NewzIntel.com

Category: Academic Analysis

  • MIL-OSI Global: Supreme Court upholds childproofing porn sites

    Source: The Conversation – USA – By Meg Leta Jones, Associate Professor of Technology Law & Policy, Georgetown University

    The Supreme Court greenlights states’ efforts to block kids from online porn by requiring age verification. AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite

    The U.S. Supreme Court handed down a decision on June 27, 2025, that will reshape how states protect children online. In a case assessing a Texas law requiring age verification to access porn sites, the court created a new legal path that makes it easier for states to craft laws regulating what kids see and do on the internet.

    In a 6-3 decision, the court ruled in Free Speech Coalition Inc. v. Paxton that Texas’ law obligating porn sites to block access to underage users is constitutional. The law requires pornographic websites to verify users’ ages – for example by making users scan and upload their driver’s license – before granting access to content that is deemed obscene for minors but not adults.

    The majority on the court rejected both the porn industry’s argument for strict scrutiny – the toughest legal test that requires the government to prove a law is absolutely necessary – and Texas’ argument for mere rational basis review, which requires only a rational connection between the law’s legitimate aims and its actions. Instead, Justice Clarence Thomas’ opinion established intermediate scrutiny, a middle ground that requires laws to serve important government interests without being overly burdensome, as the appropriate standard.

    The court’s reasoning hinged on characterizing the law as only “incidentally” burdening adults’ First Amendment rights. Since minors have no constitutional right to access pornography, the state can require age verification to prevent that unprotected activity. Any burden on adults is, according to the ruling, merely a side effect of this legitimate regulation.

    The court also pointed to dramatic technological changes since earlier similar laws were struck down in the 1990s and early 2000s. Back then, only 2 in 5 households had internet access, mostly through slow dial-up connections on desktop computers. Today, 95% of teens carry smartphones with constant internet access to massive libraries of content. Porn site Pornhub alone published over 150 years of new material in 2019. The court argued that earlier decisions “could not have conceived of these developments,” making age verification more necessary than judges could have imagined decades ago.

    More importantly for future legislation, the court embraced an “ordinary and appropriate means” doctrine: When states have authority to govern an area, they may use traditional methods to exercise that power. Since age verification is common for alcohol and tobacco, tattoos and piercings, firearms, driver’s licenses and voting, the court held that it’s similarly appropriate for regulating minors’ access to sexual content.

    The key takeaway: When states are trying to keep kids away from certain types of content that kids have no legal right to see anyway, requiring age verification is an ordinary and appropriate way to enforce that boundary.

    Implications for other laws

    This decision could resolve a fundamental enforcement problem in child privacy laws. Current laws like the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act protect children only when companies have actual knowledge a user is under 13. But platforms routinely avoid this requirement by not asking users’ ages or letting them enter whatever age they want. Without age verification, there’s no actual knowledge and thus no privacy protections.

    The Supreme Court’s reasoning changes this dynamic. Since the court emphasized that children lack the same constitutional rights as adults regarding certain protections, states may now be able to require age verification before data collection. California’s Age-Appropriate Design Code and similar state privacy laws would gain substantially more regulatory power under this framework.

    Meanwhile, social media platforms could face more restrictions. Several states have tried to limit how social media platforms interact with minors. Florida recently banned kids under 14 from having social media accounts entirely, while other states have targeted specific features such as endless scrolling or push notifications designed to keep kids hooked.

    The Supreme Court’s reasoning could protect laws that require age verification before kids can use certain platform features, such as direct messaging with strangers or livestreaming. However, laws that try to block kids from seeing general social media content would still face tough legal challenges, since that content is typically protected speech for everyone.

    The decision also supports state laws regulating how minors interact with app stores and gaming platforms. Minors generally can’t enter binding contracts without parental consent in the physical world, so states could require the same online. Proposed legislation such as the App Store Accountability Act would require parental approval before kids can download apps or agree to terms of service. States have also considered restrictions on “loot boxes” – digital gambling-like features – and surprise in-app purchases that can result in massive charges to parents.

    Since states already require an ID to buy lottery tickets or enter casinos, requiring age verification before kids can spend money on digital gambling mechanics follows the court’s logic.

    What comes next?

    But this decision doesn’t give states free rein to regulate the internet. The court’s reasoning applies to content that children have no legal right to access in the first place, specifically sexually explicit material. For most online content such as news, educational materials, general entertainment and political discussions, both adults and kids have constitutional rights to access.

    Laws trying to age-gate this protected content would still likely face the strict scrutiny’s standard and be struck down, but what online content and experiences underage users are constitutionally entitled to is not settled. Many advocates worry that while the “obscene for minors” standard in this case appears legally narrow, states will try to expand it or use similar reasoning to classify LGBTQ+-related educational content, health resources or community support materials as inherently sexual and inappropriate for minors.

    The court also emphasized that even under this more permissive standard, laws still have to be reasonable. Age verification requirements that are overly burdensome, sweep too broadly or create serious privacy problems could still be ruled unconstitutional. The court’s decision in this case gives state lawmakers much more room to effectively regulate how online platforms interact with children, but I believe successful laws will need to be carefully written.

    For parents worried about their kids’ online safety, this could mean more tools and protections. For tech companies, it likely means more compliance requirements and age verification systems. And for the broader internet, it represents a significant shift toward treating online spaces more like physical ones, where people have long accepted that some doors require showing ID to enter.

    Meg Leta Jones 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. Supreme Court upholds childproofing porn sites – https://theconversation.com/supreme-court-upholds-childproofing-porn-sites-260052

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-Evening Report: RFK Junior is stoking fears about vaccine safety. Here’s why he’s wrong – and the impact it could have

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Julie Leask, Professor, School of Public Health, University of Sydney

    The United States used to be a leader in vaccine research, development and policymaking. Now US Secretary of Health Robert F. Kennedy Jr is undermining the country’s vaccine program at the highest level and supercharging vaccine skepticism.

    Two weeks ago, RFK Jr sacked the entire Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices responsible for reviewing the latest scientific evidence on vaccines. RFK Jr alleged conflicts of interest and hand-picked a replacement panel.

    On Wednesday, RFK Jr announced the US would stop funding the global vaccine alliance, Gavi, because he claimed that “when the science was inconvenient today, Gavi ignored the science”. RFK Jr questioned the safety of COVID vaccines for pregnant women, as well as the diphtheria, tetanus and pertussis vaccine.

    On Thursday, when the new Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices met, the person who first drew RFK Jr into vaccine scepticism, Lyn Redwood, shared disproved claims about a chemical called thimerosal in flu vaccines being harmful.

    The undermining of regulation, advisory processes and funding changes will have global impacts, as debunked claims are given new levels of apparent legitimacy. Some of these impacts will be slow and insidious.

    So what should we make of these latest claims and funding cuts?

    Thiomersal is a distraction

    Thiomersal (thimerosal in the the US) is a safe and effective preservative that prevents bacterial and fungal contamination of the vaccine contained in a multi-dose vial. It’s a salt that contains a tiny amount of mercury in a safe form.

    Thiomersal is no longer used as a preservative in any vaccines routinely given in Australia. But it’s still used in the Q fever vaccine.

    Other countries use multi-dose vials with thiomersal when single-dose vials are too expensive.

    In the US, just 4% of adult influenza vaccines contain thiomersal. So focusing on removing vaccines containing thimerosal is a distraction for the committee.

    COVID vaccines in pregnancy prevent severe illness

    On Wednesday, RFK criticised Gavi’s encouragement of pregnant women to receive COVID-19 vaccines.

    A COVID-19 infection before and during pregnancy can increase the risk of miscarriage two- to four-fold, even if it’s only a mild infection.

    Conversely, there is good evidence vaccination during pregnancy is safe and can reduce the chance of hospitalisation of pregnant people and of infants by passing antibodies through the placenta.

    In Australia, pregnant people who have never received a primary COVID-19 vaccine are recommended to have one. However, they are not generally recommended to have booster unless they have underlying risk conditions or prefer to have one. This is due to population immunity.

    COVID-19 vaccine advice should adapt to changes in disease risk and vaccine benefit. It doesn’t mean previous decisions were wrong, nor that vaccine boosters are unsafe.

    RFK’s criticism of COVID-19 vaccines in pregnancy may influence choices individuals make in other countries, even when unvaccinated pregnant women are encouraged to consider vaccination.

    The diphtheria, tetanus and pertussis vaccine is safe

    RFK Jr also questioned the safety of the combined diphtheria, tetanus and pertussis (DTP) vaccine as he announced the withdrawal of US funding support for Gavi.

    In the early 2000s, three community-based observational studies reported a possible association between increased chance of death in infants and use of the DTP vaccine.

    A few subsequent studies also reported associations, with higher risk in girls, prompting a World Health Organization (WHO) review of safety.

    Real world studies are complicated and the data can be difficult to interpret correctly. Often, the very factors that influence whether someone gets vaccinated can also be associated with other health risks.

    When the WHO committee reviewed all the studies on DTP safety in 2014, it did not indicate serious adverse events. It concluded there was substantial evidence against these claims.

    What will de-funding Gavi mean for vaccination rates?

    Gavi, the vaccine alliance, supports vaccine purchasing in low-income countries.

    The US has historically accounted for 13% of all donor funds.

    However, RFK Jr said Gavi needed to re-earn the public trust and “consider the best science available” before the US would contribute funding again.

    Gavi predicted in March that the impact of US funding cuts could result in one million deaths through missed vaccines.

    Could something like this happen in Australia?

    Australia is fortunate to be buffered from these impacts.

    Our vaccine advisory body, the Australian Technical Advisory Group on Immunisation, has people with deep expertise in vaccination. We have robust decision processes that weigh evidence critically and make careful recommendations to government.

    Our governments remain committed to vaccination. The federal government released the National Immunisation Strategy in mid-June with a comprehensive plan to continue to strengthen our program.

    The federal government also announced A$386 million to support the work of Gavi from 2026 to 2030.

    All of this keeps our vaccine policies strong, preventing disease and increasing life expectancy here and overseas.

    But to mitigate the possible influence of the US in Australia, our governments, health professionals and the public need to be ready to rapidly tackle the misinformation, distortions and half-truths RFK Jr cleverly packages – with quality information.

    Julie Leask receives research funding from NHMRC, WHO, US CDC, NSW Ministry of Health. She received funding from Sanofi for travel to an overseas meeting in 2024. She has consulting fees from RTI International and the Task Force for Global Health.

    Catherine Bennett has received honoraria for contributing to independent advisory panels for Moderna and AstraZeneca, and has received NHMRC, VicHealth and MRFF funding for unrelated projects. She was the health lead on the Independent Inquiry into the Australian Government COVID-19 Response .

    – ref. RFK Junior is stoking fears about vaccine safety. Here’s why he’s wrong – and the impact it could have – https://theconversation.com/rfk-junior-is-stoking-fears-about-vaccine-safety-heres-why-hes-wrong-and-the-impact-it-could-have-259986

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-OSI Global: What the Supreme Court ruling against ‘universal injunctions’ means for court challenges to presidential actions

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

    A journalist runs out of the U.S. Supreme Court building carrying a ruling on the last day of the court’s term on June 27, 2025, in Washington, D.C. Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images

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

    But on June 27, 2025, the Supreme Court significantly limited this judicial power. In Trump v. CASA Inc., a 6-3 majority ruled that federal courts likely lack the authority to issue “universal injunctions” that block government policies nationwide. The ruling means that going forward federal judges can generally only block policies from being enforced against the specific plaintiffs who filed the lawsuit, not against everyone in the country.

    The ruling emerged from a case challenging President Trump’s executive order attempting to end birthright citizenship. While three federal courts had blocked the policy nationwide, the Supreme Court allowed it to proceed against anyone who isn’t a named plaintiff in the lawsuits. This creates a legal environment where the same government policy can be simultaneously blocked for some people but enforced against others.

    Crucially, the court based its decision on interpreting the Judiciary Act of 1789 – not the Constitution – meaning Congress could restore this judicial power simply by passing new legislation.

    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 got 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 used 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 Trump policies. Three courts stopped the president’s attempt to deny citizenship to babies born to mothers who lack legal permanent residency in the United States – the cases that led the Supreme Court to limit the reach of injunctions. 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.

    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

    A ruling that Congress could change

    The Supreme Court’s decision in Trump v. CASA was notably narrow in its legal reasoning. The court explicitly stated that its ruling “rests solely on the statutory authority that federal courts possess under the Judiciary Act of 1789” and that it expressed “no view on the Government’s argument that Article III forecloses universal relief.”

    This distinction matters enormously. Because the court based its decision on interpreting a congressional statute rather than the Constitution itself, Congress has the power to overturn the ruling simply by passing new legislation that authorizes federal judges to issue nationwide injunctions.

    The Supreme Court’s majority opinion, written by Justice Amy Coney Barrett, emphasized that universal injunctions “likely exceed the equitable authority that Congress has granted to federal courts” under the Judiciary Act of 1789. The court found these injunctions lack sufficient historical precedent in traditional equity practice.

    However, the three dissenting justices strongly disagreed. Justice Sonia Sotomayor, joined by Justices Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson, focused on the importance of birthright citizenship, explaining that “every court to evaluate the Order has deemed it patently unconstitutional.”

    As a result, the dissent argues, “the Government instead tries its hand at a different game. It asks this Court to hold that, no matter how illegal a law or policy, courts can never simply tell the Executive to stop enforcing it against anyone.”

    Legislative solutions on the table

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

    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.

    What comes next

    With the Supreme Court limiting judges’ ability to issue nationwide injunctions based on an old statute, the ball is now in Congress’ court. Lawmakers could choose to restore this judicial power with new legislation, further restrict it, or leave the current limitations in place.

    Until Congress acts, the legal landscape has fundamentally shifted.

    Future challenges to presidential actions may require either cumbersome class action lawsuits or a patchwork of individual cases – potentially leaving many Americans without immediate protection from policies that courts determine violate the Constitution. But unlike a constitutional ruling, this outcome isn’t permanent: Congress holds the key to change it.

    This is an updated and expanded version of a story originally published on April 3, 2025.

    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. What the Supreme Court ruling against ‘universal injunctions’ means for court challenges to presidential actions – https://theconversation.com/what-the-supreme-court-ruling-against-universal-injunctions-means-for-court-challenges-to-presidential-actions-260040

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: What Danish climate migration drama, Families Like Ours, gets wrong about rising sea levels

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Florian Steig, DPhil Student, Geography and the Environment, University of Oxford

    In the Danish TV drama Families Like Ours, one melancholic line from high-school student Laura captures the emotional toll of climate displacement: “Soon we will vanish like bubbles in a creek.” This seven-part series imagines a near future in which Denmark is being evacuated due to rising sea levels – a government-mandated relocation of an entire population.

    The series challenges the fantasy that wealthy western countries are immune to the far-reaching effects of climate change. Rather than focusing on catastrophic storylines, Families Like Ours portrays the mundane, bureaucratic and affective aspects of relocating a population in anticipation of a creeping crisis: the scramble for visas, the fractures that appear between families, and the inequalities in social and economic capital that shape people’s chances for a new life.

    Yet, the idea that Denmark could soon get submerged is not grounded in science. More worryingly, the narrative of the unavoidable uninhabitability of entire nations and millions of international migrants flooding Europe is misleading, dangerous, and sidelines deeply political questions about adaptation to sea level rise that should be dealt with now.

    The trailer for Families Like Ours.

    Sea levels are rising by a few millimetres a year. That pace is accelerating. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change predicts that, by 2100, sea levels could rise by up to one metre on average. Beyond 2100, sea levels could rise by several metres, although these long-term scenarios are highly uncertain.

    Even in extreme scenarios, these developments would unfold over several decades and centuries. It’s unlikely that permanent submergence of large areas of land will make Denmark uninhabitable.

    Still, sea level rise poses a serious risk to the livelihoods of millions of people living in coastal zones. In the UK, many homes in Norfolk and Fairbourne, Wales, are already at risk from coastal erosion, for instance.

    These changes are subtle. They do not warrant the evacuation of an entire nation, but degrade coastal livelihoods over time. Houses in high-risk areas like these may become uninsurable, devalued or too risky to live in. This will force people to move.

    In addition, sea level rise makes coastal flooding more likely. In European high-income countries, including Denmark, rising waters already threaten coastal communities. Without adaptation, hundreds of thousands of homes in cities such as Copenhagen could be at risk.

    The danger of mass migration narratives

    However, depicting climate change as a driver of uncontrolled mass migration is misleading. Sea level rise will contribute to coastal migration, and state-led relocation is already a reality especially in Africa and Asia. But climate migration predominantly occurs within countries or regions. International migration from climate change impacts is the exception, not the norm.

    To capture these complexities, some researchers prefer the term “climate mobility”. Mobility can be forced or voluntary, permanent or temporary, even seasonal. Some communities and people resist relocation plans and stay put.

    Families Like Ours reinforces longstanding narratives that frame certain parts of the world as destined to become uninhabitable. Even UN Secretary-General António Guterres warned of a “mass exodus of entire populations on a biblical scale” due to sea level rise.

    As a researcher working on climate adaptation, I notice that sea level rise and climate migration are increasingly discussed at the global level. Discussions focus, for example, on the protection of affected populations and continued statehood of nations after their potential submergence. A new global alliance of cities and regions tackling sea level rise called the Ocean Rise & Coastal Resilience Coalition considers a “managed retreat” not only as inevitable but as a rational and desirable adaptation pathway for many cities and regions.

    Scientists have warned that creative storylines highlighting the “uninhabitability” of low-lying countries and regions, such as the Pacific, are not helpful. The mass migration narrative can be used by governments to justify extreme protectionist action and sideline urgent adaptation debates.

    States are not helpless in the face of sea level rise and submergence is not inevitable. As geographer Carol Farbotko and colleagues suggest, “habitability is mediated by human actions and is not a direct consequence of environmental change”. People often develop their own ways of living with rising waters, resisting narratives of submergence. State-led adaptation is possible, but depends on finance, which is unequally distributed.

    People’s migration decisions can seldomly be attributed to just climate impact. A community’s capacity to respond hinges on social, political, economic and demographic factors. Adaptation measures are costly. This raises deeply political questions over who gets to be protected, who is left behind, and how managed retreat can benefit the most affected people and places in a fair way. We need to overcome mass migration myths and start a serious and justice-focused debate about the future of our shorelines.

    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 45,000+ readers who’ve subscribed so far.

    Florian Steig receives funding from the German Academic Scholarship Foundation (Studienstiftung des deutschen Volkes).

    – ref. What Danish climate migration drama, Families Like Ours, gets wrong about rising sea levels – https://theconversation.com/what-danish-climate-migration-drama-families-like-ours-gets-wrong-about-rising-sea-levels-259234

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: Back to the Future at 40: the trilogy has never been remade – let’s hope that doesn’t change

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Daniel O’Brien, Lecturer, Department of Literature Film and Theatre Studies, University of Essex

    It has now been four decades since Marty McFly first hit 88 miles per hour in a time-travelling DeLorean. Robert Zemeckis’s sci-fi adventure blockbuster didn’t just navigate the space-time continuum onscreen (thanks to the flux capacitor). It also found a lasting place in the hearts of its audience.

    Personally, I don’t think I’ve ever heard anyone speak badly about the Back to the Future trilogy (aside from certain cast members, which I’ll touch on later). It has thankfully avoided the common traps of remakes and the sprawling expanded universe trend, which has diluted so many other beloved franchises (yes, Star Wars, Indiana Jones and The Lord of the Rings, I’m talking to you).

    Naturally, the success of Back to the Future has inspired a range of adaptations, including a computer game, an immersive Secret Cinema event, as well as a more recent West End stage musical. But each version stays true to the spirit of the original, reinforcing what feels like an unspoken rule in Hollywood: Back to the Future is off-limits to a cinematic or televised remake.

    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.

    Zemeckis and Bob Gale, who co-wrote the screenplay for all three films, have repeatedly shut down the idea of a fourth instalment, declaring that the trilogy is complete. In fact, aside from a few delightful Back to the Future references in other shows made by the original stars themselves, the only remake you’re likely to come across is BBTF Project 85. It’s a multi-fan-made, shot-for-shot collaboration and true labour of love, created not for profit but out of pure admiration for the original.

    The success of the Back to the Future trilogy can be attributed to several factors, not least the undeniable charisma and chemistry between Michael J. Fox and Christopher Lloyd. The wholesome, inter-generational friendship of their characters is never explicitly explained, but also doesn’t need to be. It simply works. The dynamic between Doc and Marty captures a timeless, heartfelt bond between two generations who respect and learn from each other, much like the relationship between Daniel LaRusso and Mr. Miyagi in The Karate Kid (another trilogy that has since found itself in the rebooted camp).

    The original trailer for Back to the Future.

    Michael J. Fox was the original choice for Marty McFly but due to scheduling conflicts with his role on sitcom Family Ties, production began with Eric Stoltz in the role. Over half the film was shot before Zemeckis made the difficult decision to recast.

    As Stoltz later said in an interview, the change came because he “wasn’t giving the performance [Zemeckis] wanted for his film”. Stoltz, a talented performer, brought a darker, moodier and more intense interpretation to Marty, a version that was replaced by Fox’s lighter, more comedic approach, channelled through his effortless charm.

