EU court overturns Commission’s denial of access to von der Leyen-Pfizer text messages
(Photo by Thierry Monasse/Getty Images)
By Thomas Brooke | Remix News | May 14, 2025
The General Court of the European Union on Wednesday annulled the European Commission’s refusal to grant a New York Times journalist access to text messages exchanged between Commission President Ursula von der Leyen and Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla.
According to a communication published on Wednesday, the judgment concluded that the Commission failed to provide a credible explanation for its claim that it no longer holds the requested messages, which were allegedly sent during Covid-19 vaccine procurement negotiations.
The ruling comes in response to a 2022 request by Matina Stevi, a Brussels-based journalist with The New York Times, who sought access to all text messages exchanged between von der Leyen and Bourla between Jan. 1, 2021, and May 11, 2022. The Commission denied the request, stating that it possessed no such documents. Stevi and The New York Times challenged that decision before the EU’s General Court.
The full transcript of the Court’s ruling was published on its website.
On May 11, 2022, Stevi submitted a formal request to the European Commission seeking access to the text messages. The request was registered by the Commission the following day, on May 12. When the Commission failed to respond within the time frame set by EU transparency rules, Stevi’s legal representative filed an initial confirmatory application on June 28, 2022, reiterating the request for access.
On July 20, 2022, the Commission responded to the initial application, stating that it did not possess any documents corresponding to the request. In response, Stevi’s representative submitted a second confirmatory application on Aug. 9, 2022, which was formally registered the same day. Later that month, on Aug. 31, the Commission notified Stevi that the deadline for its response would be extended by 15 working days, setting a new target date of Sept. 21.
On Sept. 21, the Commission informed Stevi that the assessment of her application had been completed but that the draft decision still required approval from its Legal Service. Nearly two months later, on Nov. 16, 2022, the Commission issued its final decision, reiterating that it did not hold any of the requested text messages and therefore could not grant access.
The Court found that the Commission’s justification was insufficient and that Stevi and The New York Times had provided “relevant and consistent evidence” showing that such messages had existed. The Commission, it said, failed to meet its obligations under the Access to Documents Regulation and the principle of good administration as enshrined in the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights.
The judgment scrutinized the Commission’s procedural conduct, noting that it relied on assumptions and imprecise information throughout the request process. It also emphasized that public institutions must document and retain information related to their activities in a “non-arbitrary and predictable manner.”
In its decision, the Court stated that “despite those imprecisions, [the Commission] maintains that it does not possess the requested documents, with the result that it is for the applicants to produce relevant and consistent evidence capable of rebutting the presumption of non-possession of those documents.”
That presumption was indeed rebutted, the Court held, by a New York Times article and transcripts of interviews conducted by Stevi with both von der Leyen and Bourla in April 2021. The article reported that for a month during vaccine talks, von der Leyen and Bourla “had been exchanging texts and telephone calls.” In the interview transcript, Bourla said that “[the Commission President and I] exchanged text messages, if there was something that we needed to discuss,” and that von der Leyen had “sent me her phone [number].” These statements provided sufficient grounds for the Court to determine that the text messages likely existed at some point.
The Commission, by contrast, was found to have offered no credible detail about the searches it had conducted for the messages or about their fate. “It remains impossible to know with certainty,” the Court wrote, “whether the requested text messages still exist or whether they have been deleted and, if so, whether such a deletion took place deliberately or automatically.” The Commission also failed to clarify whether von der Leyen’s mobile phone had been replaced, and if so, what happened to the previous device and its data.
“The Commission did not provide in the contested decision any plausible explanation as to why it had not been able to find the requested documents,” the Court held.
Furthermore, the Court rejected the Commission’s argument that the messages did not constitute official documents because they were allegedly short-lived or lacked policy significance. Even if the messages were not registered in its document system, the Commission was still obligated to retain and account for them under EU transparency rules. “Institutions cannot deprive of all substance the right of access to documents which they hold by failing to register the documentation relating to their activities,” the Court held.
The Commission’s handling of the request, the Court concluded, “breached the principle of good administration laid down in Article 41 of the Charter.”
As a result, it annulled the Commission’s decision and ordered the institution to pay the applicants’ legal costs.
The judgment has led to calls for greater transparency within EU institutions and among the bloc’s leaders.
Rob Roos, a former Dutch MEP who was vice-president of the European Conservatives and Reformists (ECR) group in the European Parliament during the now-dubbed “Pfizergate scandal,” wrote how his legal challenge against the Commission was dismissed at the time.
“My case as an MEP was ruled inadmissible, while a foreign newspaper was accepted. Transparency isn’t optional. Democracy demands it. Back to court,” he wrote on X.
Hungarian MEP András László slammed the corruption scandals at the highest level in Brussels, which he claimed keep piling up. “Europeans want change in Brussels. We deserve better leadership! Qatargate, Pfizergate, Hololei, Reynders and money laundering, Green Deal and Timmermans, fake NGOs… The interests of Europeans are being sold out. Enough is enough!”
Several other European lawmakers demanded that the text messages now finally be released to see what agreements were reached over Covid-19 vaccines between von der Leyen and Bourla.
