Connect with us

AMERICA

Stoltenberg on the Arctic: Strategic for NATO

Published

on

NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg will visit Canada and Canadian Arctic with an agenda for Ukraine, climate change, and Arctic defence. The tour is particularly noteworthy as it represents the first visit by a NATO secretary general to the Canadian Arctic since NATO was founded in 1949.

Canada, the second largest border state in the region after Russia, has long opposed NATO involvement in the Arctic, which included even vetoing a statement on the Alliance’s role in the Arctic during a major summit in 2009. There are various opinions on the reasons why. There are those who are concerned about militarizing the Arctic and provoking Russia, as well as those who do not want non-North Alliance members such as Italy and Spain to have a say in the Arctic. But Canada wants to preserve its essentially exclusive economic territory. Moreover, the sea ice has been melting in the Northwest passage through Canadian Arctic due to climate change, and it will potentially be fully open and navigable by 2040. This means changes in routes and marine traffic in international waters. There are those who do not want to share this advantage, as well as those who argue that this will create new security requirements and thus increase the need for the Alliance.

However, the US is trying to completely change Canada’s attitude by using the Ukrainian war and the existence of Russia and China as an excuse. 

Andrea Charron, an expert on North American security at the University of Manitoba, spoke to Canadian press about Stoltenberg’s visit: “It’s more of a sign of continued solidarity between NATO’s members as opposed to an actual signal that they are opening the door to NATO exercises in the Canadian Arctic.”

For some, the visit represents an easing of past reluctance to work with NATO on the Arctic.

NATO seeks to improve its defence against China and Russia in North America and expand its position in the Arctic. Finland and Sweden’s integration into NATO is also important in the Arctic context.

‘Russia and China Threats’

Just before his visit to Canada, the NATO Secretary General wrote an article underlining the Alliance’s Arctic defence policy.

Stoltenberg underlined the region’s strategic importance for Euro-Atlantic security and noted that the shortest path to North America for Russian missiles would be over the North Pole.

Stoltenberg stressed that the North Pole will be rapidly ice-free due to climate change, and this will unlock opportunities for shipping routes, natural resources, and economic development, also pointed out Russia and China for increasing the risk of tension.

Stoltenberg note that Russia has significantly increased its military activities in recent years and set up a new Arctic Command, describing Russia’s activities as a “strategic challenge” to the Alliance.

China has declared itself as a ‘near-Arctic state’ and “is expanding its reach by planning a “Polar Silk Road” linking Beijing to Europe via the Arctic, it is rapidly strengthening its navy, with plans to build the world’s biggest icebreaker vessel. China is also investing tens of billions of dollars in energy, infrastructure and research projects in the region” told the NATO Secretary General.

“Earlier this year, Beijing and Moscow pledged to intensify practical co-operation in the Arctic, as part of a deepening strategic partnership that challenges our values and interests,” Stoltenberg said, citing Beijing and Moscow’s collaboration.

‘Finland and Sweden’s membership is critical for the region’

Describing the Arctic as the “the gateway to the North Atlantic, hosting vital trade, transport and communication links between North America and Europe” Stoltenberg said: “Once Finland and Sweden join the Alliance, seven out of the eight Arctic states (Russia, the United States, Denmark, Canada, Norway, Sweden, Finland, Iceland) will be members of NATO. Finland and Sweden’s membership will significantly enhance our posture in the High North and our ability to reinforce our Baltic Allies.”

Arctic geopolitics appears to be at the heart of Sweden’s and Finland’s insistence on NATO membership.

Stoltenberg signs that NATO will secure and militarize the Arctic region, citing it as one of the key areas of competition with China and Russia. NATO, which declared China and Russia a threat at the ‘historic summit’ in Madrid, considers the cooperation of both countries a threat to their interests. In his article, Stoltenberg highlights Beijing-Moscow cooperation in the Arctic, presenting the Alliance to North America as a security need for the Arctic.

Time will tell whether Canada, which has so far opposed the Arctic becoming a NATO agenda, will resist this further after NATO Secretary General’s visit.

Geopolitics of the Arctic

Increasing interest in the Arctic basin stems from the potential for new hydrocarbon and mineral reserves, sea transport routes and fishing in the region soon as glaciers melt due to climate change.

