The requested appropriation funds include 250 million francs earmarked for down payments on short-range ground-based air defense systems and 650 million francs for medium-range systems, as well as 60 million francs for a medium-range radar and 10 million for drone-counter systems, the Swiss federal council said in a statement on Wednesday.

The advance payments are intended to ensure deliveries take place on time and allow training of operational procedures to begin, the government said. Switzerland plans to spend 1 billion francs on Diehl’s IRIS-T SLM for medium-range air defense as well as 800 million francs to buy the Oerlikon Skynex short-range system from Rheinmetall, according to the 2026 defense-equipment program.

“Hybrid operations and attacks from a distance pose the most likely threats to Switzerland,” the federal council said. “At the same time, the armed forces lack the necessary resources to adequately protect Switzerland from aerial threats.”

The tight international arms markets with “sharply” higher demand means production capacities are fully booked for years to come, with delivery times lengthening, according to the government. Arms makers also increasingly demand “substantial” down payments, and failure to meet those demands could delay urgent procurements by several years, the government said.

Switzerland said in March the country was considering buying a second long-range air-defense system, as delivery of previously ordered Patriot systems from the United States looked to be delayed by four to five years. The country said in June it would start negotiations with French, Israeli and South Korean manufacturers.

The French-Italian SAMP/T NG system produced by Eurosam and armed with MBDA’s Aster air-defense interceptor is considered the favorite for the second long-range system, SRF Schweizer Radio und Fernsehen reported in June.

With the supplementary appropriation, the council “aims to secure production capacity and delivery dates at an early stage for the procurements approved” in the 2026 armed forces budget. The council said the financing is possible thanks to an improved fiscal outlook resulting from higher income tax revenues.

The council said it will be able to proceed with the advance payments as soon as parliament has made its decision, probably during the upcoming fall session.

The government additionally plans to invest 100 million francs in coming years to strengthen security at more than 60 military sites, including improved fencing, video surveillance, electronic access controls, and secure rooms.

The evolving security situation means “it is urgent to implement these measures quickly,” by early 2029 at the latest, and a decision next year would be too late to achieve that goal, the council said.

USS Benfold, an Arleigh Burke-class guided-missile destroyer, suffered an “engineering casualty” with its generators, causing a power outage for four days while conducting routine operations in the Indo-Pacific, 7th Fleet spokesperson Cmdr. Matthew Comer told Military Times.

Comer declined to comment about where exactly the incident occurred, but multiple news outlets reported it happened in the South China Sea.

The ship received support from the George Washington Carrier Strike Group, which included meals from Ticonderoga-class guided-missile cruiser USS Robert Smalls.

The engineering incident occurred July 24, forcing the destroyer to be towed by contracted tugboats into Subic Bay, Philippines, for repairs on July 28. The ship was met upon arrival by subject-matter experts from Ship Repair Facility-Japan Regional Maintenance Center, Comer said.

“There were no injuries to the crew, who demonstrated resilience, grit, professionalism, and unwavering steadiness in their response,” Comer said.

The day after arriving in the Philippines, the ship’s crew received food and contracted lodging off board. Benfold’s power was restored July 30, and all necessary repairs were completed prior to the ship berth shifting for fuel over a week later on Aug. 7.

All engineering, combat systems and crew support systems were functioning normally by the time the ship left Subic Bay on Aug. 8.

“The crew was directly supported by ships in the strike group while at sea and every effort was made to ensure the crew was supported on arrival in Subic Bay, Philippines,” Comer said.

The engineering mishap is under investigation, Comer said.

The incident follows reports of poor morale and mental health conditions on USS Abraham Lincoln, which has been deployed for nine months, part of which has been in support of U.S. military operations against Iran.

Recently, U.S. Central Command leader Adm. Brad Cooper visited the Nimitz-class aircraft carrier after Military Times learned that at least two sailors attempted to go overboard during the ship’s extended deployment.

Cooper said that service at sea can be challenging but asserted that the Lincoln has the lowest number of mental health cases among the Navy’s 11 active aircraft carriers.

