An ongoing US military investigation has determined that the United States was responsible for a deadly Tomahawk missile strike on an Iranian elementary school, according to the US officials and others familiar with the preliminary findings. The strike, which occurred on February 28, hit the Shajarah Tayyebeh elementary school building in the town of Minab. Investigators say the attack was the result of a targeting error by the US military. At the time, the military was conducting strikes on an adjacent Iranian base that had previously included the school building as part of its complex.&nbsp;According to officials briefed on the investigation, officers at US Central Command conducted the strike coordinates using outdated targeting data supplied by the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA). The preliminary findings suggest that the building was mistakenly labeled as a military target based on old intelligence. Officials emphasized that the investigation is still ongoing and that several critical questions remain unanswered, including why the outdated data was not verified before the strike.&nbsp;The attack on a school filled with children is expected to be remembered as one of the most devastating military errors in recent decades. Iranian authorities have reported that at least 175 people were killed, most of them children. Although the conclusion that the United States carried out the strike was largely anticipated, because the US is the only country involved in the conflict that uses Tomahawk missiles, the incident has already cast a shadow over the broader US military operation in Iran.&nbsp;Also Read: <a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/25-of-india-s-gas-imports-hit-by-strait-of-hormuz-disruption-government-reroutes-energy-supplies-as-west-asia-conflict-escalates-1773244395523">25% of India’s gas imports hit by Strait of Hormuz disruption; government reroutes energy supplies as West Asia conflict escalates</a>&nbsp;President Donald Trump’s attempts to deflect blame for the strike have further complicated the inquiry. Officials familiar with the findings have expressed concern about his public statements suggesting that Iran might have been responsible. “As The New York Times acknowledges in its own reporting, the investigation is still ongoing,” White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said in a statement. Sources briefed on the investigation say many questions remain about how the outdated information was used and who failed to verify the targeting data.&nbsp;However, some current and former officials say the error is not entirely surprising. The school in Minab is located on the same block as facilities used by Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guards Navy, which was a primary target of the US military strikes. The building that housed the school was originally part of the military base, though it is unclear exactly when it was converted into a school. A visual investigation conducted by The New York Times found that the building had been separated from the military base between 2013 and 2016.&nbsp;Satellite imagery reviewed by the newspaper showed that watchtowers previously located near the building had been removed. Three public entrances had been added, the grounds had been cleared, and recreational areas—including a sports field painted on asphalt- had been created. The walls were also repainted in bright colors such as blue and pink, consistent with a school environment. Despite these changes, the targeting data provided by the DIA still classified the building as a military facility when it was passed to US Central Command, according to people familiar with the investigation. Investigators have not yet determined how the outdated information was transmitted or whether the DIA had more recent intelligence available.&nbsp;Military targeting operations are highly complex and involve several agencies. Numerous officers are responsible for verifying target data. While the DIA provides intelligence assessments, Central Command is responsible for confirming the accuracy of that information before authorizing strikes. In fast-moving wartime situations, however, verification procedures may sometimes be rushed or overlooked. Investigators are also reviewing the role of the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency (NGA), which analyzes satellite imagery and supports military targeting operations.&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/videos/minab-school-bombing-did-ai-error-lead-to-bombing-of-iran-school-1773246548175/embed">https://www.wionews.com/videos/minab-school-bombing-did-ai-error-lead-to-bombing-of-iran-school-1773246548175/embed</a>&nbsp;Both the DIA and NGA have numerous analysts assigned to combatant commands, where they work alongside operational planners and intelligence officers to develop potential targets. When targeting data from the DIA is older, intelligence officers are expected to update and verify it using imagery and analysis provided by the NGA. Historically, the Defense Intelligence Agency has focused primarily on Iran’s missile capabilities and other strategic priorities such as China and North Korea. Iran’s naval forces have not traditionally been a major intelligence priority.&nbsp;Investigators are also examining whether artificial intelligence tools or automated intelligence systems played any role in the targeting mistake. One system under scrutiny is the Maven Smart System used by the NGA. While large language models such as Claude—developed by Anthropic—do not directly generate military targets, they can assist in identifying potential points of interest for analysts. However, officials believe that new technology was unlikely to be the cause of the error. Instead, they suspect the strike resulted from a more traditional wartime mistake: human error.&nbsp;The preliminary findings of the internal investigation align with growing public evidence suggesting US responsibility.Satellite imagery, social media posts, and verified videos analyzed by The New York Times indicate that the school was severely damaged by a precision strike around the same time that nearby Iranian naval facilities were targeted. The newspaper’s analysis also showed that the base was struck again approximately two hours after the initial attack.A video released by Iran’s semi-official Mehr News Agency and verified by The New York Times shows a Tomahawk cruise missile striking the naval base next to the school on February 28.&nbsp;Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and other administration officials have declined to comment in detail on the incident, stating only that the matter remains under investigation. Nevertheless, President Trump has at times suggested that Iran may have been responsible. “In my opinion, based on what I’ve seen, that was done by Iran,” Mr. Trump told reporters aboard Air Force One on Saturday, while Defense Secretary Hegseth stood beside him. He added that Iranian munitions are often inaccurate.&nbsp;When asked on Monday why he was the only official in his administration attributing the strike to Iran, Trump responded: “Because I just don’t know enough about it.” He also incorrectly suggested that Iran might possess Tomahawk missiles, though he said he would ultimately accept the results of the investigation. While many presidents might avoid commenting on such incidents while investigations are ongoing, Mr. Trump has repeatedly spoken publicly about the strike and has not fully withdrawn his earlier claims, even as evidence pointing to U.S. responsibility has grown. On Tuesday, Press Secretary Leavitt reiterated that the president would accept the final findings of the investigation. Although the inquiry is not yet complete, the reported use of outdated intelligence has drawn comparisons to a major mistake during the Kosovo War.&nbsp;Disclaimer: WION takes utmost care to accurately and responsibly report ongoing conflicts in West Asia involving Israel, Iran, the US, Gulf nations, and non-state actors like Hezbollah, Hamas, Houthis, Islamic State, and others. Claims and counterclaims, disinformation and misinformation are being made online and offline. Given this context, WION cannot independently verify the authenticity of all statements, social media posts, photos, and videos.

