NATO is transitioning to its own satellite surveillance systems, considering potential issues in cooperation with the US, which has traditionally played a central role in the alliance’s intelligence gathering.

Speaking to Bloomberg, NATO’s Supreme Allied Commander Transformation, General Philippe Lavigne, stated that the new system will, for the first time, allow the alliance to monitor “vast territories” such as the Russian borders, the war in Ukraine, and the Arctic.

For the initiative, named SINBAD (Smart Indicators and Warnings for Wide Area Detection), NATO has partnered with the US satellite imagery provider Planet Labs. The company will scan specific regions worldwide throughout the year to obtain high-frequency images, and artificial intelligence will be used to detect any changes and generate alerts.

General Lavigne mentioned that the new satellite surveillance capabilities will meet both current mission requirements and potential needs that could arise from a peace agreement in Ukraine.

“Today, we are not sure that the Russians will stop in Ukraine,” Lavigne said, emphasizing the importance of providing timely intelligence to Eastern European countries. He added, “We will be able to tell them: ‘We are watching you.'”

According to officials, if a peace agreement is reached, satellite intelligence will help NATO countries monitor the implementation of the ceasefire. This monitoring is seen as a crucial part of the guarantees Kyiv would need to receive from countries within a “coalition of the willing” planning a peacekeeping mission in Ukraine.

An alliance official noted that SINBAD is a pilot project preceding a larger-scale space intelligence deployment planned for January 2026. Another alliance representative added that the technology could also be used to monitor the Arctic, which is becoming increasingly important for NATO due to the growing influence of Russia and China in the region.

The administration of US President Donald Trump is urging allied governments not to participate in next week’s United Nations conference, where a potential two-state solution between Israel and Palestine will be discussed.

A diplomatic cable sent on Tuesday, June 10, and reviewed by Reuters, states that countries engaging in “anti-Israel actions” following the conference will be considered to be acting against US foreign policy interests and could face diplomatic repercussions from Washington.

This previously unreported initiative contradicts the diplomatic efforts led by France and Saudi Arabia, two close allies hosting the upcoming meeting in New York. The conference aims to establish the parameters for a Palestinian state while ensuring Israel’s security.

The memo states, “We call on governments not to participate in this conference, which we find undermines the ongoing, life-saving efforts to end the war in Gaza and rescue the hostages.”

President Emmanuel Macron has hinted that France might recognize a Palestinian state in the Israeli-occupied territories during the conference. French officials have indicated they are working to avoid a conflict with the United States, Israel’s most steadfast ally.

If Macron proceeds with this step, France, home to Europe’s largest Jewish and Muslim communities, would become the first major Western power to recognize a Palestinian state. This could lend significant momentum to a movement that has, until now, been dominated by smaller nations generally more critical of Israel.

“The United States opposes any steps to unilaterally recognize a hypothetical Palestinian state,” the cable reads. “This would introduce significant legal and political obstacles to a final resolution of the conflict and would support Israel’s enemies by pressuring it during a time of war.”

For decades, the US has officially supported the two-state solution, which envisions the establishment of a Palestinian state in the West Bank and Gaza alongside Israel.

During his first term, Trump maintained a relatively moderate stance on the two-state solution, a long-standing pillar of US Middle East policy. The Republican president has offered few clues about his position on the matter for a potential second term.

However, on Tuesday, US Ambassador to Israel Mike Huckabee suggested that an independent Palestinian state is not among US foreign policy objectives.

The American memorandum argues that unilaterally recognizing a Palestinian state would “effectively make October 7th Palestine’s Independence Day.”

The US cable also notes that Washington is working “tirelessly” with Egypt and Qatar to secure a ceasefire in Gaza, release the hostages, and end the conflict.

“This conference undermines sensitive negotiations and emboldens Hamas at a time when the terrorist organization has rejected proposals from negotiators that Israel has accepted,” the US claims.

The cable adds, “The United States rejects the conference’s implications that it supports potential actions against Israel, including boycotts, sanctions, and other punitive measures.”

Israel has repeatedly criticized the conference, arguing that it “rewards Hamas for its attack on Israel,” and has pressured France not to recognize a Palestinian state.

