Its time for real rice reform

Murray Hunter
Apr 15, 2026


Its time for real rice reform

Need policies that enhance communities





With a drought prevailing across south-east Asia, leading to irrigation water shortages and declining production, it has long been evident there would be a rice crisis in Malaysia.

With the price of imported rice significantly increasing due to shortages, there is now greater demand for cheaper local rice, which is also in shortage. Long standing price controls have eroded profit margins and are now acting as a dis-incentive mechanism for growers to produce. Increasing the long-standing retail price cap of RM 2.60 per kilogram for locally produced rice will lead to a consumer backlash in the current economic climate.

Government looking for solutions

The government introduction of a Madani branded white rice, priced at RM 30 per 10 kilograms (RM 15.50 per 5kg, and RM 3.50 per single Kg). This represents a departure from the old ceiling price of RM 2.60 per kg.

With ‘unity government’ politicians distancing themselves from the Madani rice concept, and the Kedah Menteri Besar Muhammad Sanusi Md Nor announcing the state is also looking how it can provide a cheaper rice to consumers. Government policy on rice has become politicized and looks to be in disarray.


The basic problems

1. Rice price ceilings have not risen for 18 years. This has stressed out farmers ability to make a profit and push most into debt. Basically, the industry is unsustainable due to price ceilings.

2. The market has been manipulated with cheaper local rice mixed with more expensive imported rice and passed off as imported rice, thus cheating the consumer. This has destroyed the integrity of local rice quality standards.

3. The monopoly on importing rice has brought inefficiencies into the market, where consumers have paid higher prices for imported rice than they should have.

4. The local paddy industry requires a deep study, with the view to making it more efficient, and providing new opportunities to add-value.

Solutions

Changing price controls, subsidies, and adding new packaging are not going to solve the deep structural problems in the rice industry today. This needs to be approached through the introduction of new techniques, new business models, and new products.


Rice cultivation techniques

The current rice cultivation techniques in the north, where over 50 percent of Malaysia’s rice is produced, heavily relies on contractors, where farmers undertake only the spraying of insecticide over the crop in an ad hoc manner. A major issue is that paddy farmers are aging, with the youth having little interest in continuing family paddy cultivation. This is not sustainable.

Most work on paddy fields is undertaken by contractors. Aging paddy farmers today just schedule these contractors to come and do the work.

The key in creating profitable and sustainable paddy production needs a multi-fold approach. Instead of obtaining 4-5 tonne yields per Hectare (depends upon the availability of irrigation), 9-11 tonnes could be achieved through emulating many of the practices used in Sekinchan, Selangor. Sekinchan farmers are reported to be able to obtain 5 harvests in a two-year cycle, compared with 4 crops in the north. The farmers of Sekinchan are meticulous in the preparation of their fields, cultivation practices, and weed control.

There needs to be a return to basic research to obtain the best practices, and a return to the days of extension advice provided by local agricultural authorities to farmers.


Business models

The current business model consists primarily of smallholders cultivating relatively small plots of land between one and 10 ha. Contractors do the harvesting and milling, and also receive the bulk of government subsidies. Most of these farmers are in debt and there is nobody to takeover their land plots to continue cultivating rice when they are unable to continue.

Farmers need to be re-organized into forming community and regional cooperatives which undertake the bulk cultivation activities, harvesting, milling, sales and distribution of the rice produced. This will require government grants and subsidies, but will assist in turning smallholders into sustainable farming communities. Through cooperatives, farmers can achieve economies of scale and improve profits, which can be shared.

These cooperatives must be considered start-ups.

New products

With the community bound together in cooperatives, other rice varieties can be cultivated to add value to crops. There are many local aromatic and brown rice varieties which can be commercialized. These new products can be marketed as ‘healthy foods’, using geographical regions as branding.

Other market reforms

The sooner price controls and monopolies are eliminated from the marketplace, the better off both farmers and consumers will be. To date, the rice industry has only benefitted contractors and monopoly corporations. This doesn’t mean that subsidies and grants should be eliminated. Grants and subsidies should be used as fiscal tools to reform the ailing rice industry. These reforms should benefit communities, where the cooperative will be the vehicle to do so.

This needs a brave government to make these reforms.

What Russia Can Learn from the Iranian War

Murray Hunter
Apr 14, 2026


What Russia Can Learn from the Iranian War

Strategic lessons from a six-week conflict





The intense conflict between the United States, Israel, and Iran is unfolding against a backdrop of a broader erosion in Western strategic hegemony. The United States is losing its alliances around the world, and thus becoming diplomatically weaker.

Strains in traditional partnerships over the last year have been driven by tariff disputes, skepticism over the effectiveness of NATO, and a more transactional diplomatic approaches under the second Trump administration. This has prompted allies in Europe, the Indo-Pacific, and the Middle East to hedge their bets or pursue greater autonomy in their foreign policy thinking.

Major institutions like NATO have only endured because of shared concerns over Russia and China, but prolonged friction with the United States is risking the erosion of trust and coordinated action between the US and its allies.

