Latest news with #globalpeace
The Independent
5 days ago
- Politics
- The Independent
Putin is floating a new nuclear deal with the US ahead of Trump talks. Here's why
Russian President Vladimir Putin has indicated he wants to pursue a new nuclear weapons agreement with US President Donald Trump, ahead of their anticipated summit in Alaska on Friday. The potential accord is framed by Mr Putin as part of a wider initiative to bolster global peace, coming amid persistent pressure from Mr Trump to de-escalate the three-and-a-half-year conflict in Ukraine. Moscow views the Ukrainian situation as integral to a complex web of security concerns that have elevated East-West tensions to their highest point since the Cold War. Despite Kyiv's repeated calls for an immediate and comprehensive ceasefire, Mr Putin has resisted, even as Russian forces continue their gradual advance in Ukraine. However, progress on a new arms control treaty at the summit could allow Mr Putin to present himself as actively engaged in broader peace efforts. This, in turn, might help dissuade Mr Trump from imposing new sanctions on Russia and its key exports, including oil, a measure the US leader has previously threatened. Such a development could also signify a broader push to mend relations with Washington, particularly concerning trade and economic ties, areas the Kremlin believes hold significant untapped potential. Why has Putin repeatedly talked up Russia's nuclear arsenal? Throughout the war, Mr Putin has delivered veiled threats about using nuclear missiles and warned that entering a direct confrontation with Russia could lead to World War Three. They have included verbal statements, war games, and lowering Russia's threshold for using nuclear weapons. The fact that Russia has more nuclear weapons than any other country gives it a stature in this domain that far exceeds its conventional military or economic power, allowing Mr Putin to face Mr Trump as an equal on the world stage when it comes to security. How many nuclear weapons do Russia and the US have? According to the Federation of American Scientists, Russia and the United States have estimated military stockpiles of 4,309 and 3,700 nuclear warheads respectively. China trails behind with an estimated 600. What does the existing US-Russia nuclear treaty say? Signed by then-US president Barack Obama and his Russian counterpart Dmitry Medvedev in 2010, the New START treaty caps the number of strategic nuclear warheads that the United States and Russia can deploy. Each is limited to no more than 1,550, and a maximum of 700 long-range missiles and bombers. Strategic weapons are those designed by each side to hit the enemy's centres of military, economic and political power. The treaty came into force in 2011 and was extended in 2021 for five more years after US President Joe Biden took office. In 2023, Mr Putin suspended Russia's participation but Moscow said it would continue to observe the warhead limits. The treaty expires on 5 February 2026. Security analysts expect both sides to breach the limits if it is not extended or replaced. What are the other nuclear points of contention? In a symptom of the underlying tensions, Mr Trump this month said he had ordered two US nuclear submarines to move closer to Russia because of what he called threatening comments by Mr Medvedev about the possibility of war with the US. The Kremlin played down the move but said "everyone should be very, very careful" with nuclear rhetoric. Separately, an arms race looms over shorter- and intermediate-range missiles, which can also carry nuclear warheads. During Mr Trump's first presidency, in 2019, he pulled the US out of a treaty that had abolished all ground-based weapons in this category. Moscow denied his accusations that it was cheating. The United States plans to start deploying weapons including SM-6 and Tomahawk missiles, previously placed mainly on ships, as well as new hypersonic missiles, in Germany from 2026. Russia said this month it no longer observes any restrictions on where it might deploy intermediate-range missiles.
Russia Today
7 days ago
- Business
- Russia Today
‘Biden's mistakes need to be corrected'
The policies of former US President Joe Biden must be reversed to achieve global peace, Kirill Dmitriev, Russian President Vladimir Putin's economic envoy and a key figure in the Ukraine settlement process, has said. Dmitriev, who is also CEO of the Russian Direct Investment Fund (RDIF), took to X on Wednesday to comment on a White House post touting Trump as 'the President of PEACE.' The post also listed several world leaders who had called for Trump to receive the Nobel Peace Prize. The Russian official seemingly approved of the message, writing: 'World needs peace and security. Biden's mistakes need to be corrected.' Trump has frequently described the Ukraine conflict as 'Biden's war,' stressing that he intends to end it and claiming it would never have started had he been president in 2022. Dmitriev has been a key figure in the Ukraine settlement process, welcoming Trump's special envoy Steve Witkoff during his visit to Moscow last week. Witkoff later held three-hour talks with Putin, which Moscow praised as 'business-like and constructive,' adding that the US had made an 'acceptable' offer regarding a potential settlement on Ukraine. Following the talks, Putin and Trump agreed to hold a summit in the city of Anchorage, Alaska, on August 15. The US president has described the event as a 'feel-out meeting,' suggesting that discussions could focus on a potential land swap arrangement between Russia and Ukraine. On Saturday, however, Dmitriev warned that certain countries interested in prolonging the Ukraine conflict could attempt to sabotage the summit through 'provocations and disinformation.' Numerous Western media outlets have speculated that Trump is determined to win a Nobel Peace Prize. Last month, White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt argued that 'it's well past time' for the US president to receive the award, which is traditionally handed out in December. Last week, Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan and Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev endorsed Trump for the Nobel Peace Prize in recognition of his role in mediating the long-running disputes between their countries.