“She should have made her text messages in the Pfizergate affair public,” said Dutch MEP Marieke Ehlers. “This proves the need for the parliamentary commission of inquiry into transparency proposed by the Patriots for Europe [parliamentary group].”
Anna Bryłka, Polish MEP for the right-wing Confederation, and Spanish MEP Hermann Tertsch of Vox, went further, calling on von der Leyen to resign following the judgment.
The European Commission is yet to formally respond to the judgment.
Let’s just get on with the planned Istanbul peace talks on Thursday, whether or not Putin and Zelensky meet
By Ian Proud | Strategic Culture Foundation | May 14, 2025
As we gear up for the first direct talks between Russia and Ukraine since the failed Istanbul talks of March 2022, a complex game of brinkmanship is underway.
Not surprisingly, in my view, President Putin ignored the coalition of the willing’s ultimatum to Russia to embark on an unconditional ceasefire for thirty days or face massive new sanctions. Instead he proposed what the Americans have been pushing for since Trump assumed office, direct bilateral talks with Ukraine in Istanbul on Thursday 15 May.
I have long argued that the only route out of the war in Ukraine is through talks. Compromise was offered by both sides in the first round of Istanbul talks in March 2022. Any new negotiations will require compromise from both sides, but the difference today is that the cards are more heavily stacked in Russia’s favour than they were in 2022.
Against this backdrop, President Zelensky has called on President Putin to meet him personally in Istanbul on Thursday. From my perspective, this appears an attempt to call off talks if Putin doesn’t show up.
Usually, when Heads of State meet, officials will have hammered out the negotiation for some time before hand. The leaders can then arrive and either sign on the dotted line or tackle the most difficult issues one on one. It’s now Tuesday 13 May. There is simply no way that Russian and Ukrainian officials will have lined up the framework for a deal for both leaders to sign in Istanbul on Thursday.
Even if Putin showed up on Thursday, Zelensky isn’t going to announce unilaterally that Ukraine is giving up its NATO ambition before the full negotiations have even started. Whether you agree or not, this is self-evidently Russia’s core ‘root cause’ of the war. The new German Foreign Minister, Johann Wadephul recently repeated the line that Ukraine’s path to NATO is irreversible, even though the Trump administration disagrees.
A form of words on Ukraine’s NATO aspiration that is agreeable to both sides in the war will take time to draft. And there’s a huge list of other detailed points that have to be addressed, including the line of control, the role of military forces from other states, the return of Ukrainian children, the protection of minority languages and so on.
Every statement that Zelensky has made since the war started has emphasised the need for the west to pile more pressure on Russia to ensure ultimate victory. He would meet Putin in Istanbul without the back slapping adulation that he receives in western capitals and with no pressure cards in his back pocket.
That doesn’t mean I think a meeting shouldn’t happen, because I do. The image of both war times leaders meeting in Istanbul, however awkward and uncomfortable, could be deeply symbolic in announcing the commencement of long overdue peace talks between officials. They could agree, face to face, to maintain a ceasefire for as long as those peace talks continued.
But no leader likes to turn up to any international meeting without the preparatory ground work in place. There is deep enmity between Putin and Zelensky for obvious reasons. Given Zelensky’s penchant for publicity stunts, the Russian side would want to be absolutely sure that the choreography of any meeting and the deliverables – what they would announce, however limited – had been agreed.
Putin will know that if he does not now turn up to Istanbul that Zelensky will hit the international airwaves calling for massive sanctions. But that if he meets Zelensky and a comprehensive deal isn’t agreed there and then – a frankly impossible feat it seems to me – then the same calls for massive sanctions against Russia will be made.
Of course, Putin will also know that Europe can’t muster new sanctions massive enough to make a difference at this late stage in the process, having exhausted most avenues since 2014. On Victory Day, Britain unilaterally announced the ‘biggest ever sanctions package’ against Russia’s so-called shadow fleet of oil tankers. The idea that unseaworthy hulks are carrying illicit Russian oil into Britain is obviously fanciful. But in any case, with the global oil price now close to the G7 oil price cap on Russian oil, the idea of a shadow fleet, delivering oil at its market rate, has fallen away. Britain’s February sanctions package against 107 persons and entities was labelled the largest sanctions package since 2022. Let’s be clear, the biggest sanctions package against Russia was imposed in February 2022, and everything since that time has offered diminishing marginal returns.
But that’s not really the point. By trying to force a showdown in Istanbul, Zelensky may want to continue to paint Russia as the aggressor and to press the case for more military aid, having asked for three million new artillery shells during his recent trip to Prague. However, this war really must now end, having blighted over one million lives already.
Boris Johnson was wrong in March 2022 to discourage Zelensky from accepting the first Istanbul peace deal precisely because he could not back up the promise that he made; to support Ukraine for as long as it takes. Even though Britain continues to pump £4.5bn in yearly military aid into Ukraine, that sum pales against the free aid that the U.S. offered under Joe Biden.
Trump is offering nothing more now than to plunder Ukraine’s resources so that it can buy American weapons, and Europe cannot afford to make up the difference, for as long as it takes. Ukraine is still losing on the battlefield and now, apparently, treating its traumatised troops with ketamine to help them deal with the PTSD.