The European Community (EU) itself is becoming divided and weaker as a single unit. Internal fractures over migration, energy, defense spending, fiscal policy, and relations with Russia and China have intensified, with populist shifts in several member states complicating unified responses. The recent loss of Victor Orban to Peter Magyar in Hungary will certainly exacerbate this.

Transatlantic tensions are accelerating calls for “strategic autonomy,” yet uneven capabilities and national priorities continue to limit the bloc’s geopolitical cohesion.

Militarily, U.S. military hardware which cover naval ships, aircraft carriers, and attack aircraft now appear much less effective in modern warfare. Advances in anti-access/area-denial systems, hypersonic weapons, drone swarms, and precision munitions make large surface assets and manned platforms vulnerable to saturation attacks and long-range strikes in contested environments.

Lessons from recent operations underscore the high costs and finite nature of these systems against determined adversaries with effective weaponry that have been indigenously developed and manufactured at just a small percentage of the costs relative to the United States.

In contrast, Russia demonstrates superiority in land warfare through troop numbers, logistics, and tactics. Russia also now has military technologies the US does not have. In Ukraine, Russian forces have leveraged massed artillery, glide bombs, cheap FPV and Lancet drones, electronic warfare, and adaptive “thousand cuts” tactics to sustain attritional advances despite high losses. This ground-domain edge contrasts sharply with Western emphasis on expensive precision systems.

Compounding the shifts above are the personal differences between the Russian President Vladimir Putin and US President Donald Trump. Putin, shaped by a KGB culture and discipline and decades of centralized state control, embodies calculated, long-term strategic patience and methodical risk management. Trump on the other hand, is a deal-making businessman and media-savvy populist, who favors intuitive, transactional diplomacy, public branding of “wins,” with an aversion to prolonged U.S. troop commitments.

These contrasting styles and methodical application of Putin versus the spontaneous assertiveness of Trump create both potential for direct negotiations and risks of mismatched expectations in great-power relations. We have seen this paradox as a major reason the Russo-Ukrainian war has not been ended yet.

Within this environment, the six-week US-Iranian conflict has provided Moscow with several glimpses of US and European vulnerability.

In the space of just six weeks, the brief but intense conflict between Iran, the United States, and Israel has rewritten several long-standing assumptions about how great-power confrontations can unfold in the 21st century.

On 28 February 2026, U.S. and Israeli forces struck Iranian targets in what is best described as an unprovoked escalation. What followed was a calibrated cycle of attack and retaliation of missile barrages, drone swarms, and strikes on proxy assets, until Washington quietly opened channels for ceasefire talks.

Russia’s own “special military operation” in Ukraine, now in its fourth year, has been defined by strategic patience: a grinding war of attrition designed to exhaust Ukrainian manpower, strain Western treasuries, and keep energy markets uncomfortable. Yet inside Russia, a vocal segment of the security establishment and nationalist commentariat has grown restless with what it sees as excessive restraint.

The events offer Moscow a timely view of the US directly in a theatre of war.

The Iranian precedent suggests that limited, demonstrative escalation against the external enablers of an adversary shows up a number of potential strategies that Russia could incorporate into its Ukraine campaign.

Hitting Forward Bases Without Crossing the Nuclear Threshold

Iran repeatedly struck U.S. bases located in third countries. These facilities in third countries were actively supporting operations against it. These Iranian attacks managed to avoid the kind of spiraling retaliation that many Western analysts had predicted. The strikes were precise enough to degrade US base capabilities and send a message, but carefully scoped to remain below the level that would compel Washington to treat them as acts of war against the American homeland.

For Russia, the analogy is uncomfortably direct. NATO countries have hosted training missions, provided deep-strike weapons, and allowed their territory to serve as logistics hubs for Ukrainian operations. Deep missile and UAV strikes originating from Ukrainian soil and launched with Western-supplied systems have already reached deep inside Russia.

The Iranian model implies that Moscow could respond in kind, targeting command nodes, airfields, or logistics depots on NATO soil that are unambiguously part of the war effort.

These actions may be taken by Russia without necessarily inviting a full Article 5 response. Trump calling on NATO allies to assist in the Strait of Hormuz signals the impotence of Article 5 in the contemporary today. The key, as Iran has demonstrated, is calibration, striking the enabler, but not the sovereign heartland. This for Iran demonstrated resolve, without escalation.

Exposing the Limits of Western Military Superiority

Iran’s performance in the six-week exchange revealed something that satellite imagery and leaked assessments have since confirmed. Even a mid-tier power armed with relatively low-cost drones, ballistic missiles, and layered air defenses can impose painful costs on the world’s most advanced military.

U.S. and Israeli systems were not rendered impotent, but they were shown to be expensive, finite, and vulnerable to saturation attacks. Tehran’s ability to keep launching after absorbing the first waves of strikes turned the conflict into a costly war of expenditure rather than a quick demonstration of dominance.

