NewzIntel.com

Category: Academic Analysis

  • MIL-OSI Global: Faced with new tariffs and a truculent Trump, Japan and South Korea toe a cautious line

    Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Sebastian Maslow, Associate Professor, International Relations, University of Tokyo

    Two months into US President Donald Trump’s second term, the liberal international order is on life support.

    Alliances and multilateral institutions are now seen by the United States as burdens. Europe and NATO are framed as bad business, “ripping off” the US. On his so-called “Liberation Day”, Trump also imposed 20% tariffs on all European Union imports.

    The Trump administration has been far less critical of the US’ alliances in the Indo-Pacific region. On a visit to Tokyo this week, US Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth described Japan as America’s “indispensable partner” in deterring Chinese aggression.

    Yet, Japan and South Korea fared even worse than the EU with Trump’s new tariffs. Trump slapped Japan with 24% tariffs and South Korea 25%. (Both countries enjoy a trade surplus with the US.)

    So, how are the US’ two main allies in the Indo-Pacific dealing with the mercurial US leader? Will they follow Europe’s lead in reassessing their own security relationships with the US?

    Japan: a positive summit but concerns remain

    America’s post-war security strategy in Asia differs from Europe. While NATO was built on the premise of collective defence among its members, the US adopted a “hub-and-spokes” model in Asia, relying on bilateral alliances to contain the spread of communism.

    Japan and South Korea have long sheltered under the US nuclear umbrella and hosted major US military bases. Both are also highly sensitive to changes in the US’ Indo-Pacific policies.

    Japan, in particular, has a long history of careful alliance management with the US, epitomised by former Prime Minister Shinzo Abe’s courting of Trump.

    During Trump’s first term in office, Abe’s policy goals aligned closely with the US: transforming Japan’s security posture to make it a serious military and diplomatic power. Japan increased military spending, lifted arms export restrictions and deepened ties with India and Australia.

    Prime Minister Fumio Kishida continued to raise Japan’s security profile from 2021-24, again increasing military spending and taking a tough line on Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. He emphasised “Europe today could be Asia tomorrow”.

    His successor, Shigeru Ishiba, had a successful summit with Trump in February, immediately after his inauguration. The joint statement reaffirmed US security guarantees to Japan, including over the Senkaku Islands, which are claimed by China.

    Japan also agreed to import American liquefied natural gas, and later committed to working with South Korea to develop a US$44 billion (A$70 billion) plan to export LNG from Alaska.

    However, these positive developments do not mean the relationship is on firm ground.

    In early March, Trump complained the US-Japan security agreement signed in 1960 was “one-sided” and a top administration official again called for Japan to increase its defence spending to 3% of gross domestic product (GDP) – a huge increase for a country facing serious demographic and fiscal pressures.

    Reports also emerged the US was considering cancelling a new joint headquarters in Japan aimed at deeper integration between US and Japanese forces.

    South Korea: extremely vulnerable on trade

    South Korea faces similar pressures. Ties between the two countries were strained during Trump’s first term over his demand South Korea increase the amount it pays to host US forces by
    nearly 400%. A 2021 agreement restored some stability, but left Seoul deeply worried about the future of the alliance.

    South Korea’s acting president, Choi Sang-mok, has expressed a desire to strengthen ties with the US, though Trump has reportedly been cool to his advances.

    With a US$66 billion (A$105 billion) trade surplus with the US, South Korea is considered the country most vulnerable to trade risk with the Trump administration, according to a Swiss research group.

    Trump’s past suggestions that both South Korea and Japan develop nuclear weapons or pay for US nuclear protection has also rattled some nerves. As confidence in the US alliance erodes, both countries are engaging in an urgent public debate about the possibility of acquiring nuclear weapons.

    Tensions moving forward

    Potential for conflict is on the horizon. For example, Tokyo and Washington are set to renegotiate the deal that dictates how much Japan pays to host US troops next year.

    Both allies pay huge sums to host US bases. South Korea will pay US$1.14 billion (A$1.8 billion) in 2026, and Japan pays US$1.72 billion (A$2.7 billion) annually.

    A trade war could also prompt a reassessment of the costs of US efforts to decouple from China, potentially leading to closer economic ties between Japan, South Korea and China. The three countries have agreed to accelerate talks on a trilateral free trade agreement, which had been on hold since 2019.

    Another challenge is semiconductors. Japan’s new semiconductor revitalisation strategy is prioritising domestic investment, raising questions about whether Trump will tolerate “friendshoring” if Japan diverts investments from the US.

    In 2024, Japan outspent the US in semiconductor subsidies (as a share of GDP), while Taiwan’s TSMC, the world’s largest contract chipmaker, expanded its production capacity in Japan.

    Seoul remains an important partner to Washington on semiconductors. Samsung and SK Hynix are both boosting their investments on new semiconductor plants in the US. However, there is now uncertainty over the subsidies promised to both companies to invest in America under the CHIPS Act.

    Ultimately, the strength of these alliances depends on whether the Trump administration views them as long-term bulwarks against China’s rise in the region, or merely vassals that can be extorted for financial gain.

    If the US is serious about countering China, its regional alliances are key. This would give Japan and South Korea some degree of leverage – or, in Trump terms, they’ll hold valuable cards. Whether they get to play them, however, depends on what Trump’s China policy turns out to be.

    The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

    – ref. Faced with new tariffs and a truculent Trump, Japan and South Korea toe a cautious line – https://theconversation.com/faced-with-new-tariffs-and-a-truculent-trump-japan-and-south-korea-toe-a-cautious-line-244172

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: Russia and China both want influence over Central Asia. Could it rupture their friendship?

    Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Dilnoza Ubaydullaeva, Lecturer in Government, Flinders University

    As he looks to solidify his territorial gains in Ukraine in a potential ceasefire deal, Russian President Vladimir Putin has one eye trained on Russia’s southern border – and boosting Russian influence in Central Asia.

    Following his 2024 re-election, Putin made Uzbekistan his third foreign visit after China and Belarus. The visit signalled the region’s continued importance to Moscow.

    In response to Western sanctions on Moscow over the Ukraine war, trade and investment between Russia and Central Asian countries have grown significantly.

    Russia’s Lukoil and Gazprom are now the dominant foreign players in Uzbekistan’s energy fields. In Kazakhstan, Moscow controls a quarter of the country’s uranium production.

    But as Russia tries to reaffirm its role in the region, China has also been quietly expanding its influence.

    Could this growing competition over Central Asia affect Beijing and Moscow’s broader relationship?

    Central Asia drifting apart from Moscow

    The Central Asian region is home to approximately 79 million people spread across five nations. It was part of the Soviet Union until its collapse in 1991. Its strategic location between Russia and China, on the doorstep of the Middle East, has long made it a “grand chessboard” for great power politics.

    While Russia has traditionally dominated the region, Central Asian leaders have made efforts to somewhat distance themselves from Moscow recently.

    At the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS) summit in October 2022, for example, Tajikistan’s president publicly challenged Russian President Vladimir Putin. He demanded respect for smaller states like his.

    Similarly, during Putin’s 2023 visit to Kazakhstan, President Kassym-Jomart Tokayev made a symbolic statement at the press conference by delivering his speech in Kazakh rather than Russian. This was a rare move that seemed to catch Putin’s delegation off guard.

    In another striking moment, Tokayev declared at an economic forum in Russia in 2022 that Kazakhstan does not recognise Russia’s “quasi-states”, referring to its occupied territories of Ukraine.

    Yet, all Central Asian states remain part of at least one Russia-led organisation, such as the Commonwealth of Independent States, the Collective Security Treaty Organization, or the Eurasian Economic Union.

    Three states (Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan) rely on Russian security guarantees through the Collective Security Treaty Organization.

    And the region’s economic dependency on Russia remains significant. Of the 6.1 million migrants in Russia, the largest groups come from Uzbekistan, Tajikistan and Kyrgyzstan. These countries depend heavily on remittances from these migrant workers.

    China’s growing influence

    With Russia preoccupied with Ukraine and constrained by Western sanctions, China has seized the opportunity to deepen its engagement in the region.

    Beijing’s involvement in Central Asia has long been economic. In 2013, for instance, China unveiled its ambitious, global Belt and Road Initiative in Kazakhstan. And by 2024, it was China, not Russia, that was the largest trading partner of every Central Asian country except Tajikistan.

    But in recent years, China has expanded its influence beyond economic ties, establishing itself as a key player in regional politics.

    At the inaugural China-Central Asia Summit in 2023, for example, Chinese leader Xi Jinping pledged support for the sovereignty, security and territorial integrity of the region. This is traditionally a role played by Russia.

    Xi has also been making high-profile visits to Central Asian states, signalling Beijing’s growing strategic interests here.

    Local populations, however, remain wary. Public opinion surveys indicate China is viewed more negatively than Russia.

    Many Chinese-funded projects bring their own workers, limiting job opportunities for locals and fuelling resentment. There is also anxiety about potential “debt trap” diplomacy. Civil society groups have called for economic diversification to avoid over-reliance on Beijing.

    Further complicating matters is Beijing’s treatment of the Muslim minority Uyghur population in the Xinjiang region of western China. This has reinforced suspicions in Muslim-majority Central Asia about China’s long-term intentions in the region.

    Growing competition

    The increasing competition raises questions about the potential impact on the broader, “no limits” relationship between Moscow and Beijing.

    At a recent forum, Putin acknowledged Beijing’s growing economic role in the region. However, he insisted Russia still has “special ties” with Central Asian states, rooted in history. And he notably dismissed concerns about China’s expansionist aims, saying:

    There is nothing about domination in the Chinese philosophy. They do not strive for domination.

    On the ground, however, things aren’t so simple. So far, China and Russia have managed to avoid stepping on each other’s toes. How long that balance remains, however, is an open question.

    Central Asian countries, meanwhile, are courting both sides – and diversifying their ties beyond the two powers.

    Many of the region’s educated elite are increasingly looking toward Turkey – and pan-Turkic solidarity – as an alternative to both Russian and Chinese dominance.

    Russia’s historical influence in the region remains strong. But the days of its unquestioned dominance appear to be over.

    Russia may try to reassert its preeminent position, but China’s deepening economic presence is not going anywhere.

    With both countries pushing their own regional agendas, it’s hard to ignore the overlap – and the potential for a future clash over competing interests.

    Dilnoza Ubaydullaeva does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

    – ref. Russia and China both want influence over Central Asia. Could it rupture their friendship? – https://theconversation.com/russia-and-china-both-want-influence-over-central-asia-could-it-rupture-their-friendship-251023

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: Myanmar military’s ‘ceasefire’ follows a pattern of ruling generals exploiting disasters to shore up control

    Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Tharaphi Than, Associate Professor of World Cultures and Languages, Northern Illinois University

    Myanmar’s military chief, Min Aung Hlaing, called for elections on March 27, 2025 – a day before an earthquake devastated the country. STR/AFP via Getty Images

    After a 7.7 magnitude earthquake struck Myanmar on March 28. 2025, the country’s military and the myriad resistance groups fighting a yearslong civil war faced international calls for an immediate ceasefire. A pause in the fighting would enable vital aid to enter the major quake zones and allow rescuers to assist victims in a disaster that has already killed more than 3,000 people.

    The first to heed the call was the opposition National Unity Government, which unilaterally announced a two-week pause on attacks by its armed wing, the People’s Defense Force, on March 29. The Three Brotherhood Alliance – a coalition of three ethnic resistance groups: the Myanmar National Democratic Alliance Army, the Ta’ang National Liberation Army and the Arakan Army – likewise agreed to a temporary truce.

    But Myanmar’s military demurred. Just hours after the quake, as rescuers continued to dig through rubble in search of survivors, the generals ordered airstrikes on enemy positions in Shan state and Karen state in the country’s east – a decision that United Nations special rapporteur Tom Andrews described as “nothing short of incredible.”

    The generals eventually yielded to pressure late on April 2 – some five days after the earthquake hit – announcing that they would halt fighting until April 22. But the statement appeared to be hollow, with reports just a day later that the military’s bombing campaign and ground offensive were continuing unabated in Kachin state in Myanmar’s north.

    Mandalay buildings, like Myanmar’s democracy, lie in ruins.
    STR/AFP via Getty Images

    As an expert on the political history of Myanmar, I believe the behavior of the country’s military is of no surprise. The generals who have had a grip on the country for much of the past six decades have a track record of exploiting disasters for political gain. Weakened by years of entrenched civil war, they are now seeking an opportunity in the earthquake to rehabilitate their image overseas, while consolidating power at home.

    From disasters to elections

    Myanmar’s ruling junta has tried this tactic before. In 2008, a week after the deadly cyclone Nargis killed more than 100,000 people in Myanmar, the military proceeded to hold a constitutional referendum that would guarantee the military’s control of government by reserving 25% of all parliamentary seats for officers while requiring 75% of votes for any future constitutional reform. It also allowed for the military to take over the country “in the event of an emergency.”

    The referendum took place while much of Myanmar was still reeling from disaster, yet the junta announced a 98.12% turnout, of which 92.48% voted in favor of the new pro-military constitution.

    It paved the way to elections in 2010, which the military’s Union Solidarity and Development Party won. Though that vote was boycotted by the opposition National League for Democracy, or NLD, Washington had by then signaled a shift in policy toward “pragmatic engagement” with the then-ruling junta. This U.S. shift forced the recalcitrant NLD to cooperate in subsequent elections, giving legitimacy to a process that was stacked in favor of the generals.

    Using a fig leaf of legitimacy

    The latest disaster comes as the junta is again attempting to push for elections. Just a day before the earthquake, Myanmar’s military chief, Min Aung Hlaing, confirmed plans for a December national vote and called on opposition parties to participate.

    But the proposed election in Myanmar is widely seen as a face-saving strategy for both the Myanmar military and, I would argue, an international community that has done little of any significance to end the civil war. In this context, elections would allow the generals to cover their 2021 power grab with a fig leaf of legitimacy.

    The entrenched civil war that was sparked by that military takeover – a coup that ended a 10-year experiment with limited democracy – derailed the military’s initial plan to return to full control of the country.

    Anti-military soldiers sit in a long-tailed boat on the Salween River.
    Thierry Falise/LightRocket via Getty Images

    Four years of fighting a broad-based opposition that includes ethnic minority groups like the Karen National Union, Kachin Independence Army, Arakan Army, Ta’ang National Liberation Army, Myanmar National Democratic Alliance Army, People’s Defense Force and Bamar People’s Liberation Army has taken its toll on the military.

    It has lost territorial control in many regions to the myriad resistance groups. Internationally, it has become more isolated through sanctions, and its largest trading partner, China, concerned over instability on its border, has slowed investments as it tries to play all sides of the conflict.

    In desperation, the generals have resorted to forced conscription for foot soldiers, while looking to Russia for arms and investment.

    The failure of the generals

    What the military desperately needs now is a lifeline and a civil war exit plan. The earthquake could provide both, with a ceasefire – no matter how badly observed – providing a cover for allowing for a national vote.

    But as has been evident in the days surrounding the announcement of a truce, the military is likely to exploit the disaster to weaken the resistance along the way. It has said that it will take “necessary” measures against any resistance group found to be regrouping or attacking the state during the ceasefire. Yet it has reportedly continued its own offensive.

    The earthquake has revealed the failures and brutalities of the military in other ways, too. In the aftermath of the disaster, the military shut down private clinics and hospitals in badly hit Mandalay for allegedly employing rebel doctors and nurses who were treating members of the resistance. As it was, many health care workers have been in hiding since the coup, and young people who could have been on the front lines of relief efforts have either joined the resistance groups or fled the country.

    The earthquake will also further hurt a Myanmar business community already suffering from the pullout of international businesses after the 2021 coup.

    On unsecure foundations

    Yet, the military may be hoping that it can use the disaster to rebuild its brand overseas. The surprise announcement of a ceasefire by the generals is part of that process. So, too, is the decision to allow in international rescue teams, after initially blocking relief workers from entering the country. It is the military’s way of showing willingness to cooperate with the wider world.

    In short, disaster diplomacy has kicked in for Myanmar’s military, as it did after 2008’s Cyclone Nagris. That earlier cyclone provided an opportunity for the junta to present a different face to the international community. Elections were held, not once, but twice – encouraged by the U.S. and others – and investments rushed into Myanmar as the country was touted as “Asia’s next Tiger.”

    But the foundations of military-backed reform in Myanmar were built on fault lines that cracked and crumbled amid the 2021 coup. The military’s exploitation of the 2025 earthquake will, I fear, result in similar ends.

    Tharaphi Than does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

    – ref. Myanmar military’s ‘ceasefire’ follows a pattern of ruling generals exploiting disasters to shore up control – https://theconversation.com/myanmar-militarys-ceasefire-follows-a-pattern-of-ruling-generals-exploiting-disasters-to-shore-up-control-253577

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-Evening Report: No, that’s not what a trade deficit means – and that’s not how you calculate other nations’ tariffs

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Peter Draper, Professor, and Executive Director: Institute for International Trade, and Jean Monnet Chair of Trade and Environment, University of Adelaide

    On April 2, United States President Donald Trump unveiled a sweeping new “reciprocal tariff” regime he says will level the playing field in global trade – by treating other countries the way (he claims) they treat the US.

    First, Trump’s plan will impose a “baseline” 10% tariff on virtually all goods imported into the US, effective April 5. Then, from April 9, 57 countries will face higher “reciprocal tariffs”.

    These vary by country, according to a formula based on individual trade deficits.

    On face value, the new tariff regime might sound like a simple solution for fairness. If a particular country was taxing American imports with a 50% tariff, it might seem fair for the US to tax their imports at 50% as well.

    But appearances are deceiving.

    These new “reciprocal” tariffs ostensibly aim to eliminate the US trade deficit by making imports more expensive so that Americans buy less from abroad until imports equal exports.

    But the Trump administration hasn’t directly matched specific foreign tariffs. Instead, they’ve opted for a crude formula based on bilateral trade deficits between the US and each specific country. Those aren’t the same things.



    Read more:
    New modelling reveals full impact of Trump’s ‘Liberation Day’ tariffs – with the US hit hardest

    Trade deficits aren’t tariffs

    A country has a trade deficit when the total value of everything it imports from somewhere else exceeds the value of what it exports there. A trade surplus is the opposite.

    Trade deficits and surpluses – the balance of trade – can be calculated between specific countries, but also between one country and the rest of the world.

    Tariffs are different things altogether – taxes a country charges on imports when they cross the border, paid by the importer.



    Read more:
    What are tariffs?

    Trump’s new reciprocal tariffs have been calculated by taking the US trade deficit with each country, dividing it by total US imports from that country, then halving the resulting ratio and converting it into a percentage.

    For example, in 2024, the US imported approximately US$605.8 billion from the European Union, but exported only $370.2 billion, resulting in a trade deficit of $235.6 billion.

    Dividing the deficit by total imports from the EU gives a ratio of 39%. The White House interpreted this figure as the EU’s trade “advantage” and subsequently imposed a “discounted” 20% tariff on EU products – roughly half of 39%.

    This same calculation led to a 34% tariff on China, 26% on India, 24% on Japan and 25% on South Korea. More export-dependent developing countries, including many in Southeast Asia, face some eye-wateringly high reciprocal tariffs.

    Trade experts swiftly criticised the methodology behind the tariffs. James Surowiecki, a financial journalist, labelled it “extraordinary nonsense”.

    While the use of economic formulas in the corresponding US Trade Representative document might give it an appearance of being grounded in economic theory, it is detached from the rigours of trade economics.

    The formula assumes every trade deficit is a result of other countries’ unfair trade practices, but that is simply not the case. To see why, we need to understand why Trump’s obsession with trade deficits is wrong.

    A government isn’t a household

    Why does Trump detest trade deficits? He appears to think of the national balance of trade like a business or household’s finances.

