Latest news with #IsraelIran
News.com.au
12 hours ago
- Politics
- News.com.au
‘Driven by strong emotions': Psychologists break down Trump's latest bizarre act
President Donald Trump happily dropped the F-bomb. So what does this say about his willingness to use the A-bomb? He's mercurial. He's unpredictable. He's inconsistent. And he's proud of it. The 79-year-old billionaire property developer and former game show host believes it's what sets him apart from America's governing 'elite'. A clearly exasperated Trump took to the White House lawn to blurt: 'We basically have two countries that have been fighting so long and so hard that they don't know what the f**k they're doing.' He was referring to Israel and Iran breaching the deadline for his unilaterally declared ceasefire. It seems to work. At least sometimes. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was quick to back down. He thanked the President for his 'immense appreciation for Israel' and decided to 'refrain from further attacks'. But Russian President Vladimir Putin was not so cowed when he was pommeled with similar bluster. The Don's outburst over a breached ceasefire was dismissed as 'emotional overstrain'. That's a matter of personal politics. But Professor of Psychology Geoff Beattie believes such outbursts present a window into Trump's thought processes. 'Trump was clearly furious, and his language showed it,' the Edge Hill University academic writes. 'This was not a verbal slip – there was no immediate correction, no apology, no nonverbal indication of embarrassment. He just stormed off, clearly angry.' It's not what voters generally expect from their elected representatives. Statesmanship may have gone out of vogue decades ago. Along with transparency and accountability. Despite this, President Theodore Roosevelt's mantra of 'speak softly but carry a big stick' has largely remained an unwritten law of Western diplomacy since World War II. 'But Trump showed frustration, barely contained,' Professor Beattie states. 'His furious, aggressive response was like something straight out of an old psychology textbook.' Mind games Human beings have big opinions of themselves. They're supposed to be smart. To be cool, calm, collected. Civilised. After all, that's what's supposed to set them apart from mere animals. 'They find other ways of dealing with their frustrations,' Professor Beattie writes. 'They use their rational system of thought to find solutions… 'Perhaps, that's why many people feel shocked when they watch this US president in certain situations. To many of us, it all seems so basic, so unsophisticated, so frightening.' But Trump's MAGA followers believe it's all part of a mind game. They insist the President employs a sophisticated 'Mad Man' strategy when it comes to his politics, business and personal relationships. Put simply, it keeps his opponents off balance. They never know what to expect. But critics argue the tactic has a critical flaw: the 'Mad Man' card can easily back a player into a corner, where they must either go through with a bluff or lose face. It comes down to what's behind the poker face. Does Trump think fast, automatically - or unconsciously? Professor Beattie says this is evolution's basic, rapid-reaction system. 'It is an intuitive system designed to work in a world full of approach and avoidance, scary animals and friendly animals. It is heavily reliant on affect (emotion) to guide decision-making.' Or is everything Trump does the result of constant calculation? Professor Beattie says this second method of thinking is 'slower, more deliberative. It requires conscious effort and is used for complex thinking, solving difficult problems, or making careful decisions.' Good decisions, he argues, depend upon system two checking the advice of system one. 'But system one often jumps quickly and unconsciously to certain conclusions,' he adds. 'System two should check them, but often doesn't. Even when it would be easy.' Action or reaction? 'It was a startling moment, even coming from a president who has publicly used that word, and other crude language, in the past,' states Tom Jones of the Poynter Institute for Media Studies. Mainstream media was all over the unprecedented action taken over Iran's attempt to build an A-bomb. But it couldn't make up its mind on how to cover Trump's F-bomb. Some ran unedited video clips. Others used a dash or dot dot dot to mask what everybody already knew. Poynter's senior vice president, Kelly McBride, argues the truth should be presented unvarnished. 'When you're covering the President, there are very few moments that are completely unpredictable and unscripted — many more with this President than most, but still — and that was one of them. And I think the record should reflect the entire moment.' Few dispute Trump's decision-making style emphasises immediacy and emotional conviction. This has proven effective in rallying supporters and generating an air of decisiveness. Especially when nobody dares to disagree with him. Prime Minister Netanyahu immediately complied with Trump's 'Do not drop those bombs' demand. But his office put a positive spin on things. 