Think Tanks
Here's a look at documents from think tanks
Featured Stories
Jamestown Foundation Issues Commentary to China Brief: PRC-Russia-DPRK Relations Grow Closer
WASHINGTON, Nov. 26 -- The Jamestown Foundation issued the following commentary on Nov. 25, 2025, in its China Brief:
* * *
PRC-Russia-DPRK Relations Grow Closer
By Seong-Hyon Lee
Executive Summary:
* Multiple Chinese readouts from the president-, premier-, and foreign minister-levels have omitted references to "denuclearization" following summits between the People's Republic of China (PRC) and the Democratic People's Republic of Korea (DPRK).
* Russia, the DPRK, and the PRC are engaged in a mutually-beneficial triangular relationship, which promotes diversification from Western dependence
... Show Full Article
WASHINGTON, Nov. 26 -- The Jamestown Foundation issued the following commentary on Nov. 25, 2025, in its China Brief:
* * *
PRC-Russia-DPRK Relations Grow Closer
By Seong-Hyon Lee
Executive Summary:
* Multiple Chinese readouts from the president-, premier-, and foreign minister-levels have omitted references to "denuclearization" following summits between the People's Republic of China (PRC) and the Democratic People's Republic of Korea (DPRK).
* Russia, the DPRK, and the PRC are engaged in a mutually-beneficial triangular relationship, which promotes diversification from Western dependencefor Russia, regime survival for the DPRK, and a buffer that drains U.S. focus and resources for the PRC. The dynamic is not a formal alliance, nor is it a "marriage of convenience." It may be considered an "axis."
* Competition and bilateral frictions are still present, but the bloc continues to promote sanctions-resilience and satisfy the needs of each participant.
On September 4, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA) of the People's Republic of China (PRC) published the readout of a leaders meeting between Xi Jinping and North Korea's Kim Jong Un. The document highlighted the themes of "traditional friendship" , a "shared destiny", and "mutual vigilance and support". It called especially for deeper exchanges in the "governance of party and state affairs" (MFA, September 4). Notably, it omitted "denuclearization." Four weeks later, the official readout from the meeting between the two countries' foreign ministers similarly omitted the term, instead elevating governance exchanges among socialist parties (MFA, September 28). When Premier Li Qiang met Kim Jong Un on October 9, People's Daily coverage likewise celebrated "traditional friendship and cooperation" without reference to denuclearization (People's Daily, October 10). The pattern has now hardened into a deliberate tifa--a formalized policy wording.
This shift was further confirmed in Gyeongju during the November 1 APEC leaders' summit. South Korean President Lee Jae-myung held his first bilateral meeting with Xi, in which he called for PRC assistance on denuclearization of the peninsula (YouTube/Yonhap News TV, October 29). Yet the PRC readout entirely omitted the words "denuclearization", "Korean Peninsula", and "North Korea" (MFA, November 1). This "split readout" was no clerical slip. In PRC political discourse, such formulation changes never occur by chance. A stock phrase dropped four times in three months across leader-, premier-, and minister-level texts signals deliberate recalibration. Beijing now acknowledges a nuclear Democratic People's Republic of Korea (DPRK) as reality, not aberration.
Alignment Seen In North Korea, the CCP, and Chinese Provinces
This new policy was quickly visualized. The October 2025 "Victory Day" parade in Pyongyang that marked the 80th anniversary of the Workers' Party of Korea offered a platform to demonstrate alignment. The PRC dispatched Premier Li Qiang, its highest-ranking emissary to the DPRK in over 15 years, while Russia sent Dmitry Medvedev. PRC and Russian dignitaries watched nuclear missiles parade through Kim Il Sung Square, underscoring a synchronized policy turn: both powers now treated denuclearization as a "closed issue" (The New York Times [NYT], October 11).
The parade, and the Xi-Kim meeting preceding it, granted the DPRK the recognition it craved by putting Kim on equal footing with the PRC and Russia. For Beijing, it restored the optics of a socialist front without paying the reputational cost of defending Pyongyang's arsenal outright. The omission of "denuclearization" became part of the face-saving choreography of triangular diplomacy.
