| The Maritime Security Forum is pleased to provide you with a product, in the form of a daily newsletter, through which we present the most relevant events and information on naval issues, especially those related to maritime security and other related areas. It aims to present a clear and concise assessment of the most recent and relevant news in this area, with references to sources of information. We hope that this newsletter will prove to be a useful resource for you, providing a comprehensive insight into the complicated context of the field for both specialists and anyone interested in the dynamics of events in the field of maritime security. |
MS DAILY BRIEF – May 04 th, 2024
Daily appearance Monday-Saturday 10 AM (GMT +2)
Coupons
Update from Ukraine | Great news! Allies call to target Russia to cut Putin’s attack. 1
Ukraine war briefing: Russian drone strike injures three and sparks fire in Kharkov
Israel’s war with Hamas live- now 3pm,4pm CEST. 5
Gaza crisis. Turkey has decided to halt all trade with Israel – Defense Monitor – May 3, 2024. 26
GPS jamming situation – GPSJam – 2 May 2024. 27
Kremlin plans to deploy military base in Libya pose threat to NATO – Libya Tribut – 3 May 2024. 30
Russian seaports in the first quarter of 2024 – Russian media statistics – 3 May 2024. 31
US Navy could learn from commercial shipbuilders’ standards – The Maritime Executive – 2 May 2024 33
Vladimir Putin’s Chechen time bomb – The National Interest – 3 May 2024. 40
A China in decline is a dangerous China – The National Interest – 3 May 2024. 41
Israel ATTACKS an Iranian military base; faces growing danger to Iran’s nuclear program | TBN Israel
Update from Ukraine | Great news! Allies call to target Russia to cut Putin’s attack
Xi Jinping to visit France, Hungary and Serbia amid EU trade tariffs dispute-The Guardian,Sat 4 May 2024 06.00
China’s president arrives as EU anti-subsidy investigations and tensions over spying, Ukraine and Taiwan continue
China’s president, Xi Jinping, will visit Europe next week for the first time in five years on a tour that will include the unlikely trio of France, Hungary and Serbia.
The visit comes as China presses to avoid a trade war with the EU, while attitudes towards Beijing within the bloc are hardening after multiple spying scandals and China’s continued support for Russia in the war in Ukraine.
Xi’s first stop will be Paris. On Monday, he will meet French President Emmanuel Macron and European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen.
“The Chinese leadership is quite clear about what it wants,” says Abigaël Vasselier, director of foreign relations at Merics, a German thinktank focused on China. Xi would focus on lobbying against the EU’s anti-subsidy probes, especially on electric vehicles (EVs), and on stabilising the bilateral relationship, Vasselier said.
In September, in remarks widely understood to be aimed at China, von der Leyen said global markets were “flooded with cheaper electric cars … [whose] price is kept artificially low by huge state subsidies”. The investigation has caused widespread consternation in Beijing, which sees it as unfair and politically motivated.
On Thursday, the European Commission’s trade chief suggested tariffs could be imposed on Chinese electric vehicles by June, after launching an investigation into state support for electric car production in China. The deadline for imposing any measures is 4 July.
China “can’t afford to have more and more restrictions on the European market,” says Vasselier, but at the same time, “China doesn’t have an offer for Europe at the moment.”
That’s because one of Europe’s – and Macron’s – long-standing demands of China is that Xi press Vladimir Putin, Russia’s president, to end the war in Ukraine. “After two years of war, Europeans have realised… that this is not going to happen,” Vasselier says.
Professor Shen Dingli, a Shanghai-based international relations scholar, says the Taiwan issue was more important to China than Ukraine.
Xi Jinping with Emmanuel Macron and Ursula von der Leyen: they are seated around a large dark blue circular table at 9, 12 and 3 o’clock, respectively. The table sits on a deep, bright red carpet and has a sunken green centerpiece with plants in the middle; Xi sits in front of the flags of their three countries and a backdrop of a stylized cityscape; in the background are panels of other people seen seated at long tables. Given the size of the table and the distance between them, both Macron and von der Leyen look small, especially Macron, and the overall effect is quite comical
See full screen shot
Around a round table: Xi Jinping with Emmanuel Macron and Ursula von der Leyen at a working session in Beijing, April 6, 2023. Photo: Ludovic Marin/AP
Macron, von der Leyen and Xi last met in person last April, when the Europeans flew to Beijing. Macron, who arrived with a 50-strong business delegation and left with 18 cooperation agreements between French and Chinese companies, caused a storm on that trip when he told reporters that Europe should not become “America’s descendants” on the Taiwan issue. US President Joe Biden has repeatedly said that the US would defend Taiwan militarily in the event of an annexation attempt by China.
“When the French president visited China last year … he was very clear: on the Taiwan issue, France should have its own independent position,” Shen says. “China appreciates its position.”
The personal relationship between Xi and Macron was enhanced last year when the Chinese president took his French counterpart on a rare personal trip to Guangzhou, a city in southern China. Next week, Macron will return the favor with a visit to the Hautes-Pyrénées, a mountainous region of France.
But despite the personal chemistry between Xi and Macron, “Chinese Communist Party leaders have no friends. They have interests,” says Charles Parton, senior associate fellow at the Royal United Services Institute and former British diplomat to China. “It’s a way of ruthlessly promoting their own interests.”
“Whenever China sees a benefit in dealing with Europe as a whole, then it does. When it sees the benefit of dealing with individuals, sometimes because it undermines the whole, then it deals with individuals,” says Parton.
The EU investigation into alleged state support in the car industry is one of a series ordered by Brussels into shipments to Europe, including medical devices and wind turbines, which are sold at 50% less than those made in Europe – long considered the leader in the sector. China argues that the trade investigations are politically motivated and that the only loser in a tariff war would be the consumer.
The focus on bilateral relations comes as China’s relationship with the EU bloc is increasingly strained. There are also concerns in the EU about disinformation and foreign interference, with the arrest of an aide to German AfD MEP Maximilian Krah on suspicion of spying for the Chinese.
On 24 April, the Dutch and Polish offices of Chinese security equipment company Nuctech were raided by EU competition regulators in a new investigation against foreign subsidies. The action, which was led by the European Commission, was immediately condemned by China’s Ministry of Commerce.
Tariffs on electric vehicles will be even more worrying for Beijing. Last year, EU imports of EVs from China reached $11.5 billion, according to Rhodium Group.
Xi will also visit one of his closest allies in Europe, Hungary’s Prime Minister Viktor Orbán. Relations between China and Hungary have become increasingly close in recent years. In February, China offered to deepen law enforcement ties with Hungary, taking its already cozy relationship beyond the economic realm and reaching a security cooperation agreement that has raised concerns in other EU countries. Hungary is already Huawei’s largest base outside China, and the country will soon be home to carmaker BYD’s first European factory.
In contrast, Orbán has been a vocal supporter of China in international forums. On several occasions, Hungary has opposed EU motions criticising China on human rights.
The most symbolic stop on the tour will be Xi’s visit to Belgrade on the eve of the 25th anniversary of the US bombing of the Chinese embassy in the Serbian capital. The incident, in which three Chinese journalists were killed, has caused a huge surge in anti-American sentiment in China. It also reinforced China’s hostility to NATO, as the attack took place during the alliance’s bombing of Yugoslavia.
China’s hostility to NATO is part of the reason Beijing has maintained its support for Moscow since the invasion of Ukraine. Xi’s visit “will remind the world that although China and Serbia are geographically separated by the Eurasian continent, they share the same security interests. We need to strengthen our cooperation to overcome security threats from the US and NATO,” says Shen.
The Belgrade visit is not as strategically important as the Paris and Budapest meetings. But, says Parton, “it did fit the timing. And it certainly suits their intentions and interests to highlight American behavior.”
Ukraine war briefing: Russian drone strike injures three and sparks fire in Kharkov
A 13-year-old child and two women were hit by debris from downed drone; Lithuania rejects Russian claims of sabotage. What we know on day 801-The Guardian, Saturday 4 May 2024 04.48
Debris from downed Russian drones hit civilian targets early Saturday morning in Kharkov, Ukraine’s second-largest city, injuring three people and causing a fire in an office building, the regional governor said. Oleh Synehubov, writing on the Telegram messaging app, said a 13-year-old child and a woman were being treated at the hospital, and a second woman was treated at the scene. Emergency services were bringing the fire under control, he added.
Russian Defense Minister Sergei Shigu said Friday that Russian troops have captured 547 square kilometers of territory in Ukraine this year. Shigu said Ukrainian forces were retreating across the frontline.
The Russian Defense Ministry said Friday that its air defense forces destroyed six drones that Ukraine launched overnight. Five of the drones were shot down over the Belgorod region, which borders Ukraine, and one over the Crimean peninsula, the defense ministry said on the Telegram messaging app.
Ukraine’s president and foreign minister has pressed British Foreign Secretary David Cameron to speed up the delivery of promised military aid to Kiev as Russia puts battlefield pressure on Ukraine’s depleted forces in the third year of war. “It is important that the weapons included in the British support package announced last week arrive as soon as possible,” Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy said on social media platform X as Cameron visited Kiev on Thursday.
The Lithuanian government said there were “false Russian allegations of planned sabotage by a person who allegedly entered Russia from Lithuania in March”. Vilmantas Vitkauskas, head of the National Crisis Management Centre, said Russian claims that a saboteur had links to Lithuania were false. He said he had no information about the incident reported by Interfax, but “this element of linking this to a NATO state” was misinformation.
Any Western-backed Ukrainian strike against the Crimean Bridge or Crimea itself will be met with a strong retaliatory blow from Russia, Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova said. “I would like to warn Washington and Brussels that any aggressive action against Crimea is not only doomed to failure, but will be met with a devastating revenge blow,” Zakharova said.
A Russian activist has been sentenced to 15 years in prison for trying to set fire to a military recruitment office in protest at Russia’s action in Ukraine, authorities said on Friday. A military court in Khabarovsk, in Russia’s far east, said Angel Nikolaev was convicted on terrorism charges for placing two bottles of a flammable substance in the windows of a district recruitment office in the city and setting them on fire.
The United States is preparing as early as 2022 for the possibility that Russian President Vladimir Putin will stop selling it nuclear energy fuel, and the impending ban on Russian imports will help boost domestic uranium fuel processing capacity, the top nuclear energy official told Reuters. The US Senate on Tuesday passed a bill banning imports from Russia, the latest move by Washington to disrupt Putin’s ability to pay for the full-scale invasion of Ukraine that began in 2022.
Czech Republic institutions have been targeted by a Russian cyber attack since last year, the Czech Foreign Ministry said on Friday. It said the Russian group APT28, believed to be linked to Russia’s GRU military intelligence service, exploited a vulnerability in Microsoft’s Outlook software. The ministry made the statement after Germany’s Interior Ministry said on Friday that a series of cyber attacks attributable to the GRU had targeted Germany’s ruling Social Democrats as well as the country’s logistics, defence, aerospace and IT sectors.
Germany said it has evidence that Russian state-sponsored hackers were behind an “intolerable” cyber attack last year in which several websites were taken down in apparent response to Berlin’s decision to send tanks to Ukraine. German Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock said a federal government investigation into the 2023 cyber attack on the Social Democratic Party (SPD) had just been completed.
Ukraine will at some point have to enter into talks with Russia to end their more than two-year war, a senior Ukrainian intelligence official said in an interview published Thursday. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy has repeatedly ruled out talks with the Kremlin, and a decree he issued after Russia formally annexed four Ukrainian regions in 2022 calls negotiations “impossible”.
US defence secretary Lloyd Austin confirmed that Russian security forces were deployed to the same air base as US troops in the Nigerian capital Niamey. It remains unclear when the Russian troops, who have been in Niger for several weeks, were deployed to the 101st air base, which is near Niamey’s Diori Hamani international airport. It is also unclear how many troops are on the ground.
Israel’s war with Hamas live- now 3pm,4pm CEST
Closing summary
It’s 5pm in Gaza and Tel Aviv. We’ll be closing this blog soon, but you can stay up to date with The Guardian’s coverage of the Middle East here.
Here’s a recap of the latest developments:
An Israeli incursion into Rafah could lead to “carnage”, a UN official said on Friday. “It could be a massacre of civilians and an incredible blow to the humanitarian operation in the whole strip because it is primarily run from Rafah,” Jens Laerke, spokesman for the UN humanitarian office, told a press briefing in Geneva.