The United States, which stands out with its 48 trillion cubic meters of natural gas and 90 billion barrels of oil reserves, also sees the region as geostrategic in terms of surrounding Russia. By contrast, a new maritime doctrine signed by Putin explicitly challenges Russia being surrounded through the Arctic Ocean. Pointing out that the Arctic waters are a concern of Russia’s national interests in the new doctrine, Putin emphasized that “We will ensure their [Arctic waters] protection firmly and by all means”. The northern route began to gain importance as part of Beijing’s “New Silk Road” project. Because the opening of the Arctic due to melting glaciers will dramatically shorten the distance between Asia and Europe and create new commercial opportunities for China.

With its location and energy resources, the Arctic region is likely to become more prominent as one of the new areas of competition between NATO and Russia-China forces.

AMERICA

Judge orders Trump administration to preserve Signal chats about Yemen operation

Published

on

A federal judge ordered the Trump administration to preserve chats conducted by senior officials via the Signal messaging app, including messages mistakenly shared with a reporter earlier this month concerning an imminent military operation in Yemen.

US District Judge James Boasberg issued the ruling on Thursday at the request of a transparency group that sued, alleging the app’s auto-delete function risked destroying the messages in violation of the Federal Records Act.

During a brief afternoon hearing, Justice Department lawyer Amber Richer told Boasberg such an order was unnecessary because the relevant agencies were already taking steps to preserve the records. However, she did not object to the judge reinforcing this with a court order.

“We are still in the process of working with the agencies to determine what records they have, but we are also working with the agencies to preserve the records they do possess,” Richer said.

However, the government lawyer appeared to acknowledge a court filing made earlier in the day by a Treasury Department official, which suggested that Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent currently possesses only a portion of the message chain related to the Yemen strike.

The journalist added to the message chain, The Atlantic editor Jeffrey Goldberg, reported that the chat began on March 11. Yet, Bessent only has messages starting from the afternoon of March 15. It remains unclear why Bessent failed to preserve the earlier messages or whether other senior officials in the chat retained them.

Richer stated to Boasberg, “I want to note that we are still determining what records the agencies possess.”

The Atlantic published parts of the messages earlier this week and the remainder on Wednesday after the White House stated it did not consider the exchanges classified, even though they described the scope and timeline of a military operation that had not yet occurred.

According to The Atlantic‘s report, national security adviser Mike Waltz, who initiated the exchange, had initially set the messages to auto-delete after one week but later changed the duration to four weeks.

Speaking from the bench, Boasberg ordered the defendants in the case—Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard, and CIA Director John Ratcliffe—”to preserve all Signal communications between March 11 and March 15.”

This directive appears broader than just the messages shared with Goldberg; it could encompass other Signal messages sent or received by the officials during that period.

A Pentagon lawyer also submitted a written declaration stating the Defense Department was attempting to preserve these records as well but did not claim any records had been recovered. The administration suggested that The Atlantic‘s publication of the entire exchange, except for the redaction of a CIA officer’s name, ensured the messages’ preservation.

At the start of the hearing, Boasberg also responded to a social media post by President Donald Trump suggesting the judge had improperly gained control of the politically sensitive case.

Trump had called it “shameful” that the judge, an appointee of former President Barack Obama, was handling multiple legal cases involving the White House in recent weeks. In addition to the Signal case, Boasberg is presiding over a case involving Trump’s efforts to rapidly deport people using the Alien Enemies Act.

Boasberg addressed the matter, stating he “understood some questions had been raised” about how the court assigns cases. He explained that for the 15 active judges serving on the court, cases are randomly assigned across various categories in nearly all instances “to ensure a more even distribution of cases.”

Clerks use an electronic deck of cards within each category to determine which judge receives a newly filed case.

“That is how it works, and that is how all cases continue to be assigned in this court,” said Boasberg, who has served as the court’s chief judge since 2023.

Continue Reading

AMERICA

US revokes visa of Turkish PhD student Rumeysa Ozturk

Published

on

Turkish student Rumeysa Ozturk, pursuing a doctorate at Tufts University in Boston, Massachusetts, US, was detained on March 25.

Speaking about the incident, which gained attention in the US, Senator Marco Rubio confirmed that Ozturk’s visa had been canceled.