'President Trump expressed his immense appreciation for Israel — which achieved all of its war goals. The President also expressed his confidence in the stability of the ceasefire… (So) Israel refrained from further attacks.' But President Putin's mouthpiece was more barbed when his boss was labelled 'absolutely CRAZY!'. Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov declared: 'We are really grateful to the Americans and to President Trump personally for their assistance in organising and launching this negotiation process. Of course, at the same time, this is a very crucial moment, which is associated, of course, with the emotional overstrain and emotional reactions.' Professor Beattie has made up his own mind. 'His decisions seem to be driven by strong emotions,' he observes. 'His response to events, opponents and issues are often passionate and visceral. This could lead to decisions being unduly influenced by personal feelings, first impressions based on arbitrary cues, and interpersonal perceptions, rather than anything more substantial.' The wisdom of The Don Trump rose to the US Presidency out of the knockdown world of real estate and reality television. 'Many suggest that Trump's decision-making style reflects his background in the high-pressure and high-stakes world of business, where quick judgments and gut instinct can be advantageous in these sorts of competitive winner-takes-all environments,' Professor Beattie states. 'But the world at war is a more precarious place, where system one (reactionary thought) needs to be kept more firmly in check. 'Gut instincts may have a role to play, but that old lazy system two (considered thought) needs to be more vigilant. Especially, it would seem, in Trump's case.' Such personalities have other commonly associated traits. 'Commentators have described Trump as both narcissistic and authoritarian,' state John Moores University workplace relations researchers Neil Beasley and Madeleine Pickles. 'Yet, running parallel to these factors, one character trait is glaringly common among Trump supporters: sycophancy.' Yes-men (and women): They're in every office, busily 'kissing up' and 'kicking down'. 'When leaders are surrounded by 'yes-men', they're deprived of critical input that could challenge assumptions or highlight potential flaws,' Beasley adds. 'This can lead to cognitive entrenchment where decision-makers become overconfident and resistant to change. Bad decisions then proceed unchecked, often escalating into systemic failures.' But the brains behind Trump insist this is all just sour grapes. White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said after US forces bombed Iran's nuclear facilities: 'Past presidents wanted to take this action, but they didn't have the guts to make the decision.' Columnist Debra Saunders points out for the Heritage Foundation think-tank that, despite all the hostility between Trump and Europe, 'NATO leaders are praising Trump for pushing for them to increase their contribution to NATO's defence spending'. 'At the time, Trump's remarks seemed a shocking breach of decorum,' she added. 'Now they have the ring of an alarm that needed to be sounded.'
Globe and Mail
a day ago
- Business
- Globe and Mail
Global shares are mostly higher after US stocks rise to the brink of a record
MANILA, Philippines (AP) — Global shares were mostly higher on Friday as the week was winding down with the Israel-Iran ceasefire still in place and signs of progress on a China-U.S. trade deal. Investors were watching for further details after President Donald Trump said the U.S. and China had signed a trade deal. Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick said in an interview on Bloomberg TV that the deal was signed two days ago, but did not elaborate, saying 'The president likes to close these deals himself.' China's Commerce Ministry said Friday that the two sides had 'further confirmed the details of the framework' for their trade talks. But its statement did not explicit mention an agreement to ensure U.S. access to rare earths, materials used in high-tech applications that have been at the center of negotiations. 'China will approve the export applications of controlled items that meet the conditions in accordance with the law. The United States will cancel a series of restrictive measures taken against China accordingly. It is hoped that the United States and China will meet each other halfway,' the ministry said in a statement. In early European trading, Germany's DAX added 0.8% to 23,847.16. In Paris, the CAC 40 surged 1.3% to 7,656.55. Britain's FTSE 100 gained 0.5% to 8,779.78. The futures for the S&P 500 and the Dow Jones Industrial Average were up 0.2%. Markets have settled somewhat after the upheavals of the Israel-Iran war and its aftermath. Worries about Trump's higher tariffs have receded since the president shocked the world in April with stiff proposed levies, but they have not disappeared. The wait is still on to see how big the tariffs will ultimately be, how much they will hurt the economy and how much they will push up inflation. Hong Kong's Hang Seng index lost 0.2% to 24,284.15, while the Shanghai Composite index gave up 0.7% to 3,424.23 after China reported that industrial profits slid 9.1% in May, the sharpest drop since last October. 