标签： Asia

In a provocative move that escalates tensions over territorial and religious claims in the occupied West Bank, hundreds of Israeli settlers, led by far-right Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich, forced their way into the Joseph’s Tomb compound in the heart of Nablus early Wednesday, protected by heavy Israeli military deployment.

Israeli troops launched pre-emptive raids on residential areas of the Palestinian city and closed all major entry checkpoints to clear the path for the visit, which included organized morning prayers for the settler group. Official Israeli estimates place the total number of Israelis who entered the compound overnight at approximately 5,000.

During the visit, Smotrich — who also holds a senior role in Israel’s defense ministry overseeing the civil administration of the occupied West Bank — doubled down on his longstanding goal of cementing permanent Israeli control over the religious site, which falls under the administrative jurisdiction of the Palestinian Authority. Smotrich framed the incursion as a symbolic and political milestone, stating, “Our presence here at Joseph’s Tomb, in broad daylight, is a clear statement: the people of Israel are returning home to all parts of their land. Joseph’s Tomb is living testimony to the inseparable connection between the people of Israel and their land.”

The far-right minister went on to pledge to formally transfer full administrative control of the compound to the Israeli government, calling the incursion “another step in a historic correction and in strengthening our hold on Samaria” — the Israeli term for the northern West Bank. “We are acting, and will continue to act, so that the Jewish presence here becomes permanent,” he said, before issuing a formal call to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Defense Minister Israel Katz to expand Israeli sovereignty over the site, adding that the move “is the most fitting Zionist response to our enemies – deepening our roots in our land.”

Wednesday’s incursion is the latest in a years-long pattern of accelerating de facto annexation of the West Bank led by Smotrich, who took office as part of Netanyahu’s right-wing coalition government in December 2022. Under his leadership, Israel has overseen one of the largest waves of land seizure in the occupied territory in decades, alongside a sharp rise in incursions into contested religious and heritage sites across the region. These include the Ibrahimi Mosque in Hebron and the Al-Aqsa Mosque compound in occupied East Jerusalem, both flashpoints for religious and political conflict.

A recent investigation published by Israeli daily Haaretz this week revealed that Smotrich has prioritized settlement expansion in the West Bank over his core duties as finance minister over the past two years. Between 2024 and 2025, the report found, Smotrich held more than 65 private meetings with Yehuda Eliyahu, his close political ally who until recently led the Settlement Administration within the defense ministry. Eliyahu was appointed last week to head the Israel Land Authority, the state body responsible for managing and allocating public land in both Israel and the occupied West Bank, a move that analysts say will further enable Smotrich’s annexation agenda. By comparison, Haaretz recorded that Smotrich met with senior Finance Ministry officials only around 30 times in the same two-year period.

The Joseph’s Tomb site itself has been a source of repeated conflict for decades. While many Jewish worshippers revere the site as the burial place of the biblical Prophet Joseph, Palestinians identify it as the tomb of Sheikh Yusuf Dweikat, a local 19th-century Islamic cleric, and it sits within a densely populated Palestinian city. Israeli military-backed settler visits to the site began in the early 1980s after Israel occupied the West Bank in 1967, and these incursions have consistently sparked widespread Palestinian resistance. Israel withdrew its permanent military garrison from the compound in 2000, but has continued to organize monthly escorted visits for settlers. Since the October 2023 Hamas attack, these incursions have grown dramatically in size and frequency, with far-right politicians and activists repeatedly calling for a full reoccupation of the site and the re-establishment of permanent Jewish presence.

Multiple senior far-right Israeli figures joined Smotrich on Wednesday’s visit, doubling down on calls for annexation. Tzvi Sukkot, a member of parliament from Smotrich’s own Religious Zionist Party and chair of the Knesset’s Education, Culture and Sports Committee, entered the compound alongside the group. Sukkot has long pushed for full Israeli control of the site, and introduced parliamentary legislation in July 2025 to formally annex Joseph’s Tomb to Israel, a proposal that has not yet moved forward. “From here, we send one demand: restore the Jewish presence,” Sukkot said Wednesday.

Wednesday’s authorized prayer visit followed a December 2024 order from Defense Minister Israel Katz that formally permitted Jewish worshippers to hold prayer services at the site during the early morning hours. A similar large-scale settler prayer visit was organized at the compound in January 2025, which participants described as “historic.”