Russia has already made similar calculations in Ukraine relying on massed artillery, glide bombs, and cheap Lancet drones to offset Western precision munitions. The Iranian case reinforces the logic. A continued restraint may prolong the conflict by allowing NATO to replenish stocks on its own timeline.

Consequently, a more assertive posture that forces the West to expend high-end interceptors and expose forward bases could accelerate the very economic and political fatigue Putin has sought to create, especially given the vulnerabilities already evident in U.S. naval and air assets. Iran has undertaken this strategy very well.


Punishing Allies to Discipline the Adversary

Perhaps the most politically astute element of Iran’s campaign was its willingness to strike U.S. allies in the Gulf, the facilities and assets linked to the anti-Iran coalition while calibrating the blows so that Washington felt pressure to restrain its partners rather than escalate directly. Retribution was limited, but the message was received.

Applied to the Russian context, this suggests that selective strikes against the most forward-leaning NATO states such as Poland’s airfields and logistics centers have been cited most frequently in Russian discourse. This based upon the Iran experience not automatically trigger a collective NATO response.

Instead, they could have the opposite effect. Nervous European capitals, already divided internally, might begin pressing Washington and Kyiv for de-escalation rather than further escalation.

The goal would not be conquest or permanent occupation but to make the cost of proxy war visible on allied territory, thereby fracturing the coalition’s political will.

The Domestic Calculus in Moscow

Putin’s restraint has so far been Russia’s strength. This has preserved Russia’s economy, kept nuclear risks contained, and allowed time for sanctions evasion and military-industrial expansion.

Yet the Iranian precedent arrives at a moment when patience is being questioned inside the Kremlin’s corridors and on Russian state television. Hardliners argue that the West has interpreted restraint as weakness. The six-week Iran conflict offers them an empirical example. Limited escalation produced talks, not Armageddon.

Of course, the risks are real. NATO’s nuclear umbrella, the presence of supporting U.S. personnel inside Ukraine, and the integrated intelligence-sharing networks mean that any Russian strike on allied soil would be a step into uncharted territory.

Iran operated with the tacit understanding that neither side wanted a wider regional war. Russia enjoys no such luxury. Any miscalculation could still cascade, particularly when interacting with a U.S. leader who’s intuitive, deal-oriented style differs markedly from Putin’s methodical long-termism.

It must be remembered there are ‘jokers’ on both sides Israeli prime minister Netanyahu in Israel and President Zelensky in Ukraine, who would be willing to sabotage any move which attempts to bring an end to either war.

Nevertheless, the Iranian war has supplied Moscow with a new mental model. It is no longer necessary to choose between total restraint and all-out confrontation. There exists a middle path which is demonstrative, limited, and politically potent. Iran as a regional power can bleed its adversaries’ willingness to fight without inviting the end of the world.

Whether Putin chooses to walk that path will likely define the next phase of the Ukraine conflict. The six weeks in February–March 2026 have shown that patience has limits, and that calibrated audacity can sometimes shorten them.

US eyes second Iran peace talks in Pakistan as Tehran threatens Red Sea trade shutdown

US eyes second Iran peace talks in Pakistan as Tehran threatens Red Sea trade shutdown



The Callisto tanker sits anchored as the traffic is down in the Strait of Hormuz, amid the US-Israeli conflict with Iran, in Muscat, Oman March 10, 2026. — Reuters pic

Thursday, 16 Apr 2026 8:54 AM MYT


WASHINGTON, April 16 — The United States is discussing a possible second round of peace talks with Iran in Pakistan and is optimistic about reaching a deal, US officials said yesterday, as Tehran threatened to shut down Red Sea trade unless Washington lifted a naval blockade of its ports.


A Pakistani delegation arrived in Tehran meanwhile bearing a new message from Washington after US President Donald Trump indicated negotiations could resume this week following last weekend’s abortive talks in Islamabad.


White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt told reporters further talks “would very likely” be in the Pakistani capital. “Those discussions are being had,” Leavitt said, and “we feel good about the prospects of a deal.”

US Vice President JD Vance, who led the first round of talks, has said Iran is being offered a “grand bargain” to end the six-week war with Israel and the United States and address the decades-old dispute over Tehran’s nuclear program.


Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said Israel and the United States have “identical” goals—enriched material removed from Iran, elimination of enrichment capability and a reopening of the Strait of Hormuz.


The strait, through which one-fifth of the world’s crude oil normally flows, has been choked by Iranian forces since the US-Israeli offensive began and is now the focus of the US blockade.

On the economic front, IMF chief Kristalina Georgieva warned of “tough times ahead” for the global economy if the war in the Middle East is unresolved and oil prices stay high, adding that inflation risks could seep into food prices.


Optimism about an accord in the US-Iran conflict sent share prices higher on Wall Street, however, with the major stock indices finishing at records on Wednesday while crude prices dropped.

‘Zero ships have broken through’

Washington has sought to turn the screws on Tehran with a blockade of its ports, with US Central Command claiming to have “completely halted economic trade going into and out of Iran by sea.”

