29.2 C
London
Thursday, July 9, 2026
Home Blog

India-Japan convergence reshaping Indo-Pacific’s power balance

0
india-japan-convergence-reshaping-indo-pacific’s-power-balance
India-Japan convergence reshaping Indo-Pacific’s power balance

Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi’s meeting with Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi in New Delhi on July 2 produced a long list of agreements spanning artificial intelligence, batteries, critical minerals, defense manufacturing, energy resilience and financial cooperation.

While the agreements made headlines, the larger message was the Indo-Pacific’s shifting geostrategic framework. Set against the backdrop of evolving China-Japan dynamics since Takaichi took office, her meeting with Modi underscored that the India-Japan convergence is both structural and strategic.

The meeting signaled a quest for a new economic security architecture in the Indo-Pacific — one that seeks to both manage influence and hedge against vulnerability.

China’s growing willingness to use export controls, investment restrictions and other forms of economic coercion has reinforced concerns about concentrated production networks and technological dependence.

At the same time, the Trump administration’s transactional approach to alliances and burden-sharing — along with the symbolic shift toward “Pacific,” rather than “Indo-Pacific,” in US strategic nomenclature — has reminded regional partners that they can no longer assume continuity in Washington’s strategic priorities.

The central question confronting large Indo-Pacific nations is no longer who they align with, but how they configure the technologies, industries and production systems on which economic security ultimately depends.

Frontier technologies and digital-industrial architectures are emerging as instruments of geopolitical leverage because these platforms and networks are becoming inseparable from national security, economic systems, surveillance and intelligence collection, trade governance and political influence.

The geography of these ecosystems and the interconnections between them determine whether states possess the technological, industrial and resource base necessary to sustain influence. Together, they form the architecture that defines economic security and strategic vulnerability.

The defense-industrial dimension of the India-Japan agreement is particularly revealing. The joint production of the UNICORN integrated naval antenna and communications mast is significant because it demonstrates how industrial policy and defense policy are becoming increasingly intertwined. The distinction between civilian and military industrial ecosystems is steadily narrowing as technological competitiveness itself becomes an element of deterrence.

The Indo-Pacific’s future balance of power will increasingly depend not only on military capability or diplomatic alignment, but on who can configure and anchor resilient industrial ecosystems linking technology, resources, manufacturing and defense production across trusted partners.

Semiconductors, artificial intelligence, critical minerals, batteries, trusted digital infrastructure and defense manufacturing are becoming instruments of influence.

Tokyo is not simply looking for an alternative investment destination in Asia. It is seeking partners capable of anchoring a geographically distributed, resilient industrial ecosystem — one that can absorb geopolitical shocks without the dependencies and vulnerabilities that have emerged in existing supply chains and markets.

Therein lies the significance of the Modi-Takaichi summit as a framework for economic security and influence across the Indo-Pacific. It is about building complementary capabilities that provide a long-term hedge against rival US-China axes as trade weaponization and strategic vulnerabilities pose growing threats.

India and Japan occupy vital nodes in Asia’s industrial landscape outside China. Their capabilities are, in some ways, complementary: Japan contributes capital, advanced manufacturing, precision engineering and frontier technologies, while India offers manufacturing scale, software capability, engineering talent, a large domestic market and a strategic location connecting the Western Pacific with the Indian Ocean.

These attributes make India less an alternative to China than a vital component of a more distributed Indo-Pacific production network — one that hedges against economic and national security vulnerabilities. New Delhi’s pursuit of hedging, balance and strategic autonomy amid the rival U.S. and China-dominated axes, combined with its economic capabilities, gives it a singular position in Asia.

The Takaichi-Modi meeting could thus mark the start of a wider shift toward technology-defense-industrial systems integration across the larger Indo-Pacific economies seeking a hedge against the rival US-China axes. Takaichi’s interpretation of Japan’s Free and Open Indo-Pacific (FOIP) strategy reflects this shift. Under Takaichi, economic security has become FOIP’s defining characteristic.

Strategic industries now occupy a central place in Japan’s strategic thinking, alongside maritime security. FOIP has consequently evolved from a framework for preserving regional order into one for managing strategic vulnerability at a time when economic interdependence itself has become a source of geopolitical risk.

India fits well with Japan’s need to anchor a wider industrial ecosystem that does not replicate the concentration risks associated with China-dominated production networks. The agreements signed in New Delhi, therefore, represent more than an expansion of bilateral cooperation. They show how India and Japan are seeking to reconfigure strategic influence through technology-defense-industrial capabilities rather than diplomacy alone.

Neither India nor Japan seeks to diminish the US’s central role in the region. Both recognize that they cannot address global vulnerabilities arising from critical-mineral dependencies, semiconductor supply chains or technological concentration without American participation in the global technology-industry architecture. Japan and India also understand the need for alliances that can endure regardless of shifts in American politics.