Despite significant risks around inflation and high interest rates caused by the enormous fiscal splurge on its war economy, Russia is still growing at a respectable rate. Europe is not.
For now, President Putin is keeping his powder dry by not responding to Zelensky’s relentless press stunts. It’s clear to me that Russia’s initiative of a second round of Istanbul peace talks from Thursday is essential in edging both sides closer to a cessation of the killing that should have ended over three years ago. Whether or not both leaders meet at the start or at the end of those negotiations, let’s just please get down to the business of talking.
Hungary’s new sovereignty law: A firm stand against foreign influence
By Zoltán Kovács – About Hungary – May 14, 2025
On May 13, 2025, a new bill titled “On the Transparency of Public Life” was submitted to the Hungarian parliament. The proposal comes at a critical time when national sovereignty and democratic self-determination face mounting pressures from global influence networks. This legislation marks a significant step in Hungary’s commitment to shielding its public life from covert foreign interference.
The bill was introduced in response to escalating concerns about foreign-funded organizations and their involvement in shaping Hungary’s political discourse. Investigations and public disclosures in recent years have revealed that millions of dollars, primarily from American and Brussels-based entities, were funneled into Hungarian civil society groups and media outlets with clear ideological agendas. The government argues that these funds have been used not to strengthen democracy, but to distort it, aiming to manipulate voter sentiment and policy outcomes to suit external interests.
At the core of the proposed law is a simple but powerful principle: Democratic decision-making must reflect the will of the Hungarian people, not that of foreign powers or their proxies. The bill asserts that public life, including political activity and discourse, must be free from the influence of foreign financial resources. It expands the definition of foreign-funded influence to cover all legal entities and civil organizations whose activities, backed by external support, target national decision-making processes including elections, legislative debates, and public opinion shaping.
Just as the United States began cleaning house, freezing USAID funding, and initiating a major restructuring after widespread scandals, Hungary is also taking decisive steps to defend its democracy from covert political influence.
The legislation introduces a registry system for entities that engage in such activities. If passed, the Sovereignty Protection Office will identify organizations whose foreign-funded efforts jeopardize Hungary’s constitutional values. These organizations will be listed, required to obtain state approval before receiving any foreign support, and their leaders have to file public asset declarations. Violations, such as accepting funds without approval, can lead to fines of up to 25 times the value of unauthorized support, or even a ban on further public engagement.
Crucially, the bill builds upon overwhelming public support. A recent national consultation revealed that over 98 percent of respondents back stronger measures to defend Hungary’s sovereignty and oppose foreign political influence. These figures highlight a deep societal consensus: that Hungary’s future must be determined by Hungarians alone.
Far from restricting legitimate civic activity, the bill aims to restore transparency and accountability in the political process. Just as political parties are banned from receiving foreign funds under EU rules, non-party actors should be subject to scrutiny when their operations affect public decision-making.
In today’s geopolitical climate, defending sovereignty is no longer a theoretical concern, it is a practical necessity. Hungary’s new legislation sets a precedent in protecting democratic institutions from external manipulation and reaffirms the nation’s right to self-governance.
If passed, this bill will be more than just a legal reform—it will be a declaration that in Hungary, democracy belongs to the people, not to foreign financiers.
France can’t give Ukraine any more arms – Macron
RT | May 14, 2025
France has reached the limit of its military support for Ukraine, French President Emmanuel Macron has said.
In a televised interview with TF1 on Tuesday, Macron defended his administration’s handling of the Ukraine conflict, saying the French have done “the maximum we could” to help Kiev, given that the country’s military was not set up to conduct a protracted, high-intensity land war.
”We gave away everything we had,” Macron said. “But we can’t give away what we don’t have, and we can’t strip ourselves of what is necessary for our own security.” He noted that France’s approach, coordinated with those of other Western donors, aims to avoid direct confrontation with a nuclear-armed power.
France has committed more than €3.7 billion ($4.1 billion) in military assistance to Ukraine since the escalation of the conflict in February 2022, according to the Kiel Institute’s aid tracker. Macron highlighted efforts to scale up the domestic defense industry to continue supplying arms.
The remarks came as the French government struggles with an economic crisis. The national budget deficit hit 5.8% last year, once again surpassing the 3% threshold recommended for EU members. Public debt has climbed above 110% of GDP, and economic forecasts predict growth of less than 1% in 2025. Macron is also facing increased challenges in pushing legislation through parliament.
The TF1 broadcast opened with a montage of public criticism, including accusations that Macron has mismanaged the economy, treated ordinary citizens with contempt, and focused too heavily on foreign affairs. One citizen described him as “a president who practically wants to send us to war.”
Macron advocates for deploying French troops to Ukraine in the event of a peace deal between Kiev and Moscow, arguing that such a move could help deter Russia.
Moscow has repeatedly warned it would not accept any NATO presence in Ukraine, citing the military bloc’s expansion in Europe as a core reason for the conflict. Russia views the war as a US-led proxy campaign, with local troops serving as “cannon fodder.”
Direct talks between Russia and Ukraine, which Kiev called off in 2022, are expected to resume this week in Türkiye. Kiev has demanded that President Vladimir Putin participate in person and urged its Western backers to impose new sanctions if he refuses. Moscow has yet to confirm its delegation.
