The debate about the proper function of intelligence in the US is as old as the nation. Several founding fathers, indeed, even patriarch George Washington, recognized the need for espionage to be kept secret from the Continental Congress—with all the attendant risks of abuse—to help win the war for independence. The debate then centered on whether the new country could free itself from sullying Old World intrigues and who would, or even should, oversee a secret apparatus for the new republic.

Today, intelligence is a permanent fixture in the US government. Now the debate is about the appropriate scope and reach of national security intelligence on balance with the protection of American civil liberties. This is the “constant crisis” in Jeffrey P. Rogg’s sweeping new book, The Spy and the State: The History of American Intelligence.

The book is a work of even-handed historical writing by an author with deep roots in national security studies (Rogg has taught as a member of the faculty of the US Naval War College, the Citadel, and the Joint Special Operations University). The book is also a balanced, thoughtful, and well-grounded discussion of the tumultuous growth of the national security intelligence bureaucracy, the professionalization of US intelligence, and the evolution of intelligence oversight.

The Spy and the State is a significant accomplishment of genuine scholarship. The author’s deep understanding of the US Intelligence Community (USIC) is evident in his excellent use of a wealth of primary sources, including published and archival materials ranging from government documents and period newspapers to relevant case law and the unclassified records of individual US intelligence agencies. Rogg also makes good use of secondary sources to provide insight and assessments from authors with special expertise, including the history of wartime US intelligence and of specific agencies. While The Spy and the State sometimes reads like a textbook, with some sluggish writing, Rogg is a disciplined researcher keen on offering detail. The book is well documented with more than 80 pages of notes and an outstanding bibliography. This book, then, will be welcomed by both scholars and students seeking to enhance and enlarge their understanding of the USIC.

Civil-Intelligence Relations

The Spy and the State is a history of the USIC seen “through the lens of civil-intelligence relations and the major themes of control, competition, coordination, professionalization, and politicization.” For this work, Rogg adapted the ground-breaking analog of civil-military relations advanced by Samuel P. Huntington in his book The Soldier and the State (1957). It’s a worthwhile model for Rogg to have acknowledged and adopted. Mirroring Huntington’s work, Rogg shows how the development of intelligence as a profession in the twentieth century, and attendant civil oversight, can regulate the role of intelligence in the national security state.

This work explores the USIC’s history by examining US intelligence in each of four wartime eras: the Revolutionary War to the Civil War; the Civil War to the end of World War II; the Cold War; and the present, post-Cold War era. This approach is more than a nod to the march of time. It acknowledges the dominant role military intelligence played in creating the USIC. Today, an estimated 80 percent of the nation’s classified intelligence spending is earmarked for military intelligence activities. Moreover, “each successive war,” Rogg explains, “saw the country engage in intelligence activities on an even greater scale, and each postwar period revealed the challenges that retrenchment posed.” With the era-by-era approach, the author illustrates how the changing nature of the US role in the world led to the establishment of the nation’s permanent intelligence community.

Bureaucracy and Rivalry

Rogg describes how the USIC grew by fits and starts, hamstrung as much by a failure to establish a profession of intelligence as by rivalries across government bureaus assigned various intelligence functions. For example, the author recounts episodes in the bureaucratic wrangle between the departments of State, Justice, and Treasury for control of various aspects of intelligence. For a time, Secret Service agents were “loaned” to other executive departments to pursue domestic law enforcement and counterespionage investigations, while still reporting to their managers at Treasury. That unsatisfactory arrangement spurred the Justice Department to create its own secret service, the Bureau of Investigation (BOI, later FBI).

The tangle of competing interests, Rogg observes in a telling insight, was made even more contentious because executive departments unilaterally formed their own intelligence services. Congress had no say in the creation, organization, and mission of the Secret Service, and the BOI, much less a say in the War Department’s Military Information Section (eventually the Military Intelligence Division of the Army General Staff in WWI), or the Navy Department’s Office of Naval Intelligence. Ultimately, only two of the current eighteen US intelligence agencies—the CIA and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence—would be chartered by Congress.

Rogg contends that before the onset of the Cold War era, every intelligence service in government was “straddling a fault-line in American civil-intelligence relations,” a blurry area between acceptable foreign collection and detested domestic surveillance. Various agencies, and their respective executive departments, all attempted to collect foreign intelligence, conduct domestic law enforcement investigations, surveil American citizens, and launch counter-espionage operations in the US. This, Rogg explains, was an outgrowth not only of the lack of coordination between executive departments, but of “mission creep.” He gives the example that when Secret Service agents uncovered a threat to President Cleveland, the Service simply expanded its role beyond investigations of counterfeiting and financial crimes to include protection of the president. Rogg argues that unbridled expansion and duplication were also the result of the failure of Congress to exercise any effective oversight of the growing intelligence community as the nation entered the twentieth century.

Permanence and Oversight

The Spy and the State offers readers an illuminating record of the spotty, ineffectual, and often politicized nature of oversight of the intelligence community. Rogg makes the case that the USIC in its first historical era remained “discretionary, disorganized, uncoordinated and unprofessional.” The author also describes how the intelligence community expanded in times of war and contracted in times of peace. He then neatly traces the robust growth of the nation’s intelligence capabilities in World War II and shows how that growth and the onset of the Cold War marked the end of another historical era.

At this pivotal point in the history of the USIC, Rogg ascribes an outsized influence to William “Wild Bill” Donovan, the wartime head of the Office of Strategic Services (OSS). The author contends Donovan “permanently transformed the American intelligence system,” and “set the conditions for an independent intelligence organization and, at long last, [a] profession.” It is more likely that while the influential and well-connected Donovan was then in the right place at the right time, the exigencies of the Cold War, the catastrophic intelligence failure at Pearl Harbor, and growing Congressional discomfort with the power of the executive branch spurred legislation that created the CIA in 1947. Rogg points out that legislation created two specific statutory missions for the CIA: to coordinate the activities of the USIC and furnish intelligence analysis to inform policymaking.

