Latest news with #Patriot
&w=3840&q=100)
First Post
29 minutes ago
- Politics
- First Post
Iran must tread carefully in framing post-ceasefire strategy
As a Persian proverb warns, 'Bravado without power is like a lion's roar from a sheep's throat,' Iran's defiance may echo loudly, but it risks being drowned out by the consequences of its own overreach read more The ceasefire notwithstanding, Iran has a brand new strategic mix for the near future. The first part of Iran's war strategy includes threatening traffic in the Strait of Hormuz, a chokepoint through which a fifth of the world's oil flows. This is a high-stakes gamble rooted in the sea denial principles of the British naval theorist Julian Corbett. Yet, despite its calculated bravado, Iran's approach is likely to lead to a protracted conflict it cannot win, exposing its strategic vulnerabilities and risking regional escalation. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Corbett's sea denial theory, which emphasises disrupting an adversary's control of maritime routes without seeking outright naval dominance, is evident in three facets of Iran's strategy. First, Iran deploys fast-attack boats armed with anti-ship missiles, designed to harass and deter larger naval forces through asymmetric hit-and-run tactics. Second, its naval assets, including submarines and mine-laying vessels, aim to create uncertainty and raise the costs of operating in the Strait. Third, Iran leverages its coastal geography, studded with missile batteries and radar stations, to project power over the narrow waterway, threatening commercial and military shipping alike. These tactics align with Corbett's vision of a weaker navy frustrating a stronger opponent's freedom of movement. Yet Iran's strategy extends beyond the Strait. It is likely to be flanked by the continued threat of missile strikes on American air bases in Qatar, Bahrain, and Iraq, targeting the US military presence that underpins regional security. These attacks, however, are unlikely to yield decisive results. US bases are fortified, with advanced missile defence systems like Patriot and Terminal High Altitude Area Defence (THAAD) capable of intercepting most threats. Moreover, such strikes risk galvanising American resolve and international condemnation without significantly degrading US operational capacity. A critical flaw in Iran's plan lies in the geography of the strait itself. Iran controls only the northern half; the southern half is Oman's jurisdiction. This bilateral control severely limits Iran's ability to enforce a complete blockade without provoking Oman or other Gulf states, which would escalate the conflict into a broader regional war. The US Fifth Fleet, based in Bahrain, further tilts the balance. With its carrier strike groups, destroyers, and air superiority, the fleet possesses overwhelming firepower to counter Iran's naval and missile threats. While Iran's asymmetric tactics may cause temporary disruptions, they cannot match the sustained power projection of the US Navy. The Fifth Fleet's ability to secure the Strait, supported by allies like Israel, Saudi Arabia and the UAE, ensures that any Iranian blockade would be short-lived. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Iran's strategy also risks self-inflicted wounds. By threatening to close the Strait, Iran endangers its own energy exports, which account for a significant portion of its revenue. China, Iran's largest oil buyer, would view such disruptions with alarm, as Beijing relies on stable Gulf energy supplies. Unlike Saddam Hussein, who recklessly attacked oil infrastructure during the Iran-Iraq War, Iran is unlikely to repeat this mistake, aware that alienating China and other trading partners would compound its economic woes. Compounding Iran's challenges is its weakened regional position. Its proxies, Hamas and Hezbollah, are diminished, with the former reeling from Israel's campaigns and the latter constrained by Lebanon's internal chaos. Iran's influence in Syria and Iraq has waned, eroded by local resistance and external pressures. Domestically, Iran's military is hamstrung by sanctions, outdated equipment, and a lack of air superiority—a critical disadvantage against the US and its allies. Yet this weakness makes Iran dangerous. With its prestige at stake, Tehran may feel compelled to double down and break the ceasefire at the earliest. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Iran's gambit in the Strait of Hormuz is thus a paradox: a bold strategy born of vulnerability. As a Persian proverb warns, 'Bravado without power is like a lion's roar from a sheep's throat.' Iran's defiance may echo loudly, but it risks being drowned out by the consequences of its own overreach. The writer is a senior journalist with expertise in defence. Views expressed in the above piece are personal and solely those of the author. They do not necessarily reflect Firstpost's views.
