Latest news with #InternationalInstituteforStrategicStudies'
The Hill
3 days ago
- Business
- The Hill
Hegseth warns Indo Pacific allies: ‘The threat China poses is real'
Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth on Friday urged U.S. allies in the Indo-Pacific to increase their defense spending and cooperation with Washington, warning that China poses a 'real' and 'imminent' threat to the region. 'There's no reason to sugarcoat it: the threat China poses is real, and it could be imminent,' Hegseth said late Friday at the International Institute for Strategic Studies' Shangri-La Dialogue summit in Singapore. He added that the nations need to be prepared with 'urgency and vigilance,' even if they know little about China's next move in the region. The Defense chief's comments come as President Trump has pushed NATO members to increase their defense investments, wanting each country to spend at least 5 percent of its GDP, above the alliance's previously set 2 percent target. Secretary of State Marco Rubio, who is also serving as Trump's national security adviser, said in mid-March that all NATO members 'will have agreed on a goal' of reaching the 5 percent over the next 10 years. Hegseth vowed that the U.S. would remain committed to supporting its allies. 'We do not seek conflict with communist China. … But we will not be pushed out of this critical region, and we will not let our allies and partners be subordinated and intimidated,' Hegseth told a crowd of diplomats, business figures and top military officials in Singapore. China has not taken the option of using force to take Taiwan off the table. The Defense secretary added that Beijing is 'credibly preparing to use military force to alter the balance of power in the Indo-Pacific.' But, he said, any attempts by China to occupy Taiwan — the self-governing island that Beijing still considers under their control — would cause 'devastating consequences' not just for the region, but the whole world. Similarly to Trump's speech in Riyadh earlier this month, where he condemned Western intervention and nation-building, Hegseth emphasized that the U.S. foreign policy approach is different from previous administrations. 'We are not here to pressure other countries to embrace and adopt our politics or ideology — we are not here to preach to you about climate change or cultural issues — [and] we are not here to impose our will on you,' he told the crowd. 'We are all sovereign nations.' The pressure also comes as tension rises between the U.S. and China over trade negotiations around Trump's sweeping tariffs. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent earlier this week suggested that amid tension, talks were currently stalled. Trump on Friday also accused China of violating the terms of a previous deal.
Hamilton Spectator
09-05-2025
- Politics
- Hamilton Spectator
India's clash with Pakistan sees use of Chinese missiles, French jets, Israeli drones, and more
BANGKOK (AP) — India's missile and bomb strikes on targets in Pakistan and Pakistani-controlled Kashmir have spiked tensions between the two nuclear-armed neighbors, with Pakistan's leader calling the attacks an act of war. Claims on exactly what was hit and where have differed widely, with neither India nor Pakistan releasing many specific details. Making the ongoing conflict even more confusing, the internet has been 'flooded with disinformation, false claims, and manipulated photos and videos,' the Soufan Center think tank said in a research note Friday. 'This information warfare is compounded by both sides' commitment to save face,' it said. Still, some information can be gleaned from official statements and paired with what is known to gain greater insight into the clash: Pakistan says it shot down 5 Indian planes involved in the attack Hours after India's attack early Wednesday, in retaliation for last month's massacre of tourists in Indian-controlled Kashmir, Pakistan's military spokesperson Lt. Gen. Ahmed Sharif claimed that the Pakistan air force had shot down five Indian attack aircraft: three French-made Rafales, a Russian-made SU30MKI and a Russian-made MiG-29. He said that Pakistan's air force suffered no casualties, and that all of its aircraft returned safely to base. Pakistan's Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif repeated the claim, saying that the Pakistan air force had the opportunity to shoot down 10 Indian planes, but exercised restraint and downed only the five that had fired on Pakistani targets. He told Parliament that overall 80 Indian planes had been involved in the attack. India, meantime, has not acknowledged any losses, though debris from three aircraft came down in at least three areas. Did it happen that way? India does have all three types of jets among its more-than 700 combat capable fighter aircraft, according