The fledgling CIA, however, attracted OSS veterans to its ranks who were intent on “seizing covert action” as part of its mission set. In so doing, the agency “absorbed an organization and culture that undermined its original statutory missions.” Rogg charts the uneven course of the CIA’s early covert actions. He acknowledges that policymakers steered the agency towards misguided forays and outright interference, for example, with the internal affairs of Burma, Guatemala, and Iran. By hewing to historical records, the author easily dispels any lingering notion that these were activities of rogue elements of the CIA; covert action was an integral part of Cold War strategy.

The Spy and the State recounts the covert missions of the 1950s and the agency’s soiled record in the 1960s and 1970s. The CIA’s mind-control experiments, surveillance of journalists and students, assassination plots, and other domestic intelligence operations did not escape public exposure. Media accounts spurred Congressional inquiry, and the Church and Pike Committee hearings were at the forefront to establish permanent legislative oversight. In the most telling part of his book, Rogg makes a clear-eyed account of how abuses and blatantly illegal actions by the USIC eroded public trust in government and fostered suspicion of the power of the administrative state.

Despite the growing professionalization of the intelligence community, and more vigorous oversight, the author shows that some of the most egregious abuses of the reach and power of the USIC occurred in the post-Cold War era. Rogg argues that “during the Global War on Terror, the government unleashed its powerful intelligence apparatus, undermining civil liberties and eroding constitutional rights in the process.” Enabled by the PATRIOT and Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Acts, new guidance issued by then Attorney General Michael Mukasey, for example, blurred the line between law enforcement and domestic intelligence. As a result, the FBI was able to gain access to NSA’s powerful surveillance tools. The agency’s PRISM program collected information from private companies and automatically sucked up data from Microsoft, Google, Facebook, Skype, YouTube, Apple, and others. The Bureau then expanded its use of National Security Letters (NSL)—administrative rather than judicial subpoenas—to collect information from tens of thousands of individuals each year. Because the NSLs also contain non-disclosure provisions, the FBI now had “the power both to investigate and to silence.”

The Spy and the State is as much of a historical account as it is a work of keen contemporary observation and incisive commentary. Informed by the judgements of history, the author in his conclusions argues that the combination of the national security state, its attendant administrative state, omnipresent surveillance technology, Big Data and AI, and a massive intelligence apparatus looms as an authoritarian threat in American civil-intelligence affairs. While Americans have often been able to reset civil-intelligence relations after a threat has passed or egregious abuses have been checked, Rogg is far less sanguine about future relations.

“The American people,” Rogg warns readers, “must assert their role in the US intelligence system more directly in the future than they have in the past—their liberty and security depend on it.”

ISTANBUL (AP) — Delegations from Russia and Ukraine were to meet in Turkey on Monday for their second round of direct peace talks in just over two weeks, although expectations were low for any significant progress on ending the three-year war after a string of stunning attacks over the weekend.

Ukraine said Sunday it launched a spectacular surprise attack on four Russian airbases thousands of kilometers (miles) apart, destroying more than 40 warplanes. The raid was unprecedented in its scope and geographic reach, targeting bases in Russia’s Arctic, Siberia and Far East more than 7,000 kilometers (4,300 miles) from Ukraine.

The head of the Ukrainian security service, Vasyl Maliuk, who led the planning of the operation, said its success was “a major slap in the face for Russia’s military power.” He said the drones struck simultaneously in three time zones and the complex logistics took over a year and a half to prepare.

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy called it a “brilliant operation.”

Meanwhile, Russia on Sunday fired the biggest number of drones — 472 — at Ukraine since its full-scale invasion in February 2022, Ukraine’s air force said, in an apparent effort to overwhelm air defenses. That was part of a recently escalating campaign of strikes in civilian areas of Ukraine.

Hopes not high for Istanbul talks

Amid the escalation in fighting, the talks in Istanbul appeared unlikely to make much progress.

U.S.-led efforts to push the two sides into accepting a ceasefire have so far failed. Ukraine accepted that step, but the Kremlin effectively rejected it.

The Institute for the Study of War, a Washington-based think tank, said Sunday that “Russia is attempting to delay negotiations and prolong the war in order to make additional battlefield gains.”

The relentless fighting has frustrated U.S. President Donald Trump’s goal of bringing about a quick end to the war. A week ago, he expressed impatience with Russian President Vladimir Putin as Moscow pounded Kyiv and other Ukrainian cities with drones and missiles for a third straight night. Trump said on social media that Putin “has gone absolutely CRAZY!”

Senior officials in both countries have indicated the two sides remain far apart on the key conditions for stopping the war.

The first round of talks, held on May 16, also in Istanbul, ended after less than two hours. While both sides agreed on a large prisoner swap, there was no breakthrough.

Ukraine upbeat after strikes on air bases

Ukraine was triumphant after targeting distant Russian air bases. The official Russian response was muted, with the attack getting little coverage on the state-controlled television. Russia-1 TV channel on Sunday evening spent for a little over a minute on it with a brief Ministry of Defense’ statement read out before images shifted to Russian drone strikes on Ukrainian positions.

Zelenskyy said the setbacks for the Kremlin would help force it to the negotiating table, even as its pursues a summer offensive on the battlefield.

“Russia must feel what its losses mean. That is what will push it toward diplomacy,” he said at a summit Monday in Vilnius, Lithuania with leaders from the Nordic nations and countries on NATO’s eastern flank.

Ukraine has occasionally struck air bases hosting Russia’s nuclear capable strategic bombers since early in the war, prompting the Russian air force to redeploy most of them to the regions farther from the front line.

Because Sunday’s drones were launched from trucks close to the bases targeted in five Russian regions, military defenses had virtually no time to prepare for them.

Many Russian military bloggers chided the military for its failure to build protective shields for the bombers despite previous attacks, but the large size of the planes makes that a challenging task.

