readiness, and resilience needed to deter and defend in line with our three core tasks of deterrence and defence, crisis prevention and management, and cooperative security. 
       
    3. Allies agree that this 5% commitment will comprise two essential categories of defence investment. Allies will allocate at least 3.5% of GDP annually based on the agreed definition of NATO defence expenditure by 2035 to resource core defence requirements, and to meet the NATO Capability Targets. Allies agree to submit annual plans showing a credible, incremental path to reach this goal. And Allies will account for up to 1.5% of GDP annually to inter alia protect our critical infrastructure, defend our networks, ensure our civil preparedness and resilience, unleash innovation, and strengthen our defence industrial base. The trajectory and balance of spending under this plan will be reviewed in 2029, in light of the strategic environment and updated Capability Targets. Allies reaffirm their enduring sovereign commitments to provide support to Ukraine, whose security contributes to ours, and, to this end, will include direct contributions towards Ukraine’s defence and its defence industry when calculating Allies’ defence spending. 
       
    4. We reaffirm our shared commitment to rapidly expand transatlantic defence industrial cooperation and to harness emerging technology and the spirit of innovation to advance our collective security. We will work to eliminate defence trade barriers among Allies and will leverage our partnerships to promote defence industrial cooperation. 
       
    5. We express our appreciation for the generous hospitality extended to us by the Kingdom of the Netherlands. We look forward to our next meeting in Türkiye in 2026 followed by a meeting in Albania. 

    MIL OSI Canada News –

  • MIL-OSI Security: The Hague Summit Declaration

    Source: NATO


    issued by the NATO Heads of State and Government participating in the meeting of the North Atlantic Council in The Hague 25 June 2025

    1. We, the Heads of State and Government of the North Atlantic Alliance, have gathered in The Hague to reaffirm our commitment to NATO, the strongest Alliance in history, and to the transatlantic bond. We reaffirm our ironclad commitment to collective defence as enshrined in Article 5 of the Washington Treaty – that an attack on one is an attack on all. We remain united and steadfast in our resolve to protect our one billion citizens, defend the Alliance, and safeguard our freedom and democracy.
       
    2. United in the face of profound security threats and challenges, in particular the long- term threat posed by Russia to Euro-Atlantic security and the persistent threat of terrorism, Allies commit to invest 5% of GDP annually on core defence requirements as well as defence-and security-related spending by 2035 to ensure our individual and collective obligations, in accordance with Article 3 of the Washington Treaty. Our investments will ensure we have the forces, capabilities, resources, infrastructure, warfighting readiness, and resilience needed to deter and defend in line with our three core tasks of deterrence and defence, crisis prevention and management, and cooperative security.
       
    3. Allies agree that this 5% commitment will comprise two essential categories of defence investment. Allies will allocate at least 3.5% of GDP annually based on the agreed definition of NATO defence expenditure by 2035 to resource core defence requirements, and to meet the NATO Capability Targets. Allies agree to submit annual plans showing a credible, incremental path to reach this goal. And Allies will account for up to 1.5% of GDP annually to inter alia protect our critical infrastructure, defend our networks, ensure our civil preparedness and resilience, unleash innovation, and strengthen our defence industrial base. The trajectory and balance of spending under this plan will be reviewed in 2029, in light of the strategic environment and updated Capability Targets. Allies reaffirm their enduring sovereign commitments to provide support to Ukraine, whose security contributes to ours, and, to this end, will include direct contributions towards Ukraine’s defence and its defence industry when calculating Allies’ defence spending.
       
    4. We reaffirm our shared commitment to rapidly expand transatlantic defence industrial cooperation and to harness emerging technology and the spirit of innovation to advance our collective security. We will work to eliminate defence trade barriers among Allies and will leverage our partnerships to promote defence industrial cooperation.
       
    5. We express our appreciation for the generous hospitality extended to us by the Kingdom of the Netherlands. We look forward to our next meeting in Türkiye in 2026 followed by a meeting in Albania.

    MIL Security OSI –

  • MIL-OSI Europe: ASIA/SOUTH KOREA – Day of Prayer for peace in Korea: “Everyone must strive for reconciliation and unity”

    Source: Agenzia Fides – MIL OSI

    Archdiocese of Seoul

    Seoul (Agenzia Fides) – The plea for “authentic peace and reconciliation on the Korean peninsula” is at the heart of the initiative of the Korean Catholic Church, which annually celebrates June 25, the anniversary of the Korean War, as a “Day of Prayer for National Reconciliation and Unity.” At Myeongdong Cathedral of the Archdiocese of Seoul, Msgr. Chung Soon-Taick, Archbishop of Seoul and Apostolic Administrator of Pyongyang, and President of the “Committee for reconciliation” in the Archdiocese, presided over a Mass attended by over a thousand priests, consecrated persons, and faithful, who prayed together for peace on the Korean peninsula.In his homily, the Archbishop recalled that “this year marks the 75th anniversary of the outbreak of the Korean War and 80 years since the division of the country. North and South have lived in a state of division, nurturing hatred and hostility in a context of constant tension and confrontation.” He added: “North and South Korea have previously lived as one country, one nation, and one culture for centuries. To overcome conflict and division, we must first reach out, as Jesus told us: ‘Give them something to eat.’” Archbishop Chung also emphasized in this context that “a small but significant change has begun in inter-Korean relations.” He pointed out that “as soon as our government stopped broadcasting messages to North Korea over loudspeakers, North Korea immediately stopped broadcasting its messages over loudspeakers,” which he considers a reduction in tensions. “Peace on the Korean Peninsula and a new relationship between the two Koreas begins with the renunciation of hostility and hatred. Let us pray that each of us can be the one to bring about small changes.”Following the Mass, a symposium commemorating the 30th anniversary of the founding of the “Committee for Reconciliation in Korea” in the Archdiocese of Seoul was held at the Spirituality Center of Myeongdong Cathedral. Archbishop Chung Soon-Taick recalled the committee’s objectives and working methods: “The committee, established on March 1, 1995, on the occasion of the 50th anniversary of Korea’s liberation, is intended to be the Church’s executive arm for national reconciliation and unity on the Korean peninsula and is committed to working on the basis of three main pillars: prayer, sharing and formation. “Since the first Mass for Reconciliation and Unity in Korea, celebrated on March 7, 1995, the Mass for Reconciliation has been celebrated every Tuesday evening at 7 p.m. The foundation of every pastoral activity of the committee is prayer,” the Archbishop added. He recalled Pope Francis’s call in the ncyclical “Fratelli Tutti” to be “peacemakers” and the appeal of Pope Leo XIV, who “calls for peace and denounces all violence and horror in the world.” “Every single member of our Church,” the Archbishop hoped, “must remember and pray for our brothers and sisters in North Korea and feel part of the efforts toward reconciliation and unity by reinventing the sense of solidarity based on fraternity.” He concluded with the hope that “our Church will take the initiative to overcome hostilities and promote mutual respect and understanding.” The committee’s vice-chairman, Fr. Chung Soo-yong, said: “Over the past 30 years, we have taken two steps forward and one step back: With the Gospel in mind, we must therefore find the strength to overcome divisions and conflicts and work for peace on the Korean Peninsula.” He added: “In the international context, given the armed conflicts between Russia and Ukraine, and between Israel and Iran, it is fundamental that the Korean Peninsula, which has been divided for more than half a century, lays the foundations for peace.” Father Chung concluded with an appeal to the new generations: “Young people must now take the initiative, with discussions and activities on the practice of peace, also with regard to World Youth Day 2027.” In this spirit, the Archdiocese of Seoul organizes an annual youth pilgrimage to the demilitarized zone on the border between the two Koreas, entitled “The Wind of Peace.” Launched in 2012, the initiative, aimed at young people around the world, will take place next month as part of the Jubilee Year. Participants will walk along the border, also dedicating themselves to meditation and prayer. (PA) (Agenzia Fides, 25/6/2025)
    Share:

    MIL OSI Europe News –

  • MIL-OSI Canada: Prime Minister Carney meets with Prime Minister of Estonia Kristen Michal

    Source: Government of Canada – Prime Minister

    Today, the Prime Minister, Mark Carney, met with the Prime Minister of Estonia, Kristen Michal, on the margins of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) Summit in The Hague, the Netherlands.

    The prime ministers underscored the strong and dynamic relationship between Canada and Estonia. They discussed opportunities to strengthen shared priorities – including in commerce, defence, and energy – and to bolster co-operation on critical minerals.

    The two leaders underscored their steadfast support for Ukraine and agreed on the imperative of achieving a just and lasting peace.

    Prime Minister Carney outlined Canada’s plan to rebuild, rearm, and reinvest in the Canadian Armed Forces – meeting the NATO 2 per cent target this year and accelerating defence investments in the years ahead.

    Prime Minister Carney and Prime Minister Michal agreed to remain in close contact.

    Associated Link

    MIL OSI Canada News –

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Press release – Cohesion: responding to new challenges, but focus still needed on regional inequalities

    Source: European Parliament

    The Regional Development Committee adopted its position on proposals to introduce new priorities and flexibilities to the current EU cohesion funding cycle.

    MEPs from the Regional Development Committee broadly endorse, in a report adopted on Wednesday with 26 votes in favour, 10 against, and 5 abstentions, a Commission proposal to adapt the EU’s cohesion policy priorities in the period 2021–2027 while introducing some targeted changes to ensure that the main cohesion policy principles remain in place.


    New priorities and flexibilities

    MEPs backed the proposed introduction of new objectives that would be eligible for cohesion funds, namely defence industrial capabilities and military mobility, water resilience, affordable housing, decarbonisation, and energy infrastructure. They also agreed to channel some of the funds into EU competitiveness, particularly to the Strategic Technologies for Europe Platform (STEP), and to extra support for EU regions bordering Russia, Belarus and Ukraine.

    MEPs also supported more favourable funding conditions, including the possibility of 100% co-financing, 30% pre-financing and a further pay-off of 9.5% of the total funding for reallocations to the new priorities in 2026 if at least 15% of funds are reallocated to them. MEPs propose lowering this threshold to 10%.


    MEPs call for preparedness investments

    In their amendments, MEPs want to prioritise dual-use infrastructure (suitable for civilian and military use) when funding the defence industry and military mobility. On water management, they want to broaden the scope of support to include integrated water management (for example, irrigation and desalination). MEPs also want to make housing sustainability a priority, and allow funds to go to the protection of critical energy infrastructure and civil preparedness infrastructure.

    To ensure cohesion policy’s focus on reducing inter-regional inequalities is maintained, MEPs want to update the rules such that only less developed and transition regions can access the new funding for defence and decarbonisation. They also changed a provision that would allow support to go to larger companies to specify that this can only happen when the companies commit to local employment. MEPs added a measure ensuring the consent of local and regional authorities is still needed for the transferring of already-planned territorial development funds to other purposes.

    MEPs emphasise that the new flexibilities cannot be applied to cohesion funding frozen under the EU’s conditionality regulation for violations of EU values or the rule of law.


    Quote

    After the vote, rapporteur and Committee Chair Dragoș Benea (S&D, Romania) said: “Parliament is stepping up to deliver concrete answers to citizens living in border regions, to families struggling to find affordable housing, and to communities facing the challenges of the green transition. By adapting the rules of cohesion policy to today’s emerging priorities, without undermining the core mission of territorial solidarity, we reaffirm our commitment to ensuring no region and no European citizen is left behind.”


    Next steps

    Negotiations with the Council were authorised with 31 in favour, 9 against, and 1 abstention. They will be announced during Parliament’s July 7-11 plenary session, and if there are no objections, they can proceed.