A World Health Organisation (WHO) official said on Friday that the agency had prepared a contingency plan in case of an Israeli incursion into Rafah in Gaza, but said it would not be enough to prevent a substantial increase in the death toll. “I really want to say that this contingency plan is a band-aid,” Rik Peeperkorn, the WHO representative for the occupied Palestinian territories, told a news conference in Geneva by video link.
The suspension of trade between Turkey and Israel will continue until a permanent ceasefire in Gaza and an unimpeded flow of humanitarian aid into the region is secured, Turkish Trade Minister Omer Bolat said Friday. Turkey on Thursday halted all exports and imports to and from Israel, citing the “worsening humanitarian tragedy” in the Palestinian territories. Turkish exporters with firm orders are looking for ways to send their goods to Israel via third countries, four export industry sources told Reuters on Thursday.
Israeli Foreign Minister Israel Katz accused Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan of acting like a “dictator” after the trade restrictions were first reported. Katz added that blocking ports for Israeli imports and exports ignores trade agreements, adding on social media platform X that Israel will work on alternatives for trade with Turkey.
Britain on Friday imposed sanctions against two “extremist” groups and four individuals in Israel it accused of violence in the West Bank. The British Foreign Office named Hilltop Youth and Lehava as two groups it said were known to have supported, incited and promoted violence against Palestinian communities in the West Bank. The four sanctioned individuals were responsible for human rights violations against these communities, the statement added. British Foreign Secretary David Cameron said extremist settlers undermine security and stability and threaten the prospects for peace.
An Israeli man held hostage in Gaza since the Hamas attack on 7 October has been confirmed dead, the government announced on Friday morning. Dror Or, 49, was killed and his body had been held in Gaza since 7 October, Kibbutz Be’eri, where he lived, said.
International Criminal Court (ICC) prosecutors on Friday warned against “persons threatening reprisals” against the court or its staff, saying such actions could constitute a “crime against the administration of justice”. The ICC did not say whether the comment was related to its investigation into possible war crimes committed by Israel or Palestinian groups in Gaza and the West Bank.
Food availability in the Gaza Strip has improved very slightly, although the risk of famine remains, Rik Peeperkorn, the WHO’s representative in the Palestinian territories, told a news conference in Geneva via video link from Jerusalem. He said the threat of famine had “by no means disappeared” due to the slight improvement in the food situation. Ahmed Dahir, head of the WHO’s sub-office team in Gaza, added that “access to food must now be sustained”.
Since October 2023, more than 100 Palestinian reporters have been killed in Gaza, at least 22 of them in the course of their work, said Reporters Without Borders (RWB), which published its annual World Press Freedom Day 2024 press freedom rankings around the world on Friday. According to the report, the Maghreb and Middle East regions performed worst in terms of restrictions imposed by government forces on press freedom.
At least 34,622 Palestinians have been killed and 77,867 injured in Israel’s military offensive on the Gaza Strip since 7 October, the Hamas-led Gaza Health Ministry said in a statement on Friday.
A senior Palestinian doctor died in an Israeli prison after more than four months in detention, two Palestinian prisoners’ associations announced Thursday, blaming Israel for his death. The associations said in a joint statement that Adnan al-Bursh, head of the orthopaedic ward at al-Shifa hospital, Gaza’s largest medical facility, was detained by Israeli forces while working temporarily at al-Awada hospital in northern Gaza. They described his death as an “assassination” and said his body remained in Israeli custody.
Francesca Albanese, the UN special rapporteur for the occupied Palestinian territories, said in comments on X that she was alarmed by Bursh’s death in Israeli custody. “No Palestinian is safe under Israeli occupation today. How many more lives will have to be taken before UN member states, especially those that demonstrate genuine concern for human rights globally, act to protect Palestinians?” she said.
On Thursday, Israeli authorities released 64 Palestinians they had detained during their military offensive in Gaza through the Israeli-controlled Kerem Shalom crossing, the Palestinian Border and Crossings Agency announced. One of them was the body of a man who died in detention, the prisoners’ associations said. Another released detainee was in critical condition and was moved to hospital on arrival, the border crossing agency added.
Iran has released the crew of a seized Portuguese-flagged ship linked to Israel, but remains in control of the vessel itself, Foreign Minister Hossein Amirabdollahian said. “The seized vessel, which has stopped its radar in Iran’s territorial waters and endangered the security of navigation, is under judicial detention,” Amirabdollahian said, according to a Foreign Ministry post on X late Thursday night. He said the release of the crew was a humanitarian act and that they could return to their countries with the ship’s captain
Police in Paris on Friday entered France’s prestigious Sciences Po university and removed student activists who had occupied its buildings in protest at Israel’s behaviour in its war against Hamas in Gaza. A Reuters witness saw police enter the buildings and remove many of the 70 or so protesters inside.
Seven people were killed in an air strike on a home in northern Rafah, according to Al Jazeera’s Tareq Abu Azzoum, who was broadcasting from southern Gaza. He said four of the victims were children. Elsewhere in Rafah, particularly in the east, there has been an “increase in air strikes and artillery shelling”, Abu Azzoum told Al Jazeera.
The Australian government will have to decide next week whether to support the admission of Palestine as a full member of the UN and is exchanging notes with allies such as South Korea and Germany. A copy of the draft resolution, seen by Guardian Australia, expresses “deep regret and concern” that the US used its veto to block the proposal in the UN Security Council last month.
Hundreds of pro-Palestinian protesters met Friday with a counter-protest in support of Israel at the University of Sydney. The Australian Broadcasting Corp (ABC) reported a scuffle between the groups. Supporters from both sides later retreated due to a heavy security presence, while Sydney University Vice-Chancellor Mark Scott said there was space for both groups of protesters.
How prevalent is anti-Semitism on American campuses? A look at the language of the protests-The Guardian,Friday 3 May 2024 19.00
The pressure movement to end Israel’s war in Gaza has been overshadowed by its loudest voices.
Protesters occupying Hamilton Hall at Columbia University on Tuesday quickly unfurled a banner on the facade of the historic building with one word: intifada.
Other students among the pro-Palestinian protesters in the heart of the New York campus were skeptical of invoking the Arab call to revolt because it has been so widely used by pro-Israel groups to discredit their cause as support for terrorism and therefore anti-Semitic.
The fears of these students were quickly realized when the White House described the use of the intifada as “hate speech.” Supporters of Israel at Columbia said it posed a threat to Jewish lives on campus because it amounted to a glorification of the Palestinian suicide bombing campaign during the second Intifada against the Israeli occupation two decades ago.
Eric Adams, the mayor of New York City, accused the students who hung the banner of being anti-Semitic as he sent police to remove them from Hamilton Hall and dismantle a tent camp erected to demand the university sell its investments in Israel and show its support for Palestinians as the war in Gaza continues.
Columbia’s administration said it called police to stop the protest that began on campus last month and then spread to other universities, in part to protect the safety of Jewish students threatened by anti-Semitic actions.
But pro-Palestinian students accuse Columbia of using safety concerns to shut them down under pressure from politicians and pro-Israel groups, which have a long history of using claims of anti-Semitism to limit legitimate protests against Israel.
It is hard to deny that there have been anti-Semitic incidents on campus, including that students, presumably Jewish, have been targeted, called “Nazi whores” and told to “go back to Poland”.
One Jewish student described a masked pro-Palestinian protester who confronted her as she crossed campus one evening. She said he approached her extremely close and threateningly demanded to know if she was a Zionist. Afterwards, she stopped wearing a Star of David necklace.
“It was really scary. Looking back, I don’t think he would have physically attacked me, but I was really scared at the time and I’m still scared to walk onto campus alone,” she said.
Gil Zussman, an electrical engineering professor and member of Columbia’s anti-Semitism task force, said other students have had similar experiences, being threatened or verbally attacked.
“Several times I’ve met Jewish girls sitting on the stairs crying. They are personally targeted. When people call a Jewish girl with family killed in the Holocaust a Nazi, it’s very, very bad,” he said.
However, instances of threatening behaviour towards individuals appear to have been relatively isolated and more likely to have occurred at parallel protests by non-students off campus.
The broader issue for Zussman and other pro-Israel activists is the more complex area of anti-Zionism that they say creates an “unsafe” and “threatening” climate for Columbia Jews.
The day before police shut down the protests, pro-Palestinian students led marches through the center of campus chanting “Brick by brick, wall by wall, Israel will fall” and “We don’t want two states, we’ll take it all.” Others led with a variation of the popular but controversial slogan “From the river to the sea”: “From the river to the sea, Palestine will be Arab”. One protester shouted “Fuck Israel, Israel is a bitch”.
Zussman, who was part of a small group of Israel supporters gathered near a wall overlooking the camp the day before police arrested the protesters, argued that denunciations of Zionism, as opposed to opposition to the war in Gaza or protests in support of ending the occupation, made many Jewish students feel threatened on campus.
“We saw relatively large crowds of over 100 people saying that Zionists are not wanted here. This really deviated from free speech and turned into something you will never see on a college campus towards any other minority group. When they shout ‘there are no Zionists here,’ then they are targeting us personally,” said Zussman, who is Israeli and Jewish.
“Even if you’re unhappy with Mexico’s policies, if someone shouted ‘we don’t want Mexicans here,’ the university would act very quickly.”
Zussman said he also saw students carrying signs glorifying Hamas rocket attacks.
“It’s like saying, ‘We’re going to kill you because you’re Israeli or Jewish,'” he said.
The university suspended one of the protest leaders, Khymani James, after a video surfaced in which he said in January that “Zionists don’t deserve to live” and “Be thankful that I don’t just go and kill Zionists.”
James also said Zionists, white supremacists and Nazis “are all the same people” because their existence is “antithetical to peace.”
“I feel very comfortable, very comfortable, calling for these people to die,” he said.
James apologised for his comments after they were made public and said they were “wrong”.
“Every member of our community deserves to feel safe without reservation,” he wrote.
After James’ comments were made public, university officials wrote to Columbia students denouncing anti-Semitism as a threat to safety.
“Chants, signs, taunts and social media posts by our own students mocking and threatening to ‘kill’ Jews are totally unacceptable, and Columbia students who are involved in such incidents will be held accountable,” the letter said.
James’ comments were widely condemned by pro-Palestinian groups, which said they did not represent the views of the movement. But pro-Israel activists and politicians have portrayed the student protesters in general as rooted in support of Hamas, terrorism and the destruction of Israel.
This message has been reinforced in parts of the media. CNN anchor Dana Bash drew widespread scorn for comparing the situation on American campuses to anti-Semitism in 1930s Europe.
“The fear among Jews in this country is palpable right now,” she said.
Bash also dismissed the motives of pro-Palestinian calls for a ceasefire in Gaza, arguing that there was a ceasefire before the Hamas attack on October 7, despite continued Israeli aggression in the occupied territories, including the shooting of hundreds of Palestinians in the West Bank and the army’s complicity in Jewish settler violence against Palestinians. Armed groups also fired hundreds of rockets from Gaza into Israel earlier this year.
Nadia Abu El-Haj, a professor of anthropology and co-director of the Center for Palestine Studies at Columbia, told the New York Review of Books that she has no doubt there have been anti-Semitic incidents on campus, along with abuses against Muslim and other students. But El-Haj said that “safety rhetoric,” particularly that of Jewish students, was used to conduct a “crackdown” against pro-Palestinian activists.
One of the student protesters, Jamil Mohamad, born in Jordan to an exiled Palestinian family, admitted that some Jewish students are genuinely fearful. But he said this is partly because pro-Israel groups insist that opposition to Zionism is tantamount to support for Hamas and a call to attack Jews.
Mohamad attributes accusations of anti-Semitism to students who don’t like to hear legitimate differences of opinion, such as accusations that Israel is committing genocide in Gaza.
“There is a distinction between being insecure and being uncomfortable. It’s very remarkable to see the discourse around this issue because the right in this country that talks about woke culture and how young people are snowflakes, suddenly adopts this narrative around safety, which is actually a narrative around comfort,” he said.
“People don’t have the right to feel comfortable in their ideas. This is a university. This is a place where people’s ideas are challenged. Discomfort is not the same as danger.”
Mohamad said the “narrative of anti-Semitism” has been used to silence opposition to Israel’s war in Gaza and decades of occupation. He is not alone in accusing Columbia President Minouche Shafik of trying to appease Republican politicians who have described the university as “a hotbed of anti-Semitism and hatred” since protests grew following the October 7 Hamas attack and Israel’s subsequent assault on Gaza.