The attacks were “a big blow to Russian strategic airpower” and exposed significant vulnerabilities in Moscow’s military capabilities, according to Phillips O’Brien, a professor of strategic studies at the University of St. Andrews in Scotland.

“This is hard to underestimate,” O’Brien wrote in an analysis.

Once again, eyes turn to Istanbul

Zelenskyy said that “if the Istanbul meeting brings nothing, that clearly means strong new sanctions are urgently, urgently needed” against Russia.

The Ukrainian delegation led by Defense Minister Rustem Umerov was in place, Heorhii Tykhyi, spokesperson for the Ukrainian Foreign Ministry, said in a message posted on the Ukrainian Embassy WhatsApp group.

The Russian delegation, headed by Vladimir Medinsky, an aide to Russian leader Vladimir Putin, arrived the previous evening, Russian state media reported.

Officials said Turkish Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan would chair the talks, with officials from the Turkish intelligence agency also present.

International concerns about the war’s consequences, as well as trade tensions, drove Asian share prices lower Monday while oil prices surged.

Front-line fighting and shelling grinds on

Fierce fighting has continued along the roughly 1,000-kilometer (620-mile) front line, and both sides have hit each other’s territory with deep strikes.

Russian forces shelled Ukraine’s southern Kherson region, killing three people and injuring 19 others, including two children, regional officials said Monday.

Also, a missile strike and shelling around the southern city of Zaporizhzhia, killing five people and injured nine others, officials said.

Russian air defenses downed 162 Ukrainian drones over eight Russian regions overnight, as well as over the annexed Ukrainian peninsula of Crimea, Russia’s Defense Ministry said Monday.

Ukrainian air defenses damaged 52 out of 80 drones launched by Russia overnight, the Ukrainian air force said.

___

An earlier version of this story was corrected to show that the first round of talks took place on May 16, not May 17.

___

Associated Press writers Suzan Frazer in Ankara, Turkey; Hanna Arhirova in Kyiv, Ukraine, and Geir Moulson in Berlin contributed to this report.

___

Follow AP’s coverage of the war in Ukraine at https://apnews.com/hub/russia-ukraine

Ukrainian forces have wiped out dozens of Russian military aircraft, including nuclear bombers, in a massive drone attack on President Vladimir Putin’s air bases deep inside the country, Kyiv sources are claiming.

The mission carried out by Ukraine’s Security Service (SBU) using first-person-view (FPV) drones hit 41 Russian heavy bombers at four separate airfields thousands of miles from Ukraine, a security source told the Kyiv Independent on Sunday.

The drones were reportedly smuggled into the country hidden in trucks.

TU-95 “Bear” nuclear bombers, TU-22 “Backfire” fast-attack strike bombers and A-50 “Mainstay” command-and-control jets were among the aircraft that were destroyed in the strike, according to reports.

One of the bases hit was in the Irkutsk region of Siberia, almost 2,500 miles from Ukraine.

Others targeted were in Murmansk in the Arctic Circle, Ryazan southeast of Moscow, and Ivanovo, to the northeast of the Russian capital.

The operation, codenamed “Web,” took some 18 months of planning and, if the details are confirmed, will deal a huge blow to Moscow’s efforts to launch long-range missile attacks on Ukrainian cities.

“The SBU first transported FPV drones to Russia, and later on the territory of the Russian Federation, the drones were hidden under the roofs of mobile wooden cabins, already placed on trucks,” the source claimed.

“At the right moment, the roofs of the cabins were opened remotely, and the drones flew to hit Russian bombers.”

Служба безопасности Украины организовала атаку на российские аэродромы сразу в нескольких регионах, расположенных далеко от российско-украинской границы. Об этом пишут «Украинская правда», «Бабель», «РБК-Украина» и другие издания со ссылкой на «источники в спецслужбах».

По словам источников изданий, операцией, которая получила название «Паутина», лично руководит глава СБУ Василий Малюк. Как утверждается, в результате атаки повреждения получили более 40 самолетов, среди них — А-50, Ту-95 и Ту-22 М3. Действия СБУ нанесли российской армии ущерб примерно в два миллиарда долларов, утверждают собеседники изданий.

По данным украинских СМИ, под атаку попали как минимум четыре аэродрома — Дягилево в Рязанской области, Оленья в Мурманской области, Белая в Иркутской области и Иваново в Ивановской области.

Губернатор Иркутской области Игорь Кобзев подтвердил информацию о налете дронов, отметив, что это первая атака на территории Сибири с начала войны. Он официально сообщил, что ее целью стала военная часть в поселке Средний и что «угрозы жизни и здоровью мирных жителей нет».

Губернатор Мурманской области Андрей Чибис тоже подтвердил факт налета дронов на регион, но не уточнил, что стало их целью. Губернатор Рязанской области Павел Малков отчитался лишь о факте инцидента с БПЛА, но, по его словам, повреждения получила лишь крыша одного из частных домов.

Телеграм-каналы Baza и Mash сообщили, что дроны в Мурманской и Иркутской областях вылетали из фур, припаркованных на трассах неподалеку. Водитель фуры в Мурманской области задержан, Baza пишет, что он, вероятно, не знал о том, что находится в его автомобиле.

Губернатор Кобзев подтвердил, что дрон действительно вылетел из фуры. «Источник, откуда были выпущены дроны, уже блокирован. Это фура. Главное — не нужно поддаваться панике», — написал он в телеграм-канале.

Провоенный телеграм-канал «Рыбарь» сообщил, что в результате атаки российская армия потеряла несколько самолетов Ту-95М. «Как мы уже ранее говорили, борты стратегической авиации Ту-95 и Ту-22 давно сняты с производства и восстановить их нечем. Соотвественно, данные потери не восстановить. Это без преуменьшения очень серьезный урон стратегической составляющей, вызванный как серьезными просчетами в работе спецслужб, так и наплевательским отношением к авиатехнике, которая даже после всех атак стояла на открытом поле без укрытий», — пишет «Рыбарь».