“Nothing surprises me anymore, but I don’t know how many countries might be dissuaded from attending,” said a European diplomat who requested anonymity due to the sensitivity of the issue. “This is bullying, and it’s foolish bullying at that.”

US and Chinese officials have agreed on a framework to get their trade truce back on track and resolve China’s export restrictions on rare earth minerals and magnets. US Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick announced this on Tuesday following two days of intensive negotiations in London.

Lutnick told reporters that the framework agreement adds “concrete substance” to the deal reached in Geneva last month, which aimed to ease retaliatory tariffs that were disrupted by China’s restrictions on critical mineral exports. The agreement will also lift some recently imposed US export restrictions.

“We have reached a framework to implement the Geneva consensus and the meeting between the two presidents,” Lutnick said. “The idea is to go back and talk to President Trump and make sure he approves. They will also go back and talk to President Xi and make sure he approves. If approved, we will implement the framework.”

Top economic officials from the US and China have been pushing for a deal to ease mutual export restrictions that threatened to derail the Geneva agreement, which had lowered tariffs that had reached triple-digit figures.

In a separate briefing, Chinese Vice Minister of Commerce Li Chenggang also confirmed that a trade framework had been agreed upon to be presented to the US and Chinese leaders.

“The two sides have, in principle, reached a framework for implementing the consensus reached by the two heads of state in their phone call on June 5 and the consensus reached at the Geneva meeting,” Li told reporters.

“We hope the progress made at the London meeting will contribute to strengthening trust between China and the US and to the healthy and stable development of economic and trade ties between the two countries,” he added.

While Li did not provide details on the progress made in the talks, the parties are expected to announce the content of the agreement after receiving approval from their respective national leaders.

Lutnick stated that China’s restrictions on the export of rare earth minerals and magnets to the US would be resolved as a “fundamental” part of the framework agreement.

“There were also a series of measures implemented by the United States when these rare earths were not forthcoming. You should expect those to be lifted in a balanced way, as President Trump has said,” Lutnick noted.

The new round of negotiations, initiated by the US and China to resolve trade tensions that had escalated with mutual tariff hikes, took place on June 9-10 at Lancaster House, a government mansion within walking distance of Buckingham Palace in London.

The historic venue, which also houses the British government’s 39,000-bottle wine cellar, was provided by the British government as a neutral ground for the talks between the two economic superpowers.

The US delegation was represented by Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick, and Trade Representative Jamieson Greer. The Chinese side was represented by Vice Premier He Lifeng, who is responsible for economic relations, Minister of Commerce Wang Wentao, and International Trade Representative Li Chenggang.

The London meeting was the first face-to-face encounter between He and Bessent since the signing of the 90-day truce agreement in Geneva.

The high-stakes negotiations were initiated to prevent two challenging issues—China’s rare earth exports to the US and US controls on technology exports to China—from derailing the broader talks.

Before the first round of talks in Geneva, Bessent had warned that the high tariffs imposed by both sides amounted to an embargo on bilateral trade. Highlighting the risks, China’s exports to the US in May saw their sharpest year-on-year decline since the 2020 pandemic.

The US accused China of failing to honor its commitment made in Geneva to ease restrictions on rare earth element exports, while Beijing increased pressure on Washington to lift its technology-related export controls. China also reacted strongly to the US announcing new restrictions after the Geneva meeting.

The US accused China of foot-dragging on approving shipments of rare earth elements, which are vital for the defense, automotive, and technology sectors. The slow pace of approvals has affected manufacturing supply chains in the US and Europe.

Beijing, in turn, accused Washington of “seriously violating” the Geneva agreement by issuing new warnings about the global use of Huawei chips, halting the sale of chip design software to Chinese companies, and canceling the visas of Chinese students.

On Monday, a senior White House official indicated that Trump might ease restrictions on chip sales to China if Beijing agreed to expedite the export of rare earth elements.

This would represent a significant policy shift from the Joe Biden administration’s “small yard, high fence” approach, which sought to limit China’s ability to acquire US technology.