    Stoltz wasn’t the only cast member to leave Back to the Future with a sense of disappointment. Crispin Glover, who played George McFly, also famously fell out with Zemeckis and Gale over creative differences. One of which was Glover’s objection to the film’s ending that presented Marty’s family being financially wealthier in comparison to the start. Glover felt this idea sent a negative message of money equating to happiness. This artistic clash (and ironically, dispute over salary) ultimately led to him being recast in Back to the Future Parts II and III, with actor Jeffrey Weissman stepping in.

    In the sequels, Weissman wears a facial prosthetic designed from Glover’s likeness from the first film (where George is made to look older). This enraged Glover further, who responded by filing a lawsuit, arguing that the use of his image without consent was illegal.

    He has since been openly critical of Weissman’s “bad performance” and has expressed ongoing frustration that many viewers still mistakenly assume the “bad acting” to be his own. As he notes, this explicitly contrasts with the more obvious recasting of Jennifer Parker (Marty’s girlfriend) performed by Claudia Wells in the first film and later replaced by Elisabeth Shue in the sequels.

    The recasting reflects the first film’s unexpected success. Back to the Future was never intended to have a sequel, but the overwhelming popularity of the original prompted the rapid development of two back-to-back follow-ups released in 1989 and 1990.

    Once again, the film’s success can be credited to the electric chemistry between its leads and the unforgettable music, from Huey Lewis’s Power of Love to Chuck Berry’s “new sound” in Johnny B. Goode, and Alan Silvestri’s hauntingly triumphant score. Silvestri’s music seems to capture the spirit of wide-eyed adventure, nostalgia and wisdom all at once, like a journey through time, composed entirely for the ears, affording the trilogy a sense of timelessness.

    Back to printed media

    Another charm of the Back to the Future trilogy (which stood out to me in a more recent viewing) lies in its use of printed media, which inspired me to create my video essay, Back to Printed Media.

    Back to Printed Media.

    As indicated in the video, Back to the Future begins with the sound and image of clocks before panning to a framed newspaper article, a fitting introduction to how all three instalments use print to convey plot, emotion and shifts across timelines.

    Beyond newspapers, the trilogy gives prominence to photographs, handwritten letters, phone books, a sports almanac, transparent receipts of the future, and even printed faxes (in the future of 2015). This tactile world of ink and paper evokes a deep nostalgia, underscoring the emotional weight of physical communication, something that has steadily faded with the rise of digital screens and indeed the loss of physical touch.

    Doc even comments in the third instalment (when reading a letter from his future self) that he never knew he could write anything so touching.

    In an era where glowing rectangles dominate both our lives and our storytelling, Back to the Future offers a refreshing contrast. It reminds us of the human connection and the need to be with others, packaged in a blockbuster narrative about one of the most universal cinematic themes: finding your way back home.

    As a trilogy, Back to the Future has stood the test of time for four decades, and I’m confident it will continue to resonate with both new and nostalgic audiences well into the future.

    Daniel O’Brien 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. Back to the Future at 40: the trilogy has never been remade – let’s hope that doesn’t change – https://theconversation.com/back-to-the-future-at-40-the-trilogy-has-never-been-remade-lets-hope-that-doesnt-change-259725

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-Evening Report: The sentencing of Cassius Turvey’s killers shows courts still struggle to deal with racism

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Thalia Anthony, Professor of Law, University of Technology Sydney

    Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander readers are advised this article contains names and images of deceased people.

    The brutal homicide of 15-year-old Noongar Yamatji boy, Cassius Turvey, by a group of white men revealed the racial schisms in Western Australian society. Turvey was walking home from school in October 2022 when he was abruptly beaten to death.

    On Friday, the Western Australian Supreme Court sentenced the three perpetrators. Twenty-nine-year-old Brodie Palmer and 24-year-old Jack Brearley were found guilty of murder and sentenced to life imprisonment.

    A third man, 27-year-old Mitchell Forth, was convicted of manslaughter and sentenced to 12 years behind bars.

    This was an opportunity for the Supreme Court to send a strong message against racial violence. While the punishment of the men involved is clear, the role of race, and what legally qualifies as racially motivated crime, is muddier.

    Wrong place, wrong time?

    Racism has been front and centre of the public discussion of this tragedy from the outset.

    Shortly after the 2022 attack, Western Australian Police Commissioner Col Blanch said of the homicide:

    it may be a case of mistaken identity, it may be a case of being in the wrong place at the wrong time.

    This was met with strong condemnation from the First Nations community.

    Rallies in solidarity with Turvey’s family were held across the country, with Gumbaynggirr, Bundjalung, and Dunghutti activist Lizzie Jarrett declaring:

    no black child is ever, ever, ever in the wrong place at the wrong time on their own land.

    Racism at trial

    Over the course of the trial, the court heard Turvey and his peers, a group of Aboriginal high school students, were approached by an angry group.

    This comprised the three men convicted and a woman, 23-year-old Aleesha Gilmore, who was acquitted of homicide, and 21-year-old Ethan McKenzie, who with Gilmore, was convicted of other offences relating to the attack.

    Turvey was chased and Brearly fatally beat him with a metal pole.

    Earlier this year, the trial of the three perpetrators heard arguments by the defendants that the actions were not racially motivated.

    Rather, the defence argued they were acting out of self-defence on the basis that Brearly had his car window smashed a few days prior.

    In contrast, the prosecution brought evidence of a phone call that revealed Brearley was bragging about beating Turvey, stating that “he learnt his lesson”.

    The prosecution argued the homicide was not a personal gripe, but a collective response.

    The prosecution didn’t allege the attack was racially motivated, but it was open to the judge to consider this basis for the homicide.

    At trial, 91 witnesses came forward. Witnesses gave evidence that the accused were using racial slurs.

    This direct racism raises the issue of race as a motive in the attack, and is consistent with evidence of systemic racism in Western Australia.

    The killing of Turvey comes after 14-year-old Elijah Doughty was targeted and killed in Kalgoorlie in 2016.

    Both cases show white male motorists seeking to avenge Aboriginal children for alleged vehicle offences.

    This is reinforced by a penal system in which Aboriginal children are 53 times more likely to be detained than non-Aboriginal children.

    What did the judge say?

    On the morning of the sentence hearings, Cassius Turvey’s mother, who described her son as respected, bright, loving and compassionate, said the killing was a “racially motivated” and based on “discriminatory targeting”.

    This sentiment has been echoed across the country, including by June Oscar, the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander social justice commissioner at the Australian Human Rights Commission, in 2022.

    Chief Justice Peter Quinlan strongly condemned the attacks.

    However, he stated the attack was not racially motivated, despite recognising that the perpetrators were “calling them n-words and black c—ts — you in particular Mr Brearley used language like that”.

    He noted that it creates a “fear” of racial vilification:

    it’s no surprise […] that the kids would think they were being targeted because they were Aboriginal, and the attack would create justifiable fear for them and for the broader community that this was a racially motivated attack.

    This amounts to a message of general deterrence about violence and vigilante behaviour.

    But messages to deter racial targeting and racial violence specifically were omitted from the public safety concerns expressed by the court.

    Making racial violence invisible

    Munanjahli and South Sea Islander professor Chelsea Watego, and colleagues, have remarked that the Australian psyche is more comfortable with an “abstract concern with racism; racism without actors, or rather perpetrators”.

    This, they argue, sanitises racial violence and holds no one responsible.

    The court demonstrated this abstract concern for racism.

    This Supreme Court’s reasoning has set an impossibly high bar for racial vilification, and specifically racial violence, to be identified, denounced and redressed.

    The judgement seems to relegate racism to being an unfortunate and unintended incident of co-existence, rather than willed harm.

    The failure to regard the racial slurs, the targeting of a group of Aboriginal children, and the killing of one of these children, as “racially motivated”, upholds the idea that white people’s racist treatment and crimes against Aboriginal people exist in a vacuum free of a long history of colonial violence, massacres and occupation.

    Thalia Anthony receives funding from the Australian Research Council.

    Matthew Walsh 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. The sentencing of Cassius Turvey’s killers shows courts still struggle to deal with racism – https://theconversation.com/the-sentencing-of-cassius-turveys-killers-shows-courts-still-struggle-to-deal-with-racism-259541

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: The sentencing of Cassius Turvey’s killers shows courts still struggle to deal with racism

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Thalia Anthony, Professor of Law, University of Technology Sydney

    Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander readers are advised this article contains names and images of deceased people.

    The brutal homicide of 15-year-old Noongar Yamatji boy, Cassius Turvey, by a group of white men revealed the racial schisms in Western Australian society. Turvey was walking home from school in October 2022 when he was abruptly beaten to death.

    On Friday, the Western Australian Supreme Court sentenced the three perpetrators. Twenty-nine-year-old Brodie Palmer and 24-year-old Jack Brearley were found guilty of murder and sentenced to life imprisonment.

    A third man, 27-year-old Mitchell Forth, was convicted of manslaughter and sentenced to 12 years behind bars.

    This was an opportunity for the Supreme Court to send a strong message against racial violence. While the punishment of the men involved is clear, the role of race, and what legally qualifies as racially motivated crime, is muddier.

    Wrong place, wrong time?

    Racism has been front and centre of the public discussion of this tragedy from the outset.

    Shortly after the 2022 attack, Western Australian Police Commissioner Col Blanch said of the homicide:

    it may be a case of mistaken identity, it may be a case of being in the wrong place at the wrong time.

    This was met with strong condemnation from the First Nations community.

    Rallies in solidarity with Turvey’s family were held across the country, with Gumbaynggirr, Bundjalung, and Dunghutti activist Lizzie Jarrett declaring:

    no black child is ever, ever, ever in the wrong place at the wrong time on their own land.

    Racism at trial

    Over the course of the trial, the court heard Turvey and his peers, a group of Aboriginal high school students, were approached by an angry group.

    This comprised the three men convicted and a woman, 23-year-old Aleesha Gilmore, who was acquitted of homicide, and 21-year-old Ethan McKenzie, who with Gilmore, was convicted of other offences relating to the attack.

    Turvey was chased and Brearly fatally beat him with a metal pole.

    Earlier this year, the trial of the three perpetrators heard arguments by the defendants that the actions were not racially motivated.

    Rather, the defence argued they were acting out of self-defence on the basis that Brearly had his car window smashed a few days prior.

    In contrast, the prosecution brought evidence of a phone call that revealed Brearley was bragging about beating Turvey, stating that “he learnt his lesson”.

    The prosecution argued the homicide was not a personal gripe, but a collective response.

    The prosecution didn’t allege the attack was racially motivated, but it was open to the judge to consider this basis for the homicide.

    At trial, 91 witnesses came forward. Witnesses gave evidence that the accused were using racial slurs.

    This direct racism raises the issue of race as a motive in the attack, and is consistent with evidence of systemic racism in Western Australia.

    The killing of Turvey comes after 14-year-old Elijah Doughty was targeted and killed in Kalgoorlie in 2016.

    Both cases show white male motorists seeking to avenge Aboriginal children for alleged vehicle offences.

    This is reinforced by a penal system in which Aboriginal children are 53 times more likely to be detained than non-Aboriginal children.

    What did the judge say?

    On the morning of the sentence hearings, Cassius Turvey’s mother, who described her son as respected, bright, loving and compassionate, said the killing was a “racially motivated” and based on “discriminatory targeting”.

    This sentiment has been echoed across the country, including by June Oscar, the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander social justice commissioner at the Australian Human Rights Commission, in 2022.

    Chief Justice Peter Quinlan strongly condemned the attacks.

    However, he stated the attack was not racially motivated, despite recognising that the perpetrators were “calling them n-words and black c—ts — you in particular Mr Brearley used language like that”.

    He noted that it creates a “fear” of racial vilification:

    it’s no surprise […] that the kids would think they were being targeted because they were Aboriginal, and the attack would create justifiable fear for them and for the broader community that this was a racially motivated attack.

    This amounts to a message of general deterrence about violence and vigilante behaviour.

    But messages to deter racial targeting and racial violence specifically were omitted from the public safety concerns expressed by the court.

    Making racial violence invisible

    Munanjahli and South Sea Islander professor Chelsea Watego, and colleagues, have remarked that the Australian psyche is more comfortable with an “abstract concern with racism; racism without actors, or rather perpetrators”.

    This, they argue, sanitises racial violence and holds no one responsible.

    The court demonstrated this abstract concern for racism.

    This Supreme Court’s reasoning has set an impossibly high bar for racial vilification, and specifically racial violence, to be identified, denounced and redressed.

    The judgement seems to relegate racism to being an unfortunate and unintended incident of co-existence, rather than willed harm.

    The failure to regard the racial slurs, the targeting of a group of Aboriginal children, and the killing of one of these children, as “racially motivated”, upholds the idea that white people’s racist treatment and crimes against Aboriginal people exist in a vacuum free of a long history of colonial violence, massacres and occupation.

    Thalia Anthony receives funding from the Australian Research Council.

    Matthew Walsh 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. The sentencing of Cassius Turvey’s killers shows courts still struggle to deal with racism – https://theconversation.com/the-sentencing-of-cassius-turveys-killers-shows-courts-still-struggle-to-deal-with-racism-259541

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: 1 in 3 Tuvaluans is bidding for a new ‘climate visa’ to Australia – here’s why everyone may ultimately end up applying

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Jane McAdam, Scientia Professor and ARC Laureate Fellow, Kaldor Centre for International Refugee Law, UNSW Sydney

    Photo by Fiona Goodall/Getty Images for Lumix

    In just four days, one-third of the population of Tuvalu entered a ballot for a new permanent visa to Australia.

    This world-first visa will enable up to 280 Tuvaluans to move permanently to Australia each year, from a current population of about 10,000. The visa is open to anyone who wants to work, study or live in Australia. Unlike other visa schemes for Pacific peoples, a job offer in Australia is not required.

    While the visa itself doesn’t mention climate change, the treaty that created it is framed in the context of the “existential threat posed by climate change”. That’s why when it was announced, I described it as the world’s first bilateral agreement on climate mobility.

    The Australian government, too, has called it “the first agreement of its kind anywhere in the world, providing a pathway for mobility with dignity as climate impacts worsen”.

    The high number of ballot applications may come as a surprise to many, especially given there were multiple concerns within Tuvalu when the treaty was first announced. Even so, some analysts predicted all Tuvaluans would apply eventually, to keep their options open.

    Tuvalu is one of the world’s smallest countries, covering just 26 square kilometres.
    Hao Hsiang Chen, Shutterstock

    Grabbing the chance

    The visa highlights the importance of creating opportunities for people to move in the context of climate change and disasters. The dangers of rising sea levels are clearly apparent, including coastal flooding, storm damage and water supplies. But there is a lot more at play here.

    For many, especially young families, this will be seen as a chance for education and skills training in Australia. Giving people choices about if, when and where they move is empowering and enables them to make informed decisions about their own lives.

    For the government of Tuvalu, the new visa is also about shoring up the economy. Migration is now a structural component of many Pacific countries’ economies.

    The money migrants send back to their home countries to support their families and communities is known as remittances. In 2023, remittances comprised 28% of GDP in Samoa and nearly 42% of GDP in Tonga – the highest in the world. Currently, Tuvalu sits at 3.2%.

    A long time coming

    Well before climate change became an issue of concern, Tuvalu had been lobbying Australia for special visa pathways. Demographic pressures, combined with limited livelihood and educational opportunities, made it a live policy issue throughout the 1980s and ‘90s. In 1984, a review of Australia’s foreign aid program suggested improved migration opportunities for Tuvaluans may be the most useful form of assistance.

    By the early 2000s, the focus had shifted to the existential threats posed by climate change. In 2006, as then-shadow environment minister, Anthony Albanese released a policy discussion paper called Our Drowning Neighbours. It proposed that Australia create Pacific migration pathways as part of a neighbourly response. In 2009, a spokesperson for Penny Wong, then minister for climate change, stated permanent migration might eventually be the only option for some Pacific peoples.

    When combined with other Pacific pathways to Australia and New Zealand, nearly 4% of the population could migrate each year. This is “an extraordinarily high level”, according to one expert. Within a decade, close to 40% of the population could have moved – although some people may return home or go backwards and forwards.

    How will the new arrivals be received?

    The real test of the new visa’s success will be how people are treated when they arrive in Australia.

    Will they be helped to adjust to life here, or will they feel isolated and shut out? Will they be able to find work and training, or will they find themselves in insecure and uncertain circumstances? Will they feel a loss of cultural connection, or will they be able to maintain cultural traditions within the growing Tuvaluan diaspora?

    Ensuring sound and culturally appropriate settlement services are in place will be crucial. These would ideally be co-developed with members of the Tuvaluan community, to “centralise Tuvaluan culture and values, in order to ensure ongoing dialogue and trust”.

    It has been suggested by experts that a “liaison officer with Tuvaluan cultural expertise and language skills could assist in facilitating activities such as post-arrival programs”, for instance.

    Learning from experience

    There are also many important lessons to be learned from the migration of Tuvaluans to New Zealand, to reduce the risk of newcomers experiencing economic and social hardship.

    Ongoing monitoring and refinement of the scheme will also be key. It should involve the Tuvaluan diaspora, communities back in Tuvalu, service providers in Australia, as well as federal, state/territory and local governments.

    By freeing up resources and alleviating stress on what is already a fragile atoll environment, migration may enable some people to remain in Tuvalu for longer, supported by remittances and extended family networks abroad.

    As some experts have suggested, money sent home from overseas could be used to make families less vulnerable to climate change. It might help them buy rainwater tanks or small boats, or improve internet and other communications. Remittances are also beneficial when they are invested in services that lift the level of education of children or boost social capital.

    Australia is offering ‘climate visas’ to 280 residents of Tuvalu (10 News First)

    Delaying a mass exodus

    It is difficult to know when a tipping point might be reached. For instance, some have warned that if too few people remain in Tuvalu, this could constrain development by limiting the availability of labour and skills. A former president of Kiribati, Teburoro Tito, once told me migration was “a double-edged sword”. While it could help people secure employment overseas and remit money, “the local economy, the local setup, also has to have enough skilled people” – otherwise it’s counterproductive.

    With visas capped at 280 a year – and scope to adjust the numbers if concerns arise – we are still a long way from that point. Right now, the new visa provides a safety net to ensure people have choices about how they respond to climate change. With the visa ballot open until July 18, many more people may yet apply.



    Read more:
    Fresh details emerge on Australia’s new climate migration visa for Tuvalu residents. An expert explains

    Jane McAdam receives funding from the Australian Research Council (ARC) and is the Director of the ARC Evacuations Research Hub at the Kaldor Centre for International Refugee Law, UNSW Sydney.

    – ref. 1 in 3 Tuvaluans is bidding for a new ‘climate visa’ to Australia – here’s why everyone may ultimately end up applying – https://theconversation.com/1-in-3-tuvaluans-is-bidding-for-a-new-climate-visa-to-australia-heres-why-everyone-may-ultimately-end-up-applying-259990

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: 1 in 3 Tuvaluans is bidding for a new ‘climate visa’ to Australia – here’s why everyone may ultimately end up applying

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Jane McAdam, Scientia Professor and ARC Laureate Fellow, Kaldor Centre for International Refugee Law, UNSW Sydney

    Photo by Fiona Goodall/Getty Images for Lumix

    In just four days, one-third of the population of Tuvalu entered a ballot for a new permanent visa to Australia.

    This world-first visa will enable up to 280 Tuvaluans to move permanently to Australia each year, from a current population of about 10,000. The visa is open to anyone who wants to work, study or live in Australia. Unlike other visa schemes for Pacific peoples, a job offer in Australia is not required.

    While the visa itself doesn’t mention climate change, the treaty that created it is framed in the context of the “existential threat posed by climate change”. That’s why when it was announced, I described it as the world’s first bilateral agreement on climate mobility.

    The Australian government, too, has called it “the first agreement of its kind anywhere in the world, providing a pathway for mobility with dignity as climate impacts worsen”.

    The high number of ballot applications may come as a surprise to many, especially given there were multiple concerns within Tuvalu when the treaty was first announced. Even so, some analysts predicted all Tuvaluans would apply eventually, to keep their options open.

    Tuvalu is one of the world’s smallest countries, covering just 26 square kilometres.
    Hao Hsiang Chen, Shutterstock

    Grabbing the chance

    The visa highlights the importance of creating opportunities for people to move in the context of climate change and disasters. The dangers of rising sea levels are clearly apparent, including coastal flooding, storm damage and water supplies. But there is a lot more at play here.

    For many, especially young families, this will be seen as a chance for education and skills training in Australia. Giving people choices about if, when and where they move is empowering and enables them to make informed decisions about their own lives.

    For the government of Tuvalu, the new visa is also about shoring up the economy. Migration is now a structural component of many Pacific countries’ economies.

    The money migrants send back to their home countries to support their families and communities is known as remittances. In 2023, remittances comprised 28% of GDP in Samoa and nearly 42% of GDP in Tonga – the highest in the world. Currently, Tuvalu sits at 3.2%.

