Vance opposition to Ukraine aid irks Europeans

In February this year, European political and foreign policy elite heard directly from Senator JD Vance on his opposition to military aid for Ukraine and his blunt warning that Europe will have to rely less on the United States to defend the continent.

If those comments at the annual Munich Security Conference were a first wake-up call, alarm bells are now ringing loudly across the continent after Republican Donald Trump picked Vance as his vice presidential candidate for November's US election.

"His selection as the running mate is worrying for Europe," said Ricarda Lang, co-leader of the German Green party that is part of Chancellor Olaf Scholz's government, who took part in a panel discussion with Vance in Munich.

Vance stoked fears in Europe that if Trump returns to the White House, he will drop, or curb, US support for Kyiv and push Ukraine into peace negotiations to end the war that would give Moscow a substantial slice of Ukraine and embolden Russian President Vladimir Putin to pursue further military adventures.

That view was bolstered by a letter to EU leaders from Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban, who visited Trump last week. Orban, a Trump ally, said the ex-president will be "ready to act as a peace broker immediately" if he wins in November.

Lang said on X that Vance had made very clear in Munich how quickly he and Trump would "deliver Ukraine to Putin".

At the Munich conference, Vance said Putin did not pose an existential threat to Europe, and Americans and Europeans could not provide enough munitions to defeat Russia in Ukraine.

He suggested the United States' strategic priorities lay more in Asia and the Middle East.

"There are a lot of bad guys all over the world. And I'm much more interested in some of the problems in East Asia right now than I am in Europe," he told the conference.

Speaking on a podcast with Trump ally Steve Bannon in 2022, Vance said, "I don't really care what happens in Ukraine one way or the other."

In Munich, he advocated for a "negotiated peace" and said he thought Russia had an incentive to come to the table

That stance is in stark contrast with the view of most European leaders, who argue the West should continue to support Ukraine massively with military aid and say they see no sign of Putin being willing to engage in serious negotiations.

Vance also voted against a US funding bill for Ukraine that eventually passed in April. In a New York Times op-ed justifying his vote, he argued Kyiv and Washington must abandon Ukraine's goal of returning to its 1991 borders with Russia.

Nils Schmid, the foreign policy spokesperson of Scholz's Social Democrat party - said he had observed Vance in Munich and concluded the senator saw himself as Trump's mouthpiece.

"He takes an even more radical stance on Ukraine than Trump and wants to end military support. In terms of foreign policy, he is more isolationist than Trump," Schmid told Reuters.

But some cautioned against jumping to conclusions about Vance, who was born into an impoverished home in southern Ohio.

"JD Vance is a devout Christian and the circumstances of his childhood give me great hope that he, like Speaker Mike Johnson, will conclude that US support for Ukraine is the only option," said Melinda Haring, a senior adviser for Razom for Ukraine, a US-based charitable organization that advocates for Ukraine.

"While Vance has come out strongly against Ukraine, he hasn’t been in a top job and as vice president I expect to see his views evolve."

Some diplomats also cautioned that the US election was far from over.

"We need to stop creating a self-fulfilling prophecy. Trump hasn’t won and Biden hasn’t lost," said a French diplomat.

In Ukraine, politicians were wary of criticizing Vance openly, as they may have to deal with him as US vice president. But some acknowledged harboring concerns.

Oleksiy Honcharenko, a lawmaker from the opposition European Solidarity party, said he had met Vance at the Munich conference and found him to be "a very intelligent and cool-headed man".

"Is there any concern about Vance's statements? Of course. The US is our biggest and most important ally," he told Reuters.

"We must remain allies and show the US that Ukraine not only needs help, but can help itself."

Maryan Zablotskyy, a lawmaker for President Volodymyr Zelenskiy's Servant of the People party, argued Russia was harming US interests on many fronts. He said any US politician pursuing an America First agenda "will never be positive towards Russia".

 

 

Changing Indian foreign policy under Modi

The United States has recently issued a bold call for India to realign its foreign policy, urging it to move away from its current stance of peacemaker and instead align more closely with American interests, particularly in countering China.

This shift was prompted by Prime Minister Narendra Modi's recent visits to Austria and Russia, where his embrace of President Vladimir Putin drew criticism from US Ambassador Eric Garcetti.

