NewzIntel.com

Category: Ukraine

  • MIL-OSI United Kingdom: Major £5 billion technology investment accelerates UK defence innovation in a European first

    Source: United Kingdom – Executive Government & Departments 3

    Press release

    Major £5 billion technology investment accelerates UK defence innovation in a European first

    More than £4 billion drive towards autonomous systems to shape UK military future and boost export potential, supporting the Plan for Change

    UK troops and warships will be protected by drone and laser weapon technology through a major £5 billion investment, as the UK seeks to become the leading edge of innovation in NATO under the Strategic Defence Review (SDR) and driven by lessons from Ukraine. 

    The major funding package includes more than £4 billion for autonomous systems and a further investment of nearly £1 billion for Directed Energy Weapons (DEW) this Parliament – including the iconic DragonFire laser – boosting frontline capabilities while creating 300 skilled jobs across the country. 

    DragonFire is set to be the first high power laser capability entering service from a European nation, with the first Royal Navy Type 45 destroyer due to be fitted in 2027.  

    The SDR recommends that an immediate priority for force transformation should be a shift towards greater use of autonomy. To help achieve this, it says Defence must incorporate uncrewed and autonomous systems in high numbers over the next five years and make targeted investment in the development of novel directed energy weapons.  

    Today’s autonomous systems investment – of which more than £2 billion is new funding following the Government‘s historic uplift in defence spending to 2.5% of GDP from 2027– will see autonomous systems, including drones improve accuracy and lethality for our Armed Forces, and boost UK export potential. 

    It comes after major announcements ahead of the SDR publication, including: the building of up to a dozen new attack submarines for the Royal Navy; up to 7,000 new UK-built long-range weapons to procured; at least six new munitions and energetics factories in the UK; more than £1.5 billion to improve the state of military housing; and more than £1 billion for pioneering technology to spearhead battlefield engagements.

    The new DEW capabilities will give the UK an edge, creating low cost and sustainable alternatives to missiles to shoot down targets, such as drones, at the speed of light, reduce collateral damage and have a low-cost per shot, reducing reliance on expensive ammunition.   

    The systems will be tailored to the conditions in which they will operate – whether at sea, on land, or in the air – and will work alongside crewed assets, such as current and future fighter jets.  

    Both investments reflect the SDR’s vision for UK innovation to be driven by the lessons from Ukraine – harnessing drones, data and digital warfare to make our Armed Forces stronger and safer. 

    The SDR sets a path for the next decade and beyond to transform defence and make the UK secure at home and strong abroad. It ends the hollowing out of our Armed Forces and will also drive innovation, jobs and growth across the country, allowing the UK to lead in a stronger NATO as part of this Government’s Plan for Change.  

    Defence Secretary, John Healey MP said:

    These investments will mean the most significant advance in UK defence technology in decades. We will ensure our Armed Forces have the cutting-edge capabilities they need to meet the challenges of a rapidly changing world.

    We are delivering the Strategic Defence Review’s vision to put the UK at the leading edge of innovation in NATO, by backing British industry and fast-tracking the kit of the future into the hands of frontline troops.

    This Government’s Plan for Change will harness the benefits of technology, create hundreds of new jobs and make defence a powerful engine for economic growth.

    Chancellor of the Exchequer, Rachel Reeves said:  

    A strong economy needs a strong national defence. That’s why we are delivering the biggest sustained increase in defence spending since the Cold War—putting innovation and industrial strength at the centre of our national security strategy.

    Additional funding for autonomous systems maximises the defence industry’s potential to drive long term economic growth and productivity – helping us deliver our Plan for Change while keeping the UK safe.

    A new DEW will be created for the British Army this decade, alongside DragonFire being integrated on four Royal Navy warships, with the first ship due to be fitted in 2027, forming part of a layered air defence system to better protect UK forces while reducing collateral damage and reducing reliance on expensive ammunition. 

    DEW technology already supports 200 high-skilled UK jobs, with a further 300 positions to be created across the Ministry of Defence and industry partners. It’s another example of defence as an engine for UK economic growth, delivering on the Plan for Change.  

    In addition, a new Drone Centre will be established to accelerate exploitation of small, uncrewed air systems across all three military services, helping to deliver them to the front line faster.   

    The Centre will provide a central knowledge base to tackle any emerging legislative changes, develop best practice and better manage the interaction with industry. Crucially, it will apply battlefield lessons from Ukraine where drones now kill more people than traditional artillery. Detailed organisational arrangements will be developed over the coming months. 

    During the SDR process, 1,700 individuals, political parties, and organisations submitted more than 8,000 responses. 200 companies provided written contributions, more than 120 senior experts took part in the review and challenge panels, and nearly 50 meetings took place between the Reviewers and our senior military figures.

    Updates to this page

    Published 2 June 2025

    MIL OSI United Kingdom –

  • MIL-OSI United Kingdom: Strategic Defence Review oral statement

    Source: United Kingdom – Government Statements

    Oral statement to Parliament

    Strategic Defence Review oral statement

    Statement from Defence Secretary John Healey on the Strategic Defence Review.

    With permission, Mr Speaker, I would like to make a statement on the Strategic Defence Review.

    And I have laid the full 130-page review report first before this house. I am grateful to be able to make this statement on the first day back from recess.

    Mr Speaker, the world has changed, and we must respond.

    The SDR is our Plan for Change for Defence.

    A plan to meet the threats we face.

    A plan to step up on European Security and lead in NATO.

    A plan that learns the lessons from Ukraine.

    A plan to seize the defence dividend from our record increase in defence investment, to boost jobs and growth throughout the United Kingdom.

    And a plan to put the men and women of our Armed Forces at the heart of our defence plans: better pay, better kit, better housing.

    Through the SDR will make our Armed Forces stronger, and the British people safer.

    I’d like to thank those who led the SDR… Lord Robertson of Port Ellen, General Barrons and Dr Fiona Hill.

    “The politician, the soldier, and a foreign policy expert”, as they say themselves in their forward. Thye have put in a huge effort, alongside others.

    This is a first-of-its-kind, externally led review.

    A process, in which we received 8 000 submissions from experts, individuals, organisations, and MPs from across the House, including the Shadow Defence Secretary.

    I thank them all – and I thank those in the MOD who have contributed to this SDR.

    This is not just the government’s review it is Britain’s defence review.

    And so, the government endorses the SDR’s vision, accepts its 62 recommendations, which will be implemented.

    Mr Speaker, the threats we face is now more serious and less predictable than at any time since the of Cold War.

    We face war in Europe, growing Russian aggression, new nuclear risks, and daily cyber-attacks at home. 

    Our adversaries are working more in alliance with one another, while technology is changing the way war is fought.

    We are in a new era of threat, which demands a new era for UK Defence.

    Mr Speaker, since the General Election we have demonstrated that we are a government dedicated to delivering for defence.

    Committing the largest sustained increase in defence spending since the end of the Cold War… £5 billion extra this year, 2.5% in 2027, the ambition to 3% in the next parliament.

    Mr Speaker, there can be no investment without reform.

    And so we are already driving also the deepest reforms to defence in 50 years.

    And these will ensure clearer responsibilities, better delivery, stronger budget control and new efficiencies, worth £6 billion in this parliament, money all of which will be reinvested directly into defence.

    Mr Speaker, our Armed Forces will always do what’s needed to keep the nation safe –24/7, in more than 50 countries around the world.

    But in a more dangerous world, the SDR confirms that we must move to warfighting readiness.

    Warfighting readiness means stronger deterrence.

    We need stronger deterrence to avoid the huge costs, human and economic that wars create.

    And we prevent wars by being strong enough to fight and win them. And that is what has made NATO the most successful defence alliance in history, over the last 75 years.

    So Mr Speaker, we will establish a “New Hybrid Navy” by:

    … building Dreadnought, AUKUS submarines, cutting-edge warships and new autonomous vessels.

    Our carriers will carry the first hybrid airwings in Europe.

    We will develop the next generation RAF with:

    F35s, upgraded Typhoons, 6th Gen GCAP and autonomous fighters, to defend Britain’s skies and be able to strike anywhere in the world.

    And we will make the British Army 10 times more lethal by:

    Combining the future technology of drones, autonomy and AI with the heavy metal tanks and artillery.

    Mr Speaker for too long, our Army has been asked to do more with less.

    We inherited a long run recruitment crisis – [political content removed].

    Reversing this decline will take time but we are acting to stem the loss now and aiming to increase the British Army to at least 76,000 full time soldiers in the next parliament.

    Mr Speaker, for the first time in a generation, we are a government who want the number of regular soldiers to rise.

    In our homeland, Mr Speaker, this a government that will protect our island home, we’ll do so by:

    Committing £1bn in new funding to homeland air and missile defences,  by creating a new CyberEM Command to defend Britain in the grey zone and by preparing legislation to improve defence readiness.

    Mr. Speaker, as Ukraine shows a country’s armed forces are only as strong as the industry that stands behind them.

    So this SDR begins a new partnership with industry, with innovators and with investors, we will make engine. We will make defence an engine for growth, an engine for growth to create jobs and increase prosperity in every nation and every region of the UK.

    Take our nuclear enterprise.

    We will commit 15 billion pounds in investment into the sovereign warhead programme in this Parliament, supporting over 9000 jobs. We will establish continuous submarine production through investments in Barrow and in Derby, that will allow us to produce a submarine every 18 months, allowing us to grow our nuclear attack submarine fleet to up to 12 submarines, supporting more than 20,000 jobs.

    And on munitions, we will invest 6 billion pounds in this Parliament, including for six new munitions factories and up to 7000 new long-range weapons, supporting nearly 2000 jobs.

    Mr. Speaker, the lives of workers in Barrow or Derby or Govan, where I was with the Prime Minister this morning, are being transformed, not just by this defence investment, but by the pride and purpose that comes with work that comes with defence work. And in the coming years, more communities and more working people will benefit from the defence dividend that this brings.

    Mr. Speaker Ukraine also tells us that whoever gets new technology into the hands of their armed forces fastest will have the advantage. So we will place Britain at the leading edge of innovation in NATO.

    We will double investment into autonomous systems this parliament. We will invest more than a billion pounds to integrate our armed forces through a new digital targeting web, and we will finance a £400 million UK Defence Innovation organization.

    Mr. Speaker, to ensure that Britain gains the maximum benefit from what we invent and what we produce in this country, we will create a new defence exports office in the MOD, driving exports to our allies and driving growth at home.

    Mr. Speaker, the SDR sets a new vision, a new framework for defence investment.

    The work to confirm a new defence investment plan, superseding the last government’s defence equipment plan, will be completed in the autumn.

    It will ensure our frontline forces get what they need when they need it.

    The plan will be deliverable. It will be affordable. It will consider infrastructure alongside capabilities. It will seize the opportunities of advanced tech, and it will seize the opportunities to grow the British economy.

    And Mr. Speaker, as we lose the national service generation, fewer families across this country have a direct connection to the armed forces. And so we must do more to reconnect the nation with those who defend us.

    And so as the SDR recommends, we will increase the number of cadets by 30%, we will introduce a voluntary Gap Year scheme for school and college leavers, and we will develop a new strategic reserve by 2030.

    Mr. Speaker, we must also renew the nation’s contract with those who serve. We’ve already awarded the biggest pay increase in over 20 years, an inflation busting increase this year. And now I’ve announced we will invest 7 billion pounds of funding this parliament for military accommodation, including 1.5 billion of new money for rapid work to deal with the scandal of military family homes.

    Mr. Speaker, this SDR is the first defence review in a generation for growth and for transformation in UK defence. It will end 14 years of hollowing out in our armed forces, and instead, we will see investment increased, the Navy expanded, the army grown, the Air Force upgraded, war fighting readiness, restored, NATO strengthened, the nuclear deterrent, guaranteed advanced technology developed and jobs, jobs created. Jobs created in every nation, and region of this country. Mr. Speaker. Mr. Strategic Defence Review will make Britain, safer, more secure, at home, and stronger abroad.

    Updates to this page

    Published 2 June 2025

    MIL OSI United Kingdom –

  • MIL-OSI Global: Ukraine drone strikes on Russian airbase reveal any country is vulnerable to the same kind of attack

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Michael A. Lewis, Professor of Operations and Supply Management, University of Bath

    Melnikov Dmitriy / Shutterstock

    Ukrainians are celebrating the success of one of the most audacious coups of the war against Russia – a coordinated drone strike on June 1 on five airbases deep inside Russian territory. Known as Operation Spiderweb, it was the result of 18 months of planning and involved the smuggling of drones into Russia, synchronised launch timings and improvised control centres hidden inside freight vehicles.

    Ukrainian sources claim more than 40 Russian aircraft were damaged or destroyed. Commercial satellite imagery confirms significant fire damage, cratered runways, and blast patterns across multiple sites, although the full extent of losses remains disputed.

    The targets were strategic bomber aircraft and surveillance planes, including Tu-95s and A-50 airborne early warning systems. The drones were launched from inside Russia and navigated at treetop level using line-of-sight piloting and GPS pre-programming.

    Each was controlled from a mobile ground station parked within striking distance of the target. It is reported that a total of 117 drones were deployed across five locations. While many were likely intercepted, or fell short, enough reached their targets to signal a dramatic breach in Russia’s rear-area defence.

    Get your news from actual experts, straight to your inbox. Sign up to our daily newsletter to receive all The Conversation UK’s latest coverage of news and research, from politics and business to the arts and sciences.

    The drone platforms themselves were familiar. These were adapted first-person-view (FPV) multirotor drones. These are ones where the operator gets a first-person perspective from the drone’s onboard camera.

    These are already used in huge numbers along the front lines in Ukraine by both sides. But Operation Spiderweb extended their impact through logistical infiltration and timing.

    Nations treat their airspace as sovereign, a controlled environment: mapped, regulated and watched over. Air defence systems are built on the assumption that threats come from above and from beyond national borders. Detection and response also reflect that logic. It is focused on mid and high-altitude surveillance and approach paths from beyond national borders.

    But Operation Spiderweb exposed what happens when states are attacked from below and from within. In low-level airspace, visibility drops, responsibility fragments, and detection tools lose their edge. Drones arrive unannounced, response times lag, coordination breaks.

    Spiderweb worked not because of what each drone could do individually, but because of how the operation was designed. It was secret and carefully planned of course, but also mobile, flexible and loosely coordinated.

    The cost of each drone was low but the overall effect was high. This isn’t just asymmetric warfare, it’s a different kind of offensive capability – and any defence needs to adapt accordingly.

    On Ukraine’s front lines, where drone threats are constant, both sides have adapted by deploying layers of detection tools, short range air defences and jamming systems. In turn, drone operators have turned to alternatives. One option is drones that use spools of shielded fibre optic cable. The cable is attached to the drone at one end and to the controller held by the operator at the other. Another option involves drones with preloaded flight paths to avoid detection.

    Fibre links, when used for control or coordination, emit no radio signal and so bypass radio frequency (RF) -based surveillance entirely. There is nothing to intercept or jam. Preloaded paths remove the need for live communication altogether. Once launched, the drone follows a pre-programmed route without broadcasting its position or receiving commands.

    As a result, airspace is never assumed to be secure but is instead understood to be actively contested and requiring continuous management. By contrast, Operation Spiderweb targeted rear area airbases where more limited adaptive systems existed. The drones flew low, through unmonitored gaps, exploiting assumptions about what kind of threat was faced and from where.

    Tu-95 bombers were among the planes destroyed.
    Almaz Mustafin

    Spiderweb is not the first long-range drone operation of this war, nor the first to exploit gaps in Russian defences. What Spiderweb confirms is that the gaps in airspace can be used by any party with enough planning and the right technology. They can be exploited not just by states and not just in war. The technology is not rare and the tactics are not complicated. What Ukraine did was to combine them in a way that existing systems could not prevent the attack or maybe even see it coming.

    This is far from a uniquely Russian vulnerability – it is the defining governance challenge of drones in low level airspace. Civil and military airspace management relies on the idea that flight paths are knowable and can be secured. In our work on UK drone regulation, we have described low level airspace as acting like a common pool resource.

    This means that airspace is widely accessible. It is also difficult to keep out drones with unpredictable flightpaths. Under this vision of airspace, it can only be meaningfully governed by more agile and distributed decision making. Operation Spiderweb confirms that military airspace behaves in a similar way. Centralised systems to govern airspace can struggle to cope with what happens at the scale of the Ukrainian attacks – and the cost of failure can be strategic.

    Improving low-level airspace governance will require better technologies, better detection and faster responses. New sensor technologies such as passive radio frequency detectors, thermal imaging, and acoustic (sound-based) arrays can help close current visibility gaps, especially when combined. But detection alone is not enough. Interceptors including capture drones (drones that hunt and disable other drones), nets to ensnare drones, and directed energy weapons such as high powered lasers are being developed and trialled. However, most of these are limited by range, cost, or legal constraints.

    Nevertheless, airspace is being reshaped by new forms of access, use and improvisation. Institutions built around centralised ideas of control; air corridors, zones, and licensing are being outpaced. Security responses are struggling to adapt to the fact that airspace with drones is different. It is no longer passively governed by altitude and authority. It must be actively and differently managed.

    Operation Spiderweb didn’t just reveal how Ukraine could strike deep into Russian territory. It showed how little margin for error there is in a world where cheap systems can be used quietly and precisely. That is not just a military challenge. It is a problem where airspace management depends less on central control and more on distributed coordination, shared monitoring and responsive intervention. The absence of these conditions is what Spiderweb exploited.