Initial military inquiry finds US forces responsible for strike on Iran school; cites outdated intelligence

An ongoing US military investigation has determined that the United States was responsible for a deadly Tomahawk missile strike on an Iranian elementary school, according to the US officials and others familiar with the preliminary findings. The strike, which occurred on February 28, hit the Shajarah Tayyebeh elementary school building in the town of Minab. Investigators say the attack was the result of a targeting error by the US military. At the time, the military was conducting strikes on an adjacent Iranian base that had previously included the school building as part of its complex. According to officials briefed on the investigation, officers at US Central Command conducted the strike coordinates using outdated targeting data supplied by the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA). The preliminary findings suggest that the building was mistakenly labeled as a military target based on old intelligence. Officials emphasized that the investigation is still ongoing and that several critical questions remain unanswered, including why the outdated data was not verified before the strike. The attack on a school filled with children is expected to be remembered as one of the most devastating military errors in recent decades. Iranian authorities have reported that at least 175 people were killed, most of them children. Although the conclusion that the United States carried out the strike was largely anticipated, because the US is the only country involved in the conflict that uses Tomahawk missiles, the incident has already cast a shadow over the broader US military operation in Iran. Also Read: 25% of India’s gas imports hit by Strait of Hormuz disruption; government reroutes energy supplies as West Asia conflict escalates President Donald Trump’s attempts to deflect blame for the strike have further complicated the inquiry. Officials familiar with the findings have expressed concern about his public statements suggesting that Iran might have been responsible. “As The New York Times acknowledges in its own reporting, the investigation is still ongoing,” White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said in a statement. Sources briefed on the investigation say many questions remain about how the outdated information was used and who failed to verify the targeting data. However, some current and former officials say the error is not entirely surprising. The school in Minab is located on the same block as facilities used by Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guards Navy, which was a primary target of the US military strikes. The building that housed the school was originally part of the military base, though it is unclear exactly when it was converted into a school. A visual investigation conducted by The New York Times found that the building had been separated from the military base between 2013 and 2016. Satellite imagery reviewed by the newspaper showed that watchtowers previously located near the building had been removed. Three public entrances had been added, the grounds had been cleared, and recreational areas—including a sports field painted on asphalt- had been created. The walls were also repainted in bright colors such as blue and pink, consistent with a school environment. Despite these changes, the targeting data provided by the DIA still classified the building as a military facility when it was passed to US Central Command, according to people familiar with the investigation. Investigators have not yet determined how the outdated information was transmitted or whether the DIA had more recent intelligence available. Military targeting operations are highly complex and involve several agencies. Numerous officers are responsible for verifying target data. While the DIA provides intelligence assessments, Central Command is responsible for confirming the accuracy of that information before authorizing strikes. In fast-moving wartime situations, however, verification procedures may sometimes be rushed or overlooked. Investigators are also reviewing the role of the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency (NGA), which analyzes satellite imagery and supports military targeting operations. https://www.wionews.com/videos/minab-school-bombing-did-ai-error-lead-to-bombing-of-iran-school-1773246548175/embed Both the DIA and NGA have numerous analysts assigned to combatant commands, where they work alongside operational planners and intelligence officers to develop potential targets. When targeting data from the DIA is older, intelligence officers are expected to update and verify it using imagery and analysis provided by the NGA. Historically, the Defense Intelligence Agency has focused primarily on Iran’s missile capabilities and other strategic priorities such as China and North Korea. Iran’s naval forces have not traditionally been a major intelligence priority. Investigators are also examining whether artificial intelligence tools or automated intelligence systems played any role in the targeting mistake. One system under scrutiny is the Maven Smart System used by the NGA. While large language models such as Claude—developed by Anthropic—do not directly generate military targets, they can assist in identifying potential points of interest for analysts. However, officials believe that new technology was unlikely to be the cause of the error. Instead, they suspect the strike resulted from a more traditional wartime mistake: human error. The preliminary findings of the internal investigation align with growing public evidence suggesting US responsibility. Satellite imagery, social media posts, and verified videos analyzed by The New York Times indicate that the school was severely damaged by a precision strike around the same time that nearby Iranian naval facilities were targeted. The newspaper’s analysis also showed that the base was struck again approximately two hours after the initial attack. A video released by Iran’s semi-official Mehr News Agency and verified by The New York Times shows a Tomahawk cruise missile striking the naval base next to the school on February 28. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and other administration officials have declined to comment in detail on the incident, stating only that the matter remains under investigation. Nevertheless, President Trump has at times suggested that Iran may have been responsible. “In my opinion, based on what I’ve seen, that was done by Iran,” Mr. Trump told reporters aboard Air Force One on Saturday, while Defense Secretary Hegseth stood beside him. He added that Iranian munitions are often inaccurate. When asked on Monday why he was the only official in his administration attributing the strike to Iran, Trump responded: “Because I just don’t know enough about it.” He also incorrectly suggested that Iran might possess Tomahawk missiles, though he said he would ultimately accept the results of the investigation. While many presidents might avoid commenting on such incidents while investigations are ongoing, Mr. Trump has repeatedly spoken publicly about the strike and has not fully withdrawn his earlier claims, even as evidence pointing to U.S. responsibility has grown. On Tuesday, Press Secretary Leavitt reiterated that the president would accept the final findings of the investigation. Although the inquiry is not yet complete, the reported use of outdated intelligence has drawn comparisons to a major mistake during the Kosovo War. Disclaimer: WION takes utmost care to accurately and responsibly report ongoing conflicts in West Asia involving Israel, Iran, the US, Gulf nations, and non-state actors like Hezbollah, Hamas, Houthis, Islamic State, and others. Claims and counterclaims, disinformation and misinformation are being made online and offline. Given this context, WION cannot independently verify the authenticity of all statements, social media posts, photos, and videos.