'Beijing may have paused the worst of the trade fight with Washington, but the tariff scars are showing—and unless demand picks up or pricing stabilizes, the pressure on margins and business sentiment will linger,' Stephen Innes, Managing Partner at SPI Asset Management, said in a commentary. Tokyo's Nikkei 225 index gained 1.4% to 40,150.79, as the government reported that consumer prices eased slightly in May. South Korea's KOSPI Composite Index fell 0.8% to 3,055.94, while Australia's S&P/ASX 200 shed 0.4% at 8,514.20. On Thursday, the S&P 500 climbed 0.8% and at 6,141.02 was sitting just 0.05% below its all-time closing high set in February. The index at the heart of many 401(k) accounts had dropped roughly 20% below its record during the spring on worries about Trump's tariffs. The Dow Jones Industrial Average rallied 0.9% and the Nasdaq composite gained 1%. Reports on Thursday added to evidence the U.S. economy is holding up despite higher tariffs and other challenges, though it has slowed. Orders for washing machines and other manufactured goods that last at least three years grew by more last month than economists expected. Another report said fewer U.S. workers filed for unemployment benefits last week, a potential signal of fewer layoffs. A third report said the U.S. economy shrank by more during the first three months of 2025 than earlier estimated. But many economists say those numbers were distorted by a surge in imports as companies tried to get ahead of tariffs. They're expecting a better performance in upcoming months. In other dealings on Friday, the U.S. benchmark crude gained 46 cents to $65.70 per barrel. Brent crude, the international standard, added 41 cents to $67.10 per barrel. The U.S. dollar fell to 144.37 Japanese yen from 144.40 yen. The euro edged higher to $1.1710 from $1.1703.
Asharq Al-Awsat
a day ago
- Politics
- Asharq Al-Awsat
From India-Pakistan to Iran and Ukraine, a New Era of Escalation
By Peter Apps As India's defense chief attended an international security conference in Singapore in May, soon after India and Pakistan fought what many in South Asia now dub 'the four-day war', he had a simple message: Both sides expect to do it all again. It was a stark and perhaps counterintuitive conclusion: the four-day military exchange, primarily through missiles and drones, appears to have been among the most serious in history between nuclear-armed nations. Indeed, reports from both sides suggest it took a direct intervention from US Secretary of State Marco Rubio to halt an escalating exchange of drones and rockets. Speaking to a Reuters colleague in Singapore, however, Indian Chief of Defense Staff General Anil Chauhan denied either nation had come close to the 'nuclear threshold', describing a 'lot of messaging' from both sides. 'A new space for conventional operations has been created and I think that is the new norm,' he said, vowing that New Delhi would continue to respond militarily to any militant attacks on India suspected to have originated from Pakistan. How stable that "space" might be and how great the risk of escalation for now remains unclear. However, there have been several dramatic examples of escalation in several already volatile global stand-offs over the past two months. As well as the 'four-day' war between India and Pakistan last month, recent weeks have witnessed what is now referred to in Israel and Iran as their '12-day war'. It ended this week with a US-brokered ceasefire after Washington joined the fray with massive air strikes on Tehran's underground nuclear sites. Despite years of confrontation, Israel and Iran had not struck each other's territory directly until last year, while successive US administrations have held back from similar steps. As events in Ukraine have shown, conflict between major nations can become normalized at speed – whether that means 'just' an exchange of drones and missiles, or a more existential battle. More concerning still, such conflicts appear to have become more serious throughout the current decade, with plenty of room for further escalation. This month, that included an audacious set of Ukrainian-organized drone strikes on long-range bomber bases deep inside Russian territory, destroying multiple aircraft which, as well as striking Ukraine, have also been responsible for carrying the Kremlin's nuclear deterrent. All of that is a far cry from the original Cold War, in which it was often assumed that any serious military clash – particularly involving nuclear forces or the nations that possessed them – might rapidly escalate beyond the point of no return. But it does bring with it new risks of escalation. Simmering in the background, meanwhile, is the largest and most dangerous confrontation of them all - that between the US and China, with US officials saying Beijing has instructed its military to be prepared to move against Taiwan from 2027, potentially sparking a hugely wider conflict. As US President Donald Trump headed to Europe this week for the annual NATO summit, just after bombing Iran, it was clear his administration hopes such a potent show of force might be enough to deter Beijing in particular from pushing its luck. 