    A long time coming

    Well before climate change became an issue of concern, Tuvalu had been lobbying Australia for special visa pathways. Demographic pressures, combined with limited livelihood and educational opportunities, made it a live policy issue throughout the 1980s and ‘90s. In 1984, a review of Australia’s foreign aid program suggested improved migration opportunities for Tuvaluans may be the most useful form of assistance.

    By the early 2000s, the focus had shifted to the existential threats posed by climate change. In 2006, as then-shadow environment minister, Anthony Albanese released a policy discussion paper called Our Drowning Neighbours. It proposed that Australia create Pacific migration pathways as part of a neighbourly response. In 2009, a spokesperson for Penny Wong, then minister for climate change, stated permanent migration might eventually be the only option for some Pacific peoples.

    When combined with other Pacific pathways to Australia and New Zealand, nearly 4% of the population could migrate each year. This is “an extraordinarily high level”, according to one expert. Within a decade, close to 40% of the population could have moved – although some people may return home or go backwards and forwards.

    How will the new arrivals be received?

    The real test of the new visa’s success will be how people are treated when they arrive in Australia.

    Will they be helped to adjust to life here, or will they feel isolated and shut out? Will they be able to find work and training, or will they find themselves in insecure and uncertain circumstances? Will they feel a loss of cultural connection, or will they be able to maintain cultural traditions within the growing Tuvaluan diaspora?

    Ensuring sound and culturally appropriate settlement services are in place will be crucial. These would ideally be co-developed with members of the Tuvaluan community, to “centralise Tuvaluan culture and values, in order to ensure ongoing dialogue and trust”.

    It has been suggested by experts that a “liaison officer with Tuvaluan cultural expertise and language skills could assist in facilitating activities such as post-arrival programs”, for instance.

    Learning from experience

    There are also many important lessons to be learned from the migration of Tuvaluans to New Zealand, to reduce the risk of newcomers experiencing economic and social hardship.

    Ongoing monitoring and refinement of the scheme will also be key. It should involve the Tuvaluan diaspora, communities back in Tuvalu, service providers in Australia, as well as federal, state/territory and local governments.

    By freeing up resources and alleviating stress on what is already a fragile atoll environment, migration may enable some people to remain in Tuvalu for longer, supported by remittances and extended family networks abroad.

    As some experts have suggested, money sent home from overseas could be used to make families less vulnerable to climate change. It might help them buy rainwater tanks or small boats, or improve internet and other communications. Remittances are also beneficial when they are invested in services that lift the level of education of children or boost social capital.

    Australia is offering ‘climate visas’ to 280 residents of Tuvalu (10 News First)

    Delaying a mass exodus

    It is difficult to know when a tipping point might be reached. For instance, some have warned that if too few people remain in Tuvalu, this could constrain development by limiting the availability of labour and skills. A former president of Kiribati, Teburoro Tito, once told me migration was “a double-edged sword”. While it could help people secure employment overseas and remit money, “the local economy, the local setup, also has to have enough skilled people” – otherwise it’s counterproductive.

    With visas capped at 280 a year – and scope to adjust the numbers if concerns arise – we are still a long way from that point. Right now, the new visa provides a safety net to ensure people have choices about how they respond to climate change. With the visa ballot open until July 18, many more people may yet apply.



    Read more:
    Fresh details emerge on Australia’s new climate migration visa for Tuvalu residents. An expert explains

    Jane McAdam receives funding from the Australian Research Council (ARC) and is the Director of the ARC Evacuations Research Hub at the Kaldor Centre for International Refugee Law, UNSW Sydney.

    – ref. 1 in 3 Tuvaluans is bidding for a new ‘climate visa’ to Australia – here’s why everyone may ultimately end up applying – https://theconversation.com/1-in-3-tuvaluans-is-bidding-for-a-new-climate-visa-to-australia-heres-why-everyone-may-ultimately-end-up-applying-259990

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Celebrities, blue jeans and couture: how Anna Wintour changed fashion over 37 years at Vogue

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Jye Marshall, Lecturer, Fashion Design, School of Design and Architecture, Swinburne University of Technology

    After 37 years at the helm, fashion industry heavyweight Anna Wintour is stepping down from her position as editor-in-chief of American Vogue.

    It’s not a retirement, though, as Wintour will maintain a leadership position at global fashion and lifestyle publisher Condé Nast (the owner of Vogue and other publications, such as Vanity Fair and Glamour).

    Nonetheless, Wintour’s departure from the US edition of the magazine is a big moment for the fashion industry – one which she has single-handedly changed forever.

    Fashion mag fever

    Fashion magazines as we know them today were first formalised in the 19th century. They helped establish the “trickle down theory” of fashion, wherein trends were traditionally dictated by certain industry elites, including major magazine editors.

    In Australia, getting your hands on a monthly issue meant rare exposure to the latest European or American fashion trends.

    Vogue itself was established in New York in 1892 by businessman Arthur Baldwin Turnure. The magazine targeted the city’s elite class, initially covering various aspects of high-society life. In 1909, Vogue was acquired by Condé Nast. From then, the magazine increasingly cemented itself as a cornerstone of the fashion publishing.

    Cover of a 1921 edition of Vogue.
    Wikimedia, CC BY

    The period following the second world war particularly opened the doors to mass fashion consumerism and an expanding fashion magazine culture.

    Wintour came on as editor of Vogue in 1988, at which point the magazine became less conservative, and more culturally significant.

    Not afraid to break the mould

    Fashion publishing changed as a result of Wintour’s bold editorial choices – especially when it came to the magazine’s covers. Her choices both reflected, and dictated, shifts in fashion culture.

    Wintour’s first cover at Vogue, published in 1988, mixed couture garments (Christian Lacroix) with mainstream brands (stonewashed Guess jeans) – something which had never been done before. It was also the first time a Vogue cover had featured jeans at all – perfectly setting the scene for a long career spent pushing the magazine into new domains.

    Wintour also pioneered the centring of celebrities (rather than just models) within fashion discourse. And while she leveraged big names such as Beyonce, Madonna, Nicole Kidman, Kate Moss, Michelle Obama and Oprah Winfrey, she also featured rising stars as cover models – often helping propel their careers in the process.

    Wintour’s legacy at Vogue involved elevating fashion from a frivolous runway to a powerful industry, which is not scared to make a statement. Nowhere is this truer than at the Met Gala, which is held each year to celebrate the opening of a new fashion exhibit at the Metropolitan Museum of Art’s Costume Institute.

    The event started as a simple fundraiser for the Met in 1948, before being linked to a fashion exhibit for the first time in 1974.

    Wintour took over its organisation in 1995. Her focus on securing exclusive celebrity guests helped propel it to the prestigious event it is today.

    This year’s theme for the event was Superfine: Tailoring Black Style. In a time where the US faces great political instability, Wintour was celebrated for her role in helping elevate Black history through the event.

    Not without controversy

    However, while her cultural influence can’t be doubted, Wintour’s legacy at American Vogue is not without fault.

    Notably, her ongoing feud with animal rights organisation PETA – due to the her unwavering support for fur – has bubbled in the background since the heydays of the anti-fur movement.

    Wintour has been targeted directly by anti-fur activists, both physically (she was hit with a tofu cream pie in 2005 while leaving a Chloe show) and through numerous protests.

    This issue was never resolved. Vogue has continued to showcase and feature fur clothing, even as the social license for using animal materials starts to run out.

    Fashion continues to grow increasingly political. How magazines such as Vogue will engage with this shift remains to be seen.

    A changing media landscape

    The rise of fashion blogging in recent decades has led to a wave of fashion influencers, with throngs of followers, who are challenging the unidirectional “trickle-down” structure of the fashion industry.

    Today, social media platforms have overtaken traditional media influence both within and outside of fashion. And with this, the power of fashion editors such as Wintour is diminishing significantly.

    Many words will flow regarding Wintour’s departure as editor-in-chief, but nowhere near as many as what she oversaw at the helm of the world’s biggest fashion magazine.

    Rachel Lamarche-Beauchesne has been affiliated with the Animal Justice Party.

    Jye Marshall 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. Celebrities, blue jeans and couture: how Anna Wintour changed fashion over 37 years at Vogue – https://theconversation.com/celebrities-blue-jeans-and-couture-how-anna-wintour-changed-fashion-over-37-years-at-vogue-259989

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: A strange bright burst in space baffled astronomers for more than a year. Now, they’ve solved the mystery

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Clancy William James, Senior Lecturer (astronomy and astroparticle physics), Curtin University

    CSIRO’s ASKAP radio telescope on Wajarri Country. © Alex Cherney/CSIRO

    Around midday on June 13 last year, my colleagues and I were scanning the skies when we thought we had discovered a strange and exciting new object in space. Using a huge radio telescope, we spotted a blindingly fast flash of radio waves that appeared to be coming from somewhere inside our galaxy.

    After a year of research and analysis, we have finally pinned down the source of the signal – and it was even closer to home than we had ever expected.

    A surprise in the desert

    Our instrument was located at Inyarrimanha Ilgari Bundara – also known as the Murchison Radio-astronomy Observatory – in remote Western Australia, where the sky above the red desert plains is vast and sublime.

    We were using a new detector at the radio telescope known as the Australian Square Kilometre Array Pathfinder – or ASKAP – to search for rare flickering signals from distant galaxies called fast radio bursts.

    We detected a burst. Surprisingly, it showed no evidence of a time delay between high and low frequencies – a phenomenon known as “dispersion”.

    This meant it must have originated within a few hundred light years of Earth. In other words, it must have come from inside our galaxy – unlike other fast radio bursts which have come from billions of light years away.

    A problem emerges

    Fast radio bursts are the brightest radio flashes in the Universe, emitting 30 years’ worth of the Sun’s energy in less than a millisecond – and we only have hints of how they are produced.

    Some theories suggest they are produced by “magnetars” – the highly magnetised cores of massive, dead stars – or arise from cosmic collisions between these dead stellar remnants. Regardless of how they occur, fast radio bursts are also a precise instrument for mapping out the so-called “missing matter” in our Universe.

    When we went back over our recordings to take a closer a look at the radio burst, we had a surprise: the signal seemed to have disappeared. Two months of trial and error went by, until the problem was found.

    ASKAP is composed of 36 antennas, which can be combined to act like one gigantic zoom lens six kilometres across. Just like a zoom lens on a camera, if you try to take a picture of something too close, it comes out blurry. Only by removing some of the antennas from the analysis – artificially reducing the size of our “lens” – did we finally make an image of the burst.

    We weren’t excited by this – in fact, we were disappointed. No astronomical signal could be close enough to cause this blurring.

    This meant it was probably just radio-frequency “interference” – an astronomer’s term for human-made signals that corrupt our data.

    It’s the kind of junk data we’d normally throw away.

    Yet the burst had us intrigued. For one thing, this burst was fast. The fastest known fast radio burst lasted about 10 millionths of a second. This burst consisted of an extremely bright pulse lasting a few billionths of a second, and two dimmer after-pulses, for a total duration of 30 nanoseconds.

    So where did this amazingly short, bright burst come from?

    The radio burst we detected, lasting merely 30 nanoseconds.
    Clancy W. James

    A zombie in space?

    We already knew the direction it came from, and we were able to use the blurriness in the image to estimate a distance of 4,500 km. And there was only one thing in that direction, at that distance, at that time – a derelict 60-year-old satellite called Relay 2.

    Relay 2 was one of the first ever telecommunications satellites. Launched by the United States in 1964, it was operated until 1965, and its onboard systems had failed by 1967.

    But how could Relay 2 have produced this burst?

    Some satellites, presumed dead, have been observed to reawaken. They are known as “zombie satellites”.

    But this was no zombie. No system on board Relay 2 had ever been able to produce a nanosecond burst of radio waves, even when it was alive.

    We think the most likely cause was an “electrostatic discharge”. As satellites are exposed to electrically charged gases in space known as plasmas, they can become charged – just like when your feet rub on carpet. And that accumulated charge can suddenly discharge, with the resulting spark causing a flash of radio waves.

    Electrostatic discharges are common, and are known to cause damage to spacecraft. Yet all known electrostatic discharges last thousands of times longer than our signal, and occur most commonly when the Earth’s magnetosphere is highly active. And our magnetosphere was unusually quiet at the time of the signal.

    Another possibility is a strike by a micrometeoroid – a tiny piece of space debris – similar to that experienced by the James Webb Space Telescope in June 2022.

    According to our calculations, a 22 micro-gram micrometeoroid travelling at 20km per second or more and hitting Relay 2 would have been able to produce such a strong flash of radio waves. But we estimate the chance the nanosecond burst we detected was caused by such an event to be about 1%.

    Plenty more sparks in the sky

    Ultimately, we can’t be certain why we saw this signal from Relay 2. What we do know, however, is how to see more of them. When looking at 13.8 millisecond timescales – the equivalent of keeping the camera shutter open for longer – this signal was washed out, and barely detectable even to a powerful radio telescope such as ASKAP.

    But if we had searched at 13.8 nanoseconds, any old radio antenna would have easily seen it. It shows us that monitoring satellites for electrostatic discharges with ground-based radio antennas is possible. And with the number of satellites in orbit growing rapidly, finding new ways to monitor them is more important than ever.

    But did our team eventually find new astronomical signals? You bet we did. And there are no doubt plenty more to be found.

    Clancy William James receives funding from the Australian Research Council.

    – ref. A strange bright burst in space baffled astronomers for more than a year. Now, they’ve solved the mystery – https://theconversation.com/a-strange-bright-burst-in-space-baffled-astronomers-for-more-than-a-year-now-theyve-solved-the-mystery-259893

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-OSI Global: A strange bright burst in space baffled astronomers for more than a year. Now, they’ve solved the mystery

    Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Clancy William James, Senior Lecturer (astronomy and astroparticle physics), Curtin University

    CSIRO’s ASKAP radio telescope on Wajarri Country. © Alex Cherney/CSIRO

    Around midday on June 13 last year, my colleagues and I were scanning the skies when we thought we had discovered a strange and exciting new object in space. Using a huge radio telescope, we spotted a blindingly fast flash of radio waves that appeared to be coming from somewhere inside our galaxy.

    After a year of research and analysis, we have finally pinned down the source of the signal – and it was even closer to home than we had ever expected.

    A surprise in the desert

    Our instrument was located at Inyarrimanha Ilgari Bundara – also known as the Murchison Radio-astronomy Observatory – in remote Western Australia, where the sky above the red desert plains is vast and sublime.

    We were using a new detector at the radio telescope known as the Australian Square Kilometre Array Pathfinder – or ASKAP – to search for rare flickering signals from distant galaxies called fast radio bursts.

    We detected a burst. Surprisingly, it showed no evidence of a time delay between high and low frequencies – a phenomenon known as “dispersion”.

    This meant it must have originated within a few hundred light years of Earth. In other words, it must have come from inside our galaxy – unlike other fast radio bursts which have come from billions of light years away.

    A problem emerges

    Fast radio bursts are the brightest radio flashes in the Universe, emitting 30 years’ worth of the Sun’s energy in less than a millisecond – and we only have hints of how they are produced.

    Some theories suggest they are produced by “magnetars” – the highly magnetised cores of massive, dead stars – or arise from cosmic collisions between these dead stellar remnants. Regardless of how they occur, fast radio bursts are also a precise instrument for mapping out the so-called “missing matter” in our Universe.

    When we went back over our recordings to take a closer a look at the radio burst, we had a surprise: the signal seemed to have disappeared. Two months of trial and error went by, until the problem was found.

    ASKAP is composed of 36 antennas, which can be combined to act like one gigantic zoom lens six kilometres across. Just like a zoom lens on a camera, if you try to take a picture of something too close, it comes out blurry. Only by removing some of the antennas from the analysis – artificially reducing the size of our “lens” – did we finally make an image of the burst.

    We weren’t excited by this – in fact, we were disappointed. No astronomical signal could be close enough to cause this blurring.

    This meant it was probably just radio-frequency “interference” – an astronomer’s term for human-made signals that corrupt our data.

    It’s the kind of junk data we’d normally throw away.

    Yet the burst had us intrigued. For one thing, this burst was fast. The fastest known fast radio burst lasted about 10 millionths of a second. This burst consisted of an extremely bright pulse lasting a few billionths of a second, and two dimmer after-pulses, for a total duration of 30 nanoseconds.

    So where did this amazingly short, bright burst come from?

    The radio burst we detected, lasting merely 30 nanoseconds.
    Clancy W. James

    A zombie in space?

    We already knew the direction it came from, and we were able to use the blurriness in the image to estimate a distance of 4,500 km. And there was only one thing in that direction, at that distance, at that time – a derelict 60-year-old satellite called Relay 2.

    Relay 2 was one of the first ever telecommunications satellites. Launched by the United States in 1964, it was operated until 1965, and its onboard systems had failed by 1967.

    But how could Relay 2 have produced this burst?

    Some satellites, presumed dead, have been observed to reawaken. They are known as “zombie satellites”.

    But this was no zombie. No system on board Relay 2 had ever been able to produce a nanosecond burst of radio waves, even when it was alive.

    We think the most likely cause was an “electrostatic discharge”. As satellites are exposed to electrically charged gases in space known as plasmas, they can become charged – just like when your feet rub on carpet. And that accumulated charge can suddenly discharge, with the resulting spark causing a flash of radio waves.

    Electrostatic discharges are common, and are known to cause damage to spacecraft. Yet all known electrostatic discharges last thousands of times longer than our signal, and occur most commonly when the Earth’s magnetosphere is highly active. And our magnetosphere was unusually quiet at the time of the signal.

    Another possibility is a strike by a micrometeoroid – a tiny piece of space debris – similar to that experienced by the James Webb Space Telescope in June 2022.

    According to our calculations, a 22 micro-gram micrometeoroid travelling at 20km per second or more and hitting Relay 2 would have been able to produce such a strong flash of radio waves. But we estimate the chance the nanosecond burst we detected was caused by such an event to be about 1%.

    Plenty more sparks in the sky

    Ultimately, we can’t be certain why we saw this signal from Relay 2. What we do know, however, is how to see more of them. When looking at 13.8 millisecond timescales – the equivalent of keeping the camera shutter open for longer – this signal was washed out, and barely detectable even to a powerful radio telescope such as ASKAP.

    But if we had searched at 13.8 nanoseconds, any old radio antenna would have easily seen it. It shows us that monitoring satellites for electrostatic discharges with ground-based radio antennas is possible. And with the number of satellites in orbit growing rapidly, finding new ways to monitor them is more important than ever.

    But did our team eventually find new astronomical signals? You bet we did. And there are no doubt plenty more to be found.

    Clancy William James receives funding from the Australian Research Council.

    – ref. A strange bright burst in space baffled astronomers for more than a year. Now, they’ve solved the mystery – https://theconversation.com/a-strange-bright-burst-in-space-baffled-astronomers-for-more-than-a-year-now-theyve-solved-the-mystery-259893

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Do all Iranians hate the regime? Hate America? Life inside the country is much more complex and nuanced

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Simon Theobald, Postdoctoral researcher, Institute for Ethics and Society, University of Notre Dame Australia

    From 2015 to 2018, I spent 15 months doing research work in Mashhad, Iran’s second-largest city. As an anthropologist, I was interested in everyday life in Iran outside the capital Tehran. I was also interested in understanding whether the ambitions of the 1979 Revolution lived on among “ordinary” Iranians, not just political elites.

    I first lived on a university campus, where I learned Persian, and later with Iranian families. I conducted hundreds of interviews with people who had a broad spectrum of political, social and religious views. They included opponents of the Islamic Republic, supporters, and many who were in between.

    What these interviews revealed to me was both the diversity of opinion and experience in Iran, and the difficulty of making uniform statements about what Iranians believe.

    Measuring the depth of antipathy for the regime

    When Israel’s strikes on Iran began on June 13, killing many top military commanders, many news outlets – both international and those run by the Iranian diaspora – featured images of Iranians cheering the deaths of these hated regime figures.

    Friends from my fieldwork also pointed to these celebrations, while not always agreeing with them. Many feared the impact of a larger conflict between Iran and Israel.

    Trying to put these sentiments in context, many analysts have pointed to a 2019 survey by the GAMAAN Institute, an independent organisation based in the Netherlands that tracks Iranian public opinion. This survey showed 79% of Iranians living in the country would vote against the Islamic Republic if a free referendum were held on its rule.

    Viewing these examples as an indicator of the lack of support for the Islamic Republic is not wrong. But when used as factoids in news reports, they become detached from the complexities of life in Iran. This can discourage us from asking deeper questions about the relationships between ideology and pragmatism, support and opposition to the regime, and state and society.

    A more nuanced view

    The news reporting on Iran has encouraged a tendency to see the Iranian state as homogeneous, highly ideological and radically separate from the population.

    But where do we draw the line between the state and the people? There is no easy answer to this.

    When I lived in Iran, many of the people who took part in my research were state employees – teachers at state institutions, university lecturers, administrative workers. Many of them had strong and diverse views about the legacy of the revolution and the future of the country.

    They sometimes pointed to state discourse they agreed with, for example Iran’s right to national self-determination, free from foreign influence. They also disagreed with much, such as the slogans of “death to America”.

    This ambivalence was evident in one of my Persian teachers. An employee of the state, she refused to attend the annual parades celebrating the anniversary of the revolution. “We have warm feelings towards America,” she said. On the other hand, she happily attended protests, also organised by the government, in favour of Palestinian liberation.