    Background

    The Commission’s proposal would amend the European Regional Development Fund, Cohesion Fund and Just Transition Fund. The Commission estimates that it will lead to €16.1bn in additional pre-financing paid out in 2026. The proposal does not introduce new resources, so these funds are front-loaded from subsequent years.

    In parallel, the Employment and Social Affairs Committee is discussing similar proposals in the context of the European Social Fund +.

    MIL OSI Europe News –

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Press release – Cohesion: responding to new challenges, but focus still needed on regional inequalities

    Source: European Parliament

    The Regional Development Committee adopted its position on proposals to introduce new priorities and flexibilities to the current EU cohesion funding cycle.

    MEPs from the Regional Development Committee broadly endorse, in a report adopted on Wednesday with 26 votes in favour, 10 against, and 5 abstentions, a Commission proposal to adapt the EU’s cohesion policy priorities in the period 2021–2027 while introducing some targeted changes to ensure that the main cohesion policy principles remain in place.


    New priorities and flexibilities

    MEPs backed the proposed introduction of new objectives that would be eligible for cohesion funds, namely defence industrial capabilities and military mobility, water resilience, affordable housing, decarbonisation, and energy infrastructure. They also agreed to channel some of the funds into EU competitiveness, particularly to the Strategic Technologies for Europe Platform (STEP), and to extra support for EU regions bordering Russia, Belarus and Ukraine.

    MEPs also supported more favourable funding conditions, including the possibility of 100% co-financing, 30% pre-financing and a further pay-off of 9.5% of the total funding for reallocations to the new priorities in 2026 if at least 15% of funds are reallocated to them. MEPs propose lowering this threshold to 10%.


    MEPs call for preparedness investments

    In their amendments, MEPs want to prioritise dual-use infrastructure (suitable for civilian and military use) when funding the defence industry and military mobility. On water management, they want to broaden the scope of support to include integrated water management (for example, irrigation and desalination). MEPs also want to make housing sustainability a priority, and allow funds to go to the protection of critical energy infrastructure and civil preparedness infrastructure.

    To ensure cohesion policy’s focus on reducing inter-regional inequalities is maintained, MEPs want to update the rules such that only less developed and transition regions can access the new funding for defence and decarbonisation. They also changed a provision that would allow support to go to larger companies to specify that this can only happen when the companies commit to local employment. MEPs added a measure ensuring the consent of local and regional authorities is still needed for the transferring of already-planned territorial development funds to other purposes.

    MEPs emphasise that the new flexibilities cannot be applied to cohesion funding frozen under the EU’s conditionality regulation for violations of EU values or the rule of law.


    Quote

    After the vote, rapporteur and Committee Chair Dragoș Benea (S&D, Romania) said: “Parliament is stepping up to deliver concrete answers to citizens living in border regions, to families struggling to find affordable housing, and to communities facing the challenges of the green transition. By adapting the rules of cohesion policy to today’s emerging priorities, without undermining the core mission of territorial solidarity, we reaffirm our commitment to ensuring no region and no European citizen is left behind.”


    Next steps

    Negotiations with the Council were authorised with 31 in favour, 9 against, and 1 abstention. They will be announced during Parliament’s July 7-11 plenary session, and if there are no objections, they can proceed.


    Background

    The Commission’s proposal would amend the European Regional Development Fund, Cohesion Fund and Just Transition Fund. The Commission estimates that it will lead to €16.1bn in additional pre-financing paid out in 2026. The proposal does not introduce new resources, so these funds are front-loaded from subsequent years.

    In parallel, the Employment and Social Affairs Committee is discussing similar proposals in the context of the European Social Fund +.

    MIL OSI Europe News –

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Briefing – State of Play: EU support to Ukraine – 25-06-2025

    Source: European Parliament

    In response to Russia’s full-scale war of aggression against Ukraine, which started in February 2022, the European Union (EU) and its Member States have provided unprecedented financial, military and humanitarian support to Ukraine. According to European Commission figures, Team Europe, consisting of the EU and its Member States, has made available around €150 billion in support to Ukraine. This support encompasses macro-financial assistance, financial support through the Ukraine Facility, humanitarian aid and military assistance from Member States and the European Peace Facility, as well as support to Ukrainian refugees in the EU. The overall support of Team Europe for Ukraine is now greater than the support provided by the United States (US), except in terms of military support allocation. However, Team Europe has provided 83 % of the tanks and 76 % of the air defence systems given to Ukraine since the start of the full-scale war. The disbursement of EU payments under the Ukraine Facility is conditional on Ukraine implementing the Ukraine Plan – an ambitious reform and investment plan drafted by Ukraine’s government and endorsed by the EU. The Commission and the Ukrainian government publish updates on the progress of the reforms and on the disbursal of payments. In addition to the Ukraine Facility, the G7 have agreed upon a further €45 billion loan, with €18.1 billion to be financed by the EU. For this purpose, a Ukraine Loan Cooperation Mechanism has been established, which uses extraordinary revenues originating from Russian sovereign assets immobilised in the G7 member states to repay loans and associated interest costs. The rights, responsibilities and obligations provided for under the Ukraine Facility will apply to the G7 loan to ensure seamless management of both. The European Parliament has repeatedly called for confiscating the immobilised Russian sovereign assets to finance further support for Ukraine and the country’s reconstruction, instead of just relying on extraordinary revenues. International financial institutions, such as the International Monetary Fund, play a key role in addressing external financing needs and supporting the country’s macroeconomic stability.

    MIL OSI Europe News –

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Briefing – State of Play: EU support to Ukraine – 25-06-2025

    Source: European Parliament

    In response to Russia’s full-scale war of aggression against Ukraine, which started in February 2022, the European Union (EU) and its Member States have provided unprecedented financial, military and humanitarian support to Ukraine. According to European Commission figures, Team Europe, consisting of the EU and its Member States, has made available around €150 billion in support to Ukraine. This support encompasses macro-financial assistance, financial support through the Ukraine Facility, humanitarian aid and military assistance from Member States and the European Peace Facility, as well as support to Ukrainian refugees in the EU. The overall support of Team Europe for Ukraine is now greater than the support provided by the United States (US), except in terms of military support allocation. However, Team Europe has provided 83 % of the tanks and 76 % of the air defence systems given to Ukraine since the start of the full-scale war. The disbursement of EU payments under the Ukraine Facility is conditional on Ukraine implementing the Ukraine Plan – an ambitious reform and investment plan drafted by Ukraine’s government and endorsed by the EU. The Commission and the Ukrainian government publish updates on the progress of the reforms and on the disbursal of payments. In addition to the Ukraine Facility, the G7 have agreed upon a further €45 billion loan, with €18.1 billion to be financed by the EU. For this purpose, a Ukraine Loan Cooperation Mechanism has been established, which uses extraordinary revenues originating from Russian sovereign assets immobilised in the G7 member states to repay loans and associated interest costs. The rights, responsibilities and obligations provided for under the Ukraine Facility will apply to the G7 loan to ensure seamless management of both. The European Parliament has repeatedly called for confiscating the immobilised Russian sovereign assets to finance further support for Ukraine and the country’s reconstruction, instead of just relying on extraordinary revenues. International financial institutions, such as the International Monetary Fund, play a key role in addressing external financing needs and supporting the country’s macroeconomic stability.

    MIL OSI Europe News –

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Other events – Europol presents latest EU Terrorism Situation & Trend Report (EU TE-SAT 2025) – 24-06-2025 – Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs

    Source: European Parliament

    At the LIBE Committee meeting on 24 June 2025, Ms Anna Sjöberg, Head of Europol’s European Counter Terrorism Centre (ECTC), delivered a presentation of the latest EU Terrorism Situation & Trend Report (EU TE-SAT) covering the year 2024. She opened by underscoring the report’s comprehensive scope, combining data on terrorist attacks, arrests, and convictions across EU Member States, contextualised within evolving ideological trends.

    Ms Sjöberg highlighted that in 2024, 14 EU Member States reported 58 terrorist attacks — including 34 completed, 5 failed and 19 foiled). The report distinguishes between and elaborates in-depth on different forms of terrorism, based on varying ideologies: jihadist terrorism, right-wing terrorism, left-wing and anarchist terrorism, ethno-nationalist and separatist terrorism and other types of terrorism. In assessing the terrorist threat in the EU, Europol emphasised the recent geopolitical developments such as the conflict in Gaza, anti-Semitism across the entire ideological spectrum, the Russian war against Ukraine, and the ability of Syria’s new government to fight terrorism.

    During the ensuing debate, Members were keen to highlight the need for enhanced information exchange between the Member States with Europol, the threat of returning foreign fighters, and the recruitment of minors through social media platforms. Discussion also touched upon the issue of state-sponsored terrorism.

    Concluding, Ms Sjöberg stressed the TE SAT’s crucial role in guiding EU-wide counter terrorism efforts and fostering coordinated responses via Europol’s ECTC.

    MIL OSI Europe News –

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Other events – Europol presents latest EU Terrorism Situation & Trend Report (EU TE-SAT 2025) – 24-06-2025 – Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs

    Source: European Parliament

    At the LIBE Committee meeting on 24 June 2025, Ms Anna Sjöberg, Head of Europol’s European Counter Terrorism Centre (ECTC), delivered a presentation of the latest EU Terrorism Situation & Trend Report (EU TE-SAT) covering the year 2024. She opened by underscoring the report’s comprehensive scope, combining data on terrorist attacks, arrests, and convictions across EU Member States, contextualised within evolving ideological trends.

    Ms Sjöberg highlighted that in 2024, 14 EU Member States reported 58 terrorist attacks — including 34 completed, 5 failed and 19 foiled). The report distinguishes between and elaborates in-depth on different forms of terrorism, based on varying ideologies: jihadist terrorism, right-wing terrorism, left-wing and anarchist terrorism, ethno-nationalist and separatist terrorism and other types of terrorism. In assessing the terrorist threat in the EU, Europol emphasised the recent geopolitical developments such as the conflict in Gaza, anti-Semitism across the entire ideological spectrum, the Russian war against Ukraine, and the ability of Syria’s new government to fight terrorism.

    During the ensuing debate, Members were keen to highlight the need for enhanced information exchange between the Member States with Europol, the threat of returning foreign fighters, and the recruitment of minors through social media platforms. Discussion also touched upon the issue of state-sponsored terrorism.

    Concluding, Ms Sjöberg stressed the TE SAT’s crucial role in guiding EU-wide counter terrorism efforts and fostering coordinated responses via Europol’s ECTC.

