India Faces Strategic Test After Hasina’s ICT Conviction
P&C | Tuesday, 18 Nov. 2025
India | Planet & Commerce
Bangladesh’s domestic upheaval has spilled firmly into the regional arena after the International Crimes Tribunal (ICT) sentenced former Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina to death on November 17 for alleged “crimes against humanity” linked to the 2024 student uprising. The ruling has triggered political shockwaves across South Asia and created a profound diplomatic dilemma for India, where Hasina has been living in exile since August 2024.
What was once a stable, deeply cooperative bilateral relationship has now fractured under the weight of shifting alliances, rising Islamist influence in Bangladesh, and Dhaka’s insistence that India must extradite the former prime minister under the 2013 Extradition Treaty. New Delhi has acknowledged the request but has issued no formal response — a silence widely interpreted as strategic caution during a volatile transition period in Dhaka. As Bangladesh undergoes sweeping political realignment under Nobel laureate Muhammad Yunus, India faces its most serious strategic test in the eastern neighbourhood in over a decade. The verdict against Hasina does not merely pose a legal challenge; it fundamentally threatens India’s long-term political, economic, and security interests in the region.
. New Delhi has acknowledged the request but has issued no formal response — a silence widely interpreted as strategic caution during a volatile transition period in Dhaka.As Bangladesh undergoes sweeping political realignment under Nobel laureate
The ICT ruling has ignited a phase of instability unlike any Bangladesh has faced in recent years. Ironically, the tribunal was revived by Hasina herself in 2009 to prosecute war crimes tied to the 1971 Liberation War. Today, that institution has become a political weapon aimed at the leader who once defended its legitimacy. Hasina pleaded not guilty, calling the charges a “political witch hunt” led by the interim government. For the Awami League — already sidelined from the political process — the verdict may be the irreversible blow that ends its dominant role in Bangladeshi politics, at least in the near term. The implications for India, however, are far broader than the fate of a single leader. Bangladesh’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs has escalated diplomatic pressure, calling the extradition request an “obligatory responsibility” under treaty obligations. It warned that refusing to return Hasina would be a “highly unfriendly act” and a rejection of justice. But India is under no legal obligation to extradite her, according to analysts, because the treaty includes an exception for offences “of a political character.” Many in India view the charges as precisely that — politically motivated actions by an unelected interim government. New Delhi now finds itself balancing:
- its historical loyalty to Hasina,
- its own national security interests,
- regional stability in the Bay of Bengal, and
- domestic political expectations.
Handing over Hasina, as one veteran diplomat said, would “legitimise anti-India forces” currently shaping Dhaka’s political direction. Since taking power, the Yunus-led interim government has radically altered the country’s geopolitical trajectory:
- Closer engagement with China, including infrastructure and security coordination.
- Reopening channels with Pakistan, reversing years of strategic distancing under Hasina.
- Symbolic gestures that alarm New Delhi, such as Yunus gifting Pakistan’s military chief a book showing India’s Northeast as part of a “Greater Bangladesh.”
Simultaneously, Islamist groups like Jamaat-e-Islami and Hefazat-e-Islam have regained influence. These factions, historically hostile to New Delhi, now occupy political space once firmly held by the Awami League. The consequences for India’s security are immediate:
- infiltration across the Tripura and Meghalaya borders has increased,
- radical networks are resurfacing in Chittagong and Sylhet,
- the moderating influence of Dhaka has weakened dramatically.
India’s lost strategic depth in Bangladesh now represents one of the most serious reversals of its neighbourhood policy in decades. Hasina’s 15-year rule enabled India to implement ambitious connectivity, economic, and counterterrorism partnerships. Through her government, New Delhi achieved progress on:
- BBIN Motor Vehicles Agreement (BBIN-MVA)
- BIMSTEC cooperation
- cross-border rail and port connectivity
- energy-sharing grids and transmission lines
- transshipment access for tripartite exports
These frameworks are now at risk. With the Awami League banned from the 2026 elections, India’s strongest political ally in Dhaka has been structurally removed from the system. Political instability also threatens India’s Act East Policy, which relies heavily on Bangladesh to connect the Northeast with Southeast Asia. Without Dhaka’s support, the corridors that were once celebrated as the backbone of regional economic integration now face significant uncertainty. Analysts say India is walking a tightrope. It must:
- avoid antagonising the interim government,
- protect its long-term interests in Bangladesh,
- maintain public support at home,
- uphold historical ties with Hasina, and
- prevent instability across the 4,000 km shared border.
Former diplomats argue India has no choice but to wait for the February 2026 elections, hoping a legitimate elected government emerges to re-establish stable relations.
“It is impossible to move forward while Dhaka continues to demand Hasina’s return,” said former Indian High Commissioner Pinak Ranjan Chakravarty. “But India must be civil, keep trade intact, and wait for democratic correction.” Hasina’s personal and political ties with India run deep:
- India sheltered her after her family was assassinated in 1975.
- She lived in New Delhi for six years before returning to lead the Awami League.
- Under her leadership, Bangladesh became one of India’s closest regional partners.
- She ensured India’s security in the Northeast by cracking down on insurgent sanctuaries.
Her arrival in India in August 2024 was natural and expected. As analysts note, sending her back now — under a death sentence — is simply not an option for New Delhi. Some experts argue that while the Awami League is currently cornered, its political relevance is far from over. South Asian politics is dominated by dynastic parties, and history shows that they rarely disappear permanently. Michael Kugelman, a South Asia researcher in Washington, DC, notes that Hasina’s legacy, and the Awami League’s organisational depth, may still create opportunities for resurrection in a future political cycle.
“With enough patience,” he said, “dynastic parties often find a way to return.”