U.S. lawmakers have begun pressing the service for information on the Lincoln’s conditions and to elaborate on the ship’s lengthened deployment schedule, asking for reports on the ship’s problems with basic supplies, water, plumbing, mental health, deck safety and mail.

But Pentagon and White House leaders have continued to dismiss concerns, with President Donald Trump saying the deployment’s length is “not nearly long enough.”

The change in the drills comes as Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi visits South Korea on Wednesday and Thursday for regional security talks expected to cover developments on the Korean Peninsula.

North Korea’s Kim Yo Jong, sister of leader Kim Jong Un, late on Wednesday dismissed the move, saying the nature of the exercises remained provocative and aggressive even if the scale and duration had been reduced, according to a statement published by state media KCNA.

The Ulchi Freedom Shield exercise, which began on Aug. 17, will now run through Aug. 21, South Korea’s Joint Chiefs of Staff and a Pentagon official said, instead of the original end date of Aug. 27.

South Korean Defence Minister Ahn Gyu-back said the allies were moving to cancel the drills’ second phase, media said, adding that it had been expected to involve counterattack operations after an initial defensive phase.

At the suggestion of the United States, the countries agreed on partial adjustments to the duration and scope of the drills, the JCS said. Some combined field manoeuvre training would also be scaled back, although details were still being discussed.

A Department of Defense official said the department had substantially reduced the exercise and associated live-training events, with some cancelled or switched to simulations.

The changes would preserve essential readiness and training aims, with no degradation to U.S. training objectives, the official added.

The changes follow Trump’s order on Sunday to “substantially reduce” the U.S. role in the drills, citing his “very good relationship” with North Korean leader Kim Jong Un. On Monday, Trump added that Kim had responded to his steps, without giving any details.

Trump’s objectives in the order appeared to be to pressure Seoul over the pace of its promised U.S. investments under a trade deal, shift attention away from U.S. challenges in Iran and reopen diplomacy with Pyongyang, one analyst said.

“Trump is trying to catch three birds with one stone here,” said Ellen Kim, senior fellow at the Korea Economic Institute of America.

Kim Yo Jong said she was unaware of recent communication between the two but added that Kim Jong Un held fond personal memories and feelings towards Trump.

“The relationship between the two leaders remain excellent,” KCNA quoted her as saying.

North Korea denounces drills

North Korea had earlier on Wednesday denounced the drills and said it would continue exercising its right to self-defense against what it called military threats from Washington and Seoul, KCNA said.

In a commentary, it called the United States and South Korea “warmongers” raising tension on the Korean Peninsula, but stopped short of mentioning Trump, his order or the scaling back.

North Korea’s decision to issue the commentary, rather than a statement by a senior official or a military show of force, may signal an effort to leave room for diplomacy, said Hong Min, a researcher at the Korea Institute for National Unification.

Trump has pushed aides to arrange an in-person meeting with Kim as soon as this autumn, the Wall Street Journal said, citing U.S. officials.

He has discussed holding talks during a possible November trip to Asia for the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation summit in the Chinese technology hub of Shenzhen, the paper added.

Reuters could not immediately verify the report.

The White House did not respond to a request for comment on its approach to North Korea or the military exercises.

Pyongyang routinely condemns joint U.S.-South Korean military exercises as rehearsals for invasion, while Washington and Seoul say they are defensive and necessary to ensure readiness against North Korea’s military threats.

Neither South Korean nor U.S. officials knew in advance about Trump’s order, South Korean Foreign Minister Cho Hyun told a parliamentary hearing on Wednesday.

On Tuesday, President Lee Jae Myung said the Ulchi exercises were defensive and Seoul had no intention of using them to attack North Korea or heighten tension on the peninsula.

China, North Korea’s only formal treaty ally, has not commented directly on Trump’s remarks, but Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi said in Seoul that Washington should change its “hostile policy” towards Pyongyang, South Korea’s Yonhap reported.

