As Russia remains bogged down in the grinding war in Ukraine, the geopolitical landscape of the South Caucasus is undergoing one of its most consequential transformations since the collapse of the Soviet Union. Armenia, long regarded as Moscow’s most dependable ally in the strategically critical region, is steadily pivoting toward the West and embedding itself into an emerging network of European and trans-Atlantic security partnerships.

The shift was on full display from May 4-6, when Yerevan hosted the 8th European Political Community (EPC) summit. The gathering brought together dozens of European leaders and served as a diplomatic stage for Armenia to accelerate its strategic reorientation away from Russia and toward Europe and NATO-aligned partners.

French President Emmanuel Macron emerged as the most visible Western leader backing Armenia’s transformation. Macron used the summit to deepen France’s growing defense and political partnership with Yerevan, signaling Paris’ determination to anchor itself in a country that has suffered military defeats, territorial losses, and deep disillusionment with Moscow over the past several years.

For decades after the dissolution of the Soviet Union, Armenia functioned as Russia’s loyal outpost in the South Caucasus. Landlocked and surrounded by hostile or unstable neighbors, Armenia depended heavily on Russian military protection and economic support. Moscow maintained military bases in the country, controlled key sectors of Armenia’s infrastructure, and positioned itself as Yerevan’s primary security guarantor.

The relationship was rooted not only in history but also in geography. Armenia provided Russia with a strategic corridor linking Moscow to Iran, one of the Kremlin’s closest partners in West Asia. Yerevan also joined the Moscow-led Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO), often described as Russia’s equivalent of NATO.

However, that alliance has increasingly unraveled in recent years.

Armenia froze its participation in the CSTO in 2024 after Moscow failed to support Yerevan during its conflicts with Azerbaijan. The Armenian leadership concluded that Russia was either unwilling or unable to defend Armenian interests despite formal treaty obligations.

The turning point came during the two wars between Armenia and Azerbaijan over Nagorno-Karabakh. Under Article 4 of the CSTO treaty, member states are obligated to provide military assistance if another member faces external aggression. Yet Russia refrained from intervening decisively during either conflict.

The consequences for Armenia were devastating. Azerbaijan, backed strongly by Turkey and equipped with modern weapons systems, regained control of Nagorno-Karabakh, ending decades of Armenian dominance in the disputed region. Hundreds of thousands of ethnic Armenians fled the territory, while Yerevan faced a profound national security crisis.

Russia’s passivity shattered Armenian confidence in the alliance.

As a result, Armenia began recalibrating its foreign and defense policy. Rather than relying exclusively on Moscow, Yerevan moved to diversify its security partnerships and cultivate stronger ties with Europe, the United States, India, and France.

Among these emerging partners, France has assumed a particularly prominent role.

Macron’s visit to Armenia during the EPC summit underscored Paris’ strategic ambitions in the South Caucasus. France has increasingly portrayed itself as Armenia’s principal European security partner and a defender of Armenian sovereignty.

The summit produced a series of agreements aimed at deepening cooperation between Armenia, France, and the European Union. A joint declaration established a strategic partnership between Paris and Yerevan, while the two sides agreed to expand collaboration in defense, advanced military technologies, and security research.

A memorandum of understanding signed between the Armenian and French defense ministries provides for cooperation in research and development as well as the transfer of military technology. Armenia’s defense ministry also concluded agreements with the French defense company Sofema to procure military equipment.

Additionally, Armenia signed a deal with Airbus Helicopters for the delivery of six H145 multi-purpose helicopters, according to local media reports.

France has already become Armenia’s largest arms supplier in recent years. Paris has supplied Yerevan with CAESAR self-propelled howitzers, GM200 radar systems, and Bastion armored personnel carriers, significantly boosting Armenia’s military modernization efforts.

During his visit, Macron openly argued that Europe should help Armenia reduce its dependence on Russian security structures.

“There are still 4,000 Russian soldiers on Armenian territory, including over 1,000 border guards. Europe must, therefore, commit to helping the country secure its borders more independently,” Macron stated during the summit.

Russian troops remain stationed in Armenia under a bilateral agreement governing the 102nd Russian military base in Gyumri, Moscow’s principal military foothold in the South Caucasus. Established in 1995, the agreement was later extended, allowing Russian forces to remain in Armenia until 2044.

Macron’s comments reflected a broader European strategy aimed at gradually replacing Russian influence in the region with European-led security mechanisms.

Armenia has already taken major steps in that direction. In 2023, Yerevan accepted a European Union civilian monitoring mission along its border with Azerbaijan, rejecting Moscow’s proposal for a Russian-led alternative. The mission, consisting of around 200 personnel, marked the first deployment of an EU Common Security and Defense Policy mission inside a country historically allied with Russia.