    Michael A. Lewis receives funding from the ESRC, AHRC and EPSRC

    – ref. Ukraine drone strikes on Russian airbase reveal any country is vulnerable to the same kind of attack – https://theconversation.com/ukraine-drone-strikes-on-russian-airbase-reveal-any-country-is-vulnerable-to-the-same-kind-of-attack-258005

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Security: Websites Selling Hacking Tools to Cybercriminals Seized

    Source: US FBI

    Multinational operation linked services to known ransomware groups targeting victims worldwide

    HOUSTON – A coordinated effort involving an international disruption of an online software crypting syndicate which provides services to cybercriminals to assist them with keeping their malicious software (malware) from being detected has resulted in the seizure of four domains and their associated server, announced U.S. Attorney Nicholas J. Ganjei.

    Crypting is the process of using software to make malware difficult for antivirus programs to detect. The seized domains offered services to cybercriminals, including counter-antivirus (CAV) tools. When used together, CAV and crypting services allow criminals to obfuscate malware, making it undetectable and enabling unauthorized access to computer systems.

    According to the affidavit filed in support of these seizures, authorities made undercover purchases from seized websites and analyzed the services, confirming they were designed for cybercrime. Court documents also allege authorities reviewed linked email addresses and other data connecting the services to known ransomware groups that have targeted victims both in the United States and abroad, including in the Houston area.  

    “Modern criminal threats require modern law enforcement solutions,” said Ganjei. “As cybercriminals have become more sophisticated in their schemes, they have likewise become more advanced in their efforts to avoid detection. As such, our law enforcement efforts must involve striking not just at the individual fraudster or hacker, but the enablers of these cybercriminals as well. This investigation did exactly that. With this syndicate shut down, there is one less provider of malicious tools for cybercriminals out there.”

    “Cybercriminals don’t just create malware; they perfect it for maximum destruction,” said FBI Houston Special Agent in Charge Douglas Williams. “By leveraging counter antivirus services, malicious actors refine their weapons against the world’s toughest security systems to better slip past firewalls, evade forensic analysis, and wreak havoc across victims’ systems. As part of a decisive international operation, FBI Houston helped cripple a global cyber syndicate, seize their most lethal tools, and neutralize the threat they posed to millions around the world.”

    The seizures occurred May 27 in coordination with Finnish and Dutch national police as part of Operation Endgame, a multinational law enforcement initiative targeting the dismantling of malware cybercriminal services. Participating countries include the United States, The Netherlands, France, Germany and Denmark with additional support from Ukraine and Portugal.  

    The FBI Houston Field Office is conducting the investigation with the cooperation and significant assistance of law enforcement partners in The Netherlands and Finland and U.S. Secret Service.

    Assistant U.S. Attorneys (AUSA) Shirin Hakimzadeh and Rodolfo Ramirez are prosecuting the case. AUSA Kristine Rollinson is handling the seizure aspects of the case. 

    MIL Security OSI –

  • MIL-OSI Security: NATO Secretary General joins the Vilnius Summit of B9 and Nordic Allies

    Source: NATO

    NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte participated in the B9 and Nordic Summit in Vilnius on Monday (2 June 2025), hosted by President of Lithuania Gitanas Nausėda, at which Allied leaders were joined by President Zelenskyy of Ukraine. Discussions focused on preparing the NATO Summit in The Hague and strengthening support for Ukraine.

    The Secretary General thanked President Nausėda for hosting the meeting and commended Lithuania’s leadership and commitment to NATO. “Lithuania is a staunch Ally, and continues to lead by example,” said Mr Rutte, highlighting Lithuania’s current investment of over 4% of GDP in defence and its plans to increase this to between 5-6% in 2026. “This sends an incredibly powerful message of commitment to our collective defence, and it also sets an example for our other Allies. On this stage, and in our meetings today, it is clear that the commitment to collective defence is strong,” he said. 

    During their meeting, leaders discussed how to further strengthen NATO’s deterrence and defence. “We are facing the most dangerous security environment in decades,” said Mr Rutte. “We are not at war – but we are not at peace either.” He stressed the need to pivot to warfighting readiness, including significantly more forces that are well-trained, well-equipped, fully supported and sustainable. Mr Rutte said he expects the Summit in The Hague to demonstrate Allies’ enduring commitment to collective defence – through increased defence investment and defence industrial production, and agreement on ambitious new capability targets. “We continue to count on the B9 and our Nordic Allies to play a key role in these important efforts,” he said.

    Support for Ukraine will also be a priority for the Summit in The Hague. The Secretary General commended Ukraine’s efforts, and the role of Baltic and Nordic countries in providing persistent military and financial assistance. “A strong, sovereign Ukraine is essential for Euro-Atlantic security,” said Mr Rutte.

    The B9 format brings together Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Romania and Slovakia.  This summit was held jointly with Nordic Allies Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway and Sweden. President Zelenskyy of Ukraine attended elements of the meeting.

    MIL Security OSI –

  • MIL-OSI Global: Pro-Trump candidate wins Poland’s presidential election – a bad omen for the EU, Ukraine and women

    Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Adam Simpson, Senior Lecturer, International Studies, University of South Australia

    Poland’s presidential election runoff will be a bitter pill for pro-European Union democrats to swallow.

    The nationalist, Trumpian, historian Karol Nawrocki has narrowly defeated the liberal, pro-EU mayor of Warsaw, Rafał Trzaskowski, 50.89 to 49.11%.

    The Polish president has few executive powers, though the office holder is able to veto legislation. This means the consequences of a Nawrocki victory will be felt keenly, both in Poland and across Europe.

    With this power, Nawrocki, backed by the conservative Law and Justice party, will no doubt stymie the ability of Prime Minister Donald Tusk and his Civic Platform-led coalition to enact democratic political reforms.

    This legislative gridlock could well see Law and Justice return to government in the 2027 general elections, which would lock in the anti-democratic changes the party made during their last term in office from 2015–2023. This included eroding Poland’s judicial independence by effectively taking control of judicial appointments and the supreme court.

    Nawrocki’s win has given pro-Donald Trump, anti-liberal, anti-EU forces across the continent a shot in the arm. It’s bad news for the EU, Ukraine and women.

    A rising Poland

    For much of the post-second world war era, Poland has had limited European influence.

    This is no longer the case. Poland’s economy has boomed since it joined the EU in 2004. It spends almost 5% of its gross domestic product on defence, almost double what it spent in 2022 at the time of Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine.

    Poland now has a bigger army than the United Kingdom, France and Germany. And living standards, adjusted for purchasing power, are about to eclipse Japan’s.

    Along with Brexit, these changes have resulted in the EU’s centre of gravity shifting eastwards towards Poland. As a rising military and economic power of 37 million people, what happens in Poland will help shape Europe’s future.

    Impacts on Ukraine

    Poland’s new position in Europe is most clearly demonstrated by its central role in the fight to defend Ukraine against Russia.

    This centrality was clearly demonstrated during the recent “Coalition of the Willing” summit in Kyiv, where Tusk joined the leaders of Europe’s major powers – France, Germany and the UK – to bolster support for Ukraine and its president, Volodymyr Zelensky.

    However, Poland’s unqualified support for Ukraine will now be at risk because Nawrocki has demonised Ukrainian refugees in his country and opposed Ukrainian integration into European-oriented bodies, such as the EU and NATO.

    Nawrocki was also backed during his campaign by the Trump administration. Kristi Noem, the US secretary of homeland security, said at the recent Conservative Political Action Conference in Poland:

    Donald Trump is a strong leader for us, but you have an opportunity to have just as strong of a leader in Karol if you make him the leader of this country.

    Trump also hosted Nawrocki in the Oval Office when he was merely a candidate for office. This was a significant deviation from standard US diplomatic protocol to stay out of foreign elections.

    Nawrocki has not been as pro-Russia as some other global, MAGA-style politicians, but this is largely due to Poland’s geography and its difficult history with Russia. It has been repeatedly invaded across its eastern plains by Russian or Soviet troops. And along with Ukraine, Poland shares borders with the Russian client state of Belarus and Russia itself in Kaliningrad, the heavily militarised enclave on the Baltic Sea.

    I experienced the proximity of these borders during fieldwork in Poland in 2023 when I travelled by car from Warsaw to Vilnius, the Lithuanian capital, via the Suwalki Gap.

    This is the strategically important, 100-kilometre-long border between Poland and Lithuania, which connects the Baltic states to the rest of NATO and the EU to the south. It’s seen as a potential flashpoint if Russia were ever to close the gap and isolate the Baltic states.

    Poland’s conservative nationalist politicians are therefore less Russia-friendly than those in Hungary or Slovakia. Nawrocki, for instance, does not support cutting off weapons to Ukraine.

    However, a Nawrocki presidency will still be more hostile to Ukraine and its interests. During the campaign, Nawrocki said Zelensky “treats Poland badly”, echoing the type of language used by Trump himself.

    Poland divided

    The high stakes in the election resulted in a record turnout of almost 73%.

    There was a stark choice in the election between Nawrocki and Trzaskowski.

    Trzaskowski supported the liberalisation of Poland’s harsh abortion laws – abortion was effectively banned in Poland under the Law and Justice government – and the introduction of civil partnerships for LGBTQ+ couples.

    Nawrocki opposed these changes and will likely veto any attempt to implement them.

    While the polls for the presidential runoff election had consistently shown a tight race, an Ipsos exit poll published during the vote count demonstrated the social divisions now facing the country.

    As in other recent global elections, women and those with higher formal education voted for the progressive candidate (Trzaskowski), while men and those with less formal education voted for the conservative (Nawrocki).

    After the surprise success of the liberal, pro-EU presidential candidate in the Romanian elections a fortnight ago, pro-EU forces were hoping for a similar result in Poland, as well.

    That, for now, is a pipe dream and liberals across the continent will now need to negotiate a difficult relationship with a right-wing, Trumpian leader in the new beating heart of Europe.

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

    – ref. Pro-Trump candidate wins Poland’s presidential election – a bad omen for the EU, Ukraine and women – https://theconversation.com/pro-trump-candidate-wins-polands-presidential-election-a-bad-omen-for-the-eu-ukraine-and-women-257617

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Europe: AFRICA/DR CONGO – Testimony from Bukavu: Children are the silent victims of war

    Source: Agenzia Fides – MIL OSI

    Kinshasa (Agenzia Fides) – Children are the silent victims of all wars: in Gaza, Ukraine, Sudan, and in the eastern Democratic Republic of Congo. From Bukavu, the capital of South Kivu, currently under the control of the M23 rebel movement since mid-February (see Fides 17/2/2025), we have received a testimony that reflects the dramatic humanitarian situation in the region. Although the rebels have announced the creation of an administration to manage the conquered territories, the situation in South and North Kivu remains precarious, especially for the most vulnerable: women, children, and the elderly. We publish the full testimony, omitting the name of the person who shared it for security reasons.Sister Charline welcomes me to the ward of the Bukavu General Hospital, where, together with Sister Marie-Jeanne, she coordinates the reception and care for malnourished children. “Before the war there were about 40, now there are 84; there are even three per bed,” she tells me as she invites me into the large rooms. In one of them, a mother is dressing her eight-year-old daughter: she is about to return home. She is very thin, but has passed the critical phase. The girl says goodbye with a smile. The most serious cases are in the intensive care unit, including that of a baby abandoned in the hospital by its mother, from a combat zone. A nurse cares for him with care. The war has made it impossible to grow crops, harvest, and trade… and this, along with the looting, has caused hunger. “When we have enough adequate food, they recover in two weeks; otherwise, it takes up to two months… or they die. We try to send them home as soon as possible to make room for others, but sometimes the mothers tell us they will be short of food there again… I give them a little flour; I can’t do more,” Sister Charline adds, desolately. I go to greet Natalina. In her Ek’Abana center, she welcomes children accused of witchcraft, but also, since the war began, children entrusted to her by the Red Cross while they wait to find their families. There are about 25 in total. “Cases of girls accused of witchcraft are increasing,” Natalina says. Three have arrived this week. With their parents dead or absent, the girls lived with their grandparents or other relatives. The psychologist explains: the stress of these times, the succession of illnesses, deaths, job losses, and other problems, pushes people to seek answers in prayer rooms, where irresponsible pastors point to the most vulnerable as the cause of their ills. The girl is blamed and marginalized. Sometimes, it is the grassroots communities that accompany them to the center to save them. And what about the stress of children who flinch at every noise? Of miscarriages caused by the startle of gunshots? Of the violence the children witness at the hands of the occupiers, the bandits, the population itself when, in exasperation, they lash out at the alleged thief until they kill him? Of dropping out of school after fleeing with their families? Of the humiliation of being expelled from school because parents can no longer pay the quarterly fees? Of the shortage of daily food? As I was returning, a child asked me to buy him a pancake, which is sold cheaply on the street. “Who do you live with?” “With my grandmother.” Given the crisis, I overcame my reluctance: “Take two, one for Grandma.” “Then I’ll buy some flour,” he replied. Nothing to do with a whim. All this adds to the tally of children killed directly by bombs and violence. They are silent victims, like those in Gaza, who pay the price for a debt that is all ours.” (Agenzia Fides 2/6/2025)
    Share:

    MIL OSI Europe News –

  • MIL-OSI: Oportun Issues Letter to Stockholders and Mails Definitive Proxy Materials

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    Highlights strong momentum in driving profitable growth and delivering stockholder value

    Urges stockholders to vote “FOR” Oportun’s two highly qualified nominees – Raul Vazquez and Carlos Minetti – on the GREEN proxy card

    Launches VoteForOportun.com, providing additional information for stockholders

    SAN CARLOS, Calif., June 02, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) —  Oportun (Nasdaq: OPRT), a mission-driven financial services company, today issued a letter to stockholders detailing the progress Oportun’s experienced management team and Board of Directors have made in driving financial and operational performance.

    The letter highlights information critical for stockholders to know ahead of Oportun’s upcoming 2025 Annual Meeting of Stockholders (the “Annual Meeting”), including that:

    • Oportun’s decisive actions to improve credit outcomes, strengthen business economics and identify high-quality originations are yielding concrete results as reflected in the Company’s Q1 2025 performance:
      • Aggregate originations grew by nearly 40% year-over-year;
      • Adjusted operating expense ratio reached 13.3%, its second lowest ever as a public company; and
      • Strong credit metrics, including a fifth consecutive year-over-year decline in 30+ day delinquency rate.
    • The Company continues to expect 2025 adjusted EPS guidance of $1.10 to $1.30 reflecting year-over-year growth of 53% to 81%.
    • The Company’s strong momentum has translated to total stockholder returns that have significantly outperformed its peers and the broader markets year-to-date, over the last six months and over the past year.
    • Oportun’s Board is uniquely qualified to oversee continued value creation, with critical expertise in areas that are essential to Oportun’s business.
    • Findell Capital Management’s proposal to remove CEO Raul Vazquez from the Board would jeopardize the continuity, leadership and business insight needed to continue the Company’s significant progress, and would send a disruptive message to employees and stakeholders.
    • Compared to Mr. Vazquez’s proven leadership and deep understanding of Oportun’s business, Findell Capital’s nominee falls short of the necessary experience and expertise needed to effectively oversee the execution of the Company’s strategic objectives.

    Oportun also recently mailed its definitive proxy materials in connection with the Annual Meeting. Stockholders of record as of May 27, 2025 are entitled to vote at the Annual Meeting, which will be held on July 18, 2025.

    To ensure Oportun’s progress continues, Oportun’s Board urges stockholders to vote “FOR” Oportun’s two highly qualified nominees – Raul Vazquez and Carlos Minetti – using the GREEN proxy card or GREEN voting instruction form. The letter to stockholders, definitive proxy materials and other important information related to the Annual Meeting can be found at VoteForOportun.com.

    The full text of the letter to stockholders follows:

    Dear Fellow Stockholders,

    The 2025 Annual Meeting of Stockholders (the “Annual Meeting”) of Oportun Financial Corporation (“Oportun” or the “Company”) is scheduled to be held on July 18, 2025. You have an important decision to make to support the continued execution of Oportun’s strategy to drive profitable growth and deliver stockholder value.

    Enclosed you will find materials that describe Oportun’s strategy and the progress we have made to streamline the Company’s product portfolio, reduce costs and increase profitability, driven by our experienced management team and overseen by our Board of Directors (the “Board”).

    We encourage you to review these materials carefully and vote today FOR each of the Company’s nominees standing for election at the Annual Meeting — Raul Vazquez and Carlos Minetti — using the enclosed GREEN proxy card.

    Overview of Oportun & Our History

    Over the past 19 years, Oportun has been guided by our mission: to provide inclusive, affordable financial services that empower hardworking people to build better futures.

    By offering responsible credit at lower costs than typical alternatives, we serve individuals who are often overlooked and poorly served by traditional financial institutions. This has enabled us to extend over $20 billion in credit and help more than 1.3 million members build credit histories. Our strong customer loyalty is reflected in Net Promoter Scores consistently at or above 75 — well above industry norms.

    To provide some background on how our strategy has evolved, we saw a compelling opportunity to extend our impact across underserved communities, deepen our relationship with our loyal members and unlock long-term value for stockholders by expanding our offerings and growing our loan portfolio from $5 million in 2009 to approximately $3 billion today. Supported by robust customer demand for holistic financial solutions as well as favorable credit and market conditions — including low inflation, interest rates, oil prices and unemployment — we embarked on our growth strategy.

    We executed our growth strategy with discipline, expanding first into credit cards and then into secured personal loans before acquiring Digit in December of 2021, which added savings, investing and budgeting capabilities to our platform. We delivered strong growth and record aggregate originations in 2021, while maintaining some of the lowest net charge-off and 30+ day delinquency rates in our history.