Defense News convened a panel of experts to examine what it actually takes to scale missile production in today’s security environment. Panelists explored the supplier ecosystem that supports prime contractors and missile programs, with a focus on the specialized component providers that enable production capacity, reliability, and rapid replenishment. The discussion addressed where bottlenecks typically emerge across the supply chain, how trusted suppliers reduce risk and compress timelines, and what investment and operational changes are needed to expand output without compromising performance in mission-critical systems.

Watch Recording:

Guest Speakers:

• Dr. Jahara ‘FRANKY’ Matisek, Senior Fellow at the Payne Institute for Public Policy & Visiting Scholar at Northwestern University
• Jason Meredith, President of Solid Missile Systems, Ursa Major
• Jason Reynolds, VP of Integrated Air & Missile Defense, Lockheed Martin
• Jeffrey Coffed, Senior Industry Manager, Aerospace and Defense, Regal Rexnord

The agency announced that the company AVIDrone pushed the limits with its electric helicopter design that lifted an unprecedented payload-to-weight ratio of 3.84 to 1.

In practical terms, that means the company’s Katana heavy-lift drone, weighing 29.3 pounds, lifted and carried a payload weight of 112.4 pounds across approximately five nautical miles.

AVIDrone, a Canadian company with U.S. headquarters in Maryland, specializes in cargo delivery drones for the defense and commercial sectors.

In a statement, the company called its first-place performance the “result of bringing together years of know-how, our proprietary autopilot and flight-control technologies, and decades of experience designing and flying aircraft specifically for heavy cargo lift.”

With the DARPA Lift Challenge, the agency aimed to advance vertical lift in a small unmanned aerial system. Calling it the “heavy-lift bottleneck,” multirotor drones typically can only carry payloads equal to or less than their own weight.

Phillip “Donna” Smith, the Lift Challenge program manager, described heavy vertical flight as the “next great technological inflection point that is economical for widespread adoption.”

He explained that its application could revolutionize industries like agriculture, logistics, construction and more.

By placing first, AVIDrone won $1.25 million in prize money. But the company also described the competition as an “outstanding environment for accelerating new ideas and turning them into real-world applications.”

The second-place winner, Massachusetts-based MTech Operations, was awarded $750,000 for lifting 3.64 to 1; and the third-place winner, California-based Xtreme Aerial Concepts, was awarded $500,000 for lifting 3.45 to 1.

And then DARPA issued awards for subjective categories, which were determined by a panel of program managers with deep aviation expertise.

These included the University of Maryland team for the Most Revolutionary Aerodynamic Design, the Texas-based Portal Aircraft Company for the Most Revolutionary Powertrain Design, and the Utah-based DefendTex for the Most Promising Technology.

For the latter, DARPA said it had the highest ratio in the competition, with 9.63 to 1, but it did not complete a scored run.

Smith told Military Times that besides the prize money and the cool demonstrations, the Lift Challenge created a huge networking event that allowed inventors, investors and users to set new goals and create future projects.

“So now, the challenges can get organized and the community that is built can start moving and (try) to solve problems that different organizations have across the United States or even the world,” Smith said. “Like we’ve seen in past challenges, the people here oftentimes combine forces and build the next generation of aircraft or whatever the challenge is.”

Unitree’s $1,600 Go2 model, launched in 2023, helped the company rapidly dominate the global quadruped robot market — its Shanghai IPO has drawn frenzied demand. Another Unitree robot has been shown on Chinese state television, armed and accompanying People’s Liberation Army (PLA) troops on an exercise.

These robots draw on breakthroughs in quadruped movement financed by the U.S. DEVCOM Army Research Laboratory (ARL) and other military programs, the researchers and the former official told Reuters.

The Army-funded project turned into, “basically, the first Unitree robot that had any kind of scale,” said Gavin Kenneally, a former University of Pennsylvania researcher involved in the program.

Ben Katz, who worked at Massachusetts Institute of Technology’s Biomimetic Robotics Lab, among a consortium of universities financed by the military programs, said the dimensions of Unitree’s popular Go series were “to the millimeter” almost identical to a groundbreaking robot he helped develop called Mini Cheetah.

Reuters is the first media outlet to detail connections between Unitree designs and the Army program.