Garcetti emphasized the need for concrete actions, suggesting India should stand with the US and NATO, possibly even supporting Ukraine against Russia.

Under Modi, India has engaged in military exercises in the South China Sea as part of the QUAD alliance, signaling a departure from its traditionally non-aligned stance.

However, Modi's approach to the Ukraine-Russia conflict, characterized by neutrality, has drawn scrutiny and criticism in Western circles, which view India's stance as opportunistic rather than principled.

Historically, India under leaders like Nehru and later Indira Gandhi maintained a policy of non-alignment and emphasized principles like sovereignty, non-aggression, and peaceful coexistence. Despite occasional conflicts with Pakistan and defiance of Western pressures on nuclear issues, India generally upheld a neutral stance in global affairs.

Modi's tenure has seen a significant increase in foreign engagements, including numerous trips abroad and strategic dialogues with major powers like China and the US.

However, his handling of relations, particularly with China, has been marked by fluctuating dynamics, highlighted by border disputes and military confrontations like the Galwan Valley clash.

Critics, including opposition leader Rahul Gandhi, accuse Modi of erratic diplomacy lacking a coherent strategy, particularly concerning China, Russia, and the United States.

Despite political divisions, past Indian governments maintained a relatively consistent foreign policy, which Modi's administration has diverged from, potentially complicating India's regional and global relationships.

Looking ahead, Modi faces challenges in reconciling India's foreign policy shifts with regional and global expectations, particularly in responding to calls from allies like the US to take a more definitive stance in global conflicts.

The balancing act between asserting India's sovereignty and navigating international partnerships remains a delicate task for his administration.

While Modi has reshaped India's global engagements, criticisms over inconsistency and strategic clarity persist, posing ongoing challenges for India's foreign policy direction under his leadership.

Houthis target more vessels in retaliation

According to Reuters, Yemen's Houthis targeted three vessels, including an oil tanker, in the Red and Mediterranean seas with ballistic missiles, drones and booby-trapped boats.

Houthi military spokesperson Yahya Saree said the latest Houthi military operations were a response to the Israeli airstrike on the southern Gaza Strip city of Khan Younis on Saturday, an attack that killed at least 90 Palestinians and wounded 300 others, according to the Gaza Health Ministry.

In dozens of attacks since November 2023, the Houthis have sunk two vessels and seized another, killed at least three sailors and upended global trade by forcing ship owners to avoid the popular Suez Canal trade shortcut.

It recently has become more effective at damaging ships largely through using unmanned, armed watercraft that damage a vessel's vulnerable waterline.

In a televised speech, Saree said the Houthis have targeted the Bentley I refined products carrier and the Chios Lion oil tanker in the Red Sea.

US Central Command late on Monday confirmed those attacks and said no damage or injuries had been reported.

The Houthis said it also joined the Iraqi Islamic Resistance in targeting the Olvia in the Mediterranean Sea. Reuters could not independently verify that attack.

Managers of the Panama-flagged Bentley I, Liberia-flagged Chios Lion and Cyprus-flagged Olvia could not be immediately reached for comment.

Earlier on Monday, the United Kingdom Maritime Trade Operations (UKMTO) said that two vessels came under attack in the Red Sea off Yemen's port city of Hodeidah, with one ship reporting it had sustained some damage.

A vessel 97 nautical miles northwest of Hodeidah was attacked by an uncrewed drone boat that hit its port side, causing some damage and light smoke.

Another merchant vessel, 70 nautical miles southwest of Hodeidah, came under attack by three small watercraft, UKMTO and security firm Ambrey said separately.

The Master of that ship reported being attacked by three small craft. One of those watercraft was unmanned and twice collided with the ship as passengers on the other two boats fired on the ship. The vessel conducted "self-protection measures" and after 15 minutes the small craft aborted the attack, UKMTO said.

Later in what appeared to be two separate attacks, the Master reported four projectiles exploding near the vessel.

Both the vessel and crew were reported as safe and proceeding to the next port of call, Ambrey said.

