Feed aggregator

Le constructeur au losange multiplie les partenariats industriels et financiers avec le géant de l’électrique Geely. De quoi faire craindre de nouvelles délocalisations.

La quatrième visite en France du président ukrainien, à l’occasion des cérémonies du Débarquement, sera marquée ce vendredi par la signature d’accords portant sur 650 millions d’euros sous forme de prêts et de dons.

Sigrid Gérardin est l’une des 23 syndicalistes de la liste communiste, où elle figure en deuxième position. Juste avant le vote, cette enseignante en lycée professionnel revient sur les leçons de la campagne.

Dans la plus petite commune des Hauts-de-Seine, la participation électorale est l’une des plus hautes du pays. À chaque élection, le camp macroniste dépasse les 45 %. Ce devrait aussi être le cas aux européennes de 2024. Un village archétypal du vote de classe, où le revenu annuel moyen s’élève à 109 000 euros.

C’est donc à une finale femme inédite que s’apprête samedi à vivre le public parisien. Si Iga Swiatek, une fidèle du rendez-vous sera bien là, la surprise vient d’Italie et de Jasmine Paolini, qui a déjoué tous les pièges et mis les parieurs à rude épreuve.

Les violences éducatives ordinaires sont en hausse en milieu sportif et familial, malgré des parents qui se prétendent plus informés. C’est ce que révèle jeudi 6 juin le deuxième baromètre de la Fondation pour l’enfance.

Summary: The U.S. Navy is advancing its capabilities by developing hypersonic anti-ship cruise missiles through the Hypersonic Air-Launched Offensive Anti-Surface (HALO) program.

-Contracts have been awarded to Raytheon and Lockheed Martin to create these missiles, which could be launched from surface ships, submarines, and potentially even land.

-The HALO missile is expected to surpass current options like the Harpoon and Tomahawk in speed, range, and effectiveness, providing a significant boost in naval strike capability.

-This initiative aims to enhance the Navy’s readiness for potential conflicts in the Indo-Pacific and counter advances by Russia and China in hypersonic technology.

U.S. Navy’s New HALO Program to Develop Hypersonic Anti-Ship Missiles

The U.S. Navy is advancing its capabilities by developing hypersonic anti-ship cruise missiles through the Hypersonic Air-Launched Offensive Anti-Surface (HALO) program.

Contracts have been awarded to Raytheon and Lockheed Martin to create these missiles, which could be launched from surface ships, submarines, and potentially even land.

The HALO missile is expected to surpass current options like the Harpoon and Tomahawk in speed, range, and effectiveness, providing a significant boost in naval strike capability.

This initiative aims to enhance the Navy’s readiness for potential conflicts in the Indo-Pacific and counter advances by Russia and China in hypersonic technology.

The U.S. Navy is developing hypersonic anti-ship cruise missiles that could be deployed from surface ships, submarines, and jets. “This would give Navy surface and subsurface fleets an entirely new category of naval strike capability,” The War Zone reported.

The U.S. is working to catch up with Russia and China, who already have working hypersonic missiles, and to prepare for the possibility of a naval-based conflict in the Indo-Pacific.

Ship-Launched Anti-Ship Missiles

The Navy initiative in question is known as the Hypersonic Air-Launched Offensive Anti-Surface program, or HALO. Contracts were awarded to Raytheon and Lockheed Martin in early 2023. The firms will compete to see who can create a better product.

Program specifics are a well-guarded secret, although the common understanding is that ramjet or scramjet engines will propel the new missiles. The Navy’s fiscal year 2025 budget request hinted at further details about the HALO program:

“HALO will be a carrier-suitable, higher-speed, longer-range, air-launched weapon system providing superior Anti Surface Warfare capabilities…HALO will address advanced threats from engagement distances that allow the Navy to operate in,  and control, contested battle space in littoral waters and Anti-Access/Area Denial (A2/AD) environments.”

The Navy may be offering an overly rosy projection of what the HALO missile can accomplish. But without question, a hypersonic anti-ship missile would be a considerable asset once added to the Navy’s inventory, offering an upgrade over the existing Harpoon munition.