В свою очередь канал Fighterbomber пишет: «Сегодняшний день позже назовут черным днем дальней авиации России. А день еще не закончился».

Как утверждают источники украинских СМИ, Служба безопасности Украины готовила спецоперацию «Паутина» более полутора лет, ход подготовки контролировал лично Владимир Зеленский.

Операцию называют сверхсложной с логистической точки зрения. Сначала якобы в Россию переправили FPV-дроны, а затем — мобильные деревянные ящики. В них были спрятаны дроны, после их разместили в грузовиках. В нужный момент беспилотники дистанционно активировали. Источники в украинской спецслужбе заявляют, что участники этой спецоперации уже давно находятся в Украине.

В общей сложности в ходе операции поражен 41 самолет стратегической авиации РФ, утверждают в СБУ.

Официально в Киеве операцию не комментировали.

На понедельник, 2 июня, запланирован новый раунд переговоров России и Украины в Стамбуле. Предполагается, что на нем стороны обменяются меморандумами, содержащими условия прекращения огня с каждой стороны.

Vasily Nebenzya, Permanent Representative of the Russian Federation to the United Nations, has stated that Russia is "in principle" ready to consider a ceasefire with Ukraine, but only if the other side takes reciprocal steps.

Source: Russian media, citing Nebenzya in a speech

Quote: "In principle, we are ready to consider the possibility of establishing a ceasefire regime, which could subsequently allow us to move towards a sustainable resolution of the root causes of the conflict. But for this, we must see reciprocal steps from the other side.

Advertisement:

For the duration of the ceasefire, at the very least, Western countries must stop supplying weapons to the Kyiv regime and Ukraine must halt mobilisation."

Details: Nebenzya said that Russia is not satisfied with a scenario that would allow Ukraine to "catch its breath, lick its wounds and stop the collapse of the eastern front".

Support Ukrainska Pravda on Patreon!

Russia is prepared to consider a ceasefire in its war against Ukraine, but only if Kyiv stops receiving Western weapons and halts mobilization, Vasily Nebenzya, Russia's envoy to the United Nations, said on May 30, according to the Russian state news agency TASS.

"In principle, we are ready to consider the possibility of establishing a ceasefire, which would subsequently allow for a sustainable resolution of the root causes of the conflict," Nebenzya said at a U.N. Security Council meeting.

Russia, a permanent member of the U.N. Security Council, convened the meeting to accuse European nations of undermining peace efforts. The Russian ambassador said that any ceasefire would require Western governments to end their support for Ukraine's armed forces.

"During the ceasefire, it is essential that Western countries stop supplying weapons to the Kyiv regime (the Ukrainian government) and that Ukraine halt its mobilization," Nebenzya said.

The statement comes just days ahead of the next round of peace talks in Istanbul on June 2. Despite the stated offer, Nebenzya also pledged that Moscow would "continue and intensify military operations for as long as necessary."

Ukraine swiftly rejected the demand as disingenuous.

Foreign Minister Andrii Sybiha called the remarks a "slap in the face to all who advocate for peace," including countries like China and Brazil, which have pressed both sides to end the war.

"When the entire world insists that it is time to stop the killing immediately and engage in meaningful diplomacy, Russia uses the highest fora to spew such belligerent rhetoric," Sybiha wrote on X.

"We insist that the pressure on Moscow be increased already now. They do not understand normal attitude or diplomatic language; it is time to speak to them in the language of sanctions and increased support for Ukraine."

Despite growing global calls for a truce, Russia has so far rejected Ukraine's U.S.-backed proposal for a full and unconditional ceasefire. The Kremlin has instead escalated its aerial assaults across Ukrainian territory and is reportedly preparing a new summer offensive.

Moscow is expected to present a draft "ceasefire memorandum" at the June 2 talks in Istanbul. Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said on May 29 that the proposal would be delivered by Kremlin aide Vladimir Medinsky, who led Russia's delegation at the previous round of talks.

President Volodymyr Zelensky's Chief of Staff Andriy Yermak said on May 29 that Kyiv is open to the talks but insists that Russia share the memorandum ahead of the meeting.

According to Reuters, Moscow's demands for ending the war include Ukraine's withdrawal from four partially occupied regions, a pledge to abandon NATO ambitions, and the lifting of key Western sanctions — conditions Kyiv and its allies have categorically rejected.

Представитель России в ООН Василий Небензя заявил на заседании Совета безопасности, что Запад должен на время перемирия остановить снабжение Украины оружием, а Украина — мобилизацию.

По словам Небензи, Москва готова провести второй раунд переговоров в Стамбуле в понедельник, чтобы обменяться с Киевом меморандумами о подходах к переговорному процессу. При этом Небензя заявил: "Мы будем продолжать сражаться столько, сколько это будет необходимо".

По словам американского представителя в Совбезе ООН, США разделяют обеспокоенность других членов совета о том, что "Россия может быть не заинтересована в мире и вместо этого стремится к достижению военной победы".

Ранее глава офиса президента Украины Андрей Ермак заявил, что делегация Киева готова принять участие во втором раунде переговоров с Россией в Стамбуле, но по-прежнему ждёт от Москвы меморандум об условиях мирного урегулирования конфликта. По словам Ермака, Киев заинтересован в конструктивной дискуссии, которая без документа невозможна. Украина свой уже подготовила.

Российские официальные лица не раз заявляли, что "меморандум почти готов" и скоро будет передан Украине, но, по последним данным этого не произошло.

В свою очередь, представитель МИД России Мария Захарова рассказала, что российская делегация привезёт на переговоры в Стамбул не только проект меморандума, но и другие предложения по прекращению огня. Деталей Захарова не раскрыла.

Представитель Кремля Дмитрий Песков в пятницу заявил журналистам, что до переговоров в Стамбуле положения как российского, так и украинского вариантов требований к миру раскрываться не будут.