Earlier, US President Donald Trump on Saturday (March 7) had blamed Iran for the devastating strike on an elementary school in southern Iran that killed at least 168 children and 14 teachers

Artificial intelligence firm OpenAI is exploring a potential partnership with NATO, just days after securing a major agreement with the United States Department of Defence, according to a report by The Wall Street Journal.&nbsp;The discussions indicate that OpenAI is expanding its engagement with governments and defence organisations as AI becomes increasingly important for security, data analysis and operational planning.&nbsp;However, the proposed NATO deployment would differ from the Pentagon contract in one key aspect: the AI tools would run on unclassified networks, not classified military systems.&nbsp;<h2>OpenAI may deploy AI on NATO’s unclassified networks</h2>According to the report, Sam Altman mentioned the possibility of deploying OpenAI’s technology within NATO’s network infrastructure during an internal company meeting.&nbsp;Initially, Altman appeared to suggest that the systems could operate on classified networks. The company later clarified that this was a slip and that discussions relate only to unclassified networks.&nbsp;<h2>The distinction is important.</h2>Classified systems contain sensitive military intelligence and operational plans. Unclassified networks, while still important, hold information that does not reach the highest levels of national security sensitivity.If implemented, OpenAI’s AI tools could help NATO members analyse data, improve administrative workflows and support research across alliance networks.&nbsp;<h2>Pentagon deal marked a shift in defence partnerships</h2>The NATO discussions come shortly after OpenAI secured a contract with the Pentagon to deploy its AI technology for certain government applications.&nbsp;That agreement followed changes in the Pentagon’s partnerships with AI firms.&nbsp;According to reports, US federal agencies were directed to halt collaboration with Anthropic, partly due to the company’s position on limiting military uses of artificial intelligence.&nbsp;Anthropic’s CEO Dario Amodei had previously expressed caution about defence-related AI deployments.&nbsp;Following those developments, OpenAI became one of the technology companies working more closely with the US defence ecosystem.&nbsp;<h2>Criticism and concerns around military AI</h2>OpenAI’s Pentagon deal triggered criticism from some researchers and users concerned about the role of AI in military systems.&nbsp;Reports suggested that the announcement also led to subscription cancellations from some customers who opposed defence partnerships.&nbsp;OpenAI later issued a clarification stating that its AI technology would not be used to spy on US citizens or domestic populations.&nbsp;The Pentagon also said intelligence agencies such as the National Security Agency would not directly use OpenAI’s services.&nbsp;<h2>Sam Altman acknowledges reputational risks</h2>During the internal discussion cited in the report, Altman acknowledged that the Pentagon agreement carried reputational risks for the company.&nbsp;However, he told employees that he believed the decision was necessary despite possible criticism.&nbsp;According to the report, Altman said the move was a “complicated but correct decision”, even though it could create short-term public relations challenges.&nbsp;<h2>AI’s growing role in defence technology</h2>The discussions between OpenAI and NATO highlight a broader shift in how governments are approaching artificial intelligence.&nbsp;AI systems are increasingly used for tasks such as:&nbsp;Data analysis and intelligence processing&nbsp;Cybersecurity monitoring&nbsp;Simulation and planning tools&nbsp;<h2>Logistics and operational management</h2>As governments and technology companies expand collaboration, questions about ethics, safety and oversight are likely to remain central to the debate.&nbsp;For OpenAI, the potential NATO partnership would represent another step in positioning its AI systems within global public sector infrastructure.

OpenAI is exploring a potential partnership with NATO after securing a Pentagon deal, according to reports. The discussions involve deploying OpenAI’s AI tools on NATO’s unclassified networks to support data analysis, research and administrative workflows.

