＜社会 国際＞米、対ロシア無人機攻撃を支援か 防空情報提供と英紙電子版報道
2025年10月12日 18:28 （10月12日 18:30更新）
[有料会員限定記事]
【キーウ共同】英紙フィナンシャル・タイムズ（FT）電子版は12日、トランプ米政権が数カ月にわたり、ウクライナによるロシアのエネルギー施設への無人機攻撃を支援していたと報じました。
報道によると、米情報機関が無人機の航行に関する防空情報を提供し、ウクライナの攻撃準備を支援していた可能性があるとされています。
詳細は有料会員限定のため省略いたします。ご興味のある方は7日間無料トライアルをご利用ください。
（残り587文字）
※クリップ機能は有料会員限定のサービスです。
https://www.nishinippon.co.jp/item/1410533/
Driven by the political exigency of the Bihar elections, India’s leadership has reignited an old fire. Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s invocation of Operation Sindoor and threats to change geographies have been followed by his defence minister’s explicit threat regarding the Sir Creek. This is reckless brinkmanship.
The Sir Creek area is a 96-kilometre-long tidal estuary located in the Indus Delta, forming part of the border between Sindh and India’s Gujarat. It is among Pakistan’s most strategically crucial and ecologically sensitive areas. Lying at the edge of the Indus River Delta, vital shipping routes and fishing grounds, it holds significant economic and geopolitical importance. Its proximity to the international maritime boundary with India makes it a geopolitically sensitive zone.
Control of Sir Creek is essential for safeguarding Pakistan’s maritime boundaries and preserving its exclusive economic zone (EEZ), which is abundant in marine resources. The estuary’s ever-shifting tidal surges and sediment deposition render nautical charts unreliable and navigation challenging. To secure the frontier, naval and marine personnel must conduct frequent surveillance and patrols, often in hovercraft and boats, even on foot, through the treacherous terrain.
Pakistan claims rights, in accordance with the Bombay Government Resolution of 1914, to the entire waters surrounding and fed by the creek, says Rear Admiral Foad Baig, a former director general of Pakistan Maritime Security Agency. This agreement, part of the Surveyor General’s Map, fixed the border on the creek’s eastern bank. Pakistan’s position is, therefore, based on upholding this pre-existing, fixed boundary. It has argued that the Thalweg principle, which places the boundary mid-stream, is inapplicable as the creek is a non-navigable estuary and the border was never intended to shift with the channel.
Demonstrating its commitment to a peaceful solution, Pakistan prioritised bilateral resolution. This led to a joint survey in 2007 and an exchange of agreed-upon maps. However, this process was stopped when, following the Mumbai terrorist attacks, India withdrew in 2008.
Despite the Indian position on Sir Creek, Pakistan’s claim to an extended Continental Shelf 150 NM beyond the EEZ was accepted in March 2015. This granted Pakistan 50,000 sq km of seabed territory, giving legal control over natural resources in this offshore area, says Rear Admiral Foad Baig.
The Sir Creek dispute dates back to the April 1965 Rann of Kutch battle. Some 20 years ago, the Pakistan Navy established its Coastal Command. The strategic initiative was designed to enhance amphibious and expeditionary warfare capabilities and ensure naval readiness. Pakistan Marines were raised about two decades ago and mandated to defend the creeks area southeast of Karachi, he adds.
Pakistan Marines operate in one of the most challenging environments worldwide. Rear Admiral Baig says, for the forces deployed here, the Sir Creek sector is a relentless, physical trial. It is a world of oozing mudflats where the ground shifts with the tides. Tactics are shaped by these constant transformations.
The marines conduct relentless patrols and surveillance, navigating the difficult terrain to monitor activity and gather intelligence. Their deployment in this fluid and strategically vital border is critical to defend against infiltration, smuggling, and illegal fishing, he says.
The marines endure exceptionally harsh conditions defined by oppressive humidity, scorching heat, and salt-laden winds. The unstable, waterlogged terrain rules out conventional roads, making small boats and hovercraft the sole lifelines for transport and supply.
