Zelenskyy wanted to make Ukraine’s defence sector into a “large military hub”

Ukraine tempts Western arms producers with plan for ‘large military hub’

Incentives available to partner with Ukrainian manufacturers as Kyiv looks to create ‘world class military products’.

AJ 1 Oct 2023

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has announced plans to expand the country’s domestic defence industry through partnerships with Western weapons manufacturers, in a bid to increase supplies for its counteroffensive against Russia.

Speaking at the opening of the International Defence Industries Forum, Zelenskyy said he wanted to make Ukraine’s defence sector into a “large military hub” where military equipment and weapons could be built and repaired.

“Ukraine is in such a phase of the defence marathon when it is very important, critical to go forward without retreating. Results from the front line are needed daily,” the president told executives representing more than 250 Western weapons producers.

“We are interested in localising production of equipment needed for our defence and each of those advanced defence systems which are used by our soldiers, giving Ukraine the best results at the front today.”

Zelenskyy said that air defence and de-mining were his immediate priorities. Ukraine also aims to boost domestic production of missiles, drones and artillery ammunition.

The foreign ministry said Ukrainian producers had signed about 20 agreements with foreign partners for joint production, exchange of technology or supply of components to make drones, armoured vehicles and ammunition. It did not identify the companies.

NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg, who spoke by video link during the forum after visiting Kyiv earlier in the week, threw his weight behind the initiative.

💬

• 250 Western weapons producers.
• 20 agreements with foreign partners.
• “There is no defence without industry.”
• Several leading Western arms makers  Germany’s Rheinmetall, United Kingdom’s BAE Systems have  plans to team up with Ukrainian producers.
• NATO threw his weight behind the initiative.
• Ukrainian officials see the development of the country’s domestic defence industry as a potential boost to the economy

“Heroism alone cannot intercept missiles. Ukraine needs capabilities, high quality, high quantity, and quickly,” Stoltenberg said. “There is no defence without industry.”

Ukraine retook the southern city of Kherson in November last year, and began a long-awaited counteroffensive in early June to try and recapture other territories seized by Russia, which launched its full-scale invasion of the country in February 2022.

Kyiv has reported advances in several directions and liberated more than a dozen villages since but Moscow still controls about 18 percent of Ukrainian territory.

Ukraine’s allies have provided financial and military support worth tens of billions of dollars to help it push back Moscow’s forces.

Ukrainian officials see the development of the country’s domestic defence industry as a potential boost to the economy, which shrunk by about a third last year as a result of the war.

Several leading Western arms makers including Germany’s Rheinmetall and the United Kingdom’s BAE Systems have already announced plans to team up with Ukrainian producers.

Ukraine will create new incentives to draw Western defence investment and establish a special fund, through dividends from state defence resources and profits from the sale of confiscated Russian assets, to support new technology development, officials said.

“It will be a mutually beneficial partnership. I think it is a good time and place to create a large military hub,” Zelenskyy said during a separate meeting with weapons producers from the United States, the UK, Czechia, Germany, France, Sweden and Turkey.

Recently appointed Defence Minister Rustem Umerov said Kyiv had to do everything possible to produce all the necessary military services and products in Ukraine for the needs of its army.

“Our vision is to develop world-class military products,” Umerov said.

SOURCE: NEWS AGENCIES

Washington Wakes Up to Harsh Reality Amid Ukraine Proxy War

 

25.09.2023 Author: Brian Berletic https://journal-neo.su

Long gone are Western headlines heralding Ukraine’s NATO-trained and armed forces and the prospects of them able to “sweep Putin’s conscripts aside,” as former British Army Colonel Hamish De Bretton-Gordon claimed in an article published as recently as June this year.

As Ukraine’s offensive forces broke across extensive Russian defenses all along the line of contact from Zaporozhye to Kharkov, the realization that Washington, London, and Brussels underestimated the Russian Federation economically, politically, diplomatically, and most importantly, militarily and industrially, began to set in.

Russian Military Production Grows, Western Stockpiles Dry Up 

Today, different kinds of headlines now appear across the collective West’s media.  The New York Times recently reported in an article titled, “Russia Overcomes Sanctions to Expand Missile Production, Officials Say,” that Russia ammunition production was at least seven times greater than the collective West.

The same article acknowledged that Russia had increased its tank production two-fold and was producing 2 million artillery rounds per year, a number that is larger than the combined planned expansion of shell production of the US and European Union some time between 2025 and 2027. Not only is Russia out-producing the West, it is producing weapons and ammunition at a fraction of the cost of Western arms and munitions.

As Russian military industrial production expands, producing more tanks, artillery, cruise missiles, and ammunition for the ongoing special military operation in Ukraine, Ukrainian forces find their sources of arms and ammunition drying up.

The BBC would report in a recent article, “Poland no longer supplying weapons to Ukraine amid grain row,” that:

One of Ukraine’s staunchest allies, Poland, has said it is no longer supplying weapons to its neighbour, amid a diplomatic dispute over Kyiv’s grain exports. 

Prime Minister Mateusz Morawiecki said Poland’s focus was instead on defending itself with more modern weapons.

While both Poland and the BBC attempt to frame the decision as motivated by growing tensions between Poland and Ukraine, the reality is Poland had a finite amount of expendable arms and ammunition it could send Ukraine, and it has expended those stocks. This leaves a much smaller number of more modern systems Poland has acquired for its own defense. Neither Poland nor its foreign arms suppliers produce weapons and ammunition in the quantities required to sustain Ukrainian forces on the battlefield, meaning that should Poland continue supplying Ukraine from this point forward, it will eventually find itself “demilitarized.”

Other nations are failing to deliver much anticipated weapon systems. This includes the ATACMS ballistic missile Ukraine has demanded from the United States for months now, and despite claims of its arrival being imminent, Reuters in a recent article has ruled them out once again ahead of the Pentagon’s next assistance package.

Germany’s air-launched cruise missile, the Taurus, has also failed to turn up in additional assistance packages. Bloomberg in its article, “Germany Plans Additional $428 Million in Military Aid to Ukraine,” noted that Berlin is still weighing “a multitude of political, legal, military and technical aspects,” before finally sending any.

It should be noted that neither missile, along with a wide array of other so-called “wonder weapons,” has any prospect of changing the outcome of the fighting in Ukraine. While the missiles, if delivered, will result in tactical victories for Kiev, they will have little to no impact on the fighting strategically.