The episode underscores broader problems with the United States’ ability to compete with China’s state-directed manufacturing sector in high-tech strategic industries, including those critical to national security.

Backed by subsidies, clusters of component factories, and a tolerance for heavy losses, Chinese companies have seized market share across industries such as solar panels, drones, EVs and quantum communications, many of which were first developed in the U.S. with government or military backing.

Kenneally commercialized the U.S. breakthroughs through his company Ghost Robotics, which supplies U.S. special forces with advanced, ruggedized robots. But compared to Unitree, its production is small and costly.

In June, the Pentagon added Unitree to a list of Chinese military companies, calling it a “contributor to the Chinese defense industrial base.” That designation falls short of a sanction but limits the U.S. military’s future use of Unitree’s technology. Unitree has said its robots are for civilian use.

Unitree, China’s State Council and China’s defense ministry did not respond to requests for comment.

Unitree did nothing underhanded in using the U.S. Army research. The program’s findings were published openly to stimulate progress in the field, a common practice.

ARL spokesperson Amanda Ligon said the research “strengthened the broader U.S. robotics ecosystem” and informed subsequent work across government and the private sector.

ARL referred questions about Unitree’s commercialization of the technology to the Pentagon, which declined to comment.

US companies versus China’s industrial policy

Unitree sold more than 5,500 humanoids and 18,000 quadrupeds last year, company filings show, and it’s now valued at about $9 billion ahead of its stock market debut on Wednesday.

By contrast, no U.S. company has mass-produced such robots, including Elon Musk’s Tesla, which has displayed prototypes of its Optimus humanoid for years. On a January earnings call, Musk called China “incredibly good” at scaling production.

Boston Dynamics, the U.S. company whose 2019 canine, Spot, used different technology, recently argued in a Congressional hearing that China’s low pricing would drive U.S. firms out of the market.

None of the U.S. robotics researchers who spoke with Reuters advocated for keeping such government-financed research secret. Instead, they said, U.S. policymakers should focus on enabling companies to quickly commercialize such advances to compete with China.

ARL also said publication was important to scientific and technological advancement.

The U.S. excels in innovation and software development but needs to ensure the capital, industrial base, highly skilled workforce and parts supply chains to scale up breakthroughs, said Vijay Kumar, dean at Penn Engineering.

For now, U.S. authorities often protect companies with trade restrictions on innovative Chinese products. In July, the Federal Communications Commission banned imports of future models of foreign-made humanoid and quadruped robots, including those from Unitree. China has threatened to retaliate against the FCC ban.

China’s Washington embassy said in a statement its companies are making new technologies affordable and accessible internationally. It accused the U.S. of abusing administrative power, and of “market distortion and unilateral bullying.”

Most of the experts who spoke to Reuters supported the U.S. ban but said the policy is not enough to build an industry to catch up with China.

“This isn’t just a competition between U.S. and Chinese robotics companies,” said Kenneally, the Ghost Robotics founder. “It’s between private U.S. companies and China’s coordinated national strategy.”

In 2015, Chinese President Xi Jinping set out a 10-year plan to lead industries including green energy, electric vehicles and robotics. Since then, China has channeled capital into risky bets on low-margin 21st-century advanced manufacturing.

Chinese robot manufacturers’ rapid reverse-engineering of products draws on the country’s dominance in refining critical minerals needed for magnets in robotics applications and the density of suppliers of motors, gears, ‘muscles’ known as actuators, and other components clustered near Unitree’s base in Hangzhou.

Reyk Knuhtsen, a robotics analyst at SemiAnalysis, called the United States’ failure to commercialize domestic research a “dropped ball,” citing U.S. venture capital’s preference for high-return software startups. It would take more than trade barriers on China to boost robotics manufacturing, he said.

“This is a very big hill for the U.S. to climb,” he said.

The White House did not respond to requests for comment about U.S. industrial policy. An FCC spokesperson said the commission was protecting Americans from foreign threats and preparing the country “to deliver on President Trump’s vision to lead the world on the next generation of technologies.”