Yossi Dagan, head of the Shomron Regional Council that governs Israeli settlements in the northern West Bank, called Wednesday’s incursion “a historic morning marking another step toward the full return of the State of Israel to this sacred compound.” Dagan argued that the status quo of limited, military-escorted monthly visits could not continue, stating that the end goal is “the full and permanent return of the Od Yosef Chai yeshiva to its natural place, and for the Israeli flag to fly over Joseph’s Tomb.” The religious yeshiva was first established at the site in the 1980s, but was evacuated alongside the Israeli military post in the early 2000s. Rabbi Yitzhak Shapira, the current head of the yeshiva, echoed Dagan’s call Wednesday, saying he hoped to “return and establish a permanent presence at Joseph’s Tomb” and urging supporters not to “forsake the city of the covenant.”

The incursion comes amid growing international concern over Israel’s accelerating settlement expansion and de facto annexation of the West Bank, which violates multiple UN Security Council resolutions and international law rulings that deem all Israeli settlements in the 1967 occupied territories illegal.

As the global offshore wind industry hits new milestones of rapid growth, a sudden policy shift from the Donald Trump administration has put the emerging U.S. offshore wind sector on uncertain footing. Just as the American industry was positioned for explosive expansion after years of incremental progress, Trump has moved aggressively to curtail development, prioritizing expanded fossil fuel production over clean energy transition goals that most major economies have embraced.

Offshore wind holds enormous untapped potential for the United States, with abundant consistent wind resources along the country’s long coastlines capable of delivering massive volumes of carbon-free electricity to population centers. Currently, six projects are at varying stages of operation: three are already fully online, while three more have begun delivering partial power as they wrap up construction and final pre-operational testing. More than 40 federal offshore wind leases have already been awarded to developers, but the Trump administration has moved to buy back a number of these leases, offering financial payouts to energy companies that agree to abandon their offshore wind projects. Beyond lease buybacks, the administration has put in place a series of additional regulatory and administrative roadblocks to slow the industry’s growth, as it doubles down on supporting fossil fuel production.

This policy direction stands in stark contrast to global trends, where dozens of nations are rapidly scaling up offshore wind to meet rising electricity demand while cutting greenhouse gas emissions that drive climate change. Notably, China — the host of the international summit Trump is attending this week — is the undisputed global leader in offshore wind development, accounting for more than half of all new capacity forecast to come online globally over the next five years.

Unlike coal, oil, and natural gas, which release heat-trapping greenhouse gases when burned, wind turbines generate electricity without contributing to global warming. Data from the Global Wind Energy Council (GWEC) outlines the stark gap between the U.S. policy shift and global progress: as of 2025, 19 national markets across the world have operational offshore wind capacity, led by China, followed by the United Kingdom and Germany in cumulative installed capacity and project count. Beyond the top three, the Netherlands, Taiwan, Denmark, Belgium, France, Vietnam, South Korea, Japan, Sweden, the U.S., Norway, Finland, Italy, Portugal, Ireland, and Spain are all either operating or actively developing projects.

Last year alone, China added 6.6 gigawatts of new offshore wind capacity, pushing its total installed capacity to 48.4 gigawatts by the end of 2025. Globally, 2025 saw 9.3 gigawatts of new offshore wind connected to grids — a 16% increase from 2024, enough to power 10.2 million homes. Cumulative global offshore wind capacity now stands at a level capable of powering the equivalent of 102 million homes worldwide. Looking ahead to 2026–2030, GWEC forecasts that China will account for 56% of all new global offshore wind capacity additions, while the European Union will contribute 29% and the United States is projected to add just 5% — a share that could shrink further following Trump’s recent restrictions.

For the U.S., the current operational fleet includes three completed projects: the nation’s first offshore wind farm, Block Island Wind Farm off the coast of Rhode Island; Dominion Energy’s Coastal Virginia Offshore Wind pilot project, the first located in federal waters; and South Fork Wind, the first large-scale U.S. offshore wind farm delivering power to New York. Three additional projects are in late-stage development: Massachusetts’ Vineyard Wind, Rhode Island’s Revolution Wind, and the full-scale Coastal Virginia Offshore Wind project adjacent to the existing pilot off Virginia Beach. Of these three, Vineyard Wind is the furthest along and is expected to reach full commercial operations in the coming months, and has already become the first project completed during the Trump administration.

In December, the Trump administration issued a stop-work order for all five under-construction East Coast offshore wind projects, pausing work on the three late-stage projects plus New York’s Empire Wind and Sunrise Wind, citing unproven national security concerns. Developers and affected states immediately filed legal challenges, and federal courts ultimately ruled in favor of the projects, allowing all five to resume construction after finding the administration had failed to demonstrate an imminent national security risk that justified halting work.