Artificial intelligence firm OpenAI is exploring a potential partnership with NATO, just days after securing a major agreement with the United States Department of Defence, according to a report by The Wall Street Journal. The discussions indicate that OpenAI is expanding its engagement with governments and defence organisations as AI becomes increasingly important for security, data analysis and operational planning. However, the proposed NATO deployment would differ from the Pentagon contract in one key aspect: the AI tools would run on unclassified networks, not classified military systems. OpenAI may deploy AI on NATO’s unclassified networks According to the report, Sam Altman mentioned the possibility of deploying OpenAI’s technology within NATO’s network infrastructure during an internal company meeting. Initially, Altman appeared to suggest that the systems could operate on classified networks. The company later clarified that this was a slip and that discussions relate only to unclassified networks. The distinction is important. Classified systems contain sensitive military intelligence and operational plans. Unclassified networks, while still important, hold information that does not reach the highest levels of national security sensitivity. If implemented, OpenAI’s AI tools could help NATO members analyse data, improve administrative workflows and support research across alliance networks. Pentagon deal marked a shift in defence partnerships The NATO discussions come shortly after OpenAI secured a contract with the Pentagon to deploy its AI technology for certain government applications. That agreement followed changes in the Pentagon’s partnerships with AI firms. According to reports, US federal agencies were directed to halt collaboration with Anthropic, partly due to the company’s position on limiting military uses of artificial intelligence. Anthropic’s CEO Dario Amodei had previously expressed caution about defence-related AI deployments. Following those developments, OpenAI became one of the technology companies working more closely with the US defence ecosystem. Criticism and concerns around military AI OpenAI’s Pentagon deal triggered criticism from some researchers and users concerned about the role of AI in military systems. Reports suggested that the announcement also led to subscription cancellations from some customers who opposed defence partnerships. OpenAI later issued a clarification stating that its AI technology would not be used to spy on US citizens or domestic populations. The Pentagon also said intelligence agencies such as the National Security Agency would not directly use OpenAI’s services. Sam Altman acknowledges reputational risks During the internal discussion cited in the report, Altman acknowledged that the Pentagon agreement carried reputational risks for the company. However, he told employees that he believed the decision was necessary despite possible criticism. According to the report, Altman said the move was a “complicated but correct decision”, even though it could create short-term public relations challenges. AI’s growing role in defence technology The discussions between OpenAI and NATO highlight a broader shift in how governments are approaching artificial intelligence. AI systems are increasingly used for tasks such as: Data analysis and intelligence processing Cybersecurity monitoring Simulation and planning tools Logistics and operational management As governments and technology companies expand collaboration, questions about ethics, safety and oversight are likely to remain central to the debate. For OpenAI, the potential NATO partnership would represent another step in positioning its AI systems within global public sector infrastructure.

OpenAI is exploring a potential partnership with NATO after securing a Pentagon deal, according to reports. The discussions involve deploying OpenAI’s AI tools on NATO’s unclassified networks to support data analysis, research and administrative workflows.

OpenAI eyes NATO partnership after Pentagon deal, AI may run on alliance networks

China on Thursday (December 25) accused the United States of misrepresenting Beijing’s defence stance, saying Washington was attempting to interfere in improving ties between China and India. Responding to a question at a regular press briefing, Chinese foreign ministry spokesperson Lin Jian dismissed suggestions that Beijing could use the recent easing of border tensions with India to block closer India–US relations. Lin said China approaches its relationship with India from a long-term strategic standpoint and stressed that the boundary dispute is a bilateral matter. “We oppose any third party making judgments on this issue,” he added.&nbsp;The statement came after the Pentagon, in a report released earlier this week, claimed that China may try to leverage reduced tensions along the disputed border to stabilise relations with India and prevent a further strengthening of India–US ties. The US Department of Defense’s annual report to Congress, titled Military and Security Developments Involving the People’s Republic of China and released on December 23, described India–China relations as fragile despite recent diplomatic engagement. The report said Beijing “probably seeks to capitalise on decreased tension along the Line of Actual Control (LAC)” to manage ties with New Delhi, while noting that India remains wary of China’s intentions due to long-standing mistrust.&nbsp;Also Read: <a href="https://www.wionews.com/photos/bangladesh-home-ministry-official-resigns-tariq-rahman-returns-amid-pressure-on-yunus-what-s-latest-from-bangladesh-1766652351022">Bangladesh Home ministry official resigns, Tarique Rahman returns amid pressure on Yunus — What's latest from Bangladesh</a> The report referred to an important development in October 2024, when India and China agreed to disengage from several standoff points along the LAC. This understanding was announced shortly before President Xi Jinping and Prime Minister Narendra Modi met on the sidelines of the BRICS summit in Kazan.&nbsp;According to the Pentagon, the Xi–Modi interaction triggered a phase of regular high-level dialogue, including talks on border management, resumption of direct flights, visa facilitation, and exchanges involving scholars and journalists. However, the report cautioned that major irritants continue to constrain the relationship, pointing out that China considers Taiwan, the South China Sea, the Senkaku Islands, and Arunachal Pradesh as “core interests” linked to sovereignty.&nbsp;The assessment also highlighted China’s expanding military cooperation with Pakistan. Beijing has supplied Islamabad with advanced military hardware over the past decade, including naval frigates and combat aircraft. China currently offers three fighter jets for export, the fifth-generation FC-31, the fourth-generation J-10C multirole fighter, and the jointly developed JF-17 lightweight fighter produced with Pakistan.