The infrastructural aspects of this shift are occurring at the Party and provincial levels. At the top, the Chinese Communist Party's International Liaison Department (CCP ILD) has re-emerged as the core liaison to the Workers' Party, channeling diplomacy through ideological bonding. As Xi Jinping told Kim Jong-un, "both countries are socialist states led by communist parties" (China Brief, July 26, 2024; MFA, September 4). This is language Beijing usually reserves for comrades, not for transactional partners.
Below the Party layer, local leaders are restoring provincial networks. The 2024 "Friendship Year" produced quiet cooperation agreements on customs, postal exchanges, and broadcasting. Jilin's G331 Border Tourism Corridor opened in September 2025, linking Yalu and Tumen river towns across the international border (China News, September 29). The same week, the Shenyang-Baihe high-speed rail launched, connecting Changbai/Paektu to the national grid (Xinhua, September 28). Liaoning's Dandong plan envisions new airport and port facilities to recast the city as a hub for post-sanctions trade. When Ambassador Wang Yajun toured Hyesan and Samjiyon in June 2025, he urged expansion of "ice-and-snow" tourism, a euphemism for reopening frontier commerce (PRC Embassy in the DPRK, June 7). These projects, although mundane in appearance, show how normalization is implemented. They provide a more permanent, sanctions-resistant interface with Pyongyang. Together with the rhetorical omission of 'denuclearization,' they signal that Beijing is building a system designed not to defy the rules outright, but to render them obsolete over time.
Triangular Relations Yields Asymmetric Advantages
The PRC continues to benefit from its bilateral ties with Russia. Since 2022, Sino-Russian trade has surged to record levels (Globe Magazine, March 4). Economic alignment is reinforced by increasingly routine military cooperation, including joint bomber patrols, complex naval drills near Japan, and coordinated messaging on Western "containment" (China Brief, June 7; MSN/Newsweek, August 6; Eurasia Daily Monitor [EDM], September 18).
The DPRK and its relations with Russia add to this dynamic. The June 2024 Treaty on Comprehensive Strategic Partnership between Moscow and Pyongyang included mutual-assistance provisions that created a legal framework for military and logistical cooperation (U.S. Congress, June 13). Open-source imagery, U.S. declassifications, and Ukrainian forensic reports have since documented the transfer and battlefield use of North Korean short-range ballistic missiles and artillery shells in Ukraine (Reuters, April 24). South Korean officials also state that troops the DPRK dispatched to the Kursk theater marched in Pyongyang's October parade (EDM, May 27; NYT, October 11).
For Beijing, Russia-DPRK relations yield asymmetric advantages. Military and trade cooperation stretches U.S. and allied resources, complicates sanctions enforcement, and ties both Moscow and Pyongyang closer to the PRC, without requiring Beijing to arm Russia overtly. This alignment gives the PRC flexibility to profit from the triangle while keeping its hands clean.
This logic extends to the Korean Peninsula's maritime front. During the November APEC summit, President Trump announced that the United States will arm South Korea with a nuclear submarine (Politico, October 29). While Washington assists an ally's move toward nuclear propulsion, it demands that the PRC pressure a client state to disarm. The contradiction provides diplomatic cover for Beijing's silence, allowing it to portray restraint as principle rather than policy choice.
Sanctions fatigue has not diminished the networks beneath this alignment. Western pressure on Chinese banks, and Moscow's exclusion from SWIFT, have instead prompted adaptation. The renminbi (RMB) has overtaken the U.S. dollar as Russia's dominant foreign currency, and RMB-ruble settlements now make up the bulk of bilateral trade (Reuters, July 24; Guancha, November 5).
Russian banks increasingly rely on domestic systems to offset Chinese payments, insulating both sides from direct scrutiny. Regulators in Moscow have promoted gold, digital currencies, and closed-loop barter systems as secondary hedges (Reuters, July 8). These workarounds create a semi-formal gray zone through which trade continues with plausible deniability./[1] In effect, these financial and logistical practices allow North Korean commerce to continue under the cover of broader Sino-Russian trade. They also nurture Russian dependence on the RMB and give the PRC a stabilizing hand over DPRK activity. The PRC's financial infrastructure, Russia's resource flows, and the DPRK's sanctioned economy as a result now function as a mutually reinforcing ecosystem designed to withstand external pressure.
The Triangle is Self-Sustaining
Critics of the alignment argue that it rests on conflicting interests, personal mistrust, and uneven power. But three structural realities suggest that the system can be self-sustaining despite historical antagonism and suspicions of transactional convergence.