“The university is responding to external political pressures and probably also pressure from donors threatening to withdraw money from the university because of widespread anti-Israel protests on campus. Shafik very much took this line to Congress about anti-Semitism on campus without any nuance or qualification,” he said.
Prior to Shafik’s testimony before Congress, Jewish Columbia faculty members wrote to her denouncing what they called “the use of anti-Semitism as a weapon” for political purposes.
For their part, pro-Palestinian students say the university has shown little concern for their safety, even as they have been targeted for doxing by hardline pro-Israel groups, seen their careers threatened by powerful funders and been subjected to threats of violence. So far, the only major act of violence during the nationwide protests has been an attack by Israel supporters on a Palestine solidarity camp at UCLA.
Jared, a Jewish student at Columbia, did not want his last name used because his family was threatened after he publicly supported the Palestinian cause. He said he has been the target of anti-Semitism from pro-Israel activists who question his Jewishness because of his support for the Palestinians and that he is not alone. Some Jewish supporters of pro-Palestinian protests have said they have been called “kapos” – collaborators with Nazi concentration camp prisoners – by other Jewish students.
“Most of the students recognize that there is a gap between the demand for a free Palestine and the government of Israel, and Israel does not represent the Jewish people. But there are Jewish students who are imbued with fear of anything Palestinian,” Jared said.
Part of the dispute hangs on the intent of the slogans. Some pro-Israel groups have long given the most extreme interpretation to political demands, such as the claim that calls for a cease-fire in Gaza are anti-Semitic because they deny Israel the right to defend itself.
Anti-Defamation League executive director Jonathan Greenblatt declared in 2022 that “anti-Zionism is anti-Semitism,” a claim that has been widely echoed by American politicians.
Pro-Israel activists on campuses also say that student demands to divest from Israel are anti-Semitic because they “single out” the Jewish state. In recent years, pro-Israel organisations have successfully pushed through laws in several states that penalise support for the non-violent Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions (BDS) movement on similar grounds.
Two slogans in particular attract accusations that they amount to calls for violence against Jews and therefore make Jewish students feel threatened by those who chant them.
“From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free” is frequently denounced as a call to eradicate Israel and even the Jewish population. The call for an intifada is widely seen as invoking the Palestinian campaign of suicide bombings against Israel in the early 2000s.
Some Palestinian activists say one is a call for equal rights for Palestinians in a single state, and the other for a popular uprising to achieve this. They note that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu used a phrase similar to “from the river to the sea” in January, when he said his country “must have security control over all the territory west of the Jordan River”.
Even so, Norman Finkelstein, the American Jewish political scientist who is a strong critic of Israel, advised the protesters to reconsider using slogans that could be used against them. Finkelstein went to Columbia to praise the students for raising awareness of the Palestinian cause, but advised them “to adjust to the new political reality that there are a large number of people, probably a majority, who are potentially receptive to your message.”
“We have to exercise at a time like this, if for no other reason than for the people of Gaza, we have to exercise maximum responsibility. Maximum responsibility to get out of your own navel, to crawl out of your own ego and to always have a certain question in mind: what are we trying to achieve at this particular moment?” he said.
After Finkelstein finished speaking, a protester took the microphone and led a “river to sea” chant.
Mohamad said that while he respected Finkelstein, “this is not a top-down movement.”
“We can’t dictate top-down slogans. We can’t tell people you can say this, you can’t say that,” he said.
Mohamad said he doubted, however, that dropping slogans like “from the river to the sea” would make much difference.
“It’s been a slogan in the pro-Palestine movement for many years. Telling people not to use the slogan at this stage because it’s ambiguous – and, yes, there is some ambiguity in it – runs parallel to this right-wing weaponization of anti-Semitism because there are forces of bad faith. They do not want to interpret any slogan for Palestinian liberation in a good light. They want to portray all of us as anti-Semites and Jew-haters,” he said.
Jared, the Jewish student, said he thinks Finkelstein is right about the language, but that in fact the critics are only interested in objecting to the slogans as a means of distracting from the scale of the crimes in Gaza.
“We could be better about the slogans we choose to use. I agree that maybe we should focus on protests against genocide. But the focus on the language of the protesters here is meant to distract from the genocide taking place in Gaza,” he said.
The result, however, is that a movement pushing for an end to Israel’s war in Gaza, in which more than 34,000 Palestinians, mostly children and women, have been killed, has now found itself overshadowed by its loudest voices.
After the police raid at Columbia and other New York campuses, NYPD Deputy Assistant Commissioner for Operations Kaz Daughtry posted a video of what he called a “proud moment” in which officers took down a Palestinian flag at City College, tossed it aside and raised the US flag.
To some pro-Palestinian activists, the incident appeared to resemble the actions of a conquering army marking its victory over a defeated enemy, and provided further evidence that the police action was not about campus safety, but about supporting Israel at the behest of politicians allied with the Jewish state.
On Wednesday, the House of Representatives took up the cause when it passed the Anti-Semitism Awareness Act, which requires the US Department of Education to use the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance’s controversial definition of anti-Semitism in enforcing anti-discrimination laws. The American Civil Liberties Union described the law as “an effort to stifle criticism of Israel”.
Some Jewish activists have warned that by playing to tropes about powerful Jews manipulating power, the perception that free speech is being curtailed and protesters arrested at the behest of powerful pro-Israel interests risks fueling anti-Semitism.
Jared saw another danger.
“If you protest genocide, and then a lot of people come out and say it’s offensive to Jews, people will associate Jews with committing genocide, and that makes us infinitely less safe,” he said.
“Jewish people are not committing genocide. Israel does and Israel does not represent the entire Jewish people. And using the Jewish people to protect Israel from any criticism will lead to an incredible amount of anti-Semitism.”
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/article/2024/may/03/college-gaza-protests-antisemitism
China challenges Taiwan: 26 fighter jets and 5 Chinese ships detected around the island–Publication date: 03.05.2024 08:14
Taiwan’s Defense Ministry reported Friday that it has detected considerable activity from China near the island in the past 24 hours.
According to Agerpres, citing AFP, 26 Chinese aircraft and five ships have been spotted in the area.
The activity comes ahead of the inauguration of Taiwan’s new president, Lai Ching-te, scheduled for 20 May, a figure China considers a dangerous separatist.
According to the statement issued by the ministry, 17 aircraft crossed the “median line” of the Taiwan Strait and entered the area identified as Taiwan’s air defences. The median line demarcates the Taiwan Strait, a crucial 180-kilometre sea route that separates Taiwan from mainland China.
Beijing, which does not recognise the median line, maintains its claim to Taiwan as an integral part of its territory and does not rule out the use of force to assert control over the island.
Relations between Beijing and Taipei have strained under incumbent President Tsai Ing-wen, who rejects China’s claim to Taiwan. The newly elected president, Lai Ching-te, a member of the same Democratic Progressive Party as Tsai Ing-wen, won the presidential election in January, ignoring Beijing’s warnings about the consequences for the island.
These developments come as Manila recently protested an incident in the South China Sea in which two Philippine ships were damaged by Chinese forces. Beijing confirmed the incident, claiming it had “repelled” the Philippine ships.
The dispute in the South China Sea comes at a time when the United States and the Philippines are conducting joint military exercises, including in disputed areas of the South China Sea and Taiwan Strait. One of the exercise scenarios involves simulating the recapture by force of an island in the Philippine province of Palawan, close to the Spratly Islands disputed by Manila and Beijing.
F-35 jets are sweeping across Europe and Romanian F-35s will actively participate in its defence. F-35 pilot: I would fly with confidence in a war like the one in Ukraine-Update: 03.05.2024 17:13
F-35, photo credit: Lockheed Martin
DefenseRomania participated in a media trip to the United States where it held discussions with several Lockheed Martin representatives, including the prospect of equipping Romania’s Army with F-35 Lightning II 5th generation fighter jets.
At the invitation of Lockheed Martin, DefenseRomania travelled to Texas, where it visited the F-35 aircraft facility in Fort Worth.
The F-35 aircraft facility in Fort Worth, Texas. Photo source: Lockheed Martin
We spoke there with Lockheed Martin officials and pilots about the capabilities of the F-35, a fifth-generation aircraft that Romania also wants to buy. It’s 32 F-35A aircraft, for which the Romanian state is set to pay around €6.5 billion – a huge programme for Romania, which would mean connecting the Romanian Air Force to the most modern aircraft network possible. So far, a number of European countries have opted for the F-35. Italy, the UK and the Netherlands are also directly involved in the F-35 programme. Countries such as Norway, Belgium, Finland, Switzerland, Poland and the Czech Republic have also received or are about to receive US fifth-generation aircraft.
There are three variants of the fifth generation aircraft:
F-35A, the normal landing and take-off variant (variant to be ordered by Romania),
F-35B, the short take-off and vertical landing variant (ordered by countries with aircraft carriers: UK, Italy, Japan),
the F-35C, the aircraft catapulted from US aircraft carriers (owned only by the US Navy).
“We are talking about a mature programme with over 990 aircraft delivered so far. Looking ahead to 2035, Europe will then be defended by more than 600 F-35 aircraft, of which only 10% will belong to the US Air Force and the rest will be owned by European states,” Lockheed Martin representatives told us.
However, it must be said that the upgrade of the F-35 programme, specifically the implementation of the Technology Refresh 3 (TR 3) hardware and software system, is being delayed due to problems in the TR-3 component supply chain. Lockeheed Martin is reportedly hoping to deliver a training version of TR 3 with restricted functionality. The “fully combat-capable” version won’t be available until 2025, CEO Jim Taiclet confirmed to airandspaceforces.com the other day.
“I’m 100% confident that the F-35 would do well in an environment like Ukraine”
We asked one of Lockheed Martin’s pilots what it’s like to fly such an aircraft. A former F/A-18 Hornet pilot with over 2,000 hours of flight time on several US aircraft carriers, Theodore Dyckman “Dutch” confirms that the F-35 is the most advanced weapons system he has flown in his career.
“On a scale of one to ten, I would have the utmost confidence flying on a front like the one in Ukraine,” “Dutch” says without hesitation.
Theodore Dyckman “Dutch”, American F-35 Lightning II pilot. Photo source: Lockheed Martin
And he has reason to be confident. The technology these aircraft incorporate is extremely sophisticated. For example, the pilot’s helmet alone costs almost half a million dollars. The pilot has all the information he needs in the helmet. In addition, the helmet uses a system that allows the pilot to actually see “through” the plane, in any direction he or she looks.
F-35 for Romania, just after 2030? Minister Angel Tîlvăr recently announced the signing of the contract for the F-35 in 2024
The cost of this multi-year programme, which will be carried out strictly from the MApN budget, is around 6.5 billion USD. The programme to equip the Romanian Air Force with the F-35 has been approved by the CSAT and is currently in the final documentation phase, with the contract to be signed.
National Defence Minister Angel Tîlvăr said that this year “we will have good news” about the signing of the contract for the F-35 aircraft. These details were given in response to a question asked by DefenseRomania during the official visit of the Romanian delegation to South Korea at the end of last month.
Mock-up of the F-35 Lightning II with Romania’s pennant, presented by Lockheed Martin at BSDA 2022. Photo: DefenseRomania
The procurement will be carried out in two phases.
Phase 1: 2 squadrons – 32 aircraft
Phase 2: 1 squadron – 16 aircraft.
The purchase price includes: engines, logistic support, training services, flight simulators, air-to-air and air-to-ground munitions.
Ukraine is no longer at war with Russia, but with an alliance of autocratic regimes. A new Russian offensive could be fatal for Ukrainians-Publication date: 03.05.2024 22:02
Chinese and Russian servicemen during joint naval exercises. Photo credit: TASS.
Ukraine is no longer just facing Russia, but also the alliance Moscow has assembled to support its war, according to a columnist for the British newspaper The Telegraph. He points out that Russia could hardly continue its offensive without the help of a “motley group of autocratic friends” – missiles from North Korea, drones from Iran and a huge amount of technical assistance from China.
“It’s a war against a powerful combination of autocratic regimes,” says Con Coughlin, defence and foreign policy journalist at The Telegraph.
He notes that these are different regimes, but what unites them is that they all oppose the very concept of Western liberal democracy.
“Putin’s crushing new offensive could spell the end of Ukraine” – under this headline, Coughlin published an analysis that Western support “is not coming fast enough to match the support Russia is getting from its allies”.
In terms of military assistance within the “autocratic alliance”, Con Coughlin focuses on the role of China, which is supplying Russia with significant numbers of machine tools, drones and engines, as well as cruise missile technology, and helping the Russians expand their satellite capabilities on the Ukrainian battlefield.
