The Biden administration has lifted most bans on defense technology sharing with Australia and the United Kingdom in order to fast-track the development of emerging weapons technologies among the allies.

“These critical reforms will revolutionize defense trade, innovation and cooperation, enabling collaboration at the speed and scale required to meet our challenging strategic circumstances,” Australian Defense Minister Richard Marles said Thursday.

The agreement is designed to establish “an export license-free environment,” as Australian officials put it, in conjunction with the implementation of the AUKUS deal between the three allies. Although the Australian navy’s acquisition of U.S. and British nuclear submarine technology has dominated the international spotlight, “Pillar Two” of the AUKUS deal also aims to harness the advanced technology sectors of each country in a bid to win an emerging technology race with China.

“As tensions increase, and conflicts continue around the globe, our partnerships with our allies are critically important,” British Defense Secretary John Healey said Thursday. “This is a breakthrough that will allow our three nations to deepen our collaboration on defence technology and trade. Our new government will reinforce the UK’s role in AUKUS to boost Britain’s military capabilities and economic growth.”

President Joe Biden’s team regards emerging technologies such as quantum computing and artificial intelligence as “the strategic high ground,” as Deputy Secretary of State Kurt Campbell put it recently. The pressure to outpace China, which is pouring money into a military modernization project powered in part by stolen from Western companies, spurred officials in Washington, London, and Canberra to put a premium on Pillar Two of the deal.

“We need to build an innovation system … across our three countries which stimulates the defense industry base across our three countries,” Marles said at a Center for Strategic and International Studies event last week. “Each of us have our own innovation systems which are focused on our own domestic defense industry bases. How we get value add here is by really kind of getting those much more harmonized.”

Those aspirations have been enmired in hesitation within the U.S. government about easing foreign access to prized American technology, a misgiving that has irritated proponents of the deal. “We have not realized the promise, the bright promise, of this partnership,” Sen. James Risch (R-ID), the top Republican on the Foreign Relations Committee, said during a hearing last month. “It was supposed to be a game-changer, but State’s exclusion of the exact technologies we need to advance AUKUS has inhibited this partnership from moving aggressively to reality.”

Still, defense officials announced last week that the AUKUS countries had “tested cutting edge autonomous and AI-enabled sensing capabilities in a multi-domain battlespace … that minimize the time between sensing enemy targets, deciding how to respond, and responding to the threat.” The Pentagon hailed those trials as a portent of future AUKUS projects.

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER

“This will be the most important strategic military engagement between the United States and Australia, and brings Britain into the context of what we’re engaging with in the Indo-Pacific,” Campbell told Risch in the July 30 hearing. “I can tell you that this will be never-ending. We will have to invest substantial resources, build internal capacities in our government and with our institutions to contest everywhere.”

Marles, the Australian defense chief, offered a similar overview. “A lot of this stuff is, you know, genuinely groundbreaking technology,” he said at CSIS. “I think we … will end up evaluating Pillar 2 based on whether it meets its stated objective, which is to pull through innovative technologies into service quickly. And quickly is measured in years, not decades.” 

2024-08-15 20:28:00, http://s.wordpress.com/mshots/v1/https%3A%2F%2Fwww.washingtonexaminer.com%2Fpolicy%2Fdefense%2F3123337%2Fus-drops-technology-export-bans-australia-united-kingdom%2F?w=600&h=450, The Biden administration has lifted most bans on defense technology sharing with Australia and the United Kingdom in order to fast-track the development of emerging weapons technologies among the allies. “These critical reforms will revolutionize defense trade, innovation and cooperation, enabling collaboration at the speed and scale required to meet our challenging strategic circumstances,” Australian,

The Biden administration has lifted most bans on defense technology sharing with Australia and the United Kingdom in order to fast-track the development of emerging weapons technologies among the allies.

“These critical reforms will revolutionize defense trade, innovation and cooperation, enabling collaboration at the speed and scale required to meet our challenging strategic circumstances,” Australian Defense Minister Richard Marles said Thursday.

The agreement is designed to establish “an export license-free environment,” as Australian officials put it, in conjunction with the implementation of the AUKUS deal between the three allies. Although the Australian navy’s acquisition of U.S. and British nuclear submarine technology has dominated the international spotlight, “Pillar Two” of the AUKUS deal also aims to harness the advanced technology sectors of each country in a bid to win an emerging technology race with China.

“As tensions increase, and conflicts continue around the globe, our partnerships with our allies are critically important,” British Defense Secretary John Healey said Thursday. “This is a breakthrough that will allow our three nations to deepen our collaboration on defence technology and trade. Our new government will reinforce the UK’s role in AUKUS to boost Britain’s military capabilities and economic growth.”

President Joe Biden’s team regards emerging technologies such as quantum computing and artificial intelligence as “the strategic high ground,” as Deputy Secretary of State Kurt Campbell put it recently. The pressure to outpace China, which is pouring money into a military modernization project powered in part by stolen from Western companies, spurred officials in Washington, London, and Canberra to put a premium on Pillar Two of the deal.

“We need to build an innovation system … across our three countries which stimulates the defense industry base across our three countries,” Marles said at a Center for Strategic and International Studies event last week. “Each of us have our own innovation systems which are focused on our own domestic defense industry bases. How we get value add here is by really kind of getting those much more harmonized.”

Those aspirations have been enmired in hesitation within the U.S. government about easing foreign access to prized American technology, a misgiving that has irritated proponents of the deal. “We have not realized the promise, the bright promise, of this partnership,” Sen. James Risch (R-ID), the top Republican on the Foreign Relations Committee, said during a hearing last month. “It was supposed to be a game-changer, but State’s exclusion of the exact technologies we need to advance AUKUS has inhibited this partnership from moving aggressively to reality.”

Still, defense officials announced last week that the AUKUS countries had “tested cutting edge autonomous and AI-enabled sensing capabilities in a multi-domain battlespace … that minimize the time between sensing enemy targets, deciding how to respond, and responding to the threat.” The Pentagon hailed those trials as a portent of future AUKUS projects.

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER

“This will be the most important strategic military engagement between the United States and Australia, and brings Britain into the context of what we’re engaging with in the Indo-Pacific,” Campbell told Risch in the July 30 hearing. “I can tell you that this will be never-ending. We will have to invest substantial resources, build internal capacities in our government and with our institutions to contest everywhere.”

Marles, the Australian defense chief, offered a similar overview. “A lot of this stuff is, you know, genuinely groundbreaking technology,” he said at CSIS. “I think we … will end up evaluating Pillar 2 based on whether it meets its stated objective, which is to pull through innovative technologies into service quickly. And quickly is measured in years, not decades.” 

, The Biden administration has lifted most bans on defense technology sharing with Australia and the United Kingdom in order to fast-track the development of emerging weapons technologies among the allies. “These critical reforms will revolutionize defense trade, innovation and cooperation, enabling collaboration at the speed and scale required to meet our challenging strategic circumstances,” Australian Defense Minister Richard Marles said Thursday. The agreement is designed to establish “an export license-free environment,” as Australian officials put it, in conjunction with the implementation of the AUKUS deal between the three allies. Although the Australian navy’s acquisition of U.S. and British nuclear submarine technology has dominated the international spotlight, “Pillar Two” of the AUKUS deal also aims to harness the advanced technology sectors of each country in a bid to win an emerging technology race with China. “As tensions increase, and conflicts continue around the globe, our partnerships with our allies are critically important,” British Defense Secretary John Healey said Thursday. “This is a breakthrough that will allow our three nations to deepen our collaboration on defence technology and trade. Our new government will reinforce the UK’s role in AUKUS to boost Britain’s military capabilities and economic growth.” President Joe Biden’s team regards emerging technologies such as quantum computing and artificial intelligence as “the strategic high ground,” as Deputy Secretary of State Kurt Campbell put it recently. The pressure to outpace China, which is pouring money into a military modernization project powered in part by stolen from Western companies, spurred officials in Washington, London, and Canberra to put a premium on Pillar Two of the deal. “We need to build an innovation system … across our three countries which stimulates the defense industry base across our three countries,” Marles said at a Center for Strategic and International Studies event last week. “Each of us have our own innovation systems which are focused on our own domestic defense industry bases. How we get value add here is by really kind of getting those much more harmonized.” Those aspirations have been enmired in hesitation within the U.S. government about easing foreign access to prized American technology, a misgiving that has irritated proponents of the deal. “We have not realized the promise, the bright promise, of this partnership,” Sen. James Risch (R-ID), the top Republican on the Foreign Relations Committee, said during a hearing last month. “It was supposed to be a game-changer, but State’s exclusion of the exact technologies we need to advance AUKUS has inhibited this partnership from moving aggressively to reality.” Still, defense officials announced last week that the AUKUS countries had “tested cutting edge autonomous and AI-enabled sensing capabilities in a multi-domain battlespace … that minimize the time between sensing enemy targets, deciding how to respond, and responding to the threat.” The Pentagon hailed those trials as a portent of future AUKUS projects. CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER “This will be the most important strategic military engagement between the United States and Australia, and brings Britain into the context of what we’re engaging with in the Indo-Pacific,” Campbell told Risch in the July 30 hearing. “I can tell you that this will be never-ending. We will have to invest substantial resources, build internal capacities in our government and with our institutions to contest everywhere.” Marles, the Australian defense chief, offered a similar overview. “A lot of this stuff is, you know, genuinely groundbreaking technology,” he said at CSIS. “I think we … will end up evaluating Pillar 2 based on whether it meets its stated objective, which is to pull through innovative technologies into service quickly. And quickly is measured in years, not decades.” , , , https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/kurt-campbell-ausmin.webp, Washington Examiner, Political News and Conservative Analysis About Congress, the President, and the Federal Government, https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/cropped-favicon-32×32.png, https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/feed/, Joel Gehrke,

A suspect in the destruction of the Nord Stream 2 gas pipeline linking Russia to Germany escaped into Ukraine before he could be arrested, according to Polish officials who received a German warrant for his arrest.

“The man crossed the Polish-Ukrainian border at the beginning of July,” Anna Adamiak, a spokeswoman for Poland’s national prosecutor’s office, said Wednesday.

The man, identified as a Ukrainian diving instructor named Volodymyr Z., is suspected of working with a diving team to place explosives on the controversial pipeline. Yet German authorities neglected to “include him in the database of wanted persons,” according to Polish authorities, which enabled him to leave the country without arousing suspicions at the border.

“Free crossing of the Polish-Ukrainian border by the above-mentioned person was possible because German authorities … did not include him in the database of wanted persons, which meant that the Polish Border Guard had no knowledge and no grounds to detain Volodymyr Z.,” Adamiak said.

The detonations, which erupted in September of 2022 as Polish, Danish, and Norwegian officials hailed the opening of a different pipeline as insulation against Russia’s threats to deprive Germany of gas in the coming winter, sparked a wave of international speculation and diplomatic posturing about the identities of the perpetrators. 

NATO condemned the “deliberate, reckless, and irresponsible acts of sabotage,” while Russia accused the United States of orchestrating the scheme and European officials most suspicious of Moscow suggested the Kremlin might have damaged the dormant pipeline in order to underscore the vulnerability of the alternative pipelines.

“In the end, everything depends solely on the decision of the German government. Nord Stream 2: One pipeline remained intact despite the terrorist attack,” Russian President Vladimir Putin said in February. “Can we restart Nord Stream 2? We can! It would take a week. But they don’t want to.”

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER

The damage to the other Nord Stream pipelines gave rise to criminal investigations by multiple European governments affected by the incident. Sweden and Denmark closed their investigations without identifying a perpetrator amid reports that U.S. intelligence assessments pointed to “a pro-Ukrainian group” of saboteurs. 

“Regardless of the results of this investigation, it does not change the fact that Russia is waging an illegal, aggressive war against Ukraine,” German government spokesman Wolfgang Buchner told reporters on Wednesday. “Regardless of the outcome, we will continue to support Ukraine in its defensive struggle against Russia’s illegal war of aggression for as long as necessary, as the chancellor has repeatedly stated.”