Armenia has also ratified the Rome Statute and joined the International Criminal Court (ICC), a move carrying significant symbolic weight given that the ICC has issued an arrest warrant for Russian President Vladimir Putin. Technically, Putin could face arrest if he entered Armenian territory.

The geopolitical shift is also reflected in Armenian public opinion.

According to polling by the International Republican Institute, Armenian perceptions of Russia deteriorated sharply between 2019 and 2023. The percentage of Armenians describing relations with Russia as “good” plunged from 93 percent to just 31 percent during that period.

At the same time, France emerged as the country most Armenians consider their key political partner, with the United States ranking second.

The European Union has responded positively to Armenia’s westward trajectory. In March 2024, the European Parliament welcomed Armenia’s application for EU candidate status, an important symbolic step even if full membership remains a distant prospect.

Military cooperation between Armenia and the West has also expanded. In September 2023, Armenia hosted joint military exercises with U.S. special forces, signaling an unprecedented level of defense engagement with Washington.

Yet Europe is not the only major power benefiting from Armenia’s strategic realignment.

India has emerged as another crucial partner for Yerevan, particularly in the defense sector. After France, India is now Armenia’s second-largest arms supplier, and Armenia has become India’s single largest foreign customer for military exports.

In recent years, Armenia has acquired a wide range of Indian weapons systems, including Pinaka multi-barrel rocket launchers, Akash-1S air defense systems, ATAGS 155mm howitzers, Swathi weapon-locating radars, and MArG truck-mounted artillery systems.

Yerevan is also reportedly considering the acquisition of the Akash-NG air defense system and Astra Mk2 air-to-air missiles. Discussions are underway regarding the modernization of Armenia’s Su-30 fighter fleet to India’s Su-30MKI standard.

During the 2025-26 fiscal period alone, Armenia reportedly imported nearly $2 billion worth of Indian military equipment, helping propel India into the ranks of the world’s top 25 arms exporters.

Indian systems now form the backbone of Armenia’s artillery, air defense, and counter-battery capabilities.

The transformation is remarkable given Armenia’s historic dependence on Russian weaponry. Just a decade ago, nearly 90 percent of Armenia’s arms imports came from Russia. Today, Russia’s share has reportedly fallen below 10 percent as France and India rapidly fill the vacuum.

This strategic diversification carries major geopolitical implications for the wider South Caucasus.

The region sits at the crossroads of Europe, Russia, Central Asia, West Asia, and South Asia, making it a critical arena for energy transit, trade corridors, and geopolitical competition.

Armenia occupies a particularly important position in both the India-backed International North-South Transport Corridor (INSTC) and Europe’s efforts to connect Central Asian energy resources with European markets through the Trans-Caspian corridor.

France and the EU increasingly view Armenia as a potential regional hub for trade, energy transit, and digital connectivity. The EU-Armenia connectivity partnership unveiled during the EPC summit aims to strengthen transportation and energy links between Europe, the Caspian basin, and Central Asia.

For Europe, deeper engagement with Armenia is also part of a broader strategy to reduce dependence on Russian energy and expand access to alternative trade and transport routes.

For Armenia, the objective is survival in a difficult neighborhood.

The country remains bordered by hostile Azerbaijan to the east, historical rival Turkey to the west, unstable Georgia to the north, and heavily sanctioned Iran to the south. In such an environment, Armenia’s leadership believes strategic diversification is essential.

As Russian influence wanes, a new constellation of powers — the European Union, France, India, and the United States — is stepping in to shape Armenia’s future.

While EU membership remains a long-term aspiration rather than an immediate reality, one conclusion is increasingly clear: the era of Russia as Armenia’s sole security guarantor has effectively come to an end.

By hosting the EPC summit and welcoming Macron for a high-profile state visit, Armenia sent an unmistakable message to Moscow. Yerevan is no longer content to remain within Russia’s geopolitical orbit and is actively positioning itself within a broader Western and multipolar framework.

The escalation comes amid rising protection risks for civilians and aid workers, with three humanitarian personnel killed between 7 and 16 February in Jonglei and Upper Nile states, according to the UN relief coordination office, OCHA.

Access to some of the worst-affected areas remains uneven despite renewed pledges by authorities to allow relief operations.

Last Friday, Emergency Relief Coordinator Tom Fletcher arrived in the country for a five-day mission to draw international attention to what he described as a deteriorating and underreported crisis.

“So here in South Sudan, you have this perfect storm of climate change and conflict and inequality and poverty,” Mr. Fletcher said upon arrival. “Right now, people here in South Sudan feel that no one is listening.”