    Beginning in early 2022, however, the world changed — rapidly and unexpectedly. The war in Ukraine triggered a sharp increase in oil and energy prices, and supply chain disruptions contributed to rising and sustained inflation. The Federal Reserve began a series of rate increases to tame inflation, which led to a higher cost of capital for financial services companies. As a result, many financial services companies faced significant pressure, with some going out of business altogether.

    Oportun was not immune to those headwinds. Our cost of capital increased significantly and many of our members, who typically have modest incomes and limited savings, were disproportionately affected by rising inflation and a higher cost of living, which impacted their ability to repay loans.

    Our Response to Significant Macroeconomic Disruption

    The management team and Board determined that our growth-focused strategy was no longer prudent under those economic conditions and took action to reposition the Company. We responded swiftly by shifting our focus from growth to profitability and predictability, realigning our business around our core strengths.

    After initially tightening credit in the third quarter of 2021, we proactively announced further significant credit actions during our second quarter 2022 earnings call — despite meeting or exceeding all guidance metrics, including credit. We also announced our intention to significantly reduce operating expense growth to flat in the second half of 2022 compared to the first.

    We continued to tighten credit in subsequent quarters, leading to an approximately 600 basis point reduction in first quarter 2025 losses for recent loan vintages compared to early 2022 vintages. We also took decisive steps to reduce our cost structure, including four reductions-in-force and targeted operational streamlining. Those initiatives — which also included non-personnel expense cuts, the exit of capital-intensive products and the sale of our credit card portfolio — eliminated approximately $240 million in annualized expenses.

    Today, Oportun is focused on three strategic priorities to drive sustainable, profitable growth:

    • Improving credit outcomes
    • Strengthening business economics
    • Identifying high-quality originations

    Our Business Transformation is Yielding Measurable Results

    While we recognize that there is more work to do, our team is executing well. Our progress across each of our strategic priorities is evident in our recent financial results.

    During the first quarter of 2025, we grew aggregate originations by nearly 40% year-over-year while delivering strong credit metrics, including our fifth consecutive year-over-year decline in 30+ day delinquency rate. Our adjusted operating expense ratio of 13.3% was also our second lowest ever as a public company, underscoring our ongoing focus on expense discipline.

    Supported by a more efficient cost structure and improved credit performance, we believe Oportun is well-positioned to deliver strong financial results in 2025. We continue to expect 2025 adjusted EPS guidance of $1.10 to $1.30 reflecting year-over-year growth of 53% to 81%.

    The market has recognized our progress: our total stockholder returns have significantly outperformed our peers and the broader markets year-to-date, over the last six months and over the past year.

    Today, Oportun is stronger, more resilient and more focused than it was three years ago. We are confident in our ability to deliver sustainable, profitable growth going forward.

    Our Board & Governance

    At this year’s Annual Meeting, Oportun is nominating two candidates for election to the Board: Raul Vazquez, Oportun’s CEO, and Carlos Minetti, one of our independent directors.

    As Oportun’s CEO, Mr. Vazquez has unique insight into the day-to-day operation of our business and has been instrumental in leading Oportun through its transformation as well as through several credit and economic cycles. As a significant stockholder, his interests are strongly aligned with those of our investors, reinforcing his commitment to long-term success.

    Mr. Minetti is one of the Board’s newest directors, having been appointed in February 2024. He has more than 35 years of experience in the financial services industry, including expertise in consumer lending and credit risk. He has held leadership roles at companies like Stripe, Discover and American Express.

    If elected, Mr. Vazquez and Mr. Minetti will serve alongside the Company’s six other directors, each of whom has played an important role in overseeing our progress. These directors bring critical expertise in areas that are essential to our business, including financial services, credit risk, consumer lending, government regulation, capital markets and technology.

    In addition to the election of directors, stockholders can also vote at this year’s Annual Meeting on proposals to amend the Company’s governing documents to declassify the Board and allow stockholders to amend and approve amendments to our governing documents with a simple majority vote. These two proposals reflect our ongoing commitment to effective oversight and governance and, if approved, would enhance stockholder rights and strengthen accountability.

    This Year’s Annual Meeting

    Despite the meaningful progress we have made, one of our stockholders, Findell Capital Management, LLC (together with its affiliates, “Findell”) is once again pursuing a proxy contest, this time seeking to remove our CEO from the Board and replace him with its own candidate.

    Over the last several years, we have engaged extensively with Findell in good faith. Since the beginning of 2023, members of the Board and management team have had dozens of interactions with Findell’s principal to understand his perspective and explore areas for alignment.

    We have objectively considered Findell’s suggestions and embraced more than a few of its recommendations, including recently when we determined to reduce the size of the Board and appoint a new Lead Independent Director after the Annual Meeting. We have also independently undertaken initiatives consistent with Findell’s feedback, including reducing expenses, streamlining our business and enhancing our corporate governance profile.

    We do not believe Findell’s nominee is a suitable replacement for Mr. Vazquez. Removing our CEO from the Board would jeopardize the continuity, leadership and business insight we need to continue the significant progress we’ve made, and would send a disruptive message to our employees and other stakeholders.

    Thank you for your support and investment in Oportun as we continue to work to create value on behalf of all stakeholders.

    Sincerely,
    The Oportun Financial Corporation Board of Directors

    Your Vote Is Important!

    Please vote on the GREEN proxy card “FOR” the Company’s two nominees, and “WITHHOLD” on Findell’s candidate, using one of the following options:

    • Online – Follow the instructions set forth on the enclosed GREEN proxy card to vote via the Internet,
    • Phone – Follow the instructions set forth on the enclosed GREEN proxy card to vote by telephone, or
    • Mail – Mark, sign and date the enclosed GREEN proxy card and return it in the postage-paid envelope provided.

    Remember, please discard and do not sign any white Findell proxy card. If you have already voted using a white proxy card, you may cancel that vote simply by voting again using the Company’s GREEN proxy card. Only your latest-dated vote will count!

    If you have any questions about how to vote your shares, please call the firm assisting us with the solicitation of proxies:

    INNISFREE M&A INCORPORATED
    Shareholders may call:
    (877) 800-5195 (toll-free from the U.S. and Canada) or
    +1 (412) 232-3651 (from other countries)

    About Oportun

    Oportun (Nasdaq: OPRT) is a mission-driven financial services company that puts its members’ financial goals within reach. With intelligent borrowing, savings, and budgeting capabilities, Oportun empowers members with the confidence to build a better financial future. Since inception, Oportun has provided more than $20.3 billion in responsible and affordable credit, saved its members more than $2.4 billion in interest and fees, and helped its members set aside an average of more than $1,800 annually. For more information, visit Oportun.com.

    Cautionary Statement on Forward-Looking Statements 
    Certain statements in this communication are “forward-looking statements”. These forward-looking statements are subject to the safe harbor provisions under the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995, Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. All statements other than statements of historical fact contained in this communication, including statements as to our future performance, financial position and our strategic initiatives, and the Annual Meeting, are forward-looking statements. These statements can be generally identified by terms such as “expect,” “plan,” “goal,” “target,” “anticipate,” “assume,” “predict,” “project,” “outlook,” “continue,” “due,” “may,” “believe,” “seek,” or “estimate” and similar expressions or the negative versions of these words or comparable words, as well as future or conditional verbs such as “will,” “should,” “would,” “likely” and “could.” These statements involve known and unknown risks, uncertainties, assumptions and other factors that may cause our actual results, performance or achievements to be materially different from any future results, performance or achievements expressed or implied by the forward-looking statements. We have based these forward-looking statements on our current expectations and projections about future events, financial trends and risks and uncertainties that we believe may affect our business, financial condition and results of operations. These risks and uncertainties include those risks described in our filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission, including our most recent annual report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2024, as well as our subsequent filings with the SEC. These forward-looking statements speak only as of the date on which they are made and, except to the extent required by federal securities laws, we disclaim any obligation to update any forward-looking statement to reflect events or circumstances after the date on which the statement is made or to reflect the occurrence of unanticipated events, except as required by law. In light of these risks and uncertainties, there is no assurance that the events or results suggested by the forward-looking statements will in fact occur, and you should not place undue reliance on these forward-looking statements. 

    Non-GAAP Financial Measures 
    This communication includes the presentation and discussion of certain financial measures that are not calculated in accordance with U.S. Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (“GAAP”).  

    Adjusted Net Income is a non-GAAP financial measure defined as net income adjusted to eliminate the effect of certain items. We believe that Adjusted Net Income is an important measure of operating performance because it allows management, investors, and our Board of Directors to evaluate and compare our operating results, including return on capital and operating efficiencies, from period to period, excluding the after-tax impact of non-cash, stock-based compensation expense and certain non-recurring charges. 

    Adjusted Earnings (Loss) Per Share is a non-GAAP financial measure defined as Adjusted Net Income divided by weighted average diluted shares outstanding. We believe Adjusted Earnings (Loss) Per Share is an important measure because it allows management, investors and our Board of Directors to evaluate the operating results, operating trends and profitability of the business in relation to diluted adjusted weighted-average shares outstanding. 

    Adjusted Operating Expense is a non-GAAP financial measure defined as total operating expenses adjusted to exclude stock-based compensation expense and certain non-recurring charges, such as expenses associated with our workforce optimization, and other non-recurring charges. Other non-recurring charges include litigation reserve, impairment charges, and debt amendment costs related to our corporate financing facility. We believe Adjusted Operating Expense is an important measure because it allows management, investors and our Board of Directors to evaluate and compare our operating costs from period to period, excluding the impact of non-cash, stock-based compensation expense and certain non-recurring charges. 

    Adjusted Operating Expense Ratio is a non-GAAP financial measure defined as Adjusted Operating Expense divided by Average Daily Principal Balance. We believe Adjusted Operating Expense Ratio is an important measure because it allows management, investors and our Board of Directors to evaluate how efficiently we are managing costs relative to revenue and Average Daily Principal Balance. 

    See below for a reconciliation of the 2025 non-GAAP figures provided in this document to the corresponding GAAP figure:  

    RECONCILIATION OF NON-GAAP FINANCIAL MEASURES
    (in millions, unaudited)
        Three Months Ended
    March 31,
    Adjusted Operating Expense Ratio   2025     2024  
    OpEx Ratio   13.9%     15.5%  
             
    Total Operating Expense   $92.7     $109.6  
    Adjustments:        
    Stock-based compensation expense    (2.8)     (4.0)  
    Workforce optimization expenses    0.1     (0.8)  
    Other non-recurring charges    (1.0)     (3.1)  
    Total Adjusted Operating Expense   $88.9     $101.7  
             
    Average Daily Principal Balance   $2,705.2     $2,851.7  
             
    Adjusted OpEx Ratio   13.3%     14.3%  
             

    Note: Numbers may not foot or cross-foot due to rounding. 

    RECONCILIATION OF FORWARD-LOOKING NON-GAAP FINANCIAL MEASURES
    (in millions, unaudited)
        FY 2025
    Adjusted Net Income and Adjusted EPS   Low   High
    Net income   $23.2   $33.4
    Adjustments:        
    Income tax expense (benefit)   6.3   9.0
    Stock-based compensation expense   13.7   13.7
    Other non-recurring charges   6.0   6.0
    Mark-to-market adjustment on ABS notes       23.5   23.5
    Adjusted income before taxes       $72.6
    		   $85.6
    Normalized income tax expense       19.6   23.1
    Adjusted Net Income       $53.0
    		   $62.5
             
    Diluted weighted-average common shares outstanding   48.0   48.0
             
    Diluted earnings per share   $0.48   $0.70
    Adjusted Earnings Per Share   $1.10   $1.30

    Note: Numbers may not foot or cross-foot due to rounding. 

    This non-GAAP information should be considered as supplemental in nature and is not meant to be considered in isolation from, or as a substitute for, the related financial information prepared in accordance with GAAP. In addition, this non-GAAP financial measure may not be the same as similar measures presented by other companies. We are unable to predict or estimate with reasonable certainty the ultimate outcome of certain items required for corresponding GAAP measures without unreasonable effort. Information about the adjustments that are not currently available to the Company could have a potentially unpredictable and significant impact on future GAAP results. 

    Investor Contact
    Dorian Hare
    (650) 590-4323
    ir@oportun.com

    Innisfree M&A Incorporated
    Scott Winter / Gabrielle Wolf / Jonathan Kovacs
    (212) 750-5833

    Media Contact
    FGS Global
    John Christiansen / Bryan Locke
    Oportun@fgsglobal.com

    The MIL Network –

  • Markets bounce back after early slump, end slightly lower

    Source: Government of India

    Source: Government of India (4)

    Indian stock markets recovered sharply from early losses on Monday, displaying resilience despite global headwinds. Both benchmark indices ended the session marginally lower.
     
    The Sensex closed at 81,374, down by 77 points or 0.09 per cent, after rebounding 719 points from the day’s low of 80,654. Similarly, the Nifty settled at 24,717, slipping 34 points or 0.14 per cent, recovering from an intraday low of 24,526.
     
    Investor sentiment was initially dampened by the announcement from US President Donald Trump regarding a steep hike in tariffs on steel imports, increasing from 25 per cent to 50 per cent, effective June 4.
     
    Adding to the cautious mood were rising geopolitical tensions between Russia and Ukraine, volatile foreign investment flows, and uncertainty ahead of the Reserve Bank of India’s monetary policy decision later this week.
     
    Despite a weak opening, select heavyweight buying limited the downside. Notable gainers included Adani Ports, Mahindra & Mahindra, Zomato (Eternal), PowerGrid, Hindustan Unilever, Bajaj Finserv, ITC, ICICI Bank, Asian Paints, and Nestle India, which rose between 0.4 per cent and 2 per cent.
     
    In the broader market, the Nifty MidCap and Nifty SmallCap indices outperformed, rising 0.62 per cent and 1.1 per cent, respectively.
     
    Sector-wise, Nifty IT and Nifty Metal indices were the biggest laggards, falling 0.7 per cent on concerns over US tariff hikes. In contrast, Nifty Realty and Nifty PSU Bank indices led the gains, each advancing over 2 per cent.
     
    “The domestic market continued its consolidation phase for the third consecutive week, influenced by renewed concerns over a potential tariff war and escalating geopolitical tensions,” said Vinod Nair, Head of Research at Geojit Financial Services.
     
    “While global uncertainties have made investors more risk-averse, the Indian market has shown resilience, supported by strong institutional inflows and sectoral strength in FMCG, real estate, and financials,” he added.
     
    Nair noted that investors are currently adopting a cautious short-term strategy, favouring domestically-driven and interest-sensitive sectors.
     
    –IANS

  • Russia and Ukraine to hold more peace talks after Kyiv hits nuclear-capable bombers

    Source: Government of India

    Source: Government of India (4)

    Russian and Ukrainian officials are due to sit down on Monday in Istanbul for their second round of direct peace talks since 2022 with no sign they are any closer to an agreement, one day after Kyiv struck some of Moscow’s nuclear-capable bombers.

    The two sides are expected to discuss their respective ideas for what a full ceasefire and a longer term path to peace should look like, amid stark disagreements and pressure from U.S. President Donald Trump, who has threatened to walk away from talks.

    Vladimir Medinsky, the head of Moscow’s delegation, said that Russia had received Ukraine’s draft memorandum for a peace accord ahead of the talks. There was no word on whether Kyiv had received Russia’s draft. Ukrainian Defence Minister Rustem Umerov will head the Ukrainian delegation.

    Their last round of talks in Istanbul on May 16 yielded the biggest prisoner swap of the war with each side freeing 1,000 prisoners, but no sign of peace – or even a ceasefire as both sides merely stated their opening negotiating positions.

    Kyiv regards Russia’s approach to date as an attempt to force it to capitulate – something it says it will never do – and Moscow, which advanced on the battlefield in May at its fastest rate in six months, says Ukraine should submit to peace on Russian terms or face losing more territory.

    Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy, speaking in Lithuania on Monday, said ceasefire and humanitarian issues, such as returning more prisoners, from Russia would be a priority for Kyiv at the Istanbul talks.

    Kyiv has said Zelenskiy and Russian President Vladimir Putin should hold direct talks when the time is right.

    Amid low expectations of a breakthrough, a Ukrainian source told Reuters ahead of Monday’s talks that Kyiv was ready to take real steps towards peace if Moscow showed flexibility and what they described as a readiness to “move forward, not just repeat the same previous ultimatums”.

    Ukrainian officials met with officials from Germany, Italy and Britain ahead of the talks to coordinate their positions.

    GRIM MOOD

    The mood in Russia before the talks was grim with influential war bloggers calling on Moscow to deliver a fearsome retaliatory blow against Kyiv after Ukraine on Sunday launched one of its most ambitious attacks of the war, targeting Russian nuclear-capable long-range bombers in Siberia and elsewhere.

    Ukraine’s air force said Russia had launched 472 drones at Ukraine, the highest nightly total of the war.

    Trump envoy Keith Kellogg has indicated that the U.S. will be involved in the talks and that representatives from Britain, France and Germany will be present too, though it was not clear at what level the United States would be represented.

    Turkish Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan was due to chair the talks, which are expected to get underway at 1000 GMT.

    The idea of direct talks was first proposed by Putin after Ukraine and European powers demanded that he agree to a ceasefire which the Kremlin dismissed.

    Last June Putin set out his opening terms for an immediate end to the war: Ukraine must drop its NATO ambitions and withdraw all of its troops from the entirety of the territory of four Ukrainian regions claimed and mostly controlled by Russia.

    According to a proposed roadmap that will be presented by Ukrainian negotiators in Istanbul, a copy of which was seen by Reuters, Kyiv wants no restrictions on its military strength after any peace deal, no international recognition of Russian sovereignty over parts of Ukraine taken by Moscow’s forces, and wants reparations.