    MIL OSI Europe News –

  • MIL-OSI Europe: EU Fact Sheets – Central Asia – 24-06-2025

    Source: European Parliament

    Central Asia links the huge Asian continent with Europe. The EU recognises its strategic importance in trade and energy routes, as well as in resources such as gas, oil and minerals (particularly gold, uranium and all types of rare earths). In 2019, the EU updated its Central Asia strategy to focus on resilience (covering areas such as human rights, border security and the environment), prosperity (with a strong emphasis on connectivity) and regional cooperation. The first-ever EU-Central Asia Summit, which took place in April 2025, represented a milestone and was an opportunity to upgrade relations to a strategic partnership, deepen trade and focus on energy economic cooperation, investment, high-quality connectivity, digitalisation, sustainable development and security cooperation (including hybrid threats). A EUR 12 billion investment package is planned through the Global Gateway, aimed at improving trade routes. It is a key opportunity for the EU to demonstrate its geopolitical interest in intensifying bilateral engagement and enhancing regional cooperation with Central Asia, to reduce its dependence on China and Russia in the context of global geopolitical changes. The summit also focused on climate action, human rights and strategic resources (including critical raw materials). In the light of the situation in Afghanistan, Central Asia has become crucial for security and stability. The January 2022 riots in Kazakhstan, which ended after the Collective Security Treaty Organization sent Russian-led troops, and the border clashes between Central Asian countries show the risk of instability in a region under Moscow’s influence. This influence in Central Asia is, however, weakening as a result of the Russian invasion of Ukraine and the concentration of troops at the front. This shift has created opportunities for Central Asian countries to emerge as more independent regional actors and has opened new avenues for partnership and cooperation with the EU in areas such as energy, raw materials and connectivity. However, Russia remains a key security provider in the region, with military facilities in three of the five Central Asian countries, and it controls two thirds of arms’ imports and supports the region’s governments. For trade and investment, the Chinese influence is growing with its Belt and Road Initiative. In response to the initiative, the EU has increased its engagement and investment in the region with the EU Global Gateway. Taking into account individual Member States’ assistance, the EU has become the largest donor in Central Asia, allocating over EUR 550 million to the Central Asia regional multiannual indicative programme for 2021-2027. The EU and Central Asia have taken important steps through the EU Global Gateway to develop the Trans-Caspian Transport Corridor, aimed at creating a multimodal, modern and competitive route linking Europe and Central Asia. Parliament continues to highlight the importance of resp[…]

    MIL OSI Europe News –

  • MIL-OSI Europe: EU Fact Sheets – The European Neighbourhood Policy – 24-06-2025

    Source: European Parliament

    The European neighbourhood policy (ENP) applies to Algeria, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Egypt, Georgia, Israel, Jordan, Lebanon, Libya, Moldova, Morocco, Palestine, Syria, Tunisia and Ukraine. It aims to strengthen the prosperity, stability and security of all. It is based on democracy, the rule of law and respect for human rights and is a bilateral policy between the EU and each partner country, with regional cooperation initiatives: the Eastern Partnership (EaP) and the Union for the Mediterranean[1].

    MIL OSI Europe News –

  • MIL-OSI United Kingdom: UK to provide hundreds of air defence missiles for Ukraine with money from seized Russian assets

    Source: United Kingdom – Executive Government & Departments

    Press release

    UK to provide hundreds of air defence missiles for Ukraine with money from seized Russian assets

    The UK will boost Ukraine’s air defence with 350 missiles using funds from seized Russian assets, helping to protect Ukrainians from Putin’s attacks.

    • UK to provide 350 ASRAAM air defence missiles using £70m of funding raised from the interest on seized Russian assets 
    • The new package of missiles can be used with UK-provided air defence launchers, helping to protect Ukrainian citizens from Russian missile and drone attacks 
    • Comes as the Prime Minister and Defence Secretary visit The Hague for an annual summit of NATO leaders, with de-escalation in the Middle East and support for Ukraine topping the agenda 

    The UK will boost Ukraine’s air defence with 350 missiles using funds from seized Russian assets, helping to protect Ukrainians from Putin’s attacks.

    The ASRAAM missiles can be fired using the RAVEN Ground Based Air Defence System supplied by the UK to Ukraine, with five more RAVEN systems due for imminent delivery, bringing the total to 13.  

    Initially used as air-to-air missiles fired from fighter jets, RAF engineers adapted ASRAAM in just three months to be launched from the back of a UK designed and built truck, working with a British defence industry team from MBDA UK, based in Bolton. 

    The UK, together with allies, is stepping up its support for Ukraine – providing £4.5 billion of military support this year – more than ever before.  This support is vital to European security but is also supporting economic growth across the UK, supporting the Prime Minister’s Plan for Change and delivering a defence dividend across the UK.

    The missiles will be funded using £70m worth of interest generated from seized Russian assets under the Extraordinary Revenue Acceleration (ERA) scheme.

    Prime Minister Keir Starmer said:

    “Russia, not Ukraine, should pay the price for Putin’s barbaric and illegal war, so it is only right we use the proceeds from seized Russian assets to ensure Ukraine has the air defence it needs.

    “The security of Ukraine is vital to the security of the UK and the Euro-Atlantic area, and our support will never waiver.

    “My message to President Putin is clear: Russia needs to stop its indiscriminate attacks on innocent Ukrainian people and return to the negotiating table.”

    It comes as the Prime Minister, Defence Secretary and Foreign Secretary join NATO leaders for the Alliance’s annual summit in the Hague, where they will meet counterparts to discuss de-escalation efforts in the Middle East, as well as further military support for Ukraine.  

    Defence Secretary John Healey MP said:  

     “Ukrainians are continuing to fight with huge courage – civilians and military alike. I am committed to ensuring Ukraine has the support they need to put them in the strongest possible position to secure peace.  

    “Russia’s indiscriminate missile and drone attacks on Ukrainian cities show that Putin is not serious about peace, and it’s right that we use funds from seized Russian assets to help Ukraine defend itself from this onslaught. 

    “These air defence missiles will save Ukrainian lives, using equipment developed jointly by British military engineers and our defence industry – showing how we are delivering on our Strategic Defence Review’s commitment to learn lessons from Ukraine.”  

    In March, the Prime Minister announced a historic £1.6 billion deal to provide more than five thousand air defence missiles for Ukraine – creating 200 new jobs and supporting a further 700. Defence supports more than 434,000 skilled jobs in the UK.   

    The UK will also invest a record £350m this year to increase the supply of drones to Ukraine from a target of 10,000 in 2024 to 100,000 in 2025.  

    The UK has sent around 400 different capabilities to Ukraine, with a £150 million package including drones, tanks and air defence systems announced on 12 February 2025, a £225 million package including drones, boats and munitions announced on 19 December 2024, and 650 lightweight multirole missiles announced on 6 September 2024.  

    The UK is absolutely committed to securing a just and lasting peace in Ukraine and are engaging with key allies in support of this effort.

    Updates to this page

    Published 25 June 2025

    MIL OSI United Kingdom –

  • NATO leaders set to back Trump defence spending goal at Hague summit

    Source: Government of India

    Source: Government of India (4)

    NATO leaders gathered in The Hague on Wednesday for a summit tailor-made for U.S. President Donald Trump, with European allies hoping a pledge to hike defence spending will prompt him to dispel doubts about his commitment to the alliance.

    The summit is expected to endorse a higher defence spending goal of 5% of GDP – a response to a demand by Trump and to Europeans’ fears that Russia poses an increasingly direct threat to their security following the 2022 invasion of Ukraine.

    NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte acknowledged that it was not easy for countries to find the money for extra defence spending but said it was vital to do so.

    “There is absolute conviction with my colleagues at the table that given this threat from the Russians, given the international security situation, there is no alternative,” he told reporters on Wednesday morning.

    NATO officials are hoping the conflict between Israel and Iran, and the U.S. bombing of Iranian nuclear sites at the weekend, will not overshadow the gathering, hosted by Rutte in his home city.

    Trump has threatened not to protect NATO members if they fail to meet spending targets and he raised doubts about his commitment again on his way to the summit by avoiding directly endorsing the alliance’s Article 5 mutual defence clause.

    Speaking to reporters aboard Air Force One, he said there were “numerous definitions” of the clause. “I’m committed to saving lives. I’m committed to life and safety. And I’m going to give you an exact definition when I get there,” he said.

    The new target – to be achieved over the next 10 years – is a big increase on the current goal of 2% of GDP, although it will be measured differently. It would amount to hundreds of billions of dollars in extra annual spending.

    Countries would spend 3.5% of GDP on core defence – such as troops and weapons – and 1.5% on broader defence-related measures such as cyber security, protecting pipelines and adapting roads and bridges to handle military vehicles.

    All NATO members have backed a statement enshrining the target, although Spain declared it does not need to meet the goal. Madrid says it can meet its military commitments to NATO by spending much less – a view disputed by Rutte.

    But Rutte accepted a diplomatic fudge with Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez as part of his intense efforts to give Trump a diplomatic victory and make the summit go smoothly.

    UNUSUAL INSIGHT INTO SUMMIT DIPLOMACY

    Trump gave an unusual insight into those efforts on Tuesday by posting a private message in which Rutte lavished praise on him and congratulated him on “decisive action in Iran”.

    “You will achieve something NO American president in decades could get done,” Rutte told Trump.

    “Europe is going to pay in a BIG way as they should, and it will be your win.”

    To satisfy Trump, Rutte has also kept the summit and its final statement short and focused on the spending pledge.

    The text is expected to cite Russia as a threat and reaffirm allies’ support for Ukraine but not dwell on those issues, given Trump has taken a more conciliatory stance towards Moscow and been less supportive of Kyiv than his predecessor, Joe Biden.

    Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy had to settle for a seat at the pre-summit dinner on Tuesday evening rather than a seat at the main meeting on Wednesday, although Trump said he would probably meet with Zelenskiy separately.

    Zelenskiy and his aides have said they want to talk to Trump about buying U.S. weapons including Patriot missile defence systems and increasing pressure on Moscow through tougher sanctions.

    The Kremlin accused NATO of being on a path of rampant militarisation and portraying Russia as a “fiend of hell” in order to justify its big increase in defence spending.

    (Reuters)

  • MIL-OSI New Zealand: Child Fund – Children bear the brunt as risk of war increases

    Source: ChildFund New Zealand

    Violence against children in areas with armed conflict has reached unprecedented levels, with children bearing the brunt of violent clashes, indiscriminate attacks, disregard for ceasefires and peace agreements, and deepening humanitarian crisis, according to a new report from the United Nations.
    “As wars across the world escalate, from Ukraine and Yemen, to Gaza, Israel and Iran, it is always children who suffer the most and are uniquely vulnerable to abuse,” says Josie Pagani, CEO of ChildFund.
    According to the United Nation’s annual report into Children and Armed Conflict, last year:
    • 22,495 children were illegally recruited into armed groups, killed, maimed, raped or victims of other forms of sexual violence, and abduction in conflict zones
    • 4,676 children were killed, and 7,291 maimed, affecting a staggering 11,967 children
    • 41,370 were victims of grave violations, including attacks on schools and hospitals and denial of humanitarian access
    • Grave violations against children increased by 545% in Lebanon, 525% in Mozambique and 490% in Haiti
    • 3,018 children were jailed for association with parties to conflict.
    “In too many examples, perpetrators targeted attacks on children, used explosive weapons in populated areas, and systematically exploited children in hostilities for military and sexual purposes.”
    “There is still a blatant disregard for international law at the moment, where ‘might is right’, and humanitarian access in war is denied. Children are the silent victims when the law is ignored,” says Josie Pagani.
    Charities like ChildFund are on the ground, doing what they can to protect children in war zones.
    “Through our partners in Gaza, we are distributing water, hygiene kits, and doing everything possible to keep on top of the rapid increase of illnesses spreading through communities and in the camps for displaced people.”
    In Gaza, 92% of homes, 88% of schools, 68% of cropland, and 68% of road networks have been destroyed, while only 50% of hospitals are functioning – most of them only partially.
    In Ukraine, ChildFund partners have reached nearly 3000 people, including 1,797 children and teenagers with food and water, and provided safe spaces for children to keep learning during the war, and to get the psychosocial support they need.
    “We must keep calling out those on all sides of a conflict who disregard international law, or recruit children as combatants in wars, target citizens illegally, or ride roughshod over the Convention of the Rights of the Child. These legal principles are there precisely to protect the most vulnerable people in the most violent situations.”