CENTCOM said it has turned back 10 vessels that tried to sail out of Iranian ports during the first 48 hours of the blockade and “zero ships have broken through.”

The picture based on recent maritime tracking data in the Strait of Hormuz was less clear-cut, and Iran’s Tasnim news agency reported shipping has continued from southern Iran.

The head of Iran’s military central command center warned that a US failure to lift the blockade would constitute “a prelude” to violating the two-week ceasefire struck on April 8.

Unless Washington relents, Iran’s armed forces “will not allow any exports or imports to continue in the Persian Gulf, the Sea of Oman and the Red Sea,” Ali Abdollahi said.

The military adviser to Iran’s supreme leader Mojtaba Khamenei warned that Iran would sink American ships in the Strait of Hormuz if the United States decides to “police” the key shipping channel.

“These ships of yours will be sunk by our first missiles,” Mohsen Rezaei, a former commander-in-chief of Iran’s Revolutionary Guards who was named as a military adviser by Khamenei last month, told state TV.

In Tehran, Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi welcomed a Pakistani delegation on Wednesday led by army chief Asim Munir that Iranian state television said was to relay a new US message and discuss a second round of talks.


No nuclear weapons

Trump has insisted that any deal with Iran must permanently bar the Islamic Republic from acquiring a nuclear weapon.

He launched the war on February 28, claiming that Tehran was rushing to complete an atomic bomb, an assertion not backed by the UN nuclear watchdog.

Washington has reportedly sought a 20-year suspension of Iran’s uranium enrichment program while Tehran has proposed suspending nuclear activity for five years—an offer US officials rejected.

Tehran insists its nuclear program is for civilian purposes and its foreign ministry said Wednesday that Iran’s right to enrich uranium was “indisputable” although the level of enrichment was “negotiable.”

The latest signals on US-Iran talks came as Israel and Lebanon agreed to open direct negotiations after their first high-level face-to-face meeting since 1993 took place on Tuesday in Washington.

Netanyahu on Wednesday spoke of two central objectives in the talks with Lebanon: “First, the dismantling of Hezbollah; second, a sustainable peace...achieved through strength.”

The Trump administration is pressing for an end to the conflict between Israel and Iranian-backed Hezbollah militants in Lebanon, fearing it could jeopardize a broader settlement.

A senior US administration official said on Wednesday that Trump would “welcome” an end to the conflict between Israel and Hezbollah as part of a peace agreement between Israel and Lebanon, but such a deal is not part of peace talks with Iran.

But the diplomatic push remained fragile as Hezbollah, which is hostile to any talks, fired dozens of rockets at Israel and the Israeli military claimed hits on more than 200 targets linked to the militant group in Lebanon over 24 hours. — AFP

THE IRANIANS are adding another sea blockade

From the FB page of:

Nury Vittachi 

Sdoonetpsr457496f3uuc98um4i908it8416lgm75l00gg2622cu2i7mil03 ·

THE IRANIANS are adding another sea blockade—making it the third in the area, the country announced yesterday.

But this is a big one.

The new blockade will halt sea traffic through the Red Sea, along with the Gulf and Sea of Oman, the government said in a statement on Iranian state television yesterday (Wednesday, 15 April 2026).

Such a blockade would halt all traffic to and from the Suez Canal, the only passage between the Mediterranean and Asia.

.

IRANIANS UP THE ANTE

This is a clever move which will raise the already high stakes much higher still.

It will horrify the Saudi Arabians, in particular. Frustrated by the lack of access through the Strait of Hormuz, they have been pouring their oil into a pipeline that has taken it to the shores of the Red Sea, from which four to five million barrels a day can be exported.

But if Iran closes the Red Sea outlet, this will be a huge blow to the Saudis, and to their customers, such as South Korea, Japan and Taiwan. The threat of a global recession will grow dramatically.

The Iranians have turned the US-Israel attack into a game of chess—one in which they have prevented the US making a quick win, humiliating it for seven weeks and counting.

.

CAN IT BE DONE?

But can Iran close the Red Sea?

The simple answer is Yes. The world now knows that closing sea routes is easier than it may have seemed. You don’t actually need any kind of ocean barrier, or even floating mines.

All you do is making enough threats to attack ships with drones or missiles to send the insurance companies into a panic—and then they back off and the whole system seizes up.

Furthermore, the Iranians’ great friends, the Ansarallah people in Yemen (known in the west as the Houthis), have shown great skill in closing the Red Sea route in the past, which they did as a protest against Israel’s treatment of the people of Gaza.

.

CHINA PLAYS CAREFUL ROLE

So how will this latest move play out? It’s hard to say.

With the Iranians successfully turning the US attack into a stalemate, a new element will be needed to break the deadlock—and China is the likely candidate to make that move.

The Chinese have a good relationship with Iran, and are surely enjoying seeing the failure of what the United States believed would be a quick operation to murder Iran's leaders and destroy its military.

