Russia Reacts to NATO Neighbor Hosting Nuclear-Capable Jets
Russia said it would pose an "immediate danger" to Moscow if neighboring NATO ally Estonia hosts nuclear-capable jets.
Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov gave the reaction to Russian state media after Estonia's defense minister Hanno Pevkur said his country was ready to host F-35s again, as it had done before.
"The F-35s have already been in Estonia and will soon return again in rotation. We are ready to continue to host allies on our territory, including those who use such platforms," Pevkur told Estonian radio.
Pevkur's comments come as the U.K., another NATO ally, said it would purchase at least 12 nuclear-capable F-35A fighter jets.
Sir Keir Starmer, the British prime minister, said his country "will make these aircraft able to bear nuclear weapons if necessary" and that the purchase was in "response to a growing nuclear threat".
NATO allies have agreed to increase their defense spending target to 5 percent of GDP in response to a push by the Trump Administration.
The increased spending is seen as needed to broaden the burden-sharing across the alliance and lessen its dependence on the U.S.
Moreover, the increased spending is a response to heightened threats from Russia and China.
This is a breaking news story. Updates to follow.
Related Articles
The Major Trump Question Left Unanswered at NATO SummitWas Donald Trump Mocked by Dutch Royalty? What We KnowNATO Member Expects F-35 Fighters in Trump DealWhite House Posts 'Daddy's Home' NATO Supercut
2025 NEWSWEEK DIGITAL LLC.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Newsweek
23 minutes ago
- Newsweek
Ukraine Destroys Russian Fighter-Bombers in Precision Air Base Attack
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. Four Russian fighter-bombers were targeted in a Ukrainian drone strike hundreds of miles away from the frontline, according to Ukraine's military. The drones destroyed two Su-34 fighter jets and damaged two others following the strike in Russia's Volgograd Oblast overnight Friday, according to Ukraine's General Staff. Newsweek has contacted the Russian defense ministry for comment. Russian Sukhoi Su-34 fighter-bombers fly over Red Square during a rehearsal for the Victory Day military parade in Moscow on May 7, 2017. Russian Sukhoi Su-34 fighter-bombers fly over Red Square during a rehearsal for the Victory Day military parade in Moscow on May 7, It Matters Over the course of Russia's full-scale invasion, Ukrainian drone technology has fast developed into a cost effective way of taking out expensive Russian military assets and Kyiv's report shows the latest stage of this campaign of hitting targets far from the frontline. What To Know The operation was carried out by the Special Forces and the Security Service of Ukraine (SBU) in cooperation with other military units, according to the General Staff. The statement said that two Russian Su-34 fighter-bombers have been destroyed and two others damaged at the Marinovka airfield over 560 miles southeast of Moscow in an operation carried out by long-range drones. The attack also sparked a fire in the airport's technical maintenance area used to prepare aircraft ready for missions. Russian Su-34s are the main aircraft Russia uses to launch missile and bomb strikes on Ukrainian positions and settlements. As of Saturday, 37 Russian Su-34s and 158 aircraft in total had been destroyed or damaged since February 2022 according to Oryx, a website tracking war losses by using imagery as proof. The latest strikes come as Russia steps up aerial attacks on Ukraine which said Moscow's attacks had killed 10 people and injured at least 50 others on Friday. Ukraine's Air Force reported it had downed 21 out of the 23 drones, including Shahed-type attack drones and decoys. But a Russian drone attack on the city of Odesa hit a high-rise building, killing a married couple and injuring at least 14 other people, according to local authorities. Video on social media showed firefighters battling a blaze and residents trying to escape down the stairwell of the 21-story building. Meanwhile, a Russian missile strike on the city of Samar in Dnipropetrovsk Oblast killed five people and injured at least 25 others, according to the regional governor Serhii Lysak. What People Are Saying In a statement, Ukraine's General Staff said Ukrainian forces "carried out a joint special operation that resulted in the destruction of two Russian Su-34 fighter-bombers and damage to two others at the Marinovka airfield." What Happens Next As Russia continues with its strikes on Ukrainian civilian infrastructure, Kyiv will step up its drone production. Ukraine's President Volodymyr Zelensky said in his video address on Friday that ramping up the financing and production of drones was a priority for Kyiv to defend the country following a meeting with his military chiefs.
USA Today
33 minutes ago
- USA Today
Few thought airstrikes could ‘obliterate' Iran's nuclear program. Then Trump said they did.