What remains of Western military assistance to Ukraine is inadequate amounts of ammunition, older and/or increasingly inappropriate armored vehicles including relics of the Cold War like the Leopard 1 main battle tank, and “training” for Ukrainian soldiers conducted in compressed timelines producing entirely unprepared soldiers almost certain to perish within days of arriving at the battlefield.

The US-led proxy war against Russia in Ukraine is unsustainable, and it appears many in the halls of power across the collective West are coming to grips with that.

Delusion Persists

However, elsewhere in the Western media, a deep sense of delusion is still reflected in articles that, despite admitting Ukraine’s failures, believe a “rethink” of Ukraine’s military strategy could help win what is obviously transforming into a “long war.”

For example, The Economist in its article, “Ukraine faces a long war. A change, of course, is needed,” admits the long-anticipated offensive “is not working,” but goes on to demands more offensive and defensive capabilities for Ukraine, including additional air defense systems and “reliable supplies of artillery,” both of which objectively do not and will not exist in the necessary quantities Ukraine requires for years to come.

At one point in the article, The Economist insists on Europe “beefing up its defense industry,” apparently oblivious to the lead times involved in doing so being measured in years – years Ukraine does not have.

The collective West apparently realizes their plans are failing to end the war in their favor sooner rather than later, but appear unaware that the “long war” they now realize awaits them is beyond their capability to fight by proxy or otherwise. The proxy war, designed to “extend Russia,” is now making Russia stronger militarily and industrially. At the same time, the conflict and the sanctions the West imposed on Russia are serving as a catalyst for other nations to pivot away from the US-led unipolar world and instead invest in a multipolar alternative, fearing that eventually the West may target them in a similar manner.

It is clear that the harder the collective West attempts to place Ukraine in a stronger position at the negotiation table, the weaker Ukraine and its Western sponsors become. The longer this conflict continues, the worse it will be for Ukraine and its sponsors. For the collective West, winning their proxy war is impossible militarily and industrially, but accepting this reality appears equally impossible for the collective West’s leadership psychologically.

Brian Berletic is a Bangkok-based geopolitical researcher and writer, especially for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook”. 

To Many Americans, Government Dysfunction Is the New Normal

 

NEWS ANALYSIS

To Many Americans, Government Dysfunction Is the New Normal

As the nation teetered on the brink of a shutdown, its citizens were largely focused on other things.

As the nation’s capital seemed to be barreling toward another debilitating federal government shutdown this weekend, America, well, did not exactly seem to be on the edge of its collective seat.

Judging by Google search trends, at least, Americans in the days leading up to the shutdown-that-wasn’t were more curious about who shot Tupac Shakur, who might win “The Golden Bachelor” and who would claim the giant Powerball jackpot. Even National Coffee Day 2023 generated more searches at one point than the possible government shutdown.

Those are probably not signs of public confidence that the nation’s leaders would somehow avoid plummeting off the cliff at the last minute, even though, surprisingly, they did. Instead, they may indicate that America at this point assumes that Washington actually will go over the cliff, because that is what Washington does these days. After all, the 11th-hour congressional deal that kept the government open lasts only until mid-November.

America, it seems, has come to expect crisis. In an era of disruption and polarization and insurrection, with a former president facing 91 felony counts in four criminal indictments and a sitting president facing an impeachment inquiry and a House speaker facing a possible move to oust him, the country has grown accustomed to chaos in the capital. Dysfunction is the new normal.

“For the average American outside the Beltway, these hiatuses of governing are looked at as nothing new, unfortunately,” said G. William Hoagland, who spent 33 years in the federal government, most of it as a senior budget official for Senate Republicans.

Government shutdowns are a modern phenomenon, and a measure of how fractious the capital has become. While Congress occasionally failed to pass spending bills on time in the past, it did not result in wholesale closures until President Jimmy Carter’s attorney general ruled in 1980 and 1981 that without congressional appropriations, nonessential functions had to cease. That took place several times under Presidents Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush, but often for just a few hours or days or over a weekend, when it was hardly noticed.

The seismic change came in late 1995 and early 1996, when House Republicans set off back-to-back shutdowns during a budget fight with President Bill Clinton, resulting in a popular backlash that made such tactics politically radioactive for nearly 18 years. Since 2013, however, Presidents Barack Obama, Donald J. Trump and Biden, it seems likely, have all confronted the threat of multiday shutdowns, making them seem almost routine.

💬 America, it seems, has come to expect crisis. In an era of disruption and polarization and insurrection, with a former president facing 91 felony counts in four criminal indictments and a sitting president facing an impeachment inquiry and a House speaker facing a possible move to oust him, the country has grown accustomed to chaos in the capital. Dysfunction is the new normal.

“That is a big part of the problem,” said former Senator Claire McCaskill, Democrat of Missouri. “Dysfunction and chaos are now in the political bloodstream, and therefore folks aren’t calling or emailing D.C.” to register objections with their representatives. “They see this as part of normal, polarized, partisan politics in Washington.”

What made this prospective shutdown different from those that came before was that it was less a fight between Democrats and Republicans than a fight between Republicans and Republicans. Speaker Kevin McCarthy lost control of his narrow majority and was pressed toward a shutdown by a handful of hard-liners who defied him, forcing him to turn to Democrats to avoid it.

In the days leading up to the Saturday midnight deadline, Mr. Biden’s White House tried to stir up public opposition to what it dubbed the “Extreme Republican Shutdown" by blitzing out a string of statements emphasizing the consequences: how it would cut off food assistance for impoverished parents, hinder efforts to fight fentanyl trafficking, delay disaster recovery and suspend paychecks for troops.

Yet as absorbed as Washington was by the game of political chicken, there has not been much of a popular uprising or even much complaining from the elites on Wall Street, who normally worry that a government shutdown could damage the economy. The financial markets shrugged off the threat. The Dow Jones industrial average closed on Friday 1.3 percent down for the week, while the S&P 500 was down about half of that.

The only way that might change, according to political veterans, is if a shutdown lasted for a prolonged period of time, suspending food assistance for millions of low-income mothers and children, closing national parks, delaying air travel and forcing more than three million civilian and military government workers to go without pay. “It will take an extended shutdown, when people really begin to feel pain, to see the political blowback on the Republican House members that are playing this irresponsible game,” said Ms. McCaskill.