Jaret Riddick, who as a former Army Research Laboratory director oversaw the Army-funded robotics project, said it did kick-start the U.S. quadruped industry. But in the end, without support for large-scale production, Unitree in China “just kind of consumed that space.”

Teaching robot dogs new tricks

The Army funded the Robotics Collaborative Technology Alliance (RCTA) between 2010 and 2020.

The RCTA gathered government, academic and industry researchers from UPenn, the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), Boston Dynamics, NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory, and other research institutions. The alliance’s top commercial partner was General Dynamics Land Systems, the Michigan-based defense manufacturer that makes Abrams M1 tanks.

In 2016, UPenn researchers, including Kenneally, eliminated heavy central gearboxes and placed motors in robots’ legs, enhancing the ability to sense and respond to terrain. UPenn’s progress built on the MIT lab’s work funded by the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, DARPA.

In 2019, the MIT lab presented the Mini Cheetah, building on UPenn features with increased strength – and the ability to do backflips.

Months earlier, Katz published his MIT masters thesis, detailing Mini Cheetah’s actuators. Within six months, he found Chinese companies manufacturing actuator copies “you could buy on AliExpress,” he said, referring to the Chinese online retail giant.

Unitree had been founded three years before by Wang Xingxing, then 26 years old. In his 2016 master’s thesis from Shanghai University, which Reuters reviewed online, Wang cited the work done at MIT, including on earlier iterations of the Cheetah, and set out principles consistent with those developed at the U.S. lab. He acknowledged the lab’s “pioneering” contributions.

In his thesis, Wang explored design tweaks to speed up development, saying his findings could have future “defense, security, family and education” applications. He referenced Kenneally’s ARL-funded UPenn paper.

On its website, Unitree says the company “independently developed the motors, reducers, controllers, and even some sensors of the quadruped robot.”

Katz told Reuters he decided against taking his actuators into production, thinking there would be no market. He said China’s ability to move fast had broad benefits: Robotics “has advanced a lot because of the availability of actuators.”

Joao Ramos, who did research at the same time as Katz at the MIT lab, said Unitree copied the Mini Cheetah shape, structure and design. But he credited the company with doing “proper engineering” to perfect a mass-produced robot.

“The actual practical implementation, bringing it to real life, that’s all on them,” Ramos said.

Gun-totting robot dogs

Walking robots aren’t yet widely deployed on battlefields, but the United States and Chinese militaries have both explored the prospect. In October, another Chinese company’s “Robot Wolf” quadrupeds featured in Chinese media coverage of the PLA conducting mock beach landings.

Unitree has said in public statements that its products are intended for civilian use. In 2022, the company signed an open letter along with U.S. companies pledging not to weaponize robots, citing risks of harm and serious ethical issues.

But Chinese state television has featured Unitree’s Go2 model robots alongside Chinese troops and a modified version of the firm’s B1 series robot firing a mounted assault rifle.

In September 2023, the U.S. Army secured a federal waiver from laws requiring government agencies to prioritize American-made products, in order to purchase two Unitree Go2s, according to procurement records that described the devices as crucial tools in the absence of sufficient commercial quantities of U.S.-produced alternatives “of a satisfactory quality.” Reuters could not establish whether the purchases went ahead.

Later that month, U.S. Marines conducted an exercise attaching a rocket launcher to a Go1 to enable remote firing.

Kenneally’s Ghost Robotics has shipped about 1,000 of its Vision 60 robots, mostly to military and government customers for surveillance and search applications in harsh environments. The company’s first customer was Navy Special Warfare Command, which oversees Navy SEAL teams.

Some components for the Vision 60s, which sell for upwards of $165,000, are built in China, though the company has sought to move its supply chain. By comparison, Unitree lists its B series robot for below $100,000 in the U.S.

Ghost Robotics shifted its motor supply from China to South Korea two years ago, though it still finds it difficult to eliminate Chinese magnets and some metal components, Kenneally said.