to the International Institute for Strategic Studies' Military Balance report. All three aircraft are fighters with the capability of carrying bombs or missiles for ground attacks. Pakistan and India have both said that their planes did not leave their home airspace, suggesting that if Pakistan's account is accurate, rather than a dogfight in the skies over Kashmir, Pakistani pilots fired multiple air-to-air missiles over a long distance to take down Indian planes. Presuming India fired back, even though Pakistan said none of its planes were hit, the aerial skirmish would have been quite the show. But there have been no eyewitness reports of it or video to emerge on social media. What is known for sure is that Indian planes were in the air and attacked at least nine targets, and that debris from three has been found. It's also plausible that Pakistan used surface to air missiles to hit Indian planes — which the war in Ukraine has shown to be very effective and would not have meant risking any of its own planes. Pakistan has a wide range of such missiles, primarily Chinese-made. Test of Chinese tech? Pakistan's air force includes American-made F-16s, the French Mirage, and the new Chinese-built J-10C, as well as the Chinese JF-17, which was developed jointly with Pakistan. In addition to American air-to-air missiles, Pakistan also has several Chinese products in its arsenal, including the PL-12 and PL-15, both of which can be used to fire at targets beyond visual range. Pakistan's Foreign Minister Ishaq Dar told lawmakers it was the J-10C that shot down the Indian aircraft, raising the likelihood that Chinese-built missiles were also employed. 'It's interesting that Pakistan is saying it is using Chinese jets that it has imported from China to shoot down Indian aircraft,' said Lisa Curtis, director of the Indo-Pacific security program at the Center for a New American Security, a Washington think tank. In 2019, during the rivals' previous military confrontation, 'it was a Pakistani F-16 provided by the United States that was used to shoot down an Indian aircraft,' Curtis said in a conference call. 'It's interesting to see that Pakistan is relying more on its Chinese equipment than it did six years ago.' The news convinced traders with shares in AVIC Chengdu Aircraft, which builds both the J-10C and J-17, to post large gains Wednesday and Thursday on the Shenzhen Stock Exchange. Meanwhile, the stock of Dassault Aviation, the maker of the Rafale jet, which is among those Pakistan claims to have shot down, dropped sharply on Wednesday on the Paris Stock Exchange, though had recovered by close on Thursday. What else is known? India hasn't talked about what assets were involved in the attacks. The Indian Defense Ministry said that the strikes targeted at least nine sites 'where terrorist attacks against India have been planned.' Pakistan, meantime, has said 31 civilians were killed, including women and children, in Pakistan-administered Kashmir and the country's Punjab province, and that buildings hit included two mosques. India did show video of eight of the strikes at a briefing on Wednesday. four in Pakistan-controlled Kashmir and four in Pakistan. Both sides have talked about missile strikes, but it was clear from the video that bombs were also dropped on some targets, possibly from drones. In addition to claiming the five Indian aircraft shot down, Pakistan also said it downed an unspecified number of drones on Wednesday. Indian officials said the strikes were precision attacks, and from the videos shown, it did appear that specific areas of installations were targeted with individual missiles or bombs, rather than widespread areas. What happened next? India sent multiple attack drones into Pakistan on Thursday, with Pakistan claiming to have shot down 29 of them. The drones were identified as Israeli-made Harop, one of several in India's inventory. One drone damaged a military site near the city of Lahore and wounded four soldiers, and another hit the city of Rawalpindi, which is right next to the capital Islamabad., according to the Pakistani army. India did not deny sending drones, but the Defense Ministry said its armed forces 'targeted air defense radars and systems' in several places in Pakistan, including Lahore. It did not comment on the claims of 29 being shot down. India similarly did not comment on Pakistani claims to have killed 50-60 soldiers in exchanges along the Line of Control, though it did say one of its soldiers was killed by shelling on Wednesday. Pakistani Information Minister Attaullah Tarar, meantime, denied Indian accusations that Pakistan had fired missiles toward the Indian city of Amritsar, saying in fact an Indian drone fell in the city. ___ Associated Press writers Munir Ahmed in Islamabad and Sheikh Saaliq in New Delhi contributed to this report.