Former Representative Carlos Curbelo, Republican of Florida, said “a small minority” of his party had no problem trying “to wreak havoc on the institution” and would continue to do so unless there was a political price to be paid.

“Financial markets and most Americans have become numb to the drama; however, swing voters tend to punish these unnecessary spectacles,” he said.

A survey by Monmouth University showed that voters, by a 2 to 1 margin, preferred their representatives to compromise rather than stick to principles if that led to a shutdown. But even though this weekend’s showdown was precipitated by a small cadre of far-right House Republicans, it was not clear from polls who would be held accountable.

Another survey, by YouGov this past week, showed that 29 percent of Americans blamed House Republicans for the standoff, compared with 14 percent who pinned the blame on House Democrats and 13 percent who named Mr. Biden — in other words, almost evenly split between both parties. Nearly a third considered everyone equally at fault.

💬After all, the 11th-hour congressional deal that kept the government open lasts only until mid-November.

“When you ask the American public if they want compromise, they say yes,” said Patrick Murray, director of the Monmouth poll. “But when you ask them who they will vote for,” he continued, they stand by their party, believing that it’s the other side that isn’t compromising.

David McLennan, a political science professor at Meredith College in Raleigh, N.C., and director of the university’s poll, said the cascade of once-rare eruptions in Washington — shutdown, impeachment, criminal trials, internal revolt — had fed into a broader sense of disenchantment with the direction of the country that has seeped down to the state level. He calls it a “contagion effect.”

“There is no demographic group where the majority of people think things are going well in the country,” he said. “Partisans, Democrats, Republicans and unaffiliated voters all think things are going poorly.”

Maya MacGuineas, president of the bipartisan Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, said the public had become so inured to disarray in Washington that it had lowered the bar for what it would accept.

“Our expectations have plummeted, and we have become dangerously numb to the failures of our government,” she said. ”It gets increasingly difficult to see how we turn this around and maintain our role in the world. The only way it can change is if we make demands of our leaders that are driven not by more outrage, but by a desire for the country to become more united.”

=================

Peter Baker is the chief White House correspondent for The Times. He has covered the last five presidents and sometimes writes analytical pieces that place presidents and their administrations in a larger context and historical framework.

IMF gives mixed scorecard for SL

“Despite early signs of stabilisation, full economic recovery is not yet assured,” Breuer told journalists yesterday.

• Acknowledges Sri Lanka’s economic progress amidst challenges
• Says sustaining reform momentum critical to put economy on path towards lasting recovery
• Expresses concern over significant disparity between Govt. spending and tax collection
• Predicts revenue mobilisation gains will fall short of initial projections by 15% by year end
• Govt. is tasked to raise revenue equivalent to 12% of GDP by end-2024 
• Commends steady progress in implementing structural reforms
• Says no fixed timeline for second tranche of $ 2.9 b facility
• Notes banks will suffer from restructuring, despite financial stability maintained
• Opines people are experiencing consequences of past policies, significant tax cuts in 2019

By Charumini de Silva, Daily FT Thursday, 28 September 2023

 IMF Mission Chief Peter Breuer gestures 

during the media briefing held at the 

Central Bank yesterday 

– Pic by Pradeep Pathirana 

The International Monetary Fund (IMF) yesterday said Sri Lanka is showing ‘tentative signs of stabilisation’ but insisted concerted efforts are still required to steer the country towards a complete economic recovery.

This observation follows the conclusion of a visit by an IMF staff mission team led by Peter Breuer and Katsiaryna Svirydzenka to Colombo from 14 to 27 September to discuss economic and financial policies to support the approval of the first review of the program under the $ 2.9 billion Extended Fund Facility (EFF).

“Despite early signs of stabilisation, full economic recovery is not yet assured,” Breuer told journalists yesterday.

Noting that the people of Sri Lanka have shown remarkable resilience in the face of enormous challenges, he said the country made commendable progress in implementing difficult, but much-needed reforms.

“Growth momentum remains subdued, with real GDP in the second quarter contracting by 3.1% on a year-on-year (YoY) basis and high-frequency economic indicators continuing to provide mixed signals. Reserve accumulation has slowed in recent months. Sustaining the reform momentum is critical to put the economy on a path towards lasting recovery and stable and inclusive economic growth,” he added.

Breuer pointed out that the significant gap between Government expenditures and revenue collection remains a concern, adding that reforms in tax policies and administration are vital to bridge it.

Stating that the Government has met the program’s primary balance targets and remains committed to this important pillar of the program to support their efforts to restore debt sustainability, he said that revenue mobilisation gains are expected to fall short of initial projections by nearly 15% by year-end, in part due to economic factors.

“Tax collection is a concern. It is an important pillar of the program to sustain the essential expenditures of Government services like education, health, infrastructure and support for the poor and vulnerable with an appropriate amount of revenue. However, in Sri Lanka, there is a big gap between State revenue and expenditure. The expenditures are 19% of GDP and the revenue is 9% of GDP and that gap needs to be filled. To accomplish that objective, it is important to have the appropriate tax policies and tax administration systems in place that support this effort.

He explained the need to address missing tax revenues requires reforms to increase taxation, recognising the impact on the population’s financial burden.

“This extends beyond taxes, encompassing utility prices and inflation, which have significantly raised costs for citizens. The country is grappling with the consequences of past policies and shocks, particularly the massive tax cut in 2019 compounded by subsequent economic challenges. This culminated in a crisis last summer, necessitating the public to share in the financial responsibilities.

He emphasised that to increase revenues and signal better governance, it is important to strengthen tax administration, remove tax exemptions, and actively eliminate tax evasion.

“The objective for the Government in 2024 is to raise revenue, equivalent to 12% of GDP. So there is some way to go to get there. We are looking to the benefits of the tax reforms that were introduced last year to bear full fruit and to be supplemented with appropriate conditionals,” Breuer said.

He commended the Government’s steady progress in implementing structural reforms, including the enactment of crucial legislations like the Central Bank Act and the Anti-Corruption Act, noting that if implemented effectively, it could significantly enhance governance.

❝

• Commends steady progress in implementing structural reforms
• Says no fixed timeline for second tranche of $ 2.9 b facility

❞ 

It was also noted that the upcoming IMF Governance Diagnostic report is expected to further guide future reform strategies aimed at strengthening governance.