“The ability of the Ukrainians to deter a new Russian offensive will be severely hampered if new arms deliveries do not take place soon,” Coughlin said.
Among the reasons for the worsening situation, the journalist cites a shortage of Ukrainian troops on the eastern front and a lack of F-16 fighter jets.
“The current situation of Ukrainian troops is not just a matter of concern. It should prompt [Western leaders] to act to give Kiev the firepower it needs to defend itself,” writes the British journalist.
He also points out that ensuring Russia’s complete defeat in Ukraine is vital not only to deter Putin from future acts of aggression in Europe.
It is important, says Coughlin, because China, Iran and North Korea “must also understand that their antagonistic attitudes towards the West will be met with the same determined response as Russia’s unprovoked invasion of Ukraine”.
As for cooperation between Russia, China and Iran, The New York Times suggests that protests at American universities are contributing to Russian, Chinese and Iranian efforts to take advantage of the division in the United States.
And America’s opponents are already mounting online campaigns to escalate the social and political conflicts erupting in universities around the Gaza issue, according to the newspaper, which quotes several experts.
The narratives about China, Russia and Iran’s confrontations with the United States and its allies have different roots and motives, The Hill notes.
Strategic cooperation between these three powers “could take the form of a fully cohesive geopolitical camp whose members act together against their common adversaries,” the publication writes, noting that the goals the regimes in Beijing, Moscow and Tehran seek to achieve are not the same.
“To understand what’s at stake in the struggle against the China-Russia-Iran axis, one need only read Lord of the Rings,” advises Bloomberg columnist Niall Ferguson, drawing a parallel with the epic written by World War I veteran John Tolkien.
According to the book, “it is only gradually becoming clear that the forces of darkness have united”.
And the emergence of this new axis was predicted by Zbigniew Brzezinski, President Jimmy Carter’s national security adviser, in his 1997 book, ”The Grand Chessboard”:
“The most dangerous scenario would be a grand coalition of China, Russia and possibly Iran, an ‘anti-hegemonic’ coalition united not by ideology but by complementary grievances. This would resemble in scale and scope the challenge once posed by the Sino-Soviet bloc, though this time China would probably be the leader and Russia the follower.”
Dynamics of the war in Ukraine | Ukrainian Land Forces chief talks about new combat tactics: Drones have become dominant on the battlefield, as they are more lethal than artillery-Publication date: 03.05.2024 19:37
FPV drone operated by a Ukrainian serviceman of the Armed Forces of Ukraine. Photo source: 35th Rifle Brigade – Ukrainian Army.
The war in Ukraine has changed, and now a different combat tactic dominates the frontline. The change is due to the massive use of drones on both sides, says General Oleksandr Pavliuk, commander of Ukraine’s Ground Forces, in an interview with The Times.
Drones have become dominant on the battlefield, now unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) are more lethal than artillery or aviation. Drones have changed the geography and tactics of the battlefield, and infantry have buried themselves deeper into the battlefield.
Pavliuk says drones now kill more soldiers on both sides than anything else. They can see almost everything, not just on the front line, but 10-30km away from the front line in both directions.
As the Ukrainian general explained, neither side can now create a large strike force without being observed and targeted by long-range attack drones and artillery. This new reality has forced both sides to operate with significantly smaller strike groups.
He adds that the Ukrainian military has given up moving battalions or even companies.
At the same time, Pavliuk acknowledges that it is not possible to win the war on the battlefield alone. In his view, tightening sanctions could prevent Russia from increasing its stockpile of missiles it uses to target Ukrainian energy facilities. He stresses that only greater international containment of the Kremlin could stop the confrontation.
The Ukrainian general believes that battlefield exhaustion will not end the war. The end of the war will come through technological advantage and real Russian isolation, he says. At the moment, many countries are “sitting on their hands” waiting to see how this war ends, just hoping it won’t affect them, he adds.
Using drones on the battlefield
Both Ukraine and Russia are constantly using drones in warfare, including regular short-range reconnaissance drones and long-range attack drones.
Russia constantly attacks Ukraine with Iranian-built kamikaze drones. Ukraine, for its part, has significantly increased production of drones which it uses extensively on the battlefield. For example, Ukraine has created a fleet of maritime drones that attack Russian targets at sea.
Cheap drones initially gave Ukrainian soldiers an advantage on the battlefield. Operators soon honed their skills to the point where they can track a single infantryman and “dive” behind him or enter trenches and dugouts, The Washington Post recently reported, doing an analysis of the impact of drone use on Ukraine’s front lines.
The Russians have also been quick to turn around and start mass-producing their own drones. Areas around the frontline, which are usually called the “grey zone,” according to the publication, have turned into a “death zone” on both sides.
The Washington Post notes that technological advances have likely saved many lives since the beginning, as drone operators can “work” a little further from the front line than traditional infantry.
But because of thermal imaging drones, soldiers on both sides of the front lines can’t even move safely at night, which has significantly increased casualties among the Russian and Ukrainian armies in recent months.
Overcrowded skies with drones combined with extensive minefields and shortages of ammunition and troops now make it virtually impossible for Ukraine to carry out a major offensive, but Russia faces the same problem.
Ukrainian Military Intelligence (GUR) representative General Skibitsky: Ukraine won’t be able to defeat Russia on the battlefield, even if Ukrainian troops reach the 1991 borders-Publication date: 03.05.2024 14:38
Photo source: Генеральний штаб ЗСУ / General Staff of the Armed Forces of Ukraine
For the first time since the end of March 2022, since the front has experienced a relative stabilization and the fighting has been localized in the east and south of Ukraine, the Ukrainian Military Intelligence (GUR) issues a new working hypothesis. Ukraine will not be able to defeat Russia on the battlefield and even if its troops could reach the 1991 borders it is unlikely to end the war. This is the GUR’s new prognosis for the evolution of the Russian-Ukrainian war.
Major General Vadim Skibitsky, Deputy Director of the Main Intelligence Directorate (GUR) of the Ukrainian Ministry of Defence, said this himself in an interview with The Economist (published on 2 May) and picked up by the RBK Ukraine news agency.
According to The Economist, Skibitsky looks troubled as he assesses the prospects for developments on the battlefield: Ukraine is right on the edge, things are as difficult as they have been since the war started and they are about to get worse, the Ukrainian general said.
GUR assesses that Ukraine will not be able to defeat Russia on the battlefield. Last year, GUR chief Kirill Budannov believed Ukraine could end the war victorious in 2024. “Is Budannov also being replaced by someone else with a new vision?”.
Skibitsky said he did not see the possibility of Ukraine winning the war on the battlefield. According to him, even if the Ukrainian Armed Forces were able to push Russian troops back to the border, this would not stop the war.
There will be negotiations, GUR believes, but not before the middle of next year.
The general also noted that such wars can only end with treaties. Both sides choose a “beneficial position” before any negotiations.
“Substantial negotiations can begin no earlier than the second half of 2025. Until then, Russia will face headwinds,” the GUR representative said.
According to him, Russia’s military production capacity has been growing but will reach a plateau in early 2026 due to a shortage of materials and engineers. Eventually, both sides may run out of weapons.
Previous negotiations between Ukraine and the Russian Federation
In the first weeks of the invasion, representatives of the two countries held several rounds but did not yield significant results.
In November 2023, the US television station NBC News reported that the US and the European Union had begun consultations with Ukraine on possible peace talks with the Russian Federation. Among the issues under discussion are points on which Ukraine can agree in exchange for peace.
However, Ukrainian President Volodimir Zelenski denied the rumours in the US press at the time. According to him, none of the Western partners is pressuring Ukraine on the issue of negotiations with the Russian Federation.
At the end of April 2024, Russian propaganda launched a hoax, according to which Kiev is preparing to start negotiations with the Kremlin in June. The Ukrainian Centre for Combating Disinformation said on 29 April that a disinformation thesis was being spread: “Zelensky announced that peace talks with the Russian Federation will begin in June 2024”.
Author’s comment: Major-General Skibitsky’s interview is aimed primarily at disproving Russia’s false claim of peace talks in June. The fact that this refutation comes from the GUR itself, which enjoys great credibility among Ukrainians, gives added weight to the denial given a few days ago by the Ukrainian Centre for Combating Disinformation.
Secondly, the GUR, as an institution highly knowledgeable in defence and national security, also draws the attention of all Ukraine’s supporters, especially those abroad, to the fact that the situation on the front is currently serious and something must be done urgently, otherwise important positions will be lost with pronounced negative implications for the fate of the war. On the morning of 3 May, the Ukrainian General Staff reported that 134 battles had taken place, the fourth day in a row that more than 100 battles had been fought in 24 hours. This is the first time in the war that such a high intensity of clashes has been reached on the contact line.
Third, the GUR warns that Ukraine’s projected combat capability this year and next, including with foreign support, does not allow for the defeat of Russian forces on the front. It is not clear from Skibitsky’s statement whether additional external support, i.e. in addition to the aid already announced by the US and Europe, would decisively influence the fate of the war in Ukraine’s favour.
Skibitsky’s interview was published by The Economist on the same day (2 May) as an interview with French President Emmanuel Macron. The French president said in the interview that he did not rule out sending troops to Ukraine, reiterating this for the fourth or fifth time, although his hypothesis was generally rejected among NATO member states, including the US.
Whether Skibitsky’s interview is also a reaction to Macron’s interview (Macron’s interview was taken on 29 April in Paris) is not yet clear. Could Skibitsky be signalling the need for Western forces on the frontline? Previously, Kiev had made it clear that there was no need.
They would be decisive, especially with the advanced technological capabilities that come with these forces. The Ukrainian military may not be able to assimilate so much advanced NATO military technology quickly enough, and therefore would need the Alliance’s own military to use it.
The US warns that Macron’s plan is likely to trigger World War III. Meanwhile, Ukraine is sending signals that it can’t hold the line much longer with what it has and what it is expected to get. It’s time for the West to think outside the box, especially militarily. The political options are only two: war or peace on terms more convenient to Russia.
Ukrainians can use British-supplied weaponry at will: Russia attacked Ukraine, so Ukraine has every right to retaliate against it-Update: 03.05.2024 16:36
Graphic image of the British Storm Shadow long-range air-to-ground missile. Source: DefenseExpress
British Foreign Secretary David Cameron has pledged £3 billion ($3.74 billion) in annual military assistance to Ukraine, adding that it will continue “for as long as it is needed.” The British official gave assurances that London had no qualms about the possibility of the arms supplied being used on Russian territory.
Cameron’s visit to Kiev follows Prime Minister Rishi Sunak’s announcement that the UK will spend 2.5% of GDP on defence and commit at least £3bn a year to military support for Ukraine.
“We will give £3 billion every year for as long as it is needed. We’ve just really given everything we can in terms of sending equipment,” Cameron said in an interview with Reuters during a visit to Kiev.
“Some of that (equipment) is actually arriving in Ukraine today, while I’m here,” Cameron said outside St Michael’s Cathedral in central Kiev.
Cameron added that Ukraine has the right to use weapons supplied by London to strike targets inside Russia and that it is up to Kiev whether it will do so: “Ukraine has that right. As Russia strikes inside Ukraine, you can well understand why Ukraine feels the need to ensure that it defends itself.”
The UK has consistently expressed strong support for Ukraine, alongside the US and Germany. London has pledged £12.5bn ($15.6bn) to support Ukraine from February 2022, of which £7.6bn ($9.5bn) is earmarked for military assistance.
“We all need to get involved to make sure Ukraine has what it needs to win,” Cameron said. “Through our multi-year military funding, through the provision of weapons and through vital support to protect and repair Ukraine’s energy infrastructure, the UK stands with Ukraine.”
The UK Foreign Office also announced that the UK and Ukraine have begun negotiations on the creation of a “100 Year Partnership” between the two countries.
Without giving specific details, the proposed partnership would “build lasting links between the two countries across the spectrum of cooperation on trade, security and defence, science and technology, education, culture and more”.
“Britain’s commitment to developing this partnership is a clear signal of its intention to build close and lasting cooperation with Ukraine and the Ukrainian people for decades to come,” Cameron added.
Putin’s fear of the West is forcing him to spend record sums on arms: Russia has paid a huge price for the war in Ukraine, but is prepared to pay more-Publication date: 03.05.2024 15:19
Russian President Vladimir Putin gestures during a visit to a military base in Russia’s Ryazan region. Photo source: kremlin.ru.