The fallout from Hasina’s ICT conviction marks a historic turning point in India–Bangladesh relations. As Dhaka tilts away from New Delhi toward Beijing and Islamabad, India faces:
- an extradition dispute with high political stakes,
- deteriorating security that affects its northeastern states,
- shrinking influence among Bangladeshi political actors,
- the resurgence of Islamist groups hostile to India,
- and uncertainty surrounding regional connectivity plans.
India must now navigate one of the most fragile diplomatic environments in South Asia. The coming months — particularly the February 2026 elections — will determine whether New Delhi can rebuild its strategic position or must adapt to a region where Bangladesh no longer aligns naturally with India’s interests.
Putin Backs Trump’s Ukraine Plan as Zelenskyy Faces Deadline
P&C | Saturday, 22 Nov. 2025
Russia | Planet & Commerce
Russian President Vladimir Putin has cautiously endorsed the United States’ new proposal to end the nearly four-year-old war in Ukraine, calling President Donald Trump’s 28-point plan a “modernised” framework that “could form the basis for a final peace settlement.” The comments, made in Moscow on Friday, mark the first time the Kremlin has publicly signalled openness to Washington’s strategy, even as Kyiv warns it is approaching one of the most difficult decisions in its history.
Putin’s remarks came just hours after Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said Ukraine is now at a “pivotal point” in its defence of sovereignty, with the nation confronting a stark choice: concede to U.S.-led diplomatic pressure or risk losing its most important international partner. Trump has insisted that Zelenskyy respond to the American plan by Thursday, November 27, though he indicated in a radio interview that he may extend the deadline if negotiations show progress. “We think we have a way of getting peace,” Trump told Fox News Radio, stressing that “Thursday is it — we think an appropriate time,” even as he left the door open to more discussion. For Zelenskyy, who spoke earlier with U.S. Vice President J.D. Vance and Army Secretary Dan Driscoll for nearly an hour about the proposal, the deadline underscores intense pressure that Kyiv has never faced before.
Putin, in his Moscow comments, said the proposal was never substantively discussed with Russia because “the U.S. administration has so far been unable to secure the consent of the Ukrainian side.” He accused Kyiv and its European allies of clinging to “illusions” about defeating Russia on the battlefield. Yet the Russian leader’s tone — measured rather than dismissive — suggests Moscow sees significant advantage in a plan that incorporates many of its long-standing demands. The U.S. proposal requires Ukraine to give up the entire eastern Donbas region, drastically shrink its military, and accept a permanent block on NATO membership — all red lines for Kyiv. Zelenskyy has repeatedly ruled out territorial concessions and has insisted that Ukraine’s sovereignty and territorial integrity cannot be negotiated away. But as battlefield conditions worsen, energy infrastructure collapses under Russian bombardment, and Ukraine grapples with internal political turmoil, the president faces limited room to manoeuvre.
“Currently, the pressure on Ukraine is one of the hardest,” Zelenskyy warned in a recorded address. “Ukraine may now face a very difficult choice, either losing its dignity or the risk of losing a key partner.” He urged citizens to stop infighting — a likely reference to a $100 million kickback scandal that forced high-level resignations in Kyiv — and cautioned that the coming peace talks “will be very difficult.” European leaders, caught by surprise by the scope of Washington’s proposal, scrambled to reassure Kyiv of their continued support. Zelenskyy spoke earlier by phone with German Chancellor Friedrich Merz, French President Emmanuel Macron and British Prime Minister Keir Starmer. All three leaders pledged “unchanged and full support” for Ukrainian sovereignty and endorsed American efforts to find a diplomatic end to the conflict, while subtly expressing concerns about the concessions envisioned in the U.S. plan.
The Europeans insisted that any settlement must be anchored on the current line of contact and allow Ukrainian forces to remain strong enough to defend their territory. “Russia’s war against Ukraine is an existential threat to Europe,” EU foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas said. “We all want this war to end. But how it ends matters.” She emphasised that Russia has “no legal right whatsoever” to demand concessions in exchange for peace. Yet behind the diplomatic language lies clear unease. European officials privately admit that many elements of the U.S. proposal are “quite concerning,” fearing that a deal too favourable to Moscow could encourage further Russian aggression. “A bad deal for Ukraine would also be a threat to broader European security,” one European official told AP, stressing that none of these plans were officially presented to Europe in advance.
European Council President Antonio Costa, speaking in Johannesburg on the sidelines of the G20 Summit, said the EU had received “no official communication” about the details of Washington’s offer — a revelation that further deepened worries about how quickly the geopolitical landscape is shifting. For Kyiv, the uncertainty extends beyond diplomacy. Ukrainian forces are struggling under relentless Russian attacks, facing rolling blackouts as winter approaches. A European plan to support Ukraine’s 2025 budget with loans linked to frozen Russian assets has run into obstacles. Domestic confidence has been rattled by corruption scandals. The government is strained financially, militarily and politically at the very moment it is being pushed into the most consequential decision of the war.
The origins of Trump’s plan trace back to quiet discussions between U.S. envoy Steve Witkoff and Rustem Umerov, a senior adviser to Zelenskyy. American officials say Umerov approved most of the plan with modifications before presenting it to the Ukrainian president, though Umerov denies this, insisting he only facilitated meetings. “We are thoughtfully processing the partners’ proposals within the framework of Ukraine’s unchanging principles — sovereignty, people’s security, and a just peace,” he said on Friday, confirming that technical discussions in Kyiv are ongoing. Despite Washington’s pressure, Zelenskyy has insisted that Ukraine will negotiate “calmly” while demanding fairness. But with Putin cautiously welcoming the U.S. plan, Trump expecting a rapid answer, Europe caught off guard, and Ukraine battered on multiple fronts, Kyiv enters next week’s round of talks in one of the weakest positions it has faced since the war began. The coming days — and Ukraine’s response to Trump’s deadline — may determine whether the conflict moves toward a political settlement or enters a new phase of uncertainty filled with fractured alliances, territorial losses and lasting geopolitical consequences.