    Under Trump’s logic, if more money is leaving the “account” than coming in, that’s bad business. A $200 million trade deficit would mean the US is “losing” – with money and jobs being siphoned away.

    Trump argues other countries have been taking advantage of America by running up big trade surpluses and “hollowing out” US industry. He has long argued that America’s massive deficits indicate unfair trade deals, foreign protectionism, and even a threat to national security.

    Few economists share Trump’s view

    The trade gap is not money simply being drained overseas by allegedly rapacious foreigners. Rather, it represents the exchange of value.

    American consumer behaviour is a significant driver of the US trade deficit. As a consumption powerhouse, the United States sees its residents and businesses spending vast sums on imported products ranging from iPhones and TVs to clothing and toys.

    Many of these are actually produced by US companies but made overseas. Moreover, those US companies licence foreign factories to produce these goods, and the intellectual property revenues earned make up a huge US surplus in services trade.

    But services trade does not feature in the formula. This shows the singular obsession with tangible things, or goods trade. Yet in most supply chains it is the services components that yield the most value.

    Back on the goods side, when the US economy is robust and people have disposable income, imports naturally increase. Ultimately, while trade deficits indicate economic dynamics, they are not inherently negative nor do they signify economic weakness.

    Rather, they often reflect a nation’s economic structure and consumer preference for diverse global products. After all, Australia has run trade deficits for decades, including with the US, and is one of the wealthiest countries in the world.

    The uninhabited Heard and McDonald Islands, home to a large population of penguins, were hit with tariffs in this week’s announcement.
    VW Pics/Getty

    The real reason for the deficit

    The formula used to calculate the reciprocal tariffs is highly misleading. Responsible policy makers would take account of many other factors in their calculations.

    Among other variables, the US Trade Representative formula fails to consider strong US consumer demand for imports. It also overlooks the US government’s gigantic fiscal deficit. This requires it to borrow money from overseas, pushing up the value of the US dollar. This strong dollar supports US purchases of imports.

    In other words, the US runs large trade deficits not primarily because other nations have high trade barriers but largely because Americans need to fund their debts and want to buy lots of imported goods. The misleading formula places the blame entirely on an ill-conceived notion, and we are all going to pay the price.

    Peter Draper receives funding from the European External Action Service and Australian Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, for project-specific work connected to trade policies. He is affiliated with the Australian Services Roundtable (Board Member); the International Chamber of Commerce (Research Foundation Director); European Centre for International Political Economy (non-resident Fellow); German Institute for Development and Sustainability (non-resident Research Fellow); and Friends of Multilateralism Group (member).

    Vutha Hing receives funding from Economic Research Institute for ASEAN and East Asia. He is affiliated with Trade Policy Advisory Board, Royal Government of Cambodia.

    – ref. No, that’s not what a trade deficit means – and that’s not how you calculate other nations’ tariffs – https://theconversation.com/no-thats-not-what-a-trade-deficit-means-and-thats-not-how-you-calculate-other-nations-tariffs-253830

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Hackers have hit major super funds. A cyber expert explains how to stop it happening again

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Toby Murray, Professor of Cybersecurity, School of Computing and Information Systems, The University of Melbourne

    Several of Australia’s biggest superannuation funds have suffered a suspected coordinated cyberattack, with scammers stealing hundreds of thousands of dollars of members’ retirement savings.

    Superannuation funds including Rest, HostPlus, Insignia, Australian Retirement and AustralianSuper have all reportedly been targeted. However, so far AustralianSuper appears to be the worst affected.

    It is Australia’s largest superannuation fund. It has roughly 3.5 million members and manages more than $365 billion in retirement savings. In this cyberattack, a handful of its members have lost about A$500,000 in combined savings.

    AustralianSuper is reportedly assisting authorities recover the money. It has not yet confirmed if any remediation will occur.

    It’s not yet clear whether the affected accounts had mandatory multi-factor authentication for login or money transfers. But this is a crucial measure to reduce the risk of a similar cyberattack happening in the future.

    Strategic timing, stolen passwords

    Details of the cyberattack are still sparse. But we do know that it began in the early hours of last weekend. This timing was likely strategic: account holders wouldn’t have noticed anything suspicious as they would have most likely been sleeping.

    Cyber criminals are believed to have obtained stolen passwords – either from the dark web or other hacked websites. They then used these passwords to try to access people’s superannuation accounts.

    In a statement, AustralianSuper’s Chief Member Officer Rose Kerlin said scammers had accessed up to 600 customer passwords to log into accounts.

    So far only four accounts have actually been breached. In those cases, the scammers changed login details and transferred out lump sums of money.

    Although members of other superannuation funds do not seem to have lost any money, their personal information may have been compromised.

    Different to other attacks

    There have been cases in the past of people being scammed out of their retirement savings.

    For example, in 2020, Australian man Lee Braz lost all of his retirement savings, worth $180,000, to scammers. The scammers used fraudulent documents to trick his fund, Intrust Super (now owned by HostPlus), into authorising the transfer.

    After a four-year legal battle with the fund, Braz retrieved one-third of the money he had lost. However, this amount didn’t cover his legal fees.

    But this recent scam seems very different in nature. It didn’t involve scammers using any fraudulent documents or elaborate trickery. Instead, the perpetrators appear to have pulled it off simply by using stolen passwords to access accounts.

    Tighter security is crucial

    Australian Taxation Office data indicates the average super balance for men is roughly A$180,000, while for women it is roughly A$146,000.

    To ensure all of this money is properly protected, financial organisations should implement mandatory multi-factor authentication for user accounts. This would require people to prove who they are with something in addition to a password.

    This could include, for example, using a one-time code or an authenticator app on their smartphone. This makes it much harder for criminals who obtain user passwords to take over their accounts.

    Other financial organisations, including banks and some superannuation funds, already use multi-factor authentication. But it’s especially important for all superannuation funds to implement it, given many people don’t check their retirement savings for months at a time and are less likely to notice straight away if they’ve been hacked.

    In the wake of this cyberattack, the Association of Superannuations Funds of Australia says it is working to improve security across the industry, but it is unclear exactly what this will involve.

    Consumers also need to do their part by making sure they do not reuse passwords between websites. This is especially important for passwords used to protect accounts on financial organisations such as their super fund or online banking.

    Using a password manager is a great way to make it easy to have unique passwords for each website you visit.

    Finally, customers should be on the lookout for potential scams that may target them in the coming days. Scammers have been known to exploit fear and confusion in the wake of data breaches to try to lure victims into giving away personal information or money.

    Anyone receiving messages purporting to be from their super fund and who wants to respond to them should call up their super provider directly, using a phone number from their website. Avoid clicking links or phoning numbers listed in messages that purport to be from your super fund.

    Anyone receiving messages they suspect are scams can report them to Scamwatch.

    Toby Murray receives funding from the Department of Defence and Google. He is Director of the Defence Science Institute, wich receives funding from the Commonwealth and State governments.

    – ref. Hackers have hit major super funds. A cyber expert explains how to stop it happening again – https://theconversation.com/hackers-have-hit-major-super-funds-a-cyber-expert-explains-how-to-stop-it-happening-again-253835

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-OSI Global: Why was South Africa’s ambassador to the US expelled? A view of the Ebrahim Rasool affair

    Source: The Conversation – Africa – By Peter Vale, Senior Research Fellow, Centre for the Advancement of Scholarship, University of Pretoria., University of Pretoria

    In a rare move, the Trump administration expelled Ebrahim Rasool, South Africa’s ambassador to Washington, in mid-March 2025. In a post on X, US secretary of state Marco Rubio accused Rasool of hating the US and President Donald Trump, and said the ambassador was “no longer welcome in our great country”. The expulsion came after comments Rasool had made during a webinar organised by a South African think-tank, the Mapungubwe Institute for Strategic Studies. Rasool had said he thought that Trump was “mobilising a supremacism” and trying to “project white victimhood as a dog whistle” as the white population faced becoming a minority in the US.

    Relations between the two countries had reached a new low in the first weeks of the Trump administration. Trump had lashed out at South Africa for taking Israel to the International Court of Justice on accusations of genocide in Gaza; frozen all funding to South Africa; and offered asylum to white Afrikaners from South Africa, emboldening fringe far-right groups in the country. Peter Vale, regarded as an authority on South Africa’s place in the world, answers questions about the ambassador’s expulsion.

    What was your initial reaction to the Rasool appointment?

    I know and respect Ebrahim Rasool – we worked together at the University of the Western Cape 30 years ago – and I also thought he had done a fine job as ambassador to the US during the Obama years.

    Remember, his appointment under the Trump administration was announced a week after the November poll. Preparations for this would have been months in the making. So, one question was, did the South African government think Joe Biden would win? If so, they were not following the polls very closely. South Africa’s relations with the US under Biden, although at times testy, were managable and Rasool was familiar with the individuals responsible for their making.

    More importantly, both Rasool and the Department of International Relations and Cooperation seemed to ignore the ancient Greek philosopher Heraclitus’ warning:

    Never step into the same river twice, for it is not the same river, and he is not the same man.

    Politics in the US has changed in paradigmatic proportions since Obama.

    Then there was the fact that Rasool’s politics are rooted at the sharpest edge of the African National Congress: the United Democratic Front faction. Speaking plainly in the language of the country’s streets was the gift the United Democratic Front gave national politics. It was the most important internal anti-apartheid movement in the 1980s, bringing together youth, student and civic organisations.

    Nevertheless, this, the language of the heart (as we might call it), has been eclipsed by the rise of techno-speak of the 2020s – a language that consists of buzzwords, esoteric language, or technical jargon and has become a kind of diplo-speak: diplomatic language in which the careful use of euphemism and noncontroversial language obscures points that might cause contention. Both bedevil South Africa’s domestic politics and mute the country’s foreign policy because racial justice, gender equality and compensation for colonialism seemingly have no place in everyday political discourse.

    What happened at the Mapungubwe seminar?

    The fracas arose during a virtual seminar organised by a leading South African think-tank which discussed the deepening tension in the relations between Pretoria and Washington.

    The late South African politician Frederik van Zyl Slabbert, who was brilliant with words, used to distinguish between (what he called) a conspiracy and a cock-up. Sometimes, however, it can be a mix of both.

    I think that Rasool was confounded by the audience to which he spoke – was it local or was it local and foreign?

    If there was deceit in the gathering itself, this was not to Rasool’s account. This points instead to a journalist looking to trip up any position South Africa took in the matter seemingly to advance his career. This is said to be the Breitbart journalist Joel Pollack, who made no secret of his desire to be the US ambassador in South Africa. He was registered as “Anonymous” on the webinar call. He did not disclose his name, or profession, when he asked Rasool a question.

    In my opinion, disclosure is a professional responsibility.

    Interestingly, there is no indication that the meeting was operating under the well-known Chatham House Rule by which

    participants are free to use the information received, but neither the identity nor the affiliation of the speaker(s), nor any other participant, may be revealed.

    Although not without its critics, myself included, this rule binds participants to non-disclosure by creating a safe space for candid and honest discussion.

    Where does the responsibility of an ambassador lie?

    The consensus among observers and commentators that’s emerged since the expulsion is that it was Rasool’s responsibility to hold his tongue – a kind of golden rule in diplomacy.

    There is another way of thinking about this.

    There have been many cases where the professional responsibility of diplomatic representation should follow a higher standard than that set by the incumbent government.

    This choice faced diplomats in the country during apartheid. So, for instance, in 1986, the apartheid government expelled the Swedish ambassador following that country’s strong opposition to apartheid. There were other expulsions, too. These moves were part of the broader international pressure surrounding apartheid, where responsibility of the diplomats shifted from the minority incumbent government to the country’s people.

    However, most famously, this understanding emerged in the writing of Thomas Paine, the American pamphleteer, that Benjamin Franklin (then the ambassador of the fledgling United States to Paris) was “not the diplomat of a Court, but (that the Ambassador) represented MAN (KIND)”.

    This intervention is regarded as the first recognition that human – as opposed to state – rights enjoyed currency in international relations.

    The age of turbulence through which we live has further muddied this water.

    What do you make of the reaction to Rasool’s explusion?

    A cacophony of voices, both within and without the country, have debated the pros and cons of the American decision.

    Much has been predictable in content and source. Some garbled. Former South African president Thabo Mbeki was schoolmasterish during a lecture he gave following Rasool’s expulsion, but he reminded the country of the tremendous power that ambassadors had at hand.

    Of concern to those with an ethical interest in international relations was that the trope “the national interest” appeared again and again and that, as it did so, the form it took was economic. So, it is in the national interest that South Africa “grow the economy”, “create jobs” and “fight HIV” with American money.

    Nevertheless, le affaire Rasool has reminded South Africans that the country also has other “national interests” like fighting climate change and defending human rights worldwide.

    Peter Vale does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

    – ref. Why was South Africa’s ambassador to the US expelled? A view of the Ebrahim Rasool affair – https://theconversation.com/why-was-south-africas-ambassador-to-the-us-expelled-a-view-of-the-ebrahim-rasool-affair-253640

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-Evening Report: If a child has extra needs, support can be hard to find. This new approach can help make it easier and quicker

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By David Trembath, Professor of Speech Pathology, Griffith University

    Lukas/Pexels

    If your child is struggling with certain everyday activities – such as playing with other kids, getting dressed or paying attention – you might want to get them assessed to see if they need additional support.

    Currently, the way a child is assessed is often fragmented and time-consuming for families. If there’s a concern, you might be talking to your child’s school, have a referral to see a speech pathologist and be on a wait-list to see a psychiatrist.

    We’ve developed a framework – in collaboration with 23 other community and professional organisations – to help make this approach more consistent for all Australian children aged 0–12 years.

    The framework focuses on a child’s functional strengths (what they can do day-to-day) as well as their challenges and aspirations, to work out what support they might need.

    This is useful for all children and it means support can start sooner, whether or not a child has a diagnosis now or might have one in the future.

    Working out what support is needed

    All children have support needs. But when these needs go beyond what might be expected for their age, or that the people around them can manage, they may need additional help.

    Take communication, for example.

    Parents use strategies to help their children learn to talk, such as by encouraging them and showing them how to do it.

    But for about 3.2% of children, communication difficulties substantially impact their ability to participate in everyday activities. An older child who is struggling to talk will find it harder to play and make friends with other children at childcare.

    Understanding each child’s need as well as their day-to-day functioning is the first step to getting appropriate support.

    However, there are two main problems with how assessments are currently done.

    The framework is for all children, not just those with a diagnosis.
    PeopleImages.com – Yuri A

    A fragmented and inconsistent picture

    The first problem is inconsistency. Doctors, teachers, childcare workers and allied health practitioners (such as physiotherapists or psychologists) all work hard to understand each child’s strengths and needs. But they tend to do assessments differently.

    This is not surprising – they are focusing on different things.

    But this means information can be sometimes duplicated or missed, making it harder to join the dots.

    For example, let’s say a child with intellectual disability and minimal spoken language is avoiding eating most foods.

    A psychologist may look at the child’s behaviour, a speech pathologist at their swallowing, and a doctor at their nutrition. But unless they work together, it may take longer to understand the underlying issue – in this case, that the child has strong sensory sensitivities.

    Without a consistent approach, it is difficult to form a holistic picture of a child’s strengths and support needs across settings, let alone come up with a good plan for support.

    Focusing on diagnosis, not function

    The second problem is assessment often focuses too much on diagnosis and not enough on support.

    Yet even children with the same diagnosis can have significantly different needs.

    For example, among three autistic children, one may need 24-hour supervision and support to be safe.

    The second may face challenges with a specific activity such as communicating at school, and benefit from targeted support from a speech pathologist.

    The third child may not need any additional support at this point in time, beyond what is provided for all children.

    Support needs also differ based on a range of personal and environmental factors, such as other health conditions, the quality of supports already in place (such as ramps for a wheelchair), or assistive technology (including mobility and communication aids).

    What does the new framework recommend?

    The framework focuses on what children can actually do and what they need help with, rather than a diagnosis.

    It encourages each professional doing an assessment – whether an educator or health professional – to consider the child’s existing context, including what supports they already have, their strengths and challenges. And it should consider their aspirations (what is most important to them and their hopes for the future).

    The framework recognises a child’s strengths and needs can change as they grow, and recommends follow-up assessments when there is a change, rather than following a set schedule.

    We developed this framework by reviewing the evidence, looking at how assessments work in other countries, consulting widely with the disability community and yarning with Aboriginal parents and health professionals.

    It outlines an approach that can be used consistently whenever a child is assessed across health, education, disability and community services.

    What needs to happen next?

    The framework is already available and is beginning to be used in practice.

    But to make the approach consistent, we need to also provide training for professionals who assess children’s strengths and needs, and a tool to gather and share the information consistently across different settings.

    We’re currently working on these. They will be ready by the end of the year, along with recommendations to government for supporting their roll-out across health, education, disability and community services.

    If you’re a parent, you don’t need to wait for a diagnosis to start seeking support for your child. You can talk to a professional you trust, such as your family doctor or child’s teacher about your concerns.

    David Trembath receives funding from the Autism Cooperative Research Centre (Autism CRC), the Commonwealth Government, and the Stan Perron Charitable Foundation. The research featured in this article was commissioned by the Autism Cooperative Research Centre with support from a federal government Department of Social Services Information, Linkages, and Capacity-Building grant.

    Rachelle Wicks receives funding from the Autism Cooperative Research Centre, the Commonwealth Government, and the Stan Perron Charitable Foundation. She also receives a small quarterly honorarium as Chair of the Autism Queensland Advisory Committee.

    – ref. If a child has extra needs, support can be hard to find. This new approach can help make it easier and quicker – https://theconversation.com/if-a-child-has-extra-needs-support-can-be-hard-to-find-this-new-approach-can-help-make-it-easier-and-quicker-253339

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Daylight saving time ends Sunday. Why do we change our clocks? And how does it affect our bodies?

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Meltem Weger, Research Fellow, Institute for Molecular Bioscience, The University of Queensland

    Kampus Productions/Pexels

    As summer fades into autumn, most Australian states and territories will set their clocks back an hour as daylight saving time ends and standard time resumes.

    About one-third of the world also adjust their clocks seasonally, moving forward in spring and back in autumn (remember: spring forward; fall back).

    In spring, losing an hour of sleep can leave us feeling tired, groggy and out-of-sync, making it hard to shake off that lingering sleepiness in the following days.

    Although getting an extra hour of sleep in autumn might sound great, it’s not entirely positive either, as biannual time shifts – whether you’re gaining or losing an hour – can disrupt our biological clock.

    This is why sleep experts and scientists who study the body clock (chronobiologists) often oppose the biannual clock changes. They argue we should eliminate daylight saving time and stick to standard time year-round.

    So why do we have daylight saving time in the first place? And why is it contentious?

    What’s daylight saving time for?

    Daylight saving time was first introduced during World War I as a wartime measure to conserve fuel.

    However, modern research shows that daylight saving time does not meaningfully reduce overall energy use. It can even increase it: while Australians use less power for lighting during daylight saving time, we use more for air conditioning during hot weather.

    These days, daylight saving is debated mainly for its potential economic and social benefits, such as extended evening daylight for recreation, shopping and traffic safety, as well as for its health implications.

    What happens in our body?

    Humans have a longstanding, evolutionary-conserved biological or circadian clock.

    Our biological clock regulates our sleep and many other bodily functions, including when to eat and when we can achieve optimal physical and cognitive performance.

    To keep everything running smoothly, the biological clock depends on natural daylight. Exposure at the right time is particularly important for sleep. Morning sunlight helps wake you up, while evening light signals your body to stay awake, meaning you stay up later and get up later in the morning.

    When we adjust the time on our clocks by one hour, we shift our social schedules, such as work or school times and social activities, and the timing of light exposure. When we switch our clocks back to standard time, most people experience sunrise and sunset earlier relative to their biological clock.