'American deterrence is back,' US Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth told a Pentagon press briefing the morning after the air strikes took place. Iran's initial response of drones and missiles fired at a US air base in Qatar – with forewarning to the US that the fusillade was coming – appeared deliberately moderate to avoid further escalation. Addressing senators at their confirmation hearing on Tuesday, America's next top commanders in Europe and the Middle East were unanimous in their comments that the US strikes against Iran would strengthen Washington's hand when it came to handling Moscow and Beijing. Chinese media commentary was more mixed. Han Peng, head of state-run China Media Group's North American operations, said the US had shown weakness to the world by not wanting to get dragged into the Iran conflict due to its 'strategic contraction'. Other social media posts talked of how vulnerable Iran looked, with nationalist commentator Hu Xijn warning: "If one day we have to get involved in a war, we must be the best at it." LONG ARM OF AMERICA On that front, the spectacle of multiple US B-2 bombers battering Iran's deepest-buried nuclear bunkers - having flown all the way from the US mainland apparently undetected - will not have gone unnoticed in Moscow or Beijing. Nor will Trump's not so subtle implications that unless Iran backed down, similar weapons might be used to kill its Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei or other senior figures, wherever they might hide. None of America's adversaries have the ability to strike without warning in that way against hardened, deepened targets, and the B-2 – now being replaced by the more advanced B-21 – has no foreign equal. Both are designed to penetrate highly sophisticated air defenses, although how well they would perform against cutting-edge Russian or Chinese systems would only be revealed in an actual conflict. China's effort at building something similar, the H-2, has been trailed in Chinese media for years – and US officials say Beijing is striving hard to make it work. Both China and Russia have fifth-generation fighters with some stealth abilities, but none have the range or carrying capacity to target the deepest Western leadership or weapons bunkers with conventional munitions. As a result, any Chinese or Russian long-range strikes – whether conventional or nuclear – would have to be launched with missiles that could be detected in advance. Even without launching such weapons, however, nuclear powers have their own tools to deliver threats. An analysis of the India-Pakistan 'four-day war' in May done by the Stimson Center suggested that as Indian strikes became more serious on the third day of the war, Pakistan might have taken similar, deliberately visible steps to ready its nuclear arsenal to grab US attention and help conclude the conflict. Indian newspapers have reported that a desperate Pakistan did indeed put pressure on the US to encourage India to stop, as damage to its forces was becoming increasingly serious, and threatening the government. Pakistan denies that – but one of its most senior officers was keen to stress that any repeat of India's strikes would bring atomic risk. "Nothing happened this time," said the chairman of the Pakistani joint chiefs, General Sahir Shamshad Mirza, also speaking to Reuters at the Shangri-La dialogue in Singapore. "But you can't rule out any strategic miscalculation at any time." For now, both sides have pulled back troops from the border – while India appears determined to use longer term strategies to undermine its neighbor, including withdrawing from a treaty controlling the water supplies of the Indus River, which Indian Prime Minister Modi said he now intends to dam. Pakistani officials have warned that could be another act of war. DRONES AND DETERRENCE Making sure Iran never obtains the leverage of a working atomic bomb, of course, was a key point of the US and Israeli air strikes. Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu agreed that the dangers of a government so hostile to Israel obtaining such a weapon would always be intolerable. For years, government and private sector analysts had predicted Iran might respond to an assault on its nuclear facilities with attacks by its proxies across the Middle East, including on Israel from Hezbollah in Lebanon and Hamas in Gaza, as well as using thousands of missiles, drones and attack craft to block international oil exports through the Strait of Hormuz. In reality, the threat of an overwhelming US military response – and hints of an accompanying switch of US policy to outright regime change or decapitation in Iran, coupled with the Israeli military success against Hezbollah and Hamas, appear