Meeting With Russian Envoy Fuels Turmoil Over Ukraine Plan
P&C | Saturday, 22 Nov. 2025
USA | Planet & Commerce
A clandestine meeting in Miami between senior Trump administration figures and a sanctioned Russian envoy has ignited deep concern across Washington and European capitals, prompting urgent questions about the origins, legitimacy and geopolitical implications of the United States’ newly unveiled 28-point proposal to end the war in Ukraine. The late-October gathering — involving special envoy Steve Witkoff, Trump’s son-in-law Jared Kushner, and Kirill Dmitriev, the Kremlin-linked head of Russia’s sovereign wealth fund — is now seen as central to the troubled peace plan that has stunned Ukraine and blindsided much of the U.S. foreign policy establishment.
Multiple sources confirmed that Dmitriev, an individual under strict U.S. sanctions since 2022, was granted a special waiver by the Trump administration to enter the country and attend the Miami talks. Dmitriev, a longtime ally of Vladimir Putin and a pivotal back-channel operator in U.S.–Russia contacts, reportedly worked closely with Witkoff to map out elements of the peace framework that was later handed to Kyiv and made public earlier this week. The revelation has triggered confusion inside federal agencies, anger among lawmakers, and unease within intelligence circles over the involvement of a sanctioned Russian operative in drafting a proposal with extraordinary consequences for Ukraine. The plan itself, first reported by Axios, calls for sweeping concessions from Kyiv — including territorial transfers, recognition of Crimea as Russian, and a permanent bar on Ukraine’s NATO membership — provisions that critics say align more closely with Moscow’s demands than with Ukraine’s security needs. President Volodymyr Zelenskyy responded forcefully on Friday, vowing that he “would not betray Ukraine’s interests,” even as U.S. President Donald Trump set a deadline of November 27 for Kyiv to accept the deal.
The Miami meeting has become a lightning rod for criticism. According to sources familiar with the discussions, Witkoff and Kushner met with Dmitriev at the Faena Hotel — a property linked to Russian-born billionaire Len Blavatnik, whose business ties include ventures with Viktor Vekselberg, a Putin-connected oligarch sanctioned by Washington. Dmitriev also met separately with Republican Congresswoman Anna Paulina Luna, exchanging gifts and discussing U.S.–Russia trade ties. The imagery — including Luna receiving Putin-themed chocolates — has only intensified scrutiny. What remains unclear is whether Dmitriev arrived in Miami with pre-formed Kremlin demands, and to what extent they were incorporated into the final proposal. Analysts say the structure of the 28-point plan strongly mirrors Russia’s publicly stated conditions for a ceasefire, raising concerns that the U.S. delegation may have adopted positions favourable to Moscow without sufficiently consulting Ukraine or U.S. allies.
Washington’s diplomatic machinery was caught almost entirely off guard. Senior officials at the State Department and the National Security Council were neither briefed on nor involved in the drafting process. Keith Kellogg, the administration’s special envoy for Ukraine who had been working closely with Kyiv for months, was excluded entirely. Officials told Reuters there had been “no coordination” inside the interagency system and that even Secretary of State Marco Rubio was not fully read in on the proposal prior to its public release.
The episode has fuelled fears inside Congress that Witkoff and Kushner circumvented established diplomatic processes, potentially producing a document disproportionately shaped by Russian influence. Senator Roger Wicker, the Republican chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, said he was “highly skeptical” the plan would secure peace, insisting Ukraine “should not be forced to give up its lands to one of the world’s most flagrant war criminals.”
Analysts shared similar worries. Dara Massicot, of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, warned that Putin’s positive reaction — calling the plan a potential “basis” for a settlement — indicates that Moscow sees significant strategic benefit. “One week seems ambitious for resolution,” she added, highlighting both the complexity and the imbalance of the proposal. Ukrainian officials are now distancing themselves from the Miami narrative. Rustem Umerov, Secretary of Ukraine’s National Security and Defense Council — who was reportedly in Miami this week — denied that he discussed the plan substantively, saying his involvement was purely “technical.” Umerov insisted that only “technical preparations” were conducted, and that formal negotiations were ongoing in Kyiv. But U.S. officials maintain that the American side briefed him on the plan before it was formally passed to Kyiv via the Turkish government and then directly during Thursday’s visit by Army Secretary Dan Driscoll.
The intelligence community is particularly uneasy about Dmitriev’s involvement. American agencies have long viewed him as an operator adept at cultivating influence among Western elites despite sanctions. His past contacts with Trumpworld — from 2017 meetings with Blackwater founder Erik Prince to pandemic-era cooperation with Kushner — have raised flags within agencies concerned about Russia’s ability to exploit informal channels.
The implications extend far beyond the Miami meeting. European governments say they were never officially notified of the peace plan, even though a settlement in Ukraine would directly reshape European security. EU leaders, speaking in Johannesburg during the G20 Summit, stressed that Ukraine must retain the right to defend its sovereignty and determine its future. Privately, European officials say they see elements of the plan as “deeply concerning” for the continent’s stability.
As Ukraine assesses the proposal, Zelenskyy acknowledged that the coming days could determine the trajectory of the war. In recent weeks, Kyiv has battled internal turmoil, including a major corruption scandal, and mounting battlefield losses as winter approaches. The U.S. warning — that military assistance could be reduced if Ukraine does not accept the plan — adds another layer of pressure. For now, the Miami meeting stands at the centre of a storm engulfing Washington, Kyiv and European capitals. Its secrecy, its participants, and its proximity to a proposal that aligns closely with Moscow’s demands have raised urgent questions about U.S. policy, diplomatic process and geopolitical intent — questions that are unlikely to fade as the deadline for Ukraine’s response draws near.
