India test-fires ballistic missile ahead of US tariff hike
The test-fire came a week before US tariffs are set to double from 25 percent to 50 percent, unless India meets President Donald Trump's demand that it stop buying Russian oil.
India last tested the Agni-5 missile in March 2024.
Prime Minister Narendra Modi said this month that, in the face of US tariffs, India was seeking self-reliance with energy independence and the development of its own defence systems.
New Delhi has deepened defence cooperation with Western countries in recent years, including in the Quad alliance with the United States, Japan and Australia as an apparent counter to rival China.
But India's relations with China have warmed recently with several bilateral visits, and Modi is scheduled to visit Tianjin later this month in his first visit to the country since 2018.
Agni, meaning "fire" in Sanskrit, is the name given to a series of rockets India developed as part of a guided missile development project launched in 1983.
The Agni-5 employs technology that enables it to carry several nuclear warheads, so they can split up and hit different targets.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Euronews
3 hours ago
- Euronews
Texas House approves redrawn maps to benefit Republican party in 2026
The Texas House has approved redrawn congressional maps requested by US President Donald Trump that would give the Republican party an advantage in the 2026 midterm elections. Trump had pushed for the extraordinary mid-decade revision to give his party a better chance at holding onto the US House of Representatives in 2026, as it would give Republicans five more winnable seats. The maps still need to be approved by the GOP-controlled state Senate and signed by Republican Governor Greg Abbott before they become official. Redistricting normally takes places every 10 years following a national census. House districts are then apportioned to the states based on each state's population. As states grow, they can gain seats. But if their population shrinks compared with those of other states, they can lose seats. In this case, Texas districts are being gerrymandered, meaning they are redrawn for partisan gain. Republicans and Democrats both do it, but Republicans have more openly embraced the process. Texas Republicans openly said they were acting in their party's interest. 'The underlying goal of this plan is straight forward: improve Republican political performance,' said State Representative Todd Hunter, who wrote the legislation formally creating the new map. Texas House Democrats had attempted to derail the redraw, with legislators delaying the vote by two weeks by fleeing the state earlier this month. They were assigned round-the-clock police monitoring upon their return to ensure they attended Wednesday's session. After nearly eight hours of debate, Hunter took the floor again to sum up the entire dispute as nothing more than a partisan fight. 'What's the difference, to the whole world listening? Republicans like it, and Democrats do not.' Democrats said the disagreement was about more than partisanship. 'In a democracy, people choose their representatives,' State Rep. Chris Turner said. 'This bill flips that on its head and lets politicians in Washington DC choose their voters.' Democrats noted that, in every decade since the 1970s, courts have found that Texas' legislature did violate the Voting Rights Act in redistricting, and that civil rights groups had an active lawsuit making similar allegations against the 2021 map that Republicans drew up. Gerrymandering as a tool in fight for US House The Republican power play has already triggered a national tit-for-tat battle as Democratic state lawmakers prepared to gather in California on Thursday to revise the state's map to create five new Democratic seats. 'This is a new Democratic Party, this is a new day, this is new energy out there all across this country,' California's Democratic Governor Gavin Newsom said on a call with reporters on Wednesday. 'And we're going to fight fire with fire.' A new California map would need to be approved by voters in a special election in November because the state normally operates with a nonpartisan commission drawing the map to avoid the very sort of political brawl that is playing out. Newsom himself backed the 2008 ballot measure to create that process, as did former US President Barack Obama. But in a sign of Democrats' stiffening resolve, Obama has backed Newsom's bid to redraw the California map, saying it was a necessary step to stave off the GOP's Texas move. 'I think that approach is a smart, measured approach,' Obama said during a fundraiser for the Democratic Party's main redistricting arm. 'I've had to wrestle with my preference, which would be that we don't have political gerrymandering, but what I also know is that if we don't respond effectively, then this White House and Republican-controlled state governments all across the country, they will not stop, because they do not appear to believe in this idea of an inclusive, expansive democracy," he added. However, more Democratic-run states have commission systems like California's or other redistricting limits than Republican ones do, leaving the GOP with a freer hand to swiftly redraw maps. New York, for example, cannot draw new maps until 2028, and even then, it could only do so with voter approval.
Euronews
5 hours ago
- Euronews
Who really pays for the war in Ukraine? Kyiv, the EU and US in numbers
As transatlantic talks over Ukraine's future intensify, one topic looms large, particularly in the statements made by US President Donald Trump: Who is paying what? The debate over the billions poured into the war effort to help Ukraine fend off the Russian attacks in Moscow's all-out war since February 2022, and whether the burden is shared fairly, now sits at the centre of the ongoing diplomatic efforts. Euronews breaks down exactly who is paying what, and more importantly — how much of a burden this cost is, relative to each country. Defence spending in terms of US and EU GDP In November of last year, Ukraine's parliament, the Verkhovna Rada, approved a record military budget of 2.23 trillion hryvnias (€45.9bn) for 2025. At the time, this amounted to 26.3% of the country's GDP or 55% of its total budget. In July, the amount was revised to include an extra 412.3 billion hryvnias (€8.6m) for additional military personnel support, weapons procurement and manufacturing, bringing the total up to 31% of GDP or 67% of all central government spending. Spending as a share of the budget indicates the proportion of a government's own resources allocated to a priority, such as defence, compared to all other expenditures. Whereas spending as a share of GDP measures that same amount against the size of the entire economy—so it includes private companies and other economic activity — to show the burden on the nation's economy as a whole. While Ukraine's 2.64 trillion hryvnias (€55bn) defence budget reflects immediate survival needs, the broader war costs reveal a €700 billion total burden spanning reconstruction, humanitarian needs, and economic losses. Defence spending, though historically unprecedented, represents just one component of the war's financial impact on the country. In comparison, the EU's spending on Ukraine's defence efforts — which includes both EU direct spending and bilateral spending by member states — is around €72 billion for the three-year period, 2022-2024. In terms of percentage of GDP, that comes out at around 0.3% of EU GDP per year. The US spending on Ukrainian defence alone over the same three years has been $66.9 billion (€57.3bn), according to the State Department. This is much lower than the $300 billion figure US President Donald Trump has mentioned in the past. In terms of percentage of GDP, it amounts to about 0.08% of US GDP per year. We put together the graph below to visualise the stark differences. While it comes as no surprise that the amount spent on Ukraine's defence for economic powerhouses like the US and EU is only a sliver of their annual GDP, it puts the total, real cost of Russia's war for Ukrainians into perspective. Cost of the war in Ukraine in terms of the burden to individual citizens Another way to put the numbers into context is how much each individual citizen pays for the defence costs of Ukraine. If we were to take Ukraine's defence spending budget and divide based on a general estimate of its current population, at around 37.86 million — figures are unclear due to a large number of refugees and internally displaced Ukrainians — then we can deduce that over the 2022–2024 period, each Ukrainian effectively paid around €3,424 toward defence or about €1,312 per year. This is far higher, both absolutely and relatively, than what US or EU citizens contribute. Pinning down a firm, fixed figure for funding sent by the US to Ukraine since 2022 is difficult as funding and dispersement decisions do not neatly align with defence or spending budgets the way they did for our Ukraine calculation, but let us assume the most generous numbers. If we were to take the Kiel Institute's figure of $130.6 billion (€111.28 billion) — this includes both the defence support and humanitarian aid figures over at least three years — and split that by the US population number, then each US citizen has paid $127 (€108) per year for the defence of Ukraine. For the EU, if we once again take the Kiel Institute's estimates of total military and financial commitments at around €138 billion, then the figure for each EU citizen is around €95 per year. Now, unlike the US estimate, the figures should technically not be the same for the entire bloc because some countries contribute more to Ukraine's defence and others contribute little-to-nothing apart from the joint EU budget, like Hungary. Also, some non-EU countries in Europe such as Norway contribute to the Ukraine's defence via an additional instrument, the European Peace Facility. Most estimations of EU aid to Kyiv do not include the EPF funds. But for the sake of estimation, let us say the burden is evenly spread out. The graph below illustrates the stark difference from the known figures. Of course, it should be said that the average annual salary of a Ukrainian citizen is around €3,500 — making their contribution to the war effort equivalent to about a third of the average annual salary. The numbers above seem much less of a burden if we compare the average salary in the EU, which is around €29,600 according to Eurostat, and in the US, which is around $62,000 or €56,880. Costs of wartime destruction Ukraine faces €448.6 billion in reconstruction needs over the next decade, nearly nine times the 2025 defence budget. The World Bank's Fourth Rapid Damage and Needs Assessment, released on 25 February, documented €150 billion in direct infrastructure damage. Housing damage and destruction lead all sectors at €48.8 billion, affecting 2.5 million households and requiring €71 billion for reconstruction. Transport infrastructure sustained €31.6 billion in damage, needing €66.7 billion for full restoration. The energy sector, targeted heavily in 2024, faces reconstruction costs reaching €58.2 billion. In comparison, the US and the EU have seen no direct infrastructure costs or damages due to fighting, apart from incidents related to Russian sabotage such as the damage done to subsea telecom cables in the Baltic region in December 2024. These figures capture only the economic side of the war. The far greater cost is borne in lives lost, families displaced and communities destroyed — numbers that no ledger can fully account for.
Fashion Network
5 hours ago
- Fashion Network
US retailers split on holiday prospects amid consumer caution
Mixed sales and profit forecasts from major US retailers such as Target and Home Depot have prompted investors to question if this year's crucial holiday season will yield the windfall typically associated with a year-end shopping surge. Rising costs driven by US President Donald Trump 's import tariffs and subdued consumer spending have given rise to fresh worries about the resilience of the American shopper. "We are planning cautiously for the back half of the year, given continued uncertainty and volatility," Target's chief commercial officer, Rick Gomez, said on Wednesday. Consumer and retail companies have also been among the worst hit by tariffs. The unpredictable nature of Trump's trade policies has contributed to a decline in US consumer sentiment, as shoppers expect tepid economic growth and higher inflation in the coming months. Overall inflation in the United States has been trending higher and economists are concerned that higher prices could be in store for consumers after a recent spike in wholesale-level inflation. Over the past few weeks, Adidas said it could launch new products at higher prices in the US, Levi Strauss said it would cut back on promotions, while Under Armour is considering bumping up prices for consumers who have the pricing power to tackle tariffs. "We are learning a lot about the health of the consumer. They are still interested in spending, but not splurging. Some of the comments companies gave months ago about not hiking prices due to tariffs... (are) proving to be more lip-service than reality," Brian Jacobsen, chief economist at Annex Wealth Management said. While the broader stock market has performed well in 2025 - the S&P 500 is up more than 8% - consumer discretionary stocks have lagged, gaining only about 1%. On the other hand, TJX, parent of T.J. Maxx and Marshalls, touted a "strong start" to the second half of the year. Home Depot posted disappointing quarterly results, citing consumer hesitation on big-ticket purchases, but maintained its forecasts. "Value is very top of mind for consumers right now. They're looking to stretch their budget; they're looking to navigate inflation and uncertainty around tariffs," Target's incoming CEO Michael Fiddelke said. Target reiterated that it would hike prices as a "last resort," while Lowe's said it would remain "price competitive". Target shares slumped nearly 8% on Wednesday after the company named Fiddelke as its new CEO and kept its forecasts intact. Lowe's managed to beat earnings estimates but acknowledged that home improvement demand remains soft due to high borrowing costs. The company will continue to face challenges in the back half of the year due to high mortgage rates and cautious consumers, executives said in a post-earnings call. The Reuters global tariff tracker shows that of the more than 300 companies that have reacted to the tariffs in some manner since February 1, about 38 consumer companies have withdrawn or cut their forecasts, while about 42 have mentioned price hikes. © Thomson Reuters 2025 All rights reserved.
