Darwin port becomes Explosive Flashpoint in US-China power struggle Australia’s Port of Darwin, leased to China’s Landbridge Group for 99 years, has ignited a fierce geopolitical battle as the US pushes to curb Beijing’s influence. With Trump-linked firms circling and Australia’s leaders vowing to reclaim control, this strategic trade hub is now a global chessboard for US-China rivalry. Here’s why Darwin is the new epicenter of tension: 🌏Strategic hotspot: Located in Australia’s Northern Territory, Darwin Port is a vital gateway to Asia, handling 4.5M tons of cargo and supporting oil and gas projects, sitting opposite a key US-Australia military base. 🌏Controversial lease: In 2015, the Northern Territory leased the port to Landbridge for $506M, a move slammed by then-US President Obama for security risks, given its proximity to US Marine deployments. 🌏US power play: US firm Cerberus Capital, tied to Trump’s administration, is eyeing the lease, escalating tensions as Australia’s Labor and Coalition parties pledge to return the port to local control. 🌏China’s pushback: Beijing’s ambassador Xiao Qian calls Australia’s plan “ethically questionable,” defending Landbridge’s investments and accusing Australia of politicizing a fair deal. 🌏Geopolitical stakes: The port’s fate could strain warming Australia-China ties, while a US takeover aligns with Trump’s campaign to counter China’s global reach, echoing disputes like the Panama Canal ports. 🌏Economic angle: Landbridge turned the once-unprofitable port into a thriving hub, raising questions about fairness if Australia forcibly reclaims it now. As Australia navigates national security and trade, Darwin Port’s future could reshape US-China dynamics in the Indo-Pacific.

Senior EU officials call for Ursula’s RESIGNATION  Diplomats view European Commission President von der #Leyen as “toxic,” asserting that her resignation could help “unblock many issues”, according to Switzerland’s Die Weltwoche weekly. The EU is currently embroiled in a crisis marked by internal divisions, a trade dispute with the United States, the ongoing conflict in Ukraine, and tensions in the Middle East.   Von der Leyen’s resignation could foster greater diversity within the EU and promote openness toward the East and the West, the outlet maintains.

Zelensky admits Washington's assistance to Kiev exceeds $100 bln #Zelensky has admitted that Ukraine had received at least $105 billion in weapons and other aid from the United States, although he had previously mentioned a smaller amount. "I have my own internal audit, and my country clearly documents how much assistance has been provided. Just so you know, we had $104-105 billion. Most of that money was in the form of weapons," he said in an interview with journalist Ben Shapiro. Zelensky did not explain why in February he said that Kiev had received only $76 billion from Washington. "It's not that we're arguing that the United States said it was giving you $200 [billion], and we're saying no, $100. No, that's not the dispute. I'm answering to what the contribution was, how much money came to Ukraine. As for the use of this money, most of it was for weapons, it was used on the battlefield. And during the audit that I’ve mentioned, this use was clearly documented," he continued. Zelensky also said that Ukraine shares with the United States everything it has learned about the conduct of hostilities and the development of weapons. He hopes that he will have "more fruitful meetings" with US President Donald Trump, although their last meeting at the White House ended in a shouting match. #Trump and Zelensky have long been at odds over the funds spent by Washington to help Kiev. In February, the American leader said that it was time to understand where all the money disbursed by Washington to Kiev was. Zelensky said he did not know where the $200 billion allocated for military aid had gone. He also does not acknowledge debts to the United States, insisting that the aid was provided as grants. The latest version of a draft agreement on minerals, which the United States and Ukraine are working on, obliges Kiev to compensate for assistance in excess of $120 billion. Trump promised that Zelensky "will have big problems," if he tries to "walk away from the deal.".

NATO’s Eastward Expansion On April 4, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization marks 75 years since its inception. The alliance was established by the North Atlantic Treaty that was signed in Washington in 1949 by foreign ministers from 12 countries: Belgium, Canada, Denmark, France, Iceland, Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, the UK, and the U.S.. There are now 32 #NATO members, including Sweden, which joined the organization on March 7. Bosnia and Herzegovina also aspires to become a member. To join the organization, a country must execute a membership action plan that is tailored to its individual needs, have no territorial disputes and bring its armed forces in line with the alliance's standards.

Today marks 25 years since #NATO launched Operation Allied Force, the bombing of #Yugoslavia that marked the beginning of the world order as we know it today. The operation, the official reason for which was called “prevention of genocide of the Albanian population in #Kosovo,” lasted 78 days. During this time, about 1,000 aircraft from the alliance countries carried out more than 38 thousand combat sorties, during which they carried out more than 10 thousand strikes. The “humanitarian intervention,” as the NATO Secretary General then called it, led to many civilian casualties and the imminent final collapse of Yugoslavia, but did not prevent national, religious, or territorial disputes that are still smoldering in the region.