The only way to escape China’s chokehold on the robotics supply chain, he said, is to secure supplies from other countries that have the manufacturing capacity that the United States lacks. In 2024, South Korea’s LIG Defense & Aerospace acquired a 60% stake in Ghost Robotics for $240 million. The company is exploring production in Taiwan, Kenneally said.

“We need to work closely with our allies,” he said. “There’s absolutely no path forward without them.”

The service sent out a request this week for manufacturing 133,014 Guided Multiple Launch Rocket System, or GMLRS, rockets by 2034, according to the Army’s Sources Sought notice. Contractors have until Sept. 1 to submit white papers on plans to meet that quota.

The timeline calls for churning out 19,002 rockets per year from 2028 to 2034, with the first actual deliveries starting in February 2030.

“The scope of the contract includes production, tooling, engineering change proposals, and supporting activities of GMLRS rockets including unitary, alternative warhead (AW), and extended range (ER) rockets,” the notice said.

Current GMLRS manufacturer Lockheed Martin already announced last year that it is ramping up production capacity to 14,000 rockets annually. The Army’s new plan would require a nearly 36% increase in capacity on top of that.

“Submissions must outline the most efficient and cost-effective methods for achieving this production rate,” the Army noted. Army efforts to ramp up U.S. munitions production have stumbled, including a facility to manufacture components for 155mm shells that failed to produce any parts.

GMLRS rockets are launched from the M270 Multiple Launch Rocket System armored vehicle. The munitions can also be fired from the smaller truck-mounted M142 High Mobility Artillery Rocket System, or HIMARS.

The base version of GMLRS has a range of 70 kilometers, while the extended-range version can reach up to 150 kilometers.

Lockheed Martin had delivered 75,000 GMLRS rockets to the U.S. Army by 2024. But that still hasn’t satisfied demand for the munitions.

Originally designed as Cold War weapons to unleash massive firepower against a hypothetical Soviet attack on Europe, U.S. multiple rocket launchers became some of the stars of the war in Ukraine.

The M270, HIMARS and their GMLRS rockets have proved instrumental in enabling Ukrainian resistance to the Russian invasion. GMLRS rockets devastated targets such as command posts, supply depots and troop formations.

Ukraine even used HIMARS to hit a power plant inside Russia last September. However, heavy Russian jamming of the GPS guidance system in the rockets eventually compromised some effectiveness.

Between deliveries to Ukraine and a protracted conflict with Iran, U.S stockpiles of GMLRS and other guided munitions have been depleted. Replenishment, meanwhile, has been complicated by a shortage of rocket motors.

The goal is to create a family of drones that can “represent the full range of airborne threats, spanning from inexpensive ‘hobby drones’ to the most advanced adversary fighter and large-scale aircraft,” according to the Air Force’s Request for Information, which has a deadline of Sept. 28.

At the same time, the Air Force desires next-generation target drones that are so inexpensive and easy to manufacture that they can be “treated as attritable or expendable when required.”

As with drones and other new technologies, the Pentagon is turning to private industry for fresh ideas, “including commercial, modified commercial, dual-use, and non-developmental solutions,” the RFI said. “The government is particularly interested in non-traditional, commercially derived, or dual-use solutions that offer advantages in cost, scalability, and simplicity over legacy systems.”

The new target drones are expected to simulate a wide array of capabilities.

For fighters, the drones should have “supersonic capabilities (up to and exceeding Mach 1.6 at 40,000 feet), high-agility/high-G combat maneuvers, precise low-observable Radar Cross-section (RCS) profiles, multi-spectral Infrared (IR) signatures, active RF emissions, and integrated Electronic Attack (EA) capabilities,” according to the RFI.

To simulate C-130-sized multiengine aircraft, the focus is less on high performance and more on “matching the physical scale, slow subsonic flight envelopes, and propeller or turbofan propulsion characteristics of larger multi-engine aircraft. These platforms must prioritize representative physical volume, basic RF/IR emissions, and realistic radar returns to verify missile seeker guidance, and warhead lethality against large-frame targets.”

For even bigger aircraft, such as strategic bombers and AWACS planes, the key is “replicating the massive physical dimensions, multi-spectral thermal signatures, and heavy-aircraft radar strategic threats.”

To mimic big Group 5 unmanned aerial vehicles, the target drone should be capable of flying at 50,000 feet. For Group 3 and 4 UAVs, the targets should be capable of flying at Mach 0.5 to 0.8, and maneuver at 3 to 6 Gs. For small Group 1 and 2 drones, the targets should fly at speeds of less than 150 knots and be capable of drone-swarm operations.

Remote-controlled target drones have been used for nearly a century, including Britain’s Queen Bee — a converted Tiger Moth trainer — in the 1930s.

More recently, the U.S. Air Force has relied since 2007 on the subsonic — and subscale – BQM-167A. At 20 feet long and with a wingspan of 11 feet, it hardly resembles a 67-foot-long Chinese J-20 stealth fighter or a 108-foot-wide Chinese H6 bomber.

The Air Force also has the QF-16, a converted F-16 that can play the role of a full-sized target, such as a fourth-generation fighter. While a practical way to make use of retired jets, they aren’t meant to simulate fifth-generation stealth fighters or large aircraft, nor are they cheap enough to be expended in quantity.

Japan’s Ground Self-Defense Forces are currently testing Helsing’s HX-2 strike drone, as Tokyo looks to modernize its military and counter an increasingly assertive China. The field tests will run until the end of September, the spokesperson said.

Helsing struck an “initial agreement” for the Japanese government to use its systems earlier this year, a spokesperson for the Munich-based company said, adding that the move was made possible by an unnamed “local brokerage partner.”

Japan’s Ground Self-Defence Forces did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Rakuten’s involvement with Helsing was first reported by Japan’s Nikkei newspaper. While the Tokyo-based conglomerate has limited defense experience, it is aiming to help more startups break into Japan’s defense industry.

“Encouraging greater participation for startups in Japan’s defense industry presents an important opportunity to strengthen the country’s defense capabilities,” Hideaki Mukai, chief of staff to Rakuten’s CEO, said in a statement to Reuters. “Startups often face significant structural barriers, including complex procurement systems, difficulties communicating with government agencies and challenging procurement cycles.

“Rakuten hopes to help bridge these gaps by leveraging our experience and capabilities to connect startups and cutting-edge technologies with the needs of government agencies, further driving innovation and development in Japan’s defense industry.”

GLOBAL DEFENSE FIRMS EYE JAPAN

A military spending splurge by Japan, along with its easing of arms-export rules earlier this year, has sparked strong interest from overseas defense firms looking for local partners to break into a potentially lucrative new market.

Rakuten helped U.S.-listed Ukrainian drone software maker Swarmer organize a demonstration of its technology for a unit of Japan’s military earlier this year, Reuters previously reported.

The late-April test involved using its AI software to coordinate a swarm of drones ​in a seek-and-hit mission in Japan.

Rakuten’s billionaire founder Hiroshi “Mickey” Mikitani has been among Japan’s most vocal supporters of Ukraine, and his firm has also helped other Ukrainian defense firms exhibit their products at arms fairs in Japan.

Founded in 2021, Helsing initially focused on artificial intelligence software ​designed to help analyze battlefield data ​before ⁠expanding into autonomous strike drones, underwater surveillance systems and military aircraft applications.

It has secured contracts ⁠with ​European governments and defense ​companies, while supplying drones for Ukraine backed by German government ​funding. The Munich-based firm raised $1.8 billion in a funding round in July, cementing its position as the continent’s best-funded defense technology startup.

Hours before exercises were scheduled to begin, Trump said on his Truth Social site he was “not happy” that the U.S. had agreed to participate and highlighted his “very good relationship” with Kim Jong Un, the leader of nuclear-armed and heavily sanctioned North Korea.

“These exercises are not only costly… but send a signal that is totally inappropriate and hostile, to a Country that, as long as Donald J. Trump has been President, has been unthreatening and respectful,” Trump wrote.

The annual Ulchi Freedom Shield joint military exercises are scheduled to run until August 27, with about 18,000 South Korean military personnel participating.