New York Post
13 hours ago
- Politics
- New York Post
President Trump predicts Gaza ceasefire ‘within the next week'
President Donald Trump predicted there will be a ceasefire in Gaza sometime 'within the next week.' Speaking with reporters in the Oval Office on Friday, Trump called the situation in Gaza a 'terrible situation' but expressed optimism there could soon be a ceasefire between Israel and Hamas. 'I think it's close. I just spoke with some of the people involved,' said the president, adding, 'We think within the next week we're going to get a ceasefire.' Trump also addressed the ongoing humanitarian crisis in Gaza, saying, 'we're supplying, as you know, a lot of money and a lot of food to that area because we have to, I mean, you have to. In theory we're not involved in it, but we're involved because people are dying.' He called on other countries to also send humanitarian aid to Gaza. 'You see the the lines of people just to get one meal, essentially. But it's too bad other countries aren't helping out,' he said. 'Nobody's helping out where we're doing that because I think we have to on a humanitarian basis,' he went on. President Trump says a ceasefire in the Israel-Hamas War could occur sometime next week. AP 'I look at those crowds of people that have no food, no anything. And, you know, we're the ones that are getting it there. Some of it's being taken by some bad people, you know, as you give it and you give it out, and they're supposed to be taking care of the people, and they end up stealing the food and selling it. But we have a pretty good system now, so we're helping with that.' Trump told reporters that while the situation in Gaza is terrible, there is still hope that a ceasefire can happen. APAImages/Shutterstock 'We're working on Gaza, trying to get it taken care of and again, you know, a lot of lot of food has been sent there. And other countries throughout the world should be helping also,' he said. This comes after Trump authorized U.S. strikes on three Iranian nuclear development sites and subsequently declared a ceasefire between Israel and Iran, ending what he called 'the Twelve Day War.' President Trump also took a number of questions on other matters, including one on Ukraine weapons, where he said he 'may' authorize Patriot missiles for Ukraine's air defenses.
India Today
16 hours ago
- Business
- India Today
Are U.S. Presidents selling war for profit?
Behind the pomp of presidential summits and NATO handshakes lies an uncomfortable truth—America's foreign policy isn't driven by diplomacy, but by the defence lobby's bottom line. From Obama's Nobel Peace Prize acceptance speech to Trump's brash missile marketing, every US president has doubled as the world's most powerful arms dealer. The numbers don't lie. Defence giants like Lockheed Martin, Boeing, and Raytheon pump over 80 million annually into lobbying, with nearly 280 million flowing to political campaigns since 1990. This isn't charity—it's investment in influence. Every dollar spent returns tenfold in government contracts and overseas sales NATO's latest pledge makes this crystal clear. By 2035, member states must spend 5% of GDP on "defence"—a windfall wrapped in security rhetoric. Buried in the fine print: 3.5% goes directly to military kit, much of it stamped "Made in USA." European taxpayers will fund American factories whilst their own public services face the revolving door spins faster than a Chinook's rotors. Pentagon officials become corporate executives, senators join defence boards, and generals turn consultant. This ensures continuity regardless of election results—the real winners remain never bothered with subtlety, openly flogging Patriot missiles at NATO summits like a market trader hawking knockoff watches. Biden played the statesman whilst quietly expediting record arms transfers to Ukraine. Obama collected his peace prize then approved 135 billion in weapons sales. Different styles, identical tragedy became America's opportunity. Every HIMARS rocket fired was a billboard for US firepower. Every Patriot battery deployed was a sales demonstration. Zelensky's desperate pleas for seven more systems weren't just about survival—they were free advertising for American defence human cost is staggering, but so is the opportunity cost. Half of America's discretionary budget feeds the military machine whilst schools crumble and hospitals close. NATO's spending spree threatens similar austerity across isn't foreign policy—it's product placement with geopolitical consequences. When the next crisis erupts, remember: someone dies, but someone else gets rich. In America's war economy, that's not a bug—it's the entire bloody point.- Ends
Euronews
a day ago
- Politics
- Euronews
‘We'll convince Hungary' on EU accession, Ukraine ambassador says
Ukraine is confident that it will eventually be able to overcome Hungarian resistance to its path to EU accession, the head of the country's Mission to the EU told Euronews' morning show Europe Today on Thursday. Vselovod Chentsov came into our studio in Brussels for an exclusive interview as the bloc's leaders gather in Brussels for another critical summit, with Ukrainian EU accession one of the agenda items. 'We're fighting to stop this war first of all and we're fighting for our European future. Ukraine is a candidate state and we're ready to start accession talks as soon as there is consensus,' Chentsov said. Pressed by Euronews' Méabh Mc Mahon on Hungary's resistance to Ukraine's EU accession process, he said: 'You mentioned that Hungary is blocking. I would concentrate on who is supporting, so we have 26 member states supporting, and I'm sure we'll be able to convince Hungary to get on board.' Elsewhere in the interview, Chentsov said he was confident that US President Donald Trump would 'stick to his word' on a commitment given during Wednesday's NATO summit in The Hague to supply the war-torn state with Patriot missiles. Trump told a press conference on Wednesday that Patriots were 'very hard to get' but that 'we are going to see if we can make some of them available' after a 50-minute meeting with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy on the side lines of the NATO summit. The ambassador also responded to Trump's touting the possibility that Russia's Vladimir Putin may invade other countries following the full-scale invasion of Ukraine during a press conference at the NATO summit in The Hague. Trump was asked whether he considered Putin an enemy and if he believed the Russian leader had territorial ambitions beyond Ukraine. "It's possible", Trump replied. 'Its' good there is an understanding that Russia is a threat and we kept telling (people) about this imminent threat if Ukraine is not defended, if Ukraine is left alone,' said Chentsov. 'To avoid this continuation, this broadening of this conflict, Europe and the US has to help Ukraine to stop this war,' the ambassador concluded.
