US Halts Key Military Shipments to Ukraine
The United States has suspended certain military aid shipments to Kyiv, sparking contrasting reactions in both Ukraine and Russia.
While Ukrainian officials expressed deep concern and warned the move could empower Russian forces, Moscow welcomed the decision as a step toward ending the conflict.
According to two informed sources, the US Department of Defense has
paused
deliveries of key air defense missiles and precision-guided munitions due to concerns over critically low American stockpiles.
The delayed shipments reportedly include interceptor missiles crucial for neutralizing Russian drones and artillery, which have been vital in defending Ukrainian airspace.
The slowdown in arms transfers reportedly began in recent days, affecting weaponry promised by the administration of former President Joe Biden.
White House Deputy Spokesperson Anna Kelly confirmed the decision, stating it followed a broader Pentagon review designed to prioritize America's strategic needs globally.
Ukraine's Ministry of Foreign Affairs swiftly responded by summoning US Chargé d'Affaires Jon Ginkel to express formal concern. In a statement, the ministry warned that delays in military assistance could embolden Moscow to escalate its offensives instead of seeking a diplomatic resolution.
An anonymous Ukrainian defense source admitted the pause creates a serious gap in their battlefield readiness, noting that Ukraine is currently heavily dependent on US-supplied munitions. While European nations are contributing significantly, the absence of US firepower, especially 155mm artillery shells, poses a serious operational challenge.
Fedir Venislavskyi, a member of Ukraine's Parliamentary Committee on National Security and Defense, called the suspension deeply distressing, particularly amid intensified Russian attacks. Ukraine's Ministry of Defense confirmed it is reviewing the situation amid reports of halted aid, though it has yet to receive official notification from Washington regarding any change in the delivery schedule.
Meanwhile, the Kremlin welcomed the development. Russian officials interpreted the US decision as a potential turning point that could accelerate diplomatic efforts and bring the conflict closer to an end.
read more
Gold prices rise, 21 Karat at EGP 3685
NATO's Role in Israeli-Palestinian Conflict
US Expresses 'Strong Opposition' to New Turkish Military Operation in Syria
Shoukry Meets Director-General of FAO
Lavrov: confrontation bet. nuclear powers must be avoided
News
Iran Summons French Ambassador over Foreign Minister Remarks
News
Aboul Gheit Condemns Israeli Escalation in West Bank
News
Greek PM: Athens Plays Key Role in Improving Energy Security in Region
News
One Person Injured in Explosion at Ukrainian Embassy in Madrid
News
China Launches Largest Ever Aircraft Carrier
Sports
Former Al Zamalek Player Ibrahim Shika Passes away after Long Battle with Cancer
Videos & Features
Tragedy Overshadows MC Alger Championship Celebration: One Fan Dead, 11 Injured After Stadium Fall
Lifestyle
Get to Know 2025 Eid Al Adha Prayer Times in Egypt
Business
Fear & Greed Index Plummets to Lowest Level Ever Recorded amid Global Trade War
News
Flights suspended at Port Sudan Airport after Drone Attacks
Videos & Features
Video: Trending Lifestyle TikToker Valeria Márquez Shot Dead during Live Stream
News
Shell Unveils Cost-Cutting, LNG Growth Plan
Technology
50-Year Soviet Spacecraft 'Kosmos 482' Crashes into Indian Ocean
News
"Tensions Escalate: Iran Probes Allegations of Indian Tech Collaboration with Israeli Intelligence"
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily News Egypt
4 hours ago
- Daily News Egypt
Egypt's Al-Sisi meets Rosatom chief as new Dabaa plant deals are signed
Egyptian President Abdel Fattah Al-Sisi met with the head of Russia's state atomic energy corporation Rosatom on Tuesday in the city of New Alamein to discuss developments on the Dabaa Nuclear Power Plant project, the presidency said. The meeting with Rosatom Director General Alexey Likhachev came as the two countries signed supplementary agreements aimed at accelerating the construction of the plant. Also present at the meeting were the president of Rosatom's engineering division Atomstroyexport, Andrey Petrov, the Russian Ambassador to Cairo, Georgy Borisenko, as well as Egypt's Minister of Electricity and the head of its Nuclear Power Plants Authority (NPPA). Separately on Tuesday, Egyptian and Russian officials held a signing ceremony for the new agreements at the electricity ministry's headquarters in Alamein. Minister of Electricity and Renewable Energy, Mahmoud Essmat, and Rosatom's Likhachev signed a supplementary protocol to the intergovernmental deal on the plant's construction and its physical protection systems. The two officials then witnessed the signing of a related supplementary contract covering the plant's design, procurement, and construction, which was signed by the head of the NPPA, Sherif Helmy Mahmoud, and Atomstroyexport's Andrey Petrov. A statement from the electricity ministry said the agreements were signed as part of both sides' keenness to speed up the project's implementation according to the set timetables. It added that the project is part of Egypt's strategy to rely on clean energy and achieve its updated national energy strategy goals for 2040. 'The cooperation and partnership between Egypt and Russia embody the strong political will of the two friendly countries,' Essmat said in the statement. 'Today's signing… represents an important step towards completing the Dabaa nuclear plant project in its various stages and reflects the fruitful cooperation between Egypt and Russia.' Likhachev affirmed Russia's firm commitment to supporting Egypt's efforts in building its first nuclear power plant. 'We are proud of our strategic partnership with Egypt and look forward to continuing joint cooperation to implement this ambitious project, which will contribute to enhancing energy security in Egypt and achieving sustainable development goals,' he said.