China slams US report suggesting border easing aimed at India-US ties

China on Thursday (December 25) accused the United States of misrepresenting Beijing’s defence stance, saying Washington was attempting to interfere in improving ties between China and India. Responding to a question at a regular press briefing, Chinese foreign ministry spokesperson Lin Jian dismissed suggestions that Beijing could use the recent easing of border tensions with India to block closer India–US relations. Lin said China approaches its relationship with India from a long-term strategic standpoint and stressed that the boundary dispute is a bilateral matter. “We oppose any third party making judgments on this issue,” he added. The statement came after the Pentagon, in a report released earlier this week, claimed that China may try to leverage reduced tensions along the disputed border to stabilise relations with India and prevent a further strengthening of India–US ties. The US Department of Defense’s annual report to Congress, titled Military and Security Developments Involving the People’s Republic of China and released on December 23, described India–China relations as fragile despite recent diplomatic engagement. The report said Beijing “probably seeks to capitalise on decreased tension along the Line of Actual Control (LAC)” to manage ties with New Delhi, while noting that India remains wary of China’s intentions due to long-standing mistrust. Also Read: Bangladesh Home ministry official resigns, Tarique Rahman returns amid pressure on Yunus — What's latest from Bangladesh The report referred to an important development in October 2024, when India and China agreed to disengage from several standoff points along the LAC. This understanding was announced shortly before President Xi Jinping and Prime Minister Narendra Modi met on the sidelines of the BRICS summit in Kazan. According to the Pentagon, the Xi–Modi interaction triggered a phase of regular high-level dialogue, including talks on border management, resumption of direct flights, visa facilitation, and exchanges involving scholars and journalists. However, the report cautioned that major irritants continue to constrain the relationship, pointing out that China considers Taiwan, the South China Sea, the Senkaku Islands, and Arunachal Pradesh as “core interests” linked to sovereignty. The assessment also highlighted China’s expanding military cooperation with Pakistan. Beijing has supplied Islamabad with advanced military hardware over the past decade, including naval frigates and combat aircraft. China currently offers three fighter jets for export, the fifth-generation FC-31, the fourth-generation J-10C multirole fighter, and the jointly developed JF-17 lightweight fighter produced with Pakistan.

China has accused the US of misreading its defence policy, rejecting claims it seeks to use border calm with India to curb growing India-US ties

Some of the weapons supplied by the United States and its allies to Ukraine were stolen by criminals, purported volunteer fighters and arms traffickers, a report from the US defence department's inspector general published by CNN has revealed.

The weapons&nbsp;were originally meant to aid Ukraine's war-effort against Russia.&nbsp;

The report, titled, 'DoD's Accountability of Equipment Provided to Ukraine',&nbsp;further claims that the stolen weaponry and equipment were later recovered.&nbsp;

The report claims that between February to September 2022, Washington faced challenges in tracking and monitoring all the US equipment sent to Ukraine. The Arms Export Control Act in the United States requires Washington to track its defence supplies to the countries.

The US defence department's inability to visit the areas where the equipment was being used or stored significantly hindered their ability to monitor the situation effectively, the report argued. The US resumed on-site inspections of weapons given to Ukraine with tracking systems.

<h2>US supply of weapons to Ukraine: What Washington deems as potential risk?</h2>

The report acknowledged that sending weapons to aid Ukraine's war-effort entails the risk of potential&nbsp;diversion, especially if territory changes hands during the course of war.

The Republican Party has criticised the Biden administration for the purported&nbsp;lack of accountability about the billions of dollars of aid provided to Ukraine.

<h2>Russia-Ukraine war: When US weapons were stolen</h2>

The report revealed instances when&nbsp;organisations deemed terrorist organisations by Russia and arms traffickers successfully stole weapons and equipment provided by the US and its allies.

For example, an organised crime group reportedly overseen by an unnamed Russian official used forged documents to steal weapons and ammunition. Similarly, Ukrainian criminals posed as aid workers to steal bulletproof vests.

Also watch |&nbsp;Report: Kyiv can't account for 'hundreds of millions' in weapons | Russia-Ukraine War

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<div class="videoWrapper trancodeVideo"><iframe allowfullscreen="" autoplay="1" class="includeVideo" frameborder="0" height="350" src="https://www.wionews.com/videos/report-kyiv-cant-account-for-hundreds-of-millions-in-weapons-russia-ukraine-war-606587/embed" style="width:100%;max-width:560px;" width="560"></iframe></div>
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

The report only revealed the instances in which the Ukraine's intelligence services purportedly&nbsp;intervened and disrupted the arms stealing plots.

Overall, while larger items like missiles and helicopters were easier to track through intelligence mechanisms, smaller items, such as night-vision devices, posed more significant monitoring challenges.

WATCH WION LIVE HERE

<iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="350" loading="”lazy”" src="https://www.wionews.com/live-tv/embed?autoplay=1&amp;mute=1" width="100%"></iframe>

You can now write for wionews.com and be a part of the community. Share your stories and opinions with us <a href="https://www.wionews.com/content-contribution-registration-form">here</a>.

Some of the weapons supplied by the United States and its allies to Ukraine were stolen by criminals, purported volunteer fighters and arms traffickers, a report from the US defence department's inspector general published by CNN has revealed.