Brazil Orders Bolsonaro Arrest Amid Dramatic Coup Escape
P&C | Saturday, 22 Nov. 2025
Brazil | Planet & Commerce
Brazil has been thrust into one of its most dramatic political moments in decades after Supreme Court Justice Alexandre de Moraes ordered the preemptive arrest of former President Jair Bolsonaro, accusing him of attempting to escape just days before he was due to enter prison to begin serving a 27-year sentence for leading an attempted coup. The far-right former leader was taken into custody early Saturday morning and transported from his upscale gated residence in Brasília’s Jardim Botânico to the federal police headquarters, igniting fierce reactions from his allies and setting the stage for a volatile week ahead.
In his ruling, de Moraes said Bolsonaro’s ankle monitor — imposed on him in July after he was deemed a flight risk — had been “violated” at 00:08 a.m. Saturday. He argued that the breach suggested an “intent to break the monitoring” and escape amid a surge of public disorder expected from a planned street demonstration organised by Bolsonaro’s son, Sen. Flávio Bolsonaro. The judge warned of a real possibility that Bolsonaro could seek refuge in one of several embassies in his neighbourhood to request asylum, noting that other coup-case defendants had already fled the country to avoid imprisonment. De Moraes ordered that Bolsonaro be arrested with “full respect for the dignity of a former president,” specifying that he should not be handcuffed or exposed to media spectacle. Yet the shockwaves were immediate. Bolsonaro’s aide Andriely Cirino confirmed the arrest took place around 6 a.m., only hours after the unusually swift court ruling.
The arrest has deepened Brazil’s political divide. Bolsonaro’s supporters insist he is a victim of political persecution and vowed to rally outside the federal police complex through the weekend. Sóstenes Cavalcante, the congressional leader of Bolsonaro’s Liberal Party, accused de Moraes of “psychopathy at the highest level” and promised that their movement would “respond appropriately.” Former First Lady Michelle Bolsonaro posted on Instagram, saying they “will not give up on our nation,” while Bolsonaro’s former adviser Fabio Wajngarten blasted the arrest as “a terrible stain on the institutions,” disputing the claim that the ankle monitor had been tampered with. Bolsonaro’s brother, Renato, castigated the ruling as an assault on the family’s right to “pray for our president,” reflecting the sense of besiegement felt among Bolsonaro’s base as the country braces for intensified protests.
The dramatic arrest comes after months of legal battles. Bolsonaro has been under house arrest since early August while awaiting the start of his prison term for leading a failed coup after losing the 2022 election to Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva. Prosecutors said the plot included plans to assassinate Lula, mobilise sympathetic police and military factions, and spark a January 2023 insurrection modelled on the U.S. Capitol riot. Bolsonaro has been convicted of leading an armed criminal organisation, attempting the violent abolition of democratic order and threatening the constitutional state — charges he vehemently denies. Saturday’s arrest does not yet place Bolsonaro inside the prison system, but Brazilian law requires all convicted individuals to begin serving their sentences in jail, not house detention. The Supreme Court panel will hold an extraordinary session Monday to rule on whether de Moraes’ emergency order stands or is modified.
The political stakes are enormous. Despite being barred from running until at least 2030 after an earlier electoral court ruling, Bolsonaro remains one of Brazil’s most influential figures — a right-wing populist whose loyal base could still reshape national politics. Polls consistently suggest that if he were eligible, he would be a leading contender in next year’s elections. His alliance with U.S. President Donald Trump has also shaped regional geopolitics, especially as Trump recently described Bolsonaro’s prosecution as part of a “witch hunt.” Bolsonaro was even mentioned in a July order by the Trump administration that hiked tariffs on several Brazilian exports by 50 percent; in a gesture interpreted by some as symbolic support, Trump on Friday rolled back most of those tariffs.
Meanwhile, Justice de Moraes — who has become Bolsonaro’s most formidable judicial adversary — framed Saturday’s arrest as a test of Brazil’s democratic maturity. In his ruling, he condemned the former president’s movement as a “criminal organisation” bent on sowing chaos, manipulating public sentiment and undermining institutions. “Brazil’s democracy has reached sufficient maturity to steer away and prosecute pathetic illegal initiatives,” he wrote. The arrest has triggered intense debate across Brazil and abroad about the strength of the country’s institutions, the rule of law and the political future of a former president who still commands millions of loyal supporters. With Bolsonaro’s Supreme Court panel set to meet on Monday, demonstrations swelling across Brasília and the far-right movement vowing unyielding resistance, Brazil enters a new and unpredictable chapter — one that could shape the country’s democratic trajectory for years to come.
Marjorie Taylor Greene Resigns After Bitter Break With Trump
P&C | Saturday, 22 Nov. 2025
USA | Planet & Commerce
Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia — once one of Donald Trump’s fiercest loyalists and a defining voice of the MAGA movement — announced she is resigning from Congress, marking one of the most dramatic ruptures yet within the modern Republican Party. Greene said she will step down on January 5, 2026, after a blistering public feud with the president she once championed, and amid explicit threats from Trump to destroy her political future if she dared seek reelection. Greene revealed her decision in a 10-minute video filmed in her own living room, speaking calmly with a cross necklace on her chest and a Christmas tree behind her. She framed her resignation as an act meant to spare her northwest Georgia district from what she described as “a hurtful and hateful primary” engineered by Trump as punishment for her growing criticism of his policies. “Our job title is literally ‘representative,’” Greene said, insisting that she had the right to dissent from the president without being branded a traitor. “Loyalty should be a two-way street.”
Her departure underscores a singular political arc — from Trump’s celebrated firebrand ally, to one of the most controversial members of Congress, to a symbol of the fragile cohesion within the MAGA movement. The break between the two was months in the making. Greene had publicly attacked Trump over his handling of files related to Jeffrey Epstein, his foreign-policy decisions, and his health care proposals. Trump responded with fury, calling her “a traitor,” “wacky,” and promising to endorse a primary challenger explicitly to dislodge her from Congress. In a brief call with ABC News after the announcement, Trump dismissed her exit as “great news for the country.” He said he had no plans to contact Greene privately.