First, in Leninist political systems, policy endurance arises from bureaucratic embedding. Once a tifa--such as "governance exchanges between socialist parties"--is standardized, it spreads across ministries, embassies, and state media. Repetition creates orthodoxy. Moving past "denuclearization" rhetoric will bolster ongoing tourism, trade, and cooperative initiatives.
Second, with the United Nations Panel of Experts dissolved and Moscow having declared denuclearization a "closed issue," incentives for policy reversal have disappeared. Embracing the old language would alienate both partners and produce no material gain. The cost of speaking now outweighs the cost of omission.
Third, sunk costs reinforce cooperation. The infrastructure of RMB-ruble settlements, border logistics, and the DPRK-Russia arms pipeline is expensive to build and complex to unwind. It forms an ecosystem of dependency. Compliance shocks, such as Chinese banks temporarily freezing transactions to avoid secondary sanctions, reflect only friction within the network, not its unraveling. These pauses are safety responses in a system built to bend under pressure rather than break. What analysts often mistake for fragility is in fact the noise of adaptation.
Still, tensions persist. Beijing and Moscow continue to negotiate pricing for the Power of Siberia 2 pipeline, Central Asia remains an area of competition, and Beijing's financial institutions remain wary of excessive exposure to sanctioned networks. Yet these are bargaining problems within a shared project, not precursors to rupture.
Some observers remain skeptical. Andrew Kim, former chief of the CIA's Korea Mission Center, dismissed the alignment as a "marriage of convenience," predicting that Kim will eventually pivot back to Washington "when leverage permits" (YouTube/World Knowledge Forum, October 2). Yet this view overlooks how repetition institutionalizes behavior. Diplomacy and interdependence consolidate relations. Even irritations can be managed within that framework, especially as "governance exchanges" introduce symbolic fraternity as a replacement for denuclearization.
The triangular dynamic is neither a formal alliance nor a fleeting convenience. Each actor has incentives to maintain the relationship: for Moscow, diversification from Western dependence; for Pyongyang, regime survival; for Beijing, a buffer that drains U.S. focus and resources. Overall, these forces produce what might be called "consolidated resilience." The term "axis" may be analytically loaded, yet the structure behaves like one. It is ideologically aligned, materially linked, and strategically convergent.
Conclusion
The notion that the PRC's relationship with North Korea--and by extension the PRC-DPRK-Russia triangle--is inherently fragile, is no longer backed by evidence. The pivot away from "denuclearization" is deliberate. Beijing's omission from its highest-level diplomatic texts was a policy decision ratified by repetition across the president, the premier, and the foreign minister, and then confirmed in November at APEC.
This shift was overlooked by many because it was built not through high-profile summits, but through more resilient mechanisms. Party-to-Party governance exchanges replaced transactional diplomacy. Provincial corridor projects and cross-border "Friendship Year" agreements reshaped the frontier. And a sanctions-era payments network now insulates trade from Western scrutiny. Together these layers form a sanctions-hardened system that supports each participant.
Frictions persist, but they are the ordinary frictions of coordination within a consolidated bloc. Despite bargaining over pipeline pricing and influence in Central Asia or Pyongyang's unpredictable missile tests, each participant has structural incentives to maintain the arrangement. The relationship supports strategic depth for Moscow, regime insurance for Pyongyang, and leverage for Beijing against Western pressure.
The lexicon tells the story. In Beijing's official discourse, "solidarity" now occupies the rhetorical space once held by "denuclearization." Words in PRC diplomacy do not drift; they settle through repetition into doctrine. When a word disappears repeatedly across top-level texts, it signals more than stylistic preference--it signals a strategic choice. By normalizing silence on denuclearization, Beijing has normalized the reality behind it. A nuclear North Korea supports the foundation of a broader Sino-Russian partnership. The world must learn to read that silence as a statement of intent.