The Harpoon is a dedicated anti-ship missile capable of operating within a range of 75 miles. Tomahawk cruise missiles, which have a 1,000-mile range, can also be used for anti-ship purposes when needed. But the HALO program should substantially augment the Navy’ anti-ship missile capabilities.

In addition to the HALO, the Navy is also working on the Naval Strike Missile (NSM), a stealth option with a 100-mile range to be outfitted on the Littoral Combat Ship; and the multi-purpose SM-6, with a maximum range of about 230 miles. 

Of the Navy’s existing anti-ship missiles, the Harpoon is preferred. But HALO will expand the Navy’s strike options.

“HALO would therefore give Navy ships and submarines a new way to strike at an opponent’s ships rapidly, even at extended ranges,” The War Zone reported. “The weapon’s hypersonic speed would also present complications for shipboard defenses and just generally reduce the time enemy forces have to react.”

Air, Land, and Sea

If the HALO project can be configured to fire from surface and subsurface vessels, perhaps it can also be adapted to fire from land. The U.S. Army and Marine Corps would probably be interested in a land-based HALO option. The Marine Corps already uses land-based Tomahawks and NSMs, while the Army and Navy use Tomahawks and SM-6s.

The Air Force, meanwhile, is working to develop its own hypersonic cruise missile. Its Hypersonic Attack Cruise Missile will “hold fixed, high value, time-sensitive targets at risk.”

About the Author: Harrison Kass 

Harrison Kass is a defense and national security writer with over 1,000 total pieces on issues involving global affairs. An attorney, pilot, guitarist, and minor pro hockey player, Harrison joined the US Air Force as a Pilot Trainee but was medically discharged. Harrison holds a BA from Lake Forest College, a JD from the University of Oregon, and an MA from New York University. Harrison listens to Dokken.

Image Credit: The main image is from RTX. All other images are from the U.S. Navy. 

La cité du Nord, marquée par le chômage et la pauvreté, est l’une des communes qui votent le moins en France. L’abstention s’annonce à nouveau élevée cette année. Face aux problèmes qui pourrissent la vie des habitants, le scrutin de dimanche apparaît comme secondaire.

German Transport Minister Volker Wissing (FDP/Renew) warned against "CO2 tourism", as EU rules for renewable fuels could lead to liquified CO2 from Europe being shipped to other parts of the world to produce e-fuels for the EU market.

Summary: The U.S. Navy's VX-9 "Vampires" squadron is responsible for testing new weapons and systems before they are deployed on Navy aircraft.

-Recently, an F/A-18E/F Super Hornet from VX-9 was spotted carrying a RIM-176 Standard Extended Range Active Missile (SM-6), raising speculation about new capabilities.

-The SM-6, which has a range of up to 250 nautical miles, was originally designed for anti-air and anti-ship missions.

-If integrated with Super Hornets, it could significantly extend the strike range of U.S. carrier groups, particularly in the Indo-Pacific region.

-This development suggests the Navy is exploring advanced warfare capabilities for its aircraft.

Navy’s VX-9 'Vampires' Testing New SM-6 Missile on F/A-18 Super Hornets

The aviators of the United States Navy's Air Test and Evaluation Squadron Nine (VX-9) "Vampires" could be described as the sea service's platform testers. Before most new systems make their way to the Navy's aircraft, they're put through various rigors with the pilots and ground crews of VX-9.

According to the U.S. Navy, the squadron "conducts operational test and evaluation of all air-to-ground weapons, air-to-air weapons, sensors, electronic warfare systems and mission software upgrades to aircraft and weapon systems. More than 350 VX-9 Vampires maintain and fly a diverse fleet of approximately 20 aircraft used in the demanding and dynamic role of operational flight test, supporting both Navy and Marine Corps tactical aviation."

In other words, they'll be the ones who will determine whether certain weapons and other systems will be employed by U.S. Navy warbirds when it isn't just a test!

Among the aircraft currently operated by VX-9 is the F/A-18E/F Super Hornet, and one of those warbirds was spotted in April carrying a RIM-176 Standard Extended Range Active Missile (ERAM) – also known as the Standard Missile 6 (SM-6) – near Naval Air Weapons Station (NAWS) China Lake. Photos of the Super Hornet carrying the SM-6 were shared by photographer @StinkJet via a post on X, the social media platform formerly known as Twitter.