Russian President Vladimir Putin’s “paranoid fear” of the West’s alleged intention to “limit Russia’s power” has prompted him to spend record amounts on militarisation. This was made clear by US Director of National Intelligence Avril Haines during a congressional hearing on 2 May.
The official added that NATO’s actions were actually intended to reassure him otherwise, but Putin’s own decisions accelerated “events he was trying to avoid”, including the expansion of the alliance when Finland and Sweden, which had remained neutral for decades, joined NATO.
“Putin continues to believe that Russia is under threat and almost certainly assumes that a larger and better-equipped military will convey that message to the Western and domestic public,” says Haines.
At the hearing, US lawmakers asked what Western countries could do to allay the Russian president’s fears.
“How do we convince Putin that NATO is not an aggressive entity? And that we won’t invade Russia,” US Senator Angus King asked the head of US intelligence.
King added that he had recently finished reading a book about Russian intelligence, which, according to the senator, is an inherently paranoid organisation: “They think the West wants to corner them.”
“No one wants to invade Russia or in any particular way violate Russia’s sovereignty. We just want to protect Europe’s borders as they have been since the war,” King said.
Avril Haines added: “Yes, I agree with you that there is a degree of paranoia associated with this, he [Vladimir Putin – ed.] believes that the security of his country is threatened to some extent.”
Russia has paid a huge price for the war in Ukraine, but is prepared to pay more
Putin’s strategic goals also remain unchanged, she says: “He continues to see NATO expansion and Western support for Ukraine as a reinforcement of his long-held belief that the United States and Europe seek to limit Russia’s power.”
Haines also noted that Putin “is trying to use global events, such as the outbreak of conflict between Israel and Hamas, to divide us from our allies.”
In addition, Vladimir Putin currently believes that domestic and international events are moving in his favour, Haines added.
According to the official, Moscow’s aggressive tactics are likely to continue and the war is unlikely to end anytime soon.
To prolong the war, Putin is allocating an increasing share of the country’s budget to militarisation. Russia has already paid “a huge price for the war in Ukraine” and is prepared to pay more, Haines said.
“Putin has increased defence spending to almost 7% of Russia’s GDP, almost double the historical average,” Haines said.
She added that Russia’s defence budget currently accounts for about 25% of total budget spending.
Water testing of the unarmed underwater vehicle “Manta Ray XL-UUV” by the United States, while China develops its underwater drone torpedo-launching capabilities – Maritime Security Forum
On May 1, the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency announced the completion of in-water testing of the Northrop Grumman-produced Manta Ray prototype, with tests to be conducted off the southern California coast in February and March 2024.
Photo Source – DARPA
The tests included submerged and steering operations, validating the vehicle’s readiness for real-world operations.
Manta Ray is a new type of extreme-sized UUV (Unmanned Underwater Vehicle) capable of long-duration, long-distance operations and underwater cargo transport. Given the importance of underwater movements, both the US and China are expanding their underwater capabilities, and the development of a new generation of UUVs ready for long-duration operations in dynamic maritime environments is becoming crucial.
Tests of the Northrop-developed Manta Ray vehicle have shown remarkable features such as its ability to hibernate on the seabed and its power generation and conservation technology. The vehicle’s high payload capacity offers the opportunity to carry different types of cargo for different types of missions. The conclusion of tests of this type of giant underwater vehicle could change the way underwater capabilities are used by the world’s militaries, including in contested areas and in the potential conflict between the United States and China over Taiwan.
On the other hand, China appears to be developing similar capabilities with respect to autonomous and unarmed underwater vehicles, with the ability to conduct reconnaissance, mine operations and has the potential to become an important element in anti-submarine capabilities. Emulating similar developments in the US, China appears to be emerging as a strong underwater presence, increasing maritime competition and tensions between the two superpowers.
Source MSF
Kremlin calls Macron and Cameron’s latest statements on Ukraine war ‘dangerous’ – Black Sea News – May 3, 2024
The Kremlin has called French President Emmanuel Macron’s statement calling the conditions for sending Western troops to Ukraine very important and dangerous.
On May 3, the spokesman for the Russian Federation President Dmitry Peskov said that France, represented by the head of state, keeps talking constantly about the possibility of its direct involvement on the ground, which is a very dangerous trend, Radio Liberty reports.
Peskov also called British Foreign Minister David Cameron’s statement that Kiev has the right to use British weapons to strike Russian territory dangerous.
Earlier this week, Macron said in an interview with The Economist that he is ready to consider sending troops to Ukraine if such a request is received from Kiev.
“If the Russians had broken through the front line, if there had been a request from Ukraine – which is not the case today – we would legitimately have to ask that question. Therefore, I think excluding this a priori is not learning the lessons of the last two years,” the politician explained.
British Foreign Secretary David Cameron, during a visit to Kiev in early May, said that Ukraine has the right to use UK-supplied weapons to strike targets on Russian territory, and the decision should be taken by Kiev: “Ukraine has such a right. As Russia strikes inside Ukraine, it is understandable why Ukraine feels the need to defend itself.”
On the morning of 3 May, the Ukrainian President’s Office announced a meeting between Volodimir Zelenski and David Cameron, during which the Ukrainian leader thanked the British government for the largest ever half-billion pound defence support package, which was announced last week.
Source: https://www.blackseanews.net/read/216964
Russian Federation promises ‘retaliatory strikes’ on London and Washington in case of attack on the Kerch Bridge – Black Sea News – May 3, 2024
Moscow is warning the United States, Britain and the European Union of “crushing retaliatory strikes” in the event of an attack on the bridge over the Kerch Strait.
This was stated by the official representative of the Russian Foreign Ministry, Maria Zaharova, reports moscowtimes.ru.
“I would like to warn Washington, London, Brussels once again that any aggressive actions against Crimea are not only doomed to failure, but will also receive a retaliatory blow, which will be crushing,” Zaharova was quoted by RIA Novosti as saying.
According to her, Ukraine, with the support of the West, is preparing for a new attack on the bridge over the Kerch Strait.
Earlier, Ukraine’s permanent representative to the UN, Serhiy Kyslytsya, posted a collage on his social networking site X. It depicts the six main types of bridges in 2024, with a blank image in place of the Crimean Bridge.
Earlier in April, The Guardian, citing Ukrainian military intelligence sources, wrote that Ukraine plans to destroy the bridge over the Kerch Strait in the first half of 2024.
The bridge linking Russia to the occupied peninsula is a well-defended target, and the Russian side “has taken extensive measures to protect the crossing, strengthening air defences and placing a ‘target barge’ as a decoy for guided missiles,” The Guardian notes. However, one of the publication’s sources, a senior officer in the Main Intelligence Directorate, claims that Ukrainian intelligence chief Kyrylo Budanov has “most of the means” to achieve this goal. In addition, Budanov, according to the interlocutor, is following Ukrainian President Volodimir Zelenski’s “approved plan to ‘minimize’ Russia’s maritime presence in the Black Sea.”
The Crimean bridge has already been attacked twice by Ukraine’s Armed Forces: in the summer of 2023 and in the autumn of 2022. As a result of each of these incidents, the crossing has suffered significant damage requiring time for repairs, due to which traffic on the bridge has been banned or restricted.
For Russian President Vladimir Putin, the bridge is a symbol of what he considers one of his greatest achievements: the “return” of the peninsula to Russia in 2014. For Kiev, the crossing is an ugly symbol of occupation, and its destruction “will strengthen Ukraine’s campaign to liberate Crimea and boost morale” of the Ukrainian military, writes The Guardian.
But for Russia, the bridge over the Kerch Strait is also an important strategic target, and if it is destroyed, the Russian army will have to transport military supplies by road through Ukraine’s temporarily occupied southern territories. According to the publication’s sources, this could significantly undermine the Kremlin’s ability to conduct offensive operations.
Source: https://www.blackseanews.net/read/216966
Gaza crisis. Turkey has decided to halt all trade with Israel – Defense Monitor – May 3, 2024
Turkey halts trade with Israel due to ‘humanitarian tragedy’ in Gaza. A Turkish official said the measures will remain in place until Israel allows an uninterrupted flow of aid into Gaza. In 2023, trade between the two countries was worth almost $7bn.
Turkey has suspended all trade with Israel over the Gaza offensive, citing a “worsening humanitarian tragedy”, according to the BBC.
The Turkish trade ministry said the measures would remain in place until Israel allows an “uninterrupted and sufficient flow” of aid into Gaza.
In response, Israel’s foreign minister accused Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan of acting like a “dictator” and announced that Israel would seek other trading partners.
Trade between the two countries was worth almost $7bn last year.
Source: https://monitorulapararii.ro/criza-din-gaza-turcia-a-decis-sa-opreasca-orice-forma-de-comert-cu-israelul-1-54674
Russia blocks GPS signal for civil aviation in seven European countries – Black Sea News – May 3, 2024
Margus Tsahkna, Estonia’s foreign minister, has accused the Russian Federation of a hybrid attack on aviation communications over a significant part of the European Union.
GuildHall writes about this with reference to Tagesschau.
On Estonian television, he said Russia had jammed the GPS signal since the start of its aggression in Ukraine. In the last year and a half, this problem has become very serious in the region.
This incident has affected not only Estonia, but also Finland, Lithuania, Norway, Latvia, Poland and Sweden.
The Baltic country’s foreign minister has assessed these actions as a hybrid impact that violates life and international agreements.
Tsahkna recalled the international convention that lays down the rules of interaction between countries regarding GPS signals, a convention that Russia also recognises. According to him, aggressive actions aimed at disrupting the transmission of the navigation signal in aviation come from the territory of Russian cities such as St. Petersburg, Pskov and Kaliningrad.
Recall that earlier in Finland, the plane failed to land due to GPS interference created by Russia.
The fact that the Russian Federation is behind widespread GPS jamming in Europe was previously stated by an Estonian general.
It has also been reported that Russia attacked Estonia’s GPS in the Leningrad region.
Source: https://www.blackseanews.net/read/216951
GPS jamming situation – GPSJam – 2 May 2024
Sursa: https://gpsjam.org/?lat=46.13500&lon=42.01799&z=3.4&date=2024-05-02
Sitrep: Could the next generation Tempest be the UK’s last manned fighter jet? -Force.net – 3 May 2024
A concept drawing of the Tempest aircraft (Image: MOD)
The UK’s next-generation fighter jet, Tempest, could be the last that will need a human pilot to fly it.
Commander Martin Lowe, programme director of the Future Combat Air System, took part in the latest episode of the Sitrep podcast – which looks at the week’s top defence stories and is available wherever you get your podcast.
Future Combat Air System is a project between the UK, Italy and Japan to develop a sixth-generation fighter – the Tempest.
It’s said to come with concepts that sound almost like science fiction – laser weapons, brain sensors and cockpit controls in a helmet.
But the project also focuses on developing high-capacity networks between aircraft, ground crew and unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs), which is dubbed the “Battle Cloud”.
Air Commodore Lowe said that while he doesn’t think “we’re ready to have a completely unmanned system yet,” that’s the plan for the future.
“We envision the future system to be a mix of manned manned aircraft in the traditional sense and unmanned systems alongside,” he said.
“And we’ll find the right balance of those things to have the military effect we need.
“It’s fair to say that in the future combat air systems will be completely unmanned – how far into the future is a debate.”
However, the centrepiece of the future combat air system remains Tempest.
It is expected that within three years we will see the first prototype of Tempest and in just over 10 years, the UK and two allies want the first Tempest aircraft in service.
Air Cdre Lowe said that while he could not reveal details of the aircraft’s development, he “can talk about a long-range, highly survivable, next-generation platform with truly impressive networking capabilities in other systems”.
“It’s really a brilliant thing,” he said.
“We all see from the news the increasing use of unmanned systems and artificial intelligence-based platforms on the modern battlefield.
“This trend will continue, so we will be developing these systems alongside our pilots in the fighter jets of the future.”
Sitrep’s resident expert, Professor Michael Clarke, said the most important word used by Air Commodore Lowe was “network”.
“This sixth-generation combat capability is about networking,” he said.
“So if one aircraft can direct six other unmanned aircraft, robot aircraft, plus all the connectivity it needs for air control, electronic warfare, ground issues, satellite and so on, it’s about networking.
“The idea, and I’ve heard the Chief of Defence Staff talk about this, he said we could conceive in the not too distant future of an air force of 1,000 aircraft, only 100 of which have pilots in them.
“We are thinking of a navy of 600 ships, of which only 50 are manned ships.