* * *
Original text here: https://jamestown.org/prc-russia-dprk-relations-grow-closer/
[Category: ThinkTank]
InfluenceWatch Podcast 386: Soros's Not-So-Independent News
WASHINGTON, Nov. 26 -- The Capital Research Center issued the following InfluenceWatch wrapup on Nov. 25, 2025:
* * *
InfluenceWatch Podcast #386: Soros's Not-So-Independent News
By Sarah Lee and Michael Watson
What makes a journalistic outfit "completely independent"? According to Drop Site News, the outlet is exactly that, and "reader-supported" to boot. But recent Open Society Foundations spending reports suggest that the outlet is not completely reader-supported: George Soros's philanthropy spent $250,000 to support the creation of a "MENA desk" for the group through a fiscal sponsorship
... Show Full Article
WASHINGTON, Nov. 26 -- The Capital Research Center issued the following InfluenceWatch wrapup on Nov. 25, 2025:
* * *
InfluenceWatch Podcast #386: Soros's Not-So-Independent News
By Sarah Lee and Michael Watson
What makes a journalistic outfit "completely independent"? According to Drop Site News, the outlet is exactly that, and "reader-supported" to boot. But recent Open Society Foundations spending reports suggest that the outlet is not completely reader-supported: George Soros's philanthropy spent $250,000 to support the creation of a "MENA desk" for the group through a fiscal sponsorshipcut-out. Joining us to discuss the Open Society-Drop Site relationship is Chuck Ross, senior investigative reporter at the Washington Free Beacon.
* Washington Free Beacon: EXCLUSIVE: Soros Bankrolling Anti-Israel Drop Site News (https://freebeacon.com/media/exclusive-soros-bankrolling-anti-israel-drop-site-news/)
* Washington Free Beacon: Same Game, Different Name: 'Radioactive' Arabella Advisors Announces Rebrand to 'Sunflower Services' as Prominent Donors Flee (https://freebeacon.com/democrats/same-game-different-name-radioactive-arabella-advisors-announces-rebrand-to-sunflower-services-as-prominent-donors-flee/)
* * *
Sarah Lee
Sarah Lee was born and raised in Atlanta, Ga., but found herself drawn to Washington, DC, the birthplace of her mother, after completing a master's degree in public administration from the University of Georgia in 2010.
*
Michael Watson
Michael is Research Director for Capital Research Center and serves as the managing editor for InfluenceWatch.
* * *
View link to podcast here: https://capitalresearch.org/article/influencewatch-podcast-386-soross-not-so-independent-news/
[Category: ThinkTank]
Ifo Institute: Companies in Germany Continue Cutting Jobs - November 2025
MUNICH, Germany, Nov. 26 -- ifo Institute issued the following news release:
* * *
Companies in Germany Continue Cutting Jobs (November 2025)
Companies in Germany have grown more restrictive in their personnel planning. The ifo Employment Barometer fell to 92.5 points in November, down from 93.5 points in October. "Many companies are continuing to cut jobs," says Klaus Wohlrabe, Head of Surveys at ifo. "Due to the stuttering economy, the labor market trend remains weak."
In industry, the barometer kept on moving downward. The trend towards reducing the headcount there continued in almost all
... Show Full Article
MUNICH, Germany, Nov. 26 -- ifo Institute issued the following news release:
* * *
Companies in Germany Continue Cutting Jobs (November 2025)
Companies in Germany have grown more restrictive in their personnel planning. The ifo Employment Barometer fell to 92.5 points in November, down from 93.5 points in October. "Many companies are continuing to cut jobs," says Klaus Wohlrabe, Head of Surveys at ifo. "Due to the stuttering economy, the labor market trend remains weak."
In industry, the barometer kept on moving downward. The trend towards reducing the headcount there continued in almost allsectors. After a brief respite in the previous month, service providers are once again noticeably more cautious about hiring new staff. The hospitality industry in particular is planning to cut further jobs. Only the legal advice sector and tax consulting firms want to add significant numbers of new staff. Despite the upcoming holiday shopping season, retail companies are planning to employ fewer staff. In the construction industry, demand for labor is increasing slightly; the barometer for it reached its highest level since May 2022.