As Defence Blog reported, the sighting has raised questions about the potential new capabilities of the F/A-18 Super Hornet, as the SM-6 was originally developed by Raytheon as an extended range anti-air warfare (ER-AAW) platform that can be employed against fixed and rotary-wing aircraft, drones and as an anti-ship cruise missile. It has been integrated with the U.S. Navy's Aegis Combat System.

It is estimated that on the low end, the SM-6 has a range of 130 nautical miles (240 km), while higher estimates such it could reach a target from a distance of up to 250 nautical miles (463 km). An air-launched variant would be certainly welcome for carrier strike groups (CSGs) operating in the Indo-Pacific, where China has sought to introduce weapons that would force carriers to operate much further out.

According to Naval News, the SM-6 employs an X-band receiver that provides guidance – meaning it would work with an F/A-18E/F AN/APG-79 or F-35C AN/APG-81 AESA radars is possible. It further suggested that a forward-based F-35C – the carrier-based variant of the Joint Strike Fighter – could be employed to guide the SM-6 to target after it is launched by a Super Hornet from a safe distance, as the F/A-18E/F already can communicate fire control data via the Naval Integrated Fire Control–Counter Air (NIFC-CA) datalink system.

That is still just a matter of speculation.

Moreover, this is not the first time that photos have circulated online showing the F/A Super Hornet possibly putting the SM-6 through the motions. Another image made the rounds in 2021, and it would seem that the U.S. Navy seems very interested in extending how far its Super Hornets could sting.

Author Experience and Expertise: Peter Suciu

Peter Suciu is a Michigan-based writer. He has contributed to more than four dozen magazines, newspapers, and websites with over 3,200 published pieces over a twenty-year career in journalism. He regularly writes about military hardware, firearms history, cybersecurity, politics, and international affairs. Peter is also a Contributing Writer for Forbes and Clearance Jobs. You can follow him on Twitter: @PeterSuciu. You can email the author: Editor@nationalinterest.org.

Image Credit: Creative Commons and Shutterstock. 

Washington has been making a series of bad assumptions that trace back 30 years.

Algérie, identité, mesures anti-immigration… La tête de liste LR aux européennes, François-Xavier Bellamy, revendique une stratégie de la radicalité dans la dernière ligne droite de sa campagne européenne. Une tactique qui ne lui permet pas de décoller dans les sondages, où il oscille toujours entre 6 et 8 % des intentions de vote.

Le Parlement israélien vient d’adopter en première lecture un projet de loi visant à empêcher les consulats basés à Jérusalem de servir les Palestiniens, coupant les territoires occupés du reste du monde.

India’s prime minister will balk at needing allies to stay in power, but coalition rule has proved to have benefits for large democracies.

Au cours de l’illustre Congrès de la société américaine d’oncologie clinique, à Chicago, la chercheuse et docteure portugaise Ines Vaz Luis, qui exerce à l’hôpital Gustave-Roussy, à Villejuif, s’est vu décerner le prestigieux prix du mentorat Women Who Conquer Cancer.

Summary and Key Points: Houthi rebels recently claimed to have struck the USS Dwight D. Eisenhower in the Red Sea using unmanned aerial vehicles, a claim denied by U.S. Central Command.

-The incident is part of a broader disinformation campaign by the Iran-backed group, which has been targeting international shipping in retaliation for U.S. and UK military actions against them.

-Supported by Iran, the Houthis have increased their attacks in strategic waterways, posing significant risks to global trade and regional stability.

-Despite the claims, there is no evidence that the USS Eisenhower or any U.S. vessel was hit.

Houthi Rebels' False Claims: No Hit on USS Dwight D. Eisenhower

Houthi rebels claimed they achieved a “direct hit” on a U.S. aircraft carrier in the Red Sea over the weekend. 

A spokesman for the Iran-backed militant group said Houthi forces targeted USS Dwight D. Eisenhower with unmanned aerial vehicles on Saturday in retaliation for Israel’s ongoing military operation against Hamas in Gaza. 