    MIL OSI New Zealand News –

  • MIL-OSI Global: The war won’t end Iran’s nuclear program – it will drive it underground, following North Korea’s model

    Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Anthony Burke, Professor of Environmental Politics & International Relations, UNSW Sydney

    The United States’ and Israel’s strikes on Iran are concerning, and not just for the questionable legal justifications provided by both governments.

    Even if their attacks cause severe damage to Iran’s nuclear facilities, this will only harden Iran’s resolve to acquire a bomb.

    And if Iran follows through on its threat to pull out of the Treaty on the Nonproliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT), this will gravely damage the global nuclear nonproliferation regime.

    In a decade of international security crises, this could be the most serious. Is there still time to prevent this from happening?

    A successful but vulnerable treaty

    In May 2015, I attended the five-yearly review conference of the NPT. Delegates debated a draft outcome for weeks, and then, not for the first time, went home with nothing. Delegates from the US, United Kingdom and Canada blocked the final outcome to prevent words being added that would call for Israel to attend a disarmament conference.

    Russia did the same in 2022 in protest at language on its illegal occupation of the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power station in Ukraine.

    Now, in the latest challenge to the NPT, Israel and the US have bombed Iran’s nuclear complexes to ostensibly enforce a treaty neither one respects.

    When the treaty was adopted in 1968, it allowed the five nuclear-armed states at the time – the US, Soviet Union, France, UK and China – to join if they committed not to pass weapons or material to other states, and to disarm themselves.

    All other members had to pledge never to acquire nuclear weapons. Newer nuclear powers were not permitted to join unless they gave up their weapons.

    Israel declined to join, as it had developed its own undeclared nuclear arsenal by the late 1960s. India, Pakistan and South Sudan have also never signed; North Korea was a member but withdrew in 2003. Only South Sudan does not have nuclear weapons today.

    To make the obligations enforceable and strengthen safeguards against the diversion of nuclear material to non-nuclear weapons states, members were later required to sign the IAEA Additional Protocol. This gave the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) wide powers to inspect a state’s nuclear facilities and detect violations.

    It was the IAEA that first blew the whistle on Iran’s concerning uranium enrichment activity in 2003. Just before Israel’s attacks this month, the organisation also reported Iran was in breach of its obligations under the NPT for the first time in two decades.

    The NPT is arguably the world’s most universal, important and successful security treaty, but it is also paradoxically vulnerable.

    The treaty’s underlying consensus has been damaged by the failure of the five nuclear-weapon states to disarm as required, and by the failure to prevent North Korea from developing a now formidable nuclear arsenal.

    North Korea withdrew from the treaty in 2003, tested a weapon in 2006, and now may have up to 50 warheads.

    Iran could be next.

    How things can deteriorate from here

    Iran argues Israel’s attacks have undermined the credibility of the IAEA, given Israel used the IAEA’s new report on Iran as a pretext for its strikes, taking the matter out of the hands of the UN Security Council.

    For its part, the IAEA has maintained a principled position and criticised both the US and Israeli strikes.

    Iran has retaliated with its own missile strikes against both Israel and a US base in Qatar. In addition, it wasted no time announcing it would withdraw from the NPT.

    On June 23, an Iranian parliament committee also approved a bill that would fully suspend Iran’s cooperation with the IAEA, including allowing inspections and submitting reports to the organisation.

    Iran’s envoy to the IAEA, Reza Najafi, said the US strikes:

    […] delivered a fundamental and irreparable blow to the international non-proliferation regime conclusively demonstrating that the existing NPT framework has been rendered ineffective.

    Even if Israel and the US consider their bombing campaign successful, it has almost certainly renewed the Iranians’ resolve to build a weapon. The strikes may only delay an Iranian bomb by a few years.

    Iran will have two paths to do so. The slower path would be to reconstitute its enrichment activity and obtain nuclear implosion designs, which create extremely devastating weapons, from Russia or North Korea.

    Alternatively, Russia could send Iran some of its weapons. This should be a real concern given Moscow’s cascade of withdrawals from critical arms control agreements over the last decade.

    An Iranian bomb could then trigger NPT withdrawals by other regional states, especially Saudi Arabia, who suddenly face a new threat to their security.

    Why Iran might now pursue a bomb

    Iran’s support for Hamas, Hezbollah and Syria’s Assad regime certainly shows it is a dangerous international actor. Iranian leaders have also long used alarming rhetoric about Israel’s destruction.

    However repugnant the words, Israeli and US conservatives have misjudged Iran’s motives in seeking nuclear weapons.

    Israel fears an Iranian bomb would be an existential threat to its survival, given Iran’s promises to destroy it. But this neglects the fact that Israel already possesses a potent (if undeclared) nuclear deterrent capability.

    Israeli anxieties about an Iranian bomb should not be dismissed. But other analysts (myself included) see Iran’s desire for nuclear weapons capability more as a way to establish deterrence to prevent future military attacks from Israel and the US to protect their regime.

    Iranians were shaken by Iraq’s invasion in 1980 and then again by the US-led removal of Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein in 2003. This war with Israel and the US will shake them even more.

    Last week, I felt that if the Israeli bombing ceased, a new diplomatic effort to bring Iran into compliance with the IAEA and persuade it to abandon its program might have a chance.

    However, the US strikes may have buried that possibility for decades. And by then, the damage to the nonproliferation regime could be irreversible.

    Anthony Burke received funding from the UK’s Economic and Social Research Council for a project on global nuclear governance (2014–17).

    – ref. The war won’t end Iran’s nuclear program – it will drive it underground, following North Korea’s model – https://theconversation.com/the-war-wont-end-irans-nuclear-program-it-will-drive-it-underground-following-north-koreas-model-259281

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Chairman Wicker Leads SASC Hearing on CENTCOM and EUCOM Nominees

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Mississippi Roger Wicker

    Watch Video Here

     

    WASHINGTON – U.S. Senator Roger Wicker, R-Miss., Chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, today led a hearing to consider the nominations of two senior military officers to lead U.S. Central Command, and U.S. European Command.

     

    In his opening remarks, Chairman Wicker praised our service members for their skill and proficiency in carrying out the Operation Midnight Hammer mission to degrade Iran’s nuclear weapon capability. The Chairman also emphasized the consequential threat environments in the CENTCOM and EUCOM theaters of operations and stressed the importance of alliances in achieving peace through strength.

     

    Read Senator Wicker’s hearing opening statement as delivered.

     

    The committee meets today to consider the nominations of Vice Admiral Brad Cooper, to be Commander, United States Central Command, and Lieutenant General Alexus G. Grynkewich, to be Commander, United States European Command and Supreme Allied Commander, Europe. I welcome our nominees and their families, and I thank them for their continued willingness to serve our nation.

     

    I want to begin my remarks by recognizing the remarkable skill, courage, and professionalism displayed by the men and women of our military and intelligence communities who participated in Operation Midnight Hammer over the weekend.

     

    President Trump was right to authorize the mission to strike Iran’s nuclear facilities and address this longstanding threat to the United States. Our commander-in-chief gave Ayatollah Khamenei every chance to negotiate peacefully. The Iranian leader, however, rejected our President’s entreaties. He instead chose to continue his pursuit of a nuclear weapon and support of terrorism rather than a peaceful resolution that would have benefited the Iranian people. To be clear, the situation the Iranian regime finds itself in today is entirely of its own making.

     

    I know members of this committee will have questions about Operation Midnight Hammer and the administration’s Iran policy. I do remind my colleagues there will be a classified briefing for all senators later today with senior administration officials to address many of these questions.

     

    If confirmed, Admiral Cooper will assume command of CENTCOM in the midst of a seismic shift across the Middle East. These changes were precipitated by Hamas’ barbaric attack against Israel on October 7th, 2023. Since then, Iran’s conventional military capabilities have been severely degraded, Hezbollah’s leadership has been decimated, and Hamas has been crushed. Iran’s longtime political ally in the region – Syria’s Bashar Assad – is out of power and in exile.

     

    Iran and its terrorist allies are weaker than they have been in decades, but the job is not done.

     

    We must do all we can to support the defense of Israel and ensure that American forces in the region have what they need. I hope to hear Admiral Cooper’s unclassified assessment of recent developments and his description of the force posture and force protection requirements CENTCOM needs in order to contend with Iran, its proxies, and other threats emanating from the region.

     

    Lastly, we must not lose sight of the continuing threat posed by radical Islamist terrorist groups like ISIS and al-Qaeda. Although weakened, ISIS and al-Qaeda remain intent on killing Americans. I am interested in Admiral Cooper’s testimony about the current capabilities of terrorist groups in the region and what CENTCOM’s counterterrorism strategy should be in order to counter this threat.

     

    Now as to General Grynkewich — If confirmed, he will take command of EUCOM and NATO at a time of war and great uncertainty. Vladimir Putin continues to remind the West that Russia remains a determined enemy, one which is willing to use force to vindicate long-held grievances and to violate international law. The Russian dictator’s invasion of Ukraine has rained death and destruction upon a democratic people and serves as a warning to the world that the military threat from Russia is as relevant today as it ever has been.

     

    Indeed, earlier this month, NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte warned that “Russia could be ready to use military force against NATO within five years.” He added that Putin’s war economy “produces more munitions in three months than the whole of NATO produces in a year.” Of course, Russia is not just a danger to our NATO allies. Russia also directly threatens the homeland. Its nuclear arsenal is sized and postured to destroy the United States. The members of this committee are keen to hear General Grynkewich’s views of the threat Russia poses, as well as his plans to counter it.

     

    The United States faces a dauting challenge: We must deter, and if necessary, defeat two nuclear peer adversaries. That task highlights the important role allies play in our security. President Trump deserves considerable credit for dramatically increasing allied burden sharing, which has helped to renew NATO’s purpose. NATO is now actively debating a commitment for members to spend 5 percent of their GDP on defense.

     

    Amid this encouraging development, there are some in the Pentagon that believe the U.S. must draw down our military presence in Europe. This thinking bewilders most of us on this committee, given Russia’s aggression and the renewed willingness of allies to share our collective defense burden.

     

    Our presence in Europe helps deter Russia. It also has additional benefits, including enabling and assisting our military operations in the CENTCOM and AFRICOM areas of operation. That support is vital, especially now, as tensions once again rise in the Middle East.

     

    With that I look forward to our hearing today, and I turn to my colleague and friend, Ranking Member Reed.

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Chairman Wicker Leads SASC Hearing on CENTCOM and EUCOM Nominees

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Mississippi Roger Wicker

    Watch Video Here

     

    WASHINGTON – U.S. Senator Roger Wicker, R-Miss., Chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, today led a hearing to consider the nominations of two senior military officers to lead U.S. Central Command, and U.S. European Command.

     

    In his opening remarks, Chairman Wicker praised our service members for their skill and proficiency in carrying out the Operation Midnight Hammer mission to degrade Iran’s nuclear weapon capability. The Chairman also emphasized the consequential threat environments in the CENTCOM and EUCOM theaters of operations and stressed the importance of alliances in achieving peace through strength.

     

    Read Senator Wicker’s hearing opening statement as delivered.

     

    The committee meets today to consider the nominations of Vice Admiral Brad Cooper, to be Commander, United States Central Command, and Lieutenant General Alexus G. Grynkewich, to be Commander, United States European Command and Supreme Allied Commander, Europe. I welcome our nominees and their families, and I thank them for their continued willingness to serve our nation.

     

    I want to begin my remarks by recognizing the remarkable skill, courage, and professionalism displayed by the men and women of our military and intelligence communities who participated in Operation Midnight Hammer over the weekend.

