This audio is created with AI assistance

WASHINGTON, July 9 (Reuters) – The U.S. has not seen Russia shift on its preference from previous U.S. presidential elections on who it prefers to win this year, a U.S. intelligence official said on Tuesday, indicating that Moscow again favors Republican Donald Trump.

The official, briefing reporters on U.S. election security, did not name the former president and presumptive Republican nominee when asked who Moscow wants as the next U.S. president.

But he indicated that Russia favored Trump, saying the U.S. intelligence community had not changed its assessments from previous elections.

“We have not observed a shift in Russia’s preferences for the presidential race from past elections, given the role the U.S. is playing with regard to Ukraine and broader policy toward Russia,” said the official from the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI).

The Russian embassy did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

The Trump campaign responded by saying Biden was weak on Russia, as evidenced by the Russian invasion of Ukraine.

“When President Trump was in the Oval Office, Russia and all of America’s adversaries were deterred, because they feared how the United States would respond,” Karoline Leavitt, the Trump campaign’s press secretary, said in a statement.

Trump frequently has criticized the scale of U.S. military support for Ukraine – some $60 billion since Russia’s full-scale invasion in 2022 – and called Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy “the greatest salesman ever.”

The NATO charter obliges members to come to the defense of members that are attacked.

The ODNI official conducted the briefing on condition of anonymity with ODNI colleagues and officials from the FBI and the National Coordinator for Critical Infrastructure Security and Resilience, an agency that conducts cyber defense for the government and works with private industry.

He defined election influence as efforts to shape the outcome of polls or undermine democratic processes, while interference constitutes efforts to disrupt the ability of the U.S. to hold a free and fair vote.

The U.S. has not monitored plans by any country to “degrade or disrupt” the country’s ability to hold the November elections, he said.

But Russia, he continued, through social media and other means has begun trying to influence specific groups of U.S. voters in battleground states, “promote divisive narratives and denigrate specific politicians,” whom he did not identify.

“Russia is undertaking a whole of government approach to influence the election, including the presidential, Congress, and public opinion,” he said.

Moscow “determines which candidates they’re willing to support or oppose largely based on their stance toward further U.S. aid to Ukraine and related issues,” said the official. “It’s all the tactics we’ve seen before, primarily through social media efforts” and “using U.S. voices to amplify their narratives.”

A new intelligence community assessment published this week on the ODNI website said Russia “remains the primary threat to our elections” and that unidentified “Russian influence actors” secretly plan to “sway public opinion” in swing states and “diminish U.S. support for Ukraine.”

Russia recently has been seeking to influence U.S. audiences through “encrypted direct messaging channels,” said the official. He did not elaborate.

China is assessed as currently not planning “to influence the outcome of the presidential race,” the official said.

The U.S. views China as its leading geostrategic rival. Beijing and Washington have been working to ease strains. The Chinese embassy did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Beijing is trying to expand its ability to collect and monitor data from social media platforms “probably to better understand and eventually manipulate public opinion,” the official said.

The official called generative artificial intelligence a “malign influence accelerant” being increasingly used to “more convincingly tailor” video and other content ahead of the November vote.

Sign up here.

Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles., opens new tab

WASHINGTON, July 9 (Reuters) – U.S. President Joe Biden pledged to forcefully defend Ukraine against Russia’s invasion at the NATO summit in Washington on Tuesday, using the global stage to try to show allies at home and abroad that he can still lead.

“(Vladimir) Putin wants nothing less, nothing less, than Ukraine’s total subjugation … and to wipe Ukraine off the map,” Biden said in his welcome to NATO member states to the summit, referring to the Russian president. “Ukraine can and will stop Putin.”

The White House is hoping he can turn the page on a difficult period in his presidency with his highest profile policy speech since the debate, although some diplomats at the summit said the damage was hard to erase.

On Tuesday, Biden spoke off of a teleprompter with a strong and confident voice and largely avoided the verbal flubs and signs of confusion that marked his debate performance.

Biden was framed by the gilded walls of the federal hall where the treaty creating NATO was signed, his speech bookended by stirring musical performances by the U.S. Marine Corp band.

“Today NATO is stronger than it’s ever been in its history,” he said.

The U.S. president has made restoring traditional alliances abroad the centerpiece of his foreign policy after Trump challenged allies as part of an “America First” approach. The election winner in November could have a substantial impact on the future of NATO, Europe and the rest of the world.

“We don’t see how he can come back after the debate,” said one European diplomat, who dismissed Tuesday’s speech as evidence of Biden’s endurance because it was scripted. “I can’t imagine him being at helm of the U.S. and NATO for four more years.”

Biden closed his remarks by surprising NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg with the Presidential Medal of Freedom, clasping the highest U.S. civilian award around the Norwegian politician’s neck and crediting him with reviving the 32-member alliance.

The centerpiece of the NATO summit is set to be new commitments of military and humanitarian aid to Ukraine. U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken said the summit would “further strengthen” the war-torn country’s path to NATO membership.

Biden and the leaders of Germany, Italy, the Netherlands and Romania issued a joint statement with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy announcing the delivery of five additional Patriot and other strategic air defense systems to protect Ukrainian cities, civilians and soldiers.

They said additional strategic air defense systems would be announced this year.

“We are fighting for additional security guarantees for Ukraine – and these are weapons and finances, political support,” he said on social media.

Ukraine ultimately wants to join NATO to ward against further future attacks by Russia but candidates have to be approved by all of the alliance’s members, some of which are wary of provoking a direct conflict with Russia.

Biden will hold a rare solo press conference on Thursday, also aimed at quieting concerns.

But he estimated Russia would be able to sustain its war economy for three to four more years and also said “it will be some time” before Ukraine has amassed the munitions and personnel it needs to mount its own large-scale offensive operations.

Sign up here.

Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles., opens new tab

Noah Robertson is the Pentagon reporter at Defense News. He previously covered national security for the Christian Science Monitor. He holds a bachelor’s degree in English and government from the College of William & Mary in his hometown of Williamsburg, Virginia.

Published: 13:12 BST, 10 July 2024 | Updated: 14:46 BST, 10 July 2024

This audio is created with AI assistance

Joe Biden has announced that Nato countries will provide Ukraine with five new strategic air defense systems as leaders began a summit in Washington where the alliance was expected to declare Ukraine’s path toward Nato to be “irreversible”.

The promise of weapons deliveries, including anti-air defenses sought after by Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelenskiy, came just a day after a deadly missile strike against a paediatric cancer hospital and other civilian targets in Ukraine that Biden called a “horrific reminder of Russia’s brutality”.

“All told, Ukraine will receive hundreds of additional interceptors over the next year, helping protect Ukrainian cities against Russian missiles and Ukrainian troops facing their attacks on the frontlines,” said Biden.

The headline speech was a critical step to convincing foreign leaders that Biden, 81, remains up to the task of leading the 32-member military alliance. It was also a key test in saving his presidential campaign following a disastrous debate against Donald Trump that led many in his own party to question his mental acuity.

In forceful tones, Biden said: “Before this war, Putin thought Nato would break. Today, Nato is stronger than it’s ever been in its history. When this senseless war began, Ukraine was a free country. Today it’s still a free country and the war will end with Ukraine remaining a free and independent country.”

“Russia will not prevail,” he said to rising applause. “Ukraine will prevail.”

In a speech later in the night, Zelenskiy urged US political leaders not to wait for the outcome of November’s presidential election to move forcefully to aid his country.

“Everyone is waiting for November. Americans are waiting for November, in Europe, Middle East, in the Pacific, the whole world is looking towards November and, truly speaking, Putin awaits November too.

“It is time to step out of the shadows, to make strong decisions … to act and not to wait for November or any other month,” Zelenskiy said.

It was announced on Tuesday that the US and its European allies would act to bolster Ukraine’s air defences at a time when the country is under constant heavy bombardment from Russia.

The US, Germany and Romania would send additional batteries of the Patriot air defence system while Patriot components donated by the Netherlands would enable another battery to operate, according to a statement by the leaders of the US, the Netherlands, Germany, Italy and Romania.

The Italian prime minister, Giorgia Meloni, approved the donation of a Italian-French-made equivalent of the Patriot interceptor, the SAMP/T air defence system.

“These five strategic air defence systems will help to protect Ukrainian cities, civilians, and soldiers, and we are coordinating closely with the Ukrainian government so that these systems can be utilised rapidly,” the statement said. “We are working on a further announcement this year of additional strategic air defence systems for Ukraine.”

As well the medium range Patriot and SAMP/T systems, the US and its allies said they would provide Ukraine with dozens of shorter-range tactical systems, including the US-Norwegian made NASAMS, US-made Hawks, Iris systems made by a European consortium and German Gepard missiles.

Britain’s new prime minister, Keir Starmer, and Zelenskiy, were among those arriving at the US capital amid a warning that Russia could step up missile strikes on Ukraine this week, repeating a barrage that killed at least 38 on Monday.

Diplomats said that a final communique would probably declare Ukraine’s path to Nato to be “irreversible” and to move control of the Ukraine Defense Contact Group, the main conduit for delivering military aid and training to Ukraine, under Nato control.

Those steps are widely seen as an attempt to “Trump-proof” Nato policies from the potential for a new Republican administration to cut aid to Ukraine, or possibly to make it contingent on holding direct negotiations with Russia.

skip past newsletter promotion

Our US morning briefing breaks down the key stories of the day, telling you what’s happening and why it matters

Privacy Notice: Newsletters may contain info about charities, online ads, and content funded by outside parties. For more information see our Privacy Policy. We use Google reCaptcha to protect our website and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

after newsletter promotion

Despite the communique, there will be no meaningful progress on Ukraine joining Nato in Washington, although alliance members will seek to dress up the latest package of support as part of what is described as “a bridge to membership”.

Holdouts including the US, Hungary, Germany and Italy are concerned that allowing Ukraine to join Nato while the war with Russia continues would be considered an escalation that could bring the alliance into direct conflict with Moscow. Even a more limited form of what could be considered direct military intervention in support of Kyiv attracts similar concerns.

On Tuesday, Zelenskiy said he hoped Trump would not quit Nato and would keep supporting Ukraine, if he won in November, but he could not predict the former president’s actions.

“I can’t tell you what he will do, if he will be the president of the United States. I don’t know,” he said.

Jens Stoltenberg, Nato’s outgoing secretary general, speaking immediately before Biden, sought to justify continued US and western support for Ukraine by arguing that “the biggest cost and the greatest risk will be if Russia wins in Ukraine”. Authoritarian leaders in China, North Korea and Iran would all feel emboldened if Russia conquered its neighbour, he added, describing the war as a struggle over values.

“They all support Russia’s brutal war. They all want Nato to fail. So the outcome of this war will shape global security for decades to come. The time to stand for freedom and democracy is now the place is Ukraine,” the Nato chief added. Biden subsequently awarded Stoltenberg, the presidential medal of freedom, the highest civilian honour in the US.

In remarks to the Guardian, Ruslan Stefanchuk, Chairman of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine, said that the strike on the Okhmatdyt children’s hospital should be a “turning point” in the war and lead to great supplies of anti-air weapons to Ukraine.

“I believe that what happened today must be a turning point to change everyone’s attitude to what is happening in Ukraine, and I believe that without the F-16 fighter jets, without the new air defence systems, without the ammunition for those systems, we won’t be able to cover the skies to defend Ukraine,” he said.

Elsewhere at the summit, several high-ranking European officials have met with a top foreign policy adviser to Donald Trump.

Keith Kellogg, a retired lieutenant general who served as the chief of staff to Trump’s national security council, told Reuters he had met several European officials in recent days, including foreign ministers, but did not disclose their identities.

Kellogg, who is in regular contact with Trump, has emphasised that he does not speak for the former president nor his campaign.

Navigating the complex world of Directed Energy Weapons (DEWs) might seem like a daunting task. Yet, as an expert researcher in military technology who has extensively studied these high-tech systems, I am equipped to be your guide.

This article will offer you comprehensive insights into the detection methods for DEWs and their importance in modern warfare. Are you ready to demystify DEWs?

Directed Energy Weapons (DEWs) utilize electromagnetic radiation to inflict damage or destruction on targets.

Directed Energy Weapons, also known as DEWs, operate on the principle of harnessing and directing electromagnetic radiation to harm or incapacitate targets. The beauty of these weapons lies in their precision – they hone onto a specific target without the collateral damage often associated with conventional weaponry.

They come in different types – microwave weapons that emit high-frequency electromagnetic radiation causing burns and internal organ damage; laser weapons emitting concentrated beams of light that can cause blindness and severe burns; particle beam weapons accelerating subatomic particles towards targets for similar effects.

So, while their functionality may sound straight out from a spy movie, the reality is far more potent – they’re real, they’re deadly, and knowing how to detect them could potentially save lives.

In our exploration of directed energy weapons (DEWs), we come across a spectrum of advanced weapon systems. These systems function by producing a concentrated beam of energy to disable or destroy a target. Below are some noticeable types:

1. Microwave Weapons: As one of the common types, microwave weapons release high-frequency electromagnetic radiation. The U.S. Navy uses High Power Microwaves (HPM) as part of their DEWs arsenal.
2. Laser Weapons: A shining example in this category is the High Energy Lasers (HEL). They emit photons, creating a concentrated beam of light that has proven effective in both power projection and integrated defense missions. Notably, the Maritime Laser Demonstrator (MLD) was initially operated at sea, followed by the Laser Weapons System (LaWS) onboard USS Ponce – marking it as the first military HEL.
3. Particle Beam Weapons: Remarkably innovative particle-beam weapons fire streams of subatomic particles to incapacitate targets. This type is still under substantial research and holds promise for future warfare technologies.
4. Plasma Weapons: Considered science fiction not too long ago, plasma weapons use a highly energized state of matter – plasma – usually delivered as compact pulses against targets.
5. Sonic Weapons: Deployed for both military and law enforcement agencies’ purposes, sonic weapons use sound waves at extreme volumes or frequencies, causing discomfort or actual physical harm to individuals exposed to them.

Microwave Directed Energy Weapons (DEWs) have carved a niche for themselves in the realm of modern warfare. These devices shockingly harness the power of high-frequency electromagnetic radiation to inflict harm.

And it’s not just minor scrapes and bruises we’re talking about here, but serious internal organ damage and severe burns that can incapacitate instantly. Military and law enforcement agencies around the globe realize the potency of these tools, as well as their cost-effectiveness and accuracy, making them an increasingly common weapon choice on today’s battlefield.

But beware – criminals and terrorists aren’t far behind in exploiting this dangerous technology for nefarious purposes too. That’s why detection is critical! With specialized equipment tuned to pick up radio waves or infrared detectors designed to sense heat energy emitted by DEWs – including microwaves – keeping ahead in this dangerous game becomes achievable.

Laser weapons are a type of directed energy weapon (DEW) that use concentrated beams of light to deliver a powerful punch. These beams can cause severe burns and even blindness. As an aerospace engineer, I’ve seen firsthand the incredible range and accuracy of laser weapons.

They emit photons, which are particles of electromagnetic energy, in a tightly focused beam. When this beam hits its target, it releases an intense amount of heat energy, causing damage with pinpoint precision.

The U.S. military has been at the forefront of developing laser technology for both offense and defense purposes. From anti-drone rifles to counter-electronics projects, lasers have proven their operational advantages on the battlefield.

Particle-beam

As a man interested in understanding directed energy weapons, it’s important to know about particle-beam weapons. These weapons are considered one of the types of directed energy weapons alongside microwave and laser weapons.

What sets particle-beam weapons apart is their ability to accelerate subatomic particles and direct them toward targets, resulting in severe burns and internal organ damage. With these devastating effects, detecting the use of particle-beam weapons becomes crucial for personal safety and national security.

By being aware of the distinctive signs and employing specialized tools like radio detection or infrared detectors, we can enhance our defenses against these advanced technologies.

Plasma, one of the types of directed energy weapons (DEWs), is an incredibly powerful form of matter that can be used as a destructive force. Plasma weapons are designed to generate and control high-temperature plasma, a state of matter in which electrons and ions are no longer bound together.

This allows them to unleash devastating amounts of heat and energy on their targets.

When it comes to detecting plasma-based DEWs, special equipment is required due to the unique characteristics they possess. Plasma emits electromagnetic radiation that can be detected using radio detection techniques.

In addition, the extreme temperatures generated by plasma weapons create distinct heat signatures that can be identified using thermal cameras.

Sonic-directed energy weapons are a fascinating and powerful type of DEW. They utilize sound waves to target and disrupt their intended victims. These weapons emit intense, high-frequency sounds that can cause significant physical harm and even psychological effects.

Sonic weapons have been used by law enforcement agencies for crowd control purposes, as well as by the military for various applications. When exposed to these acoustic beams, individuals may experience symptoms such as dizziness, nausea, disorientation, and even hearing loss.

It is crucial for security personnel to be able to detect sonic DEWs in order to protect both themselves and the public from potential harm. So stay vigilant and informed regarding these advanced weaponry capabilities!

To detect directed energy weapons, you can employ various techniques and tools such as radio detection, infrared detection, visual detection, and acoustic detection. By understanding the signs of directed energy weapon use and utilizing specialized equipment like EMF meters, thermal cameras, Faraday cages, UV lights, and metal detectors, you can effectively detect these weapons in order to ensure personal safety or protect national security.

As a man interested in detecting directed energy weapons (DEWs), I understand the importance of staying informed and prepared. Here are some techniques and tools that can help you detect DEWs:

1. Radio Detection: DEWs emit electromagnetic waves that can be detected using radio receivers or EMF meters. These devices can pick up unusual frequency patterns or spikes in the surrounding area, indicating the presence of a DEW.
2. Infrared Detection: DEWs produce heat signatures, which can be detected using thermal cameras. By scanning the area with a thermal camera, you can identify any hotspots or abnormal heat sources that may indicate the use of a DEW.
3. Visual Detection: Keep an eye out for any unusual energy sources or beams of light. Laser-based DEWs, for example, produce concentrated beams of light that are visible to the naked eye. Look for any unexplained laser-like lights or flashes in your surroundings.
4. Acoustic Detection: Some DEWs, such as sonic weapons, produce audible sound waves that can be detected using specialized acoustic sensors or microphones. These devices can pick up high-frequency sounds or vibrations associated with DEW activity.
5. Protective Measures: To protect yourself from potential harm caused by DEWs, consider investing in special materials such as Faraday cages or fabrics that block electromagnetic radiation. These materials create a shield against electromagnetic waves and can minimize exposure to harmful effects.

As a man, it’s important to be aware of the signs that may indicate the use of directed energy weapons (DEWs). These advanced weapons can cause severe harm and have become increasingly prevalent in modern warfare. Here are some signs to look out for:

1. Unexplained Burns: If you or others around you start experiencing sudden and unexplained burns on your skin or clothing, it could be a sign of DEW use. These weapons emit electromagnetic radiation that can cause severe burns.
2. Nausea and Dizziness: Feeling nauseous or dizzy without any apparent reason could be a symptom of exposure to DEWs. The electromagnetic waves emitted by these weapons can affect the central nervous system, leading to such symptoms.
3. Sight and Hearing Problems: Blurred vision, temporary blindness, or hearing difficulties might indicate the presence of DEWs nearby. Laser weapons and sonic devices can target the sensory organs, causing temporary impairments.
4. Rapid Heating Sensations: If you suddenly feel intense heat concentrated on specific areas of your body without any external source, it could be a result of DEW exposure. Microwave weapons emit high-frequency electromagnetic radiation that can rapidly heat up objects.
5. Electronics Malfunctioning: DEWs emit strong electromagnetic waves that can interfere with electronic devices. If your electronic equipment starts malfunctioning unexpectedly or displays unusual behavior, it might be due to nearby DEW usage.
6. Distortion of Surroundings: Look out for any distortion in the air or shimmering effects around objects when there is no obvious source for such phenomena. Particle-beam weapons create plasma trails which can cause visible distortions in the surrounding environment.
7. Unusual Energy Sources: Keep an eye out for strange energy sources appearing near sensitive locations or events. DEWs require power sources to operate efficiently, so spotting unusual energy signatures could suggest their presence.

Detecting directed energy weapons is crucial for personal safety and has significant national security implications. By understanding how to detect these weapons, individuals can take effective measures to protect themselves and their surroundings from potential threats.

Discover the importance of detecting directed energy weapons and learn about the role they play in modern warfare, including incidents like Havana Syndrome. Stay informed and stay vigilant against this emerging technology.

As men, ensuring our personal safety is of utmost importance in today’s world. With the increasing use of Directed Energy Weapons (DEWs), it’s crucial to be aware and knowledgeable about their detection.

DEWs utilize electromagnetic radiation to cause harm or destruction, posing serious threats to individuals. Microwave weapons emit high-frequency electromagnetic radiation that can lead to severe burns and internal organ damage.

Laser weapons employ concentrated beams of light that can potentially cause blindness and severe burns. Particle beam weapons accelerate subatomic particles toward targets, resulting in similar devastating effects.

As someone deeply invested in national security, understanding the implications of directed energy weapons (DEWs) is crucial. DEWs have revolutionized modern warfare and pose significant threats to the safety of nations worldwide.

These weapons are not limited to military use; terrorists and criminals also exploit their destructive power. With their low cost and high accuracy, DEWs have become a preferred choice for both offensive and defensive operations.

By knowing how to detect DEWs, we can augment our defenses against these unseen but dangerous threats. This knowledge empowers us to enhance our security measures, safeguarding our nation from potential attacks by ensuring quick response times and effective countermeasures based on early detection.

From historical conflicts to the present day, directed energy weapons have revolutionized modern warfare. Discover how these advanced technologies are reshaping military strategies and impacting global security.

Throughout the 20th century and into the present day, directed energy weapons (DEWs) have played a significant role in warfare. These advanced weapons systems have been utilized by military forces around the world for a wide range of purposes.

From tactical operations to strategic engagements, DEWs have proven their effectiveness on the battlefield.

One noteworthy example of DEW use is the development of microwave weapons. In recent years, these weapons have gained attention for their ability to emit high-frequency electromagnetic radiation, which can cause severe burns and internal organ damage.

Additionally, laser weapons have become increasingly prevalent in modern warfare. By utilizing concentrated beams of light, they are capable of targeting and destroying enemy assets with remarkable accuracy.

Another type of DEW that has seen significant use is particle beam weapons. These powerful devices accelerate subatomic particles and direct them toward targets, resulting in devastating effects such as severe burns and internal organ damage.

As technology continues to advance at an unprecedented pace, it is crucial for military personnel and law enforcement agencies to remain vigilant in their efforts to detect these highly sophisticated weaponry systems.

With specialized equipment and techniques designed specifically for detecting DEWs – such as radio detection, infrared detection, visual detection, and acoustic detection – professionals can effectively identify potential threats before they escalate.

I recently came across an intriguing phenomenon called Havana Syndrome that has been affecting diplomats and spies from the United States and Canada. The cause of this mysterious ailment is still unknown, but experts believe that it may be linked to electromagnetic beams.

A study conducted by the U.S. National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine suggested that the victims likely experienced physical phenomena caused by electromagnetic radiation.

This brings us to the topic of directed energy weapons (DEWs), which use highly focused energy to damage or destroy targets without using solid projectiles. DEWs can pass through the skin and transfer energy to the water just beneath its surface, causing various effects on the human body.

As a result of the increasing threat of piracy, directed energy weapons (DEWs) have become an essential tool in anti-piracy measures. These advanced weapons allow law enforcement and security personnel to quickly and effectively neutralize pirate threats without causing significant harm or casualties.

DEWs such as the Vigilant Eagle system, Bofors HPM Blackout, and EL/M-2080 Green Pine radar are used to detect and deter pirates by disabling their vessels or disrupting their communication systems.

With their operational advantages, DEWs provide a non-lethal solution that helps protect maritime interests and ensure the safety of crew members aboard targeted ships.

As we delve into the world of detecting directed energy weapons (DEWs), it’s important to understand both the advantages and challenges that come with this task. One major advantage is the opportunity for increased security and quick response.

By being able to detect DEWs, law enforcement agencies, and military personnel can better protect themselves and others from potential threats.

Another advantage lies in the effective defenses that can be put in place once a DEW is detected. With specialized equipment such as EMF meters, thermal cameras, UV lights, and metal detectors, detection becomes more efficient.

Additionally, having government technology and expertise on hand helps to develop advanced detection techniques.

However, there are also various challenges involved in DEW detection. For one, these weapons often leave little residue or evidence behind, making them difficult to trace back to their source.

Moreover, some DEWs emit low levels of energy or may have unusual energy sources that evade traditional detection methods.

Furthermore, health issues related to exposure to electromagnetic beams pose a challenge in detecting DEWs effectively without causing harm. The symptoms of Havana syndrome experienced by U.S. embassy personnel in Cuba highlight the importance of understanding how different radio frequencies affect our central nervous system.

Despite these challenges, advancements are continuously being made in technologies for identifying electromagnetic waves emitted by DEWs. As we strive towards staying one step ahead of malicious intent surrounding directed energy weapons usage – whether it be governmental or criminal – recognizing both advantages and challenges will assist us in maintaining safety and security against this rising threat.

In conclusion, being able to detect directed energy weapons is crucial for personal safety and national security. With the increased availability of these weapons to not only military and law enforcement agencies but also to criminals and terrorists, knowing how to identify signs of their use is essential.

By utilizing specialized techniques and tools such as UV lights, thermal cameras, and EMF meters, we can increase our vigilance and quickly respond to any threats posed by these high-tech weapons.

Stay alert, stay informed, and stay safe from the potential dangers of directed energy weapons.

Biden, 81, said any candidates who doubt his ability should challenge him at the Democratic National Convention in August – an effort that stands no chance of success unless he lets the delegates he won in primaries this year consider other candidates.

“The bottom line here is that I am not going anywhere,” Biden said in a phone call he placed to MSNBC’s Morning Joe program. He repeated that message to donors on a private call later in the day, according to a source on the call.

Several senior House Democrats called for Biden to drop out in a Sunday phone call, media outlets reported. Other lawmakers said they supported his candidacy.

“President Joe Biden is the nominee and has been selected by millions of voters across this country,” Representative Steven Horsford, chair of the Congressional Black Caucus, said on social media. Black voters are a critical part of Democrats’ base of support.

In his letter to Democrats, Biden said he was aware of their concerns but said it was time to put them aside.

On MSNBC, Biden sounded a defiant note against wealthy donors who have called for him to drop out. “I don’t care what the millionaires think,” he said.

If Republicans were to capture the White House and both houses of Congress, Trump would face few constraints on his ability to push through major policy changes.

However, that poll also found that none of his possible replacements fared better in a matchup against Trump. The poll found Biden and Trump tied at 40% each.

Biden’s troubles appear to be increasing the number of races Democrats need to worry about in November.

Internal party polling shows that New Mexico and Virginia became more competitive following the debate, according to a source familiar with the findings, and the nonpartisan Center for Politics at the University of Virginia last week shifted its ratings on the states of Michigan and Minnesota to make each slightly more favorable for Republicans.

Together, those states will host a half-dozen of the most competitive House races.

Sign up here.

Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles., opens new tab

A Republican lawmaker on Tuesday took the latest right-wing conspiracy theory about President Joe Biden to a fizzy new level by claiming he would be “jacked up” on soda for this week’s debate against Donald Trump.

“Trump’s team should not underestimate Joe Biden and his team’s ability to, y’know, whether they’re gonna jack him up on Mountain Dew or whatever it is,” Rep. Eric Burlison (R-Mo.) said on Fox Business. “Look, the State of the Union this year, he had a lot of energy for about an hour. Or an hour and a half.”

The Mountain Dew line may have been a reference to the Will Ferrell movie “Talladega Nights.”

However, Trump and his allies ― including multiple Fox News personalities ― have suggested Biden will take something, possibly caffeine, to get “jacked up” for the debate.

Trump has even called for a drug test before the event.

These claims come after Trump supporters have spent years attacking Biden’s cognition, while ignoring growing concerns that Trump’s own brainpower has diminished.

Burlison’s comments fell flat on X as critics took the fizz out of the attack:

Warnings about nuclear escalation in Ukraine are now being issued with increasing frequency and urgency, due to dramatic changes in policy by some of Kyiv’s main western supporters.

Some European countries, including Britain, France and Germany, and the United States, have changed course, giving Ukraine the green light to use their weapons against sites within Russia. The latter two limited their permission to Ukrainian strikes aimed at defending Kharkiv province – although, according one report, Joe Biden may even lift that geographic restriction, as well. These steps are responses to devastating Russian strikes on Ukraine, many from points beyond its reach.

These changes in western policy – plus the French president Emmanuel Macron’s plans to send French troops to train Ukrainian forces on site and even possibly to fight – have heightened anxieties that Russia may undertake nuclear escalation in retaliation. Vladimir Putin has alluded to this possibility since the day he invaded Ukraine, as have other senior Russian officials, most notably Dmitry Medvedev, the deputy chairman of the security council of Russia, who previously served as prime minister and president, and may hold the record within Russian officialdom for the frequency of nuclear threats.

The problem leaders and pundits face is that the risks of escalation are devilishly hard to pin down. It’s impossible to make predictions about nuclear escalation in the manner of weather forecasters predicting rain or tornadoes. Simply put, there’s no reliable procedure for making assessments nor any solid evidence on which to base them because there has never been a crisis in a world with multiple nuclear powers that spiraled and culminated in the use of nuclear weapons.

Therefore, analysts and commentators trying to determine the risk of Russian escalation put themselves in Putin’s place and try to see the world, and the Ukraine war more narrowly, as they imagine he sees it. Yet they cannot be sure that their attempts to reconstruct Putin’s views – based on the state of the battlefield and the changes occurring within it, including shifts in policy by Ukraine’s western supporters – correspond to his perceptions.

Even if that problem could somehow be overcome, there’s another. Putin’s views aren’t set in stone – no leader’s are – and can shift quickly based on his reassessments of how the war is going and what he needs to do to achieve victory. Outsiders’ conclusions about escalation lack any solid evidentiary foundation beyond what Putin and his associates say on the subject. Yes, analyzing the latest iteration (2020) of Russia’s nuclear doctrine can help, but nothing prevents Russian leaders from going off script. Besides, that document sets conditions, such as a nuclear attack on Russia or a threat to its existence, that aren’t pertinent to the war in Ukraine.

Some experts attribute an increase in Russian nuclear escalation threats to posturing and intimidation attempts, others see it as alarming

There’s also no surefire way to ascertain the value of the statements emanating from Moscow’s inner circle. Are they reliable guides to the Kremlin’s true beliefs and therefore useful in predicting what Putin may actually do? Or are they part of an information war designed to unnerve the west and influence its policies governing what Ukraine may do with Nato-supplied weapons?

Because we can’t know what Putin and his foreign policy and national security crew are discussing behind closed doors, there’s no way to know whether their public pronouncements are warnings to take seriously or scare tactics to ignore. The result? Some experts attribute an increase in Russian nuclear escalation threats to posturing and intimidation attempts, others see it as alarming.

In pondering the escalation problem, it helps to imagine how and where Putin might decide to use nuclear weapons. Surely, he wouldn’t rain them down on the United States or Europe; that would be suicidal. Perhaps he’d attack Ukraine – but he’d have to find a place that’s not teeming with Russians troops, lest they be killed as well, and in large numbers. He might choose western Ukraine, far from the frontlines, but launching a nuclear strike there for demonstrative effect could still kill many people, shock the global community and even provoke Nato retaliation.

Beyond that, Putin’s messaging to the global south and sympathetic westerners about the Ukraine war has painted the west as heedless of legitimate Russian security concerns, especially Kyiv’s aspirations to membership in Nato and its growing military ties with the west. Using nuclear weapons would be a bad way to win friends and influence people.

skip past newsletter promotion

Get the most important US headlines and highlights emailed direct to you every morning

Privacy Notice: Newsletters may contain info about charities, online ads, and content funded by outside parties. For more information see our Privacy Policy. We use Google reCaptcha to protect our website and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

after newsletter promotion

More importantly, despite the “no limits friendship” between Beijing and Moscow, President Xi Jinping has made his opposition to the use of nuclear weapons in Ukraine clear.

While it’s prudent to worry about escalation and to avoid steps that increase the risk based on the (unachievable) certainty that Moscow’s threats are mere noise, it’s also important to understand that the risks of escalation cut both ways. Putin is not immune from them.

Ultimately, there’s no escaping the fog of war. In such circumstances it’s essential to keep in mind the downsides of being wrong – which, when nuclear weapons are involved, are catastrophic – but without succumbing to paralyzing fear. Alas, that balance, while easy to prescribe, is hard to strike.

• Rajan Menon is the director of the grand strategy program at Defense Priorities, a professor emeritus of international relations at the City College of New York and a senior research scholar at Columbia University’s Saltzman Institute of War and Peace Studies

To judge from the editorial pages and Capitol Hill currents that both shape and reflect Washington’s perceptions of the world, the doomsayers sounding alarms over the risk of direct military conflict between the U.S. and Russia over Ukraine have been proved wrong. Despite many Russian warnings and much nuclear saber-rattling, the United States has managed to supply advanced artillery systems, tanks, fighter aircraft, and extended-range missiles to Ukraine without an existential contest—or even significant Russian retaliation.

For Washington’s hawkish chorus, the benefits of providing increasingly greater lethality to Ukraine outweigh the dangers of provoking a direct Russian attack on the West. They insist that the U.S. not allow fears of an unlikely Armageddon to block much-needed aid for Ukraine’s defense, particularly now that battlefield momentum has swung toward Russia. Hence the White House’s recent decision to green-light Ukraine’s use of American weapons to strike into internationally recognized Russian territory and its reported deliberations over putting American military contractors on the ground in Ukraine.

Read More: Inside Ukraine’s Plan to Arm Itself

There are several problems with this reasoning. The first is that it treats Russia’s redlines—limits that if crossed, will provoke retaliation against the U.S. or NATO—as fixed rather than moveable. In fact, where they are drawn depends on one man, Vladimir Putin. His judgments about what Russia should tolerate can vary according to his perceptions of battlefield dynamics, Western intentions, sentiment inside Russia, and likely reactions in the rest of the world.

It is true that Putin has proved quite reluctant to strike directly at the West in response to its military aid for Ukraine. But what Putin can live with today may become a casus belli tomorrow. The world will only know where his red lines are actually drawn once they have been crossed and the U.S. finds itself having to respond to Russian retaliation.

The second problem is that by focusing narrowly on how Moscow might react to each individual bit of American assistance to Ukraine, this approach underestimates the cumulative impact on Putin and the Kremlin’s calculations. Russian experts have become convinced that the U.S. has lost its fear of nuclear war, a fear they regard as having been central to stability for most of the Cold War, when it dissuaded both superpowers from taking actions that might threaten the other’s core interests.  

A key question now being debated within Russia’s foreign policy elite is how to restore America’s fear of nuclear escalation while avoiding a direct military clash that might spin out of control. Some Moscow hardliners advocate using tactical nuclear weapons against wartime targets to shock the West into sobriety. More moderate experts have floated the idea of a nuclear bomb demonstration test, hoping that televised images of the signature mushroom cloud would awaken Western publics to the dangers of military confrontation. Others call for a strike on a U.S. satellite involved in providing targeting information to Ukraine or for downing an American Global Hawk reconnaissance drone monitoring Ukraine from airspace over the Black Sea. Any one of these steps could lead to an alarming crisis between Washington and Moscow.

Underlying these internal Russian debates is a widespread consensus that unless the Kremlin draws a hard line soon, the U.S. and its NATO allies will only add more capable weapons to Ukraine’s arsenal that eventually threatens Moscow’s ability to detect and respond to strikes on its nuclear forces. Even just the perception of growing Western involvement in Ukraine could provoke a dangerous Russian reaction.

These concerns undoubtedly played a part in Putin’s decision to visit North Korea and resurrect the mutual defense treaty that was in force from 1962 until the Soviet Union’s demise. “They supply weapons to Ukraine, saying: We are not in control here, so the way Ukraine uses them is none of our business. Why cannot we adopt the same position and say that we supply something to somebody but have no control over what happens afterwards? Let them think about it,” Putin told journalists after the trip.

Last week, following a Ukrainian strike on the Crimean port of Sevastopol that resulted in American-supplied cluster munitions killing at least five Russian beachgoers and wounding more than 100, Russian officials insisted that such an attack was only possible with U.S. satellite guidance aiding Ukraine. The Foreign Ministry summoned the U.S. ambassador in Moscow to charge formally that the U.S. “has become a party to the conflict,” vowing that “retaliatory measures will definitely follow.” The Kremlin spokesperson announced that “the involvement of the United States, the direct involvement, as a result of which Russian civilians are killed, cannot be without consequences.”

Are the Russians bluffing, or are they approaching a point where they fear the consequences of not drawing a hard line outweighs the dangers of precipitating a direct military confrontation? To argue that we cannot know, and therefore should proceed with deploying American military contractors or French trainers in Ukraine until the Russians’ actions match their bellicose words, is to ignore the very real problems we would face in managing a bilateral crisis.  

Unlike in 1962, when President John F. Kennedy and his Russian counterpart Nikita Khrushchev famously went “eyeball to eyeball” during the Cuban missile crisis, neither Washington nor Moscow is well positioned to cope with a similarly alarming prospect today. At the time, the Soviet ambassador was a regular guest in the Oval Office and could conduct a backchannel dialogue with Bobby Kennedy beyond the gaze of internet sleuths and cable television. Today, Russia’s ambassador in Washington is a tightly monitored pariah. Crisis diplomacy would require intense engagement between a contemptuous Putin and an aging Biden, already burdened with containing a crisis in Gaza and conducting an election campaign whose dynamics discourage any search for compromise with Russia. Levels of mutual U.S.-Russian distrust have gone off the charts. Under the circumstances, mistakes and misperception could prove fatal even if—as is likely—neither side desires a confrontation.

Pivotal moments in history often become clear only in hindsight, after a series of developments produce a definitive outcome. Discerning such turning points while events are in motion, and we still have some ability to affect their course, can be maddeningly difficult. We may well be stumbling toward such a moment today.

top of page

bottom of page

Some people might have been on the fence prior to Thursday night’s debate between President Joe Biden and former President Donald Trump. For others, the debate might have sealed their decision on who they will vote for as the nation’s commander-in-chief.

The 90-minute debate was hosted by CNN. Jake Tapper and Dana Bash were the moderators.

A variety of topics were covered, including abortion, immigration, taxes, January 6th rioters, foreign policy, and even their golf game.

Several Missouri politicians did not waste time going on X to give their two cents.

“This will end up being the only debate. No way Democrats agree to another one unless it’s with their replacement. When Kamala Harris debates President Trump on September 10th, I hope she’ll be more coherent for the sake of the country,” said Sen. Eric Schmitt.

“Maybe he should have had some Mountain Dew,” said Congressman Eric Burlison, R-7th District.

“We cannot afford four more years of Biden’s blunders,” said St. Louis area Congresswoman Ann Wagner, R-2nd District.

“Total triumph for Trump. Tomorrow the clamor to replace Biden will be deafening,” said Sen. Josh Hawley.

“The clear winner of tonight’s debate was President Donald J. Trump. He was strong, resolute, and firm on his message. Most importantly, he was himself. The vision, results, and policies he laid out will be critical in putting our country back on track and getting the American government back to doing the business of the American people,” said Congressman Mark Alford, R-4th District.

In a statement from Biden’s campaign, Jen O’Malley Dillon said that Biden presented a positive and winning vision for the future of America – one in which every American has a fair shot at the American dream, where every one of our rights are protected, and where our president fights to strengthen our democracy – not to tear it down.

“On the other side of the stage was Donald Trump, who offered a dark and backwards window into what America will look like if he steps foot back in the White House: a country where women are forced to beg for the health care they need to stay alive. A country that puts the interests of billionaires over working people. And a former president who not once, not twice, but three times, failed to promise he would accept the results of a free and fair election this November.

“Trump’s performance tonight reminded the American people why they fired him four years ago, and reinforced just how high the stakes are this November for the future of our country.”

The Republican National Convention is July 15-18 in Milwaukee. The Democratic National Convention is August 19-22 in Chicago.

Copyright © 2024 Missourinet

KYIV, July 7 (Reuters) – Ukrainian drones hit a munitions depot inside Russia overnight and there was a “high chance” of explosions at Russian military-industrial sites in the near future, a security source said on Sunday.

The source, who asked to remain anonymous, told Reuters the 9,000 sq. metre munitions storage facility was in the Russian region of Voronezh, which borders a chunk of northeastern Ukraine occupied by Russia since 2022.

Russia stored surface-to-surface and surface-to-air missiles, tank and artillery shells, and bullets at the depot, according to the source.

According to the source, the depot was near the village of Sergeyevka, which is about 85 miles from the nearest Kyiv-controlled territory.

Since Russia invaded it in 2022, Ukraine has been building a fleet of long-range drones to give it the ability to strike targets deep inside Russia.

“In the nearest future, there remains a high chance of sudden detonations at Russian military-industrial facilities, which are working (to supply) the war against Ukraine,” the source said.

Sign up here.

Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles., opens new tab

A Russian spy plot that sought to sow “panic and terror” in the West has been revealed in a joint-investigation.

Leaked emails from Russia’s Foreign Intelligence Service (SVR) obtained by independent Russian site The Insider and the German newspaper Der Spiegel reveal an elaborate plan masterminded in 2022, dubbed “Project Kylo.”

Just months into Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine, in May 2022, a group of SVR employees unveiled the operation at a private roundtable discussion in the Russian Senate. Leaked communications showed that Moscow sought to sow disinformation campaigns in the West about Ukraine, “stoke existential fears and create animosity to [Ukrainian] refugees fleeing the war.”

Newsweek couldn’t independently verify the claims made in the investigation and has contacted Russia’s Foreign Ministry for comment by email.

Russian President Vladimir Putin is pictured in Astana, Kazakhstan, on July 4, 2024. A Russian spy plot which sought to sow “panic and terror” in the West has been revealed in a joint investigation.
Russian President Vladimir Putin is pictured in Astana, Kazakhstan, on July 4, 2024. A Russian spy plot which sought to sow “panic and terror” in the West has been revealed in a joint investigation.
SERGEI GUNEYEV/POOL/AFP/Getty Images

The proposal, first put forward by Mikhail Kolesov, a 45-year-old SVR officer, was designed to “inject a new scheme into the Kremlin’s propaganda approach” that was “systematic, targeted and active, offensive in nature,” according to the investigation.

The SVR officer suggested that instead of pushing typical pro-Russian arguments about the conflict, the operation should “deepen internal contradictions between the ruling elites” in the West, including in the U.S., which is known among the special services as Russia’s “main adversary.”

This involved SVR recruits creating fake advertisements disguised as news headlines, fake NGOs and websites, publishing manipulative content on social media platforms including YouTube, and hiring individuals to take part in protests in the West with the aim of filming them and disseminating the content online.

At a time when some Western politicians were suggesting that Ukrainian refugees who fled the war were becoming burdens on state resources, SVR recruits attempted to exploit the situation by creating fake news websites and running articles with headlines such as: “How Ukrainians are robbing Germany of economic prosperity.”

Hundreds of thousands of social media accounts attempted to direct internet users to these sites by publishing images with “sensationalistic slogans” such as “Germany is sinking into homelessness” and “Even bread is a luxury” and linking back to them.

The “leitmotif of our cognitive campaign in the [Western] countries is proposed to be the instilling of the strongest emotion in the human psyche—fear,” one leaked document said. “It is precisely the fear for the future, uncertainty about tomorrow, the inability to make long-term plans, the unclear fate of children and future generations. The cultivation of these triggers floods an individual’s subconscious with panic and terror.”

Do you have a tip on a world news story that Newsweek should be covering? Do you have a question about the Russia-Ukraine war? Let us know via worldnews@newsweek.com.

МОСКВА (ИА Реалист). После того, как в конце мая Алексей Дюмин сместил на должности секретаря Госсовета влиятельного Игоря Левитина, поползли слухи, что президент России Владимир Путин готовит себе преемника.

О том, насколько оправданы эти слухи и кем на самом деле является Алексей Дюмин рассуждает научный сотрудник-консультант программы «Россия и Евразия» в лондонском Chatham House, профессор кафедры политологии ВШЭ Николай Петров.

Профессор считает, что нынешнее повышение Дюмина представляет собой второе по серьезности кадровое изменение в рамках путинской перестановки элит, уступающее только замене Сергея Шойгу на посту министра обороны Андреем Белоусовым.

«Замена Левитина Дюминым, несомненно, — значительный шаг вперед для бывшего телохранителя, но влечет за собой ослабление института: Дюмину не хватает навыков и поддержки, необходимых для того, чтобы вести бюрократическую игру так же успешно, как это делал Левитин», — полагает Петров.

Он полагает, что продвижение Дюмина — часть модели, согласно которой Путин все больше полагается на членов своей «преторианской гвардии» при выборе кандидатов на важные посты.

В качестве примера, профессор называет фамилии Дмитрия Миронова, назначенного на пост помощника президента в октябре 2021 года, Александра Куренкова, получившего кресло министра по чрезвычайным ситуациям в мае 2022 года, Валерия Пикалина, ставшего главой Федеральной таможенной службы в мае 2024 года.

«Короче говоря, Дюмин никогда не был первым кандидатом Путина, и маловероятно, что его новое назначение указывает на какой-либо особый статус в мышлении российского президента относительно его преемственности. Включение Дюмина в списки возможных преемников Путина, похоже, стало результатом специальной информационной кампании Кремля. Более того, Путин может назначить на свой пост любого, кого пожелает. Нет никаких норм или правил, ограничивающих его — и он, скорее всего, не будет косвенно сигнализировать о своем выборе, прежде чем сделать его», — полагает Петров.

Он подчеркивает, что даже если Дюмин станет президентом, что, по его мнению, маловероятно, он хоть и будет обладать атрибутами власти, но не будет иметь реальную власть.

У лидеров России и Ирака есть свои подходы для нормализации отношений Турции и Сирии. Об этом заявил турецкий лидер Реджеп Тайип Эрдоган. По его словам, Анкара готова к улучшению отношений с Дамаском.

Общаясь 7 июля с журналистами на борту самолета по пути из Германии, Эрдоган заявил, что Турция готова направить приглашение сирийскому лидеру Башару Асаду, чтобы «привести отношения Турции и Сирии к тому же уровню, что и в прошлом». Однако для этого Асад должен сделать свои шаги.

Эрдоган дал понять, что данный вопрос будет обсуждаться в ходе возможной встречи с президентом РФ.

«Что касается встречи в Турции, то у господина Путина есть подходы. У премьер-министра Ирака есть подходы по этому вопросу», – приводит слова Эрдогана «РИА Новости».

Ранее пресс-секретарь президента РФ Дмитрий Песков заявлял, что визит Путина в Анкару готовится, однако конкретных дат пока нет.

3После атаки на Севастополь глава Пентагона Ллойд Остин позвонил министру обороны России Андрею Белоусову. О чём они говорили и как это повлияет на общий ход СВО? Своей версией поделился политолог Андрей Перла в новом выпуске программы “Скрытые смыслы”.

При атаке на Севастополь погибли четыре человека, включая двух детей, пострадали больше сотни людей. Из пяти ракет ATACMS, выпущенных Украиной, четыре были сбиты российскими ПВО. Боевая часть пятой ракеты взорвалась в районах Учкуевки и Любимовки – популярных местах отдыха в городе. Москва возложила ответственность за случившееся на США, которые поставляли ракеты Киеву. 

После инцидента 25 июня по инициативе американской стороны состоялся телефонный разговор между министром обороны России Андреем Белоусовым и главой Пентагона Ллойдом Остином. По информации российского Минобороны, министры обсудили ситуацию вокруг Украины. Белоусов “указал на опасность дальнейшей эскалации обстановки в связи с продолжающимися поставками” вооружений Вашингтоном для украинских боевиков. 

МОМЕНТ УДАРА РАКЕТАМИ ATACNS ПО ГОРОДСКОМУ ПЛЯЖУ В СЕВАСТОПОЛЕ, СКРИНШОТ TELEGRAM-КАНАЛ “ЦАРЬГРАД”

Это был первый разговор между Белоусовым и Остином. При этом в деталях не уточняется, что именно послужило поводом для звонка. 

В МИД России заявили, что причастность США и Украины к теракту в Севастополе не подвергается сомнению. Комментируя заявления по поводу причастности США к обстрелам нашей территории, официальный представитель Пентагона Чарли Дитц заявил, что Киев сам определяет цели для нанесения ударов по России. 

По поводу дальнобойных ракет и обстрелов наших территорий президент Владимир Путин ещё месяц назад заявил, что в НАТО должны отдавать себе отчёт, с чем они играют. Почему он так сказал? Потому что и выбор цели, и полётное задание для современных ударных систем вносятся дистанционно, автоматически теми, кто производит и поставляет эти ударные системы на Украину. 

На этом фоне разговор министров обороны России и США приобретает особую важность. Более детально эту тему раскрыл политический обозреватель “Первого русского” Андрей Перла в эфире программы “Скрытые смыслы”. 

Почему так важен этот звонок?

Политолог Андрей Перла напомнил, что предыдущий разговор министров обороны России и США имел место в начале 2023 года. Когда Сергей Шойгу разговаривал всё с тем же Ллойдом Остином. Почему сейчас так важен сам факт обсуждения между Белоусовым и Ллойдом? Потому что это произошло именно после севастопольской трагедии, сказал Перла.

ФОТО: ЦАРЬГРАД

Россия, по сути, совершенно официально возложила ответственность за это на США. Поскольку всё очевидно: американская ракета, американский боеприпас. Да, наверное, она была пущена с украинской формально территории. Но если там и присутствовали при этом какие-то украинские солдаты, то они американским специалистам кофе подавали. Больше они ни на что не годны. Это американская атака на Россию,

– сказал Перла. 

БИЛИ ПО ОТДЫХАЮЩИМ. КАДРЫ С МЕСТА АТАКИ ВСУ В СЕВАСТОПОЛЕ. СКРИНШОТ TELEGRAM-КАНАЛ “ЦАРЬГРАД”

Со своей стороны, продолжил он, США официально не согласились с этими обвинениями. И заявили, что поставки оружия на Украину действительно осуществляются, но “они не стреляют по мирным жителям“. Более того, американцы считают трагедией произошедшее в Севастополе, отметил Перла.

Но самое главное, что они не отвечают за то, что делают украинцы с тем оружием, которое им поставили. До тех пор, пока они в рамках наложенных американцами ограничений. А Крым бомбить можно, потому что это, с их точки зрения, территория Украины,

– отметил политолог. 

“ХОТЯ АМЕРИКУ НЕМНОГО ЖАЛЬ”: СМЫСЛ ЗВОНКА БЕЛОУСОВУ ИЗ ПЕНТАГОНА РАЗЪЯСНИЛИ ДВЕ “ШУТКИ”. ПЛОХАЯ И СМЕШНАЯ ФОТО: ЦАРЬГРАД

Ответ за Севастополь

По словам Андрея Перлы, разговоры о красных линиях, за которые нельзя переходить, “уже навязли на зубах”. И когда людям кажется, что они уже перейдены врагом, а наше правительство, наша власть и Минобороны ничего не сделали или сделали недостаточно, это может, конечно, вызывать злость. 

Мы совершенно справедливо говорим, что на Украине против нас воюет весь “объединённый Запад”. Хотя если слушать высказывания генерального секретаря НАТО, министра иностранных дел Германии, президента Франции, политиков тех же США, они все воюют против России. Они так и говорят вслух: мы ведём против русских войну. Но есть очень большая разница в том, чтобы вести войну против нас Украиной и украинцами и тем, чтобы вступили в бой части вооруженных сил стран НАТО, Польши, Франции, Германии, США. И вот эта большая разница отделяет СВО, войну на Украине, локальную, от мировой войны. И, вероятно, от мировой ядерной войны всеобщей,

– сказал Андрей Перла. 

ФОТО: ЦАРЬГРАД

Могло ли это быть поводом для звонка Ллойда? Это знает только он и Белоусов. Но вполне возможно, что американцам могли намекнуть на то, что они уже заигрались и подошли вплотную к той грани, за которой может последовать удар по их боевым частям. Не по украинским, которые они подготовили и обучили. Конкретно по ним, подчеркнул Перла. И дальше обратного хода не будет. 

Почему у нас есть аргументы для этого разговора? Потому что практически сразу после удара по Севастополю, по пляжу в Учкуевке, военные эксперты, указали, что этот удар был бы невозможен без поддержки американского БПЛА, который, по странному стечению обстоятельств, “болтался” над нейтральными водами Чёрного моря. Тот самый Global Hawk, огромный, ужасно дорогой беспилотник, предназначенный для того, чтобы корректировать ракетные атаки. Все видели это на карте,

– сказал собеседник.

УДАР ВСУ ПО МИРНЫМ ЖИТЕЛЯМ СЕВАСТОПОЛЯ НЕ ОСТАНЕТСЯ БЕЗ ОТВЕТА. СКРИНШОТ TELEGRAM-КАНАЛ “ЦАРЬГРАД”

Одно дело – абстрактное обвинение в том, что США снабжают ту или иную армию разведданными. Но совсем другое, когда весь мир через Flight Radar видит, как американский беспилотник “висит” над Чёрным морем и корректирует ракеты. Что, по мнению Перлы, может рассматриваться “как решающий фактор участия США непосредственно в боевых действиях”.

На грани ядерной войны

Эксперт добавил, что мы все подошли очень близко к той точке, за которой может вспыхнуть мировая война. И для этого не обязательно, чтобы НАТО и США напрямую вступали с нами в бой. Достаточно просто вторжения их танковых корпусов на Украину. А дальше – наш ракетный удар по базам НАТО, по их ПВО на территории Европы, их немедленный ответ нам, и понеслась. 

КТО ЗАПРЕТИЛ ТРОГАТЬ АМЕРИКАНСКИЕ БЕСПИЛОТНИКИ НАД ЧЁРНЫМ МОРЕМ? ПОСЛЕ СРОЧНОГО ЗВОНКА ИЗ ПЕНТАГОНА ПОРА “РАЗВЯЗАТЬ РУКИ” НАШИМ ПВО ФОТО: ЦАРЬГРАД

Угроза ядерной войны – это не какая-нибудь выдумка писателей-фантастов. А это та информационная реальность, в которой мы все сейчас живём, отметил Андрей Перла. Мир действительно находится на грани начала ядерной войны. Более того, близкие к президенту люди вроде Сергея Караганова, политического эксперта, уже не первый год с начала СВО выступают за нанесение Россией превентивного ядерного удара по базам НАТО. И, конечно, желательно так, чтобы мирные жители не пострадали, сказал Перла. 

Для чего? Чтобы продемонстрировать, что ядерное оружие – это не пугалка. Это не просто фактор сдерживания. Это оружие, которое реально находится на боевом взводе и которое реально может выстрелить. И если какую-нибудь там польскую базу снабжения ближе к восточной её границе таким образом уничтожить, вот тогда, говорит он, Запад поймёт, что мы не шутим. Что мы действительно готовы идти до конца. И будет вынужден пересмотреть свою позицию,

– отметил политолог. 

Насколько прав Караганов – покажет проведение эксперимента, считает Перла. А то, что мы всё ближе к этому эксперименту, в этом сомнений уже не осталось.

kemerovo.tsargrad.tv

НОВОСТИ ПО ТЕМЕ

НОВОСТИ ПО ТЕМЕ

A former CIA director who served a number of roles under multiple presidents has issued a warning to the country over the Supreme Court‘s presidential immunity ruling.

On Monday, Chief Justice John Roberts wrote in a 6-3 majority ruling that former President Donald Trump has “absolute immunity” for acts that fall “within his conclusive and preclusive constitutional authority” and is entitled to presumptive immunity for all official acts. The ruling did not offer immunity for unofficial, or private, acts.

John Brennan, who served as CIA director under former President Barrack Obama, called the decision “breathtaking” and said it has “dangerous implications for our nation’s future.”

“By rewriting the rule that has governed presidential authority for the past 235 years — that no one, not even a president, is above the law — the court has given a green light to any future president inclined to wield his or her executive authority irrespective of the laws that apply to all other citizens and residents of the U.S. King George III would be pleased,” Brennan wrote in an opinion column for MSNBC.

The former CIA chief went on to say the six Supreme Court judges who had been in favor of the ruling showed “abject ignorance and apparent indifference.”

He added that he is worried if “an unprincipled and politically corrupt individual” is elected to the White House, it could have “deeply disturbing practical consequences.”

Trump’s team argued that he should be held responsible for personal actions, rather than those related to official duties.

Stock photo of the Supreme Court building. Former CIA Director John Brennan blasted the High Court’s ruling on presidential immunity, saying it has “dangerous implications for our nation’s future.”
Stock photo of the Supreme Court building. Former CIA Director John Brennan blasted the High Court’s ruling on presidential immunity, saying it has “dangerous implications for our nation’s future.”
AP

The Supreme Court’s three liberal justices dissented with Associate Justice Sonia Sotomayor writing that the “President is not a king above the law.”

She wrote: “Let the President violate the law, let him exploit the trappings of his office for personal gain, let him use his official power for evil ends. Because if he knew that he may one day face liability for breaking the law, he might not be as bold and fearless as we would like him to be. That is the majority’s message today.

“Even if these nightmare scenarios never play out, and I pray they never do, the damage has been done. The relationship between the President and the people he serves has shifted irrevocably. In every use of official power, the President is now a king above the law.”

Justice Roberts responded to the dissent, saying it was in “a tone of chilling doom that is wholly disproportionate to what the Court actually does today.”

But Brennan, who has been a frequent critic of Trump and had his security clearance revoked by the former president, argued: “The accuracy of that statement, however, is wholly dependent on whether only good and honest individuals who firmly believe in the rule of law take up future residence in the White House.”

Brennan ended his piece with: “This is certainly not the America I thought we would live in as we celebrate the 248th anniversary of our country’s independence.”

Newsweek has contacted the Supreme Court’s Public Information Office, via email, for comment.

Noah Robertson is the Pentagon reporter at Defense News. He previously covered national security for the Christian Science Monitor. He holds a bachelor’s degree in English and government from the College of William & Mary in his hometown of Williamsburg, Virginia.

The attacks were first identified in Cuba in 2016 in what became known as “Havana Syndrome.” American diplomats were believed to have been targeted with directed energy from an unknown source. Victims of the suspected attacks have reported symptoms including severe headaches, ringing and pressure in the ears, and even long-term brain damage. Since then the incidents have stumped officials across the U.S. government, where a massive investigation is beginning to take shape as the threat to American personnel has increased — both overseas and on U.S. soil.

“The response was inadequate in the early stages. I think it’s gotten better but still not good enough,” Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.), vice chair of the intelligence committee, said in a brief interview. “It’s almost like the burden of proof is on these individuals, and given the nature of the injuries they’ve suffered, I don’t think it was initially treated the way it should’ve been.”

After POLITICO first revealed the Pentagon’s recent warnings to congressional committees amid a rising number of incidents, lawmakers lamented that individuals hit with suspected attacks were not getting the necessary medical care. Rubio, for example, said victims were facing “bureaucratic hurdles” to get proper treatment.

Last year, former Acting Defense Secretary Christopher Miller approved a plan for the Pentagon to cover medical care for victims of the suspected attacks who sought treatment at the department’s facilities, according to two former national security officials with direct knowledge of the matter.

In the meantime, though, Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine) told POLITICO she is working on legislation that would allocate funding for medical care and other financial compensation for the alleged victims. Collins, a senior member of the intelligence committee, also wants to give targets of directed-energy attacks access to the brain injury unit at Walter Reed National Military Medical Center.

Sen. Susan Collins speaks during a Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee hearing on the federal coronavirus response on March 18.
|
Susan Walsh, Pool/AP Photo

“I have been very concerned for two years about the battle that government personnel have faced in getting proper medical treatment for these mysterious attacks that have occurred while they’ve been serving our country — and it just should not be that way,” Collins, who has spoken directly with some of the victims, said in a brief interview.

Meanwhile, President Joe Biden’s top deputies are facing growing pressure from lawmakers to figure out who is responsible for the suspected attacks, which officials believe have also occurred on U.S. soil, including near the White House and in the D.C. suburbs. Despite CIA Director William Burns’ renewed focus on the matter, lawmakers want to see more done.

“Too much of that information has been classified, to the detriment not just of those people who have been affected, but also to the response to address it,” said Sen. Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.), an Armed Services Committee member who has led the push on “Havana Syndrome” for years.

Shaheen added that the Biden administration is “at least beginning to address it” while the Trump administration didn’t do enough.

Due to the nature of the suspected attacks and the sophisticated weaponry used, they are extremely difficult to attribute. Officials have told lawmakers that they suspect the GRU, Russia’s military-intelligence unit, may be behind the incidents, as POLITICO first reported, but the U.S. intelligence community has not yet made a formal determination.

Lawmakers and aides say the yearslong failure to determine who is responsible means the executive branch has kept too much information about the phenomenon under wraps. It’s a familiar spot for members of Congress, who, Republican and Democratic alike, grew frustrated with the Trump administration for its lackluster congressional engagement that often led to lawmakers first learning of major developments through the press.

Even the ultra-secretive Gang of Eight — the group of congressional and intelligence committee leaders privy to top-secret information — has been in the dark about key elements of the episodes. Rubio, a Gang of Eight member, said the Biden administration was not providing enough concrete information to the committees of jurisdiction on Capitol Hill.

“We’re demanding to know more. It’s a legitimate thing for us to oversee … not just on how they’ve responded, but how that’s ongoing,” Rubio said in a brief interview. “I know I haven’t been [told enough]. And I think you’ll find everybody else agrees with that.”

Sen. Richard Burr (R-N.C.), the former chair and a current member of the intelligence committee, said the panel has not been briefed about the suspected domestic incidents involving directed energy, adding: “I would think most people would assume that we have been [briefed].” A source familiar with the committee’s briefings noted that the panel has been informed about the suspected incidents on U.S. soil.

Sen. Richard Burr, R-N.C., speaks with reporters on Capitol Hill, Tuesday, Feb. 4, 2020 in Washington. (AP Photo/Alex Brandon)
|
Alex Brandon/AP Photo

A representative for the Office of the Director of National Intelligence declined to comment. A spokesperson for the CIA referred questions about the broader engagement with Congress to the National Security Council but added: “CIA is committed to continued and robust engagement with intelligence oversight on our work to care for affected officers and to determine the cause of these anomalous health incidents.”

“In our first 100 days, the Biden administration had both more open and closed member and staff engagements on this issue than the entire Trump administration,” said National Security Council spokesperson Emily Horne. “We will keep working closely with Congress on this issue and very much appreciate efforts by members to support improved access to medical care for impacted individuals.”

Complicating matters further is the fact that in addition to the intelligence panels, the House and Senate Armed Services committees are pushing for additional information on the attacks, which have also impacted Defense Department personnel. The Pentagon, which launched a task force on the suspected attacks last year, has been briefing both committees and told lawmakers last month that the threat against U.S. personnel was growing and urgent.

The investigation has intensified in recent months, and now includes all 18 agencies of the U.S. intelligence community. Burns in particular has stepped up his personal involvement in the matter.

“There are a lot of entities within the government looking at this,” Warner said. “We need to have it better coordinated, and I think there’s a level of seriousness given to this now that, frankly, was not there until Director Burns came and made this a priority.”

At a Senate Armed Services Committee hearing on Tuesday, Shaheen pressed Biden’s pick to be the Pentagon’s top civilian intelligence official, Ronald Moultrie, on making more information about the mysterious attacks publicly available. The details released have been “very dispersed” and “very classified,” Shaheen said.

“Sometimes I’m not sure that one agency talks to the other agency in terms of what we’re doing,” she added.

Shaheen urged Moultrie to push for an “unclassified accounting” to ensure lawmakers and the public get “consistent information” on directed-energy attacks.

Moultrie vowed he would “find ways to disseminate this information to our citizens and to those who need to know in our installations and facilities around the world.”

Lara Seligman and Connor O’Brien contributed to this report.

Vladimir Putin is setting “no limits” on how much territory he seeks to snatch in his war on Ukraine, defense analysts have warned.

According to a new report from a leading U.S. thinktank, the Russian president and his Kremlin staff have “intentionally set no limits to their objectives of conquest in Ukraine and have suggested repeatedly that areas outside of Kherson, Zaporizhia, Donetsk, and Luhansk oblasts are part of Russia.”

The Institute for the Study of War (ISW) added that Russia sees a strategic need to maintain military operations on multiple fronts to prevent Ukraine from successfully conducting a counter-offensive.

Nicole Wolkov, Russia Researcher for the ISW, told Newsweek that Russia’s plans to “protract” the war will incentivize Putin to set new territorial objectives.

Russian President Vladimir Putin attends a wreath-laying ceremony at the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier by the Kremlin wall to commemorate the 83rd anniversary of the Nazi German invasion of the Soviet Union in 1941…
Russian President Vladimir Putin attends a wreath-laying ceremony at the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier by the Kremlin wall to commemorate the 83rd anniversary of the Nazi German invasion of the Soviet Union in 1941 Sergey Guneev/AP

“Russia is making creeping gains to advance in Ukraine to protract the war, prevent Ukraine from conducting significant counter-offensive operations, and outlast Western security support for Ukraine,” the ISW said.

Wolkov added: “Putin likely assesses that that he can leverage Russia’s ability to maintain the initiative during that time to seize more territory. A protracted war would also provide Russia with time to continue to expand its defense industrial base and generate manpower.”

The ISW warned that a protracted war will “incentivize” Putin to explicitly set new territorial objectives as long as he believes Ukrainian forces cannot hold back his advances nor conduct meaningful counter-offensives to regain lost territory.

“Russian officials have routinely denied the existence of Ukrainian statehood and culture and have indicated their interest in territories on lands beyond these four oblasts”, the ISW said.

The ISW also stressed the importance of delivering military aid swiftly to help turn the tide of the war in Ukraine’s favor.

“If weapons are delivered in a timely fashion and consistently, this could help Ukraine conduct offensive operations,” Wolokov said amid the ongoing conflict.

It comes after documents obtained by the Washington Post suggest Russia accidentally dropped glide bombs on its territory nearly at least 38 times.

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky said Russia fired hundreds of glide bombs at his country in the last week.

Putin speaks during a press briefing with Vietnamese President To Lam at the Presidential Palace in Hanoi
Putin speaks during a press briefing with Vietnamese President To Lam at the Presidential Palace in Hanoi
Minh Hoang/AP

Writing on X, he said: “This week alone, Russia has used more than 800 guided aerial bombs against Ukraine. Against our cities and communities, against our people, against everything that makes life normal”

Glide bombs are Soviet-era munitions that have been modified to include wings and navigation systems that allow for a gliding flight path to a target. The bombs can have a payload of 1.5 tonnes.

The gliding additions allow bombs to travel much further as the heavy weaponry is fitted with precision guidance systems and launched from an aircraft flying out of range of air defenses.

Ukraine dismissed allegations from Belarus that it was amassing troops to reinforce their shared border. The Belarusian Defence Ministry claimed on Sunday that Ukraine was moving troops and weapons to the border.

Border guard spokesman Andriy Demchenko told Ukrainian TV: “It is not the first time Belarus offers information about Ukraine presenting a threat and strengthening itself. This is another part of the information operation conducted by Belarus with support by Russia.

Do you have a story we should be covering? Do you have any questions about this article? Contact LiveNews@newsweek.com

A highly anticipated ruling by the Supreme Court that former presidents enjoy wide-ranging immunity for their official acts while in the White House was repeatedly praised by former President Trump in the hours after the high court’s blockbuster opinion.

“BRILLIANTLY WRITTEN AND WISE,” Trump wrote in a social media post about the ruling, which likely dealt a major blow to the ongoing prosecution of Trump on charges he aimed to subvert his 2020 election loss to President Biden.

“THE SUPREME COURT DECISION IS A MUCH MORE POWERFUL ONE THAN SOME HAD EXPECTED IT TO BE,” Trump spotlighted.

The move on Monday by the conservative-dominated court – including three justices nominated by Trump – means that the trial judge in the lower court case against Trump will now have to hold hearings on whether the charges against Trump were based on official acts by the then-president or unofficial ones. 

WHAT TRUMP TOLD FOX NEWS ABOUT THE SUPREME COURT RULING

That process will take time, and it’s extremely unlikely Trump will go on trial for trying to overturn the 2020 election before voters cast ballots in the 2024 rematch between the former president and his Democratic successor.

Trump called it a “big win for our Constitution and for democracy” during an exclusive interview with Fox News’ Brooke Singman.

TRUMP IMMUNITY CASE: SUPREME COURT RULES EX-PRESIDENTS HAVE SUBSTANTIAL PROTECTION FROM PROSECUTION

But Biden principal deputy campaign manager Quentin Fulks, in a conference call with reporters, charged that “this decision will give Donald Trump cover to do exactly what he’s been saying he wants to do for months, which is enact revenge and retribution against his political enemies.”

“This is a pivotal moment for our country. The conservative justices on the court, three of whom are only there because of Donald Trump, just made it easier for him to pursue a path to a dictatorship,” Fulks argued.

A major question going forward is what kind of impact the Supreme Court ruling on presidential immunity will have on the Biden-Trump rematch with just over four months to go until the November election.

The president has long charged that Trump is a threat to democracy and his argument is a central tenant of his campaign for a second term in the White House.

And in an address Monday night, Biden hammered home the point.

“The American people must decide if Trump’s embrace of violence to preserve his power is acceptable. Perhaps most importantly, the American people must decide if they want to entrust the presidency to Donald Trump once again. Now knowing, he’ll be even more emboldened to do whatever he pleases, whenever he wants to do it,” the president emphasized.

Some Biden supporters see a silver lining in the move by the Supreme Court.

Longtime Democratic strategist and presidential campaign veteran Maria Carodona said the “ruling is a shot in the arm to voters who care about our democracy, our Constitution, and the rule of law. It is a shot in the arm for them to work their butts off to elect President Biden because the Supreme Court ruling was a victory for one person, Donald Trump, and it was a huge loss for the country, and our democracy.”

Voters need to understand that presidents matter when it comes to the make up of the court. Today’s dangerous decision that came out of the Trump-molded MAGA court is proof of that,” Cardona, a committee member on the Democratic National Committee, argued.

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP 

Democratic strategist Joe Caiazzo, another veteran of multiple presidential campaigns, emphasized that voters will remember the ruling when they cast their ballot in the autumn.

“The stakes of the election continue to grow as this activist court has attacked reproductive rights, environmental protection and now the integrity of the ability to hold elected officials accountable for their actions. Voters will remember this in November,” Caiazzo said.

But longtime Republican consultant and communicator Ryan Williams, who served on a handful of GOP presidential campaigns, spotlighted that the ruling “makes it less likely Trump will be in courtrooms before the election. That’s a win for Trump.”

“The general consensus was that the more serious charges were in the federal cases and by moving them to after the election, they are removed as a distraction during the campaign,” Ryan added. “Trump can now continue to campaign and focus on the election rather than preparing for trial prior to Election Day. That’s a win for him.”

Get the latest updates from the 2024 campaign trail, exclusive interviews and more at our Fox News Digital election hub.

EPA

Ultra-Orthodox Jews in full time study have been exempt from conscription since the beginning of the state

Anadolu via Getty Images

Clashes erupted in Jerusalem between Israeli police and ultra-Orthodox Jews over the weekend

Rabbi Yehoshua Pfeffer has called on the army to improve its relationship with the ultra-Orthodox community

Western leaders are becoming increasingly frustrated by China’s role in enabling the war in Ukraine. Some have even openly threatened to sanction the country if it continues to provide Russia with the materials it needs to build more weapons.

And they are right to focus on China’s position of power. Russia is now so dependent on the only major economy still taking the risk to support its regime, that China could effectively force Vladimir Putin to end the conflict.

The extent of Russia’s economic dependence became apparent fairly quickly after its full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022. Just a few months later, things were not going to plan.

In the hope of putting pressure on European countries supporting Ukraine, Russia decided to cut almost all of its exports of gas to the west. Before the war, Russia had provided about 40% of Europe’s gas.

While at first that decision provoked an energy crisis and a surge in bills across the continent, Europe eventually managed to wean itself from Russia’s supply. They did this in part by replacing gas with other sources of energy, but also by substituting Russian imports with gas from other countries, including the US.

Electricity prices in Europe are now roughly back to pre-war levels. And while gas prices are still high, they have dropped, with storage facilities expected to be almost full later this year.

So now Russia faces a massive problem of its own: selling its gas.

For the first time in over 20 years, the Russian state-owned energy giant Gazprom sustained a financial loss in 2023. Until then, the custom and tax revenues from the company contributed around 10% of the country’s budget.

Revenue from oil exports has also decreased. As western countries have banned Russian oil, the country is forced to sell it for less, absorbing the additional costs of transporting production to the likes of China and India while mainstream transporters refuse to risk carrying it.

As for natural gas, geography makes things even worse for Russia. China is the only potential customer large enough to justify a new pipeline to replace the ones which used to deliver to Europe. But given this privileged position, China feels able to demand the gas at a huge discount.

In this kind of bargaining situation, China has the upper hand.

China can buy gas from anywhere in the world, but Russia can only sell it (at the volumes it needs) to China. Then there is the question of urgency – Russia needs to finance a war now, while China has no pressing energy need it cannot fulfil.

Bargaining basement

Russia’s dependence on China applies to other sectors of the economy too. The Chinese yuan now accounts for 54% of trades in Russia’s stock exchange since it was cut off from the global banking system in 2022. It has no credible alternative to replace that money if China started to apply similar sanctions.

Even more crucial for the war, China is responsible for around 90% of Russia’s import of “high priority” dual-use goods – electronic components, radars, sensors – without which it could not build advanced military hardware. Again, there is no alternative supplier.

It is hard to win a war with only North Korea and Iran – two countries themselves subject to heavy economic sanctions – on your side. In short, this means that China is now in a position to demand anything from Russia.

Aftermath of a June 2024 bomb attack in Ukraine. EPA-EFE/SERGEY KOZLOV

And in potential negotiations between China and the west, both have much to gain – and a similar bargaining position to each other.

For example, China is facing considerable domestic economic problems of its own. One of these stems from industrial overcapacity and the need to find buyers for all the products it manufactures.

But the US has just imposed a 100% border tax on electric cars from China, and 50% on solar cells. The EU is doing something similar and considering asking Chinese firms to make electric vehicles in Europe, sharing their technology.

Taxing cheap products which could reduce carbon emissions may seem like a self-defeating strategy given the urgent need to finance the energy transition. So perhaps the west wants to avoid becoming too dependent on China, for the same bargaining reasons that make Russia’s current position so weak.

But the balance is not the same. China needs western markets, and the west need China’s green industrial capacity and know-how, as the country now installs more renewable capacity every year than the rest of the world combined.

Europe is still facing difficult economic times, and a tariff is essentially an extra tax burden on European consumers. Everyone would benefit from the trade war toning down, and China has something very valuable to offer. For to all intents and purposes, it now owns Russia, and could use this power to end the war in Ukraine.

Russian intelligence operatives using energy weapons may have been behind Havana Syndrome, according to a new investigation into the mysterious and debilitating condition that struck U.S. personnel in Cuba.

“Unexplained anomalous health incidents, also known as Havana Syndrome, may have their origin in the use of directed energy weapons” used by Russia’s foreign military intelligence agency, the GRU, according to a joint investigation published by independent Russian outlet The Insider, CBS‘ 60 Minutes and German news website Der Spiegel.

The new report pinpointed one unit, referred to as the 29155, as responsible.

The U.S. Embassy in Havana on October 3, 2017. Russian intelligence operatives may have been behind Havana Syndrome, according to a new investigation into the mysterious and debilitating condition that struck U.S. personnel in Cuba…
The U.S. Embassy in Havana on October 3, 2017. Russian intelligence operatives may have been behind Havana Syndrome, according to a new investigation into the mysterious and debilitating condition that struck U.S. personnel in Cuba from 2016. YAMIL LAGE/AFP via Getty Images

Unusual symptoms were first identified by U.S. officials at the embassy in Havana in 2016.Those affected by the condition reported a range of symptoms, including memory loss, problems with hearing, insomnia and what appeared to be evidence of brain injury. More than 1,000 people in the U.S. and elsewhere are thought to be affected by Havana Syndrome, which U.S. intelligence officially terms “anomalous health incidents.”

According to the new joint investigation, the first of the “attacks” may have been recorded in Frankfurt, Germany, in 2014.

The three outlets “uncovered documentary evidence that Unit 29155 has been experimenting with exactly the kind of weaponized technology experts suggest is a plausible cause for the mysterious medical condition” referred to as Havana Syndrome, the investigation added.

Senior members of Unit 29155 were praised and rewarded for efforts related to “non-lethal acoustic weapons,” The Insider wrote. Unit 29155 operatives “have been geolocated to places around the world just before or at the time of reported anomalous health incidents,” the outlet added.

Speculation has long focused on some form of energy or acoustic weapon as possibly responsible for the symptoms displayed by U.S. officials in Cuba and elsewhere.

David Relman, a professor of medicine at Stanford University, told CBS News in February 2022 that research into the symptoms appeared to show “clear evidence of an injury to the auditory and vestibular system of the brain.”

A study published by the National Institutes of Health in March offered no further insight into the causes of the condition.

In March 2023, a U.S. intelligence investigation concluded that it was “very unlikely” that a foreign adversary was behind the symptoms.

“There is no credible evidence that a foreign adversary has a weapon or collection device” causing the symptoms, the report added. U.S officials said the lack of explanation did not discredit the symptoms described by U.S. personnel and their family members.

Update 4/1/2024 at 4:40 a.m. ET: This article was updated with additional information.

“It’s not my work. It is my existence.”

This simple statement from a Latvian captain participating in the Northern Raven combined collection operation clarified the grave importance he, and many of his fellow analysts from the Baltics, placed on this particular mission. To them, Russia is an existential threat, and the insight this week-long combined open-source intelligence collection operation—the largest in NATO’s history—provided was critical to understanding Russian actions and intentions. Under the auspices of Northern Raven—US Army Europe and Africa’s multinational open-source intelligence (OSINT) program—thirty analysts representing eleven countries had gathered in Finland to collect OSINT, guided by a collection plan developed six months earlier.

While this operation marked the culmination of months of work, its roots stretched back to 2019 when Soldiers from the 66th Military Intelligence Brigade (Theater) met with Polish partners in Bydgoszcz, Poland to collect OSINT on Russian cyberattacks. The operation demonstrated the powerful effect partners can achieve when they align their capabilities: the Poles provided linguistic knowledge while the Americans employed data-mining tools to streamline collection. More bilateral exchanges followed with Canadian, Finnish, Croatian, and Romanian partners. By 2023, Northern Raven had expanded to include staff visits as well as training events and seminars in OSINT tradecraft best practices.

Though Northern Raven had grown in number of participants, its members were not collaborating with one another, just with their American partners. The program’s hub-and-spoke structure—with the United States at the center—didn’t encourage communication among other participants. To maximize its effectiveness and leverage partners’ collection strengths, Northern Raven needed to expand its charter. The solution was to provide a common purpose and operationalize the network—to bring everyone under one roof for a combined collection operation that would harness the expertise of all members and incorporate each step of the intelligence cycle: plan and direct, collect, process and exploit, analyze and produce, disseminate, and assess.

Merging the intelligence priorities, collection methods, and analytic techniques of eleven countries required careful planning. In December 2023, the Army Europe Open Source Center (AEOSC)—the OSINT cell of the 66th Military Intelligence Brigade (Theater)—hosted partners in Wiesbaden for a working group to define and direct collection requirements. This led to the creation of the first standing Northern Raven collection plan, which set requirements for fiscal year 2024. Rather than attempting during the operation to temporarily synchronize collection efforts designed to address divergent priorities, partners hardwired interoperability into their intelligence activities from the start.

In the months after the working group, partners communicated regularly on the results of their collection. They shared requests for information, refined the collection plan, and uploaded relevant products to the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency’s Protected Internet eXchange (PIX) website, a secure but unclassified US government-sponsored information dissemination and sharing tool. Such routine collaboration transformed intelligence sharing from ad hoc exchanges—uncoordinated and often reliant on strong personal relationships—to formalized practice. Cooperation was persistent and focused on shared requirements, rather than episodic.

Eleven NATO nations gathered in Riihimäki, Finland in May 2024 for the culminating combined collection operation. Once in Finland, the group divided into five collection teams based on preassigned requirements. Each was structured to reflect a range of skills, nationalities, and collection capabilities. Partners with access to nonstandard tools such as the AI-powered Babel Street Insights platform were placed on different teams while each team was allocated at least one Russian speaker. The fact that most European partners were permitted to use burner phones to create accounts on social media platforms significantly enhanced the group’s ability to provide critical information to commanders. The organizational structure was decidedly flat: participants operated as a constellation of dynamic teams, experimenting and improvising with the best techniques for collection, processing, and exploitation.

For example, when a partner stumbled across a Telegram post by a Ukrainian milblogger that listed towns where Russian forces were alleged to be unloading equipment, he passed the locations to a member of his team currently serving in a cyber defense unit. Using a Python script he developed, the programmer-turned-intel officer was able to extract usernames and photos associated with Telegram accounts in the area. (Several photos featured soldiers posing in uniform, their unit patches clearly visible.) The partner plugged the usernames into other Russian social media platforms to gather more information before passing the photos to another colleague who proceeded to geolocate some of the buildings. After performing additional searches, the partner discovered videos of the same unit in three of the identified locations, corroborating his colleagues’ earlier findings. With this information, the team was able to map the logistical and transit routes taken by units moving toward Kharkiv.

By leveraging partners’ complementary strengths—whether regional knowledge, language ability, or access to specialized tools—Northern Raven created powerful synergies. Months of planning had bred trust and a shared sense of the operation’s overarching purpose. Everyone owned the mission. This made the teams agile and adaptive, able to craft a coordinated response to real-time developments.

Pooling partners’ skill sets and best practices expanded and sharpened the collection and processing of intelligence. It also reinforced the need to better integrate emerging technologies into OSINT operations. Northern Raven presents a unique opportunity to combine these activities: improving interoperability with partners and embracing new technologies to collect and evaluate open-source information. To that end, partners are creating a repository on a software developers’ platform that allows members to create, store, manage, and share their code. This enables partners to exchange tools and technical data, including software, map layers, AI models, and OSINT source lists. Its goals are twofold: to improve efficiency by sharing resources and increase interoperability through the use of common formats for data exchange. The platform could also serve as a test bed for technologies that hold the potential to unlock deeper and wider data-driven insights. By tapping the rich vein of Northern Raven’s growing network, NATO allies can capitalize on existing efforts to develop and adopt new capabilities.

While it is too soon to draw firm conclusions about the impact of Northern Raven’s approach to partner relationships, several initial takeaways emerge. First, it is not enough to set requirements and build collection plans together; to increase buy-in, the United States must empower partners to shape the collection effort in areas of particular importance to their intelligence enterprises. An approach that centers partners in the pursuit of their own priorities—areas where they are likely to possess special expertise—also optimizes collection capabilities, allowing for greater burden-sharing.

Second, partners must build ownership for Northern Raven among their leadership and secure resources. While AEOSC has lent structure and predictability to multinational OSINT—formalizing its processes and programming—long-term success will depend on sustained funding and organizational buy-in. As NATO members establish permanent OSINT organizations within their militaries, Northern Raven can serve as a unifying operation by which all analysts regularly coordinate and communicate, but that will also require programmed, predictable budgets.

Next, from a US Army perspective, Army OSINT must develop a rigorous framework for assessing the effectiveness of Northern Raven’s burgeoning suite of programs. Doing so will require the AEOSC to articulate what it wants to accomplish and identify the causal relationships that link Northern Raven’s activities to those outcomes. The team’s members must continuously ask themselves: What is working, what is not, and how does this achieve commanders’ requirements?

To meet the demands of this comprehensive approach to partner engagement, OSINT teams may also need to create new roles and responsibilities for their soldiers. The AEOSC created a new position, the partner integration lead, responsible for securing PIX and Digital Globe accounts for partners, as well as a dissemination manager to improve the reach—and track the circulation—of multinational products. To mitigate training shortfalls among partners, the AEOSC developed an exportable OSINT course, tailored for both in-person and virtual learning environments, which noncommissioned officers on the team instruct.

These types of activities not only present US soldiers with unique and meaningful opportunities, but also provide a purpose that increases their commitment to Army service. Exposure to new tools and data practices deepens their OSINT tradecraft knowledge while frequent interactions with partners prepare them to operate in culturally diverse coalition environments. Northern Raven also serves as a retention incentive. As one soldier remarked recently, “If I got out of the Army, I wouldn’t be able to call my mom and say, ‘Today I helped Sweden stand up its OSINT shop.’”

In less than a year, Northern Raven has evolved from a series of bilateral engagements into persistent cooperation across the entire intelligence cycle. Northern Raven enhances units’ readiness, preparing soldiers from all nations to write OSINT products that can be quickly released for consumption across the coalition. Training between partners, with real data on real networks, builds OSINT capacity across Europe, bringing us closer to a world in which every ally is a sensor. Finally, Northern Raven’s evolution into a multifaceted program integral to day-to-day operations creates opportunities for professional growth while exposure to partners’ analytic techniques upskills every analyst in the operation.

Though barriers to cooperation remain, relationships are no longer confined to physical engagement. Partners plan, train, and operate as one multinational team. With US and NATO military planning increasingly integrated, the ability to merge national-level processes into a single operation that capitalizes on partner expertise has never been more important. Knowing the enemy through open-source intelligence is not just our work, it is our intelligence team’s central purpose.

Colonel Christina Bembenek is the commander of the 66th Military Intelligence Brigade (Theater). She has served in multiple tactical, operational, and strategic intelligence assignments and was the first commandant of the Military Intelligence Corps.

Captain Chels Michta was the former officer in charge of the Army Europe OSINT Center and currently serves as an intelligence officer in the 66th Military Intelligence Brigade (Theater) All Source Control Element. She is also a 2023 Atlantic Council Millenium Fellow.

The views expressed are those of the authors and do not reflect the official position of the United States Military Academy, Department of the Army, or Department of Defense.

Image credit: Staff Sgt. Chad Menegay, US Army

A majority of voters want Joe Biden to stand down following his dismal debate performance, yet aren’t convinced there is a suitable alternative Democratic candidate, new polls have found.

In a Morning Consult poll, 60% of respondents, Republicans and Democrats, said the president should be replaced by his party for November’s election, while another 11% were unsure.

But the same poll also found that Biden’s popularity, initially at least, appeared to be unaffected by his stumbles and gaffes during Thursday night’s debate with Republican presumptive nominee Donald Trump.

He retained a one-point advantage, 45-44% over Trump, the same margin as Morning Consult found the day after the former president was convicted in May on 34 charges of falsifying business records to try to influence the 2016 election.

Another apparent glimmer of hope for the incumbent came in a separate Data for Progress post-debate poll that found no indication any other Democrat would perform better against Trump in November.

While Biden trails Trump 48-45 among respondents, all other leading Democratic figures would perform the same or worse in a head-to-head match-up. Prominent names that voters were asked about included vice-president Kamala Harris (45-48), transport secretary Pere Buttigieg (44-47), California governor Gavin Newsom (44-47) and Michigan governor Gretchen Whitmer (44-46).

A YouGov poll, meanwhile, found respondents overwhelmingly thought Trump won the debate, and that 30% of Democrats believed somebody other than Biden would give the party the best chance of winning in November.

The figure rises to 49% among all US voters, including Republicans and independents. Conversely, only 13% of Republicans believe their party’s best chance of victory would come by nominating somebody other than Trump.

One of the most devastating polls for Biden, however, was a Democracy Corps survey of Democratic-leaning voters, who used words such as “confused”, “frail”, and “dementia” to describe the president’s debate performance, Politico reported.

Voters were surveyed before and after the debate. While 65% said they would vote for Biden before the debate, only 54% said he won the debate once it ended, according to the survey.

Harris, 59, is the obvious choice to replace Biden, if he stands down, and has been the subject of increasing speculation in the days since the debate.

But Biden allies have insisted the president is standing firm and will contest and win the election, despite anguished calls from senior party officials and media heavyweights, including the New York Times, for him to step aside.

According to the Data for Progress poll, most voters consider Biden, who will be 82 at the start of a second term, too old to run again. 53% said they were concerned about his age, and physical and mental health, while 42% said they were more concerned by Trump’s criminal conviction, other upcoming trials and threats to democracy.

A CBS poll released Sunday, recorded in the two days following the debate, appears to echo the findings of the other surveys. It found 72% of registered voters did not believe Biden possessed the mental or cognitive health necessary to be able to fulfil the obligations of office, up from 65% at the beginning of the month.

A breakdown of the Morning Consult poll, meanwhile, shows that almost half of Democrats, 47%, want Biden out of the race, compared to 59% of independents, and 74% of Republicans. The figure among Democrats rises to 50% when limited to those who actually watched the debate.

That poll also suggests there is no clear replacement for Biden. Harris leads the field, but with only 30% support of Democratic voters, with Newsom the only other potential candidate in double figures, at 20%.

Others listed include Buttigieg at 9% and Whitmer at 5%, with a string of other Democratic state governors, Andy Beshear, Roy Cooper, JB Pritzker and Wes Moore at 3% or below.

Since the debate, Newsom has forcefully defended Biden and insisted he will not challenge the president. Harris has also expressed confidence in Biden, stating after the debate that the November presidential election “will not be decided by one night in June”.

Biden, 81, meanwhile, was huddling with family members at the Camp David presidential retreat on Sunday.

The New York Times cited people close to the situation as saying that Biden’s family were urging him to stay in the race and keep fighting. The paper said some members of his clan privately expressed exasperation at how his staff prepared him for Thursday night’s event.

A drumbeat of calls for Biden to step aside has continued since Thursday and a post-debate CBS poll showed a 10-point jump in the number of Democrats who believe Biden should not be running for president, to 46% from 36% in February.

“The unfortunate truth is that Biden should withdraw from the race, for the good of the nation he has served so admirably for half a century,” the Atlanta Journal-Constitution said in an editorial on Sunday. “The shade of retirement is now necessary for President Biden.”

Democratic leaders rejected this.

“Absolutely not,” responded Georgia Democratic Senator Raphael Warnock, one of several Democrats seen as a possible replacement for Biden.

“Bad debates happen,” he told NBC’s Meet the Press program. “The question is, ‘Who has Donald Trump ever shown up for other than himself and people like himself?’ I’m with Joe Biden, and it’s our assignment to make sure that he gets over the finish line come November.”

House of Representatives Democratic leader Hakeem Jeffries, who could become speaker next year if his party can take control of the House in November, acknowledged that Biden had suffered a setback, but this was “nothing more than a setup for a comeback.”

“So the moment that we’re in right now is a comeback moment,” he told MSNBC.

Senator Chris Coons of Delaware, a leading Biden surrogate, told ABC’s This Week program Biden needed to stay in the race to ensure Trump’s defeat.

“I think he’s the only Democrat who can beat Donald Trump,” Coons said.

With Democratic leaders rallying around him, it will be up to Biden to decide whether he wants to end his re-election bid.

But other Democrats held open the possibility of choosing a different presidential candidate.

Representative Jamie Raskin, a prominent Democrat in Congress, told MSNBC that “very honest and serious and rigorous conversations” were taking place within the party.

“Whether he’s the candidate or someone else is the candidate, he’s going to be the keynote speaker at our convention. He will be the figure that we rally around to move forward,” Raskin said.

For his part in the debate, Trump made a series of well-worn falsehoods, including claims that migrants have carried out a crime wave, that Democrats support infanticide and that he actually won the 2020 election.

Trump’s daughter-in-law Lara, co-chair of the Republican National Committee, told Fox News that Trump was feeling “great” after “probably the best debate of his political career.”

While the Camp David trip had been planned for months, the timing and circumstances of Biden being surrounded by family members who have weighed heavily in his past decisions to run for the presidency have added to the scrutiny around the visit.

Two people familiar with the scheduling said the gathering would include a family photo shoot. The attendees include his wife Jill, as well as the Biden children and grandchildren.

DNC Chairman Jaime Harrison and Biden campaign manager Julie Chavez Rodriguez held a Saturday afternoon call with dozens of committee members across the country, a group of some of the most influential members of the party.

The call was part pep talk, part planning meeting for the upcoming national convention, according to two people who were on the call who requested anonymity to discuss private discussions.

Sign up here.

Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles., opens new tab

President Biden and Dr. Jill Biden leave a campaign rally in Raleigh, N.C., on Friday. Photo: Elizabeth Frantz/Reuters

President Joe Biden’s shaky performance in Thursday’s debate has prompted calls from some left-wing pundits for him to drop out of the race and allow Democrats to appoint another candidate in his place—an unprecedented scenario that would require Biden loyalists to spurn the president, who has so far said he will continue his campaign.

President Joe Biden looks down as he participates in the first presidential debate of the 2024 … [+] election with former US President and Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump at CNN’s studios in Atlanta, Georgia, on June 27, 2024. (Photo by ANDREW CABALLERO-REYNOLDS/AFP via Getty Images)

AFP via Getty Images

The party plans to vote for a nominee before the convention begins on Aug. 19 via virtual roll call to allow Biden to be on the ballot in Ohio, which requires presidential candidates be nominated at least 90 days before the November election (in this case Aug. 7). The party has not announced an official date for the virtual roll call.

Contra

Biden rejected suggestions that he should step aside in speaking to reporters after the debate, answering “no” when asked about the prospect and blaming his poor performance on former President Donald Trump. “It’s hard to debate a liar,” Biden said, before telling supporters in Atlanta in a post-debate speech “let’s keep going.” On Friday, Biden delivered a fiery speech from Raleigh, North Carolina, in which he sounded notably more energetic than he did the previous night and reiterated his plans to keep running, admitting “I don’t debate as well as I used to.”

Any candidate who were to challenge Biden at the convention would need to first select a running mate.

Tangent

Speculation has swirled for months about who could replace Biden as the Democratic nominee amid concerns about the 81-year-old president’s age. Vice President Kamala Harris is the most obvious choice to replace him, though she has an uphill battle in winning over voters given her 39% approval rating. California Gov. Gavin Newsom is another name commonly floated, but he’s repeatedly dismissed the prospects of replacing Biden, voicing his allegiance to the president in interviews after the debate. As of Friday morning, no prominent Democrats had openly called on him to step down and there is no public consensus within the party about who would replace Biden if he did.

Key Background

Biden stammered through Thursday’s debate, losing his train of thought minutes after it began, speaking with a hoarse voice throughout the 90-minute program, and giving incoherent responses to several questions. Abysmal reviews poured in on social media, even from some of Trump’s staunchest critics, and by the end of the debate, Democratic operatives, donors and elected officials were reportedly discussing replacing Biden. By Friday morning, Biden-friendly pundits, including MSNBC’s “Morning Joe” host, Joe Scarborough, and New York Times’ columnist Thomas Friedman were openly suggesting Biden should drop out, predicting that if Democrats don’t replace him now, they’re effectively handing Trump another term.

Morning Joe’s Joe Scarborough Gently Suggests Biden Should Drop Out Amid Dem Freak Out Over Debate Performance (Forbes)

Biden Loses Train Of Thought And Corrects Himself Repeatedly In Debate With Trump (Forbes)

Biden’s Debate Performance Torched—Even By Trump Foes—Over Weak Voice And Verbal Stumbles: ‘Hard To Watch (Forbes)