• Первые с 2022 года прямые переговоры России и Украины состоялись 16 мая в Стамбуле. Их итогом стал обмен военнопленными по формуле "1000 на 1000" и формирование сторонами условий прекращения огня. Обмен состоялся с 23 по 25 мая.
• Позднее Украина заявила, что передала США и России меморандум с условиями мирного урегулирования. Он содержит положения о прекращении огня "на суше, на море и в воздухе", а также мониторинге соблюдения перемирия международными партнерами".

Donald Trump hosted an Oval Office press conference with Elon Musk on Friday to mark the end of the tech billionaire’s tenure as a special government employee overseeing the so-called “department of government efficiency”, or Doge.

Musk’s departure comes after weeks of increasing pressure over his time leading Doge, in which he slashed thousands of jobs, resources and public spending.

Here are the key takeaways from the event:

Российские официальные лица продолжают демонстрировать непримиримую позицию Кремля накануне предложенных переговоров в Стамбуле, запланированных на 2 июня, что свидетельствует о крайне низкой вероятности достижения на этой встрече каких-либо существенных результатов в поддержку устойчивого мира в Украине.

Об этом говорится в очередном отчете Института изучения войны (ISW).

Как отмечается в отчёте, постоянный представитель России при ООН Василий Небензя заявил на заседании Совета Безопасности ООН 30 мая, что Россия готова воевать с Украиной "столько, сколько потребуется", и что Украина может либо принять мир на российских условиях, либо столкнуться с неизбежным поражением на поле боя. Небензя также сказал, что США якобы "открыли глаза" на "коренные причины" войны в Украине, и повторил требования президента России Владимира Путина о прекращении поставок вооружений ВСУ со стороны Запада и остановке мобилизации в Украине в качестве предварительных условий для прекращения огня.

Генеральный директор Российского фонда прямых инвестиций (РФПИ) и специальный представитель президента по инвестициям и экономическому сотрудничеству с иностранными государствами Кирилл Дмитриев также потребовал устранить "коренные причины" конфликта в Украине в англоязычном сообщении в социальной сети X 30 мая. Ранее министр иностранных дел России Сергей Лавров определил "коренные причины" войны в Украине как расширение НАТО на восток после распада Советского Союза в 1991 году и якобы дискриминацию русскоязычного населения и русской культуры со стороны украинского правительства.

Представитель МИД РФ Мария Захарова заявила 29 мая, что российская делегация на предстоящих двусторонних переговорах в Стамбуле 2 июня будет "той же самой", что и на предыдущих переговорах 15–16 мая. Россия тогда направила делегацию низкого уровня, которую возглавил помощник президента Владимир Мединский, в состав делегации также вошли заместитель министра иностранных дел Михаил Галузин, начальник Главного управления Генштаба ВС РФ (ГРУ) Игорь Костюков и заместитель министра обороны Александр Фомин.

Решение российских официальных лиц повторять старые требования и направить ту же делегацию низкого уровня на следующую встречу в Стамбуле указывает на отсутствие у России интереса к добросовестным переговорам. Институт изучения войны (ISW) по-прежнему считает, что Россия стремится затянуть процесс мирных переговоров, чтобы продолжить наступательные действия на территории Украины и добиться дополнительных уступок от Киева и Запада.

The wife of a top Trump confidant is leaving the White House to work for Elon Musk after her stint at DOGE.

Katie Miller - the wife of influential White House Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller - worked as spokeswoman and advisor for DOGE until this week when it was reported by CNN that she will be departing the cost-cutting group to work for Musk full-time.

At the start of President Donald Trump's second term she was, like Musk, a 'Special Government Employee,' which means her role at DOGE was always expected to come to an end and could not exceed 130 days.

The former DOGE spokeswoman will now reportedly help the billionaire owner of SpaceX and Tesla in setting up media interviews.  

Musk has done several interviews this week on a recent SpaceX rocket launch, possibly indicating that Miller could already be organizing the tech founder's media schedule. 

Born in Fort Lauderdale, Florida, Miller has been involved in Republican politics since at least 2014, when she worked at the National Republican Senatorial Committee (NRSC) as a spokesperson. 

After her stint there, she went on to work for Sens. Steve Daines, R-Mont., and former Arizona Republican Martha McSally.

Following her work on Capitol Hill she served in the first Trump administration in a variety of different roles in communications and press, often interfacing with journalists.

Miller was a spokeswoman for the Department of Homeland Security and later the communications director for Vice President Mike Pence. 

During the first administration on February 16, 2020, she married Stephen Miller, then a senior adviser to the president.

The pair were married at the Trump Hotel in Washington, D.C., a hotel later sold by the president that is just blocks from the White House. 

They reportedly began dating shortly after she began with the vice president's office, likely putting her in the same White House office working areas as her future husband.  

The two now share a daughter and two sons.  

The news that she will work with Musk comes days after Stephen Miller, 39, a key Trump aide for a decade, appeared to correct Musk in a post on X. 

After Musk called Trump's 'One big, beautiful bill' a 'disappointment,' the deputy chief of staff wrote a lengthy statement explaining why it could not include DOGE cuts.

Musk officially quit his position as the head of DOGE this month and announced Wednesday he was stepping down from his role alongside Trump.

He is now set to dedicate more time to his private sector ventures.

'I think I probably did spend a bit too much time on politics,' Musk told Ars Technica this week.

'It's less than people would think, because the media is going to over-represent any political stuff, because political bones of contention get a lot of traction in the media.'

In addition to commenting on DOGE-related matters, Miller has been regularly posting about Musk's work at Tesla and SpaceX. 

It is unclear if she will be working at one of Musk's companies or through another venture.  

Israel’s laser weapons debut in combat as NATO eyes next-gen defenses. Low-cost, battlefield-proven tech—but geopolitics may block export deals.

The Defense Ministry’s confirmation that Rafael’s laser interception systems were used during the ongoing Swords of Iron war comes at a pivotal moment. NATO countries are preparing to raise their defense spending to 5% of gross domestic product (GDP), a shift expected to generate some €800 billion in procurement.