2024-08-14 18:31:00, http://s.wordpress.com/mshots/v1/https%3A%2F%2Fwww.washingtonexaminer.com%2Fnews%2Fworld%2F3121443%2Fnord-stream-2-bombing-suspect-escapes-poland-germany-arrest-warrant%2F?w=600&h=450, A suspect in the destruction of the Nord Stream 2 gas pipeline linking Russia to Germany escaped into Ukraine before he could be arrested, according to Polish officials who received a German warrant for his arrest. “The man crossed the Polish-Ukrainian border at the beginning of July,” Anna Adamiak, a spokeswoman for Poland’s national prosecutor’s,

A suspect in the destruction of the Nord Stream 2 gas pipeline linking Russia to Germany escaped into Ukraine before he could be arrested, according to Polish officials who received a German warrant for his arrest.

“The man crossed the Polish-Ukrainian border at the beginning of July,” Anna Adamiak, a spokeswoman for Poland’s national prosecutor’s office, said Wednesday.

The man, identified as a Ukrainian diving instructor named Volodymyr Z., is suspected of working with a diving team to place explosives on the controversial pipeline. Yet German authorities neglected to “include him in the database of wanted persons,” according to Polish authorities, which enabled him to leave the country without arousing suspicions at the border.

“Free crossing of the Polish-Ukrainian border by the above-mentioned person was possible because German authorities … did not include him in the database of wanted persons, which meant that the Polish Border Guard had no knowledge and no grounds to detain Volodymyr Z.,” Adamiak said.

The detonations, which erupted in September of 2022 as Polish, Danish, and Norwegian officials hailed the opening of a different pipeline as insulation against Russia’s threats to deprive Germany of gas in the coming winter, sparked a wave of international speculation and diplomatic posturing about the identities of the perpetrators. 

NATO condemned the “deliberate, reckless, and irresponsible acts of sabotage,” while Russia accused the United States of orchestrating the scheme and European officials most suspicious of Moscow suggested the Kremlin might have damaged the dormant pipeline in order to underscore the vulnerability of the alternative pipelines.

“In the end, everything depends solely on the decision of the German government. Nord Stream 2: One pipeline remained intact despite the terrorist attack,” Russian President Vladimir Putin said in February. “Can we restart Nord Stream 2? We can! It would take a week. But they don’t want to.”

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER

The damage to the other Nord Stream pipelines gave rise to criminal investigations by multiple European governments affected by the incident. Sweden and Denmark closed their investigations without identifying a perpetrator amid reports that U.S. intelligence assessments pointed to “a pro-Ukrainian group” of saboteurs. 

“Regardless of the results of this investigation, it does not change the fact that Russia is waging an illegal, aggressive war against Ukraine,” German government spokesman Wolfgang Buchner told reporters on Wednesday. “Regardless of the outcome, we will continue to support Ukraine in its defensive struggle against Russia’s illegal war of aggression for as long as necessary, as the chancellor has repeatedly stated.”

, A suspect in the destruction of the Nord Stream 2 gas pipeline linking Russia to Germany escaped into Ukraine before he could be arrested, according to Polish officials who received a German warrant for his arrest. “The man crossed the Polish-Ukrainian border at the beginning of July,” Anna Adamiak, a spokeswoman for Poland’s national prosecutor’s office, said Wednesday. The man, identified as a Ukrainian diving instructor named Volodymyr Z., is suspected of working with a diving team to place explosives on the controversial pipeline. Yet German authorities neglected to “include him in the database of wanted persons,” according to Polish authorities, which enabled him to leave the country without arousing suspicions at the border. “Free crossing of the Polish-Ukrainian border by the above-mentioned person was possible because German authorities … did not include him in the database of wanted persons, which meant that the Polish Border Guard had no knowledge and no grounds to detain Volodymyr Z.,” Adamiak said. The detonations, which erupted in September of 2022 as Polish, Danish, and Norwegian officials hailed the opening of a different pipeline as insulation against Russia’s threats to deprive Germany of gas in the coming winter, sparked a wave of international speculation and diplomatic posturing about the identities of the perpetrators.  NATO condemned the “deliberate, reckless, and irresponsible acts of sabotage,” while Russia accused the United States of orchestrating the scheme and European officials most suspicious of Moscow suggested the Kremlin might have damaged the dormant pipeline in order to underscore the vulnerability of the alternative pipelines. “In the end, everything depends solely on the decision of the German government. Nord Stream 2: One pipeline remained intact despite the terrorist attack,” Russian President Vladimir Putin said in February. “Can we restart Nord Stream 2? We can! It would take a week. But they don’t want to.” CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER The damage to the other Nord Stream pipelines gave rise to criminal investigations by multiple European governments affected by the incident. Sweden and Denmark closed their investigations without identifying a perpetrator amid reports that U.S. intelligence assessments pointed to “a pro-Ukrainian group” of saboteurs.  “Regardless of the results of this investigation, it does not change the fact that Russia is waging an illegal, aggressive war against Ukraine,” German government spokesman Wolfgang Buchner told reporters on Wednesday. “Regardless of the outcome, we will continue to support Ukraine in its defensive struggle against Russia’s illegal war of aggression for as long as necessary, as the chancellor has repeatedly stated.”, , , https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/russia-germany-flag-pipeline.webp, Washington Examiner, Political News and Conservative Analysis About Congress, the President, and the Federal Government, https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/cropped-favicon-32×32.png, https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/feed/, Joel Gehrke,

Ukraine launched a surprise attack into Russia in part to establish a “buffer zone” that would make it more difficult for Russian forces to target important Ukrainian border cities, according to officials.

“The Ukrainian Armed Forces only targets military infrastructure,” Ukrainian foreign ministry spokesman Heorhii Tykhyi said Tuesday. “The purpose of the operation is to save the lives of our people and protect the territory of Ukraine from Russian attacks.”

Such explanations, after days of silence about the purpose of the audacious operation, struck some observers as an inversion of Russian President Vladimir Putin’s rhetorical justifications for the occupation of Ukrainian territory. Ukrainian officials, however, signaled that the risky maneuver would not have been necessary if President Joe Biden had not banned Ukrainian forces from firing American-made long-range missiles, known as ATACMS, at key Russian bases in Russia.

“Unfortunately, Ukraine does not have sufficient capabilities to carry out long-range strikes with the weapons it has to defend itself against this terror,” he said. “We do not yet have the solutions we insist on. Therefore, there is a need to use the Ukrainian Armed Forces to liberate these border areas from Russian military contingents that are striking Ukraine.”

Biden has restricted the use of U.S. weapons to attack long-range targets in Russia due to a misgiving that such operations could provoke Putin to escalate or widen the war. Ukrainian officials, on the other hand, hope that their foray into Russia will show that such fears are overblown.

“It has destroyed the myth of escalation, and it created an additional argument to lift this ban on the use of American missiles in the territory of Russia,” Oleksandr Merezhko, Ukrainian foreign affairs chairman, told the Washington Examiner. “This operation, it gives us more arguments and increases the chances that we will finally be allowed to use ATACMS against Russia in its territory.”

Ukrainian forces poured over the Russian border last week, catching Russian officials and Western observers off guard with an invasion that puts new pressure on the Kremlin but runs the risk of weakening Ukrainian defenses on the front lines of eastern Ukraine. That attack is creating a “buffer zone,” Merezhko said, to guard Sumy, a border city in a region where civilians have had to evacuate in recent weeks due to Russian attacks.

Ukrainian commanders hope, among other things, that their Russian counterparts will ease some of the pressure on their beleaguered men by forcing Moscow to divert forces to try to repel the Ukrainian incursion.

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER

“Russia has relocated some of its units from both Zaporizhzhia and Kherson regions of Ukraine’s south,” Ukrainian army spokesman Dmytro Lykhoviy told Politico, acknowledging that the redeployment involves a “relatively small” number of troops.

Still, Russian forces continue to press towards Pokrovsk, a key node of Ukrainian military logistics in Donbas. “The coming days will show whether there are enough reserves to maintain this pressure,” former Estonian intelligence chief Rainer Saks wrote on social media.

2024-08-13 22:18:00, http://s.wordpress.com/mshots/v1/https%3A%2F%2Fwww.washingtonexaminer.com%2Fnews%2Fworld%2F3120474%2Fukraine-cites-russia-raid-push-biden-long-range-strikes%2F?w=600&h=450, Ukraine launched a surprise attack into Russia in part to establish a “buffer zone” that would make it more difficult for Russian forces to target important Ukrainian border cities, according to officials. “The Ukrainian Armed Forces only targets military infrastructure,” Ukrainian foreign ministry spokesman Heorhii Tykhyi said Tuesday. “The purpose of the operation is to,

Ukraine launched a surprise attack into Russia in part to establish a “buffer zone” that would make it more difficult for Russian forces to target important Ukrainian border cities, according to officials.

“The Ukrainian Armed Forces only targets military infrastructure,” Ukrainian foreign ministry spokesman Heorhii Tykhyi said Tuesday. “The purpose of the operation is to save the lives of our people and protect the territory of Ukraine from Russian attacks.”

Such explanations, after days of silence about the purpose of the audacious operation, struck some observers as an inversion of Russian President Vladimir Putin’s rhetorical justifications for the occupation of Ukrainian territory. Ukrainian officials, however, signaled that the risky maneuver would not have been necessary if President Joe Biden had not banned Ukrainian forces from firing American-made long-range missiles, known as ATACMS, at key Russian bases in Russia.

“Unfortunately, Ukraine does not have sufficient capabilities to carry out long-range strikes with the weapons it has to defend itself against this terror,” he said. “We do not yet have the solutions we insist on. Therefore, there is a need to use the Ukrainian Armed Forces to liberate these border areas from Russian military contingents that are striking Ukraine.”

Biden has restricted the use of U.S. weapons to attack long-range targets in Russia due to a misgiving that such operations could provoke Putin to escalate or widen the war. Ukrainian officials, on the other hand, hope that their foray into Russia will show that such fears are overblown.

“It has destroyed the myth of escalation, and it created an additional argument to lift this ban on the use of American missiles in the territory of Russia,” Oleksandr Merezhko, Ukrainian foreign affairs chairman, told the Washington Examiner. “This operation, it gives us more arguments and increases the chances that we will finally be allowed to use ATACMS against Russia in its territory.”

Ukrainian forces poured over the Russian border last week, catching Russian officials and Western observers off guard with an invasion that puts new pressure on the Kremlin but runs the risk of weakening Ukrainian defenses on the front lines of eastern Ukraine. That attack is creating a “buffer zone,” Merezhko said, to guard Sumy, a border city in a region where civilians have had to evacuate in recent weeks due to Russian attacks.

Ukrainian commanders hope, among other things, that their Russian counterparts will ease some of the pressure on their beleaguered men by forcing Moscow to divert forces to try to repel the Ukrainian incursion.

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER

“Russia has relocated some of its units from both Zaporizhzhia and Kherson regions of Ukraine’s south,” Ukrainian army spokesman Dmytro Lykhoviy told Politico, acknowledging that the redeployment involves a “relatively small” number of troops.

Still, Russian forces continue to press towards Pokrovsk, a key node of Ukrainian military logistics in Donbas. “The coming days will show whether there are enough reserves to maintain this pressure,” former Estonian intelligence chief Rainer Saks wrote on social media.