Since November 2023, Houthi militants in Yemen have launched drone and missile strikes in shipping lanes in the Red Sea and Gulf of Aden. The group says these actions are in solidarity with Palestinians affected by Israel's war in Gaza.

US and British have conducted retaliatory strikes since February - shooting down drones and bombing attack sites in Yemen.

At least 65 countries and major energy and shipping companies have been affected by Houthi attacks, according to a report by the US Defense Intelligence Agency.

JD Vance: Trump’s Running Mate

Former President Donald Trump on Monday chose Sen. JD Vance as his running mate despite the Ohio Republican formerly describing himself as a "Never Trump guy" and calling the presumptive GOP nominee an "idiot," an "asshole," and "America's Hitler."

Trump—who survived an assassination attempt at a Pennsylvania campaign rally on Saturday—announced his pick on the opening day of the Republican Party's convention in Wisconsin with a post on his Truth social media platform, calling Vance "the person best suited" to be vice president.

"JD honorably served our country in the Marine Corps, graduated from Ohio State University in two years, summa cum laude, and is a Yale Law School graduate, where he was the editor of the Yale Law Journal, and president of the Yale Law Veterans Association," Trump wrote. "JD's book, Hillbilly Elegy, became a major bestseller and movie, as it championed the hardworking men and women of our country."

Vance's selection came two days after the senator took to social media to assert that President Joe Biden's rhetoric—including the assertion that Trump "is an authoritarian fascist who must be stopped at all costs"—led "directly" to Trump's attempted assassination.

Should he accept his selection, Vance—who turns 40 next month—would be making a stark departure from his previous views on Trump.

"I'm a Never Trump guy," Vance said in a 2016 interview with the late Charlie Rose. "I never liked him."

"My God what an idiot," he said of Trump on social media that same year.

In another message explaining his views on the rise of Trump, Vance wrote that the Republican Party "has itself to blame."

"Trump is the fruit of the party's collective neglect" of working-class Americans, Vance argued. "I go back and forth between thinking Trump is a cynical asshole" like former President Richard Nixon "who wouldn't be that bad... or that he's America's Hitler."

Vance, who claims to be a champion of working people and against elites, is a former venture capitalist whose 2022 Senate campaign was backed by billionaires and who has ties to Big Pharma. He opposes reproductive and LGBTQ+ rights.

He has complained about high gas prices while raking in Big Oil campaign contributions. He says that Project 2025 —a conservative coalition's agenda for a far-right takeover of the federal government—has some "good ideas" in it.

He has fundraised for January 6 insurrectionists. He blamed the Robb Elementary School massacre in Uvalde, Texas on "fatherlessness." He wants to ban pornography.

"As Trump's running mate, Vance will make it his mission to enact Trump's Project 2025 agenda at the expense of American families," Jen O'Malley Dillion, chair of the Biden-Harris reelection campaign, said in response to Trump's pick. "This is someone who supports banning abortion nationwide while criticizing exceptions for rape and incest survivors; railed against the Affordable Care Act, including its protections for millions with preexisting conditions; and has admitted he wouldn't have certified the free and fair election in 2020."

"Billionaires and corporations are literally rooting for JD Vance: They know he and Trump will cut their taxes and send prices skyrocketing for everyone else," she added.

The Democratic National Committee (DNC) responded to Vance's selection in a statement asserting that "this is the most consequential election of our lifetimes, and with Donald Trump's decision today to add JD Vance to the Republican ticket, the stakes of this election just got even higher."

"JD Vance embodies MAGA—with an out-of-touch extreme agenda and plans to help Trump force his Project 2025 agenda on the American people," the DNC continued.

"Vance has championed and enabled Trump's worst policies for years—from a national abortion ban, to whitewashing January 6, to railing against Social Security and Medicare."

"Let's be clear. A Trump-Vance ticket would undermine our democracy, our freedoms, and our future," the DNC added.

Corruption Within Indian Army

Since the partition of the Sub-Continent in 1947, instances of corruption within Indian Army have periodically surfaced, marking various stages of the country’s military history. Corruption in the Indian Army has proven to be a recurrent issue that erodes public trust. Several high-profile scandals and cases have exposed the depth of this issue, raising major questions about ethical standards and accountability in one of India’s most prestigious organizations. However, in recent decades, the incidence and severity of such occurrences have particularly increased, attracting worldwide attention and criticism.