“That’s the thinking as we move towards robotics, where a number of aircraft are used and operate like any other fighter.
“But only one or two pilots are involved in flying 10 or 15 aircraft.”
Source: https://www.forces.net/technology/aircraft/sitrep-could-tempest-be-uks-last-crewed-fighter-jet
Crimea’s water supply has dropped by 13 million cubic metres in one month – Black Sea News – May 3, 2024
The total water supply to temporarily occupied Crimean rivers by the beginning of May amounted to just over 190 million cubic meters, which is about 6.5% lower than the level at the beginning of April.
This was reported by the Crimean Hydrometeorological Center, Kryminform writes.
“The total water supply in reservoirs located in the beds of the main rivers until the beginning of May amounted to 190.87 million cubic meters, which is 13.03 million cubic meters less than a month ago,” the hydrometeorological center said in a statement.
It noted that during the month, a gradual decrease in water levels was observed in the basins of all rivers on the peninsula. Discharges were made from the Partizansky, Zagorsky and Belogorsk reservoirs, and from the Simferopol reservoir they stopped on 17 April. Due to water discharges from the middle and lower parts of the Alma, Kacha, Salgir and Biyuk-Karasu river basins, the high water content remained.
At the same time, precipitation in the last month in Basnow was local: in the basins of the Salgir, Biyuk-Uzenbash, Kokkozka, Kuchuk-Uzenbash rivers on the southern coast of Crimea, as well as in the lower parts of the Kacha and Belbek rivers, precipitation was within 8-19% of normal, and in the basins of other rivers – in the range of 24-54% of normal.
A significant lack of precipitation was also observed in mountainous areas.
Source: https://www.blackseanews.net/read/216957
Kremlin plans to deploy military base in Libya pose threat to NATO – Libya Tribut – 3 May 2024
Russia’s ambition to establish a naval presence in Libya’s eastern region will likely lead to the creation of a base for its nuclear submarines.
For Moscow, this is more than an outpost, writes GuildHall, citing the Libya Tribute.
Vladimir Putin is using Libya as a stepping stone to deploy Russian submarines in the central Mediterranean and to deploy nuclear weapons on Europe’s southern flank.
Enrico Borghi, a member of the Italian parliament’s intelligence committee, recently warned that Russia’s interest in Tobruk in Libya is no secret and could be a prelude to sending its nuclear submarines there, similar to the way the Soviet Union sent its missiles to Cuba in 1962.
Obviously, the presence of submarines within a few hundred kilometres of NATO countries will not contribute to security. In light of these developments, Washington is resuming embassy activity in Libya a decade after suspending its activities.
Russia’s strong presence in Libya not only poses a threat to NATO and European security because of Libya’s geographical position linking Niger, Chad and Sudan to North Africa and Europe, but also makes it of vital strategic importance.
The concentration of Russian forces in Libya has increased significantly, as evidenced by the recent delivery of military supplies to the port of Tobruk. Armoured vehicles, weapons and equipment have arrived in this strategically important eastern city. This is the fifth such delivery in a short period of time. Russia is systematically increasing its military contingent.
The shipment was reportedly shipped from a Russian naval facility in Syria and delivered by Northern Fleet ships.
Libya is part of a wider Russian scheme to establish a permanent military presence, similar to what has been seen in Syria for nearly a decade. Such an expansion is a direct challenge to NATO’s southern flank.
The introduction of advanced air defence systems in Libya by Russian operators, which threatens Western ‘beyond the horizon’ counter-threat operations in North Africa and the Sahel, changes the regional balance of air control and jeopardises freedom of navigation, as the provision of anti-access/denial (A2/AD) assets will nullify NATO’s operational reach over its territory.
How prepared is the West for Libya’s subsequent fall? Strengthening positions in Libya also serves as a gateway for deeper penetration into Africa. Moscow is cleverly exploiting gaps in the partnership, offering African regimes military economic cooperation devoid of the commitments favoured by Western patrons.
This adds embarrassing complications to the security calculus of the NATO alliance, which is now weighing the long-term consequences of a US withdrawal from Niger and eventually Chad.
In short, Moscow’s strategy in Libya is shifting from the usual combination of military action with political influence in Libya to the sidelines. The alliance with regional dictator Khalifa Haftar is contributing to consolidation.
Washington’s decision to re-establish a diplomatic presence in Libya is therefore an attempt to counter Russia’s growing presence while strengthening the UN mission. By re-establishing a physical diplomatic presence in Libya, the US is taking a rare proactive stance with profound implications for Russia’s rise.
The US move represents a tangible commitment to support UN-led mediation efforts and lay the groundwork for crucial elections.
There is no time to waste. Libya’s protracted state of fragmentation poses a challenge for Brussels in managing the influx of migrants, as any unrest between sub-Saharan Africa and the Maghreb serves as a catalyst for a mass movement of people to Europe. This has a negative impact on security, political cohesion and social protection systems in the EU.
In addition, the power vacuum in Libya could become a breeding ground for extremism, which will be difficult to counter, given the constant presence of mercenaries and foreign fighters alongside local militias entrenched in a very complex security landscape.
Earlier, Bloomberg reported that Khalifa Haftar is seeking air defense systems to protect him from rival forces in Tripoli, according to people close to his self-proclaimed Libyan National Army. A defence agreement has been worked out between Russian President Vladimir Putin and Haftar since their first meeting in Moscow in late September.
Source: https://www.blackseanews.net/read/216950
Russian seaports in the first quarter of 2024 – Russian media statistics – 3 May 2024
In the first quarter of 2024, cargo transshipment in Russian ports decreased by 3.1% compared to the same period in 2023.
The decline compared to the same period of the previous year is observed for the second consecutive quarter, reports the Russian website PortNews.
The most significant was the decrease in transshipment of petroleum products (-16.2%). The drop in export volumes is due to the seasonal increase in domestic consumption amid production restrictions caused by “repair works at a number of refineries”.
A significant decline was also characteristic of coal (-15.2% compared to Q1 2023). The main reason holding back coal exports is still rail infrastructure constraints. An additional limiting factor was the fall in world prices during 2023 (with the resumption of the export tax in March 2024), as a result of which some transport routes proved unprofitable for coal exports.
At the same time, the Russian government’s decision to abolish the export tax on thermal coal and anthracite for the period from 1 May to 31 August 2024 should support enterprises in the coal industry.
There is still a decrease in ferrous metals transhipment (-5.2%) and ores (-4.4%). At the end of the quarter, a slight increase was recorded in oil (+0.7%) and liquefied natural gas (+4.6%).
A significant increase in transshipment volumes was demonstrated by containerized cargo (+11.9%), grain (+14.5%) and fertilizers (+37.9%). The increase in transshipment of liquefied natural gas was facilitated by an increase in the volume of shipments from the Baltic terminals – Cryogas-Vysotsk and Gazprom LNG Portovaya. The increase in grain shipments was positively influenced by the expansion of export quotas. A significant increase in fertiliser transhipment is associated with the development of terminals in the Baltic Basin (Ultramar, Bronka, St. Petersburg terminals), including due to fertiliser shipments from Belarus.
Among the basins, an increase in transhipment was observed only in the Caspian Basin (+40.4%), which is associated with an increase in grain transhipment.
In the Baltic Basin, the decline (-1.6%) was small, as the withdrawal of oil products was largely offset by an increase in fertiliser shipments. A decrease in transhipment was observed in the Far East (-4.8%) and Azov-Black Sea (-3.5%) basins (mainly due to lower coal deliveries), as well as in the Arctic Basin (-4.3%) due to a decrease in coal and oil transport along the longest routes.
Container transhipment in TEUs in the first quarter of 2024 increased by 16.9%. Transhipment in the Baltic Basin continued to recover (+97.4%) and stable growth in the Azov-Black Sea Basin (+7.3%). On the contrary, in the Far East, Arctic and Caspian basins, container transhipment decreased (-3.5%, -6.6% and -33.2% respectively).
Source: https://www.blackseanews.net/read/216948
Finnish army commander: Russia will test NATO unity with hybrid attacks – European Pravda – May 3, 2024
Russia is unlikely to attack a NATO member state directly, but could continue its hybrid attacks, including election jamming and interference.
Source: General Janne Jaakkola, the new commander of the Finnish armed forces, in an interview with Reuters.
According to Jaakkola, a test of Article 5 of the North Atlantic Treaty, which provides for collective self-defence in the event of an attack on NATO, “is always possible, but if we take the right measures and maintain unity, I think an attack is unlikely.”
According to the Finnish general, Moscow is now too busy preparing for a new summer offensive in Ukraine to consider attacking NATO.
However, he warned, Russia is likely to continue hybrid attacks against European countries in the form of jamming GPS signals, influence operations and facilitating illegal migration to neighbouring countries, including Finland.
“The idea for the Russians is that they want to cause as much division as possible in Europe so that our unity and cohesion is a little weaker,” Jaakkola said.
Janne Jaakkola’s appointment as commander of the Finnish armed forces on 1 April marked the anniversary of the country’s accession to NATO.
His predecessor in the post, Timo Kivinen, predicted that the subsequent situation with the war in Ukraine would become more difficult before it could change for the better in the future.
Source: https://www.blackseanews.net/read/216940
US Navy could learn from commercial shipbuilders’ standards – The Maritime Executive – 2 May 2024
The US Navy is struggling to build its next generation of surface combatants and submarines on time and on budget, and several major programs are years behind schedule. Delays and changes in ship design are part of the problem, the Navy acknowledges, and the service is taking steps to speed up engineering work, such as co-locating Navy contractors and ship designers in one place to collaborate. The Government Accountability Office (GAO) has plenty of additional recommendations based on the current standard for commercial shipbuilders.
Even the most complex and expensive commercial ships – cruise ships, which are often built by European defense shipbuilders – go from detailed design to first-class delivery in up to four times the time it takes US Navy surface combatants. The difference comes down to a few factors. First, the Navy has a long requirements process that pulls the timeline before detail design begins. Cost and schedule estimates are prepared before the design is stable, leading to changes and budget uncertainty down the road. Supplier selection for ship systems is also slow, further delaying completion of detailed design.
GAO also found that the Navy lacks the structured design timelines and design maturity benchmarks that commercial owners use to make shipbuilding choices. The service does not have a defined, time-bound process for making decisions, and many stakeholders have overlapping authority. This slows down the process of reaching a decision on detailed design elements.
While the Navy has several departments with decision-making authority, it recognizes that it has less strong internal design capabilities and is working on ways to become a more technically competent shipbuilding customer. Adopting modern computer-aided design tools would help this process, according to the GAO.
The GAO recommends that Congress require that all essential design work be completed with 3D modeling before any construction work begins, and that each block should have a complete detail design before it is built (as opposed to the government shipbuilding practice of “concurrent design and construction”). This requirement would include completion of the design of all major distributive systems prior to keel laying.
It also advised the Secretary of the Navy to make basic internal changes, such as requiring that the functional design process be done prior to award of a detailed design contract and establishing effective timelines and standards for design review. It also suggests that people who will use the ships – current or recent surface warfare officers – be incorporated into design review teams to provide feedback to users on practicality.
Source: https://www.maritime-executive.com/article/gao-u-s-navy-could-learn-from-commercial-shipbuilders-standards
US sanctions four shipowners and hundreds of suppliers for ties to Russia – The Maritime Executive – 1 May 2024
The US Treasury is cracking down on the supply network for Russia’s invasion of Ukraine with a broad package of sanctions against companies that sell or ship military products – including a long list of Chinese suppliers of explosives and electronics. The Treasury also sanctioned four shipping companies that did business with Russia’s Arctic LNG 2 export plant project.
The new list includes a constellation of logistics firms offering services tailored to remove sanctions. The list includes Albait Al Khaleeje General Trading LLC, an auto parts company based in the United Arab Emirates, which allegedly arranged more than 6,800 shipments of goods to Russian customers, including soldering and welding machines for the production of military electronics. Six others are based in Russia, such as OOO PV Bridzh (PVB), which provides services for deliveries of “sanctioned goods”. Some of the companies facilitate both the movement of goods and the transfer of funds through third countries to disguise the final destination and evade sanctions.
The sanctions also add further pressure on Russia’s shipbuilding sector, which has already been badly hit by the departure of Western suppliers of machinery and propulsion systems. The new list adds Information Telecommunication Technologies JSC, a Russian supplier of hardware and software for naval applications; Meridian Research and Production Firm JSC, a developer of combat management systems for the Russian Navy’s surface fleet; and Aktsionernoe Obshchestvo Proektno Konstruktorskoe, which designs automated communications systems for warships.