Experts long argued that airstrikes alone would not be capable of permanently ending Iran's nuclear program absent negotiations. WASHINGTON — A highly politicized debate is unfolding over the impact of June 21 U.S. airstrikes against Iran's nuclear facilities, raising questions over the attack's goal and projected impact. President Donald Trump quickly claimed total victory in the strikes' wake, claiming that Iran's 'key nuclear enrichment facilities have been completely and totally obliterated.' Subsequent scrutiny of that claim amid early assessments from intelligence agencies has led Trump and his allies to double down on and even expand on his declarations of success. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth claimed to CNN that the strikes 'obliterated Iran's ability to create nuclear weapons.' Iran itself has acknowledged the impact of the U.S. and Israeli attacks. But in the years since Washington's withdrawal from the 2015 nuclear deal with Tehran, experts and analysts have emphasized that airstrikes alone would merely delay Iran's nuclear ambitions rather than permanently derail them. Rep. Mike Quigley, D-Illinois, reiterated that long-held understanding in a June 26 interview. 'The targets are hard targets, deep targets, mobile targets. So it was never meant to eliminate the program,' Quigley told USA TODAY. 'It was never meant to do anything but slow the program.' The congressman, who is on the House's intelligence committee and has regularly received briefings on Iran, added, 'We've always been told . . . the only way to end this (nuclear) program is with a lot of troops on the ground for a long time. A war.' The former head of the National Nuclear Security Agency's nonproliferation programs, Corey Hinderstein, struck a similar tone. 'The conventional wisdom that you can't destroy the Iranian (nuclear) program through air attack alone has actually held,' said Hinderstein, now a vice president at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. 'While some are saying that the airstrikes were tactically and strategically successful, I think that the jury is still out on that, and we don't actually have the information that we need to believe that this program is gone.' Third nuclear site, hidden centrifuges, missing uranium Iran may have another nuclear site that, if equipped with enrichment centrifuges and conversion equipment, could continue the process of preparing uranium for use in a nuclear bomb, if the regime wishes to pursue one. Shortly before Israel began its air campaign against Iran, the regime told the International Atomic Energy Agency that it had a third nuclear enrichment site but did not reveal details. Analysts believe an undisclosed underground facility at Pickaxe Mountain near the Natanz nuclear plant may be even deeper under the surface than the Fordow enrichment plant that was severely damaged in the U.S. strikes. The Pickaxe Mountain facility was first publicly revealed in 2023 by experts who spoke with the Associated Press. And it's unclear how much of Tehran's approximately 880 pounds of highly enriched uranium was destroyed or buried during the strikes — satellite images show cargo trucks parked outside the Fordow enrichment plant in the days before the U.S. attack. U.S. lawmakers briefed June 26 and June 27 on intelligence assessments of the strikes acknowledged the missing uranium and called for a full accounting of the material, according to CNN. Rep. Michael McCaul, R-Texas, told the news agency that the question of the uranium's whereabouts underscores the importance of Iran negotiating 'directly with us, so the (IAEA) can account for every ounce of enriched uranium that's there.' More: Where is Iran's enriched uranium? Questions loom after Trump claims victory. But whether Iran wants to negotiate is another question. Despite the country's obligations as a member of the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, Iran's Guardian Council approved a law June 25 halting the country's cooperation with the IAEA and its inspections of Tehran's nuclear sites 'until the safety and security of our nuclear activities can be guaranteed,' the country's foreign minister said on social media. Contributing: Tom Vanden Brook and Cybele Mayes-Osterman, USA TODAY Davis Winkie's role covering nuclear threats and national security at USA TODAY is supported by a partnership with Outrider Foundation and Journalism Funding Partners. Funders do not provide editorial input.
USA Today
33 minutes ago
- USA Today
Stocks usually rise by 10% a year. Those days may be over.