     

    President Trump was right to authorize the mission to strike Iran’s nuclear facilities and address this longstanding threat to the United States. Our commander-in-chief gave Ayatollah Khamenei every chance to negotiate peacefully. The Iranian leader, however, rejected our President’s entreaties. He instead chose to continue his pursuit of a nuclear weapon and support of terrorism rather than a peaceful resolution that would have benefited the Iranian people. To be clear, the situation the Iranian regime finds itself in today is entirely of its own making.

     

    I know members of this committee will have questions about Operation Midnight Hammer and the administration’s Iran policy. I do remind my colleagues there will be a classified briefing for all senators later today with senior administration officials to address many of these questions.

     

    If confirmed, Admiral Cooper will assume command of CENTCOM in the midst of a seismic shift across the Middle East. These changes were precipitated by Hamas’ barbaric attack against Israel on October 7th, 2023. Since then, Iran’s conventional military capabilities have been severely degraded, Hezbollah’s leadership has been decimated, and Hamas has been crushed. Iran’s longtime political ally in the region – Syria’s Bashar Assad – is out of power and in exile.

     

    Iran and its terrorist allies are weaker than they have been in decades, but the job is not done.

     

    We must do all we can to support the defense of Israel and ensure that American forces in the region have what they need. I hope to hear Admiral Cooper’s unclassified assessment of recent developments and his description of the force posture and force protection requirements CENTCOM needs in order to contend with Iran, its proxies, and other threats emanating from the region.

     

    Lastly, we must not lose sight of the continuing threat posed by radical Islamist terrorist groups like ISIS and al-Qaeda. Although weakened, ISIS and al-Qaeda remain intent on killing Americans. I am interested in Admiral Cooper’s testimony about the current capabilities of terrorist groups in the region and what CENTCOM’s counterterrorism strategy should be in order to counter this threat.

     

    Now as to General Grynkewich — If confirmed, he will take command of EUCOM and NATO at a time of war and great uncertainty. Vladimir Putin continues to remind the West that Russia remains a determined enemy, one which is willing to use force to vindicate long-held grievances and to violate international law. The Russian dictator’s invasion of Ukraine has rained death and destruction upon a democratic people and serves as a warning to the world that the military threat from Russia is as relevant today as it ever has been.

     

    Indeed, earlier this month, NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte warned that “Russia could be ready to use military force against NATO within five years.” He added that Putin’s war economy “produces more munitions in three months than the whole of NATO produces in a year.” Of course, Russia is not just a danger to our NATO allies. Russia also directly threatens the homeland. Its nuclear arsenal is sized and postured to destroy the United States. The members of this committee are keen to hear General Grynkewich’s views of the threat Russia poses, as well as his plans to counter it.

     

    The United States faces a dauting challenge: We must deter, and if necessary, defeat two nuclear peer adversaries. That task highlights the important role allies play in our security. President Trump deserves considerable credit for dramatically increasing allied burden sharing, which has helped to renew NATO’s purpose. NATO is now actively debating a commitment for members to spend 5 percent of their GDP on defense.

     

    Amid this encouraging development, there are some in the Pentagon that believe the U.S. must draw down our military presence in Europe. This thinking bewilders most of us on this committee, given Russia’s aggression and the renewed willingness of allies to share our collective defense burden.

     

    Our presence in Europe helps deter Russia. It also has additional benefits, including enabling and assisting our military operations in the CENTCOM and AFRICOM areas of operation. That support is vital, especially now, as tensions once again rise in the Middle East.

     

    With that I look forward to our hearing today, and I turn to my colleague and friend, Ranking Member Reed.

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Tuberville Speaks with Department of Defense Nominees

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Alabama Tommy Tuberville

    WASHINGTON – Today, U.S. Senator Tommy Tuberville (R-AL) participated in a Senate Armed Services Committee hearing to consider the nominations of Vice Admiral Charles B. Cooper II, to be Commander for United States Central Command, and Lieutenant General Alexus G. Grynkewich to be Commander for United States European Command and Supreme Allied Commander of Europe. During the hearing, Senator Tuberville and Lt. General Grynkewich discussed the general’s relationship with NATO commanders as well as the conflict in Eastern Europe. Additionally, he spoke to Vice Admiral Cooper about preventing the Houthis from obstructing trade in the Middle East.

    Read Senator Tuberville’s remarks below or on YouTube or Rumble.

    ON NATO RELATIONSHIPS:

    TUBERVILLE: “Good morning. Thanks for both of your service and moving your families around. Kinda like a coach. You know, you don’t stay very long in one spot. Admiral, it’s good to see your family here. Auburn folks. Good Alabama folks. Living Montgomery, I think.
    Right? […]

    “General, let me ask you this. What’s your relationship with the NATO commanders in the bigger countries? That we have.”

    GRYNKEWICH: “Senator, I have worked with European partners around the world over the years in a variety of coalition environments, and I know many of the leaders across all of those countries. It’s a solid relationship, sir.”

    TUBERVILLE: “How about Turkey?”

    GRYNKEWICH: “Sir, I’ve had the privilege of visiting Türkiye several times over the course of my career and have great respect for the military capabilities that they can bring to bear.”

    TUBERVILLE: “Largest military in NATO. Is that right?”

    GRYNKEWICH: “Yes, sir.”

    ON LIKELIHOOD OF UKRAINE DEFEATING RUSSIA:

    TUBERVILLE: “Yeah. Let me ask this question. This Ukraine-Russia war has been going on for a long time. A lot of people killed. We’ve spent a lot of money. Can Ukraine win?”

    GRYNKEWICH: “Senator, I think Ukraine can win. I think anytime your own homeland is threatened, you fight with a tenacity that’s difficult for us to conceive of if we haven’t found ourselves in that same situation.”

    TUBERVILLE: “Yeah. They’ve they have absolutely fought hard. You gotta give it to them.”

    ON WHO SUPPORTS HOUTHIS:

    TUBERVILLE: “Admiral, we hadn’t talked about the Houthis. I think we’ve bombed them for 30 straight days. Is that correct?”

    COOPER: “Sir, we bombed them for 51 straight days in conjunction with Operation Rough Rider.”

    TUBERVILLE: “Yeah. Have we stopped?”

    COOPER: “Sir, the president gave the military a very precise mission, which was to restore the freedom of navigation, and that mission was successfully executed. We have freedom of navigation today. We agreed [to] a ceasefire several weeks ago. Now 40 days ago. If the Houthis didn’t shoot at us, we wouldn’t shoot at them. They have not shot at us. We have not shot at them. And we have multiple examples of destroyers going back and forth through the Bab al-Mandab.”

    TUBERVILLE: “Destroyers, but what about merchant ships?”

    COOPER: “There is merchant ships flowing through the Bab al-Mandab today. If we walk back to the fall of 2023 when the Houthis started their kinetic actions, it took several months for the flow of commerce to leave the Red Sea. I would expect it’s gonna take several months for it to fully come back.”

    TUBERVILLE: “My understanding is that the Houthis are one of the strongest groups that are backed by Iran. Is that correct?”

    COOPER: “Sir, they’ve been supported with arms, people, training, ISR for the better part of 10 years. They’re well supported.”

    TUBERVILLE: “Yeah. China support’s them too?”

    COOPER: “They do.”

    TUBERVILLE: “So, do you think this is going to be an on and off project with the Houthis over the years? Or are we going to be able to stabilize it?”

    COOPER: “I think we’re now 40 days into this; the ball is in the Houthis’ court. We’re prepared for a range of actions, but I think the policies associated with the ceasefire remain in place, and we’ll just be prepared, from a military perspective, for a wide range of contingencies as is our obligation to do so.”

    TUBERVILLE: “Do we actually know who the leadership is that controls the Houthis?”

    COOPER: “We do, sir.”

    TUBERVILLE: “Yeah. […] Do we talk to them? They talk back to us? How does that work?”

    COOPER: “Communications with the Houthis is done through diplomatic channels. And Houthis are a foreign terrorist organization. We don’t have a communication via the military.”

    TUBERVILLE: “So the president, when he works and tries to calm the situation down, who does he talk to?”

    COOPER: “Sir, he uses the Envoy for the Middle East, Ambassador Steve Witkoff, who helped enable the most recent ceasefire.”

    TUBERVILLE: “Yeah. They must be some tough rascals. I mean, we bombed them for 51 days and they’re still kicking. Right?”

    COOPER: “They’re extremely well supplied by the Iranians.”

    TUBERVILLE: “They’re supplied, but what? Are they dug in?”

    COOPER: “As we’ve seen throughout the region, groups are going underground, Hamas, Hezbollah, the Houthis. This is a serious issue that we will have to look at into the future.”

    TUBERVILLE: “Yeah. We do make a bomb in Huntsville called ‘MOAB.’ They do a lot of damage. I think we’ve seen that in Afghanistan. We got a few left. So, maybe in the future, [if] we can’t get them to reconcile…because we’re gonna have to have full passage in the Red Sea. If we’re going to get AI going, we’re going to get supply chains going, we can’t haphazardly wonder if they’re going to sink one of our ships but thank you. Good luck to both of you. Thank you very much. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.”

    Senator Tommy Tuberville represents Alabama in the United States Senate and is a member of the Senate Armed Services, Agriculture, Veterans’ Affairs, HELP and Aging Committees.

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: McConnell on American Leadership; Standing with Israel and Ukraine

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Kentucky Mitch McConnell

    Washington, D.C. – U.S. Senator Mitch McConnell (R-KY), Chairman of the Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Defense, delivered remarks on the Senate floor today regarding U.S. national security interests in standing with Israel, supporting Ukraine, and investing sufficiently in our own defense. Prepared text of his speech follows:

    “When Iran’s proxies launched a full-scale war on Israel on October 7th, 2023, President Biden pledged an ‘unwavering commitment to Israel’s security’. This was the right message in the moment. But as I warned publicly at the time, Israel needed more than rhetorical solidarity.

    “Like Ukraine, Israel needed precious time, space to maneuver, and material support to defeat a shared enemy. And yet, as in Ukraine, America’s commitment has indeed wavered. Our support has not been ironclad.

    “Instead, under the previous Administration, American support was delayed, restricted, and paired with attempts to micromanage Israeli operations and even interfere with Israeli politics. And at every turn, the progressive left and isolationist right hyperventilated about the specter of so-called forever war.

    “Fortunately, Israel held its ground. Israelis weren’t enthused about a ground war in Gaza. Their leaders knew that war would be difficult. But they knew it was unavoidable so long as Hamas terrorists still refused to release its hostages. They also knew lasting security meant changing Iran’s calculus…Not just responding to attacks from its proxies. So Israel decided to turn Iran’s terrorist assets into liabilities.

    “Despite the pearl-clutching here in Washington, our ally simultaneously decapitated Hizballah and crippled Hamas. Their bold operations created a new opportunity for Lebanon to claw back its sovereignty from a terrorist state within a state.

    “Meanwhile, the collapse of the brutal Assad regime in Syria brought down a Russian vassal and Iran’s favorite corridor of weapons and terrorist finance. These are the circumstances President Trump inherited. What to do with them has been the subject of some debate. Some of his advisors and supporters came with Obama-Biden-era talking points, ready to urge him to continue his predecessor’s policy of constraining Israel. Some had argued publicly that America had no vital or existential interests in the Middle East or claimed the region was a distraction from other priorities. They warned of forever war. Some seemed to push for nuclear negotiations with parameters eerily similar to the nuclear deal he withdrew from during his first term. They even proposed Iran could keep enriching uranium, until the President rightly quashed that idea.