But at the same time, China is always focused on trade, so would certainly prefer a peaceful world where all sea passages are open.

Yet Beijing will not want to solve Washington’s self-made problem too quickly. It will surely remain focused on the fact that ultimate aim of all US overseas foreign policy actions is to harm China itself.

Rattled by Trump, US allies eye Japan’s biggest arms‑export shift since WW2

Rattled by Trump, US allies eye Japan’s biggest arms‑export shift since WW2



A concept model of the Global Combat Air Programme (GCAP)'s fighter jet is displayed during the Defence Security Equipment International (DSEI) Japan at Makuhari Messe in Chiba, east of Tokyo May 21, 2025. — Reuters pic

Thursday, 16 Apr 2026 7:00 AM MYT

• Japan’s arms export easing draws interest from Poland, Philippines and others
• Some allies concerned about dependence on Washington and strains on its supply from two wars
• Japanese firms like Toshiba, Mitsubishi Electric ramp up hiring and industrial capacity
• Despite decades of pacifism, Tokyo sustains an industry that can produce advanced military products

TOKYO, April 16 — Japan’s imminent easing of arms export rules has sparked ‌strong interest from Warsaw to Manila, Reuters reporting found, as President Donald Trump wavers on security commitments to allies and the wars in Iran and Ukraine strain US weapons supplies. Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi’s ruling party approved the changes this week as she tries to invigorate the pacifist country’s military industrial base. Her government will formally adopt the new rules as soon as this month, three Japanese government officials told Reuters. Despite largely isolating itself from global arms markets since World War Two, Japan spends enough on its own military — US$60 billion (RM237 billion) this year — to sustain a sizeable defence industry capable of manufacturing advanced systems like submarines and fighter jets. Among the potential new ‌customers are the Polish military and the Philippine navy, which are undergoing modernisation amid regional security challenges, according to Reuters interviews with Japanese officials and foreign diplomats in Tokyo. Defence contractors Toshiba and Mitsubishi Electric are hiring staff and adding capacity to capitalise on demand, their executives said, providing previously unreported details.


One of the first deals Takaichi’s government will likely approve are exports of used frigates to the Philippines, which is locked in maritime confrontation with Beijing in the South China Sea, according to two of the Japanese officials. Reuters is the first to report the timeframe of the likely sale, which may be followed by missile defence systems, the officials said.


Warsaw and Tokyo can help plug gaps in each other’s arsenals, cooperating in areas like anti-drone and electronic warfare systems, said Mariusz Boguszewski, deputy chief of mission at Poland’s embassy in Japan.

“There are some bottlenecks that we can overcome having Japan on board,” he added, without providing details of specific deals. Poland’s WB Group, one of Europe’s largest private defence contractors, last year signed a tentative drone deal with Japanese aircraft maker ShinMaywa. Three other European diplomats said Japan’s easing provided a chance to lessen their heavy dependence on US weapons production, which is strained by conflicts. Trump’s unpredictability, such as his threats to leave the Nato security alliance and invade Greenland, have also heightened the push to diversify, according to the diplomats, who requested anonymity to discuss sensitive matters. “Offers are coming from everywhere,” said Masahiko Arai, senior vice president at Mitsubishi Electric’s defence unit, which has been adding staff in London and Singapore to facilitate defence exports.


Takaichi’s office declined to answer specific questions for this story, instead referring Reuters to a February 20 speech where she said she was reviewing the controls to bolster Japan’s defence production and strengthen capabilities of allies.


Tokyo’s export overhaul has previously been encouraged by successive US administrations, including Trump’s, eager for allies to contribute more to collective defence efforts.

White House spokeswoman Anna Kelly did not respond to questions from Reuters about the changes to ‌Japanese policy but said that the two nations were closer than ever under Trump and Takaichi.


China’s foreign ministry did not immediately respond to questions about Japanese frigates potentially being sent to the Philippines. Ministry spokeswoman Mao Ning told reporters in April that Beijing was concerned about changes in ⁠Tokyo’s arms export policy and that it should “act prudently in military and security areas.”

The Philippines defence ministry declined to comment.



A Japanese Ground Self-Defense Force Type 10 tank is displayed at a defence equipment fair called 'DSEI Japan' in Chiba, east of Tokyo, Japan, November 10, 2019, in this photo take by Kyodo. — Kyodo pic via Reuters


Risky business?

Japan’s first steps to relax ⁠the rules began more than a decade ago when Takaichi’s mentor, the late premier Shinzo Abe, eased a near-blanket ban on exports to encourage joint arms development with allies that would help counter ⁠China’s growing military might.

The push largely stalled, however, as many restrictions — including on lethal ⁠equipment — remained. Companies continued to shy away from overseas defence sales. Buoyed ⁠by a bumper election win and shorn of the longtime coalition partner that had opposed more radical change, Takaichi hopes the latest easing will nudge arms makers to add the production capacity Japan needs for a major military buildup.

Some Japanese defence firms say they are ready to pivot.