    When our clocks change, our schedules change.
    Raissa Lara/Unsplash

    Conversely, under daylight saving time, morning light is delayed, so we encounter sunlight later in relation to our internal clock. This “circadian misalignment” can throw our biological clock out of sync, adversely affecting bodily functions.

    This is especially problematic for people who already experience a persistent circadian misalignment (social jetlag), such as shift workers and those who prefer to stay up late in the evening and wake up later in the morning (night owls).

    How the ‘spring forward’ can affect your health

    Most research on biannual clock changes has historically focused on the spring switch, the transition from standard time to daylight saving.

    The spring switch can cause sleep deprivation across the week following the time change and is linked with a 5.7% increase in work related injuries.

    It’s also associated with a higher risk of cardiovascular and mental health problems, with studies reporting a 4–29% increase in heart attacks and a 6% increase in mental health crises and substance misuse. These are attributed to the acute disruptions in sleep and the body clock.

    Losing sleep might make it harder to concentrate.
    Krakenimages.com/Shutterstock

    Daylight saving time is also linked to long-term health consequences, even after several months.

    On standard time, mornings are bright and evenings are dark. But with daylight saving time, sunlight comes later, so you might stay up later and still need to wake up at the same time due to social obligations.

    When that pattern persists, it can cause longer-term circadian misalignment. This “social jetlag” has been associated with poorer cognitive performance and mental health.

    How the ‘fall back’ can affect your health

    The autumn transition from daylight saving time back to standard time is often perceived as beneficial because of the extra hour of sleep gained.

    However, some research shows the autumn transition from daylight saving time back to standard time can disrupt wellbeing too. It is linked with increased restlessness during the night that compromises sleep.

    It has also been linked to a rise in depressive episodes in Denmark, up to ten weeks after the transition to standard time. This may be due to the sudden start of earlier sunsets, which signals the start of a long period of short days.

    The days get shorter soon after daylight saving time ends.
    Son Tuyen Dinh/Shutterstock

    Where does this leave the debate?

    The European Union and United States are on the path to abolishing biannual clock changes.

    The EU’s proposal to end biannual clock changes was approved in principle and awaits final agreement by all members states.

    The US Senate has passed the Sunshine Protection Act, which now needs additional approval to become law.

    From a circadian health perspective, permanent standard time aligns better with our biological clocks than permanent daylight saving time.

    But people do not have to sacrifice their lifestyle preferences to live in tune with their biological clocks. Daylight saving time doesn’t provide more sunlight, it only shifts the timing.

    So simple lifestyle adaptions, such as flexible work hours, can let people start working earlier in summer months and enjoy longer evenings even without changing the clock twice a year.

    Meltem Weger has received funding from the German Academic Scholarship Foundation (PhD fellowship; 2010-2012) and from the European Commission (Marie Curie Curie Postdoctoral fellowships; 2014-2016, 2017-2019).

    Benjamin Weger receives funding from the National Health and Medical Research Council
    and the Alzheimer’s Association.

    – ref. Daylight saving time ends Sunday. Why do we change our clocks? And how does it affect our bodies? – https://theconversation.com/daylight-saving-time-ends-sunday-why-do-we-change-our-clocks-and-how-does-it-affect-our-bodies-252518

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Heroin found in cocaine and ‘ice’, and snorting a line can be lethal

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Darren Roberts, Conjoint Associate Professor in Clinical Pharmacology and Toxicology, St Vincent’s Healthcare Clinical Campus, UNSW Sydney

    Skrypnykov Dmytro/Shutterstock

    Authorities in New South Wales and Victoria have been warning the public about worrying cases of heroin overdoses after people thought they had taken cocaine or methamphetamine.

    We know the issue is also relevant to other parts of Australia. And it’s particularly concerning because heroin can cause life-threatening opioid overdoses, particularly in people inexperienced with heroin who snort it.

    Our new research sheds more light on what happens to people who accidentally took heroin thinking it was something else.

    What we did and what we found

    We are part of a NSW Health program that helps to find and quickly respond to concerning illicit and recreational drug poisonings and trends. The program is a collaboration between many government health services, including hospitals, the NSW Poisons Information Centre and labs.

    We searched our database and found 34 cases of opioid overdoses after using what people thought to be a stimulant drug between January 2022 and June 2024. A total of 19 people thought they were taking cocaine and 15 methamphetamine.

    Most of these 34 people had a severe opioid overdose requiring treatment by paramedics and in hospital. Sadly, two people died.

    Heroin was the opioid in all cases where we specifically tested for it, and we suspect all the cases.

    Cases occurred across NSW but most cases (68%) were in Sydney. In the last eight months of our study we identified multiple cases each month which may indicate these cases are becoming more common.

    In the United States, drugs like cocaine and methamphetamine are sometimes mixed with the potent opioid drug fentanyl. This unintentional use of opioids is causing many deaths in the US. But we didn’t find any evidence that fentanyl was the cause of the overdoses we examined.

    What happens when you take heroin by accident?

    Cocaine and methamphetamine are stimulant drugs. These are drugs that make a person feel more energetic and confident, and their pupils become larger.

    They have the opposite effect to heroin, which is an opioid and sedative. Heroin and other opioids make a person feel relaxed and often drowsy, with smaller pupils.

    When overdosing, opioids cause loss of consciousness and a person’s breathing slows or even stops, which is life-threatening. Severe opioid overdose without prompt treatment is lethal.

    If you expect to be taking cocaine or methamphetamine, but it is actually heroin, or has some heroin in it, you will very likely overdose. This is particularly true if you don’t usually take opioids, or if you use it for the first time. People can overdose from as little as snorting a line.

    Why is this happening?

    Sometimes people get a different drug than they wanted. This can happen because the drug is mixed with something else or swapped.

    This can happen for many reasons, including during manufacturing and distribution. It can happen intentionally or unintentionally by the dealer or people using the drug.

    One major reason is that you sometimes can’t tell heroin apart from cocaine or methamphetamine just by looking at them. So if drugs are mixed or swapped, you can’t always tell until you take them.

    What can we do about it?

    Opioid deaths are preventable. Government and community groups are working together to respond to the problem, either via issuing drug alerts or by educating their members.

    But people who take illicit or recreational drugs can reduce their risk by avoiding using drugs alone, and by making sure one person in their group is able to get help if needed.

    Unexpected sleepiness is a reason to seek help, not to simply rest. Start CPR if someone is not responsive and call 000.

    If someone is not responsive, start CPR and call 000.
    PanuShot/Shutterstock

    How about naloxone?

    Definitely, if someone is experiencing an opioid overdose, give them naloxone as soon as possible.

    Naloxone is a life-saving medicine that can temporarily reverse an opioid overdose. It comes in an easy-to-use nasal spray, and as a pre-filled injection.

    It’s available for free and without a prescription via the national Take Home Naloxone program. You can also order it online and get it by post.

    Naloxone is for anyone who may experience, or witness, an opioid overdose or adverse reaction.

    NSW authorities recommend it for people who use any illicit drugs including opioids, stimulants (like cocaine, methamphetamine and MDMA), ketamine and counterfeit pharmaceuticals, due to the risk of drugs being mixed with something else or swapped. Call 000 even if you have given naloxone.

    You can report unexpected overdoses to the Poisons Information Centre from anywhere in Australia on 131 126. In an emergency in Australia, call 000.

    Darren Roberts is the Medical Director of the NSW Poisons Information Centre and a clinical toxicologist and addiction medicine specialist at Royal Prince Alfred Hospital

    Jared Brown is affiliated with NSW Ministry of Health and NSW Poisons Information Centre.

    Peter Chisholm is a is a public health registrar in Drug and Alcohol Services at The Langton Centre and Prince of Wales Hospital.

    – ref. Heroin found in cocaine and ‘ice’, and snorting a line can be lethal – https://theconversation.com/heroin-found-in-cocaine-and-ice-and-snorting-a-line-can-be-lethal-253348

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: It’s not easy being a street tree, but this heroic eucalypt withstands everything we throw at it

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Gregory Moore, Senior Research Associate, School of Agriculture, Food and Ecosystem Sciences, The University of Melbourne

    alybaba/Shutterstock

    Street trees usually grow in appalling soils, have little space for their roots, are rarely watered and often get aggressively trimmed by road authorities or utility companies.

    If they do get established, many street trees suffer damage from vehicles, have to live in wind tunnels or are forced to grow in the permanent shade of large buildings.

    But despite everything we throw at them, many street trees don’t just survive, they thrive. So let’s meet one of these heroic species: the yellow gum, (Eucalyptus leucoxylon).

    Pretty but tough

    Yellow gum is widely planted across southeastern and eastern Australia as a street tree. In some suburbs and towns, it is so common that people think it is a native tree (in fact it is from South Australia, Victoria or southwest New South Wales).

    It is not to be confused with yellow box (Eucalyptus melliodora), a different eucalypt altogether.

    Yellow gum has been widely planted because it meets many of the demands we place on urban trees.

    It grows well in different soils and climates, and has very attractive red, white or pink flowers.

    It’s called yellow gum in Victoria and parts of NSW, but is often known as blue gum in SA.

    The common names can be confusing, but yellow gum refers to its pale yellow wood and bark patches, while blue gum refers to its leaves.

    Many specimens develop dense, low, spreading canopies, which offer lovely shade and help cool our cities down.

    And importantly, it doesn’t grow too big. It is typically a medium to small woodland tree, usually between 13 and 16 metres high (but it can grow higher in the wild).

    Yellow gum has an attractive smooth trunk with yellow, blue-grey or cream patches.
    alybaba/Shutterstock

    Different bird and insect species feed on the trees some feeding on flowers and fruits and others on the foliage.

    Natural populations of yellow gum occur in coastal and inland SA, in the southwest corner of NSW and in the western half of Victoria from the Murray River to the coast.

    There are several subspecies, too, and debate rages in botanical and horticultural circles about whether some of them deserve to be recognised as their own species.

    Yellow gum is also tolerant of wind and salt spray, and can withstand waterlogged soils. They stood up to the millennium drought conditions well.

    Many arborists think the yellow gum has the potential to do well in many parts of Australia as the climate changes. Research has shown, for example, that some individual yellow gum trees regulate their water use better (when compared to other individuals in the species, and when compared to other eucalypts).

    Like many eucalypts, yellow gum possesses lots of dormant buds and a lignotuber (a swelling at the base of the trunk containing dormant buds and carbohydrate). This means it copes well with pruning and will respond especially well to targeted formative pruning when young.

    This can help reduce the risk of problems such as what’s known as “co-dominant stems” (when two main stems grow from a single point of origin, instead of one tall, straight trunk) and rubbing or crossing branches.

    Not everyone’s favourite

    Not everybody likes the yellow gum, and for some good reasons.

    Some yellow gums are multi-stemmed, while others have twisted and curving trunks; some have both. These are not the characteristics many local governments want in street trees; many want to see straight trunks and dense canopies.

    Yellow gums often produce a lovely dense canopy.
    Gregory Moore

    These problems can be so annoying that some council arborists no longer recommend planting yellow gums.

    But these issues are due to poor tree selection and propagation. In the past, yellow gum seed was not carefully sourced from the best trees with the most suitable characteristics, and so inferior specimens have prospered.

    With the right investment of time and money into tree selection, these problems can be overcome.

    Ticking most of the boxes

    All in all, yellow gum can be a very fine and useful urban tree.

    The species grows well and if superior stock is used, the trees develop with straight and attractive trunks and wide, dense canopies.

    They are typically medium-sized trees, do well in tough street conditions or in smaller domestic front and back yards.

    They tick most, if not all, of the boxes for a good urban street tree.

    Gregory Moore does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

    – ref. It’s not easy being a street tree, but this heroic eucalypt withstands everything we throw at it – https://theconversation.com/its-not-easy-being-a-street-tree-but-this-heroic-eucalypt-withstands-everything-we-throw-at-it-246040

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Labor leads in three recent national polls, four weeks from the election

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Adrian Beaumont, Election Analyst (Psephologist) at The Conversation; and Honorary Associate, School of Mathematics and Statistics, The University of Melbourne

    The federal election will be held in four weeks. A national YouGov poll, conducted March 28 to April 3 from a sample of 1,622, gave Labor a 51–49 lead, a one-point gain for Labor since the previous non-MRP YouGov poll taken March 14–19.

    Primary votes were 35% Coalition (down two), 30% Labor (down one), 13% Greens (steady), 7% One Nation (steady), 2% Trumpet of Patriots (up one), 10% independents (up two) and 3% others (steady). YouGov is using respondent preferences from its last MRP poll. By 2022 election preference flows, Labor would lead by about 52–48.

    Anthony Albanese’s net approval rose three points to -6, with 50% dissatisfied and 44% satisfied. Peter Dutton’s net approval slumped ten points to -15, his worst in YouGov’s polls and the first time he’s had a worse net approval than Albanese since June 2024. Albanese led as better PM by 45–38 (45–40 previously).

    Since Sunday, we have had leaders’ ratings polls from Newspoll, Resolve, Freshwater, Essential and YouGov. A simple average of the net approval from these five polls has Albanese at net 7.8 and Dutton at net -12.

    Here is the poll graph. Labor has led in four of the six polls taken since the budget, with the exceptions a 50–50 tie in Resolve and a Coalition lead by 51–49 in Freshwater. However, Labor’s lead is narrow, except in Morgan.

    While the Coalition could regain the lead before the election, Donald Trump’s tariff announcement on Thursday may make it more difficult for the Coalition.

    Essential poll: Labor takes slight lead

    A national Essential poll, conducted March 26–30 from a sample of 1,144, gave Labor a 48–47 lead by respondent preferences including undecided (a 47–47 tie in mid-March). This was the first Labor lead in Essential since November, with the Coalition either leading narrowly or a tie since.

    Primary votes were 34% Coalition (down one), 30% Labor (up one), 12% Greens (steady), 9% One Nation (up one), 2% Trumpet of Patriots (up one), 8% for all Others (down one) and 5% undecided (down one). By 2022 election flows, Labor would lead by about 51–49.

    Albanese’s net approval was down three points to -2, with 46% disapproving and 44% approving. Dutton’s was down one point to -6. It’s Dutton’s worst net approval in Essential since October 2023.

    By 52–32, voters thought Australia was on the wrong track (48–35 previously). Essential and Morgan have a big lead for wrong track, but Labor is ahead. Voters may be blaming Trump more than Labor.

    By 61–29, voters did not think the federal budget would make a meaningful difference on cost of living (64–27 after the May 2024 budget). By 69–31, voters thought the government should prioritise the delivery of services, even if it means running a deficit, over prioritise running a surplus.

    Voters were told the Trump administration wanted to pressure Australia into removing some policies using tariffs. By 65–15, voters supported the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme and by 64–13 they supported making US companies pay tax on income generated in Australia.

    Morgan poll: Labor retains solid lead

    A national Morgan poll, conducted March 24–30 from a sample of 1,377, gave Labor a 53–47 lead by headline respondent preferences, unchanged from the March 17–23 poll.

    Primary votes were 35% Coalition (down 0.5), 32% Labor (down 1.5), 13% Greens (up 0.5), 5.5% One Nation (up 1.5), 10.5% independents (up 0.5) and 4% others (down 0.5). By 2022 election flows, Labor led by 53.5–46.5, a 0.5-point gain for the Coalition.

    By 51.5–32, voters thought Australia was going in the wrong direction (52.5–32.5 previously). Morgan’s consumer confidence index was up 1.1 points to 85.3.

    This term, Morgan’s results in general haven’t skewed to Labor relative to other polls, and Labor was behind in Morgan’s polls from November until late February. But Trump’s initial imposition of steel and aluminium tariffs on Australia on March 12 has seen Morgan move much more to Labor than other polls.

    Additional Resolve and Newspoll questions and a NSW federal poll

    I covered the national Resolve poll for Nine newspapers on March 30. In additional questions, by 60–15 voters thought Trump’s election was bad for Australia (40% bad in November). On threats to Australia in the next few years, 31% thought China the greatest threat, 17% the US, 4% Russia and 38% all equally.

    Newspoll has been asking the same questions on the budget since 1988. The Poll Bludger said on Wednesday the March 25 budget was the fourth worst perceived on economic impact (at net -10), but about the middle on personal impact (net -19). The nine-point lead for “no” on would the opposition have delivered a better budget was about par for a Labor government.

    A federal DomosAU poll of New South Wales, conducted March 24–26 from a sample of 1,013, gave the Coalition a 51–49 lead (51.4–48.6 to Labor in NSW at the 2022 federal election). Primary votes were 38% Coalition, 30% Labor, 12% Greens, 9% One Nation and 11% for all Others.

    Albanese led Dutton as preferred PM by 39–38. By 52–31, respondents did not think Australia was headed in the right direction.

    Canadian election and US special elections

    The Canadian federal election is on April 28. Polls continue to show the governing centre-left Liberals gaining ground, and they now lead the Conservatives by 43.4–37.6 in the CBC Poll Tracker.

    US federal special elections occurred on Tuesday in two safe Republican seats. While Republicans easily retained, there were big swings to the Democrats from the 2024 presidential election results in those districts. A left-wing judge won an election to the Wisconsin state supreme court by 55–45. I covered the Canadian and US developments for The Poll Bludger.

    WA election final lower house results

    I previously covered Labor winning 46 of the 59 lower house seats at the March 8 Western Australian election. The ABC’s final two-party estimate was a Labor win by 57.2–42.8. While that’s way down from the record 69.7–30.3 in 2021, it’s up from 55.5–44.5 in 2017.

    Final primary votes were 41.4% Labor (down 18.5% since 2021), 28.0% Liberals (up 6.7%), 5.2% Nationals (up 1.2%), 11.1% Greens (up 4.1%), 4.0% One Nation (up 2.8%), 3.2% Australian Christians (up 1.7%), 2.5% Legalise Cannabis (up 2.1%) and 3.3% independents (up 2.5%).

    The upper house will be finalised next week. All above the line votes have been included, with only below the line votes to be added. Labor will win 15 of the 37 seats, the Liberals ten, the Nationals two, the Greens four and One Nation, Legalise Cannabis and the Christians one each. That leaves three unclear seats.

    ABC election analyst Antony Green’s modelling of the effect of below the line votes suggests Labor’s 16th seat is in doubt and the Liberals won’t win an 11th seat. If this is correct, an independent group and Animal Justice will probably win two seats, with the final seat to be determined by preferences.

    Adrian Beaumont does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

    – ref. Labor leads in three recent national polls, four weeks from the election – https://theconversation.com/labor-leads-in-three-recent-national-polls-four-weeks-from-the-election-253541

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Ancient Rome used high tariffs to raise money too – and created other economic problems along the way

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Peter Edwell, Associate Professor in Ancient History, Macquarie University

    Nuntiya/Shutterstock

    Tariffs are back in the headlines this week, with United States President Donald Trump introducing sweeping new tariffs of at least 10% on a vast range of goods imported to the US. For some countries and goods, the tariffs will be much higher.

    Analysts have expressed shock and worry, warning the move could lead to inflation and possibly even recession for the US.

    As someone who’s spent years researching the economy of Ancient Rome, it all feels a shade familiar.

    In fact, tariffs were also used in Ancient Rome, and for some of the reasons that governments claim to be using them today.

    Unfortunately for the Romans, however, these tariffs often led to higher prices, black markets and other economic problems.

    Roman tariffs on luxury goods

    As the Roman Empire expanded and became richer, its wealthy citizens demanded increasing amounts of luxury items, especially from Arabia, India and China. This included silk, pearls, pepper and incense.

    There was so much demand for incense, for example, that growers in southern Arabia worked out how to harvest it twice a year. Pepper has been found on archaeological sites as far north as Roman Britain.

    Around 70 CE the Roman writer Pliny – who later died in the eruption that buried Pompeii – complained that 100 million sesterces (a type of coin) drained from the empire every year due to luxury imports. About 50 million sesterces a year, he reckoned, was spent on trade from India alone.