to have forced Tehran to largely stand down. What that means longer term is another question. Flying to the Netherlands on Tuesday for the NATO summit, Trump appeared to be offering Iran under its current Shi'ite Muslim clerical rulers a future as a 'major trading nation' providing they abandoned their atomic program. The Trump administration is also talking up the success of its Operation ROUGH RIDER against the Iran-backed Houthi militia in Yemen. Vice Admiral Bradley Cooper, selected as the new head of US Central Command, told senators the US military had bombed the Houthis for 50 days before a deal was struck in which the Houthis agreed to stop attacking US and other international shipping in the Red Sea. But Cooper also noted that like other militant groups in the Middle East, the Houthis were becoming increasingly successful in building underground bases out of the reach of smaller US weapons, as well as using unmanned systems to sometimes overwhelm their enemies. 'The nature and character of warfare is changing before our very eyes,' he said. Behind the scenes and sometimes in public, US and allied officials say they are still assessing the implications of the success of Ukraine and Israel in infiltrating large numbers of short-range drones into Russia and Iran respectively for two spectacular attacks in recent weeks. According to Ukrainian officials, the drones were smuggled into Russia hidden inside prefabricated buildings on the back of trucks, with the Russian drivers unaware of what they were carrying until the drones were launched. Israel's use of drones on the first day of its campaign against Iran is even more unsettling for Western nations wondering what such an attack might look like. Its drones were smuggled into Iran and in some cases assembled in secret there to strike multiple senior Iranian leaders and officials in their homes as they slept in the small hours of the morning on the first day of the campaign. As they met in The Hague this week for their annual summit, NATO officials and commanders will have considered what they must do to build their own defenses to ensure they do not prove vulnerable to a similar attack. Judging by reports in the Chinese press, military officials there are now working on the same.
Yahoo
2 days ago
- Business
- Yahoo
Nat-Gas Prices Fall on Forecasts for Cooler US Weather
July Nymex natural gas (NGN25) on Tuesday closed down by -0.161 (-4.35%). July nat-gas prices Tuesday fell for a third consecutive session and sank to a 1-week low. Nat-gas prices are under pressure due to forecasts for cooler US temperatures that will potentially reduce nat-gas demand from electricity providers to run air conditioning. Forecaster Atmospheric G2 said Tuesday that forecasts shifted cooler for parts of the southwestern and south-central US for June 29-July 3. Robusta Coffee Prices Are Still Falling. Are We Finally at an Inflection Point? Nat-Gas Prices Fall on Forecasts for Cooler US Weather Crude Prices Tumble as Geopolitical Risks Ease in the Middle East Markets move fast. Keep up by reading our FREE midday Barchart Brief newsletter for exclusive charts, analysis, and headlines. An easing of geopolitical risks also pushed natural-gas prices lower on Tuesday following the announcement of a ceasefire between Israel and Iran. The ceasefire reduces the likelihood that Iran will close the Strait of Hormuz and disrupt LNG shipments through that Strait, which accounts for approximately 20% of global LNG trade. Lower-48 state dry gas production on Tuesday was 104.4 bcf/day (+0.9% y/y), according to BNEF. Lower-48 state gas demand on Tuesday was 80.3 bcf/day (+2.2% y/y), according to BNEF. LNG net flows to US LNG export terminals on Tuesday were 14.7 bcf/day (+13.6% w/w), according to BNEF. An increase in US electricity output is positive for nat-gas demand from utility providers. The Edison Electric Institute reported last Wednesday that total US (lower-48) electricity output in the week ended June 14 rose +0.8% y/y to 85,329 GWh (gigawatt hours), and US electricity output in the 52-week period ending June 14 rose +2.9% y/y to 4,246,808 GWh. Last Wednesday's weekly EIA report was mixed for nat-gas prices since nat-gas inventories for the week ended June 13 rose +95 bcf, below expectations of +97 bcf but well above the 5-year average build for this time of year of +72 bcf. As of June 13, nat-gas inventories were down -8.0% y/y and +6.1% above their 5-year seasonal average, signaling adequate nat-gas supplies. In Europe, gas storage was 54% full as of June 16, versus the 5-year seasonal average of 64% full for this time of year. Baker Hughes reported last Friday that the number of active US nat-gas drilling rigs in the week ending June 20 fell by -2 to 111 rigs, slightly below the 15-month high of 114 rigs from June 6. In the past nine months, gas rigs have risen from the 4-year low of 94 rigs posted in September 2024. On the date of publication, Rich Asplund did not have (either directly or indirectly) positions in any of the securities mentioned in this article. All information and data in this article is solely for informational purposes. This article was originally published on Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Telegraph