Air defence systems builder Toshiba told Reuters it plans to hire about 500 people over the next three years and is constructing new testing and manufacturing facilities. It has also established a new department to handle defence exports.

“Reputational risk is not what it used to be,” said Kenji Kobayashi, vice president in Toshiba’s ⁠defence division. Some big Japanese brands that have sidelines in defence equipment and also make consumer goods have expressed concerns that arms sales will put off their broader range of customers.

“Rather than worrying about that, we focus on fulfilling our role and growing the business,” Kobayashi said.



Mitsubishi Heavy Industries' Unmanned surface vehicle is displayed at the DSEI Japan defense show at Makuhari Messe in Chiba, east of Tokyo March 15, 2023. — Reuters pic


A recruitment listing reviewed by Reuters from Mitsubishi Electric — whose products include fridges and missiles — shows the firm is hiring for an overseas sales role covering fighter aircraft and other military exports.

Demand for finished systems is strongest in Asia, while Europe, Australia and the United States offer markets for components and co-development of new products, said Arai, the Mitsubishi Electric defence executive.

He expects overall sales at his unit, including domestic and international, to increase by 50 per cent to ¥600 billion (RM15 billion) by 2031.

There remains a gap between the political messaging and the policies of some companies, however, said Latvia’s envoy to Japan, Zigmars Zilgalvis.

He gave the example of carmaker Toyota, whose subsidiary turned down an attempted purchase of engines and related parts by Latvian firm VR Cars for a military utility vehicle in 2023.

The Latvian mission had tried to help broker the failed sale, Zilgalvis said.

Toyota Customising & Development ⁠said in response to Reuters questions that it could not accommodate the request for military vehicles “based on our business scope and policy.” It declined to comment on the upcoming revisions to Japan’s arms export policy.

VR Cars said it respected the decision.

While Tokyo is expected to maintain strict controls on sending arms to conflict zones, even Ukraine has sensed an opportunity.

Kyiv’s chamber of commerce in Tokyo will soon launch a new industry group of Ukrainian and Japanese drone firms to spur development of ⁠new technologies, timed to coincide with the rule changes, its head Kateryna Yavorska exclusively told Reuters.



The US Army (left) and Japanese Self-Defence Forces’ (SDF) military vehicles parade during the annual SDF ceremony at Asaka Base in Asaka, north of Tokyo October 14, 2018. — Reuters pic


Emerging from World War Two ‘timeout’

The US has long dominated global military supply chains. It accounted for 95 per cent of Japan’s defence imports, 85 per cent of Australian and British purchases and 77 per cent of Saudi Arabian buys between ⁠2021-2025, according to a March report by ⁠the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI) think-tank.

But Washington’s foreign military sales programme, often blamed for late deliveries and rising costs, and its tight control over defence technologies has long been a source of frustration, officials and analysts said. One objective of Japan’s rule changes is to build defence supply chains in Asia that do not rely on the United States, said a ruling party official involved in drafting security policy.

Neighbouring South Korea offers something of a blueprint: It has become the largest defence supplier to Poland and the Philippines after steady growth over the last five years, SIPRI data shows.

But the potential for Japan — the world’s fourth largest economy — is greater.

Even ‌with the curbs, Japan’s arms industry is on a par with South Korea, Germany, Italy and Israel, and nearly twice the size of India’s, according to SIPRI’s analysis of leading defence contractor revenues in 2024. The US industry, however, is 25 times bigger.

“Japan has been kind of in the timeout box because of World War Two, frankly. But they were inevitably going to swing closer towards the centre of global politics,” said Andrew Koch, founder of Nexus Pacific, a Tokyo-based defence-industry advisory. — Reuters

US seeking military overflight rights to Indonesian skies

Murray Hunter
Apr 14, 2026


US seeking military overflight rights to Indonesian skies

This will dramatically change the regional power balance



President Prabowo Subianto and his American counterpart Donald Trump listen to US Trade Representative Jamieson Greer in Washington on Feb. 19, 2026. (Jakarta Globe)



Indonesian President Prabowo Subianto is reported to have agreed with US President Donald Trump to allow US military aircraft to overfly and transit Indonesian airspace without case-by-case approval. The issue has now become public with the recent visit of the Indonesian Defense Minister General (Ret.) Dr. Sjafrie Sjamsoeddin to the Pentagon. US Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth in a tweet on X said that the US and Indonesia are elevating their relationship to a major Defense Cooperation Partnership, which presumably incorporates the US military flyover privileges.

For countless decades Indonesian airspace has been strictly regulated. Even civilian aircraft require forward permission to fly into and/or across Indonesian airspace. However, Indonesia may be preparing to grant the United States its most important new military access arrangement in Southeast Asia since Washington expanded rotational deployments through the Philippines and northern Australia.

Such an agreement will grant US military aircraft free and unobscured access to the South China Sea and Malacca Strait. According to a document titled “Operationalizing U.S. Overflight” transmitted from US Department of Defense and to Indonesian Ministry of Defense the blanket overflight access US aircraft would be free to conduct contingency operations, crisis-response missions anywhere in Indonesian airspace. This replaces Indonesia’s case by case approval system.