    The document stated that the current location of the front line will be the starting point for negotiations about territory.
    Russia currently controls just under one fifth of Ukraine, or about 113,100 square km, about the same size as the U.S. state of Ohio.

    Putin ordered tens of thousands of troops to invade Ukraine in February 2022 after eight years of fighting in eastern Ukraine between Russian-backed separatists and Ukrainian troops. The United States says over 1.2 million people have been killed and injured in the war since 2022.

    Trump has called Putin “crazy” and berated Zelenskiy in public in the Oval Office, but the U.S. president has also said that he thinks peace is achievable and that if Putin delays then he could impose tough sanctions on Russia.

    (Reuters)

  • MIL-OSI Russia: How the USSR switched from a tachanka to a T-34

    Translation. Region: Russian Federal

    Source: State University Higher School of Economics – State University Higher School of Economics –

    Nikita Melnikov, a leading specialist in the history of Soviet tank building, spoke at the HSE Faculty of Economic Sciences. He told how, between the world wars, the USSR proposed producing 100,000 tanks a year, how American and European experience helped Soviet industry, and how, in the end, the Soviet Union built a powerful tank industry that helped turn the tide of the war.

    Production of T-34

    Press service of Uralvagonzavod

    Nikita Nikolaevich Melnikov, PhD in history, senior research fellow at the Center for Political and Sociocultural History of the Institute of History and Archaeology of the Ural Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences, gave two lectures on May 13 at the campus on Pokrovsky Boulevard. The first was devoted to the development of Soviet tank building in the interwar and wartime, the second to the modernization of industry during the Great Patriotic War. These are stories not so much about the armored vehicles themselves, but about the entire industrial complex, without studying which it is impossible to understand the logic of economic decisions of those years.

    Soviet industry, how it developed and transformed — these are the questions, the answers to which help us understand how we live today. The answers to these questions lie in the past, including the history of the Great Patriotic War. If we want to know and understand the features of modern Russian industry, past experience is important to us. Economists sometimes lack their own tools, and therefore we have to turn to historians in the hope that they will have answers to the questions of interest.

    Tank production began in Soviet Russia in 1920–1921. The young republic tried to establish serial production of armored vehicles at the Sormovo plant. It was the “Russian Renault” — a copy of the French FT-17. 15 vehicles were produced, but guns were installed on only 11: there was not enough compact armament. Soviet artillery could not offer a gun of the appropriate size. Production was semi-artisanal. Parts were supplied by the Putilov and Izhora plants.

    Already in the late 1920s, the creation of its own industry began. The T-18 that was produced became a modernized copy of the same FT-17. The Bolshevik Plant (formerly Obukhov) itself produced castings and engines. However, many components – bearings, electrical equipment, spark plugs, carburetors – were still imported. The main problem of the era: the lack of civil engineering in the USSR. Parts that were produced in large quantities in Europe for tractors and cars were in short supply in the USSR.

    For example, there was only one large bearing plant in the entire Union, GPZ-1, which supplied more than 90% of bearings. But its capacity was insufficient, as was quality production. This is what prompted the creation of a special model. Within each civilian plant, for example, the Kharkov Locomotive Plant or the Kirov Plant, separate sections were created where tanks were manufactured. They were not connected with the main production. These “islands” of armored vehicles existed in parallel with the production of locomotives and tractors.

    At the same time, there were ambitious plans to expand tank production within the USSR. Thus, in 1930, the commander of the Leningrad Military District, Mikhail Tukhachevsky, presented a project to modernize the army, in which he proposed producing 100 thousand tanks per year – a fantastic figure. The logic was simple: according to the calculations of engineer Magdesiev from the Bolshevik plant, one tank requires as much effort as two tractors. It was the tractor factories that were considered the foundation of the tank industry. But this idea was not realized.

    As a result, in the 1930s, two groups of factories were formed. Specialized (No. 174 and No. 37) produced light and amphibious tanks, and machine-building giants, where tanks were a by-product (KhPZ, Kirov, STZ). Each factory built its own chains, from the production of individual parts to final assembly. There was almost no cooperation between them. This provided autonomy, but slowed down scaling.

    In case of war, the USSR planned to build up to 30 thousand tanks. But the industry itself was capable of producing about three thousand vehicles per year. After the start of the Great Patriotic War, the USSR had to seriously restructure its production. The industry was evacuated to the Urals, where a new tank-building cluster was formed.

    Production was transferred to civilian factories, which faced a new challenge. Enterprises had to reorganize to produce military products, and new production chains were created for each type of armored vehicle. Work on orders for the civilian sector was stopped, which allowed the production of tanks to be increased in the shortest possible time. And by the end of 1942, the Soviet Union was able to reach a relatively stable level of production of 1,500 medium tanks per month, those same “thirty-fours” that largely became the weapon of victory.

    Nikita Melnikov in his lecture spoke in detail about the creation of the Soviet tank industry and the specifics of its formation. He drew attention to many rarely mentioned aspects of the tank industry. Thus, he pointed out that in the conditions of insufficient development of certain branches of mechanical engineering, some components for the production of tanks in the early 1930s were purchased abroad. The prototypes of the most mass-produced models of Soviet tanks T-26 and BT were purchased abroad and then adapted to the conditions of production of the Soviet industry. In addition, during the war, the industry partly switched to the American model of organization, when tanks were produced at large machine-building plants, receiving components from outside. Answering questions from the audience, Nikita Melnikov noted the negative impact of the repressions on tank production, which fell by 2.4 times in 1937 compared to 1936, from 3,800 to 1,600. During the Great Patriotic War, the strain of forces and concentration of resources made it possible to overcome the decline in the production of military equipment and the deterioration of its quality and provide the front with enough tanks.

    The second lecture was devoted directly to the restructuring of industry during the war years.

    By June 1941, almost half of the USSR’s ferrous metallurgy was concentrated in Ukraine. The loss of the southern regions meant, in essence, an industrial catastrophe. Already in August, the USSR Academy of Sciences Commission began working in Sverdlovsk under the leadership of Academician V.L. Komarov, whose task was to develop projects for mobilizing the Urals’ resources and evacuating industry.

    By 1943, a third of all rolled steel in the USSR was used for ammunition, and almost another 10% was used for armored rolled steel. Factories were working at their limits: firebricks needed for steel smelting had to be made with double the intensity, but their durability in wartime was half that of the pre-war period. By the end of 1942, metallurgists and power engineers were faced with equipment wear and tear, the freezing of civilian projects, and total concentration on the needs of the front.

    One of the most important systems was energy. Without it, it was impossible to establish industrial production. At the same time, there was a constant energy deficit. The Sverdlovenergo system operated at a reduced frequency of below 49 Hz from October 1941 to March 1943, sometimes even down to 45. Losses during energy transfers over long distances reached 50%. The main industrial facilities consumed up to 77% of all electricity in the region, housing and communal services and the social sphere found themselves in strict isolation. Cement and glass factories received half the required capacity at best. Many worked for several hours a day or stopped completely. The copper industry received half as much energy as before the war.

    Against the background of a shortage of electricity, refractory materials and fuel, resources were concentrated on the production of weapons. The volumes of building materials and products for the civilian sector were sharply reduced. Construction was either frozen or transferred to an extremely simplified mode. In the Urals, round timber was used en masse as the most accessible building material.

    The industry was forced to rely on women and teenagers. At UZTM in 1945, women accounted for 34.6%, and teenagers under 18 accounted for more than 11%, including girls under 16. It was these efforts of the rear that helped achieve victory at the front.

    At the same time, the shortage of production, energy, lack of time and experience led to a decrease in the quality of products. For example, many T-34s produced in 1942 had their gearbox gears completely worn out after several hundred kilometers of running. In 1942, to check the batch, each tank was tested for five kilometers of running before being delivered to the troops. In fact, it was necessary to check whether the tank could start at all, and this was enough to send it to the front. The warranty period for the V-2 engine in 1943 was only 200 engine hours. At the same time, up to 90% of the engine life was depleted by idling the engine at night to warm the tankers in winter. But in war conditions, it was more important to establish mass production, which the USSR successfully managed.

    At the same time, after the end of the war, it was necessary to abandon mass military production. However, the established production chains could not be quickly transferred to civilian rails; the factories had been focused only on the production of military goods for several years. This led to a post-war conversion crisis and a revision of plans for the production of armored vehicles.

    Nikita Melnikov’s reports aroused keen interest among the audience. Despite the tight program, both students and faculty members came to the lecture. Answering questions from the audience and exchanging opinions took almost as much time as the reports themselves.


    Nikita Nikolaevich Melnikov

    Candidate of Historical Sciences, Senior Researcher at the Center for Political and Sociocultural History of the Institute of History and Archaeology of the Ural Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences

    This experience was extremely valuable and educational for me. For the first time, I gave a lecture to fellow economists, whose questions and comments allowed me to better understand the processes being studied and identify new aspects. The economic model of the USSR’s development is a complex and multifaceted phenomenon that requires detailed analysis and systematic study. In this study, I sought to examine the key factors and mechanisms that determined the dynamics and trajectory of the economic development of the Soviet Union during the Great Patriotic War. I express my sincere gratitude to the Higher School of Economics and Ilya Voskoboinikov for the opportunity to present the results of my research.

    Please note: This information is raw content directly from the source of the information. It is exactly what the source states and does not reflect the position of MIL-OSI or its clients.

    MIL OSI Russia News –

  • MIL-OSI: Radware Expands its Threat Intelligence Services

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    MAHWAH, N.J., June 02, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Radware® (NASDAQ: RDWR), a global leader in application security and delivery solutions for multi-cloud environments, today announced it has expanded its Threat Intelligence Services with the launch of its Telegram Claimed Attacks Report and TLS Fingerprint Reputation Feed. The subscription-based cloud services work in real-time to provide global threat intelligence and visibility so security teams can anticipate and neutralize emerging cyber threats before they materialize. In the face of escalating cyberthreats, they offer additional preemptive protection to strengthen cyber defenses and improve security posture with minimal operational effort.

    “Our new TLS Fingerprint Reputation Feed and Telegram Claimed Attacks Report are part of our comprehensive, multi-layered approach to cyber security and threat management,” said Gabi Malka, chief operating officer at Radware. “They are like an advanced warning system designed to help already time-strapped security teams stay ahead of cyber threats. The new capabilities deliver real-time, high-value insights into attackers, their motivations and methods so security teams can take proactive, decisive action on threats before they happen and maintain an airtight security posture.”

    Telegram Claimed Attacks Report
    Radware’s Telegram Claimed Attacks Report, the latest addition to the company’s Cloud Threat Intelligence Service, offers real-time visibility into cyber threats targeting specific regions or industry verticals. This new open-source intelligence (OSINT) based report aggregates claims made by hacker groups on Telegram, presenting them with supporting evidence. Key features include:

    • Timely insights: Offers real-time visibility into emerging threats for swift decision-making.
    • Proactive threat management: Helps security operation center teams anticipate attacks or address attacks happening in real-time.
    • Intuitive dashboards: Presents refreshed data every 15 minutes via user friendly interfaces and offers easy filtering of specific data by industry geography and attacking group.

    TLS Fingerprint Reputation Feed
    To prevent malicious actors from entering a system, Radware’s TLS Fingerprint Reputation Feed proactively identifies and blocks malicious TLS fingerprints by leveraging advanced analytics and global threat intelligence correlated across Radware’s cloud network. The feed, which is an enhancement to Radware’s industry leading DDoS Protection, includes:

    • Global data correlation: Offers access to a globally sourced, continuously updated feed of high-risk TLS fingerprints.
    • Automated mitigation: Dynamically blocks known malicious TLS fingerprints at the handshake level.
    • Smart learning and configurability: Customizes scoring models and defines thresholds by severity.
    • Seamless visibility: Monitors blocked fingerprints and policy impact through a user-friendly dashboard.

    Radware has received numerous awards and recognitions for its application and network security solutions from industry analysts, including Aite-Novarica Group, Forrester, GigaOm, Gartner, KuppingerCole, and QKS Group.

    About Radware
    Radware® (NASDAQ: RDWR) is a global leader in application security and delivery solutions for multi-cloud environments. The company’s cloud application, infrastructure, and API security solutions use AI-driven algorithms for precise, hands-free, real-time protection from the most sophisticated web, application, and DDoS attacks, API abuse, and bad bots. Enterprises and carriers worldwide rely on Radware’s solutions to address evolving cybersecurity challenges and protect their brands and business operations while reducing costs. For more information, please visit the Radware website.

    Radware encourages you to join our community and follow us on: Facebook, LinkedIn, Radware Blog, X, and YouTube.

    ©2025 Radware Ltd. All rights reserved. Any Radware products and solutions mentioned in this press release are protected by trademarks, patents, and pending patent applications of Radware in the U.S. and other countries. For more details, please see: https://www.radware.com/LegalNotice/. All other trademarks and names are property of their respective owners.

    Radware believes the information in this document is accurate in all material respects as of its publication date. However, the information is provided without any express, statutory, or implied warranties and is subject to change without notice.

    The contents of any website or hyperlinks mentioned in this press release are for informational purposes and the contents thereof are not part of this press release.

    Safe Harbor Statement
    This press release includes “forward-looking statements” within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Any statements made herein that are not statements of historical fact, including statements about Radware’s plans, outlook, beliefs, or opinions, are forward-looking statements. Generally, forward-looking statements may be identified by words such as “believes,” “expects,” “anticipates,” “intends,” “estimates,” “plans,” and similar expressions or future or conditional verbs such as “will,” “should,” “would,” “may,” and “could.” For example, when we say in this press release that the new capabilities deliver insights into attackers, their motivations and methods so security teams can take proactive, decisive action on threats before they happen, we are using forward-looking statements. Because such statements deal with future events, they are subject to various risks and uncertainties, and actual results, expressed or implied by such forward-looking statements, could differ materially from Radware’s current forecasts and estimates. Factors that could cause or contribute to such differences include, but are not limited to: the impact of global economic conditions, including as a result of the state of war declared in Israel in October 2023 and instability in the Middle East, the war in Ukraine, tensions between China and Taiwan, financial and credit market fluctuations (including elevated interest rates), impacts from tariffs or other trade restrictions, inflation, and the potential for regional or global recessions; our dependence on independent distributors to sell our products; our ability to manage our anticipated growth effectively; our business may be affected by sanctions, export controls, and similar measures, targeting Russia and other countries and territories, as well as other responses to Russia’s military conflict in Ukraine, including indefinite suspension of operations in Russia and dealings with Russian entities by many multi-national businesses across a variety of industries; the ability of vendors to provide our hardware platforms and components for the manufacture of our products; our ability to attract, train, and retain highly qualified personnel; intense competition in the market for cybersecurity and application delivery solutions and in our industry in general, and changes in the competitive landscape; our ability to develop new solutions and enhance existing solutions; the impact to our reputation and business in the event of real or perceived shortcomings, defects, or vulnerabilities in our solutions, if our end-users experience security breaches, or if our information technology systems and data, or those of our service providers and other contractors, are compromised by cyber-attackers or other malicious actors or by a critical system failure; our use of AI technologies that present regulatory, litigation, and reputational risks; risks related to the fact that our products must interoperate with operating systems, software applications and hardware that are developed by others; outages, interruptions, or delays in hosting services; the risks associated with our global operations, such as difficulties and costs of staffing and managing foreign operations, compliance costs arising from host country laws or regulations, partial or total expropriation, export duties and quotas, local tax exposure, economic or political instability, including as a result of insurrection, war, natural disasters, and major environmental, climate, or public health concerns; our net losses in the past and the possibility that we may incur losses in the future; a slowdown in the growth of the cybersecurity and application delivery solutions market or in the development of the market for our cloud-based solutions; long sales cycles for our solutions; risks and uncertainties relating to acquisitions or other investments; risks associated with doing business in countries with a history of corruption or with foreign governments; changes in foreign currency exchange rates; risks associated with undetected defects or errors in our products; our ability to protect our proprietary technology; intellectual property infringement claims made by third parties; laws, regulations, and industry standards affecting our business; compliance with open source and third-party licenses; complications with the design or implementation of our new enterprise resource planning (“ERP”) system; our reliance on information technology systems; our ESG disclosures and initiatives; and other factors and risks over which we may have little or no control. This list is intended to identify only certain of the principal factors that could cause actual results to differ. For a more detailed description of the risks and uncertainties affecting Radware, refer to Radware’s Annual Report on Form 20-F, filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), and the other risk factors discussed from time to time by Radware in reports filed with, or furnished to, the SEC. Forward-looking statements speak only as of the date on which they are made and, except as required by applicable law, Radware undertakes no commitment to revise or update any forward-looking statement in order to reflect events or circumstances after the date any such statement is made. Radware’s public filings are available from the SEC’s website at www.sec.gov or may be obtained on Radware’s website at www.radware.com.

    Media Contact:
    Gerri Dyrek
    Radware
    Gerri.Dyrek@radware.com

    The MIL Network –

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Press release – EP leaders visit Copenhagen ahead of the Danish EU Presidency

    Source: European Parliament

    European Parliament President, Roberta Metsola, and political group leaders will visit Copenhagen on Tuesday to prepare the upcoming Danish Presidency of the Council of the European Union.

    EP leaders will meet with Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen. They will also have an audience with Their Majesties King Frederik X and Queen Mary of Denmark and meet with Folketinget.

    War in Ukraine, the climate crisis, and global trade tensions are putting significant strain on the EU’s capacity to act. On 1 July, Denmark assumes the Presidency of the Council of the EU, taking on a central role in shaping the direction of the Union.

    In preparation for assuming the Presidency of the Council, Copenhagen will welcome the European Parliament’s Conference of Presidents (President Roberta Metsola and political group leaders) on Tuesday 3 June. The conference will discuss priorities of the forthcoming Danish Presidency with government officials and members of the Danish parliament (Folketinget).