    In reality, however, the cost of these imports was even larger than Pliny thought.

    An Egyptian document, known as the Muziris Papyrus, from about the same time Pliny wrote shows one boat load of imports from India was valued at 7 million sesterces.

    Hundreds of boats laden with luxuries sailed from India to Egypt every year.

    At Palmyra (an ancient city in what’s now Syria) in the second century CE, an inscription shows 90 million sesterces in goods were imported in just one month.

    And in the first century BCE, Roman leader Julius Caesar gave his lover, Servilia (mother to his murderer Marcus Brutus), an imported black pearl worth 6 million sesterces. It’s often described as one of the most valuable pearls of all time.

    Julius Caesar gave his lover, Servilia, an imported black pearl worth 6 million sesterces.
    AdelCorp/Shutterstock

    So while there was a healthy level of trade in the other direction – with the Romans exporting plenty of metal wares, glass vessels and wine – demand for luxury imports was very high.

    The Roman government charged a tariff of 25% (known as the tetarte) on imported goods.

    The purpose of the tetarte was to raise revenue rather than protect local industry. These imports mostly could not be sourced in the Roman Empire. Many of them were in raw form and used in manufacturing items within the empire. Silk was mostly imported raw, as was cotton. Pearls and gemstones were used to manufacture jewellery.

    With the volume and value of eastern imports at such high levels in imperial Rome, the tariffs collected were enormous.

    One recent estimate suggests they could fund around one-third of the empire’s military budget.

    Inflationary effects

    Today, economic experts are warning Trump’s new tariffs – which he sees as a way to raise revenue and promote US-made goods – could end up hurting both the US and the broader global economy.

    Today’s global economy has been deliberately engineered, while the global economy of antiquity was not. But warnings of the inflationary effects of tariffs are also echoed in ancient Rome too.

    Pliny, for example, complained about the impact of tariffs on the street price of incense and pepper.

    In modern economies, central banks fight inflation with higher interest rates, but this leads to reduced economic activity and, ultimately, less tax revenue. Reduced tax collection could cancel out increased tariff revenue.

    It’s not clear if that happened in Rome, but we do know the emperors took inflation seriously because of its devastating impact on soldiers’ pay.

    Black markets

    Ancient traders soon became skilled at finding their way around paying tariffs to Roman authorities.

    The empire’s borders were so long traders could sometimes avoid tariff check points, especially when travelling overland.

    This helped strengthen black markets, which the Roman administration was still trying to deal with in the third century, when its economy hit the skids and inflation soared. This era became known as the Crisis of the Third Century.

    I don’t subscribe to the view that you can draw a direct line between Rome’s high tariffs and the decline of the Roman Empire, but it’s certainly true that this inflation that tore through third century Rome weakened it considerably.

    And just as it was for Rome, black markets loom as a potential challenge for the Trump administration too, given the length of its borders and the large volume of imports.

    But the greatest danger of the new US tariffs is the resentment they will cause, especially among close allies such as Australia.

    Rome’s tariffs were not directed at nations and were not tools of diplomatic revenge. Rome had other ways of achieving that.

    Peter Edwell receives funding from the Australian Research Council.

    – ref. Ancient Rome used high tariffs to raise money too – and created other economic problems along the way – https://theconversation.com/ancient-rome-used-high-tariffs-to-raise-money-too-and-created-other-economic-problems-along-the-way-253752

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Russia and China both want influence over Central Asia. Could it rupture their friendship?

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Dilnoza Ubaydullaeva, Lecturer in Government, Flinders University

    As he looks to solidify his territorial gains in Ukraine in a potential ceasefire deal, Russian President Vladimir Putin has one eye trained on Russia’s southern border – and boosting Russian influence in Central Asia.

    Following his 2024 re-election, Putin made Uzbekistan his third foreign visit after China and Belarus. The visit signalled the region’s continued importance to Moscow.

    In response to Western sanctions on Moscow over the Ukraine war, trade and investment between Russia and Central Asian countries have grown significantly.

    Russia’s Lukoil and Gazprom are now the dominant foreign players in Uzbekistan’s energy fields. In Kazakhstan, Moscow controls a quarter of the country’s uranium production.

    But as Russia tries to reaffirm its role in the region, China has also been quietly expanding its influence.

    Could this growing competition over Central Asia affect Beijing and Moscow’s broader relationship?

    Central Asia drifting apart from Moscow

    The Central Asian region is home to approximately 79 million people spread across five nations. It was part of the Soviet Union until its collapse in 1991. Its strategic location between Russia and China, on the doorstep of the Middle East, has long made it a “grand chessboard” for great power politics.

    While Russia has traditionally dominated the region, Central Asian leaders have made efforts to somewhat distance themselves from Moscow recently.

    At the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS) summit in October 2022, for example, Tajikistan’s president publicly challenged Russian President Vladimir Putin. He demanded respect for smaller states like his.

    Similarly, during Putin’s 2023 visit to Kazakhstan, President Kassym-Jomart Tokayev made a symbolic statement at the press conference by delivering his speech in Kazakh rather than Russian. This was a rare move that seemed to catch Putin’s delegation off guard.

    In another striking moment, Tokayev declared at an economic forum in Russia in 2022 that Kazakhstan does not recognise Russia’s “quasi-states”, referring to its occupied territories of Ukraine.

    Yet, all Central Asian states remain part of at least one Russia-led organisation, such as the Commonwealth of Independent States, the Collective Security Treaty Organization, or the Eurasian Economic Union.

    Three states (Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan) rely on Russian security guarantees through the Collective Security Treaty Organization.

    And the region’s economic dependency on Russia remains significant. Of the 6.1 million migrants in Russia, the largest groups come from Uzbekistan, Tajikistan and Kyrgyzstan. These countries depend heavily on remittances from these migrant workers.

    China’s growing influence

    With Russia preoccupied with Ukraine and constrained by Western sanctions, China has seized the opportunity to deepen its engagement in the region.

    Beijing’s involvement in Central Asia has long been economic. In 2013, for instance, China unveiled its ambitious, global Belt and Road Initiative in Kazakhstan. And by 2024, it was China, not Russia, that was the largest trading partner of every Central Asian country except Tajikistan.

    But in recent years, China has expanded its influence beyond economic ties, establishing itself as a key player in regional politics.

    At the inaugural China-Central Asia Summit in 2023, for example, Chinese leader Xi Jinping pledged support for the sovereignty, security and territorial integrity of the region. This is traditionally a role played by Russia.

    Xi has also been making high-profile visits to Central Asian states, signalling Beijing’s growing strategic interests here.

    Local populations, however, remain wary. Public opinion surveys indicate China is viewed more negatively than Russia.

    Many Chinese-funded projects bring their own workers, limiting job opportunities for locals and fuelling resentment. There is also anxiety about potential “debt trap” diplomacy. Civil society groups have called for economic diversification to avoid over-reliance on Beijing.

    Further complicating matters is Beijing’s treatment of the Muslim minority Uyghur population in the Xinjiang region of western China. This has reinforced suspicions in Muslim-majority Central Asia about China’s long-term intentions in the region.

    Growing competition

    The increasing competition raises questions about the potential impact on the broader, “no limits” relationship between Moscow and Beijing.

    At a recent forum, Putin acknowledged Beijing’s growing economic role in the region. However, he insisted Russia still has “special ties” with Central Asian states, rooted in history. And he notably dismissed concerns about China’s expansionist aims, saying:

    There is nothing about domination in the Chinese philosophy. They do not strive for domination.

    On the ground, however, things aren’t so simple. So far, China and Russia have managed to avoid stepping on each other’s toes. How long that balance remains, however, is an open question.

    Central Asian countries, meanwhile, are courting both sides – and diversifying their ties beyond the two powers.

    Many of the region’s educated elite are increasingly looking toward Turkey – and pan-Turkic solidarity – as an alternative to both Russian and Chinese dominance.

    Russia’s historical influence in the region remains strong. But the days of its unquestioned dominance appear to be over.

    Russia may try to reassert its preeminent position, but China’s deepening economic presence is not going anywhere.

    With both countries pushing their own regional agendas, it’s hard to ignore the overlap – and the potential for a future clash over competing interests.

    Dilnoza Ubaydullaeva does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

    – ref. Russia and China both want influence over Central Asia. Could it rupture their friendship? – https://theconversation.com/russia-and-china-both-want-influence-over-central-asia-could-it-rupture-their-friendship-251023

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: ‘Curiosity-driven research’ led to a recent major medical breakthrough. But it’s under threat

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Sean Coakley, Senior Research Fellow, School of Biomedical Sciences, The University of Queensland

    Hakase_420/Shutterstock

    Earlier this year news broke about doctors in London curing blindness in children with a rare genetic condition.

    The genetic condition was a severe, albeit rare, form of retinal dystrophy. It causes severe sight impairment and can be caused by defects in many different genes.

    In this case, the four young patients had mutations in the gene encoding AIPL1. This accounts for up to 5% of infants affected by this condition, and has no treatment.

    In this study, published in The Lancet, a team from the Moorfields Eye Hospital and University College London Institute of Ophthalmology injected a new copy of the gene AIPL1 into one eye of each patient to replace the defective one. The four children in the study showed improved functional vision without serious adverse effects.

    The story of this incredible breakthrough actually begins 132 years ago. It highlights the importance of research done not for any clear application in the world – just curiosity. But around the world, this kind of research is under threat.

    Understanding the world – just for the sake of it

    Curiosity-driven research is exactly what it sounds like: research driven by the goal of understanding nature without regard for application. It has many aliases. “Blue-sky research”, “discovery science” and “basic science” are all terms commonly used to describe this approach.

    This kind of research differs from “mission-directed research”, which focuses primarily on practical applications and whose goals are set by governments and industry.

    The logic behind curiosity-driven research is that understanding how things work will inevitably lead to discoveries that will fuel innovation.

    Historically, this has led to transformational discoveries. Another recent example is the 2023 Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine, which was awarded to Katalin Karikó and Drew Weissman for discoveries that enabled the development of effective mRNA vaccines against COVID.

    The recent study in The Lancet follows more than a century of curiosity-driven discoveries culminating in these four children receiving their life-changing injections.

    Sketching the structure of the retina

    The kind of medical intervention used on these patients is called a gene therapy.

    In this case, the cause of the condition is a defect in a single gene. This defect leads to the malfunction of an individual protein in the eye that is required for vision. The approach essentially is to provide a working copy of that gene to the eye, to restore function. This requires not only the technology to deliver the therapy, but the underlying knowledge of how AIPL1 functions in normal vision.

    In 1893, the pioneer of modern neuroscience Santiago Ramon y Cajal exquisitely sketched the structure of the retina.
    Santiago Ramon y Cajal/Wikipedia

    This knowledge dates back to 1893, when the pioneer of modern neuroscience, Santiago Ramon y Cajal, exquisitely sketched the structure of the retina – the light-sensitive tissue at the back of the eye.

    In the 132 years since, our knowledge of how this tissue converts light into an electrical signal for our brain to interpret as vision has significantly advanced. We now understand a lot about how this works.

    This foundational knowledge also means we know precisely why a dysfunctional AIPL1 gene leads to severe vision impairment. It also enables us to predict that providing a working version could improve vision. Armed with this knowledge, we have an engineering problem. How do we get a working copy into the eye?

    In this case, the working copy of AIPL1 was delivered by an adeno-associated virus, or AAV. These were first discovered in the mid-1960s, and without realising their therapeutic potential, several research groups dedicated themselves to understanding their biology.

    An AAV was first used in a human patient in 1995 for the treatment of cystic fibrosis. Without this curiosity-driven research they would not have been developed into a gene therapy platform. This is how most modern therapies have emerged.

    Curiosity-driven research is driven by the goal of understanding nature without regard for application.
    Trust Katsande/Unsplash

    Protecting curiosity-driven research

    This is one of hundreds of therapies taking a similar approach. We will likely see many more stories like this in the coming decades. But I am certain we won’t see any examples where we don’t understand the underlying biology.

    Curiosity-driven research, focused on understanding how biology works, is essential for the development of therapies to treat human disease. The history of medical advances shows us this time and time again.

    Curiosity-driven breakthroughs include the discovery of X-rays as well as the antibiotic penicillin. The discovery of CRISPR/Cas9, an ancient bacterial defence, has enabled the editing of DNA with unprecedented precision. This has already led to an FDA-approved therapy to treat sickle cell disease.

    Australia has punched above its weight in this arena for many years. But this is no longer the case.

    Funding from the National Health and Medical Research Council, our largest funder of medical research, has been falling since 2020. More broadly, this coincides with a decline in the proportion of basic research being funded in Australia and directly threatens our capacity for curiosity-driven innovation.

    Internationally, this strong focus on practical application is repeated. For example, 83% of the European Union’s €95.5 billion research funding program supports mission-directed research.

    In Australia, and globally, we must protect curiosity-driven research at all costs and not underestimate the vital contribution it will make to our future.

    Sean Coakley receives funding from the National Health and Medical Research Council and the Australian Research Council.

    – ref. ‘Curiosity-driven research’ led to a recent major medical breakthrough. But it’s under threat – https://theconversation.com/curiosity-driven-research-led-to-a-recent-major-medical-breakthrough-but-its-under-threat-252298

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Yes, data can produce better policy – but it’s no substitute for real-world experience

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Anna Matheson, Associate Professor in Public Health and Policy, Te Herenga Waka — Victoria University of Wellington

    Shutterstock

    Governments like to boast that “data-driven” policies are the best way to make fair, efficient decisions. They collect statistics, set targets and adjust strategies to suit.

    But while data can be useful, it’s not neutral. There are biases and blind spots in the systems that produce the data. Worse, data often lacks the depth, context and responsiveness needed to drive real-world change.

    The real questions are about who decides which data matter, how it’s interpreted – and what the change based on the data might look like.

    Take the Social Investment Agency, for example. One of New Zealand’s best-known data-driven initiatives, it was established to improve the efficiency of social services using data and predictive analytics to identify individuals and families most at risk, directing funding accordingly.

    The model is intended to guide early interventions and prevent long-term harm. And on paper, this appears to be a smart, targeted strategy. Yet it has also faced criticism over the risk of data-driven policies reducing individuals to measurable statistics, stripping away the complexity of lived experiences.

    The result is that decision making remains centralised within government agencies rather than being shaped by the communities most affected.

    What data can’t tell us

    The Social Investment Agency also relies on Stats NZ’s Integrated Data Infrastructure, a database of anonymised administrative information. While a rich source for longitudinal research and policy development, this too has limitations.

    It relies heavily on government-collected data, which may embed systemic bias and fail to represent communities accurately. Without accounting for context, some populations may be underrepresented or misrepresented, leading to skewed insights and misguided policy recommendations.

    This kind of data is completely separate from the lived reality of the people the data describes. Māori in particular have been concerned about a lack community ownership and that the Integrated Data Infrastructure does not currently align with their own data sovereignty aspirations.

    Given this greater likelihood of misrepresentation, Māori and Pasifika communities worry that data-driven funding models, on their own, fail to account for more holistic, whānau-centered approaches.

    For instance, a predictive algorithm might flag a child as “at risk” based on socioeconomic indicators. But it would fail to also measure protective factors such as strong cultural connections, intergenerational knowledge and community leadership.

    This is where the kaupapa Māori initiative Whānau Ora provides an alternative model. Instead of viewing individuals in isolation, it prioritises the needs of families to provide tailored housing, education, health and employment support.

    A Whānau Ora COVID vaccination campaign in 2021 funded Māori health providers to reach at-risk communities in the North Island.
    Getty Images

    Change from the ground up

    Funded by Te Puni Kōkiri/Ministry of Māori Development, Whānau Ora has been criticised in the past for the lack of measurable outputs data-driven systems can offer. But research has also shown community-led models produce better long-term outcomes than traditional, top-down, data-driven welfare and service delivery models.

    A 2018 review found Whānau Ora strengthened family resilience, improved employment outcomes and increased educational engagement – for example, through supporting whānau into their own businesses and off social assistance.

    Whānau Ora’s work strengthening community networks and building self-determination migh be harder to measure using standard metrics, but it has long-term economic and social benefits.

    Similarly, data-driven approaches to disease prevention can fall short. While governments might rely on obesity rates or physical activity levels to shape interventions, these blunt measurements fail to capture the deeper social and economic factors that affect health.

    Too often, strategies target individual behaviours – calorie counting, exercise tracking – assuming better data leads to better choices. But we know local conditions, including what financial and community resources are available, matter much more.

    An example of this in action is Health New Zealand/Te Whatu Ora’s Healthy Families NZ division. With teams in ten communities around the country, it works to create local change to improve health.

    Instead of simply telling people to eat better and exercise more, it has supported community action to reshape local environments so healthier choices become easier to make.

    In South Auckland, for example, Healthy Families NZ has worked with local businesses to improve access to fresh, affordable food. In Invercargill, it has helped transform urban planning policies to expand green spaces for physical activity.

    Data in perspective

    Such initiatives recognise health is about more than just individuals. It is a shared outcome that results from systemic processes. Data-driven approaches by themselves struggle to capture these less measurable pathways and relationships.

    That is not to say government-led, data-driven methods don’t often diagnose the problem correctly – just that they frequently fail to provide solutions that empower communities to make lasting change.

    Rather than over-relying on data analytics to dictate funding, or on national health targets to guide the system, cross-sector and place-based initiatives such as Whānau Ora and Healthy Families NZ can teach us a lot about what works in the real world.

    Data will always have an important role to play in shaping policy, but this requires a broader perspective. Data offers a tool for communities, not a substitute for their leadership and voice. Real system change happens when we fundamentally rethink how change happens, and who leads that change in the first place.

    Anna Matheson has been leading the evaluation of Healthy Families NZ which is funded by Health New Zealand.

    – ref. Yes, data can produce better policy – but it’s no substitute for real-world experience – https://theconversation.com/yes-data-can-produce-better-policy-but-its-no-substitute-for-real-world-experience-253527

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: An exotic escape, or empty illusion? How The White Lotus exposes the contradictions of luxury travel

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Anita Manfreda, Senior Lecturer in Tourism, Torrens University Australia

    Warner Bros

    The White Lotus season three returns to familiar territory: an exotic escape, privileged and powerful guests, the supposed heights of luxury.

    But beneath this lies a satirical critique of these very things – an investigation into the contradictions of luxury travel.

    Set in Thailand, the heart of the South Asian wellness scene, the show comments on more than just what luxury looks like. It asks: what does luxury cost? And who bears this cost?

    At the same time, the show quietly gestures towards what tourism could become, if we were bold enough to re-imagine it. Because luxury isn’t the problem. The problem is how we do it.

    The resort staff bend over backwards for their guests.
    Warner Bros

    Wellness … but not really

    Season three leans into the booming wellness economy. Between floating therapy, personalised biomarker tests and digital detoxes, the appearance of “healing” is everywhere.

    The irony, however, is clear: guests pursue self-care, but act disconnected, irritable and hostile.

    The luxury setting reflects their worst impulses. Characters such as Jaclyn (Michelle Monaghan), a Hollywood star chasing relevance, and Victoria (Parker Posey), lost without her Lorazepam, treat wellness practices as a trend that’s more about image than transformation.

    This reflects a broader trend in luxury tourism: wellness that photographs well, but rarely goes beneath the surface.

    Victoria (Parker Posey) can’t seem to get through her holiday without Lorazepam.
    Warner Bros

    Research shows real transformation in tourism requires discomfort – something most luxury guests instinctively avoid.

    As the character of monk Luang Por Teera (Suthichai Yoon) warns:

    Everyone runs from pain toward pleasure […] but you cannot outrun pain.

    One person’s wellness is another person’s work

    In luxury tourism, wellness is not mutual. One person’s transformation often depends on someone else’s sacrifice. And this exchange is never equal.