Displacement surges

Clashes between the South Sudan People’s Defence Forces – the national army – and elements of the rival Sudan People’s Liberation Army-in-Opposition (SPLA-iO), which resumed in late December, have triggered large-scale displacement across central and northern Jonglei.

According to South Sudanese authorities, nearly 280,000 people have fled their homes across eight counties, with many moving into Upper Nile and Lakes states.

Families are sheltering in the open or in makeshift structures, with urgent needs for food, healthcare and basic supplies. Markets and agricultural activities have been disrupted, leaving several communities with little or no access to food.

The UN World Food Programme (WFP) has scaled up food assistance but fighting and insecurity – including looting of aid convoys – are hampering the response.

Caught in the crossfire

In Akobo, southern Jonglei state, Mr. Fletcher visited a local hospital, where at least 93 patients with gunshot wounds had been treated by 18 February.

“Civilians should never be a target,” he said, after meeting victims that included an 18-month-old child and a 70-year-old grandmother.

At the hospital, a humanitarian worker recounted: “The father was shot. The mother was abducted.” The grandmother had walked seven days for help. Asked whether she had received food, Mr. Fletcher observed: “There is no food.”

He added that communities are going “weeks, without the support they need,” describing “devastating stories of sexual violence, of hunger and starvation, of children arriving who have lost everything.”

Cholera on the march

The fighting has taken a heavy toll on health services. Thirteen facilities have reportedly been damaged or looted, resulting in three deaths and one injury among health workers. In some counties, most facilities have been destroyed or suspended operations.

Meanwhile, cholera continues to spread. Between 11 and 17 February, 106 new cases and three deaths were reported across five counties. Since the outbreak began in September 2024, more than 98,000 cases and 1,624 deaths have been recorded nationwide.

Access and accountability

Although authorities have reiterated directives for unhindered humanitarian access, implementation remains inconsistent. Aid convoys have faced denials in some areas, and operational constraints have limited movements.

Mr. Fletcher said the challenge extends beyond immediate relief, asking: “How do we get a peace process? How do we end this conflict? How do we provide security for people here?”

“But also, how do we cut through the noise, the noise of distraction and apathy?”

Thirty years after the thundering tanks and artillery of Operation Storm swept through the hills and towns of southern Croatia, crushing the self-declared Republic of Serbian Krajina (RSK) and bringing the Croatian War of Independence to its decisive end, the country marked the anniversary not just with solemn remembrance, but with a grand military parade — a thunderous display of Croatia’s newly transformed military power.

Held in the capital city of Zagreb, the event served as both a national celebration and a strategic signal to allies and rivals alike: Croatia has emerged from the scars of war as a modernized military power, integrated into NATO, and increasingly assertive on the regional stage. This year’s commemoration of Operation Storm was unlike any before it — a blend of history, politics, and high-tech ambition.

Operation Storm, which took place from August 4 to 7 in 1995, marked the final chapter of Croatia’s four-year war to free itself from the remnants of Yugoslav control and the Serbian-backed rebel enclaves within its borders. With the operation’s launch, some 150,000 Croatian troops surged into the breakaway RSK, seizing back nearly a third of the country’s territory in a lightning campaign that lasted just 84 hours.

By August 5 — now commemorated annually as the Day of Victory and Homeland Thanksgiving and the Day of Croatian Veterans — the symbolically significant town of Knin had fallen, and the war was all but over.

But the costs were steep. The offensive triggered a mass exodus of ethnic Serbs, with an estimated 200,000 fleeing Croatia. Accusations of war crimes committed by Croatian forces during and after the operation continue to stir regional tensions and legal battles at international tribunals. In Serbia, Operation Storm is mourned as a national tragedy.

Croatian President Zoran Milanović, however, struck a defiant tone ahead of the anniversary parade.

“We are celebrating victories; we don’t hate anyone,” he said. “We are fully aware – and I want those who come after us to be aware – that this is a victory of Croatian soldiers, the Croatian people, and the Croatian leadership of that time.”

The centerpiece of this year’s celebration was a large-scale military parade in Zagreb, showcasing the Croatian Armed Forces’ latest acquisitions — a transformation fueled by defense reforms, increased spending, and a shift towards NATO-standard capabilities.

Watched by tens of thousands of citizens lining Vukovar Street and attended by top military brass and foreign observers, the event was headlined by an impressive flyover of Croatia’s newest pride: the Rafale multirole fighter jets.

Nine of the twelve French-made Rafales, ordered in 2021 and fully delivered by early 2025, roared overhead in tight formation. Purchased from surplus stocks of the French Air and Space Force and upgraded to the F3-R standard, the aircraft represent the most ambitious and expensive modernization effort in the country’s military history.