Moscow reacts to UN aviation agency’s MH17 vote
RT | May 13, 2025
Russia has rejected the UN civilian aviation agency’s claims that it was responsible for the 2014 downing of the Malaysia Airlines flight over eastern Ukraine. Moscow insisted that the Dutch-led investigation into the incident was politically motivated and relied on “questionable” evidence submitted by Kiev.
“Moscow’s principal position remains that Russia was not involved in the crash of MH17, and that all statements to the contrary by Australia and the Netherlands are false,” the Foreign Ministry said on its website on Tuesday.
The statement came after the Council of the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) voted that Russia failed to uphold its obligation to “refrain from resorting to the use of weapons against civil aircraft in flight.”
Malaysia Airlines Flight 17 (MH17) was shot down in eastern Ukraine on July 17, 2014, killing all 298 people on board, most of whom were Dutch, Malaysian, and Australian nationals. The incident occurred as Ukrainian troops were attempting to retake the self-proclaimed republics of Donetsk and Lugansk, which voted to secede following the Western-backed coup in Kiev. The two entities later voted to become part of Russia in September 2022.
In 2015, the investigation – conducted by the Netherlands, Australia, Belgium, Malaysia, and Ukraine – concluded that the plane was shot down by a Soviet-era Buk surface-to-air missile system delivered by Russia to the Donbass militias. Moscow denied providing heavy weapons to local forces and argued that the aircraft was hit by a version of the missile used by Ukrainian, not Russian, troops. It also criticized its exclusion from the investigation.
The Foreign Ministry condemned the ICAO Council’s decision as politically motivated, alleging “multiple procedural violations.” It said the ICAO ignored “ample and convincing factual and legal evidence” submitted by Russia to demonstrate its non-involvement in the shootdown.
“The conclusions of the Dutch investigation were based on the testimonies of anonymous witnesses – whose identities were classified – as well as on questionable information and materials submitted by a biased party: the Security Service of Ukraine,” the statement read.
The Foreign Ministry added that Ukraine should ultimately be blamed for the tragedy because Kiev “launched a military operation in Donbass under the false pretense of combating terrorism.”
Speaking to reporters on Tuesday, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said that, because Russia was not part of the investigation, it “does not accept biased conclusions.”
Ian Proud: Ukraine Peace Talks or Political Theatre?
Glenn Diesen | May 13, 2025
Ian Proud was a member of His Majesty’s Diplomatic Service from 1999 to 2023. Ian was a senior officer at the British Embassy in Moscow from July 2014 to February 2019, at a time when UK-Russia relations were particularly tense. He performed a number of roles in Moscow, including as Head of Chancery, Economic Counsellor – in charge of advising UK Ministers on economic sanctions – Chair of the Crisis Committee, Director of the Diplomatic Academy for Eastern Europe and Central Asia and Vice Chair of the Board at the Anglo-American School.
Ian Proud’s Substack: https://thepeacemonger.substack.com/
Follow Prof. Glenn Diesen:
Substack: https://glenndiesen.substack.com/
Israeli massacre at Gaza hospital leaves at least 28 killed, 70 injured
Al Mayadeen | May 13, 2025
In a new escalation of its ongoing war on Gaza, the Israeli occupation military committed a massacre at the Gaza European Hospital on Tuesday evening, targeting the facility and its surroundings in Khan Younis, southern Gaza, with a series of intensive airstrikes.
Al Mayadeen’s correspondent reported that the Israeli airstrikes struck multiple sections of the hospital, including the entrance to the emergency department, the courtyard between the maintenance and anthropology departments, and areas adjacent to two shelter centers: Ehsan al-Agha and Jenin.
The attack caused extensive destruction and resulted in multiple fatalities and injuries, with bodies still trapped under the rubble.
Gaza Civil Defense: At least 28 killed, 70 injured
According to Gaza Civil Defense spokesperson Mahmoud Basal, the bodies of 28 martyrs were recovered from the area around the Gaza European Hospital, which had come under fire belts by the Israeli military. He added that more than 70 people were injured, many of them seriously.
The hospital was reportedly hit with at least six missiles, leading to the collapse of several facilities and severe structural damage. Following the attack, Nasser Medical Complex in Khan Younis, southern Gaza, declared a state of maximum emergency, unable to cope with the influx of casualties or take on the burden of patients transferred from the now-disabled hospital.
Medical teams were forced to evacuate the wounded and patients from the Gaza European Hospital to Nasser Medical Complex, as the infrastructure of the former could no longer support medical operations.
The actual death toll is expected to be higher as rescue operations remain obstructed by continuous air raids.
In the early hours of Tuesday, Israeli occupation forces bombed the burn unit of Nasser Medical Hospital, killing several Palestinians, including renowned journalist Hassan Eslaih, whose powerful and unflinching photography has brought global attention to the harrowing massacres committed since the outset of the Israeli genocide.
Palestinian Resistance denies claims about targeted leader
In response to Israeli media reports suggesting that a Palestinian Resistance leader was present at the hospital site, a senior figure in the Resistance affirmed that such claims were untrue.