Irish Independent
a day ago
- Politics
- Irish Independent
Nato has just surrendered Ukraine to Putin in ultimate betrayal
Donald Trump achieved a major diplomatic victory as his calls for increased European defence spending converted into reality. The final summit declaration text announced Nato's commitment to spending 5pc of its budget on defence and articulated its ironclad support for the Article 5 collective defence clause. While the US president's big win should have enhanced Europe's sense of security against the Russian threat, the Nato summit left the alliance's eastern flank with a feeling of grave unease. Trump's inflammatory comments on the ambiguity of Article 5 left the Baltic States questioning whether Nato would confront Russia's intensifying array of hybrid threats. The sense of betrayal in Ukraine was even more palpable. The Nato final summit declaration's refusal to condemn Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine and Volodymyr Zelensky's marginal presence encapsulated the alliance's growing Ukraine fatigue. While Mark Rutte, the Nato secretary-general, repeated the age-old trope about Ukraine's irreversible path towards alliance membership, his words felt hollower than ever before. The Nato summit's dismissal of Ukraine's concerns is emblematic of an alarming broader trend. After more than three years of attritional war with Russia, Ukraine finds itself lacking the manpower and weaponry to triumph. During their inflammatory Oval Office meeting with Zelensky, Trump warned that Ukraine was 'running low on soldiers' and JD Vance, his vice-president, railed against forced conscription on the Ukrainian streets. The Ukrainian president responded to these taunts by reversing his long-standing opposition to mobilising Ukrainians aged 18-24. The uptick in voluntary new recruits has not solved the problem. Russia's incremental military triumphs around Pokrovsk were enabled by a shortage of Ukrainian defenders and morale in the Ukrainian army's ranks is dipping due to frictions between the rank-and-file and senior command over tactics. ADVERTISEMENT Learn more Combat injuries are afflicting Ukraine's most experienced servicemen and leaving their rookie replacements vulnerable to Russian human wave attacks. As Trump continues to signal his aversion to open-ended military assistance to Ukraine, war materiel supplies are poised to dry up further. As Russia's drone and missile barrages against Kyiv intensify, Ukraine is prioritising Patriot air defence systems in its US procurements and is side-lining its past pleas for more sophisticated offensive weapons. The prospects of the US transferring Tomahawk cruise missiles or aircraft that could fully neutralise Russia's Su-35 advanced stealth fighter jets are remote. For now, Ukraine can rely on the largesse of its European allies to compensate for some of these shortfalls. Germany has received permissions from the US to transfer 125 long-range artillery rockets and 100 Patriot air defence missiles to Ukraine. Vladimir Putin's threats against Germany over the Taurus long-range missiles suggests that Friedrich Merz, its chancellor, might finally be breaking with his predecessor Olaf Scholz's die-hard restraint. The Netherlands recently transferred the last of its 24 pledged F-16 jets to Ukraine and Norway is mulling a doubling of F-16 deliveries to Ukraine's air force. European countries are also playing a critical role in strengthening Ukraine's domestic arms industry. At the Nato summit, the UK announced plans to fund joint drone production initiatives with Ukraine and Germany built on its recent pledge to invest €5bn in Ukraine's long-range missile production capacity. These promises are music to Zelensky's ears but are not a panacea for Ukraine's equipment woes. Ukraine's domestic arms industry cannot develop fast enough to neutralise North Korea's military assistance to Russia and Europe's depleted militaries need to supply Ukraine by ordering new weapons from the US. As Russia launches a multi-pronged offensive against Donetsk, Kharkiv and Sumy, Ukraine is unable to meet its urgent war materiel needs. Despite these negative headwinds, Ukraine's unbreakable patriotism and tactical ingenuity can slow Russia's advance. Ukrainian Armed Forces Commander Oleksandry Syrskyi's declaration that Ukraine has stopped Russia's offensive in Sumy and the Operation Spiderweb attack on Russian strategic bombers encapsulate these invaluable traits. Russia's unwillingness to de-escalate the war despite staggering casualties and frustratingly slow gains suggests that Ukraine cannot rely on resolve alone. This realisation is turning Ukrainians who idolised Western economic and democratic institutions into cynics, and damaging Ukraine's long-term prospects of integrating into the trans-atlantic security orbit. While Trump and Rutte hailed defence spending increases that should increase Nato's long-term resilience, the Nato joint declaration's marginalisation of Ukraine undoes many of the benefits of the system. Long-term security is impossible if we surrender to Russia in Ukraine.