There is criticism inside Indonesia that such an agreement would compromise Indonesian sovereignty, and reflect a pivot towards the US by President Prabowo.

Implications for the Malacca Strait and South China Sea

The new agreement now means that the US military now has direct access to the Malacca Strait and South China Sea from Australia. Aircraft such as the KC-46A Pegasus, P-8A Poseidon, RC-135 Rivet Joint and B-1B Lancer could potentially patrol the Strait of Malacca anytime. This could potentially allow US forces to build up a presence in the strait which is one of the world’s busiest shipping passages.

In the context of the Iranian war, the US would now have access to the Strait of Malacca and run operations against any shipping it believes are operating against US interests.

The Strait of Malacca would be much more militarised under the agreement.

From China’s perspective this is bad news as a large volume of China’s oil from the gulf transits both the Strait of Malacca and South China Sea.

ASEAN through Indonesian President Prabowo is potentially changing the super-power balance of power in the Strait of Malacca, running a risk that the strait could become a centre of military friction under certain circumstances.

With Indonesia becoming a much closer US military collaborator, the state of détente within the ASEAN region has drastically changed bringing the Strait of Malacca into much heavier focus. This differs greatly from the traditional Indonesian “Bekas Aktif” doctrine began under the former president Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono where Indonesia maintained a formal non-alignment while engaging multiple competing great powers.

ASEAN now must sit back and wait to see what the Chinese reaction will be to such a dramatic policy realignment. China is a major trading partner with Indonesia, where China has made massive infrastructure investment. China accordingly could react with trade sanctions as what it did a decade ago to Australia, diplomatic pressure, or decide to raise military activity in the region.

The region is yet to see how the new Indonesian agreement with Washington will be implemented. If this agreement brings in greater command and logistic collaboration between the US and Indonesia, the next step could be to integrate Australia into the relationship. Such a move would be strongly supported in Canberra. The new agreement could also lead to a political backlash from groups inside Indonesia who may see it infringing sovereignty.

The latest news from Jakarta is that the government says the agreement is not yet final. Jakarta may be having second thoughts about the potential consequences.



***

For aeons the wanks have been overflying Malaysia, Indonesia, the Philippines, Far East and their Diego Garcia hideout without permission.

Penang CM: Physical works for next phases of Juru-Sungai Dua decongestion project to kick off in Q3

Penang CM: Physical works for next phases of Juru-Sungai Dua decongestion project to kick off in Q3



Penang Chief Minister Chow Kon Yeow speaks at a press conference after officiating the State Disaster Control Centre at Komtar in George Town on October 14, 2025. — Bernama pic

Thursday, 16 Apr 2026 9:20 AM MYT


GEORGE TOWN, April 16 — Physical works for the next four packages of the Juru–Sungai Dua Toll Plaza Traffic Dispersal Project (PTJSD) are expected to commence in the third quarter of this year, according to Penang Chief Minister Chow Kon Yeow.

The expansion of the project, covering Package 2 through to Package 5, will complete the critical alignment from the Juru Toll Plaza to Sungai Dua.

Chow said today that while the technical scope is still being finalised, the state is prepared to move into this next phase to address the long-standing congestion along the North-South Expressway (PLUS) corridor.

Providing an update on the project’s progress, the chief minister noted that Package 1 is already underway.


Physical works for the first phase began in October last year and are currently trending ahead of schedule. Based on the 24-month construction timeline provided by the Malaysian Highway Authority (LLM), Package 1 is expected to be operational by the end of 2027.


The PTJSD is a strategic response to the heavy traffic volume on the state’s primary artery, which currently sees an average flow of more than 200,000 vehicles per day.

This corridor serves as the linchpin for traffic moving between the north and south of Peninsular Malaysia, and its frequent bottlenecks have a direct negative impact on surrounding areas including Permatang Pauh, Bukit Mertajam, and Perai.


"The implementation of this project is believed to be capable of delivering a significant impact in reducing traffic congestion and improving road user comfort," Chow said in a statement today.

He added that the project would also stimulate economic growth and strengthen Penang’s position as a strategic investment hub.

To ensure the project remains on track for its overall completion target in 2030, the Penang state government has adopted a proactive monitoring role.

This includes continuous consultations with federal agencies and local authorities to resolve any implementation issues as they arise.

Chow added that the project scope is currently in the final consultation stage following a Value Assessment Laboratory process.

This step ensures that the finalised costs are optimised while meeting the technical needs of all stakeholders.

Comprehensive traffic analyses and sustainability studies for the project have been ongoing since April 2024.