In the context of the IMF’s assessment process for the second tranche, Breuer said there is ‘no fixed timeline’.

“Two crucial conditions must be met: firstly, an agreement on policies and reforms to progress in line with program objectives, especially in light of identified shortfalls this year. Efforts are underway to address and compensate for this shortfall. Secondly, addressing the debt situation and reaching agreements with creditors is essential for sustainability. Once both conditions are satisfied, an administrative process follows, including the preparation of a performance assessment report. This report undergoes various stages before being reviewed by the Executive Board, which ultimately makes the final decision and publishes the findings for public access,” he explained.

Regarding debt sustainability, he acknowledged ongoing efforts to regain control through domestic debt restructuring and discussions with external creditors.

On the debt situation, he said the key lies in a process called ‘financing assurances’, relevant to both official and commercial creditors. “In Sri Lanka’s case, the debt is spread around quite a bit, externally and domestically. What we look for is to be able to move forward in this debt restructuring case is adequate progress in the negotiations with the creditors. That would give us confidence that this process will be concluded promptly with program objectives and deadlines,” Breuer said.

“From the IMF perspective, what matters to us is that debt targets are achieved. Remember, these are the targets concerning the debt stock on the floor. The gross financing needs the debt service on the external side and also the debt relief that is needed within the program period. The Government has chosen a particular way and the banks are not in there. While we care about the target, we also care, to some extent, how we get it to maintain financial and social stability because otherwise the problem could just become worse and then these targets do not apply anymore,” he added.

He said the financial stability is maintained, but the banks will nevertheless suffer from the restructuring through the exposure to the Government through domestic foreign exchange instruments, as well as external foreign exchange instruments.

The IMF’s mission reaffirmed its commitment to providing support during these challenging times, highlighting the dynamic nature of programs that may require adjustments to meet their objectives.

☝

Explainer: Why US-led Saudi-Israel normalization talks are doomed to fail?

 

PRESS TV Wednesday, 27 September 2023 By Reza Javadi

On Tuesday, two events took place simultaneously that highlighted Saudi Arabia’s misplaced foreign policy priorities, especially vis-a-vis Palestine and Israeli settler colonialism.

In the occupied West Bank city of Ramallah, Saudi Arabia's newly appointed envoy to Palestine Nayef al-Sudairi presented his credentials to Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas.

Palestinian foreign ministry had earlier welcomed the appointment of the Saudi ambassador, describing it as “a historic milestone for developing fraternal relations between the two sister countries.”

Israeli Foreign Minister Eli Cohen told Tel Aviv’s 103 FM radio station Sunday that the Saudi ambassador’s appointment comes amid “the advancement of talks between the US and the Saudis regarding Israel.”

On the same day, the Israeli tourism minister landed in Riyadh, in what was described as the first visit by a senior Israeli regime official to the Arab kingdom, to attend a World Tourism Organization event.

"I will work to create collaborations to promote tourism and Israel's foreign relations," Katz said in a statement as cited by various media outlets.

The two events, according to observers, lay bare the duplicity of some Arab states in keeping the channels of diplomacy open with the Israeli regime while claiming support for the Palestinian cause.

The farce of normalization

Speculation has been rife that the US is trying to mediate the normalization of ties between the Saudi government and Israel, even though previous normalization agreements under the Abraham Accords brokered by Washington have so far proved to be an exercise in futility.

Saudi Arabia reportedly has put specific conditions for recognizing Israel. In an interview with Fox News last week, Saudi Crown Prince Mohammad Bin Salman cited the Palestinian issue and asserted that it is very important and needs to be resolved.

However, he didn’t rule out normalization with the Tel Aviv regime, dismissing reports that the ongoing talks have been suspended. He said the two sides are coming closer every day.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has also prioritized normalization with Saudi Arabia, but it remains uncertain how his right-wing coalition will respond to any Saudi demands.

Netanyahu told Bloomberg TV on August 7 that the Palestinian issue is “a lot less than you think” on the agenda of negotiating normalization with the Saudis and affirmed that his regime categorically rejects the idea of a viable Palestinian state.   

Addressing the UN General Assembly on Saturday, Saudi Foreign Minister Prince Faisal bin Farhan warned that regional security in West Asia hinges on a “just, comprehensive solution to the Palestinian issue” and appeared to criticize Israel for “unilateral measures that are a flagrant violation of international law”

“Security in the Middle East region requires the acceleration of… a just, comprehensive solution to the Palestinian issue; the solution must be based on resolutions in the international arena and must bring about a peace that allows [the] Palestinian people to have an independent state based on the 1967 borders with East Jerusalem as its capital,” he said.

In his speech to the UNGA, Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas warned against sidelining the Palestinian people's legitimate national rights in any potential normalization agreement.

“Those who think that peace can prevail in the Middle East without the Palestinian people enjoying their full legitimate national rights would be mistaken,” Abbas told the summit of world leaders.

❠ 

Netanyahu told Bloomberg TV on August 7 that the Palestinian issue is “a lot less than you think” on the agenda of negotiating normalization with the Saudis and affirmed that his regime categorically rejects the idea of a viable Palestinian state.   

❠ 

Normalization and conditions

Saudi Arabia's conditions for a potential normalization pact with the Israeli regime go beyond Palestine.

Riyadh is seeking several concessions from the US, including support for its nuclear program, expansion of trade (including a free trade agreement), and various commitments related to defense.  These defense commitments encompass security guarantees, access to advanced military equipment, and more efficient procurement processes.

Meanwhile, members of the US Congress are hesitant to grant significant concessions to Riyadh, adding complexity to the negotiations. In exchange for meeting Saudi conditions, the US seeks Riyadh's commitment to cease sensitive transactions with Beijing and align more closely with US interests.

The Saudis appear unwilling to downgrade their relations with China, as China has already made substantial investments in Saudi Arabia's economic infrastructure, including in telecommunications, the sale of advanced weaponry, and cooperation on drone and ballistic missile production.

Furthermore, China's Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), a Chinese-led infrastructure project connecting Asia to Europe, has bolstered its presence in Saudi Arabia, with the kingdom being a pivotal component of this project among the Persian Gulf states.