    Or take the young government worker I met in Mashhad: “We want to be independent of other countries, but not like this.”

    In a narrower sense, discussions about the “state” may refer more to organisations like the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) and the Basij, the paramilitary force within the IRGC that has cracked down harshly on dissent in recent decades. Both are often understood as being deeply ideologically committed.

    Said Golkar, a US-based Iranian academic and author, for instance, calls Iran a “captive society”. Rather than having a civil society, he believes Iranians are trapped by the feared Basij, who maintain control through their presence in many institutions like universities and schools.

    Again, this view is not wrong. But even among the Basij and Revolutionary Guard, it can be difficult to gauge just how ideological and homogeneous these organisations truly are.

    For a start, the IRGC relies on both ideologically selected supporters, as well as conscripts, to fill its ranks. They are also not always ideologically uniform, as the US-based anthropologist Narges Bajoghli, who worked with pro-state filmmakers in Tehran, has noted.

    As part of my research, I also interviewed members of the Basij, which, unlike the IRGC proper, is a wholly volunteer organisation.

    Even though ideological commitment was certainly an important factor for some of the Basij members I met, there were also pragmatic reasons to join. These included access to better jobs, scholarships and social mobility. Sometimes, factors overlapped. But participation did not always equate to a singular or sustained commitment to revolutionary values.

    For example, Sāsān, a friend I made attending discussion groups in Mashhad, was quick to note that time spent in the Basij “reduced your [compulsory] military service”.

    This isn’t to suggest there are not ideologically committed people in Iran. They clearly exist, and many are ready to use violence. Some of those who join these institutions for pragmatic reasons use violence, too.

    Looking in between

    In addition, Iran is an ethnically diverse country. It has a population of 92 million people, a bare majority of whom are Persians. Other minorities include Azeris, Kurds, Arabs, Baloch, Turkmen and others.

    It is also religiously diverse. While there is a sizeable, nominally Shi’a majority, there are also large Sunni communities (about 10-15% of the population) and smaller communities of Christians, Jews, Zoroastrians, Baha’is and other religions.

    Often overlooked, there are also important differences in class and social strata in Iran, too.

    One of the things I noticed about state propaganda was that it flattened this diversity. James Barry, an Australian scholar of Iran, noticed a similar phenomenon.

    State propaganda made it seem like there was one voice in the country. Protests could be dismissed out of hand because they did not represent the “authentic” view of Iranians. Foreign agitators supported protests. Iranians supported the Islamic Republic.

    Since leaving Iran, I have followed many voices of Iranians in the diaspora. Opposition groups are loud on social media, especially the monarchists who support Reza Pahlavi, the son of the deposed Shah.

    In following these groups, I have noticed a similar tendency to speak as though they represent the voice of all Iranians. Iranians support the shah. Or Iranians support Maryam Rajavi, leader of a Paris-based opposition group.

    Both within Iran, and in the diaspora, the regime, too, is sometimes held to be the imposition of a foreign conspiracy. This allows the Islamic Republic and the complex relations it has created to be dismissed out of hand. Once again, such a view flattens diversity.

    Over the past few years, political identities and societal divisions seem to have become harder and clearer. This means there is an increasing perception among many Iranians of a gulf between the state and Iranian society. This is the case both inside Iran, and especially in the Iranian diaspora.

    Decades of intermittent protests and civil disobedience across the country also show that for many, the current system no longer represents the hopes and aspirations of many people. This is especially the case for the youth, who make up a large percentage of the population.

    I am not an Iranian, and I strongly believe it is up to Iranians to determine their own futures. I also do not aim to excuse the Islamic Republic – it is brutal and tyrannical. But its brutality should not let us shy away from asking complex questions.

    If the regime did fall tomorrow, Iran’s diversity means there is little unanimity of opinion as to what should come next. And if a more pluralist form of politics is to emerge, it must encompass the whole of Iran’s diversity, without assuming a uniform position.

    It, too, will have to wrestle with the difficult questions and sometimes ambivalent relations the Islamic Republic has created.

    Simon Theobald received funding from the Australian National University during his research.

    – ref. Do all Iranians hate the regime? Hate America? Life inside the country is much more complex and nuanced – https://theconversation.com/do-all-iranians-hate-the-regime-hate-america-life-inside-the-country-is-much-more-complex-and-nuanced-259554

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-OSI Global: There’s gold trapped in your iPhone – and chemists have found a safe new way to extract it

    Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Justin M. Chalker, Professor of Chemistry, Flinders University

    A sample of refined gold recovered from mining and e-waste recycling trials. Justin Chalker

    In 2022, humans produced an estimated 62 million tonnes of electronic waste – enough to fill more than 1.5 million garbage trucks. This was up 82% from 2010 and is expected to rise to 82 million tonnes in 2030.

    This e-waste includes old laptops and phones, which contain precious materials such as gold. Less than one quarter of it is properly collected and recycled. But a new technique colleagues and I have developed to safely and sustainably extract gold from e-waste could help change that.

    Our new gold-extraction technique, which we describe in a new paper published today in Nature Sustainability, could also make small-scale gold mining less poisonous for people – and the planet.

    Soaring global demand

    Gold has long played a crucial role in human life. It has been a form of currency and a medium for art and fashion for centuries. Gold is also essential in modern industries including the electronics, chemical manufacture and aerospace sectors.

    But while global demand for this precious metal is soaring, mining it is harmful to the environment.

    Deforestation and use of toxic chemicals are two such problems. In formal, large-scale mining, highly toxic cyanide is widely used to extract gold from ore. While cyanide can be degraded, its use can cause harm to wildlife, and tailings dams which store the toxic byproducts of mining operations pose a risk to the wider environment.

    In small-scale and artisanal mining, mercury is used extensively to extract gold. In this practice, the gold reacts with mercury to form a dense amalgam that can be easily isolated. The gold is then recovered by heating the amalgam to vaporise the mercury.

    Small-scale and artisanal mining is the largest source of mercury pollution on Earth, and the mercury emissions are dangerous to the miners and pollute the environment. New methods are required to reduce the impacts of gold mining.

    In 2022, humans produced an estimated 62 million tonnes of electronic waste.
    DAMRONG RATTANAPONG/Shutterstock

    A safer alternative

    Our interdisciplinary team of scientists and engineers has developed a new technique to extract gold from ore and e-waste. The aim was to provide a safer alternative to mercury and cyanide and reduce the health and environmental impacts of gold mining.

    Many techniques have previously been reported for extracting gold from ore or e-waste, including mercury- and cyanide-free methods. However, many of these methods are limited in rate, yield, scale and cost. Often these methods also consider only one step in the entire gold recovery process, and recycling and waste management is often neglected.

    In contrast, our approach considered sustainability throughout the whole process of gold extraction, recovery and refining. Our new leaching technology uses a chemical commonly used in water sanitation and pool chlorination: trichloroisocyanuric acid.

    When this widely available and low-cost chemical is activated with salt water, it can react with gold and convert it into a water-soluble form.

    To recover the gold from the solution, we invented a sulphur-rich polymer sorbent. Polymer sorbents isolate a certain substance from a liquid or gas, and ours is made by joining a key building block (a monomer) together through a chain reaction.

    Our polymer sorbent is interesting because it is derived from elemental sulphur: a low-cost and highly abundant feedstock. The petroleum sector generates more sulphur than it can use or sell, so our polymer synthesis is a new use for this underused resource.

    Our polymer could selectively bind and remove gold from the solution, even when many other types of metals were present in the mixture.

    The simple leaching and recovery methods were demonstrated on ore, circuit boards from obsolete computers and scientific waste. Importantly, we also developed methods to regenerate and recycle both the leaching chemical and the polymer sorbent. We also established methods to purify and recycle the water used in the process.

    In developing the recyclable polymer sorbent, we invented some exciting new chemistry to make the polymer using light, and then “un-make” the sorbent after it bound gold. This recycling method converted the polymer back to its original monomer building block and separated it from the gold.

    The recovered monomer could then be re-made into the gold-binding polymer: an important demonstration of how the process is aligned with a circular economy.

    A long and complex road ahead

    In future work, we plan to collaborate with industry, government and not-for-profit groups to test our method in small-scale mining operations. Our long-term aim is to provide a robust and safe method for extracting gold, eliminating the need for highly toxic chemicals such as cyanide and mercury.

    There will be many challenges to overcome including scaling up the production of the polymer sorbent and the chemical recycling processes. For uptake, we also need to ensure that the rate, yield and cost are competitive with more traditional methods of gold mining. Our preliminary results are encouraging. But there is still a long and complex road ahead before our new techniques replace cyanide and mercury.

    Our broader motivation is to support the livelihood of the millions of artisanal and small-scale miners that rely on mercury to recover gold.

    They typically operate in remote and rural regions with few other economic opportunities. Our goal is to support these miners economically while offering safer alternatives to mercury. Likewise, the rise of “urban mining” and e-waste recycling would benefit from safer and operationally simple methods for precious metal recovery.

    Success in recovering gold from e-waste will also reduce the need for primary mining and therefore lessen its environmental impact.

    Justin M. Chalker is an inventor on patents associated with the gold leaching and recovery technology. Both patents are wholly owned by Flinders University. This research was supported financially by the Australian Research Council and Flinders University. He has an ongoing collaboration with Mercury Free Mining and Adelaide Control Engineering: organisations that supported the developments and trials reported in this study.

    – ref. There’s gold trapped in your iPhone – and chemists have found a safe new way to extract it – https://theconversation.com/theres-gold-trapped-in-your-iphone-and-chemists-have-found-a-safe-new-way-to-extract-it-259817

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: ‘Do not eat’: what’s in those little desiccant sachets and how do they work?

    Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Kamil Zuber, Senior Industry Research Fellow, Future Industries Institute, University of South Australia

    towfiqu ahamed/Getty Images

    When you buy a new electronic appliance, shoes, medicines or even some food items, you often find a small paper sachet with the warning: “silica gel, do not eat”.

    What exactly is it, is it toxic, and can you use it for anything?

    The importance of desiccants

    That little sachet is a desiccant – a type of material that removes excess moisture from the air.

    It’s important during the transport and storage of a wide range of products because we can’t always control the environment. Humid conditions can cause damage through corrosion, decay, the growth of mould and microorganisms.

    This is why manufacturers include sachets with desiccants to make sure you receive the goods in pristine condition.

    The most common desiccant is silica gel. The small, hard and translucent beads are made of silicon dioxide (like most sands or quartz) – a hydrophilic or water-loving material. Importantly, the beads are porous on the nano-scale, with pore sizes only 15 times larger than the radius of their atoms.

    Silica gel looks somewhat like a sponge when viewed with scanning electron microscopy.
    Trabelsi et al. (2009), CC BY-NC-ND

    These pores have a capillary effect, meaning they condense and draw moisture into the bead similar to how trees transport water through the channelled structures in wood.

    In addition, sponge-like porosity makes their surface area very large. A single gram of silica gel can have an area of up to 700 square metres – almost four tennis courts – making them exceptionally efficient at capturing and storing water.

    Is silica gel toxic?

    The “do not eat” warning is easily the most prominent text on silica gel sachets.

    According to health professionals, most silica beads found in these sachets are non-toxic and don’t present the same risk as silica dust, for example. They mainly pose a choking hazard, which is good enough reason to keep them away from children and pets.

    However, if silica gel is accidentally ingested, it’s still recommended to contact health professionals to determine the best course of action.

    Some variants of silica gel contain a moisture-sensitive dye. One particular variant, based on cobalt chloride, is blue when the desiccant is dry and turns pink when saturated with moisture. While the dye is toxic, in desiccant pellets it is present only in a small amount – approximately 1% of the total weight.

    Indicating silica gel with cobalt chloride – ‘fresh’ on the left, ‘used’ on the right.
    Reza Rio/Shutterstock

    Desiccants come in other forms, too

    Apart from silica gel, a number of other materials are used as moisture absorbers and desiccants. These are zeolites, activated alumina and activated carbon – materials engineered to be highly porous.

    Another desiccant type you’ll often see in moisture absorbers for larger areas like pantries or wardrobes is calcium chloride. It typically comes in a box filled with powder or crystals found in most hardware stores, and is a type of salt.

    Kitchen salt – sodium chloride – attracts water and easily becomes lumpy. Calcium chloride works in the same way, but has an even stronger hygroscopic effect and “traps” the water through a hydration reaction. Once the salt is saturated, you’ll see liquid separating in the container.

    Closet and pantry dehumidifiers like this one typically contain calcium chloride which binds water.
    Healthy Happy/Shutterstock

    I found something that doesn’t seem to be silica gel – what is it?

    Some food items such as tortilla wraps, noodles, beef jerky, and some medicines and vitamins contain slightly different sachets, labelled “oxygen absorbers”.

    These small packets don’t contain desiccants. Instead, they have chemical compounds that “scavenge” or bond oxygen.

    Their purpose is similar to desiccants – they extend the shelf life of food products and sensitive chemicals such as medicines. But they do so by directly preventing oxidation. When some foods are exposed to oxygen, their chemical composition changes and can lead to decay (apples turning brown when cut is an example of oxidation).

    There is a whole range of compounds used as oxygen absorbers. These chemicals have a stronger affinity to oxygen than the protected substance. They range from simple compounds such as iron which “rusts” by using up oxygen, to more complex such as plastic films that work when exposed to light.

    Some of the sachets in your products are oxygen absorbers, not desiccants – but they may look similar.
    Sergio Yoneda/Shutterstock

    Can I reuse a desiccant?

    Although desiccants and dehumidifiers are considered disposable, you can relatively easily reuse them.

    To “recharge” or dehydrate silica gel, you can place it in an oven at approximately 115–125°C for 2–3 hours, although you shouldn’t do this if it’s in a plastic sachet that could melt in the heat.

    Interestingly, due to how they bind water, some desiccants require temperatures well above the boiling point of water to dehydrate (for example, calcium chloride hydrates completely dehydrate at 200°C).

    After dehydration, silica gel sachets may be useful for drying small electronic items (like your phone after you accidentally dropped it into water), keeping your camera dry, or preventing your family photos and old films from sticking to each other.

    This is a good alternative to the questionable method of using uncooked rice, as silica gel doesn’t decompose and won’t leave starch residues on your things.

    Kamil Zuber 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. ‘Do not eat’: what’s in those little desiccant sachets and how do they work? – https://theconversation.com/do-not-eat-whats-in-those-little-desiccant-sachets-and-how-do-they-work-258398

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: Streaming giants have helped bring Korean dramas to the world – but much is lost in translation

    Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Sung-Ae Lee, Lecturer, Macquarie University

    In less than a decade, Korean TV dramas (K-dramas) have transmuted from a regional industry to a global phenomenon – partly a consequence of the rise of streaming giants.

    But foreign audiences may not realise the K-dramas they’ve seen on Netflix don’t accurately represent the broader Korean TV landscape, which is much wider and richer than these select offerings.

    At the same time, there are many challenges in bringing this wide array of content to the rest of the world.

    The rise of hallyu

    Korean media was transformed during the 1990s. The end of military dictatorship led to the gradual relaxation of censorship.

    Satellite media also allowed the export of K-dramas and films to the rest of East Asia, and parts of Southeast Asia. Some of the first K-dramas to become popular overseas included What Is Love (1991–92) and Star in My Heart (1997). They initiated what would later become known as the Korean wave, or hallyu.

    The hallyu expansion continued with Winter Sonata (2003), which attracted viewers in Japan, Malaysia and Indonesia. Dae Jang Geum/Jewel in the Palace (2005) resonated strongly in Chinese-speaking regions, and was ultimately exported to more than 80 countries.

    A breakthrough occurred in 2016. Netflix entered South Korea and began investing in Korean productions, beginning with Kingdom (2019–21) and Love Alarm (2019–21).

    In 2021, the global hit Squid Game was released simultaneously in 190 countries.

    But Netflix only scratches the surface

    Last year, only 20% of new K-drama releases were available on Western streaming platforms. This means global discussions about K-dramas are based on a limited subgroup of content promoted to viewers outside South Korea.

    Moreover, foreign viewers will generally evaluate this content based on Western conceptions of culture and narrative. They may, for instance, have Western preferences for genre and themes, or may disregard locally-specific contexts.

    This is partly why Korean and foreign audiences can end up with very different ideas of what “Korean” television is.

    Genres

    When a K-drama is classified as a sageuk (historical drama) but also incorporates elements of fantasy, mythology, romance, melodrama, crime fiction and/or comedy, foreign audiences may dismiss it as “genre-confused”. Or, they may praise it for its “genre-blending”.

    But the drama may not have been created with much attention to genre at all. The highly inventive world-building of pre-Netflix dramas such as Arang and the Magistrate (2012) and Guardian: The Lonely and Great God (2016) prominently feature all the aforementioned genres.

    While foreign viewers may think visual media begins with readily identifiable genres, many K-dramas aren’t produced on this premise.

    Themes

    Western viewers (and other viewers watching through a Western lens) might assume “liberal” themes such as systemic injustice, women’s rights and collusion in politics entered K-dramas as a result of Western influence. But this is a misconception.

    The emergence of such themes can be attributed to various changes in Korean society, including the easing of censorship, rapid modernisation, and the imposition of neoliberal economics by the International Monetary Fund in 1997.

    Although gender disparities still exist in South Korea, economic uncertainty and modernisation have prompted a deconstruction of patriarchal value systems. Female-centred K-dramas have been around since at least the mid-2000s, with women’s independence as a recurring theme in more recent dramas.

    Local contexts

    A major barrier to exporting K-dramas is the cultural specificity of certain elements, such as Confucian values, hierarchical family dynamics, gender codes, and Korean speech codes.

    The global success of a K-drama comes down to how well its culturally-specific elements can be adapted for different contexts and audiences.

    In some cases, these elements may be minimised, or entirely missed, by foreign viewers.

    For example, in Squid Game, the words spoken by the killer doll in the first game are subtitled as “green light, red light”. What the doll actually says is “mugunghwa-kkochi pieot-seumnida”, which is also what the game is called in Korean.

    This translates to “the mugunghwa (Rose of Saron) has bloomed”, with mugunghwa being South Korea’s national flower.

    These words, in this context, are meant to ironically redefine South Korea as a site of hopelessness and death. But the subtitles erase this double meaning.

    It’s also difficult for subtitles to reflect nuanced Korean honorific systems of address. As such, foreign viewers remain largely oblivious to the subtle power dynamics at play between characters.

    All of this leads to a kind of cultural “flattening”, shifting foreign viewers’ focus to so-called universal themes.

    A case study for global success

    Nevertheless, foreign viewers can still engage with many culturally-specific elements in K-dramas, which can also serve as cultural literacy.

    The hugely successful series Extraordinary Attorney Woo (2022) explores the personal and professional challenges faced by an autistic lawyer.

    Director Yoo In-sik described the series as distinctly Korean in both its humour and the legal system it portrays, and said he didn’t anticipate its widespread popularity.

    Following success in South Korea, the series was acquired by Netflix and quickly entered the top 10 most popular non-English language shows.

    The global appeal can be attributed to its sensitive portrayal of the protagonist, the problem-solving theme across episodes, and what Yoo describes as a kind and considerate tone. Viewers who resonate with these qualities may not even need to engage with the Korean elements.

    Many K-dramas that achieve global success also feature elements typically considered “Western”, such as zombies.

    While the overall number of zombie-themed productions is low, series and films such as Kingdom (2019–21), All of Us Are Dead (2022), Alive (2020) and Train to Busan (2016) have helped put Korean content on the map.

    One potential effect of the zombie popularity may be the displacement of Korean mythological characters, such as fox spirits, or gumiho, which have traditionally held significant narrative space.

    Shin Min-ah and Lee Seung-gi star in the acclaimed romantic comedy series My Girlfriend is a Gumiho (2010).
    IMDB

    Local production under threat

    The influence of streaming giants such as Netflix is impacting South Korea’s local production systems.

    One consequence has been a substantial increase in production costs, which local companies can’t compete with.

    The early vision of low-cost, high-return projects such as Squid Game is rapidly diminishing.

    Meanwhile, Netflix is exploring other locations, such as Japan, where dramas can be produced for about half the price of those in Korea. If this continues, the rise of Korean content may slow down.

    Sung-Ae Lee 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. Streaming giants have helped bring Korean dramas to the world – but much is lost in translation – https://theconversation.com/streaming-giants-have-helped-bring-korean-dramas-to-the-world-but-much-is-lost-in-translation-257547

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: Do all Iranians hate the regime? Hate America? Life inside the country is much more complex and nuanced

    Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Simon Theobald, Postdoctoral researcher, Institute for Ethics and Society, University of Notre Dame Australia

    From 2015 to 2018, I spent 15 months doing research work in Mashhad, Iran’s second-largest city. As an anthropologist, I was interested in everyday life in Iran outside the capital Tehran. I was also interested in understanding whether the ambitions of the 1979 Revolution lived on among “ordinary” Iranians, not just political elites.

    I first lived on a university campus, where I learned Persian, and later with Iranian families. I conducted hundreds of interviews with people who had a broad spectrum of political, social and religious views. They included opponents of the Islamic Republic, supporters, and many who were in between.