Americans are wise to invest in the stock market, we are told, because stocks have yielded historical gains of about 10% a year. But not, perhaps, this year. Many analysts predict that the S&P 500 index will end 2025 essentially flat, or with only meager gains. In one June 25 roundup, Yahoo Finance charts several strategists with year-end projections that put the benchmark S&P index between 5,600 and 6,100. Those figures fall below, or only slightly above, where the S&P started the year, around 5,900. Some forecasts range higher, and forecasters have been growing more bullish about American stocks in 2025. But anyone who predicts double-digit returns this year risks being branded an outlier. If big investment firms expect the stock market to finish 2025 more or less where it started, how should armchair investors react? Is the investment landscape shifting beneath our feet? First, let's explore the reasoning behind those gloomy forecasts. Stocks opened high in 2025. Maybe too high. The stock market opened strong in 2025. The broad S&P index sat near its all-time high, following two years of conspicuous growth. That growth spurt, alone, was enough to seed caution in forecasters. A surging S&P means stock prices are relatively high. Some stocks are overpriced. Bargains are fewer. The index may not have that much room to grow. 'I believe that, given the strong returns over the past two years, some lower returns are expected,' said Eric Teal, chief investment officer at Comerica Bank. Comerica's own projections call for the S&P 500 to end the year at 6,400, a number toward the high end of forecasts. Wall Street prognosticators have been bearish on stocks in 2025 because of one overarching theme: uncertainty. 'It's all the volatile actors in our current economy,' said Catherine Valega, a certified financial planner near Boston. 'It's like you don't know from one day to the next: Do we have tariffs? Do we not have tariffs?' It's hard to predict how President Trump's import taxes will affect prices, and thus, inflation. The trade war, coupled with Trump's immigration crackdown, could slow economic growth. Recession fears are heightened. The Federal Reserve may or may not ease interest rates in response. 'We're assuming that we sidestep a recession, that interest rate cuts are on the horizon, but not immediate,' Teal said, reflecting a common view on Wall Street. 'And so, there is an element of cautious optimism that I think is in the market, but a high degree of uncertainty and macro policy unknowns that will keep markets contained.' Stock forecasters don't want to be wrong There's another big reason, analysts say, why year-end forecasts for the S&P 500 are trending low: Forecasters tend to err on the conservative side. 'The analysts have historically kind of underestimated S&P 500 returns,' said Kristy Akullian, head of iShares investment strategy, Americas, at BlackRock. 'People don't want to stick their necks out with a bold prediction and be wrong.' That impulse, she said, also explains why stock forecasts tend to bunch together. No one wants to stand out. 'It's hard being an outlier,' said David Meier, a senior analyst at Motley Fool. Meier cites yet another reason why stock forecasters tend to aim low: 'Being negative, let's call it bearish, tends to get more clicks,' he said. Readers gravitate to distressing news about stocks. So, stocks are having an off year. What can I do? Now, let's move on to the practical question: If the S&P 500 might not gain much ground in 2025, what should ordinary investors do about it? The easy answer, of course, is to do nothing. Stock market projections for next month, or next year, shouldn't matter much to an investor who is in for the long haul, advisers say. And that advice applies to just about everyone: If you aren't in for the long haul, experts advise, stocks might not be for you. 'If you need funds soon, don't have it invested,' said Randy Bruns, a certified financial planner in Naperville, Illinois. 'If you don't need the funds for 15 years, stop looking at the volatility.' Market downturns tend to be brief. Recessions are shorter than they seem. Anyone who is saving for retirement, or for other long-term goals, can generally ride them out. 'If you have the luxury of being a long-term investor, be one,' Akullian said. There is, however, a longer and more nuanced answer to the question of how to respond to those conservative projections for stocks in 2025. A gloomy forecast for 2025 -- and for 2035 It involves this complicating factor: Stock market forecasts are also surprisingly conservative for 2035. Vanguard, the investment firm, predicts the U.S. stock market as a whole will rise by an underwhelming 3.8% to 5.8% a year over the next 10 years. 'Growth' stocks, the likes of Nvidia and Amazon, are projected to rise by only 2.5% to 4.5%: not much faster than inflation. Those forecasts are based on the idea that many U.S. stocks are overpriced, in essence, and trading above their real value. In Vanguard's analysis, everyday investors who want the gaudy returns they have come to expect from American growth stocks would do well to look elsewhere: Global stocks. Small-cap American stocks, in companies with a lower market value. 'Value' stocks, trading below their intrinsic worth. 'I would say it's time to have a more balanced allocation,' said Teal of Comerica. Bruns, the financial planner, suggests average investors should 'diversify across all the broad asset classes that should comprise a textbook portfolio.' That doesn't mean you should sell all of your Alphabet stocks, experts say. But the time might be right to scrutinize your portfolio. Does it include foreign stocks? Small-cap stocks? Bonds? If not, then you might consider rebalancing your portfolio to make it more diverse. 'The easiest way to do that, if you are a 401(k) contributor, is to change your future allocations,' Valega said. That way, you don't have to tinker with your current investments. Not sure how to rebalance? 'Reach out to your adviser,' Valega said. 'That's what we're there for.'