“Loser Netanyahu is trying to please the Zionist right by claiming that he is achieving success in Gaza,” the senior figure indicated.
Civil Defense condemns Israeli targeting of rescue teams
Gaza’s Civil Defense confirmed that its teams remain unable to access the site of the massacre due to heavy and continuous Israeli shelling. Attempts to retrieve the remaining bodies scattered around the Gaza European Hospital have been thwarted by the Israeli occupation’s deliberate targeting of rescuers.
In a statement, the Civil Defense condemned the attack on its personnel as they attempted to evacuate civilians from a bombed residential building near the customs checkpoint in eastern Khan Younis. The same building was bombed again by Israeli forces while the rescue operation was underway, injuring two crew members and forcing the team to retreat without being able to save trapped civilians.
Continued Israeli raids on Khan Younis, Gaza City
Simultaneously, Israeli strikes continued across other parts of Khan Younis. Two civilians were killed and others injured in an Israeli airstrike on a tent near the Asdaa Gate, west of the city. Another round of airstrikes hit Aabasan al-Kabira, east of Khan Younis.
Elsewhere, Civil Defense teams reported recovering 10 bodies and 16 injured civilians from the Afghan family home, targeted by Israeli warplanes near the customs checkpoint in eastern Khan Younis.
In Gaza City, Israeli shelling was concentrated on eastern neighborhoods, including al-Shujaiya, al-Zaytun, al-Tuffah, and the area near al-Shawa Square, resulting in additional casualties and widespread destruction.
Gaza death toll surpasses 52,900
The Gaza Ministry of Health announced earlier on Tuesday that the death toll from the ongoing Israeli war on Gaza since October 7, 2023, has now exceeded 52,900 martyrs, with more than 119,700 injured. Since March 18 alone, over 2,700 have been martyred and more than 7,600 wounded.
Hundreds of bodies remain under the rubble and in the streets, unreachable due to relentless Israeli attacks and debris blocking access.
Ambulance and Civil Defense teams face immense challenges in responding, as they themselves are targeted in what officials describe as a systematic effort to paralyze rescue efforts.
Are UK Atrocities in Afghanistan a Smokescreen for IDF Defenders?
Sputnik – 13.05.2025
Emerging reports about atrocities perpetrated by British special forces against civilians in Afghanistan may be a part of a “preemptive defense” of the IDF, former Pentagon analyst Ret. Lt. Col. Karen Kwiatkowski told Sputnik.
If and when stories of “the incredibly disturbing activities of the UK- and US-supported IDF in Gaza” come out, the public would already be taught beforehand that “war is awful, civilians and sleeping children are always killed and it’s just a few bad apples.”
Regarding the UK soldiers and officers involved in illegal activities in Afghanistan, Kwiatkowski believes they should be placed on unpaid leave and “tried in a legal court.”
Any key eyewitnesses and whistleblowers “need immediate protection from suicide or accidents,” Kwiatkowski adds.
Key lessons from the Recent India-Pakistan escalation
By Lucas Leiroz | Strategic Culture Foundation | May 13, 2025
Recent developments in the India-Pakistan conflict indicate that New Delhi has suffered a significant military humiliation. Despite the ceasefire allegedly mediated by Washington, reports suggest that hostilities are ongoing — implying that the agreement was either never respected or was quickly broken by one of the parties.
It is unclear whether Islamabad abandoned the path of peace after gaining an advantage on the battlefield, or whether it was India that, unwilling to accept its military defeat, chose to resume offensive actions. The fact remains: tensions are far from resolved, and the international perception is that India severely underestimated Pakistan’s response capabilities.
It is remarkable, from any point of view, that Indian strategists acted as if they could launch strikes inside the territory of a nuclear power without facing serious retaliation. This is a major miscalculation, revealing political amateurism and serious failures in military intelligence.
Even more troubling is New Delhi’s diplomatic conduct at the height of the tension. Amid Iranian efforts to mediate — a country with which India maintains long-standing strategic relations — Indian officials went so far as to publicly insult the Iranian Foreign Minister, with a high-ranking military officer calling him a “pig” on national TV during his official visit to India’s capital. This behavior not only undermines key diplomatic ties but also highlights the disorientation and arrogance currently affecting some key segments of Indian society.
The broader context of this crisis becomes even more concerning when one considers the direct involvement of Israeli “experts” in India’s decision-making apparatus following the Pahalgam attack. The decision to call in military advisors from Israel is neither neutral nor effective. The recent history of the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) in dealing with asymmetric enemies is, at best, questionable: its repeated failures against Hezbollah, Hamas, and other supposedly “weaker” adversaries in the Middle East should have served as a warning to India.
It is unwise, to say the least, for a major power like India to entrust a substantial part of its national defense strategy to a foreign military doctrine whose effectiveness is increasingly problematic and doubtful. Israel’s obsession with disproportionate shows of strength, combined with a tendency to underestimate smaller adversaries, appears to have infected Indian strategic thinking in this recent episode.
New Delhi now faces a delicate situation: it seeks to maintain its image as a respectable regional power, yet it cannot conceal the operational and diplomatic failures of recent weeks. Pakistan’s response, by contrast, has been militarily effective and politically coordinated — something India has failed to do during the clash.