With Israeli companies Rafael Advanced Defense Systems and Elbit Systems already embedded in NATO supply chains, their next-generation laser systems could become Israel’s next multi-billion-dollar defense export—if diplomatic friction doesn’t block the path.

Despite more than 10,000 successful interceptions since 2011, Israel’s Iron Dome air-defense system—developed by Rafael—has never been sold as a full system to any foreign country. While the United Kingdom purchased its battle management center and the United States Marine Corps acquired its interceptors, no nation to date has received the complete platform.

This contrasts with the international success of other Israeli air-defense systems. The Arrow 3, developed by Israel Aerospace Industries (IAI), was sold to Germany in a $3.5 billion deal. David’s Sling, another Rafael system, was sold to Finland for €317 million. Rafael’s Barak MX system has racked up roughly $10 billion in global sales. Despite Iron Dome’s strong brand recognition, it has lagged behind these systems in terms of foreign adoption.

Meanwhile, other Israeli-made weapons have already become NATO standards. Rafael’s Spike anti-tank guided missiles have been sold in the billions of dollars and are produced in Germany, with previous manufacturing in Poland.

In recent years, Elbit’s PULS rocket artillery system has gained momentum, with confirmed sales to Germany, the Netherlands, and Denmark—alongside several undisclosed NATO members. Ukraine’s successful use of comparable systems against Russian targets has only added to the demand.

Israel's hopes for its defense technologies

Israel now hopes its laser-based interception technology will be next in line for global adoption—and it’s betting billions on it.

The Defense Ministry recently disclosed the existence of two laser systems: Magen Or (Iron Beam), a high-powered 100-kilowatt laser developed jointly by Rafael and Elbit Systems, and Lahav Barzel (Iron Sting), a smaller 30-kilowatt system designed by Rafael. Magen Or has intercepted short-range rockets at distances of up to 10 kilometers in tests. The IDF is expected to deploy an operational version by the end of the year.

Lahav Barzel, which was used in combat for the first time during Swords of Iron, is more compact and energy-efficient. Rafael and Israeli vehicle manufacturer Plasan have already developed a mobile version mounted on Plasan’s SandCat armored vehicle, enabling rapid redeployment between combat zones.

Footage released by the Defense Ministry showed Lahav Barzel successfully intercepting unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) launched by Hezbollah. The laser doesn’t obliterate the drones in dramatic fashion—rather, it focuses heat on the drone’s wing or fuselage until the structural integrity fails and the UAV crashes. The cost per interception is just a few dollars, limited to the electricity required to power the laser.

By contrast, using interceptor missiles or air-to-air munitions can cost hundreds of thousands of dollars per engagement. For American readers, that cost-efficiency could resonate strongly, particularly given current U.S. debates over defense budgets and aid allocations.

As warfare becomes increasingly reliant on drone technology—seen most visibly in Ukraine and Russia’s tit-for-tat strikes involving hundreds of UAVs each week—Israel’s laser defense systems offer something rare: proven battlefield results at a fraction of the price.

The case for Israel’s laser technology is not only tactical but financial. However, Rafael CEO Yoav Turgeman acknowledged that export success also depends on geopolitical considerations—particularly growing European criticism of Israeli operations in Gaza.

France, for example, reportedly attempted to dissuade Germany from purchasing the Arrow 3 system, and other European countries have downplayed their acquisitions of Israeli-made systems in response to domestic political concerns. While some European defense ministries are eager to procure Israeli technologies, officials are increasingly constrained by the political environment.

Nevertheless, the security rationale remains persuasive. NATO states such as Finland, Sweden, Poland, and Germany—countries increasingly concerned about potential Russian aggression—view laser interception systems as a vital new layer of defense. While the United States has deployed 60-kilowatt laser systems on naval vessels, Israel appears poised to be the first country to field a land-based laser system in operational service.

Director Dustin Wills, a 2023 Obie winner, is leading his first local operatic production.

Dustin Wills

Tchaikovsky has long been Russian culture’s most iconic queer figure: the equivalent of Oscar Wilde or Virginia Woolf in British arts circles. All three contracted conventional marriages, least happily the composer. His conflicted and largely gay romantic path partly fueled his most accessible and tuneful opera, 1879’s “Eugene Onegin,” based on Pushkin’s novel-in-verse. Heartbeat Opera, since its inception a decade ago as New York’s most excitingly innovative and inclusive opera company, presents New York’s first explicitly queer reimagining of “Onegin” this month. Brilliant gay director Dustin Wills, a 2023 Obie winner, helms his first local operatic production, and the superb Jacob Ashworth conducts from the fiddle.

LGBTQ+ personnel and sensibility are hardly in short supply in the opera world but Heartbeat, though open to everybody, trends queerer than most. Queer Heartbeat co-founder Dan Schlosberg (pianist/composer/conductor) has been called the troupe’s “secret sauce” for his incredibly skillful — and also playful — arrangements of the scores, often incorporating jazz, bluegrass, and electric rock elements when you least expect them. “For the Russian-ness of  ‘Onegin,’ which deploys nine musicians, we have our guitarist doubling balalaika. Plus there’s the harp for some dreamy parts — kind of a Russian and certainly queer special effect!” Tchaikovsky’s work — a pretty good “date opera”, by the way — plays alongside Schlosberg’s world première opera, “The Extinctionist,” about a young woman weighing childbearing given today’s environmental collapse. By design, Heartbeat foregrounds intersectional political content in many of their revisionist and (in a positive sense) provocative shows — with alternative sexuality, most notably in 2018’s “Fidelio” in which the title character was posing not as a man romancing the jailer Rocco’s daughter but (with Rocco’s approval) as a hot lesbian prospect. Schlosberg relishes the company’s annual Drag Extravaganzas, saying they’re “basically a big party to dress up and perform all kinds of arias and numbers with subtexts made explicit. Many younger people come and say they had no idea opera could be so cool — and we love that. Kind of a ‘gateway drug to opera’ thing.”