    “These mixed messages emboldened Iran and its proxies. After all, why give up if Administration officials saw the Middle East as little more than a distraction?…or if they seem as fearful of restoring deterrence as the previous guys? So Hamas kept holding hostages. The Houthis kept targeting Israel and Red Sea commerce. And the Islamic Republic kept marching toward a nuclear weapon. And in response, Israel took the next logical step to restore deterrence.

    “Once again, innovative and decisive strikes destroyed Iran’s air defenses and imposed immediate costs on Tehran. And leaders from across Israel’s politics stood united behind the daring operations. But here in America, the same restrainers, anti-Israel progressives, and self-proclaimed realists warned again of regional conflagration if the President intervened alongside – or even supported – Israel’s strikes.

    “The President’s own Director of National Intelligence traveled to Hiroshima to record a bizarre video message – not as a warning against Tehran’s nuclear ambitions but, presumably, against American or Israeli operations to blunt them.

    “Fortunately, the President rejected the pleas of appeasers and isolationists. The strikes he ordered dealt a massive blow to Iran’s nuclear program, bolstered American credibility, and strengthened U.S. and Israeli leverage to end Iran’s pursuit of nuclear weapons and its support for terrorism for good.

    “Thanks to Israel’s heroic efforts for more than a year and a half, Iran’s ability to threaten regional stability is massively degraded. Not since before the Islamic revolution has there been such an opportunity for America, Israel, and our Arab partners to reset regional dynamics on such favorable terms. Achieving it has required no large-scale deployment of U.S. ground forces. It required only supporting our friends. Israel is a close ally and a strategic asset. Not a liability. And the strategic return on our investment in assisting Israel is incalculable.

    “Standing with our Israeli friends offers a powerful lesson about American leadership, the value of alliances and partnerships, and the real nature of peace through strength. And this lesson extends far beyond the Middle East. If America refuses to apply it elsewhere – like Ukraine – we do so at grave risk to our own interests. But that’s exactly what some in Washington seem to be doing. Congress recently learned that a senior DoD official conducted a review of DoD security assistance efforts and concluded that the Ukraine Security Assistance Initiative (USAI), among other programs, was wasteful. This is a Republican Administration panning a program created by a Republican Congress in 2015 to counter President Obama’s toothless response to Russia’s initial invasion of Ukraine. I’d like to see the analysis behind the Administration’s decision to zero out USAI in its FY26 request. I’d like to hear them try to explain away the massive return on investment of America’s security assistance to Ukraine and the precious lessons we’ve learned from our Ukrainian partners.

    “The Secretary of the Army has rightly called Ukraine ‘the Silicon Valley of warfare’. Do his colleagues at the Pentagon think this assessment is wrong, or do they just not think access to the cutting edge of modern combat is valuable? Here’s the truth: USAI and other security assistance efforts have helped us measurably address shortcomings in strategy, capabilities, and production capacity that would have gone ignored until it was too late.

    “It’s an inconvenient reality for isolationists and restrainers, but – for a tiny percent of our defense budget – we helped a smaller military resist invasion by a vastly larger one and degrade a major U.S. adversary.

    “As with Israel, Ukraine is fighting an adversary of the United States. Our support does not entangle us in a far-off foreign conflict. For Russia, Iran, China, and North Korea, America is the main enemy – the great Satan. If these adversaries beat our friends, the threat to America become a thousand times greater. We should be grateful for friends so willing to defend our collective interests against common foes.

    “Partnership with Ukraine is teaching us what modern warfare could mean for U.S. forces when they do face direct conflict. It has tested our assumptions about munitions inventories, expenditure rates, electronic warfare, and the duration of conflict. Without Ukraine’s experience with U.S. weapons, we would have been surprised to find some advanced systems quickly rendered inoperable on future battlefields.

    “The money we invest in USAI on weapons for Ukraine expands our own production capacity in the process and will improve the quality of our own munitions. Supplemental appropriations on Ukraine and Israel, in turn, backfill our own stocks with brand-new capabilities – not just 155mm rounds, but air defenses and long-range fires, with specific investment in solid rocket motors. These investments help us prepare for conflict in the Indo-Pacific. And production would be slower in the absence of our partnership with Ukraine. Not doing more to address our growing defense needs isn’t a failure of foresight. It’s a failure of political will. Everyone wants to see an end to Russia’s war in Ukraine. But the price of peace matters. If we want enduring stability in Europe, we can’t fall for an illusory peace.

    “We should know enough history not to dismiss this as merely ‘a quarrel in a faraway country, between two people of whom we know nothing’. It’s a major war of conquest in Europe…The most significant since the days of Nazi Germany…And allies and adversaries half a world away are watching it closely for clues about America’s resolve. Certainly, Europe’s deepening commitments to collective defense will make real peace more enforceable. The President’s insistence has driven much of this progress; Putin’s brutality has reinforced it.

    “Since 2022, our European NATO allies have made historic investments in defense – often buying American. And many are preparing to make even larger commitments at this week’s NATO Summit. This is good news. But we can’t expect allies to continue signing up for 3.5% and 5% commitments if America insists on falling further behind. Likewise, we can’t expect Putin to end his aggression if he thinks America’s abandonment of Ukraine is only a matter of time. And we can’t expect anyone to take America’s threats and commitments seriously if we’re content to let our own strength atrophy.

    “A base budget request that cuts defense spending in real terms doesn’t show Moscow we’re serious – let alone Beijing. Leading from behind would be bad enough, but this is just plain falling behind. The strongest deterrence is denying an adversary’s objectives through military means. Israel is restoring this deterrence in the Middle East. Ukraine is achieving it by holding its own against Russia. But it needs help.

    “Recently, I’ve asked Administration officials simple questions, like: Who is the aggressor in this conflict? The answer is obvious. But a second, equally simple question seems to trip them up: Who do we want to win?

    “The President made the right call to stand with Israel. I hope he’ll also decide to stand with Ukraine, prevent Russian victory, and start reversing a dangerous, downward trend in our defense budgets. I hope he’ll recognize Russia’s attempt to ‘tap him along’ for what it is. Putin is getting mixed messages from Washington. He thinks he has time. He believes the West is weak and divided. But the President – at very little cost – can shatter this illusion. It’s time to impose sanctions, raise the price of Russia’s aggression, redouble security assistance to Ukraine, and drive the Kremlin to seek peace. It’s time for deterrence through denial.

    “There’s no surer path to just and enduring peace…No better way to demonstrate that peace through strength actually means something…No clearer sign to allies and adversaries watching closely from the Western Hemisphere to the Indo-Pacific that America still has the will to lead.”

     

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI Global: Ceasefires like the one between Iran and Israel often fail – but an agreement with specific conditions is more likely to hold

    Source: The Conversation – USA – By Donald Heflin, Executive Director of the Edward R. Murrow Center and Senior Fellow of Diplomatic Practice, The Fletcher School, Tufts University

    President Donald Trump speaks to reporters outside the White House on June 24, 2025, in Washington, less than 12 hours after announcing a ceasefire between Israel and Iran. Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images

    Within hours of President Donald Trump unexpectedly announcing an upcoming ceasefire between Israel and Iran on June 23, 2025, both countries launched airstrikes against the other.

    “We basically have two countries that have been fighting so long and so hard that they don’t know what the f–k they’re doing,” an angry and frustrated Trump told reporters outside the White House on June 24.

    While Iran and Israel have tentatively agreed to the truce – and Trump reiterated on June 24 that the “ceasefire is in effect” – it is not clear whether this deal can hold. Some research shows that an estimated 80% of ceasefire deals worldwide fail.

    Amy Lieberman, a politics and society editor at The Conversation U.S., spoke with former Ambassador Donald Heflin, an American career diplomat who serves as the executive director of the Edward R. Murrow Center at the Fletcher School, Tufts University, to understand how ceasefires typically work – and how the Israel-Iran deal stacks up against other agreements to end wars.

    An excavator removes debris from a residential building that was destroyed in Israel’s June 13, 2025, airstrike on Tehran, Iran.
    Majid Saeedi/Getty Images

    How do ceasefire deals typically happen?

    There are classes taught on how to negotiate ceasefires, but it is ad hoc with each situation.

    For example, in one scenario, one of the warring parties wants a ceasefire and has decided that the conflict isn’t going well. The second party might not want a ceasefire, but could agree that it is getting tired or the risks are too high, and agrees to work something out.

    The next scenario, which leads to more success, is when both parties want a ceasefire. They decide that the loss of life and money has gone too far for both sides. One of the parties approaches the other through intermediaries to say it wants a ceasefire, and the other warring party agrees.

    In a third situation – which is what we are seeing with the Iran-Israel deal – the outside world imposes a ceasefire. Trump likely told both Israel and Iran: Look, it’s enough. This is too dangerous for the rest of the world. We don’t care what you think. Time for a ceasefire.“

    The U.S. has done this in the Middle East before, like after the Yom Kippur War in 1973 between Israel and a coalition of Arab countries led by Egypt and Syria. Israel was achieving big military victories, but the risk was pretty great for the world. The U.S. came in and said, “That’s enough, stop it now.” And it worked.

    Does the US bring the warring parties to a table in this kind of situation, or simply pressure the countries to stop fighting?

    It is more of the U.S. saying, “We are done.” When the U.S. does something like this, it is often going to have backup from the European Union and other countries like Qatar, saying, “The Americans are right. It is time for a ceasefire.”

    It appears that this Israel-Iran deal does not have specific conditions attached to it. Is that typical of a ceasefire deal?

    This deal doesn’t seem to have any specific details attached to it. Ceasefires work better when they have that. Lasting ceasefires need to address the concerns of the warring parties and give each side some of what it wants.

    For instance, in the Ukraine and Russia war, we have not seen either one of those countries push for a ceasefire. Part of the problem is Crimea and eastern Ukraine, sections of land in Ukraine that Russia has annexed and claims as its own. Russia would be happy with a deal that puts it in charge of Crimea and Ukraine, but Ukraine won’t agree to that. The question of who controls specific areas of land has to be addressed in this conflict; otherwise, the ceasefire isn’t going to last.

    Search and rescue efforts continue in a building in Beersheba, Israel, hit by a ballistic missile fired from Iran shortly before the ceasefire announced by U.S. President Donald Trump came into effect on June 24, 2025.
    Mostafa Alkharouf/Anadolu via Getty Images)

    Who is responsible for ensuring that both sides uphold a ceasefire?

    Security guarantees are an important part of negotiating and maintaining long-term ceasefires. Big countries like the U.S. could say that if a warring party violates a ceasefire agreement, they are going to punish them.

    In the 1990s, the U.S. and Europe assured Ukraine that if it gave up its nuclear arsenal, the U.S. would defend Ukraine if Russia ever invaded it. Russia has invaded Ukraine twice since then, in 2014 and 2022. The U.S. gave a more substantial response in the form of sending weapons and other war materials to Ukraine after the 2022 invasion, but there have been no real consequences for Russia.

    That has created a problem for ceasefires in the future, because the U.S. didn’t deliver on its past security guarantees.

    The further away you get from Europe, the less interested the West is in wars. But in those kinds of disputes, United Nations and other international peacekeeping troops can be sent in. Sometimes, that can work brilliantly in one place, like with the example of international peacekeeping troops called the multilateral Observer Mission stationed between Israel and Egypt helping maintain peace between those countries. But you can copy it to another place and it just doesn’t work as well.

    How does this ceasefire fit within the history of other ceasefires?

    It’s too early to tell. What matters is how the details get fleshed out.

    Ideally, you can get representatives of the Israeli and Iranian governments to sit around a conference table to reach a detailed agreement. The Israelis might say, “We have got to have some kind of assurances that Iran is not going to use a nuclear weapon.” And the Iranians could say, “Assassinations of our military generals and scientists has got to stop.” That kind of conversation and agreement is what is missing, thus far, in this process.