Daily News Egypt
4 hours ago
- Daily News Egypt
From Harvard to Berkeley: The Federal War on American Universities
The past year has laid bare a growing and dangerous campaign against American universities — one that threatens to undermine academic freedom, institutional autonomy, and the right to dissent. What began with pro-Palestinian demonstrations in late 2023 has escalated into a calculated effort by the Trump administration to police campus discourse, punish ideological nonconformity, and suppress political protest. Behind the rhetoric of combating antisemitism lies a far more ambitious project: transforming America's independent centres of scholarship into compliant instruments of state power. The first major flashpoint came at Harvard, where over thirty student groups issued a statement in October 2023 holding Israel responsible for escalating violence in Gaza. The backlash was swift. Prominent donors, conservative commentators, and federal officials demanded punitive action. Though Harvard's administration initially distanced itself from the protests, its response was neither swift nor severe enough to appease critics. By early 2024, the Trump administration had frozen $2.3bn in federal research grants to Harvard, accusing the university of tolerating antisemitic expression — despite the absence of formal findings to that effect. The message was unmistakable: universities that fail to suppress pro-Palestinian activism will face financial ruin. This retaliation set a precedent. At Yale University, a student group protesting an Israeli official's lecture in late 2024 was branded antisemitic, prompting the university to revoke the group's recognition and sparking campus unrest. Yet even that concession was not enough to prevent federal reprisal. In April 2025, the administration threatened Yale's accreditation, signalling that institutions would now be punished not only for what they say, but for what they allow others to say. The University of California, Berkeley faced its own reckoning in May 2025, when it rejected federal demands to monitor international students' social media accounts for alleged 'anti-American' or 'antisemitic' content. The response was immediate: Berkeley lost $100m in federal research funding. A faculty-led strike followed, with professors warning that such intrusions violated the most basic principles of academic freedom and would devastate American research. Berkeley's defiance made clear that this was not an isolated clash over campus culture, but part of a systematic campaign to bring universities to heel. The consequences are dire. Harvard's Alan Garber noted that the frozen grants threaten vital research on gene editing and GLP-1 drugs — work central to treating genetic disorders and obesity. Steven Pinker warned that the US risks ceding its scientific leadership to nations like China, where research may face ideological limits but not this kind of self-inflicted sabotage. This campaign is not only about silencing dissent; it is about disabling the innovation that has long defined American higher education. Equally alarming is the erosion of academic freedom. Through ideological audits, pressure to dismantle DEI (Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion) initiatives, and threats to accreditation, the administration has created an environment in which both faculty and students are discouraged from engaging with politically sensitive topics. The chilling effect is unmistakable. Universities that once prided themselves on fearless inquiry now weigh the cost of financial or political backlash for permitting protest or controversial scholarship. This climate of coercion has fuelled unrest across already polarised campuses. Yale's suppression of student groups and Columbia's heightened policing of protests have sparked further demonstrations. The risk of a nationwide student movement, reminiscent of the Vietnam War era, grows. Yet unlike past waves of protest, today's confrontations stem not from universities defying authority, but from institutions struggling to survive under relentless external attack. Perhaps most insidious is the threat to institutional autonomy. By wielding funding freezes, accreditation threats, and tax status reviews, the administration bypasses due process and replaces independent governance with political fiat. It transforms universities from self-governing scholarly communities into state-dependent contractors — a tactic common in authoritarian regimes, but newly and openly deployed in the American context. The damage also reverberates globally. Visa restrictions and demands for surveillance of international students have already deterred global talent, undermining the diversity and international collaboration that fuel scientific and cultural progress. If the US ceases to be a destination for the world's brightest minds, it will forfeit the intellectual prestige it has long enjoyed. Though comparisons to Hungary's Viktor Orbán or China's Xi Jinping are often made, the Trump administration's tactics are more brazen. Freezing billions in funding without legislative oversight and demanding student surveillance are not the slow, bureaucratic tools of autocracies — they are ideological purges executed with speed and force, bypassing both law and tradition. To be clear, universities must protect all students and ensure civil, inclusive discourse. Antisemitism must be confronted wherever it exists. But using that imperative to justify the suppression of political protest is dishonest and deeply damaging. Harvard's legal challenge to its funding freeze — backed by a coalition of 400 college presidents — is a crucial first step. Yet only sustained resistance by faculty, students, alumni, and the broader public can defend higher education's essential role in a free society. The Trump administration's vendetta against American universities, sparked by pro-Palestinian protests, threatens to dismantle the very principles that have made US higher education a global model. The assault on dissent, the coercion of scholars, and the policing of speech must be recognised for what they are: an attack not only on universities, but on democracy itself. The survival of both now rests on whether those under siege choose silence — or resistance. Dr. Marwa El-Shinawy – Academic and Writer
Daily News Egypt
4 hours ago
- Daily News Egypt
The B-2 Gamble: How Israel is Rewriting Middle East Power Politics
The Middle East has long been a region where contradictions fuel conflict. It is a place where terrorism morphs into political authority with both regional and international consent. It is a battlefield for nuclear brinkmanship, where occupying powers and others pursue dangerous ambitions for weapons they may never dare to use. It holds nearly 40% of the world's energy reserves, while wealthy nations depend on superpower protection to ensure their survival. This volatile mix provides endless justification for intervention, for redrawing borders, and for reinventing regional power structures under shifting global agendas. The latest chapter of this evolving story began on October 7, 2023, and has intensified with the twelve-day war between Israel and Iran. At the centre of this accelerating transformation stands a blunt truth: Israel is being prepared not merely as a stakeholder, but as the region's official security enforcer and power broker. What distinguishes this moment is not that the United States is grooming a proxy to police the region — Washington did so in the 1950s with the Shah of Iran after the ousting of nationalist leader Mohammad Mosaddegh. The difference now is that this is not a US design imposed on Israel — it is Israel's own blueprint, carried out with Washington's endorsement. The evidence is no longer subtle. Just weeks ago, Admiral James Kilby, acting US Chief of Naval Operations, told Congress that America's military operations in the Arabian Sea were rapidly depleting its arsenal at an unsustainable rate. Over a billion dollars' worth of missiles had been launched against Houthi rebels, with three Super Hornet jets lost in three months — one due to friendly fire. Kilby's message was calculated and unambiguous: while US interests in the Gulf and Middle East remain vital, the costs have become prohibitive. Perhaps it is time for a regional actor to shoulder that burden. That actor is, unmistakably, Israel. US lawmakers are already moving in that direction. Following recent American strikes on Iranian assets, Congress proposed new legislation granting President Donald Trump authority to transfer advanced strategic weaponry to Tel Aviv — including the formidable B-2 stealth bomber and GBU-57 bunker-buster bombs, capable of destroying targets buried sixty metres underground. This is not routine arms support. It is about enabling Israel with autonomous deterrent capabilities, easing Washington's political load regardless of who sits in the Oval Office. The so-called 'Bunker Buster Act,' backed by Democratic Congressman Josh Gottheimer and Republican Mike Lawler, seeks to give the president sweeping powers to ensure Israel's readiness for any scenario should Iran advance its nuclear programme. If enacted, it would transform the Middle East's military landscape. For Israel, the implications would be historic. Acquiring B-2 strategic bombers would allow Tel Aviv to enforce its long-held doctrine of 'open skies' — ensuring uncontested air dominance from Lebanon to Iran via Syria and Iraq. This would not only disrupt supply lines to Hezbollah and Hamas but would also grant Israel a definitive military veto over any regional force aspiring to strategic parity. Trump and Netanyahu are perfectly aligned in this vision. Their recent summit — the third in just six months — marked a turning point in US-Israeli relations. Trump saw in Israel's role during the strikes on Iranian assets confirmation of Tel Aviv's enduring strategic value. Notably, no global power — not even China or Russia — condemned the attacks. This silence was telling, reinforcing deterrence and giving Trump a window to advance a Middle East order grounded in preemption and militarised regional policing. At the core of the Trump-Netanyahu dialogue was a pragmatic and unapologetic vision for the region: to contain Iran's nuclear ambitions through a binding deal that curbs its regional influence; to stabilise Syria under pro-Western — or at least anti-Iranian — leadership; to integrate defence systems and economic corridors under an expanded Abraham Accords framework; to marginalise Chinese influence through deeper military ties with Gulf states; and to preserve Israel's absolute military and technological edge. For Israel, the immediate challenge is not competing with Gulf states for investments or high-level visits. Its real dilemma lies in defining its role within this emerging order while avoiding premature confrontations. Historically, Israel has operated as Washington's indispensable regional asset, equipped with one of the world's most advanced military machines, backed by extensive Western intelligence networks. In contrast, even the wealthiest Gulf states — led by Saudi Arabia — remain militarily vulnerable, a condition unlikely to change despite multi-billion-dollar arms purchases. Within this emerging structure, Israel is positioned to become the frontline executor of US interests — at least until tensions ease and Iran's nuclear file is closed. To solidify this role, Israel must progress along three tracks: maintaining its independent military superiority, now bolstered by the proposed B-2 transfer; pursuing pragmatic relations with regional powers like Turkey to prevent destabilising flare-ups; and embedding itself within new regional economic frameworks by leveraging its unmatched technological base. Yet none of this is inevitable. History consistently reminds us that no geopolitical vision, however heavily armed, is immune to resistance. The region's future will hinge on whether its nations possess the resolve, strategic cohesion, and unity to challenge this vision — before Israel secures uncontested authority over the Middle East's airspace, politics, and resources. The clock, however, is ticking. Dr. Hatem Sadek, Professor at Helwan University