Chinese and Iranian state-run media outlets circulated the rumor, publishing a clearly doctored photograph of the American ship on social media (we have compiled several example photos in this article). However, U.S. Central Command denies the claim. According to Voice of America, a CENTCOM official asserted that, “There is no truth to the Houthi claim of striking the USS Eisenhower or any U.S. Navy vessel,” adding that “This is an ongoing disinformation campaign that the Houthis have been conducting for months.”

The Houthis Continue to Barrage Ships in the Red Sea

Over the last few months, the U.S. and the United Kingdom have been carrying out frequent barrages against Houthi assets in the Middle East in an effort to further degrade the group’s capabilities. 

The Iran-backed militants continue to cause headaches in the Gulf of Oman and Red Sea, attacking international shipping routes frequently. Since the October 7 Hamas massacre in Israel, the Houthis have partnered with regional affiliates to strike vessels they claim are linked to the Jewish state and the West. From October to March alone, the Houthis carried out at least 60 attacks in the Red Sea and Gulf of Aden. 

How Iran Is Fueling the Conflict

In a direct response to these unwarranted barrages, UK and U.S. forces target Houthi assets and weapons depots in Yemen. The Houthis have embroiled Yemen in civil war since 2014 after they seized control of the country’s northern Sana’a province and forced out the government. The conflict evolved into a larger and quite lethal war. 

Just as the Islamic Republic supports Gaza-based Hamas terrorists via weapons transfers, funding, training and propaganda, so it also backs the Houthis in Yemen. Tehran is proficient in exploiting regional instability to exert control. As detailed by War on the Rocks, “They assemble these parts into working weapons with technical assistance from Hezbollah and Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps advisers. This approach has allowed the Houthis to now field short and long-range drones and an increasingly diversified fleet of missiles capable of striking deep inside Saudi Arabia.” 

The Houthis’ increased barrages targeting ships in the Gulf of Oman are a dangerous escalation, according to U.S. officials. Approximately one-fifth of the world’s crude oil traded by sea passes through the Strait of Hormuz. The Iran-backed group knows it can interrupt the flow of the global economy using  lethal UAVs, missiles, rockets and other projectiles. The rebels may claim to only target ships linked to Israel, but the Pentagon has refuted this claim and provided evidence indicating the group also targets multinational ships. As explained by a Department of Defense spokesperson, “The Houthis continue to endanger commercial shipping that goes through that region, continue to put at risk U.S. forces, other countries’ forces in the region who want to see commerce continue to flow in a very crucial area in the Middle East.”

Although Houthi military spokesperson Yahya Saree claims that the Eisenhower was damaged in recent barrages, this narrative is clearly pure fiction. However, the militant group is well supplied with UAVs thanks to Iran, and eliminating the Houthis’ weapons depots should remain a top priority for U.S. and Israeli forces alike.

About the Author: Maya Carlin

Maya Carlin, National Security Writer with The National Interest, is an analyst with the Center for Security Policy and a former Anna Sobol Levy Fellow at IDC Herzliya in Israel. She has by-lines in many publications, including The National Interest, Jerusalem Post, and Times of Israel. You can follow her on Twitter: @MayaCarlin. 

Images of fake aircraft carrier attack via social media screenshots. 

Summary and  Key Points: The Admiral Kuznetsov, Russia’s sole aircraft carrier, has been plagued by persistent operational failures and extensive repairs, casting doubt on its future effectiveness.

-Originally launched during the Soviet era and designed to project power, the Kuznetsov has suffered from technical issues and accidents, including aircraft losses and fires.

-Despite these challenges, Russia claims it will rejoin the fleet soon.

-Historically, Russia's naval ambitions have faced setbacks, and the Kuznetsov’s troubled legacy highlights ongoing struggles.

Admiral Kuznetsov: Russia’s Troubled Aircraft Carrier Faces Uncertain Future

As Russia inches closer to commissioning its second Gerald R. Ford-class carrier, the gap in capabilities between Russian and Western naval power remains stark.

While the U.S. Navy is inching closer to commissioning its second Gerald R. Ford-class aircraft carrier, Russia remains dependent on its semi-defunct Admiral Kuznetsov for sea-based power projection. Despite the former Soviet Union’s military prowess and development during the Cold War, the completion of robust aircraft carriers never came to fruition. Once the USSR collapsed in 1991, any hopes for the Soviet’s carrier aspirations came crumbling down. Due to poor planning and timing over the years, Russia possesses a singular aircraft carrier in its naval fleet. To make matters worse, Admiral Kuznetsov has proven to be a massive disappointment.

The history of Russia’s Navy:

Following the death of Peter the Great in the early 18th century, the Imperial Russian Navy sharply declined. In fact, between 1726-1730, only 54 ships were constructed. During the second half of this century, Russia saw an uptick in its naval development due to its domination of the Black Sea. By the turn of the 19th century, Russia’s progress on this front ramped up quickly. The Russian Navy became the second most powerful naval force across the globe at this time, second to the United Kingdom.

However, the naval might Russia possessed was soon nixed following the Russo-Japanese War, which resulted in a tremendous loss of Russian ships. To rectify this downfall, Tsar Nicholas II launched a hefty shipbuilding development program, which granted Russia a larger sea-based fleet than its Central Power enemies when the First World War broke out.

The trajectory of the Russian Navy would remain tumultuous for years to come. During the Russian Civil War, which would ultimately lead to the rise of the new Soviet Union, Russia’s naval fleet was completely weakened as a fighting force. With the Bolsheviks in charge, a renewed interest in building up the naval fleet was prioritized.

Although the USSR worked hard to quickly develop advanced battleships, destroyers, and cruisers around the WWI era, the U.S., Japan, and Great Britain pivoted toward adopted aircraft carriers. In a sense, the Soviets missed the boat on taking advantage of these years to build up their career potential.  

The rise of the Kuznetsov-class aircraft carrier

It wasn’t until the late 1930’s that aircraft carriers would be prioritized by the Soviets in one of Stalin’s five-year plans.

The “Project 71” class, however, was largely put on hold when the Second World War broke out. Over the next few decades, additional carrier class prototypes were introduced, yet they never came to fruition due to frequent changes in the country’s political leadership. By the mid-1980s, the push to develop a homegrown aircraft carrier was finally fruitful.

Admiral Flota Sovetskoho Soyuza Kuznetsov was constructed at Chernomorskiy Shipyard and officially launched by the middle of the decade. Initially, the ship was named Riga before being redesignated as Leonid Brezhnev, Tbilisi, and finally Kuznetsov over the years.

Kuznetsov was designed to be the lead ship of the Admiral Kuznetsov-class of aircraft carriers. However, when the USSR collapsed, Kuznetsov’s sister ship- Varyag- was not complete. The Kuznetsov became the sole carrier to sail for the new Russian Federation in 1991, serving as the flagship of its navy. In addition to helicopters, the Kuznetsov can carry an array of Sukhoi Su-33 and MiG-29 fighters. The carrier has a complement of a dozen long-range surface-to-surface anti-ship P-700 Granit cruise missiles, giving it its “heavy aircraft-carrying missile cruise” designation.

On paper, Kuznetsov displaces roughly 60,000 tons and can sail at speeds in excess of 30 knots. The carrier is also fitted with anti-submarine warfare capabilities. As detailed by Naval Technology, “The ship is equipped with an Udav-1 anti-submarine system with 60 anti-submarine rockets. Udav-1, supplied by the Splav Research and Production Association in Moscow, protects surface ships by diverting and destroying incoming torpedoes. The system also provides defence against submarines and saboteur systems, such as underwater vehicles. The system has ten barrels and is capable of firing 111SG depth charge projectiles, 111SZ mine-laying projectiles and 111SO diverting projectiles. The range of the system is up to 3,000m and the submarine engagement depth is to 600m.”

Despite these abilities, Kuznetsov has suffered from a litany of failures and mishaps over the years. In fact, Russia’s sole carrier has remained dry-docked for the better part of the last decade. During the carrier’s first-ever deployment to aid the government-backed forces in the Syrian Civil War in 2016, two aircraft were lost, partaking in carrier operations. Faulty arresting wires were reportedly to blame for losing one Su-33 and one MiG-29K.

Following these mishaps, Kuznetsov was rendered useless as the carrier ceased launching and landing airframes. In addition to this tragic deployment, Kuznetsov has suffered from many incidents onboard, including fires, falling cranes and deck holes.

Even if Kuznetsov sets sail again as the flagship of Russia’s Navy, the carrier is limited in its capabilities when compared to its foreign counterparts.

About the Author: Maya Carlin

Maya Carlin, National Security Writer with The National Interest, is an analyst with the Center for Security Policy and a former Anna Sobol Levy Fellow at IDC Herzliya in Israel. She has by-lines in many publications, including The National Interest, Jerusalem Post, and Times of Israel. You can follow her on Twitter: @MayaCarlin. 

All images are Creative Commons. 

Summary: The Russian aircraft carrier Admiral Kuznetsov, plagued by a history of technical failures and mishaps, has been out of service since 2017.

-Initially built in the Soviet era and intended for high-profile roles, the carrier's outdated mazut fuel system and subpar construction have led to operational issues, including a fatal fire and a crane collapse that caused significant damage.

-Despite Russian claims that Kuznetsov will return to service, its history of limited deployments and continuous setbacks suggests that retiring the vessel might be a more practical option.

Why Russia’s Admiral Kuznetsov Might Never Sail Again

Russia’s sole aircraft carrier should be relegated to the scrapyard.

For years, Admiral Kuznetsov has been dry docked undergoing frequent repairs. The ship’s history is marred with unfortunate events, causing some to refer to the carrier as a complete failure. From abysmal deployment performance to fire outbreaks and falling cranes, bad luck just seems to engulf the Kuznetsov. Russia’s carrier has remained out of service since 2017, however, state-run news outlets allege that Kuznetsov could re-commission with the fleet by the end of this year. Considering the ship’s history and Moscow’s tendency to over-exaggerate, this timeline seems murky at best.

The History of Russia's Admiral Kuznetsov Aircraft Carrier :

During the Cold War, Admiral Kuznetsov was designed to serve as the lead ship of the two-ship Admiral Kuznetsov class in the Soviet Navy. By the time the Soviet Union collapsed, however, the second planned ship- Varyag- was not fully constructed. Ultimately, Ukraine sold this incomplete carrier to China and it was commissioned as the People’s Liberation Army’s Liaoning. The carrier was built within the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic at Chernomorskiy Shipyard during the late 1980’s to early 1990’s. Initially, the carrier was named Riga, which was eventually changed to Leonid Brezhnev and later Tbilisi. It was not until 1990 that the ship was designated Admiral Flota Sovetskogo Soyuza N.G. Kuznetsov (shortened to Admiral Kuznetsov.

Specs & Capabilities

Admiral Kuznetsov has at least two dozen rotary-style vertical launch systems, with eight missile cells each. According to The Drive, these systems could potentially fire 192 SA-N-9 “Gauntlet” point air defense missiles, which would be instrumental in defending the carrier against anti-ship missiles, aircraft, and surface ships in wartime. Additionally, Russia’s sole carrier is fitted with several anti-submarine defenses with two UDAV-1 anti-submarine/anti-torpedo rocket systems.

While Western ships developed around this time typically used gas turbines or nuclear power for energy, Kuznetsov was conventionally powered by mazut. This fuel source is notoriously black and tarry, giving off a heavy and visible trail of dark smoke when used. For an aircraft carrier, this fuel source is subprime, considering enemy warships can view the mazut from miles away. To make matters worse, mazut is a particularly challenging fuel source that requires proper boiler and piping installations to ensure adequate preheating and pressurization. When the Kuznetsov was constructed, however, insufficient piping incorporated on the ship made it challenging for its boilers to operate at full capacity simultaneously.

In addition to its shoddy construction and difficult power source, the carrier has underperformed in its intended role. Over Kuznetsov's 30-year career, it has only been deployed one time. In 2015, Russia deployed its sole carrier to the Syrian coast as part of the Kremlin’s campaign in support of the government forces in the civil war. During this operation, both a MiG-29 and an Su-33 fighter jet were lost.

As detailed by USNI News, “A fighter assigned to the Russian carrier operating in the Eastern Mediterranean crashed during a landing approach on Sunday. The Mikoyan MiG-29K was part of a trio of MiGs that had sortied from Russian carrier Admiral Kuznetsov headed over Syria. At one point, for unknown reasons, one of the fighters turned back to the carrier and crashed while on approach to the carrier, the official said.”

Russian state-run media outlets also verified these claims, asserting that a “technical fault during the approach landing” was to blame for the two losses.

Following these mishaps, the rest of the airframes positioned on the carrier were moved to an airbase in Syria, essentially rendering the presence of the ship useless. This incident appeared to be the first of many unfortunate mishaps that would plague the aircraft carrier. In 2018, a floating crane fell onto the carrier’s deck, killing one worker and injuring several others. Since the crane opened up a 200-square-foot hole in the flight deck, it took some time for the wreckage to be cleared. While waiting to be delivered to dry dock, another incident occurred.

A fire caused by a welding error in the ship’s engine room killed two workers and injured more than a dozen others. Overall, the repair bill for this mishap alone ballooned to roughly $8 million. Kuznetsov has not been impervious to additional incidents since being relegated to dry dock, however.

In 2022, another fire erupted onboard. Alexei Rakhmanov, head of the United Shipbuilding Corporation, said that "All the relevant fire systems worked normally. There was no damage and no casualties.”

While the Kremlin claims that Kuznetsov will re-enter service with its naval fleet sometime this year, the prospects for this remain dim. In fact, Moscow may want to consider scrapping its sole carrier altogether.

About the Author: Maya Carlin

Maya Carlin, National Security Writer with The National Interest, is an analyst with the Center for Security Policy and a former Anna Sobol Levy Fellow at IDC Herzliya in Israel. She has by-lines in many publications, including The National Interest, Jerusalem Post, and Times of Israel. You can follow her on Twitter: @MayaCarlin. 

All images are Creative Commons. 

Véritable carrefour entre les océans Indien et Pacifique, la mer de Chine est un espace hautement stratégique en ce qu’elle est un point de passage vital pour les économies des pays qui la bordent; un quart du commerce mondial y transite. Cet espace est de fait le théâtre de différends maritimes et territoriaux entre les pays riverains mais aussi le lieu de remise en cause du droit international de la mer. Les États côtiers se disputent la souveraineté de plusieurs îles et récifs de cet espace qui leur offriraient des droits sur les eaux territoriales et les zones économiques exclusives de ces terres émergées. À ces conflits régionaux s’ajoute la présence d’acteurs extérieurs faisant de la région une priorité dans leurs agendas de politique étrangère. C’est en particulier le cas des États-Unis.

Dans cette vidéo agrémentée de cartes, de photos et d’infographies, retour sur les conflits en mer de Chine, les multiples revendications des États riverains, et en particulier les ambitions chinoises, mais aussi l’implication d’acteurs extérieurs à la région.

With Egypt, Ethiopia, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and Iran joining the BRICS at the beginning of 2024, the group now embodies a group of influential states on the international stage, representing 46% of the world’s population and 29% of global GDP. While 2024 is synonymous with an important electoral year for several BRICS members, further enlargements could take place in the coming years. Are we heading for an alternative international order? What are the strategic advantages of the BRICS+? Can they embody the voice of the global South? Interview with Jean-Joseph Boillot, Associate Research Fellow at IRIS, specialised in the Indian economy and the emerging world.

A new mandate for Vladimir Putin in Russia, a historic setback for the African National Congress (ANC) in the South African elections, a narrow victory for Narendra Modi in India, new elections to come in Iran following the death of Ebrahim Raissi and in Ethiopia… 2024 is a pivotal electoral year for many BRICS+ countries. Should we expect any repercussions from these elections on the international agenda of the BRICS+ states?

Quite possibly, as the BRICS+ are a fairly heterogeneous group. All it takes, as we saw in Argentina, is for Javier Milei, a pro-American liberal, to be elected to leave this group. But what is interesting is to see that, even with the Indian elections, the results of which returned Narendra Modi with a small majority, most of the countries of the so-called ‘Global South’ are fundamentally united, with a strong internal consensus to finally free themselves from the Western international order known as Bretton Woods. So, with one or two exceptions, there can be changes of government without undermining this very strong consensus. And while some would like to see the BRICS+ as a confrontational anti-Western club, in reality it is clear that, with Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and Egypt joining the group recently, the consensus is more along the lines of multi-alignment, rather like India, which has recently moved closer to the United States without severing its relations with Russia, for example. For the time being at least, elections in the developing world do not seem to be challenging this majority consensus in the South, and I am not talking about fake elections like the one in Russia with the election of Putin.

Since the expansion of the BRICS+ at the beginning of 2024, what analysis can be made of the group’s economic expansion? What are its strengths and strategic advantages?

We can see that the myth of a BRICS+ grouping that is more powerful than the Western economies and capable of turning the tables has not been borne out, nor are the BRICS+ a marginal phenomenon in the evolution of the world economy. What we can see is that the BRICS+ are more a fairly flexible grouping, born of the political will of the countries of the South to be taken seriously in international forums – which are still largely dominated by the West – rather than an alternative world order, except no doubt in Moscow’s mind. One example of this is Russia’s assumption of the BRICS presidency this year, because Brazil held the G20 presidency and could not do both. If you look at the way Russia is leading the preparatory sessions for the Kazan summit in October, you will see that the agenda is relatively empty. There are hardly any meetings, and no decisions have been taken. On the monetary front, for example, there was the idea of a common currency, but this has not progressed.

In a way, this reassures us that, instead of moving towards a confrontational world between two blocs, we are moving towards a South-North confrontation, but within the existing international architecture and in particular around institutions that need to be reformed, such as the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank, which are still largely dominated by Western countries, unlike the United Nations, where the countries of the South are much more represented.

It should be noted, however, that the entry of Saudi Arabia, Iran and the United Arab Emirates is tending to reinforce a certain ‘cartelisation of the world’ under the BRICS umbrella in the key areas of raw materials, food, energy and metals. Some countries in the South now have strong political leverage over the critical raw materials they claim. This poses a problem, because most of the so-called countries of the South are not in fact producers of these raw materials. There is therefore a risk that within the BRICS+ club, there will not be a confrontation for the time being, but a difficulty in finding a point of balance between the interests of the producer countries and the interests of the consumer countries. For example, Africa, one of tomorrow’s giants in raw materials, is being courted by China, but also by Russia and the Gulf States. The challenge for the continent will be to avoid becoming dependent on this cartel.

With Thailand having recently applied to join the BRICS+ and numerous countries such as Mexico, Algeria and Turkey likely to join the group, what are the possible horizons for the BRICS+? Can they embody in a homogeneous way the voice of the so-called ‘global South’?

It seems unlikely that not only will the BRICS+ become a structured organisation, but that the club will be able to be ‘THE’ voice of the countries of the South. The reason for this is that a majority of countries tend to adopt positions of multi-alignment, of double-dealing between Western countries and the emerging or re-emerging powers of the South in the broad sense of the term, including Russia. The vast majority of the developing world does not wish to fall into a dependency that would be Russian-Chinese, for example. Those who gave during the Cold War, such as Angola, are now biting their fingers. The expansion of the BRICS, which will continue – albeit very probably at a moderate pace – relatively dilutes power within the organisation and prevents any one group from gaining the upper hand. This explains why progress has been so slow on the question of a monetary alternative to the dollar, or on actual disbursements from the BRICS bank, which is now headed by a Brazilian.

We would therefore be moving more towards what could be described as a meeting forum, and in particular a pre-G20 forum – since the BRICS have got into the habit of meeting before every G20 or other major international summit, with the aim of harmonising the positions of the South and collectively influencing decisions, as the G7 countries did. It is therefore rather positive that the BRICS are being enlarged to include countries that represent visions and interests that are a little different from those of the five founding countries, such as Algeria, Indonesia, Vietnam and Thailand, which seems to be serious about its application. It will also be interesting to see whether the election of Mexico’s new president alters the country’s thinking about joining the club at a time when the United States is totally opposed.

In the four possible scenarios described by French researcher Julien Vercueil, it seems that we are heading towards a scenario of continued expansion of the BRICS rather than its break-up and decline, as some had thought. But in this expansion scenario, rather than the world economy being divided between the South and the North, we would be moving towards growing contestation leading progressively to reforms of the global economic order. This seems the most likely scenario, given the way the first enlargement was carried out. The second enlargement may not take place in 2024 because India and Brazil are not very keen on it. So the countries that have applied will certainly have to wait until 2025. But what’s a year when you’re talking about reforming the architecture of the world?

 

Translated by Deepl.