In his July 2022 Middle East tour, US President Joe Biden affirmed that the US “will not walk away and leave a vacuum to be filled by China, Russia or Iran” but this visit did not accomplish its objectives, neither in energy nor in strategy, beyond opening Saudi airspace to Israel.

Despite US efforts to counter China's influence in the region, China has strengthened its ties with Saudi Arabia through a series of agreements. During Chinese President Xi Jinping’s visit to Riyadh last year, China finalized over 40 deals with Saudi Arabia covering the climate, technology, and energy sectors.

These agreements are poised to enhance economic and investment cooperation between the two countries, aligning with Saudi Arabia's Vision 2030 and the Belt and Road Initiative.

Saudi Minister of Investment Khalid Al-Falih stated that the accords will “contribute to raising the pace of economic and investment cooperation between the two countries.”

In a recent interview with Xinhua, Saudi Minister of Industry and Mineral Resources Bandar Alkhorayef highlighted the high complementarity between the two countries in the fields of economy and trade.

“The deep synergy between the Belt and Road Initiative and Saudi Arabia's Vision 2030 will bring advanced science, technology and ideas to the country, and boost its economic and social development,” Alkhorayef said.

“China is not only an important partner of our kingdom in the economic field but also in many other areas,” he added.

Betrayal of Palestinians

Amid reports of progress in normalization talks between Tel Aviv and Riyadh, Israeli atrocities continue in the occupied Palestinian territories, which have been quietly condemned by Riyadh.

Saudi Arabia issued a statement on Monday condemning incidents involving Jews praying on the Temple Mount, home to the al-Aqsa Mosque, the third holiest site in Islam.

“The Ministry of Foreign Affairs expresses the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia’s condemnation of the repeated provocative practices carried out by a group of extremists at al-Aqsa Mosque under the protection of the Israeli occupation forces,” the statement noted.

At the same time, they continue normalization talks with the Netanyahu regime, which have significantly increased in recent months, as confirmed by the highest officials on both sides.

Experts believe Saudi Arabia’s normalization with the apartheid regime in Tel Aviv, if it materializes, will represent another betrayal of the Palestinian cause and the Muslim world at large.

Iran’s President Ebrahim Raeisi, addressing a press conference on the sidelines of the UN General Assembly summit in New York last week, warned that any normalization deal between Saudis and Israelis would amount to a “betrayal” of the Palestinian cause.

“The initiation of a relationship between the Zionist regime and any country in the region, if it is with the aim to bring security for the Zionist regime, will certainly not do so,” the Iranian president asserted.

“We believe that a relationship between regional countries and the Zionist regime is a stab in the back of the Palestinian people and of the resistance of the Palestinians.”

Palestinians have also expressed concern and rage over the possible deal between Saudi Arabia and the Israeli regime, slamming it as a betrayal.

Failed normalizations

Before Saudi Arabia, the UAE and Bahrain formalized ties with the Tel Aviv regime in 2020 in what became known as the Abraham Accords. Sudan and Morocco also followed them. 

The normalization between the UAE and Israel is considered a failed exercise by regional experts, as the agreement has not yielded any results for the two sides.

More importantly, the accord has failed to bring any stability to the region and has had nothing more than entrenching Israeli settler colonialism.

When the UAE agreed to normalize relations with Israel in 2020 through the Abraham Accords, it faced criticism for betraying the Palestinian cause. 

The UAE defended its decision, claiming it served Palestinian interests by preventing Israel's annexation of the West Bank and preserving the two-state solution.

However, recent statements from Abu Dhabi's Ambassador in Washington, Yousef Al-Otaiba, suggest that the situation on the ground is different.

Al-Otaiba noted that Israel's actions in the West Bank are effectively annexing the territory, complicating the prospects for a two-state solution.

“It’s challenging because it’s ongoing. It’s happening subtly, which complicates the path to a two-state solution even further” Al-Otaiba said, adding that “our agreement had a specific timeframe, which is nearly over. Thus, we cannot influence decisions made beyond that period.”

Given the increasing Israeli violence against Palestinians under the current far-right regime, the UAE has condemned Israel's violations of basic Palestinian rights.

Three years into their relationship, the UAE faces significant challenges in dealing with Israel's most extreme right-wing regime ever, including the likes of Bezalel Smotrich, Itamar Ben-Gvir, and others.

A recent survey conducted by Arab Barometer, a research group affiliated with Princeton University, revealed that the majority of citizens across the Middle East/West Asia region oppose the normalization of relations between Arab states and Israel.

The extensive survey, conducted between October 2021 and July 2022, involved 26,000 participants from 11 populous MENA countries.

Participants were asked the question: “To what extent do you favor or oppose the normalization of relations between Arab states and Israel?”

In nine out of the 11 countries surveyed, fewer than one in five participants expressed support for normalization agreements with Israel, which shows how unpopular the move is.

Experts believe Saudi Arabia’s normalization, if it happens, will not only not serve the interests of any party but prove counter-productive for Riyadh and the region.

☝

China stresses need for WTO reform, high-level opening-up

 

SOURCE / ECONOMY

By GT staff reporters Published: Sep 27, 2023 

Nation’s 'dual circulation' policy doesn’t mean isolation: experts

China's top leadership has stressed efforts to actively participate in the reform of the World Trade Organization (WTO) and improve the ability to handle high-level opening-up. 

Xi Jinping, general secretary of the Communist Party of China (CPC) Central Committee, made the remarks while presiding over a group study session of the Political Bureau of the CPC Central Committee on Wednesday, Xinhua News Agency reported.

He urged efforts to fully participate in WTO reform and adjustments of international economic and trade rules, while promoting deep-level reform and high-quality development with high-level opening-up.

Historical changes have taken place in the relationship between China and the WTO, he said, noting that the country has gradually grown from a passive recipient of and an active adapter to international economic and trade rules, to an important participant in this field.

The facts have proven that China's decision to join the WTO was a perfectly right one, as the accession has not only accelerated China's own development but also benefited the rest of the world, Xi said.

He stressed the need to stick to the overall trend of economic globalization, champion free trade and true multilateralism, oppose unilateralism and protectionism, oppose politicizing, weaponizing and overstretching the concept of national security on economic and trade issues, and build an open world economy.

Experts have highlighted China's proactive engagement in WTO reform, its commitment to opening-up and contribution to multilateralism and free trade.