    While the guests of season three try and look inward, those holding space for them – such as the meditation guide Amrita (Shalini Peiris), or the ever-present security guard Gaitok (Tayme Thapthimthong) – remain relatively voiceless. They quietly manage the chaos, with little room for their own stories to flourish.

    Throughout the season, the interactions between guest and staff are built on performance. Staff are praised for their beauty, politeness or spiritual presence, but rarely acknowledged as full people.

    Emotional and “aesthetic” labour (looking and acting the part) are silently expected and constantly extracted.

    Security guard Gaitok (Tayme Thapthimthong), who gets caught up in some of the guests’ drama, has to always keep up appearances.
    Warner Bros

    When resort employee Belinda (Natasha Rothwell) raises concerns about Greg (Jon Gries), resort manager Fabian (Christian Friedel) brushes her off, saying:

    It is really not wise to stir anything up. You do not have anything to worry about, as long as you focus on yourself and your job.

    The message is clear: stay quiet and stay in your place.

    Nature as wallpaper

    This season offers no shortage of natural cues. Clean air, ocean views, jungle trails – luxury retreats promise grounding and transformation through nature.

    As with much of luxury tourism, however, this nature is curated. The jungle is manicured, the ruins softly lit. Nature, too, performs.

    But unlike the staff, who slip into silence and composure, nature doesn’t follow the script. It interrupts, resists and sometimes bites. Monkeys raid the buffet. Lizards slip into rooms and cause havoc. A venomous cobra bites a guest. The pong-pong tree bears deadly fruit.

    This is a contradiction luxury travel can’t resolve. Nature is brought in for healing and ambience, but refuses to be compliant.

    Culture – flattened and filtered

    Season three could have been set in any location with beaches and palm trees. For most guests, the local culture is invisible – a scenic backdrop for their personal drama. Cultural experiences are safely curated, stripped of context, and designed to comfort, not challenge.

    For character’s like Saxon (Patrick Schwarzenegger), the resort is just a scenic backdrop for their personal dramas to play out.
    Warner Bros

    Even brief moments beyond the resort feel disorienting to the guests.

    “He seems like the real deal,” Timothy (Jason Isaacs) says after an encounter with monk Luang Por Teera (Yoon) – revealing how artificial everything else feels.

    The show critiques a familiar move in luxury tourism: selling “authenticity” while delivering a flattened, palatable version of reality. There is just enough difference to feel exotic, but never enough to feel uncomfortable.

    In one cautionary scene, Jaclyn (Monaghan), Piper (Sarah Catherine Hook), and Laurie (Carrie Coon) wander into a Thai New Year celebration, where locals start chasing them with water guns, drenching them in what feels like joyful protest.

    Jaclyn (Michelle Monaghan), Piper (Sarah Catherine Hook) and Laurie (Carrie Coon) are unhappy to be soaked by locals with water guns – in what is one of few genuinely authentic experiences with locals.
    Warner Bros

    Although it’s played for laughs, the scene reminds us culture isn’t there to serve. Travellers might do better to meet culture on its terms and not their own.

    Glimpses of something better

    Ironically, the show’s satire may be fuelling the very thing it critiques. Since season three aired, talk of a “White Lotus effect” has already begun, with claims of a rise in tourism interest and bookings. It seems the (not-so) fantasy still sells, even when we can see the cracks.

    Yet, in quiet, awkward and sometimes funny moments, the show resists cynicism, offering glimpses of potential. Guests perceive themselves. Relationships shift. Silenced actors push back.

    Through these cracks, we can sense what luxury could be if it connected us, instead of shielding us, from new people and places.

    Luxury travel, re-imagined, could be a space where care flows in both directions – where staff are seen as people, and where nature and culture aren’t curated, but respected as they are. Indeed, it is the experiences that expand us, rather than insulate us, which end up changing us the most.

    And it’s not just up to hotels and resorts to deliver this shift. It asks something of us, too. A different mindset.

    This season’s power lies in what it leaves unsaid, inviting us to examine what is lost in the pursuit of comfort.

    The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

    – ref. An exotic escape, or empty illusion? How The White Lotus exposes the contradictions of luxury travel – https://theconversation.com/an-exotic-escape-or-empty-illusion-how-the-white-lotus-exposes-the-contradictions-of-luxury-travel-253229

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: This election, what are Labor and the Coalition offering on the energy transition, climate adaptation and emissions?

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Johanna Nalau, Senior Lecturer, Climate Adaptation, Griffith University

    Composite image, Xiangli Li, Shirley Jayne Photography and geckoz/Shutterstock

    Australia’s 2022 federal election was seen as the climate election. But this time round, climate policy has so far taken a back seat as the major parties focus on cost-of-living issues.

    Despite this, climate change remains an ever-present threat. Last year was the world’s hottest on record and extreme weather is lashing Queensland. But there are hints of progress. Australia’s emissions have begun to fall and the main power grid is now 40% renewable.

    So before Australians head to the polls on May 3, it’s worth closely examining the climate policies of the two major parties. What are they offering on cutting emissions, preparing for climate-boosted disasters and future-proofing our energy systems? And where are the gaps?

    Energy transition – Tony Wood, Grattan Institute

    Cost-of-living pressures, escalating damage from climate change and global policy uncertainty mean no election issue is more important than transforming Australia’s economy to achieve net zero. But our energy supply must be reliable and affordable. What should the next government prioritise?

    There is great pressure to deliver power bill relief. But the next government’s priority should be reducing how much a household spends on energy, rather than trying to bring down the price of electricity. Far better to give financial support for battery storage and better home insulation, to slash how much power consumers need to buy from the grid.

    The Liberal-led Senate inquiry has just found supporting home electrification will also help with cost of living pressures.

    The electricity rebates on offer from Labor and the temporary cut to fuel excise from the Coalition aren’t enough.

    Federal and state governments must maintain their support and investment in the new transmission lines necessary to support new renewable generation and storage.

    Labor needs to do more to meet its 2030 target of reaching 82% renewables in the main grid. Currently, the figure is around 40%. The Coalition’s plan to slow down renewables, keep coal going longer and burn more gas while pushing for a nuclear future carries alarmingly high risks on reliability, cost and environmental grounds.

    Gas shortfalls are looming for Australia’s southeast in the next few winters and the price of gas remains stubbornly high. Labor does not yet have a workable solution to either issue, while the Coalition has an idea – more and therefore cheaper gas – but no clarity on how its plan to keep more gas for domestic use would work in practice.

    So far, we have been offered superficially appealing ideas. The field is wide open for a leader to deliver a compelling vision and credible plan for Australia’s net-zero future.

    Climate adaptation – Johanna Nalau, Griffith University

    You would think adapting to climate change would be high on the election agenda. Southeast Queensland just weathered its first cyclone in 50 years, estimated to have caused A$1.2 billion in damage, while outback Queensland is enduring the worst flooding in 50 years.

    But so far, there’s little to see on adaptation.

    Both major parties have committed to building a weather radar in western Queensland, following local outcry. While welcome, it’s a knee-jerk response rather than good forward planning.

    By 2060, damage from climate change will cost Australia $73 billion a year under a low emissions scenario, according to a Deloitte report. The next federal government should invest more in disaster preparation rather than throwing money at recovery. It’s cheaper, for one thing – longer term, there are significant savings by investing in more resilient infrastructure before damage occurs.

    Being prepared requires having enough public servants in disaster management to do the work. The Coalition has promised to cut 41,000 jobs from the federal public service, and has not yet said where the cuts would be made.

    While in office, Labor has been developing a National Adaptation Plan to shape preparations and a National Climate Risk Assessment to gather evidence of the main climate risks for Australia and ways to adapt.

    Regardless of who takes power, these will be useful roadmaps to manage extreme weather, damage to agriculture and intensified droughts, floods and fires. Making sure climate-exposed groups such as farmers get necessary assistance to weather worse disasters, and manage new risks and challenges stemming from climate change, is not a partisan issue. Such plans will help direct investment towards adaptation methods that work at scale.

    New National Science Priorities are helpful too, especially the focus on new technologies able to sustainably meet Australia’s food and water needs in a changing climate.

    Intensifying climate change brings more threats to our food systems and farmers.
    Shirley Jayne Photography

    Emission reduction – Madeline Taylor, Macquarie University

    Emission reduction has so far been a footnote for the major parties. In terms of the wider energy transition, both parties are expected to announce policies to encourage household battery uptake and there’s a bipartisan focus on speeding up energy planning approvals.

    But there is a clear divide in where the major parties’ policies will lead Australia on its net-zero journey.

    Labor’s policies largely continue its approach in government, including bringing more clean power and storage into the grid within the Capacity Investment Scheme and building new transmission lines under the Rewiring Australia Plan.

    These policies are leading to lower emissions from the power sector. Last year, total emissions fell by 0.6%. Labor’s Future Made in Australia policies give incentives to produce critical minerals, green steel, and green manufacturing. Such policies should help Australia gain market share in the trade of low-carbon products.

    From January 1 this year, Labor’s new laws require some large companies to disclose emissions from operations. This is positive, giving investors essential data to make decisions. From their second reporting period, companies will have to disclose Scope 3 emissions as well – those from their supply chains. The laws will cover some companies where measuring emissions upstream is incredibly tricky, including agriculture. Coalition senators issued a dissenting report pointing this out. The Coalition has now vowed to scrap these rules.

    The Coalition has not committed to Labor’s target of cutting emissions 43% by 2030. Their flagship plan to go nuclear will likely mean pushing out emissions reduction goals given the likely 2040s completion timeframe for large-scale nuclear generation, unless small modular reactors become viable.

    On gas, there’s virtually bipartisan support. The Coalition promise to reserve more gas for domestic use is a response to looming shortfalls on the east coast. Labor has also approved more coal and gas projects largely for export, though Australian coal and gas burned overseas aren’t counted domestically.

    Opposition Leader Peter Dutton has promised to include gas in Labor’s renewable-oriented Capacity Investment Scheme and has floated relaxing the Safeguard Mechanism on heavy emitters. The Coalition has vowed to cancel plans for three offshore wind projects and are very critical of green hydrogen funding.

    Both parties will likely introduce emission reduction measures, but a Coalition government would be less stringent. Scrapping corporate emissions reporting entirely would be a misstep, because accurate measurement of emissions are essential for attracting green investment and reducing climate risks.

    Johanna Nalau has received funding from Australian Research Council for climate adaptation research, is a Lead Author of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Co-chair of the Science Committee of the World Adaptation Science Program (United Nations Environment Programme) and is a technical expert with United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change

    Madeline Taylor has received funding from the Australian Research Council, ACOLA, and several industry and government partners for energy transition research. She is a board member of REAlliance, Fellow of the Climate Council, and Honorary Associate of the Sydney Environment Institute.

    Tony Wood may own shares in companies in relevant industries through his superannuation fund

    – ref. This election, what are Labor and the Coalition offering on the energy transition, climate adaptation and emissions? – https://theconversation.com/this-election-what-are-labor-and-the-coalition-offering-on-the-energy-transition-climate-adaptation-and-emissions-253430

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Flu vaccines are now available for 2025. What’s on offer and which one should I get?

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Allen Cheng, Professor of Infectious Diseases, Monash University

    PeopleImages.com – Yuri A/Shutterstock

    It’s that time of year when flu vaccines are becoming available in Australia. You may have received an email from your GP clinic or a text message from your pharmacy telling you they’re in stock.

    So far in 2025 in Australia, there have been more flu notifications compared to the same period in previous years.

    Elsewhere, many northern hemisphere countries have reported intense flu activity during the 2024–25 winter season. This has included several deaths in children.

    Although it’s difficult to make predictions about the intensity and timing of the upcoming flu season, it’s a good time to start thinking about vaccination.

    Who should get vaccinated, and when?

    In Australia, flu vaccines are available for everyone over the age of six months. Flu vaccines don’t work well in young infants, but they can be protected if their mothers are immunised during pregnancy.

    The National Immunisation Program provides free vaccines for people at higher risk, including specific age groups (adults older than 65 and children between six months and five years), those with chronic medical conditions, pregnant women and Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people.

    For healthy adults and children outside these groups, a flu vaccine costs around A$20–30. The vaccines are widely available at GPs and pharmacies, and through workplace programs.

    Flu vaccines reduce the risk of GP presentation with influenza by around 30–60% and hospitalisation with influenza by about 50–70%.

    There’s some evidence the protection from flu vaccines wanes over several months. Ideally, everyone would get vaccinated within a few months of the peak of the flu season. But in reality, we can’t easily predict when this will occur, and since the COVID pandemic, flu seasons have arrived unusually early in the year. So, some time in the next month or so is a good time to get vaccinated.

    The flu can be a nasty virus to catch.
    Kmpzzz/Shutterstock

    In general, flu vaccines can be given at the same time as most other vaccines, including COVID vaccines, but check with your vaccination provider about whether this is appropriate for you.

    Influenza vaccines are regarded as safe. While some people may get a sore arm or fever, these symptoms are usually mild and short lived. Serious side effects, such as Guillain-Barré syndrome, are rare, and are thought to be less common than after influenza infection.

    Why do we need a flu vaccine every year?

    Influenza is a difficult virus to make vaccines for, as the virus changes frequently, and vaccines generally only provide protection against a limited range of strains. Some studies suggest mutations in the influenza virus are 20 times more common than with SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID.

    This means, each year, experts need to predict the likely circulating strains in the next season, so vaccines can be manufactured in preparation.

    The World Health Organization coordinates two meetings each year – in February to decide on vaccine strains for the following northern hemisphere season, and around September for the southern hemisphere.

    Although all current influenza vaccines contain strains from four influenza subtypes (A/H1N1, A/H3N2, B Victoria and B Yamagata), one of the strains appears to have disappeared during the pandemic. So next year’s vaccines will probably drop the B Yamagata strain.

    Seasonal flu vaccines don’t provide protection against avian influenza (bird flu) strains, but vaccination is still recommended for people who may be at risk of bird flu, such as poultry workers. This is to reduce the chance that a new virus could result from the combination of both seasonal and avian influenza strains.

    Which vaccines are available?

    There are a variety of vaccines you may be offered when you book in or turn up for a flu vaccine.

    Over the past few years, new types of vaccines have been developed. Some of these attempt to improve the body’s immune response to vaccines. For example, Fluad Quad contains an adjuvant called MF59, an additional substance designed to attract immune cells to the site of vaccination.

    Other vaccines, such as Fluzone High-Dose, use a larger dose of the vaccine strains to improve the immune response. These vaccines are recommended for older people, as immune responses tend to decline with age.

    Certain vaccines use alternative production methods to try to improve the match between vaccine strains and the circulating strains. Standard flu vaccines are produced using influenza viruses grown in chicken eggs. One weakness of this method is that viral mutations can occur during the production process, known as “egg adaptation”. During some of the seasons between 2014 and 2019, this was shown to reduce the effectiveness of flu vaccines.

    The avoid this issue, cell-based vaccines, such as Flucelvax Quad, use influenza vaccine strains grown in mammalian cells rather than eggs.

    Flu vaccines are free for certain vulnerable groups, such as children under five.
    SeventyFour/Shutterstock

    The key takeaways are:

    1. older people are recommended to receive an enhanced vaccine (Fluad Quad for >65 years or Fluzone High-Dose for >60 years), with Fluad Quad provided free under the National Immunisation Program

    2. other people are recommended to receive a standard vaccine (egg-based or cell-based), with vaccines provided free for high-risk groups and children between six months and five years.

    Looking to the future

    There are several new flu vaccines currently under development. Recombinant vaccines, such as Flublok, use insect cells to produce a specific component of the virus.

    With the success of mRNA vaccines for COVID, there is interest in using a similar process for influenza. In theory, this could shorten the time to develop vaccines, for both seasonal influenza and pandemic influenza.

    There’s also interest in combination vaccines – for example, a single shot could provide protection against both COVID and the flu.

    The “holy grail” of influenza vaccines is one that could provide long-lasting protection against many different strains. Although we’re not there yet, you’re at lower risk of influenza and its complications if you get a flu shot.

    Allen Cheng is a member of the Australian Technical Advisory Group on Immunisation. He receives funding from the Australian Department of Health and the National Health and Medical Research Council.

    – ref. Flu vaccines are now available for 2025. What’s on offer and which one should I get? – https://theconversation.com/flu-vaccines-are-now-available-for-2025-whats-on-offer-and-which-one-should-i-get-252292

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Gender played a significant role in the 2022 election. Will it do the same in 2025?

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Michelle Arrow, Professor of History, Macquarie University

    Gender was an important factor in the 2022 election: it shaped the ways the major parties packaged their policies and their leaders. Three years later, as Australians grapple with an uncertain world and a cost-of-living crisis, how might gender shape the 2025 election result?

    Ideas about gender have always shaped Australian politics, although male and female political alignments have shifted over time. For example, when Sir Robert Menzies established the Liberal Party in 1944, he crafted messages to appeal to women, in contrast with the Labor Party’s blue-collar masculinity.

    By the 1970s and 1980s, as more women entered the workforce and pursued further education, they became more progressive in their voting habits. This trend is evident beyond Australia (for example in the US, and in Europe and Canada).

    How gender influenced the 2022 election

    Women’s issues were decisive in the last federal election. The gendered impact of the COVID-19 pandemic, the emergence of Grace Tame as a fiery advocate for survivors of sexual abuse, and the Morrison government’s poor response to Brittany Higgins’ allegation of sexual assault enraged many women, who took the streets in the March for Justice in 2021.

    The election was a contest of competing masculinities, between what political scientist Blair Williams calls the “state daddy” (Anthony Albanese) and the “daggy dad” (Scott Morrison). Labor targeted women with messages about “care”, while the Coalition donned high-vis and continued to pursue young men who “might vote Labor”.

    The (mostly) female community independents added another new gender dynamic. Highly competent professional women who were disaffected with the Liberal party, they ran on integrity, climate action and gender equality, and won some of the Coalition’s safest seats.

    The gender gap in favour of Labor in the 2022 election was driven by younger voters (18-34 years) and a strong Greens vote. Women gave the Coalition their lowest ever level of support at just 32%.

    So what role might gender play in the 2025 election campaign?

    First, the gender gap remains in place. Internal Liberal party polling suggests that many women have returned to the party since 2022, but most polls suggest the gender gap in favour of Labor is still at least around 2%. This gap is most pronounced among younger voters.

    Second, while gender issues remain important, they are not electrifying political debate as they did in 2022. According to the latest Newspoll, neither Albanese or Dutton are especially appealing to women voters, who are shifting to the Greens. However, young women (and a majority of young people) still prefer Albanese over Dutton.

    This doesn’t mean gender issues won’t play a role, though. Dutton’s threat to curtail working from home (which women especially dislike), and promises to cut public service jobs (and therefore services) might suggest that he has not yet learned the gender lessons from 2022.

    Similarly, while Labor has delivered on its policy promises of improving wages in female-dominated industries, voter response to much of Labor’s first term has been tepid at best. However, Labor’s recent announcements on Medicare and bulk-billing will speak to women feeling the pinch of the cost of living crisis (according to one poll, middle aged women moved away from Labor in 2024 because of this issue.)

    Third, gender is now a fault line in international politics. The resurgence of Donald Trump and his brand of “strongman” masculinity, attacks on women’s and trans rights, online polarisation, and the rise of a “manosphere” spreading (often) misogynistic messages appears to be fuelling a growing divide between young men and women. The lobby group Advance is letterboxing Australian households with leaflets arguing Labor is “Weak, Woke,[and] Sending Us Broke”. They clearly believe Trump-style campaign slogans will win over voters.

    Gender polarisation was evident in the recent US election: Trump won young men by 14 points, while Harris won young women by 18 points, though many white women remained loyal to Trump.

    Data from Essential suggested that while many Australians regard the Trump administration with dismay, young men (aged 18-35) are the outliers.

