.
Europe
Ukraine
(June 24, 2025) 06:30 Russian drones and missiles killed at least 14 civilians and injured several dozen others in Ukraine in overnight attacks, local officials said yesterday, with nine deaths reported in the capital, Kyiv, where an apartment building partially collapsed. The attacks came as Zelensky began a visit to Britain, where he met privately with King Charles. (Source: Irish Independent - Ireland)
Asia
Gaza
June 24, 2025 49 people were killed in Gaza at different locations while they were trying to get food aid today, the Hamas-run Gaza Ministry of Health said. /Video/ (Source: ABC News)
North America
United States
June 24, 2025 / July/August 2025 Beware the Europe you wish for - The downsides and dangers of independence of United States’ allies in Europe. I. By the NATO’s 2024 summit in Washington, twenty-three of NATO’s 32 members were spending two percent of their GDP on defense - up from six members in 2021. U.S. president Trump’s rhetoric, broadly critical of European defense spending during his first presidential term and now his second, has played a role in the uptick. But for over a decade, NATO allies have been focused on the elevated threat that Russia poses to European security, with Russian President Putin’s naked aggression against Ukraine as a harbinger. Washington paid less attention to their region, more to Asia. Trump’s reelection has only helped underscore the continent’s burgeoning independence. Europeans now see a fundamentally changed United States, and ’they are no longer confident that investing in U.S. leadership will secure their interests’. Thanks to the continent’s increased strength, Washington can now focus on China first and Russia second. But growing European power means the era of comfortable U.S. leadership is over. It might deny the United States the right to use American military bases in Europe for operations in Africa, Asia, and the Middle East. And the continent is already holding up Washington’s efforts to end the war in Ukraine. The changing balance of power means that the United States now has to earn Europe’s partnership. During the Cold War, in the 1970s, preventing Moscow from controlling western Europe when it already occupied eastern Europe was the necessary condition for American global security and prosperity. The imbalance of defense spending in the alliance, was still a source of friction for the most powerful player, the U.S. leadership, but contributing the lion’s share was perfectly rational, ultimately in Washington’s own interest. ’The most concrete benefit: the more than 30 military bases the United States has set up across Europe’. The legal status of these bases is established in bilateral - ’access, basing, and overflight,’ or ABO- agreements that dictate how, when, and whether the U.S. military can operate from both the bases themselves and the airspace and waterways that allow access to them. Typically, the terms are quite generous, allowing the United States to use the bases not only ’to defend Europe’ but to support American interests across the globe. The United States had a hegemonic advantage to preserve U.S. ’leadership’: NATO allies often supported ’American priorities’, even when they disagreed with them. In 2001, multiple European allies granted Washington permission to use its bases ’for operations in Afghanistan’, as well as the right to fly military planes through European airspace. „Several NATO allies that opposed the 2003 U.S. war against Iraq” nonetheless allowed Washington to use bases in Europe for the invasion - or at least permitted U.S. military aircraft to transit their territory. When France did not, it was criticized by some members for causing NATO disunity. The benefits of the United States’ NATO hegemony continue to this day. Washington’s 2024 defense of Israel against Iranian air attacks depended on American military aircraft and ships based in Greece, Italy, Spain, and the United Kingdom. European basing and overflight enabled the United States to destroy strike and command facilities operated by the Houthi rebels in Yemen. And European bases support U.S. counterterrorism operations in the Horn of Africa. These bases help the United States protect itself. To reach the northern Atlantic Ocean, Russian submarines must first travel from a naval and air base on the Arctic Ocean through a chokepoint known as the GIUK Gap (for Greenland, Iceland, and the United Kingdom). The Pentagon is typically able to track these submarines through the gap, but only because of the many U.S. naval and air assets it has stationed in Europe. Washington is helped in this task by patrols from Denmark, Iceland, Norway, and the United Kingdom. The United States benefits from NATO leadership in ways that go beyond basing. For the alliance to function properly, its members need to be able to jointly plan, patrol, and carry out operations. They must use similar sets of weapons. NATO states in practice, very often buy U.S.-made ones. Norwegian and U.S. NATO patrols in the GIUK Gap, for instance, train on the same systems, especially the Boeing P-8 Poseidon aircraft. Poland and the Baltic states have prioritized the purchase of High Mobility Artillery Rocket Systems, known as HIMARS, to ensure round-the-clock coverage of NATO’s ’eastern frontline’. By equipping European forces with American weapons, ’eastern allies can encourage Washington to keep its military in the region’. American defense contractors are typically capable of providing decades’ worth of maintenance, parts, and upgrades. The reliability of the U.S. defense industrial base and the scale of the Pentagon’s long-term contracts offer additional incentives to use American weapons. This reliability is one reason why European countries have inked contracts for fifth-generation F-35 aircraft despite the high prices and torturous timelines. The F-35 alone is worth billions of dollars to U.S. defense companies. Europe’s purchases help the United States maintain a strong defense industrial base. Since 2020, European NATO allies have more than doubled the number of weapons they import and increased the proportion they buy from the United States from 54 percent to 64 percent. From 2022 to 2024, European countries purchased $61 billion worth of U.S. defense systems, accounting for 34 percent of all their defense contract procurement, according to the International Institute for Strategic Studies. The United States has long enjoyed its own benefits from this predominance. Washington pays more for defense than Europe does. If the United States’ share of global GDP were significantly larger than Europe’s, Washington might still be spending far more on NATO than its transatlantic counterparts do, even as Europe begins to spend a similar share of GDP on defense. In 2024, European members spent an average of 2.2 percent of GDP on defense, whereas the United States spent under 3.4 percent. By 2025, the United States made up 14.8 percent of global GDP, whereas European countries (the EU, along with Norway and the United Kingdom) made up 17.5 percent. After Russia’s first invasion of Ukraine in 2014, nearly all NATO countries began spending more on buying and maintaining military equipment. 'In 2024 alone, NATO’s non-U.S. members increased their expenditures on equipment by 37 percent', while U.S. spending for equipment grew 15 percent. European NATO allies allocated the vast majority of their defense spending to the continent. The United States, by contrast, has military forces spanning the globe. The (European) union is making changes in procurement and in overall military spending to expand defense industrial production. It changed its stringent deficit spending restrictions. Members can budget up to 1.5 percent more of individual GDP on defense. ’They could spend more than $700 billion more on defense through 2030 than is currently earmarked’. Germany long highly averse to both defense and deficit spending changed its constitution so ’it could borrow money for military purposes’. The country’s new government, led by Chancellor Friedrich Merz, has signaled plans to expand defense procurement through at least 2030. ’Committed to increasing spending’, Belgium, Italy, and Spain have all announced that they will reach NATO’s two percent goal in 2025. The EU has also proposed setting aside a $163.5 billion pool of money for long-term low-interest loans for procuring military goods. Should all these trends continue, Europe will not only match U.S. regional defense spending but also exceed it. The heavy burden that Washington bore for collective ’defense’ is being lightened ’by Europe’s response to Russia’. (Source: Foreign Affairs)
by Wallander, Executive Director of Penn Washington and an Adjunct Senior Fellow at the Center for a New American Security. She was Assistant Secretary of Defense for International Security Affairs and oversaw U.S. military assistance to Ukraine during the Biden administration.