Dong Shaopeng, a senior research fellow at the Chongyang Institute for Financial Studies, told the Global Times on Wednesday that China's entry into the WTO has led to a boost in global trade, thanks to China's advantages in population, resources, and sophisticated industry system. 

Dong also highlighted that China's role as a world factory has helped balance global merchandise prices and ease global inflation.

Li Yong, a senior research fellow at the China Association of International Trade, told the Global Times on Wednesday that China's commitment to continuing high-quality opening-up will contribute to China's "standard-bearer" role for free trade and investment and globalization, which is facing headwinds under the complex global geopolitical situation.

As the world's largest trading nation, the second largest economy and the world's largest consumer market, China's further opening-up stands to benefit partner countries, Li said.

Since its accession to the WTO more than 20 years ago, China has become the world's largest trader for goods and a major trading partner for over 140 countries and regions, contributing an average of nearly 30 percent to the world's annual economic growth.

Experts also argued that China's development, centered on "domestic circulation," does not equate to a policy of isolationism or abandoning the international market, as hyped by some Western media.

"Dual circulation," the new development paradigm that China adopted in 2020, takes the domestic market as the mainstay while allowing domestic and foreign markets to reinforce each other.

Dong said that large economies like China, the US, and India should focus on domestic economic circulation, which is the basis for generating spillover effects to the outside world and driving global economic growth.

"China's 'dual circulation' strategy aligns with the regular trend of large economies and stigmatization against China from some Western media exposes their misunderstanding and ignorance," Dong said.

The "dual circulation" strategy will make China more proactive in its openness, effectively enhancing its resilience against risks, and is also a response to the Western "decoupling" from China, expert said.

In fact, China has been continuously exploring higher levels of openness, and the construction of pilot free trade zones (FTZs) serve as a proactive exploration.

Xi has recently delivered instructions on advancing the development of FTZs, Xinhua reported.

He called for being a pioneer to forge ahead and overcome difficulties, explore a wider field and at a deeper level, and strive to build higher-level pilot FTZs.

He said that it is essential to align domestic rules with international economic and trade rules by high standards, further promote institutional opening-up, strengthen overall planning and systematic integration of reform, and promote innovative development of the entire industrial chain.

Since the establishment of the first pilot FTZ in Shanghai in 2013, China has so far established 21 FTZs and the Hainan Free Trade Port.

In the past 10 years, 278 institutional innovations have been formulated in FTZs and then replicated nationwide, covering investment facilitation, trade liberalization, financial opening-up, among other fields, Xinhua reported.

☝

Who’s Gaining Ground in Ukraine? This Year, No One.

Less territory changed hands in August than in any other month of the war, according to a New York Times analysis of data from the Institute for the Study of War. While Ukraine made small gains in the south, Russia took slightly more land overall, mostly in the northeast.

Across the front line, every mile of territory has been a grinding fight, with no repeat of the rapid breakthrough that Kyiv managed in Kharkiv in September last year, when Russia’s defenses collapsed after a surprise Ukrainian counterattack.

Russia and Ukraine have faced similar challenges this year. Both sides are fighting for positions that have remained largely entrenched for months, or even years in some parts of eastern Ukraine. Seasoned troops and commanders who were killed earlier in the war have been replaced with new recruits who often lack sufficient training.

Ukraine’s counteroffensive has struggled to push forward across the wide-open fields in the south. It is facing extensive minefields and hundreds of miles of fortifications — trenches, anti-tank ditches and concrete obstacles — that Russia built last winter to slow Ukrainian vehicles and force them into positions where they could be more easily targeted.

When both sides’ gains are added up, Russia now controls nearly 200 square miles more territory in Ukraine compared with the start of the year.

Rather than seeking rapid gains, the Russian military appears to be comfortable holding the territory it already controls, according to Marina Miron, a postdoctoral researcher in war studies at King’s College London. “It’s not losing anything by not moving forward,” she said.

Russia’s forces outnumber Ukraine’s nearly three to one on the battlefield, and with a larger population to replenish its ranks, Russia could see a prolonged defense as in its interests.

“The whole strategy in Ukraine is for the Russians to let the Ukrainians run against those defenses, kill as many as possible, and destroy as much Western equipment as possible,” she added.

Russia controls about 18 percent of Ukraine — a swath of land larger than Switzerland. This includes Crimea and part of eastern Ukraine, which it has occupied since 2014.

The slowdown comes with huge risks for Ukraine. If it looks unlikely to recapture large areas of the country, Western support could wane, either through lack of political will or unwillingness to donate more weapons, especially given the yearslong wait for deliveries of replacement equipment.

“Russia is trying to wait out until the West turns its back,” said Dr. Miron.

Ukraine continues to battle through Russia’s defenses in the south. Last month it successfully recaptured the village of Robotyne, and in recent days moved armored vehicles past Russia’s main anti-tank defenses near Verbove, about eight miles to the west of Robotyne.

But the clock is ticking for Ukraine’s counteroffensive to make significant territorial gains. Heavy rains are expected next month, and muddy terrain could prevent the use of heavy vehicles, such as the newly arrived U.S. Abrams tanks and the Challenger tanks supplied by Britain. “When there is mud and you have a 75-ton Challenger, it will just sink,” said Dr. Miron.

Our Coverage of the War in Ukraine

---

• The Future of Ukraine: The European Union and NATO have promised a path to membership for the country. But real partnership will hold risks and benefits.

• Photos: Photographers with The New York Times and other news organizations have been chronicling the war, capturing a slice of how soldiers and civilians have experienced it. Our photographers say some images will never leave them.

• Defying Isolation: After the invasion of Ukraine, the West tried to cut Russia off from the rest of the world. But wealthy Russians continue to rely on a network of middlemen to circumvent the restrictions.

• A Wartime Partnership: The alliance between President Biden and President Volodymyr Zelensky of Ukraine has become critical to the world order.

• Zelensky’s Rise: The Ukrainian president, once brushed off as a political lightweight, has become a household name, representing his country’s tenacity.

⚫

Justin Trudeau Accuses India of a Killing on Canadian Soil

The Canadian leader said agents of India had assassinated a Sikh community leader in British Columbia in June. India called the accusation “absurd.”