Beyond clean climate benefits, the U.S. offshore wind industry already delivers tangible economic and consumer benefits that are at risk under the new restrictions. According to the American Clean Power Association, the sector currently supports 18,000 domestic jobs across the country. The full-scale Coastal Virginia Offshore Wind project, the largest operational wind farm in the U.S. to date, already started delivering power to the grid in March and will eventually provide enough electricity for 660,000 homes across the state, which hosts critical U.S. military infrastructure and a major global data center hub. For Massachusetts, the Vineyard Wind project is projected to save electricity customers a total of $1.4 billion over 20 years, and already undercut competing energy sources on wholesale markets to lower rates for consumers during last winter. The 800-megawatt project can power 400,000 Massachusetts homes with clean energy.

Industry data shows that offshore wind development has already spurred $25.5 billion in domestic investment across U.S. ports, steel production, transmission infrastructure upgrades, shipbuilding, workforce training, and research and development, according to the Oceantic Network, a non-profit advancing offshore energy development. The domestic supply chain for the sector already includes more than 1,000 American companies across at least 40 states. Oceantic’s analysis finds that canceling just one 1-gigawatt offshore wind project in the Northeast would result in nearly $10 billion in lost economic activity from foregone jobs and investments, while also eliminating long-term energy savings for local ratepayers.

Internationally, the sector continues to break records: the world’s largest currently operational offshore wind farm, the UK’s Hornsea 2 located in the North Sea 55 miles off Yorkshire’s coast, features 165 turbines and can power more than 1.4 million U.K. homes across its 178-square-mile footprint. An even larger UK project is currently under construction that will surpass Hornsea 2’s capacity.

The Associated Press’ climate and environmental reporting receives financial support from multiple private foundations, with the AP retaining full editorial control over all content. More information on the AP’s philanthropic partnership standards, supporter list, and funded coverage areas is available at AP.org.

In a high-stakes diplomatic summit between Chinese leader Xi Jinping and former U.S. President Donald Trump, Beijing has delivered its starkest warning to Washington in recent years over the long-running Taiwan dispute, emphasizing that mishandling the issue could trigger direct confrontation between the two global powers.

According to an official readout released by China’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Xi framed the Taiwan question as the single most sensitive and consequential issue shaping the future of bilateral relations between Beijing and Washington. Striking an uncompromising tone, Xi stated that Taiwan independence and cross-Strait peace are fundamentally incompatible, incompatible as fire and water. He added that a constructive approach to the issue would pave the way for overall stability in U.S.-China ties, while mismanagement would lead to open clashes and even full conflict that would put the entire bilateral relationship in catastrophic jeopardy.

The historically separate governance of China and Taiwan dates back to the end of the Chinese civil war in 1949, when defeated Nationalist Party forces retreated to the island after the Communist Party claimed victory on the mainland. Over the following decades, Taiwan transitioned from decades of martial law to a fully functional multi-party democracy, a status that Beijing has never recognized. China continues to claim the self-governing island of 23 million people as an integral part of its territory, reserving the right to retake it by force if necessary. Cross-Strait relations have deteriorated sharply since 2016, when Tsai Ing-wen of the pro-sovereignty Democratic Progressive Party was elected president of Taiwan. Beijing responded by cutting off all official bilateral dialogue with Taipei, and in recent years has ramped up military pressure, deploying warships and fighter jets to air and sea spaces close to the island on an almost daily basis. Beyond military coercion, Beijing has also successfully poached a number of Taiwan’s remaining formal diplomatic allies, steadily isolating the island on the global stage.

The U.S. maintains no official diplomatic relations with Taiwan but is the island’s largest and most critical unofficial ally, bound by domestic law to ensure Taiwan has the capability to defend itself against potential aggression. For decades, Washington has maintained a policy of “strategic ambiguity”, refusing to explicitly confirm whether it would intervene militarily if China launched an attack on the island. Following Xi’s comments, then-U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio reaffirmed that long-standing U.S. policy on Taiwan remained unchanged, while warning that a military seizure of Taiwan by force would be a catastrophic mistake for Beijing.

Beyond its geopolitical significance, Taiwan holds a critical position in the global tech supply chain: it is the world’s leading manufacturer of advanced semiconductors, AI servers, and high-precision instruments, and the global AI boom of recent years has pushed the island’s top technology firms to record-breaking revenue and profit levels.

Regional analysts note that Xi’s unusually stern rhetoric reflects growing anxiety in Beijing over shifting U.S. policy and deepening ties between Washington and Taipei. In December preceding the summit, the Trump administration announced an $11 billion arms package for Taiwan — the largest ever offered to the island — and Trump has repeatedly pressured Taipei to increase its own defense spending.

William Yang, senior Northeast Asia analyst at the International Crisis Group, explained that Beijing’s forceful readout of the summit carries a clear signal. “If China had secured any meaningful concession on Taiwan from Trump, it would have been reflected in Beijing’s official statement. The absence of any such mention and the relatively stern tone suggest Trump may not have budged on Taiwan in principle,” Yang said.

Ma Chun-wei, a scholar of cross-Strait relations at Taiwan’s Tamkang University, added that Beijing is also concerned that the Trump administration has begun to deviate from long-standing standardized diplomatic language on the Taiwan issue. While the U.S. has for decades acknowledged Beijing’s position on Taiwan while maintaining unofficial ties with the island, the Trump administration’s December national security strategy only reaffirmed a commitment to opposing any unilateral change to the status quo, a framing that experts say leaves room for interpretation that worries Beijing.

For Xi, Ma noted, taking a hard line on the Taiwan issue is also a matter of domestic political credibility: “For Xi Jinping, he must show that the Taiwan issue is in China’s hands. He must demonstrate this image, or else he would be criticized,” Ma explained.

The report was filed from Bangkok by AP correspondents, with additional contributions from Simina Mistreanu in Bangkok and Michelle L. Price in Washington.

Nine years after his last trip to China during his first presidential term, former and returning U.S. President Donald Trump touched down in Beijing for a landmark summit that could redefine the trajectory of relations between the world’s two most powerful rival nations. Chinese President Xi Jinping rolled out a meticulously orchestrated, grand ceremonial welcome for Trump outside the Great Hall of the People, complete with a military honor guard, 21-gun salute, and a military band playing the U.S. national anthem. As Trump walked the receiving line, he twice paused to greet crowds of waving schoolchildren holding both Chinese and American flags, before sharing a warm, informal greeting with Xi, patting Xi’s arm in a gesture of goodwill that drew attention from observers.

In unscripted remarks after their initial handshake, Trump offered effusive praise for his host, telling Xi, “You’re a great leader. I say it to everybody.” During a later cultural tour of the 600-year-old Temple of Heaven, he commented to reporters that China is a beautiful country, and opened his remarks at that evening’s state banquet by calling the high-level talks a “cherished” opportunity to connect. This warm reception marks a striking departure from Trump’s long-held rhetorical posture toward China, which he built his 2016 political brand around by taking a hardline stance. During his first campaign, he infamously claimed China was “raping” the United States economically; in 2020, he doubled down, saying China had “ripped off the United States like no one has ever done before” and labeled the COVID-19 pandemic the “Chinese virus”. Ahead of his return to office, he pledged to force China to “pay” for what he framed as unfair trade practices.

At the peak of the U.S.-China trade war in the preceding year, the two powers imposed reciprocal tariffs totaling over 100% on each other’s goods. A fragile truce followed the escalation, and this summit was framed around three core unanswered questions: whether the truce will hold, what long-term trade deal will replace it, whether Beijing can help broker a diplomatic resolution to the ongoing Iran crisis that has blocked the Strait of Hormuz, and how the two powers will navigate the long-simmering tensions over Taiwan – the self-governing island that China claims as its sovereign territory, and which the U.S. maintains unofficial diplomatic and defense ties with.

Beijing’s elaborate welcome was not just a gesture of hospitality to Trump and the 30 top American CEOs accompanying him on the trip; it was a deliberate display of geopolitical strength broadcast to audiences across the United States and the entire globe. Almost immediately after talks got underway, Chinese state media released comments from Xi that made clear Taiwan remains a major flashpoint that could derail progress between the two sides. When reporters pressed both leaders on whether they had discussed Taiwan during their Temple of Heaven visit, neither leader responded to the question.

John Delury, senior fellow at the Asia Society’s Center on US-China Relations, framed the summit as a visible marker of shifting global power dynamics. “We are witnessing a historical change,” Delury explained. “I hesitate to put too much on this specific summit, but the inexorable rise of China to a place where it is legitimately rivaling the U.S. – that is now happening before our eyes. Beijing is now the second world capital.”

Xi has positioned himself as a steady, predictable global leader in contrast to what many global observers frame as Trump’s mercurial policy style. In the years since Trump’s first term, China has expanded its global trade reach dramatically, pre-emptively building new economic partnerships to offset the risk of renewed U.S. tariffs. Over the past year, China demonstrated its economic leverage during the trade war: it matched Trump’s tariffs tit-for-tat, and restricted exports of rare earth minerals – critical inputs for advanced global manufacturing – forcing Washington to return to negotiations and agree to lower tariff rates.

Today, China controls 30% of global manufacturing output, processes over 90% of the world’s rare earth minerals, and produces between 60% and 80% of global supplies of solar panels, wind turbines and electric vehicles. Xi has indicated he believes this summit has already made clear to the U.S. and the world just how deeply dependent global economies are on Chinese manufacturing and technology. While ongoing international concerns over China’s human rights record and its close diplomatic ties to Russia and North Korea persist, those issues have been pushed to the background amid Trump’s broader reshaping of the global world order. Many global analysts now see the trajectory of global power shifting in China’s favor.

China enters these talks with a clear upper hand, as Trump faces domestic political headwinds of his own, including sinking approval ratings, and international pressure over the ongoing Iran crisis that has shut down the Strait of Hormuz – a critical global energy shipping lane whose closure has sent shockwaves through the global economy. Trump has publicly said he is counting on Beijing’s help to reopen the corridor. As Iran’s largest trading partner with decades of close diplomatic ties to Tehran, Beijing holds significant influence over the Iranian government. If Xi can help push Tehran toward negotiations to de-escalate the crisis, that would give China even greater leverage in talks with the U.S.

U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio framed the U.S. position ahead of the trip, telling Fox News, “It’s in their interest to resolve this. And we hope to convince them to play a more active role.” But analysts widely agree China will demand major concessions in exchange for cooperation on Iran. According to Chinese state media, Xi has already made clear to Trump during closed-door talks that the Taiwan issue has the potential to spark direct conflict between the two powers. Analysts expect Xi will pressure the U.S. to delay or halt arms sales to Taiwan – a requirement that would put Washington in a difficult position, as it is legally bound to provide the island with defensive military capabilities. Officials in Taipei are closely watching the summit’s outcome with significant anxiety.

This visit differs from Trump’s first trip to China in key ways: unlike his first visit, when former First Lady Melania Trump accompanied him, this trip centers heavily on the high-powered U.S. business delegation, which includes some of the biggest names in American tech and industry: Tesla CEO Elon Musk, Apple CEO Tim Cook, and Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang, all of whom attended the opening state banquet.

Trump has centered his trade demands around pushing China to further open its domestic markets to increased access for U.S. companies. As of the end of the first day of talks, few concrete details of any potential deal have been released to the public. A preliminary White House statement only confirmed that the two sides “discussed ways to enhance economic cooperation”, including expanding U.S. firms’ access to the Chinese market and facilitating Chinese investment in U.S. domestic industries. On the Iran issue, the statement added that “both countries agreed that Iran can never have a nuclear weapon” and “the Strait of Hormuz must remain open to support the free flow of energy”.

Additional talks between the two leaders are scheduled for the following day, which are expected to yield more concrete details on potential agreements. For Trump, a tangible diplomatic win from the summit is critical to boost his sinking domestic approval ratings back home. Xi, for his part, has signaled China is open to expanding cooperation in trade and agriculture, a move widely interpreted as a signal Beijing is prepared to increase purchases of U.S. soybeans, beef, and Boeing commercial aircraft.

The two leaders have agreed to a new framing of the bilateral relationship as “constructive, strategic and stable”, a positioning that will guide U.S.-China ties for the next three years. At the same time, China is grappling with its own serious domestic economic challenges, including rising youth unemployment, uneven post-pandemic growth, a persistent real estate sector crisis, and record high levels of local government debt. While Beijing seeks a global order less centered on U.S. hegemony, it still has a critical strategic interest in maintaining stable, functional relations with Washington.

At the close of the opening day’s state banquet, after remarking that he had received a “magnificent welcome like no other” in Beijing, Trump formally invited Xi to visit Washington D.C. for a return summit in September. Xi struck a unifying tone in response, saying that the “great rejuvenation of the Chinese nation” and Trump’s campaign slogan “Make America great again” can progress hand in hand. He closed his remarks with a toast to the future of both nations, ending the evening with a single word: “Cheers.”

In a landmark ruling that upholds core free speech principles, a US federal judge issued a temporary preliminary injunction on Wednesday halting the Trump administration’s sanctions against Francesca Albanese, the United Nations Special Rapporteur on Palestine, finding the punitive measures likely violated her constitutional right to free expression.

Albanese was targeted with US sanctions in July 2025, just weeks after she published a sweeping, critical report on June 30 that condemned Israel’s military campaign in Gaza. In that document, she identified over 60 major global firms — including tech giants Google, Amazon, and Microsoft — alleging the companies were complicit in shifting Israel’s occupation-based economy into what she framed as an economy of genocide. The report called on the International Criminal Court (ICC), national judicial bodies worldwide to launch investigations and prosecute implicated corporate leaders and companies, and urged UN member states to impose targeted sanctions and asset freezes on the entities named.

The sanctions imposed on Albanese carried severe practical consequences: she was barred from entering the United States, and was shut out of the US banking system, cutting off access to basic financial services. The legal challenge to the sanctions was brought by Albanese’s husband Massimiliano Cali, a senior World Bank economist based in Tunisia, who filed the civil suit on behalf of himself, Albanese, and the couple’s US citizen daughter. The complaint argued that the Trump administration had unlawfully seized Albanese’s accessible assets without adhering to due process, violated existing US sanctions legislation, and effectively de-banked her, leaving her unable to meet routine daily needs.

In his opinion accompanying the injunction order, US District Judge Richard Leon emphasized that safeguarding free speech is always aligned with the public interest. The judge further ruled that Albanese’s status as a non-US resident does not strip her of protections under the First Amendment to the US Constitution, noting that the administration targeted her specifically because of the content and message of her public criticism.

Albanese celebrated the court’s decision in a public post on X, writing, “BREAKING! US court has suspended the US sanctions against me! As the judge says: ‘Protecting the Freedom of speech is always just the public interest’. Thanks to my daughter and my husband for stepping up to defend me, and everyone who has helped so far. Together we are One.”

The ruling comes amid growing international solidarity with Albanese. Earlier that month, on May 7, Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez awarded the UN expert the Order of Civil Merit in a clear show of support. A day before that honor, Sanchez formally asked the European Commission to activate the EU’s Blocking Statute, a regulation designed to protect EU individuals and institutions from extraterritorial US sanctions, to shield both the ICC and the United Nations from US punitive measures.

In a sharp rebuke that has highlighted growing friction over international defense contracts, Malaysian Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim has publicly condemned Norway’s decision to revoke an export license for a key naval missile system earmarked for the Royal Malaysian Navy, warning the unilateral move risks eroding long-term trust in European defense contractors. The dispute centers on the Naval Strike Missile (NSM) system and related launcher components, which were contracted to equip Malaysia’s upcoming fleet of littoral combat ships as a core part of the Southeast Asian nation’s ongoing military modernization drive.

Speaking Thursday, Anwar confirmed he conveyed Malaysia’s “vehement objection” to the cancellation directly during a phone conversation with Norwegian Prime Minister Jonas Gahr Støre. In an official statement released after the call, the Malaysian leader emphasized that Kuala Lumpur has met every contractual obligation for the deal, which was first signed in 2018, with unwavering consistency and good faith. “Malaysia has honored every obligation under this contract since 2018: scrupulously, faithfully and without equivocation,” Anwar said. “Norway, it appears, has not felt compelled to extend us the same courtesy and demonstration of good faith.”

Per Malaysia’s national news agency Bernama, Kongsberg Defense & Aerospace AS, the Norwegian manufacturer of the NSM anti-ship missile system, has distanced itself from the policy move, stating that all export licensing decisions fall exclusively under the jurisdiction of the Norwegian government. As of Thursday, Oslo has not issued any public statement addressing the license revocation or Anwar’s criticisms.

Malaysian Defense Minister Mohamed Khaled Nordin revealed to local media outlets that the Malaysian government had already completed payments for nearly 95% of the total contract value before Norwegian authorities blocked the shipment in March. Without the NSM systems, Malaysia’s littoral combat ship modernization program faces significant delays, which Anwar says will undermine the navy’s operational readiness and carry unforeseen consequences for the regional military balance.

The Malaysian prime minister stressed that signed international defense contracts are binding, formal agreements, not disposable arrangements to be changed at random. “Signed contracts are solemn instruments. They are not confetti to be scattered in so capricious a manner,” Anwar said. “If European defense suppliers reserve the right to renege with impunity, their value as strategic partners flies out the window.”

In response to the cancellation, Khaled confirmed that Malaysian officials are currently reviewing all available legal pathways, including potential claims for financial compensation from the Norwegian side, to resolve the breach of contract.