The statistics paint an even grim picture, between 2000 and 2023, over 1,800 corruption cases were recorded within Indian Armed Forces. The Indian Army alone reported more than 1,080 cases from 2013 to 2022, underscoring the pervasive nature of the problem across all ist branches. Such figures are not mere numbers but indicators of deep-rooted challenges that undermine the very fabric of an institution tasked with defending the nation’s sovereignty and security.

Among the most infamous scandals is the Sukna Land scam of 2008, where senior generals of Indian Armed Forces were implicated in an illegal land transfer near the Sukna Military Base. That scandal not only tarnished the reputation of those involved but also sparked a national debate on the ethical standards, expected out of military leaders. The subsequent fallout from scandals involving procurement irregularities and recruitment bribery further eroded public trust besides raising serious questions about the accountability within the ranks and file of Armed Forces.

Another scam got surfaced in 2010, namely Adarsh Housing Society Scam, including top military leaders, politicians, and bureaucrats, who were reportedly scheming to acquire Mumbai properties for war widows and veterans. However, at the end of the day, flats were given to powerful people only, which sparked public outrage over the mismanagement of military lands and resources.

In a similar episode in 2012, concerns were raised that top Army officials were found involved in irregularities in the acquisition of Tatra trucks, which were meant to transport troops and equipment. The affair sparked questions about inflated pricing and bribes in defence acquisition. Similarly, in 2013, a bribery scandal erupted in which a Lieutenant General was accused of accepting payments for influencing various Army appointments. The controversy highlighted flaws in the promotion system besides raising questions about top officials’ ethical standards.

The Canteen Stores Department (CSD) Scam in 2020 exposed anomalies and mismanagement in the CSD that sells items on discounted rates to military troops. Allegations included inflated pricing, bribes, and favoritism in supplier contracts thus harming the welfare of active and retired staff. Furthermore, investigations carried out by the Central Bureau of Investigations (CBI) in respects of recruiting scams and financial malpractices have exposed systemic flaws in the military’s internal checks and balance system. The revelation that 17 Army officers were involved in a bribery scandal to influence selection procedures is a sobering reminder of how ethical failings may jeopardize the integrity of military operations and personnel management.

Former Army Chief General Deepak Kapoor’s term was tarnished by charges ranging from financial mismanagement to procurement favoritism, showing flaws in leadership control. Such examples not only highlight shortcomings in governance.

In addition to above-mentioned scandals, during the Kargil War in 1999, India received widespread condemnation for a corruption scandal involving suspected payments in the purchasing of coffins for dead troops. Investigations revealed that Indian Government paid exorbitant amounts for coffins, causing public uproar and creating severe concerns about openness and accountability in defence expenditure. The affair highlighted India’s susceptibility to corruption in important national security concerns, undermining its reputation.

Corruption in the military is not a result of individual instances, but rather a reflection of larger systemic flaws. The lack of severe control, along with opaque decision-making procedures, creates an environment conducive to misbehavior. Aside from such high-profile scandals, there have been other cases of financial mismanagement, embezzlement, and other sorts of corruption that have impacted the military’s reputation. From embezzling billions in procurement funding to unlawfully selling guns, these crimes not only breach public confidence, but also risk national security by eroding force discipline and morale. Indian Armed Forces need to reset their moral and ethical compass on prior basis.

Courtesy: South Asia Journal

 

Biden administration accused for Trump shooting

The Kremlin on Sunday said it did not believe the current US administration was responsible for Saturday's assassination attempt on US presidential candidate Donald Trump, but that it had created an atmosphere that provoked the attack.

Trump was shot in the ear during a Saturday rally in Pennsylvania, in an attack now being investigated as an assassination attempt that left the Republican presidential candidate's face streaked with blood.

"We do not believe that the attempt to eliminate and assassinate Trump was organized by the current authorities," Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov told reporters. "But the atmosphere around candidate Trump...provoked what America is confronting today.

"After numerous attempts to remove candidate Trump from the political arena - using first legal tools, the courts, prosecutors, attempts to politically discredit and compromise the candidate - it was obvious to all outside observers that his life was in danger."