    Why is it so common for ceasefire deals to fail?

    Some ceasefire deals don’t get to the underlying conditions of what really caused the problem and what made people start shooting this time around. If you don’t get to the core issues of a conflict, you are putting a Band-Aid on the situation. Putting a Band-Aid on someone when they are bleeding is a good move, but you ultimately might need more than that to stop the bleeding.

    The outside world might be pretty happy with a ceasefire deal that seems to stop the fighting, but if the details are not ironed out, the experts would say, “This isn’t going to last.”

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

    – ref. Ceasefires like the one between Iran and Israel often fail – but an agreement with specific conditions is more likely to hold – https://theconversation.com/ceasefires-like-the-one-between-iran-and-israel-often-fail-but-an-agreement-with-specific-conditions-is-more-likely-to-hold-259739

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: Ceasefires like the one between Iran and Israel often fail – but an agreement with specific conditions is more likely to hold

    Source: The Conversation – USA – By Donald Heflin, Executive Director of the Edward R. Murrow Center and Senior Fellow of Diplomatic Practice, The Fletcher School, Tufts University

    President Donald Trump speaks to reporters outside the White House on June 24, 2025, in Washington, less than 12 hours after announcing a ceasefire between Israel and Iran. Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images

    Within hours of President Donald Trump unexpectedly announcing an upcoming ceasefire between Israel and Iran on June 23, 2025, both countries launched airstrikes against the other.

    “We basically have two countries that have been fighting so long and so hard that they don’t know what the f–k they’re doing,” an angry and frustrated Trump told reporters outside the White House on June 24.

    While Iran and Israel have tentatively agreed to the truce – and Trump reiterated on June 24 that the “ceasefire is in effect” – it is not clear whether this deal can hold. Some research shows that an estimated 80% of ceasefire deals worldwide fail.

    Amy Lieberman, a politics and society editor at The Conversation U.S., spoke with former Ambassador Donald Heflin, an American career diplomat who serves as the executive director of the Edward R. Murrow Center at the Fletcher School, Tufts University, to understand how ceasefires typically work – and how the Israel-Iran deal stacks up against other agreements to end wars.

    An excavator removes debris from a residential building that was destroyed in Israel’s June 13, 2025, airstrike on Tehran, Iran.
    Majid Saeedi/Getty Images

    How do ceasefire deals typically happen?

    There are classes taught on how to negotiate ceasefires, but it is ad hoc with each situation.

    For example, in one scenario, one of the warring parties wants a ceasefire and has decided that the conflict isn’t going well. The second party might not want a ceasefire, but could agree that it is getting tired or the risks are too high, and agrees to work something out.

    The next scenario, which leads to more success, is when both parties want a ceasefire. They decide that the loss of life and money has gone too far for both sides. One of the parties approaches the other through intermediaries to say it wants a ceasefire, and the other warring party agrees.

    In a third situation – which is what we are seeing with the Iran-Israel deal – the outside world imposes a ceasefire. Trump likely told both Israel and Iran: Look, it’s enough. This is too dangerous for the rest of the world. We don’t care what you think. Time for a ceasefire.“

    The U.S. has done this in the Middle East before, like after the Yom Kippur War in 1973 between Israel and a coalition of Arab countries led by Egypt and Syria. Israel was achieving big military victories, but the risk was pretty great for the world. The U.S. came in and said, “That’s enough, stop it now.” And it worked.

    Does the US bring the warring parties to a table in this kind of situation, or simply pressure the countries to stop fighting?

    It is more of the U.S. saying, “We are done.” When the U.S. does something like this, it is often going to have backup from the European Union and other countries like Qatar, saying, “The Americans are right. It is time for a ceasefire.”

    It appears that this Israel-Iran deal does not have specific conditions attached to it. Is that typical of a ceasefire deal?

    This deal doesn’t seem to have any specific details attached to it. Ceasefires work better when they have that. Lasting ceasefires need to address the concerns of the warring parties and give each side some of what it wants.

    For instance, in the Ukraine and Russia war, we have not seen either one of those countries push for a ceasefire. Part of the problem is Crimea and eastern Ukraine, sections of land in Ukraine that Russia has annexed and claims as its own. Russia would be happy with a deal that puts it in charge of Crimea and Ukraine, but Ukraine won’t agree to that. The question of who controls specific areas of land has to be addressed in this conflict; otherwise, the ceasefire isn’t going to last.

    Search and rescue efforts continue in a building in Beersheba, Israel, hit by a ballistic missile fired from Iran shortly before the ceasefire announced by U.S. President Donald Trump came into effect on June 24, 2025.
    Mostafa Alkharouf/Anadolu via Getty Images)

    Who is responsible for ensuring that both sides uphold a ceasefire?

    Security guarantees are an important part of negotiating and maintaining long-term ceasefires. Big countries like the U.S. could say that if a warring party violates a ceasefire agreement, they are going to punish them.

    In the 1990s, the U.S. and Europe assured Ukraine that if it gave up its nuclear arsenal, the U.S. would defend Ukraine if Russia ever invaded it. Russia has invaded Ukraine twice since then, in 2014 and 2022. The U.S. gave a more substantial response in the form of sending weapons and other war materials to Ukraine after the 2022 invasion, but there have been no real consequences for Russia.

    That has created a problem for ceasefires in the future, because the U.S. didn’t deliver on its past security guarantees.

    The further away you get from Europe, the less interested the West is in wars. But in those kinds of disputes, United Nations and other international peacekeeping troops can be sent in. Sometimes, that can work brilliantly in one place, like with the example of international peacekeeping troops called the multilateral Observer Mission stationed between Israel and Egypt helping maintain peace between those countries. But you can copy it to another place and it just doesn’t work as well.

    How does this ceasefire fit within the history of other ceasefires?

    It’s too early to tell. What matters is how the details get fleshed out.

    Ideally, you can get representatives of the Israeli and Iranian governments to sit around a conference table to reach a detailed agreement. The Israelis might say, “We have got to have some kind of assurances that Iran is not going to use a nuclear weapon.” And the Iranians could say, “Assassinations of our military generals and scientists has got to stop.” That kind of conversation and agreement is what is missing, thus far, in this process.

    Why is it so common for ceasefire deals to fail?

    Some ceasefire deals don’t get to the underlying conditions of what really caused the problem and what made people start shooting this time around. If you don’t get to the core issues of a conflict, you are putting a Band-Aid on the situation. Putting a Band-Aid on someone when they are bleeding is a good move, but you ultimately might need more than that to stop the bleeding.

    The outside world might be pretty happy with a ceasefire deal that seems to stop the fighting, but if the details are not ironed out, the experts would say, “This isn’t going to last.”

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

    – ref. Ceasefires like the one between Iran and Israel often fail – but an agreement with specific conditions is more likely to hold – https://theconversation.com/ceasefires-like-the-one-between-iran-and-israel-often-fail-but-an-agreement-with-specific-conditions-is-more-likely-to-hold-259739

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Chairman Aguilar Relaunches National Security Task Force To Ensure America Remains Leader Of The Free World

    Source: US House of Representatives – Democratic Caucus

    The following text contains opinion that is not, or not necessarily, that of MIL-OSI – June 24, 2025

    WASHINGTON, D.C. – Today, House Democratic Caucus Chair Pete Aguilar re-launched the Democratic Caucus National Security Task Force co-chaired by Reps. Jason Crow (CO-06), Maggie Goodlander (NH-02), Mikie Sherrill (NJ-11) and Derek Tran (CA-45). The National Security Task Force will continue to engage experts and convene Members to reassert America’s role as the leader of the free world and develop policy solutions to complex challenges threatening both our national security and Democracy abroad.

    “House Democrats are committed to keeping the American people safe, protecting American interests and ensuring America remains the leader of the free world,” said House Democratic Caucus Chair Pete Aguilar. “The American people want a steady hand at the wheel and the Members leading the National Security Task Force will draw on their patriotism, expertise and commitment to service to provide the leadership that Donald Trump and Rubberstamp Republicans lack the courage and moral clarity to deliver. Donald Trump failed to deliver on his promise for peace and Congress must conduct rigorous oversight of the Trump Administration’s foreign policy, including the President’s decision to unilaterally strike Iran without Congressional authorization.”

    “My time in the Army taught me the essence of servant leadership. Servant leaders lead by example, jumping out of the plane first and eating last. Sadly, this is not the leadership we are seeing from President Trump. Instead, this administration’s reckless actions are making us less safe. As the co-chair of the House Democrats’ National Security Task Force, I will work to protect America’s national security and hold the Trump administration accountable,” said Rep. Jason Crow. 

    “America needs fighters in the United States Congress who will cut through the chaos, lead with a can-do spirit, and deliver on strengthening our national security and keeping the American people safe,” said Rep. Maggie Goodlander. “That’s what this Task Force is all about, and I’m proud to be part of it.”

    “Under Donald Trump and Secretary Hegseth, we’ve seen national security turned into a political prop — with chaos at the Pentagon, the sidelining of experienced military leaders, and decisions that put partisan loyalty ahead of America’s safety,” said Rep. Mikie Sherrill. “This reckless approach threatens the strength of our military and the security of our nation. My experience in the Navy as a helicopter pilot taught me what real leadership looks like and what we’re seeing from this Administration falls far short of that standard. That’s why I’m honored to serve as co-chair of the Democratic National Security Task Force so we can hold Trump accountable and ensure our military serves the American people, not a political agenda.”

    “I joined the Army Reserves when I was 18 to give back to the country that had given me so much,” said Rep. Derek Tran. “I bring that devotion to service with me to Congress, especially to protect our national security. I am proud to help lead the House Democratic Caucus National Security Task Force and ensure we protect our country’s standing as a leading global democracy. Growing Russian aggression toward Ukraine and China’s rapid expansion into the Indo-Pacific are defining issues of our time. I’ll continue to hold this Administration accountable and ensure that our national security priorities reflect the best interest of the American people.” 

    About the Task Force on National Security Members 
    Former Army Ranger and Bronze Star recipient, Rep. Crow grew up working class and enlisted in the National Guard to help pay his way through college. After graduating, Rep. Crow joined the active-duty Army and served in the Army’s storied 82nd Airborne Division and in the elite 75th Ranger Regiment, deploying to both Iraq and Afghanistan. 

    Before taking the oath to represent New Hampshire in the People’s House, Rep. Goodlander served as an intelligence officer in the United States Navy Reserve for over a decade.

    Rep. Sherrill is a U.S. Naval Academy graduate and served in the United States Navy for nearly a decade. She graduated from the first class of women eligible for combat roles, flew as a Sea King helicopter pilot leading missions across Europe and the Middle East, and was later a Russian policy officer.

    Rep. Tran enlisted in the Army Reserve at age 18 to give back to the country that welcomed his refugee parents and allowed them to build a foundation that helped him thrive. He served for eight years and was activated for Operation Noble Eagle/Enduring Freedom before earning an honorable discharge.