Some of the weapons supplied by the United States and its allies to Ukraine were stolen by criminals, purported volunteer fighters and arms traffickers, a report from the US defence department's inspector general published by CNN has revealed. The weapons were originally meant to aid Ukraine's war-effort against Russia. The report, titled, 'DoD's Accountability of Equipment Provided to Ukraine', further claims that the stolen weaponry and equipment were later recovered. The report claims that between February to September 2022, Washington faced challenges in tracking and monitoring all the US equipment sent to Ukraine. The Arms Export Control Act in the United States requires Washington to track its defence supplies to the countries. The US defence department's inability to visit the areas where the equipment was being used or stored significantly hindered their ability to monitor the situation effectively, the report argued. The US resumed on-site inspections of weapons given to Ukraine with tracking systems. US supply of weapons to Ukraine: What Washington deems as potential risk? The report acknowledged that sending weapons to aid Ukraine's war-effort entails the risk of potential diversion, especially if territory changes hands during the course of war. The Republican Party has criticised the Biden administration for the purported lack of accountability about the billions of dollars of aid provided to Ukraine. Russia-Ukraine war: When US weapons were stolen The report revealed instances when organisations deemed terrorist organisations by Russia and arms traffickers successfully stole weapons and equipment provided by the US and its allies. For example, an organised crime group reportedly overseen by an unnamed Russian official used forged documents to steal weapons and ammunition. Similarly, Ukrainian criminals posed as aid workers to steal bulletproof vests. Also watch | Report: Kyiv can't account for 'hundreds of millions' in weapons | Russia-Ukraine War × The report only revealed the instances in which the Ukraine's intelligence services purportedly intervened and disrupted the arms stealing plots. Overall, while larger items like missiles and helicopters were easier to track through intelligence mechanisms, smaller items, such as night-vision devices, posed more significant monitoring challenges. WATCH WION LIVE HERE You can now write for wionews.com and be a part of the community. Share your stories and opinions with us here.

How weapons sent by West got stolen in Ukraine, Pentagon report reveals

In a strange case of bilateral common-ground between India and China amid their continued hostilities, Beijing told American officials not to interfere in its relationship with India, the Pentagon said in a report to the US Congress. India too disapproves any third-party interference with respect to its prevailing bilateral disputes with its neighbours.&nbsp;

Since the beginning of the Line of Actual Control (LAC) standoff between the two sides, Chinese officials reportedly downplayed the severity of the crisis. Beijing emphasised on its purported intent to preserve "border stability" and prevent the standoff from harming other areas of its bilateral relationship with India, the Pentagon said in a report on Tuesday.

"The PRC (People's Republic of China) seeks to prevent border tensions from causing India to partner more closely with the United States. PRC officials have warned US officials to not interfere with the PRC's relationship with India," the Pentagon said in its latest report on Chinese military build-up.

ALSO READ |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/india-china-ties-many-stumbles-no-meets-537197">India-China ties: Many stumbles, no meets</a>

In a section on the China-India border, the Pentagon said throughout 2021, China's People Liberation Army (PLA) sustained the deployment of forces and continued infrastructure build-up along the LAC. Negotiation made minimal progress as both sides resist losing perceived advantages on the border, it said.

Beginning in May 2020, Chinese and Indian forces faced off in clashes with rocks, batons, and clubs wrapped in barbed wire at multiple locations along the LAC. The resulting standoff triggered the build-up of forces on both sides of the border.

WATCH |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/videos/gravitas-india-china-standoff-is-tibet-the-new-front-309514">Gravitas: India-China standoff | Is Tibet the new front?</a>

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<div class="videoWrapper trancodeVideo"><iframe allowfullscreen="" autoplay="1" class="includeVideo" frameborder="0" height="350" src="https://www.wionews.com/videos/gravitas-india-china-standoff-is-tibet-the-new-front-309514/embed" style="width:100%;max-width:560px;" width="560"></iframe></div>
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

"Each country demanded the withdrawal of the other's forces and a return to pre-standoff conditions, but neither China nor India agreed on those conditions," it said.

"The PRC blamed the standoff on Indian infrastructure construction, which it perceived as encroaching on PRC territory, while India accused China of launching aggressive incursions into India's territory," it added.

Since the 2020 clash, PLA has maintained a continuous force presence and continued infrastructure build-up along the LAC.

The 2020 Galwan Valley incident was the deadliest clash between the two nations in the past 46 years, the report said. On June 15, 2020, patrols violently clashed in Galwan Valley resulting in the death of approximately 20 Indian soldiers and an unspecified number of PLA troops, according to PRC officials, it said.&nbsp;

(With inputs from agencies)

WATCH WION LIVE HERE

<iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="350" loading="”lazy”" src="https://www.wionews.com/live-tv/embed?autoplay=1&amp;mute=1  width=&quot;100%&quot;"></iframe>

You can now write for wionews.com and be a part of the community. Share your stories and opinions with us <a href="https://www.wionews.com/content-contribution-registration-form">here</a>.

In a strange case of bilateral common-ground between India and China amid their continued hostilities, Beijing told American officials not to interfere in its relationship with India, the Pentagon said in a report to the US Congress.