    What these interviews revealed to me was both the diversity of opinion and experience in Iran, and the difficulty of making uniform statements about what Iranians believe.

    Measuring the depth of antipathy for the regime

    When Israel’s strikes on Iran began on June 13, killing many top military commanders, many news outlets – both international and those run by the Iranian diaspora – featured images of Iranians cheering the deaths of these hated regime figures.

    Friends from my fieldwork also pointed to these celebrations, while not always agreeing with them. Many feared the impact of a larger conflict between Iran and Israel.

    Trying to put these sentiments in context, many analysts have pointed to a 2019 survey by the GAMAAN Institute, an independent organisation based in the Netherlands that tracks Iranian public opinion. This survey showed 79% of Iranians living in the country would vote against the Islamic Republic if a free referendum were held on its rule.

    Viewing these examples as an indicator of the lack of support for the Islamic Republic is not wrong. But when used as factoids in news reports, they become detached from the complexities of life in Iran. This can discourage us from asking deeper questions about the relationships between ideology and pragmatism, support and opposition to the regime, and state and society.

    A more nuanced view

    The news reporting on Iran has encouraged a tendency to see the Iranian state as homogeneous, highly ideological and radically separate from the population.

    But where do we draw the line between the state and the people? There is no easy answer to this.

    When I lived in Iran, many of the people who took part in my research were state employees – teachers at state institutions, university lecturers, administrative workers. Many of them had strong and diverse views about the legacy of the revolution and the future of the country.

    They sometimes pointed to state discourse they agreed with, for example Iran’s right to national self-determination, free from foreign influence. They also disagreed with much, such as the slogans of “death to America”.

    This ambivalence was evident in one of my Persian teachers. An employee of the state, she refused to attend the annual parades celebrating the anniversary of the revolution. “We have warm feelings towards America,” she said. On the other hand, she happily attended protests, also organised by the government, in favour of Palestinian liberation.

    Or take the young government worker I met in Mashhad: “We want to be independent of other countries, but not like this.”

    In a narrower sense, discussions about the “state” may refer more to organisations like the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) and the Basij, the paramilitary force within the IRGC that has cracked down harshly on dissent in recent decades. Both are often understood as being deeply ideologically committed.

    Said Golkar, a US-based Iranian academic and author, for instance, calls Iran a “captive society”. Rather than having a civil society, he believes Iranians are trapped by the feared Basij, who maintain control through their presence in many institutions like universities and schools.

    Again, this view is not wrong. But even among the Basij and Revolutionary Guard, it can be difficult to gauge just how ideological and homogeneous these organisations truly are.

    For a start, the IRGC relies on both ideologically selected supporters, as well as conscripts, to fill its ranks. They are also not always ideologically uniform, as the US-based anthropologist Narges Bajoghli, who worked with pro-state filmmakers in Tehran, has noted.

    As part of my research, I also interviewed members of the Basij, which, unlike the IRGC proper, is a wholly volunteer organisation.

    Even though ideological commitment was certainly an important factor for some of the Basij members I met, there were also pragmatic reasons to join. These included access to better jobs, scholarships and social mobility. Sometimes, factors overlapped. But participation did not always equate to a singular or sustained commitment to revolutionary values.

    For example, Sāsān, a friend I made attending discussion groups in Mashhad, was quick to note that time spent in the Basij “reduced your [compulsory] military service”.

    This isn’t to suggest there are not ideologically committed people in Iran. They clearly exist, and many are ready to use violence. Some of those who join these institutions for pragmatic reasons use violence, too.

    Looking in between

    In addition, Iran is an ethnically diverse country. It has a population of 92 million people, a bare majority of whom are Persians. Other minorities include Azeris, Kurds, Arabs, Baloch, Turkmen and others.

    It is also religiously diverse. While there is a sizeable, nominally Shi’a majority, there are also large Sunni communities (about 10-15% of the population) and smaller communities of Christians, Jews, Zoroastrians, Baha’is and other religions.

    Often overlooked, there are also important differences in class and social strata in Iran, too.

    One of the things I noticed about state propaganda was that it flattened this diversity. James Barry, an Australian scholar of Iran, noticed a similar phenomenon.

    State propaganda made it seem like there was one voice in the country. Protests could be dismissed out of hand because they did not represent the “authentic” view of Iranians. Foreign agitators supported protests. Iranians supported the Islamic Republic.

    Since leaving Iran, I have followed many voices of Iranians in the diaspora. Opposition groups are loud on social media, especially the monarchists who support Reza Pahlavi, the son of the deposed Shah.

    In following these groups, I have noticed a similar tendency to speak as though they represent the voice of all Iranians. Iranians support the shah. Or Iranians support Maryam Rajavi, leader of a Paris-based opposition group.

    Both within Iran, and in the diaspora, the regime, too, is sometimes held to be the imposition of a foreign conspiracy. This allows the Islamic Republic and the complex relations it has created to be dismissed out of hand. Once again, such a view flattens diversity.

    Over the past few years, political identities and societal divisions seem to have become harder and clearer. This means there is an increasing perception among many Iranians of a gulf between the state and Iranian society. This is the case both inside Iran, and especially in the Iranian diaspora.

    Decades of intermittent protests and civil disobedience across the country also show that for many, the current system no longer represents the hopes and aspirations of many people. This is especially the case for the youth, who make up a large percentage of the population.

    I am not an Iranian, and I strongly believe it is up to Iranians to determine their own futures. I also do not aim to excuse the Islamic Republic – it is brutal and tyrannical. But its brutality should not let us shy away from asking complex questions.

    If the regime did fall tomorrow, Iran’s diversity means there is little unanimity of opinion as to what should come next. And if a more pluralist form of politics is to emerge, it must encompass the whole of Iran’s diversity, without assuming a uniform position.

    It, too, will have to wrestle with the difficult questions and sometimes ambivalent relations the Islamic Republic has created.

    Simon Theobald received funding from the Australian National University during his research.

    – ref. Do all Iranians hate the regime? Hate America? Life inside the country is much more complex and nuanced – https://theconversation.com/do-all-iranians-hate-the-regime-hate-america-life-inside-the-country-is-much-more-complex-and-nuanced-259554

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: What do the Bible, the Quran and the Torah say about the justification for war?

    Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Robyn J. Whitaker, Associate Professor, New Testament, & Director of The Wesley Centre for Theology, Ethics, and Public Policy, University of Divinity

    Wars are often waged in the name of religion. So what do key texts from Christianity, Islam and Judaism say about the justification for war?

    We asked three experts for their views.

    The Bible

    Robyn J. Whitaker, University of Divinity

    The Bible presents war as an inevitable reality of human life. This is captured in the cry of the Teacher in Ecclesiastes:

    for everything there is a season […] a time for war and a time for peace.

    In this sense, the Bible reflects the experiences of the authors and communities who shaped the texts over more than a thousand years as they experienced both victory and defeat as a small nation among the large empires of the ancient near east.

    When it comes to God’s role in war, we cannot shirk from the problematic violence associated with the divine. At times, God orders the Hebrew people to go to war and enact horrendous violence. Deuteronomy 20 is a good example of this: God’s people are sent to war with the blessing of the priest but told to first offer terms of peace. If peace terms are accepted, the town is enslaved. Certain enemies, however, are decreed worthy of total annihilation, and the Hebrew army is commanded to destroy anyone and anything that doesn’t produce food.

    On other occasions, war is interpreted as a tool, a punishment where God uses foreign nations against the Hebrew people because they have gone astray (Judges 2:14). You can also find an underlying ethic to treat the captives of war justly. Moses commands that women captured in war are to be treated as wives, not slaves (Deuteronomy 21), and in 2 Chronicles, captives are allowed to return home.

    In contrast to war as divinely authorised, many of the Hebrew prophets express hope in a time where God will bring peace and people will “neither learn war any more” (Micah 3:4) but rather turn their weapons into tools for agriculture (Isaiah 2:4).

    War is viewed as a result of human sinfulness, something that God will ultimately transform into peace. And that peace (Hebrew: shalom) is more than an absence of war. It is about human flourishing and unity between peoples and God.

    Most of the New Testament was written during the first century CE, when Jews and emerging Christians were a minority within the Roman Empire. The military power of Rome is harshly critiqued as evil in resistance texts such as the Book of Revelation. Many early Christians refused to fight in the Roman army.

    In this context, Jesus says nothing specific about war but generally rejects violence. When Jesus’s disciple Peter seeks to defend him with a sword, Jesus tells him to put away his sword because a sword only leads to more violence (Matthew 26:52). This is consistent with Jesus’s other teachings such as “blessed are the peacemakers” or his commands to “turn the other cheek” when struck or to “love your enemies”.

    The reality is that we find various war ideologies in the Bible’s pages. If you want to find a justification for war in the Bible, you can. If you want to find a justification for peace or pacifism, that is there too. Later Christians would develop ideas of “just war” and pacifism based on biblical ideas, but these are developments rather than explicit within the Bible.

    For Christians, Jesus’s teaching provides an ethical framework for interpreting earlier war texts through the lens of love for enemies. This counterpoint to divine violence and war points readers back to the prophets, whose hopeful visions imagine a world where violence and suffering are no more and peace is possible.

    The Quran

    Mehmet Ozalp, Charles Sturt University

    Islam and Muslims emerged onto the world stage in the hostile environment of the seventh century. In response to major challenges, including warfare, Islam introduced pioneering legal and ethical reforms. The Quran and the Prophet Muhammad’s example laid out clear legal and ethical guidelines for the conduct of war, well before similar frameworks appeared in other societies.

    Islam did this by defining a new term, “jihad” rather than the usual Arabic word for war, “harb”. While harb refers broadly to warfare, jihad was defined within Islamic teachings as a legal, morally justified struggle, which includes but is not limited to armed conflict. In the context of warfare, jihad refers specifically to fighting in a just cause under clear legal and ethical guidelines, rather than belligerent or aggressive warfare.

    Between 610-622, Prophet Muhammad practised active non-violence in the face of the constant suffering, persecution and economic embargo he and his followers endured in Mecca, despite insistent approaches by his followers to take up arms. This showed that armed struggle cannot be taken up within the members of the same society, as this would lead to anarchy.

    After leaving his home town to escape persecution, he established a pluralistic and multi-faith society in Medina. He took active steps to sign treaties with neighbouring tribes. Despite following a deliberate strategy of peace and diplomacy, the hostile Meccans and allied tribes attacked the Muslims in Medina. Engaging these attackers in an armed struggle was unavoidable.

    The permission to fight was given to Muslims by the Quran verses 22:39-40:

    The believers against whom war is waged are given permission to fight in response, for they have been wronged. Surely, God has full power to help them to victory. Those who have been driven from their homeland against all right, for no other reason than that they say, “Our Lord is God” […]

    This passage not only permits armed struggle but also offers a moral justification for just war. It means war is clearly just when defensive — while aggression is unjust and condemned. Elsewhere, the Quran emphasises this point:

    If they withdraw from you and do not fight against you, and offer you peace, then God allows you no way (to war) against them.

    Verse 22:39 outlines two ethical justifications for warfare. The first is when people are driven from their homes (and land) – in other words, through occupation by a foreign power. The second is when people are attacked because of their beliefs to the point of violent persecution and attack.

    Importantly, verse 22:40 includes churches, monasteries and synagogues. If believers in God do not defend themselves, all places of worship would be destroyed, so this is to be prevented by force if necessary.

    The Quran does not allow for aggression, since “God loves not the aggressors” (2:190). It also provides detailed regulations on who is to fight and who is exempted (9:91); when hostilities must cease (2:193); and prisoners should be treated humanely and with fairness (47:4).

    Verses such as 2:294 emphasise that warfare and any response to violence and aggression must be proportional and within limits:

    Whoever attacks you, attack them in like manner as they attacked you. Nevertheless, fear God and remain within the bounds.

    In the event of unavoidable war, every opportunity to end it must be pursued:

    But if the enemy inclines towards peace, then you must also incline towards peace and trust in God.

    The aim of military action is to end hostilities and remove the reason for warfare, not to humiliate or annihilate the enemy.

    Military jihad cannot be pursued for personal ambition or to further nationalistic or ethnic disputes. Muslims cannot wage war on nations that have no hostility towards them (60:8). But if there is open hostility and attack, Muslims have a right to defend themselves.

    The Prophet and the early caliphs specifically warned military leaders and all combatants that they must not act treacherously or engage in indiscriminate killing and pillage. He said:

    Do not kill women, children, the elderly, or the sick. Do not destroy palm trees or burn houses.

    Because of these teachings, Muslims have had legal and ethical guidelines throughout much of history to help limit human suffering caused by war.

    The Torah

    Suzanne D. Rutland, University of Sydney

    Judaism is not a pacifist religion, but in its traditions it values peace above all else, and prayers for peace are central to Jewish liturgy. At the same time, there is a recognition of the need to fight defensive wars, but only within certain boundaries.

    In the Torah, the Five Books of Moses, the recognition of the need for war is clear. Throughout their journeying in the desert, the Israelites (Children of Israel) fight various battles. At the same time, in Deuteronomy, the Israelites are instructed (chapter 12, verse 10):

    When you go forth against your enemies and are in camp, then you should keep yourself from every evil thing.

    The story of Amalek is the symbol of ultimate evil in Jewish tradition. Scholars argue this is because his army attacked the Israelites from the rear – killing defenceless women and children.

    The Torah also stresses that army service is compulsory. Yet, Deuteronomy elaborates four categories of people who are exempt:

    • someone who has built a home but has not yet dedicated it
    • someone who has planted a vineyard but has not yet eaten of its fruit
    • someone who is engaged or in his first year of marriage
    • someone who is afraid, in case he influences other soldiers with his fear.
    Judaism is not a pacifist religion, but in its traditions it values peace above all else.
    Shutterstock

    It is important to point out that the disdain of war is so strong that King David was not permitted to build the temple in Jerusalem because of his military career. His son, Solomon, was allocated this task, but no iron was to be used in the building because this represented war and violence, while the temple was to represent peace, the ideal virtue.

    The vision of peace for all humanity is further developed in the prophetic writings and the concept of the Messiah. This is seen particularly in the writings of the prophet Isiah, who envisaged an age when, as he describes in his idyllic vision:

    they shall beat their swords into ploughshares, and their spears into pruning hooks; nation shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall they learn war any more.

    The Mishnah, the first part of the Talmud, raises the concept of an “obligatory war” (milhemet mizvah). This encompasses the biblical wars against the seven nations said to inhabit the Promised Land, the war against Amalek, and the Jewish nation’s defensive wars. It is, accordingly, a clearly defined and recognisable class.

    Not so the second category, “permitted war” (milhemet reshut), which is more open-ended and, as scholar Avi Ravitsky writes, “could relate to a preemptive war”.

    After the Talmudic period, which ended in the 7th century, this debate became theoretical, since Jews living in Palestine and the diaspora no longer had an army. This was largely the case from the time of the defeat of the Bar Kokhba Rebellion against the Romans (132–135 CE), apart from a few small Jewish kingdoms in Arabia.

    However, with the return of the early Zionist pioneers to the Land of Israel in the late 19th and 20th century, the rabbinic debates of what constitutes an obligatory, defensive war and what is a permitted war, as well as the characteristics of a forbidden war has reignited. This is a subject of deep concern and controversy for both academics and rabbis today.

    Robyn J. Whitaker is affiliated with The Wesley Centre for Theology, Ethics, and Public Policy.

    Mehmet Ozalp is affiliated with Islamic Sciences and Research Academy

    Suzanne Rutland has received an Australian Research Council grant for her research on the Australian Jewry and funding from the Pratt Foundation, as well as an Australian Prime Ministers Centre (APMC) fellowship for her research on Soviet Jewry and Australia. She is also involved with numerous NGOs, including the Australian Jewish Historical Society (patron), the Australian Association for Jewish Studies (past president and committee member), and the Australian government’s expert delegation to the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance. In addition, she is a board member of the Freilich Project for the Study of Bigotry at ANU; she is on an academic advisory committee at the Sydney Jewish Museum; she is the director of the Australian Academic Alliance Against Antisemitism; and she is an Australian board member for Boys Town Jerusalem and a board member of Better Balance Futures for faith communities These roles are all undertaken in an honorary capacity. She is also writing the history of the Executive Council of Australian Jewry in an honorary capacity.

    – ref. What do the Bible, the Quran and the Torah say about the justification for war? – https://theconversation.com/what-do-the-bible-the-quran-and-the-torah-say-about-the-justification-for-war-259679

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Cats at 40: a dazzling cast – stuck in an outdated show

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Karen Cummings, Lecturer in Singing, University of Sydney

    The star of the 40th anniversary production of Cats – which premiered at the Theatre Royal Sydney last week – is the performing ensemble.

    Some ensemble scenes, such as The Jellicle Ball, offered the same joy and exhilaration as the original 1985 production. In these moments of song and dance, the invisible connection between the performers’ hearts, voices and bodies, and those in the audience, is truly felt. There is still magic here.

    Yet, 40 years on, it’s clear other aspects of the show have become too tired for modern audiences.

    Comfort for frightening times

    By today’s standards, Cats is a modest show where the biggest investment is in the extraordinary performers and performances.

    But back in 1985, when it first premiered in Australia, Andrew Lloyd Webber’s musical was at the forefront of a wave of mega-musicals that swept the world. A review published in the Los Angeles Times that year called it “one of the most imaginative and eye-catching musicals of the century”.

    Cats ran for decades, all around the world. On the West End it ran for 21 years and 8,949 performances. On Broadway, it replaced A Chorus Line as the longest-running musical, playing for 18 years.

    First performed in London in 1981, the show is based on a set of poems from T.S. Eliot’s Old Possum’s Book of Practical Cats (1939). Some may know the poems from their primary school elocution classes (we both did).

    Eliot wrote Old Possum’s Book of Practical Cats in the period between the two world wars, when the world was teetering on the edge of fascism. It spoke to an audience that was probably eager to escape from its frightening reality.

    Commitment lifts the show

    In the musical, the cats move between songs and ensembles that describe the characteristics of each individual. The musical styles include rock, classical, pop, jazz, musical hall, blues and everything in between. Each cat has a specific musical and movement language.

    The committed and exuberant performers lift the show. Gabryel Thomas, who plays Grizabella, brings new life and intense musicality in her singing of the iconic song Memory.

    Axel Alverez performs the role of Mr. Mistoffelees with exuberance and charisma. And Todd McKenney’s charming and nuanced characterisation of Bustopher Jones makes him an audience favourite.

    The cameo roles feature strong performances by well-known music theatre performers, such as Lucy Maunder as Jellylorum, along with some newer faces, such as Claudia Hastings as White Cat.

    Gabriyel Thomas plays the outcast glamour cat Grizabella.
    Daniel Boud

    Stagnation or reinvention?

    In this re-launch, the score, direction and choreography are almost identical to what we saw back in 1985.

    The dancing and choreography are the heart and soul of the show, just as they were back then. For those who appreciate performance, this alone will make Cats worth seeing.

    Yet, the quality of the performances couldn’t completely make up for the tired and largely unchanged musical score. The 80s style synthesisers and guitars, and reduced orchestration, are oddly nostalgic, but in an unsatisfying way.

    Nostalgia is big business, and no doubt this production taps into this. As music journalist Peter C Baker wrote in an article last year:

    More and more of what we’re offered […] feels motivated by the logic that what people want, or can most easily be sold, is what they already liked before.

    At the same time, there’s much discussion these days about reinterpretations of classic musicals and opera – which are often a gamble.

    In the 2024 re-imagined New York production of Cats, Cats: The Jellicle Ball, the gamble paid off. The Jellicle Ball was set in a queer ballroom culture where competitive performers rehearse on a catwalk.

    The show premiered to wide acclaim, with some reviewers saying Cats finally made sense. As reviewer Jeanine T. Abraham put it:

    The ballroom version takes this story into the twenty-first century with flavor, sass, and reverence for the Black Queer Ballroom community who created this joyous form out of so much pain and trauma.

    This positive reception was far removed from the very badly reviewed 2019 feature film starring James Corden.

    Cats is a musical that has always been controversial – both celebrated and derided, depending on who you ask.

    What makes a show spectacular?

    Since around the mid 1980s, audiences have become acclimatised to the spectacular. Whether it’s Wicked, the Olympic ceremonies, or Kendrick Lamar’s Superbowl halftime show, we’ve come to expect spectacle and jaw-dropping visual effects. But Cats is not that kind of show.

    Rather, it deals with the idea of community, and of a world where particular kinds of difference are accepted and others are rejected. The narcissistic elderly male cats are revered, while the glamour cat Grizabella is an outcast. A utopian ending brings reconciliation for all.

    Cats is a musical that defied expectations. Many initially predicted it would flop, and the song Memory was the only real hit. Yet it enjoyed enormous success.

    In 2025, the show leans heavily on its 30 or so performers who still manage to transport us to another world, despite the dated music and lack of story. The success of future interpretations will likely come down to how well those gaps can be filled.