Meanwhile, the international community watches with growing concern as tensions escalate between two nuclear powers. Fears of a larger, prolonged conflict are rising, and India’s unpreparedness in handling the crisis only deepens these anxieties.
This case should serve as a lesson. Military strategy requires sobriety, precision, and, above all, realism. Underestimating the enemy, insulting long-time allies, and importing failed military doctrines are a certain path to strategic disaster.
If India wishes to preserve its stability, sovereignty and international position, it must reevaluate not only its stance toward Pakistan but also its entire strategic decision-making framework — including the dangerous influence of foreign consultants who know more about propaganda than real victories.
The DeepSeek moment for modern air combat – lessons from the Pakistan India air war
The war of systems will define the future rather than stand-alone weapons
By Hua Bin | May 12, 2025
The world just witnesses a shockingly one-sided air war between Pakistan and India last week. Pakistan air force, equipped with Chinese weapon systems, took down a large number of India air combat assets while suffering zero loss.
The air battle featured Chinese-made J-10C fighters, PL-15 air to air missiles, HQ-9 air defense system, and ZDK-03 AWACS. Reported India losses included 3 French-made Rafale fighters, 1 Russia-made Su-30, 1 MiG-29, and 1 Israel-made Heron UAV.
What makes the outcome so shocking is that the Rafale fighter, sold to India at $240 million each, is often lauded as the most advanced European fighter jet, didn’t manage to put up any fight in the confrontation with J-10C. The Mica and Meteor air-to-air missiles carried by Rafale were discovered intact/unfired in the wreckage.
J-10C, by no means a backward fighter, is considered as well past its prime in the Chinese air force whose more advanced fighters include J-20, J-35 (both 5th generation stealth fighters), J-16, J-15 (4.5th generation multirole fighters), let alone the 6th generation fighters (J-36 and J-50) that are being tested.
J-10C is mainly for exports these days. Pakistan has acquired them at $40 million per unit. A few Middle Eastern nations are also considering the jet, including Egypt. Typically Chinese military export is one or one and a half generation behind what the PLA equips itself.
In all fairness, Rafale would be a strong match against J-10C in a head-to-head dog fight. At $240 million, it is even for more expensive than F-35.
Then, how did the Indian air force suffer such a humiliating one-sided loss against a much smaller Pakistan air force?
The answer lies in the strength of the integrated Chinese weapon system used by Pakistan.
Rather than using a hodgepodge of weapons sourced from France, Russia, Israel, and the US, as is the case with India, Pakistan utilized a full suite of highly integrated and synchronised air combat systems from China that include –
– J-10C fighter jet – a 4th generation multirole lighter fighter with a KLJ-7A AESA radar whose detection range exceeds 300km. With gallium nitride technology, it can lock onto the Rafale’s RBE-2 gallium arsenide radar signature 60-100 km before the Rafale even detects it. In modern air war, who sees first fires first.
– PL-15 air to air missile – one of the deadliest beyond visual range air to air missile with strike range over 200km. The PL-15E, the export version, still has a strike range of 150km, significantly longer than the 80km range of the Mica or the 100km range of Meteor, the most advanced European air to air missile.
– HQ-9 air defense system – this older generation Chinese air defense system (the newer one is HQ-19 with much longer range) has a maximum range of 200 km up to an altitude of 30km. While it has a significant shorter effective range than the Russian S-400 system (400km range), it enjoys a seamless data link with the J-10C fighter and PL-15E missile that automatically handles both fighter and missile guidance in combat
– ZDK-03 AWACs – again this is an older Chinese early warning planes, two generations from PLA air force most advanced systems (KJ-3000 and KJ-700). It is tailor-made for the Pakistan air force by China. The AWAC features an Active Electronically Scanned Arrange (AESA) radar with 360-degree coverage, capable of detecting and tracking up to 100 aerial targets, including low-flying and stealth jets. Importantly, ZDK-03 features an integrated sensor and communications suite, including Missile Approach Warning Systems (MAWS) and can maintain data links with ground command centers and friendly aircraft for real-time battlefield coordination.
With Link 17, a two-way communication data link China has helped Pakistan develop, the HQ-9 air defense system passes the Indian Rafale fighter information to the J-10C fighter which fires the PL-15E air to air missile well beyond the range of Rafale’s own missiles. Then the ZDK-03 AWAC maintains the data link with the missile and guides it toward the target.
PLA’s internal data link systems, such as XS-3 and DTS-03, are far more sophisticated than Link 17 or Link 16, the NATO data link standard. They use a combination of Beidou satellite navigation/communication and AI-powered military-grade 5G system. Given their highly classified nature, the systems are under strict export ban.
The Rafales were shot down before they even had a chance to engage with the J-10Cs within the missile range.
The defeat suffered by the India air force is a result of its lack of an integrated air warfare system. Standalone weaponry, however advanced, cannot achieve air superiority without the integration of other air warfare systems and seamless data links in today’s informationalized combat environment. Of course, poor training and tactical planning are also contributing factors.
Pakistan, with its integrated Chinese-made air combat platforms, has achieved a decisive victory over India, whose patchwork collection of various weapon platforms prove both costly and ineffective.