* * *
More information
Survey (https://www.ifo.de/en/facts/2025-11-26/companies-germany-continue-cutting-jobs-november-2025)
* * *
Original text here: https://www.ifo.de/en/press-release/2025-11-26/companies-germany-continue-cutting-jobs-november-2025
[Category: ThinkTank]
Center of the American Experiment Issues Commentary: Minnesota's High Employment Level Slows Its Per Capita GDP Growth Rate
GOLDEN VALLEY, Minnesota, Nov. 26 -- The Center of the American Experiment, a civic and educational organization that says it creates and advocates policies, issued the following commentary:
* * *
Minnesota's high employment level slows its per capita GDP growth rate
By John Phelan
Yesterday, I looked at why Gross Domestic Product (GDP) per capita growth in Minnesota has ranked 38th out of 50 states since 2014. Using the framework and data from our recent report "Accounting for Growth: Measuring the sources of per capita economic growth at the state level," which "broke down the growth rate
... Show Full Article
GOLDEN VALLEY, Minnesota, Nov. 26 -- The Center of the American Experiment, a civic and educational organization that says it creates and advocates policies, issued the following commentary:
* * *
Minnesota's high employment level slows its per capita GDP growth rate
By John Phelan
Yesterday, I looked at why Gross Domestic Product (GDP) per capita growth in Minnesota has ranked 38th out of 50 states since 2014. Using the framework and data from our recent report "Accounting for Growth: Measuring the sources of per capita economic growth at the state level," which "broke down the growth rateof per capita GDP into its components; the per capita growth rate in human capital, physical capital, and Total Factor Productivity," I found that:
Minnesota's average annual rate of per capita human capital growth between 2014 and 2023 ranked 42nd out of 50 states. This was driven by low rankings for the growth of the employment/population ratio (43rd out of 50 states), and the per worker skills arising from education (42nd) and experience (45th).
Employment
In October, I summarized how we assemble our estimates of human capital per capita at the state level.
Human capital has both quantitative and qualitative components.
The quantitative components are the number of people employed (E) and the average number of hours each of these workers works annually (hours). Taken together, these give you a measure of what might be called "raw labor."
The qualitative components are the skills which augment each hour of raw labor. We call this "knowledge capital," and it arises from either the education (hEduc) or the experience (hExp) of the average worker.
Multiplying all these together gives you the total stock of human capital in each state in each year (H) and dividing that by the population (N) gives you the per capita stock of human capital (h), as shown in this equation:
[View formula in the link at bottom]
It follows, if you remember your high school math, that we can break down the growth rate in human capital per capita (gh) into the growth rates of its components using this equation:
[View formula in the link at bottom]
This will allow us to calculate how much human capital growth comes from the growth of raw labor and how much comes from the growth of knowledge capital.
Updating my estimates for 2024, for its share of the population employed (E/N) "Minnesota ranked fifth out of 50 states with a rate of 52.4%, an impressive score." But, in 2014, it ranked fourth. This is not to ring an alarm bell -- we've dropped one spot and are still fifth -- but it is to say that the scope for our state to grow its economy by increasing the share of the population employed is probably bumping up against some limit and it already was in 2014. The slow growth of this element of human capital in the period since 2014 should not be a surprise.
Immigration
While increasing the share of given population working can be expected to increase GDP per capita, the same is not necessarily true for increasing the number of people working via immigration.
In our 2021 report "The State of Minnesota's Economy: 2020: A focus on economic growth," I noted that:
Whether a policy which increases the population, such as expanding immigration, leads to higher per capita incomes depends on two things.
The first is whether the new arrivals have an employment ratio at least as high as that of the population already here. If they do not, they actually will lower the employment ratio, exacerbating the very problem the policy is intended to solve...
The second is whether the new arrivals are at least as productive as the workers already resident. Considering GDP per capita, immigrant workers add to the denominator (population) as well as the numerator (GDP). If these workers increase the population by a greater percentage than they increase GDP, they will actually lower GDP per capita.
What matters is the [relative] skill level of the workers...
In any discussion of immigration as a tool to increase the growth rate of per capita GDP, these questions need to be borne in mind.
* * *
John Phelan is an Economist at the Center of the American Experiment.
john.phelan@americanexperiment.org
* * *
Original text here: https://www.americanexperiment.org/minnesotas-high-employment-level-slows-its-per-capita-gdp-growth-rate/
[Category: ThinkTank]
Center of the American Experiment Issues Commentary: Governor Walz's Failed Oversight: Disabled Minnesotans Evicted Amid Medicaid Fraud Crisis
GOLDEN VALLEY, Minnesota, Nov. 26 -- The Center of the American Experiment, a civic and educational organization that says it creates and advocates policies, issued the following commentary:
* * *
Governor Walz's failed oversight: Disabled Minnesotans evicted amid Medicaid fraud crisis
By Matt Dean
Governor Tim Walz has presented himself as a champion for those who got tough breaks along the way, but Minnesotans who live with addiction and disabilities are getting caught in the crossfire of the fraud crisis. These are folks who need help and it is the responsibility of the state, churches,
... Show Full Article
GOLDEN VALLEY, Minnesota, Nov. 26 -- The Center of the American Experiment, a civic and educational organization that says it creates and advocates policies, issued the following commentary:
* * *
Governor Walz's failed oversight: Disabled Minnesotans evicted amid Medicaid fraud crisis
By Matt Dean
Governor Tim Walz has presented himself as a champion for those who got tough breaks along the way, but Minnesotans who live with addiction and disabilities are getting caught in the crossfire of the fraud crisis. These are folks who need help and it is the responsibility of the state, churches,and families to provide the support that they need to survive. Yet, in 2025, adults with profound disabilities -- many nonverbal and under guardianship -- received eviction notices from the places the administration helped fund through the Integrated Community Supports (ICS) program.
Traditionally, these folks would live in group homes, but ICS allowed them to get their own place and receive services to foster more independent living through alternative services agreements. ICS bills Medicaid for housing and supportive services that are traditionally provided in a group home.
DHS cut payments to providers in September of 2025 after ICS allegedly approved Medicaid payments for vendors who did no work on the tenant's behalf. When this happened, many providers cut off leases and left many people with disabilities facing eviction and homelessness or relying on family who were assured the ICS program was going to help their loved one.
In a Nov 13 statement, DHS said it contacted 'five Integrated Community Supports providers (ICS) that they are subject to payment withholds based on a determination by our inspector general that there is a credible allegation of fraud."
These struggling Minnesotans did nothing to deserve eviction. They are guilty of no more than getting a tough break and living with a disability that prevents the from working to support themselves, yet they are paying the price for the crooks who stole money from Medicaid. Many of the fraudsters who stole millions of taxpayer dollars can pay for expensive lawyers and will get a slap on the wrist, while the victims get evicted from their apartments.
For years, the administration has allowed fraud to become a massive problem and a national spectacle. Rather than prevent the fraud from happening in the first place, or assisting federal partners in booting the foreign nationals who rip us off, the administration kicks people with disabilities out of their apartments. The message should not be that if this administration is forced to look for fraud, the most vulnerable will end up being punished for it.
* * *
Matt Dean is a Policy Fellow at Center of the American Experiment.
matt.dean@americanexperiment.org
* * *
Original text here: https://www.americanexperiment.org/governor-walzs-failed-oversight-disabled-minnesotans-evicted-amid-medicaid-fraud-crisis/
[Category: ThinkTank]
CSIS Issues Commentary: Understanding the Red Fort Attack in New Delhi
WASHINGTON, Nov. 26 -- The Center for Strategic and International Studies issued the following commentary on Nov. 25, 2025:
* * *
Understanding the Red Fort Attack in New Delhi
By S. L. Narasimhan
At about 6:52 p.m. on November 10, 2025, a car laden with explosives blew up near the iconic seventeenth-century Mughal-era Red Fort in New Delhi at a busy traffic signal. The driver of the car, Dr. Umar Un Nabi, a doctor by profession and an assistant professor at Al Falah University in Faridabad, Haryana, was the suicide bomber, and he died in the incident. He killed 12 more innocent civilians who
... Show Full Article
WASHINGTON, Nov. 26 -- The Center for Strategic and International Studies issued the following commentary on Nov. 25, 2025:
* * *
Understanding the Red Fort Attack in New Delhi
By S. L. Narasimhan
At about 6:52 p.m. on November 10, 2025, a car laden with explosives blew up near the iconic seventeenth-century Mughal-era Red Fort in New Delhi at a busy traffic signal. The driver of the car, Dr. Umar Un Nabi, a doctor by profession and an assistant professor at Al Falah University in Faridabad, Haryana, was the suicide bomber, and he died in the incident. He killed 12 more innocent civilians whowere near the site of the blast and injured 32 people through this heinous act. The last attack of this nature in Delhi took place in 2011, when a briefcase exploded outside the premises of Delhi's High Court.
Q1: How did the attack unfold?
A1: The following has been reported, though there has been no official statement or confirmation from India's government on these claims. On October 19, 2025, some posters were found in Srinagar in Jammu and Kashmir, which said that "Some people shelter these Indian predators in their shops, which obstructs our work; therefore, we want to say openly to those people: stop, otherwise strict action will be taken against them as well." The government had begun to investigate these posters and had identified the suspected terrorist group of the upcoming Red Fort attack. At 6:10 p.m. on November 10, 2025, the Jammu and Kashmir Police put out a message on X saying that "You can run but you can't hide." By then, Umar had arrived in Delhi and parked his car near Red Fort.
Q2: How should this incident be analyzed?
A2: This is alleged to be an act of the Jaish-e-Mohammed, a terrorist organization founded in neighboring Pakistan, to avenge the death of 10 family members of its leader, Masood Azhar. This attack took place just a few months after Operation Sindoor, an Indian tri-services military operation that aimed to neutralize terror groups involved in cross-border terrorism emanating from Pakistan, showing that terrorism cannot be eradicated but can only be controlled. Operation Sindoor was launched in response to the Pahalgam attack of April 22, 2025, that killed 26 civilians (25 Indian and 1 Nepalese) in Baisaran Valley in India's Jammu and Kashmir. Operation Sindoor led to four days of intense tit-for-tat conflict between India and Pakistan on the border and received widespread international attention. President Donald Trump claims that his administration negotiated a ceasefire between the two neighbors, though India's government rejects this claim.
If the reports are true, the security forces in Kashmir likely knew that such an incident was likely to occur. The when, where, and how were the imponderables. That there was a terror group that was working on this incident demonstrates that such cells can be located anywhere.
The details of the explosive material captured are revealing. Authorities found several weapons and two tranches of chemicals that can be converted to explosive devices. In all, they amounted to 2,600 kg of explosives in 88 bags, another 360 kg of ammonium nitrate, and 2 AK series of weapons and ammunition. The explosive material was bought in small quantities over an extended period to avoid detection, suggesting long-term planning of an operation.
The most significant aspect of this incident is that it was done by a well-educated person. Umar, who initiated that blast, was an assistant professor of medicine. So are the alleged coconspirators who have been arrested, including Shaheen Sayeed, Muzammil Ahmed Ganaie, Mujammil Shakil, Muzaffar Rather, and Adil Ahmed Rather. Allegedly, all of them seem to have been recruited and radicalized by Maulvi Irfan Ahmad, a former paramedic at the GMC Srinagar hospital. The backgrounds of these perpetrators have given rise to the term "white collar terrorism." Social media appears to have been used to influence first and radicalize second, motivating even educated people to carry out such acts.
Q3: How have India and other countries responded?
A3: India's government has declared it an act of terrorism after vetting initial information. It has not named the Jaish-e-Mohammed or Pakistan and has handed over the case to India's National Intelligence Agency (NIA). While many countries condoled the casualties and some, like the United States, mentioned the incident as a terror attack, there has not been any major statement condemning terrorism. Many countries simply reported the details about the attack without expressing any opinion.
Q4: What lessons emerge from this incident?
A4: First, terrorism can raise its ugly head anytime, anywhere. In 2025 alone, there have been terrorist incidents in Niger, Syria, Pakistan, India, the Democratic Republic of Congo, Mali, and the United States. Second, to deal with such incidents effectively, each incident should be studied in detail, and counterterrorism drills need to be constantly updated and practiced. For example, there was very little shrapnel in the Red Fort incident. Therefore, injuries due to excessive heat created by the blast need a different type of handling than a blast in which shrapnel causes the most damage. Similarly, a terrorist attack on an army camp, such as the one that happened in Niger on June 19, 2025, or the vehicle that rammed into a crowd in New Orleans on January 1, 2025, needs different types of preventive mechanisms and drills. Third, complacency sets in when no terrorist incident happens in a region or a country for some time. This leads to lapses in security awareness and drills.
It is necessary to have a mechanism, particularly in countries that are susceptible to such attacks, to constantly create awareness among the public and also practice drills and procedures to prevent such attacks and to handle them effectively when they occur. Fourth, some mechanisms are in place for sharing the lessons that come out of investigations into terrorist attacks between countries, so that efforts can be made to prevent such attacks from happening. However, the efficacy of the same needs to be rechecked and if need be, remedial measures are undertaken. Fifth, contrary to the belief that less educated youth are vulnerable to getting motivated to carry out such attacks, this incident has served as a reminder that well-educated people are also susceptible to the same.
Q5: What is the likely outlook following the attack?
A5: India's NIA will try and get to the bottom of the incident and bring the perpetrators to justice. If the culpability for the Red Fort incident is proven to have emanated from Pakistani soil, India's government is more likely to resume Operation Sindoor. Preventive measures need to be undertaken to ensure better detection of the accumulation of large quantities of explosive material.
Terrorism does not depend on religion or location. It can target anybody, anywhere. Prudence lies in coming together and not only condemning all forms of it but also taking decisive measures to counter it.
* * *
Lt. Gen. S.L. Narasimhan (Retd.) is a senior associate (non-resident) with the Chair on India and Emerging Asia Economics at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington, D.C.
* * *
Original text here: https://www.csis.org/analysis/understanding-red-fort-attack-new-delhi
[Category: ThinkTank]
America First Policy Institute: Off Target - Ukraine's Fighter Jet Pivot a Betrayal to U.S. Taxpayers
WASHINGTON, Nov. 26 -- The America First Policy Institute posted the following commentary on Nov. 25, 2025, to RealClear World:
* * *
Off Target: Ukraine's Fighter Jet Pivot a Betrayal to U.S. Taxpayers
By Mike Garcia
In the midst of the continued conflict in Ukraine and the longest government shutdown in U.S. history, Ukraine publicly announced intentions to buy new fighter jets from Sweden and France instead of from the U.S.. After receiving nearly $180 billion in American aid (including free aircraft), Zelensky turns to others when it's time for Ukraine to actually pay for weapon systems.
... Show Full Article
WASHINGTON, Nov. 26 -- The America First Policy Institute posted the following commentary on Nov. 25, 2025, to RealClear World:
* * *
Off Target: Ukraine's Fighter Jet Pivot a Betrayal to U.S. Taxpayers
By Mike Garcia
In the midst of the continued conflict in Ukraine and the longest government shutdown in U.S. history, Ukraine publicly announced intentions to buy new fighter jets from Sweden and France instead of from the U.S.. After receiving nearly $180 billion in American aid (including free aircraft), Zelensky turns to others when it's time for Ukraine to actually pay for weapon systems.Zelensky turns to the Swedes and French while President Trump has fought for a peaceful settlement and an end to this ugly war initiated by Russia. All wars end at a table, and we should continue to push both Putin and Zelensky to that end. But we should also require Zelensky to commit to buy American.
I want to be very direct: The nation of Ukraine exists today because of the U.S. and our taxpayers. For decades the U.S. has invested its treasure, military equipment and diplomatic capital in Ukraine's survival. America stood with Kyiv when the skies darkened and the rockets fell. So when President Volodymyr Zelensky signs a letter of intent to purchase up to 100 to 150 inferior Gripen jets from Sweden or Rafale jets from France, in effect bypassing or sidelining U.S. makers, he betrays more than an acquisition plan: He slaps the face of a nation that saved him.
Why is this a betrayal? First, procurement of major weapon systems is not simply a "which plane" choice -- it is a signal of strategic alignment. The U.S. has already committed itself to training Ukrainian pilots on the U.S.-made F-16s via a multinational coalition, clearly demonstrating its commitment. When Kyiv opts instead to anchor its future air force around a Swedish or French platform, it signals that America's aircraft -- American systems, logistics, munitions, industrial base -- are not preferred. That sends a chilling message to U.S. policymakers, industry and taxpayers: Ukraine isn't "in it to win it".
To read the full article, click here (https://www.realclearworld.com/articles/2025/11/25/off_target_ukraines_fighter_jet_pivot_a_betrayal_to_us_taxpayers_1149468.html).
* * *
Mike Garcia, Chairman, America First California
Driven by a love of country, Mike Garcia, a first-generation American has served his nation in combat, in business and in Congress.
* * *
Original text here: https://www.americafirstpolicy.com/issues/off-target-ukraines-fighter-jet-pivot-a-betrayal-to-u.s-taxpayers
[Category: ThinkTank]