The Rafales boast cutting-edge capabilities: active electronically scanned array (AESA) radars, electronic warfare suites, precision-guided munitions, and advanced air-to-air missiles. For a country whose air force previously relied on aging Soviet-era MiG-21s, the leap is revolutionary.

“This acquisition dramatically changes our strategic posture,” said Defense Minister Ivan Anušić. “With these aircraft, we move from short-range, second-generation systems to a 4.5-generation platform with full interoperability with our NATO allies.”

The Rafales weren’t the only stars of the parade. For the first time, Croatia publicly displayed two Leopard 2 main battle tanks, temporarily loaned from Germany as a teaser for a much larger acquisition plan.

In 2024, Croatia signed a Letter of Intent to purchase approximately 50 of the most advanced Leopard 2A8 tanks — a model so new that even the German Army has not yet fielded them. Anušić confirmed that Croatia would receive the tanks on the same timeline as Germany.

The parade also marked the debut appearance of the Bayraktar TB2, the battle-proven Turkish-made drone that has reshaped the dynamics of modern warfare in conflicts ranging from Nagorno-Karabakh to Ukraine. Though the TB2s remained grounded during the parade, their presence signaled Croatia’s commitment to integrating unmanned systems into its defense doctrine.

A deal finalized in 2024 will see six TB2s delivered to Croatia, equipped with reconnaissance optics and armed strike capabilities, along with a full package of control stations, radio systems, and training.

“These UAVs will greatly enhance our surveillance and response capabilities, especially in coastal and border regions,” Anušić explained.

One notable absence from the parade was the U.S.-made HIMARS (High Mobility Artillery Rocket System). Croatia agreed to purchase the system in 2024, but delivery timelines remain uncertain.

“The HIMARS is not coming yet. We asked the U.S., but we couldn’t reach an agreement in time,” the Defense Minister said. “What matters most is that the system arrives in our service within the next two years.”

Croatia has steadily increased its defense spending to reach 2% of GDP, meeting NATO’s long-standing target. That has allowed the government to invest heavily in new capabilities across all service branches — from new armored vehicles and aircraft to naval upgrades and cyber defense.

“The modernization effort is about much more than prestige,” said Igor Tabak, a security analyst at the OBRIS institute in Zagreb. “It’s about ensuring real interoperability with NATO forces and asserting Croatia’s role as a stable and capable actor in the region.”

Marinko Krešić, the head of the Croatian General Staff, emphasized that the parade was aimed not only at domestic audiences but also at international partners.

“We want to show our taxpayers where their money is going,” he told N1 television. “And we also want to show NATO and others that we are not a toy – we take our defense seriously.”

Croatia’s transformation from a war-torn state to a NATO and EU member with a rising military profile is rooted in the turbulent collapse of Yugoslavia in the early 1990s.

Once part of the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia alongside Serbia, Bosnia, Slovenia, and others, Croatia moved towards independence as the central state began to fracture under the weight of economic stagnation and growing nationalism.

The Croatian population, mostly ethnic Croats (about 78%) with a significant Serb minority (12%), held a referendum in May 1991, with 93% voting for independence. The move was boycotted by most Serbs, who feared marginalization in an independent Croatian state.

With backing from Serbia and the Yugoslav People’s Army (JNA), Serb rebels in Croatia declared the Republic of Serbian Krajina (RSK), occupying nearly a third of Croatian territory. The JNA, increasingly aligned with Serbian President Slobodan Milošević’s dream of a “Greater Serbia,” launched a series of offensives to carve out ethnically Serb territories.

Croatia, under President Franjo Tuđman, resisted — but was initially ill-equipped and outgunned. By late 1991, Serb and JNA forces controlled key highways, cities, and Adriatic ports, isolating the fledgling Croatian state.

A 1992 UN-brokered ceasefire temporarily froze the conflict, with peacekeepers deployed in Krajina. But real peace remained elusive.

Between 1992 and 1994, Croatia quietly rebuilt its army. It launched Operation Flash in May 1995, recapturing Western Slavonia and showcasing its growing strength.

Then came Operation Storm.

From August 4 to 7, 1995, over 150,000 Croatian troops launched a coordinated assault on the RSK. Backed by 400 tanks, 500 artillery pieces, and a small but effective air force, Croatian forces advanced swiftly on multiple fronts.

Their goal: to retake occupied territory and reassert control over the vital road and rail links between Zagreb and the Dalmatian coast.

The offensive shattered Serb resistance. Knin fell by August 5, and within days, the RSK collapsed entirely. Croatian troops reclaimed 10,400 square kilometers of territory.