, Ukraine launched a surprise attack into Russia in part to establish a “buffer zone” that would make it more difficult for Russian forces to target important Ukrainian border cities, according to officials. “The Ukrainian Armed Forces only targets military infrastructure,” Ukrainian foreign ministry spokesman Heorhii Tykhyi said Tuesday. “The purpose of the operation is to save the lives of our people and protect the territory of Ukraine from Russian attacks.” Such explanations, after days of silence about the purpose of the audacious operation, struck some observers as an inversion of Russian President Vladimir Putin’s rhetorical justifications for the occupation of Ukrainian territory. Ukrainian officials, however, signaled that the risky maneuver would not have been necessary if President Joe Biden had not banned Ukrainian forces from firing American-made long-range missiles, known as ATACMS, at key Russian bases in Russia. “Unfortunately, Ukraine does not have sufficient capabilities to carry out long-range strikes with the weapons it has to defend itself against this terror,” he said. “We do not yet have the solutions we insist on. Therefore, there is a need to use the Ukrainian Armed Forces to liberate these border areas from Russian military contingents that are striking Ukraine.” Biden has restricted the use of U.S. weapons to attack long-range targets in Russia due to a misgiving that such operations could provoke Putin to escalate or widen the war. Ukrainian officials, on the other hand, hope that their foray into Russia will show that such fears are overblown. “It has destroyed the myth of escalation, and it created an additional argument to lift this ban on the use of American missiles in the territory of Russia,” Oleksandr Merezhko, Ukrainian foreign affairs chairman, told the Washington Examiner. “This operation, it gives us more arguments and increases the chances that we will finally be allowed to use ATACMS against Russia in its territory.” Ukrainian forces poured over the Russian border last week, catching Russian officials and Western observers off guard with an invasion that puts new pressure on the Kremlin but runs the risk of weakening Ukrainian defenses on the front lines of eastern Ukraine. That attack is creating a “buffer zone,” Merezhko said, to guard Sumy, a border city in a region where civilians have had to evacuate in recent weeks due to Russian attacks. Ukrainian commanders hope, among other things, that their Russian counterparts will ease some of the pressure on their beleaguered men by forcing Moscow to divert forces to try to repel the Ukrainian incursion. CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER “Russia has relocated some of its units from both Zaporizhzhia and Kherson regions of Ukraine’s south,” Ukrainian army spokesman Dmytro Lykhoviy told Politico, acknowledging that the redeployment involves a “relatively small” number of troops. Still, Russian forces continue to press towards Pokrovsk, a key node of Ukrainian military logistics in Donbas. “The coming days will show whether there are enough reserves to maintain this pressure,” former Estonian intelligence chief Rainer Saks wrote on social media., , , https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/russia-forces-kursk.webp, Washington Examiner, Political News and Conservative Analysis About Congress, the President, and the Federal Government, https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/cropped-favicon-32×32.png, https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/feed/, Joel Gehrke,

China has not answered “a legal aid request” from NATO allies investigating the damage done to an undersea pipeline linking Finland and Estonia last year, according to Estonian officials, following a report that Beijing acknowledged the involvement of a Chinese-owned ship.

“We submitted a legal aid request to the Chinese authorities to gather evidence from the vessel and its crew,” Kairi Küngas, who leads the public relations department of the Estonian prosecutor’s office, said Monday. “The Chinese authorities have not provided a response on executing the legal aid request as of yet.”

Baltic investigators have assessed that the damage, which Estonian officials regarded as a “man-made disaster” redolent of Russia’s hybrid warfare tactics, was caused by the anchor from a Chinese-owned vessel. Chinese authorities reportedly have acknowledged the ship’s involvement and described the incident as unintentional.

“The South China Morning Post understands that the Chinese authorities conducted an internal investigation and recently communicated the results to governments in the European countries,” the Hong Kong-based media outlet reported on Monday. “The Chinese-language report said the accident was the result of a strong storm.”

Finland and Estonia avoided confirming the transmission of those results, giving guarded statements about their dialogues with Beijing.

“We constantly cooperate with China and exchange information, but we do not go into details because the investigation is still in progress,” Estonian Foreign Affairs Minister Elina Valtonen said Monday.

Chinese officials emphasized “the poor sea conditions at the time” in the first weeks after the incident, which took place in October 2023. Yet senior European officials have cast doubt on the idea that the damage could have been inflicted accidentally, given the extent of the “wide dragging trail” of an anchor found on the seafloor near the pipeline.

“I’m not the sea captain. But I would think that you would notice that you’re dragging an anchor behind you for hundreds of kilometers,” Finnish European Affairs Minister Anders Adlercreutz said in December. “I think everything indicates that it was intentional. But of course, so far, nobody has admitted to it.”

China has emerged as an indispensable patron of Russia during the war in Ukraine, according to NATO, particularly through support for its defense industry. Baltic analysts have worried about the security of undersea cables and pipelines for years, but their vulnerability took on a new salience in 2022, with the destruction of the Nord Stream 2 pipeline, a dormant yet controversial Russian project to transport natural gas to Germany without having to use pipeline networks that pass through Ukrainian territory. 

Western officials have said they believe “a pro-Ukrainian group carried out the attack,” according to the New York Times. Sweden and Denmark closed their investigations without identifying a perpetrator, while Russian officials accused the United States of orchestrating the incident.

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER

China’s reported assessment was not sent to the Estonian prosecutor’s office, according to Kungas, who implied that a document of the sort reportedly transmitted “can’t be used as evidence in an Estonian criminal investigation.” Finnish officials likewise emphasized the need for “legal assistance” from China. 

“It must be stated that the investigation is still ongoing, and final conclusions [regarding] what was behind these incidents (technical failure, negligence/poor seamanship, deliberate act), can be made only after all necessary investigative measures have been finalized, and this will still take some time,” Anna Zareff, communications director for the Finnish National Bureau of Investigation, said Monday.

2024-08-12 18:36:00, http://s.wordpress.com/mshots/v1/https%3A%2F%2Fwww.washingtonexaminer.com%2Fnews%2Fworld%2F3118627%2Fchina-ship-responsible-baltic-pipeline-damage%2F?w=600&h=450, China has not answered “a legal aid request” from NATO allies investigating the damage done to an undersea pipeline linking Finland and Estonia last year, according to Estonian officials, following a report that Beijing acknowledged the involvement of a Chinese-owned ship. “We submitted a legal aid request to the Chinese authorities to gather evidence from,

China has not answered “a legal aid request” from NATO allies investigating the damage done to an undersea pipeline linking Finland and Estonia last year, according to Estonian officials, following a report that Beijing acknowledged the involvement of a Chinese-owned ship.

“We submitted a legal aid request to the Chinese authorities to gather evidence from the vessel and its crew,” Kairi Küngas, who leads the public relations department of the Estonian prosecutor’s office, said Monday. “The Chinese authorities have not provided a response on executing the legal aid request as of yet.”

Baltic investigators have assessed that the damage, which Estonian officials regarded as a “man-made disaster” redolent of Russia’s hybrid warfare tactics, was caused by the anchor from a Chinese-owned vessel. Chinese authorities reportedly have acknowledged the ship’s involvement and described the incident as unintentional.

“The South China Morning Post understands that the Chinese authorities conducted an internal investigation and recently communicated the results to governments in the European countries,” the Hong Kong-based media outlet reported on Monday. “The Chinese-language report said the accident was the result of a strong storm.”

Finland and Estonia avoided confirming the transmission of those results, giving guarded statements about their dialogues with Beijing.

“We constantly cooperate with China and exchange information, but we do not go into details because the investigation is still in progress,” Estonian Foreign Affairs Minister Elina Valtonen said Monday.

Chinese officials emphasized “the poor sea conditions at the time” in the first weeks after the incident, which took place in October 2023. Yet senior European officials have cast doubt on the idea that the damage could have been inflicted accidentally, given the extent of the “wide dragging trail” of an anchor found on the seafloor near the pipeline.

“I’m not the sea captain. But I would think that you would notice that you’re dragging an anchor behind you for hundreds of kilometers,” Finnish European Affairs Minister Anders Adlercreutz said in December. “I think everything indicates that it was intentional. But of course, so far, nobody has admitted to it.”

China has emerged as an indispensable patron of Russia during the war in Ukraine, according to NATO, particularly through support for its defense industry. Baltic analysts have worried about the security of undersea cables and pipelines for years, but their vulnerability took on a new salience in 2022, with the destruction of the Nord Stream 2 pipeline, a dormant yet controversial Russian project to transport natural gas to Germany without having to use pipeline networks that pass through Ukrainian territory. 

Western officials have said they believe “a pro-Ukrainian group carried out the attack,” according to the New York Times. Sweden and Denmark closed their investigations without identifying a perpetrator, while Russian officials accused the United States of orchestrating the incident.

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER

China’s reported assessment was not sent to the Estonian prosecutor’s office, according to Kungas, who implied that a document of the sort reportedly transmitted “can’t be used as evidence in an Estonian criminal investigation.” Finnish officials likewise emphasized the need for “legal assistance” from China. 

“It must be stated that the investigation is still ongoing, and final conclusions [regarding] what was behind these incidents (technical failure, negligence/poor seamanship, deliberate act), can be made only after all necessary investigative measures have been finalized, and this will still take some time,” Anna Zareff, communications director for the Finnish National Bureau of Investigation, said Monday.

, China has not answered “a legal aid request” from NATO allies investigating the damage done to an undersea pipeline linking Finland and Estonia last year, according to Estonian officials, following a report that Beijing acknowledged the involvement of a Chinese-owned ship. “We submitted a legal aid request to the Chinese authorities to gather evidence from the vessel and its crew,” Kairi Küngas, who leads the public relations department of the Estonian prosecutor’s office, said Monday. “The Chinese authorities have not provided a response on executing the legal aid request as of yet.” Baltic investigators have assessed that the damage, which Estonian officials regarded as a “man-made disaster” redolent of Russia’s hybrid warfare tactics, was caused by the anchor from a Chinese-owned vessel. Chinese authorities reportedly have acknowledged the ship’s involvement and described the incident as unintentional. “The South China Morning Post understands that the Chinese authorities conducted an internal investigation and recently communicated the results to governments in the European countries,” the Hong Kong-based media outlet reported on Monday. “The Chinese-language report said the accident was the result of a strong storm.” Finland and Estonia avoided confirming the transmission of those results, giving guarded statements about their dialogues with Beijing. “We constantly cooperate with China and exchange information, but we do not go into details because the investigation is still in progress,” Estonian Foreign Affairs Minister Elina Valtonen said Monday. Chinese officials emphasized “the poor sea conditions at the time” in the first weeks after the incident, which took place in October 2023. Yet senior European officials have cast doubt on the idea that the damage could have been inflicted accidentally, given the extent of the “wide dragging trail” of an anchor found on the seafloor near the pipeline. “I’m not the sea captain. But I would think that you would notice that you’re dragging an anchor behind you for hundreds of kilometers,” Finnish European Affairs Minister Anders Adlercreutz said in December. “I think everything indicates that it was intentional. But of course, so far, nobody has admitted to it.” China has emerged as an indispensable patron of Russia during the war in Ukraine, according to NATO, particularly through support for its defense industry. Baltic analysts have worried about the security of undersea cables and pipelines for years, but their vulnerability took on a new salience in 2022, with the destruction of the Nord Stream 2 pipeline, a dormant yet controversial Russian project to transport natural gas to Germany without having to use pipeline networks that pass through Ukrainian territory.  Western officials have said they believe “a pro-Ukrainian group carried out the attack,” according to the New York Times. Sweden and Denmark closed their investigations without identifying a perpetrator, while Russian officials accused the United States of orchestrating the incident. CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER China’s reported assessment was not sent to the Estonian prosecutor’s office, according to Kungas, who implied that a document of the sort reportedly transmitted “can’t be used as evidence in an Estonian criminal investigation.” Finnish officials likewise emphasized the need for “legal assistance” from China.  “It must be stated that the investigation is still ongoing, and final conclusions [regarding] what was behind these incidents (technical failure, negligence/poor seamanship, deliberate act), can be made only after all necessary investigative measures have been finalized, and this will still take some time,” Anna Zareff, communications director for the Finnish National Bureau of Investigation, said Monday., , , https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/estonia-foreign-minister.webp, Washington Examiner, Political News and Conservative Analysis About Congress, the President, and the Federal Government, https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/cropped-favicon-32×32.png, https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/feed/, Joel Gehrke,

Ukraine’s raid into Russia could endanger a major nuclear power plant in the border region, the top United Nations nuclear watchdog worries.

“The IAEA has been monitoring the situation on the reported military activities taking place in the vicinity of the Kursk Nuclear Power Plant,” said Rafael Grossi, International Atomic Energy Agency‘s director-general, Friday. “At this juncture, I would like to appeal to all sides to exercise maximum restraint in order to avoid a nuclear accident with the potential for serious radiological consequences.”

Ukrainian officials have kept a close hold on information about their operation in Kursk, a foray that caught both United States and Russian officials by surprise. The extent and objective of their operation remains uncertain, but Russian authorities have claimed that “fighting is ongoing a few dozen kilometers” from the city that is home to the Kursk nuclear power plant.

“The situation is tense. The state of emergency is in place,” Kurchatov Mayor Igor Korpunkov wrote on social media. “The enemy is not only employing military weapons against us, but also so-called ‘psychological special forces … Its goal is to sow panic among the population, to create an uncontrollable situation and chaos.”

The uncertain situation has put Grossi in a strangely familiar position, as Russia’s seizure of a Ukrainian nuclear power plant in Zaporizhzhia, one of the four Ukrainian regions that Russian President Vladimir Putin wants to integrate into Russia, has forced him to coordinate between the warring parties to try to secure the plant. He invoked the “concrete principles” of nuclear plant security developed in that context in his latest intervention.