Greene’s resignation comes amid broader Republican frustrations in Washington, where many members have already chosen not to seek reelection. Yet Greene’s exit stands apart — a break born not from exhaustion, but from direct political assault by the president she helped elevate. Her departure exposes fissures even among Trump’s most devoted base, highlighting how dissent within the movement is punished swiftly and publicly.
Since entering Congress in 2021, Greene has been one of the most polarizing figures in American politics. She embraced QAnon conspiracy theories, aligned herself with white nationalists, and entertained fringe claims that ranged from denying 9/11 to floating bizarre suggestions about “space lasers” causing California wildfires. She drew fierce condemnation for comparing pandemic mask mandates to the Holocaust and for suggesting that Muslim lawmakers were not legitimate members of Congress.
Even so, her alliance with Trump initially shielded her from Republican backlash, and she became one of the most recognisable faces of the party’s right flank. She forged a powerful partnership with then-House Republican leader Kevin McCarthy, who relied on her support to consolidate his hold on the speakership. But after McCarthy was ousted in 2023, Greene’s influence waned, leaving her politically exposed even before her clash with Trump deepened. Greene’s restlessness surfaced repeatedly this year. She toyed with running for Senate, flirted with challenging Georgia Governor Brian Kemp, and clashed with GOP strategists who doubted her viability statewide. She grew increasingly resentful of the Republican-controlled Congress under Trump, complaining that the legislative branch had been “sidelined” and that her bills “just sit collecting dust.” In her resignation video, Greene blasted the dysfunction on Capitol Hill and predicted — starkly — that Republicans will likely lose the 2026 midterms. She said she had no interest in becoming “a battered wife” defending a president who “dumped tens of millions of dollars” into destroying her career.
For Greene’s deeply conservative district, her resignation triggers a rapid political scramble. Under Georgia law, Governor Brian Kemp must call a special election within 10 days of her departure to fill the remainder of her term through January 2027. Those contests could play out even before Republican primaries begin in May, opening the door to an unpredictable and heated race in one of the GOP’s safest seats.
Greene’s resignation caps a turbulent five-year transformation: from Trump’s hand-picked insurgent to a national spectacle, from an unquestioning loyalist to a defiant outcast. She remains defiant and unapologetic. “My life is filled with happiness,” she said. “My convictions remain unchanged.”
What is clear now is that Greene’s departure will reverberate far beyond Georgia. Her exit signals a warning to the Republican Party about the consequences of internal dissent in the Trump era — and raises urgent questions about what comes next for one of MAGA’s most controversial figures, whose political ambition has never fully aligned with Washington’s expectations.
Xi Jinping, King Felipe VI Seal Cooperation And Trade Pacts
P&C | Wednesday, 12 Nov. 2025
China | Planet & Commerce
China And Spain Strengthen Strategic Ties During King Felipe VI’s State Visit To Beijing
Spanish King Felipe VI and Chinese President Xi Jinping signed multiple cooperation agreements in Beijing on Wednesday, reaffirming a commitment to deepen bilateral ties through language exchange, trade, technology, and renewable energy collaboration. The historic meeting marks the first state visit by a Spanish monarch to China in nearly two decades, underscoring Spain’s growing economic and diplomatic engagement with the world’s second-largest economy. The visit comes at a pivotal moment for Spain, which continues to court Chinese investment amid strained transatlantic relations with the United States under President Donald Trump. As tensions rise between Washington and Beijing over trade, technology, and geopolitical influence, Madrid has sought to position itself as a bridge between Europe and China, advocating for balanced engagement within the European Union.
Xi And Felipe Emphasize “Steady And Dynamic Partnership”
During their meeting at the Great Hall of the People in Beijing, Xi Jinping welcomed King Felipe VI and Queen Letizia with a 21-gun salute and a military band performance — a ceremonial display highlighting China’s intent to elevate the China–Spain comprehensive strategic partnership.
“China stands ready to work hand in hand with Spain to build a comprehensive strategic partnership that is more strategically steady, more dynamic in development, and more influential internationally,” Xi said in his opening remarks, according to a statement released by Xinhua News Agency. Xi noted that despite global uncertainty and “complex and volatile” geopolitical conditions, both countries could advance cooperation in trade, renewable energy, artificial intelligence, and cultural exchange. He also pledged that China will import more Spanish products, further expanding access for Spanish agricultural and industrial goods in the Chinese market.
Agreements Signed On Education, Trade, And Fisheries
Following official talks, both leaders signed a series of agreements aimed at strengthening bilateral collaboration across multiple sectors. These include:
- Language and education exchanges, expanding Mandarin teaching in Spanish universities and promoting Spanish-language learning across Chinese institutions.
- Trade and economic cooperation frameworks, facilitating Spanish exports and joint ventures in technology and infrastructure.
- A new export protocol for aquatic and seafood products, opening opportunities for Spain’s fishing industry to access China’s vast consumer market.
King Felipe VI was accompanied by Foreign Minister José Manuel Albares, Economy Minister Carlos Cuerpo, and a high-level delegation of Spanish business leaders seeking to explore opportunities in China’s green technology, logistics, and digital industries.
Spain’s Renewed Economic Engagement With China
Spain, the fourth-largest economy in the eurozone, has emerged as one of Europe’s most China-friendly nations in recent years. While several EU members have grown wary of Beijing’s political and economic influence, Madrid has pursued a pragmatic approach — favoring trade and technological cooperation over confrontation. Earlier this year, Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez made his third visit to China in as many years, expressing support for “more balanced relations between the European Union and China.” His administration continues to advocate that Brussels pursue dialogue rather than decoupling, arguing that economic interdependence is key to Europe’s green transition. Spain’s exports to China — valued at approximately €9 billion annually — remain modest compared to Chinese exports to Spain, but both governments see potential for growth in agriculture, clean energy, automotive technology, and tourism.