    “Denmark takes the EU steering wheel at a time of war on our continent, global trade tensions and economic pressure. Security, sustainability and competitiveness are the right focus. From strengthening our defence to cutting red tape for business, from energy security to digital leadership – Europe must act. I look forward to working with the Danish Presidency to deliver,” says Roberta Metsola, President of the European Parliament, ahead of the visit.

    Following their meeting, President Roberta Metsola and PM Mette Frederiksen will speak to the press at 11:25. It will be live on the EP multimedia centre and on EbS. Journalists can register their attendance via this link, where you can also find more information about the visit.

    Denmark will hold the rotating Presidency of the Council of the EU from July to December 2025, after which Cyprus will assume the presidency.

    What is the Conference of Presidents?

    The Conference of Presidents in the European Parliament is the political body responsible for organising and coordinating the Parliament’s work. The Conference is composed of the President of the European Parliament, the leaders of the political groups in the European Parliament, and a non-voting representative of the non-attached Members.

    Traditionally, the Conference of Presidents travels to the country preparing to take over the rotating Presidency of the Council of the EU, in order to engage in preparatory discussions and ensure a shared understanding of, as well as joint action on the upcoming priorities.

    MIL OSI Europe News –

  • MIL-OSI Russia: Russian Foreign Minister and US Secretary of State Discuss Ukraine Crisis in Phone Call

    Translation. Region: Russian Federal

    Source: People’s Republic of China in Russian – People’s Republic of China in Russian –

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

    Moscow, June 2 (Xinhua) — Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov and U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio had a telephone conversation on Sunday. The parties discussed the situation related to the crisis around Ukraine. The corresponding information was published by the press service of the Russian Foreign Ministry on the same day.

    US Secretary of State M. Rubio expressed his sincere condolences over the civilian casualties resulting from the bombings of railway infrastructure in the Bryansk and Kursk regions on June 1.

    The Russian side emphasized that the competent authorities are conducting the most thorough investigation and the results will be published in the nearest future. The guilty parties will definitely be identified and will inevitably suffer the punishment they deserve.

    S. Lavrov and M. Rubio also exchanged views on various initiatives concerning the political settlement of the Ukrainian crisis, including plans to resume direct Russian-Ukrainian negotiations in Istanbul on June 2. –0–

    MIL OSI Russia News –

  • MIL-OSI Russia: Summary: Ukraine announced attacks against Russian airfields, Russian Defense Ministry reported several aircraft units catching fire

    Translation. Region: Russian Federal

    Source: People’s Republic of China in Russian – People’s Republic of China in Russian –

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

    Kyiv/Moscow, June 2 (Xinhua) — The Security Service of Ukraine (SBU) said Sunday that 34 percent of strategic cruise missile carriers at Russia’s main airfields were hit in an attack carried out on Sunday. The Russian Defense Ministry, meanwhile, said several aircraft caught fire.

    According to a message published by the SBU on Facebook, the estimated cost of the damaged strategic aviation is about 7 billion US dollars.

    The Interfax-Ukraine news agency, citing its sources, reported that drones struck four military airfields on Russian territory: Belaya in the Irkutsk region, Dyagilevo in the Ryazan region, Olenya in the Murmansk region, and Ivanovo in the Ivanovo region.

    According to the agency, more than forty A-50, Tu-95 and Tu-22 aircraft, which Russia used to strike Ukrainian territory, were hit as a result of the attack.

    The Russian Defense Ministry, in turn, reported that the Ukrainian side committed a terrorist attack using FPV drones against airfields in the Murmansk, Irkutsk, Ivanovo, Ryazan and Amur regions. All terrorist attacks at military airfields in the Ivanovo, Ryazan and Amur regions were repelled.

    According to the Russian military department, several aircraft units caught fire in the Murmansk and Irkutsk regions as a result of FPV drones being launched from the territory located in the immediate vicinity of airfields. The fires have been extinguished. There are no casualties among military personnel or civilian personnel. Some of the participants in the terrorist attacks have been detained.

    Irkutsk Region Governor Igor Kobzev reported on his Telegram channel that the first drone attack in Siberia took place in the region on a military unit in the village of Sredniy. “At the moment, it is known that this was a drone attack on a military unit in the village of Sredniy. The first in Siberia. One drop was on an old building in Novomaltinsk. The exact number of UAVs has not yet been counted. Operational and security services have been deployed to the scene: FSB officers, the Ministry of Emergency Situations, and Russian National Guard fighters. They set up an operational headquarters. I also went to the Usolsky District,” I. Kobzev wrote. –0–

    MIL OSI Russia News –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Pro-Trump candidate wins Poland’s presidential election – a bad omen for the EU, Ukraine and women

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Adam Simpson, Senior Lecturer, International Studies, University of South Australia

    Poland’s presidential election runoff will be a bitter pill for pro-European Union democrats to swallow.

    The nationalist, Trumpian, historian Karol Nawrocki has narrowly defeated the liberal, pro-EU mayor of Warsaw, Rafał Trzaskowski, 50.89 to 49.11%.

    The Polish president has few executive powers, though the office holder is able to veto legislation. This means the consequences of a Nawrocki victory will be felt keenly, both in Poland and across Europe.

    With this power, Nawrocki, backed by the conservative Law and Justice party, will no doubt stymie the ability of Prime Minister Donald Tusk and his Civic Platform-led coalition to enact democratic political reforms.

    This legislative gridlock could well see Law and Justice return to government in the 2027 general elections, which would lock in the anti-democratic changes the party made during their last term in office from 2015–2023. This included eroding Poland’s judicial independence by effectively taking control of judicial appointments and the supreme court.

    Nawrocki’s win has given pro-Donald Trump, anti-liberal, anti-EU forces across the continent a shot in the arm. It’s bad news for the EU, Ukraine and women.

    A rising Poland

    For much of the post-second world war era, Poland has had limited European influence.

    This is no longer the case. Poland’s economy has boomed since it joined the EU in 2004. It spends almost 5% of its gross domestic product on defence, almost double what it spent in 2022 at the time of Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine.

    Poland now has a bigger army than the United Kingdom, France and Germany. And living standards, adjusted for purchasing power, are about to eclipse Japan’s.

    Along with Brexit, these changes have resulted in the EU’s centre of gravity shifting eastwards towards Poland. As a rising military and economic power of 37 million people, what happens in Poland will help shape Europe’s future.

    Impacts on Ukraine

    Poland’s new position in Europe is most clearly demonstrated by its central role in the fight to defend Ukraine against Russia.

    This centrality was clearly demonstrated during the recent “Coalition of the Willing” summit in Kyiv, where Tusk joined the leaders of Europe’s major powers – France, Germany and the UK – to bolster support for Ukraine and its president, Volodymyr Zelensky.

    However, Poland’s unqualified support for Ukraine will now be at risk because Nawrocki has demonised Ukrainian refugees in his country and opposed Ukrainian integration into European-oriented bodies, such as the EU and NATO.

    Nawrocki was also backed during his campaign by the Trump administration. Kristi Noem, the US secretary of homeland security, said at the recent Conservative Political Action Conference in Poland:

    Donald Trump is a strong leader for us, but you have an opportunity to have just as strong of a leader in Karol if you make him the leader of this country.

    Trump also hosted Nawrocki in the Oval Office when he was merely a candidate for office. This was a significant deviation from standard US diplomatic protocol to stay out of foreign elections.

    Nawrocki has not been as pro-Russia as some other global, MAGA-style politicians, but this is largely due to Poland’s geography and its difficult history with Russia. It has been repeatedly invaded across its eastern plains by Russian or Soviet troops. And along with Ukraine, Poland shares borders with the Russian client state of Belarus and Russia itself in Kaliningrad, the heavily militarised enclave on the Baltic Sea.

    I experienced the proximity of these borders during fieldwork in Poland in 2023 when I travelled by car from Warsaw to Vilnius, the Lithuanian capital, via the Suwalki Gap.

    This is the strategically important, 100-kilometre-long border between Poland and Lithuania, which connects the Baltic states to the rest of NATO and the EU to the south. It’s seen as a potential flashpoint if Russia were ever to close the gap and isolate the Baltic states.

    Poland’s conservative nationalist politicians are therefore less Russia-friendly than those in Hungary or Slovakia. Nawrocki, for instance, does not support cutting off weapons to Ukraine.

    However, a Nawrocki presidency will still be more hostile to Ukraine and its interests. During the campaign, Nawrocki said Zelensky “treats Poland badly”, echoing the type of language used by Trump himself.

    Poland divided

    The high stakes in the election resulted in a record turnout of almost 73%.

    There was a stark choice in the election between Nawrocki and Trzaskowski.

    Trzaskowski supported the liberalisation of Poland’s harsh abortion laws – abortion was effectively banned in Poland under the Law and Justice government – and the introduction of civil partnerships for LGBTQ+ couples.

    Nawrocki opposed these changes and will likely veto any attempt to implement them.

    While the polls for the presidential runoff election had consistently shown a tight race, an Ipsos exit poll published during the vote count demonstrated the social divisions now facing the country.

    As in other recent global elections, women and those with higher formal education voted for the progressive candidate (Trzaskowski), while men and those with less formal education voted for the conservative (Nawrocki).

    After the surprise success of the liberal, pro-EU presidential candidate in the Romanian elections a fortnight ago, pro-EU forces were hoping for a similar result in Poland, as well.

    That, for now, is a pipe dream and liberals across the continent will now need to negotiate a difficult relationship with a right-wing, Trumpian leader in the new beating heart of Europe.

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

    – ref. Pro-Trump candidate wins Poland’s presidential election – a bad omen for the EU, Ukraine and women – https://theconversation.com/pro-trump-candidate-wins-polands-presidential-election-a-bad-omen-for-the-eu-ukraine-and-women-257617

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • Drones hidden in wooden sheds: How Ukraine carried out its most devastating drone strike of the war

    Source: Government of India

    Source: Government of India (4)

    Ukrainian secret services were able to attack strategic bomber aircraft at Russian air bases on Sunday by hiding explosive-laden drones inside the roofs of wooden sheds, according to a Ukrainian security official and images posted online.

    Ukraine’s domestic security agency, the SBU, acknowledged that it carried out the operation, codenamed “Spider’s Web” and said it had caused considerable damage.

    The sheds were loaded onto trucks that were driven to the perimeter of the air bases. The roof panels of the sheds were lifted off by a remotely-activated mechanism, allowing the drones to fly out and begin their attack, the official said.

    The security official, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said strikes were conducted on Sunday on four air bases, and that 41 Russian warplanes were hit.

    An SBU statement posted on the Telegram messaging app estimated the damage caused by the assaults at $7 billion.

    “Thirty-four percent of strategic cruise missile carriers at the main airfields of the Russian Federation were hit,” the SBU said on the Telegram messaging app.

    President Volodymyr Zelenskiy, writing on Telegram, expressed delight at the “absolutely brilliant outcome”.

    “And an outcome produced by Ukraine independently,” he wrote, noting that the operation had taken more than a year and a half to prepare. “This is our longest-range operation.”

    Speaking shortly afterwards in his nightly video address, the president noted that 117 drones had been used to attack the Russian bases and that Russian forces suffered “very tangible losses, and justifiably so”.

    Zelenskiy said the SBU had set up a nerve centre for the operation right next to a regional office of Russia’s FSB intelligence service. All operatives taking part had been brought out of Russia “on the eve of the operation”, he said.

    VIDEO SHOWS BOMBERS ABLAZE

    Unverified video and pictures posted on Russian social media showed Russian strategic bombers on fire at the Belaya air base in the Irkutsk region of Siberia.

    Igor Kobzev, the regional governor, said there had been a drone attack on a military unit near the village of Sredny, which is near the Belaya base, though he did not specify what the target was. He said the drones had been launched from a truck.

    The Irkutsk region attack was the first time a drone assault had been mounted by Ukraine so far from the front lines, which are more than 4,300 km (2,670 miles) away.

    That is beyond the range of the long-range strike drones or ballistic missiles Ukraine has in its arsenal, so required a special scheme to get the drones close enough to their targets.

    Photographs shared with Reuters by the Ukrainian security official showed dozens of short-range quadrocopter drones piled up in an industrial facility. The official said these were the same devices used in the attack.

    Other images shared by the official showed the wooden sheds with their metal roofing panels removed, and the drones sitting in the cavities between roof beams.

    Separate video posted on Russian Telegram channels, which has not been verified by Reuters, appeared to show matching sheds on the back of a truck.

    The roof panels can be seen lying on the ground next to the truck, and the video footage shows at least two drones rising out of the top of the sheds and flying off.

    The Russian online media outlet that posted the video, Baza, said in a caption that it was filmed in the district near the Belaya air base.

    The Irkutsk region air base hosts Tupolev Tu-22M supersonic long-range strategic bombers, a type of aircraft that has been used to launch missiles against targets in Ukraine.

    The operation, according to the Ukrainian security official, was personally overseen by Zelenskiy and Vasyl Maliuk, head of the SBU domestic intelligence agency.

    If confirmed, the strikes would be the most damaging Ukrainian drone attack of the war, and would be a significant setback for Moscow.

    The source shared video footage shot from a drone, saying it showed one of the strikes. The images showed several large aircraft, some of which appeared to be Tu-95 strategic bombers, on fire.

    (Reuters)

  • MIL-OSI China: Russia says Ukraine launched drone attacks on multiple Russian airfields

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

    Ukraine on Sunday carried out drone attacks targeting airfields in multiple Russian regions, the Russian Defense Ministry said.

    According to the ministry, the attacks were repelled in the regions of Ivanovo, Ryazan, and Amur. In the Murmansk and Irkutsk regions, drones launched from areas near the airfields caused several aircraft to catch fire.

    The ministry added that there were no casualties among military personnel or civilian staff. 

    MIL OSI China News –

  • MIL-OSI China: Zheng, Sabalenka book quarterfinal meeting at Roland Garros

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

    Zheng Qinwen returns a shot during the women’s singles 4th round match between Liudmila Samsonova of Russia and Zheng Qinwen of China at the French Open tennis tournament at Roland Garros, Paris, France, June 1, 2025. [Photo/Xinhua]

    Olympic gold medalist Zheng Qinwen has set up a quarterfinal clash with top seed Aryna Sabalenka at the French Open.

    Less than a year after her historic Olympic triumph on the Paris clay, the Chinese sensation recorded her best result at Roland Garros, reaching the quarterfinals with a 7-6 (5), 1-6, 6-3 victory over Russia’s Liudmila Samsonova on Sunday.

    The Australian Open finalist battled for nearly three hours to secure the win.

    The first set stayed on serve through six games before the players exchanged breaks in the next four. Tied at 5-5 in the tiebreak, Zheng held her nerve, striking a patient inside-in forehand winner and forcing Samsonova to net a shot to close out the grueling 76-minute set.

    Samsonova responded strongly in the second, breaking Zheng twice and serving out the set. Zheng struggled with the Russian’s wide angles and squandered seven break point opportunities.

    Regrouping in the final set, Zheng broke Samsonova in the sixth game when the Russian sent a backhand down the line long.

    Serving for the match at 5-3, the 22-year-old Zheng fell behind 0-30 but reeled off four straight points, sealing victory after a forehand error from Samsonova.

    “I am super happy, honestly,” Zheng said. “There are not many words that can describe my emotions, because I’ve been trying every year, and that’s the real first time for me to be in quarterfinals in Roland Garros.”

    Sabalenka continued her consistency at the majors with a 7-5, 6-3 win over American 16th seed Amanda Anisimova to reach her third straight French Open quarterfinal.

    Sabalenka won her first six meetings with Zheng, including the 2024 Australian Open final. However, Zheng earned her first victory over the Belarusian last month – on clay – in Rome.

    “It’s always tough matches against her,” Sabalenka noted. “She’s a great player. Of course, I expect a great battle, and I’m super excited to face her in the quarterfinals, and I want to get my revenge. I want to get this win after Rome, so I’m happy to face her in the quarters.”

    Four-time winner Iga Swiatek had to dig deep to extend her 24-match winning streak in Paris, overcoming No. 12 seed Elena Rybakina 1-6, 6-3, 7-5.

    “It means a lot,” said the fifth-seeded Pole. “I think I needed that kind of win to feel these feelings that I’m able to win under pressure, and even if it’s not going the right way, you know, still turn the match around to win it.”

    Swiatek will next face Ukraine’s Elina Svitolina, who outplayed Italian fourth seed Jasmine Paolini 4-6, 7-6 (6), 6-1.

    On the men’s side, reigning champion Carlos Alcaraz clinched a hard-fought 7-6 (8), 6-3, 4-6, 6-4 victory over American Ben Shelton after three hours and 19 minutes on Court Philippe Chatrier to reach his fourth straight quarterfinal in Paris.

    “Today I fought against myself, against the mind,” second seed Alcaraz said. “I just tried to calm myself. In some moments I was mad, I was angry with myself. Talking not really good things, but I am really happy to not let those thoughts play against me. I tried to calm myself down, and I tried to keep going. That is what I tried.”

    The Spaniard will next face Tommy Paul, after the 12th seed defeated Australia’s Alexei Popyrin 6-3, 6-3, 6-3.

    Italy’s Lorenzo Musetti brushed aside Holger Rune of Denmark 7-5, 3-6, 6-3, 6-2 to set up a last-eight meeting with American Frances Tiafoe, who overcame Daniel Altmaier of Germany 6-3, 6-4, 7-6 (4).