Baig says the difficult geography also affords strategic advantage. “The marshy land forbids any rapid ingress of the enemy,” he says. “Also, the environment offers excellent opportunities for camouflage. We have better geography on our side, making operations a little more convenient.”
As both navies maintain a forward posture, deployment is no longer limited to periods of hostility. Pakistan Marines remain in a state of perpetual readiness, sustaining a forward presence to enable strategic deployment beyond primary bases.
To maintain a high level of vigilance, the Navy and the Marines employ a robust, integrated surveillance architecture. Through round-the-clock Marine Domain Awareness, the Navy maintains real-time tracking and monitoring of hostile navies, he says. Intelligence flows seamlessly from this system, ensuring tactical and operational flexibility.
This intelligence is constantly fed to layered defences comprising long-range missiles, air defence systems, an unmanned force, and drone units. This is meant to deny the element of surprise to enemy forces.
Despite the Indian position on Sir Creek, Pakistan’s claim for an extended Continental Shelf 150 NM beyond the EEZ was accepted in March 2015. This added 50,000 sq km of seabed territory, granting legal control over natural resources in this offshore area.
Rear Admiral Foad Baig says Pakistan’s operational planning employs innovative tactical approaches that leverage the complex creek terrain to neutralise the adversary’s numerical advantage. Being a porous zone, Sir Creek could be targeted for a false-flag operation. Rear Admiral Baig highlights this is a persistent risk.
This could involve a fabricated account of an incident involving a fisherman’s boat or aggressive maneuvers targeting the Karachi Port. Alternatively, there may be an attempt to infiltrate the defences so that saboteurs can strike key harbour infrastructure. Such tactics and strategies have been war-gamed repeatedly, he says.
Through plans integrated with the Pakistan Army and Air Force, the Pakistan Marines maintain a qualitative edge. “We have no aggressive designs against anyone, but by the Grace of Allah, we can effectively blunt any mischief in a befitting manner.”
This vigilant posture is deemed essential as India is building up its military presence in the area, bringing more BSF units, naval assets, and special operations (MARCOS) forces along the coast. The Indian mobilisation has been supported by infrastructure upgrades and air bases. In the face of this mobilisation, the Pakistan Navy and Pakistan Marines have maintained a robust and resilient watch.
**Recent Threats**
Responding to recent statements by Indian leaders with regard to Karachi and Port Qasim, the Inter-Services Public Relations (ISPR) said: “The people and Armed Forces of Pakistan have the capability and resolve to take the fight to every nook and corner of the enemy’s territory.”
Several months ago, Lt Gen Ahmed Sharif Chaudhry had highlighted this capability by emphasising Pakistan’s potential to strike deep into India, particularly targeting its industrial base in the east. He had warned that in the event of an Indian misadventure, Pakistan could retaliate with precision strikes against counter-value targets in India’s military-industrial complex, including eastern economic hubs such as Kolkata, Jamshedpur, and Bhubaneswar, which remain within reach of missiles fired from the Karachi harbour.
These assertions of military capability are framed by a deepening apprehension over Indian intentions. In a stark assessment of regional tensions, former ambassador Naghmana Hashmi highlights a grave warning issued by Pakistan’s former National Security Advisor Nasir Janjua. Janjua has said that India is capable of launching a missile attack on Pakistan.
Hashmi expresses particular concern that Prime Minister Modi, preoccupied apparently with the upcoming Bihar election, might resort to dangerous actions for domestic political gain. The schedule of the Bihar elections makes the threat immediate. Modi could use a limited military strike to rally nationalist voters, she says.
Hashmi cautions against dismissing Indian threats as mere electoral rhetoric, noting that Modi and the Indian military leadership could use kinetic force to avenge the enormous humiliation faced by them. The aggressive posturing comes at a delicate time for India, as it navigates growing friction with the United States, a key strategic partner.
While these bilateral tensions are likely a temporary strain rather than a lasting rupture, they add pressure on New Delhi. The US is not going to abandon its broad strategic plans for the region, which depend heavily on India as a counterweight to China.
Hashmi says that the May 2025 conflict exposed India’s vulnerability and weaknesses across various domains. She says the US stance is a clear message to India to deliver on its side of the strategic partnership and unequivocally side with the West against China and Russia.