    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. Cats at 40: a dazzling cast – stuck in an outdated show – https://theconversation.com/cats-at-40-a-dazzling-cast-stuck-in-an-outdated-show-256881

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Travelling with food allergies? These 8 tips can help you stay safer in the skies

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Jennifer Koplin, Evidence and Translation Lead, National Allergy Centre of Excellence; Chief Investigator, Centre of Food Allergy Research; Associate Professor and Group Leader, Childhood Allergy & Epidemiology Group, Child Health Research Centre, The University of Queensland

    Anchiy/Getty Images

    With the school holidays approaching, many families will be travelling, including on planes interstate and overseas. But travel can pose unique challenges for people with serious food allergies.

    Research shows air travel is a significant source of anxiety for people living with or caring for someone with a food allergy. In a global survey of 4,704 people with food allergies and their caregivers published in 2024, 98% said having a food allergy adds anxiety to air travel.

    Fortunately, there are things you can do to help keep yourself or children with food allergies safe in the skies.

    What are the concerns about plane travel with allergies?

    Reassuringly, documented allergic reactions during flights are very rare. A 2023 review that combined data from 17 studies estimated about seven in every 10 million passengers had an allergic reaction while flying.

    While many people have more mild food allergies, some are at risk of anaphylaxis (a life-threatening allergic reaction) and need to carry adrenaline with them at all times in the form of an EpiPen or Anapen. The review found reports of severe reactions needing adrenaline were even rarer – about eight cases per 100 million passengers.

    In fact, this study concluded people were less likely to experience an allergic reaction on a plane than in their everyday lives. However, some of this might be due to the precautions passengers with food allergies already take.

    People with food allergies are sometimes worried about food particles travelling in the air of the plane cabin and causing a reaction.

    Thankfully, research has shown this risk is very low. It’s difficult for food proteins (the part of the food that causes the allergic reaction) to become airborne. And if they do, air filters fitted on large commercial planes can remove any airborne food particles quickly from the cabin air.

    Peanuts are one of the foods commonly associated with anaphylaxis. Studies that have tested opening and shaking containers containing peanuts and de-shelling peanuts found peanut proteins were only detected directly above the container, at a low level, and for a short period of time.

    Other studies have found airborne peanut was not detected when eating peanuts in a confined space. And studies found no severe reactions among people with peanut allergy when peanut butter or peanuts were held close to their face or kept in a bowl close by in a small room.

    A bigger risk for reactions is the food protein ending up on a seat or tray table. However, casual contact with food crumbs or smears is highly unlikely to cause a severe allergic reaction. This type of contact can cause mild to moderate skin reactions that can be treated with antihistamines if needed.

    Staying safe on a plane with allergies

    For people at risk of anaphylaxis:

    1. take your adrenaline in your hand luggage (not your checked baggage). Store it under the seat in front of you or in the seat pocket so it’s in easy reach

    2. carry a travel plan and action plan for anaphylaxis, completed and signed by a medical professional, or similar documentation, showing the traveller’s food allergy status and what to do in an emergency. (Templates of these plans are available via the Australasian Society of Clinical Immunology and Allergy)

    3. let the flight crew know you have an allergy and indicate the location of your adrenaline and anaphylaxis action plan. This is particularly important for people travelling alone, since anaphylaxis can be mistaken for other non-allergic symptoms, which could lead to a delay in receiving adrenaline.

    For people with food allergies generally:

    1. let the airline know you have a food allergy and ask about their food and medication policies when booking or before travelling

    2. take allergy-safe food from home. Airlines don’t guarantee allergy-safe food will be available, and not all food supplied on a plane will have an ingredient label (but check liquid restrictions and be aware of potential restrictions on taking fresh food across borders)

    3. wipe down surfaces such as the seat, armrests and tray table with wet wipes when boarding. You can request early boarding from airlines to do this

    4. wash your hands before eating (wet wipes and handwashing with soap are more effective than plain water or hand sanitiser)

    5. you may choose to sit a child with food allergy away from areas where food or drink will be passed over the top of them (for example, next to a window or between family members). Tell passengers sitting next to your child about their allergy so they don’t offer to share food or drink

    6. if you think you’re experiencing an allergic reaction, let the flight crew know immediately.

    Most people with food allergies feel anxiety about plane travel.
    joo830908/Shutterstock

    What can other passengers and airlines do?

    If you’re travelling, you could wipe down surfaces around you at the end of the flight. Remove rubbish from seatbacks and other areas around your seat and aisle before disembarking.

    Also, ask about allergies before offering to share any food with your neighbours during the flight (and check with parents before offering anything to their children).

    Airlines, meanwhile, should have clear policies relating to food allergies easily available and consistently applied by ground staff and cabin crew, such as allowing early boarding on request.

    The patient support organisation Allergy & Anaphylaxis Australia has a Food Allergy Travel Hub with advice on how to stay safe when travelling with food allergies.

    Jennifer Koplin receives funding from the National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia. She is a member of the Executive Committee for the National Allergy Centre of Excellence (NACE), which is supported by funding from the Australian government.

    Christopher Warren receives institutional research funding from the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Disease, Food Allergy Research and Education, Genentech Inc, and The United States Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

    Desalegn Markos Shifti is supported by the National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC)-funded Centre for Food Allergy Research (CFAR) Postdoctoral Funding.

    – ref. Travelling with food allergies? These 8 tips can help you stay safer in the skies – https://theconversation.com/travelling-with-food-allergies-these-8-tips-can-help-you-stay-safer-in-the-skies-258387

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Earth is trapping much more heat than climate models forecast – and the rate has doubled in 20 years

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Steven Sherwood, Professor of Atmospheric Sciences, Climate Change Research Centre, UNSW Sydney

    NASA, CC BY-NC-ND

    How do you measure climate change? One way is by recording temperatures in different places over a long period of time. While this works well, natural variation can make it harder to see longer-term trends.

    But another approach can give us a very clear sense of what’s going on: track how much heat enters Earth’s atmosphere and how much heat leaves. This is Earth’s energy budget, and it’s now well and truly out of balance.

    Our recent research found this imbalance has more than doubled over the last 20 years. Other researchers have come to the same conclusions. This imbalance is now substantially more than climate models have suggested.

    In the mid-2000s, the energy imbalance was about 0.6 watts per square metre (W/m2) on average. In recent years, the average was about 1.3 W/m2. This means the rate at which energy is accumulating near the planet’s surface has doubled.

    These findings suggest climate change might well accelerate in the coming years. Worse still, this worrying imbalance is emerging even as funding uncertainty in the United States threatens our ability to track the flows of heat.

    Energy in, energy out

    Earth’s energy budget functions a bit like your bank account, where money comes in and money goes out. If you reduce your spending, you’ll build up cash in your account. Here, energy is the currency.

    Life on Earth depends on a balance between heat coming in from the Sun and heat leaving. This balance is tipping to one side.

    Solar energy hits Earth and warms it. The atmosphere’s heat-trapping greenhouse gases keep some of this energy.

    But the burning of coal, oil and gas has now added more than two trillion tonnes of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases to the atmosphere. These trap more and more heat, preventing it from leaving.

    Some of this extra heat is warming the land or melting sea ice, glaciers and ice sheets. But this is a tiny fraction. Fully 90% has gone into the oceans due to their huge heat capacity.

    Earth naturally sheds heat in several ways. One way is by reflecting incoming heat off of clouds, snow and ice and back out to space. Infrared radiation is also emitted back to space.

    From the beginning of human civilisation up until just a century ago, the average surface temperature was about 14°C. The accumulating energy imbalance has now pushed average temperatures 1.3-1.5°C higher.

    Ice and reflective clouds reflect heat back to space. As the Earth heats up, most trapped heat goes into the oceans but some melts ice and heats the land and air. Pictured: Icebergs from the Jacobshavn glacier in Greenland, the largest outside Antarctica.
    Ashley Cooper/Getty

    Tracking faster than the models

    Scientists keep track of the energy budget in two ways.

    First, we can directly measure the heat coming from the Sun and going back out to space, using the sensitive radiometers on monitoring satellites. This dataset and its predecessors date back to the late 1980s.

    Second, we can accurately track the build-up of heat in the oceans and atmosphere by taking temperature readings. Thousands of robotic floats have monitored temperatures in the world’s oceans since the 1990s.

    Both methods show the energy imbalance has grown rapidly.

    The doubling of the energy imbalance has come as a shock, because the sophisticated climate models we use largely didn’t predict such a large and rapid change.

    Typically, the models forecast less than half of the change we’re seeing in the real world.

    Why has it changed so fast?

    We don’t yet have a full explanation. But new research suggests changes in clouds is a big factor.

    Clouds have a cooling effect overall. But the area covered by highly reflective white clouds has shrunk, while the area of jumbled, less reflective clouds has grown.

    It isn’t clear why the clouds are changing. One possible factor could be the consequences of successful efforts to reduce sulfur in shipping fuel from 2020, as burning the dirtier fuel may have had a brightening effect on clouds. However, the accelerating energy budget imbalance began before this change.

    Natural fluctuations in the climate system such as the Pacific Decadal Oscillation might also be playing a role. Finally – and most worryingly – the cloud changes might be part of a trend caused by global warming itself, that is, a positive feedback on climate change.

    Dense blankets of white clouds reflect the most heat. But the area covered by these clouds is shrinking.
    Adhivaswut/Shutterstock

    What does this mean?

    These findings suggest recent extremely hot years are not one-offs but may reflect a strengthening of warming over the coming decade or longer.

    This will mean a higher chance of more intense climate impacts from searing heatwaves, droughts and extreme rains on land, and more intense and long lasting marine heatwaves.

    This imbalance may lead to worse longer-term consequences. New research shows the only climate models coming close to simulating real world measurements are those with a higher “climate sensitivity”. That means these models predict more severe warming beyond the next few decades in scenarios where emissions are not rapidly reduced.

    We don’t know yet whether other factors are at play, however. It’s still too early to definitively say we are on a high-sensitivity trajectory.

    Our eyes in the sky

    We’ve known the solution for a long time: stop the routine burning of fossil fuels and phase out human activities causing emissions such as deforestation.

    Keeping accurate records over long periods of time is essential if we are to spot unexpected changes.

    Satellites, in particular, are our advance warning system, telling us about heat storage changes roughly a decade before other methods.

    But funding cuts and drastic priority shifts in the United States may threaten essential satellite climate monitoring.

    Steven Sherwood receives funding from the Australian Research Council and the Mindaroo Foundation.

    Benoit Meyssignac receives funding from the European Commission, the European Space Agency and the French National Space Agency.

    Thorsten Mauritsen receives funding from the European Research Council, the European Space Agency, the Swedish Research Council, the Swedish National Space Agency and the Bolin Centre for Climate Research.

    – ref. Earth is trapping much more heat than climate models forecast – and the rate has doubled in 20 years – https://theconversation.com/earth-is-trapping-much-more-heat-than-climate-models-forecast-and-the-rate-has-doubled-in-20-years-258822

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: 1 in 5 community footy umpires have been assaulted, while others cop death threats: new research

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Alyson Crozier, Senior Lecturer, Exercise and Sport Psychology, University of South Australia

    Scott Barbour/Getty Images

    Umpires’ decisions often upset sports fans, especially during a close contest.

    At most games, spectators boo loudly, coaches throw their hands up in frustration and players can yell or even physically intimidate officials.

    It seems abusing umpires is acceptable. But why? It’s certainly not something generally tolerated in other workplaces.

    Without umpires, games simply couldn’t go ahead.

    That’s why we sought to shed light on the situation by researching what it’s really like to be an Australian rules umpire.

    Not for the faint-hearted

    Umpires (also called referees or match officials) apply the rules of their respective sports to ensure fair and safe competitions for all players.

    They participate in training and accreditation programs to learn rules and apply them based on the demands of the game.

    They need to be physically fit and position themselves appropriately around the playing field.

    But many sport organisations are struggling to provide enough qualified officials at grassroots levels. Between 1993 and 2010, there was a 28% decline in active sport officials in Australia.

    Football Australia, soccer’s governing body here, boasts 11,000 officials but estimates around 4,200 leave their roles every year.

    In many sports, teenagers are increasingly stepping in to umpire junior and senior games to back-fill shortages.

    However, Australian rules football appears to be defying this trend – the number of community umpires surpassed 20,000 for the first time in 2024. This is an 18% increase in umpire registrations compared to 2023, largely driven by a 31% rise in registrations by women and girls.

    Despite these record numbers, the Australian Football League (AFL), and many sports organisations including Rugby Australia and the A-League, are worried about retaining officials.

    Abuse towards officials is one of the primary areas of concern.

    Our research focused particularly on what was happening in Australian rules football.

    Abuse and even death threats

    We surveyed 356 umpires across all levels of Australian rules football competition to examine their experiences of abuse.

    Almost half reported receiving regular verbal abuse (name-calling, insults, swearing and threats). Worryingly, 21% said they had experienced physical abuse (pushing, hitting, or assault).

    As one state-level umpire remarked:

    Over time, you end up developing a thick skin.

    Encouragingly, most umpires knew the process to officially report any abuse received, with more than half indicating they had formally reported at least one incident of abuse.

    While many felt supported through the reporting process, only 62% were satisfied with the outcome.

    As one state-league umpire recalled:

    I was assaulted two years ago by a spectator. Lucky I was bigger than him. I was disappointed he only got a one-year suspension from attending games.

    Further, a senior community football umpire commented:

    I was threatened with my life this year and the league did nothing about it.

    What can be done?

    Many respondents commented on the need to support young umpires to have positive experiences.

    One potential strategy is to make it clearer when officials are underage.

    As one example, Netball Victoria provides a green band or scrunchie to any umpire under the age of 18 to promote respect from players, coaches and spectators.

    Other codes could look to implement similar strategies.

    Most of our responding umpires called for the introduction of tougher penalties in games and through tribunal systems.

    Some called for clubs to be fined or spectators banned for repeated incidents of abuse.

    Others commended the AFL’s stricter interpretation of umpire abuse in 2022, which mandated a 50-metre penalty for any player showing dissent.

    Additionally, umpires felt clubs needed to take greater responsibility for the actions of players, coaches and spectators.

    One umpire told us:

    Cultural change needs to come from within clubs because top-down campaigns encouraging respect don’t change hearts and minds.

    This could be in the form of creating a positive club culture and zero-tolerance abuse policies.

    In our research, umpires said it was crucial that governing bodies communicated both the level of evidence required to report abuse, and how tribunals worked.

    As younger officials may not know the process, having this information embedded in umpire training may help umpires feel more supported in reporting abuse.

    Equally, appropriate penalties must be handed down to ensure umpires have faith in the reporting system.

    While the number of Australian rules football umpires has increased in recent years, these numbers can also decrease quickly.

    If we want to retain umpires for the medium and long-term, we need governing bodies such as the AFL to address the frequency and severity with which umpire abuse occurs.

    As one umpire commented:

    Cases of abuse need to have consequences, not just a slap on the wrist. Why would anyone want to go out and be abused for two hours?

    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. 1 in 5 community footy umpires have been assaulted, while others cop death threats: new research – https://theconversation.com/1-in-5-community-footy-umpires-have-been-assaulted-while-others-cop-death-threats-new-research-257804

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: The NDIA is changing how it pays for disability supports. What does that mean for rural communities?

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Edward Johnson, Lecturer in Social Entrepreneurship and Co-Founder of Umbo, University of Sydney

    Shutterstock

    Each year, the National Disability Insurance Agency (NDIA) reviews its pricing rules to ensure services funded under the National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS) remain sustainable.

    This year’s annual pricing review outlines changes that will take effect from July 1 2025.

    Among the updates are changes to therapy pricing, travel reimbursement, and rural loadings. The NDIA says this will bring NDIS pricing in line with other government schemes and private health insurance.

    But what do these changes mean for people outside the big cities?

    What’s changing

    Key changes include:

    • adjusted therapy support rates, including a $10 per hour reduction for physiotherapists to $183.99 per hour.

    • travel reimbursement for therapists will be halved (from 100% to 50% of the hourly rate during any time spent travelling)

    • price loadings for some rural and remote areas will be removed.

    The NDIA justifies these decisions with a dataset that includes the average of hourly rates from Medicare, private health claims, and 13 other government programs.

    The agency says some NDIS therapy prices exceed mainstream equivalents by up to 68%.

    Why pricing comparisons don’t always translate to rural services

    While these comparisons might make sense for metropolitan clinics, they do not capture the realities of service delivery in rural and remote areas.

    For example, allied health professionals such as physiotherapists, occupational therapists, and speech pathologists in cities can see multiple clients in a row at one location (although this isn’t always realistic or best practice in cities either).

    In contrast, rural and remote providers may drive hundreds of kilometres between appointments. Much of their time, including travel, planning, and follow-up, is essential but often unbilled.

    So while $193.99 (soon $183.99) per hour for physiotherapy might look generous, it does not reflect what is left after factoring in travel and unpaid care coordination.

    Disabilities are complex and often lifelong, so clinical support is time-consuming. However, that is something clinicians are passionate about – therapists so often squirm at the thought of billing our clients for anything other than direct clinical services.

    The NDIA’s own data confirm most therapy providers are small operators. In fact, 90% are unregistered, and many serve fewer than five participants.

    The result is a fragile “market”, particularly in towns with limited infrastructure. If pricing makes it unviable for local clinicians to offer services, the only remaining options may involve families travelling long distances or forgoing support entirely. This has knock-on effects for local economies and contributes to professional burnout and workforce shortages.

    What this means for rural families

    For families living in towns with limited services, travel is not optional. It is a lifeline. If providers cannot afford to travel, many people with disability simply go without.

    Telepractice can be used in some clinical situations, but not all. The most effective kind of telepractice also includes support from local clinicians and coworkers, and ideally a mix of in-person and online consultations.

    One family I worked with during my PhD research lived four hours from the nearest regional centre. After an 18-month wait, their child’s therapy appointment was cancelled twice due to workforce shortages. They eventually paid privately for a service in another state.

    This story is not unusual. Many families said they did not necessarily want more funding; they just wanted support delivered in ways that worked for them. Being able to access help locally allowed their children to remain part of the school community and reduced pressure on carers already juggling other responsibilities. Clinicians, communities, and families are continuing to tell very similar stories.

    It is essential clinicians are able to travel to meet with NDIS clients in regional areas.
    Shutterstock

    Is there a better way?

    My research found rural families preferred flexible models that blended telepractice with local capacity-building. These hybrid approaches worked well when supported by policy that allowed for coordination, community involvement, and some in-person time. They were not luxury add-ons. They were what made services possible.

    There is also a long-term benefit in supporting local service ecosystems. When therapists can build relationships within a community, they are more likely to stay, collaborate with other professionals, and mentor early-career clinicians.

    This helps reduce churn and provides continuity of care. However, with travel reimbursement and rural loadings cut, sustaining these models becomes more difficult.

    What happens next?

    The NDIA’s strategy includes a shift toward “differentiated pricing”, which could eventually support more tailored approaches. The Department of Social Services has also promised to offer “foundational supports” outside the NDIS, but it is currently unclear what the nature of these supports will be. Right now, though, rural communities are being asked to absorb the reduced funding and limited flexibility. Without further adjustment, these changes risk widening the gap between metropolitan and non-metropolitan service access.

    A single national price does not guarantee equal access. Equity comes from recognising and responding to different contexts. For rural and remote Australians living with disability, that recognition is long overdue.

    Until then, it will be up to 7 million rural Australians to make it work for themselves in places where resources are already stretched thin.

    I am a co-founder of Umbo Pty Ltd (an NDIS therapy provider which provides telepractice services)

    – ref. The NDIA is changing how it pays for disability supports. What does that mean for rural communities? – https://theconversation.com/the-ndia-is-changing-how-it-pays-for-disability-supports-what-does-that-mean-for-rural-communities-259148

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-OSI Global: Supreme Court rules that states may deny people covered by Medicaid the freedom to choose Planned Parenthood as their health care provider

    Source: The Conversation – USA – By Naomi Cahn, Professor of Law, University of Virginia

    Abortion-rights demonstrators holds a sign in front of the Supreme Court building in Washington as the Medina v. Planned Parenthood South Atlantic case is heard on April 2, 2025. Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call via Getty Images

    Having the freedom to choose your own health care provider is something many Americans take for granted. But the U.S. Supreme Court’s conservative supermajority ruled on June 25, 2025, in a 6-3 decision that people who rely on Medicaid for their health insurance don’t have that right.

    The case, Medina v. Planned Parenthood South Atlantic, is focused on a technical legal issue: whether people covered by Medicaid have the right to sue state officials for preventing them from choosing their health care provider. In his majority opinion, Justice Neil Gorsuch wrote that they don’t because the Medicaid statute did not “clearly and unambiguously” give individuals that right.

    As law professors who teach courses about health and poverty law as well as reproductive justice, we think this ruling could restrict access to health care for the more than 78 million Americans who get their health insurance coverage through the Medicaid program.

    Excluding Planned Parenthood

    The case started with a predicament for South Carolina resident Julie Edwards, who is enrolled in Medicaid. After Edwards struggled to get contraceptive services, she was able to receive care from a Planned Parenthood South Atlantic clinic in Columbia, South Carolina.

    Planned Parenthood, an array of nonprofits with roots that date back more than a century, is among the nation’s top providers of reproductive services. It operates two clinics in South Carolina, where patients can get physical exams, cancer screenings, contraception and other services. It also provides same-day appointments and keeps long hours.