“These include, among others, the imperative to ensure the physical integrity of a nuclear power plant,” he said. “This is valid irrespective of where an NPP is situated.”

That message came on the heels of another warning with respect to the Ukrainian nuclear plant, which Grossi fears is vulnerable to harm from “the occurrence of intense fires” in the area, as well as the indirect effects of Russia’s bombardment of other Ukrainian power grid infrastructure.

“The vulnerability of the electricity infrastructure across the country remains very concerning,” Grossi said Thursday. “It is essential that the electricity network across all of Ukraine remains stable to help maintain nuclear safety at all nuclear power plants.”

Western officials have suggested that Ukraine launched the raid in order to force Russian commanders to divert troops away from their own offensive in Ukrainian territory.

“Ukraine’s incursion into the Kursk region is likely to lead to the redeployment of Russian units from other areas to support the defensive actions of Russian Federation units and counterattacks against Ukraine’s forces in the area,” said Janek Kesselmann, Estonian Military Intelligence Center’s deputy commander, Friday.

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky’s team has implied that they see the Kursk attack as a way to amass leverage for negotiations with Russia.

“When will it be possible to conduct a negotiation process in the way that we can push them or get something from them? Only when the war is not going on according to their scenarios,” presidential adviser Myhailo Podolyak said Thursday.

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER

Zelensky applauded Ukrainian forces for “replenishing the ‘exchange fund’ — by taking the occupiers as captives,” in an apparent reference to reports that scores of Russian service members have been captured. 

“I also want to express my special gratitude to our warriors and units who are replenishing the ‘exchange fund’ — by taking the occupiers as captives and thus helping to free our people from Russian captivity,” Zelensky said Friday. “This is extremely important and has been particularly effective over the past three days. We must return freedom to all our people who remain in Russian captivity.”

2024-08-09 22:13:00, http://s.wordpress.com/mshots/v1/https%3A%2F%2Fwww.washingtonexaminer.com%2Fpolicy%2Fforeign-policy%2F3117248%2Fun-nuclear-chief-worried-ukraines-raid-endanger-russias-kursk-nuclear-plant%2F?w=600&h=450, Ukraine’s raid into Russia could endanger a major nuclear power plant in the border region, the top United Nations nuclear watchdog worries. “The IAEA has been monitoring the situation on the reported military activities taking place in the vicinity of the Kursk Nuclear Power Plant,” said Rafael Grossi, International Atomic Energy Agency‘s director-general, Friday. “At,

Ukraine’s raid into Russia could endanger a major nuclear power plant in the border region, the top United Nations nuclear watchdog worries.

“The IAEA has been monitoring the situation on the reported military activities taking place in the vicinity of the Kursk Nuclear Power Plant,” said Rafael Grossi, International Atomic Energy Agency‘s director-general, Friday. “At this juncture, I would like to appeal to all sides to exercise maximum restraint in order to avoid a nuclear accident with the potential for serious radiological consequences.”

Ukrainian officials have kept a close hold on information about their operation in Kursk, a foray that caught both United States and Russian officials by surprise. The extent and objective of their operation remains uncertain, but Russian authorities have claimed that “fighting is ongoing a few dozen kilometers” from the city that is home to the Kursk nuclear power plant.

“The situation is tense. The state of emergency is in place,” Kurchatov Mayor Igor Korpunkov wrote on social media. “The enemy is not only employing military weapons against us, but also so-called ‘psychological special forces … Its goal is to sow panic among the population, to create an uncontrollable situation and chaos.”

The uncertain situation has put Grossi in a strangely familiar position, as Russia’s seizure of a Ukrainian nuclear power plant in Zaporizhzhia, one of the four Ukrainian regions that Russian President Vladimir Putin wants to integrate into Russia, has forced him to coordinate between the warring parties to try to secure the plant. He invoked the “concrete principles” of nuclear plant security developed in that context in his latest intervention.

“These include, among others, the imperative to ensure the physical integrity of a nuclear power plant,” he said. “This is valid irrespective of where an NPP is situated.”

That message came on the heels of another warning with respect to the Ukrainian nuclear plant, which Grossi fears is vulnerable to harm from “the occurrence of intense fires” in the area, as well as the indirect effects of Russia’s bombardment of other Ukrainian power grid infrastructure.

“The vulnerability of the electricity infrastructure across the country remains very concerning,” Grossi said Thursday. “It is essential that the electricity network across all of Ukraine remains stable to help maintain nuclear safety at all nuclear power plants.”

Western officials have suggested that Ukraine launched the raid in order to force Russian commanders to divert troops away from their own offensive in Ukrainian territory.

“Ukraine’s incursion into the Kursk region is likely to lead to the redeployment of Russian units from other areas to support the defensive actions of Russian Federation units and counterattacks against Ukraine’s forces in the area,” said Janek Kesselmann, Estonian Military Intelligence Center’s deputy commander, Friday.

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky’s team has implied that they see the Kursk attack as a way to amass leverage for negotiations with Russia.

“When will it be possible to conduct a negotiation process in the way that we can push them or get something from them? Only when the war is not going on according to their scenarios,” presidential adviser Myhailo Podolyak said Thursday.

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER

Zelensky applauded Ukrainian forces for “replenishing the ‘exchange fund’ — by taking the occupiers as captives,” in an apparent reference to reports that scores of Russian service members have been captured. 

“I also want to express my special gratitude to our warriors and units who are replenishing the ‘exchange fund’ — by taking the occupiers as captives and thus helping to free our people from Russian captivity,” Zelensky said Friday. “This is extremely important and has been particularly effective over the past three days. We must return freedom to all our people who remain in Russian captivity.”

, Ukraine’s raid into Russia could endanger a major nuclear power plant in the border region, the top United Nations nuclear watchdog worries. “The IAEA has been monitoring the situation on the reported military activities taking place in the vicinity of the Kursk Nuclear Power Plant,” said Rafael Grossi, International Atomic Energy Agency‘s director-general, Friday. “At this juncture, I would like to appeal to all sides to exercise maximum restraint in order to avoid a nuclear accident with the potential for serious radiological consequences.” Ukrainian officials have kept a close hold on information about their operation in Kursk, a foray that caught both United States and Russian officials by surprise. The extent and objective of their operation remains uncertain, but Russian authorities have claimed that “fighting is ongoing a few dozen kilometers” from the city that is home to the Kursk nuclear power plant. “The situation is tense. The state of emergency is in place,” Kurchatov Mayor Igor Korpunkov wrote on social media. “The enemy is not only employing military weapons against us, but also so-called ‘psychological special forces … Its goal is to sow panic among the population, to create an uncontrollable situation and chaos.” The uncertain situation has put Grossi in a strangely familiar position, as Russia’s seizure of a Ukrainian nuclear power plant in Zaporizhzhia, one of the four Ukrainian regions that Russian President Vladimir Putin wants to integrate into Russia, has forced him to coordinate between the warring parties to try to secure the plant. He invoked the “concrete principles” of nuclear plant security developed in that context in his latest intervention. “These include, among others, the imperative to ensure the physical integrity of a nuclear power plant,” he said. “This is valid irrespective of where an NPP is situated.” That message came on the heels of another warning with respect to the Ukrainian nuclear plant, which Grossi fears is vulnerable to harm from “the occurrence of intense fires” in the area, as well as the indirect effects of Russia’s bombardment of other Ukrainian power grid infrastructure. “The vulnerability of the electricity infrastructure across the country remains very concerning,” Grossi said Thursday. “It is essential that the electricity network across all of Ukraine remains stable to help maintain nuclear safety at all nuclear power plants.” Western officials have suggested that Ukraine launched the raid in order to force Russian commanders to divert troops away from their own offensive in Ukrainian territory. “Ukraine’s incursion into the Kursk region is likely to lead to the redeployment of Russian units from other areas to support the defensive actions of Russian Federation units and counterattacks against Ukraine’s forces in the area,” said Janek Kesselmann, Estonian Military Intelligence Center’s deputy commander, Friday. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky’s team has implied that they see the Kursk attack as a way to amass leverage for negotiations with Russia. “When will it be possible to conduct a negotiation process in the way that we can push them or get something from them? Only when the war is not going on according to their scenarios,” presidential adviser Myhailo Podolyak said Thursday. CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER Zelensky applauded Ukrainian forces for “replenishing the ‘exchange fund’ — by taking the occupiers as captives,” in an apparent reference to reports that scores of Russian service members have been captured.  “I also want to express my special gratitude to our warriors and units who are replenishing the ‘exchange fund’ — by taking the occupiers as captives and thus helping to free our people from Russian captivity,” Zelensky said Friday. “This is extremely important and has been particularly effective over the past three days. We must return freedom to all our people who remain in Russian captivity.”, , , https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/grossi.webp, Washington Examiner, Political News and Conservative Analysis About Congress, the President, and the Federal Government, https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/cropped-favicon-32×32.png, https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/feed/, Joel Gehrke,

Israel must face a “severe punishment” for the assassination of a top Hamas official in Iran, according to a senior Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps official, who aired the threat amid an internal debate and international effort to discourage the attack.

“There is no doubt that the blood of this noble martyr will have an impact on severe punishment of the Zionist regime at the hands of the Islamic Republic,” IRGC Brig. Gen. Esmail Qa’ani wrote in a letter to Yahya Sinwar, the Gaza-based mastermind of the Oct. 7 terrorist attack that sparked the war between Israel and Hamas. “The heroic struggle of your brothers in the Islamic resistance will intensify the effect of this punishment and lead to the elimination of this ominous phenomenon as soon as possible.”

That message suggests an apparent aspiration to target Israel in a coordinated fashion in response to the killing of Hamas political chief Ismail Haniyeh, who was killed last week while attending an Iranian presidential inauguration. Yet Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian is trying to prevent such a retaliatory operation, according to reports that suggest he believes “the IRGC aims to draw the country into a war” with Israel.

“There have been lengthy and intense discussions where Mr Pezeshkian has been trying to persuade IRGC commanders to avoid actions that could spiral out of control,” an unnamed Pezeshkian aide said this week, according to the Telegraph. “He is aware that the IRGC aims to draw the country into a war, yet he is determined to uphold the promises he made during his presidential campaign which included providing peaceful life conditions for people.”

The Iranian president, however, has limited influence over security policy. Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei has ultimate authority in the regime, while Pezeshkian has a focus on stabilizing the Iranian economy, if possible.

“This is, I think, the part of the debate inside Tehran — how to react but not to lose the possibilities to be a regional player and to have a kind of pragmatic relationship with other countries in the region and maybe, maybe in Europe,” a European official based in Israel told the Washington Examiner. “I don’t think that he wants a war because it will basically ruin his presidency.”

Secretary of State Antony Blinken, for his part, is urging Israel and Hamas to finalize a long-discussed ceasefire deal that would allow for the release of at least some of the hostages taken captive by the terrorist organization on Oct. 7. The United States, Qatar, and Egypt released a joint statement late Thursday calling for the two sides to return to “conclude the ceasefire” as quickly as possible.

“The time has come to conclude the ceasefire and hostages and detainees release deal,” the leaders of the three countries said. “As mediators, if necessary, we are prepared to present a final bridging proposal that resolves the remaining implementation issues in a manner that meets the expectations of all parties.”

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who has stipulated that he will agree only to temporary ceasefires, responded by announcing that an Israeli negotiating team would return to Cairo for talks next week. That decision met with immediate opposition from the hard-right flank of his fragile coalition government.

“It is definitely not the time for a capitulating deal that ends the war before the elimination of the Hamas ISIS Nazis, allowing them to recover and return to murder Jews again,” Israeli Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich said Friday. “I call on the Prime Minister not to fall into this trap and not agree to the shift, even in the slightest, from the red lines he set just recently, though they are also very problematic.”

Netanyahu has excluded Smotrich and his closest ally in the coalition, Israeli National Security Minister Itamar Ben Gvir, from setting policy related to the war. But he has to be cautious about alienating them entirely, as they could deprive him of a governing majority if they withdraw from the coalition. 

“It’s incumbent upon not just the Israeli side, but also the Hamas side,” a senior U.S. official told reporters Thursday, per the Times of Israel. “At the end of the day, this is a hostage negotiation, and they’re holding hostages. … With some force of will and sitting down to hash it out, we think [a deal] is possible.”

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER

Blinken has implied that he thinks such a deal could provide Iran and Israel an off-ramp from the crisis over the assassination of Haniyeh. Yet IRGC officials sound a different note.

“The orders of the Leader of the Revolution regarding severe punishment of the occupiers and take revenge for the blood of Martyr Haniyeh are crystal clear,” Ali Fadavi, IRGC deputy chief, said Friday. “The orders of the Leader of the Revolution will be implemented in the best possible way and this is the duty of Iran now.”

2024-08-09 20:43:00, http://s.wordpress.com/mshots/v1/https%3A%2F%2Fwww.washingtonexaminer.com%2Fpolicy%2Fforeign-policy%2F3116960%2Firanian-generals-insist-on-attacking-israel-over-hamas-leaders-assassination%2F?w=600&h=450, Israel must face a “severe punishment” for the assassination of a top Hamas official in Iran, according to a senior Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps official, who aired the threat amid an internal debate and international effort to discourage the attack. “There is no doubt that the blood of this noble martyr will have an impact,

Israel must face a “severe punishment” for the assassination of a top Hamas official in Iran, according to a senior Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps official, who aired the threat amid an internal debate and international effort to discourage the attack.

“There is no doubt that the blood of this noble martyr will have an impact on severe punishment of the Zionist regime at the hands of the Islamic Republic,” IRGC Brig. Gen. Esmail Qa’ani wrote in a letter to Yahya Sinwar, the Gaza-based mastermind of the Oct. 7 terrorist attack that sparked the war between Israel and Hamas. “The heroic struggle of your brothers in the Islamic resistance will intensify the effect of this punishment and lead to the elimination of this ominous phenomenon as soon as possible.”

That message suggests an apparent aspiration to target Israel in a coordinated fashion in response to the killing of Hamas political chief Ismail Haniyeh, who was killed last week while attending an Iranian presidential inauguration. Yet Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian is trying to prevent such a retaliatory operation, according to reports that suggest he believes “the IRGC aims to draw the country into a war” with Israel.

“There have been lengthy and intense discussions where Mr Pezeshkian has been trying to persuade IRGC commanders to avoid actions that could spiral out of control,” an unnamed Pezeshkian aide said this week, according to the Telegraph. “He is aware that the IRGC aims to draw the country into a war, yet he is determined to uphold the promises he made during his presidential campaign which included providing peaceful life conditions for people.”

The Iranian president, however, has limited influence over security policy. Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei has ultimate authority in the regime, while Pezeshkian has a focus on stabilizing the Iranian economy, if possible.

“This is, I think, the part of the debate inside Tehran — how to react but not to lose the possibilities to be a regional player and to have a kind of pragmatic relationship with other countries in the region and maybe, maybe in Europe,” a European official based in Israel told the Washington Examiner. “I don’t think that he wants a war because it will basically ruin his presidency.”

Secretary of State Antony Blinken, for his part, is urging Israel and Hamas to finalize a long-discussed ceasefire deal that would allow for the release of at least some of the hostages taken captive by the terrorist organization on Oct. 7. The United States, Qatar, and Egypt released a joint statement late Thursday calling for the two sides to return to “conclude the ceasefire” as quickly as possible.

“The time has come to conclude the ceasefire and hostages and detainees release deal,” the leaders of the three countries said. “As mediators, if necessary, we are prepared to present a final bridging proposal that resolves the remaining implementation issues in a manner that meets the expectations of all parties.”

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who has stipulated that he will agree only to temporary ceasefires, responded by announcing that an Israeli negotiating team would return to Cairo for talks next week. That decision met with immediate opposition from the hard-right flank of his fragile coalition government.

“It is definitely not the time for a capitulating deal that ends the war before the elimination of the Hamas ISIS Nazis, allowing them to recover and return to murder Jews again,” Israeli Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich said Friday. “I call on the Prime Minister not to fall into this trap and not agree to the shift, even in the slightest, from the red lines he set just recently, though they are also very problematic.”

Netanyahu has excluded Smotrich and his closest ally in the coalition, Israeli National Security Minister Itamar Ben Gvir, from setting policy related to the war. But he has to be cautious about alienating them entirely, as they could deprive him of a governing majority if they withdraw from the coalition. 

“It’s incumbent upon not just the Israeli side, but also the Hamas side,” a senior U.S. official told reporters Thursday, per the Times of Israel. “At the end of the day, this is a hostage negotiation, and they’re holding hostages. … With some force of will and sitting down to hash it out, we think [a deal] is possible.”

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER

Blinken has implied that he thinks such a deal could provide Iran and Israel an off-ramp from the crisis over the assassination of Haniyeh. Yet IRGC officials sound a different note.

“The orders of the Leader of the Revolution regarding severe punishment of the occupiers and take revenge for the blood of Martyr Haniyeh are crystal clear,” Ali Fadavi, IRGC deputy chief, said Friday. “The orders of the Leader of the Revolution will be implemented in the best possible way and this is the duty of Iran now.”

, Israel must face a “severe punishment” for the assassination of a top Hamas official in Iran, according to a senior Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps official, who aired the threat amid an internal debate and international effort to discourage the attack. “There is no doubt that the blood of this noble martyr will have an impact on severe punishment of the Zionist regime at the hands of the Islamic Republic,” IRGC Brig. Gen. Esmail Qa’ani wrote in a letter to Yahya Sinwar, the Gaza-based mastermind of the Oct. 7 terrorist attack that sparked the war between Israel and Hamas. “The heroic struggle of your brothers in the Islamic resistance will intensify the effect of this punishment and lead to the elimination of this ominous phenomenon as soon as possible.” That message suggests an apparent aspiration to target Israel in a coordinated fashion in response to the killing of Hamas political chief Ismail Haniyeh, who was killed last week while attending an Iranian presidential inauguration. Yet Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian is trying to prevent such a retaliatory operation, according to reports that suggest he believes “the IRGC aims to draw the country into a war” with Israel. “There have been lengthy and intense discussions where Mr Pezeshkian has been trying to persuade IRGC commanders to avoid actions that could spiral out of control,” an unnamed Pezeshkian aide said this week, according to the Telegraph. “He is aware that the IRGC aims to draw the country into a war, yet he is determined to uphold the promises he made during his presidential campaign which included providing peaceful life conditions for people.” The Iranian president, however, has limited influence over security policy. Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei has ultimate authority in the regime, while Pezeshkian has a focus on stabilizing the Iranian economy, if possible. “This is, I think, the part of the debate inside Tehran — how to react but not to lose the possibilities to be a regional player and to have a kind of pragmatic relationship with other countries in the region and maybe, maybe in Europe,” a European official based in Israel told the Washington Examiner. “I don’t think that he wants a war because it will basically ruin his presidency.” Secretary of State Antony Blinken, for his part, is urging Israel and Hamas to finalize a long-discussed ceasefire deal that would allow for the release of at least some of the hostages taken captive by the terrorist organization on Oct. 7. The United States, Qatar, and Egypt released a joint statement late Thursday calling for the two sides to return to “conclude the ceasefire” as quickly as possible. “The time has come to conclude the ceasefire and hostages and detainees release deal,” the leaders of the three countries said. “As mediators, if necessary, we are prepared to present a final bridging proposal that resolves the remaining implementation issues in a manner that meets the expectations of all parties.” Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who has stipulated that he will agree only to temporary ceasefires, responded by announcing that an Israeli negotiating team would return to Cairo for talks next week. That decision met with immediate opposition from the hard-right flank of his fragile coalition government. “It is definitely not the time for a capitulating deal that ends the war before the elimination of the Hamas ISIS Nazis, allowing them to recover and return to murder Jews again,” Israeli Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich said Friday. “I call on the Prime Minister not to fall into this trap and not agree to the shift, even in the slightest, from the red lines he set just recently, though they are also very problematic.” Netanyahu has excluded Smotrich and his closest ally in the coalition, Israeli National Security Minister Itamar Ben Gvir, from setting policy related to the war. But he has to be cautious about alienating them entirely, as they could deprive him of a governing majority if they withdraw from the coalition.  “It’s incumbent upon not just the Israeli side, but also the Hamas side,” a senior U.S. official told reporters Thursday, per the Times of Israel. “At the end of the day, this is a hostage negotiation, and they’re holding hostages. … With some force of will and sitting down to hash it out, we think [a deal] is possible.” CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER Blinken has implied that he thinks such a deal could provide Iran and Israel an off-ramp from the crisis over the assassination of Haniyeh. Yet IRGC officials sound a different note. “The orders of the Leader of the Revolution regarding severe punishment of the occupiers and take revenge for the blood of Martyr Haniyeh are crystal clear,” Ali Fadavi, IRGC deputy chief, said Friday. “The orders of the Leader of the Revolution will be implemented in the best possible way and this is the duty of Iran now.”, , , https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/haniyeh-pezeshkian.webp, Washington Examiner, Political News and Conservative Analysis About Congress, the President, and the Federal Government, https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/cropped-favicon-32×32.png, https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/feed/, Joel Gehrke,

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu will not agree to a deal that requires Israel to end the war before the destruction of Hamas despite international hopes that a bargain will avert a larger clash between the Jewish state and Iran.

“No,” Netanyahu told Time magazine. “And I think there’s a vast consensus in Israel that if we did that, we’ll just have a repetition. There’ll be future hostage taking, there’ll be a future October 7, and actually worse things that could happen.”

Hamas has tried to use the fate of the Israeli hostages as leverage to force Israel to end the war for months, but Netanyahu has refused. His reiteration of that position, however, will be a blow to the hostages’ families, many of whom believe he has not tried hard enough to free their loved ones, and could portend another dispute between President Joe Biden and Netanyahu, even if U.S. and regional mediators succeed in brokering a more limited agreement.

“The way that I’m seeking to achieve [in] this deal is a way that will maximize the number of hostages that are released in the first phase — living hostages that are released in the first phase — but also that would make sure that Hamas cannot take over Gaza after the deal,” Netanyahu said in the interview when asked if he would end the war in exchange for “all of the hostages.”

That conversation, given Sunday but published Thursday, occurred against a backdrop of international anxiety about a potential Iranian strike in retaliation for the assassination of a top Hamas official in Tehran last week. Iranian officials have pledged to “instill deep regret” in Israel, but Tehran signaled its interest in a “durable ceasefire” just hours after Secretary of State Antony Blinken suggested that a ceasefire deal could provide the two governments an off-ramp from the crisis over the assassination.

“We have pursued two priorities simultaneously: first, establishing a durable cease-fire in Gaza and the withdrawal of the [Israeli military] occupiers from this territory; second, punishing the aggressor for the assassination of Martyr Haniyeh,” Iran’s diplomatic mission at the United Nations said Wednesday evening, according to Al-Monitor.

Blinken argued in a Wednesday evening press conference that “avoiding any action that could disrupt” the ceasefire talks would be key to “bringing calm” to the Middle East.

“So in and of itself, escalation would be a bad thing, but it also has the potential to upend bringing the ceasefire over the line and bringing it to conclusion,” he said Wednesday.

Blinken regards the ceasefire as a first agreement as an initial step to “break the cycle” of violence between Israel and Iran.

“It’s also critical that we break this cycle by reaching a ceasefire in Gaza,” he said earlier this week. “That in turn will unlock possibilities for more enduring calm, not only in Gaza itself but in other areas where the conflict could spread.”

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER

Netanyahu, for his part, has signaled his opposition to a short-term deal that evolves into a permanent end to the fighting, if that means that Hamas remains in place.

“That is something that would run against everything that we were talking about,” he told Time. “I think it’s important to achieve it, not only because we eliminate that front so close to the center of our country …but also to send a message to the other elements of the Iran terror axis,” he said. 

2024-08-08 21:51:00, http://s.wordpress.com/mshots/v1/https%3A%2F%2Fwww.washingtonexaminer.com%2Fpolicy%2Fforeign-policy%2F3115978%2Fnetanyahu-wont-end-war-with-hamas-for-all-the-hostages%2F?w=600&h=450, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu will not agree to a deal that requires Israel to end the war before the destruction of Hamas despite international hopes that a bargain will avert a larger clash between the Jewish state and Iran. “No,” Netanyahu told Time magazine. “And I think there’s a vast consensus in Israel that,

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu will not agree to a deal that requires Israel to end the war before the destruction of Hamas despite international hopes that a bargain will avert a larger clash between the Jewish state and Iran.

“No,” Netanyahu told Time magazine. “And I think there’s a vast consensus in Israel that if we did that, we’ll just have a repetition. There’ll be future hostage taking, there’ll be a future October 7, and actually worse things that could happen.”

Hamas has tried to use the fate of the Israeli hostages as leverage to force Israel to end the war for months, but Netanyahu has refused. His reiteration of that position, however, will be a blow to the hostages’ families, many of whom believe he has not tried hard enough to free their loved ones, and could portend another dispute between President Joe Biden and Netanyahu, even if U.S. and regional mediators succeed in brokering a more limited agreement.

“The way that I’m seeking to achieve [in] this deal is a way that will maximize the number of hostages that are released in the first phase — living hostages that are released in the first phase — but also that would make sure that Hamas cannot take over Gaza after the deal,” Netanyahu said in the interview when asked if he would end the war in exchange for “all of the hostages.”

That conversation, given Sunday but published Thursday, occurred against a backdrop of international anxiety about a potential Iranian strike in retaliation for the assassination of a top Hamas official in Tehran last week. Iranian officials have pledged to “instill deep regret” in Israel, but Tehran signaled its interest in a “durable ceasefire” just hours after Secretary of State Antony Blinken suggested that a ceasefire deal could provide the two governments an off-ramp from the crisis over the assassination.

“We have pursued two priorities simultaneously: first, establishing a durable cease-fire in Gaza and the withdrawal of the [Israeli military] occupiers from this territory; second, punishing the aggressor for the assassination of Martyr Haniyeh,” Iran’s diplomatic mission at the United Nations said Wednesday evening, according to Al-Monitor.

Blinken argued in a Wednesday evening press conference that “avoiding any action that could disrupt” the ceasefire talks would be key to “bringing calm” to the Middle East.

“So in and of itself, escalation would be a bad thing, but it also has the potential to upend bringing the ceasefire over the line and bringing it to conclusion,” he said Wednesday.

Blinken regards the ceasefire as a first agreement as an initial step to “break the cycle” of violence between Israel and Iran.

“It’s also critical that we break this cycle by reaching a ceasefire in Gaza,” he said earlier this week. “That in turn will unlock possibilities for more enduring calm, not only in Gaza itself but in other areas where the conflict could spread.”

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER

Netanyahu, for his part, has signaled his opposition to a short-term deal that evolves into a permanent end to the fighting, if that means that Hamas remains in place.

“That is something that would run against everything that we were talking about,” he told Time. “I think it’s important to achieve it, not only because we eliminate that front so close to the center of our country …but also to send a message to the other elements of the Iran terror axis,” he said. 

, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu will not agree to a deal that requires Israel to end the war before the destruction of Hamas despite international hopes that a bargain will avert a larger clash between the Jewish state and Iran. “No,” Netanyahu told Time magazine. “And I think there’s a vast consensus in Israel that if we did that, we’ll just have a repetition. There’ll be future hostage taking, there’ll be a future October 7, and actually worse things that could happen.” Hamas has tried to use the fate of the Israeli hostages as leverage to force Israel to end the war for months, but Netanyahu has refused. His reiteration of that position, however, will be a blow to the hostages’ families, many of whom believe he has not tried hard enough to free their loved ones, and could portend another dispute between President Joe Biden and Netanyahu, even if U.S. and regional mediators succeed in brokering a more limited agreement. “The way that I’m seeking to achieve [in] this deal is a way that will maximize the number of hostages that are released in the first phase — living hostages that are released in the first phase — but also that would make sure that Hamas cannot take over Gaza after the deal,” Netanyahu said in the interview when asked if he would end the war in exchange for “all of the hostages.” Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu speaks at the state memorial for Ze’ev Jabotinsky, at Mount Herzl Military Cemetery in Jerusalem, Sunday, Aug. 4, 2024. (Naama Grynbaum/Pool Photo via AP) That conversation, given Sunday but published Thursday, occurred against a backdrop of international anxiety about a potential Iranian strike in retaliation for the assassination of a top Hamas official in Tehran last week. Iranian officials have pledged to “instill deep regret” in Israel, but Tehran signaled its interest in a “durable ceasefire” just hours after Secretary of State Antony Blinken suggested that a ceasefire deal could provide the two governments an off-ramp from the crisis over the assassination. “We have pursued two priorities simultaneously: first, establishing a durable cease-fire in Gaza and the withdrawal of the [Israeli military] occupiers from this territory; second, punishing the aggressor for the assassination of Martyr Haniyeh,” Iran’s diplomatic mission at the United Nations said Wednesday evening, according to Al-Monitor. Blinken argued in a Wednesday evening press conference that “avoiding any action that could disrupt” the ceasefire talks would be key to “bringing calm” to the Middle East. “So in and of itself, escalation would be a bad thing, but it also has the potential to upend bringing the ceasefire over the line and bringing it to conclusion,” he said Wednesday. Blinken regards the ceasefire as a first agreement as an initial step to “break the cycle” of violence between Israel and Iran. “It’s also critical that we break this cycle by reaching a ceasefire in Gaza,” he said earlier this week. “That in turn will unlock possibilities for more enduring calm, not only in Gaza itself but in other areas where the conflict could spread.” CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER Netanyahu, for his part, has signaled his opposition to a short-term deal that evolves into a permanent end to the fighting, if that means that Hamas remains in place. “That is something that would run against everything that we were talking about,” he told Time. “I think it’s important to achieve it, not only because we eliminate that front so close to the center of our country …but also to send a message to the other elements of the Iran terror axis,” he said. , , , https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/netanyahu-1.webp, Washington Examiner, Political News and Conservative Analysis About Congress, the President, and the Federal Government, https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/cropped-favicon-32×32.png, https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/feed/, Joel Gehrke,

Vice President Kamala Harris’s new running mate, Gov. Tim Walz (D-MN), has a reputation as a “reliable friend” to Ukraine, according to Ukrainian officials.

“It’s a good sign for us,” Oleksandr Merezhko, Ukrainian foreign affairs chairman, told the Washington Examiner. “Of course, we don’t know whether or not he will become the vice president because, you know, this political struggle is very close, and again, it’s becoming interesting and unpredictable.”

Merezhko and other Ukrainian officials have become avid American political news followers, given the importance of U.S. military assistance in continuing Ukraine’s ability to fight against Russia’s full-scale invasion. And Walz has found ways to cultivate relationships with them, even as a governor.

“Gov. Walz is definitely one of the leaders of such support and a reliable friend of our country,” Ukrainian Ambassador Oksana Markarova told a Ukrainian outlet Tuesday. “When I visited Minnesota in December … the governor and I met with the Farm Bureau and actually joined him in convincing them of how important Ukraine’s victory is to the U.S. national interest.”

And in February, Walz signed an agreement with Markarova to establish a partnership between the state of Minnesota and Chernihiv Oblast, a region near Kyiv.

“He is very pro-Ukrainian and our press and our people, they view him as a friend, as a true friend of Ukraine,” Merezhko said.

The presidential election has put Ukrainian officials in a tricky diplomatic position, given the divergent rhetorical postures of the Republican and Democratic tickets. Harris and President Joe Biden have maintained a very supportive tone throughout the full-scale war despite their policy of doling out aid by degrees or imposing restrictions on the use of American weapons against military targets inside Russia. 

Former President Donald Trump and his running mate, Sen. J.D. Vance (R-OH), have downplayed the relevance of the conflict to U.S. interests and signaled their desire for a quick end to the war — a prospect that worries many Ukrainians, who fear that such a scenario would amount to a victory for Russia. Yet Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky’s team has been reaching out to Trump and his allies in recent months, which included what Trump described as “a very good phone call” with Zelensky after the Republican standard-bearer survived an assassination attempt at a rally in Pennsylvania.

“The fact that Trump described this as a good call means his animus against Zelensky is old news,” former U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine, John Herbst, told Politico. “It’s why the populist wing of the party was against Ukraine. If Trump is not there, then they’re not there.”

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER

Vance, for his part, recently suggested Harris doesn’t have the gravitas to “promote an acceptable peace” in a prospective dialogue with Russian President Vladimir Putin — a jab that, in Merezhko’s view, contains a sign that his position is trending toward one that Kyiv could welcome. 

“Interestingly, Vance started to change his rhetoric, and recently, he mentioned that Ukraine should have peace, just peace, not on the Russian terms,” he said. “So we can see that both candidates to become vice president, they’re — well, Vance is becoming more pro-Ukrainian also. It seems to me.”

2024-08-07 21:34:00, http://s.wordpress.com/mshots/v1/https%3A%2F%2Fwww.washingtonexaminer.com%2Fpolicy%2Fforeign-policy%2F3114458%2Fukraine-sees-walz-reliable-friend-against-russia%2F?w=600&h=450, Vice President Kamala Harris’s new running mate, Gov. Tim Walz (D-MN), has a reputation as a “reliable friend” to Ukraine, according to Ukrainian officials. “It’s a good sign for us,” Oleksandr Merezhko, Ukrainian foreign affairs chairman, told the Washington Examiner. “Of course, we don’t know whether or not he will become the vice president because,

Vice President Kamala Harris’s new running mate, Gov. Tim Walz (D-MN), has a reputation as a “reliable friend” to Ukraine, according to Ukrainian officials.

“It’s a good sign for us,” Oleksandr Merezhko, Ukrainian foreign affairs chairman, told the Washington Examiner. “Of course, we don’t know whether or not he will become the vice president because, you know, this political struggle is very close, and again, it’s becoming interesting and unpredictable.”

Merezhko and other Ukrainian officials have become avid American political news followers, given the importance of U.S. military assistance in continuing Ukraine’s ability to fight against Russia’s full-scale invasion. And Walz has found ways to cultivate relationships with them, even as a governor.

“Gov. Walz is definitely one of the leaders of such support and a reliable friend of our country,” Ukrainian Ambassador Oksana Markarova told a Ukrainian outlet Tuesday. “When I visited Minnesota in December … the governor and I met with the Farm Bureau and actually joined him in convincing them of how important Ukraine’s victory is to the U.S. national interest.”

And in February, Walz signed an agreement with Markarova to establish a partnership between the state of Minnesota and Chernihiv Oblast, a region near Kyiv.

“He is very pro-Ukrainian and our press and our people, they view him as a friend, as a true friend of Ukraine,” Merezhko said.

The presidential election has put Ukrainian officials in a tricky diplomatic position, given the divergent rhetorical postures of the Republican and Democratic tickets. Harris and President Joe Biden have maintained a very supportive tone throughout the full-scale war despite their policy of doling out aid by degrees or imposing restrictions on the use of American weapons against military targets inside Russia. 

Former President Donald Trump and his running mate, Sen. J.D. Vance (R-OH), have downplayed the relevance of the conflict to U.S. interests and signaled their desire for a quick end to the war — a prospect that worries many Ukrainians, who fear that such a scenario would amount to a victory for Russia. Yet Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky’s team has been reaching out to Trump and his allies in recent months, which included what Trump described as “a very good phone call” with Zelensky after the Republican standard-bearer survived an assassination attempt at a rally in Pennsylvania.

“The fact that Trump described this as a good call means his animus against Zelensky is old news,” former U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine, John Herbst, told Politico. “It’s why the populist wing of the party was against Ukraine. If Trump is not there, then they’re not there.”

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER

Vance, for his part, recently suggested Harris doesn’t have the gravitas to “promote an acceptable peace” in a prospective dialogue with Russian President Vladimir Putin — a jab that, in Merezhko’s view, contains a sign that his position is trending toward one that Kyiv could welcome. 

“Interestingly, Vance started to change his rhetoric, and recently, he mentioned that Ukraine should have peace, just peace, not on the Russian terms,” he said. “So we can see that both candidates to become vice president, they’re — well, Vance is becoming more pro-Ukrainian also. It seems to me.”

, Vice President Kamala Harris’s new running mate, Gov. Tim Walz (D-MN), has a reputation as a “reliable friend” to Ukraine, according to Ukrainian officials. “It’s a good sign for us,” Oleksandr Merezhko, Ukrainian foreign affairs chairman, told the Washington Examiner. “Of course, we don’t know whether or not he will become the vice president because, you know, this political struggle is very close, and again, it’s becoming interesting and unpredictable.” Merezhko and other Ukrainian officials have become avid American political news followers, given the importance of U.S. military assistance in continuing Ukraine’s ability to fight against Russia’s full-scale invasion. And Walz has found ways to cultivate relationships with them, even as a governor. “Gov. Walz is definitely one of the leaders of such support and a reliable friend of our country,” Ukrainian Ambassador Oksana Markarova told a Ukrainian outlet Tuesday. “When I visited Minnesota in December … the governor and I met with the Farm Bureau and actually joined him in convincing them of how important Ukraine’s victory is to the U.S. national interest.” Gov. Tim Walz (D-MN), Democratic vice presidential nominee, arrives on stage to deliver remarks before Vice President Kamala Harris, Democratic presidential nominee, at a campaign event, Wednesday, Aug. 7, 2024, in Eau Claire, Wisconsin. (AP Photo/Charles Rex Arbogast) And in February, Walz signed an agreement with Markarova to establish a partnership between the state of Minnesota and Chernihiv Oblast, a region near Kyiv. “He is very pro-Ukrainian and our press and our people, they view him as a friend, as a true friend of Ukraine,” Merezhko said. The presidential election has put Ukrainian officials in a tricky diplomatic position, given the divergent rhetorical postures of the Republican and Democratic tickets. Harris and President Joe Biden have maintained a very supportive tone throughout the full-scale war despite their policy of doling out aid by degrees or imposing restrictions on the use of American weapons against military targets inside Russia.  Former President Donald Trump and his running mate, Sen. J.D. Vance (R-OH), have downplayed the relevance of the conflict to U.S. interests and signaled their desire for a quick end to the war — a prospect that worries many Ukrainians, who fear that such a scenario would amount to a victory for Russia. Yet Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky’s team has been reaching out to Trump and his allies in recent months, which included what Trump described as “a very good phone call” with Zelensky after the Republican standard-bearer survived an assassination attempt at a rally in Pennsylvania. “The fact that Trump described this as a good call means his animus against Zelensky is old news,” former U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine, John Herbst, told Politico. “It’s why the populist wing of the party was against Ukraine. If Trump is not there, then they’re not there.” CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER Vance, for his part, recently suggested Harris doesn’t have the gravitas to “promote an acceptable peace” in a prospective dialogue with Russian President Vladimir Putin — a jab that, in Merezhko’s view, contains a sign that his position is trending toward one that Kyiv could welcome.  “Interestingly, Vance started to change his rhetoric, and recently, he mentioned that Ukraine should have peace, just peace, not on the Russian terms,” he said. “So we can see that both candidates to become vice president, they’re — well, Vance is becoming more pro-Ukrainian also. It seems to me.”, , , https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/tim-walz.webp, Washington Examiner, Political News and Conservative Analysis About Congress, the President, and the Federal Government, https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/cropped-favicon-32×32.png, https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/feed/, Joel Gehrke,

China’s growing military has spurred the Royal Australian Navy to focus on buttressing “the rules-based order” in the Indo-Pacific, Australia’s top defense official said following a milestone meeting with U.S. officials.

“We are all deeply engaged in asserting the rules-based order within our region. That is principally what the Royal Australian Navy is doing,” Australian Defense Minister Richard Marles said Wednesday at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. “That’s the main job that it is doing today … the core business for us is about using our navy to assert the rules-based order within our region and that’s what we’re doing.”

That statement coincided with the announcement of a joint naval exercise involving Australia, the United States, Canada, and the Philippines. Those drills continue a pattern of multinational shows of force in vital waterways that Beijing seeks to claim for itself at the expense of U.S. allies, an ambition backed by a surge in Chinese military investments that have startled governments across the Indo-Pacific.

“Their navy is the largest navy in the world, and they’re not just putting out ships [at a pace of] one a year, but several ships a year; in Chinese terms, it’s like dropping dumplings in the water, cooking dumplings,” Taiwan’s top envoy in the U.S., Alexander Yui, observed to Marles during the Q&A session. “What’s your opinion about the readiness and the preparation that like-minded countries such as Australia, [the] United States, and others are doing? Is it enough?”

Marles averred that “the answer to that question is yes,” not only because of Australia’s operations, but also due to Washington’s effort to change the “defense footprint” of the U.S. military in the region. Those efforts were a top priority for Marles and other U.S. and Australian officials who met this week in Annapolis for the annual strategic dialogue, in which the two governments unveiled plans to enlarge the U.S. military presence in Australia and expand the production of key weapons in the country. 

“All this will mean more maritime patrol aircraft and reconnaissance aircraft operating from bases across northern Australia,” Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin said Tuesday evening in a press conference alongside Marles, Australian Foreign Minister Penny Wong, and Secretary of State Antony Blinken. “It will also mean more frequent rotational bomber deployments.” 

The quartet also protested “China’s dangerous and escalatory behavior toward Philippine vessels lawfully operating within the Philippines’ exclusive economic zone” and warned against Beijing’s ominous pressure on Taiwan in a joint statement published after their meetings.

“They expressed strong concern regarding China’s military and Coast Guard activity around Taiwan,” they said. “They highlighted Taiwan’s important role as a critical partner for both countries and a leading Indo-Pacific economy and democracy, and reiterated their commitment to work together to support Taiwan’s meaningful participation in international organizations.”

U.S. and Australian officials emphasize that Australian forces have fought alongside the U.S. “in every major conflict” involving American forces since World War I. Marles, in the moment, was cagey about the role Australian forces could or would play in the event of a military crisis around Taiwan.

“We are the biggest supplier of energy to Taiwan and, really, that is the single-most significant equity we have in place, in terms of contributing to Taiwan’s resilience,” he said. “I think I’m not going to go into more detail about that.”

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER

More broadly, Marles suggested that U.S. and Australian cooperation is “as significant as we have ever had it,” not least because of the growing military rotation and the AUKUS agreement — a major pact designed not only to provide Australia with nuclear-powered submarines, but also to harness the defense industries of both countries for the development and production of emerging technologies. 

We are a high-tech country, and we can make a contribution here as well, and so, there is an upside for America in being able to access the technology that we’re doing,” he said. “There are some significant technologies which do come out of Australia, which America is keen to use.”

2024-08-07 20:15:00, http://s.wordpress.com/mshots/v1/https%3A%2F%2Fwww.washingtonexaminer.com%2Fpolicy%2Fforeign-policy%2F3114254%2Faustralian-navys-main-job-countering-china-defense-chief%2F?w=600&h=450, China’s growing military has spurred the Royal Australian Navy to focus on buttressing “the rules-based order” in the Indo-Pacific, Australia’s top defense official said following a milestone meeting with U.S. officials. “We are all deeply engaged in asserting the rules-based order within our region. That is principally what the Royal Australian Navy is doing,” Australian,

China’s growing military has spurred the Royal Australian Navy to focus on buttressing “the rules-based order” in the Indo-Pacific, Australia’s top defense official said following a milestone meeting with U.S. officials.

“We are all deeply engaged in asserting the rules-based order within our region. That is principally what the Royal Australian Navy is doing,” Australian Defense Minister Richard Marles said Wednesday at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. “That’s the main job that it is doing today … the core business for us is about using our navy to assert the rules-based order within our region and that’s what we’re doing.”

That statement coincided with the announcement of a joint naval exercise involving Australia, the United States, Canada, and the Philippines. Those drills continue a pattern of multinational shows of force in vital waterways that Beijing seeks to claim for itself at the expense of U.S. allies, an ambition backed by a surge in Chinese military investments that have startled governments across the Indo-Pacific.

“Their navy is the largest navy in the world, and they’re not just putting out ships [at a pace of] one a year, but several ships a year; in Chinese terms, it’s like dropping dumplings in the water, cooking dumplings,” Taiwan’s top envoy in the U.S., Alexander Yui, observed to Marles during the Q&A session. “What’s your opinion about the readiness and the preparation that like-minded countries such as Australia, [the] United States, and others are doing? Is it enough?”

Marles averred that “the answer to that question is yes,” not only because of Australia’s operations, but also due to Washington’s effort to change the “defense footprint” of the U.S. military in the region. Those efforts were a top priority for Marles and other U.S. and Australian officials who met this week in Annapolis for the annual strategic dialogue, in which the two governments unveiled plans to enlarge the U.S. military presence in Australia and expand the production of key weapons in the country. 

“All this will mean more maritime patrol aircraft and reconnaissance aircraft operating from bases across northern Australia,” Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin said Tuesday evening in a press conference alongside Marles, Australian Foreign Minister Penny Wong, and Secretary of State Antony Blinken. “It will also mean more frequent rotational bomber deployments.” 

The quartet also protested “China’s dangerous and escalatory behavior toward Philippine vessels lawfully operating within the Philippines’ exclusive economic zone” and warned against Beijing’s ominous pressure on Taiwan in a joint statement published after their meetings.

“They expressed strong concern regarding China’s military and Coast Guard activity around Taiwan,” they said. “They highlighted Taiwan’s important role as a critical partner for both countries and a leading Indo-Pacific economy and democracy, and reiterated their commitment to work together to support Taiwan’s meaningful participation in international organizations.”

U.S. and Australian officials emphasize that Australian forces have fought alongside the U.S. “in every major conflict” involving American forces since World War I. Marles, in the moment, was cagey about the role Australian forces could or would play in the event of a military crisis around Taiwan.

“We are the biggest supplier of energy to Taiwan and, really, that is the single-most significant equity we have in place, in terms of contributing to Taiwan’s resilience,” he said. “I think I’m not going to go into more detail about that.”

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER

More broadly, Marles suggested that U.S. and Australian cooperation is “as significant as we have ever had it,” not least because of the growing military rotation and the AUKUS agreement — a major pact designed not only to provide Australia with nuclear-powered submarines, but also to harness the defense industries of both countries for the development and production of emerging technologies. 

We are a high-tech country, and we can make a contribution here as well, and so, there is an upside for America in being able to access the technology that we’re doing,” he said. “There are some significant technologies which do come out of Australia, which America is keen to use.”

, China’s growing military has spurred the Royal Australian Navy to focus on buttressing “the rules-based order” in the Indo-Pacific, Australia’s top defense official said following a milestone meeting with U.S. officials. “We are all deeply engaged in asserting the rules-based order within our region. That is principally what the Royal Australian Navy is doing,” Australian Defense Minister Richard Marles said Wednesday at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. “That’s the main job that it is doing today … the core business for us is about using our navy to assert the rules-based order within our region and that’s what we’re doing.” That statement coincided with the announcement of a joint naval exercise involving Australia, the United States, Canada, and the Philippines. Those drills continue a pattern of multinational shows of force in vital waterways that Beijing seeks to claim for itself at the expense of U.S. allies, an ambition backed by a surge in Chinese military investments that have startled governments across the Indo-Pacific. “Their navy is the largest navy in the world, and they’re not just putting out ships [at a pace of] one a year, but several ships a year; in Chinese terms, it’s like dropping dumplings in the water, cooking dumplings,” Taiwan’s top envoy in the U.S., Alexander Yui, observed to Marles during the Q&A session. “What’s your opinion about the readiness and the preparation that like-minded countries such as Australia, [the] United States, and others are doing? Is it enough?” Australia’s Deputy Prime Minister and Defense Minister Richard Marles, left, standing with Australia’s Foreign Minister Penny Wong, center, and Secretary of State Antony Blinken, right, speaks during a news conference at the Unites States Naval Academy in Annapolis, Maryland, Tuesday, Aug. 6, 2024. (AP Photo/Susan Walsh) Marles averred that “the answer to that question is yes,” not only because of Australia’s operations, but also due to Washington’s effort to change the “defense footprint” of the U.S. military in the region. Those efforts were a top priority for Marles and other U.S. and Australian officials who met this week in Annapolis for the annual strategic dialogue, in which the two governments unveiled plans to enlarge the U.S. military presence in Australia and expand the production of key weapons in the country.  “All this will mean more maritime patrol aircraft and reconnaissance aircraft operating from bases across northern Australia,” Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin said Tuesday evening in a press conference alongside Marles, Australian Foreign Minister Penny Wong, and Secretary of State Antony Blinken. “It will also mean more frequent rotational bomber deployments.”  The quartet also protested “China’s dangerous and escalatory behavior toward Philippine vessels lawfully operating within the Philippines’ exclusive economic zone” and warned against Beijing’s ominous pressure on Taiwan in a joint statement published after their meetings. “They expressed strong concern regarding China’s military and Coast Guard activity around Taiwan,” they said. “They highlighted Taiwan’s important role as a critical partner for both countries and a leading Indo-Pacific economy and democracy, and reiterated their commitment to work together to support Taiwan’s meaningful participation in international organizations.” U.S. and Australian officials emphasize that Australian forces have fought alongside the U.S. “in every major conflict” involving American forces since World War I. Marles, in the moment, was cagey about the role Australian forces could or would play in the event of a military crisis around Taiwan. “We are the biggest supplier of energy to Taiwan and, really, that is the single-most significant equity we have in place, in terms of contributing to Taiwan’s resilience,” he said. “I think I’m not going to go into more detail about that.” CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER More broadly, Marles suggested that U.S. and Australian cooperation is “as significant as we have ever had it,” not least because of the growing military rotation and the AUKUS agreement — a major pact designed not only to provide Australia with nuclear-powered submarines, but also to harness the defense industries of both countries for the development and production of emerging technologies.  We are a high-tech country, and we can make a contribution here as well, and so, there is an upside for America in being able to access the technology that we’re doing,” he said. “There are some significant technologies which do come out of Australia, which America is keen to use.”, , , https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/marles.webp, Washington Examiner, Political News and Conservative Analysis About Congress, the President, and the Federal Government, https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/cropped-favicon-32×32.png, https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/feed/, Joel Gehrke,

A protracted effort to broker a ceasefire and hostage release deal has reached “the decisive moment” for a deal between Israel and Hamas, according to Secretary of State Antony Blinken, who pitched the pact as an off-ramp from a potential clash between Israel and Iran.

“This is the decisive moment,” Blinken told reporters Tuesday in Annapolis, Maryland. “The negotiations have reached their final stage, and we believe strongly that they should come across the finish line very, very soon.”

Blinken made the remarks alongside Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin as the pair hosted their Australian counterparts at the U.S. Naval Academy. Those annual dialogues have taken on added significance in recent years given the importance of the U.S.-Australia alliance to the wider competition with China, but the conversation this week was overshadowed by the prospect of Iran’s impending response to the assassination of a Hamas leader in Tehran.

“Everyone in the region should understand that further attacks only perpetuate conflict, instability, [and] insecurity for everyone,” Blinken said. “And further attacks only raise the risk of dangerous outcomes that no one can predict and no one can fully control.”

The potential for a war between Israel and Iran has haunted U.S. officials and their counterparts across the Middle East since the Oct. 7 terrorist attack by Hamas that ignited the war. As Israel’s campaign in Gaza has unfolded, other Iranian proxies, especially Lebanese Hezbollah and the Yemen-based Houthis, have conducted a variety of attacks designed to put pressure on Israel and international powers, especially the United States. 

“We’ve adjusted our military posture to strengthen our force protection, to reinforce our ironclad commitment to the offense of Israel, and to remain prepared to respond to any contingency,” Austin said Tuesday evening. “I’ve also ordered more cruisers and destroyers capable of ballistic missile defense to the region, and I’ve ordered the deployment of another fighter squadron to the Middle East to reinforce our defensive air support capabilities here.”

The U.S. military presence in the region served in the initial months of the war to help deter Lebanese Hezbollah from launching a full-scale attack on Israel in support of Hamas and also to provide additional air defense coverage to drones and missiles launched at vessels in the Red Sea. Yet Israel’s killing of a senior Iranian military officer in Syria gave rise to the first-ever direct attack on Israel from Iran — a largely unsuccessful bombardment that was thwarted by a multi-national coalition of countries. And the killing of Hamas political chief Ismail Haniyeh in Tehran, as well as another senior Hezbollah official in Beirut, has spurred Iran and its proxies to pledge to retaliate once more.

“We have not sought escalations until now, we have been fighting in support of Gaza but keeping in mind the Lebanese national interest,” Lebanese Hezbollah chief Hassan Nasrallah said Tuesday. “But an assassination of a top leader in [Beirut] must be treated differently. … Our response is coming, God willing, from us and the axis of resistance — and it will be strong.”

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER

Hamas, for its part, announced that military commander Yahya Sinwar, the Gaza-based mastermind of the Oct. 7 attack, will replace Haniyeh, whose political role outside of Gaza had made him a key point of contact for the Arab governments mediating the ceasefire talks. Blinken, though, downplayed the significance of the change.

“With regard to Mr. Sinwar, he has been and remains the primary decider when it comes to concluding the ceasefire,” Blinken said. “It is really on him to decide whether to move forward with a ceasefire … and that, besides changing everything for people in Gaza — bringing the hostages home, giving us an opportunity to build a more enduring peace for Gaza — also opens up other possibilities, other prospects, more broadly, in terms of de-escalating tensions and bringing real security and stability.”

2024-08-07 00:13:00, http://s.wordpress.com/mshots/v1/https%3A%2F%2Fwww.washingtonexaminer.com%2Fpolicy%2Fforeign-policy%2F3113195%2Fblinken-pitches-ceasefire-deal-off-ramp-from-iran-israel-crisis%2F?w=600&h=450, A protracted effort to broker a ceasefire and hostage release deal has reached “the decisive moment” for a deal between Israel and Hamas, according to Secretary of State Antony Blinken, who pitched the pact as an off-ramp from a potential clash between Israel and Iran. “This is the decisive moment,” Blinken told reporters Tuesday in,

A protracted effort to broker a ceasefire and hostage release deal has reached “the decisive moment” for a deal between Israel and Hamas, according to Secretary of State Antony Blinken, who pitched the pact as an off-ramp from a potential clash between Israel and Iran.

“This is the decisive moment,” Blinken told reporters Tuesday in Annapolis, Maryland. “The negotiations have reached their final stage, and we believe strongly that they should come across the finish line very, very soon.”

Blinken made the remarks alongside Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin as the pair hosted their Australian counterparts at the U.S. Naval Academy. Those annual dialogues have taken on added significance in recent years given the importance of the U.S.-Australia alliance to the wider competition with China, but the conversation this week was overshadowed by the prospect of Iran’s impending response to the assassination of a Hamas leader in Tehran.

“Everyone in the region should understand that further attacks only perpetuate conflict, instability, [and] insecurity for everyone,” Blinken said. “And further attacks only raise the risk of dangerous outcomes that no one can predict and no one can fully control.”

The potential for a war between Israel and Iran has haunted U.S. officials and their counterparts across the Middle East since the Oct. 7 terrorist attack by Hamas that ignited the war. As Israel’s campaign in Gaza has unfolded, other Iranian proxies, especially Lebanese Hezbollah and the Yemen-based Houthis, have conducted a variety of attacks designed to put pressure on Israel and international powers, especially the United States. 

“We’ve adjusted our military posture to strengthen our force protection, to reinforce our ironclad commitment to the offense of Israel, and to remain prepared to respond to any contingency,” Austin said Tuesday evening. “I’ve also ordered more cruisers and destroyers capable of ballistic missile defense to the region, and I’ve ordered the deployment of another fighter squadron to the Middle East to reinforce our defensive air support capabilities here.”

The U.S. military presence in the region served in the initial months of the war to help deter Lebanese Hezbollah from launching a full-scale attack on Israel in support of Hamas and also to provide additional air defense coverage to drones and missiles launched at vessels in the Red Sea. Yet Israel’s killing of a senior Iranian military officer in Syria gave rise to the first-ever direct attack on Israel from Iran — a largely unsuccessful bombardment that was thwarted by a multi-national coalition of countries. And the killing of Hamas political chief Ismail Haniyeh in Tehran, as well as another senior Hezbollah official in Beirut, has spurred Iran and its proxies to pledge to retaliate once more.

“We have not sought escalations until now, we have been fighting in support of Gaza but keeping in mind the Lebanese national interest,” Lebanese Hezbollah chief Hassan Nasrallah said Tuesday. “But an assassination of a top leader in [Beirut] must be treated differently. … Our response is coming, God willing, from us and the axis of resistance — and it will be strong.”

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER

Hamas, for its part, announced that military commander Yahya Sinwar, the Gaza-based mastermind of the Oct. 7 attack, will replace Haniyeh, whose political role outside of Gaza had made him a key point of contact for the Arab governments mediating the ceasefire talks. Blinken, though, downplayed the significance of the change.

“With regard to Mr. Sinwar, he has been and remains the primary decider when it comes to concluding the ceasefire,” Blinken said. “It is really on him to decide whether to move forward with a ceasefire … and that, besides changing everything for people in Gaza — bringing the hostages home, giving us an opportunity to build a more enduring peace for Gaza — also opens up other possibilities, other prospects, more broadly, in terms of de-escalating tensions and bringing real security and stability.”

, A protracted effort to broker a ceasefire and hostage release deal has reached “the decisive moment” for a deal between Israel and Hamas, according to Secretary of State Antony Blinken, who pitched the pact as an off-ramp from a potential clash between Israel and Iran. “This is the decisive moment,” Blinken told reporters Tuesday in Annapolis, Maryland. “The negotiations have reached their final stage, and we believe strongly that they should come across the finish line very, very soon.” Blinken made the remarks alongside Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin as the pair hosted their Australian counterparts at the U.S. Naval Academy. Those annual dialogues have taken on added significance in recent years given the importance of the U.S.-Australia alliance to the wider competition with China, but the conversation this week was overshadowed by the prospect of Iran’s impending response to the assassination of a Hamas leader in Tehran. “Everyone in the region should understand that further attacks only perpetuate conflict, instability, [and] insecurity for everyone,” Blinken said. “And further attacks only raise the risk of dangerous outcomes that no one can predict and no one can fully control.” Secretary of State Antony Blinken, second from right, standing with, from left, Australian Deputy Prime Minister and Defense Minister Richard Marles, Australian Foreign Minister Penny Wong, and Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin, speaks during a news conference at the U.S. Naval Academy in Annapolis, Maryland, Tuesday, Aug. 6, 2024. (AP Photo/Susan Walsh) The potential for a war between Israel and Iran has haunted U.S. officials and their counterparts across the Middle East since the Oct. 7 terrorist attack by Hamas that ignited the war. As Israel’s campaign in Gaza has unfolded, other Iranian proxies, especially Lebanese Hezbollah and the Yemen-based Houthis, have conducted a variety of attacks designed to put pressure on Israel and international powers, especially the United States.  “We’ve adjusted our military posture to strengthen our force protection, to reinforce our ironclad commitment to the offense of Israel, and to remain prepared to respond to any contingency,” Austin said Tuesday evening. “I’ve also ordered more cruisers and destroyers capable of ballistic missile defense to the region, and I’ve ordered the deployment of another fighter squadron to the Middle East to reinforce our defensive air support capabilities here.” The U.S. military presence in the region served in the initial months of the war to help deter Lebanese Hezbollah from launching a full-scale attack on Israel in support of Hamas and also to provide additional air defense coverage to drones and missiles launched at vessels in the Red Sea. Yet Israel’s killing of a senior Iranian military officer in Syria gave rise to the first-ever direct attack on Israel from Iran — a largely unsuccessful bombardment that was thwarted by a multi-national coalition of countries. And the killing of Hamas political chief Ismail Haniyeh in Tehran, as well as another senior Hezbollah official in Beirut, has spurred Iran and its proxies to pledge to retaliate once more. “We have not sought escalations until now, we have been fighting in support of Gaza but keeping in mind the Lebanese national interest,” Lebanese Hezbollah chief Hassan Nasrallah said Tuesday. “But an assassination of a top leader in [Beirut] must be treated differently. … Our response is coming, God willing, from us and the axis of resistance — and it will be strong.” CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER Hamas, for its part, announced that military commander Yahya Sinwar, the Gaza-based mastermind of the Oct. 7 attack, will replace Haniyeh, whose political role outside of Gaza had made him a key point of contact for the Arab governments mediating the ceasefire talks. Blinken, though, downplayed the significance of the change. “With regard to Mr. Sinwar, he has been and remains the primary decider when it comes to concluding the ceasefire,” Blinken said. “It is really on him to decide whether to move forward with a ceasefire … and that, besides changing everything for people in Gaza — bringing the hostages home, giving us an opportunity to build a more enduring peace for Gaza — also opens up other possibilities, other prospects, more broadly, in terms of de-escalating tensions and bringing real security and stability.”, , , https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/blinken-ausmin.webp, Washington Examiner, Political News and Conservative Analysis About Congress, the President, and the Federal Government, https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/cropped-favicon-32×32.png, https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/feed/, Joel Gehrke,