When $240 million Rafale fighters are brought down by $40 million J-10Cs with $180,000 PL-15E missiles, the military world is experiencing its own DeepSeek moment.
I wrote in my essay A Watershed Hypersonic Breakthrough: China’s New Hypersonic Air-to-air Missile (https://huabinoliver.substack.com/p/a-watershed-hypersonic-technology) that China just fielded an ultra-long 1,000km hypersonic missile (which can cover that distance in 8 minutes at Mach 5), designed to neutralize the US F-22 and F-35 fighters and B-21 bomber.
The Pakistan India air combat, labelled as the largest air war in 50 years, is a testing ground for Chinese technologies. With military hardware one to two generations older than PLA’s own, Pakistan has handily beat Indian’s most advanced western weaponry.
The US and the west would be making a deadly mistake to underestimate the Chinese military in Western Pacific and challenge China in a kinetic war.
The cherry on top is that India, despite western media’s hype as a counterbalance to China, proves it is just noise and can barely serve as a speed bump.
US War on Yemen Exposes Limits of American Military Might
By Brian Berletic – New Eastern Outlook – May 13, 2025
Despite years of devastating military and economic pressure, Yemen’s Ansar Allah movement continues to defy U.S. operations, exposing the growing limitations of American military power in the region.
Yemen, a nation of approximately 40 million people, is one of the poorest nations on Earth. It has suffered decades of political instability, including a US-engineered regime change operation in 2011 followed by a nearly 7 year long war with a US-armed and backed Saudi-led Persian Gulf coalition. The war included air strikes and a ground invasion, along with economic sanctions and a naval blockade. Subsequently, the UN has declared Yemen to be one of the world’s worst humanitarian crises, with up to 14% of the population displaced by conflict.
Since then, the US has carried out direct attacks on Yemen. Both the previous Biden administration and now the current Trump administration have carried out military campaigns in a bid to subdue Ansar Allah (often referred to as the “Houthis”) – the military and political organization administering Yemen’s capital and surrounding cities along the nation’s western coast.
The most recent military campaign has included strikes on civilian infrastructure, including a major port and reportedly a reservoir.
Leaked messages between the US Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth, the US Vice President and other senior officials reveal the deliberate targeting and complete destruction of residential buildings to kill a single suspected enemy individual.
Despite the tremendous power of the US military and the protracted brutality the US has applied to Yemen, Ansar Allah remains a viable political and military organization. It continues to target and destroy US drones conducting surveillance and attacks in Yemeni airspace, as well as targeting US warships in the Red Sea, amid a much wider blockade Ansar Allah has placed on Israeli-bound vessels and now US oil shipments.
While Ansar Allah has regularly claimed to have targeted and forced US warships to flee, a recent CNN article appears to confirm that indeed drones and anti-shipping missiles targeting US ships have not only forced them to take evasive maneuvers, they have also caused material losses including a $60 million F-18 warplane.
The article admits:
A US official said initial reports from the scene indicated the Truman made a hard turn to evade Houthi fire, which contributed to the fighter jet falling overboard. Yemen’s Houthi rebels claimed on Monday to have launched a drone and missile attack on the aircraft carrier, which is in the Red Sea as part of the US military’s major operation against the Iran-backed group.
Other Western media outlets have admitted the loss of multiple $30 million drones over Yemen. An April 29, 2025 article by France 24 reported that the US had lost up to 7 MQ-9 Reaper drones over the previous 2 months.
The drones are used to identify and guide munitions to targets. They have a service ceiling comparable to modern manned warplanes like the US F-35 Lightning. The regular loss of MQ-9 drones over Yemen implies that Ansar Allah possesses air defense systems also capable of reaching altitudes manned US warplanes operate at. This is why the US has failed so far to establish air superiority over Yemeni airspace, forcing the US to instead carry out standoff strikes.
Standoff strikes involve the use of long-range precision guided missiles fired far beyond the reach of enemy air defenses. The missiles then travel into enemy airspace to strike their targets. While the obvious advantage of this strategy is avoiding enemy air defenses, there are many disadvantages, including the use of standoff munitions which are expensive and made in relatively small quantities. Enemy radar systems can detect stand-off weapons as they travel across their airspace, allowing them to potentially intercept the incoming missile. It also provides personnel and equipment time to take cover before the stand-off munitions reach their target.
Western media outlets have reported that Ansar Allah is believed to have surface-to-air missiles from Iran. This includes systems like the Barq-1 and Barq-2 air defense systems. These are comparable to the Russian-made Buk air defense system. While considered a “medium range” air defense system, it is capable of targeting modern warplanes at their maximum service ceiling.
Western media outlets have also noted the US’ use of electronic warfare aircraft against targets across Yemen, armed with anti-radiation guided missiles designed to detect and home in on radar signals. Such missiles are used as part of “suppression of enemy air defenses” (SEAD) missions to either force air defense operators to turn off their radar sets to prevent their destruction, or to target and destroy the radar set if they don’t. Whether switched off or destroyed, the radar systems are unable to target and destroy incoming warplanes, allowing airstrikes to be conducted.
