Latest news with #SIAC
Euronews
23-05-2025
- Politics
- Euronews
EU intelligence centre chief: We know what Russia is doing — and how
Earlier this year, after nine years at the head of Croatian intelligence, Daniel Markić was appointed director of the European Union Intelligence and Situation Centre (EU INTCEN), the closest thing the 27-member bloc has to a European intelligence service. Reporting to the EU foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas, INTCEN monitors what happens inside and outside the EU and provides analyses and alerts to institutions, decision-makers, and member states regarding security, defence, and counterterrorism. While in Lisbon to take part in a conference celebrating the 30th anniversary of the Strategic Intelligence and Defence Service (SIED), Markić gave an exclusive interview to Nascer do SOL and Euronews in which he identifies the main threats to the security of the EU, cooperation between intelligence services and explains what he sees as the future of the sector. Euronews: What is INTCEN's role in the EU? Daniel Markić: For the last 20 years, INTCEN has been a kind of intelligence fusion centre for the European Union. It used to be part of the (European) Council, but with the different reforms of the institutions, it is now part of the European External Action Service (EEAS). The people who work at INTCEN come mostly from the security and intelligence services of the member states, and we work very closely with military intelligence (EUMS Intelligence Directorate) under an informal umbrella called SIAC, Single Intelligence and Analysis Capacity — and it works very well. But now we think that what is being done in terms of intelligence may not be enough. Euronews: Why is that? Markić: We need to do more. The EU realised a few years ago that it is not just a global political and economic actor, but that it is potentially a security actor. In 2020, the first threat analysis was carried out, namely by SIAC. It was revised in 2022 and we did a third version a few months ago. This proves that the EU was trying to think about threats in order to find solutions to deal with them. Euronews: Are you talking about civilian or military threats? Because when we think about military threats we also think about NATO. Markić: Globally, about all the threats. And then there's the famous strategic document, the (2022) Strategic Compass, which once again describes the EU's capacity. That's where we find a small part of the document that refers to SIAC as the only entry point for strategic information in the EU. We have to remember that, in terms of information, for member states there is an important article in the Treaty on European Union, 4.2, which says that national security is a competence of states. Knowing all this, we have to find ways to give more. The EU needs more. And the member states are willing to give more. Euronews: Are they? Markić: Yes, they are. Euronews: Has information sharing always been a sensitive issue? Markić: It is sensitive. But it exists and it works very well. I say this not only as director of INTCEN, but I've worked for the last nine years as director of a national intelligence and security service. And it works. But when there's a feeling that the services don't do enough very often, it's because they don't communicate enough. We need to make information more visible. But to add to what I said earlier, everything is being done, and obviously it has become more than a necessity when we look at the threats, the most obvious of which is February 2022 and Russia's brutal attack on Ukraine. Euronews: Do you believe that the attack has changed the way intelligence gathering and sharing is seen in the EU's decision-making process? Markić: Absolutely. And one of the best examples is not necessarily in the EU. US intelligence and the UK intelligence community have started communicating information publicly, which is an important change. This is something that member states and the EU have a lot to learn from. Euronews: This was also an attempt at pre-emptive action. As if to say to the other side "we know you're doing this, so don't do it". Markić: Exactly. Euronews: And it didn't work. Markić: It didn't work but... I agree with you. And there are many different opinions in the intelligence community. It's no secret. Many EU services were convinced that (the full-scale invasion) wouldn't happen. When it did, many people were surprised. But if we try to reflect on the messages sent by our Baltic friends, they told us. We just had to listen to them. (Russian President Vladimir) Putin was very clear in all his speeches. And the same goes for other parts of Europe, for example, in the Western Balkans. People like Putin are so proud of their information. He's so proud of his own past in the secret services. In the EU, intelligence is a bit of a dirty word. When you talk about intelligence, you whisper it. You shouldn't whisper. When you meet the head of intelligence, you don't have to meet him at night. You have a normal meeting. The secret services will never be the main tool of any political decision-maker, but they are one of the important specific tools he has. And I think EU decision-makers have to have it too. So we have to find ways to get the information to them. It's important to note that, even in the European institutions, brilliant people are working on security issues. But intelligence is a very specific area. Specific techniques are used, specific means of obtaining information. Euronews: Which INTCEN can't do. Markić: Yes. But we have a very strong community of 27 member states. One of the specificities of security and intelligence in the EU - and maybe that's why it's a