Hashmi says that preventing Sindoor-2 requires demonstrating matching preparedness. Pakistan must strengthen its defences and regional alliances to deter India’s ambitions and ensure stability in the face of geopolitical shifts.
https://www.thenews.com.pk/tns/detail/1350033-more-saber-rattling
—
title: 政治 首相、殉職自衛隊員を追悼 「遺志受け継ぎ国民守る」
date: 2025/10/11 11:41
updated: 2025/10/11 11:43
—
石破茂首相は11日、防衛省で行われた自衛隊殉職隊員追悼式に参列し、任務中の事故などで亡くなった隊員に対し哀悼の意を示しました。
首相は「職務の遂行に全身全霊をささげた隊員を失ったことは痛恨の極みだ」と述べ、殉職された隊員の遺志を受け継ぎ、国民の安全を守る決意を新たにしました。
※この記事は有料会員限定となっております。
残りの本文（255文字）は、7日間無料トライアル（1日37円）または年払いプランでご覧いただけます。
くらし
NATO、万博初イベントで連携
8月に北欧館で、安保を議論
2025年10月10日 15:44（2025年10月10日 15:46 更新）
【有料会員限定記事】
米国、カナダと欧州諸国で構成される軍事同盟、北大西洋条約機構（NATO）が8月、大阪・関西万博の会場でイベントを開催し、日本との連携や次世代の安全保障を議論しました。
NATOの万博でのイベントは今回が初めてとなります。
※この記事は有料会員限定です。
残り893文字
7日間無料トライアル、1日37円で読み放題。年払いならさらにお得です。
https://www.nishinippon.co.jp/item/1409845/
2025年10月10日 6:00 （有料会員限定記事）
記者会見する台湾国防部（国防省）の幹部＝10月9日、台北（共同）
【台北共同】台湾国防部（国防省）は9日、中国が軍事演習などを通じて台湾周辺の封鎖活動を強化しているとして、強い警戒感を示しました。これは、2年ごとに公表される最新の「国防報告書」で明らかにされたものです。
報告書では、中国のミリタリーアクションの動向に加え、台湾が米国や日本などと連携して地域の安定を維持しようとする取り組みについても言及しています。
なお、本記事の全文は有料会員のみ閲覧可能です。現在、7日間無料トライアルを実施しており、1日あたり37円で読み放題となっています。年払いプランもご用意しており、さらにお得にご利用いただけます。
2025年10月10日 5:39 更新 5:41 [有料会員限定記事]
【ベルリン共同】
ドイツのメディアは9日、同国西部ガイレンキルヒェンにある北大西洋条約機構（NATO）の軍事基地で、8日夜に滑走路上空を低空で飛行する無人機が検知されたと報じた。
警報を受けて現場を確認したが、詳細は有料会員限定の記事となっている。
（残り232文字。7日間無料トライアルあり。1日37円で読み放題。年払いならもっとお得。）
**IDF Opens Fire at Suspected Terrorists in Gaza Strip**
The Israel Defense Forces (IDF) opened fire on Hamas terrorists who emerged from a tunnel near the Netzarim Corridor on Wednesday. According to Israeli reports, several terrorists were killed, while others fled back underground.
Weapons used by Hamas terrorists to attack IDF troops in the Gaza Strip were documented on October 8, 2025.
*(Photo credit: IDF Spokesperson’s Unit)*
By Jerusalem Post Staff, Amichai Stein, Amir Bohbot
https://www.jpost.com/israel-news/defense-news/article-869815
A Russian lawmaker has claimed that a civil war is brewing in America, while calling Donald Trump “dumb.” Andrey Lugovoy, a member of the State Duma—the lower chamber of Russia’s parliament—argued that Moscow should take advantage of the deep divisions between Republicans and Democrats to cause a government shutdown.
In a staggering appearance on Russian state TV, Lugovoy said the differences between the two US political parties have reached a point where they are impossible to resolve, and suggested that the Kremlin should interfere. He stated that he does not consider claims of an impending civil war in America to be a conspiracy theory.