    MIL OSI China News –

  • Russia and Ukraine step up the war on eve of peace talks

    Source: Government of India

    Source: Government of India (4)

    On the eve of peace talks, Ukraine and Russia sharply ramped up the war with one of the biggest drone battles of their conflict, a Russian highway bridge blown up over a passenger train and an ambitious attack on nuclear-capable bombers deep in Siberia.

    After days of uncertainty over whether Ukraine would even attend, President Volodymyr Zelenskiy said Defence Minister Rustem Umerov would meet Russian officials at the second round of direct peace talks in Istanbul on Monday.

    The first round of the talks more than a week ago yielded the biggest prisoner exchange of the war – but no sense of any consensus on how to halt the fighting.

    Amid talk of peace, though, there was much war.

    At least seven people were killed and 69 injured when a highway bridge in Russia’s Bryansk region, neighbouring Ukraine, was blown up over a passenger train heading to Moscow with 388 people on board. No one has claimed responsibility.

    Ukraine attacked Russian nuclear-capable long-range bombers at a military base deep in Siberia on Sunday, a Ukrainian intelligence official said, the first such attack so far from the front lines more than 4,300 km (2,670 miles) away.

    Ukraine’s domestic intelligence service, the SBU, acknowledged it carried out the attack, codenamed “Operation Spider’s Web,” planned for more than a year and a half.

    The intelligence official said the operation involved hiding explosive-laden drones inside the roofs of wooden sheds and loading them onto trucks that were driven to the perimeter of the air bases.

    A total of 41 Russian warplanes were hit, the official said. The SBU estimated the damage at $7 billion and said Russia had lost 34% of its strategic cruise missile carriers at its main airfields.

    Zelenskiy expressed delight at the “absolutely brilliant outcome,” and noted 117 drones had been used in the attack.

    “And an outcome produced by Ukraine independently,” he wrote. “This is our longest-range operation.”

    RUSSIA SAYS AIRCRAFT FIRES PUT OUT

    A Ukrainian government official told Reuters that Ukraine did not notify the United States of the attack in advance.

    Russia’s Defence Ministry acknowledged on the Telegram messaging app that Ukraine had launched drone strikes against Russian military airfields across five regions on Sunday.

    Air attacks were repelled in all but two regions — Murmansk in the far north and Irkutsk in Siberia – where “the launch of FPV drones from an area in close proximity to airfields resulted in several aircraft catching fire.”

    The fires were extinguished without casualties. Some individuals involved in the attacks had been detained, the ministry said.

    Russia launched 472 drones at Ukraine overnight, Ukraine’s air force said, the highest nightly total of the war. Russia had also launched seven missiles, the air force said.

    Russia’s military reported new drone attacks into Sunday evening, listing 53 attacks intercepted in a period of less than two hours, including 34 over the border Kursk region. Debris from destroyed drones triggered residential fires.

    Russia said it had advanced deeper into the Sumy region of Ukraine, and open source pro-Ukrainian maps showed Russia took 450 square km of Ukrainian land in May, its fastest monthly advance in at least six months.

    U.S. President Donald Trump has demanded Russia and Ukraine make peace and he has threatened to walk away if they do not – potentially pushing responsibility for supporting Ukraine onto the shoulders of European powers – which have far less cash and much smaller stocks of weapons than the United States.

    According to Trump envoy Keith Kellogg, the two sides will in Turkey present their respective documents outlining their ideas for peace terms, though it is clear that after three years of intense war, Moscow and Kyiv remain far apart.

    Russia’s lead negotiator, presidential adviser Vladimir Medinsky, was quoted by TASS news agency as saying the Russian side had received a memorandum from Ukraine on a settlement.

    Zelenskiy has complained for days that Russia had failed to provide a memorandum with its proposals.

    Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov spoke to U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio on prospects for a settlement and the forthcoming talks in Turkey, Lavrov’s ministry said.

    Putin ordered tens of thousands of troops to invade Ukraine in February 2022 after eight years of fighting in eastern Ukraine between Russian-backed separatists and Ukrainian troops. The United States says over 1.2 million people have been killed and injured in the war since 2022.

    In June last year, Putin set out opening terms for an immediate end to the war: Ukraine must drop its NATO ambitions and withdraw its troops from the territory of four Ukrainian regions claimed and mostly controlled by Russia.

    According to a copy of the Ukrainian document seen by Reuters with a proposed roadmap for a lasting peace, there will be no restrictions on Ukraine’s military strength after a deal is struck. Nor will there be international recognition of Russian sovereignty over parts of Ukraine taken by Moscow’s forces, and reparations for Ukraine.

    The document also stated that the current front line will be the starting point for negotiations about territory.

    (Reuters)

  • Swiatek digs herself out of deep hole, Alcaraz powers on at French Open

    Source: Government of India

    Source: Government of India (4)

    Four-time champion Iga Swiatek clawed her way back from the brink to reach the French Open quarter-finals by defeating her claycourt nemesis Elena Rybakina while men’s title holder Carlos Alcaraz also went through after a tough workout on Sunday.

    Fifth seed Swiatek looked out of sorts as she trailed 6-1 2-0 on Court Philippe Chatrier, leaving the crowd stunned. But Swiatek found her groove and some grit to prevail 1-6 6-3 7-5.

    Her final opponent from last year, Jasmine Paolini, was on the wrong end of another last-16 clash against 13th seed Elina Svitolina of Ukraine, the Italian wasting three match points in a 4-6 7-6(6) 6-1 defeat.

    Svitolina will provide the next test for Swiatek, who continues her quest to become the first female player since tennis turned professional to claim the singles’ title four times in a row at Roland Garros.

    The only women to win the singles at Roland Garros in four straight years were Jeanne Matthey from 1909-12 and Suzanne Lenglen from 1920-23 when only French players competed.

    Since tennis turned professional in 1968, Swiatek is one of three women with Monica Seles and Justine Henin to enjoy three consecutive triumphs in Paris and on Sunday it looked like her quest for a fourth straight was going to crash to a halt.

    The 12th-seeded Rybakina made a bullet start, putting Swiatek on the back foot with some powerful baseline play and racing to a 5-0 lead, threatening to inflict on the former world number one her first bagel at a Grand Slam.

    “It was as if I was playing (men’s world number one and heavy hitter) Jannik Sinner,” Swiatek joked.

    DOUBLE FAULTS

    If there was any sign that Swiatek was rattled, it was her three double faults at 2-2 in the second set.

    The fifth seed still held though and it proved to be a turning point as she went on to break to love and move 4-2 up, bagging 10 consecutive points in the process to send the clash into a decider.

    At 4-4, with Rybakina serving at 15-40, the Kazakh appeared to have double-faulted on break point.

    Both players were walking towards their benches when chair umpire Kader Nouni’s deep voice overruled the line judge’s call.

    The reversal offered Rybakina an unexpected lifeline as the air filled with electricity.

    Swiatek later saved a game point with a blistering forehand winner, but it was Rybakina who ultimately secured the crucial hold, shifting the weight of expectation squarely onto her opponent’s shoulders.

    Swiatek cooled down and held, then broke and finished it off on the second match point before unleashing a huge scream and bumping her chest in a mix of released anger and relief.

    “In the first set, with her playing like that I felt I did not have a single chance,” said Swiatek, who had lost to Rybakina in their two previous encounters on clay.

    “Using the top spin was the plan from the beginning but I did not feel she gave me the space to do that. But I’m happy that I was patient enough to stay in the game and use any opportunity that came to me.”

    Elsewhere in the top half of the draw, Olympic champion Zheng Qinwen battled on, the Chinese eighth seed overcoming Russia’s Liudmila Samsonova 7-6(5) 1-6 6-3, with a potential clash against world number one Aryna Sabalenka looming.

    In the men’s draw, Carlos Alcaraz etched his name deeper in clay by overcoming American Ben Shelton 7-6(8) 6-3 4-6 6-4 for his 100th tour-level win on the surface to reach the quarter-finals for a fourth successive year.

    Victory was far from simple and Alcaraz said he fought against himself in the mind.

    “I just tried to calm myself. In some moments I was mad, I was angry with myself. Talking not really good things but I am happy to not let those thoughts play against me,” he added.

    “I tried to calm myself down and I tried to keep going.”

    Up next for him is world number 12 Tommy Paul, who blitzed Alexei Popyrin 6-3 6-3 6-3 to become the first American male player to reach the French Open quarter-finals in 22 years.

    Paul matched Andre Agassi’s run from 2003 after Americans on Saturday equalled a 40-year-old record with five women and three men reaching round four of the clay court Grand Slam.

    Another American in the last eight is Frances Tiafoe, who beat Germany’s Daniel Altmaier but will find himself with a mountain to climb in the next round as he takes on Italian craftsman Lorenzo Musetti.

    World number seven Musetti beat Denmark’s Holger Rune 7-5 3-6 6-3 6-2, showing his impressive palette of claycourt game. He has reached at least the semi-finals of all three Masters events on the slow surface this season.

    Sabalenka battled past 16th-seed Amanda Anisimova 7-5 6-3 to become the first player to reach the quarter-finals in 10 straight Grand Slams since American Serena Williams between 2014-17.

    The Belarusian squandered a total of seven matchpoints before seeing off Anisimova to set up a clash with Zheng.

    (Reuters)

  • MIL-OSI USA: Reps. Garamendi, Thompson Demand Answers from Pentagon Over Plans to Use Travis AFB as Deportation Center

    Source: United States House of Representatives – Congressman John Garamendi – Representing California’s 3rd Congressional District

    WASHINGTON, DC— This week, U.S. Representatives John Garamendi (D-CA-08) and Mike Thompson (D-CA-04) sent a joint letter to Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth following reports that the Trump Administration is considering Travis Air Force Base as an immigration detention facility:

    “It’s outrageous and inappropriate for the Trump Administration to use Travis Air Force Base as an immigration detention facility. Converting Travis into an immigration facility would undermine its vital national security mission. Travis Air Force Base has long been known as the ‘Gateway to the Pacific’ because it plays a crucial role in our national security by providing transportation for personnel and materiel around the world, particularly in support to Ukraine.” said the Representatives.

    “Unfortunately, this is not the President’s first attempt to inappropriately utilize Travis Air Force Base, hampering its critical mission. In February we uncovered that Trump was using Travis’s military aircraft to transport undocumented individuals at three times the cost of commercial flights. Later that month, we were able to stop his attempt to send trained medical personnel to the proposed migrant detention camp in Guantanamo Bay. Now, the President wants to turn Travis into a mass deportation center. All these instances compromise our national security and are simply absurd.

    “We are deeply alarmed by Trump’s blatant abuse of presidential power and his indifference to the rule of law. His utter disregard for the Posse Comitatus Act, which explicitly prohibits using active-duty military personnel for domestic law enforcement functions, is gravely concerning.

    “We will continue Congress’s oversight role and work to ensure the American people understand the unlawful, wasteful, and dangerous path Trump is pursuing.”

    This letter is the latest in a series of actions by Rep. Garamendi and Rep. Thompson to hold the Trump Administration accountable for misusing military resources in immigration enforcement.

    In January, Rep. Garamendi’s office sent a letter demanding answers from the Department of Defense regarding the use of C-17s and C-130s from Travis Air Force Base to deport undocumented immigrants. 

    In February, Rep. Garamendi followed up with another letter pressing the Trump Administration over plans to deploy medical professionals to a proposed migrant detention facility in Guantanamo Bay. The Department of Defense recently responded to that inquiry, but Rep. Garamendi’s office found the response inadequate.

    Read the full letter here and below.

    Pete Hegseth
    Secretary of Defense
    Office of the Secretary of Defense 
    1000 Defense Pentagon 
    Washington, DC 20301 

    Dear Secretary Hegseth, 

    We are deeply frustrated and gravely concerned by recent reports regarding the proposed use of Travis Air Force Base (AFB) as a migrant detention site. In our previous correspondence, we requested detailed assessments on the impact of this plan, including its effects on military resources, infrastructure, ongoing construction projects, and overall readiness. To date, these critical details remain unclear.

    While the federal government must address immigration challenges with humane and practical solutions, utilizing a military installation for civilian law enforcement and detention operations raises significant concerns about the misuse of military resources, operational readiness, and national security. The decision to use Travis AFB as a migrant detention center would both constitute a dangerous militarization of immigration enforcement and unnecessarily degrade military readiness.

    Travis AFB plays a critical role in national security and is responsible for the global transportation of personnel and material. Whether providing aid to Ukraine or transporting personnel and equipment into the Pacific, Travis AFB must maintain its readiness to respond to global crises.

    Additionally, military personnel’s involvement in civilian detention and law enforcement contradicts established legal frameworks, including the Posse Comitatus Act, which restricts military engagement in civilian law enforcement. Assigning resources toward immigration enforcement risks blurring this crucial distinction and setting a concerning precedent for the use of military installations for purposes beyond their intended scope.

    We demand answers from the Department of Defense to the following inquiries, no later than 30 days after receipt:

    1. Has the Department assessed the potential impact on Travis AFB’s infrastructure, specifically regarding water and energy, should a detention site be established at the base?
    2. How will diverting space and resources for a detention center at Travis AFB impact ongoing or future operations?
    3. How many migrants does the Department expect to detain at Travis AFB?
    4. Does the Department plan to reassign military personnel at Travis AFB to assist in detention operations?
    5. How will the Department ensure military personnel are not performing law enforcement activities at this detention center?
    6. What authorized and appropriated funds are being diverted to build and maintain this detention center?

    We urge you to provide full transparency on how this decision will affect Travis AFB and to reconsider any action that might compromise military readiness and interfere with ongoing or future operations.

     ###

     

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: House Foreign Affairs Committee Ranking Member Meeks, Lofgren Send Letter to Secretary Lutnick on Multilateral Export Controls

    Source: United States House of Representatives – Congressman Gregory W Meeks (5th District of New York)

    Washington, D.C. – Representatives Gregory W. Meeks, Ranking Member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, and Zoe Lofgren, Ranking Member of the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology, sent a letter to Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick raising concerns over reports that the Department of Commerce may withdraw from critical multilateral agreements aimed at restricting access to critical technologies, like semiconductors and semiconductor manufacturing equipment (SME). The Members warned Secretary Lutnick that abandoning coordinating efforts with partners would make it harder to prevent the People’s Republic of China (PRC) from accessing cutting-edge technology and undermine America’s national security. 
     
    The full text of the letter can be found below. A PDF copy of the letter can be found here.  

    Dear Secretary Lutnick,

    We are concerned by recent reports indicating the Department of Commerce may seek to pull back from critical multilateral agreements and engagements with allies and partners that are designed to coordinate policies to restrict the People’s Republic of China (PRC) from accessing cutting-edge technologies. While it’s important to prevent U.S. technology from powering the PRC’s military, a coordinated approach with partners and allies is necessary in critical technology areas such as advanced semiconductors and semiconductor manufacturing equipment (SME), to prevent the PRC from developing critical capabilities that are detrimental to our national security. 

    To ensure the United States continues to outpace the PRC on semiconductors and SME, we have worked on a bipartisan basis to facilitate a domestic innovation and manufacturing ecosystem while controlling our adversary’s ability to access advanced technologies. We helped to pass the bipartisan CHIPS and Science Act of 2022, sweeping legislation that sought to reinvigorate U.S. leadership in science and technology and included an investment of $52.7 billion designed to help reshore U.S. semiconductor manufacturing capacity. We also recognize the need for a defensive strategy to protect our economic and national security. Both the Trump and Biden Administrations have placed restrictions on PRC entities from purchasing certain high-end semiconductor chips and SME technologies.  We believe these export controls were necessary and remain so.

    However, U.S. export controls alone are not sufficient because other countries also manufacture advanced semiconductors and associated equipment and tools that they can sell to the PRC. While the previous administration achieved some success with multilateral agreements with the Netherlands and Japan on certain SME controls,  those controls would have been far more successful in constraining the PRC if they were coordinated from the start. To this day these trilateral controls remain misaligned in key ways, from a lack of end use controls to different approaches to the denial of licensing.

    We recognize that organizing these coalitions can be challenging, but working with allies and partners achieves real results. The United States assembled a coalition of nearly 40 nations to coordinate controls against Russia after its invasion of Ukraine. We urge you to continue to engage with our partners and allies to build a similar coalition focused on the PRC. This can only be accomplished through direct and sustained diplomacy, which while not always as fast as we would like, is the only effective option in the long competition with the PRC.

    The Commerce Department has an opportunity to demonstrate strength and support the U.S. manufacturing base by coordinating more plurilateral controls, not less. With Russia stalling progress in the four large multilateral regimes, we urge you to seek out small coalitions of countries that have market-share in particular critical technology sectors. In the case of semiconductors, for instance, we should be broadening coordination beyond Japan and the Netherlands to include South Korea, Taiwan, and others. Initiatives and fora, such as the Multilateral Action on Sensitive Technologies (MAST) and the U.S.-E.U. Trade and Technology Council (TTC), can help advance such coordination while furthering U.S. global leadership and interests on standards development, technology transfer, trade, and many other multinational issues.

    We are worried that if the United States goes it alone or attempts to bully our partners, they will increasingly hedge to the PRC instead of working with the United States. Disengaging from multilateral dialogues and initiatives could provide an excuse for key governments not to cooperate with our controls. In response to President Trump’s tariffs, President Ursula von der Leyen of the European Commission has called for strengthening European-PRC relations.  In March, the Dutch company ASML announced it would be building a facility in China—a decision that runs counter to U.S. interests and could only have been made with European government support.  Last month, the PRC engaged in its first multilateral economic dialogue with Japan and South Korea in five years—seeking a regional partnership among the three nations to weather the trade policies of the United States.

