"Expanding our security partnerships with India": US Defence Secy Hegseth; bats for enhancing QUAD cooperation
ANI "Expanding our security partnerships with India": US Defence Secy Hegseth; bats for enhancing QUAD cooperation
The United States on Saturday announced the expansion of its security partnerships with India through robust military exercises while emphasising the amplification of its cooperation within the QUAD and other multilateral frameworks.
During his address at the Shangri-La Dialogue here, US Secretary of Defence Pete Hegseth underscored the US's commitment to strengthening ties with Indo-Pacific allies, addressing threats from China, and promoting a pragmatic foreign policy grounded in mutual self-interest amidst a shifting global security landscape.
"We are expanding our security partnerships with India through robust military exercises like Tiger Triumph and amplifying cooperation within the QUAD and other multilateral friendly groups," the US Secretary of Defence stated. "Within the QUAD, we are also leading an initiative called the Indo-Pacific Logistic Network, which enables QUAD partners to leverage their logistics capabilities in the Indo-Pacific," he added, highlighting the QUAD's role in the region. The QUAD is a diplomatic partnership among India, Australia, Japan, and the United States, committed to fostering an open, stable, and prosperous Indo-Pacific that is inclusive and resilient.
Hegseth emphasised a broader commitment to regional partnerships, noting the need to find new ways to work with not just treaty allies but also key defence partners in ASEAN and the Indo-Pacific. "We will continue to wrap our arms around our friends and find new ways to work together, not only with our treaty allies here but also with our key defence partners in ASEAN and the Indo-Pacific," he stated. He further pointed to the US-India defence relationship as a cornerstone, adding, "Look no further than our growing defence relationship with India, where we pass new milestones by the day. From the shared venture of our defence industries to the increased operational coordination and interoperability within our military."The Defence Secretary also outlined the Trump administration's new foreign policy approach, which he says was grounded in "common sense" and "national interest." "President Trump's approach is grounded in common sense and national interest, built on a willingness to work with others while respecting mutual self-interests... The United States is not interested in the moralistic, preachy approach of the foreign policy of the past. We are not here to pressure other countries to embrace or adopt policies or ideologies. We are not here to preach to you about climate change or cultural issues. We are not here to impose our will on you. We are all sovereign nations," the Defence Secretary stated. Speaking on the China challenge, Hegseth asserted, "We do not seek conflict with communist China. We will not instigate, nor seek to subjugate, nor humiliate. President Trump and the American people have immense respect for the Chinese people and their civilisation. But we will not be pushed out of this critical region, and we will not let our allies and partners be subordinated and intimidated." However, he issued a stark warning on Taiwan, stating that any attempt to conquer Taiwan by force would result in devastating consequences for the Indo-Pacific and the world, noting that the threat China poses was "real and could be imminent". Widely recognised as Asia's premier defence summit, the IISS Shangri-La Dialogue is a meeting where ministers from different countries debate the region's most pressing security challenges, engage in important bilateral talks and come up with fresh approaches together.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hindustan Times
5 minutes ago
- Hindustan Times
America's campus wars and its China connection
The US announced last week it is revoking the visas of hundreds of Chinese nationals studying and researching in high-value science and engineering fields. This sweeping decision by the Trump administration represents a major escalation in tensions with Beijing and is aimed at curbing what it describes as the Chinese Communist Party's efforts to steal US intellectual property through academic institutions. The decision has triggered protests from American universities and reignited debates about immigration, openness, and national security. But it also marks a turning point. For the first time in decades, the US is limiting academic access on national security grounds—a move that, while controversial, is not without justification. As someone who has taught at Duke, Stanford, Harvard, and Carnegie Mellon, I have long believed in the power of openness. The US has led in innovation precisely because it has welcomed the world's brightest minds. Over the last four decades, its top universities have drawn extraordinary talent from countries like China and India. These students have earned advanced degrees, contributed to major breakthroughs, launched start-ups, and helped build the US tech economy. Many of my students from China and India were among the most diligent, creative, and capable I have taught. At Carnegie Mellon's Silicon Valley campus, where I taught a course on exponential innovation — covering Artificial Intelligence (AI), robotics, cybersecurity, and synthetic biology — more than half of the class was Chinese. Most of them were outstanding and will no doubt go on to do great things. But not all Chinese students come to the US solely to learn. In 2005, I was teaching a course and conducting research at Duke University comparing engineering education in the US, China, and India. One Chinese student stood out — not for academic excellence, but for disinterest. When I asked him why he had enrolled, he told me plainly: His father was in the Chinese military, and he had been sent — on a government scholarship — to study, make contacts, and report back. Years later, a European institute contacted me to verify a recommendation letter I had supposedly written for him. I had written no such letter. It had been forged — presumably to help him gain access to sensitive research. In other cases, I met Chinese students who openly said they were on Chinese military-sponsored programmes. They worked hard to align themselves with professors conducting cutting-edge research in photonics, quantum devices, and advanced materials—fields with clear military applications. To be clear, this is not the norm. I estimate that only a small, single-digit percentage of Chinese students are sent abroad with such strategic intentions. But even a small number, when operating in critical research environments, can have an outsized impact. What troubles me more is how US universities often look the other way. At every institution where I taught, professors routinely received invitations from Chinese universities to collaborate or attend conferences — with business-class airfare, honorariums, and perks for spouses. Visiting researchers from Chinese State-linked institutions were welcomed with little scrutiny. Everyone seemed to treat it as business as usual. I myself received dozens of such invitations. I declined nearly all of them, except for a research trip to Hong Kong organised by the New York Academy of Sciences which paid $5,000. I also hosted Chinese scholars at Stanford and CMU, receiving modest stipends. At the time, my colleagues assured me this was routine and did not require disclosure. But in hindsight, I see how easily these engagements can blur into influence operations, especially in the absence of transparency. Meanwhile, America's own immigration system continues to undermine its competitiveness. Because it is so difficult for foreign students to stay after graduation, nearly all of my Chinese students returned home. They took with them the knowledge, networks, and experience they gained in the US — and many will now use that to advance China's strategic goals. If the class had been made up of 80% American citizens and 20% foreign students committed to contributing to the US, that would have felt balanced. But what I witnessed was lopsided. I increasingly worried that I might be helping train technologists who would later compete with democratic countries. That was one of the reasons I chose to step away from teaching. This doesn't warrant blanket bans. The US must remain open to the world's talent, but it also must be smart. Visa and research screening should include affiliations, risk, and research domains. If a student or researcher has ties to the Chinese military or a State-backed research initiative, they should not be allowed into the country or granted access to sensitive technologies or federally funded labs. Universities must also be held accountable. They should be required to fully disclose all foreign funding sources. Faculty should not be permitted to accept undisclosed compensation or enter into informal partnerships with institutions tied to adversarial governments. Sensitive research, particularly in dual-use technologies, must be governed by stronger security protocols — on par with those used by government contractors and national laboratories. China is not just another academic peer. It is a surveillance State, a strategic rival, and an authoritarian regime with a declared ambition to dominate critical technologies. It does not separate research from national interest, unlike democracies such as the US and India, which must now work together to protect the integrity of their institutions. Vivek Wadhwa is CEO, Vionix Biosciences. The views expressed are personal.
Time of India
12 minutes ago
- Time of India
Trump claims Harvard is teaching ‘two plus two' in Math: Here's what is actually going on
President Donald Trump alleges Harvard to be teaching 'two plus two Math' to students The US President Donald Trump has ignited a fresh controversy involving Harvard University, alleging that the Ivy League school now teaches 'remedial math' — including basic arithmetic like 'two plus two is four'. But according to a thorough fact-check by the Associated Press (AP), those claims are not only misleading — they're false. During recent public remarks, Trump mocked Harvard for allegedly teaching first-grade-level math to incoming students. He portrayed the university as having fallen from academic rigor, saying students are now learning basics such as simple addition. The claim quickly circulated among conservative media and supporters, fueling renewed criticism of elite institutions and broader debates over declining academic standards. Here is the link to the YouTube video of President Trump accusing Harvard of teaching remedial Math: LIVE: Trump participates in swearing-in ceremony for Jeanine Pirro What is actually happening at Harvard? Harvard does not offer remedial math courses to its undergraduate students, according to the Associated Press. Instead, the university has introduced a revised version of its introductory calculus class — Mathematics MA5 — to help students who may have academic gaps caused by the COVID-19 pandemic. Far from being remedial, MA5 is a full college-level course that features the same lectures, problem sets, exams, and grading criteria as the university's standard Mathematics MA class. Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like USDJPY đang đi lên không? IC Markets Đăng ký Undo The only difference is that MA5 includes smaller discussion sections and additional instructional support — a structure designed to help students, particularly those from under-resourced high schools, transition into the rigors of college math. Who takes these courses? Programs like MA5 and Harvard's Rising Scholars and Emerging Scholars initiatives are aimed at students who are interested in STEM fields and may benefit from extra academic support — but they're still expected to meet the university's high standards. These offerings are not evidence of Harvard 'lowering' the bar. In fact, AP notes that the university's most recent freshman class scored a median of 790 (out of 800) on the math portion of the SAT. That's hardly a remedial cohort. Additionally, AP clarifies that while Harvard Extension School — a separate entity for working adults — does offer a precalculus course, undergraduates at Harvard College are not eligible to take it. Context behind Trump's criticism Trump's remarks come against a backdrop of escalating tensions between his administration and Harvard University. During his second term, Trump and his administration have attempted to revoke Harvard's certification to enroll international students and launched efforts to cancel roughly $100 million in federal contracts with the institution. These policy actions — and now, rhetorical attacks — have been widely interpreted as political retaliation, particularly given Harvard's legal challenges to Trump-era immigration policies. As reported by the AP, educational experts and Harvard officials alike reject the notion that the university is offering basic math to its students. Rather, they view the expanded course options and academic support as necessary, particularly in the wake of pandemic-related learning disruptions. Trump's claims about Harvard offering remedial math courses to teach 'two plus two' are not grounded in reality. As the Associated Press concludes, the university continues to uphold its demanding academic standards while offering thoughtful, data-informed support to students who need it most. In an era when facts are often eclipsed by soundbites, it's worth checking the math — and the facts. Ready to navigate global policies? Secure your overseas future. Get expert guidance now!
Time of India
15 minutes ago
- Time of India
Gold price prediction: will gold surge further as Russia-Ukraine conflict intensifies and US-China trade war heats up, driving safe-haven demand ahead of key US jobs data?
Why is gold rising again after recent declines? Gold price movement: Gold surged more than 2% early Monday, May 26, 2025. early Monday, May 26, 2025. Spot gold climbed to $3,353.69 an ounce in London trading. in London trading. Gold had previously touched a record high above $3,500 per ounce in April before pulling back slightly. in April before pulling back slightly. Prices are currently up more than 25% in 2025 overall. Market drivers: The surge was driven by growing geopolitical risks, including an escalation in the Russia-Ukraine conflict — specifically, Ukraine's drone strikes deep inside Russia and Moscow's longest aerial assault on Kyiv. Heightened US-China trade tensions, with President Donald Trump doubling tariffs on imported steel and aluminum to 50%, which provoked backlash and retaliatory tariff threats, notably from Canada. The Bloomberg Dollar Spot Index fell by 0.4% , weakening the dollar and making gold cheaper for international buyers. fell by , weakening the dollar and making gold cheaper for international buyers. Increasing investor demand for safe-haven assets amid global uncertainty. Is the US-China trade war heating up again? Live Events How are currency markets impacting gold prices? Are other precious metals reacting too? Silver also climbed on Monday, tracking bullion's movement. Palladium posted gains, reflecting continued industrial demand. Platinum, however, edged slightly lower, showing a mixed reaction across the broader metals market. What economic data could move gold next? What are analysts saying about gold's future? FAQs: (You can now subscribe to our (You can now subscribe to our Economic Times WhatsApp channel Gold prices jumped more than 2% early Monday, May 26, 2025, as growing geopolitical risks reignited investor demand for safe-haven assets. The surge came amid heightened military conflict between Russia and Ukraine and rising trade tensions between the United States and China. Spot gold climbed to $3,353.69 an ounce in London trading, while the Bloomberg Dollar Spot Index slipped 0.4%, making bullion more attractive to international rally also comes as investors look ahead to key U.S. jobs data due this week, which could shape the Federal Reserve's next move on interest rates. With inflation still a concern, analysts at Goldman Sachs said last week that gold, alongside oil, continues to play a critical role as a long-term had pulled back slightly after touching a record high above $3,500 per ounce in April, but Monday's jump signals a renewed push as safe-haven demand grows. According to Bloomberg, a dramatic escalation over the weekend—where Ukraine launched drone strikes deep inside Russia and Moscow retaliated with its longest aerial assault on Kyiv—has rattled developments come just before critical peace talks scheduled for later this week, which now appear increasingly tensions between the world's two largest economies are flaring once more. Over the weekend, both Washington and Beijing accused each other of breaking recent trade promises. In a surprise move, President Donald Trump announced plans to double tariffs on imported steel and aluminum to 50%, a decision that has already triggered backlash from U.S. trade quickly responded, warning of retaliatory tariffs of its own. These escalating trade threats are pressuring the dollar and pushing investors back toward gold and other hard U.S. dollar weakened, with the Bloomberg Dollar Spot Index falling 0.4% by late morning in London. A softer dollar typically boosts gold prices by making it cheaper for foreign buyers using other currencies. This is especially impactful during periods of global uncertainty, when investors often seek shelter in non-yielding assets like the rally wasn't limited to just gold. According to Bloomberg:These shifts underline how different metals are responding to both industrial trends and global economic ahead, investors are eyeing U.S. labor market indicators due this week, especially the May employment report. These numbers are seen as crucial in shaping the Federal Reserve's next interest rate job growth slows or wage pressures ease, the Fed may consider holding rates steady, potentially weakening the dollar further—another tailwind for gold. On the other hand, stronger-than-expected numbers could temper bullion's Sachs reaffirmed its bullish long-term view on gold last week, suggesting that the metal remains a critical hedge in investment portfolios, especially amid ongoing inflation risks and geopolitical prices already up more than 25% in 2025, many analysts believe the recent correction was temporary—and the latest global headlines may signal the start of another push toward new war tensions rising, trade fears growing, and the U.S. economy at a potential turning point, gold is once again proving its worth as a safe harbor in uncertain times. From drone strikes to tariff threats, every headline seems to be adding fuel to the fire—and for now, bullion is where investors are turning for is rising due to rising global tensions and fresh safe-haven tensions weaken the dollar, which boosts gold's value.