Despite the simple premise, the detection and suppression of enemy air defense systems as part of SEAD missions is dangerous and complex. The fact that Ansar Allah is still regularly detecting and downing MQ-9 drones means US SEAD missions have fallen short of destroying Ansar Allah’s air defenses and establishing air superiority over Yemen.
The limitations of US military power have been steadily exposed in recent conflicts. The US proxy war in Syria and now its military operations against Yemen has required US warplanes to conduct standoff strikes because of an inability to either destroy or evade Russian and Iranian-designed air defense systems. The transfer of US weapons to Ukraine and their failure on the battlefield there have further exposed the limits of US military might.
Despite this, the US remains a dangerous threat to the nations it targets. In Syria, the US used asymmetric military power in the form of armed militants, economic warfare, and political interference to succeed where its airpower had failed. While the disparity between US military might and that of the nations it targets has narrowed significantly over recent years, its vast array of economic and political weapons remain potent alternatives.
Only time will tell whether the emerging multipolar world can close the gap in regard to these US advantages in the same way it has regarding America’s quickly shrinking military advantages.
Featured Video
No Threat Can Force Iran’s Surrender /Trita Parsi & Lt Cl Daniel Davis
or go to
Aletho News Archives – Video-Images
From the Archives
What is the Israeli Lobby in Australia Doing in Interfaith Dialogue?
By Ali Kazak | Dissident Voice | October 11, 2015
For years Israel and its lobby around the world have been trying to normalise their relations with Arabs and Muslims without solving the Palestine Question.
One of the methods they resorted to in the last few years is using human rights and community organizations such as interfaith dialogue and Multiculturalism to achieve this objective and to: isolate the Palestinians, marginalise the Palestine question, end Israel’s isolation, and prevent criticism of Israel, knowing that these organisations will be the first to stand against Israel’s violations, racial and religious discrimination.
The group responsible for this task in Australia is The Australia/Israel & Jewish Affairs Council (AIJAC); its Director of International & Community Affairs, Jeremy Jones is in charge of lobbying religious community organizations, specifically Muslims and Christians. Consequently he convened the Faith Communities for Reconciliation, founding participant in the Australian Partnership of Religious Organisations and the Australian National Dialogue of Christians, Muslims & Jews.
AIJAC is a private political propaganda group. It is recognised as the main Israeli lobby in Australia. It coordinates its activities and works intimately with the Israeli embassy in Canberra and different institutions in Israel. It is privately funded by some Jewish businessmen. It monitors closely Australian politicians, the media, ethnic and religious groups, (especially Arabs and Muslims), unions and academics on their stands towards Israel and the Palestine question. … continue
Blog Roll
Aletho News- ‘Economic terrorism’: Steel facilities hit again in US-Israeli strike
- ‘War Crime’: Iran condemns attacks on Arak, Ardakan nuclear sites
- Two-thirds of Americans want quick end to Iran war even if goals unmet
- Trump to Give “Important Update on Iran” Wednesday in Prime-Time Speech
- Theodore Postol: Iran’s Missiles & Drones Were Underestimated
- Iran To Target Military Industrial-Tech Complex That Facilitated Gaza Genocide
- Collapsing Empire: The Resistance Disarms ‘Israel’
- Suicide Should Not Be a Government Service
- Rethinking America’s greatest threat: Iran vs. Israel-Firsters
- Iran accuses adversaries of false flags to strain Turkey ties
- If Americans Knew
- Ann Coulter Rips Into Fox News for Iran War Coverage
- Joe Kent Urges Americans To Call White House and Congress To Object To Sending Troops Into Iran
- DNC Resolution to Reject AIPAC Funding Puts Democratic Leaders in the Hot Seat
- Swedish foundation to build 400 schools as over 650,000 Gaza children remain without education for 2 years
- Israeli army admits photshopping image of slain Lebanese journalist
- This is how Israel is systematically killing health workers under the cover of war in Lebanon
- Carrying life under fire: Israeli invasion of Lebanon leaves pregnant women facing deadly risks
- Champagne all around for the new death penalty (for Palestinians) law – Not a ceasefire Day 172
- Why are Palestinian books struggling to be seen on Amazon?
- The Line Between Affinity and Conspiracy
- No Tricks Zone
- New Study Finds Warming Saves Lives…Cold Temperatures 12 Times More Deadly Than Excess Heat
- German Science Blog Accuses PIK Climate Institute Of Hallucinating Climate Tipping Points
- Devastating Assessment Of Comirnaty Vaccine By Former Senior Pfizer Europe Toxicologist
- New Study: CO2 Is ‘Effectively Negligible’ As An Explanatory Climate Change Factor Since 2000
- Former Pfizer Toxicologist Dr. Helmut Sterz Tells Bundestag Hearing Pfizer Vaccine Should Have Never Been Approved
- Energy Expert: Germany’s Nuclear Phaseout Was A “500 Billion Euro Mistake”
- New Research: South Australia’s Mid-Holocene Sea Surface Temperatures Were 4°C Warmer Than Today
- Storing Green Energy To Last Germany 10 Days Would Require A 60-Million Tonne Battery
- New Studies: UK Sea Levels Were 4 Meters Higher Than Today During The Mid-Holocene
- Destructive Green New Deal: German Energy And Metal Group Warns Of Drastic Crisis
Aletho News 