San Francisco Chronicle
09-05-2025
- Politics
- San Francisco Chronicle
India's clash with Pakistan sees use of Chinese missiles, French jets, Israeli drones, and more
BANGKOK (AP) — India's missile and bomb strikes on targets in Pakistan and Pakistani-controlled Kashmir have spiked tensions between the two nuclear-armed neighbors, with Pakistan's leader calling the attacks an act of war. Claims on exactly what was hit and where have differed widely, with neither India nor Pakistan releasing many specific details. Making the ongoing conflict even more confusing, the internet has been "flooded with disinformation, false claims, and manipulated photos and videos,' the Soufan Center think tank said in a research note Friday. 'This information warfare is compounded by both sides' commitment to save face,' it said. Still, some information can be gleaned from official statements and paired with what is known to gain greater insight into the clash: Pakistan says it shot down 5 Indian planes involved in the attack Hours after India's attack early Wednesday, in retaliation for last month's massacre of tourists in Indian-controlled Kashmir, Pakistan's military spokesperson Lt. Gen. Ahmed Sharif claimed that the Pakistan air force had shot down five Indian attack aircraft: three French-made Rafales, a Russian-made SU30MKI and a Russian-made MiG-29. He said that Pakistan's air force suffered no casualties, and that all of its aircraft returned safely to base. Pakistan's Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif repeated the claim, saying that the Pakistan air force had the opportunity to shoot down 10 Indian planes, but exercised restraint and downed only the five that had fired on Pakistani targets. He told Parliament that overall 80 Indian planes had been involved in the attack. India, meantime, has not acknowledged any losses, though debris from three aircraft came down in at least three areas. Did it happen that way? India does have all three types of jets among its more-than 700 combat capable fighter aircraft, according to the International Institute for Strategic Studies' Military Balance report. All three aircraft are fighters with the capability of carrying bombs or missiles for ground attacks. Pakistan and India have both said that their planes did not leave their home airspace, suggesting that if Pakistan's account is accurate, rather than a dogfight in the skies over Kashmir, Pakistani pilots fired multiple air-to-air missiles over a long distance to take down Indian planes. Presuming India fired back, even though Pakistan said none of its planes were hit, the aerial skirmish would have been quite the show. But there have been no eyewitness reports of it or video to emerge on social media. What is known for sure is that Indian planes were in the air and attacked at least nine targets, and that debris from three has been found. It's also plausible that Pakistan used surface to air missiles to hit Indian planes — which the war in Ukraine has shown to be very effective and would not have meant risking any of its own planes. Pakistan has a wide range of such missiles, primarily Chinese-made. Test of Chinese tech? Pakistan's air force includes American-made F-16s, the French Mirage, and the new Chinese-built J-10C, as well as the Chinese JF-17, which was developed jointly with Pakistan. In addition to American air-to-air missiles, Pakistan also has several Chinese products in its arsenal, including the PL-12 and PL-15, both of which can be used to fire at targets beyond visual range. Pakistan's Foreign Minister Ishaq Dar told lawmakers it was the J-10C that shot down the Indian aircraft, raising the likelihood that Chinese-built missiles were also employed. 'It's interesting that Pakistan is saying it is using Chinese jets that it has imported from China to shoot down Indian aircraft,' said Lisa Curtis, director of the Indo-Pacific security program at the Center for a New American Security, a Washington think tank. In 2019, during the rivals' previous military confrontation, 'it was a Pakistani F-16 provided by the United States that was used to shoot down an Indian aircraft,' Curtis said in a conference call. 'It's interesting to see that Pakistan is relying more on its Chinese equipment than it did six years ago.' The news convinced traders with shares in AVIC Chengdu Aircraft, which builds both the J-10C and J-17, to post large gains Wednesday and Thursday on the Shenzhen Stock Exchange. Meanwhile, the stock of Dassault Aviation, the maker of the Rafale jet, which is among those Pakistan claims to have shot down, dropped sharply on Wednesday on the Paris Stock Exchange, though had recovered by close on Thursday. What else is known? India hasn't talked about what assets were involved in the attacks. The Indian Defense Ministry said that the strikes targeted at least nine sites 'where terrorist attacks against India have been planned.' Pakistan, meantime, has said 31 civilians were killed, including women and children, in Pakistan-administered Kashmir and the country's Punjab province, and that buildings hit included two mosques. India did show video of eight of the strikes at a briefing on Wednesday. four in Pakistan-controlled Kashmir and four in Pakistan. Both sides have talked about missile strikes, but it was clear from the video that bombs were also dropped on some targets, possibly from drones. In addition to claiming the five Indian aircraft shot down, Pakistan also said it downed an unspecified number of drones on Wednesday. Indian officials said the strikes were precision attacks, and from the videos shown, it did appear that specific areas of installations were targeted with individual missiles or bombs, rather than widespread areas. What happened next? India sent multiple attack drones into Pakistan on Thursday, with Pakistan claiming to have shot down 29 of them. The drones were identified as Israeli-made Harop, one of several in India's inventory. One drone damaged a military site near the city of Lahore and wounded four soldiers, and another hit the city of Rawalpindi, which is right next to the capital Islamabad., according to the Pakistani army. India did not deny sending drones, but the Defense Ministry said its armed forces 'targeted air defense radars and systems' in several places in Pakistan, including Lahore. It did not comment on the claims of 29 being shot down. India similarly did not comment on Pakistani claims to have killed 50-60 soldiers in exchanges along the Line of Control, though it did say one of its soldiers was killed by shelling on Wednesday.
Arab News
01-05-2025
- Politics
- Arab News
Europe's mobilization struggles prime for exploitation
Joseph Stalin is rumored to have once asked, 'How many divisions does the pope have?' The story goes that the Soviet leader said it during the 1943 Tehran Conference, a turning point in the Second World War. Others attribute it to a different time and place. Nevertheless, it is a statement that carries an undeniable truth about the importance of military might and how Moscow analyses military situations. The rhetorical question was meant to denigrate anything that is not real power symbolized by armies. There is nothing that can be gained on the front line without material power. In short, military strength is the ultimate determinant during wars and, hence, in the balance of international relations. A similar question could be asked today: 'How many divisions does Europe have?' It is clear that Europe finds itself facing a tricky dilemma. As the old continent contemplates sending troops to stabilize Ukraine, the question of military capability remains central. According to a report in The Times this week, European nations that are part of the 'coalition of the willing' are struggling to assemble even a proposed 25,000-strong military force for a potential peacekeeping or deterrence mission in Ukraine, far short of an initially suggested target of 64,000 troops. The shortfall is attributed to understaffed and underfunded European armies. London, which was pushing for this initiative, has reportedly scaled back its plan to deploy a large number of troops due to high risks and inadequate forces, opting instead to offer limited training missions in western Ukraine, such as near Lviv. Europe's struggle to mobilize troops reveals a weakness that will undoubtedly have a direct consequence on Europe's capacity to shape the geopolitical outcome of the war. This incapacity to align sufficient military resources with the ongoing discussions about supporting a peace deal in Ukraine makes the future of Europe fragile, not only at its borders but also from within. This situation destroys any deterrence capacity. The harsh reality of the current situation in Ukraine reinforces that hard power is ultimately the only thing that matters Khaled Abou Zahr The harsh reality of the current situation in Ukraine reinforces that hard power is ultimately the only thing that matters. In comparison, according to the International Institute for Strategic Studies' 2024 'Military Balance' report, Russia has about 1.1 million active troops, including 500,000 in the army, along with 1.5 million reservists. This is despite the heavy losses it has suffered in Ukraine. As of late 2024, 95,000 to 165,000 Russian soldiers had been killed and up to 700,000 injured. Desertions exceed 50,000, reflecting low morale in a force that is still large but is less robust than its Soviet predecessor. During the Second World War, the Soviet Union lost at least 8.8 million military personnel and suffered 15 to 17 million civilian deaths. There is no doubt that, if it were not for the Eastern Front and these deaths, the war in Europe would have lasted much longer. Now, there is no doubt that even Russia cannot sustain such losses alone and the presence of North Korean soldiers on the front line in Ukraine underlines this. Yet, Moscow's numbers and, more importantly, its willingness and capacity for sacrifice are still much higher than Europe's. The EU's 27 member states, plus the UK, collectively have about 1.5 million active-duty military personnel, according to estimates from the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute. The largest force is Italy's with 338,000, followed by France with 304,000 and then Spain at 199,000. Germany has 181,000 and Poland about 150,000. Poland is aiming for 300,000 by 2035 and other countries are following the same path. However, as highlighted by the inability to send peacekeeping troops to Ukraine, many are not combat-ready. At a time when Europe is looking to build up its deterrence without the US, this is a weak signal that will be exploited. More importantly, internal divisions and a lack of will are making it worse. Moscow's numbers and, more importantly, its willingness and capacity for sacrifice are still much higher than Europe's Khaled Abou Zahr Everyone understands that, despite the ruthlessness of the war in Ukraine, there have been guardrails that have prevented it spiraling into a full-blown 'anything goes' type of war. Everyone has also noticed the new technologies, such as drones, entering the battlefield. But everyone has also noticed how counter-drone technology has come into effect, how quickly a technological stalemate was reached and how this translated into infantry-heavy combat in trenches reminiscent of the two world wars. Europe's troop shortfall puts its easternmost countries in a tough situation, as they are the first line of defense and have smaller armed forces. This is why any decisions that might cause an escalation of the conflict must be carefully considered at this stage. Understanding this reality must ensure a pragmatic and street-smart approach. If Europe cannot mobilize the troops needed for peacekeeping or even agree on the principle, then this is not a deterrence but an invitation. It will need to rebuild this deterrence as soon as possible; this not only applies to troop numbers, but also industrial capacity. Moreover, this also means that if Europe cannot implement the steps following a ceasefire agreement, it will have even less influence on the outcome of the negotiations. Ukraine demands a complete Russian military withdrawal and the restoration of its 1991 borders, including Crimea, while Moscow insists on recognition of its control over these territories. Ukraine is paying in kind for its position and is showing its will. So, the equation for Europe is simple, either accept what the facts on the ground say or increase its military involvement. In this case, Europe will not only have to boost its divisions, but also its will to sacrifice. This underlines the absolute necessity for a negotiated breakthrough as soon as possible.
IOL News
30-04-2025
- Politics
- IOL News
Nuclear rivals with huge resources
A map of Kashmir showing the line of control between India and Pakistan. Nuclear-armed rivals India and Pakistan have exchanged gunfire across their heavily militarised de facto border in contested Kashmir since an April 22 attack that New Delhi blames on Islamabad, claims it rejects. Troops are facing off along the 770-kilometre fortified Line of Control - the route of a ceasefire line dating back to 1949 - which ranges from icy outposts in high-altitude Himalayan mountains down to greener foothills in the south. India and Pakistan have fought over the Muslim-majority region since their partition at the end of British rule in 1947. Insurgents in Indian-run Kashmir have battled since 1989 seeking independence or a merger with Pakistan. Both countries trade accusations of arming groups in each other's territory to cause instability. India, a Hindu majority nation with 1.4 billion people, and Pakistan, a Muslim-majority nation with 240 million citizens, both have nuclear weapons, and their militaries are among the largest in the world. Pakistan's main weapons supplier is China, Islamabad's closest regional ally, as well getting drones from Turkey. Although India's military strength is much larger, Pakistani analysts point to Islamabad's decades of experience fighting insurgencies on its border with Afghanistan. India is the world's largest arms importer, according to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute. The bulk of India's supplies come from Russia. New Delhi has also expanded military suppliers to include the United States, France and Israel, as well as developing its domestic production, including of aircraft carriers, submarines and helicopters. Both sides have boosted their military capabilities since 2019, when India launched air strikes on Pakistan following an attack by a suicide bomber on Indian forces in Kashmir. Here, according to the International Institute for Strategic Studies' Military Balance database, are their estimated forces. Pakistan Active military personnel: 660 000 Paramilitary police: 291 000 Defence budget: $10 billion (2025) Nuclear capabilities: Islamabad has both land-based and air-delivered weapons, with medium-, short- and close-range ballistic missiles. Islamabad has sought submarine-launched nuclear-armed cruise missiles. Fixed wing aircraft: 812 Rotary-wing (helicopters): 322 Armoured vehicles: 6 137 Artillery: 4 619 India Active military personnel: 1 475 000 Paramilitary police: 1 616 000 Defence budget: $81 billion (2025) Nuclear capabilities: primarily land-based, but may be able to deliver bombs from the air, and is developing its submarine force. It has intermediate-range ballistic missiles, and are testing an intercontinental-range version. Fixed wing aircraft: 1 437 Rotary-wing (helicopters): 995 Armoured vehicles: 7 074 Artillery: 11 225 | AFP