The Independent
09-08-2025
- Politics
- The Independent
Nagasaki falls silent to remember US atomic bombing
Nagasaki commemorated the 80th anniversary of the US atomic attack with a ceremony at Nagasaki Peace Park, attended by approximately 2,600 people and representatives from numerous countries. The commemoration included a moment of silence at 11:02 am, the exact time of the 1945 plutonium bomb explosion, and saw the twin bells of Urakami Cathedral ring together for the first time in 80 years. Mayor Shiro Suzuki, whose parents survived the attack, emphasised the city's commitment to ensuring Nagasaki remains the last atomic bombing site and called for the abolition of nuclear weapons and global peace. Survivors, now numbering around 99,130 with an average age of over 86, renewed their plea for nuclear disarmament, expressing concern that the world is moving in the opposite direction, and entrusting their hopes to younger generations. China notably did not send a representative to the ceremony, and last year's event faced controversy due to the absence of US and other Western envoys after Nagasaki declined to invite Israel.
Al Arabiya
10-07-2025
- Politics
- Al Arabiya
A weapon threatening global security
In Lebanon, Hezbollah's weapons are no longer just a divisive domestic issue. They have evolved into an international concern that threatens global peace, hinders the establishment of a functioning state, and paralyzes the entire political system. Despite the cautious optimism expressed by US Envoy Tom Barrack regarding Lebanon's response to the disarmament file, the party's leadership continues to reaffirm its unwavering attachment to its arms. As stated explicitly by Hezbollah's Deputy Secretary-General Naim Qassem: 'Hezbollah can't be told to give up our weapons.' This statement is not just political posturing – it is a clear declaration that weapons have become a substitute identity for the state itself, serving as a shield for consolidating power rather than liberating land. For all the latest headlines, follow our Google News channel online or via the app. The model of a party or faction monopolizing power outside of state institutions is not unique to Lebanon. We also see it in Yemen, though it has escalated there in a more alarming form. Last week, Yemen's Minister of Information Moammar al-Eryani warned of the start of ballistic missile and drone manufacturing programs being localized in areas under Houthi control – specifically in Saada, Hajjah, and the outskirts of Sanaa. According to al-Eryani's warning, the situation has moved beyond smuggling into a stage of organized transfer of advanced military capabilities into environments that fall outside any form of legal oversight and do not recognize the concept of a national state. The shift from merely using weapons to manufacturing them within areas outside of control not only threatens Yemen, but also pushes regional and global security to the brink. Yemen's geographic position near the Bab al-Mandab Strait and the Arabian Sea makes it a vital corridor for global trade. Any tension or escalation in this region would destabilize international shipping routes and global supply chains. These warnings do not appear isolated from the broader international context. A 2022 report by Canada's National Defence Studies Centre noted that the Houthis, along with four other groups in the region, have developed advanced and sustainable drone programs. These programs differ in methods but are equally dangerous. The report emphasized that the real threat lies not just in possessing the technology but in incorporating it into aggressive military doctrines beyond any legal or regulatory framework. The report stressed that innovation and rapid adaptation in such programs – especially in areas beyond state control – represent a serious challenge that cannot be countered by traditional means. According to the report, each armed group has developed its own approach to drone warfare, tailored to its operational environment and objectives. This makes such programs flexible, scalable, and too complex to be addressed through temporary or reactive measures. What we are witnessing today cannot be dismissed as a passing or temporary phenomenon. It is the result of a long path of accumulating advanced weaponry in the hands of groups that do not recognize state sovereignty and are not hesitant to use these weapons across borders – in open defiance of the state. If Hezbollah's experience in Lebanon has ended in political paralysis and factional dominance over state institutions, then what the Houthis are building in Yemen signals something far more dangerous: a wide-open threat to global maritime security, given its proximity to a strategic waterway and one of the most vital straits in global supply chains. The real danger lies in the political vacuum that allows such groups to develop, store, and operate weapons without accountability or oversight. In an extremely sensitive region like the southern Red Sea, any reckless act could ignite a crisis that spreads far beyond the Yemeni conflict. Even so, the responsibility of Yemen's legitimate government is not only to express concern, but also to strengthen its political presence and intensify its efforts to confront this threat – even if that requires seeking international support to control the situation. Additionally, there must be a way to bring the Houthis back to the negotiating table in an attempt to find a way out of the broader crisis. Leaving this type of weaponry in areas beyond state control will transform Yemen from a site of internal conflict into a platform for global threat. Dealing with the issue of drones and ballistic missiles outside of state authority has become an urgent necessity that demands coordinated international action. When weapons are made in the shadows, tested at sea, and launched across borders, then talk of local security becomes meaningless – because the threat is now global, and weapons no longer recognize borders.
Times of Oman
07-07-2025
- Politics
- Times of Oman
Condemning terrorism should be our 'principle', not just 'convenience': PM Modi at BRICS summit
Rio de Janeiro: Prime Minister Narendra Modi, during the 17th BRICS Summit on Sunday, asserted that condemning terrorism must be a "principle" rather than a matter of "convenience", describing it as the "most serious challenge" for humanity in the current global scenario. Addressing the BRICS Session on Peace and Security, the Prime Minister highlighted the recent terror attack in Pahalgam in Jammu and Kashmir on April 22 as a stark reminder of terrorism's threat to global peace and called for unwavering international solidarity. He stated that the attack was a blow to the "soul, identity, and dignity" of India, acknowledging the international support that the nation received in solidarity. "Terrorism has become the most serious challenge for humanity today. Recently India faced an inhuman and cowardly terrorist attack. On 22 April, the terrorist attack in Pahalgam was a direct attack on the soul, identity, and dignity of India. This attack was a blow not only to India but to the entire humanity. In this hour of grief, I express my heartfelt gratitude to the friendly countries who stood with us, who expressed support and condolences," the PM stated. "Condemning terrorism should be our 'principle', not just a 'convenience'. If we first see in which country the attack took place and against whom, then it would be a betrayal against humanity," he added. He further emphasised the need for decisive action, calling for sanctions against such acts. He further noted that words and actions regarding terrorism should be the same. "There should be no hesitation in imposing sanctions against terrorists. The victims and supporters of terrorism cannot be weighed on the same scale. For personal or political gain, giving silent consent to terrorism and supporting terror or terrorists should not be acceptable under any circumstances. There should be no difference between words and actions regarding terrorism. If we cannot do this, then the question naturally arises: are we serious about the fight against terrorism or not?" he noted. The Prime Minister's address also situated the fight against terrorism within a broader global context, noting the pervasive threats from West Asia to Europe and the humanitarian crisis in Gaza. "From West Asia to Europe, today the world is surrounded by disputes and tensions. The humanitarian situation in Gaza is a cause of great concern. India firmly believes that no matter how difficult the circumstances are, the path of peace is the only option for the welfare of humanity," he said while reaffirming India's commitment to peace rooted in its cultural heritage and positioning the country as a proponent of peaceful resolution. "India is the land of Lord Buddha and Mahatma Gandhi. There is no place for war and violence for us. India supports every effort that takes the world away from division and conflict and leads it towards dialogue, cooperation, and coordination and increases solidarity and trust," he added. PM Modi also highlighted the role of BRICS in fostering global peace and security, stating, "Global peace and security is not just an ideal; it is the foundation of our common interests and future. The development of humanity is possible only in a peaceful and secure environment. BRICS has a very important role in fulfilling this objective. We have to unite and make collective efforts to face our common challenges. We have to move forward together." The Prime Minister concluded with an invitation to BRICS leaders to visit India for the next summit under India's chairmanship in 2026, further underscoring the alliance's potential to drive global stability. The summit, hosted by Brazil from July 7 to July 9, saw leaders from Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa, and new members Egypt, Ethiopia, Iran, the UAE, and Indonesia coming together during the event. (