Wills and Ashworth have assembled a typically committed and diverse cast of attractive singing actors, centered on Indian baritone Edwin Joseph (Onegin) and Lebanese tenor Roy Hage (Lensky) and the sisters whose lives their shifting, ambiguous friendship complicates, Tatyana and Olga (Chicago-born soprano Emily Margevich, who just triumphed as Tatiana in Baltimore, and Mexican mezzo Sishel Claverie, Heartbeat’s terrific 2017 Carmen). In the rehearsal I attended, “The Talented Mr. Ripley” (in which scenes from “Eugene Onegin” actually figure) and “Top Gun” were bandied about in discussing the tragedy-bound bromance between the young aristocrats Onegin and Lenski.

Says Wills, “There’s a story here screaming to come out that I’ve never seen: the closest was Krzysztof Warlikowski’s “Brokeback Onegin” [in Munich], with lots of naked men in cowboy hats. I didn’t want to hit people over the head like that. Sexuality exists on a spectrum. Tchaikovsky’s recently-released letters show a very sophisticated individual dealing with his particular (for the time) issues with sexuality. That complexity brings a lot more to ‘Onegin’ than ‘boy meets girl, boy dumps girl, someone gets shot.’ In directing this, I think about my favorite writer, Lorca: sexually fluid, writing in a coded way with so much desire compacted together. All this desire eating these people alive, and they don’t know what to do with it! But it’s much more than just, ‘Oh — they’re gay!’ — which is pretty uninteresting. I like to think that Tchaikovsky has bisected himself into Onegin and Tatiana: each of them has what the other one needs, but can’t ever get it. So Olga and Lenski become the victims of this world that has placed this structure round them, keeping them from being the way they need to be.”

Wills’ complex reading of the two leading men’s overlapping desires and how the dynamics among “this strange little country romantic foursome” play out over time does not exclude moments of great humor alongside the teenage and 20-something angst, plus some explicitly hands-on experimentation between the guys during their big quarrel.

“The way the music and the text layer on the tension there, I’m like: I don’t know how else you would stage this! The mazurka there is the most sexual music in the whole score,” Wills said.

Wills stresses the interactivity of Heartbeat’s process; how he’s worked with Ashworth and Schlosberg to find moments that reinforce the concept but also challenge it. Then the singers come in with their insights and inspirations.

“Everybody’s in the mode of trying to get rid of their ideas of what they assume [“Eugene Onegin”] is, and come at it with fresh eyes,” Wills said.

Operalovers and those new to the form have seven chances to see what promises to be a fascinating and moving night in the theater.

“Eugene Onegin” | Heartbeat Opera | Baruch Performing Arts Center| 55 Lexington Ave., Manhattan | April 2-13 | Tickets from $10 | 100 minutes

The European Commission wants to increase EU clout in the strategically important Black Sea region, countering Russian influence through closer collaboration with Ukraine, Moldova, Georgia, Turkey, Azerbaijan and Armenia.

"Against a backdrop of Russia breaching airspace, attacking ports and shipping routes ... front and center of this work is improving security in the region," EU foreign affairs chief Kaja Kallas told reporters in Brussels on Wednesday, unveiling a new strategy for the region.

The Black Sea is a body of water bordering seven countries with its coast spanning two EU member states — Bulgaria and Romania— as well as EU accession candidates Georgia, Turkey and Ukraine, plus Russia. Moldova, another aspiring EU state, also has access via the Danube River.

Since the start of Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022, the Black Sea has been both a theatre of combat and the site of Russian blockades of Ukrainian grain exports, which are key to world food security.

More recently, the EU has grown concerned about potential Russian attacks on critical undersea infrastructure like cables needed for internet and communications as well as so-called "shadow fleet" shipping that helps Russia skirt EU sanctions on its oil exports, Kallas said.

What is the EU proposing?

In general, the plan is to further build on trade, energy and transport cooperation.

The most concrete aspect of the new proposal is to set up a "maritime security hub" to enhance "situational awareness and information sharing on the Black Sea, real-time monitoring from space to seabed, and early warning of potential threats and malicious activities," according to the strategy document.

Kallas said it could also help monitor a potential future ceasefire between Russia and Ukraine. Another goal is to support the buildup of regional transport infrastructure, in part "to improve military mobility so troops and equipment can be where they are needed, when they are needed," Kallas said.

However, where the hub would be based and which countries would be involved is not clear, nor is there any clarity on which financial resources would be allocated to it.

How might Black Sea countries respond?

While most Black Sea countries apart from Russia are on cooperative terms with the EU, some are more closely aligned with the 27-country bloc's agenda than others.

The governments of Ukraine and Moldova are striving to join the EU. Georgia and Turkey are also EU candidate countries although their bids to join are currently frozen. Armenia has drawn closer to the EU in recent years while Azerbaijan has a complex relationship with Russia and the EU.

Turkey is a close partner of the EU and member of the military alliance NATO but as a strong regional player, it also has its own interests to consider.

Like Russia, Turkey also has an interest in keeping the US and other NATO countries out of the Black Sea region, Stefan Meister, head of the Center for Order and Governance in Eastern Europe, Russia, and Central Asia at the German Council on Foreign Relations, or DGAP, said. Ankara is hedging its bets, fulfilling its obligations to NATO while trying not to provoke Moscow, he notes.

Ankara "understands Russia as a security threat, supports Ukraine in the war and does not agree with the Russian annexation of Crimea," Meister told DW. "But it benefits from the Western sanctions, still buys Russian resources and benefits from the trade with Ukraine." 

EU relationship with Black Sea region has changed

The EU first started taking a keener interest in the Black Sea region, which was traditionally dominated by Russia and Turkey, after Bulgaria and Romania joined the bloc in 2007. It is not alone: China has also increased its footprint there. Last year the Georgian government awarded the tender to construct a deep sea port at Anaklia to a Chinese conglomerate that includes entities under US sanctions.