Over the past number of weeks, Canadian security agencies have been actively pursuing credible allegations of a potential link between agents of the government of India and the killing of a Canadian citizen, Hardeep Singh Nijjar. Any involvement of a foreign government in the killing of a Canadian citizen on Canadian soil is an unacceptable violation of our sovereignty. In the strongest possible terms, I continue to urge the government of India to cooperate with Canada to get to the bottom of this matter. We’ve been clear we will not tolerate any form of foreign interference. As of today, and as a consequence, we’ve expelled a top Indian diplomat from Canada.

By Ian Austen and Vjosa Isai

Ian Austen reported from Ottawa, and Vjosa Isai from Toronto.

Sept. 18, 2023

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau of Canada said on Monday that “agents of the government of India” had carried out the assassination of a Sikh community leader in British Columbia in June, an explosive allegation that is likely to further sour relations between the two nations.

Speaking in the House of Commons, Mr. Trudeau said that he had raised India’s involvement in the shooting of the Sikh leader, Hardeep Singh Nijjar, directly with Prime Minister Narendra Modi at the Group of 20 summit meeting earlier this month “in no uncertain terms.” He said the allegation was based on intelligence gathered by the Canadian government.

“Any involvement of a foreign government in the killing of a Canadian citizen on Canadian soil is an unacceptable violation of our sovereignty,” Mr. Trudeau told lawmakers. He said Canada would pressure India to cooperate with the investigation into the killing of Mr. Nijjar, who advocated Sikh separatism.

Mélanie Joly, the foreign minister, later announced that Canada had expelled an Indian diplomat whom she described as the head of India’s intelligence agency in Canada.

India’s foreign ministry rejected the Canadian allegations on Tuesday morning as “absurd” and politically motivated, saying that Canada had long provided shelter to “Khalistani terrorists and extremists” who threaten India’s security. Khalistan is what Sikh separatists call the independent state they seek to create.

The ministry said that Mr. Modi had “completely rejected” the allegations when Mr. Trudeau presented them to him. “We urge the government of Canada to take prompt and effective legal action against all anti-India elements operating from their soil,” the ministry said in a statement.

----------------------------------------------------

Canada’s Assassination Claim Against India

• A Stunning Accusation: Canada accused India of assassinating a Sikh leader in British Columbia in June, further souring relations between the two nations. “The Daily” explains the situation.
• U.S. Intelligence: American spy agencies provided information to their Canadian counterparts after the killing, but communications intercepted by Canada were more definitive in linking India to the plot.
• Biden in a Bind: The alleged assassination has left President Biden caught between U.S. allies — one of America’s oldest friends and the newer friend he has been cultivating.
• A Divided Diaspora: The allegation has revived long-simmering tensions within Canada’s Indian diaspora, pitting Hindu nationalists against supporters of the creation of an independent Sikh state.

---------------------------------------------------------- 

It later said that it had moved to expel a senior Canadian diplomat based in India.

The allegation that India’s government was involved in a political killing in Canada is likely to further corrode relations between the two countries. Earlier this month, Canada suspended negotiations on a trade deal with India that were scheduled to have been concluded this year — because of the assassination allegations, it now appears. During the G20, Mr. Modi excluded Mr. Trudeau from the list of leaders with whom he held formal bilateral meetings.

Mr. Trudeau said many Canadians of Indian origin — they make up about 4 percent of the population — had been angered by the killing and in some cases feared for their personal safety. There are about 1.4 million Canadians of Indian heritage, many of whom are Sikhs; they include Jagmeet Singh, the leader of the opposition New Democratic Party, which is keeping Mr. Trudeau’s minority government in power. Singh is a common surname and middle name in Punjab.

Mr. Nijjar, 45, was shot near a Sikh temple in Surrey, British Columbia. At a news conference in June, investigators from the Royal Canadian Mounted Police said he had been ambushed by masked men, but would not say whether the attack appeared politically motivated.

Mr. Nijjar was known for his advocacy of the creation of an independent Sikh nation, Khalistan, that would include parts of India’s Punjab state, and India had declared him a wanted terrorist.

Citing the police investigation, neither Ms. Joly nor Dominic LeBlanc, the minister of public safety, offered any details about Indian involvement in the killing. But Mr. LeBlanc said that Jody Thomas, Mr. Trudeau’s national security adviser, as well as the head of Canada’s intelligence service, had traveled over the past few weeks “to confront the Indian intelligence agencies with these allegations.”

It was unclear from the two minister’s remarks how forthcoming the Indian government has been or what cooperation, if any, it has offered.

Ms. Joly said she planned to discuss India’s actions during meetings with Canada’s allies after she travels to New York this week for the United Nations General Assembly.

The announcement came on the same day that a judge opened a public inquiry into interference by foreign governments. It was prompted by allegations that China is meddling in Canadian politics, but Mr. LeBlanc said that reviewing India’s actions are within the inquiry’s mandate. “Obviously these allegations are at a much more serious level,” he said.

Mr. Nijjar was vocal about the threats to his life, which were shared with Canada’s spy agency, the World Sikh Organization of Canada, a nonprofit, said in a statement.

“If these allegations are true, they represent an outrageous affront to Canada’s sovereignty,” said Pierre Poilievre, leader of the Conservative Party. “Our citizens must be safe from extrajudicial killings of all kinds, most of all from foreign governments.”

Mr. Singh, the New Democratic Party leader, broke with protocol to address the House of Commons in Punjabi as well English and said he had spoken with Mr. Nijjar’s son. “I could hear the pain of that loss in his voice,” Mr. Singh said. “I can only imagine how much more painful it is going to be knowing this potential connection.”

Rumors about possible retribution by India against those critical of its government have stoked fear within the Sikh expatriate community and discouraged many from returning to that country, Mr. Singh said. But Canada, he said, had been seen as “a beacon of safety.”

“That safety and security that so many Canadians feel has now been rocked,” he said.

Sikhs are a relatively small religious group, with about 25 million adherents worldwide, most of them in India.

A violent Sikh insurgency that took shape in India in the 1980s killed a number of government officials. The government responded with widespread human rights abuses, including torture and extrajudicial killings, according to human rights groups.

In 1984, Prime Minister Indira Gandhi sent the military to storm the Golden Temple in Amritsar, the holiest site in Sikhism, which had been fortified by heavily armed Sikh militants. The government said hundreds of people were killed in the clash, but others put the death toll in the thousands.

In retaliation, two of the prime minister’s Sikh body guards assassinated her, prompting riots in which thousands of Sikhs were killed.