Chengdu Business Forum Highlights Investment Momentum
King Felipe’s first stop on his visit was Chengdu, a major industrial and technology hub in western China, where he opened the Spain–China Business Forum alongside Spanish and Chinese corporate leaders. The forum spotlighted investment partnerships in clean energy, e-mobility, and logistics, aligning with Spain’s drive to attract green industrial investment. Business leaders attending the forum noted that Spanish exports of wine, olive oil, seafood, and pharmaceuticals are steadily increasing, while Chinese investment in Spain’s automotive and renewable sectors continues to expand. Last year, Chinese battery manufacturer CATL announced a joint venture with Stellantis to build a battery factory in northern Spain, marking one of the most significant Chinese industrial investments in Western Europe. Similarly, companies like Envision and Hygreen Energy have partnered with Spanish entities to develop green hydrogen infrastructure, a key pillar of Spain’s 2030 decarbonization strategy.
Renewable Energy And AI: New Frontiers For Cooperation
China and Spain are expected to further strengthen their collaboration in renewable energy and artificial intelligence, two areas highlighted by Xi Jinping during the talks. Spain’s domestic energy transition has gained global attention: the country generated over half of its electricity from renewable sources last year, and is now looking to secure critical raw materials and technology from China — including solar panels, batteries, and AI-driven grid management systems. Xi noted that China’s green technology ecosystem complements Spain’s sustainability agenda. Both nations have agreed to establish a joint research framework for AI applications in energy optimization, smart transport, and climate resilience.
Diplomatic Symbolism: From 2007 To 2025
King Felipe’s visit is the first by a Spanish monarch to China since 2007, reflecting both renewed diplomatic warmth and shifting global alignments. The last Chinese state visit to Spain occurred in 2018, when Xi Jinping met with Spanish leaders in Madrid to sign a bilateral memorandum on infrastructure and tourism. The two countries have maintained consistent cultural and educational ties, including through the Instituto Cervantes network and Confucius Institutes across Spain. Wednesday’s language exchange agreement builds upon this foundation, reinforcing the role of cultural diplomacy as a stabilizing pillar in a turbulent global environment.
Spain Balances Between China And The U.S.
The timing of King Felipe’s visit carries significant geopolitical weight. As Washington pressures its European allies to adopt a harder line against China, Spain is signaling strategic independence. With U.S.–Spain relations strained under Trump’s protectionist trade policies, Madrid has opted to diversify its global partnerships, maintaining strong ties with both Beijing and Brussels. Spain’s approach — focusing on economic pragmatism over ideological confrontation — mirrors similar strategies pursued by France and Italy, which have also emphasized the importance of stable ties with Beijing. Analysts say Spain’s engagement with China could also strengthen Europe’s collective bargaining position, ensuring that the EU’s China policy reflects both caution and cooperation.
Looking Ahead: A Partnership Rooted In Mutual Gains
As King Felipe VI prepares to meet Premier Li Qiang and National People’s Congress chairman Zhao Leji, the visit is expected to pave the way for expanded trade missions, technological partnerships, and academic collaboration. Both sides view this renewed cooperation as a strategic investment in global stability and economic modernization. By combining Spain’s expertise in green innovation and infrastructure with China’s industrial capacity and market scale, the partnership aims to deliver tangible outcomes that benefit both nations. With Europe reassessing its role in a shifting global order, the China–Spain partnership stands out as an example of balanced diplomacy — one that prioritizes shared development over rivalry.
Ukrainian Forces Withdraw As Russia Gains Ground
P&C | Wednesday, 12 Nov. 2025
Ukraine | Planet & Commerce
Ukrainian Forces Pull Back Under Intense Russian Pressure In Southern Zaporizhia
Ukraine’s military has confirmed a strategic withdrawal from five villages in the southern Zaporizhia region, marking one of the most significant territorial setbacks in months as Russian forces intensify pressure across multiple fronts. The announcement came from Commander-in-Chief Oleksandr Syrskii, who said the battlefield situation had “significantly worsened” amid relentless Russian bombardment and manpower advantages. The developments underscore the mounting strain on Ukraine’s overstretched defences, as Moscow escalates attacks in Zaporizhia, Pokrovsk, and Kupiansk, while leveraging poor weather and superior artillery to push forward.
Russia Advances Amid Relentless Artillery Barrage
In a statement on Tuesday, General Syrskii acknowledged that Russian troops, benefiting from numerical superiority in both personnel and weaponry, had advanced in fierce fighting and captured three settlements in southeastern Zaporizhia.
“The situation has significantly worsened in the Oleksandrivka and Huliapole directions,” Syrskii said, describing the fighting as some of the most intense seen in recent months.
The Ukrainian Army reported that orders to withdraw from five frontline villages were issued after the “de facto destruction of all shelters and fortifications” due to Russian shelling. Ukrainian commanders said more than 2,000 artillery shells were fired on their positions within 24 hours, destroying bunkers and trenches that had served as key defensive points since mid-2024. Russian units reportedly advanced under dense fog, exploiting reduced visibility to infiltrate Ukrainian positions and overwhelm exhausted troops. However, Ukrainian officials said Russian forces suffered “extremely heavy losses” during the assault.
“Every metre of our land costs Russia hundreds of military lives,” Syrskii stated, asserting that Ukrainian artillery and drone units inflicted substantial casualties despite the retreat.
Heavy Fighting Engulfs Zaporizhia, Pokrovsk, And Kupiansk
The latest fighting reflects a widening Russian offensive stretching from the southeastern Zaporizhia front to the Donetsk and Kharkiv regions. Russian war bloggers and pro-Kremlin media released videos showing troops riding motorcycles and trucks into Pokrovsk, calling it “the gateway to Donetsk.” For over a year, Pokrovsk has been a focal point of Russian military strategy due to its strategic location and logistics network connecting central and eastern Ukraine. Ukrainian officials denied claims that Pokrovsk had been encircled but admitted that supply lines to the nearby town of Myrnohrad remain under constant threat. Russia has also announced progress further north in Kupiansk, claiming to have captured the city’s eastern industrial zone, including an oil depot and several train stations. A Russian commander identified by the call sign “Hunter” said his unit had secured multiple transport nodes, which could complicate Ukrainian resupply efforts in the area. Ukraine, however, maintains that Kupiansk remains contested, with counter-battery fire and drone strikes targeting advancing Russian columns.
Zelenskyy Acknowledges “Difficult Situation”
During a visit to Kherson’s southern frontlines on Tuesday, President Volodymyr Zelenskyy admitted that the situation in Zaporizhia and Pokrovsk was “difficult,” citing adverse weather conditions and Russian numerical advantages.
“The conditions favour the attacks,” Zelenskyy said, adding that Ukrainian forces in the Kupiansk sector had achieved “localized successes.”
Military analysts believe the harsh winter fog and terrain have provided cover for Russian troops to carry out close-range assaults while limiting Ukraine’s use of drones and reconnaissance aircraft.
A War Of Attrition Deepens
The fighting in Zaporizhia illustrates the continuing shift toward a war of attrition, where artillery, manpower, and drones dominate the battlefield. Russia’s military, drawing on its vast reserves, has deployed an estimated 150,000 troops toward the Pokrovsk and Zaporizhia axes, according to Ukrainian intelligence sources cited by U.S. media. Russian advances in southeastern Ukraine follow months of heavy drone bombardments and guided bomb attacks, which have steadily eroded Ukrainian fortifications and forced tactical withdrawals in several areas. Ukrainian officers acknowledge that shortages of personnel and ammunition have widened vulnerabilities across the 1,000-kilometre front line. Many brigades, already exhausted after the failed 2024 counteroffensive, are struggling to rotate units or replenish supplies.
Moscow Claims “Major Breakthrough,” Kyiv Disputes
The Russian Ministry of Defence on Tuesday celebrated what it called a “major operational breakthrough” in the Zaporizhia region, claiming control of three villages and partial encirclement of several Ukrainian units. Kyiv dismissed those claims, calling them “exaggerations aimed at domestic propaganda.” Ukrainian officials said that while Russian forces had captured abandoned positions, Ukrainian artillery remained active and continued to shell advancing troops. Independent analysts, including the Institute for the Study of War (ISW), assessed that Russian gains were “tactically significant but operationally limited”, noting that Moscow still faces major logistical hurdles in sustaining its advance deeper into Ukrainian-held territory.
Drones And Weather Shift Battlefield Dynamics
The latest phase of the war highlights Russia’s drone superiority and artillery density, both of which have played crucial roles in Ukraine’s recent setbacks. Russian forces are reportedly deploying dozens of reconnaissance drones per battalion, giving them near-continuous surveillance of Ukrainian troop movements. Meanwhile, bad weather — including thick fog and mud — has hampered Ukrainian reconnaissance and mobility, leaving exposed troops vulnerable to bombardment. Ukrainian commanders say they are focusing on stabilizing defensive lines east of Huliapole, deploying reserve units and counter-artillery batteries to prevent deeper Russian penetration toward the Dnipro River.
The Human Cost Mounts
The escalating battles have inflicted heavy casualties on both sides. Ukrainian emergency services report that civilian evacuations are underway from contested areas of Zaporizhia, where Russian artillery has destroyed homes and infrastructure. Hospitals in Dnipro and Zaporizhia City are reportedly operating at near capacity, treating wounded soldiers and civilians alike. Russian losses are also mounting, with Ukrainian sources claiming “hundreds” of Russian troops have been killed in just 72 hours of fighting. These figures, however, remain unverified.
Three And A Half Years Into The War
Now entering its fourth year, the Russia–Ukraine war has evolved into a grinding, multi-front conflict defined by incremental territorial shifts rather than major breakthroughs. The frontline fatigue among Ukrainian units and dwindling Western ammunition supplies have emboldened Russia to relaunch offensives across several sectors. Still, Ukrainian morale remains resilient. As General Syrskii noted,
“We continue to fight for every metre. Russia may have numbers, but Ukraine has the will.”
USS Gerald Ford Enters Latin America Amid Venezuela Tension
P&C | Wednesday, 12 Nov. 2025
Venezuela | Planet & Commerce
Pentagon’s Largest Warship Enters Latin American Waters Amid Escalating US–Venezuela Tensions
In a move that has heightened regional anxiety and geopolitical strain, the USS Gerald R. Ford, the world’s largest and most advanced aircraft carrier, has entered Latin American waters under the command of the U.S. Southern Command (SOUTHCOM). The arrival marks the largest U.S. military presence in the region since the 1989 invasion of Panama, sparking intense backlash from Venezuela’s government and concern among neighboring nations. The Pentagon announced that the Gerald R. Ford Strike Group—comprising dozens of tactical aircraft, guided-missile destroyers, and a nuclear-powered submarine—had officially arrived in its operational zone this week. The deployment, first revealed three weeks ago, comes amid a rapidly deteriorating standoff between Washington and Caracas.
U.S. Military Escalation And “War On Drugs” Narrative
The U.S. government has framed the operation as part of President Donald Trump’s “war on drugs”, claiming the increased military presence will target narcotics traffickers operating through Caribbean and Pacific routes. Pentagon spokesperson Sean Parnell said the carrier’s arrival “will bolster U.S. capacity to detect, monitor, and disrupt illicit actors and activities” across Latin American waters.
“These forces will enhance and augment existing capabilities to disrupt narcotics trafficking and degrade and dismantle transnational criminal organizations,” Parnell said in an official Navy statement.
The Pentagon confirmed that the USS Gerald R. Ford carries over 4,000 sailors and an array of advanced aircraft capable of conducting long-range reconnaissance and precision strikes. However, analysts across Latin America view the deployment as a strategic show of force aimed at pressuring Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro, who Washington accuses of rigging last year’s election and maintaining links with regional criminal networks.
Maduro Responds With Massive Military Mobilization
In a fiery response, Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro announced what he described as a “massive deployment” of national defence forces—including land, air, naval, missile, and militia units—to counter the U.S. naval presence off Venezuela’s northern coast.
“This represents the greatest threat our continent has faced in the past 100 years,” Maduro declared in a televised address. “The United States is fabricating a new war, one that threatens all of Latin America.”
Venezuelan state television broadcast footage of military commanders rallying troops in coastal and border provinces, vowing to defend national sovereignty. The show of force was accompanied by footage of missile exercises, armored vehicle parades, and riverine patrols—symbolic gestures intended to project readiness in the face of U.S. provocation.
Regional Unease Over Military Buildup
The U.S. carrier’s arrival has drawn a cautious but unified response from regional governments. At the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States (CELAC) summit in Colombia, 58 of the 60 participating nations signed a joint declaration rejecting “the use or threat of use of force” and urging all parties to respect international law and the United Nations Charter. The statement, however, stopped short of directly naming the United States—a sign of the delicate diplomatic balancing act many countries face amid rising hemispheric tensions. Venezuela and Nicaragua were the only nations that refused to sign the CELAC declaration, criticizing the statement as “too weak” and failing to deliver a full condemnation of Washington’s actions. Meanwhile, Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, who is negotiating a separate trade deal with President Trump to cut U.S. tariffs on Brazilian exports by more than 50%, avoided direct criticism of Washington.
“We are a zone of peace. We don’t need war here,” Lula said. “The problem in Venezuela is political and must be resolved through politics.”
The Largest U.S. Military Presence In Latin America In Decades
The deployment of the USS Gerald R. Ford represents a dramatic escalation in the United States’ regional military posture. The aircraft carrier—over 1,100 feet long and weighing 100,000 tons—is the flagship of a strike group that includes destroyers, submarines, and support vessels based out of Puerto Rico. The U.S. Navy confirmed that the carrier joins several other warships and aircraft in joint patrol operations across the Caribbean Sea and the eastern Pacific Ocean, forming the largest American military presence in Latin America since 1989. That year, the U.S. invasion of Panama toppled dictator Manuel Noriega in a major Cold War–era intervention. Today’s deployment, analysts note, could similarly redefine Washington’s military engagement footprint in the Western Hemisphere.
Airstrikes And Rising Death Toll
Since September, U.S. air and naval operations have reportedly targeted dozens of small vessels suspected of drug trafficking in Caribbean and South American waters. The campaign has resulted in at least 76 deaths, according to Pentagon figures, though human rights groups have criticized the strikes as extrajudicial killings that often lack verification or judicial oversight. Regional analysts fear that the expanding U.S. naval operations may blur the line between counter-narcotics missions and military coercion, particularly given the political nature of U.S.–Venezuela tensions. “The ‘war on drugs’ justification feels like a pretext for political leverage,” said María Fernanda Echeverría, a Caracas-based security analyst. “Deploying an aircraft carrier strike group to the Caribbean is a message, not a routine operation.”
Venezuela’s Political Crisis At The Heart Of The Standoff
The confrontation unfolds amid Venezuela’s deepening political and economic crisis. Since disputed elections last year, Maduro has faced mounting internal dissent and international isolation. The opposition-controlled National Council has accused the regime of human rights abuses, corruption, and manipulation of electoral results. Washington, which refuses to recognize Maduro’s presidency, has ramped up sanctions, asset freezes, and diplomatic isolation, while backing opposition movements that call for free elections under international supervision. For Trump, the naval buildup serves a dual purpose: projecting U.S. dominance in Latin America and reaffirming a hardline stance against leftist regimes, a policy popular among conservative voters at home.
A Region Divided Between Diplomacy And Deterrence
While Colombia, Brazil, and Mexico have publicly urged restraint, smaller Caribbean states have expressed alarm over the proximity of the U.S. fleet and its potential to escalate into a broader conflict. The Dominican Republic and Trinidad and Tobago have already activated emergency coordination channels to monitor maritime traffic, fearing that tensions could disrupt regional trade routes. Meanwhile, the Organization of American States (OAS) is reportedly preparing an emergency session to discuss the implications of the U.S. naval buildup and Venezuela’s counter-mobilization, though divisions among member states could hinder consensus.
Strategic And Symbolic Implications
The USS Gerald R. Ford’s presence in Latin America is both militarily strategic and politically symbolic. The carrier’s advanced radar systems, electromagnetic catapult technology, and F/A-18 fighter fleet give Washington unparalleled operational reach in the hemisphere. More significantly, it sends a geopolitical message to both allies and rivals: the United States intends to reassert control over the Western Hemisphere, in line with the Monroe Doctrine’s legacy of hemispheric dominance. However, critics argue that such displays of force may undermine diplomacy and embolden anti-American sentiment in a region already wary of foreign intervention.
“This deployment risks resurrecting old fears of U.S. imperialism in Latin America,” said Dr. Rafael Ortega, a political scientist at the University of São Paulo. “It’s a reminder of the fragility of peace in a region that has long resisted military coercion.”
Escalation Or Deterrence?
As both nations dig in, the risk of miscalculation or confrontation grows. With Venezuela mobilizing troops and the U.S. reinforcing its fleet, regional observers warn that even a single incident at sea or in the air could spark a wider crisis. For now, Latin American leaders continue to urge diplomacy. Yet, the arrival of the USS Gerald R. Ford represents more than a naval maneuver—it symbolizes a renewed era of great power rivalry playing out in the waters of the Caribbean. Whether this escalation leads to negotiation or confrontation may determine the future of regional stability in the Americas.