The Quad will remain a key Indo-Pacific strategic coordination framework, central to the China context. But its significance increasingly lies in facilitating cooperation among Asia’s largest industrial, technological and defense manufacturing systems and networks.

The agreements announced in New Delhi, therefore, are not simply discrete bilateral initiatives. They point to an emerging Indo-Pacific strategic and economic security architecture.

Vivek Y Kelkar is a researcher and analyst focused on the intersection of geoeconomics, geopolitics and corporate strategy.

Israeli Knesset approves freezing more Palestinian clearance funds

0
israeli-knesset-approves-freezing-more-palestinian-clearance-funds
Israeli Knesset approves freezing more Palestinian clearance funds

The Israeli Knesset on Wednesday approved in its first reading a bill that would allow additional Palestinian Authority clearance funds to be frozen, a move expected to increase financial pressure on the authority.

Israeli daily Haaretz reported that the bill would authorise the freezing of additional Palestinian Authority funds.

Under the proposal, submitted by Moshe Passal of the Likud party, Israel would freeze each year an amount equal to the funds transferred by the Palestinian Authority to Gaza during the previous year.

According to Haaretz, the frozen money would be used to pay compensation to people affected by what the bill describes as terrorist acts originating from Gaza.

READ: Israeli air strikes, shelling and home demolitions continue across Gaza Strip

The bill was backed by 12 of the Knesset’s 120 members, with no votes against. It will now return to the Knesset’s Foreign Affairs and Defence Committee for further discussion before being brought for its second and third readings, which are required before it can become law.

Haaretz said Israel is currently withholding about 14 billion shekels ($4.6 billion) in Palestinian tax revenues collected on imports destined for the Palestinian territories, known as clearance funds. Israel says the funds are being withheld because they are used to encourage and support terrorism.

The newspaper added that while the withheld revenues continue to accumulate in the Israeli treasury each month, the Palestinian Authority government in Ramallah has been forced to introduce further austerity measures to cope with a financial crisis that has continued for nearly three years.

According to Haaretz, the total amount withheld has been accumulating since 2019, with around 400 million shekels ($131.41 million) added each month.

OPINION: Israel debated: Why Palestine is rewriting the rules of domestic US politics

Western Europe records hottest June on record

0
western-europe-records-hottest-june-on-record
Western Europe records hottest June on record


Western Europe just experienced ​its warmest June on record, EU scientists confirmed on Thursday, after an extreme heatwave at the ‌end of the month smashed temperature records, disrupted power supplies and shut schools.

Last month was also the second-warmest June globally, and the planet experienced the highest June sea surface temperatures since records began, the EU’s Copernicus Climate Change Service (C3S) said in a ​monthly bulletin.

The average temperature in Western Europe last month was 20.74 degrees Celsius (69.3 degrees Fahrenheit), more ​than 3 C above the average for June during 1991-2020, the data showed.

Copernicus defines ⁠the region as spreading from Spain and the United Kingdom eastwards as far as Italy, Germany and part ​of Austria. Western Europe has now suffered three intense heatwaves in as many months, with countries including Spain ​and Portugal in the grip of another this week.

“June 2026 underscored how profoundly the climate is changing,” said Samantha Burgess, strategic lead at the European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts. “The result is increasingly intense heatwaves, a persistently warm ocean, and growing risks ​for people, ecosystems and infrastructure across Europe and beyond.”

National authorities reported more than 4,700 excess deaths in France, ​Belgium, Spain and the Netherlands during the June heatwave — with the total across other countries likely to be higher — while ‌the intense ⁠heat also fuelled wildfires in Iberia and France and exacerbated drought conditions.

Greenhouse gas emissions, mostly from burning coal, oil and gas, have increased the planet’s average temperature to around 1.4 C above pre-industrial times in the 19th century, according to the World Meteorological Organization. That higher baseline means temperatures can now hit higher peaks during ​heatwaves.

“The relationship between heatwaves ​and global warming is about ⁠as straightforward as it gets: on a hotter planet, there will be more heatwaves, and they will become more intense,” said Joeri Rogelj, a climate scientist at ​Imperial College London.

Globally, C3S said other factors were at play in driving sea ​surface temperatures to ⁠a record high for June — including the development of a strong El Niño weather pattern in the Pacific Ocean.

El Niño did not contribute to Europe’s June heatwave, while climate change played a clear role in worsening the extreme temperatures, ⁠a scientific study ​after the event found.

C3S’s temperature records go back to 1940, and ​are cross-checked with global temperature records dating back to 1850.

Miami-based City Labs achieves a first for commercial nuclear power in space

0
miami-based-city-labs-achieves-a-first-for-commercial-nuclear-power-in-space
Miami-based City Labs achieves a first for commercial nuclear power in space

The proliferation of nuclear power in space got a little more real Tuesday with the launch of a small satellite developed by a Florida-based company specializing in nuclear micro-power technology.

It’s a long way from launching a bona fide nuclear reactor, a breakthrough that could help power a permanent Moon base and efficiently drive rockets throughout the Solar System. But you have to start somewhere.

The satellite from Miami-based City Labs is named BOHR, short for Betavoltaic Orbital High-Reliability, and it launched on a SpaceX rideshare mission Tuesday alongside 80 other payloads. SpaceX’s Falcon 9 rocket released the BOHR satellite into an orbit between 350 and 400 miles (nearly 600 km) in altitude.

Starting small

City Labs bills the BOHR mission as “the world’s first commercial nuclear-powered satellite and first nuclear CubeSat.” CubeSats are modest in scale, and images released by City Labs suggest BOHR is built on a “1U” CubeSat platform, a cubical design measuring about the same size as a softball. BOHR’s power source is a nuclear betavoltaic battery that generates electricity from the decay of tritium, a radioactive isotope of hydrogen.

“This is a historic step for commercial nuclear power in space,” said Peter Cabauy, CEO of City Labs, in a statement. “BOHR demonstrates that safe, compact, and regulatory-approved nuclear power systems are ready for routine commercial deployment. This capability enables persistent, always-on payload operations that are not constrained by sunlight or battery life.”

City Labs will use its experimental NanoTritium power generator in demonstration mode to supply electricity to a payload onboard the BOHR CubeSat. The spacecraft itself uses conventional solar power for regular operations, the company said. Betavoltaic batteries are best suited for low-power applications that require a reliable, long-duration source of electricity. These use cases include remote terrestrial sensors—such as in undersea or polar locations—and instrumentation for secure communications. City Labs is also studying the use of its NanoTritium technology to power implantable medical devices.

The space industry is the other near-term market for City Labs. NASA has worked with City Labs to look at using nuclear tritium power sources to support a network of small sensors that could be deployed into permanently shadowed craters on the Moon to scout for resources like water ice. The US Air Force and Space Force have given City Labs several research contracts, funding the development of an experimental tritium AA battery for cryptographic devices and a self-powered wireless autonomous imaging sensor. City Labs says its betavoltaic systems could also power heaters for microelectronics in harsh environments.

It’s important to remember that the company’s betavoltaic power systems are small—in the nanowatt to microwatt range—far short of the electricity required to power a smartphone, much less a large spacecraft or a Moon base. Still, the BOHR mission is a step in the right direction for proponents of nuclear power in space. Until now, nuclear-powered spacecraft have been solely owned by government agencies like NASA and the US military.

Commercial nuclear-powered space missions face regulatory hurdles, and BOHR was the first commercial nuclear mission to pass through the Federal Aviation Administration’s new nuclear launch approval process. The FAA authorized City Labs to launch the BOHR mission last September.

It helped that the BOHR satellite carries just a tiny amount of radioactive material, and the tritium isotope decays more quickly than plutonium or uranium. It’s also less toxic than other well-known nuclear fuels. “Tritium emits a weak form of radiation, a low-energy beta particle similar to an electron. The tritium radiation does not travel very far in air and cannot penetrate the skin,” the Nuclear Regulatory Commission says on its website.

Future missions will have to launch with far more nuclear material than City Labs’ BOHR mission, but this week’s launch served as a first step.

“The BOHR mission serves as a pathfinder for future nuclear-powered spacecraft supporting both civil and national security missions,” City Labs said in a statement.

Open letter to NATO: the false promise of militarized security

0
open-letter-to-nato:-the-false-promise-of-militarized-security
Open letter to NATO: the false promise of militarized security

As NATO convenes once again to double down on military spending, arms production and the logic of deterrence through superior firepower — this despite the alliance’s own members having repeatedly used force in violation of international law in recent years, in Iran, Iraq, VenezuelaLibyaSyria and the open-ended War on Terror — it is worth asking: What kind of security are we actually buying?

These interventions, often justified under the guise of humanitarianism or collective defense, have in practice destabilized entire regions, fueled insurgencies, and visited immense suffering upon some of the world’s most vulnerable populations.

The result is a perverse paradox of an alliance that presents itself as the guardian of a rules-based order but has, through its own actions, undermined that very order, deepening the insecurity it claims to combat.

The record is unambiguous: Militarized security is reactive, not preventive. It treats symptoms—territorial disputes, insurgencies, great-power rivalry—while ignoring root causes such as inequality, resource scarcity, political exclusion, and the erosion of trust in institutions. The post-1945 era, for all its flaws, demonstrated that stability is not the product of arms races, but of norms, institutions, and the rule of law.

The relative peace among liberal democracies, the decline in international armed conflicts, and the gradual expansion of human rights all occurred not because states built bigger arsenals, but because they built stronger frameworks for cooperation.

International organizations — including the United Nations, the World Health Organization, the International Labor Organization, and the International Court of Justice — have encouraged cooperation and stability, while aircraft carriers or hypersonic missiles have mainly spread terror and destruction.

Yet as NATO attempts to expand its influence, these very institutions of social cooperation are under attack by the same NATO member states who have cut funding and even withdrawn from the organizations in some cases.

The opportunity cost of this militarized approach urged by NATO is staggering. The combined military expenditure of NATO members now exceeds US$1.3 trillion annually according to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI).

The UN Development Programme’s (UNDP) Human Development Reports indicates this is a figure that dwarfs the estimated $40 billion needed to close the global gaps in education, healthcare, and food security.

For the price of a single nuclear-powered submarine, a nation could fund universal pre-kindergarten for its entire population for a year. For the cost of a new fighter jet squadron, it could eliminate malaria in an entire region. These are not moral abstractions; they are strategic failures.

Study after study has shown that spending on healthcare, education, and renewable energy generates far greater economic multipliers in terms of job creation and GDP growth than equivalent spending on defense. Military expenditure distorts economies, prioritizing a narrow industrial base of contractors and exporters over diversified, sustainable development.

It exacerbates inequality by funneling public resources into capital-intensive sectors that benefit elites, while social services—hospitals, schools, public transit—suffer from chronic underfunding. When citizens see their tax dollars funding bombs rather than bridges, cynicism replaces civic engagement, and the very legitimacy of a country’s governance is undermined.

International law, which has been a strong impetus to cooperation in the world and which can provide fundamental rules of fairness, has been used as an instrument to promote militarization and violence in the world by the wealthiest and most powerful countries in the world.

The path forward demands a radical reimagining of international law—not as it is currently wielded by powerful states to justify intervention, enforce economic dependency, or entrench global hierarchies, but as a tool for genuine equity, cooperation, and shared prosperity.

Today, international law is too often a weapon of the strong, invoked selectively to punish adversaries while ignoring the transgressions of allies. This is not the international law we need. What we require is a legal framework that serves as the foundation for a truly equitable international community—one that enforces cooperation over competition, shared development over extraction, and the rights of all people over the privileges of a few.

Such a system must prioritize binding agreements on climate change to ensure our natural environment is protected not as a luxury but as a fundamental right. A fair international legal system would mandate fair trade practices that prevent the exploitation of weaker economies, and it would guarantee economic rights—food, water, education, healthcare—as inalienable entitlements for every human being, not as charities doled out at the discretion of the wealthy.

A rejuvenated international law would also hold all states, regardless of power, accountable to the same standards, ending the hypocrisy that allows some nations to flout norms with impunity while others are punished for far lesser offenses.

The argument for participatory governance is not merely moral but strategic. States that involve all their citizens in a meaningful way in the governance of their country are less likely to engage in external conflict because their leaders are accountable to electorates who bear the costs of war.

But this participation must be substantive, not procedural. Holding elections means little if economic inequality allows elites to dominate policy, if media concentration distorts public discourse, or if voter suppression silences marginalized groups.

True participation requires deliberative assemblies, workplace unionization, digital direct democracy, and local autonomy. When people feel ownership over their government, they are less susceptible to the siren song of populist demagogues and the xenophobic chants of nationalists.

The post-2008 austerity consensus has been a disaster for global stability. Neoliberalism’s core assumption—that unregulated competition drives progress—ignores the fact that markets produce winners and losers, and that losers, when abandoned, turn to extremism. The rise of far-right parties, the spread of extremist movements, and the surge in gang violence are all, in no insignificant part, responses to economic despair.

A global fair deal must prioritize universal basic services as human rights, not commodities. It must invest in green industrial policy to create high-wage, low-carbon jobs. It must cancel the crushing debts of the Global South and replace free trade with fair trade, ensuring that corporations cannot exploit weak regulations in developing States.

And it must tax extreme wealth to fund the end of extreme poverty. These are not socialist or communist ideas; they are merely common sense policies.

Yet NATO’s current trajectory assumes that security is a zero-sum game, where one state’s gain is another’s loss. This ignores that the greatest threats of our time—climate change, pandemics, nuclear proliferation—respect no borders. Even China and the United States, despite their rivalry, have cooperated on climate accords and pandemic response when it served their interests.

The Montreal Protocol succeeded because states realized ozone depletion threatened them all. Collective security, properly structured, can work. The question is not whether cooperation is possible, but whether we have the will to pursue it. NATO does not answer this challenge, but seeks to exploit it by setting people against each other in the name of militarization.

We have a choice. We can continue down the path of militarized security, where trillions are spent on weapons that guarantee mutual destruction, where inequality festers, and where the logic of competition ensures that no one is ever truly safe.

Or we can invest in a future where no child goes hungry, no family lacks healthcare, and no nation lives in fear of another — a future where international law serves as an equalizer, ensuring that the rights and dignity of all people are upheld, and that our shared planet is preserved for generations to come. The former is the path of barbarism. The latter is the path of civilization.

NATO’s leaders would do well to remember that true security is not measured in the size of an arsenal, but in the strength of the societies it claims to protect — and that those societies are far weaker when their most vulnerable members are abandoned to the consequences of unchecked militarism.

Dr. Curtis F.J. Doebbler is a research professor of law at the University of Makeni. This article first appeared on Common Dreams.

Scuba Diver Charged in Death of 23-Year-Old Student

0
scuba-diver-charged-in-death-of-23-year-old-student
Scuba Diver Charged in Death of 23-Year-Old Student


A 23-year-old woman vanished 65 feet below the ocean during what was supposed to be a routine scuba lesson. Now, months after her body was found off the coast of Argentina, her diving instructor is facing a criminal charge.

Thiago Nahuel Pocovi, 26, has been charged with manslaughter in connection with the death of Sofia Devries, who disappeared on Feb. 16 while taking part in a scuba diving lesson near Punta Cuevas Historical Park in Chubut, Argentina, according to reports from La Nacion, Todo Noticias and El Chubut.

Devries had reportedly been diving to advance her scuba certification alongside her partner and other divers when the outing turned into a desperate search mission.

Pocovi, who was leading a group of seven divers at the time, allegedly violated safety protocols and regulations that govern professional diving instructors, prosecutors said, according to La Nacion.

The criminal investigation into Devries’ death was formally opened on Monday, July 6, by Judge Marcela Pérez Bogado, Todo Noticias reported. Pocovi appeared at the hearing virtually from Buenos Aires.

With the court’s ruling, Argentina’s Public Prosecutor’s Office will now continue investigating the case and determine whether Pocovi should face trial, according to Todo Noticias.

The dive took place in Golfo Nuevo, near the Hu Shun Yu 809 artificial reef. The site is a well-known destination for divers and was created after a fishing vessel was intentionally sunk in 2017 to form a habitat for marine life, according to Dive Magazine.

But what began as a certification dive quickly became a nightmare.

According to Argentinian station Radio Rafaela, Devries disappeared during the underwater lesson. A search and rescue mission was launched, but she was not found alive.

Her body was recovered two days later, about 65 feet beneath the surface, near the area where she was last seen.

The tragic case has now shifted from a recovery mission to a criminal probe, with authorities looking closely at whether the young instructor’s alleged failures played a role in the deadly dive.

US seeks cheaper hunter-killer drones after Iran destroys $1B worth of Reapers

0
us-seeks-cheaper-hunter-killer-drones-after-iran-destroys-$1b-worth-of-reapers
US seeks cheaper hunter-killer drones after Iran destroys $1B worth of Reapers

The US military has lost dozens of Reaper drones collectively worth more than $1 billion while carrying out surveillance and attack missions over Iran. Now the Pentagon is seeking large numbers of cheaper drones that can perform such missions despite the expectation that many will be lost in combat.

In a call for industry pitches, the Defense Innovation Unit’s notice described the US military’s current reliance on drones and crewed aircraft, each costing more than $30 million, as being “unsustainable against adversaries utilizing layered defenses enabled by increasingly low-cost antiaircraft capabilities.” It envisions deploying more “cost-effective” drones to “overwhelm enemy air defenses even while experiencing numerous [drone] losses.”

That is, in practice, what Ukraine’s military has been demonstrating with its long- and mid-range strike campaign against Russian supply lines, oil refineries, and various energy or industrial targets within Russia or occupied Ukraine. The Ukrainian campaign has been overwhelming Russia’s overstretched air defense capabilities by launching hundreds of relatively inexpensive drones and missiles on a daily basis to attack targets far behind the frontlines, while continuing to damage or destroy Russia’s most sophisticated air defense systems.

By contrast, the US military has primarily deployed sophisticated, expensive crewed aircraft and drones to perform airstrikes since the United States and Israel launched their attack on Iran on February 28, 2026. That has led to the loss of costly aircraft and helicopters and forced the US military to scramble to rescue downed pilots in Iran or the Strait of Hormuz.

For the riskiest combat missions, the US military has sent MQ-9A Reaper drones deep into Iranian airspace to gather intelligence and strike targets with missiles. Kenneth Wilsbach, chief of staff of the Air Force, described the Reaper as the “most valuable player” in the Air Force arsenal during the US military’s war against Iran.

Unleashing the drones of war comes at a cost

A heavy reliance on Reapers avoids putting more US pilots at risk, but it has also led to Iranian air defenses shooting down dozens of the hunter-killer drones. The US military had lost nearly 30 Reaper drones as of May 2026, including some destroyed on the ground by Iranian counterstrikes, according to Air & Space Forces Magazine. The Air Force acknowledged such combat losses as reducing its Reaper fleet to about 135 drones.

The total US taxpayer bill for the destroyed Reapers comes to about $1 billion, according to Bloomberg. A typical Reaper may cost $30 million per aircraft, but the Air Force has said a Reaper equipped with a full sensor package can cost up to $50 million.

That number of Reapers lost in combat has almost certainly increased since May, as the United States and Iran have continued to trade airstrikes and drones despite so-called ceasefire periods and attempted negotiations. On July 8, as hostilities ramped up again recently with new Iranian strikes on commercial shipping triggering more US military airstrikes, Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps claimed to have shot down yet another Reaper drone.

The defense company General Atomics stopped manufacturing Reaper drones for the US military in 2025. But a General Atomics executive told Breaking Defense that the company is interested in pursuing the newest drone contract offering from the US military, and seemed to suggest it would provide a cheaper successor to the Reaper.

The Defense Innovation Unit notice called for drones capable of carrying many different sensor and weapons payloads up to 2,800 pounds and flying with a combat radius of at least 2,300 nautical miles—or 8,000 nautical miles on a one-way strike mission—while executing the same missions that the MQ-9A Reaper drone currently performs for the US military. It envisions delivery of “20 mission-ready aircraft” by 2031.

Whether the US military and companies can deliver on that vision of deploying cheaper yet capable strike drones remains to be seen. The Pentagon is asking for about $54 billion in its fiscal year 2027 budget to spend on drones and autonomous warfare technologies—an amount that rivals wartime Ukraine’s entire military budget.

Lebanon’s Aoun Says Upcoming Washington Visit Aims To Halt Conflict with Israel 

0
lebanon’s-aoun-says-upcoming-washington-visit-aims to halt-conflict-with-israel 
Lebanon’s Aoun Says Upcoming Washington Visit Aims To Halt Conflict with Israel 


Lebanese President Joseph Aoun said Wednesday that his upcoming visit to Washington is intended to advance efforts to end the conflict between Lebanon and Israel through negotiations, expressing hope that talks with President Donald Trump will produce a lasting solution. 

“I expect that my upcoming visit to Washington and my meeting with US President Donald Trump will bring positive outcomes for Lebanon … to find a permanent solution to the cycle of wars and Israeli attacks on our country,” Aoun said in a statement issued by the presidency. 

Aoun said the planned negotiations are aimed at halting Israeli military operations in Lebanon and ultimately ending what he described as the “Israeli occupation.” He added that a majority of the Lebanese people support pursuing negotiations. 

US officials announced Tuesday that Aoun will visit the White House on July 21. The trip will mark his first official visit to Washington since taking office. 

The announcement comes as diplomatic contacts between Israel and Lebanon continue. 

Israeli Foreign Minister Gideon Sa’ar said Tuesday that the next round of negotiations between the two countries is expected to take place in Rome next week. 

The previous round of talks was held in Washington in late June. Those discussions concluded with a framework agreement intended to strengthen the ceasefire and reduce tensions along the Lebanon-Israel border. 

 

 

Oil rises after US launches fresh strikes on Iran

0
oil-rises-after-us-launches-fresh-strikes-on-iran
Oil rises after US launches fresh strikes on Iran


Oil prices rose more than 1% on Thursday after the U.S. carried out fresh strikes on ‌Iran, denting hopes for talks to end their war and for the full reopening of the Strait of Hormuz, a chokepoint for one-fifth of pre-war global oil supplies.

Brent crude futures rose 86 cents, or 1.1%, to $78.88 a barrel by 0352 ​GMT. U.S. West Texas Intermediate crude futures were up 85 cents, or 1.2%, at $74.37 a ​barrel.

Both crude benchmarks, WTI and Brent, rose more than a dollar in post-settlement trade on ⁠Wednesday after the U.S. military began launching fresh strikes on Iran.

Before that, the benchmarks had settled at ​their highest in over two weeks after U.S. President Donald Trump threatened new attacks on Iran.

“Fresh US strikes ​on Iran pushed oil higher this morning, with the latest escalation undermining confidence in the fragile ceasefire,” said ING analysts in a client note.

The U.S. military said it completed strikes on Iran aimed at keeping the critical Strait of Hormuz open ​to traffic, hours after President Donald Trump declared that an interim agreement to end the war was “over”.

U.S. ​forces struck approximately 90 Iranian military targets, which included air defense systems, coastal surveillance assets, missile and drone storage sites, ‌naval ⁠capabilities, and military logistics infrastructure along Iran’s coastline, U.S. Central Command said.

Iran earlier said on Wednesday it attacked U.S. military sites in Bahrain and Kuwait in response to earlier U.S. strikes on infrastructure.

A fifth of global oil and liquefied natural gas supplies traversed the Strait of Hormuz prior to the Iran war, and Tehran’s ​control of the waterway ​has been its main leverage ⁠in a conflict that started with U.S. and Israeli airstrikes against Iran on February 28.

The rush of oil that passed through the strait in recent weeks is ​over for now, with shipowners expected to take a more cautious stance, ​IG analyst Tony ⁠Sycamore said in a note.

Despite the interim peace deal between Washington and Tehran, “significant geopolitical risks remain,” said DBS Bank’s head of energy research Suvro Sarkar, expecting conflict uncertainty to support prices in the near term.

“We believe ⁠Iran has ​every incentive to prolong these discussions, suggesting that the war ​risk premium in oil prices may not fully dissipate for several months, leading to continued volatility despite an overall downward price trajectory ​in the medium term.”

Source:  Reuters

Graham Platner’s Exit From Senate Race Leaves Maine Dems “Hobbled” in Scramble for New Nominee

0
graham-platner’s-exit-from-senate-race-leaves-maine-dems-“hobbled”-in-scramble-for-new-nominee
Graham Platner’s Exit From Senate Race Leaves Maine Dems “Hobbled” in Scramble for New Nominee


In group chats of progressive activists and political operatives concerned with the state of the Senate race in Maine Wednesday morning, a link to an anonymous Google Doc was making the rounds. It disavowed Graham Platner, the disgraced Democratic nominee whose campaign was throttled by a rape accusation on Monday, and called to replace him with Troy Jackson, a recent gubernatorial contender the document deemed “the one candidate who can hold Platner’s coalition together.”

Platner suspended his Senate campaign on Wednesday evening, and there is no clear alternative to his candidacy. His campaign’s swift downfall has presented Democrats and his primary supporters with several bad options: The party establishment could pick a candidate and inflame an already frustrated base that scoffed at its efforts to anoint Gov. Janet Mills as the nominee, or it could bend to Platner’s past demands and let him influence the selection of his successor.

In either case, a base already exhausted by months of Platner scandals is at risk of fracturing and failing to consolidate behind a potential replacement — and Democrats are at risk of once again losing a key seat they need to pick up for control of the Senate to Republican Sen. Susan Collins.

With so much blame and anger to go around, the fear of poisoning the selection process was on display in the anonymity of the Google Doc pushing Jackson, the Bernie Sanders-endorsed third-place candidate in Maine’s Democratic gubernatorial primary. Jackson, who has already been discussed in national progressive circles as a possible ideological successor to Platner, was first to file paperwork on Tuesday to take the candidate’s place. But the anonymous document, shared with The Intercept by a source who said its origin was unclear, was quick to distance him from Platner.

“In a state where Democrats have hemorrhaged rural support and where Collins has consistently overperformed, Platner has attempted to sell himself as the populist solution. Jackson doesn’t need to sell; his career tells the story,” it says, citing a claim from centrist writer Matthew Yglesias that Jackson is more genuine than Platner.

There are still Platner supporters — and one progressive political operative close to the Platner campaign, who spoke on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized by his employer to discuss the race publicly, said they were divided in their reactions to the rape allegation against their once-powerful candidate.

“There are some people who just immediately decided that they believed they believed his accuser and who feel very betrayed and are just like, ‘Fuck this guy, now we’re screwed,’” the operative said. “And then there are some people who don’t believe her, and there are some people who think that he can continue to run, and some people who think he should run as an independent.” 

Platner announced he was dropping out of the race in an 11-minute video posted on X Wednesday evening. In it, he claimed the rape and sexual assault accusations against him were false and drummed up by an establishment leading a plot against his rise as an outsider in politics.

“I think it’s really important to understand why this is happening in the timeline,” Platner said, asserting that past scandals that dogged his campaign had broken at key political junctures. “There is a reason that this is happening now. I only have until July 13th until I am officially the nominee. This was the last week to try to get me off of the ballot. And that’s why this is occurring.”

The Maine Democratic Party announced that it would hold a nominating convention to pick Platner’s replacement, though its exact shape and timeline remain unclear.

The party has publicly feuded with Platner’s campaign, releasing a statement and an unusual video post on Tuesday saying that the campaign had tried “to put their thumb on the scale of what this process looks like,” after people close to Platner’s campaign told reporters that he would only drop out if he could ensure that the new candidate shared his ideological and policy stances.

In a mass text sent out before Platner dropped out on Wednesday, his campaign manager Ben Chin claimed that the campaign had been told it would have no role in helping to select a new candidate and that the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee had sent staffers “to plan a potential nominating process behind closed doors.”

A DSCC spokesperson called the assertion “false” in a statement to The Intercept. “The Maine Democratic Party has made it clear that they are working to put forth an open process to select a nominee. Graham Platner — who was credibly accused of rape — needs to drop out immediately so that Maine Democrats can begin the process of fielding a new candidate and focus on defeating Susan Collins,” the spokesperson wrote.

Platner’s campaign did not immediately respond to The Intercept’s request for comment.

Other potential picks being floated to replace Platner include Jackson’s Democratic gubernatorial opponents Dr. Nirav Shah, the former director of the Maine Centers for Disease Control and Prevention who came in second in the final round of ranked-choice voting in the June primary, and Maine Secretary of State Shenna Bellows, who ranked fourth. 

A source familiar with the matter told The Intercept that outgoing Rep. Jared Golden, a Blue Dog Democrat who represents Maine’s Second Congressional District is not seeking reelection, had been getting calls about running, but on Tuesday night a spokesperson said he had removed his name from consideration.

The progressive political operative warned against the idea that a middle-of-the-road candidate like Golden would be the safest bet to replace Platner against Collins. A “generic Democrat,” the operative said, would find themselves up against a deceptively formidable incumbent, with little chance of mustering the energy that made Platner, for a time, such a threat to Collins.

“People always underestimate Susan Collins, and that’s why I think a lot of us in the progressive movement are saying that you have to give a reason for people to turn out, because turnout in the midterms is everything,” the operative said. “I think a lot of that’s coming from the national Democrats and national pundits who have no friggin’ clue about — I don’t know if I’d say popular — but about how entrenched she is in Maine politics.”

“People always underestimate Susan Collins. … You have to give a reason for people to turn out, because turnout in the midterms is everything.”

Shah said Tuesday that he had few details about what the state Democratic party plans to do. 

“This should be a process that is open, robust, and transparent, not something where the torch is handed from one person to another, because that will undermine faith in that nominee,” Shah told The Intercept. He said his campaign has not yet decided if he’ll file paperwork to enter the race, and that while he had received calls from hundreds of supporters urging him to jump in, he had not heard from any national Democrats.

Jackson, for his part, now has to toe the line between seizing the progressive mantle and being publicly tied to a candidate who lost massive public trust. In a statement Tuesday, he called the allegations against Platner “serious, credible, and deserving of full accountability,” and called on Platner to step down for the sake of the movement that supported him. Jackson did not address his own intention to run, but his spokesperson told The Intercept that he was the person to beat Collins.

“Working Mainers need someone who will take on the wealthy and powerful and give them a voice in D.C. It is clear that Troy Jackson is that person,” said Christine Kirby, the spokesperson. “Since the recent news broke, Troy has been flooded with calls to run for U.S. Senate. He is clearly the strongest option to take on Susan Collins and has consistently won in deep-red Northern Maine.”

The document making the case in Jackson’s favor emphasized his appeal among working-class voters, whom Platner had tried to cultivate but lagged with compared to Collins in recent polling.

Platner reiterated his commitment to working-class politics and repeated his assertion that his campaign represented people who’d been locked out of the halls of power in his departure announcement on Wednesday.

“We live in a political system that is not built for normal people. It is a system that is built structurally to make sure that movements like ours cannot flourish,” Platner said. “That if they begin to succeed, they can be crushed.”

In a statement released before Platner suspended his campaign on Wednesday, the Maine Democratic Party’s executive director Devon Murphy-Anderson sought to thread the needle between castigating Platner and courting his voters.

“While we may be frustrated with Graham Platner’s continued efforts to manipulate this process, we are so thankful for his supporters and all of their efforts to defeat Susan Collins,” Murphy-Anderson wrote. “They are a vital part of our Party and deserve to participate in an open process to select Platner’s replacement.”

A new candidate has to be submitted to the Maine secretary of state by July 27 to qualify for the ballot.

In Shah’s view, anyone picked by Platner would be dragged down by his baggage, while anyone picked by the state party might not have buy-in from the base that Platner helped activate.

“If there is a torch-passing or anointments,” Shah said, “whoever that nominee is will be hobbled out of the gate.” 

Update: July 8, 8:55 p.m. ET
This story has been updated with news that Graham Platner has suspended his Senate campaign.

0FansLike
0FollowersFollow
0FollowersFollow
0SubscribersSubscribe
- Advertisement -
Google search engine

Recent Posts