bit difficult at times - is that there are big differences. When you look at any institution in the member states, the ministries, they are similar or the same in every country. The Ministry of Agriculture in Portugal is similar to the one in Germany. Or the Defence Ministry. The security and intelligence community is different. They all have different legal frameworks. Euronews: And different capacities and possibilities. There are things that the French can do that the Portuguese can't. Markić: Exactly. But we have the ability to harness the best of each service for the common good. That's the role of INTCEN and SIAC. When I was head of my national agency, I worked directly for the president and the prime minister, which is not easy, as you can imagine. But for me, if we have information, it's to act, to use it or to react. Having information just for the database is useless. It's the same in the EU. We need to give the information to the decision-maker, specifically to EU High Representative for Foreign Policy Kaja Kallas, but also to (Commission) President von der Leyen and (Council) President António Costa. All these actors need to have the right data, at the right time, during the decision-making process. The EU is a strong actor. Euronews: How do you act when there is a conflict of information sent by different countries? Markić: In terms of information, it's not something that happens often. We may have different positions, a different political decision. But in terms of raw information, it doesn't happen very often. What's more, the EU has a specificity. Intelligence in the EU is not as structured as it is in NATO, especially since NATO's reform of its intelligence services 10 years ago. But we have an advantage. We don't necessarily need intelligence to be agreed upon by all states. We need to be able to use the information provided by a service, a community or a group of services and utilise it. And that's what we're doing. Euronews: Can you assess whether there were differences in the way intelligence was viewed before and after the Russian invasion of Ukraine? Markić: There was definitely a change. And, once again, going back to the fact that the information is there for all to see and the need to utilise it. This aggression, which is not just a war, but a long-term civilizational shock, has changed the way we think about intelligence and use intelligence. Euronews: The Niinistö report on strengthening Europe's civilian and defence preparedness and readiness advocated the need to strengthen intelligence sharing. Markić: In the report you'll find a section on SIAC. The report was a major effort to find a new solution that analysed the new threats. One of the problems was that the services were not visible enough. And that's the problem. And that's why, in my communication with all the services, as I did yesterday in your external service, I talked about the need to communicate more. My service, when I took over nine years ago, was very good, but very closed, without communication, so the image wasn't very good. We changed that through different initiatives. We made a public report, we sometimes communicated with the media. I think that's what the community should do in Europe. So once again, the substance will always be for the decision-maker. But the fact that we co-operate, that we have information - it's not just the other side, whatever they do, we can do even better - we have to communicate about it. Euronews: Do you imagine that INTCEN will be a kind of European Intelligence Service? Markić: It's hard for me to say. Once again, I'd go back to the famous Article 4.2 of the EU Treaty. I don't think it will happen because doing intelligence, especially abroad, requires a lot of elements in addition to know-how. In the EU environment, it would be difficult. The EU institutions are very transparent, as they should be, but we still need to raise awareness of security issues. Organising missions like that from somewhere in the EU seems difficult to me. Euronews: We've heard a lot about strengthening European defence, but we haven't heard about intelligence. Markić: There was an initiative to strengthen intelligence, which was started three years ago by the member states, and we are working on it. We created a joint document on strengthening the SIAC, a joint document by the High Representative and the states. So there is an initiative. It's less visible because defence requires a lot of money. In terms of information, we need more money, but you can't compare. Euronews: What do you see as the main threats to European security? Markić: First of all, I'll return to the subject of Russian aggression: it's a clash of civilisations, because we have the aggression itself, we have Russian hybrid activities, even in EU member states, which can sometimes be kinetic activities. Euronews: Sabotage? Markić: Among others. Euronews: What kind? Markić: We've reported on activities in Lithuania, the packages that exploded in the UK, some assassination attempts and other activities. Perhaps we tend to forget about cyber-attacks in the first place. The Russians specialise in cyber-attacks, along with their criminal groups. And espionage. In Brussels we try to remind everyone of the importance of security and that espionage exists. Euronews: State or industrial? Markić: All kinds, depending on the actor. We have Russia, but also other actors. And when we look at what happened a few days ago in India and Pakistan, what has been happening in Africa, we can see that there are more and more threats. I haven't mentioned the Middle East, but it's obviously important. And I can't help thinking about the operation that the Russians are carrying out in Ukraine and the reaction of the world, the EU, the US: it's evident that many actors have been watching everything for the last three years and may be tempted to do something. Euronews: They might think that if the Russians can do it, so can they? Markić: Definitely. And there are so many conflicts, so many tensions, that the fact that (you don't know) who the main actor is who can stop them is also an element. Euronews: Do you also have a role in combating disinformation and propaganda? Markić: Yes, we're not the only ones, there are other organisations in the EU that are working on this. We had a recent case in Portugal during the blackout. In less than an hour there was fake news being spread in WhatsApp groups and on social media attributing the power failure to a Russian cyber-attack. There is a tendency to make too many attributions and make Putin out to be a real superman. We have a clear vision, again working together with the 27 communities, of what Russia is doing and how it is doing it. So it's good to be clear and not try to find Russia behind every stone. Putin would love that. He would have to utilise very few resources and use only social media to show his strength. Euronews: I noticed that you didn't mention terrorism as a threat. Markić: Because of this acute crisis, we don't talk about terrorism, but the fight against terrorism is one of the main tasks of the security services. It always remains a priority, but some crises are now more visible. Euronews: But do you believe that groups like the so-called Islamic State group or Al Qaeda still have some influence on the hearts and minds of some people in our community? Markić: Definitely. And in that sense, when these issues are less in the media, perhaps there are fewer young people tempted to follow in the footsteps of these movements. But it does exist and I can tell you that the intelligence services in the EU are active on this topic. Euronews: How do you see the possibility of the return to Europe of foreign terrorist fighters and their families who are still in camps and prisons in Syria and Iraq? Markić: It's a very important issue. It remains to be seen what the US will do in Syria, what will happen to the prisons. Euronews: Because there are still thousands of people in Syria. Markić: Exactly. What Turkey is going to do. There are many doubts, but we're all working on it. Euronews: Should there be a common position among the member states? Markić: I think we all have a very similar position. Euronews: Some countries have already repatriated people. Others, like Portugal, haven't. Markić: Yes, but the difference in numbers between countries can be enormous. Some countries are much more concerned. Not just because of the number of combatants, but also because of the women and children. Euronews: If they remain in the camps, could these children be the next generation of terrorists? Markić: Definitely. I'd just say that because I wouldn't want to give a political point of view. But in terms of security, what could happen to them is a big question. Not only if they stay, but even if they return to Europe.
Miami Herald
07-05-2025
- Business
- Miami Herald
HBCU football gets postseason boost with DII playoff expansion
College Sports HBCU football gets postseason boost with DII playoff expansion The NCAA Division II Executive Board's decision to expand the football playoff bracket from 28 to 32 teams is a major development for HBCU football programs, particularly those in the CIAA and SIAC. These are the only two HBCU conferences competing at the Division II level. This expansion, effective for the upcoming season, means every football-sponsoring conference will now receive an automatic qualifier into the playoffs. That includes the CIAA and SIAC, guaranteeing that each conference's champion secures a postseason berth. The bracket adjustment also comes with increased financial support, with the NCAA approving $545,000 to assist with expansion costs and raising the championship per diem to $150 per day. There is also a new regional alignment. The CIAA now moves into Super Region 1, separating from the SIAC, which remains in Super Region 2. This realignment allows both conferences to have their champions - and potentially other strong programs in the conference - advance deeper into the postseason without facing each other in the early rounds. Playoff Strides Last season, both conferences made important strides in the NCAA Division II playoffs. Virginia Union represented the CIAA by capturing its second straight conference title, defeating Virginia State 17-13. In the playoffs, Virginia Union broke through with its first-ever postseason victories, beating Wingate in overtime and dominating Lenoir-Rhyne before falling to Valdosta State in the quarterfinals. In the SIAC, Miles College led the way. Miles finished an impressive season by winning the conference championship over Clark Atlanta. In the postseason, Miles made history by securing their first-ever NCAA playoff win, narrowly defeating Carson-Newman before their season ended against Valdosta State. This year's changes could open new doors. With the CIAA and SIAC now in separate regions and the playoff field expanded, there is real potential for more than one HBCU program to make noise in the postseason. Greater access to the playoffs, more national exposure, and additional financial support are all steps toward leveling the playing field and showcasing the strength and tradition of HBCU football at the Division II level. The post HBCU football gets postseason boost with DII playoff expansion appeared first on HBCU Gameday. Copyright HBCU Gameday 2012-2025 This story was originally published May 7, 2025 at 11:38 AM.
Mint
28-04-2025
- Business
- Mint
Karnataka HC dismisses Qatar Holding's plea against Byju Raveendran, but orders status quo on Aakash shares
The Karnataka High Court has dismissed Qatar Holding's plea seeking to restrain Byju's co-founder Byju Raveendran and Byju's Investments from transferring of assets worth $235 million, including shares in Aakash Educational Services Ltd (Aakash Institute), bringing relief to the embattled edtech founder. The order, delivered by Justice Ashok S. Kinagi on 16 April and reviewed by Mint, held that Qatar Holding must pursue further remedies before the arbitral tribunal constituted under the Singapore International Arbitration Centre (SIAC) Rules. Nonetheless, the high court granted partial interim relief to Qatar Holding by directing that the status quo regarding the alienation of the disputed shares be maintained for three months. The court stated in its judgement, 'The petitions are rejected; however, liberty is reserved to the petitioner to apply either before the Emergency Arbitrator or the Arbitral Tribunal for interim relief. Meanwhile, the interim orders, undertaking, and status quo shall continue for three months." The dispute centers around Byju's $1 billion acquisition of Aakash Institute at the height of the covid pandemic in 2021 — the company's largest deal to date. To fund the acquisition, Byju's Global Pte Ltd entered into a share security agreement with Qatar Holdings, supported by a personal guarantee from Raveendran. Under the terms of the agreement, Byju's was obligated to repay $300 million by 31 March 2025. However, in February 2024, Qatar Holding terminated the agreement, alleging defaults, and demanded immediate repayment of $235.18 million. It subsequently initiated arbitration proceedings at SIAC on 7 March 2024. On 28 March an emergency arbitrator barred Byju's from disposing of assets up to the claimed amount, and the award was later enforced by the Singapore High Court. Although Raveendran submitted affidavits disclosing his assets, Qatar Holding argued that the disclosures were incomplete, particularly concerning the Aakash shares. It also pointed out inconsistencies in Raveendran's statements, saying he initially declared the Aakash shares as part of his assets but later claimed their inclusion had been an error. Following this, Qatar Holding approached the Karnataka High Court seeking interim protection over the disputed shares. While refusing to grant the main relief it sought, Justice Kinagi noted that Raveendran had taken contradictory positions regarding ownership of the Aakash shares. "A litigant may adopt different positions at different times, but cannot take contradictory stands in the same case. A party cannot approbate and reprobate on the same facts. Such inconsistency reflects poorly on a party's conduct," the court said. Although the petition was dismissed, the high court enforced a status quo for three months, offering Qatar Holding temporary protection pending further developments before the SIAC tribunal. Byju's has also been facing insolvency proceedings in by the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) since 16 June 2024, after it defaulted on a ₹ 158-crore payment to the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) under a sponsorship agreement. Founded in 2011 by Raveendran and Divya Gokulnath, Byju's was once India's most celebrated edtech startup, achieving unicorn status and attracting global investors. However, aggressive expansion, financial troubles, regulatory scrutiny, and disputes with creditors have since plunged the company into crisis, with lenders' total claims against it rising to $1.5 billion. Byju Raveendran currently lives in Dubai while his brother Riju is based in London. First Published: 28 Apr 2025, 05:01 PM IST
Yahoo
27-04-2025
- Sport
- Yahoo
Memorial tops Mater Dei in SIAC
HENDERSON, Ky. (WEHT) — The Memorial Tiger beat the Mater Dei Wildcats 5-4 to create a five-way tie at the top of the SIAC. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Time of India
25-04-2025
- Business
- Time of India
Sebi imposes Rs 10 lakh fine on Future Retail
"It was observed that Noticee (Future Retail) had disclosed the initiation of arbitration proceeding before SIAC initiated by Amazon on November 1, 2020, only after active intervention of stock exchanges," Sebi said. Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads Mumbai: Sebi has imposed a penalty of ₹10 lakh on Future Retail for alleged delay in disclosing arbitration proceedings and interim order by Singapore International Arbitration Centre( SIAC ).Amazon had raised concerns with Sebi regarding a scheme of arrangement between Future group and Mukesh Dhirubhai Ambani group. On October 5,2020, Amazon had initiated arbitration proceeding against Future Groups before April 7,2021, Sebi issued a show cause notice to Future Retail alleging violation of its disclosure norms. The regulator alleged that Future Retail didn't disclose the arbitration proceedings inspite of receiving the information about the commencement of the proceedings on October 5, 2020, from SIAC and even after filing its objection before SIAC on October 6, 2020."The same was required to be disclosed as soon as reasonably possible and not later than 24 hours, i.e., on or before October 6, 2020, as material event as required under LODR Regulations," Sebi said in an order on Thursday."It was observed that Noticee (Future Retail) had disclosed the initiation of arbitration proceeding before SIAC initiated by Amazon on November 1, 2020, only after active intervention of stock exchanges," Sebi said.