In a strange case of bilateral common-ground between India and China amid their continued hostilities, Beijing told American officials not to interfere in its relationship with India, the Pentagon said in a report to the US Congress. India too disapproves any third-party interference with respect to its prevailing bilateral disputes with its neighbours. Since the beginning of the Line of Actual Control (LAC) standoff between the two sides, Chinese officials reportedly downplayed the severity of the crisis. Beijing emphasised on its purported intent to preserve "border stability" and prevent the standoff from harming other areas of its bilateral relationship with India, the Pentagon said in a report on Tuesday. "The PRC (People's Republic of China) seeks to prevent border tensions from causing India to partner more closely with the United States. PRC officials have warned US officials to not interfere with the PRC's relationship with India," the Pentagon said in its latest report on Chinese military build-up. ALSO READ | India-China ties: Many stumbles, no meets In a section on the China-India border, the Pentagon said throughout 2021, China's People Liberation Army (PLA) sustained the deployment of forces and continued infrastructure build-up along the LAC. Negotiation made minimal progress as both sides resist losing perceived advantages on the border, it said. Beginning in May 2020, Chinese and Indian forces faced off in clashes with rocks, batons, and clubs wrapped in barbed wire at multiple locations along the LAC. The resulting standoff triggered the build-up of forces on both sides of the border. WATCH | Gravitas: India-China standoff | Is Tibet the new front? × "Each country demanded the withdrawal of the other's forces and a return to pre-standoff conditions, but neither China nor India agreed on those conditions," it said. "The PRC blamed the standoff on Indian infrastructure construction, which it perceived as encroaching on PRC territory, while India accused China of launching aggressive incursions into India's territory," it added. Since the 2020 clash, PLA has maintained a continuous force presence and continued infrastructure build-up along the LAC. The 2020 Galwan Valley incident was the deadliest clash between the two nations in the past 46 years, the report said. On June 15, 2020, patrols violently clashed in Galwan Valley resulting in the death of approximately 20 Indian soldiers and an unspecified number of PLA troops, according to PRC officials, it said. (With inputs from agencies) WATCH WION LIVE HERE You can now write for wionews.com and be a part of the community. Share your stories and opinions with us here.

Beijing warned US officials not to interfere with India-China ties: Pentagon report

After a Pentagon report highlighted a major increase in China's nuclear warhead arsenal over the next decade, the country's foreign ministry dismissed it as "full of prejudice".

China's foreign ministry spokesman Wang Wenbin said the report "ignores facts" and "is purely just manipulative banter".

<a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/india-has-less-nukes-than-pakistan-china-new-analysis-of-capabilities-426600">Also Read|&nbsp;India has less nukes than Pakistan, China: New analysis of capabilities</a>

The Pentagon report said China could have 1,000 nuclear warheads by 2030 and had started building at least "three intercontinental ballistic missile silo fields".&nbsp;

However, the Chinese foreign ministry said it was "cheap tricks based on gossip" while accusing the US of being the "largest nuclear threat to this world."

<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/very-concerning-pentagon-report-says-china-could-have-1000-nuclear-warheads-by-2030-426519">Also Read:&nbsp;Pentagon report on China's&nbsp;nuclear warheads&nbsp;</a>

Reports claim the US has 3,750 nuclear warheads. The Pentagon report said China's nuclear arsenal had grown faster than expected while adding that the country is building a "nuclear triad".

The report claimed that the Xi regime is also building the infrastructure necessary to support major expansion of its nuclear forces.

<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/amid-tensions-with-china-taiwan-military-unveils-exoskeleton-suit-for-soldiers-426511">Also Read:&nbsp;Amid tensions with China, Taiwan military unveils exoskeleton suit for soldiers</a>

Last year the Pentagon report had said that China possessed&nbsp;&nbsp;200 nuclear warheads and was in line to double the number by the end of the decade, however, the latest report projected a dramatic increase in China's warhead producing capability.

The report comes as tensions between the US and China has grown over Taiwan as Chinese jets last month repeatedly entered Taipei's air defence zone.

(With inputs from Agencies)

After a Pentagon report highlighted a major increase in China's nuclear warhead arsenal over the next decade, the country's foreign ministry dismissed it as "full of prejudice".

After a Pentagon report highlighted a major increase in China's nuclear warhead arsenal over the next decade, the country's foreign ministry dismissed it as "full of prejudice". China's foreign ministry spokesman Wang Wenbin said the report "ignores facts" and "is purely just manipulative banter". Also Read| India has less nukes than Pakistan, China: New analysis of capabilities The Pentagon report said China could have 1,000 nuclear warheads by 2030 and had started building at least "three intercontinental ballistic missile silo fields". However, the Chinese foreign ministry said it was "cheap tricks based on gossip" while accusing the US of being the "largest nuclear threat to this world." Also Read: Pentagon report on China's nuclear warheads Reports claim the US has 3,750 nuclear warheads. The Pentagon report said China's nuclear arsenal had grown faster than expected while adding that the country is building a "nuclear triad". The report claimed that the Xi regime is also building the infrastructure necessary to support major expansion of its nuclear forces. Also Read: Amid tensions with China, Taiwan military unveils exoskeleton suit for soldiers Last year the Pentagon report had said that China possessed 200 nuclear warheads and was in line to double the number by the end of the decade, however, the latest report projected a dramatic increase in China's warhead producing capability. The report comes as tensions between the US and China has grown over Taiwan as Chinese jets last month repeatedly entered Taipei's air defence zone. (With inputs from Agencies)

Cheap tricks based on gossip, says China on Pentagon's nuclear warhead report

The Pentagon said the growth projection was based on factors including Beijing having enough material to double its nuclear weapons stockpile without new fissile material production.