South Korea’s Joint Chiefs of Staff told Reuters the drills started on Monday as scheduled.

South Korea’s presidential Blue House said it was reviewing Trump’s post and “hopes that the friendly relationship between the U.S. and North Korean leaders will lead to meaningful dialogue between the two countries, opening discussions aimed at advancing peace and stability on the Korean Peninsula,” it said.

The allies would continue coordinating on their combined defense posture and military exercises, it said.

Responding to Trump’s claim that President Lee Jae Myung had refused to join U.S. efforts to denuclearise Iran, it said Seoul was discussing potential military contributions, while considering its defense readiness on the Korean Peninsula and domestic legal procedures.

A Pentagon spokesperson referred questions on the matter to the White House, which did not immediately respond to a request for details.

Up and down relationship

Trump has long sought to end or curtail military exercises with South Korea while clashing with Seoul over sharing the costs of stationing 28,500 U.S. troops in South Korea and their role in securing the broader region.

North Korea, still technically at war with the South, routinely denounces the U.S.-South Korean exercises as preparations for an invasion. Pyongyang last week fired a ballistic missile from its eastern coast towards the Sea of Japan, days after a similar North Korean short-range ballistic missile launch.

“This decision may be part of a larger effort to create a diplomatic opportunity with Pyongyang, as Trump has consistently wanted since coming back to office, although the haphazard nature of this move is unlikely to make much of an impression in Pyongyang,” Jenny Town, head of the Stimson Center think tank’s 38 North program, said in an email.

The relationship between Trump and Kim has been a roller coaster for years.

Trump once mocked the North Korean leader as “little rocket man” and threatened Pyongyang with “fire and fury,” while Kim boasted that he would “tame the mentally deranged U.S. dotard with fire.”

Yet they also took part in three summits, with Trump declaring, “we fell in love” after exchanging letters with Kim. None of these efforts led to changes in North Korea’s nuclear weapons or ballistic missile development.

Even as Trump on Sunday spoke warmly of North Korea, he pointed to South Korea’s stance on the U.S.-Israeli conflict with Iran.

“While somewhat unrelated (?), I recently asked the President of South Korea if they would like to join us in the Denuclearization of the Islamic Republic of Iran, and they said, ‘No thanks!’” Trump wrote.

Exercises shift to simulations

It’s unclear how the drills could be cut back, but in recent years, they have shifted away from live-fire exercises to computer-simulated missile and cyberattacks.

Victor Cha, head of the Korea program at Washington’s Center for Strategic and International Studies, said Trump may be seeking greater influence over North Korea as Pyongyang has been heavily engaged in support of Russia in Ukraine.

“The other way to look at this is that Trump wants to engage Kim as a way to impede the Russia-NK ties,” said Cha.

U.S. military officials have said North Korean troops, who have fought alongside Russia in its invasion of Ukraine, have gained experience from the conflict, while Ukraine said last week that North Korean-made missiles were used in a Russian ballistic missile attack on a steel plant in Zaporizhzhia.

A high-ranking U.S. Northern Command official, Lieutenant General Joseph Jarrard, last week warned that North Korea had successfully tested intercontinental ballistic missiles with “enough boost to deliver a nuclear payload anywhere in North America.”

Economic factors

While Trump has repeatedly called for South Korea to shoulder a bigger burden of defense costs, a U.S. official this year called Seoul a “model ally” committed to increasing defense spending in line with U.S. regional strategy.

There are also broader economic tensions.

A former U.S. official who worked in the first Trump administration told Reuters he believed Trump is “frustrated with the intransigence” of the South Korean administration in addressing economic issues.

“The Lee government has repeatedly pursued policies antagonistic to American companies and shown little interest in following through on the historic investment deal with the United States,” the official said.

The countries signed a trade deal last year to lower Trump’s auto tariffs in exchange for Seoul’s commitment to invest $350 billion. South Korea has not announced details of its investment plan.

The allies have been at odds over a dispute involving U.S.-listed e-commerce company Coupang, which is being investigated by Seoul over a massive data leak.