    ###

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Lee Introduces Accountability Reporting for NATO Freeloaders

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Utah Mike Lee
    WASHINGTON – As NATO convenes today, U.S. Senator Mike Lee (R-UT) introduced legislation addressing inadequate burden sharing among the United States’ allies and NATO member nations.
    The Allied Burden Sharing Report Act and the NATO Burden Sharing Report Act would incentivize delinquent nations to contribute their fair share for defense measures by requiring the U.S. Department of Defense (DOD) to compile annual reports on allied nations’ defense contributions and their ability to fulfill commitments. U.S. Senators Rand Paul (R-KY) and Marsha Blackburn (R-TN) cosponsored both pieces of legislation.
    “America has shouldered the burden of NATO freeloaders for decades,” said Senator Mike Lee. “Year after year, our so-called allies shirk their commitments while we pay for the conflicts raging in their backyards. By imposing annual reporting requirements, my legislation will identify delinquent allies – promoting accountability and putting them on notice to pay their fair share.”
    “Our NATO allies expect the U.S. to be the sugar daddy and the world’s policeman while they sit back and let us do the heavy lifting. President Trump was right, it’s time for them to pull their own weight. Congress must stop giving blank checks to our allies and start demanding accountability. That’s why I’m pushing for the NATO Burden Sharing Report Act and the Allied Burden Sharing Report Act, to show the American people exactly who’s paying the bills and who’s shirking their share,” said Sen. Paul.
    Background:
    NATO allies committed to spending 2% of their annual GDP on defense measures over a decade ago, but many have failed to deliver – instead allowing the U.S. to carry the burden of European security. Even as conflict in Ukraine continues in their own backyards, a significant portion of NATO members remain delinquent on their defense commitments. It is unreasonable for the U.S. to continue subsidizing the security of a peripheral theater, while allies neglect to carry their fair share.
    As the alliance convenes today, President Donald Trump has rightfully demanded greater burden sharing and higher defense spending. As the Summit opens, Senator Lee is introducing two pieces of legislation to support this burden sharing agenda. The Allied Burden Sharing Report Act and NATO Burden Sharing Report Act require regular reporting on allies’ contributions to the common defense.
    These bills promote burden sharing accountability, removing any doubt as to who the delinquent allies are and equipping Congress with the information it needs to perform necessary oversight.

    The Allied Burden Sharing Report Act:
    Requires DOD to prepare an annual report on the defense spending of all 59 U.S. allies – including:
    Annual defense spending of each allied nation, both as a nominal figure and percentage of GDP
    Activities of each allied nation that contribute to military or stability operations in which the Armed Forces of the U.S. are a participant or could be called upon per the obligations of a cooperative defense agreement of which the United States is a signatory
    Any limitation placed by an allied nation on the use of such contributions
    Any actions undertaken by the U.S. or by other countries to minimize such limitations
    The NATO Burden Sharing Report Act:
    Applies only to NATO member countries and includes all of the above reporting requirements plus:
    A description of each member’s hard vs. soft power contributions for Ukraine
    Defense industrial base health and comparative advantages
    Size and structure of armed forces
    Any areas where the country would be fully reliant on allied assets
    FMS deliveries or contracts in the previous year
    Any change in defense spending over the previous year and anticipated future spending
     

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Welch Welcomes Release of 14 Political Prisoners in Belarus 

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator Peter Welch (D-Vermont)
    WASHINGTON, D.C. — U.S. Senator Peter Welch (D-Vt.) today welcomed news that Belarus has freed 14 imprisoned opposition activists following a meeting between Special Envoy for Ukraine and Russia, retired Lt. Gen. Keith Kellogg, and Belarusian President Alexander Lukashenka. Among those freed are top opposition leader Siarhei Tsikhanouski, husband of Belarusian political activist Sviatlana Tsikhanouskaya. 
    “Since the 2020 presidential elections, Belarusian authorities have arrested thousands of protestors, opposition figures, journalists, and civil society members. Hundreds remain behind bars subject to harsh conditions, including accusations of torture from credible human rights organizations. In particular, I remain concerned about the arbitrary detention of activist and opposition leader, Maryia Kolesnikova. Serious concerns have been raised about her health and treatment in a penal colony. 
    “These releases are a welcome first step. I am grateful that the Trump Administration facilitated this action and urge U.S. officials to continue to prioritize human rights in future discussions with Belarusian officials. The release of political prisoners must remain at the forefront in bilateral negotiations. I will continue to engage with the Trump Administration on the parameters of these and future discussions and urge Belarus to release all remaining political prisoners, including Maryia.” 
    Senator Welch has advocated for bipartisan cooperation to secure the release of political prisoners in Belarus and around the world. Last Congress, Senator Welch spoke on the Senate floor to highlight the story of Maryia Kalesnikava, a leading member of the Belarusian political opposition calling for free and fair elections in Belarus, who was apprehended in 2020 by officials driving an unmarked vehicle and taken to the Belarus border where they attempted to forcibly deport her to Ukraine. In November, Senator Welch met with political and human rights advocates, including Maryia’s sister, Tatsiana Khomic to discuss ways to help secure the release of Maryia and other political prisoners in Belarus.  
    Senator Welch also joined Senate Minority Whip Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) and Senator Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.) to meet with Belarusian opposition leader, Sviatlana Tsikhanouskaya, to discuss efforts to push back against Belarus’s authoritarian leadership. Senator Welch also led his colleagues in urging Secretary of State Marco Rubio to preserve the staff and programs administered by the Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights and Labor (DRL) amid the Department’s proposed reorganization. 

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Looking back on Tuesday 24 June, the start of the 2025 NATO Summit in The Hague

    Source: Government of the Netherlands

    News item | 24-06-2025 | 23:00

    The 2025 NATO Summit officially opened today in The Hague. Heads of government, ministers, experts and defence industry representatives as well as young people, academics and opinion leaders came together at various locations to discuss security, cooperation and innovation. Below is an overview of the day’s main events.

    Enlarge image
    Photo: Ministry of Foreign Affairs

    NATO Public Forum – live on YouTube

    The two-day NATO Public Forum began today and is being broadcast live online for everyone to watch. Participants from the Netherlands and around the world, including heads of government, ministers, young people, academics and opinion leaders discussed the themes of this year’s Summit and developments in the world that affect our security.
    On Wednesday 25 June the Forum will again be broadcast live on the Ministry of Foreign Affairs’ YouTube channel under NATO Public Forum Live. More information about the programme is available at www.natopublicforum.org.

    Meeting between defence ministers and industry

    The NATO Summit Defence Industry Forum also took place today. Ministers, experts and business leaders from NATO countries came together to discuss how the defence industry can quickly be scaled up and strengthened. The goal is a stronger, sustainable and future-proof defence industry.

    Meeting between NATO, EU and Ukraine

    NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte and the EU and Ukraine met for talks in The Hague.

    President Zelenskyy visits House of Representatives and Prime Minister

    Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy visited the House of Representatives, where he addressed members of parliament. In the morning, he had a special meeting with Prime Minister Dick Schoof at the Catshuis. This visit was not part of the official summit programme.

    Royal dinner at Huis ten Bosch Palace

    On Tuesday evening, King Willem-Alexander and Queen Máxima hosted heads of state and government from NATO countries for an informal dinner. Leaders from Australia, New Zealand and Ukraine were also present, as was South Korea’s national security director and the presidents of the European Commission and the European Council.

    Enlarge image
    Photo: Ministry of Foreign Affairs

    Working dinners for ministers of NATO countries

    Foreign ministers met for a working dinner of the NATO-Ukraine Council. At the same time, defence ministers convened for a working dinner of the North Atlantic Council. Both meetings took place at World Forum in The Hague and were preceded by a joint reception.

    The 2025 NATO Summit will continue on Wednesday 25 June at the World Forum in The Hague.

    MIL OSI Europe News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Dr. Rand Paul Cosponsors Accountability Reporting for NATO Freeloaders

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Kentucky Rand Paul

    As NATO convenes today, U.S. Senator Rand Paul cosponsored legislation by Senator Mike Lee (R-UT) addressing inadequate burden sharing among the United States’ allies and NATO member nations.

    The Allied Burden Sharing Report Act and the NATO Burden Sharing Report Act would incentivize delinquent nations to contribute their fair share for defense measures by requiring the U.S. Department of Defense (DOD) to compile annual reports on allied nations’ defense contributions and their ability to fulfill commitments. U.S. Senators Rand Paul (R-KY) and Marsha Blackburn (R-TN) cosponsored both pieces of legislation.

    “Our NATO allies expect the U.S. to be the sugar daddy and the world’s policeman while they sit back and let us do the heavy lifting. President Trump was right, it’s time for them to pull their own weight. Congress must stop giving blank checks to our allies and start demanding accountability. That’s why I’m pushing for the NATO Burden Sharing Report Act and the Allied Burden Sharing Report Act, to show the American people exactly who’s paying the bills and who’s shirking their share,” said Sen. Paul.

    “America has shouldered the burden of NATO freeloaders for decades,” said Senator Mike Lee. “Year after year, our so-called allies shirk their commitments while we pay for the conflicts raging in their backyards. By imposing annual reporting requirements, my legislation will identify delinquent allies – promoting accountability and putting them on notice to pay their fair share.”

    Background:

    NATO allies committed to spending 2% of their annual GDP on defense measures over a decade ago, but many have failed to deliver – instead allowing the U.S. to carry the burden of European security. Even as conflict in Ukraine continues in their own backyards, a significant portion of NATO members remain delinquent on their defense commitments. It is unreasonable for the U.S. to continue subsidizing the security of a peripheral theater, while allies neglect to carry their fair share.

    As the alliance convenes today, President Donald Trump has rightfully demanded greater burden sharing and higher defense spending. As the Summit opens, Senator Lee is introducing two pieces of legislation to support this burden sharing agenda. The Allied Burden Sharing Report Act and NATO Burden Sharing Report Act require regular reporting on allies’ contributions to the common defense.

    These bills promote burden sharing accountability, removing any doubt as to who the delinquent allies are and equipping Congress with the information it needs to perform necessary oversight.

    The Allied Burden Sharing Report Act:

    Requires DOD to prepare an annual report on the defense spending of all 59 U.S. allies – including:

    • Annual defense spending of each allied nation, both as a nominal figure and percentage of GDP
    • Activities of each allied nation that contribute to military or stability operations in which the Armed Forces of the U.S. are a participant or could be called upon per the obligations of a cooperative defense agreement of which the United States is a signatory
    • Any limitation placed by an allied nation on the use of such contributions
    • Any actions undertaken by the U.S. or by other countries to minimize such limitations

    The NATO Burden Sharing Report Act:

    Applies only to NATO member countries and includes all of the above reporting requirements plus:

    • A description of each member’s hard vs. soft power contributions for Ukraine
    • Defense industrial base health and comparative advantages
    • Size and structure of armed forces
    • Any areas where the country would be fully reliant on allied assets
    • FMS deliveries or contracts in the previous year
    • Any change in defense spending over the previous year and anticipated future spending

    Coutesy of Sen. Mike Lee: One-Pager | Bill Text – Allies | Bill Text – NATO

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI United Kingdom: PM meeting with President Macron of France and Chancellor Merz of Germany: 24 June 2025

    Source: United Kingdom – Executive Government & Departments

    Press release

    PM meeting with President Macron of France and Chancellor Merz of Germany: 24 June 2025

    The Prime Minister spoke to the French President Emmanuel Macron and German Chancellor Friedrich Merz at the NATO Summit in The Hague this evening.

    The Prime Minister spoke to the French President Emmanuel Macron and German Chancellor Friedrich Merz at the NATO Summit in The Hague this evening.

    The leaders reflected on the volatile situation in the Middle East. Now was the time for diplomacy and for Iran to come to the negotiating table, they agreed.

    Turning to Ukraine, the leaders discussed the need to apply more pressure on the Kremlin, including through further sanctions.

    Discussing Gaza, the Prime Minister reiterated that the situation was intolerable and all sides needed to work towards an urgent ceasefire.

    The leaders looked forward to speaking again this evening.

    Updates to this page

    Published 24 June 2025

    MIL OSI United Kingdom –