    Finally, we caution against a unilateral approach that overly relies upon the foreign direct product rule (FDPR) to extend U.S. jurisdiction to foreign-produced items. While the Department should continue to exercise this authority as a last resort, abuse of the rule may further weaken our standing with allies and partners and result in the removal of U.S. suppliers from major global supply chains in the long run, which would be disastrous for our economy and our ability to outcompete the PRC on critical technologies. A better path would be to coordinate controls with other partners and help them build enforcement capacity, so the Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS) does not have to monitor and police millions of transactions alone. We would be willing partners in ensuring that BIS has the tools and resources to make U.S. controls more effective.

    We are deeply concerned about the harms that will occur to U.S. interests if the United States walks away from multilateral approaches. We urge the Department to continue multistakeholder dialogues to bring our allies along in aligning their export controls with ours, using appropriate leverage available to you. Given the critical importance of this matter to both domestic and foreign affairs, we request that you provide us answers to the following questions by June 5, 2025:

    • What is the Department’s current policy with regards to participation in multilateral councils and forums, including MAST, TTC, multilateral agreements, and plurilateral agreements such as the U.S.-Japan-South Korea trilateral agreement?
    • What steps is the Department taking to coordinate with our allies and partners on export controls on critical technologies, such as semiconductors and SME?
    • To what extent will the Department continue to take into account foreign availability as it designs and coordinates its controls?
    • What additional staffing, resources, or authorities does the Department need to more effectively coordinate with partners on controls on technology entering the PRC market?

    We would appreciate a briefing from your staff to better understand how you are approaching these questions.

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI United Kingdom: New munitions factories and long-range weapons to back nearly 2000 jobs under Strategic Defence Review

    Source: United Kingdom – Executive Government & Departments

    Press release

    New munitions factories and long-range weapons to back nearly 2000 jobs under Strategic Defence Review

    Procurement of up to 7,000 UK-built long-range weapons and £1.5 billion to build at least six munitions and energetics factories.

    • Procurement of up to 7,000 UK-built long-range weapons and £1.5 billion to build at least six munitions and energetics factories.
    • Work to create more than 1,000 new jobs and support around 800 more across the UK, driving defence as an engine for economic growth and supporting the Plan for Change.
    • Delivers the Strategic Defence Review’s focus on warfighting readiness to deter and follows historic uplift in defence spending.

    The UK will build at least six new munitions and energetics factories and thousands more long-range weapons to strengthen Britain’s Armed Forces and create new jobs across the country.

    Through the Strategic Defence Review – published in the coming days – the UK’s defence and deterrence is being bolstered with thousands of long-range weapons and a new £1.5 billion government investment in munitions and energetics factories.

    Together the investment will back around 1,800 highly-skilled jobs across the UK, putting money in the pockets of working people, and supporting the government’s Plan for Change by driving growth in every region and nation.

    The SDR recommends creating an ‘always on’ munitions production capacity in the UK allowing production to be scaled up at speed if needed. It says the MOD should also lay the industrial foundations for an uplift in munitions stockpiles to meet the demand of high-tempo warfare.

    Taking the lessons from Ukraine which shows that our military is only as strong as the industry that stands behind it, the measures will boost British jobs while improving the warfighting readiness of both British Armed Forces and industry.

    The additional funding will see UK munitions spend hit £6 billion this Parliament. It follows the Prime Minister’s historic commitment to increase defence spending to 2.5% of GDP, recognising the critical importance of military readiness in an era of heightened global uncertainty. 

    Commitments include:

    • £1.5 billion in an “always on” pipeline for munitions and building at least 6 new energetics and munitions factories in the UK. Creating more than 1,000 skilled manufacturing jobs, the factories will produce munitions and energetics, which are key components of weapons, including propellants, explosives, and pyrotechnics.

    • Up to 7,000 UK-built long-range weapons for the UK Armed Forces, supporting around 800 defence jobs.The lessons from Ukraine demonstrate the importance of long-range weaponry and boosting our military capabilities.

    The SDR sets a path for the next decade and beyond to transform defence and make the UK secure at home and strong abroad. It ends the hollowing out of our Armed Forces and will also drive innovation, jobs and growth across the country, allowing the UK to lead in a stronger NATO.

    Defence Secretary, John Healey MP said:

    The hard-fought lessons from Putin’s illegal invasion of Ukraine show a military is only as strong as the industry that stands behind them. 

    We are strengthening the UK’s industrial base to better deter our adversaries and make the UK secure at home and strong abroad. 

    We will embrace the Strategic Defence Review; making defence an engine for economic growth and boosting skilled jobs in every nation and region as part of our Government’s Plan for Change.

    Chancellor of the Exchequer Rachel Reeves said:

    A strong economy needs a strong national defence, and investing in weaponry and munitions and backing nearly 2,000 jobs across Britain in doing so is proof the two go hand-in-hand.

    We are delivering both security for working people in an uncertain world and good jobs, putting more money in people’s pockets as part of our Plan for Change.

    The new investments will form an ‘always-on’ approach for priority munitions. They will provide a steady drumbeat of investment to industry sustaining a thriving defence industrial base that drives growth and jobs to deliver on the Plan for Change, while strengthening the UK’s commitment to NATO. 

    The funding will help transform the UK’s Armed Forces readiness and ability to endure in prolonged campaigns, providing the industrial foundations needed to support our Armed Forces in warfare, as demonstrated by the conflict in Ukraine.

    Updates to this page

    Published 1 June 2025

    MIL OSI United Kingdom –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Joint Statement from U.S. Senators Graham and Blumenthal on Visit to France

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for South Carolina Lindsey Graham
    WASHINGTON – U.S. Senators Lindsey Graham (R-South Carolina) and Richard Blumenthal (D-Connecticut) today made this joint statement on their visit to Paris, France. 
    “Congratulations to Paris Saint-Germain for winning the Champions league and making history. We learned firsthand that the French are good at soccer and have amazing endurance when it comes to celebrating. Also during our time in Paris, we had worthwhile meetings with France’s Ministers of Foreign Affairs and Finance and President Macron’s national security advisor, and a lengthy and productive phone call with President Macron. 
    “As authors of the bone-crushing Russia sanctions bill that now has 82 Senate cosponsors, we assured President Macron and his team that we believe Putin is playing games regarding peace and is actually preparing for a military offensive in the late summer or early fall. 
    “President Macron shares the view that Putin’s behavior demonstrates that he is not interested in peace. Macron is also very determined to unite Europe, working in coordination with the U.S., to change the calculation for Putin. Importantly, we all agreed that if China and India stopped buying cheap Russian oil, Putin’s war machine would grind to a halt. 
    “President Macron supports lowering the price cap for Russian oil, which will hit Putin in the wallet, and working with his team, he committed to try to deliver a forceful message to China and India regarding their financial backing of Putin’s war. It is our hope that Europe will move forward together on lowering the price caps, and join together to send a clear message to China and India that they must change their behavior. 
    “Europe and the United States are holding all the cards and can make meaningful efforts to change China and India’s behavior. 
    “We are also hopeful Europe will up their game regarding the seizure of frozen assets of those who are benefiting off of Putin’s illegal invasion. President Macron was very open to that idea. 
    “We also discussed Russia’s kidnapping of approximately 20,000 Ukrainian children over the course of the war.  President Macron has been a clear, moral voice against this barbaric kidnapping and other Russian atrocities. 
    “France has been terrific in supporting Ukraine. In many ways, this has been President Macron’s finest hour. 
    “We will be pushing the Senate to take action by using the expedited Rule 14 process to bring the sanctions bill to the floor. By the G7 summit, we hope to have sanctions put in place —  in coordination with Europe —  to deliver an unequivocal message to China. 
    “The theme of this engagement was that we appreciate President Trump’s earnest efforts to bring about peace and entice Putin to come to the table. It is our view Putin is not responding in kind, he is not interested in peace and that he plans to continue to dismember Ukraine. We appreciate that President Zelensky will send a delegation to Istanbul, which is a clear sign that he is earnestly seeking peace. Unfortunately, we believe Monday’s meeting will result in another demand by Russia that will be unrealistic. 
    “An end of the war that rewards Putin’s aggression will create a ripple effect around the world, which will be catastrophic in every corner. Bad actors will be emboldened, and those who want to align with the West will be deterred.
    “If we can have a just and honorable peace, it will reset the world in all the right ways. History is watching.”

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI Russia: Ukraine and Russia to resume peace talks in Istanbul on June 2

    Translation. Region: Russian Federal

    Source: People’s Republic of China in Russian – People’s Republic of China in Russian –

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

    ISTANBUL, June 1 (Xinhua) — Ukraine and Russia will resume talks in Istanbul on June 2 as part of ongoing diplomatic efforts to end the conflict, Turkish authorities announced Sunday.

    According to a statement from the Turkish presidential office, the meeting of the delegations is scheduled for 13:00 local time /10:00 GMT/ at the Ciragan Palace, located on the European side of Istanbul on the shore of the Bosphorus Strait.

    The previous round of direct talks between the parties took place in this city on May 16, the parties held a face-to-face meeting for the first time since March 2022. However, it was not possible to reach an agreement on a ceasefire. –0–

    MIL OSI Russia News –

  • MIL-OSI Global: Blind box toys are booming: Are they just child’s play or something more concerning?

    Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Eugene Y. Chan, Associate Professor of Marketing, Toronto Metropolitan University

    Collectible figurines on display at Pop Mart in Ivano-Frankivsk, Ukraine, on April 29, 2025. (Shutterstock)

    If you’ve seen videos of people tearing into tiny toy packages online, or noticed teens obsessing over pastel-coloured figurines at the mall, you’ve probably encountered the global craze for blind box toys.

    These small collectibles — usually figures of cartoonish characters — are sold in sealed packaging that hides which specific item is inside. You might get the one you want, or you might not. That uncertainty is part of the thrill.

    Unlike traditional toys, these figures are marketed as collectibles. Many are part of themed series, with some designs labelled as “rare” or “secret,” appearing in as few as one in every 144 boxes. This sense of exclusivity fuels repeat purchases and has spawned a resale market where rare figures can command hundreds of dollars.

    Popular among children and adults alike, blind box toys have grown into a billion-dollar industry. One of the more popular brands is Pop Mart, a Chinese toy company founded in 2010 known for its collectible designer toys sold in mystery packs.

    Gen Z consumers, in particular, have embraced blind box toys both as a nostalgic pastime and as a form of legitimate collecting. The proliferation of unboxing videos on platforms like TikTok and YouTube, where creators open dozens of blind boxes on camera, has added to their appeal.

    For many fans, these toys offer more than just cuteness: they also provide suspense, surprise and a rush of dopamine with every box opened. But how did this niche product become a global obsession?

    From Tokyo streets to western malls

    The origins of blind box toys trace back to East Asia. Capsule toy vending machines called gashapon originated in Japan in the 1960s. By the 1980s, they had become a cultural fixture. These machines dispense small toys in opaque plastic balls, with customers never quite sure which item they’ll receive.

    In the early 2010s, Chinese companies like Pop Mart adapted the gashapon model for the mainstream retail space. Instead of vending machines, they began selling artist-designed vinyl toys in blind boxes at dedicated boutiques.

    A tourist uses a gashapon machine in Osaka, Japan, in 2024. Gashapon machines are similar to the coin-operated toy vending machines seen outside grocery stores and other retailers in North America.
    (Shutterstock)

    Pop Mart’s success helped transform the blind box into a mainstream commercial phenomenon. Characters like Molly, Skullpanda and Dimoo became instant hits, combining Japanese kawaii esthetics with western pop art sensibilities.

    Pop Mart figures have since developed a cult-like following. Many consumers treat the toys as affordable art objects, displayed in cabinets, on purses or traded online.

    Today, blind box retail stores have expanded globally from Asia to Europe and North America. In October 2024, Pop Mart opened its first store in the Midwestern United States, located on Chicago’s Magnificent Mile at The Shops at North Bridge. The store offers exclusive products and taps into the growing demand for collectibles among American consumers.

    The psychology behind the mystery

    What makes blind box toys so hard to resist?

    Their success relies on a psychological principle known as variable-ratio reinforcement — the same reward pattern that makes slot machines so addictive.

    You never know exactly when you’ll score the item you’re after, but the possibility that the next box might contain it keeps people coming back. This unpredictability keeps people engaged, especially when the potential reward is framed as rare or valuable.

    Cconsumer psychology research also suggests that anticipation plays a major role. Studies show that dopamine, the brain’s reward chemical, spikes not just when we get what we want, but when we anticipate it. The sealed packaging, the suspense of unwrapping and the hope for a rare figure all heighten this effect.

    Sonny Angels on display in a store in Shenzhen, China, in March 2019.
    (Shutterstock)

    For younger collectors, the excitement of “the chase” can foster compulsive buying habits. This effect is amplified by the social influence of watching unboxings online or seeing friends complete their sets, and it becomes a powerful loop.

    Even when buyers don’t get the figure they want, the sunk cost fallacy — the feeling that they’ve already invested too much time or money to walk away — keeps them buying more.

    The hidden costs of blind boxes

    As blind box toys surge in popularity, they have drawn criticism from consumer advocates, psychologists and environmentalists alike.

    Some worry that blind boxes normalize gambling-like behaviours, especially among children. The randomness, excitement and promise of rare rewards closely mirror the mechanisms behind loot boxes in video games — another product that has sparked global concern over youth exposure to gambling psychology.

    Several countries, including Belgium and the Netherlands, have regulated loot boxes under gambling laws. Blind boxes, though currently unregulated, may be next in line for scrutiny.



    Read more:
    Blind bags: how toy makers are making a fortune with child gambling

    There are also environmental concerns. Many blind box toys come in excessive packaging — plastic wraps, foil bags, cardboard boxes — most of which is discarded immediately. The collectibles themselves are often made of non-recyclable plastics, raising questions about sustainability in an era of rising consumer awareness over waste.

    Even among adult fans, some critics question whether blind boxes are designed less to bring joy and more to trigger compulsive consumption. The joy of collecting, they argue, is increasingly overshadowed by the mechanics of engineered desire.

    What should we make of the blind box boom?

    Blind box toys are not inherently harmful, and for many, they’re a source of fun, nostalgia and self-expression. They also offer an accessible way for consumers to engage with designer art in a collectible, miniature form, as many of them are created by individual artists.

    But blind box toys also raise deeper questions about how modern marketing leverages psychological triggers associated with gambling, especially when it comes to children.

    As these toys continue to gain traction in the West, it’s worth asking more critical questions, like: are we buying into mystery or are we being sold obsession and compulsion?

    The blind box trend reflects broader shifts in how products are marketed, how value is perceived and how consumer behaviour is shaped in a digital, attention-driven economy. Understanding the forces at play may be the first step toward more informed — and perhaps more mindful — collecting.

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

    – ref. Blind box toys are booming: Are they just child’s play or something more concerning? – https://theconversation.com/blind-box-toys-are-booming-are-they-just-childs-play-or-something-more-concerning-257611

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • Bridges collapse in 2 Russian regions bordering Ukraine, 7 dead

    Source: Government of India

    Source: Government of India (4)

    Two bridges collapsed in different Russian regions bordering Ukraine, derailing trains and killing at least seven people and injuring dozens, Russian authorities said early on Sunday, while a Russian politician called Kyiv a “terrorist enclave”.

    Reuters could not independently confirm whether the incidents in the neighbouring regions were related. The areas in Russia’s south have been subject to frequent attacks by Ukraine during the war that Russia started with its full-scale invasion more than three years ago.

    Seven people were killed and 69 injured when a highway bridge collapsed onto railway tracks, derailing an approaching train in the Bryansk region late on Saturday, Russian emergency ministry and regional officials said.

    Russia’s Railways initially posted on the Telegram messaging app that the Bryansk bridge collapse was the result of an “illegal interference in the operation of transport”, but the post was later removed.

    Bryansk Governor Alexander Bogomaz said on Telegram that 47 people were hospitalised. Three children were among those injured with one in serious condition, he said.

    The collapse in the Kursk region occurred early on Sunday while a freight train was crossing the bridge, Alexander Khinshtein, acting governor of the region, and Russian Railways said on Telegram.

    “Part of the train fell onto a road underneath the bridge,” Khinshtein said. He added that the locomotive caught fire, which was quickly extinguished. One of the drivers sustained leg injuries, and he and the team operating the train were taken to a local hospital, Khinshtein added.

    He posted a photo of derailed carriages on a damaged bridge over a road.

    Andrei Klishas, a senior member of the Federation Council, Russia’s upper chamber of parliament, said on the Telegram messaging app that the incident in Bryansk shows that “Ukraine has long lost the attributes of a state and has turned into a terrorist enclave.”

    Russia’s Baza Telegram channel, which often publishes information from sources in the security services and law enforcement, reported, without providing evidence, that according to preliminary information, the Bryansk bridge had been blown up.

    Prominent Russian military blogger Semyon Pegov, who uses the name War Gonzo, called the Bryansk collapse “sabotage.”

    Since the war began in February 2022, there have been continued cross-border shelling, drone strikes and covert raids from Ukraine into the Bryansk, Kursk and Belgorod regions that border Ukraine.

    Russia’s Ministry of Emergency Situations said on Telegram that efforts to find and rescue victims in the Bryansk incident continued throughout the night, and that some 180 personnel were involved in the operation.

    Among those killed was the locomotive driver, Russia’s state news agencies reported, citing medics.

    Social media pictures and videos showed passengers trying to help others climb out of the Bryansk train’s damaged carriages in the dark and firefighters looking for ways to reach passengers.

    The train was going from the town of Klimovo to Moscow, Russian Railways said. It collided with the collapsed bridge in the area of a federal highway in the Vygonichskyi district of the Bryansk region, Bogomaz said. The district lies some 100 km (60 miles) from the border with Ukraine.