    In July 2018, however, South Carolina Gov. Henry McMaster issued an executive order that barred Medicaid reimbursement for health care providers in the state that offer abortion care.

    That meant Planned Parenthood, a longtime target of conservatives’ ire, would no longer be reimbursed for any type of care for Medicaid patients, preventing Edwards from transferring all her gynecological care to that office as she had hoped to do.

    Planned Parenthood and Edwards sued South Carolina. They argued that the state was violating the federal Medicare and Medicaid Act, which Congress passed in 1965, by not letting Edwards obtain care from the provider of her choice.

    A ‘free-choice-of-provider’ requirement

    Medicaid, which mainly covers low-income people, their children and people with disabilities, operates as a partnership between the federal government and the states. Congress passed the law that led to its creation based on its power under the Constitution’s spending clause, which allows Congress to subject federal funds to certain requirements.

    Two years later, due to concerns that states were restricting which providers Medicaid recipients could choose, Congress added a “free-choice-of-provider” requirement to the program. It states that people enrolled in Medicaid “may obtain such assistance from any institution, agency, community pharmacy, or person, qualified to perform the service or services required.”

    While the Medicaid statute does not, by itself, allow people enrolled in that program to enforce this free-choice clause, the question at the core of this case was whether another federal statute, known as Section 1983, did give them a right to sue.

    The Supreme Court has long recognized that Section 1983 protects an individual’s ability to sue when their rights under a federal statute have been violated. In fact, in 2023, it found such a right under the Medicaid Nursing Home Reform Act. The court held that Section 1983 confers the right to sue when a statute’s provisions “unambiguously confer individual federal rights.”

    In Medina, however, the court found that there was no right to sue. Instead, the court emphasized that “the typical remedy” is for the federal government to cut off Medicaid funds to a state if a state is not complying with the Medicaid statute.

    The ruling overturned lower-court decisions in favor of Edwards. It also expressly rejected the Supreme Court’s earlier rulings, which the majority criticized as taking a more “expansive view of its power to imply private causes of action to enforce federal laws.”

    Planned Parenthood clinics, like this one in Los Angeles, are located across the United States.
    Patrick T. Fallon/AFP via Getty Images

    Restricting Medicaid funds

    This dispute is just one chapter in the long fight over access to abortion in the U.S. In addition to the question of whether it should be legal, proponents and opponents of abortion rights have battled over whether the government should pay for it – even if that funding happens indirectly.

    Through a federal law known as the Hyde Amendment, Medicaid cannot reimburse health care providers for the cost of abortions, with a few exceptions: when a patient’s life is at risk, or her pregnancy is due to rape or incest. Some states do cover abortion when their laws allow it, without using any federal funds.

    As a result, Planned Parenthood rarely gets any federal Medicaid funds for abortions.

    McMaster explained that he removed “abortion clinics,” including Planned Parenthood, from the South Carolina Medicaid program because he didn’t want state funds to indirectly subsidize abortions.

    After the Supreme Court ruled on this case, McMaster said he had taken “a stand to protect the sanctity of life and defend South Carolina’s authority and values – and today, we are finally victorious.”

    But only about 4% of Planned Parenthood’s services nationwide were related to abortion, as of 2022. Its most common service is testing for sexually transmitted diseases. Across the nation, Planned Parenthood provides health care to more than 2 million patients per year, most of whom have low incomes.

    South Carolina Gov. Henry McMaster stands outside the Supreme Court building in Washington in April 2025 and speaks about this case.
    Kayla Bartkowski/Getty Images

    Consequences beyond South Carolina

    This ruling’s consequences are not limited to Medicaid access in South Carolina.

    It may make it harder for individuals to use Section 1983 to bring claims under any federal statute. As Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, joined by Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan, wrote in her dissent, the court “continues the project of stymying one of the country’s great civil rights laws.”

    Enacted in 1871, the civil rights law has been invoked to challenge violations of rights by state officials against individuals. Jackson wrote that the court now limits the ability to use Section 1983 to vindicate personal rights only if the statutes use the correct “magic words.”

    The dissent also criticized the majority decision as likely “to result in tangible harm to real people.” Not only will it potentially deprive “Medicaid recipients in South Carolina of their only meaningful way of enforcing a right that Congress has expressly granted to them,” Jackson wrote, but it could also “strip those South Carolinians – and countless other Medicaid recipients around the country – of a deeply personal freedom: the ‘ability to decide who treats us at our most vulnerable.’”

    The decision could also have far-reaching consequences. Arkansas, Missouri and Texas have already barred Planned Parenthood from getting reimbursed by Medicaid for any kind of health care. More states could follow suit.

    In addition, given Planned Parenthood’s role in providing contraceptive care, disqualifying it from Medicaid could restrict access to health care and increase the already-high unintended pregnancy rate in America.

    States could also try to exclude providers based on other characteristics, such as whether their employees belong to unions or if they provide their patients with gender-affirming care, further restricting patients’ choices.

    With this ruling, the court is allowing a patchwork of state exclusions of Planned Parenthood and other medical providers from the Medicaid program that could soon resemble the patchwork already seen with abortion access.

    Portions of this article first appeared in another article published on April 2, 2025.

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

    – ref. Supreme Court rules that states may deny people covered by Medicaid the freedom to choose Planned Parenthood as their health care provider – https://theconversation.com/supreme-court-rules-that-states-may-deny-people-covered-by-medicaid-the-freedom-to-choose-planned-parenthood-as-their-health-care-provider-259953

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Beyond playgrounds: how less structured city spaces can nurture children’s creativity and independence

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Jose Antonio Lara-Hernandez, Senior Researcher in Architecture, Auckland University of Technology

    Getty Images

    Children’s play is essential for their cognitive, physical and social development. But in cities, spaces to play are usually separated, often literally fenced off, from the rest of urban life.

    In our new study, we compare children’s use of such spaces in Auckland, New Zealand, and Venice, Italy. Our findings present a paradox: playgrounds built for safety can stifle creativity and mobility, while self-organising open spaces offer rich opportunities to explore and belong.

    In Auckland, places such as Taumata Reserve are a testimony to contemporary playground design – grassy, shaded, equipped with slides and swings, and buffered from traffic. Such places are an oasis cherished by caregivers for the sense of perceived safety they provide.

    Yet during our observations, we noted how these spaces function not necessarily as an oasis or a point for social encounter, but rather as isolated refuge islands, disconnected from the city’s everyday life. Children’s independent mobility and opportunities for diverse play activities remained limited and predefined.

    Children in urban spaces in Venice are free to find their own spontaneous activities.
    Antonio Lara-Hernandez, CC BY-SA

    Contrast this with Venice’s Santa Croce neighbourhood. Car-free streets and piazzas, such as Campo San Giacomo dell’Orio above, pulsate with life. We saw children play ball, draw on pavements, chase each other and even water plants. These spaces are shared inter-generational stages.

    To compare children’s experience, we measured the diversity of activities (a proxy for creativity). Auckland’s Taumata Reserve scored just 1.46. In contrast, Venice scored 2.33, with more than 2,600 spontaneous acts in the streets, reflecting a child-led play culture.

    Why this matters

    Play is not a luxury. It is a fundamental necessity of life to understand, navigate and adapt to the complexities of the world.

    From a deterministic perspective, contemporary Western cultures (such as in Europe and New Zealand) prescribe diverse benefits of play. This includes learning and developing resilience, spatial awareness and social skills.

    In Auckland, safety is the focus. While inclusion for children with special needs is understandable, it may inadvertently limit the collective capacity for vital and formative developmental experiences at the neighbourhood scale.

    Global research shows declining children’s mobility, linked to car dependency and adult-controlled routines. This reduces children’s activity radius, constrains confidence and diminishes connection to place. For one of us, a father of two, watching his daughters navigate parks underscores this: children need to be able to learn risk competency.

    Venice is a cultural model we can draw lessons from. Its pedestrian streets let children roam, climb statues and play hide-and-seek on bridges. This exposure to risks builds judgement, adaptability and agency. It also makes children co-creators of urban life.

    Children in Venice’s car-free piazza San Giacomo dell’Orio play ball, draw on pavements and chase each other.
    Authors provided, CC BY-SA

    Our study uses what we call “temporary appropriation” – when children use spaces in unplanned, creative ways – and a design framework called SPIRAL, which draws from individual experiences and cultural narratives to build public spaces.

    Auckland’s rules and fences curb this; Venice’s human-scale design invites it.
    Venice’s conditions foster risk competency in children and caregivers, strengthening community bonds through a culture of care. Auckland’s spaces for play are spatially fragmented, limiting social encounters and the risk-taking skills vital for development.

    Auckland’s playgrounds tend to be separated and limit the development of risk-taking skills.
    Shutterstock/Mary Star

    From a New Zealand perspective, it is also essential to recognise the significance of place-based belonging from a Māori worldview. Concepts such as whakapapa (genealogy), whenua (land) and whanaungatanga (relational ties) emphasise deep, inter-generational connections to place.

    In this view, play is not merely recreation but a cultural expression; a way for children to experience turangawaewae (a place to stand).

    What other cities can learn

    From our research, we can draw lessons for how urban spaces might be reimagined to better support children’s wellbeing and autonomy. This includes:

    • Designing public spaces with natural elements, “risky art”, loose parts and creative equipment for open-ended play that balances safety without compromising opportunities for discovery and risk-taking

    • reducing the number of cars and slowing speeds to achieve better outcomes for children

    • reclaiming streets so that all people and animals can have positive adventures

    • prioritising policies for car-free or traffic-calmed areas across neighbourhoods and in proximity to social places (schools, libraries, shops, parks) to contribute to a culture where safety is a collective responsibility and a commitment towards a stronger social cohesion

    • proactively involving children in urban design through place-making and temporary appropriation; it is their right to be heard and listened to through the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child

    • encouraging participatory co-design workshops and action-focused initiatives to harness children’s insights to design spaces that meet needs

    • considering nuanced and emotional indicators for success such as belonging, curiosity, joy and inter-generational exchange rather than just efficiency or maintenance cost

    • and collaboratively modifying the environment over time.

    We envision cities where children roam freely, invent and experience deeper and authentic belonging. Venice proves that shared public spaces help children enrich and shape cities, as much as the rest of the population does.

    Safe playgrounds are only a starting point. For healthy, regenerative and vibrant cities to work, we need to realise that children should have agency to shape the complex assemblage that cities really are. Let’s build urban futures where children don’t just play, but can have positive adventures.

    The choices we make today matter. We can either feed the fear or meet the cultural challenge together by embracing the positive adventures of life, with a sense of collective wellbeing, care and stewardship.

    Jose Antonio Lara-Hernandez received funding for the Horizon 2020 CRUNCH project and was a member of the curatorial team of the Italian Pavilion for the Venice Biennale 2021. He is a senior member of City Space Architecture and the International Society of City and Regional Planners.

    Gregor Mews has previously served as a founding director of the Australian Institute of Play and currently serves as a council board member of City Space Architecture as well as a member of the International Society of City and Regional Planners.

    – ref. Beyond playgrounds: how less structured city spaces can nurture children’s creativity and independence – https://theconversation.com/beyond-playgrounds-how-less-structured-city-spaces-can-nurture-childrens-creativity-and-independence-257481

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: NATO’s 5% of GDP defence target ramps up pressure on Australia to spend vastly more

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Jennifer Parker, Adjunct Fellow, Naval Studies at UNSW Canberra, and Expert Associate, National Security College, Australian National University

    After lobbying by US President Donald Trump, NATO leaders have promised to boost annual defence spending to 5% of their countries’ gross domestic product (GDP) by 2035.

    A NATO statement released this week said:

    United in the face of profound security threats and challenges, in particular the long-term threat posed by Russia to Euro-Atlantic security and the persistent threat of terrorism, allies commit to invest 5% of GDP annually on core defence requirements as well as defence-and security-related spending by 2035.

    This development comes at a tricky time for the Albanese government. It has so far batted away suggestions Australia should increase its defence spending from current levels of around 2% of gross domestic product (GDP), or almost A$59 billion per year (and projected to reach 2.33% of GDP by 2033–34). Trump has called on Australia to increase this to about 3.5%.

    With this NATO agreement, global security deteriorating and defence capability gaps obvious, pressure is mounting on the Australian government to increase defence spending further.

    Pressure from Trump

    A long‑time critic of NATO, Trump and his key officials have castigated NATO’s readiness and spending.

    Meanwhile, Russia’s war on Ukraine, now in its fourth year, and a spate of suspected Russian sabotage across Europe have sharpened concerns about allied preparedness.

    Against this backdrop, the NATO summit saw Trump publicly reaffirms US commitment to the alliance, and European members pledged to lift defence spending.

    What exactly did NATO promise and why?

    The headlines say NATO members agreed to increase annual defence spending to 5% of GDP by 2035.

    In fact, the actual agreement is more nuanced.

    The summit communique, notably shorter than in previous years, broke the pledge down into two parts.

    The first is 3.5% of GDP on what is considered traditional defence spending: ships, tanks, bullets, people and so on.

    The second part – the remaining 1.5% of GDP – is to

    protect our critical infrastructure, defend our networks, ensure our civil preparedness and resilience, unleash innovation, and strengthen our defence industrial base.

    Exactly what strategic resilience initiatives this money will be spent on is up to the individual member nation.

    It might be tempting to paint NATO’s commitment to increased defence spending as evidence of European NATO partners bowing to US political pressure.

    But it’s more than that. It is a direct response to the increased threat posed by Russia to Europe, and perhaps an insurance policy against any doubts European NATO partners may have about the US reliability and enduring commitment to the 76-year-old alliance between the US and Europe.

    However, not all countries are keen on the defence spending commitment, with notable reservations from Spain and Belgium.

    These two countries are yet to meet NATO’s 2014 commitment to spend 2% of GDP on defence.

    What’s all this mean for Australia?

    The commitment to hike NATO defence spending will have an indirect impact on Australia’s own beleaguered defence spending debate.

    As mentioned, Australia’s main strategic ally – the US – has pressured Australia to hike defence spending to 3.5% of GDP, up from around 2.02% of GDP this financial year (which the government projects will reach 2.33% by 2033–34).

    Australia is not the only Indo-Pacific partner being pushed to spend more on defence. Japan is too.

    This is consistent with US Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth’s Shangri-La speech in May, when he urged Asian allies to step up on defence spending, pointing to Europe as the model.

    The NATO announcement will likely embolden the US to apply greater pressure on the Australia to increase defence spending.

    Trump’s strategy towards NATO has clearly been to sow ambiguity in the minds of European countries as to the US’ commitment to NATO, to get them to come to the table on defence spending.

    This may well be a future Australia faces, too. It could mean a bumpy road ahead for Australia and its most crucial alliance partner.

    Where to from here?

    Prime Minister Anthony Albanese has said Australia will determine its own level of defence spending, and that arbitrary GDP limits are unhelpful. Defence spending, he argues, should be based on capability needs, not demands from allies.

    And he is right, to a point.

    That said, allies have a right to have an expectation all parties in the alliance are holding up their end of the bargain.

    Australian defence spending should be based on the capabilities it needs to resource its stated defence strategy and defend its core interests. Currently, in my view, Australia’s defence capability does not match its current strategy.

    There are clear gaps in Australia’s defence capabilities, including:

    • its aged naval capability
    • a lack of mine warfare, replenishment and survey capabilities
    • a limited ability to protect critical infrastructure against missile attack
    • space capabilities.

    These are key risks, at the moment of possibly most significant strategic circumstances since the second world war.

    In the event of a major crisis or conflict in the region, Australia would not presently be able to defend itself for a prolonged period. To address this requires structural reform and defence investment.

    In response to this week’s NATO announcement, Defence Minister Richard Marles said:

    We have gone about the business of not chasing a number, but thinking about what is our capability need, and then resourcing it.

    During the election campaign both the prime minister and defence minister left the door open to increasing defence spending.

    The real unknown is how long it will take to make it happen, and how much damage it may do in the meantime to Australia’s relationship with the US and overall defence-preparedness.

    Jennifer Parker is affiliated with UNSW Canberra and ANU’s National Security College.

    – ref. NATO’s 5% of GDP defence target ramps up pressure on Australia to spend vastly more – https://theconversation.com/natos-5-of-gdp-defence-target-ramps-up-pressure-on-australia-to-spend-vastly-more-259886

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: One bad rainstorm away from disaster: why proposed changes to forestry rules won’t solve the ‘slash’ problem

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Mark Bloomberg, Adjunct Senior Fellow, Te Kura Ngahere-New Zealand School of Forestry, University of Canterbury

    Murry Cave/Gisborne District Council, CC BY-SA

    The biggest environmental problems for commercial plantation forestry in New Zealand’s steep hill country are discharges of slash (woody debris left behind after logging) and sediment from clear-fell harvests.

    During the past 15 years, there have been 15 convictions of forestry companies for slash and sediment discharges into rivers, on land and along the coastline.

    Such discharges are meant to be controlled by the National Environmental Standards for Commercial Forestry, which set environmental rules for forestry activities such as logging roads and clear-fell harvesting. The standards are part of the Resource Management Act (RMA), which the government is reforming.

    The government revised the standards’ slash-management rules in 2023 after Cyclone Gabrielle. But it it is now consulting on a proposal to further amend the standards because of cost, uncertainty and compliance issues.

    We believe the proposed changes fail to address the core reasons for slash and sediment discharges.

    We recently analysed five convictions of forestry companies under the RMA for illegal discharges. Based on this analysis, which has been accepted for publication in the New Zealand Journal of Forestry, we argue that the standards should set limits to the size and location of clear-felling areas on erosion-susceptible land.

    Why the courts convicted 5 forestry companies

    In the aftermath of destructive storms in the Gisborne district during June 2018, five forestry companies were convicted for breaches of the RMA for discharges of slash and sediment from their clear-fell harvesting operations. These discharges resulted from landslides and collapsed earthworks (including roads).

    There has been a lot of criticism of forestry’s performance during these storms and subsequent events such as Cyclone Gabrielle. However, little attention has been given to why the courts decided to convict the forestry companies for breaches of the RMA.

    The courts’ decisions clearly explain why the sediment and slash discharges happened, why the forestry companies were at fault, and what can be done to prevent these discharges in future on erosion-prone land.

    New Zealand’s plantation forest land is ranked for its susceptibility to erosion using a four-colour scale, from green (low) to red (very high). Because of the high erosion susceptibility, additional RMA permissions (consents) for earthworks and harvesting are required on red-ranked areas.

    This map shows areas with the highest and lowest susceptibility to erosion.
    David Palmer/Te Uru Rākau, CC BY-SA

    New Zealand-wide, only 7% of plantation forests are on red land. A further 17% are on orange (high susceptibility) land. But in the Gisborne district, 55% of commercial forests are on red land. This is why trying to manage erosion is such a problem in Gisborne’s forests.

    Key findings from the forestry cases

    In all five cases, the convicted companies had consents from the Gisborne District Council to build logging roads and clear-fell large areas covering hundreds or even thousands of hectares.

    A significant part of the sediment and slash discharges originated from landslides that were primed to occur after the large-scale clear-fell harvests. But since the harvests were lawful, these landslides were not relevant to the decision to convict.

    Instead, all convictions were for compliance failures where logging roads and log storage areas collapsed or slash was not properly disposed of, even though these only partly contributed to the collective sediment and slash discharges downstream.

    The court concluded that:

    1. Clear-fell harvesting on land highly susceptible to erosion required absolute compliance with resource consent conditions. Failures to correctly build roads or manage slash contributed to slash and sediment discharges downstream.

    2. Even with absolute compliance, clear-felling on such land was still risky. This was because a significant portion of the discharges were due to the lawful activity of cutting down trees and removing them, leaving the land vulnerable to landslides and other erosion.

    The second conclusion is critical. It means that even if forestry companies are fully compliant with the standards and consents, slash and sediment discharges can still happen after clear-felling. And if this happens, councils can require companies to clean up these discharges and prevent them from happening again.

    This is not a hypothetical scenario. Recently, the Gisborne District Council successfully applied to the Environment Court for enforcement orders requiring clean-up of slash deposits and remediation of harvesting sites. If the forestry companies fail to comply, they can be held in contempt of court.

    A typical scale of clear-felling affected by the June 2018 storms.
    Murry Cave/Gisborne District Council, CC BY-SA

    Regulations are not just red tape

    This illustrates a major problem with the standards that applies to erosion-susceptible forest land everywhere in New Zealand, not just in the Gisborne district. Regulations are not just “red tape”. They provide certainty to businesses that as long as they are compliant, their activities should be free from legal prosecution and enforcement.

    The courts’ decisions and council enforcement actions show that forestry companies can face considerable legal risk, even if compliant with regulatory requirements for earthworks and harvesting.

    Clear-felled forests on erosion-prone land are one bad rainstorm away from disaster. But with well planned, careful harvesting of small forest areas, this risk can be kept at a tolerable level.

    However, the standards and the proposed amendments do not require small clear-fell areas on erosion-prone land. If this shortcoming is not fixed, communities and ecosystems will continue to bear the brunt of the discharges from large-scale clear-fell harvests.

    To solve this problem, the standards must proactively limit the size and location of clear-felling areas on erosion-prone land. This will address the main cause of catastrophic slash and sediment discharges from forests, protecting communities and ecosystems. And it will enable forestry companies to plan their harvests with greater confidence that they will not be subject to legal action.

    Mark Bloomberg receives funding from the government’s Envirolink fund and from local authorities and forestry companies. He is a member of the NZ Institute of Forestry and the NZ Society of Soil Science.

    Steve Urlich 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. One bad rainstorm away from disaster: why proposed changes to forestry rules won’t solve the ‘slash’ problem – https://theconversation.com/one-bad-rainstorm-away-from-disaster-why-proposed-changes-to-forestry-rules-wont-solve-the-slash-problem-258280

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: The drought in southern Australia is not over – it just looks that way

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Andrew B. Watkins, Associate research scientist, School of Earth, Atmopshere & Environment, Monash University

    Andrew Watkins

    How often do you mow your lawn in winter? That may seem like an odd way to start a conversation about drought. But the answer helps explain why our current drought has not broken, despite recent rain – and why spring lamb may be more expensive this year.

    Southern Australia has been short of rain for 16 months. Western Victoria, the agricultural regions of South Australia (including Adelaide) and even parts of western Tasmania are suffering record dry conditions. Those rainfall measurements began in 1900 (126 years ago).

    Large parts of southeastern Australia have experienced the lowest rainfall on record over the past 16 months. Serious deficiency means among the driest 10% of such periods on record, Severe deficiency means among the driest 5%.
    Bureau of Meteorology

    Fewer and less intense rain-bearing weather systems have been crossing the southern coastline since February 2024, compared to normal. Put simply, the land has not received enough big dumps of rain.

    But June has finally brought rain to some drought-affected regions. There’s even an emerald green tinge to the fields in certain agricultural areas. But it’s now too cold for plants to really grow fast, meaning farmers will be carting hay and buying extra feed for livestock until the weather warms in spring.

    Lambs in the Adelaide Hills have little to eat without extra feed.
    Saskia Jones

    Too little, too late

    This month, some areas received good rainfall – including places near Melbourne and, to a lesser degree, Adelaide. City people may be forgiven for thinking the drought has broken and farmers are rejoicing. But drought is not that simple.

    Unfortunately, the rainfall was inconsistent, especially further inland. The coastal deluge in parts of southern Australia in early June didn’t extend far north. Traditionally, the start of the winter crop-growing season is marked by 25mm of rain over three days – a so-called “autumn break”. But many areas didn’t receive the break this year.

    The lack of rain (meteorological drought) compounded the lack of water in the soil for crops and pasture (agricultural drought). Parts of Western Australia, SA, Victoria, Tasmania and southern New South Wales had little moisture left in their soils. So some rain is quickly soaked up as it drains into deeper soils.

    To make matters worse, autumn was the warmest on record for southern Australia, following its second-warmest summer on record. This can increase the “thirst” of the atmosphere, meaning any water on the surface is more likely to evaporate. Recent thirsty droughts, such as the 2017–19 Tinderbox Drought in NSW, were particularly hard-hitting.

    Some areas may have experienced “flash drought”, which is when the landscape and vegetation dry up far quicker than you would expect from the lack of rain alone. By May, areas of significantly elevated evaporative stress were present in southeastern SA, Victoria, southern NSW and northern Tasmania.

    In late May and early June, and again this week, there have been winter dust storms in SA. Such dust storms are a bad sign of how dry the ground has become.

    Some regions no longer have enough water to fill rivers and dams (hydrological drought). Water restrictions have been introduced in parts of southwest Victoria and Tasmania. The bureau’s streamflow forecast does not look promising.

    The landscape near Mortlake in western Victoria was still dry in late May. Typically the autumn break (first post-summer rain event of more than 25 mm) occurs here by early May.
    Andrew Watkins

    A green drought

    Remember that lawn mowing analogy? The winter chill has already set in across the south. This means it’s simply too cold for any vigorous new grass growth, and why you are not mowing your lawn very often at the moment.

    Cool temperatures, rather than just low rainfall, also limit pasture growth. While from a distance the rain has added an emerald sheen to some of the landscape, it’s often just a green tinge. Up close, it’s clear there is very limited new growth.

    Rather than abundant and vigorous new shoots, there’s just a little bit of green returning to surviving grasses. This means there’s very limited feed for livestock. To make matters worse, sometimes the green comes from better-adapted winter weeds.

    There will be a lot of hay carting, regardless of rainfall, until spring when the soils start to warm up once again and new growth returns. This all adds up to fewer stock kept in paddocks or a big extra cost in time and money for farmers – and ultimately, a more expensive spring lamb barbecue.

    Is this climate change?

    Southern Australia (southern WA, SA, Tasmania, Victoria and southern NSW) used to experience almost weekly rain events in autumn and early winter. Cold fronts and deep low-pressure systems rolling in from the west brought the bulk of the rainfall.

    Now there is a far more sporadic pattern in these regions. Rainfall in the April to October crop and pasture growing season has declined by around 10–20% since the middle of last century. The strongest drying trend is evident during the crucial months between April and July.

    Further reductions in southern growing season rainfall are expected by the end of this century, especially in southwestern Australia. Southeastern regions, including southern Victoria, parts of SA and northern Tasmania, also show a consistent drying trend, with a greater time spent in drought every decade.

    Drought is complex. Just because it’s raining doesn’t always mean it has rained enough, or at the right time, or in the right place. To make matters worse, a green drought can even deceive us into thinking everything is fine.

    Breaking the meteorological drought will require consistent rainfall over several months. Breaking the agricultural drought will also require more warmth in the soils. Outlooks suggest we may have to wait for spring.

    This article includes scientific contributions from David Jones and Pandora Hope from the Australian Bureau of Meteorology.



    Read more:
    Why is southern Australia in drought – and when will it end?

    Ailie Gallant receives funding from the Australian Research Council and the National Environmental Science Program Climate Systems Hub.

    Pallavi Goswami works at Monash University. She receives funding from the National Environmental Science Program, Climate Systems Hub.

    Andrew B. Watkins 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. The drought in southern Australia is not over – it just looks that way – https://theconversation.com/the-drought-in-southern-australia-is-not-over-it-just-looks-that-way-259543

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Lung cancer screening is about to start. What you need to know if you smoke or have quit

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Ian Olver, Adjunct Professsor, School of Psychology, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, University of Adelaide

    Magic mine/Shutterstock

    From July, eligible Australians will be screened for lung cancer as part of the nation’s first new cancer screening program for almost 20 years.

    The program aims to detect lung cancer early, before symptoms emerge and cancer spreads. This early detection and treatment is predicted to save lives.

    Why lung cancer?

    Lung cancer is Australia’s fifth most diagnosed cancer but causes the greatest number of cancer deaths.

    It’s more common in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people, rural and remote Australians, and lower income groups than in the general population.

    Overall, less than one in five patients with lung cancer will survive five years. But for those diagnosed when the cancer is small and has not spread, two-thirds of people survive five years.

    Who is eligible?

    The lung cancer screening program only targets people at higher risk of lung cancer, based on their smoking history and their age. This is different to a population-wide screening program, such as screening for bowel cancer, which is based on age alone.

    The lung cancer program screens people 50-70 years old with no signs or symptoms of lung cancer such as breathlessness, a persisting cough, coughing up blood, chest pain, becoming very tired or losing weight.

    To be eligible, current smokers must also have a history of at least 30 “pack years”. To calculate this you multiply the number of packets (of 20 cigarettes) you smoke a day by the number of years you’ve been smoking them.

    For instance, if you smoke one packet (20 cigarettes) a day for a year that is one pack year. Smoking two packets a day for six months (half a year) is also a pack year.

    People who have quit smoking in the past ten years but have accumulated 30 or more pack years before quitting are also eligible.

    Heavy smokers aged 50-70 may be eligible for screening.
    Gyorgy Barna/Shutterstock

    What does screening involve?

    Ask your GP or health worker if you are eligible. If you are, you will be referred for a low-dose computed tomography (CT) scan. This uses much lower doses of x-rays than a regular CT but is enough to find nodules in the lung. These are small lumps which could be clumps of cancer cells, inflammatory cells or scarring from old infections.

    Imaging involves lying on a table for 10-15 minutes while the scanner takes images of your chest. So people must also be able to lie flat in a scanner to be part of the program.

    After the scan, the results are sent to you, your GP and the National Cancer Screening Register. You’ll be contacted if the scan is normal and will then be reminded in two years’ time to screen again.

    If your scan has findings that need to be followed, you will be sent back to your GP who may arrange a further scan in three to 12 months.

    If lung cancer is suspected, you will be referred to a lung specialist for further tests.

    What are the benefits and risks?

    International trials show screening people at high risk of lung cancer reduces their chance of dying prematurely from it, and the benefits outweigh any harm.

    The aim is to save lives by increasing the detection of stage 1 disease (a small cancer, 4 centimetres or less, confined to the lung), which has a greater chance of being treated successfully.

    The risks of radiation exposure are minimised by using low-dose CT screening.

    The other greatest risk is a false positive. This is where the imaging suggests cancer, but further tests rule it out. This varies across studies from almost one in ten to one in two of those having their first scan. If imaging suggests cancer, this usually requires a repeat scan. But about one in 100 of those whose imaging suggests cancer but were later found not to have it have invasive biopsies. This involves taking a sample of the nodule to see if it contains cancerous cells.

    Some people will be diagnosed with a cancer that will never cause a problem in their lifetime, for instance because it is slow growing or they are likely to die of other illnesses first. This so-called overdiagnosis varies from none to two-thirds of lung cancers diagnosed, depending on the study.

    Imaging involves a low-dose CT scan.
    Peakstock/Shutterstock

    How much will it cost?

    The Australian government has earmarked A$264 million over four years to screen for lung cancer, and $101 million a year after that.

    The initial GP consultation will be free if your GP bulk bills, or if not you may be charged an out-of-pocket fee for the consultation. This may be a barrier to the uptake of screening. Subsequent investigations and consultations will be billed as usual.

    There will be no cost for the low-dose CT scans.

    What should I do?

    If you are 50-70 and a heavy smoker see your GP about screening for lung cancer. But the greater gain in terms of reducing your risk of lung cancer is to also give up smoking.

    If you’ve already given up smoking, you’ve already reduced your risk of lung cancer. However, since lung cancer can take several years to develop or show on a CT scan, see your GP if you were once a heavy smoker but have quit in the past ten years to see if you are eligible for screening.

    This is the first article in our ‘Finding lung cancer’ series, which explores Australia’s first new cancer screening program in almost 20 years.

    More information about the program is available. If you need support to quit smoking, call Quitline on 13 78 48.

    Ian Olver receives funding from the Australian Research Council.

    – ref. Lung cancer screening is about to start. What you need to know if you smoke or have quit – https://theconversation.com/lung-cancer-screening-is-about-to-start-what-you-need-to-know-if-you-smoke-or-have-quit-253227

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: What do the Bible, the Quran and the Torah say about the justification for war?

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Robyn J. Whitaker, Associate Professor, New Testament, & Director of The Wesley Centre for Theology, Ethics, and Public Policy, University of Divinity

    Wars are often waged in the name of religion. So what do key texts from Christianity, Islam and Judaism say about the justification for war?

    We asked three experts for their views.

    The Bible

    Robyn J. Whitaker, University of Divinity

    The Bible presents war as an inevitable reality of human life. This is captured in the cry of the Teacher in Ecclesiastes:

    for everything there is a season […] a time for war and a time for peace.

    In this sense, the Bible reflects the experiences of the authors and communities who shaped the texts over more than a thousand years as they experienced both victory and defeat as a small nation among the large empires of the ancient near east.

    When it comes to God’s role in war, we cannot shirk from the problematic violence associated with the divine. At times, God orders the Hebrew people to go to war and enact horrendous violence. Deuteronomy 20 is a good example of this: God’s people are sent to war with the blessing of the priest but told to first offer terms of peace. If peace terms are accepted, the town is enslaved. Certain enemies, however, are decreed worthy of total annihilation, and the Hebrew army is commanded to destroy anyone and anything that doesn’t produce food.

    On other occasions, war is interpreted as a tool, a punishment where God uses foreign nations against the Hebrew people because they have gone astray (Judges 2:14). You can also find an underlying ethic to treat the captives of war justly. Moses commands that women captured in war are to be treated as wives, not slaves (Deuteronomy 21), and in 2 Chronicles, captives are allowed to return home.

    In contrast to war as divinely authorised, many of the Hebrew prophets express hope in a time where God will bring peace and people will “neither learn war any more” (Micah 3:4) but rather turn their weapons into tools for agriculture (Isaiah 2:4).

    War is viewed as a result of human sinfulness, something that God will ultimately transform into peace. And that peace (Hebrew: shalom) is more than an absence of war. It is about human flourishing and unity between peoples and God.

    Most of the New Testament was written during the first century CE, when Jews and emerging Christians were a minority within the Roman Empire. The military power of Rome is harshly critiqued as evil in resistance texts such as the Book of Revelation. Many early Christians refused to fight in the Roman army.

    In this context, Jesus says nothing specific about war but generally rejects violence. When Jesus’s disciple Peter seeks to defend him with a sword, Jesus tells him to put away his sword because a sword only leads to more violence (Matthew 26:52). This is consistent with Jesus’s other teachings such as “blessed are the peacemakers” or his commands to “turn the other cheek” when struck or to “love your enemies”.

    The reality is that we find various war ideologies in the Bible’s pages. If you want to find a justification for war in the Bible, you can. If you want to find a justification for peace or pacifism, that is there too. Later Christians would develop ideas of “just war” and pacifism based on biblical ideas, but these are developments rather than explicit within the Bible.

    For Christians, Jesus’s teaching provides an ethical framework for interpreting earlier war texts through the lens of love for enemies. This counterpoint to divine violence and war points readers back to the prophets, whose hopeful visions imagine a world where violence and suffering are no more and peace is possible.

    The Quran

    Mehmet Ozalp, Charles Sturt University

    Islam and Muslims emerged onto the world stage in the hostile environment of the seventh century. In response to major challenges, including warfare, Islam introduced pioneering legal and ethical reforms. The Quran and the Prophet Muhammad’s example laid out clear legal and ethical guidelines for the conduct of war, well before similar frameworks appeared in other societies.

    Islam did this by defining a new term, “jihad” rather than the usual Arabic word for war, “harb”. While harb refers broadly to warfare, jihad was defined within Islamic teachings as a legal, morally justified struggle, which includes but is not limited to armed conflict. In the context of warfare, jihad refers specifically to fighting in a just cause under clear legal and ethical guidelines, rather than belligerent or aggressive warfare.

    Between 610-622, Prophet Muhammad practised active non-violence in the face of the constant suffering, persecution and economic embargo he and his followers endured in Mecca, despite insistent approaches by his followers to take up arms. This showed that armed struggle cannot be taken up within the members of the same society, as this would lead to anarchy.

    After leaving his home town to escape persecution, he established a pluralistic and multi-faith society in Medina. He took active steps to sign treaties with neighbouring tribes. Despite following a deliberate strategy of peace and diplomacy, the hostile Meccans and allied tribes attacked the Muslims in Medina. Engaging these attackers in an armed struggle was unavoidable.

    The permission to fight was given to Muslims by the Quran verses 22:39-40:

    The believers against whom war is waged are given permission to fight in response, for they have been wronged. Surely, God has full power to help them to victory. Those who have been driven from their homeland against all right, for no other reason than that they say, “Our Lord is God” […]

    This passage not only permits armed struggle but also offers a moral justification for just war. It means war is clearly just when defensive — while aggression is unjust and condemned. Elsewhere, the Quran emphasises this point:

    If they withdraw from you and do not fight against you, and offer you peace, then God allows you no way (to war) against them.

    Verse 22:39 outlines two ethical justifications for warfare. The first is when people are driven from their homes (and land) – in other words, through occupation by a foreign power. The second is when people are attacked because of their beliefs to the point of violent persecution and attack.

    Importantly, verse 22:40 includes churches, monasteries and synagogues. If believers in God do not defend themselves, all places of worship would be destroyed, so this is to be prevented by force if necessary.

    The Quran does not allow for aggression, since “God loves not the aggressors” (2:190). It also provides detailed regulations on who is to fight and who is exempted (9:91); when hostilities must cease (2:193); and prisoners should be treated humanely and with fairness (47:4).

    Verses such as 2:294 emphasise that warfare and any response to violence and aggression must be proportional and within limits:

    Whoever attacks you, attack them in like manner as they attacked you. Nevertheless, fear God and remain within the bounds.

    In the event of unavoidable war, every opportunity to end it must be pursued:

    But if the enemy inclines towards peace, then you must also incline towards peace and trust in God.

    The aim of military action is to end hostilities and remove the reason for warfare, not to humiliate or annihilate the enemy.

    Military jihad cannot be pursued for personal ambition or to further nationalistic or ethnic disputes. Muslims cannot wage war on nations that have no hostility towards them (60:8). But if there is open hostility and attack, Muslims have a right to defend themselves.

    The Prophet and the early caliphs specifically warned military leaders and all combatants that they must not act treacherously or engage in indiscriminate killing and pillage. He said:

    Do not kill women, children, the elderly, or the sick. Do not destroy palm trees or burn houses.

    Because of these teachings, Muslims have had legal and ethical guidelines throughout much of history to help limit human suffering caused by war.

    The Torah

    Suzanne D. Rutland, University of Sydney

    Judaism is not a pacifist religion, but in its traditions it values peace above all else, and prayers for peace are central to Jewish liturgy. At the same time, there is a recognition of the need to fight defensive wars, but only within certain boundaries.

    In the Torah, the Five Books of Moses, the recognition of the need for war is clear. Throughout their journeying in the desert, the Israelites (Children of Israel) fight various battles. At the same time, in Deuteronomy, the Israelites are instructed (chapter 12, verse 10):

    When you go forth against your enemies and are in camp, then you should keep yourself from every evil thing.

    The story of Amalek is the symbol of ultimate evil in Jewish tradition. Scholars argue this is because his army attacked the Israelites from the rear – killing defenceless women and children.

    The Torah also stresses that army service is compulsory. Yet, Deuteronomy elaborates four categories of people who are exempt:

    • someone who has built a home but has not yet dedicated it
    • someone who has planted a vineyard but has not yet eaten of its fruit
    • someone who is engaged or in his first year of marriage
    • someone who is afraid, in case he influences other soldiers with his fear.
    Judaism is not a pacifist religion, but in its traditions it values peace above all else.
    Shutterstock

    It is important to point out that the disdain of war is so strong that King David was not permitted to build the temple in Jerusalem because of his military career. His son, Solomon, was allocated this task, but no iron was to be used in the building because this represented war and violence, while the temple was to represent peace, the ideal virtue.

    The vision of peace for all humanity is further developed in the prophetic writings and the concept of the Messiah. This is seen particularly in the writings of the prophet Isiah, who envisaged an age when, as he describes in his idyllic vision:

    they shall beat their swords into ploughshares, and their spears into pruning hooks; nation shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall they learn war any more.

    The Mishnah, the first part of the Talmud, raises the concept of an “obligatory war” (milhemet mizvah). This encompasses the biblical wars against the seven nations said to inhabit the Promised Land, the war against Amalek, and the Jewish nation’s defensive wars. It is, accordingly, a clearly defined and recognisable class.

    Not so the second category, “permitted war” (milhemet reshut), which is more open-ended and, as scholar Avi Ravitsky writes, “could relate to a preemptive war”.

    After the Talmudic period, which ended in the 7th century, this debate became theoretical, since Jews living in Palestine and the diaspora no longer had an army. This was largely the case from the time of the defeat of the Bar Kokhba Rebellion against the Romans (132–135 CE), apart from a few small Jewish kingdoms in Arabia.

    However, with the return of the early Zionist pioneers to the Land of Israel in the late 19th and 20th century, the rabbinic debates of what constitutes an obligatory, defensive war and what is a permitted war, as well as the characteristics of a forbidden war has reignited. This is a subject of deep concern and controversy for both academics and rabbis today.

    Robyn J. Whitaker is affiliated with The Wesley Centre for Theology, Ethics, and Public Policy.

    Mehmet Ozalp is affiliated with Islamic Sciences and Research Academy

    Suzanne Rutland has received an Australian Research Council grant for her research on the Australian Jewry and funding from the Pratt Foundation, as well as an Australian Prime Ministers Centre (APMC) fellowship for her research on Soviet Jewry and Australia. She is also involved with numerous NGOs, including the Australian Jewish Historical Society (patron), the Australian Association for Jewish Studies (past president and committee member), and the Australian government’s expert delegation to the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance. In addition, she is a board member of the Freilich Project for the Study of Bigotry at ANU; she is on an academic advisory committee at the Sydney Jewish Museum; she is the director of the Australian Academic Alliance Against Antisemitism; and she is an Australian board member for Boys Town Jerusalem and a board member of Better Balance Futures for faith communities These roles are all undertaken in an honorary capacity. She is also writing the history of the Executive Council of Australian Jewry in an honorary capacity.

    – ref. What do the Bible, the Quran and the Torah say about the justification for war? – https://theconversation.com/what-do-the-bible-the-quran-and-the-torah-say-about-the-justification-for-war-259679

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –