US reconnaissance aircraft are ramping up surveillance near the border to gather intelligence on Mexican drug cartels

February 10, 2025

The US military has markedly intensified its surveillance efforts targeting Mexican drug cartels in the last two weeks, utilizing advanced spy planes that have completed at least 18 missions over the southwestern United States and in international airspace near the Baja peninsula, as reported by open-source data and three US officials knowledgeable about the operations.

These flights, carried out over a 10-day span in late January and early February, signify a substantial increase in activity, according to current and former military officials. This surge aligns with President Donald Trump’s directive to the military to enhance border security and combat the drug smuggling activities of cartels.

Historically, the Pentagon has conducted approximately one surveillance mission per month along the US-Mexico border, as noted by a former military official with extensive experience in homeland defense. Typically, these aircraft have been deployed to gather intelligence on other pressing matters, such as Russian maneuvers in Ukraine or tracking Russian and Chinese submarines.

Among the recent missions, at least 11 have involved Navy P-8 aircraft, which are highly valued for their advanced radar systems that excel in submarine detection but are also equipped to gather imagery and signals intelligence.

One notable mission on February 3 involved a U-2 spy plane, a renowned reconnaissance aircraft developed during the Cold War for high-altitude imaging of the Soviet Union. Current and former military officials with significant experience in counternarcotics operations along the border indicated that they could not recall a U-2 being deployed for this specific purpose previously.

The flight operations extend across the US-Mexico border, encompassing missions in California, Arizona, and Texas. CNN has also reported on at least one extended mission that circled the Baja peninsula and approached Sinaloa on February 4. This operation involved an Air Force RC-135 “Rivet,” which is designed to intercept ground communications.

According to a defense official, the flight pattern around the Baja peninsula has been utilized for an extended period but is currently experiencing increased activity.

While these aircraft operate within US airspace along the border, they possess the capability to gather intelligence well into Mexican territory, as noted by former officials.

Military Assumes Role in Counternarcotics

This escalation highlights Trump’s commitment to positioning the military as the primary agency addressing counternarcotics and border security—areas traditionally managed by domestic law enforcement.

However, the Trump administration’s strategy for utilizing the gathered intelligence remains uncertain. It may serve to compile evidence for potential foreign terrorist designations or to provide actionable intelligence to the Mexican military for targeting cartel operations.

Some current and former US officials have expressed concerns to CNN that these intelligence flights might be aimed at identifying targets for direct military action by the US.

Trump has previously indicated intentions to bomb fentanyl production facilities and deploy special forces to eliminate cartel leaders, actions that could infringe upon Mexico’s sovereignty and strain relations with the United States’ largest trading partner.

The Trump administration has initiated the process of classifying cartels as foreign terrorist organizations, prompting discussions regarding the possibility of direct U.S. military intervention in Mexico.

Additionally, the president has deployed thousands of extra active-duty troops to the border, despite migrant crossings being at their lowest since 2020.

These troops are tasked with supporting U.S. Border Patrol and providing intelligence specialists to evaluate threats and monitor migrant movements, as reported by sources familiar with the situation. However, they are not permitted to engage in law enforcement activities, such as making arrests or confiscating drugs, and are restricted from interacting with migrants except for transportation assistance.

Current and former U.S. officials perceive a deliberate shift in the counternarcotics strategy, placing greater responsibility on the military, which has extensive experience combating non-state terrorist organizations worldwide that share operational characteristics with the cartels.

Border czar Tom Homan stated to ABC News on Thursday, “The cartels would be unwise to confront the military, although they have previously challenged the Mexican military. Now, we have the United States military involved.” He added, “Do I anticipate an increase in violence? Absolutely, as the cartels are generating unprecedented profits.”

Former officials and analysts highlight significant distinctions between cartels and Islamist terrorist organizations abroad. Cartels primarily function as commercial entities rather than ideological groups. Their focus is not on governing populations or acquiring territory. In some instances, they have established deep connections with segments of the Mexican government, which the U.S. military collaborates with and supports.

Will Freeman, a fellow for Latin America studies at the Council on Foreign Relations, noted in a recent essay for The New York Times that while certain state elements may collude with cartels, there are also factions resisting them. He emphasized the importance of collaboration with these resisting elements, particularly with Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum.

This context renders cartels a fundamentally different type of adversary compared to what the Defense Department typically encounters, which is a key reason why most military counternarcotics efforts have historically been conducted in support of law enforcement agencies like the Drug Enforcement Administration and the Department of Homeland Security.

Groups such as ISIS, Boko Haram, and Hamas are among those classified as foreign terrorist organizations.

Initial exchanges in a trade conflict have begun. What are Beijing’s next steps?

Asif Shahid

February 10, 2025

The fully automated container terminal at Qingdao Port of Shandong Port Group is the first of its kind in Asia.

The initial response in a new trade dispute between China and the United States was initiated on Monday, as Beijing implemented tariffs on nearly $14 billion worth of US imports.

These tariffs, which include duties on crude oil, liquefied natural gas, and various machinery and vehicles, were enacted shortly after US President Donald Trump introduced a blanket 10% tariff on hundreds of billions of dollars in goods imported from China annually.

There had been optimism that a phone conversation between Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping last week might prevent an escalation of tensions that could result in a larger trade war. However, that discussion did not take place.

The pressing question for both nations now is the next steps to be taken and the extent to which each of the world’s two largest economies is prepared to jeopardize their closely intertwined commercial and trade relationships.

Despite the initial exchange of tariffs, both parties seem to be allowing for the possibility of a negotiated settlement.

“Beijing has shown restraint in its reaction to the new Trump tariffs, partly due to the limited impact on China and because Xi aims to keep avenues open for negotiation with Trump,” stated Andy Rothman, CEO of the advisory firm Sinology.

Is there potential for negotiation?

China’s tariffs include a 15% tax on specific types of coal and liquefied natural gas, along with a 10% tariff on crude oil, agricultural machinery, and certain vehicles, impacting approximately $13.86 billion in goods, as calculated by CNN based on China’s 2024 customs data.

This total represents less than 9% of China’s overall imports from the US. Last year, China exported over $524 billion to the US while importing more than $163 billion, according to its customs statistics.

Additionally, Beijing announced last week the immediate implementation of export controls on certain raw materials utilized in the defense and green technology sectors, along with measures targeting select US companies.

Trump’s latest tariffs are relatively modest when compared to the over 60% duties he had previously threatened to impose on China during his campaign. These new tariffs contribute to the existing levies on hundreds of billions of dollars’ worth of Chinese imports.

The US president ran on a platform aimed at leveling the economic playing field with China and has expressed a willingness to negotiate. Last month, at a gathering of political and business leaders in Davos, Switzerland, he remarked that he has “always liked” Xi and is eager to “get along with China.”

According to Rothman, “Trump seems to be in a deal-making mindset, utilizing tariffs as a bargaining chip. However, it remains uncertain what he seeks from Xi and what concessions he might be prepared to make in return.”

So far, analysts observing China’s elite political landscape suggest that Xi and his team are likely feeling relieved by the current tone of the Trump administration and the limited measures taken thus far.

“They were bracing for 60% tariffs and a complete economic separation… nothing has transpired that approaches the worst-case scenario,” noted Suisheng Zhao, director of the Center for China-US Cooperation at the University of Denver.

However, another deadline looms on April 1, when Trump has instructed his officials to complete an investigation into US-China economic relations, which could lead to further actions.

Officials in Beijing are now prioritizing the careful management of their communications with the Trump administration regarding diplomacy and trade policies, aiming to prevent a more severe trade conflict.

They are likely eager to capitalize on any opportunities to leverage the personal relationship between Trump and Xi to dissuade the U.S. president from imposing further sanctions on the Chinese economy, which experts warn could also significantly impact the U.S. economy.

This suggests that Beijing may be open to hosting the American president for in-person discussions in Beijing, a prospect that sources indicated Trump expressed interest in last month.

Chinese leaders are wary of escalating tensions, as their leverage is not as substantial as that of the United States. Therefore, they must seize every opportunity to appease Trump and encourage him to direct his frustrations towards other nations, according to Zhao.

Regarding penalties and concessions, while Beijing is focused on avoiding an intensification of the trade war, officials are nonetheless preparing for various contingencies, including potential penalties and concessions should Trump choose to escalate the situation further.

“Trump’s trade measures will compel Beijing to react, but this time the response will be more measured, rather than the broad retaliatory actions seen during the initial trade war from 2018 to 2019,” stated Nick Marro, principal economist for Asia at the Economist Intelligence Unit.

Last year, the country updated its export control regulations, enhancing its capacity to limit the trade of dual-use items, raw materials, and critical minerals, many of which the United States considers vital for its economic and national security. Analysts estimate that China accounts for 60% of global production and 85% of processing capacity for critical minerals.

According to observers, Beijing is weighing the potential benefits and drawbacks of imposing further restrictions on these goods and additional tariffs, while also seeking to safeguard its economy, which is currently grappling with slow growth, ongoing deflation, and weak consumer demand.

In some respects, China is now better equipped to handle trade tensions than it was during the initial term of the Trump administration, analysts note. Chinese companies have made efforts to diversify their export markets, and Beijing has initiated a campaign to strengthen or mend its relationships with other trading partners—an opportunity that increases for China whenever Trump escalates tensions with US allies.

However, a more complex issue arises regarding what concessions China might be willing or able to make in any meaningful negotiations with the US regarding a trade agreement.

Analysts point out that Beijing did not fully adhere to the phase one trade agreement established at the conclusion of Trump’s first term, while US concerns have expanded to encompass China’s industrial policies and economic framework.

“Considering the unsuccessful outcomes of previous negotiations, the US’s interest in a comprehensive deal—one that transcends minor discussions, such as the future of TikTok—appears to be quite limited at this time,” remarked Marro, referencing the Chinese-owned app that is facing a potential ban in the US. “This will likely reduce any chances for a viable resolution.”

Indonesia Considers Ambitious Step: Possible Purchase of an Aircraft Carrier

Asif Shahid

February 10, 2025

Both of Japan's LHD vessels, JS Izumo and JS Kaga, have been modified to become "mini aircraft carriers."

The Indonesian Navy, officially referred to as Tentara Nasional Indonesia-Angkatan Laut (TNI-AL), has announced its consideration of acquiring an aircraft carrier to improve its capabilities for non-combat military operations. This information was recently shared by Admiral Muhammad Ali, the Chief of Staff of TNI-AL.

At a press conference held prior to a naval leadership meeting at the TNI-AL Headquarters in East Jakarta, he remarked, “It appears that we require an aircraft carrier for non-combat military missions.”

In addition to the potential aircraft carrier, Admiral Ali indicated that the navy is also looking into acquiring various other assets, including two frigates from Italy. Furthermore, the navy is preparing to receive fast attack craft equipped with missiles from Türkiye. Regarding the two patrol vessels provided by the Japanese government, Admiral Ali mentioned that TNI-AL intends to deploy them at the naval base in Balikpapan, East Kalimantan, to strengthen the defense of Ibu Kota Nusantara (IKN), Indonesia’s future capital, which is adjacent to Balikpapan.

As Ibu Kota Nusantara is set to become the new capital of Indonesia, there is a pressing need for additional military resources to enhance its security. Meanwhile, Frega Wenas, the Head of the Defense Information Bureau at Indonesia’s Ministry of Defense, was cited by local media discussing the rationale behind the aircraft carrier acquisition plan, which is influenced by Indonesia’s geographical characteristics. He noted that as an archipelagic nation vulnerable to natural disasters, an aircraft carrier would be an essential asset for expediting humanitarian assistance and disaster relief (HADR) operations. However, Frega clarified that the proposed aircraft carrier would not be a full-sized ship equipped with a runway for launching fighter jets.

Indonesia has no plans to utilize this aircraft carrier for power projection outside its borders, as clarified by Frega.

He explained that the aircraft carrier is intended to function as a platform for short take-off and vertical landing (STOVL) operations, primarily employing helicopters for logistical support during disaster response efforts. The overall concept is still under evaluation, with one possibility being the adoption of a Landing Helicopter Dock (LHD).

A feasibility study is currently underway to ensure that future defense acquisitions are in line with Indonesia’s strategic military requirements. Frega emphasized that any acquisition should facilitate a variety of operations, encompassing both Warfare Military Operations (OMP) and Non-Warfare Military Operations (OMSP). At this stage, no formal decision has been reached regarding the procurement of an aircraft carrier.

Frega noted, “The ultimate decision on acquiring new defense assets is influenced by several factors, including national strategic priorities, budget constraints, and the preparedness of infrastructure and personnel for operational deployment.”

In a related comment, Evan Laksmana, Head of the Southeast Asian Security and Defense Research Program at the International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS), informed Kompas that if the main objective is Non-Warfare Military Operations (OMSP), such as disaster relief, there are numerous other platforms that would be more effective and economical. He highlighted that aircraft carriers are primarily designed for deploying fighter jets and helicopters for power projection beyond national borders, necessitating a dedicated task force, including submarines and escort vessels like frigates, to ensure their protection.

Evan also advised Indonesia to avoid repeating Thailand’s experience with its aircraft carrier HTMS Chakri Naruebet, which was acquired but ultimately saw limited use.

Thailand acquired the HTMS Chakri Naruebet for military purposes, but it was predominantly utilized for Non-Warfare Military Operations (OMSP) and ultimately became inactive due to insufficient resources and a lack of demand for its complete operational capabilities.

Thailand’s Aircraft Carrier: A Costly Lesson

In 1992, Thailand embarked on the construction of its first and only aircraft carrier, a project estimated to cost around US$285 million (RM1.14 billion). The ship was named “HTMS Chakri Naruebet” (CVH-911), meaning “Sovereignty of the Chakri Dynasty.”

The construction of HTMS Chakri Naruebet spanned five years, culminating in its completion in 1997, which positioned Thailand as the sole Southeast Asian country to own an aircraft carrier at that time.

However, the timing was unfortunate, as Thailand, along with other Asian nations, faced the repercussions of the 1997 Asian Financial Crisis just as the HTMS Chakri Naruebet was commissioned.

Due to significant economic and financial difficulties, Thailand was unable to fully operate the vessel. Consequently, the HTMS Chakri Naruebet, intended to be a representation of national pride and naval capability, spent more time docked at Sattahip Naval Base than actively patrolling the seas.

With a full-load displacement of 11,400 tons and an overall length of 182 meters, HTMS Chakri Naruebet stands out as one of the most prominent yet underutilized aircraft carriers in contemporary naval history.

Russia has supplied India with advanced missiles to enhance its maritime dominance

Asif Shahid

February 10, 2025

Recent reports indicate that Russia is supplying its advanced 3M54TE Kalibr/Club anti-ship missiles to India, representing a notable upgrade to the Indian Navy’s capabilities. This transaction occurs in the context of ongoing international sanctions against Russia, underscoring India’s strategic intent to enhance its military strength through Russian technology.

India has a longstanding partnership with Russia in defense, particularly in naval systems. The agreement for the Kalibr-PL anti-ship cruise missiles was finalized in the presence of India’s Defence Secretary, Rajesh Kumar Singh, as confirmed by the Ministry of Defence via the social media platform X. This initiative is perceived as a strategic measure to balance naval power in the region, especially amid rising geopolitical tensions with neighboring nations.

The Kalibr missile system, which has been widely deployed by Russia in various military engagements, including operations in Ukraine, is recognized for its adaptability and effectiveness. It can be launched from submarines, surface vessels, and land-based platforms, making it a potent asset in naval combat. The missiles operate at a low altitude of 10-15 meters, significantly minimizing the response time for enemy defenses and enhancing their precision strike capabilities.

This acquisition is particularly focused on bolstering the operational effectiveness of India’s Kilo-class submarines, which have Soviet origins. The modular nature of the Kalibr system allows for various configurations and shares common components with other variants in the Kalibr series, potentially simplifying logistics and maintenance for the Indian Navy.

This agreement prompts a reevaluation of the effectiveness of international sanctions imposed on Russia. Despite these restrictions, nations such as India continue to recognize the value of Russian military technology, indicating a complex landscape of international relations where defense requirements often take precedence over political considerations. This situation highlights the evolving global alliances and the strategic independence that India is asserting in its defense acquisitions.

For India, this transaction is part of a larger initiative to upgrade its naval capabilities, which includes collaborations with various countries on new submarine projects. Just prior to this announcement, India selected Germany’s ThyssenKrupp Marine Systems to construct six submarines, demonstrating a multifaceted strategy to strengthen its naval forces.

The acquisition of Kalibr missiles by India transcends mere military enhancement; it illustrates the intricate interplay of international diplomacy, where historical ties, strategic priorities, and technological advancements are crucial factors.

As these events unfold, the consequences for regional security and the power dynamics in the Indian Ocean could be significant, potentially leading other countries to reevaluate their naval strategies and partnerships.

The 3M-54 Kalibr/Klub missile, designated by NATO as SS-N-27 “Sizzler,” is a multifaceted family of Russian cruise missiles developed by the Novator Design Bureau [OKB-8]. This missile system was introduced into service in 1994 and has since been adapted to serve various roles, including anti-ship, land attack, and anti-submarine missions. The Kalibr missile family encompasses both domestic and export variants, with the latter known as Klub.

Engineered as a modular system, the missile allows for various configurations tailored to specific operational needs. The fundamental design principle emphasizes the use of common components across both ship-launched and submarine-launched variants, although each type features distinct elements, such as launch platform-specific boosters.

The Kalibr system comprises anti-ship and land attack missiles capable of executing a supersonic sprint during the terminal phase of flight, which significantly shortens the response time for defense systems.

In the anti-ship category, the 3M-54 serves as a domestic variant for the Russian Navy. This submarine-launched missile measures 8.22 meters in length and carries a 200 kg warhead. Its operational range is estimated to be between 440 and 660 kilometers, functioning as a sea-skimmer with a terminal speed of Mach 2.9 and a final flight altitude of 4.6 meters. The 3M-54T, another variant intended for surface vessels, employs a Vertical Launch System [VLS] and features a thrust vectoring booster, while maintaining performance characteristics similar to those of the 3M-54.

The export variant referred to as Club encompasses both the Club-S (submarine-launched) and Club-N (surface ship-launched) systems. The Club-S model features the 3M-54E, which boasts a range of 220 kilometers, and the 3M-54E1, which increases the range to 300 kilometers while maintaining subsonic speeds throughout its trajectory.

Both variants are equipped with a 200 kg warhead. The Club-N model includes the 3M-54TE, which also has a range of 220 kilometers, and the 3M-54TE1, extending to 300 kilometers, both of which utilize thrust vectoring technology to enhance launch versatility.

For land strike missions, the 3M-14 missile employs inertial guidance and can be launched from either submarines or surface vessels. Its range is reported to vary widely, with some sources indicating it can reach up to 2,500 kilometers for conventionally armed versions, while others propose different ranges for variants that may carry thermonuclear warheads.

The 91RE1 variant provides anti-submarine capabilities, featuring a two-stage missile design with a solid rocket booster and a lightweight anti-submarine torpedo as its payload. It has a range of 50 kilometers and can achieve supersonic speeds, following a ballistic trajectory before releasing its torpedo.

Kalibr missiles have been deployed in various operational scenarios, particularly during the Syrian Civil War, where Russian naval vessels and submarines launched them from the Caspian and Mediterranean Seas targeting locations in Syria. These operations showcased the missile’s long-range strike capabilities, with some projectiles reportedly traveling over 1,500 kilometers to reach their targets.

The system’s adaptability is significantly improved by its capability to be launched from various platforms, including Kilo, Lada, Akula, Yasen, and Borei class submarines, as well as surface vessels such as the Admiral Gorshkov, Admiral Grigorovich, Gepard, Gremyashchy, and Buyan-M classes. This extensive range of platforms highlights the strategic edge that Russia possesses with this missile family, facilitating versatile deployment and application in diverse naval combat situations.

In conclusion, the 3M-54 Kalibr/Klub missile system, known by its SS-N-27 “Sizzler” designation, represents a highly advanced and flexible weapon system that is essential to contemporary Russian naval strategy. It provides capabilities in anti-ship, land attack, and anti-submarine operations, with both domestic and export variants that enhance the operational scope and effectiveness of the Russian Navy and its partners.

Trump says he is committed to US ownership of Gaza

Asif Shahid

February 10, 2025

Buildings lie in ruin in North Gaza, amid the ongoing conflict between Israel and Hamas, as seen from Israel.

President Donald Trump reaffirmed his vision for the redevelopment of Gaza on Sunday, characterizing the war-torn region as a significant real estate opportunity.

“I believe it would be a grave error to allow the Palestinians or those residing in Gaza to return at this time, especially with Hamas still present. We should view it as a major real estate project, and the United States intends to take ownership and develop it gradually—there’s no urgency. Our goal is to bring stability to the Middle East in the near future,” Trump stated to reporters on Air Force One while en route to the Super Bowl in New Orleans.

The United Nations reports that Israel’s conflict with Hamas has resulted in the displacement of 90% of Gaza’s population, with many individuals forced to relocate multiple times.

As a former real estate developer, Trump referred to Gaza as a “demolition site” that would need to be “cleared and renovated.”

He also proposed that other nations in the Middle East could provide housing for displaced Palestinians in “beautiful locations.”

Trump initially introduced this idea during a joint press conference with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, asserting, “The US will take control of the Gaza Strip, and we will manage it effectively,” later envisioning the area as a new “Riviera.”

Netanyahu has characterized Trump’s proposal as a “revolutionary, creative vision.”

During a cabinet meeting on Sunday following his return from the United States, Netanyahu remarked that the visit and his discussions with the US president “bring with them significant achievements that can secure Israel’s safety for generations to come.”

He informed his cabinet that Trump offered a “distinct vision for the ‘day after'” the conflict in Gaza.

“For an entire year, we have been told that the ‘day after’ necessitates the presence of the PLO (Palestine Liberation Organization) in Gaza, the Palestinian Authority,” the Israeli leader stated.

“President Trump introduced a markedly different vision, one that is far more advantageous for the state of Israel. It is a revolutionary, creative vision – and we are currently deliberating on it. He is highly committed to its implementation, which also presents numerous opportunities for us.”

In contrast, a Hamas official dismissed Trump’s recent comments as “absurd.”

“Gaza is not a commodity that can be traded; it is an essential part of our occupied Palestinian territory,” asserted Izzat Al-Rishq, a member of Hamas’ political bureau. “Approaching the Palestinian issue with a real estate dealer’s mindset is a formula for failure.”

Regional leaders have also expressed their disapproval of Trump’s proposals, which diverge from long-standing US foreign policy. These plans are anticipated to be a central topic of discussion when the president meets with the king of Jordan at the White House this week.

Mike Waltz, Trump’s national security adviser, indicated on Sunday that Trump was making an initial move to encourage other regional stakeholders to engage in discussions aimed at finding a resolution.

“Present your own proposal if you disagree with his,” Waltz stated during his appearance on NBC’s “Meet the Press,” noting that the White House has experienced “various forms of outreach” following Trump’s remarks earlier in the week.

Russia has initiated drone strikes targeting Kyiv and Sumy, according to Ukrainian officials

Asif Shahid

February 10, 2025

Firefighters work at a site of a building damaged during a Russian drone strike, amid Russia's attack on Ukraine, in Kyiv region, Ukraine.

Russian drone strikes overnight ignited a fire in Kyiv and resulted in injuries to a woman, while also causing damage to several homes in the northeastern city of Sumy, according to Ukrainian officials on Monday.

Kyiv Mayor Vitali Klitschko reported via the Telegram messaging app that no injuries occurred from the fire at a non-residential structure in the capital. However, a 38-year-old woman was hospitalized following the drone attacks on Sumy, the administrative center of the Sumy region, as stated by regional governor Ihor Kalchenko on Telegram.

Additionally, five homes sustained damage, he noted. The overall impact of the Russian drone assault on Ukraine remains unclear, and there has been no response from Russian authorities. Both parties assert that they do not target civilians in the ongoing conflict, which escalated with Russia’s full-scale invasion in February 2022. Nevertheless, thousands of civilians, predominantly Ukrainians, have lost their lives in the war.

Modi plans to introduce additional tariff cuts ahead of his meeting with Trump

Asif Shahid

February 10, 2025

Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi speaks to U.S. President Donald Trump during a meeting at Hyderabad House in New Delhi, India.

Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi is set to implement further tariff reductions prior to his meeting with U.S. President Donald Trump, a move that could enhance American exports to India and help avert a potential trade conflict, according to government officials.

Modi’s visit to the United States on Wednesday and Thursday coincides with Trump’s intention to announce reciprocal tariffs affecting numerous countries, a strategy designed to realign global trade dynamics in favor of the U.S.

While Trump has not detailed which nations will be impacted, he has previously labeled India as a “very big abuser” in trade matters and emphasized the need for India to increase its purchases of American-made security products to foster a more equitable trading relationship.

India is contemplating tariff cuts across at least a dozen sectors, including electronics, medical and surgical equipment, and certain chemicals, to facilitate increased U.S. exports. These potential reductions are in line with New Delhi’s domestic production initiatives, as noted by three government officials.

The officials, who requested anonymity, indicated that concessions are being evaluated for products that India predominantly imports from the U.S. or has the capacity to acquire more of, such as dish antennas and wood pulp. Modi is anticipated to address tariff issues with Trump next week, and India is receptive to discussing a possible mini trade agreement.

This early visit aims to prevent a “trade war-like situation similar to that between the U.S. and China,” according to a third official. Trump has enacted broad 10% tariffs on Chinese imports, leading to retaliatory measures from Beijing on American energy products.

Officials chose to remain anonymous as they are not authorized to communicate with the media. The trade ministry, foreign affairs ministry, and the Prime Minister’s Office in India did not reply to requests for comments sent outside of official working hours.

The discussions regarding tariff concessions come in the wake of a decrease in India’s average import tariff rates from 13% to 11% on various items as outlined in the annual budget, along with reductions in taxes on high-end motorcycles and luxury vehicles.

Additionally, India is assessing surcharges imposed on over 30 products, including luxury cars and solar panels.

The forthcoming meeting between Modi and Trump will address trade, defense collaboration, and technology, although it has been somewhat overshadowed by the recent deportation of Indian nationals from the United States.

One official indicated that the meeting is expected to provide political guidance for the bilateral relationship, with more detailed discussions on tariffs anticipated to occur after the visit.

Despite Trump’s critiques of India’s trade policies, he has referred to Modi as “fantastic.” The United States remains India’s largest trading partner, with bilateral trade exceeding $118 billion in 2023/24, resulting in a surplus of $32 billion for India.

Over the past decade, trade relations between the two countries have steadily strengthened, with Washington increasingly recognizing New Delhi as a counterweight to China’s expanding influence in the region.

Trump suggests progress in talks with Russia but offers no specifics

Asif Shahid

February 10, 2025

Russian President Vladimir Putin and then-US President Donald Trump on the sidelines of the G20 Summit in Osaka, Japan, June 28, 2019.

U.S. President Donald Trump stated on Sunday that he believes the United States is making headway in discussions aimed at resolving the conflict between Russia and Ukraine. However, he refrained from sharing specifics regarding any interactions he may have had with Russian President Vladimir Putin.

While speaking to reporters on Air Force One, Trump suggested that he and Putin have been in communication, which would represent the first officially recognized dialogue between a U.S. president and Putin since early 2022.

When questioned about whether his conversation with Putin occurred after he took office on January 20 or prior, Trump responded, “I’ve had it. Let’s just say I’ve had it…And I expect to have many more conversations. We have to get that war ended.” He added, “If we are talking, I don’t want to tell you about the conversations. I do believe we’re making progress. We want to stop the Ukraine-Russia war.”

The president emphasized that the United States is maintaining contact with both Russia and Ukraine, stating, “We’re talking to both sides.”

While Trump has committed to ending the war, he has yet to publicly outline his strategy for achieving this goal. In a recent interview with the New York Post, he mentioned that he “better not say” how many times he and Putin have communicated and did not reveal when their most recent conversation occurred.

Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov commented to the TASS state news agency that “many different communications are emerging.” He added, “I personally may not know something, be unaware of something. Therefore, in this case, I can neither confirm nor deny it.”

U.S. National Security Adviser Mike Waltz refrained from providing details when questioned about the communications between the two nations. “There are certainly numerous sensitive discussions taking place,” Waltz stated during an interview with NBC News.

TRUMP-PUTIN SUMMIT?

Former President Trump has consistently expressed his desire to conclude the conflict and has indicated he would meet with Putin to address the situation, although no specific date or location for such a meeting has been disclosed. On Sunday, Trump informed reporters that he would engage with Putin at an appropriate moment. According to a Reuters report earlier this month, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates are viewed by Russia as potential locations for a summit.

In the upcoming days, a number of U.S. officials will travel to Europe, partly to discuss the ongoing war. This delegation includes Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth, Vice President JD Vance, and Keith Kellogg, the special envoy for the Ukraine conflict. Waltz suggested that Trump might consider employing sanctions and tariffs to encourage Putin to enter negotiations. He also mentioned that U.S. and Ukrainian officials would explore the possibility of the U.S. accessing Ukraine’s rare earth resources as a form of compensation for American support to the Eastern European nation. On June 14, Putin outlined his initial conditions for an immediate cessation of hostilities: Ukraine must abandon its NATO aspirations and withdraw its forces from all territories of four Ukrainian regions that are claimed and predominantly controlled by Russia.

In November, Reuters reported that President Putin is willing to engage in discussions regarding a peace agreement for Ukraine with former President Trump, although he firmly rejects any significant territorial concessions and demands that Kyiv relinquish its aspirations to join NATO. The Kremlin has consistently advised caution regarding speculation about potential communications with Trump’s team concerning a peace settlement. Leonid Slutsky, the chairman of the Russian parliament’s international affairs committee, was quoted by the state RIA news agency on Thursday, indicating that preparations for such a meeting are at an “advanced stage” and could occur in February or March.

Putin last communicated with former U.S. President Joe Biden in February 2022, just prior to the deployment of thousands of troops into Ukraine. In his 2024 book “War,” Washington Post journalist Bob Woodward reported that Trump had direct conversations with Putin as many as seven times after leaving the White House in 2021. When asked about this in a Bloomberg interview last year, Trump remarked, “If I did, it’s a smart thing.” The Kremlin has denied Woodward’s claims.

Additionally, Reuters, The Washington Post, and Axios reported separately that Trump and Putin had discussions in early November, which the Kremlin also refuted.

On Friday, Trump mentioned that he is likely to meet with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy the following week to talk about ending the conflict. Zelenskiy informed Reuters that he seeks to provide the United States with rare earths and other minerals in exchange for financial support for Ukraine’s war efforts.

In 2022, Putin initiated the deployment of thousands of troops into Ukraine, describing it as a “special military operation” aimed at protecting Russian speakers and addressing what he claimed was a significant threat to Russia posed by potential Ukrainian NATO membership. Ukraine and its Western allies, led by the United States, have characterized the invasion as an imperialistic land grab and have committed to defeating Russian forces. Currently, Moscow controls an area of Ukraine roughly equivalent to the size of Virginia and is advancing at its fastest rate since the early stages of the 2022 invasion.

Trump indicates that the United States may become impatient with the ceasefire agreement

Asif Shahid

February 10, 2025

People gather ahead of the handover of hostages, held in Gaza since the deadly October 7 2023 attack, to members of the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) as part of a ceasefire and a hostages-prisoners swap deal between Hamas and Israel, in Jabalia, in the northern Gaza Strip.

President Trump expressed growing frustration on Sunday regarding the ceasefire agreement between Israel and Hamas. His comments followed the release of footage showing Israeli hostages freed by the Palestinian militant group over the weekend, which he likened to Holocaust survivors.

Trump’s reaction to the images of the three hostages, who looked notably frail upon their release on Saturday, raised new doubts about the viability of the ceasefire deal, especially as 76 hostages remain unaccounted for. This comes shortly after he advocated for the removal of Palestinians from the region and suggested that the U.S. should assume control.

“They resemble Holocaust survivors. Their condition is appalling. They are emaciated,” Trump remarked to reporters while aboard Air Force One en route to New Orleans for the Super Bowl. “I’m not sure how much longer we can endure this… at some point, our patience will run out.”

“I understand we have an agreement… but the hostages are being released slowly, and they are in very poor condition,” he added, referring to the Israeli captives.

The three men—Ohad Ben Ami and Eli Sharabi, who were taken from Kibbutz Be’eri during the Hamas-led assault on October 7, 2023, and Or Levy, abducted from the Nova music festival that same day—were escorted onto a Hamas platform by armed individuals prior to their handover to Israeli authorities. Their appearance was notably worse than that of the 18 other hostages released earlier under the truce, which was established on January 15, months into the ongoing conflict. Many Palestinian prisoners released by Israel have also shown signs of significant weight loss and poor health.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu expressed on Saturday that the sight of the frail hostages was deeply distressing and would be addressed. In a reciprocal action for the release of the three men, Israel released 183 Palestinian prisoners on the same day.

Former President Trump also informed reporters of his ongoing commitment to the idea of the U.S. purchasing and assuming control of Gaza once Palestinians vacate or are removed from the area. This unexpected announcement was made on February 4 during Netanyahu’s recent visit to Washington. He indicated that other nations might participate in the reconstruction of parts of Gaza.

“In terms of our involvement in the rebuilding, we might delegate sections to other states in the Middle East, or allow others to contribute under our guidance. However, we are dedicated to owning it, taking control, and ensuring that Hamas does not regain a foothold.”

Trump is set to declare a 25% tariff on steel and aluminum as part of the latest escalation in trade tensions

Asif Shahid

February 10, 2025

U.S. President Donald Trump speaks to reporters before signing a proclamation renaming the Gulf of Mexico to the Gulf of America, while flying over the gulf aboard Air Force One en route to New Orleans to attend the Super Bowl.

U.S. President Donald Trump announced on Sunday his intention to implement new tariffs of 25% on all steel and aluminum imports into the United States, in addition to the existing duties on metals, marking a significant escalation in his trade policy reforms.

While en route to the NFL Super Bowl in New Orleans, Trump addressed reporters aboard Air Force One, stating that he would unveil the new tariffs on metals on Monday. He also indicated that reciprocal tariffs would be announced on Tuesday or Wednesday, set to take effect almost immediately, applying to all nations and mirroring the tariff rates imposed by each country.

“It’s straightforward: if they impose charges on us, we will impose charges on them,” Trump explained regarding the reciprocal tariff strategy. According to data from the government and the American Iron and Steel Institute, Canada, Brazil, and Mexico are the largest sources of steel imports to the U.S., followed by South Korea and Vietnam. Canada, rich in hydropower, is the predominant supplier of primary aluminum to the U.S., representing 79% of total imports in the first 11 months of 2024.

Canadian Innovation Minister Francois-Philippe Champagne expressed on X that “Canadian steel and aluminum support key industries in the U.S., including defense, shipbuilding, and automotive.” He affirmed Canada’s commitment to advocating for its workers and industries.

Trump also mentioned that while the U.S. government would permit Japan’s Nippon Steel to invest in U.S. Steel, it would not allow Nippon Steel to acquire a majority stake. “Tariffs will make it very successful again, and I believe it has strong management,” Trump remarked about U.S. Steel. Nippon Steel chose not to comment on Trump’s recent announcements.

During his first term, Trump imposed tariffs of 25% on steel and 10% on aluminum but later granted several trading partners, including Canada, Mexico, and Brazil, exemptions from these duties. Mexico is a significant supplier of aluminum scrap and aluminum alloy.

QUOTA AGREEMENTS

Former President Joe Biden subsequently established duty-free quota agreements with the United Kingdom, the European Union, and Japan. Trump’s announcement did not clarify the future of these exemptions and quota agreements.

“Quebec exports 2.9 million tons of aluminum to the U.S., which accounts for 60% of their requirements. Do they prefer sourcing from China?” stated Francois Legault, the premier of Quebec, on X.

“This situation underscores the necessity to begin renegotiating our free trade agreement with the United States immediately, rather than waiting for the scheduled review in 2026. We need to eliminate this uncertainty.”

In 2019, steel mill capacity utilization surged above 80% following Trump’s initial tariffs, but it has since declined as China’s dominance in the sector has led to lower steel prices. A Missouri aluminum smelter, which was revitalized by the tariffs, was shut down last year by Magnitude 7 Metals.

Trump announced he would hold a press conference on Tuesday or Wednesday to elaborate on the reciprocal tariff strategy, noting that he had initially disclosed his plans for reciprocal tariffs on Friday to ensure “that we are treated fairly compared to other nations.”

The new U.S. president has consistently criticized the EU’s 10% tariffs on auto imports, which are significantly higher than the U.S. rate of 2.5%. He often remarks that Europe “won’t accept our cars,” despite exporting millions to the U.S. each year.

The United States currently benefits from a 25% tariff on pickup trucks, which serves as a significant revenue stream for domestic automakers such as General Motors, Ford, and Stellantis. In contrast, the U.S. trade-weighted average tariff rate stands at approximately 2.2%, as reported by the World Trade Organization. This rate is notably lower than those of other countries, including India at 12%, Brazil at 6.7%, Vietnam at 5.1%, and the European Union at 2.7%.

BORDER STEPS

In a recent interview with Fox News, Trump criticized the measures taken by Canada and Mexico to secure their borders and curb the influx of drugs and migrants, deeming them inadequate ahead of a March 1 tariff deadline. He has warned that he may impose a 25% tariff on all imports from Mexico and Canada unless these nations implement more robust actions. Following some initial concessions regarding border security, Trump postponed the tariffs until March 1, with Mexico agreeing to deploy an additional 10,000 National Guard troops and Canada introducing new technology and personnel to combat fentanyl trafficking.

When asked if the actions taken by Mexico and Canada were sufficient, Trump responded, “No, it’s not good enough. Something has to happen; it’s not sustainable, and I’m changing it.” However, he did not specify what further measures would be required from Canada and Mexico to avert the imposition of broad tariffs on March 1.

Uzbekistan Transfers Confiscated Afghan Black Hawk Helicopters to the United States as Tensions Escalate

Asif Shahid

February 9, 2025

In a development that has escalated geopolitical tensions, Uzbekistan has transferred seven Black Hawk helicopters to the United States—aircraft that were previously flown into the country by Afghan military pilots fleeing the Taliban’s swift advance in 2021, as reported by American diplomatic sources.

As the dispute over ownership heats up, the Taliban-led Afghan government is insisting on the immediate repatriation of the helicopters, while U.S. President Donald Trump has also called for the Taliban to return American military equipment to the U.S.

A U.S. Embassy official in Tashkent, speaking on the condition of anonymity, confirmed to AFP that the seven helicopters had been recovered, corroborating a report from the Uzbek branch of Voice of America.

The report referenced U.S. Department of Defense officials, who indicated that Washington had recently retrieved helicopters that had been rendered inoperable and flown into Uzbekistan by Afghan military personnel escaping the Taliban’s takeover in 2021.

Uzbekistan, situated in Central Asia, shares a brief southern border with Afghanistan. In response to Uzbekistan’s decision to transfer the helicopters, Afghanistan’s Ministry of National Defense has urged the U.S. not to impede their return and to ensure they are handed over to the Afghan populace, according to an official statement.

The Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan expresses significant concern regarding the situation involving the helicopters, which are considered Afghan property. These aircraft were relocated to Uzbekistan when officials from the previous government departed. Consequently, it is imperative that they be returned to Afghanistan.

The transfer of these helicopters to the United States for any purpose is deemed unacceptable. The Afghan populace has the inherent right to reclaim their assets, and it is essential that neighboring nations acknowledge and respect these rights, as stated in the official communication.

As reported by the Centre for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), based on satellite imagery, a total of 22 military aircraft and 24 helicopters, carrying 585 Afghan military personnel, entered Uzbekistan’s airspace during the fall of Kabul in 2021.

Over the course of two decades, the United States invested billions of dollars to enhance Afghanistan’s military capabilities following the invasion that led to the ousting of the Taliban regime after the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks. The aircraft that were flown from Afghan air bases to Termez Airport in Uzbekistan included:

– Embraer EMB 314 Super Tucano (light attack aircraft)
– Pilatus PC-12NG (multirole aircraft)
– UH-60 Black Hawk and Mi-17 (multirole helicopters)
– MD-530 (light multirole helicopters)

An Embraer EMB 314 Super Tucano was lost following a collision with an Uzbek MiG-29 fighter jet that was providing escort. Fortunately, both pilots managed to eject and parachute to safety.

The Taliban has consistently claimed that all military aircraft and helicopters that entered Uzbekistan are the property of Afghanistan and should be returned. In contrast, the Uzbek government has stated that these military assets belong to the United States and cannot be returned, a claim that was later corroborated by American officials. Consequently, the majority of the 46 aviation assets that arrived in Uzbekistan were transferred to the Uzbek government. However, seven operational Black Hawk helicopters were sent back to the United States, as determined by the Pentagon.

In the meantime, the former Afghan Air Force successfully relocated at least 12 Cessna AC-208 reconnaissance and strike aircraft, along with one Pilatus PC-12NG, to Tajikistan.

At the time of the Taliban’s takeover, some Afghan military aircraft were located abroad, either awaiting transfer or undergoing maintenance. In the United States, former Afghan Air Force assets were initially gathered at a military base. By April of the previous year, some Mi-17 helicopters were sent to Ukraine, with a total of 20 helicopters announced for deployment.

Russia has proposed to India the option of acquiring the R-37M missile and manufacturing it domestically

Asif Shahid

February 9, 2025

India has received a proposal from Russia to substitute the R-77 air-to-air missile on the Su-30MKI aircraft with the R-37M missile. According to local Indian reports, Moscow is prepared to license the production of the R-37M in India. This move would enable India to significantly enhance the capabilities of the Indian Air Force (IAF).

The R-37M, referred to by its NATO designation AA-13 Axehead, is a long-range air-to-air missile developed for beyond-visual-range (BVR) engagements. It is an advancement of the earlier R-33 missile, specifically designed to target high-value assets such as AWACS, tanker aircraft, and other support systems, allowing the launching aircraft to remain outside the reach of enemy fighters. Below is a detailed overview of the R-37M, its variants, and associated technologies:

The R-37M missile offers substantial improvements over its predecessor, the R-37, featuring advancements in range, speed, and guidance technology. It is equipped with a jettisonable rocket booster, enabling it to achieve a range of 300 to 400 kilometers (160-220 nautical miles), positioning it among the longest-range air-to-air missiles currently in operation worldwide.

Its speed can reach hypersonic levels, up to Mach 6, which is essential for intercepting rapidly moving targets. The missile’s design incorporates a cylindrical body with an ogive fairing, employing a conventional aerodynamic configuration with a low-aspect wing to enhance lift and range. It weighs approximately 510 kilograms and measures over 4 meters in length, with a warhead mass of 60 kilograms.

The R-37M missile’s guidance system integrates inertial navigation with mid-course updates, an active radar homing head, and semi-active radar guidance for the terminal phase. This configuration enables the missile to maintain a low radar signature throughout most of its flight, activating its radar homing head only when nearing the target to reduce the likelihood of detection. The missile is equipped with an advanced digital processor in its control system, which enhances its accuracy and capability to navigate through complex aerial scenarios.

Russia manufactures two variants of this missile: the RVV-BD and the Izdeliye 810. The RVV-BD serves as the export variant of the R-37M, boasting a launch range of up to 200 kilometers. It is designed to be compatible with a range of Russian aircraft, such as the Su-57, Su-35, Su-30, MiG-31BM, and MiG-35, and features folding rear fins for internal storage in certain aircraft configurations.

The Izdeliye 810 represents a further refinement for internal carriage within the Su-57, showcasing more compact dimensions with shorter strakes and enhanced seeker and motor technologies.

The missile has been operationally utilized in various conflicts, including the ongoing situation in Ukraine, where it has been deployed by Russian Su-35S, MiG-31BM, and more recently, Su-30SM2 aircraft. Its capability to engage targets at ranges exceeding 300 km offers a strategic edge, enabling the neutralization of threats before they can mount an effective response.

The R-77, known by NATO as the AA-12 Adder, is a Russian air-to-air missile designed primarily for medium-range engagements. In contrast to the R-37M, the R-77 emphasizes versatility, allowing it to be deployed on a wider array of aircraft and catering to both air superiority and multi-role combat situations. Below is a comparison of the two missiles:

Regarding range, the R-77 can engage targets at a maximum distance of approximately 100 kilometers, which is considerably shorter than the R-37M’s range of 300-400 kilometers. In terms of speed, the R-77 achieves velocities of up to Mach 4-5, whereas the R-37M can reach Mach 6, providing a significant edge in intercepting faster or more distant targets.

The guidance systems also vary; the R-77 employs an active radar seeker akin to that of the R-37M, but it lacks the advanced inertial navigation and mid-course correction features found in the R-37M. This makes the latter more adept for long-range, high-altitude missions where stealth is advantageous.

The R-77 is designed with a “fire and forget” capability, enabling it to lock onto and track targets independently of the launching aircraft’s guidance. While this feature is also available in the R-37M, it is particularly vital for the longer engagement ranges that the R-37M operates within.

In terms of dimensions and weight, the R-77 is both lighter and shorter, facilitating its integration into various aircraft’s weapon bays or external hardpoints. This adaptability has made the R-77 a common choice in the armaments of many Russian aircraft, unlike the R-37M, which is more specialized and necessitates specific launch platforms due to its larger size and weight.

Ultimately, while both missiles are integral to Russia’s air-to-air capabilities, their functions are distinctly different. The R-37M is designed for strategic missions requiring long-range interception, particularly against high-value targets, whereas the R-77 provides a versatile medium-range option suitable for a variety of aerial combat scenarios.

This analysis of the R-37M highlights the intricacies of contemporary aerial combat, where factors such as range, velocity, and advanced guidance systems are crucial in influencing the results of military engagements.

India and Russia have maintained a longstanding partnership in the defense arena, working together on a variety of weapon systems, including numerous missile technologies that have significantly enhanced the military capabilities of both countries.

A prominent example of this collaboration is BrahMos Aerospace, which develops the BrahMos missile, a supersonic cruise missile recognized for its adaptability across multiple launch platforms, including naval vessels, submarines, aircraft, and ground systems. This missile has become a fundamental element of India’s strategic defense, providing precise strike capabilities over long distances.

The partnership has also explored other missile technologies, with historical initiatives such as the joint development of the Agni series of ballistic missiles. However, recent efforts have concentrated on the BrahMos due to its versatility and proven effectiveness.

The proposal to facilitate the production of the R-37M in India presents several financial and strategic benefits. Primarily, local manufacturing would significantly reduce logistics and transportation expenses that come with importing advanced weaponry from Russia. By producing these missiles domestically, India could lower import duties, transit insurance costs, and expenses related to international shipping.

Additionally, domestic production would allow India to take advantage of economies of scale. Given the country’s substantial military needs, manufacturing these missiles locally would not only satisfy national requirements but could also create opportunities for export, considering the expansion of India’s defense sector. This could result in cost efficiencies through bulk production, ultimately decreasing the unit price of each missile.

One important consideration is the transfer of technology associated with these collaborations. Manufacturing the R-37M in India would necessitate the sharing of essential technology, thereby bolstering India’s domestic defense production capabilities. This technology transfer could result in innovations or adaptations specifically designed to meet the requirements of the Indian military, further optimizing costs by modifying the missile’s design to align with local specifications or facilitating integration with existing Indian defense systems.

From a strategic perspective, this initiative could reinforce the military-industrial relationship between India and Russia, promoting additional collaboration in defense technology that may extend to other military equipment. It also positions India as a more autonomous entity in defense matters, decreasing reliance on foreign suppliers for vital military assets, which can yield long-term financial advantages by lowering future procurement expenses.

Therefore, the proposal to manufacture the R-37M in India can be viewed as a strategic effort to curtail financial outlays, enhance domestic defense capabilities, and strengthen the already solid defense partnership between India and Russia.

Su-57 achieved takeoff in slightly more than 11 to 12 seconds from a compact runway

Asif Shahid

February 9, 2025

Su-57 achieved takeoff in slightly more than 11 to 12 seconds from a compact runway.

A recent video from the upcoming Aero India 2025 international exhibition, commencing tomorrow, highlights the Su-57’s capability to take off from a short runway. A detailed timing analysis indicates that the Su-57 achieved takeoff from a “short position” in approximately 11-12 seconds. This represents a notable enhancement in the Su-57’s performance, particularly with the AL-41F1 engine featured in the aircraft shown in the footage.

Typically, modern fighter jets, including the Su-57, require between 15 and 25 seconds to accelerate along the runway before takeoff, influenced by factors such as payload, engine thrust, and runway length.

Achieving such a brief takeoff time—merely 12 seconds—implies that the aircraft must reach takeoff speed of approximately 250-280 km/h (155-175 mph) very rapidly. This could indicate the use of afterburners for maximum thrust or that the aircraft was operating with a minimal load, which is indeed the case here.

However, this capability of the Su-57 may be limited to specific flight scenarios, such as showcasing its abilities at military exhibitions or transitioning from the manufacturing facility’s runway to its final deployment within the Russian Air Force. In actual combat situations, such a rapid takeoff would not be feasible.

The primary reasons for this limitation are the absence of armament and a reduced fuel load. When fully equipped, the Su-57 can carry up to 10 tons of combat payload, including various air-to-air and air-to-ground missiles. This significantly increases the aircraft’s overall weight, necessitating a longer runway for takeoff.

The Su-57, when operating with minimal load—specifically without weapons and with reduced fuel—has a weight ranging from approximately 18 to 20 tons. However, in a fully armed combat configuration, its weight can surpass 35 tons, effectively doubling the energy required for acceleration.

While the Su-57 is engineered to carry its munitions internally to minimize drag, it is capable of utilizing external hardpoints in certain scenarios. This adaptation further adds to the aircraft’s weight and necessitates increased engine thrust for acceleration.

Aerodynamic drag significantly influences the Su-57’s takeoff duration. A video showcasing its swift takeoff illustrates the aircraft in an ideal aerodynamic condition—devoid of external weapons and with a minimal load, which greatly lessens air resistance.

Parasitic drag, also known as frontal drag, refers to the resistance encountered by the aircraft as it advances. The Su-57 features sleek, stealth-optimized shapes designed to reduce this drag. However, when equipped with missiles or bombs on external hardpoints, the frontal drag increases, complicating acceleration. In the video, the Su-57 appears unarmed, enabling it to achieve takeoff speed more rapidly.

Induced drag is another vital consideration, as it is associated with the lift produced by the wings. A heavier aircraft demands more lift, which in turn elevates drag. The lighter configuration of the Su-57 in the video results in reduced induced drag, facilitating a quicker and more efficient takeoff.

The aircraft possesses several notable advantages that effectively mitigate aerodynamic drag. Its internal weapon bays significantly decrease frontal drag when compared to fighters such as the Su-35 or F-15, which depend on external weapon mounts. Furthermore, its sophisticated control surfaces and robust engines enhance airflow efficiency, while the utilization of afterburners during takeoff provides an extra thrust boost, facilitating quicker acceleration.

The AL-41F1 engines, along with the forthcoming “Izdeliye 30,” generate substantial thrust, allowing the Su-57 to attain impressive acceleration. If the aircraft is lightly loaded and employs afterburners, this could account for its ability to leave the runway in a mere 11-12 seconds—an impressive yet entirely rational outcome.

Armament plays a crucial role in determining the takeoff time of any fighter jet. A lighter configuration allows for swift takeoff, whereas a fully loaded Su-57 would necessitate a significantly longer distance to become airborne. This video highlights the exceptional capabilities of the Russian fighter while also serving as a reminder that combat scenarios can greatly influence its performance metrics.

Certainly, the Su-57’s accomplishment can be viewed in the context of other fighters’ capabilities. While such comparisons may lose relevance during actual combat operations, it is still worthwhile to examine the performance of other aircraft.

Under ideal circumstances—characterized by the absence of weapons, a minimal payload, an empty fuel tank, and the use of afterburners—the takeoff durations for various contemporary fighter jets will differ, yet all will demonstrate remarkable capabilities.

For instance, the F-35 is expected to achieve takeoff in approximately 20-25 seconds under these parameters. Although it is powered by a robust engine, its thrust-to-weight ratio is not as favorable when compared to lighter or more powerful aircraft, which influences its acceleration.

The F-22 Raptor, benefiting from its dual-engine configuration and stealthy design, can take off in roughly 15-20 seconds, highlighting its exceptional performance.

The Chinese J-20, despite its greater size and weight, would require about 20-25 seconds for takeoff with a minimal load. Its advanced engines and aerodynamic design allow for rapid acceleration, but its larger dimensions hinder it from matching the takeoff times of lighter counterparts.

The Dassault Rafale also exhibits commendable performance, achieving takeoff in around 20-25 seconds under similar conditions. This fighter is powered by two strong engines that facilitate swift acceleration.

The Eurofighter Typhoon, with its dual engines and relatively light frame, would take off in approximately 15-20 seconds, owing to its outstanding maneuverability and power.

The Saab Gripen, being a lighter and more agile aircraft, would similarly achieve takeoff in about 15-20 seconds when operating with minimal load and utilizing afterburners.

The F-15, equipped with its dual engines, can achieve takeoff in approximately 20-25 seconds under favorable conditions. This aircraft is renowned for its exceptional performance, though its heavier weight results in a slightly slower acceleration compared to some of the latest models.

Similarly, the F-18, celebrated for its agility and well-balanced structure, also requires around 20-25 seconds for takeoff in optimal circumstances. Its robust engines facilitate a strong launch, yet it is not as lightweight as some of its contemporary rivals.

While all these aircraft exhibit remarkable acceleration capabilities under ideal conditions, the Su-57 demonstrates that, with minimal load and the right environment, it can take off in an even shorter timeframe. Nonetheless, when evaluated under the same takeoff conditions, all these fighters would achieve takeoff in under 30 seconds.

China has probably outfitted a new brigade with J-20 aircraft, substituting the J-11 models

Asif Shahid

February 9, 2025

There are indications that the 19th Air Brigade (AB) stationed within China‘s Central Theater Command (CTC) has begun to receive J-20 fighter jets, which would replace the older J-11 models.

Although the Chinese military has not officially announced this transition, various sources, including satellite images and military observer reports, indicate that the process is progressing.

The J-11s, which have served as a cornerstone of the Chinese air force for many years, are being gradually retired in favor of the more advanced J-20 stealth fighters. This shift underscores China’s ongoing commitment to modernizing its air force with state-of-the-art technology, focusing on enhanced stealth capabilities, extended-range precision strikes, and improved combat effectiveness.

The J-20’s superior radar-evading technology and advanced avionics position it as a crucial element in the People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) strategy to secure air dominance in the region.

While the J-11s were significant during their operational period, providing a reliable multirole fighter platform, they are increasingly viewed as outdated compared to the advanced capabilities of the J-20. The decision to equip the 19th AB with these newer aircraft reflects China’s dedication to upgrading its military forces and maintaining competitiveness on the global stage, especially amid rising tensions in the Asia-Pacific region.

It is still uncertain whether all units of the 19th AB have completely transitioned to the J-20, but confirmed sightings of these advanced fighters both on base and in operational settings strongly indicate that the replacement process is either complete or close to completion.

The introduction of the J-20 into the 19th AB is part of a larger trend within China’s military, as the People’s Liberation Army Air Force (PLAAF) continues to integrate more stealth fighters into its fleet, potentially signaling a significant shift in aerial power dynamics.

The decision to phase out the J-11s signifies the increasing confidence of the Chinese military in its capabilities, with the J-20 representing the pinnacle of extensive research and development efforts.

Although the J-20 is recognized as one of the most sophisticated fighter jets globally, achieving full operational integration within units such as the 19th Air Brigade is a significant milestone in China’s broader military modernization strategy. As the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) seeks to enhance its technological advancements and operational capabilities, the J-20 is expected to be instrumental in defining the future of China’s aerial supremacy.

The 19th Air Brigade of the People’s Liberation Army Air Force (PLAAF) holds strategic importance within the Central Theater Command (CTC). This brigade is integral to China’s military aviation modernization initiatives, playing a vital role in safeguarding airspace and protecting essential regions within the country.

Renowned for its high operational readiness and professionalism, the brigade is situated in one of China’s most critical areas and actively engages in various training exercises and missions to uphold national security. The modernization efforts within the brigade focus on replacing outdated aircraft with advanced models that align with contemporary air and strategic security requirements.

The technological capabilities at the brigade’s disposal enable it to execute a diverse array of missions, ranging from air control and superiority to more intricate operations involving rapid response during crises. Furthermore, the 19th Air Brigade is pivotal in the operational integration of China’s air forces, participating in joint exercises and showcasing military capabilities.

The 19th Air Brigade, while not often revealing specific details about its aircraft numbers and specifications, is recognized as a premier unit within China’s aviation forces. It plays a crucial role in the People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) initiatives aimed at enhancing operational efficiency and modernization.

The Chengdu J-20, referred to as the Mighty Dragon, represents a significant advancement in China’s military aviation capabilities, positioning the country among the select few with fifth-generation stealth fighter technology. Since its first flight in 2011, the J-20 has attracted considerable attention, both for its performance and the debates surrounding its development.

The design of the J-20 incorporates sophisticated stealth characteristics aimed at minimizing its radar visibility. Its structure features a blended wing and fuselage, serrated edges, and materials designed to absorb radar waves.

These design elements collectively enhance the J-20’s stealth capabilities, although some experts have noted that certain features, such as its canards, may affect its stealth performance at particular radar angles.

Nonetheless, China has made significant strides in stealth technology, with reports indicating that the J-20’s radar cross-section is competitive with that of several Western models.

Initially powered by Russian AL-31F engines, the J-20 has seen a strong movement towards the development of domestic engines. The WS-10C engine, viewed as a temporary solution, has been integrated into later production variants, demonstrating performance levels comparable to the AL-31F.

The primary objective remains the WS-15 engine, which is expected to provide the J-20 with supercruise capabilities, enabling it to fly at supersonic speeds without the use of afterburners. This advancement would position the J-20 on equal footing with the F-22 Raptor. Although the development of the WS-15 has faced delays, recent updates indicate that it is approaching readiness for integration into the J-20 fleet.

China has also placed significant emphasis on enhancing the J-20’s avionics suite. It is equipped with a sophisticated active electronically scanned array (AESA) radar, essential for both air-to-air combat and ground attack operations.

Additionally, the fighter incorporates systems such as the distributed aperture system (DAS) and electro-optical targeting system (EOTS), which are critical for situational awareness and targeting accuracy. These technologies enable the J-20 to detect, track, and engage targets from considerable distances, thereby improving its effectiveness in contemporary combat situations.

Regarding armament, the J-20 does not feature an internal cannon, a topic that has sparked discussion among military experts. While it is argued that missiles have largely replaced guns in modern aerial warfare, the lack of a cannon may present a vulnerability in close-range engagements.

Nonetheless, the J-20 is equipped with a formidable selection of missiles. It can internally carry PL-15 beyond-visual-range missiles and PL-10 short-range air-to-air missiles, preserving its stealth characteristics, while also having the option to carry additional weapons externally, albeit at the expense of its stealth profile.

The J-20 is not merely an air superiority fighter; it is engineered as a multirole aircraft, proficient in both air-to-air and air-to-ground operations. This adaptability is facilitated by its internal weapon bays, which can accommodate a range of munitions such as air-to-surface missiles, anti-radiation missiles, and laser-guided bombs. Such capabilities position the J-20 as a crucial asset for China in scenarios requiring power projection or the defense of territorial claims, particularly in areas like the South China Sea.

The J-20’s development has sparked controversy, including allegations of intellectual property infringement involving Western designs. Nevertheless, it also highlights significant Chinese advancements in stealth and sensor technologies. The ongoing discussion regarding whether the J-20 is a derivative model or a truly original design persists, yet its operational features indicate it is a formidable aircraft.

Looking ahead, various J-20 variants are under development, including a twin-seat model that could enhance its functionalities in training, electronic warfare, or advanced tactical missions. This potential variant, likely referred to as the J-20S, has been observed in testing, signaling China’s ambition to broaden the operational capabilities of the J-20.

The J-20 symbolizes China’s aspiration to compete with and potentially challenge the air forces of technologically advanced countries. Its introduction has altered the strategic landscape in the Asia-Pacific region, compelling neighboring nations and global powers to reevaluate their military strategies. In terms of stealth, speed, and armament, the J-20 clearly reflects China’s commitment to modernizing and asserting its military prowess on the international stage.

Egypt will convene an urgent Arab summit to address significant developments concerning the Palestinian situation

Asif Shahid

February 9, 2025

Egypt’s Foreign Minister Badr Abdelatty (C) heads a meeting with ministers from Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Qatar and the UAE, to discuss US President Donald Trump's proposal for Egypt and Jordan to host Palestinians displaced from the Gaza Strip, in Cairo.

Egypt is set to convene an emergency Arab summit on February 27 to address what it has termed “serious” developments concerning the Palestinian situation, as stated by the Egyptian foreign ministry on Sunday.

This summit is being organized in response to widespread regional and international criticism of U.S. President Donald Trump‘s proposal to “take over the Gaza Strip” from Israel and establish a “Riviera of the Middle East” following the relocation of Palestinians to other areas.

Trump has said he discussed the Ukraine conflict with Putin as it approaches its third anniversary

Asif Shahid

February 9, 2025

President Donald Trump and President Vladimir Putin.

President Donald Trump revealed in a Saturday interview that he has had discussions with Russian President Vladimir Putin.

“He wants to see people stop dying,” Trump stated to the New York Post.

The timing of their conversations remains unclear, including whether they have communicated since Trump assumed office in January and the frequency of those discussions. CNN has sought clarification from the National Security Council.

Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov responded to CNN by saying he “can neither deny nor confirm this news.” He noted that Washington and Moscow communicate “through different channels” as the Trump administration becomes more active.

“So… there could be something I don’t know,” Peskov remarked.

In the interview, Trump refrained from disclosing the number of times he has spoken with Putin but emphasized that he has a “good relationship” with the Russian leader.

The US president expressed his desire for a swift resolution to Putin’s war in Ukraine, which is nearing its third year, stating, “I hope it’s fast. Every day people are dying. This war is so bad in Ukraine. I want to end this damn thing,” as he told the New York Post.

Trump stated earlier this week that negotiations aimed at resolving the conflict have shown significant advancement.

During an interview conducted while he was en route to Florida on Air Force One on Friday, the president instructed his national security adviser, Mike Waltz, to initiate these discussions.

“They are eager to meet. Every day, lives are being lost. Young, capable soldiers are dying. Young men, similar to my sons, on both sides. Across the battlefield,” he remarked.

On Friday, the president informed reporters that he would likely meet with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky in the coming week and suggested that he also intended to engage in discussions with Putin.

“I will likely be meeting with President Zelensky next week, and I will probably be in conversation with President Putin,” Trump noted.

Zelensky is anticipated to head Ukraine’s delegation at the Munich Security Conference, which will also see the attendance of Vice President JD Vance and special envoy for Ukraine and Russia, Keith Kellogg, although Trump will not be present.

Earlier this week, Trump expressed his desire to secure access to Ukraine’s rare earth mineral resources in exchange for ongoing U.S. support to the nation.

Trump stated to reporters in the Oval Office, “We aim to establish a deal with Ukraine, where they will back what we provide them with their rare earth materials and other resources,” expressing dissatisfaction that Europe has not matched the level of support given to Ukraine by the United States.

This transactional approach sheds light on Trump’s perspective regarding the conflict in Ukraine. He has frequently voiced concerns about the financial burden the U.S. bears in supplying arms to Kyiv, yet he has not clarified his strategy for either ceasing or maintaining that support since assuming office.

Earlier this week, the Kremlin informed CNN that there have been no substantial discussions regarding a potential meeting between Trump and Putin.

Peskov remarked, “There has been no initial communication to determine the necessity of a meeting, nor discussions on the timing or format of such a meeting.”

As speculation grows about a possible interaction between the two leaders, a senior Russian legislator indicated to state media that “extensive” preparations are in progress for a meeting, which could occur as soon as this month.

Russia controls 70% of Ukraine’s $26 trillion in mineral resources while Trump explores a rare earth agreement with Kyiv.

Asif Shahid

February 8, 2025

A dumper truck shifts iron ore from an excavation site near Horishni Plavni, Ukraine.

US President Donald Trump is advocating for an agreement that would allow the United States to access Ukraine‘s rare earth minerals in exchange for American assistance as Kyiv continues its conflict with Russia. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has reportedly shown a favorable response to this initiative.

Trump highlighted the nearly US$300 billion in support from the US, stressing the importance of “equalization.” He remarked, “Ukraine possesses highly valuable rare earths,” suggesting a possible arrangement where resources are exchanged for aid.

“We aim to establish a deal that ensures Ukraine receives what we provide in return for their rare earths and other resources,” he noted, while leaving the term “other resources” undefined. “We are determined to put an end to that absurd war,” he stated.

In his response, Zelenskyy expressed a willingness to accept “investment” from allies, provided it bolsters Ukraine’s efforts against Russia. He confirmed that conversations regarding rare earth minerals had begun several months prior. “I mentioned this back in September during my meeting with President Trump,” he disclosed.

Notably, Ukrainian media previously indicated that the concept might have originated in Kyiv rather than Washington, aimed at securing ongoing US military support. Reports suggest that Zelenskyy’s team even postponed a crucial minerals agreement with the Biden administration to leverage it in the event of Trump’s return to power.

Recent reports indicate a significant development: Moscow has reportedly taken control of approximately 70% of Ukraine’s mineral resources, with the most valuable deposits found in the occupied territories of Donetsk, Dnipropetrovsk, and Luhansk.

What Lies Beneath Ukraine’s Surface?

What valuable resources lie beneath Ukraine’s conflict-affected land that have captured international interest? The country is endowed with a wealth of critical minerals, positioning it as a potential leader in the global raw materials sector.

Ukraine is abundant in critical minerals and rare earth elements that are vital for a range of modern technologies, including batteries, magnets, catalysts, and electronic components. These resources are essential across various industries such as consumer electronics, healthcare, transportation, energy production, petroleum refining, and defense technologies.

The nation is known to possess 20 critical minerals and metals, making it one of the top ten suppliers globally, accounting for about 5% of the world’s total supply.

Among these resources are rare earth metals such as titanium, lithium, beryllium, manganese, gallium, uranium, zirconium, graphite, apatite, fluorite, and nickel, as reported by the World Economic Forum.

According to the Ministry of Ecology and Natural Resources of Ukraine:

Titanium: Ukraine is the leading country in Europe for titanium reserves and ranks among the top ten worldwide, contributing 7% of the global supply. With 28 identified fields, it also produces zirconium as a byproduct. The primary titanium minerals are ilmenite and rutile.

Lithium: The country holds one-third of Europe’s lithium reserves, which accounts for nearly 3% of the global supply.

Graphite: Ukraine has 20% of the world’s graphite resources, with reserves estimated at around 19 million tons of ore containing 5-8% natural graphite, placing it among the top five holders of global reserves.

Nickel and Cobalt: Ukraine possesses 12 silicate nickel fields, which also yield cobalt as a secondary product. The estimated cobalt reserves in the country reach up to 9,000 tons. Nevertheless, the Pobuzhsky ferronickel plant in Ukraine continues to depend on the importation of nickel and cobalt raw materials to meet its industrial requirements.

Rare Earth Elements: The country is also rich in rare earth metals, including tantalum, niobium, and beryllium, with six known fields containing these elements. Non-commercial extraction occurs in conjunction with titanium mining activities.

Additionally, Ukraine ranks significantly in the production of other minerals, holding the 4th position in copper, 5th in lead, 6th in zinc, and 9th in silver, as reported by the Finance Ministry.

For example, the identified reserves of lithium and graphite in Ukraine are adequate to manufacture cathode and anode materials for lithium batteries, with a total capacity of 1,000 GWh, which could facilitate the production of around 20 million electric vehicles.

The estimated value of Ukraine’s critical materials stands at US$12 trillion, reflecting the potential for growth in the global raw materials market. When factoring in additional natural resources such as coal and natural gas, this valuation increases to US$26 trillion.

According to the Kyiv School of Economics (KSE), the rare earth deposits in Ukraine are primarily located in the central regions. However, these resources remain largely untapped, and their overall value has yet to be fully assessed.

The US$12 trillion valuation presented at the recent Davos forum should be approached with caution. A large portion of these reserves remains unexplored, and the actual quality and quantity of the resources are still uncertain.

The full scope and feasibility of Ukraine’s critical materials are not yet fully understood, necessitating further exploration to determine their genuine potential.

Minerals in Russian-Controlled Areas

Russia has taken control of approximately 70% of Ukraine’s mineral resources, with the highest concentrations found in the Donetsk, Dnipropetrovsk, and Luhansk regions. Forbes Ukraine estimates these resources to be worth around US$15 trillion.

A recent article from ‘The Moscow Times’ references an April 2023 estimate from Forbes Ukraine, which places Ukraine’s total mineral resources at 111 billion tons, valued at US$14.8 trillion, predominantly comprising coal and iron ore.

However, over 70% of these resources are situated in Donetsk and Luhansk—regions that are partially under Russian control—as well as in Dnipropetrovsk, where Russian military forces are making advances.

A 2022 report by The Washington Post suggested an even higher valuation for Ukraine’s mineral reserves, estimating them at US$26 trillion, with nearly half located in territories currently controlled by Russia.

US-China-Russia: Competition for Essential Minerals

The proposal from Trump extends beyond the situation in Ukraine; it aims to counter the influence of China and Russia.

Ukraine ranks as the fifth-largest producer of gallium, a crucial component for semiconductors and LEDs, and is a primary source of neon gas, supplying 90% of the neon required by the US chip industry. The full-scale invasion by Russia has led to a global shortage of neon, significantly impacting US chip production.

Additionally, Ukraine possesses important deposits for the nuclear sector, contributing 1% of the world’s zirconium output along with substantial reserves of beryllium and uranium. Beryllium is vital for various industries, including nuclear power, aerospace, military, acoustic, and electronics, while uranium is critical for nuclear energy and defense.

President Donald Trump’s focus on Ukraine’s essential materials is likely influenced by China’s stronghold in the rare earth market. As of January of the previous year, China was responsible for 60% of global rare earth production and processed approximately 90%, as reported by the Center for Strategic and International Studies. Through his “America First” initiative, Trump aimed to enhance US competitiveness by decreasing reliance on China.

Russia, a key provider of titanium, nickel, and platinum group metals, has been significantly affected by Western sanctions. These measures have exacerbated global shortages of essential materials such as titanium, which is critical for the aerospace and electronics sectors.

Future Implications

The global market for critical minerals, currently valued at approximately US$320 billion, is projected to double within the next five years, as reported by the World Economic Forum.

Prior to 2022, Ukraine was a significant source of steel plates, titanium, lithium, gallium, iron ore, and manganese for Europe. However, the Russian invasion has severely disrupted these supply chains, necessitating a shift to more costly and slower rail transport options.

Consequently, the struggle for Ukraine’s mineral resources extends beyond mere territorial disputes; it plays a vital role in global technology supply chains and the dynamics of geopolitical power.

As Trump calls for ceasefire talks, Ukraine sees Kursk as a potential leverage point

Asif Shahid

February 8, 2025

Ukraine has initiated fresh offensives in Russia‘s southern Kursk region as US President Donald Trump advocates for ceasefire negotiations.

According to the Institute for the Study of War, a US-based conflict monitoring organization, Ukrainian forces conducted a new wave of attacks in the Kursk area on Thursday, advancing as much as five kilometers (three miles) behind Russian lines to the southeast of Sudzha.

It remains uncertain whether these assaults are intended to capture additional territory or to bolster Ukraine’s defensive positions. ISW analyst Angelica Evans noted that such significant advances are noteworthy.

“The ability of the Ukrainians to breach Russian defenses and move forward by five kilometers is something we haven’t observed the Russians achieving anywhere along the front line,” she stated in an interview with CNN.

Kyiv’s offensive into Russian territory has taken even its allies by surprise, and the fighting in Kursk continues despite challenging conditions elsewhere along the front.

On Friday, Russia announced that it had captured Toretsk, an industrial town in eastern Ukraine that has been a focal point of conflict for the past six months. Ukraine has not yet responded to this claim, but if verified, the loss of Toretsk would represent another strategic gain for Moscow, bringing Russian forces closer to key Ukrainian defensive positions.

Simultaneously, Russian troops have been gradually advancing towards Pokrovsk, a logistical center in eastern Ukraine that has been a target since the summer, as well as Kupiansk in the north.

Some individuals in Ukraine, including troops engaged in the fighting in Kursk and other areas, are questioning the decision to allocate valuable resources for operations in Russia while facing challenges in defending their own territory.

The rationale may stem from the anticipation that Trump could soon exert pressure on Ukraine to engage in discussions with Russia.

There is no intrinsic value in the land currently held by Ukrainians in Kursk, as it consists of fields and settlements that do not pose a threat to Kursk city or Moscow, according to Evans.

However, in the context of peace negotiations, retaining Russian territory could serve as a significant leverage point for Ukraine when considering the reclamation of its own land or other concessions from Russia in future discussions, she noted.

Ukrainian military and political officials have consistently stated that the operation in Kursk aims to thwart a new Russian offensive in northern Ukraine and compel Moscow to reallocate some of its forces from other regions.

President Volodymyr Zelensky reported on Friday that North Korean troops have re-engaged in combat in the Kursk area, following earlier indications that these units had been withdrawn due to heavy losses. He mentioned that numerous North Korean and Russian soldiers were “eliminated” during confrontations with Ukrainian forces.

This operation marks Ukraine’s most significant strategic achievement since the liberation of Kherson in November 2022, providing a substantial boost to national morale.

As discussions about negotiations to conclude the conflict continue, Zelensky has emphasized that Kyiv views Kursk as a potential asset in future bargaining scenarios.

On Wednesday, he referred to the incursion as “a very important operation.”

“You will understand later, when we achieve a diplomatic resolution to conclude the war, what conditions the Russians will encounter concerning the Kursk direction,” he stated during his nightly address to the nation.

Trump has expressed a strong desire for negotiations between Russia and Ukraine to commence “as soon as possible.” He mentioned that his administration is in direct communication with both parties.

“We have made significant progress regarding Russia and Ukraine,” Trump remarked. “We will see what unfolds. We are determined to put an end to that absurd war,” he added on Monday.

A notable strategic advantage for Ukraine

It has been six months since Kyiv initiated its unexpected incursion into the Kursk region. Although Russia has managed to regain more than half of the territory initially seized by Kyiv, this has come at a substantial cost to Moscow.

The Ukrainian General Staff reported on Thursday that Russia has suffered the loss of 40,000 troops during the six months of conflict in Kursk, with 16,100 of those being fatalities.

“Ukrainian forces captured 909 Russian military personnel, significantly enhancing the exchange fund. This enabled the return of hundreds of Ukrainian defenders who were imprisoned in Russia,” the General Staff noted.

This incursion represents the first instance of foreign troops gaining control over Russian territory since World War II, marking a significant embarrassment for President Vladimir Putin, who has predominantly portrayed Russia’s invasion of Ukraine as a means of “defending” the nation.

The Ukrainian military has assessed that approximately 78,000 Russian troops have been stationed in Kursk, a number significantly exceeding Ukraine’s forces. According to Evans, “These Russian troops, which include members of elite units, are currently occupied and diverted in Kursk. If not, they would likely be engaged on the frontlines in eastern Ukraine, where they could inflict considerable damage.”

Despite this numerical superiority, the Russian military has faced challenges in dislodging Ukrainian forces from their territory, prompting Moscow to seek foreign assistance by deploying around 12,000 North Korean soldiers to the Kursk area.

This move marks the first instance of a Russian leader relying on foreign troops to reclaim Russian land, as noted by Evans.

She emphasized that the strategic implications of the Ukrainian forces’ actions in Kursk are “far more significant than what these troops could have accomplished by defending within Ukraine.”

While the military operations may not lead to the collapse of the Russian state, the pressures exerted on Russia could have that potential, she remarked, highlighting the growing discontent within Russia regarding Ukraine’s ability to maintain control over Russian territory for six months. “This situation significantly undermines Putin’s credibility domestically and challenges the narrative he has constructed for himself as a defender and stabilizer.”

During a conversation with Alexander Khinshtein, the acting governor of the Kursk region, on Wednesday, Putin acknowledged that the situation in Kursk is “very difficult.”

However, the North Korean troops have had minimal impact on Russia’s efforts to reclaim its territory, primarily serving as foot soldiers for brutal mass ground assaults that result in significant casualties.

Ukrainian officials and Western intelligence estimate that approximately 4,000 North Korean troops have been killed or injured. The South Korean intelligence agency reported earlier this week that the North Korean forces stationed in Kursk have not participated in combat since mid-January, corroborating earlier claims from the Ukrainian military.

Evans noted that Russia is facing challenges in countering Ukrainian forces due to Kyiv’s advanced use of technology, particularly drones and electronic warfare capabilities.

Trump’s rapport with European allies has become increasingly complex

Asif Shahid

February 8, 2025

Donald Trump gestures at Turning Point USA's AmericaFest in Phoenix, Arizona, U.S.

For a fortnight, America’s allies remained silent. Since his inauguration, President Donald Trump had received a continuous flow of positive remarks—and minimal criticism—from leaders in Europe and the Anglosphere, who may have privately taken issue with the tumult and bravado he brought to the presidency.

However, this temporary harmony was destined to break, and it did so dramatically this week when Trump proposed one of his most controversial foreign policy initiatives: placing Gaza under American governance, relocating its Palestinian inhabitants, and transforming the area into the “Riviera of the Middle East.”

This proposal appeared to instantly dismantle decades of established Western policy, veering away from the long-accepted, albeit frustratingly stagnant, “two-state solution” framework.

Countries swiftly denounced the idea. Allies in the region expressed shock and apprehension regarding the potential repercussions on ongoing diplomatic efforts, particularly the ceasefire and hostage negotiations between Israel and Hamas. Palestinians voiced their distress at the thought of being uprooted from their homeland.

In Europe, where the United States typically navigates less complex relationships, leaders expressed a range of reactions but were unified in their opposition: they do not endorse this plan.

Nonetheless, Trump has placed America’s partners in a challenging position. For many leaders, openly criticizing the US is a last resort—doing so early in a presidential term carries significant risks.

“My impression is that they are all taken aback. They didn’t anticipate this,” remarked Jon B. Alterman, a former US State Department official and current director of the Middle East Program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, a Washington-based think tank.

There are also broader, more widespread implications at play. Trump’s erratic approach to geopolitical matters has gradually put the United States at risk of becoming ideologically isolated from its global partners. His comments regarding Gaza—whether they signify a concept, a strategy, or something in between—could further this trend.

“This administration not only has a tendency but also a desire to disrupt,” Alterman noted. He anticipated “a more profound introspection in Europe regarding its engagement with a United States that is increasingly self-centered and less dedicated to a multilateral framework.”

Trump and Europe

Many Western countries are wary of the unpredictability that Trump introduces into the political landscape, yet they were better equipped for his potential second term than they were for his first.

They anticipated a challenge of this nature. Their reactions to Trump’s Gaza proposal underscored how they might address the broader implications of a second Trump presidency.

The United Nations responded firmly, with its secretary-general cautioning Trump against “ethnic cleansing.” France characterized the proposal as “a serious violation of international law,” noting that the forced displacement of a population is forbidden under the Geneva Convention. Spain’s foreign minister stated on radio station RNE that “the land of Gazans is Gaza.” In Western Europe, only Dutch far-right leader Geert Wilders diverged from the consensus to support the plan, suggesting, “Let Palestinians move to Jordan. Gaza-problem solved!” on X.

German President Walter Steinmeier described the proposal as “unacceptable,” while Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock warned that it would result in “new suffering and new hatred.”

Eric Nelson, who served as Trump’s ambassador to Bosnia and later as the associate director of the German-American Marshall European Center for Security Studies in Munich, remarked to CNN, “As a career diplomat, my role was to present the interests of the US government in the most favorable manner. President Trump made that increasingly challenging. It was difficult to predict his next moves.”

He observed that the German government’s response was predictable: they are quite dismissive. The approaching federal election has heightened the pressure on the struggling German government to denounce Trump, who is largely unpopular in Germany and throughout Western Europe.

This situation is one that Trump’s team is likely to view with ease. Nathan Sales, Trump’s former Coordinator for Counterterrorism, stated, “They won’t anticipate Western capitals to enthusiastically join in. We don’t need to agree with our allies all the time.”

Moreover, German Chancellor Olaf Scholz and his administration have little reason to hold back their criticism, as they may not remain in power next month to address any fallout.

However, not everyone finds it easy to criticize the US president.

Consider the situation in Britain. As a loyal ally of the United States, the UK is eager to cultivate a constructive relationship with Trump, and initial indications suggest that Prime Minister Keir Starmer’s charm offensive is yielding results. Trump remarked this week that Starmer had been “very nice” and hinted that the UK might evade the tariffs he has threatened against the European Union. This represents a significant opportunity for a British leader seeking to stimulate economic growth.

However, these connections are precarious. London is acutely aware that a poorly chosen comment could jeopardize months of efforts to win over Trump. Simultaneously, Starmer understands the risks of appearing overly submissive to an American president, a stance he has previously criticized Conservative leaders for adopting.

This dilemma necessitates careful communication. “On the issue of Gaza, Donald Trump is right,” stated David Lammy, Starmer’s Foreign Secretary, while speaking to reporters in Ukraine this week, tailoring part of his response for Trump’s ears. “Observing those scenes, it is evident that Palestinians have been horrendously displaced amid months of conflict, and Gaza lies in ruins.” The remainder of his statement was directed at a broader audience: “We have consistently maintained that a two-state solution is essential, allowing Palestinians to live and thrive in their homeland in Gaza.”

A Labour MP expressed to CNN his shock at Trump’s comments but acknowledged that numerous factors, including an ongoing ceasefire and a vital trade relationship, made public criticism of the president unwise. He expressed considerable sympathy for Starmer as he endeavors to maintain a positive relationship.

“Adopting a hardline stance with allies is certainly an unusual approach to foreign policy,” the MP remarked. “Will he apply the same strategy with adversaries?”

The upcoming confrontation

Similar to many of Trump’s more controversial statements, his proposal regarding Gaza has been met with both criticism and scrutiny, both domestically and internationally, for its potential strategic implications.

Those who understand his mindset suggest that presenting an undesirable standard could, intentionally or not, prompt America’s allies to devise a more favorable alternative. “He thrives on keeping others in a state of reaction,” noted Nelson.

“We have witnessed this tactic from President Trump on numerous occasions… this exemplifies the art of negotiation,” Sales remarked. “Many of the United States’ Western allies are entrenched in outdated perspectives regarding the Israeli-Palestinian conflict… during his first term, the Trump administration acknowledged that this approach was futile.”

However, if the intention was to break through a longstanding diplomatic impasse, it carries risks that may not be well-received by America’s partners. “When you attempt to thaw frozen situations, you might unleash forces that are far more detrimental than you can anticipate,” Alterman cautioned.

Among these risks is the potential for American isolation on global matters, leading to a void in international leadership. “Several nations may feel compelled to establish different ties with Russia and China,” Alterman warned. “This is partly to reduce their dependence on the United States and partly because they no longer perceive the moral advantages of a close alliance with the U.S.”

The risk is amplified by Trump’s actions to impose sanctions, withdraw from, or criticize international organizations, as well as his efforts to dismantle the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID).

“Many people mistakenly view USAID as merely a charity,” Nelson remarked. “While Americans are indeed among the most generous globally, making strategic investments is crucial for supporting our allies and enhancing our influence.”

This is unlikely to be the final geopolitical clash between Trump and Europe. Observers are already considering potential negotiations to resolve Russia’s war in Ukraine; Trump has previously proposed the idea of conceding Ukrainian territory to Russia, raising concerns among NATO officials that he might publicly advocate for a deal that would leave Kyiv and European capitals in a difficult position.

To alleviate these concerns, several members of Trump’s close circle, including Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Vice President JD Vance, and Ukraine-Russia envoy Keith Kellogg, are anticipated to attend the Munich Security Conference in Germany next week.

“I hope the administration will adopt a more balanced and thoughtful strategy regarding Ukraine,” Nelson stated. “It is essential that Trump relies heavily on expert guidance concerning this conflict,” he added.

In various respects, Trump’s favorable global standing seems to have diminished. Western nations have been reminded of the disruption he can bring to international relations.

“The Biden administration has made significant efforts to be a reliable and predictable presence on the global stage,” Alterman noted. “In contrast, the Trump administration operates with an entirely different instinct.”

Philippines is set to purchase an additional 12 ATMOS 155mm self-propelled howitzers from Israel

Asif Shahid

February 8, 2025

The Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP) is reportedly planning to acquire an additional 12 ATMOS 155mm Self-Propelled Howitzers (SPH) from Israel, which would complement the existing 12 units currently in operation within the country. If this acquisition is finalized, the total number of ATMOS 155mm SPH in the Philippine military’s inventory will rise to 24 units.

Reports circulating on the social media platform X indicate that the AFP intends to fund this procurement through the nation’s defense budget for the current year. Should this deal proceed, it will contribute to the AFP’s ongoing modernization efforts, which are currently facing budgetary constraints, with only USD 595 million of the allocated USD 1.275 billion for defense in 2025 confirmed.

The AFP began receiving its first batch of ATMOS 155mm/52cal howitzers in 2021, following a procurement agreement signed the previous year. The Philippines had earlier entered into a contract with Israel to acquire between 12 and 15 ATMOS 155mm/52cal SPH units as part of the Horizon 2 phase of its military modernization initiative, with a value of RM 211 million (USD 47 million).

Weighing 23,000 kg, the ATMOS 155mm/52cal howitzer can engage targets at a distance of 41 km using Extended Range Full Bore Base Bleed (ERFB-BB) projectiles. This Israeli-made SPH system is designed to be operated by a crew of four to six members, including two loaders. For the Philippine Army, the ATMOS 155mm/52cal SPH is mounted on MAN trucks, selected for their availability and compatibility within the country. The Royal Thai Army also utilizes the Soltam ATMOS 155mm/39cal system.

The AFP stands as a significant customer of Israeli defense systems in Southeast Asia, with all branches of the Philippine military employing various equipment developed by Israeli defense manufacturers. Furthermore, Israeli military advisors are actively engaged in training Philippine security and special forces units.

The procurement of the ATMOS 155mm/52cal Self-Propelled Howitzer from Elbit Systems Land further enhances the strong military relationship between the Philippines and Israel. In March of the previous year, the Philippine Army carried out live-fire drills featuring the ATMOS 155mm/52cal SPH during the “Katihan” Combined Arms Training at Camp O’Donnell. The 10th Field Artillery Battalion, known as “Rolling Thunder,” was the inaugural unit to utilize the ATMOS 155mm/52cal SPH within the Philippine Army.

In addition to its use in the Philippines, the Soltam ATMOS 155mm/52cal SPH is operational in several other countries, including Azerbaijan, Botswana, Denmark, Cameroon, Colombia, Uganda, and Zambia.

Furthermore, the Philippine Army has acquired M113 Armored Mortar Carriers, which are outfitted with the Soltam CARDOM recoil mortar system. In 2019, the Philippines formalized an agreement with Elbit Systems for the purchase of 15 self-propelled mortar systems, each featuring a 120mm mortar.

DefenceTalksLatest Defence News & Analysis

DefenceTalks

DefenceTalksLatest Defence News & Analysis

DefenceTalksLatest Defence News & Analysis

TOP STORIES

DIPLOMACY

Nuclear Doctrine

DISPUTES

Defense Budget

Featured

DEFENCE

Military Exercise

Ukraine War

DefenceTalks.com

TOP STORIES

DIPLOMACY

Nuclear Doctrine

DISPUTES

Defense Budget

Featured

DEFENCE

Military Exercise

Ukraine War

DefenceTalks.com

Military Assumes Role in Counternarcotics

Is there potential for negotiation?

Thailand’s Aircraft Carrier: A Costly Lesson