Meister says it is a good thing that the EU is looking to take a more active role in security in the Black Sea with a monitoring hub. But much was still unclear, he stressed, referring to the lack of further details on participation, financing and resources for the new security hub.

On Wednesday, the European Commission said the next step would be to gather ministers from EU member states and Black Sea countries to discuss how to take the proposal forward. 

The European Union aims to strengthen its presence in the Black Sea, a region of renewed geostrategic value, by setting up a security hub that would protect critical infrastructure, remove naval mines, combat hybrid threats, mitigate environmental risks and ensure freedom of navigation for commerce.

The hub is primarily designed to counter Russia's expansionism in Eastern Europe and could eventually be employed to monitor and sustain a peace settlement in Ukraine.

"The Black Sea region is of great strategic importance to the European Union because of the connection (between) Central Asia and Europe. It is important because of security, trade and energy," High Representative Kaja Kallas said on Wednesday as she unveiled a new strategy to bolster ties with the Black Sea.

"But the region's potential is marred by Russia's war. Recurring airspace violations and attacks on ports and shipping lanes highlight this reality."

Notably, the strategy, which also touches upon transport, energy, digital networks, trade, climate change and the blue economy, lacks a specific financial envelope to realise its ambitions and instead builds upon other programmes under the EU budget, such as SAFE, the new €150-billion initiative of low-interest loans to boost defence spending.

The funding, location and operational model of the security hub will depend on the negotiations of the bloc's next seven-year budget, Kallas said.

The European Commission is expected to present the much-anticipated proposal for the 2028-2032 budget before the end of the year. The draft will then kick-start a prolonged, complex and possibly explosive debate among governments.

Brussels hopes the magnified importance of the Black Sea, which encompasses 174 million people, two member states (Romania and Bulgaria) and four candidates to join the bloc (Turkey, Ukraine, Moldova and Georgia), will convince capitals to bet on the strategy and provide the necessary funds. The plan may also benefit from the fiscal effort that most member states will have to make to meet NATO's likely future 5% of GDP target.

Chasing the 'shadow fleet'

One of the main threats that inspired the strategy is the "shadow fleet", the old-age tankers that Russia has deployed to circumvent the G7 price cap on seaborne oil.

The fleet, present in both the Black Sea and Baltic Sea, uses obscure insurance and ownership to escape the surveillance of Western allies and engages in illicit practices at sea, such as transmitting false data and becoming invisible to satellite systems. Its condition is so poor that it has stoked fears of an environmental disaster.

In recent months, "shadow fleet" vessels have been accused of engaging in sabotage and vandalism against the EU's critical infrastructure, fuelling calls for hard-hitting sanctions. Estonia has warned that Moscow is ready to provide military assistance to protect the decrepit tankers from inspections and seizures.

On Wednesday, Kallas admitted the "shadow fleet" was becoming a "bigger problem" for the EU. "We see our adversaries finding new ways to use it," she said.

Asked if Brussels should set up an EU-wide military mission to keep a closer eye on the "shadow fleet", Kallas appeared open to the idea but acknowledged the limitations imposed by international law, which provides for the right of innocent passage that compels all states to guarantee unimpeded, non-discriminatory transit.

The right entails a heavy burden of proof to justify the intervention of a foreign vessel.

"The discussions are ongoing," Kallas said. "We need to work also with our intentional partners to address these concerns (such as) when you can stop the ships. They need much broader attention than only the European Union."

CNN  — 

Elon Musk raised concerns about President Donald Trump’s sweeping tax and spending cuts package, saying in a video released Tuesday that he believes it would raise the US budget deficit and undercut efforts by the Department of Government Efficiency.

“I was disappointed to see the massive spending bill, frankly, which increases the budget deficit, not just decreases it, and undermines the work that the DOGE team is doing,” the tech billionaire and Trump donor told “CBS Sunday Morning.” “I think a bill can be big or it can be beautiful, but I don’t know if it can be both.”

Trump’s “big, beautiful bill” includes trillions of dollars in tax cuts and a big boost to the US military and to national security spending – largely paid for by overhauls to federal health and nutrition programs and cuts to energy programs. The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office estimates that the bill would pile another $3.8 trillion to the deficit. It narrowly passed the House last week, and now heads to the Senate, where it will likely face many changes.

Musk’s comments come amid a media tour ahead of a SpaceX test flight Tuesday evening. Musk is stepping away from full-time government work to focus on his companies, including SpaceX and Tesla, which have struggled in part as a result of Musk’s alliance with the Trump administration.

He noted the move in an interview with Ars Technica on Tuesday, hours before SpaceX’s Starship test flight.

“I think I probably did spend a bit too much time on politics, it’s less than people would think, because the media is going to over-represent any political stuff, because political bones of contention get a lot of traction in the media,” he said when asked whether he feels his focus on politics over the past year has “harmed” SpaceX. “It’s not like I left the companies. It was just relative time allocation that probably was a little too high on the government side, and I’ve reduced that significantly in recent weeks.”

Musk also noted last week that he’ll spend “a lot less” money on politics in the future, but it’s still not clear whether the remarks signal any change in his pledge to commit $100 million into political groups controlled by the president. Musk previously spent more than $290 million to help get Trump and GOP congressional candidates elected in November. Musk-linked groups also shelled out more than $20 million on a Wisconsin Supreme Court race earlier this year that his preferred candidate ultimately lost.

Musk also continued to defend the work DOGE has been doing in Washington, telling the Washington Post on Tuesday that the team has become a “whipping boy.”

“DOGE is just becoming the whipping boy for everything,” he said. “So, like, something bad would happen anywhere, and we would get blamed for it even if we had nothing to do with it.”

CNN has previously reported that DOGE is poised to continue its work even as Musk steps back, with staffers to remain in place, embedded across federal agencies, for months or years to come.

CNN’s Hadas Gold contributed to this report.