    These men are also the demographic group most supportive of Dutton’s performance as opposition leader. The 2022 Australian Co-operative Election Study suggested that younger men were less receptive to gender equality. For example, while 70% of women agreed that “Australian society needs to do more to achieve equality between men and women”, only 51% of men agreed. Young men were by far the most hostile to this proposition, perhaps due in part to the polarised social climate of the post-#MeToo era.

    Yet it is easy to overstate these gender differences: Intifar Chowdhury’s research showed that while young women are shifting leftwards, so too are young men, though at a relatively slower rate.

    Gender gaps in voting intention are particularly apparent among young people.
    Shutterstock

    A generation gap?

    The 2025 election is the first where Gen Z and Millennial voters will outnumber Baby Boomers. So while gender differences might determine voting, they will intersect with socioeconomic and generational issues.

    While politicians argue over the best way to address the cost of living crisis, young people have grappled with that crisis on top of life-changing HECS-HELP debts, distress over climate change, and a rise in insecure work. Home ownership, a pathway to prosperity for older generations, is out of reach for many Gen Z and Millennials: social researcher Rebecca Huntley found that more than 60% of Australians (and 75% of renters) believe the dream of home ownership is dead for young people. Is it any wonder that young people might despair about their futures?

    In response to this rather bleak picture, young women have consistently turned to progressive parties. Like their feminist forebears, these women are looking to the state for rights and protections, which has long been one of the hallmarks of Australian feminism.

    Many young men appear to be more sceptical of such solutions. But it is important not to overstate gender differences at a time when generational differences seem more politically salient. It will be fascinating to see if young Australians can leverage their electoral clout to force the next parliament to meaningfully address intergenerational inequality.

    Michelle Arrow receives funding from the Australian Research Council. Michelle would like to thank Professor Shaun Wilson for his assistance in researching this article.

    – ref. Gender played a significant role in the 2022 election. Will it do the same in 2025? – https://theconversation.com/gender-played-a-significant-role-in-the-2022-election-will-it-do-the-same-in-2025-249580

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Get big or die trying: social media is driving men’s use of steroids. Here’s how to mitigate the risks

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Timothy Piatkowski, Lecturer in Psychology, Griffith University

    Anna Moskvina/Shutterstock

    Men have cared about their appearance throughout the centuries, and ideals of masculinity and “manliness” are ancient – with strong emphasis put on physical fitness and virility. In ancient Greece, the ideal male body was considered strong, symmetrical and athletic.

    Now, with easier access to performance and image enhancing drugs (PIEDs) and their promotion on social media, ideals of masculinity and muscularity have taken on a whole new level.

    PIEDs are a class of drugs that some people use to enhance physical appearance or athletic performance. They include anabolic-androgenic steroids, human growth hormone, and other medicines used “off-label” such as insulin.

    Social media platforms such as Instagram and TikTok flood us with images and videos promoting steroid use as a “quick fix” to achieve big muscles.

    Other influencers promote muscularity by “natural” means, but are then found out as liars who were using steroids all along. For those following, especially impressionable young men, the fallout is real. What once seemed like a natural achievement is exposed as chemically enhanced, pushing young men to wonder whether steroids are the only way to keep up.

    A growing and harmful trend

    Recent studies show that muscle-building behaviours such as steroid use are rising among young men. But why is this happening?

    The answer lies partly in a societal obsession with hypermasculine ideals. Images of sculpted bodies, amplified by social media influencers with millions of followers, set unattainable standards of physical perfection. Fitness influencer content often normalises extreme body ideals. It is no longer just about fitness, it is about shaping an identity around an ideal male body.

    It is not a harmless trend. The use of steroids carries significant health risks. For instance, beyond the well-known risks of heart disease and liver damage, steroid use can also lead to psychiatric issues such as mood disorders, aggression and depression.

    Tragically, some fitness influencers and bodybuilders who use PIEDs have died unexpectedly. Australian fitness influencer Jaxon Tippet, who openly admitted to using steroids in the past, died at 30 from a heart attack – a known risk linked to anabolic steroids.

    Towards ‘safer use’

    Many fitness influencers actively engage in online fitness coaching, a booming industry.

    This involves providing guidance on training, diet and supplementation. Some of this extends into drug coaching: providing guidance on how to use steroids and other enhancement drugs within a “safer use” model that’s informed by harm reduction approaches.

    While these approaches don’t encourage drug use, they do offer strategies to reduce and mitigate known harms.

    Some elite bodybuilders actively champion transparency over steroid use. In recent years, athletes and coaches have partnered with scholars on numerous podcasts to discuss prioritising health and health monitoring behaviours such as blood testing.

    Regular blood testing is framed as a key strategy to mitigate risks associated with steroid use, often conducted at specific intervals.

    However, the absence of formal regulation means not all advice is created equal. Some influencers may still encourage practices that are dangerous and potentially life-threatening.

    While these trends are concerning, the solution doesn’t lie in finger-pointing at influencers or shaming young men for their choices. Instead, we advocate for a more positive, educational approach.

    A better way forward

    Asking people to “just say no” to drug use has never worked. Instead, we must shift the narrative by educating, supporting and collaborating with the people who drive the trend – PIED consumers.

    By partnering with trusted community figures and influencers, we can spread awareness about the dangers of steroid use while offering accurate, evidence-based information about health and wellbeing.

    An example of this approach is Vigorous Steve, a well-known figure in the fitness world. He has used his platform to share important research on the harms of steroids.

    Steve’s work on social media, with millions of views, is a model for how harm reduction education can reach a large, engaged audience, help normalise safer use discussions and expand access to information.

    With this in mind, the Queensland Injectors Voice for Advocacy and Action (QuIVAA) has recently launched the Steroid QNECT program (one of us, Tim Piatkowski, is the vice president of QuIVAA). The program provides support to people using steroids, offering peer education and resources via online platforms.

    Since its inception in January this year, the program has already engaged with and provided harm reduction information to hundreds of Australians who use steroids, helping to bridge critical gaps in education.

    As the muscle building trend continues, peers, policymakers, researchers and health professionals across Australia must collaborate to provide accurate, balanced education about the risks of steroids – especially for young men.

    Timothy Piatkowski receives funding from the Queensland Mental Health Commission. He is Vice President of Queensland Injectors Voice for Advocacy and Action (QuIVAA). Tim collaborates regularly with peers in community, such as Vigorous Steve, mentioned in this article.

    Samuel Cornell receives funding through an Australian Government Research Training Program
    Scholarship. Over the past five years, he has received funding from Royal Life Saving – Australia, Surf Life Saving Australia, and Meta Inc.

    – ref. Get big or die trying: social media is driving men’s use of steroids. Here’s how to mitigate the risks – https://theconversation.com/get-big-or-die-trying-social-media-is-driving-mens-use-of-steroids-heres-how-to-mitigate-the-risks-253110

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: 1 trillion species, 3 billion years: how we used AI to trace the evolution of bacteria on Earth

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Ben Woodcroft, Associate Professor of Microbial Informatics, Queensland University of Technology

    Association of two Cyanobacteria (Oscillatoria sp. and Chroococcus sp.). Ekky Ilham/Shutterstock

    There are roughly a trillion species of microorganisms on Earth – the vast majority of which are bacteria.

    Bacteria consist of a single cell. They do not have bones and are not like big animals that leave clear signs in the geological record, which thankful palaeontologists can study many millions of years later.

    This has made it very hard for scientists to establish a timeline of their early evolution. But with the help of machine learning, we have been able to fill in many of the details. Our new research, published today in Science, also reveals some bacteria developed the ability to use oxygen long before Earth became saturated with it roughly 2.4 billion years ago.

    A monumental event in Earth’s history

    About 4.2 billion years ago, the Moon formed. Violently. A Mars-size object collided with Earth, turning its surface into molten rock. If life existed before this cataclysm, it was probably destroyed.

    After that, the current ancestors of all living beings appeared: single-celled microbes. For the first 80% of life’s history, Earth was inhabited solely by these microbes.

    Nothing in biology makes sense except in the light of evolution, as evolutionary biologist Theodosius Dobzhansky famously said in 1973. But how did the evolution of life proceed through the early history of Earth?

    Comparing DNA sequences from the wonderful diversity of life we see today can tell us how different groups relate to each other. For instance, we humans are more closely related to mushrooms than we are to apple trees. Likewise, such comparisons can tell us how different groups of bacteria are related to each other.

    But comparison of DNA sequences can only take us so far. DNA comparisons do not say when in Earth’s history evolutionary events took place. At one point in time, an organism reproduced two offspring. One of them gave rise to mushrooms, the other to humans (and lots of other species too).

    One thing geology teaches us about is the existence of another monumental event in the history of Earth, 2.4 billion years ago. At that time, the atmosphere of the Earth changed dramatically. A group of bacteria called the cyanobacteria invented a trick that would alter the story of life forever: photosynthesis.

    Harvesting energy from the sun powered their cells. But it also generated an inconvenient waste product, oxygen gas.

    Over the course of millions of years, oxygen in the atmosphere slowly accumulated. Before this “Great Oxidation Event”, Earth contained almost no oxygen, so life was not ready for it. In fact, to uninitiated bacteria, oxygen is a poisonous gas, and so its release into the atmosphere probably caused a mass extinction. The surviving bacteria either evolved to use oxygen, or retreated into the recesses of the planet where it doesn’t penetrate.

    The bacterial tree of life

    The Great Oxidation Event is especially interesting for us not only because of its impact in the history of life, but also because it can be given a clear date. We know it happened around 2.4 billion years ago – and we also know most bacteria that adapted to oxygen had to live after this event. We used this information to layer on dates to the bacterial tree of life.

    We started by training an artificial intelligence (AI) model to predict whether a bacteria lives with oxygen or not from the genes it has. Many bacteria we see today use oxygen, such as cyanobacteria and others that live in the ocean. But many do not, such as the bacteria that live in our gut.

    As far as machine learning tasks go, this one was quite straightforward. The chemical power of oxygen markedly changes a bacteria’s genome because a cell’s metabolism becomes organised around oxygen use, and so there are many clues in the data.

    We then applied our machine learning models to predict which bacteria used oxygen in the past. This was possible because modern techniques allow us to estimate not only how the species we see today are related, but also which genes each ancestor carried in its genome.

    There are roughly one trillion species of microorganisms on Earth – the vast majority of which are bacteria.
    GSFC/NASA

    A surprising twist

    By using the planet-wide geological event of the Great Oxidation Event effectively as a “fossil” calibration point, our approach produced a detailed timeline of bacterial evolution.

    Combining results from geology, paleontology, phylogenetics and machine learning, we were able to refine the timing of bacterial evolution significantly.

    Our results also revealed a surprising twist: some bacterial lineages capable of using oxygen existed roughly 900 million years before the Great Oxidation Event. This suggests these bacteria evolved the ability to use oxygen even when atmospheric oxygen was scarce.

    Remarkably, our findings indicated that cyanobacteria actually evolved the ability to use oxygen before they developed photosynthesis.

    This framework not only reshapes our understanding of bacterial evolutionary history but also illustrates how life’s capabilities evolved in response to Earth’s changing environments.

    Ben Woodcroft receives funding from the ARC.

    Adrián A. Davín does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

    – ref. 1 trillion species, 3 billion years: how we used AI to trace the evolution of bacteria on Earth – https://theconversation.com/1-trillion-species-3-billion-years-how-we-used-ai-to-trace-the-evolution-of-bacteria-on-earth-253720

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: 5 years on from its first COVID lockdown, NZ faces hard economic choices – but rebuilding trust must come first

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Dennis Wesselbaum, Associate Professor, Department of Economics, University of Otago

    Phil Walter/Getty Images

    Five years after New Zealand’s first COVID-19 lockdown, it is clear there will be no going back to the pre-pandemic “normal”.

    The pandemic amplified existing fractures and inequities in New Zealand and elsewhere. It also revealed new fissures in society.

    The early effects of the pandemic were clear. There were lockdowns, economic downturns, disrupted education and public health challenges. But as the country moves further into the post-pandemic era, the true consequences of the government’s emergency measures have become more evident.

    Work became flexible – for some

    The shift to flexible work has improved work-life balance and productivity for some.

    But its impact has been uneven. Many remote workers, especially parents, have reported worsened mental health due to social isolation and blurred work-life boundaries.

    Working from home can also lead to overwork and stress. The lack of in-person environments has hindered on-the-job training, particularly for younger employees. Managers have also struggled with monitoring performance and building team culture.

    The pandemic fundamentally changed how New Zealanders work, shop, study and interact with each other.
    Lakeview Images/Shutterstock

    Shopping shifted online

    The pandemic shifted consumer behaviour towards increased online spending. Small and medium-sized businesses rapidly adapted by launching online platforms or boosting their digital presence.

    By 2021, there was a 52% growth in online spending compared to 2019.

    This digital shift helped many businesses survive during lockdowns. But it also created a competitive landscape that favoured those who could invest in a strong online presence.

    Urban centres have continued to see a decline in foot traffic, affecting traditional stores. This may lead to a permanent change in city layouts.

    Hard trade-offs after big spending

    The effect of COVID-19 related monetary and fiscal policy responses continue to have a lasting impact on the economy.

    To reduce the effects of the immediate downturn caused by the pandemic response, the government introduced several stimulus packages, including wage subsidies and NZ$3 billion for “shovel ready” infrastructure projects.

    These measures were essential in maintaining economic stability, given the pandemic and pandemic-related policies. But this persistent stimulus injected cash into a country already struggling with efficiency and productivity.

    This move contributed to rising inflation. Higher interest rates followed, raising borrowing costs and leading to a recession and stagflation (a mix of low growth and rising inflation).

    What made things worse was that this fiscal stimulus was debt-financed, raising questions about whether it was fiscally sustainable.

    In the post-pandemic period, policymakers have faced the delicate task of balancing economic recovery with the need to reduce debt levels over time. This requires careful adjustments, either via tax increases or reductions in spending.

    The government has actively sought to reduce spending, especially on low-value programs (such as cutting contractor and consultant spending) and non-essential spending (for example, cuts to public sector back-office functions). It’s also targeted “fiscal adjustments”, such as delaying or phasing some infrastructure projects or adjusting the timing of capital expenditure. Overall, their policy-mix appears to be right for the current economic environment.

    In the long-run, the high debt levels may limit the government’s ability to respond to future crises or invest in other critical areas such as infrastructure, education and healthcare.

    The need to manage inflation and debt simultaneously has necessitated difficult trade-offs. This could potentially influence future government priorities and policy decisions.

    In March 2020, New Zealand entered its first lockdown in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Five years on, the country is still feeling the effect of the former government’s policies.
    Mark Mitchell/Getty Images

    Falling trust in institutions

    The pandemic highlighted the importance of trust in government, science and media. Early on, New Zealanders supported the government’s measures, benefiting from high levels of trust in politicians, scientists and journalists.

    However, with prolonged lockdowns in cities such as Auckland and the imposition of vaccine mandates, cracks began to appear in this trust. This contributed to resistance against some policies, even non-COVID related ones, and an erosion of trust.

    Nowhere was this more evident than the 2022 anti-COVID-19 vaccine mandate protests that resulted in the occupation of parliament grounds.

    This erosion of trust has far-reaching consequences. For example, we have already seen a drop in childhood immunisation rates with concerns about measles and other preventable diseases resurfacing.

    This distrust can have long-term implications for future policy responses across various sectors, potentially affecting areas such as public health, economic growth, trade and social cohesion.

    Risks of entrenching inequality

    The long-term impact of COVID-19 policies on inequalities in education, unemployment and health, to name a few, is likely to persist well beyond the immediate recovery.

    In education, the shift to online learning during the lockdowns exposed deep inequalities in access to technology, digital literacy and home learning environments, particularly for lower-income students. Over time, these disparities could affect future career opportunities and limit social mobility for marginalised groups.

    The shift towards more digital and remote work models may further disadvantage those that don’t have the skills or resources to participate in these new economies, entrenching existing inequality.

    Given that socioeconomic status is an important determinate of health outcomes, the former effects could result in increased physical and mental health inequalities in the long-run.

    The long tail of the pandemic

    In essence, the pandemic has amplified existing vulnerabilities. But it has also revealed emerging fissures between those who have the capacity to adapt to the new digital world, and those that don’t.

    It is not enough for New Zealand to simply move on from the pandemic-era policies. Policymakers need to address the consequences of both COVID-19 and the decisions made in responses to the health emergency.

    At an economic level, the government needs to embrace policies that will increase the productivity and efficiency of the economy.

    But five years on from the pandemic, it is clear that rebuilding trust in institutions is vital. Clear communication, transparency and true expert involvement will help restore public confidence – helping the country to truly move on from the global pandemic.

    The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

    – ref. 5 years on from its first COVID lockdown, NZ faces hard economic choices – but rebuilding trust must come first – https://theconversation.com/5-years-on-from-its-first-covid-lockdown-nz-faces-hard-economic-choices-but-rebuilding-trust-must-come-first-252478

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-OSI Global: World Affairs Briefing: World considers response to Trump’s tariffs – and Israel launches new Gaza offensive

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Sam Phelps, Commissioning Editor, International Affairs

    This article was first published in The Conversation UK’s World Affairs Briefing email newsletter. Sign up to receive weekly analysis of the latest developments in international relations, direct to your inbox.

    Donald Trump has announced a massive package of trade tariffs on some of America’s largest trading partners. In a speech on the White House lawn, Trump said that America had been “looted, pillaged and raped” by these countries for decades, adding that “in many cases, the friend is worse than the foe”.

    Trump claims that April 2, which he has called “liberation day”, will “forever be remembered as the day American industry was reborn”. The tariffs include 20% on imports from the EU, 24% on those from Japan, 27% for India, and 34% for China. The UK got off comparatively lightly, with tariffs of 10%.

    Renaud Foucart, a senior lecturer in economics at Lancaster University, explores how the world may react. In his view, there are three possible scenarios.



    Read more:
    How the UK and Europe could respond to Trump’s ‘liberation day’ tariffs

    First, countries may seek to forge trade deals with the US that, as Foucart puts it, “give Trump enough rope to climb down”. This is the approach favoured by British prime minister Keir Starmer. But it does send the message that the US can obtain concessions from its international partners by bullying them.

    Sign up to receive our weekly World Affairs Briefing newsletter from The Conversation UK. Every Thursday we’ll bring you expert analysis of the big stories in international relations.

    Second, countries may retaliate. Whether through reciprocal tariffs or tools like the European Commission’s “anti-coercion instrument”, the goal will be to force the US to back down. If this scenario plays out, new modelling by Niven Winchester of Auckland University of Technology suggests it is probably the US that stands to lose the most, while some countries may actually gain.



    Read more:
    New modelling reveals full impact of Trump’s ‘Liberation Day’ tariffs – with the US hit hardest

    Third, in what is the most dramatic scenario, we may see a reorganisation of the world order that more or less avoids the US. This would take the world to uncharted economic and political territories.

    A renewed offensive

    Meanwhile, Israeli officials have announced a major expansion of military operations in Gaza. In a statement released on Wednesday, Israel’s defence minister, Israel Katz, said that “troops will move to clear areas of terrorists and infrastructure, and seize extensive territory that will be added to the state of Israel’s security areas”.

    The country’s prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, later confirmed the plans. In a video message, he announced that Israel would be building a new security corridor called the “Morag Route” to “divide up” the Gaza Strip. Netanyahu says carving Gaza will add pressure on Hamas to return the remaining 59 hostages.

    We spoke to Scott Lucas, a Middle East expert at University College Dublin and a regular contributor to our coverage of the war in Gaza, about Israel’s renewed offensive and some of the other key issues involved.

    In his view, the resumption of the ground offensive in Gaza was largely inevitable once Netanyahu’s government refused to move from phase one of the ceasefire to phase two. The second phase would have involved the establishment of a permanent ceasefire and a complete Israeli military withdrawal. This, as Lucas explains, was never going to be agreed by Netanyahu.