In 1985 a bomb exploded on an Air India flight from Toronto to London, killing all 329 people on board. It remains Canada’s deadliest terrorist attack and worst mass murder.

After a prolonged investigation and trial, two Sikh separatists from British Columbia were acquitted in 2005 of murder and conspiracy in that explosion as well as a second blast that killed two baggage handlers in Japan. Many witnesses had either died — some were murdered — or apparently been intimidated out of testifying. Wiretaps by Canada’s intelligence agency had been erased before they could be used as evidence and physical evidence was destroyed in the blast.

A third Sikh man was found guilty of manslaughter for his role in making the bombs and, later, of perjury at the murder trial.

About a year ago, Ripudaman Singh Malik, one of the men acquitted in 2005, was shot to death. Two men were later arrested, but the killing rattled the Sikh community in British Columbia.

🔴Trudeau went public with India allegations because story was going to come out in the media: minister

Canada's minister of emergency preparedness says the prime minister publicly implicated India in the murder of a Canadian citizen because he learned the story was going to come out in the media.

Justin Trudeau stood in Parliament on Monday and announced: "Canadian security agencies have been actively pursuing credible allegations of a potential link between agents of the government of India and the killing of a Canadian citizen, Hardeep Singh Nijjar."

The Sikh leader was shot dead outside a Sikh temple in Surrey, B.C., on June 18. India has vehemently denied involvement in his death and called Canada's allegations "absurd."

Nijjar was a supporter of a Sikh homeland in the form of an independent Khalistani state. India branded him a terrorist and accused him of leading a militant separatist group. His supporters deny this.

Minister Harjit Sajjan, the Liberal MP for Vancouver South, says the investigation into Nijjar's death is still ongoing, but Trudeau wanted to ensure Canadians had "the accurate information" about the story before it made headlines. Here is part of Sajjan's conversation with As It Happens host Nil Köksal.

What evidence is there to support the allegations the prime minister is making?

First and foremost, there is a police investigation currently undergoing and they're independent to conduct their investigation. It would be very inappropriate for me to discuss anything about that.

Why not wait until after the RCMP has finished its investigation? Why did the prime minister come out with what he said before that?

It was important for the prime minister to make the statement that he did because some information was going to ... come out within the media.

The safety of Canadians is very important and making sure that they have the accurate information. And that's one of the reasons why the prime minister went out with this statement.

One day after explosive allegation, Trudeau says he's not trying to 'provoke' India

Questions mount about security precautions for Nijjar after India's government linked to killing

You can't share the evidence with us. But how specific [have] the prime minister and other officials ... been able to be with the Indian government? Because you've heard what they've said. They've called this all "absurd" and are rejecting it outright.

Our government officials at various agencies have spoken with their Indian counterparts on this, and the prime minister has also raised this.

And I also just want to clarify one thing based on your question. When it comes to the evidence, it's the police that hold the evidence. And they, alone, decide the next actions on this. 

Do you worry, though, that the prime minister coming out with this before that investigation is finished … has hampered any potential attempts to get the kind of co-operation you need from India in this?

I can assure you that the decision for the prime minister to go out … was done with the full consultation of the appropriate agencies involved. 

And, again, we would prefer not to have to come out, but because if there were stories that were going to be coming out, it's important for the prime minister to make it very clear what is taking place based on, you know, the amount of information that could be provided.

Making sure to give calm to Canadians is an absolute priority for us. And this is one of the reasons why the prime minister went out, is to give confidence and calm to Canadians — and just in case somebody is trying to use certain information to divide Canadians, which we have seen many times in the past.

A group of Sikh men speak informally to each other for a posed photograph.

What do you say, though, to Canadians who worry that things aren't calm and that they may not be able to be protected by police? Because, as you well know,  Hardeep Singh Nijjar was warned by CSIS. The community in British Columbia, the Sikh community, people at the heart of this story, have said they have repeatedly told your government that something like this could and would happen. So why wasn't more done to protect him?

First of all, these types of operational questions will have to be answered by the RCMP. But one thing I can tell you [is] when it comes to the work that is done, there's a lot of work that happens also behind the scenes. Some can be talked about, but most of it can't. And I can say with absolute surety that when there is credible information, a threat to someone, our intelligence agencies and our police agencies do act swiftly on this. 

And right now, because there is an ongoing investigation, we can't talk about the details of the case, obviously.

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau says India may be responsible for the killing of Hardeep Singh Nijjar, a prominent Sikh community leader in Surrey. Some of his supporters in Surrey say they hope justice will be served.

[Gurpreet Singh], an independent journalist who had interviewed Mr. Nijjar, told us last night on the program that {Mr. Nijjar] had been given a bullet-proof vest. He was allowed to use that. So were there not enough credible claims to protect him further?

I'm not going to get into details of what took place and what did not take place. But I can assure you and Canadians, when there is credible information by our intelligence agencies, they work very closely with the police agencies to make sure that the individual has the important information.

Former B.C. premier and former federal Liberal MP Ujjal Dosanjh was speaking to our colleagues at CBC News. And while he doesn't condone, he said, what has happened here and this killing, he said that your government has become, as he put it, a friend of the Khalistanis, not of India. 

So do you feel Canada is doing enough to draw a line between allowing freedom of expression in this country, but also making sure that it is not fuelling further conflict?

With absolute due respect to the former colleague, I absolutely disagree with his assertion on this. 

I'll be honest with you. My face turns blue [from] how many times we have said this. I don't know what else, sometimes, what we can do. The prime minister, myself, many other ministers, we've been very clear on our approach with this.

We absolutely will fight for the right for any Canadian to express their viewpoint peacefully. Anybody who crosses the line is absolutely unacceptable. 

We do not advocate for the break up of any other country, and especially India, and I've been very public about this in the past. 

I feel for all the Canadians who have constantly been questioned on their loyalty and who they are, and in some cases just because they bring up a certain viewpoint that they might have, and they do it in a peaceful manner, and they get labelled in a certain way.

Canada's allies aren't keen to take sides in confrontation with India over Sikh activist's death

We, as a very strong democracy, want to protect our independence, our police, our judicial system and freedom of the press and also the freedom to express their viewpoints peacefully. 

With files from CBC News. Interview produced by Morgan Passi. Q&A edited for length and clarity