Latest news with #Shangri-LaDialogue
Barnama
7 hours ago
- Business
- Barnama
Prabowo And Trump Agree On New Era Of Mutual Benefit In Bilateral Trade
Indonesia's President-Elect Prabowo Subianto speaks at the Shangri-La Dialogue in Singapore in this June 2024 file photo. Prabowo expressed confidence that Nusantara, the new capital city in East Kalimantan, will be fully operational as Indonesia's capital within the next three years. -- Photo by REUTERS/Edgar Su By Mohd Iswandi Kasan Anuar JAKARTA, July 16 (Bernama) -- Indonesia's President Prabowo Subianto said he had a 'very good' phone call with United States (US) President Donald Trump, during which they discussed efforts to deepen bilateral trade ties. In an Instagram post on Wednesday, Prabowo said the two leaders had agreed to usher in 'a new era of mutual benefit' in economic relations between Indonesia and the US. bootstrap slideshow 'President Trump extends his warm regards to the people of Indonesia,' he added. The post was accompanied by two photos showing Prabowo in a bright room, first sitting calmly on a phone call, then laughing and leaning back in a relaxed moment. On Tuesday, Trump wrote on his Truth Social platform that he had finalised an important deal with Indonesia after speaking with Prabowo, and that the landmark agreement opens up Indonesia's entire market to the US for the first time in history. He also announced that his administration would reduce tariffs on Indonesian imports from 32 per cent to 19 per cent, while US exports to Indonesia would face no tariff or non-tariff barriers. As part of the deal, Indonesia has committed to purchasing US$15 billion worth of energy products, US$4.5 billion in agricultural goods, and 50 Boeing jets, he added. -- BERNAMA
LeMonde
2 days ago
- Politics
- LeMonde
'Europe is under the double grip of America'
During the Shangri-La Dialogue in Singapore on May 30, President Emmanuel Macron condemned "revisionist countries that want to impose −under the name of spheres of influence (…) − on free countries their foreign policy choices," lamenting the "potential erosion of longtime alliances (…) [that could usher] in a new instability." Through his comments, Macron was not just targeting Russia and China, but also the United States. Needless to say, these remarks could not have been made at the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) summit in The Hague on June 24 and 25 − a major milestone in the Trump administration's effort to turn Europe into its sphere of influence. Heirs of a 200-year-old tradition that was born with the Monroe Doctrine, the United States has long exercised an often brutal hegemony over the Western Hemisphere. But after 1945, when Europe was under Soviet threat, they established a different kind of relationship. This included an international order based on the rule of law, embodied by the United Nations Charter; a massive transfer of resources through the Marshall Plan; and the stationing of American troops at the request of Western European governments. In 1949, NATO was founded. Norwegian historian Geir Lundestad famously called this arrangement an "empire by invitation," confirmed by the eagerness of nations freed from communist rule to join the organization. After resisting the test of time for eight decades, this "benign hegemony," as it was sometimes called, suddenly lost that qualifier in the shockwave of disruption brought about by Trump's second term, the "new sheriff in town"; A double grip is beginning to take hold. Purchasing American weaponry The first operation balances upon the transatlantic security partnership embodied by NATO, the continent's only collective defense body. At a time when the Russian threat has become "existential," the United States has set its conditions: Europeans must raise their defense spending to 5% of GDP. The Hague summit endorsed this objective for 2035, with some creative accounting regarding what counts toward this envelope. Nonetheless, the American president has remained evasive about the extent of the United States' commitment to apply, if necessary, Article 5 of the Washington Treaty, which stipulates that if any NATO member is attacked, the others will come to its aid.
The Diplomat
5 days ago
- Business
- The Diplomat
Reframing the French Indo-Pacific: Clipperton, France's Indo-Pacific Edge
Although its land area is modest – only 1.7 square kilometers – Clipperton's strategic and ecological significance is anything but small. As Emmanuel Macron wrapped up his visits to Vietnam, Indonesia, and Singapore – where he delivered the keynote address at the Shangri-La Dialogue at the end of May – the French president reaffirmed the Indo-Pacific's strategic importance for both France and Europe. In a context of growing geopolitical uncertainty and renewed unilateralism, Macron emphasized France's commitment to a stable, multipolar order grounded in international law, freedom of navigation, and inclusive multilateralism – an international posture shared with key partners such as India, Japan, and ASEAN. Building on this common strategic vision, and as the only remaining European Union (EU) member state with sovereign territories in the Indo-Pacific, France seeks to position its diplomacy not only as a national actor but also as a standard-bearer for European engagement in the region. The exercise of sovereignty is precisely what underpins France's specificity and credibility as a resident power. The French Indo-Pacific overseas collectivities (FIPOCs) – La Réunion, Mayotte, les TAAF (or South Antarctic Lands), New Caledonia, Wallis and Futuna, French Polynesia, and Clipperton – which together have a population of 1.65 million inhabitants, play a central role in the construction and elaboration of a credible strategy. Notably, 93 percent of France's Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) lies in the Indian and Pacific Oceans, making it the second largest EEZ in the world after that of the United States. There are also around 200,000 French expats residing in countries of the region, more than 7,000 French subsidiary companies operating in the region, and 8,000 military personnel stationed permanently. The assimilation of the FIPOCs into a single geostrategic Indo-Pacific framework is a logical step for a state seeking to assert itself as a legitimate actor in the region. However, despite some common geographical, economic, and political characteristics, grouping the FIPOCs into a single macro-region does not fully reflect the diversity of contexts and geopolitical challenges specific to each territory. A comprehensive and nuanced understanding of local contexts is thus essential to fully comprehend the complexity of France's Indo-Pacific engagement. This series will explore each of the FIPOCs separately to understand their characteristics, role in France's Indo-Pacific strategy, and potential friction points between national and local drivers. You can view the full series here; today, we focus on Clipperton Island. The final feature in our series on FIPOCs is perhaps the least known to the public: Clipperton Island. This uninhabited coral atoll, circular in shape and spanning just 8.9 square kilometers, lies over 1,000 kilometers off the Mexican coast and approximately 5,400 kilometers northeast of Tahiti, in French Polynesia. Although its land area is modest – only 1.7 square kilometers – Clipperton's strategic and ecological significance is anything but small. A Tumultuous History Reportedly discovered in 1706 by British privateer John Clipperton, the atoll was later explored in 1711 by French navigator Michel-Joseph Dubocage, who named it Île de la Passion. In 1858, France officially annexed the territory in the name of Napoleon III. Throughout the 19th century, Clipperton's phosphate deposits were exploited by British and American companies. In 1897, Mexico asserted its claim to the island, establishing a small garrison that was later abandoned during World War I. After a series of sordid events, only three women and seven children remained, eventually repatriated in 1917. Since then, the atoll has remained uninhabited. In 1931, an international arbitration tribunal reaffirmed French sovereignty. Nevertheless, the island was temporarily occupied by the United States during World War II. A Micro-Territory With Macro Potential Located at 10°18' North and 109°13' West, Clipperton's geographical isolation and equatorial proximity offer a unique vantage point for scientific observation, including satellite tracking and space surveillance. It is also a valuable site for marine biology, providing critical insight into coral ecosystems, migratory fish patterns – particularly tuna – and climate phenomena such as El Niño. The atoll is a significant ornithological refuge, hosting tens of thousands of nesting seabirds. Marine biodiversity is equally rich. However, the lack of a permanent presence has left its waters vulnerable to unregulated fishing by foreign fleets, beyond the reach of French enforcement. Despite its small size, Clipperton offers France the possibility of controlling and exploiting an EEZ of 435,331 square kilometers – larger than mainland France's EEZ. This maritime domain holds vast mineral, biological, and energy resources. Studies have identified the presence of polymetallic nodules, on the ocean floor, further increasing the strategic interest in the area. However, this potential rests on a fragile legal foundation. Under international law, the classification of Clipperton as either an island or a rock is critical. According to Article 121(3) of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), rocks that cannot support human habitation or economic life are not entitled to an EEZ. A 2016 ruling by the Hague tribunal supports a broad interpretation of this clause, potentially undermining France's EEZ claim around Clipperton (and by extension many inhabited islands in French Polynesia). A Case for Permanent Presence Despite its potential, Clipperton today presents a bleak reality. The atoll is plagued by illegal fishing, widespread pollution – including military debris and plastics – rat infestation, and even suspected use as a transit hub for Mexican drug traffickers. These issues highlight the urgency of restoring a sustained political authority. Some observers have even expressed concern that Clipperton could become subject to strategic attention from the Trump administration, especially given recent signs of U.S. expansionist rhetoric. To prevent such challenges, scholars and policymakers – most notably university professors Christian Jost and Anthony Tchékémian, along with Senator Philippe Folliot – have advocated for the creation of a permanent scientific mission on Clipperton Establishing a permanent scientific and logistical base would not only reinforce France's sovereignty but also serve as a platform for ecological monitoring, ocean governance, and international cooperation in the Indo-Pacific – a region of growing strategic importance. Such a platform would both support research and meet the legal criteria established by the Hague Tribunal for effective occupation and governance. Comparable installations already exist in the TAAF where logistical support is provided by the French military and civilian agencies with extensive experience in sustaining remote outposts. Series Conclusion The FIPOCs are an important component of France's international relations in the 21st century. The articulation of a national Indo-Pacific strategy in recent years stands as a testament to France's sustained engagement in the region. However, this strategic vision often reflects a top-down approach, shaped primarily by national imperatives and geopolitical ambition, occasionally at the expense of local contextualization. FIPOCs tend to be considered less for their internal specificities than for the strategic advantages they offer. Each subregion – whether the Indian Ocean territories, Polynesia, Melanesia, or even Clipperton – presents distinct geopolitical configurations that challenge an Indo-Pacific-fits-all approach. As France reaffirms its presence and ambitions in the Indo-Pacific, the development of dedicated expertise on these territories becomes essential. This calls for the strengthening of institutions, academic centers, and policy-oriented think tanks capable of informing nuanced and region-specific strategies. Only through such differentiated and well-informed engagement can France fully leverage the strategic potential of its overseas territories while responding to the aspirations of the populations who inhabit them.
Express Tribune
5 days ago
- Politics
- Express Tribune
Decoding defeat: Five times Indian military officials admitted losses against Pakistan
The conflict between Pakistan and India in May 2025 marked a major military escalation between the two nuclear powers. Following the April 22 Pahalgam attack in Indian Illegally Occupied Jammu and Kashmir (IIOJK), which killed 26 tourists, New Delhi immediately blamed Islamabad without providing any evidence. It also took a raft of major diplomatic measures to downgrade its ties with Pakistan. Islamabad denied the allegations and offered an impartial probe into the incident. On the night of May 7, the Indian Air Force launched an unprovoked attack on civilian targets in Pakistan. The Pakistan Air Force (PAF) immediately retaliated and shot down at least six IAF jets, including three French-built Rafales. On the night of 9–10 May, India launched another round of strikes against Pakistan, but this time targeted military sites. In retaliation, Pakistan launched Operation Bunyanum Marsoos, striking back at Indian military installations, including missile storage sites, airbases and other strategic targets. On May 10, US President Donald Trump announced that a ceasefire had been reached following intense diplomatic efforts overnight. Read: French intelligence official confirms downing of Rafale by Pakistan While the Indian political leadership has consistently denied losses, a series of remarks from senior Indian defence officials over recent weeks suggest that the Indian Air Force (IAF) did suffer losses, and potentially more than previously acknowledged. It also shows that the political and military leadership are not on the same page and are at a loss on how to form a new narrative. Air Marshal AK Bharti The first official hint came on May 11, when Air Marshal AK Bharti, Director General of Air Operations, responded to a journalist's question at a press briefing on Operation Sindoor. He said, 'Losses are a part of combat… All our pilots are back home.' Though he did not confirm the number or type of aircraft lost, it marked the first public admission of any kind regarding IAF losses. General Anil Chauhan On May 31, General Anil Chauhan, India's Chief of Defence Staff, made a more pointed remark during an interview with Bloomberg Television at the Shangri-La Dialogue in Singapore. India's military confirmed for the first time that it lost an unspecified number of fighter jets in clashes with Pakistan in May. Anil Chauhan, chief of defense staff of the Indian Armed Forces, spoke to Bloomberg TV on Saturday, while attending the Shangri-La Dialogue in… — Bloomberg TV (@BloombergTV) May 31, 2025 Dismissing reports that six Indian jets had been downed, he remarked, 'What is important is not the jet being down, but why they were being down… That is more important for us. And what did we do after that.' General Chauhan also acknowledged that the IAF was "handicapped" in its flying operations for the next two days — a significant revelation from India's top military official. Captain (IN) Shiv Kumar A third and particularly candid admission came on June 10 from Captain (IN) Shiv Kumar, India's Defence Attaché to Indonesia, while speaking at a university seminar titled 'Analysis of the Pakistan–India Air Battle and Indonesia's Anticipatory Strategies from the Perspective of Air Power', hosted by Universitas Dirgantara Marsekal Suryadarma in Jakarta. 'IAF Lost Fighter Jets to Pak Because of Political Leadership's Constraints': Indian Defence Attachehttps:// — The Wire (@thewire_in) June 29, 2025 'I may not agree that we lost so many aircraft, but I do agree we did lose some aircraft… The Indian Air Force lost fighter jets to Pakistan on the night of May 7, 2025, only because of the constraint given by the political leadership to not attack the military establishment or their air defences,' he said. Read more: India again admits jet losses in Pakistan clash, citing political limits Captain Kumar's statement was notable not only for confirming the IAF's losses but also for attributing them directly to political limitations imposed by New Delhi — an implication that contradicts official claims that the armed forces were given full operational freedom during the conflict. Defence Secretary RK Singh On July 8, Defence Secretary RK Singh added to the growing list of official acknowledgements in an interview with CNBC-TV18. Responding to speculation about the loss of multiple Rafale aircraft, he said, 'You have used the term Rafales in the plural, I can assure you that is absolutely not correct.' While aimed at denying the scale of losses claimed by Pakistan, Singh's remark effectively confirmed that at least one Rafale may have been downed — again, without disclosing numbers. Lt General Rahul Singh Further confirmation came from Indian Deputy Army Chief Lt General Rahul Singh, who, two months after the fighting ended, acknowledged India's military defeat in the operation. Also read: Pakistan had real-time knowledge of Indian jets during Operation Sindoor: security experts Though his remarks included accusations that Pakistan's success was backed by foreign support from China and Turkey, regional analysts and security experts have dismissed these claims, asserting that Pakistan's gains were achieved independently. 'Pakistan's security forces were fully aware of Indian fighter jet movements in real-time… We have been preparing for decades to counter India,' security experts said, adding that the victory was the result of professionalism, strategy, and training, not external assistance. Taken together, these statements paint a picture of guarded admissions by Indian officials, revealing more through what was left unsaid than what was openly confirmed.
Miami Herald
6 days ago
- Politics
- Miami Herald
US Ally Issues Warning Over China Military Expansion in Pacific
China's "aggressiveness" in the Asia-Pacific region has been years in the making and does not depend on which U.S. administration is in power, Philippine defense chief Gilberto Teodoro warned Wednesday. "It depends on its own plan of action in the region-in our view, its own expansionist activities, its own need to control the area," he said during remarks at the Reuters NEXT Asia summit in Singapore. China claims nearly the entire South China Sea as its territory, citing historical rights-a position that puts it at odds with the Philippines and several other countries with competing claims. Under President Ferdinand Marcos Jr., the Philippines has mounted a strong challenge to China's growing presence within its exclusive economic zone. Chinese maritime forces have responded with blockades at disputed reefs and forceful measures during confrontations with Philippine government vessels. This has brought renewed focus on the Southeast Asian country's defense treaty with Washington, which could potentially draw U.S. forces into a conflict with geopolitical rival Beijing. Newsweek reached out to the Chinese Foreign Ministry via a request for comment by email. Asked whether U.S. President Donald Trump's leadership style had prompted China's behavior, Teodoro said Beijing's designs are "predetermined by their own leader-irrespective of who an American leader is," though he acknowledged "U.S. pushback" remains a factor. As for the prospect of war, the official said he believed the chances are "remote." "That would entirely depend on the internal conditions of China," Teodoro said, pointing out the Philippines is constitutionally barred from seeking war "as an instrument of national policy." He said Manila seeks to balance diplomacy with a credible deterrent. "What we are doing is merely putting a stop-as best as we can-to the illegal incursion of China, of which I do not think any country in the world supports," Teodoro said. His remarks echoed comments he made in a Newsweek interview at last month's Shangri-La Dialogue in Singapore, where he said China's actions have bred weariness and distrust. Both the administrations of Trump and former President Joe Biden have reaffirmed the U.S.' commitment to the defense treaty with the Philippines, which remains "ironclad." Beijing has repeatedly accused the Philippines of being in a pawn in U.S. efforts to contain China's rise and touted bilateral dialogue with its neighbor as the only solution to their territorial dispute. Rahm Emanuel, former U.S. ambassador to Japan, said of the Asia Pacfic's hot spots during a recent interview with CNN: "On China, let me say this, everybody focuses on Taiwan. Look, you have the South China Sea with the Philippines. That is a country that's a treaty ally of the United States. You have our entire reputation and clarity of deterrence on stage. "…And Xi does not have the confidence in his own military to make that move yet [against Taiwan]. So to me, the real challenge is, first and foremost in the front queue, is the South China Sea with the Philippines." President Marcos has indicated that any deliberate act by China resulting in a Philippine death would constitute a "red line." Still, in its pushback against China, the country has sought to avoid outright conflict, opting instead to document and publicize Chinese vessel movements and incidents, such as ramming and water cannon attacks. Even so, tensions with China are driving the Philippines' ongoing $35 billion military modernization program, which includes efforts to acquire more capable fighter jets and warships. Related Articles US Flexes Air Power With Ally in Contested South China SeaUS Ally Plans Naval Power Increase Amid China Threat on Disputed TerritoryChina Sends Military on Combat Patrol Against US Ally: VideoMap Tracks US Coast Guard Missions Near China 2025 NEWSWEEK DIGITAL LLC.