    “Beyond his personal opposition to the requisite Israeli military withdrawal from Gaza, powerful hard-right ministers in his government had made clear that their acceptance of phase one was conditioned on no phase two and on a return to military operations,” Lucas writes. Netanyahu’s political survival depends on the continuation of the war.



    Read more:
    Why is Israel expanding its offensive in Gaza and what does it mean for the Middle East? Expert Q&A

    But according to Leonie Fleischmann, a senior lecturer in international politics at City St George’s, University of London, the decision to launch another ground offensive in Gaza remains a high-risk strategy.

    Netanyahu is already unpopular among many Israeli citizens, as is the continued assault on Gaza. And his recent attempts to bend Israel’s legal system to his will by pushing through a law that would give the government the power to appoint new members of the supreme court have certainly not endeared him to many.

    The move has the potential to undermine the country’s system of checks and balances which, as in many western democracies, rests largely on the separation of powers. But in Fleischmann’s view, it was not unexpected.

    Netanyahu has done anything he can to try to gain control of the country’s judiciary over the past few years. He was charged with bribery, fraud and breach of trust in 2019, which he denies, and has consistently sought to delay legal proceedings.

    It remains to be seen whether pressure from the Israeli public can check Netanyahu’s power. Widespread unrest over the weekend caused Netanyahu to pause plans for judicial reform, though he has maintained that the overhaul is still needed.



    Read more:
    As Israel begins another assault in Gaza, Netanyahu is fighting his own war against the country’s legal system

    Elsewhere, we have reported on the recent endorsement of Trump’s policies by Aleksandr Dugin, who is sometimes referred to as “Putin’s brain” because of his ideological influence on Russian politics.

    “Trumpists and the followers of Trump will understand much better what Russia is, who Putin is and the motivations of our politics,” Dugin said in an interview with CNN on March 30.

    His endorsement should be a warning of the disruptive nature of the Trump White House, says Kevin Riehle of Brunel University of London.



    Read more:
    ‘Putin’s brain’: Aleksandr Dugin, the Russian ultra-nationalist who has endorsed Donald Trump

    And China may be making preparations for an invasion of Taiwan. As naval history expert Matthew Heaslip of the University of Portsmouth reports, a handful of so-called Shuiqiao barges were filmed at a beach in China’s Guangdong province in March.

    The barges, the name of which translates to “water bridge”, were working together to form a relocatable bridge to enable the transfer of vehicles, supplies and people between ship and shore.

    Heaslip points out that, as there is no obvious commercial role for such large vessels, the most likely purpose is for landing armed forces during amphibious operations. But, as he reassures in this piece, their appearance does not guarantee that a Chinese invasion of Taiwan is imminent.



    Read more:
    What these new landing barges can tell us about China’s plans to invade Taiwan

    There are reported to be three completed prototype landing barges ready for deployment and three under construction. This would offer just one or two beach bridges, which would be of minimal value in a major invasion.

    World Affairs Briefing from The Conversation UK is available as a weekly email newsletter. Click here to get updates directly in your inbox.

    – ref. World Affairs Briefing: World considers response to Trump’s tariffs – and Israel launches new Gaza offensive – https://theconversation.com/world-affairs-briefing-world-considers-response-to-trumps-tariffs-and-israel-launches-new-gaza-offensive-253647

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: How a lone judge can block a Trump order nationwide – and why, from DACA to DOGE, this judicial check on presidents’ power is shaping how the government works

    Source: The Conversation – USA – By Cassandra Burke Robertson, Professor of Law and Director of the Center for Professional Ethics, Case Western Reserve University

    The Trump administration has asked the Supreme Court to limit judges’ power to issue what legal experts call ‘nationwide preliminary injunctions.’ Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images

    When presidents try to make big changes through executive orders, they often hit a roadblock: A single federal judge, whether located in Seattle or Miami or anywhere in between, can stop these policies across the entire country.

    These court orders have increasingly become a political battleground, increasingly sought by both Republicans and Democrats to fight presidential policies they oppose.

    This explains why the Trump administration recently asked the Supreme Court to limit judges’ power to issue what legal experts call “nationwide preliminary injunctions.” Congress also held hearings on curtailing judges’ ability to issue the injunctions.

    But what exactly are these injunctions, and why do they matter to everyday Americans?

    Immediate, irreparable harm

    When the government creates a policy that might violate the Constitution or federal law, affected people can sue in federal court to stop it. While these lawsuits work their way through the courts – a process that often takes years – judges can issue what are called “preliminary injunctions” to temporarily pause the policy if they determine it might cause immediate, irreparable harm.

    A “nationwide” injunction – sometimes called a “universal” injunction – goes further by stopping the policy for everyone across the country, not just for the people who filed the lawsuit.

    Importantly, these injunctions are designed to be temporary. They merely preserve the status quo until courts can fully examine the case’s merits. But in practice, litigation proceeds so slowly that executive actions blocked by the courts often expire when successor administrations abandon the policies.

    Legislation introduced by GOP Sen. Chuck Grassley would ban judges from issuing most nationwide injunctions.
    Sen. Chuck Grassley office

    More executive orders, more injunctions

    Nationwide injunctions aren’t new, but several things have made them more contentious recently.

    First, since a closely divided and polarized Congress rarely passes major legislation anymore, presidents rely more on executive orders to get substantive things done. This creates more opportunities to challenge presidential actions in court.

    Second, lawyers who want to challenge these orders have gotten better at “judge shopping” – filing cases in districts where they’re likely to get judges who agree with their client’s views.

    Third, with growing political division, both parties aim to use these injunctions more aggressively whenever the other party controls the White House.

    Affecting real people

    These legal fights have tangible consequences for millions of Americans.

    Take DACA, the common name for the program formally called Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, which protects about 500,000 young immigrants from deportation. For more than 10 years, these young immigrants, known as “Dreamers,” have faced constant uncertainty.

    That’s because, when President Barack Obama created DACA in 2012 and sought to expand it via executive order in 2015, a Texas judge blocked the expansion with a nationwide injunction. When Trump tried to end DACA, judges in California, New York and Washington, D.C. blocked that move. The program, and the legal challenges to it, continued under President Joe Biden. Now, the second Trump administration faces continued legal challenges over the constitutionality of the DACA program.

    More recently, judges have used nationwide injunctions to block several Donald Trump policies. Three different courts stopped the president’s attempt to deny citizenship to babies born to mothers who lack legal permanent residency in the United States. Judges have also temporarily blocked Trump’s efforts to ban transgender people from serving in the military and to freeze some federal funding for a variety of programs.

    While much of the current debate focuses on presidential policies, nationwide injunctions have also blocked congressional legislation.

    The Corporate Transparency Act, passed in 2021 and originally scheduled to go into effect in 2024, combats financial crimes by requiring businesses to disclose their true owners to the government. A Texas judge blocked this law in 2024 after gun stores challenged it.

    In early 2025, the Supreme Court allowed the law to take effect, but the Trump administration announced it simply wouldn’t enforce it – showing how these legal battles can become political power struggles.

    A polarized Congress rarely passes major legislation anymore, so presidents – including Donald Trump – have relied on executive orders to get things done.
    Christopher Furlong/Getty Images

    Too much power or necessary protection?

    Some critics say nationwide injunctions give too much power to a single judge. If lawyers can pick which judges hear their cases, this raises serious questions about fairness.

    Supporters argue that these injunctions protect important rights. For example, without nationwide injunctions in the citizenship cases, babies born to mothers without legal permanent residency would be American citizens in some states but not others – an impossible situation.

    Congress is considering legislation to limit judges’ ability to grant nationwide injunctions.

    The Trump administration has also tried to make it expensive and difficult to challenge its policies in court. In March 2025, Trump ordered government lawyers to demand large cash deposits – called “security bonds” – from anyone seeking an injunction. Though these bonds are already part of existing court rules, judges usually set them at just a few hundred dollars or waive them entirely when people raise constitutional concerns.

    Under the new policy, critics worry that “plaintiffs who sue the government could be forced to put up enormous sums of money in order to proceed with their cases.”

    Another way to address the concerns about a single judge blocking government action would be to require a three-judge panel to hear cases involving nationwide injunctions, requiring at least two of them to agree. This is similar to how courts handled major civil rights cases in the 1950s and 1960s.

    My research on this topic suggests that three judges working together would be less likely to make partisan decisions, while still being able to protect constitutional rights when necessary. Today’s technology also makes it easier for judges in different locations to work together than it was decades ago.

    As the Supreme Court weighs in on this debate, the outcome will affect how presidents can implement policies and how much power individual judges have to stop them. Though it might seem like a technical legal issue, it will shape how government works for years to come – as well as the lives of those who live in the U.S.

    Cassandra Burke Robertson does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

    – ref. How a lone judge can block a Trump order nationwide – and why, from DACA to DOGE, this judicial check on presidents’ power is shaping how the government works – https://theconversation.com/how-a-lone-judge-can-block-a-trump-order-nationwide-and-why-from-daca-to-doge-this-judicial-check-on-presidents-power-is-shaping-how-the-government-works-252556

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: Blue Origin’s all-female space flight urges women to shoot for the stars – but astronaut memoirs reveal the cost of being exceptional

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Jasleen Chana, PhD Candidate, Science and Technology Studies, UCL

    For the first time since Russian cosmonaut Valentina Tereshkova’s solo flight in 1963, a spacecraft will enter orbit with only women aboard. Blue Origin’s all-female space flight crew, which includes popstar Katy Perry, is set to take off this spring.

    Jeff Bezos’ crew is assembled from successful and well-known women, also including television presenter Gayle King, producer Kerianne Flynn, former Nasa scientist Aisha Bowe, civil rights activist Amanda Nguyen and journalist Lauren Sanchez. Promotional material for the flight, claims that Perry “hopes her journey encourages her daughter and others to reach for the stars, literally and figuratively”.

    The glamorous optics of this spaceflight are supposedly designed to encourage women to strive for their dreams. The glossy narrative tells others that they can be just like these extraordinary women. Yet, behind this aspirational ideal, there is a more problematic story regarding successful women in science and their roles in public.

    My PhD research examines memoirs written by women astronauts. They construct appealing depictions of women who are successful and exceptional. But in practice their success stories are nigh on impossible for ordinary women to emulate.

    Looking for something good? Cut through the noise with a carefully curated selection of the latest releases, live events and exhibitions, straight to your inbox every fortnight, on Fridays. Sign up here.

    This is epitomised in astronaut Catherine Coleman’s reaction to wearing a spacesuit designed for men. In her 2024 memoir, she wrote: “Most of the time, I took the approach that if the suit didn’t fit, I would simply wear it anyway – and wear it well. Wear it better than anyone expected.”

    Mae Carol Jemison was the first black woman to travel to space.
    Nasa

    As this quote shows, women who have travelled to space tend to construct themselves as having worked exceptionally hard to deny the norms of what is expected of them and to offset systemic biases.

    From the outset of her memoir, Coleman emphasises that she’s always had to be an “exception” from the rest of humanity, which feels alienating. But she also consistently suggests that her life was destined to be this way. “Space felt like home to me,” she says, tacitly acknowledging that she was always meant to be there.

    Jemison, who was the first African American woman in space, also expresses this sense of destiny in her 2001 memoir. “I perched quietly, looking out of the windows on the flight deck,” she writes. “Strange, but I always knew I’d be here. Looking down and all around me, seeing the Earth, the moon, and the stars, I just felt like I belonged.”

    The crew set to board the Blue Origin flight want to be storytellers in the same way that women astronauts are in their memoirs. But the well-known members of its crew are a reminder that hard work is only part of this particular story – fortune and privilege also play a part.

    Eileen Collins was the first woman to pilot and command a space shuttle. In her 2021 memoir, she details the pressures and expectations of working in a male-dominated field. She found that it exacerbated already tricky decision-making and the need to perform critical actions correctly.

    When she says “current and future women pilots are counting on me to do a perfect job up here,” she exemplifies the harsh scrutiny that women astronauts are often subject to when they are the first of their gender.

    Behind the cover

    The issue with popular scientific memoirs is that they are consistently marketed as honest and truthful works. These books promise to reveal who the astronaut actually is, but they are, in fact, carefully curated images of the women they portray.

    So while they intend to motivate and inspire others, the memoirs don’t always do so in a totally honest way. This draws a parallel with the Blue Origin flight.

    Perry discusses her space flight.

    Many of these narratives seek to rewrite past stereotypes of scientists while also functioning as a response to the contemporary appetite for memoirs that reveal the interior emotional world of their subjects. For example, Kathryn Sullivan discusses “wrestling” with visceral “pangs” of pain at being unable to launch her mission due to technical issues.

    This concept reflects why there is a fevered public expectation that the Blue Origin flight crew will embark on a perspective-shifting journey and experience “deep emotions from space”.

    While current coverage surrounding the launch frames it as a celebration of collective advancement, the people comprising this spaceflight crew do not reflect most women.

    If the Blue Origin mission is to be a lodestar for a universal feminist narrative, using women’s spaceflight as a measure of progress, then it should also be considered in tandem with the incongruities and uniqueness of women’s experiences. Ultimately, it is important to move away from narratives that inform us that science, spaceflight and success are only synonymous with fame and exceptionalism.

    Jasleen Chana does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

    – ref. Blue Origin’s all-female space flight urges women to shoot for the stars – but astronaut memoirs reveal the cost of being exceptional – https://theconversation.com/blue-origins-all-female-space-flight-urges-women-to-shoot-for-the-stars-but-astronaut-memoirs-reveal-the-cost-of-being-exceptional-251880

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: Consecutive El Niños are happening more often and the result is more devastating – new research

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Zhengyao Lu, Researcher in Physical Geography, Lund University

    El Niño, a climate troublemaker, has long been one of the largest drivers of variability in the global climate. Every few years, the tropical eastern Pacific Ocean seesaws between warm (El Niño) and cold (La Niña) phases. This reshuffles rainfall patterns, unleashing floods, droughts and storms thousands of miles from the Pacific origin.

    The 1997-98 and 2015-16 El Niño events, for instance, brought catastrophic flooding to the eastern Pacific while plunging Africa, Australia and southeast Asia into severe droughts.

    These disruptions don’t just alter weather, but devastate crops, collapse fisheries, bleach coral reefs, fuel wildfires, and threaten human health. The 1997-98 El Niño alone caused an estimated US$5.7 trillion (£4.4 trillion) in global income losses.

    Now, something more alarming is unfolding: both El Niño and La Niña are lingering longer than ever before, which is amplifying their destructive potential.

    Traditionally, El Niño events lasted about a year, alternating with La Niña in an irregular cycle every two to seven years.

    And normally when an El Niño or La Niña event ends, the disturbance to global weather patterns gradually subsides. But when these anomalies persist or re-emerge, the damage compounds and complicates recovery efforts. For instance, a single-year El Niño-driven drought can challenge agricultural systems, but consecutive years of drought could overwhelm them.

    In recent decades, these climate patterns have been persisting longer and recurring more often. A striking example is the 2020-2023 La Niña, a rare “triple-dip” event that lasted for three years. Rather than returning to neutral conditions, these anomalies are prolonging devastation and making recovery increasingly difficult.

    In a recent study, my colleagues and I revealed that multi-year Enso (El Niño-southern oscillation, or both warm El Niño and cold La Niña) events have been steadily increasing over the past 7,000 years, and are now more frequent than ever. This is due to a fundamental shift in Earth’s climate system.

    Clear proof of this shift comes from ancient corals in the central Pacific. These fossilised time capsules preserve a climate record stretching back thousands of years. By analysing oxygen isotopes in their skeletons, scientists can reconstruct past ocean temperatures and Enso activity.

    What we’ve found is remarkable: in the early Holocene (7,000 years ago), single-year Enso events were the norm. But over time, multi-year events have become five times more common.

    To confirm this, we turned to sophisticated computer simulations that replicate Earth’s climate system. The latest advancements in these global climate models allow us to simulate Enso dynamics stretching back hundreds of millions of years, across vastly different climate conditions and continental arrangements.

    In our study, we used a group of models contributed by international research teams to track Enso evolution over millennia, incorporating factors such as ocean circulation, atmospheric conditions, vegetation changes and solar radiation. The results align with coral records: Enso events have grown more prolonged over time.

    Look at the graphs below. On the left are black circles which represent fossilised coral slice records (bigger circles contain data for longer periods). The increasing trend (blue dashed line) shows the ratio of multi-year Enso events to single-year events increasing over the past 7,000 years (a ratio of 0.5 means one multi-year Enso event for every two single-year events). On the right, climate model simulations also show this ratio increasing.

    The increasing trend (blue dashed lines) of mult-year ENSO occurrence over the last 7,000 years. Ancient coral reconstructions on the left, climate model simulations on the right.
    Lu et al. (2025)/Nature

    The role of Earth’s orbit and humans

    This trend of Enso events lasting longer started gradually in the Holocene and is linked to changes in the Pacific Ocean’s thermocline, which is the boundary between warm surface waters and cooler deep waters. Over millennia, the tropical Pacific’s thermocline has become shallower and more stratified, enabling more efficient interaction between the atmosphere and ocean that allow El Niño and La Niña events to persist for longer.

    The primary driver of this stratification has been the slow change in Earth’s orbit, which alters the distribution of solar energy our planet receives. These orbital variations have subtly influenced upper ocean temperatures in the tropical Pacific, nudging Enso towards longer phases. This slow process has unfolded naturally, but now there’s a new and powerful force accelerating it: human-driven climate change.

    Greenhouse gas emissions, predominantly from burning fossil fuels, are turbocharging this trend. The extra heat trapped in the atmosphere and ocean is making conditions even more favourable for persistent Enso events, and possibly more intense. What was once a slow, natural evolution is now accelerating at an alarming rate. Unlike past climate shifts, this one is happening in our lifetimes, with consequences we can already see.

    The implications are staggering. If Enso events keep lasting longer, we can expect more frequent and prolonged droughts, heatwaves, wildfires, floods and back-to-back intense hurricane seasons driven by multi-year Enso. Agriculture, fisheries, water supplies and disaster response systems will face increasing strain. Coastal cities, already struggling with rising seas, could face even more destructive storm surges fuelled by extended El Niño conditions.

    This is less a scientific puzzle than a growing crisis. While we can’t change Earth’s orbit, we can cut carbon emissions, strengthen climate resilience efforts and prepare for more persistent extreme weather. The science is clear: El Niño and La Niña are sticking around longer, and their consequences will be felt across the globe. The time to act is now, before the next multi-year Enso shockwave hits.

    Don’t have time to read about climate change as much as you’d like?

    Get a weekly roundup in your inbox instead. Every Wednesday, The Conversation’s environment editor writes Imagine, a short email that goes a little deeper into just one climate issue. Join the 40,000+ readers who’ve subscribed so far.

    Zhengyao Lu receives funding from the Swedish Research Council, FORMAS and the Crafoord Foundation.

    – ref. Consecutive El Niños are happening more often and the result is more devastating – new research – https://theconversation.com/consecutive-el-ninos-are-happening-more-often-and-the-result-is-more-devastating-new-research-251504

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: As Israel begins another assault in Gaza, Netanyahu is fighting his own war against the country’s legal system

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Leonie Fleischmann, Senior Lecturer in International Politics, City St George’s, University of London

    The Israel Defense Forces has launched a further major ground assault in Gaza – this time with the intention of taking and holding significant amounts of territory as a “security buffer”. This appears unlikely to endear the prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, to many of the families of the remaining 59 Hamas hostages, who may well fear the worst for their loved ones.

    It’s a high-risk strategy on Netanyahu’s part. But the prime minister is already walking a political tightrope as he simultaneously attempts to bend his country’s legal system to his will.

    Thousands of Israelis have taken to the streets to protest the prime minister’s recent attempts to bring the country’s supreme court under government control. The saga started when he sacked the country’s most important spy chief, the head of Shin Bet, Ronen Bar, in mid-March.