US President Joe Biden condemned the attack, saying there was no place for that kind of violence in America.

Peskov said there were no plans for Putin to call Trump in light of the incident.

 

The world must help Israel stop Iran and its proxies, not appease them

President elect of Iran, has outlined his policy in an open letter to the world leaders. Pressure is building on Israel to stop genocide in Gaza and the United States is also openly asked to stop supply of lethal arms to Israel. Under the prevailing circumstances Israel’s daily The Jerusalem Post has written an anti-Iran editorial prove that Iran and its proxies are real threat for Israel and the world.

Following is the text of the Editorial:

As the war against Hamas rages on and attempts are made to reach a new hostage deal, we should never forget who the primary sponsor of terror against Israel is – Iran. Its proxies include “the 3H” – Hamas, Hezbollah and the Houthis.

We should also not turn a blind eye to the fact that Iran is edging closer and closer to becoming a nuclear power, which could pose an existential threat to Israel. This cannot be allowed.

After the latest NATO Summit in Washington, Foreign Minister Israel Katz posted Thursday on X that one of the main topics discussed by the foreign ministers attending the summit – including US Secretary of State Antony Blinken – was the need to increase pressure on Tehran.

“Israel, NATO, and the entire world share a common enemy – the Iranian regime,” Katz wrote. “We must stop Iran now before it’s too late.”

No one seems to know the status of Iran’s nuclear weapons program, including the United States. On Wednesday, Sen. Lindsey Graham wrote a letter to Avril Haines, the director of national intelligence, accusing the administration of being in violation of the law by failing to report to Congress, as required by legislation Graham himself drafted every six months about Iran’s nuclear progress.

In the letter, Graham notes that the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) recently censured Iran for failing to cooperate with it and escalating its uranium enrichment up to 60% purity in May. This, he says, is only “a small technical step away from weapons-grade 90% purity” and brings Iran that much closer to building a nuclear bomb.

In response, White House national security spokesperson James Kirby said on Thursday that President Joe Biden remained committed to making sure that Tehran would never develop nuclear weapons but denied a claim by Iran’s acting foreign minister, Ali Bagheri Kani, that the US and Iran were holding indirect nuclear negotiations mediated by Oman.

“No active negotiations are going on right now with respect to Iran’s nuclear ambitions,’ Kirby said. “I won’t speak or can’t speak to channels of communication with Iran one way or the other, but there are no active negotiations going to restore the 2015 nuclear deal.”

Kirby made it clear last Monday that the US would not resume nuclear talks with new Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian, citing Tehran’s support of terrorism as a significant obstacle.

According to IAEA chief Rafael Mariano Grossi, Iran has exceeded uranium enrichment limits and is now “weeks, not months,” away from having enough enriched uranium to make a nuclear weapon.

Iran's looming threat

Stopping a nuclear Iran, which has always been a top priority for Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, will surely be high on the agenda of his visit to Washington later this month when he is due to address a special joint session of Congress.

But Israel and the US cannot deal with the Islamic Republic alone. An international alliance is necessary to curb the Iranian regime’s nuclear program, led by the United Nations via bodies such as the IAEA and NATO. It must also enlist the support of the European Union and key players in the Middle East, such as Saudi Arabia.

Besides closer supervision of Iran’s nuclear program, the international community must enforce tighter economic sanctions against Tehran.

Ways must be found to stop it from funding Hamas, Hezbollah, and the Houthis. And its funding of anti-Israel protests in the US, as Haines warned last week, must be thwarted. But this is not enough. Only decisive action will show Iran that it cannot get away with terrorism.

“Candidate objectives to be attacked should include Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps installations, Iranian naval assets, critical energy infrastructure, and even nuclear weapons development facilities with strike packages that are more destructive than any launched by Iran’s proxies,” he said. “Iran’s religious leaders must feel the ground shake under their own feet, both politically and militarily. If this threat is not made manifest in their minds, they will continue to feel free to attack American interests wherever and whenever they wish.”

On the other hand, as Haines concludes, if the US – and the rest of the world – continue to appease the ayatollahs, “there will be no peace.”