Rubio stated, “We gave you a visa to get an education; not to be a social activist who destroys our campuses. If you use your visa to do that, we will take your visa back. I encourage every country to do the same.”

The US Senator continued, “If you lie to get a visa, and then engage in this type of behavior after arriving here, we will cancel your visa. And when your visa is canceled, you are no longer legally in the US. Like any country, we have the right to deport you. It’s that simple.”

The Senator also announced that the visas of approximately 300 students had been similarly canceled.

Rubio asked, “It would be madness, even stupidity, for a country to let in people who say, ‘I’m going to go to your universities and start riots, occupy libraries, harass people.’ I don’t care what movement you are part of. Why should we accept that?”

Rubio said that individuals could carry out such actions “in their own countries, but not in the US.”

Last year, mass student protests occurred at many universities across the US to protest the administration’s support for Israel’s military operations in Gaza.

It is alleged that Ozturk, whose student visa was canceled, participated in “pro-Hamas” movements.

Rumeysa Ozturk’s lawyer, Mahsa Khanbabai, noted in a written statement to BBC Turkce that she was first able to speak with the young woman on the evening of March 27.

Referring to the moments of her client’s detention, the lawyer stated, “Nothing in this video indicates they were law enforcement officers or which agency they were from. This situation should deeply concern everyone.”

Khanbabai emphasized that Ozturk is a successful doctoral student at Tufts University on a Fulbright scholarship and stressed that the allegations of her being a Hamas supporter were “baseless.”

Video footage of Ozturk’s detention showed the doctoral student being surrounded by plainclothes officials on the street while heading to iftar.

The officials subsequently handcuffed Ozturk behind her back and led her to a vehicle.

In a written statement shared with BBC Turkce, Tufts University said, “We are in contact with the authorities. We hope Rumeysa will be given the opportunity to clear her name using her legal rights.”

Minister of Justice Yilmaz Tunc declared in his statement that he strongly condemned the detention, arguing the incident was “proof that there is no freedom of thought in so-called democratic countries and that human rights are not respected.”

CHP leader Ozgur Ozel also condemned the detention, stating in his post that “hundreds of students in Turkey arrested groundlessly and unscrupulously are experiencing the same victimization.”

Continue Reading

AMERICA

Trump announces 25% tariff on imported cars and parts

Published

on

US President Donald Trump announced that a 25% customs tariff will be applied to cars imported into the US.

Effective from April 2, the taxes also include car parts not produced in the US.

The President stated that the tariffs will be “permanent,” adding that there is nothing that would necessitate the removal of the import taxes.

Trump told reporters, “We will apply a 25% customs duty, but if you produce your car in the US, there is no customs duty. This means that many foreign car companies will be in a very good position because they have already established their facilities in the US.”

In a fact sheet released after Trump’s remarks in the Oval Office, the White House stated that car parts compliant with the US-Mexico-Canada (USMCA) trade agreement would remain exempt from customs duties “until Customs and Border Protection establishes a process to apply customs duties to their content outside the US.”

The US International Trade Commission examined in early 2024 the potential consequences if the government implemented comprehensive automotive tariffs. According to the report, a 25% customs duty applied to all US car imports would reduce imports by approximately 74% and increase average car prices by 5%.

Although President Trump’s increase in customs duties on imported vehicles will primarily affect foreign automakers, domestic automakers General Motors and Ford will also face a significant impact.

According to research by Wards Automotive and Barclays, Volvo (13%), Mazda (19%), and Volkswagen (21%) produce the lowest share of their vehicles sold in the US within the country.

Hyundai-Kia (33%), Mercedes (43%), BMW (48%), and Toyota (48%) also produce less than half of the vehicles they sell in the US domestically.

According to the Department of Transportation, examples of significant 2025 models imported into the US include the Ford Maverick pickup, Chevrolet Blazer crossover, Hyundai Venue crossover, Nissan Sentra compact car, Porsche 911 sports car, and Toyota Prius hybrid.

Approximately 45% of vehicles sold in the US are imported, with the largest share originating from Mexico and Canada.

According to data from the American Automobile Labeling Act, every 2025 model year vehicle sources at least 20% of its content from countries outside the US and Canada.

Continue Reading

MOST READ

Turkey