A broad set of sanctions on Chinese exporters of electronics, machinery and chemicals will also have domino effects on the Russian navy. The Treasury has identified dozens of Chinese companies sending Russia the microelectronic systems it needs to build drones, missiles and other military equipment. The department has also designated two Chinese manufacturers of an important ingredient in explosives and rocket propellants, nitrocellulose.
The Treasury and State Departments also announced sanctions against four shipping companies that helped Russian gas company Novatek build its Arctic LNG 2 expansion project, a massive export facility in the Gulf of Ob.
The first is a Singapore-based company, Red Box, known for its specially built module carriers. The firm supported the Yamal LNG project and also provided transportation services for Arctic LNG 2, according to the State Department. Two of its vessels, Audax and Pugnax, have been designated. The second, CFU Shipping, is a Hong Kong-based heavy lift vessel operator. Two of its ships – Hunter Star and Nan Feng Zhi Xing – have been designated. The third and fourth companies are Russian firms, Eko Shipping Ltd. and Transstroy Limited; their fleets – 12 vessels in total – have also been added to the list.
Source: https://www.maritime-executive.com/article/u-s-sanctions-four-shipowners-and-hundreds-of-suppliers-for-russian-ties
U.S. Navy eyes Indian, Japanese and Korean shipyards to quickly repair its warships during war with China – The EurAsian Times – May 3, 2024
The United States is considering carrying out maintenance on up to six of its naval warships at international shipyards in countries such as Japan, South Korea and India in the next fiscal year.
If approved by Congress, the move signals a significant effort to identify foreign shipyards to maintain US Navy ships and underscores the growing emphasis on countering China’s naval power.
Navy Secretary Carlos Del Toro unveiled the plans during a recent House Armed Services Committee hearing on the fiscal 2025 budget, stressing the need to diversify repair locations to ensure operational agility.
Del Toro stressed the importance of preventive measures: “If we were to go to war, then we would have full knowledge of which shipyards and which countries we could actually send these ships to in order to be able to do the damage repair that will be needed.”
If a US warship is damaged during a conflict over Taiwan or the Philippines, the US would be required to transport the damaged ships back to Guam, Hawaii or the US West Coast for repairs.
However, by mobilising foreign shipyards closer to potential conflict zones, the US aims to speed up repairs and quickly send ships back to the battlespace.
Del Toro noted that maintenance activities at international shipyards would typically be completed in less than 90 days, providing a quick turnaround for critical repairs.
The proposed expansion of the use of foreign shipyards builds on recent efforts by the U.S. Navy to explore partnerships with allied nations for ship maintenance.
During a visit to South Korea in March, Del Toro visited shipyards operated by HD Hyundai Heavy Industries and Hanwha Ocean. During his tour, Del Toro hailed South Korean shipbuilding as a vital asset in countering China’s aggressive pursuit of naval dominance.
Later, Del Toro visited Japan, where talks with shipbuilding executives at Mitsubishi Shipyard in Yokohama further explored ways to revitalize the U.S. maritime industry.
India, too, is emerging as a key player in America’s naval strategy, with efforts underway to establish it as a major hub for maintenance and repair activities in the Indo-Pacific region. A joint statement issued after a September 2023 meeting between President Biden and Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi highlighted India’s role in servicing US naval assets.
The US Navy has signed ship repair agreements with several Indian shipbuilders such as Larsen and Toubro, Mazagon Dock Shipbuilders and Cochin Shipyard, with audits underway to expand operations in the port of Kolkata.
General Pat Ryder, the Pentagon spokesman, said last year that the US was trying to make India a logistics hub for the US military and other Indo-Pacific partners, suggesting that Indian ports could serve a strategic purpose in potential conflicts.
Shashank S. Patel, a geopolitical and defence analyst, told EurAsian Times, “Amid China’s rise as a new naval power, certainly, the US is actively exploring strategic arrangements with allied nations due to three major considerations – A) Creating competitive maritime strengths. B) Reducing downtime for US naval assets. C) Establishing advanced docks outside the Chinese strike zone.”
Patel added: “Currently, there are only a limited number of shipyards where US advanced ships can undergo maintenance. The US government has signed more than seven MSRA reciprocal agreements globally to address this shortage.
US needs Asian allies to counter China
To strengthen its presence in the Indo-Pacific region, the US is pursuing a strategy called “places, not bases”, seeking access to locations where it currently has no military facilities.
This initiative is crucial to deterring China. According to Pentagon officials, it will also ensure rapid mobilisation in the event of a conflict. The move comes amid China’s proactive engagement with countries such as Sri Lanka and Pakistan, where it has built or expanded ports as part of its Belt and Road initiative.
To counterbalance this, the US has been quick to establish new security agreements or upgrade existing ones with several nations in the region. In recent years, the US has concluded agreements with Vietnam, Japan, Palau, the Philippines, Australia, Papua New Guinea and India.
The agreements vary in scope, with some involving arrangements for ship and submarine repair and supply, while others focus on improving infrastructure and strengthening maritime law enforcement capabilities.
These efforts are essential to counter China’s formidable navy, which outnumbers the US fleet. Beijing currently boasts a fleet of no fewer than 350 warships, outnumbering the US contingent of 290 military vessels.
The US Navy has also faced challenges in completing maintenance of its surface ships on time, prompting it to explore the use of allied shipyards to maintain its warships in the Indo-Pacific region.
In a Bloomberg editorial, retired US Navy Admiral James Stavridis stressed the importance of building a coalition of allies to balance China’s naval power.
“Given the global demands on the U.S. fleet and the fact that any fighting in the South China Sea would take place in the shadow of the Chinese mainland – in effect, a massive and unassailable aircraft carrier – the U.S. must pursue a coalition strategy to balance the numbers,” he wrote.
The push to use foreign shipyards underscores the pressing need to expand US Navy capacity amid concerns about domestic limitations.
Patel explained, “The U.S. decision to sign reciprocal maintenance agreements with like-minded nations has invested in their shipyards unable to stay in full maintenance or repair of their ships today due to volume and frequency. Another reason is that the US Navy is burdened with declining and uncertain budget allocations in recent years.
He pointed out, “It is popularly heard in PLA-N discussions that US shipyards are the greatest weakness in their warfighting potential. To refit it in America’s favour, the only way out is to align with the coastal machineries of India, Japan and South Korea, along with developing them to US requirements.
Patel added. “It will benefit the said countries because of their common interests against China and strengthen their domestic capabilities to the next level of progress. By advancing the shipyards, the US and its allies are materializing regional obligations, which they have signed under several groupings.
Source: https://www.eurasiantimes.com/us-navy-eyes-indian-japanese-korean-shipyards/amp/
‘Great game’: Britain works to checkmate Russia in Central Asia years after losing to Moscow – The EurAsian Times – May 3, 2024
From the mid-19th century to World War II, nearly a century was the era of British imperialism’s great filigree, focusing on the Central Asian region. It had become the active playground of the two imperial powers of the time, namely Tsarist Russia and Britain.
Their rivalry led to the famous strategy called “The Great Central Asian Game”, written by Lord Curzon, Britain’s foreign secretary.
These strategies aimed to confine Imperial Russia within its borders in Central Asia and not allow its forces to move south, risking the stability of British power in its Indian colony. The strategy encompassed the neighbouring regions of Iran, Afghanistan and Sinkiang (now renamed Xinjiang by the Chinese).
After World War II
World War II was a major event that sidelined various lesser regional strategies at work then, including Lord Curzon’s Great Game in Central Asia.
Although the Allies emerged victorious in the war, Britain left a much weaker colonial power financially and economically than it had been previously. The Cold War era brought the United States to the forefront of world politics, and Britain became almost a back-bencher.
In this scenario, we find that London played a modest role and did not matter much in the strategies developed by former allies in shaping things in Central Asia.
Britain also had to end its pre-war strategies in Central Asia because the Soviet Union was determined to extend its jurisdiction to the Badakhshan mountain range.
Iron Curtain
Winston Churchill’s famous phrase ‘Iron Curtain’ accurately explains the land situation in the traditional territories of Turkestan, which were divided into 5 Central Asian and 2 Trans-Caspian states as a result of the delimitation process completed under the leadership of Joseph Stalin of the Soviet Union.
By 1924, the delimitation process was almost completed and a new geography of Central Asia came into being.
In general, the outside world knew nothing about what was happening in these states behind the Iron Curtain. The region was no longer under Britain’s active surveillance, and American and other Western intelligence agencies had little, if any, access to the ground realities of the vast steppes.
Implosion and the aftermath
The Soviet Union imploded in 1991, and the 5+2 federating units in Central Asia declared their independence from Moscow’s control. It was a difficult decision for them, but ultimately it turned out to be a blessing in disguise.
Three and a half decades have passed, and today these Central Asian states are part of the world community and equal partners in the United Nations. They have developed their respective political and administrative systems, are part of the international economic system and manage their financial transactions with major financial organisations around the world.
In addition, these republics conduct their foreign policy independently and have concluded bilateral or multilateral agreements to boost their economies and development agenda.
Cameron visits the region in the UK
British Foreign Secretary David Cameron recently concluded his five-day official visit to five Central Asian republics. This is the first visit by a senior British diplomat to the region in decades.
Perhaps the British foreign secretary has begun to sense that his country’s renewed interest in Central Asia has become a geopolitical imperative. With each passing day, the contemporary history of the region is confronted with new situations and their consequences.
A few months ago, the UK Parliament’s Foreign Affairs Committee published its report entitled ‘Countries at the Crossroads: UK Engagement in Central Asia’. It criticised London’s low level of engagement in the region and called deepening ties “a geopolitical imperative”. He recommended a visit to the region at foreign minister level.
The report highlighted the echoes of Russia’s war in Ukraine “and the status of the region as a way for Moscow to evade UK sanctions”.
Alicia Keams, chair of the Foreign Affairs Committee, welcomed Cameron’s visit to Central Asia. She pledged a commitment of £50 million ($62 million) in assistance from the UK, which “could help Britain increase its soft power and influence in the region”.
She wrote on the parliament’s website, “Situated along the fault line between Russia and China, protecting the independence and sovereignty of Central Asian countries is of paramount importance.”
Keams was probably inspired by a report David Cameron sent when he was in Ashkhabad (Turkmenistan). He used the term “sandwich” to refer to Central Asia’s position between Russia and China. He mentioned that Iran was just 40 kilometres over those mountains.
Highlights of Cameron’s statement
In a televised interview, the British Foreign Secretary made some interesting remarks that provided insight into the British Foreign Secretary’s views on contemporary Central Asia.
He said he was the first UK foreign secretary to ever visit Turkmenistan, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan since 1977.
In his video on 24 April, he admitted that “perhaps we should have done more in the past in these countries”. Talking about Turkmenistan, he said the country was the best example of why “these countries” are not equal in interest with the UK. It is one of the most authoritarian in the world and relies almost exclusively for its survival on the purchase of its natural gas by China and Russia.
He added that in the last quarter of 2023, bilateral trade between Turkmenistan and the UK reached just £66 million ($82.5 million), according to the UK Department of Business and Trade, less than any of the other six countries.
Speaking at an event with the Kazakh foreign minister, Cameron stressed that London is not asking Central Asian countries to disown either China or Russia. He told his counterpart: “We are here because we believe that you should be able to choose to partner with us in a way that is good for the security and prosperity of both countries.”
In conclusion
The above is just a glimpse into the policy framework that the UK government may be considering for Central Asia. David Cameron’s visit to the Central Asian republics and his integration with the local leadership (no doubt a very limited one) is significant because it is ultimately the UK Foreign Secretary who will have the final say on what the framework for UK activism in Central Asia should be.
Perhaps the focus will be on security and the appropriate use of natural resources. Overall, the British Foreign Secretary is almost sceptical that the roots of democracy will take root in these republics any time soon.
Source: https://www.eurasiantimes.com/the-great-game-uk-works-to-checkmate/amp/
Vladimir Putin’s Chechen time bomb – The National Interest – 3 May 2024
Chechen dictator Ramzan Kadyrov’s poor health and lack of a succession plan may create opportunities for terrorist and separatist activity in Russia’s most unstable republic.