    This was the first time a government had dismissed a serving head of Shin Bet, and the supreme court stepped in to freeze the order until it had the chance to hear opposition objections.

    The attorney-general, Gali Baharav-Miara, a vocal critic of Netanyahu, accused the prime minister of ignoring the law. This led the government to pass a no-confidence motion in her as well.

    Israel’s parliament, the Knesset, subsequently passed a law which would give the government the power to appoint new members of the supreme court.

    The move was criticised by the Israel Democracy Institute, which described the new law as a “broader shift toward subordinating legal and security institutions to political authority” in Israel. It certainly has the potential to undermine the country’s system of checks and balances which – as in many western democracies – rests largely on the separation of powers.

    Israel does not have a single written constitution. What it has is a set of “Basic Laws” which provide the rules of governance. Within these are checks and balances, which aim to prevent any one institution or individual from exercising untrammelled control. Putting the make-up of the supreme court into the hands of the government would threaten this basic democratic principle on which Israel has always operated.

    On March 19, Netanyahu posted on X from the prime ministerial account: “In America and Israel, when a strong right-wing leader wins, the leftist Deep State weaponizes the justice system to thwart the people’s will. They won’t win in either place!” He later removed the post and reposted the same thing from his personal account.

    The post linked his efforts to control the judiciary with the Trump administration’s loudly voiced campaign against state barriers to its power.

    But anyone who has followed Netanyahu’s decision-making in recent years will discern a pattern. Since being charged with bribery, fraud and breach of trust in 2019 (which he denies) he has done anything he can to try to gain control of the country’s judiciary – for his own political preservation.

    Netanyahu’s motivations

    At the same time, many critics believe Netanyahu’s conduct of the war in Gaza had been with one eye to prolonging hostilities to delay proceedings in his own trials. Now it appears that the Israeli prime minister is attempting a frontal assault on Israel’s judiciary.

    His decision to sack Bar came as the Shin Bet chief was supervising an investigation into allegations concerning, as he put it in a letter to the cabinet before his sacking: “Qatar’s involvement at the highest levels of Israeli decision-making, including the Prime Minister’s Office.”

    Equally questionable is the attempted ousting of Attorney-General Baharav-Miara, who is overseeing the criminal case against him. Replacing them with more compliant and loyal individuals would help ensure that Netanyahu and the policies of his government are protected.

    All of this drew a strong response from the former consul general of Israel in New York, Alon Pinkas. Writing in the opposition paper Haaretz on March 21, Pinkas argued that Israeli “democracy’s guardrails” are being brought “crashing down fast and furious by Netanyahu’s design”.

    He concluded that the only two remaining checks on Netanyahu’s power are “the supreme court and the Israeli public” – adding that the court can only act when it is permitted. “So the Israeli public becomes the only potentially effective check.”

    An active civil society is an important marker of democracy and my research shows that Israel has a strong history of protest and extra-parliamentary action across a range of social, economic and political issues.

    There has been a continuous stream of anti-Netanyahu protests in Israel since the “black flag protests” in 2020 in opposition to Netanyahu’s continuing in power despite facing serious criminal charges. The protests grew ever stronger, despite COVID safeguarding regulations.

    When the government attempted wide-ranging reforms which many critics feared would fundamentally weaken the independence of the judiciary, hundreds of thousands took to the streets weekend after weekend, forcing the government eventually to shelve its plans.



    Read more:
    Israel protests: Netanyahu delays judicial reforms over fears of ‘civil war’ – but deep fault-lines threaten future of democracy

    Since the start of the war in Gaza, the political focus of protests shifted to broad consensus in calling the government to do everything in its power to ensure the release of the October 7 hostages. Now the protests will focus more centrally back on the considerable public discontent with the prime minister himself.

    It remains to be seen, now, whether Alon Pinkas is right and whether the Israeli public can be an effective check against a leader who appears now to be governing solely in his own interests.

    Leonie Fleischmann does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

    – ref. As Israel begins another assault in Gaza, Netanyahu is fighting his own war against the country’s legal system – https://theconversation.com/as-israel-begins-another-assault-in-gaza-netanyahu-is-fighting-his-own-war-against-the-countrys-legal-system-253568

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: Would you join the resistance if stuck in an authoritarian regime? Here’s the psychology

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Magnus Linden, Associate Professor of Psychology, Lund University

    Female activist protesting with megaphone during a strike with group of demonstrator in background. Jacob Lund/Shuttestock

    Most of us like to believe we would have opposed the rise of Nazism in 1930s Germany. We may even like to imagine that we would have bravely fought for the resistance to Nazism in the 1940s. But would we? Our ability to take a stand may be put to the test as authoritarianism is increasing worldwide.

    All electoral democracies can transform into autocracies. These are governments that restrict political and civil rights, centralise executive power, manipulate elections and minimise the diversity of political views.

    In western democracies, a move toward autocracy is often led by would-be strongmen whose focus is to reinstate traditionalist values and nationalism. They typically target the free media, opponents and stigmatised social groups without moral compunction.

    Moves to deepen autocracy are always resisted, however. Depending on how autocratic a country is, this resistance will differ. Early in the autocratisation process, resistance is common within formal state institutions. It may be expressed in overt actions, including public statements condemning government actions.

    In closed autocracies, however, resistance is exercised more by covert social movements. One reason for this is the personal risk connected to resistance. In Vladimir Putin´s autocratic Russia, for example, political dissenters know they risk being either murdered or imprisoned if they’re caught.

    In the United States, on the other hand, where the new administration has taken steps that increase the level of autocracy, dissonant views may effectively be silenced because of fear of retribution. Many people are scared of losing their jobs or having their companies harmed.

    Psychological profile

    The science about the choices made by those who resist autocratic regimes, and the strategies they apply in resisting, is evolving.

    Interviews with resisters in Myanmar suggest that personal moral commitments, being compassionate and feeling compelled to act when witnessing violations of rights, are all factors motivating resistance.

    These factors are also evident in those who helped Jews survive during the Holocaust. For example, studies suggest that rescuers were more empathic and morally conscious than others. They had essentially been socialised into being ethical in childhood and were also more inclusive of people from other social groups.

    People who join resistance groups also tend to be more open to taking risks. That makes sense: the more driven you are by a need to feel safe, the less likely you are to engage in anything that could jeopardise that – even if your moral compass suggests you should.

    Beyond resisting autocratic steps, research on moral courage in everyday settings shows that believing you can succeed, that you have the necessary knowledge and skills, is an important predictor for intervention when people witness norm violations, whether this means addressing a perpetrator or protecting a victim.

    Leadership characteristics

    That said, it’s not all down to individual followers. No autocratic leader can gain power without influencing their followers. The same is true of resistance: resistance cannot exist without effective leadership.

    Research suggests that followers are influenced by leaders who create a positive ethical climate, which in turn influences their own ethical behaviour.

    For fighting autocracy, one important aspect of this process is to communicate that inclusive moral values, such as universalism (the idea that things like liberty, justice, fraternity and equality should apply to everyone) and benevolence (helping, forgiving, being responsible) are a prominent part of the group’s identity.

    Members of the French resistance group Maquis in La Tresorerie, September 14 1944, Boulogne.

    For example, when the Danish Jews were persecuted by the Nazis in 1943, representatives of morally-grounded institutions, including bodies representing the Protestant clergy and hospital physicians, started to actively resist the regime. They became effective leaders as they were already in jobs perceived to be morally “committed”, and people trusted their judgement.

    Research on nonviolent resistance also shows that strong resistance organisations, and their leaders, tend to embrace diversity among people. And when they are successful, they often include the pillars in society that have the power to disrupt, such as military forces or economic elites.

    Research on the underground railroad, the network of activists helping enslaved people escape to the northern states in America or Canada, has shown that influential church leaders played a crucial role. They refused to follow federal legislation that obliged them to help slave owners capture enslaved people that had escaped.

    Knowing that ethical role models are taking a stand is important for a resistance movement’s followers. Stanley Milgram gave evidence for this in his much-debated psychological obedience studies, showing that 90% of the participants who had been asked to give others electrical shocks stopped immediately if two assistant teachers stopped first.

    Building resistance

    In a world where autocracy is on the rise, how can we foster traits in people that promote appropriate forms of resistance?

    Teaching others about morally courageous figures can work, but heroism is not the key for all learners. The science suggests a number of other – perhaps surprising – objectives which can move ordinary people to stand up for democracy. In particular, educational initiatives that boost contact between different groups may be useful.

    To be able to resist autocratic regimes, and help people who are persecuted under them, we ultimately need empathy for people who are different to ourselves. There’s plenty of research showing that white people who move to more diverse areas, within cities, for example, become less racist.

    So perhaps the more time we spend with people who are unlike us, the more we are growing our potential as resistance fighters.

    We may also want to boost our self-efficacy, or self-confidence. One technique is to repeatedly expose ourselves to situations that evoke fear, but which force us to act courageously, such as standing up to bullies. This is a crucial part of ethical police training, for example.

    Learning about moral values can also help build confidence. Educators who are given the challenge to teach good moral behaviour can do this effectively by focusing on universal principles – rather than those that are based on culture or social class – such as treating others how we wish to be treated.

    These are building blocks for a group identity which favours empathy with all and expectations of good behaviour.

    The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

    – ref. Would you join the resistance if stuck in an authoritarian regime? Here’s the psychology – https://theconversation.com/would-you-join-the-resistance-if-stuck-in-an-authoritarian-regime-heres-the-psychology-252533

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: ‘Doom loops’ are accelerating climate change – but we can break them

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Jack Marley, Environment + Energy Editor, UK edition

    Surasak Jailak/Shutterstock

    Vicious cycles are accelerating climate change. One is happening at the north pole, where rising temperatures caused by record levels of fossil fuel combustion are melting more and more sea ice.

    Indeed, the extent of Arctic winter sea ice in March 2025 was the lowest ever recorded. This decline in sea ice means the Earth reflects less of the Sun’s energy back into space. So, more climate change leads to less sea ice – and more climate change.

    Human behaviour is not immune to this dynamic either, according to a recent report by the International Energy Agency (IEA). It identified another troubling feedback loop: demand for coal rose 1% globally in 2024 off the back of intense heatwaves in China and India, which spurred a frenzy for air-conditioners and excess fuel to power them.

    The need to cool ourselves, and briefly escape the consequences of climate change, is driving more climate change. Thankfully, there are ways to break these cycles and form greener habits. Today, we’ll look at one in particular.

    This roundup of The Conversation’s climate coverage comes from our award-winning weekly climate action newsletter. Every Wednesday, The Conversation’s environment editor writes Imagine, a short email that goes a little deeper into just one climate issue. Join the 40,000+ readers who’ve subscribed.

    The Sun can cool you down

    “As the climate crisis deepens, close to half of the world’s people have little defence against deadly heat,” says Radhika Khosla, an associate professor of urban sustainability at the University of Oxford.



    Read more:
    COP28: countries have pledged to cut emissions from cooling – here’s how to make it happen

    “At the same time, energy demand from cooling – by those who can afford it – could more than double by 2050.”

    If wealthy countries paid the enormous climate finance debt they owe the developing world, it could help finance the closing of this gap. And thankfully, advancements in renewable energy technology mean no one should need to contribute to a spike in fossil fuel use just to keep cool.



    Read more:
    Wealthy nations owe climate debt to Africa – funds that could help cities grow

    “The absurdity of resorting to coal to power air conditioners … is difficult to miss”, say a team of engineers and energy experts at Nottingham Trent University and Coventry University, led by Tom Rogers. They recommend rooftop solar panels instead, which can soak up sunshine during heatwaves and turn it into electricity for air-conditioning units.

    “Rooftop solar can also reduce demand for cooling by keeping buildings in the shade,” the team say. “A study conducted by Arizona State University found that even a modest group of solar panels that shade about half a roof can lead to anything from 2% to 13% reduction in cooling demand, depending on factors such as location, roof type and insulation levels.”



    Read more:
    Rising temperatures mean more air conditioning which means more electricity is needed – rooftop solar is a perfect fit

    Of course, solar panels are less helpful for powering air conditioners in the evening, when lots of people turn them on after work or school.

    “Researchers in Australia have proposed a clever solution to address this imbalance, by programming air-conditioning units to work in tandem with solar systems to pre-cool buildings before people arrive home,” Rogers and his colleagues add.

    There is huge untapped potential for generating electricity from rooftop solar – even in the dreary UK. It could ensure that future heatwaves are a boon for solar energy, not coal power.

    “Consider the possibilities for Nottingham and Coventry, two cities in England’s Midlands where we work,” they say.

    “If Nottingham were to maximise its rooftop potential, all those panels could generate nearly 500 megawatts (MW) of electricity, about the same as a medium-sized gas power plant. Coventry has greater potential, with 700MW.

    “These capacities would equate to nearly one-third of Nottingham’s electricity demand and almost half of Coventry’s – from their rooftops alone.”

    Doom loops

    Installing solar panels on top of buildings worldwide will need massive investment in equipment and training. It will require new means of incentivising the uptake of this technology and, as mentioned earlier, the redistribution of wealth to allow low-emitting but highly vulnerable nations to make the switch.

    But there are likely to be virtuous cycles as well as vicious ones. Once a certain threshold has been crossed, like the price and capacity of batteries or the number of homes with heat pumps installed, “a domino effect of rapid changes” takes effect such that green alternatives swiftly become the established norm.



    Read more:
    Climate ‘tipping points’ can be positive too – our report sets out how to engineer a domino effect of rapid changes

    However, the prospect of harmonising these efforts across borders butts against a trend moving in the opposite direction. As the world warms, relations between nations are becoming more fraught and war, trade tensions and internal strife are obscuring the universal threat of climate change.

    A Trump yard sign during the 2024 election campaign.
    Dlbillings_Photography/Shutterstock

    Climate risk expert Laurie Laybourn and earth system scientist James Dyke, both at the University of Exeter, say that extreme weather in 2022 caused crop failures that made food more expensive and stoked headline inflation rates. Climate-sceptic Donald Trump made hay with these high prices in the 2024 US election.

    “The risk is that this ‘doom loop’ runs faster and faster and ultimately derails our ability to phase out fossil fuels fast enough to avoid the worst climate consequences,” they say.



    Read more:
    A ‘doom loop’ of climate change and geopolitical instability is beginning

    However, Laybourn and Dyke are not wholly pessimistic. History shows that periods of instability and crisis like the one we are living through also provide fertile ground for positive change, they argue, and the chance to accelerate virtuous circles.

    “For example, out of the crises of the interwar period and the devastation of the second world war came legal protections for human rights, universal welfare systems and decolonisation.”

    – ref. ‘Doom loops’ are accelerating climate change – but we can break them – https://theconversation.com/doom-loops-are-accelerating-climate-change-but-we-can-break-them-253457

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: Replacing gas vehicles with electric cars could prevent new cases of childhood asthma

    Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Harshit Gujral, Ph.D. Student, Department of Computer Science, University of Toronto

    Up to one-third of all new asthma cases each year are attributed to the harmful air pollutants that are emitted by gas-powered automobiles.

    To address this, our recent study has found that replacing around half of all gas-powered vehicles with electric vehicles could be sufficient to minimize childhood asthma cases linked to pollution from vehicle exhausts.

    As researchers studying the intersection of transportation, climate change and public health, we wanted to understand whether electric vehicle sales were having any impact on human health. Given the growing electric vehicle market in the United States, we investigated the impact this growth is having on population health.

    We chose childhood asthma as a proxy due to its widespread impact on the population. Around five million American children suffered from asthma in 2019. This statistic hasn’t changed considerably since then.

    Numerous studies have shown that exposure to air pollutants such as nitrogen dioxide and particulate matter, which are emitted from the tailpipe of gas-powered automobiles when they burn fossil fuels, is linked with an increased risk of developing asthma. Our study builds on this by examining the number of gas-powered and electric vehicles on the road, and the number of new childhood asthma cases annually.

    Numerous studies have found a link between gas-powered automobiles and increased asthma risk.
    (Shutterstock)

    Examining vehicle sales

    We used publicly available data on childhood asthma from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Then, we built a burden-of-disease model to isolate new cases of childhood asthma that were linked to traffic-related air pollution. We included data collected between 2013 and 2019 from all 50 U.S. states and the District of Columbia.

    We found that for every 1,000 new gas-powered vehicles sold, there was one new case of childhood asthma. Our research revealed that replacing approximately 21 per cent of these sales with electric vehicles appears to be sufficient to halt rising asthma rates caused by new vehicle sales. However, this number varied depending on the state and various factors — such as population density and the number of existing gas-powered vehicles on the road.

    For instance, in some states, replacing just seven per cent of gas car sales with electric vehicles might be enough to halt rising asthma rates caused by new vehicle sales. But in other states, 42 per cent of new car sales had to be electric vehicles in order to have any impact.

    States with a higher population density and a larger proportion of older, gas-powered vehicles on the road would likely see the greatest health gains from switching to electric vehicles.

    Our findings indicate there’s already a measurable public health benefit being seen in the U.S. from the increase of electric vehicles on the road. This impact would be profound in states with a zero-emission vehicle program, because 63 per cent of all new electric vehicles were sold in states with these mandates between 2013 and 2019.

    In 2021 (at the time of this study), 10 American states had rules promoting electric vehicles, including: California, Connecticut, Massachusetts, Maryland, Maine, New Jersey, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island and Vermont.

    Our findings underscore the urgent need for policies that accelerate the replacement of older, fossil-fuel powered vehicles with electric vehicles. It will also be important for policymakers to find ways of making electric vehicles more accessible for lower-income households, as they’re disproportionately affected by traffic-related air pollution.

    Not the only solution

    We don’t want readers to assume that putting more electric vehicles on the road is the only solution for improving children’s health.

    First, it’s important to note that a reduction in childhood asthma rates only manifests when electric vehicles are sold as replacements for gas-powered vehicles. This means that when people buy an electric vehicle as a second car, it won’t be linked to the same health benefits.

    Second, electric vehicles — as with any other vehicle — still contribute to air pollution emissions in other ways. This is why our research doesn’t point towards completely replacing all gas-powered automobiles with electric vehicles for the sake of public health.

    Replacing half of gas-powered cars with electric vehicles appears to minimize childhood asthma caused by traffic-related air pollution.
    (Shutterstock)

    While a 36-77 per cent fleet share of electric vehicles should minimize the asthma burden due to reducing the amount of nitrogen dioxide emitted from gas-powered automobiles, this doesn’t eliminate all the pollutants that are produced by vehicles.

    For example, particulate matter from brake wear, tire wear and road dust are all linked with adverse health impacts — such as respiratory and cardiovascular illnesses. The actual reduction in pollution also depends on driving behaviours, as plug-in hybrids can operate on both gas and electricity.

    Alternative forms of transportation are still important for reducing the total number of cars on the road and ultimately improving public health.

    For electric vehicles to be truly beneficial, it’s also important to ensure the electricity needed to charge their batteries comes from clean sources. If the electricity comes from coal or other fossil-fuel-based sources, then we’re just moving the pollution from the urban centres to communities living near power plants.

    Other critical limitations of electric vehicle technology include battery recycling, social injustices in acquiring raw materials for battery production and restrictions on the right to repair.

    The bottom line is that while electric vehicles are needed to move away from fossil fuel-based vehicles, they aren’t the whole solution. We need to promote and invest more in public transit and biking infrastructure to improve air quality and public health.

    This research was supported by the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC, RGPIN-2019-07042) and the Data Sciences Institute at the University of Toronto (grant no. DSIDSFY3R1P22).

    Meredith Franklin received funding from NSCERC for this research.

    Steve Easterbrook received funding from NSCERC and UofT DSI for this research.

    – ref. Replacing gas vehicles with electric cars could prevent new cases of childhood asthma – https://theconversation.com/replacing-gas-vehicles-with-electric-cars-could-prevent-new-cases-of-childhood-asthma-252244

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –