Putin praises Trump but warns supplies of US long-range missile to Ukraine will badly hurt ties
_vb_04.jpeg)
Moscow (AP): Russian President Vladimir Putin warned the United States that supplies of long-range missiles to Ukraine will seriously damage relations between Moscow and Washington but will not change the situation on the battlefield where the Russian army is making slow but steady advances.
The potential supply of US Tomahawk cruise missiles to Kyiv will signal a “qualitatively new stage of escalation, including in relations between Russia and the US," Putin said at a forum of foreign policy experts in Russia's Black Sea resort of Sochi.
The Russian leader noted that even though Tomahawk missiles will inflict damage on Russia if supplied to Ukraine, Russian air defences will quickly adapt to the new threat. “It will certainly not change the balance of force on the battlefield,” he added, emphasising that the Russian military is continuously making gains against Ukraine.
The White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment on Putin's remarks.
At the same time, Putin hailed US President Donald Trump's efforts to help negotiate peace in Ukraine and described their August summit in Alaska as productive.
“It was good that we made an attempt to search for and find possible ways to settle the Ukrainian crisis,” he said, adding that he felt “comfortable” talking to Trump.
While praising Trump and trying to emphasise potential common interests, including nuclear arms control, the Russian president sent a stern warning to Ukraine's Western allies against trying to seize ships that carry Russian oil to global markers. He argued that would amount to piracy and could trigger a forceful response while sharply destabilising the global oil market.
Asked about the detention of an oil tanker off France's Atlantic coast, which President Emmanuel Macron linked to Russia's so-called shadow fleet of ageing tankers of uncertain ownership that are avoiding Western sanctions, Putin cast it as an attempt by Macron to distract public attention from his country's own internal problems.
He strongly warned the West against such action, arguing that it defies international maritime law and could trigger a forceful response. “The risk of confrontation will seriously increase," he added.
Putin also scoffed at Western claims of possible Russian involvement in recent drone flights over Denmark, casting them as part of purported NATO efforts to “inflame tensions to boost the defense spending.”
“I won't do it anymore — to France, Denmark, Copenhagen, Lisbon — wherever they could reach,” he said with a sardonic grin.
Asked about Charlie Kirk's assassination, Putin called it a “heinous crime” that reflected a “deep split" in American society. He hailed Kirk as a hero killed for promoting the same conservative values that Russia shares.
Putin also praised Michael Gloss, an American and the son of a deputy CIA chief, who joined the Russian military and was killed in action in Ukraine in 2024. He said he had awarded Gloss with a medal, which he handed to Trump's envoy Steve Witkoff during his visit to Moscow.
The Russian leader likened Gloss to Kirk, saying they championed similar “traditional” values. "He gave his life while defending those values as a Russian soldier, and Kirk gave his life while fighting for the same values in the United States,” Putin said.
In response to questions about Gloss, the CIA said in a statement that the agency “considers Michael's passing to be a private family matter — and not a national security issue. The entire CIA family is heartbroken for their loss."
Let the Truth be known. If you read VB and like VB, please be a VB Supporter and Help us deliver the Truth to one and all.
Single higher education regulator bill tabled in LS; Oppn flags ‘centralisation,' JPC likely
New Delhi: A bill to set up a 13-member body to regulate institutions of higher education was introduced in the Lok Sabha on Monday.
Union Education Minister Dharmendra Pradhan introduced the Viksit Bharat Shiksha Adhishthan Bill, which seeks to establish an overarching higher education commission along with three councils for regulation, accreditation, and ensuring academic standards for universities and higher education institutions in India.
Meanwhile, the move drew strong opposition, with members warning that it could weaken institutional autonomy and result in excessive centralisation of higher education in India.
The Viksit Bharat Shiksha Adhishthan Bill, 2025, earlier known as the Higher Education Council of India (HECI) Bill, has been introduced in line with the National Education Policy (NEP) 2020.
The proposed legislation seeks to merge three existing regulatory bodies, the University Grants Commission (UGC), the All India Council for Technical Education (AICTE), and the National Council for Teacher Education (NCTE), into a single unified body called the Viksit Bharat Shiksha Adhishthan.
At present, the UGC regulates non-technical higher education institutions, the AICTE oversees technical education, and the NCTE governs teacher education in India.
Under the proposed framework, the new commission will function through three separate councils responsible for regulation, accreditation, and the maintenance of academic standards across universities and higher education institutions in the country.
According to the Bill, the present challenges faced by higher educational institutions due to the multiplicity of regulators having non-harmonised regulatory approval protocols will be done away with.
The higher education commission, which will be headed by a chairperson appointed by the President of India, will cover all central universities and colleges under it, institutes of national importance functioning under the administrative purview of the Ministry of Education, including IITs, NITs, IISc, IISERs, IIMs, and IIITs.
At present, IITs and IIMs are not regulated by the University Grants Commission (UGC).
Government to refer bill to JPC; Oppn slams it
The government has expressed its willingness to refer it to a joint committee after several members of the Lok Sabha expressed strong opposition to the Bill, stating that they were not given time to study its provisions.
Responding to the opposition, Parliamentary Affairs Minister Kiren Rijiju said the government intends to refer the Bill to a Joint Parliamentary Committee (JPC) for detailed examination.
Congress Lok Sabha MP Manish Tewari warned that the Bill could result in “excessive centralisation” of higher education. He argued that the proposed law violates the constitutional division of legislative powers between the Union and the states.
According to him, the Bill goes beyond setting academic standards and intrudes into areas such as administration, affiliation, and the establishment and closure of university campuses. These matters, he said, fall under Entry 25 of the Concurrent List and Entry 32 of the State List, which cover the incorporation and regulation of state universities.
Tewari further stated that the Bill suffers from “excessive delegation of legislative power” to the proposed commission. He pointed out that crucial aspects such as accreditation frameworks, degree-granting powers, penalties, institutional autonomy, and even the supersession of institutions are left to be decided through rules, regulations, and executive directions. He argued that this amounts to a violation of established constitutional principles governing delegated legislation.
Under the Bill, the regulatory council will have the power to impose heavy penalties on higher education institutions for violating provisions of the Act or related rules. Penalties range from ₹10 lakh to ₹75 lakh for repeated violations, while establishing an institution without approval from the commission or the state government could attract a fine of up to ₹2 crore.
Concerns were also raised by members from southern states over the Hindi nomenclature of the Bill. N.K. Premachandran, an MP from the Revolutionary Socialist Party representing Kollam in Kerala, said even the name of the Bill was difficult to pronounce.
He pointed out that under Article 348 of the Constitution, the text of any Bill introduced in Parliament must be in English unless Parliament decides otherwise.
DMK MP T.M. Selvaganapathy also criticised the government for naming laws and schemes only in Hindi. He said the Constitution clearly mandates that the nomenclature of a Bill should be in English so that citizens across the country can understand its intent.
Congress MP S. Jothimani from Tamil Nadu’s Karur constituency described the Bill as another attempt to impose Hindi and termed it “an attack on federalism.”
_vb_22.jpeg)