Your Story: Pentagon concerned by China's Nuclear ambitions

In the first report since the February 29 agreement, the United States Department of Defense issued its quarterly report to the US Congress.

In this report, the Pentagon reported that Pakistan continues to harbor the Taliban and associated militant groups in Pakistan, such as the Haqqani Network, which maintains the ability to conduct attacks against Afghan interests.

The report is valuable as it covers the first month after the US signed a peace agreement with the Taliban.

The report, covering the period from January to March of Operation Freedom's Sentinel, the U.S. military mission in Afghanistan, has significant inputs, as the US signed a deal on February 29 to facilitate the withdrawal of American troops from Afghanistan.

The report, which was issued on May 19, comes at a time when the US special envoy for Afghanistan reconciliation Zalmay Khalilzad has called on India to hold direct talks with the Taliban.

(With inputs from agencies)

In the first report since the February 29 agreement, the United States Department of Defense issued its quarterly report to the US Congress. In this report, the Pentagon reported that Pakistan continues to harbor the Taliban and associated militant groups in Pakistan, such as the Haqqani Network, which maintains the ability to conduct attacks against Afghan interests.

In the first report since the February 29 agreement, the United States Department of Defense issued its quarterly report to the US Congress. In this report, the Pentagon reported that Pakistan continues to harbor the Taliban and associated militant groups in Pakistan, such as the Haqqani Network, which maintains the ability to conduct attacks against Afghan interests. The report is valuable as it covers the first month after the US signed a peace agreement with the Taliban. The report, covering the period from January to March of Operation Freedom's Sentinel, the U.S. military mission in Afghanistan, has significant inputs, as the US signed a deal on February 29 to facilitate the withdrawal of American troops from Afghanistan. The report, which was issued on May 19, comes at a time when the US special envoy for Afghanistan reconciliation Zalmay Khalilzad has called on India to hold direct talks with the Taliban. (With inputs from agencies)

Pakistan continues to support Taliban: Pentagon report

Daniel Ellsberg, a former military intelligence contractor who leaked the "Pentagon Papers", a secret government history of the Vietnam War in 1971, is a contender for the <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/young-swedish-activist-greta-thunberg-nominated-for-nobel-peace-prize-203378">2019 Nobel Peace Prize</a>.

Born on April 7, 1931, Ellsberg is an American economist, anti-war activist and former United States military analyst.

In 1971, whilst working for the RAND Corporation, Ellsberg gave rise to a national political controversy by releasing the Pentagon Papers - a top-secret study of the US&nbsp;government decision-making in relation to the Vietnam War - to The New York Times and other newspapers.

In 1973 he was put on trial charged with espionage, theft and conspiracy, carrying a total maximum sentence of 115 years. But due to evidence of governmental misconduct and illegal evidence-gathering, Judge William Matthew Byrne Jr. dismissed all charges against Ellsberg on May 11, 1973.

He has since won the Right Livelihood Award in 2006 and was awarded the Olof Palme Prize in 2018.

The Nobel Peace Prize will be announced in Oslo on Friday, October 11, at 0900GMT&nbsp;and the prize, worth 9 million Swedish crowns ($1.12 million), <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/trump-makes-his-case-for-nobel-peace-prize-complains-hell-never-get-it-197683">will be handed over</a> on December 10, 2019.

Daniel Ellsberg, a former military intelligence contractor who leaked the "Pentagon Papers", a secret government history of the Vietnam War in 1971, is a contender for the 2019 Nobel Peace Prize.

Daniel Ellsberg, a former military intelligence contractor who leaked the "Pentagon Papers", a secret government history of the Vietnam War in 1971, is a contender for the 2019 Nobel Peace Prize. Born on April 7, 1931, Ellsberg is an American economist, anti-war activist and former United States military analyst. In 1971, whilst working for the RAND Corporation, Ellsberg gave rise to a national political controversy by releasing the Pentagon Papers - a top-secret study of the US government decision-making in relation to the Vietnam War - to The New York Times and other newspapers. In 1973 he was put on trial charged with espionage, theft and conspiracy, carrying a total maximum sentence of 115 years. But due to evidence of governmental misconduct and illegal evidence-gathering, Judge William Matthew Byrne Jr. dismissed all charges against Ellsberg on May 11, 1973. He has since won the Right Livelihood Award in 2006 and was awarded the Olof Palme Prize in 2018. The Nobel Peace Prize will be announced in Oslo on Friday, October 11, at 0900GMT and the prize, worth 9 million Swedish crowns ($1.12 million), will be handed over on December 10, 2019.

Daniel Ellsberg, whistleblower of 'Pentagon Papers', contender for Nobel Peace Prize

pentagon-report

Pentagon Report, News on Pentagon Report, stories on Pentagon Report, articles on Pentagon Report, Pentagon Report stories at Wion, Pentagon Report news, Pentagon Report latest news

pentagon report