Referring to the Republicans and Democrats, Lugovoy said: “They’re currently using political repressions against each other in the most proactive way… Secondly, they will never agree about migration, we’ve heard it from their statements. Of course, we should take advantage of this unsolvable problem.”
He went on to accuse the US of meddling in Russian affairs and argued that Moscow should adopt a more politically aggressive stance.
Lugovoy is a former KGB officer suspected by the UK of involvement in the 2006 murder of ex-Russian spy Alexander Litvinenko in London. Litvinenko died after ingesting radioactive polonium-210, which was believed to have been administered in a cup of tea. Lugovoy has dismissed these accusations as “absurd.”
During his appearance on the state TV show *60 Minutes*, Lugovoy suggested that Russia could be more politically aggressive through outlets like its controlled news channel, Russia Today. Representing the Liberal Democratic Party of Russia—a party considered part of the country’s systemic opposition—he claimed Moscow should buy journalists and politicians abroad.
“We should plant our people into US domestic life,” Lugovoy said, adding that he was “deeply convinced” of placing operatives within the Democratic Party. “We should further pit them [Republicans and Democrats] against each other. We should take advantage of their existing differences. We should drive them not only to an economic shutdown, but a political one. We shouldn’t be shy about it.”
He continued: “They often accuse us of interfering in their elections; we say that we aren’t, we really aren’t, but we should interfere. We are developing our propagandist activities — I mean it in a positive sense — in Europe and America. We should intensify it even more.”
Commentators and guests on Russian state TV often share anti-Western messages. Earlier in his appearance, Lugovoy criticized the US President by saying that Trump “says whatever pops into his head,” and added, “Mr. Trump says things that are obviously dumb from every standpoint.”
https://www.express.co.uk/news/2117945
**Trump Defies Court Order; Deploys National Guard to Oregon and Chicago**
*By Snehil Singh | October 6, 2025, 10:57 AM*
United States President Donald Trump has defied a federal court order by deploying National Guard troops to Portland, Oregon, and Chicago, Illinois. This move follows a judge’s temporary block on the deployment of 200 troops to Oregon.
California Governor Gavin Newsom condemned the decision, announcing plans to sue and describing the action as “un-American” and “a breathtaking abuse of the law and power.”
### Deployment Details
President Trump authorized the deployment of 300 National Guard troops to Chicago to address what he called “out-of-control crime.” The decision came after clashes between immigration authorities and protesters in Chicago, where officials reported that an armed woman was shot following allegations that she and others rammed their cars into police vehicles.
Meanwhile, the Pentagon confirmed that 200 members of the California National Guard were reassigned to Portland in support of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and other federal personnel. Oregon Governor Tina Kotek confirmed that 101 California National Guard members had already arrived in Oregon.
### Lack of Communication and Local Opposition
Governor Kotek revealed that there was no official communication from the federal government regarding the deployment. She emphasized, “There is no need for military intervention in Oregon. There is no insurrection in Portland. No threat to national security.”
The California National Guard had been federally activated in June for a 90-day period as part of President Trump’s broader strategy to combat rising crime and assist with deportation efforts. The California Department of Justice confirmed that the Trump administration sought to extend this federalization for an additional 90 days.
### Ongoing Protests and Political Context
Protests continue in Portland and other cities in response to the Trump administration’s increased immigration enforcement. Portland is noted for having a significant presence of Antifa activists—a loosely organized group of far-left activists. Recently, President Trump signed an executive order designating Antifa as a domestic terrorist organization.
### Reactions from Illinois Leadership
The Illinois governor accused President Trump of “manufacturing a crisis” by deploying troops, suggesting the move is politically motivated rather than based on actual public safety needs.
—
The deployment of National Guard troops to Portland and Chicago marks a contentious escalation in the ongoing tensions between federal authorities and local governments, highlighting deep divisions over immigration enforcement and public safety strategies.
https://www.newsbytesapp.com/news/world/trump-defies-court-sends-national-guard-troops-to-oregon-chicago/story
In the volatile landscape of Middle East politics, two seismic events unfolded in late September, reshaping narratives around Israel’s war on Gaza.
On September 26, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu delivered a fiery address to the United Nations General Assembly, vowing to block Palestinian statehood amid walkouts by dozens of delegates. Three days later, on September 29, U.S. President Donald Trump unveiled a 21-point peace plan following a White House meeting with Netanyahu, proposing an end to the Gaza violence, hostage release, and a potential pathway to Palestinian statehood.
The new proposal marks a significant shift in Washington’s stance. It is a major change from February, when President Trump shocked the world by suggesting the U.S. could take over Gaza, build a Riviera, and permanently relocate its two million people. In a transformative step toward Gaza’s revival, residents will have the freedom to choose their path, with no one forced to leave their homeland. Those who wish to depart will be free to do so and return at their discretion, while a bold initiative encourages Gazans to stay and shape a brighter future.
Israel will neither occupy nor annex Gaza, paving the way for a transformative era of redevelopment and self-governance. Hamas and similar groups will have no role in Gaza’s future administration, ensuring a focus on stability and progress. A newly formed technocratic, apolitical Palestinian committee, backed by international experts, will manage essential public services and municipal operations, ensuring stability and support for the region’s people.
To complement this effort, President Trump will spearhead an ambitious economic development plan, assembling a panel of experts behind the Middle East’s thriving modern cities. The plan’s suggestion of a potential path to a future Palestinian state—after Gaza is rebuilt and the Palestinian Authority undergoes reforms—also represents a major departure from the Trump administration’s previous refusal to endorse a two-state solution.
Some analysts argue that the proposed 21-point plan outlines a pathway to Palestinian statehood that is so heavily conditional it appears watered down to the point of being largely theoretical. While it represents a rhetorical evolution from the Trump administration’s earlier musings on relocating Gaza’s population, statehood is presented not as a right or a guaranteed outcome, but as a distant reward contingent on meeting a series of vaguely defined and immensely challenging prerequisites.
A transitional government led by a technocratic, apolitical Palestinian committee will soon take shape to stabilize and rebuild Gaza. This initiative will be guided by the newly established Board of Peace, an international transitional body tasked with setting the strategic framework and securing funding for Gaza’s redevelopment. The board will be chaired by President Trump and could include former UK prime minister Tony Blair.
The committee’s work will continue until the Palestinian Authority completes its reform programme. The proposal—developed mainly by U.S. special envoy Steve Witkoff and expected to be refined further—contains several provisions that Israel has long wanted. However, the suggestion of a pathway to a future Palestinian state goes against the stated position of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. His statement to the UN General Assembly leaves no room for interpretation:
“Giving the Palestinians a state one mile from Jerusalem after October 7 is like giving Al Qaeda a state one mile from New York City after September 11. This is sheer madness. It’s insane and we won’t do it. Israel will not allow you to shove a terror state down our throats.”
These developments highlight a high-stakes diplomatic tightrope between Netanyahu’s unyielding security-first stance and Trump’s deal-oriented vision. By sidelining the Palestinian Authority and declaring no tolerance for Hamas, the plan risks undermining the most credible foundation for a future state.
Its foundational steps—creating a de-radicalized, terror-free Gaza under an interim technocratic government—are not mere procedural hurdles but the core of the quagmire. These demands, including the massive undertaking of disarming Hamas and a complex de-radicalization process of a traumatised nation, rely on an untested international force and a long-term peace that does not yet exist.
Mushtaq Shah, Pakistan’s former ambassador to Jordan and Egypt, acknowledges the selective ambiguity of the plan. “It is vague enough to allow for broad interpretation, even manipulation, during implementation. Much remains to be negotiated,” he tells The News on Sunday. Despite its shortcomings, Ambassador Shah describes the initiative as a vital lifeline for Palestinians facing relentless violence. “Anything that can help end the bloodshed and allow humanitarian aid to reach people is welcome,” he stresses.
Later, in meetings in New York with U.S. envoy Steve Witkoff and adviser Jared Kushner, Netanyahu secured key revisions on disarmament. While last week’s draft offered amnesty to Hamas members pledging peaceful coexistence, the updated plan requires them to surrender. It also strengthens language mandating the destruction and cessation of all offensive military capability.
The updated plan includes a map outlining three phases of Israeli withdrawal. Israel Defence Forces (IDF) will still control most of Gaza after the so-called first withdrawal until an International Stabilisation Force arrives to oversee Hamas’s disarmament. After the second phase, Israel will retain more than a third of the Gaza Strip. Even after the final phase of full withdrawal, Israel will retain a permanent security buffer along Gaza’s perimeter.
The revised plan conditions each withdrawal stage on standards and milestones tied to demilitarisation, effectively allowing Israel to delay its exit until Gaza is deemed secure. If Hamas delays or rejects the plan, it will proceed in terror-free areas, which the IDF will hand over to the International Stabilisation Force.
While it proposes new leaders committed to peace, regional security guarantees, and new security forces to replace Hamas, the fundamental question remains: who will govern Gaza?
Ambassador Javed Hafiz argues that while Israel and the U.S. can dismantle Hamas’s visible structure, the group will survive as a potent ideological force, much like Hezbollah. The stated goal of disarmament may, in practice, only reduce its military capacity to a level Israel finds manageable rather than achieving total elimination.
The alternative, the Mahmoud Abbas-led Palestinian Authority, is widely seen by Gazans as corrupt, illegitimate, and ineffective. Ambassador Hafiz suggests that the most likely — yet fraught — compromise is installing a technocratic government under a transitional authority.
President Trump has tapped former British prime minister Tony Blair for the Gaza interim authority. However, Blair is not trusted by many in the Arab world and the UK due to his controversial role in the Iraq War. This transitional authority will likely include Arab members to provide legitimacy and avoid the appearance of a direct Israeli-American occupation, with Gulf states funding reconstruction.
Its success will depend entirely on its ability to deliver tangible improvements to daily life while navigating the complex pressures of Palestinian politics, Israel, and wary Arab patrons, says Ambassador Hafiz.
The primary focus of Hamas, the Palestinian leadership, and Arab governments is on securing ironclad guarantees against the annexation of Gaza and the West Bank and on restoring Jerusalem’s status, says Ambassador Hafiz. However, the diplomatic maneuvering is starkly disconnected from realities on the ground.
Ambassador Hafiz points out that Israel has already effectively annexed roughly 60 percent of the West Bank through its military control and buffer zones. On July 23, the Knesset approved a bill to impose its sovereignty over the West Bank, a move critics call annexation.
This highlights a stark divide: while international powers oppose such measures, Israel is systematically rendering Gaza uninhabitable to spur a Palestinian exodus and expanding the West Bank settlements. The United States has supported Israel’s position. Its ambassador recently used biblical terms, Judea and Samaria, for the West Bank, tacitly endorsing Israeli territorial claims.
Ambassador Javed Hafiz notes that despite Tel Aviv’s strong desire, annexation of the Jordan Valley is unlikely now. Gaza’s near-total destruction requires an unprecedented, multi-billion-dollar reconstruction effort, involving experts to build a modern urban economy. The process will likely take many years.
The U.S. and Israel may not wish to assign the rebuilding role to the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees (UNRWA). Both have previously sought to undermine the organisation. Coordinating among multiple Arab states with differing priorities and foreign policies will be complex.
Ambassador Hafiz suggests two possibilities: either UNRWA is resuscitated, or Egypt, Turkey, and the Gulf states take the lead. A Middle East-led approach may offer greater regional legitimacy, he says. Ambassador Hafiz emphasises that the Arab world must put their act together to seize this opportunity to rebuild Gaza and foster long-term stability.
The explicit pathway to statehood makes statehood a declared goal in the plan contingent on two vague conditions: advancing Gaza’s redevelopment and implementing Palestinian Authority reforms. This intentional vagueness—failing to define what “advanced” means or specify the required reforms—creates a mechanism effectively allowing statehood to be indefinitely postponed.
The plan commits the U.S. to facilitating a final settlement on issues like borders, Jerusalem, and refugees, but its launch depends on the success of highly ambitious, prior security and governance steps—a sequencing that has historically doomed similar initiatives.
It offers Palestinians a conditional pathway to statehood, requiring them to build a state tailored to Israeli security needs.
https://www.thenews.com.pk/tns/detail/1348319-trumps-blurry-path-to-peace