Ramzan Kadyrov, Chechnya’s leader since 2007, was diagnosed with pancreatic necrosis in 2019. Last week it was reported that his health had seriously deteriorated and that he was in a “critical condition”, with probably months to live. Novaya Gazeta Evropa broke the story based on research dating back to 2019, including reports of Kadyrov’s absence from many key public appearances, including the United Russia Party Congress last December. Appearing in photos with Vladimir Putin last September, the Chechen leader’s face appeared bloated. A PR video of Kadyrov pumping iron in a gym was released this week to promote a healthy image. It’s not very convincing; he’s lifting at most 50% of his weight, usually much less, than I, a sixty-five-year-old getting a hip replacement next month, can lift. Ramzan is not in good health.
Chechnya has been fairly stable since Ramzan took over as president at the age of thirty, three years after his father Akhmat, also president, was blown up in a Victory Day celebration in May 2004. The relationship between Putin and Kadyrov, though framed as father and son, is actually a Faustian bargain. Kadyrov receives huge subsidies from Moscow to distribute as he sees fit and free to control the notoriously troubled republic. Putin gets a stable Chechnya, and Kadyrov has been eager to support Putin by sending over 20,000 Chechen soldiers to the war in Ukraine and carrying out occasional political assassinations.
Kadyrov reportedly wants to maintain a family dynasty (he has at least fourteen known children) and recently promoted his eighteen-year-old son Ahmat to minister of sports and youth and sixteen-year-old Adam to administrator at the University of Special Forces in the Chechen capital Grozny. Adam bears the strongest resemblance to his father and seems to have inherited his father’s sadistic and violent nature. In September 2023, Ramzan released a video of Adam, then aged fifteen, beating a detained Ukrainian accused of burning the Koran. However, since Chechnya’s constitution requires the president to be at least thirty years old, it would seem unlikely that Kadyrov Sr. will be able to engineer a family dynastic succession, at least in the short term.
No doubt the Kremlin will seek a peaceful succession. Ramzan Kadyrov’s consistent support for Putin has been invaluable to the Russian president, even if it has sparked criticism from some in Russia’s intelligence and security agencies who see Kadyrov as a loose cannon with his own regional ambitions in the North Caucasus. But Chechens’ historical grievances against Russia run deep. Chechens fought for decades for independence against the Tsars in the 19th century, suffered from Stalin’s mass deportations from their homeland, and fought against Moscow’s rule in two wars in the 1990s and 2000s. Chechnya is a volatile place with a well-armed population.
The ISIS-K-sponsored attack by Tajik workers on Moscow’s Crocus Hall, which killed more than 140 people, marked the end of a six-year lull in Islamic terrorist attacks in Russia. More than twenty years before 2018, the catalyst for almost all terrorist attacks in Russia came from Chechen and other groups in the North Caucasus. In 2012 and 2013, most fighters from the North Caucasus found conditions too difficult to fight at home and moved to join ISIS in Syria and Iraq, where, by 2018, most had been killed.
However, the global jihadist group’s ties to the North Caucasus date back to the 1990s, and ties to ISIS remain. Chechnya was de facto independent in the late 1990s as the Islamic Republic of Ichkeria and served as a criminal hub for trafficking in all manner of illicit goods. When legendary Chechen leader and perpetrator of Russia’s worst terrorist attacks, Shamil Basaev, led Chechen troops across the border into Dagestan in August 1999, the second Chechen war began, catapulting new Prime Minister Vladimir Putin to public acclaim.
Putin understands the immense value of a submissive Chechnya in the Russian Federation. His symbiotic relationship with Ramzan Kadyrov has served each leader’s interests well, but has not been without its costs. Kadyrov and his feared legions of “Kadyrovites” have created many potential opponents of stability in Chechnya and Russia in general. The high number of Chechen casualties in Ukraine adds to simmering discontent there. It is not hard to imagine that ISIS and other jihadist groups could come to see Chechnya and the North Caucasus once again as an attractive target for chaos. Putin’s concern about this possibility could be a factor in his public support for the Palestinians in the Gaza war. With Russian intelligence and security forces already stretched to breaking point, the near future would be a particularly inopportune time for unrest in Chechnya.
Source: https://nationalinterest.org/feature/vladimir-putin%E2%80%99s-chechen-time-bomb-210864
A China in decline is a dangerous China – The National Interest – 3 May 2024
Even if the United States fell into decline in absolute economic and military terms, China could have risen early and plunged into an even steeper decline. In this case, the margin between competitors would widen even if both countries were declining. If this is the way Xi Jinping & Co. size things up, they could order the People’s Liberation Army into action while China has the best chance of success. There is ample precedent.
China is in a hurry. It is rushing because the Chinese Communist Party has staggering ambitions but fewer and fewer resources to fulfil them. A gulf has opened up between political goals and the means to achieve them. The pursuit of unattainable goals poses a danger to China or any other strategic actor. Political and military leaders have been known to roll the iron dice anyway.
So has Beijing.
In any case, this is the gist of what Admiral John Aquilino, former commander of US Indo-Pacific Command, told reporters in Tokyo last week. (Admiral Samuel Paparo is expected to relieve him of his command on Friday.) Admiral Aquilino derided the claim by party tycoons that the Chinese economy is growing at 5.3% a year, declaring the statistic “untrue”. He went so far as to portray it as a “bankrupt” economy.
This might sound like a pleasant story for Indo-Pacific powers competing against China in the Taiwan Strait, the China Seas and along the Sino-Indian land border. A bankrupt economy makes a shaky substructure for military aggression. Yet Aquilino warned that Beijing is throwing money into military coffers with abandon. The official figure given for this year’s annual increase in the defence budget is 7.2%. He opined, “I think it is drastically more than that.”
If the INDOPACOM chief is right, party leaders are promoting China’s economic performance, perhaps to destroy its image as a preferred economic partner, while buying arms, perhaps to assuage Asian societies’ fears about their domineering neighbour. No one should be bothered by the Party’s lying game with statistics . After all, China’s government statistics are worth exactly what you pay for them.
In other words, Communist Party tycoons promote or stifle official figures as a matter of course to suit their interests. But while they may be able to mask China’s decline by dissembling, it is doubtful they can sustain a blatant mismatch between means and ends for long. Few competitors can. And a free-falling economy eventually drags military power down with it.
The ends, the ways and the means must be in sync for a nation to flourish: this is Strategy 101. It is rarely a sound strategy for politicians to write checks that the military cannot cash.
Of note, China’s dilemma is not unique either. A declining antagonist – or one whose leadership has come to believe, rightly or wrongly, that it is declining – can be an extremely dangerous antagonist. If senior leaders see the need to use violent force to achieve their goals, and if they are convinced that their nation is losing ground to antagonists with the physical power to counter their goals, they may feel that now is the time to act. Or never.
Why not do it now, if now is as good as it gets?
And indeed, “now or never” logic is common in the annals of military history, including East Asian history. Imperial Japan was particularly prone to it. It was an island state renowned for excellence in arms, but it lacked the natural resource base to defeat a mobilized enemy such as Russia or America. Consequently, opportunism was a watchword for Japanese foreign policy and strategy. Tokyo acted when it had a temporary advantage.
Two cases stand out in modern Japanese history. The Imperial Japanese Navy struck first during the Russo-Japanese War of 1904-1905, executing a surprise raid against the Russian Pacific squadron at Port Arthur on the Liaotung Peninsula in northern China. The Japanese Navy struck again in 1941, deploying its fleet of aircraft carriers to strike the US Pacific Fleet’s battle line at Pearl Harbor. In both conflicts, Japanese leaders saw an adversary boasting far greater military potential, turning natural resources and taxpayer largesse into actionable naval and military power. Given time, they would build insurmountable military power. Japan would lose.
By contrast, Japan had an advantage in military power being at the beginning of the Russo-Japanese War and the Pacific War. In both cases, Tokyo chose to strike first before declaring war. Japanese leaders’ calculations: the opportunity was fleeting, and Japan must act before its moment passes – never to return.
And this made strategic sense. The notion that adverse trends – not just military, but economic, demographic, etc. – could spur aggression finds approval in the classics of strategy. The martial sage Carl von Clausewitz, to name one learned commentator, confirms this possibility. History, he points out, shows that weaker belligerents choose to fight the strong in certain circumstances. “Assume that a minor state is in conflict with a much stronger one and expects its position to weaken every year,” he writes. “If war is inevitable, should it not make the most of its opportunities before its position worsens further?”
National leaders, then, can initiate fights if they are convinced that trend lines are becoming hostile to their aspirations. Their relative position could deteriorate as the nation falters domestically, as rivals prosper, or – the nightmare scenario – both. If Communist Party leaders believe that time will send China into an increasingly weak position relative to adversaries like the United States and its allies, they may decide to seize the day.
In other words, a China in real or perceived decline is a dangerous China.
Politics and war, it seems, are messy affairs. That’s why I’ve never been a fan of Thucydides’ Trap, Professor Graham Allison’s account of the dynamic between rising and declining powers. In Allison’s words, both rising and declining competitors are tempted to strike as brand power approaches the crossover point beyond which it is stronger than the erstwhile hegemon. To oversimplify a trifle, Allison’s thesis holds that the declining challenger may opt for war before its margin of superiority falls to zero, while the rising competitor may opt for war to hasten its emergence or to parry its rival’s pre-emptive assault.
This, of course, is a riff on Thucydides’ classic History of the Peloponnesian War, which chronicles the warfare that rocked Greek antiquity in the 5th century BC. Or, rather, a riff on a passage from his treatise. The historian muses on the causes of the war between rival leagues led by the city-states of Athens and Sparta. He posits that the “real cause” of the war, the most basic one, was “the one that was kept most out of sight”. Thucydides’ hypothesis: ‘The growth of Athens’ power and the alarm it inspired in Sparta made war inevitable’.
Understand? The rise of a new ambitious and powerful opponent fuels fear on the part of the established power, making war inevitable. This is certainly a possibility. But think about it. This was Thucydides’ interpretation of the reasons that drove two specific combatants, Sparta and Athens, into a whirlwind. He produces no quotes from leaders or ordinary citizens on either side to support his hypothesis – this despite recounting dozen speeches and despite confessing that he sometimes got speakers to say what he thought they should have said. His omission is telling.
Nor does the historian announce that he intends to enunciate a universal law of international politics and war, even assuming that he correctly understands the ulterior motives of the Greek combatants.
But my main complaint is that Thucydides’ trap seems too linear, too mechanical, too pained. It feels like an attempt to reduce interactions between human societies to mathematics. Sure, you might be able to graph the relative strength of two competitors, and sure, in some cases you could measure when the challenger would eclipse the established strength. Making the effort might prove useful. But think about the freshman calculation. Gradients change as the curves work their way through time. Inflection points, highs and lows come and go. Averages reverse and reverse again.
Rarely do human affairs follow smooth, continuous, straight projections from the past into the future. In fact, Clausewitz criticizes commentators who neglect “to take proper account of the endless complexities involved” in war. “As we have seen, the conduct of war branches out in almost every direction and has no definite limits; whereas any system, any pattern, has the finite nature of a synthesis. There is a fractal nature to strategic competition and warfare.
Take it from an ancestor of complexity theory.
So much for the rise and fall parables. Think of alternative possibilities. The challenger could peak before it reaches the crossover point that heralds its primacy. The established power could regain momentum, restoring or extending its relative superiority even as the challenger continues to rise. Or both competitors could decline, and the balance between them would depend on who declined faster. Or discontinuities occur. Something could happen to one or both curves, interrupting trend lines to an unpredictable, black swan effect . For example, a third competitor could appear, overtaking both competitors or giving rise to a triangular contest for supremacy. Etc.
In conclusion, Thucydides’ Trap projects a possible competitive dynamic into a universe of alternative futures.
Even if the United States fell into decline in absolute economic and military terms, China could have risen early and plunged into an even steeper decline. In this case, the margin between competitors would widen even if both countries were declining. If this is the way Xi Jinping & Co. size things up, they could order the People’s Liberation Army into action while China has the best chance of success. There is ample precedent.
Back to Admiral Aquilino’s diagnosis of what hurts China and could spur aggression. China may have begun its descent without ever overcoming US power. Even if the United States had fallen into decline in absolute economic and military terms, China could have risen early and plunged into an even steeper decline. In that case, the margin between competitors would widen even if both countries were declining. If this is the way Xi Jinping & Co. size things up, they could order the People’s Liberation Army into action while China has the best chance of success. There is ample precedent.
With apologies to Thucydides, perhaps we should change his dictum to suit the US-China contest: ‘China’s withering power and the alarm this has inspired in Beijing have made war inevitable’.
Source: https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/declining-china-dangerous-china-210861