3 days ago
- Business
- Telegraph
Trump: I'll make Spain pay for Nato spending snub
Donald Trump said on Wednesday that he would make Spain 'pay twice as much' after it refused to honour a Nato agreement to increase defence spending to 5 per cent of GDP. The US president singled out Spain for declining to meet the target and said he would seek to punish the Mediterranean country in trade negotiations unless it changed course. His threat came after Nato's 32 member states agreed to 'submit annual plans showing a credible, incremental path' to the 5 per cent goal at the alliance's annual summit in The Hague. Mr Trump and others hailed his personal role in the decision after he threatened to withdraw American security guarantees from Europe. Mark Rutte, Nato's secretary general, had earlier called the US president 'daddy' as he sought to flatter the American for brokering a ceasefire between Israel and Iran. The traditional post-summit communique, signed off by Nato's leaders, set out the need for increased military expenditure because of the 'long-term threat posed by Russia to Euro-Atlantic security'. Unlike previous years, the statement made no condemnation of Vladimir Putin's full-scale invasion of Ukraine. The omission, first reported by The Telegraph, was seen as a concession by Kyiv's supporters to convince Mr Trump to sign off on a statement confirming his 'ironclad commitment to collective defence as enshrined in article 5'. Ahead of the summit, the US president had cast doubt over his support for the mutual defence clause, suggesting it was open to interpretation. But European allies breathed a sigh of relief when Mr Trump declared that their promise to ramp up spending had changed his mind. Mr Trump said: 'I watched the heads of these countries get up, and the love and the passion that they showed for their country was unbelievable. I've never seen anything like it. 'It was great. And I left here differently. I left here saying that these people really love their countries. It's not a rip-off, and we're here to help them protect their country.' But he said it was 'terrible' that Spain had refused to join the others in increasing their defence spending. Spain had claimed it had agreed an opt-out from the 5 per cent target and said it would meet the alliance's capability targets without increasing its military expenditure. Mr Trump added: 'We are negotiating with Spain on a trade deal and we will make them pay twice as much. I'm actually serious about that. 'I like Spain. It's a great place, and they're great people, but Spain is the only country, out of all of the countries, that refuses to pay. They want a free ride but I am not going to let that happen.' While the European Union handles trade negotiations on behalf of its members, Mr Trump could still move to levy new tariffs against Spanish exports. Officials later said Mr Trump's Spanish rant had been a minor hiccup in what was a successful summit in the Dutch city. Their perceived strategy to flatter Mr Trump, lavishing him in praise and a night's stay at the Huis ten Bosch royal palace had succeeded in keeping the American president from turning the event into a row over defence spending. Mr Rutte was key in that flattery, at one point hailing 'daddy' Mr Trump's decision to strike Iran's nuclear sites. 'Daddy sometimes has to use strong language,' the Nato official said as he interjected in Mr Trump's comparison of the Israel-Iran conflict as a playground brawl. Mr Rutte later claimed no other US president had succeeded in convincing Nato's European allies to increase their defence spending like Mr Trump. Asked about his description of Mr Trump as 'daddy', he replied: 'It is a question of taste. 'When it comes to making more investments, would that have been the result of this summit if he would have not been re-elected president?' Sources told The Telegraph all of Nato's 32 leaders took the opportunity to speak during a single summit session dedicated to the new spending goal, with many of them praising Mr Trump for his role in their decision. Pedro Sanchez, Spain's prime minister, even avoided any mention that he had no intention of the percentage target on the table. Despite the omission of any blame for Russia's invasion of Ukraine, which Mr Trump described as a 'crisis', the US president heaped praise on a 'brave' Volodymyr Zelensky, after the leaders met on the sidelines of the summit. The American described his Ukrainian counterpart as a 'nice guy', insisting he was fighting a 'tough battle'. Mr Trump said he would further hold talks with Putin about ending the war, saying: 'Look, Vladimir Putin really has to end that war.' He added: 'It's more difficult than people would have any idea. Vladimir Putin has been more difficult.' Mr Trump also hinted at the possibility of selling Ukraine more Patriot surface-to-air missile defences after months of Ukrainian requests for more systems to protect its cities from Russian barrages.