Iran adviser threatens to sink US ships in Strait of Hormuz amid blockade tensions

Iran adviser threatens to sink US ships in Strait of Hormuz amid blockade tensions



The US is imposing a military blockade of the Strait of Hormuz after Iran blocked shipping for over six weeks of war in a conflict which is on hold as a fragile two-week ceasefire remains in place. ― Reuters pic

Thursday, 16 Apr 2026 10:08 AM MYT




TEHRAN, April 16 — The military adviser to Iran’s supreme leader Mojtaba Khamenei, yesterday warned that Iran would sink American ships in the Strait of Hormuz if the United States decided to “police” the key shipping bottleneck.

The US is imposing a military blockade of the Strait of Hormuz after Iran blocked shipping for over six weeks of war in a conflict which is on hold as a fragile two-week ceasefire remains in place.

“Mr Trump wants to become the police of the Strait of Hormuz. Is this really your job? Is this the job of a powerful army like the US?” Mohsen Rezaei, a former commander-in-chief of Iran’s Revolutionary Guards who was named as a military adviser by Khamenei last month, told state TV.

“These ships of yours will be sunk by our first missiles and have created a great danger for the US military. They can definitely be exposed to our missiles and we can destroy them,” Rezaei, wearing his military uniform, told the state broadcaster.

Long regarded as a hardliner even within the Revolutionary Guards, Iran’s ideological army, Rezaei said it would be “great” if the United States launched a ground invasion of Iran as “we would take thousands of hostages and then for each hostage we would get a billion dollars.”

He also added, without giving further details: “I am not in favour of extending the ceasefire at all and this is a personal view.”

A veteran and high-profile figure in Iran, Rezaei headed the Revolutionary Guards from 1981 to 1997.

The first and so far only round of Iranian negotiations with the US after the outbreak of war were led in Pakistan by parliament speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, a former aerospace forces commander of the Revolutionary Guards. — AFP

Netanyahu Clashes With Europe as Israel Expands Lebanon Offensive

 

Netanyahu Clashes With Europe as Israel Expands Lebanon Offensive

 

Benjamin Netanyahu has intensified a diplomatic clash with European leaders while continuing Israel’s military campaign in Lebanon, rejecting calls for a ceasefire and insisting operations against Hezbollah will proceed. European governments have condemned the strikes and urged de-escalation, warning of worsening humanitarian conditions as the conflict expands alongside broader regional tensions involving Iran.

Israeli operations have caused extensive destruction in parts of southern Lebanon, with reports that entire villages have been leveled in areas Israel says contain Hezbollah infrastructure. Casualties and displacement have risen, fueling international criticism and concern over the humanitarian toll.

Despite pressure from the United States and European allies to scale back operations and engage in negotiations, Netanyahu has maintained that the Lebanon front remains active, leaving the situation volatile with no immediate resolution in sight.

GhostofBasedPatrickHenry:

Net-and-Yoohoo lecturing Europe about the Holocaust? Talk about the pot calling the kettle black.

Now that the holocaust in Gaza is over, Netanyahu has moved on to Lebanon.

My guess is that the IDF strategy is to completely clear out the area between the Golan Heights and Tyre, then follow the Litani River where it turns north and take the area north of Khiyam. This would sever the physical connection between southern Lebanon and Syria, preventing Hezbollah from using Syria as an escape route or to bring in weapons/supplies from empathetic neighbors. They will level every village (and structure) between Taybeh and Tyre, completing their conquest of southern Israel.

There is a massive psyop online right now trying to convince Western Christians that Hezbollah wants to kill them for loving Jesus. But this is a terrible lie. Here is a picture of a Hezbollah soldier on patrol in Syria cleaning a dirty statue of the Virgin Mary.

And here is Iranian President Pezeshkian defending the Pope from President Trump’s “attacks.” He also makes it clear that Iran is willing to make a deal, under the correct conditions.

(Aside: I was told my entirely life that all Muslims hate me and want to kill me because I love Jesus. It turns out they love Jesus, too. I don’t think this is something that can be forgiven.)

So what are the correct conditions? I would imagine that a ban on uranium enrichment is going to be a non-starter. It would be foolish and irresponsible for the Iranian government to agree to shut down their enrichment programs—especially to a government (USA) that has already demonstrated a reckless disregard for human life in its unwavering support for Israel.

The war is very serious, though, so please do not make light of it. Don’t post any of the super spicy memes that Iran has been churning. Don’t post their videos of President Trump being presidential. (This one was posted by the Iranian embassy in Saudi Arabia—which was purportedly closed last month due to the fighting.)

And definitely don’t share this one that came from their consulate in India…

…or this one from their embassy in Thailand…

This is a totally normal thing for the Iranian government to post while it is fighting a very serious and very real war against the United States.

It would appear that Iran is now waging a memetic jihad through its [online] proxies—truly, the next evolution of fifth-generation warfare.

I was always told that these Muslims hate free speech and therefore have no sense of humor. Yet now they are now revealing themselves to be some of the most prolific edgelords on the internet today.

Does Israel plan on fighting the entire world? Or are they planning to stop after they have destroyed and/or occupied Gaza, Syria, West Bank, Lebanon, Turkey, Iran, and Europe?