It was the most significant Croatian military operation since World War II. The war, which had cost the lives of over 20,000 people and displaced hundreds of thousands, was effectively over.

But the operation remains controversial. Human rights groups allege that Croatian forces committed atrocities during and after the offensive. Serbia marks the anniversary with mourning and remembrance for the Serbs who fled or were killed.

In Croatia, Operation Storm is a symbol of resilience and sovereignty — a moment when a people fought for and reclaimed their homeland.

But critics warn that the anniversary must also be an opportunity for reflection.

“Victory is never simple,” said political scientist Milena Rakočević. “While Croatians rightfully celebrate their independence, the stories of displaced Serbs and the conduct of war must also be reckoned with. A mature democracy acknowledges both pride and pain.”

In recent years, efforts to reconcile with Serbia have faltered. Political leaders on both sides have traded barbs over how the war and its aftermath should be remembered.

Still, for most Croatians, the 30th anniversary was about pride — and about a military that no longer plays catch-up.

Since joining NATO in 2009 and the EU in 2013, Croatia has aligned itself with Western defense and political frameworks. It now plays an active role in regional peacekeeping and international military cooperation.

Its armed forces have participated in missions in Afghanistan, Mali, Kosovo, and the Baltic states. With its new fighter jets, tanks, and drones, Croatia’s military aims to project competence and capability.

The 2025 parade — with its Rafales, Leopards, and Bayraktars — was not just a show for citizens, but a message to Brussels, Washington, and even Belgrade.

Thirty years after war ripped it apart, Croatia stands transformed.

And as the Rafales roared above Vukovar Street, it was clear: the country no longer fights for survival, but for stature.

UN agencies warn that the decimated enclave is teetering on the brink of further chaos after months of war and the collapse of all essential services.

The incident took place at WFP’s Al-Ghafari facility in Deir Al-Balah, where limited stocks of wheat flour had been pre-positioned for use by the few bakeries which have been able to resume operations.

Tragic consequences

Corinne Fleischer, WFP’s Regional Director for the Middle East, described it as a “tragedy [that] should never have happened”.

She called for immediate and steady flow of aid to avoid further scenes desperation.

“When people know food is coming, desperation turns to calm,” she said.

The storming of the warehouse is the latest sign of a hunger crisis spiralling out of control after 80 days of near-total blockade on aid into Gaza. While limited supplies of aid have resumed, “it is a drop in the ocean of what is urgently needed,” UN officials have said.

In a statement, WFP said it has consistently warned of alarming and deteriorating conditions on the ground, and the risks of limiting humanitarian aid – despite the looming threat of famine.

The agency reiterated its call for safe, unimpeded humanitarian access to enable orderly food distributions across Gaza immediately.

Collapse of fishing sector

The UN-led Protection Cluster – a coalition of UN entities and NGOs working on protecting civil rights during crisis – warned on Thursday of a collapse of Gaza’s fishing sector.

The sector was a vital source of food and livelihoods before the conflict erupted on 7 October 2023, when Hamas and other Palestinian armed groups attacked Israeli communities.

Monitoring from the UN human rights office, OHCHR, “found a consistent pattern” of Israeli military attacks on fishers in Gaza.

This included firing on vessels at sea by Israeli Naval Forces, as well as drone attacks at sea and on land.

According to the UN Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), Gaza’s fishing industry is now operating at just 7.3 per cent of its pre-October 2023 capacity, with the fleet all but decimated.

Around 94 per cent of trawlers, 100 per cent of large fishing vessels and 70 per cent of smaller boats have been destroyed.

“This dramatic decline is having a devastating impact on food security, income generation, and community resilience across Gaza, triggering negative coping strategies and risks to fishers,” the Protection Cluster said in a report.

Darkest point

Meanwhile, the UN Humanitarian Country Team (HCT) warned that the humanitarian situation in Gaza, six hundred days into the crisis, is at its darkest point yet.

“As relentless, deadly bombardment and mass displacement intensify, families are being starved and denied the basic means of survival,” the team said in statement on Wednesday, adding that conditions for humanitarians to deliver aid safely and at scale are absent.

The HCT noted that over the past days, it had submitted 900 truckloads for Israeli approval – about 800 were cleared and just over 500 were cleared for offloading on the Israeli side of Kerem Shalom.

However, humanitarians have been able to collect only about 200 on the Palestinian side of the crossing due to insecurity and restricted access.

“While letting us bring in some nutrition and medical supplies, as well as flour, Israeli authorities have banned most other items, including fuel, cooking gas, shelter and hygiene products,” the HCT said.

Let us work

The UN and partners underscored Israel’s obligations under international humanitarian law, and urged it to treat civilians humanely, with respect for their inherent dignity, refrain from forcible transfer and facilitate the aid that is needed.

“We echo the Secretary-General’s calls: a permanent ceasefire, the immediate and unconditional release of all hostages, and full humanitarian access,” it said, adding:

“We are ready to save lives. Let us work. The window to prevent famine is closing fast.”

Reuters

The United States has entered a new chapter in its nuclear modernization effort with the early completion of the first B61-13 nuclear gravity bomb—an upgraded, high-yield weapon specifically crafted to destroy hardened underground targets. Completed nearly a year ahead of schedule at the Pantex Plant in Texas, the Department of Energy hailed the bomb’s development as a critical step in adapting America’s deterrent to the challenges of a new era. But behind the technical achievement lies a strategic paradox: while the B61-13 is designed to deter adversaries like China and Russia, its strategic utility may be limited by vulnerable basing, operational constraints, and growing skepticism from key Indo-Pacific allies.

The B61-13 is the most powerful air-delivered bomb the U.S. has fielded in decades, boasting a yield of 340–360 kilotons—roughly 24 times the power of the bomb dropped on Hiroshima. It is a modernized derivative of the B61-12, incorporating advanced guidance, safety systems, and compatibility with stealth bombers like the B-2 Spirit and the upcoming B-21 Raider. While the B61-12 was designed for NATO aircraft and limited-yield scenarios, the B61-13 is reserved exclusively for U.S. long-range bombers, indicating its role in high-end deterrence.

The urgency driving this development is clear: the U.S. is facing a nuclear environment that is simultaneously multipolar, technologically advanced, and increasingly opaque. Secretary of Energy Chris Wright stated that the B61-13 reflects a doctrine of “peace through strength,” reaffirming the Trump Administration’s push for strategic clarity and overwhelming retaliatory capability.

Yet, the weapon’s creation also highlights a disturbing trend—nuclear deterrence is becoming more complex, more fragile, and potentially less credible.

One of the B61-13’s most pressing missions is to hold at risk the growing number of hardened underground missile silos now proliferating across China. In recent years, satellite imagery and open-source analysis have revealed rapid construction of large intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) silo fields at Yumen, Hami, and Yulin. Hans Kristensen, a leading nuclear analyst at the Federation of American Scientists, reported in The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists that China now fields over 300 new silos, likely hosting DF-31A ICBMs.

These fields are not haphazard installations—they’re built in triangular grid patterns, with underground communication networks and security facilities that suggest preparations for launch-on-warning capabilities. This marks a departure from China’s historically minimalist nuclear posture and indicates a move toward a more survivable, ready force.

Ryan Snyder, writing in Science & Global Security, assessed that China’s new silos are structurally comparable to Russia’s most fortified ones, with diameters around six meters and peak hardness levels potentially as high as 1,500 PSI. These facilities incorporate engineering features like shock absorbers and rattlespace buffers—methods designed to protect missiles from even the most powerful nuclear strikes.

To overcome such hardening, the U.S. needs more than raw yield. It needs the right weapon delivered in the right place, at the right time. This is where the B61-13 is intended to play a role. Yet doubts remain about whether it truly can.

Theoretically, the B-21 bomber—America’s next-generation stealth platform—can penetrate Chinese airspace to deliver the B61-13 against deeply buried targets. Mark Gunzinger of the Mitchell Institute argues that the B-21 is built precisely for this kind of mission, with stealth, range, and payload tailored for high-value strikes across China’s vast interior.

But delivering a gravity bomb like the B61-13 is inherently dangerous. Unlike standoff weapons such as cruise missiles, gravity bombs must be released in close proximity to their target—bringing the aircraft directly into enemy air defense range. Greg Weaver, in an April 2025 Atlantic Council report, underscores this vulnerability, noting that even stealth aircraft are not invulnerable. As China continues to expand its integrated air defense systems and satellite tracking capabilities, the likelihood of successfully reaching a target like a hardened silo—especially in a first strike or crisis scenario—remains uncertain.

Moreover, a nuclear gravity bomb, no matter how sophisticated, cannot compensate for weaknesses in the broader architecture of nuclear basing and deployment. And that’s where the real challenge lies.

The United States currently has a gaping hole in its nuclear posture in the Indo-Pacific. Unlike Europe, where U.S. tactical nuclear weapons are forward-deployed under NATO’s nuclear sharing agreements, the Indo-Pacific has no such infrastructure.

Josh Chang, writing in Real Clear Defense, notes that the U.S. nuclear theater posture in the region consists mainly of dual-capable aircraft and bombers based in the continental U.S. The air leg of the nuclear triad has not been on continuous alert in over 30 years, meaning that in a crisis, bombers and their payloads must fly thousands of miles—across contested airspace—to reach potential targets. This delay weakens credibility and leaves time for an adversary to strike first.

Even proposals to forward-deploy bombers face logistical and survivability issues. As Thomas Shugart III and Timothy Walton explain in a Hudson Institute report, China has developed a missile strike doctrine that could render key U.S. bases like Guam, Iwakuni, or Diego Garcia inoperable with as few as 10 precision missile strikes. These bases lack hardened infrastructure—like China’s 3,000 reinforced aircraft shelters—leaving bombers, fuel, and maintenance assets exposed on open tarmacs.

This means the B61-13 could be functionally useless in a real conflict if its delivery platforms are destroyed before ever leaving the ground.

Extended deterrence—the promise that the U.S. will defend its allies with nuclear force if necessary—relies as much on perception and posture as it does on firepower. And right now, that perception is faltering.

South Korea offers a telling example. Despite the 2023 Washington Declaration reaffirming nuclear commitments, polls show declining public confidence in the U.S. nuclear umbrella. As Peter Lee and Kang Chungku argue in a February 2024 Asan Institute paper, South Koreans remain skeptical because the U.S. has not forward-deployed any nuclear assets to Asia—unlike in Europe.

This sentiment is echoed in Japan, where officials have quietly raised concerns about whether U.S. promises can be fulfilled in a high-intensity conflict. Zuzanna Gwadera, writing for the International Institute for Strategic Studies, argues that allies are increasingly considering self-reliant options—including indigenous nuclear programs—due to fears that Washington’s security guarantees are neither automatic nor unconditional.

Such perceptions are shaped in part by the Trump Administration’s transactional approach to alliances, which has emphasized burden-sharing and cost recovery. While urging allies to invest more in defense, the administration has also sent mixed signals about U.S. resolve.

In this environment, the unveiling of a more powerful gravity bomb does little to calm nerves. If anything, it may reinforce concerns that the U.S. is preparing for strategic conflict while doing little to reinforce the front lines of its extended deterrent.

The B61-13 is, in many ways, a technological marvel. It reflects the cutting edge of U.S. nuclear engineering, offering a weapon tailored for hardened targets and future bomber platforms. Its early completion is a testament to America’s defense-industrial capabilities and its commitment to staying ahead of peer adversaries.

But technology cannot substitute for strategy.

The hard truth is that no matter how powerful the B61-13 is, its relevance will be defined not by its kilotons, but by where it’s based, how it’s deployed, and whether allies and adversaries believe the U.S. is willing and able to use it if necessary.

The strategic gap between America’s nuclear capabilities and its Indo-Pacific posture threatens to undermine the very deterrent the B61-13 is meant to strengthen. Without hardened bases, reliable forward deployment, and reassured allies, the bomb risks becoming more symbolic than practical—a relic of a strategy that cannot be credibly executed under current conditions.

To restore credibility to its deterrence posture in Asia, the U.S. must move beyond hardware. That means investing in hardened infrastructure at forward bases, resuming rotational bomber deployments with nuclear options, and engaging allies in concrete planning for crisis scenarios.

It also means grappling with the political implications of extended deterrence. If Washington is unwilling to station nuclear assets in the Indo-Pacific, it must offer transparent, realistic alternatives—whether through allied consultations, missile defense integration, or conventional force augmentation.

Most importantly, the U.S. must rebuild trust—not just in its technology, but in its strategy and commitments. The B61-13 may destroy bunkers, but only credibility can deter war.

The B61-13 is born into a world where power is shifting, trust is eroding, and the risks of nuclear conflict are growing. It represents both a technological advance and a strategic dilemma. As the U.S. grapples with China’s hardened silos, fragile basing, and allied doubt, one thing is clear: bombs don’t deter adversaries—strategies do. And right now, the strategy is still catching up to the threat.

“All the dark clouds of a perfect storm have descended upon the people of the world’s newest country – and one of the poorest,” Mr. Guterres told reporters at UN Headquarters in New York.

After finally gaining independence from neighbouring Sudan in July 2011, civil war broke out in South Sudan in December 2013 between troops loyal to President Salva Kiir and opposition forces led by his rival Riek Machar, resulting in hundreds of thousands of deaths.  

In 2018, a peace agreement ended the fighting and established a unity government.

However, the arrest of First Vice President and main opposition leader Mr. Machar on Wednesday – alongside mounting military clashes and reported attacks on civilian populations – signals a severe unravelling of the peace process and a direct threat to millions, the UN Commission on Human Rights in South Sudan explained on Thursday.

Combined with growing regional spillover from the conflict in neighbouring Sudan, Mr. Guterres painted a dire picture of a country on the edge.  

“Let’s not mince words,” he said. “What we are seeing is darkly reminiscent of the 2013 and 2016 civil wars, which killed 400,000 people.”

Multiple crises at once

South Sudan is now facing what the Secretary-General described as a security emergency, political upheaval, humanitarian catastrophe, displacement crisis, economic collapse and a severe funding shortfall – all at once.

Half the population is severely food insecure, he warned, while three out of four people require humanitarian assistance.  

Meanwhile, over one million people have fled across the border from Sudan since fighting broke out there last year between rival militaries – and cholera has been reported, compounding the crisis.

“South Sudan may have fallen off the world’s radar,” Mr. Guterres said, “but we cannot let the situation fall over the abyss.”

Call for de-escalation and support

Mr. Guterres urged South Sudanese leaders to “put down the weapons” and “put all the people of South Sudan first.”  

He called for the restoration of the Government of National Unity and the full implementation of the peace agreement, which remains the only legal path to free and fair elections in December 2026.

He also appealed to the regional and international community to speak with one voice in support of peace. 

“We fully support the initiative to deploy the [African Union] Panel of the Wise,” he said, adding that he had spoken with the Chairperson of the AU Commission earlier in the day.  

The Secretary-General described his long-standing connection to the people of South Sudan, recalling his first mission as High Commissioner for Refugees and his time spent with returnees.  

“They had such enormous hopes and aspirations. But unfortunately, not the leadership they deserve.”

Tropical Storm Beryl brought howling winds and torrential rain to southeast Texas on Monday, killing at least three people, flooding highways, closing oil ports, canceling more than 1,300 flights and knocking out power to more than 2.7 million homes and businesses.

Beryl, the season’s earliest Category 5 hurricane on record, weakened from a hurricane after pounding the coastal Texas town of Matagorda with dangerous storm surges and heavy rain before moving across Houston, the US National Hurricane Center (NHC) said. The agency said conditions could spawn tornadoes in Texas, Louisiana and Arkansas.

The storm, which was expected to rapidly weaken as it moved inland, swept a destructive path through Jamaica, Grenada, and St. Vincent and the Grenadines last week. It killed at least 11 in Mexico and the Caribbean and before reaching Texas, Lieutenant Governor Dan Patrick told reporters.

In Texas, a 53-year-old man and a 74-year-old woman were killed in two incidents by trees that fell on their homes in the Houston area on Monday. A third person, a city of Houston employee going to work, drowned in an underpass, Patrick said.

Oil refining activity slowed and some production sites were evacuated in the state that is the nation’s biggest producer of US oil and natural gas.

State officials had yet to assess the economic damage as officials remained on a rescue footing while powerful winds continued to blow. Restoring power would take several days, said Thomas Gleeson, chair of the Texas Public Utility Commission.

More than 2,500 first responders were deployed statewide, said Nim Kidd, chief of the Texas Division of Emergency Management.

Following warnings that it could be a deadly storm for communities in its path, people rushed to board up windows and stock up on fuel and other essential supplies.

Before daybreak, strong gusts and torrential rain lashed cities and towns such as Galveston, Sargent, Lake Jackson and Freeport, television video showed. By late morning, many fallen trees blocked roads in Houston as the worst of the storm passed, with persisting winds and some road flooding, rendering lanes on major freeways impassable. The city barricaded flooded areas.

Crews using a life jacket and ladder fire truck rescued a man from a truck on a flooded stretch of freeway, video posted on social media by Houston’s local ABC station showed. Patrick said there were several other rescues.

Flood waters exceeded 25 cm across most of Houston, Mayor John Whitmire said.

The storm had strengthened to a Category 1 hurricane as it crossed the warm waters of the Gulf of Mexico before making landfall. But the NHC said it was expected to weaken into a tropical depression overnight and a post-tropical cyclone on Tuesday.

That was still enough to deliver more heavy rain as it moved northeastward from eastern Texas on Monday afternoon, across Arkansas on Tuesday, into the Lower Ohio Valley on Tuesday night, and finally into the Lower Great Lakes on Wednesday, the US National Weather Service said.

The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) and the US Coast Guard had positioned staff to assist with search and rescue efforts. FEMA also readied water, meals and generators to boost local response efforts, according to the Biden administration.

Schools said they would close as the storm approached. Airlines canceled more than 1,300 flights, and officials ordered a smattering of evacuations in beach towns. Small businesses in Houston, including package delivery services and chiropractors, delayed openings or were closed on Monday.

More than 2.7 million homes and businesses in Texas lost power, according to Patrick and and PowerOutage.us.