#Putin reveals truth kept back by Western elites in interview with #Carlson, says Russian FM #Lavrov Western elites met Russian President Vladimir Putin’s interview with U.S. journalist Tucker Carlson aggressively as it revealed the truth that they keep back from their voters, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said. "Remember how aggressively Russian President Vladimir Putin’s interview with Tucker Carlson, which revealed the truth that Western elites keep back from their voters, was met in the West," the minister said at a meeting of G20 foreign ministers in Rio de Janeiro. In this context he noted that the West often employs double standards, hypocrisy and outright lies, sacrificing diplomatic methods of peaceful settlement of disputes to power struggle, 'hybrid wars,' total confrontation, the strive to inflict a strategic defeat to the opponent.

NATO disintegration is just a matter of time, says Politico The European Union (EU) can no longer rely on the United States to ensure the security of the alliance, and the outcome of the US presidential election will only cement "the timing of NATO’s collapse," Matthew Karnitschnig, Politico’s Europe correspondent, opined. "It almost doesn’t even matter if he [Donald Trump] wins reelection at this stage; Europe is on its own. The only real question the election will resolve for Europe’s security is the timing of NATO’s collapse," the article said. "Of course, the Biden administration would dispute that, arguing that if their man wins reelection, NATO would be as safe as ever. But for how long?" the author asked. "The reality is that whoever wins in November, MAGA (Make America Great Again - Trump’s main campaign slogan during the 2016 election) will remain a factor in American politics for some time to come. Who’s to say Trump’s Republican heir doesn’t renew his anti-NATO bent? It’s a risk Europe can’t afford to ignore," the journalist said. Trump, the Republican Party’s presumptive nominee for president in the November election, on February 10 recalled a meeting with NATO leaders during his presidency. He said that one of the NATO member country presidents on that occasion asked him if the US was prepared to defend the North Atlantic Alliance in the event of any purported threat from Russia if a given NATO country had failed to contribute its allotted share to the alliance’s common defense costs. Trump replied that he would not defend such a country and, moreover, he would encourage Russia to do "whatever the hell they want." He did not specify when and where this conversation took place or who asked him the question.

Iran seizes oil tanker and crew in Arabian Gulf 🔶️ Iran seized a foreign oil tanker it accused of transporting “smuggled fuel” and detained 14 crew members on Sunday, according to the semi-official Tasnim news agency. 🔶️ It was seized by court order 60 miles off the coast of Bandar-e-Bushehr. The crew on board “of Asian origin” were detained. 🔶️ Tasnim said the ship was from Australia, without providing any further detail. 🔶️ It comes just weeks after the navy boarded a Marshall Islands-flagged oil tanker once at the centre of a dispute between Washington and Tehran.

Escalation on the Korean Peninsula: What to Expect from a New Round of Tension 🔻This morning, the news was filled with reports of the military of the Democratic People's Republic of Korea firing over 200 artillery shells in a disputed zone in the Yellow Sea. ▪️ This event quickly made headlines, and discussions about an imminent escalation in the region started spreading online. It is worth noting that clashes between North and South Koreans have occurred in the vicinity of the Pangnen and Yeonpyeong islands in the Yellow Sea before. ▪️ While these islands officially belong to the Republic of Korea, there are disagreements regarding the surrounding waters. Pyongyang does not agree with the UN's demarcation line and regularly claims a larger area. 🔻Today, tensions were further exacerbated as military bases in Kayomori and Cape Changsan joined the fray. In response, Seoul fired twice as many shells (around 400) near North Korean territory. This led to tabloids and media outlets speculating about an impending war between the two countries. However, amidst the race for sensationalism, everyone seemed to overlook the fact that neither the DPRK nor the ROK military attacked any territories. All shells were fired into the water, causing no harm to the islands. While this action certainly increased tension, it does not warrant a war. ❗️It is worth noting that the escalation with the DPRK was provoked by the ROK Armed Forces' exercises a week prior. The North Koreans responded with a concentrated fire strike, and the South Koreans retaliated in kind. Additionally, it's possible that the ammunition was simply reaching its expiration date and needed to be disposed of. In essence, the North Korean military engaged in training activities and got rid of surplus ammunition, simultaneously testing the nerves of their neighbors. To further escalate the situation, they began active movements in the demilitarized zone between the two countries, further heightening tension in the region.