NATO
24/06/2025 - 23:18 From The Netherlands, as NATO leaders meet. /Video/ (Source: France 24)
24.06.2025 What to expect at NATO's pivotal summit: Defense spending, Ukraine, Iran fallout. NATO leaders will debate ’a US-backed plan for members to spend 5% of GDP on defense’, a proposal facing pushbacks. Rutte has justified the 5% goal largely on the basis of 'growing threats from Russia'. Currently, European allies spend an average of 1.9% of GDP on defense. Canada allocates around 1.4%, while the US spends approximately 3.5%. The initial aim is to reach the target by 2032. No unanimous support among allies. Threat perception varies across the alliance, and many governments face domestic resistance to increased military spending due to rising national debt and public skepticism. Spain has emerged as the clearest opponent of the proposed target. Sanchez argued that the 5% goal does not align with Spain's strategic vision and is not necessary for fulfilling NATO obligations. Today, Slovak Prime Minister Robert Fico joined Spain's calls, arguing that Bratislava can fulfill its NATO commitments without hitting the 5% mark. Zelenskyy's invitation is being interpreted as a symbolic gesture of support. US President Trump previously said that Ukraine’s NATO membership will never happen and claimed the issue was the root cause of the war with Russia. The summit declaration is expected to include a reference to NATO's sovereign commitments to Ukraine's security. Leaders from Asia-Pacific partners such as Australia, New Zealand, South Korea and Japan will be present at a dinner hosted by the Dutch King. Summit comes amid rising US-Iran tensions - the geopolitical fallout from recent US military strikes on Iranian nuclear facilities and Iran's counterattack targeting US bases in Qatar and Iraq. The crisis has prompted renewed discussions about missile defense and counterterrorism, which are expected to be on the agenda alongside defense spending. Experts note that the Iran issue represents an unpredictable and potentially destabilizing factor for the summit. (Source: Anadolu Agency - Turkey)
24/06/2025 - 06:03 Trump and his NATO counterparts are due to meet today in The Hague for a high-stakes summit amid discord over defence spending and Ukraine. The summit will cover topics such as a proposed 5% GDP target and questions about Kyiv's role at the table. Spain rejected the new NATO target for each country to spend 5% of its gross domestic product on defence ’needs’, calling it “unreasonable". The alliance operates on a consensus that requires the backing of all 32 members. The following day, Trump lashed out at Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez's government. He also criticised Canada as ’a low payer’. After Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022, the NATO allies agreed to make 2% of GDP the minimum spending level. Last year, 22 countries were expected to hit that target, up from only three a decade ago. Spain was the lowest spender in the alliance last year, directing less than 2% of its GDP on defence expenditure, while Canada was spending 1.45%. In The Hague, the allies were expected to up the ante to 3.5%, plus a further 1.5% for things like improving roads, bridges, ports and airfields or preparing societies to deal with future conflicts. Then Trump ordered the bombing of nuclear installations in Iran. In 2003, the US-led war on Iraq deeply divided NATO, as France and Germany led opposition to the attack, while Britain and Spain joined the coalition. Ukraine's role at the summit is unclear. ’European allies and Canada want Ukraine to be at the top of the summit agenda’, but they are wary that Trump might not want Zelensky to steal the limelight. Zelensky has been invited, but it's unclear whether he will have a seat at NATO’s table. He may take part in Tuesday's dinner. Europeans provided 60% of the military support that Ukraine received in 2024. NATO coordinates those weapons deliveries via a hub on the Polish border and helps organise training for Ukrainian troops. The two-day summit in The Hague involves an informal dinner Tuesday and one working session Wednesday morning. A very short summit statement has been drafted to ensure the meeting is not derailed by fights over details and wording. The US nuclear arsenal provides strategic deterrence against would-be adversaries. A key part of the commitment for allies to defend one another is to deter Russia, or any other adversary. Under NATO’s new military plans, 300,000 military personnel would be deployed within 30 days to counter any attack, whether it be on land, at sea, by air ’or in cyberspace’. Experts doubt whether the allies could muster the troop numbers. Trump’s threats against US allies – including imposing tariffs on them – has weakened the deterrence. (Source: France 24 „with AP” - U.S.)
.