    U.S. President Donald Trump has urged Moscow and Kyiv to work together on a deal to end the war, and Russia has proposed a second round of face-to-face talks with Ukrainian officials in Istanbul on Monday.

    Ukraine has not committed to attending the talks, saying it first needed to see Russia’s proposals, while a leading U.S. senator warned Moscow it would be “hit hard” by new U.S. sanctions.

    (Reuters)

  • Operation Sindoor: India’s Military Doctrine of Offensive Defence

    Source: Government of India

    Source: Government of India (4)

    In the annals of India’s military history, Operation Sindoor marks a decisive departure from the doctrine of strategic restraint. Triggered by the barbaric Pahalgam terror attack that claimed the lives of Indian civilians and tourists, this operation was meticulously crafted as a calibrated military-political response. It did not seek territorial gain nor a prolonged conflict it was a limited, high-impact military reprisal meant to enforce deterrence, inflict punitive costs, and collapse the artificial distinction between so-called “non-state actors” and the Pakistani state that harbours, trains, and directs them. This operation represents a maturing Indian statecraft where kinetic power is exercised with precision, proportionality, and political clarity. India’s strategic objective was not war it was redefinition. By shifting the cost-benefit calculus of cross-border terrorism and signalling that every future provocation will invite asymmetric retaliation, Operation Sindoor has ushered in a new era in subcontinental geopolitics.

    Precision Strikes: Surgical, Not Symbolic

    The first phase of Operation Sindoor commenced in the early hours of May 7, 2025. Leveraging a composite air package of Rafale multirole fighters, Sukhoi-30MKIs, and Mirage-2000 aircraft, the Indian Air Force conducted precise, intelligence-led strikes deep inside Pakistani territory. These were not blind retaliations they were carefully selected targets identified through layered ISR (Intelligence, Surveillance, Reconnaissance) systems, including satellite imagery, HUMINT, and SIGINT.

    The use of SCALP missiles from Rafales and BrahMos supersonic missiles from air platforms ensured surgical delivery with minimal collateral damage. Terrorist enclaves in Bahawalpur, Muridke, and Kotli, Skardu etc., regions long known to host training camps, ammunition dumps, and communication nodes were decimated. Over 100 confirmed militant casualties, including senior leadership figures from proscribed outfits like Jaish-e-Mohammed and Lashkar-e-Taiba, marked a devastating blow to the Pakistani terror-industrial complex. What distinguished these strikes from past episodes was their surgical nature and strategic framing. India did not seek to provoke full-scale war, nor did it act in anger. It acted with method, legality, and legitimacy framing the strikes as a response to an act of war perpetrated through proxy actors by a complicit state. This legitimacy ensured global understanding, if not overt support.

    The Dogfight: Honouring the Fog of War

    Later that night, tensions escalated into an aerial dogfight over contested between two countries. Both sides scrambled assets, leading to a kinetic engagement involving BVR (Beyond Visual Range) and close-range exchanges. India lost some air assets, and so did Pakistan. However, all Indian pilots were accounted for, is a testament to India’s rapid SAR protocols, operational preparedness, and strong morale. The air engagement is a reminder that operations however well-planned carry risks. Air dominance is not simply about superior machines but real-time decision-making, jamming, radar countermeasures, and pilot skill. India emerged from the engagement with its credibility intact. The enemy was bloodied, morale hit, and escalation managed.

    Air Defence Triumph: Holding the Line

    On May 8 and 9, 2025, Pakistan attempted retaliatory missile strikes and indulged in drone warfare by Turkish drones but India’s integrated air defence network held firm. Systems like the indigenous Akash SAMs, S-400 Triumf batteries, L-70 anti-aircraft guns, and the command-and-control network Akashteer worked in seamless coordination to intercept and neutralize incoming aerial threats. These systems represented a layered shield—short, medium, and long-range defences working in tandem. Not many Indian casualties were reported across these two days. While it is tempting to credit hardware alone, this success was equally a victory for Indian military doctrine, training, radar discipline, and force synergy across the Army, Air Force, and strategic command. The S-400 system, sourced from Russia, showed its full battlefield integration with Indian command doctrine, while Akash and L-70 systems, developed by DRDO and BEL, demonstrated India’s growing self-reliance in air defence. These engagements proved that India is no longer reactive. It can now predict, pre-empt, and neutralize threats without waiting for external validation or international permission.

    Airbases Neutralized: A Blow to Pakistani Air Power

    The most daring component of Operation Sindoor came in the early hours of May 10, 2025. In a pre-dawn mission, India struck eleven Pakistani airbases with BrahMos cruise missiles and stand-off weapons. Airstrips, hardened aircraft shelters, radar systems, and command centers were targeted based on precise ISR data. These strikes disrupted the Pakistan Air Force’s sortie capability, grounded multiple squadrons, and paralyzed operational momentum.

    These weren’t merely punitive. They were strategic de-capacitation measures, designed to ensure that Pakistan could not sustain a second or third wave of escalation. Post-strike imagery, open-source analysis, and leaked intercepts confirm major damages at bases like Rahim Yar Khan, Sargodha, Bholari, Jacobabad & Nur Khan Airbase. Significant PAF infrastructure, including JF-17 hangars, SAAB Awacs, and early-warning systems, were taken offline.

    As per noted Defence & Security expert Shishir Gupta in HT, “India’s S-400 air defence system in Adampur went into action no less than 11 times during Operation Sindoor and destroyed a Pakistani SAAB-2000 airborne early warning system as far as 315 kilometres away deep in Pakistan”. He further goes on to report that “Indian Air Force also has proof of its missiles having downed one C-130 J medium lift aircraft, a JF-17 and two F-16 fighters on ground and in the air” & “..The Indian strikes took out a Chinese-made LY-80 air defence system using a HARPY kamikaze drone at Lahore, while an Indian missile took out the prized HQ-9 (Chinese version of S-300) at Malir in Karachi.”

    This phase also demonstrated India’s maturing offensive deterrence posture. The use of standoff missiles allowed deep strikes without exposing aircraft to enemy radar or engagement zones. The message was clear: India possesses both the will and the capability to cripple Pakistan’s retaliatory framework without boots on the ground.

    Redefining Deterrence: The End of “Plausible Deniability”

    Perhaps the most far-reaching impact of Operation Sindoor is the collapse of the false firewall Pakistan erected between its army and its jihadi proxies. For decades, GHQ Rawalpindi operated in the grey zone training, equipping, and deploying terrorists while pretending innocence. India, until now, often responded diplomatically, seeking proof and global condemnation. That model is now obsolete. By treating the Pahalgam attack as a state-sanctioned act of war, India has established a new doctrine: no differentiation between non-state actors and the state that shelters them. This strategic redefinition collapses the ambiguity that Pakistan exploited for decades and forces it to absorb the consequences of proxy warfare. This is more than retaliation it is deterrence by punishment. The world, too, is watching. While global powers may issue standard calls for restraint. The legitimacy of India’s counter-strikes is enhanced by its commitment to proportionality, non-targeting of civilian infrastructure, and avoidance of war escalation.

    Indus Waters Treaty in Abeyance: Weaponizing Asymmetry

    One of the boldest geopolitical moves during Operation Sindoor was India’s decision to place the Indus Waters Treaty (IWT) in abeyance. Long hailed as an example of transboundary cooperation, the IWT has persisted even through wars. However, in the face of repeated Pakistani provocation, it has become a one-sided symbol of Indian restraint. By moving to suspend water flows or delay data sharing and project clearances, India has signalled that economic levers are now part of the strategic toolkit. This asymmetric tool non-lethal but deeply consequential gives India leverage without inviting kinetic escalation. It allows New Delhi to exert economic, agricultural, and psychological pressure on Pakistan’s heartland in a prolonged conflict scenario. This step also sends a larger message: India will now integrate all dimensions of national power military, diplomatic, economic, technological into its response architecture.

    A Strategic Template for the Future

    Operation Sindoor is not just a successful operation it is a template. India has for the first time demonstrated where there was Rapid force mobilization with surgical precision, multi-platform integration of air, missile-based assets, Resilience and transparency in combat engagements, Defensive superiority using indigenous and imported systems, Asymmetric escalation through economic and hydrological tools and Geopolitical signalling without diplomatic fallout. This holistic approach marks India’s arrival as a mature regional power capable of defending its interests across the spectrum from grey-zone threats to full-spectrum deterrence. It is no longer about reactive diplomacy. India now leads with strength, speed, and clarity.

    Noted International Defence Expert, John Spencer in his Article, “India’s Wake-Up Call: Why US Defense Reform Must Match the Speed of Modern War”, in Small War Journal has quoted as below:

    “India’s overwhelming success demonstrated something more enduring than airpower. It validated a national defense doctrine built around efficient domestic industrial strength. And most significantly, it delivered a clear message to its strategic rival. Pakistan a Chinese proxy by armament, alignment, doctrine was completely outmatched. Its Chinese-made air defense systems could not stop, detect, or deter India’s precision strikes. In Sindoor, India didn’t just win. It demonstrated overwhelming military superiority against a Chinese-backed adversary.”

    Reflecting on the Brahmos strikes of Indian Russian joint venture and its integration with domestic Indian systems under Make in India Program, he goes on to highlight that, “In the skies over Pakistan, India didn’t just dominate. It redefined regional deterrence. India didn’t just talk about reform. It executed it. And it won. India has become a master of the physics of lethality. The United States can learn from their success and model some of their changes for its own needs. India’s success—and Ukraine’s innovation—should be a wake-up call. They are building the warfighting models of the future. The US is still operating with Cold War machinery and Gulf War assumptions.”

    Further in an Article dt 29th May 2029 on X, titled “India’s Operation Sindoor: A Battlefield Verdict on Chinese Weapons—And India’s Victory”, John Spencer goes on to write about India’s weapon systems used and exclaimed that:

     “India fought as a sovereign power wielding precision tool it designed, built, and deployed with unmatched battlefield control. Pakistan fought as a proxy force, dependent on Chinese hardware that was built for export, not for excellence. When challenged, these systems failed—exposing the strategic hollowness behind Islamabad’s defense posture. ….Operation Sindoor wasn’t just a military campaign. It was a technology demonstration, a market signal, and a strategic blueprint. India showed the world what self-reliance in modern warfare looks like and proved that “Atmanirbhar Bharat” works under fire.”

    Conclusion: Sindoor as a Strategic Line Drawn

    One of the articles written by Royal United Services Institute titled, “Calibrated Force: Operation Sindoor and the Future of Indian Deterrence”, on 21st May 2025 sums it up perfectly. It states that rather than serious analysis of India’s targeting methodology, command intent, or escalation thresholds, the western media coverage has focused instead on the air-to-air engagement that led to the probable loss of some Indian Air Assets. Undue prominence was given to the performance of specific platforms, with little regard for the broader operational context or the rules of engagement that shaped the encounter. Arguably more impressive than the operation’s reach was its restraint on the first day.

    The article on goes on say, “According to Indian officials, pilots operated under strict rules of engagement that prohibited initiating attacks on Pakistani aircraft or pre-emptively suppressing air defence systems. It suggests a political leadership determined to signal its intent with clarity: India was not interested in initiating a conflict with the Pakistani state, but rather in degrading a specific ecosystem of terrorist violence that exists in the country. In effect, India accepted heightened operational risk in pursuit of clear strategic messaging. Such discipline in the face of a capable adversary is neither automatic nor easy. Yet it may well have prevented a broader escalation spiral. That alone deserves more analytical attention than it has received”.

    There is a media narrative of Chinese experts in Bloomberg exulting on performance of Chinese platforms presents a distorted narrative as part of information warfare. The target here is to drown the Indian strategic success and overwhelming air-superiority of the Indian Airforce crippling Pakistani Airbases and infrastructure, taking out Chinese defence systems of which we have clear satellite imagery and proof. In any air-combat there are bound to be losses, the Americans have faced F-16 losses operated by Ukraine, American MQ-9 reaper drones were taken out by Houthis in Yemen, even the Chinese air defence systems of Pakistan were taken out by Indian Airforce in Operation Sindoor. Many of these narratives in international media are shaped by commercial interests of respective military-industrial complexes.

    However, what should matter is that the overall objective of targeted military operation carried out by India between 7th to 10th May 2025 has been achieved. Indian strategic objectives have been met without getting trapped into an elongated war like Vietnam, Afghanistan, Syria or Ukraine. Pakistan must remember that Operation Sindoor is not over yet and no amount of aid from IMF, World Bank, military aid from China (amounting to 80% its military hardware) or a Crypto deal with US corporations would be able to protect it from Indian response to state sponsored terrorism abetted by Pakistani military-intelligence apparatus.

    Operation Sindoor is a watershed in India’s military and geopolitical evolution. It transformed tragedy into a moment of clarity, demonstrating that the Indian state will no longer absorb terror as the cost of diplomacy. Every attack will now invite disproportionate retaliation measured not in rhetoric but in military and economic terms. By operationalizing deterrence, neutralizing terror nodes, blunting enemy retaliation, and avoiding escalation into war, India has delivered a sophisticated, high-impact campaign that redefines conflict dynamics in South Asia. The message is now loud and clear: There will be no safe havens. No immunity through proxies. And no peace without accountability. India has drawn a red line in blood and steel. Operation Sindoor thus showcases clinical execution of India’s military doctrine of Offensive Defence

     

  • MIL-OSI Global: Kyiv’s allies have lifted restrictions on Ukraine attacking targets inside Russia – here’s what that means for the war

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Matthew Powell, Teaching Fellow in Strategic and Air Power Studies, University of Portsmouth

    The frontlines in the Russo-Ukrainian conflict have largely been bogged down, with little significant movement on either side. It was reported recently that Russian troops had only advanced about 25 miles in the eastern sector near Donetsk in one year, at a huge cost in terms of casualties. As a result, both sides have sought different ways of trying to gain a strategic advantage over their opponent.

    Air power has long been a recognised way of restoring a degree of mobility to the battlefield. But in Ukraine, neither side has been able to achieve control of the air, thanks to the quality of their air defences. So instead, both sides are using drones for “tactical” (small-scale) effect.

    At this point, it’s worth focusing on the three levels of warfare: tactical, operational and strategic. The chart below, taken from the US Military Review, illustrates how these levels work – operating as a “distinct hierarchy with marginally overlapping areas between the strategic and the operational, and between the tactical and the operational”.

    The three levels of war: tactical, operational and strategic.
    Army University Press

    The tactical level is where small actions are planned and executed. At the operational level, major operations and campaigns are planned with a view to achieving strategic objectives. The strategic level involves longer-term ways to achieve the overarching political objectives of a conflict.

    Russia’s ability to deploy long-range missiles and longer-range drones (such as the Shahed 136) that can strike targets – both military and civilian – deep inside Ukraine, has given it a strategic advantage.

    There are two strategic aims to these strikes. The first is to reduce Ukraine’s capacity to produce military equipment through its domestic industrial base. The second is to target urban areas and civilian populations to undermine public morale – although how effective this is has long been a matter for debate.

    Advantage Russia

    The prohibition on Ukraine using weapons supplied by its allies to strike targets in Russia has put it at a considerable disadvantage – meaning that Ukraine’s military has been unable to exploit these weapons’ full potential. So, Russia has been able to build a considerable military/industrial base without threat of attack.

    But now, the decision to lift these restrictions by the UK, US and, most recently, Germany will allow Ukraine to attack a wider range of targets and create more strategic difficulties for Russian political and military leadership.

    In particular, it’s worth highlighting the recent statement by the German chancellor, Friedrich Merz, who announced on May 28 that Berlin would help Kyiv develop new long-range weapons that can hit targets in Russian territory.

    To what extent Ukraine will be able to exploit this greater latitude to attack targets inside Russia remains to be seen. But the prospect of long-range missiles being used against its cities – the German Taurus missiles have a range of more than 500km – could give Ukraine a degree of leverage in any fresh peace talks.

    The lifting of these restrictions is unlikely to make much difference on the ground for some time, though. While theoretically, Ukraine will be able to strike at some of Russia’s military production sites, Russia has dramatically overhauled its arms production capacity. Nato’s top US commander is reported to have recently told a Senate Armed Services Committee that Russia is “on track to build a stockpile three times greater than the United States and Europe combined”.

    No restrictions – for now

    It’s also worth noting that both the US and UK signalled their willingness to allow their long-range missiles to strike at missile launchers inside Russia late last year as a defensive measure – but on a limited scale and only using domestically produced weapons, in contrast to the attacks conducted by Russia.

    What is different in the most recent announcement is the lifting of restrictions on what can be targeted with weapons provided by western allies, rather than those domestically produced by the Ukrainian defence industry. This is an extension of an initial lifting of restrictions in late 2024
     by the US and UK, further broadening the targets that can be attacked.

    But the relaxation of these restrictions could be reversed very quickly if Ukraine launches large-scale strikes against civilian populations – which could generate highly adverse publicity for Ukraine and the countries that supplied the weapons.

    Russia’s targeting of Kyiv in recent weeks has been bitterly criticised by the US president, Donald Trump, who posted on his TruthSocial website recently: “[Vladimir Putin] has gone absolutely crazy. Needlessly killing a lot of people.”

    But Kyiv’s allies will also be wary of how Russia may react. Russia has always threatened dire consequences if Ukraine uses western-supplied weapons to launch attacks within Russia.

    Indeed, the political ramifications of the lifting of restrictions are likely to be more consequential than the military outcomes – for now, at least.

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

    – ref. Kyiv’s allies have lifted restrictions on Ukraine attacking targets inside Russia – here’s what that means for the war – https://theconversation.com/kyivs-allies-have-lifted-restrictions-on-ukraine-attacking-targets-inside-russia-heres-what-that-means-for-the-war-257841

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –