NewzIntel.com

Category: Analysis

  • MIL-Evening Report: Do you talk to AI when you’re feeling down? Here’s where chatbots get their therapy advice

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Centaine Snoswell, Senior Research Fellow, Centre for Health Services Research, The University of Queensland

    Pexels/Mikoto

    As more and more people spend time chatting with artificial intelligence (AI) chatbots such as ChatGPT, the topic of mental health has naturally emerged. Some people have positive experiences that make AI seem like a low-cost therapist.

    But AIs aren’t therapists. They’re smart and engaging, but they don’t think like humans. ChatGPT and other generative AI models are like your phone’s auto-complete text feature on steroids. They have learned to converse by reading text scraped from the internet.

    When someone asks a question (called a prompt) such as “how can I stay calm during a stressful work meeting?” the AI forms a response by randomly choosing words that are as close as possible to the data it saw during training. This happens so fast, with responses that are so relevant, it can feel like talking to a person.

    But these models aren’t people. And they definitely are not trained mental health professionals who work under professional guidelines, adhere to a code of ethics, or hold professional registration.

    Where does it learn to talk about this stuff?

    When you prompt an AI system such as ChatGPT, it draws information from three main sources to respond:

    1. background knowledge it memorised during training
    2. external information sources
    3. information you previously provided.

    1. Background knowledge

    To develop an AI language model, the developers teach the model by having it read vast quantities of data in a process called “training”.

    Where does this information come from? Broadly speaking, anything that can be publicly scraped from the internet. This can include everything from academic papers, eBooks, reports, free news articles, through to blogs, YouTube transcripts, or comments from discussion forums such as Reddit.

    Are these sources reliable places to find mental health advice? Sometimes.
    Are they always in your best interest and filtered through a scientific evidence based approach? Not always. The information is also captured at a single point in time when the AI is built, so may be out-of-date.

    A lot of detail also needs to be discarded to squish it into the AI’s “memory”. This is part of why AI models are prone to hallucination and getting details wrong.

    2. External information sources

    The AI developers might connect the chatbot itself with external tools, or knowledge sources, such as Google for searches or a curated database.

    When you ask Microsoft’s Bing Copilot a question and you see numbered references in the answer, this indicates the AI has relied on an external search to get updated information in addition to what is stored in its memory.

    Meanwhile, some dedicated mental health chatbots are able to access therapy guides and materials to help direct conversations along helpful lines.

    3. Information previously provided

    AI platforms also have access to information you have previously supplied in conversations, or when signing up to the platform.

    When you register for the companion AI platform Replika, for example, it learns your name, pronouns, age, preferred companion appearance and gender, IP address and location, the kind of device you are using, and more (as well as your credit card details).

    On many chatbot platforms, anything you’ve ever said to an AI companion might be stored away for future reference. All of these details can be dredged up and referenced when an AI responds.

    And we know these AI systems are like friends who affirm what you say (a problem known as sycophancy) and steer conversation back to interests you have already discussed. This is unlike a professional therapist who can draw from training and experience to help challenge or redirect your thinking where needed.

    What about specific apps for mental health?

    Most people would be familiar with the big models such as OpenAI’s ChatGPT, Google’s Gemini, or Microsofts’ Copilot. These are general purpose models. They are not limited to specific topics or trained to answer any specific questions.

    But developers can make specialised AIs that are trained to discuss specific topics, like mental health, such as Woebot and Wysa.

    Some studies show these mental health specific chatbots might be able to reduce users’ anxiety and depression symptoms. Or that they can improve therapy techniques such as journalling, by providing guidance. There is also some evidence that AI-therapy and professional therapy deliver some equivalent mental health outcomes in the short term.

    However, these studies have all examined short-term use. We do not yet know what impacts excessive or long-term chatbot use has on mental health. Many studies also exclude participants who are suicidal or who have a severe psychotic disorder. And many studies are funded by the developers of the same chatbots, so the research may be biased.

    Researchers are also identifying potential harms and mental health risks. The companion chat platform Character.ai, for example, has been implicated in ongoing legal case over a user suicide.

    This evidence all suggests AI chatbots may be an option to fill gaps where there is a shortage in mental health professionals, assist with referrals, or at least provide interim support between appointments or to support people on waitlists.

    Bottom line

    At this stage, it’s hard to say whether AI chatbots are reliable and safe enough to use as a stand-alone therapy option.

    More research is needed to identify if certain types of users are more at risk of the harms that AI chatbots might bring.

    It’s also unclear if we need to be worried about emotional dependence, unhealthy attachment, worsening loneliness, or intensive use.

    AI chatbots may be a useful place to start when you’re having a bad day and just need a chat. But when the bad days continue to happen, it’s time to talk to a professional as well.

    Aaron J. Snoswell previously received research project funding from OpenAI in 2024-2025 to develop new evaluation frameworks for measuring moral competence in AI agents.

    Laura Neil receives funding through the Australian government Research Training Program Scholarship.

    Centaine Snoswell 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 you talk to AI when you’re feeling down? Here’s where chatbots get their therapy advice – https://theconversation.com/do-you-talk-to-ai-when-youre-feeling-down-heres-where-chatbots-get-their-therapy-advice-257732

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Family law changes will better protect domestic violence victims – and their pets

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Meri Oakwood, Lecturer in Law, Southern Cross University

    Zivia Kerkez/Shutterstock

    Welcome changes to family law come into effect this week to better support victims of domestic violence in property settlements.

    Importantly, the Family Law Amendment Bill 2024 will provide a new framework for determining ownership of the family pet in divorce and separation proceedings. Pets will no longer be recognised merely as property, but as “companion animals”.

    Family law courts must now consider animal abuse, including threats to harm pets, when deciding which partner is awarded ownership.

    Research suggests up to 15% of all animal cruelty cases involve domestic violence offending. Therefore, the new laws will provide some relief to partners whose beloved pets have suffered abuse.

    Part of the family

    Australia has high pet ownership, with 69% of households owning an animal companion. Some 48% have dogs and 33% have cats.

    For victims of violence, the bond with their pet is very important for emotional support. Because of this attachment, abusers often target animals as one of the ways to control their victims.

    The new laws recognise the strong emotional bond between owners and pets.
    Ksenia Raykova/Shutterstock

    Disturbing research has found animals living in violent households may be kicked, punched, held by their ears, thrown and poisoned. Injuries are common. Pets can be killed.

    When a person experiences family violence in their home, they are often asked “Why don’t you just leave?” The reasons are complicated. Perpetrators of coercive control can make their victims fearful for their own safety and their children’s – and for the safety and wellbeing of their pets.

    If victims do leave an abusive relationship, family pets are often left behind because it is too hard to find suitable accommodation. Also, the pet may be registered in the name of the abuser.

    Court’s past view of pets

    Previously, if a victim asked for ownership of their pet, courts could not consider the animal’s safety or wellbeing.

    In Australian family law, pets were viewed as personal property, similar to other possessions such as cars, furniture and electronic equipment.

    In any dispute about pets, courts would consider the following:

    • who paid for it?
    • was it a gift?
    • whose name is on the ownership documents?
    • who has possession?
    • who paid the expenses?

    In deciding custody, courts were not thinking about where the pet would be out of harm’s way. Instead the focus was on who had the superior right to title, a common question in personal property law.

    The safety and survival of a dog or cat was irrelevant in decision-making.

    Hope on the horizon

    Many Australians do not view pets as just another item of personal property. They see them as treasured family members who should be protected.

    The amended Family Law Act redefines pets as companion animals, rather than as mere property. The shift recognises the deep emotional attachments between pets and their owners.

    Any species of animal owned by a couple as a companion will be covered under the new sections of the Act. However, disputes in family law are more commonly about dogs.

    When a marriage or de facto relationship breaks down, the court will consider any past cruelty towards a pet when deciding future ownership.

    Matters for consideration will include:

    • was there family violence?
    • was there animal abuse, actual or threatened?
    • who has ownership or possession of the animal?
    • is there any attachment by an adult or child to the animal?
    • how much did each person in the household care for the animal?

    Courts will only be able to assign ownership to one party. There will be no joint custody to prevent ongoing disputes over the ownership of the pet.

    Under the new laws, custody of a pet will not be awarded to an abuser.
    Nejec Vesel/Shutterstock

    If an abused partner is confident they would be allowed to keep their companion animal if they leave a violent relationship, there is a greater chance they will seek safety.

    If a victim has fled to accommodation where they cannot keep their pet, the new laws will allow for a court order to transfer the animal to another person. A safe person.

    The sentience of animals – their ability to feel pain and fear – is still not recognised in Australian family law.

    Nevertheless, this week’s changes should lead to large numbers of companion animals gaining protection from future abuse.

    Financial abuse may constitute family violence

    Other changes to family law also come in to force this week.

    Family law courts must consider the economic effects of family violence on the victim when making decisions about property and finances after separation.

    Critically, the definition of family violence is being broadened. It will now include economic or financial abuse-related conduct, such as sabotaging the victim’s employment, forcibly controlling their money or forcing them to go into debt.

    Not paying child support for a long time might also count. Intentionally damaging a property to reduce its value will also be in the equation.

    There will also be greater protections to prevent the misuse of sensitive information that arise from confidential conversations with healthcare professionals, or with specialist support services.

    The property changes will apply to all new and existing proceedings, except where a final hearing has already commenced.

    These reforms to better protect victim-survivors of family violence and the animals they love, are long overdue.

    Meri Oakwood 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. Family law changes will better protect domestic violence victims – and their pets – https://theconversation.com/family-law-changes-will-better-protect-domestic-violence-victims-and-their-pets-258189

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Visual feature: Scanning Australia’s bones

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Vera Weisbecker, Associate Professor in Evolutionary Biology, College of Science and Engineering, Flinders University

    ➡️ View the full interactive version of this article here.

    Vera Weisbecker receives funding from the Australian Research council. She is member of the Australian Greens Party and the Australian Mammal Society.

    Erin Mein is a member of the Australian Archaeological Association and Australian Mammal Society.

    Pietro Viacava performed this work as a research associate at Flinders University, before becoming affiliated with CSIRO.

    Jacob van Zoelen and Thomas Peachey 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. Visual feature: Scanning Australia’s bones – https://theconversation.com/visual-feature-scanning-australias-bones-257119

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Resisting Dependency: U.S. Hegemony, China’s Rise, and the Geopolitical Stakes in the Caribbean

    Source: Council on Hemispheric Affairs – Analysis-Reportage

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: With so many parties ‘ruling out’ working with other parties, is MMP losing its way?

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Richard Shaw, Professor of Politics, Te Kunenga ki Pūrehuroa – Massey University

    There has been a lot of “ruling out” going on in New Zealand politics lately. In the most recent outbreak, both the incoming and outgoing deputy prime ministers, ACT’s David Seymour and NZ First’s Winston Peters, ruled out ever working with the Labour Party.

    Seymour has also advised Labour to rule out working with Te Pāti Māori. Labour leader Chris Hipkins has engaged in some ruling out of his own, indicating he won’t work with Winston Peters again. Before the last election, National’s Christopher Luxon ruled out working with Te Pāti Māori.

    And while the Greens haven’t yet formally ruled anyone out, co-leader Chlöe Swarbrick has said they could only work with National if it was prepared to “completely U-turn on their callous, cruel cuts to climate, to science, to people’s wellbeing”.

    Much more of this and at next year’s general election New Zealanders will effectively face the same scenario they confronted routinely under electoral rules the country rejected over 30 years ago.

    Under the old “first past the post” system, there was only ever one choice: voters could turn either left or right. Many hoped Mixed Member Proportional representation (MMP), used for the first time in 1996, would end this ideological forced choice.

    Assuming enough voters supported parties other than National and Labour, the two traditional behemoths would have to negotiate rather than impose a governing agenda. Compromise between and within parties would be necessary.

    Government by decree

    By the 1990s, many had tired of doctrinaire governments happy to swing the policy pendulum from right to left and back again. In theory, MMP prised open a space for a centrist party which might be able to govern with either major player.

    In a constitutional context where the political executive has been described as an “elected dictatorship”, part of the appeal of MMP was that it might constrain some of its worst excesses. Right now, that is starting to look a little naive.

    For one thing, the current National-led coalition is behaving with the government-by-decree style associated with the radical, reforming Labour and National administrations of the 1980s and 1990s.

    Most notably, the coalition has made greater use of parliamentary urgency than any other government in recent history, wielding its majority to avoid parliamentary and public scrutiny of contentious policies such as the Pay Equity Amendment Bill.

    Second, in an ironic vindication of the anti-MMP campaign’s fears before the electoral system was changed – that small parties would exert outsized influence on government policy – the two smaller coalition partners appear to be doing just that.

    It is neither possible nor desirable to quantify the degree of sway a smaller partner in a coalition should have. That is a political question, not a technical one.

    But some of the administration’s most unpopular or contentious policies have emerged from ACT (the Treaty Principles Bill and the Regulatory Standards legislation) and NZ First (tax breaks for heated tobacco products).

    Rightly or wrongly, this has created a perception of weakness on the part of the National Party and the prime minister. Of greater concern, perhaps, is the risk the controversial changes ACT and NZ First have managed to secure will erode – at least in some quarters – faith in the legitimacy of our electoral arrangements.

    The centre cannot hold

    Lastly, the party system seems to be settling into a two-bloc configuration: National/ACT/NZ First on the right, and Labour/Greens/Te Pāti Māori on the left.

    In both blocs, the two major parties sit closer to the centre than the smaller parties. True, NZ First has tried to brand itself as a moderate “common sense” party, and has worked with both National and Labour, but that is not its position now.

    In both blocs, too, the combined strength of the smaller parties is roughly half that of the major player. The Greens, Te Pāti Māori, NZ First and ACT may be small, but they are not minor.

    In effect, the absence of a genuinely moderate centre party has meant a return to the zero-sum politics of the pre-MMP era. It has also handed considerable leverage to smaller parties on both the left and right of the political spectrum.

    Furthermore, if the combined two-party share of the vote captured by National and Labour continues to fall (as the latest polls show), and those parties have nowhere else to turn, small party influence will increase.

    For some, of course, this may be a good thing. But to those with memories of the executive-centric, winner-takes-all politics of the 1980s and 1990s, it is starting to look all too familiar.

    The re-emergence of a binary ideological choice might even suggest New Zealand – lacking the constitutional guardrails common in other democracies – needs to look beyond MMP for other ways to limit the power of its governments.

    Richard Shaw 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. With so many parties ‘ruling out’ working with other parties, is MMP losing its way? – https://theconversation.com/with-so-many-parties-ruling-out-working-with-other-parties-is-mmp-losing-its-way-257974

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-OSI Global: World’s most powerful ex-New Yorker gets a DC military parade, not a ticker-tape celebration in Manhattan’s Canyon of Heroes

    Source: The Conversation – USA – By Lincoln Mitchell, Lecturer, School of International and Public Affairs, Columbia University

    Heavy equipment and military vehicles arrive in Jessup, Md., for the U.S. Army’s 250th anniversary parade on June 14, 2025, which coincides with President Donald Trump’s 79th birthday. Jim Watson/AFP via Getty Images

    Donald Trump’s plan for a military parade on June 14, 2025, officially to celebrate the 250th anniversary of the U.S. Army as well as coinciding with the president’s 79th birthday, is yet another indication of his affinity for authoritarian leaders and regimes.

    Although the parade, which will include 6,000 soldiers, 150 military vehicles and 50 helicopters − and will temporarily close Reagan National Airport and cost more than US$45 million − is ostensibly to celebrate the military, the idea is pure Trump.

    When pressed about his desire for the parade, the president has explained his reasoning for having the parade.

    “We had more to do with winning World War II than any other nation. Why don’t we have a Victory Day? So we’re going to have a Victory Day for World War I and for World War II.”

    While big military parades in Washington, D.C., other than immediately following a major military victory, are largely without precedent, there is another American city that has a much richer tradition of parades. That city is New York.

    Melania Trump and President Donald Trump joined French President Emmanuel Macron and his wife, Brigitte Macron, to watch the annual Bastille Day military parade in Paris on July 14, 2017, an event that inspired Trump to seek a parade in Washington, D.C.
    Mustafa Yalcin/Anadolu Agency/Getty Images

    Trump vs. NYC

    New York is a parade town. It’s also a city with which Trump has a long, complex relationship.

    Trump was born in New York and began his business career there. Before Trump was a politician, or even a reality TV star, he was a fixture in the New York tabloids. His marriages, divorces, dating life and business successes and failures were splashed across more headlines than can be easily counted beginning in the early 1980s, but Trump was always presented as a clownish figure, albeit a very rich one.

    In those years, continuing into the first decade of this century, the local media always presented him as gaudy, loud and not quite as business savvy as he claimed – hence the coverage of his bankruptcies.

    While much of the rest of the country bought the Trump narrative that he was a brilliant businessman surrounded by beautiful women, doting staff and fawning celebrities, many New Yorkers never did.

    New Yorkers, including me, remembered an earlier Trump who almost ran the family business into the ground over many years. Nonetheless, New York has always been important to Trump. Although he still is a well-done steak with ketchup kind of guy, while New York is a soup dumplings, or bagels and lox, or arroz con pollo, or even caviar kind of town, Trump still has a connection to this city and wants to be celebrated here.

    Politicians, heroes and ticker tape

    And the city celebrates with big parades honoring everything from sports championships, which used to be much more common for New York teams, to the U.S. winning wars, most recently following the first Gulf War in 1991. Additionally, New York has parades for many of the hundreds of ethnic groups that make up the city.

    For decades on Thanksgiving Day, as they roast their turkey, prepare the stuffing and finalize preparations for the traditional feast, millions of Americans have watched the Thanksgiving parade, which is always held in Manhattan, frequently referred to as the Macy’s Day parade because Macy’s has long sponsored the event.

    In many of New York City’s legendary parades, including those celebrating LGBTQ+ pride, the Puerto Rican Day Parade, St. Patrick’s Day, West Indian American Day and others, politicians march, often in the lead, alongside their constituents.

    Some, like the Thanksgiving parade, have their own rituals, such as watching the balloons being inflated behind the American Museum of Natural History on the evening before Thanksgiving.

    However, the most famous of all parade types in New York is the ticker-tape parade. Dating from the days when paper, not computers, dominated trading floors and offices, people would throw ticker tape and other papers out their windows as the parade passed through the Financial District area that became known as the Canyon of Heroes.

    Not all New York parades are the same. Some, like the Thanksgiving parade, are simply fun and celebratory. Ticker-tape parades honor individuals or groups that have accomplished something significant, like landing on the Moon or winning the Super Bowl. They can recognize important foreign guests and dignitaries, while other parades celebrate the contributions of various peoples or groups of New Yorkers.

    But New Yorkers never throw parades for their politicians and tend to favor drums and floats rather than tanks and soldiers at these events.

    An avalanche of confetti rains down on Aug. 13, 1969, honoring the three astronauts of the Apollo 11 mission, who became the first people to walk on the Moon.
    Bettman/Getty Images

    No ticker tape for Trump

    While there are parades for all kinds of people and events in New York, there has never been a parade there for Donald Trump. There was a pretty massive street party in the city when it was announced that Trump had lost the 2020 election.

    Although Trump changed his primary residence to Florida in 2019, Trump was a New Yorker for many years and like many longtime residents had the chance to see many heroes – Mickey Mantle, John Glenn, Tom Seaver, Derek Jeter, Eli Manning, Nelson Mandela, American war veterans, numerous foreign leaders and many others – feted with a parade down the Canyon of Heroes. Jeter was celebrated five times, John Glenn and Mickey Mantle twice.

    It is impossible to know Trump’s motivations for pushing the parade in the nation’s capital. But we also know that he is a man who holds himself in high regard and craves attention. Trump will likely never get a parade in his erstwhile hometown, so Washington must be the next best thing.

    Trump’s newfound parade fetish underscores his love-hate relationship with New York.

    New York is the city that made him famous and made his family, primarily because of his father’s work, very rich. It is also the city that has repeatedly rejected Trump. It is the home of some of his worst real estate deals, the place where the business community lost patience with his antics and unwillingness to pay contractors, and where three times the voters turned out in huge numbers against him.

    A Washington, D.C., parade celebrating an unappreciated New Yorker who years ago decamped to Florida and Washington is a pale imitation of the Canyon of Heroes, where New Yorkers honor beloved leaders, war heroes, explorers and their favorite sports stars. But it is all Trump has.

    Lincoln Mitchell 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. World’s most powerful ex-New Yorker gets a DC military parade, not a ticker-tape celebration in Manhattan’s Canyon of Heroes – https://theconversation.com/worlds-most-powerful-ex-new-yorker-gets-a-dc-military-parade-not-a-ticker-tape-celebration-in-manhattans-canyon-of-heroes-258110

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: PKK’s decision to disband shows the benefit of engaging in politics rather than an armed struggle

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Rebecca Lucas, Senior Analyst – Defence Economics and Acquisition, RAND Europe

    The recent decision by the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK) to disarm and disband has important lessons for any country facing a seemingly intractable insurgency. On May 12, the group stated that following its 12th Congress it will “dissolve the PKK’s organizational structure and end the armed struggle method”. The organisation has said that it will now pursue its goals “through democratic politics”.

    The PKK’s decision follows talks between the Turkish government and the group’s leader, Abdullah Ocalan, who has been in Turkish custody since 1998. Regional dynamics, Turkish domestic politics, and personal ambition have all played key roles in bringing the conflict to this point.

    Much uncertainty remains. The PKK and Turkey have embarked on peace processes before, only to return to conflict. But the group’s formal announcement of its intention to disband marks an important step towards ending an insurgency that has lasted over 40 years. If so, it will bring to an end a conflict that has cost all sides involved tens of thousands of lives.

    The possibility of ending this insurgency not only raises questions about this specific conflict, but also what we know more broadly about how insurgencies end.

    Get your news from actual experts, straight to your inbox. Sign up to our daily newsletter to receive all The Conversation UK’s latest coverage of news and research, from politics and business to the arts and sciences.

    The PKK has a long track record of combining military action with political struggle. As with many other insurgent organisations, the group has worked to gain and maintain public support among ethnic Kurds, despite its use of violence.

    Its strategy has also evolved over the years to adapt to circumstances. It moved away from the its original Marxist beginnings with the end of the cold war and over the years changed its fundamental aim from separatism to increased regional autonomy and local government, through the system of what it calls democratic confederalism. Over the decades the group and its affiliates have also decreased their use of terrorism in Europe and western Turkey.

    This is in keeping with characteristics that researchers have found facilitate the transformation of organisations from armed groups to participants in institutional politics. There are a large number of cases in which insurgencies or terrorist organisations shifted – successfully or unsuccessfully – to either transform into a political party or combine with one.

    There’s no doubt that military pressure has been important in downgrading the PKK as an insurgency. But military victories over the PKK have failed to end the conflict – in fact military oppression against the PKK has often backfired and reinforced public support for the group.

    Many of the factors that have made it possible for the PKK to transform itself have been political, rather than narrowly military. Research by the RAND Corporation thinktank has found that rather than simply aiming to defeat an insurgency, it’s usually more effective to combine military pressure with political reform that aims to remove the reasons for the insurgency.

    Combining armed force with political pressure

    Turkey has taken this mixed approach, something many analysts have attributed to the foreign minister, Hakan Fidan. Ankara has pursued parallel tracks of negotiation and force. This has included improved counter-terrorism and counter-insurgency techniques, investment in drones and other military pressure.

    But Ankara has in parallel cut off financial flows to the organisation, while strengthening economic opportunities for Kurdish citizens – particularly in western Turkey. Many Kurds moved west to escape violence in the traditionally Kurdish regions in Turkey’s southeast: Istanbul is now the city with the largest Kurdish population in Turkey.

    The Turkish government has also strengthened its relationships with other Kurdish groups, primarily the Kurdistan Democratic Party in northern Iraq, to provide both military and political support.

    This case is another example of the importance of blending strictly military tactics with diplomacy, economic policy and strategic communications. The celebrated Prussian military theorist, Carl von Clausewitz said that war is politics by other means – and many insurgencies are fundamentally political in nature. So this requires multiple lines of effort to be pursued in parallel to effectively respond to this – with an emphasis on political solutions rather than just the use of force.

    This has been seen in conflicts with a number of insurgent groups in recent years – including the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (Farc) or the Bangsamoro Islamic Armed Forces (Biaf) and Moro Islamic Liberation Front in the Philippines. In all of these cases, central governments have engaged in constructive political dialogue, providing amnesty and other incentives for fighters to demobilise while offering broader concessions in order to build a more sustainable peace.

    Successfully bringing insurgencies to and through a negotiated settlement requires long-term investment and effort. The issues that caused the insurgency in the first place do not simply disappear when the document is signed. In the case of the PKK, there are a number of ways in which this recent progress could be reversed. Concerns have been raised about whether the Turkish government will deliver on promised constitutional reforms or prisoner releases. There is also the question of whether PKK fighters will be willing and able to demobilise and reintegrate into society.

    Research has indicated that states with flawed democracies have more difficulty ending insurgencies on favourable terms. Freedom House and similar organisations currently rank Turkey as “Not Free”. The country has been backsliding for years under the presidency of Recep Tayyip Erdoğan.

    Despite these misgivings, the initial success of Turkey’s approach support previous research on how insurgencies end, and how armed groups might turn instead to politics. For the governments of countries facing insurgency, it means taking a comprehensive and multi-sectoral approach to encourage this to happen. Governments may also need to move away from a binary definition of “winning” or “losing” to a more nuanced understanding of how all parties stand to gain from the end of an insurgency.

    Rebecca Lucas 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. PKK’s decision to disband shows the benefit of engaging in politics rather than an armed struggle – https://theconversation.com/pkks-decision-to-disband-shows-the-benefit-of-engaging-in-politics-rather-than-an-armed-struggle-258221

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: How far-right ideas in Canada are working their way into mainstream politics

    Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Lisa Gasson-Gardner, Assistant Professor of Religious Studies, Mount Royal University

    The fortunes of the Conservative Party and its leader Pierre Poilievre in Canada’s April 2025 election seemed to have shifted dramatically after United States President Donald Trump called for Canada to become the 51st state.

    Political pundits regarded Mark Carney and the Liberal Party’s victory — along with the failure of Poilievre to retain his own seat — as a “Trump slump” and a repudiation of both Trump’s and Poilievre’s style of politics.

    But is that an accurate assessment? The Conservative Party received its largest vote share since Prime Minister Brian Mulroney. Exit polling data suggested stronger support for the Conservative Party among people aged 18-34 than among people aged 55 and older.

    Although Trump has said Poilievre is “not a MAGA guy,” some political analysts have likened the rhetoric of Poilievre and other Canadian Conservatives to American Republicans who lean towards far-right Christian nationalist politics..

    As an inter-religious humanities scholar of the U.S. far right, I have observed alarming parallels between the rise of the far right in mainstream politics in the U.S. and the scene in Canada.



    Read more:
    A ‘Trump slump’ has lifted the left in Canada and now Australia – what are the lessons for NZ?

    Christian nationalism’s role in politics

    In the U.S., both scholars and news media have been highlighting the connections between far-right Christian ideology and politics.

    Trump’s first presidential term ended with the Jan. 6, 2021 violent attack on the U.S. Capitol. Scholars like Matthew Taylor, author of The Violent Take it by Force, have pointed to Christian nationalism and other far-right ideologies as factors that motivated the rioters.

    In February 2025, Trump appointed televangelist Paula White-Cain to head the newly created White House Faith Office. White-Cain’s appointment followed an executive order establishing a task force to eradicate anti-Christian bias.

    Thea appointment adds to the the narrative that U.S. Christians are facing persecution, a refrain since at least the 1970s and heightened during Barack Obama’s presidency. Scholars have linked the assertion that “Christianity is under attack” to the rise of Christian nationalism in mainstream politics.



    Read more:
    Trump may have emboldened hate in Canada, but it was already here

    What is Christian nationalism?

    American sociologists Andrew Whitehead and Samuel Perry define Christian nationalism as “a cultural framework that blurs distinctions between Christian identity and American identity, viewing the two as closely related and seeking to enhance and preserve their union.”

    It’s tempting to read “Christian idenity” and “American identity” and assume it does not affect Canada.

    But Christian nationalist ideologies were present during the so-called Freedom Convoy in Ottawa in 2022. According to Canadian scholars, national identity is blurred in online spaces, allowing U.S. nationalist ideals to take hold in Canada.]

    Christian nationalism is not synonymous with Christianity or any specific branch of Christianity, like evangelical Christianity.

    According to U.S. sociologist Daniel Miller, Christian nationalism is not a set list of ideological or religious beliefs. Instead, Miller says, Christian nationalism emerges when people identify with “a very narrow, idealized prototype of the ‘real or ‘authentic’ American.”

    He says two mechanisms connect people to Christian nationalism. The first is perceived loss of power by the people who historically held power. This is known as a “power devaluation crisis.” The second is a narrative of decline — known as a a “declensionist narrative” — which asserts that American society has declined since the 1960s and needs repair and reclamation.

    Poilievre’s signals to Christian nationalists

    Poilievre is not open about his religion and does not call for Canada to be a Christian nation. But whether Poilievre intends to stir up Christian nationalists, some of his rhetoric has indicated support for the classic definitions of Christian nationalism.

    According to Miller, support for Christian nationalism is not always direct. It can be activated by stoking a crisis of lost power, like the decline of the “traditional” family or by asserting a narrative of decline, like “Canada is broken.”

    For example, Poilievre’s 2025 campaign mobilized both of the narrative mechanisms that attract Christian nationalist mentioned by sociologists: a power devaluation crisis and the narrative of decline.

    In the lead-up to his 2025 campaign, Poilievre repeatedly called Canada “broken.”. He cited increased crime, addiction, high grocery prices and more as evidence of Canada’s brokenness, accusing the Liberal government of erasing Canada’s past.

    When Poilievre calls Canada “broken,” it affirms the world view of Christian nationalists.

    Poilievre courts conservative Christians

    Another strategy Poilievre reportedly adopted from Trump was his work to court conservative Christians.

    In an 2024 interview with The Tyee, religious right scholar Carmen Celestini of Waterloo University said Poilievre had “ramped up” his presence at churches. Additionally, The Globe and Mail reported there were fewer photos ops of Poilievre visiting mosques in 2024.

    Of course, visits to churches are not enough to signal alignment with Christian nationalists. And Poilievre has not espoused any Christian evangelical ideals in any public speech.

    But it’s still important for Canadians to remain alert about Christian nationalists and their ambitions to become part of mainstream politics.

    Canadian Christian nationalism

    A study from the U.S. has linked the rise in Christian nationalist ideologies to attacks on religious minorities. The 2024 qualitative data from the study indicates that when politicians rhetorically supported Christian nationalist values, there was a increased violence against minority groups.

    According to Statistics Canada, the violent crime rate in Canada rose 13 per cent from 2021-2022.. Police-reported hate crimes increased 32 per cent from 2022 to 2023. Crimes targeting religion rose 67 per cent in 2023, primarily targeting Jewish and Muslim communities.

    While I know of no studies showing the rise of the far right is directly leading to violence in Canada, Canadians should be aware of the pattern in the U.S. Research shows that growing Christian nationalists and far-right world views south of the border are, in fact, connected to a rise in violence.

    Lisa Gasson-Gardner 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. How far-right ideas in Canada are working their way into mainstream politics – https://theconversation.com/how-far-right-ideas-in-canada-are-working-their-way-into-mainstream-politics-238965

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: Why more youth are landing in the ER with vomiting from cannabis use

    Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Jamie Seabrook, Professor, Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics; Professor, Department of Paediatrics; Professor, Brescia School of Food and Nutritional Sciences, Western University

    As cannabis use among youth rises in Canada — and THC potency reaches record highs — emergency departments are seeing a surge in cases of a once-rare condition: cannabis hyperemesis syndrome (CHS).

    Characterized by relentless vomiting, abdominal pain and temporary relief through compulsive hot showers or baths, CHS is increasingly affecting adolescents and young adults. Yet few people — including many clinicians — know it exists.

    As public health and substance use researchers, and authors of a recent review on CHS in youth, we are struck by how misunderstood and misdiagnosed this condition remains.

    A silent side-effect of heavy cannabis use

    Canada ranks among the highest globally for youth cannabis use, with 43 per cent of 16-19-year-olds reporting use in the past year. Usage peaks among those 20–24 years, with nearly half (48 per cent) reporting past-year use.

    This rise in regular, heavy use coincides with a 400 per cent increase in THC potency since the 1980s. Strains with THC levels above 25 per cent are now common. As cannabis becomes more potent and accessible, clinicians are seeing more cases of CHS, a condition virtually unheard of before 2004.

    What is CHS?

    CHS unfolds in three phases:

    1. Prodromal phase: Nausea and early morning discomfort begin. Users increase cannabis consumption, thinking it will relieve symptoms.

    2. Hyperemetic phase: Intense vomiting, dehydration and abdominal pain follow. Hot showers or baths provide temporary relief — a hallmark of CHS.

    3. Recovery phase: Symptoms resolve after stopping cannabis entirely.

    Diagnosis is often delayed. One reason is because CHS mimics conditions like gastroenteritis or eating disorders, leading to costly CT scans, MRIs and gastric emptying tests. One telltale sign — compulsive hot bathing — is frequently overlooked, despite its strong diagnostic value.

    Nausea and early morning discomfort begin in the early stages of CHS.
    (Shutterstock)

    Why CHS is dangerous for youth

    Youth face unique risks. The brain continues to develop until about age 25, and THC exposure during this critical window can impair cognitive functions like memory, learning and emotional regulation. Heavy cannabis use is associated with heightened risks of anxiety, depression, psychosis and self-harm.

    Some youth use cannabis to self-medicate for mental health concerns and increase their use when symptoms of CHS appear, mistakenly believing cannabis will help. Others are reluctant to disclose their use due to stigma, fear of judgment or legal consequences.

    In our recent review, we found that CHS is frequently misdiagnosed as bulimia nervosa because of the vomiting and unintended weight loss. But unlike bulimia, CHS-related vomiting is involuntary and not motivated by body image concerns. A clue is that those with CHS often return to normal eating and bathing patterns during symptom-free periods, which is not typical for an eating disorder.

    Compulsive hot bathing is a telltale sign of CHS.
    (Shutterstock)

    A burden on the health system and individual

    CHS doesn’t just take a toll on youth — it strains the health-care system. Emergency department visits for CHS have spiked in recent years, with a study in Ontario showing a significant rise after cannabis commercialization following legalization in 2018. Repeated ER visits, missed school or work and emotional distress compound the burden. In rare cases, CHS can lead to kidney failure due to severe dehydration and electrolyte imbalance.

    Unfortunately, anti-nausea medications like ondansetron often fail. Studies have shown temporary relief from topical capsaicin or low-dose haloperidol, but no acute treatment consistently works unless cannabis use stops.

    What can be done?

    The most effective long-term solution to treating CHS is cannabis cessation. For youth who use cannabis to cope with anxiety, quitting can lead to withdrawal symptoms and distress. This makes harm reduction strategies critical: gradual reduction plans, mental health supports and non-judgmental conversations between providers and patients.

    Clinicians should systematically screen youth presenting with cyclic vomiting for cannabis use and hot bathing behaviour. Youth are more likely to disclose cannabis use when asked in an empathetic, stigma-free way.

    Public health campaigns can play a major role. We need honest, accessible education — in schools, clinics and online — that explains what CHS is, how to recognize it and how to seek help. In our view, the addition of CHS content to youth health curriculums, pediatric training programs and cannabis use screening tools is overdue.

    A preventable crisis

    CHS is a preventable but growing consequence of chronic cannabis use in young people. As legalization continues to reshape social norms and access, it is essential to ensure that youth — and those who care for them — are informed about the full spectrum of cannabis-related health risks.

    This story was co-authored by Morgan Seabrook, an undergraduate research assistant at the Human Environments Analysis Laboratory at Western University.

    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. Why more youth are landing in the ER with vomiting from cannabis use – https://theconversation.com/why-more-youth-are-landing-in-the-er-with-vomiting-from-cannabis-use-258375

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: Chatbots can help clinicians become better communicators, and this could boost vaccine uptake

    Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Jaigris Hodson, Associate Professor of Interdisciplinary Studies, Royal Roads University

    Strengthening doctors’ communications skills is a public health benefit. (Shutterstock)

    Measles is back. In recent months, outbreaks have re-emerged across North America including 2,968 cases in Canada as of May 31, 2025. At the heart of many of these surges lies missed childhood vaccinations — not just because of access barriers, but also due to conversations that didn’t happen.

    Many clinicians want to support their patients in making protective health decisions, but these are not simple conversations. Trust is essential, and clinicians need to accept that these may be complex discussions and learn how to build trust when medical misinformation and misunderstandings are in play.

    These conversations are important, but clinicians’ and patients’ time together is often limited, and it’s hard to demonstrate trustworthiness and build trust. That’s where we believe — and evidence suggests — artificial intelligence (AI) can help.

    A surprising use for AI

    AI is already being used to support diagnostic decisions and streamline administrative tasks in health care. But it also offers promise as a training tool for the human side of care.

    We’re part of a team researching how chatbots can be developed to help clinicians practise difficult conversations about vaccines. These tools have the potential to provide low-cost, emotionally engaging and psychologically safe simulations for health professionals like doctors, nurse practitioners and pharmacists.

    These kinds of tools are especially valuable in rural and remote areas, where access to in-person workshops or continuing education may be limited. Even for busy clinicians in well-resourced areas, chatbots can offer a flexible way to hone communication skills and to learn about circulating concerns.

    Improving communication

    Research consistently shows that clinicians can increase vaccine uptake by using better communication strategies. Even brief interventions — such as training in motivational interviewing — have measurable impacts on patient trust and behaviour.

    Chatbots provide an opportunity to deliver this kind of training at scale. In recent work, computational social scientist David Rand and colleagues have demonstrated how AI-based agents can be trained to engage in social conversations and generate responses that effectively persuade.

    These principles can be applied to the clinician–patient setting, allowing professionals to test and refine different ways of engaging with vaccine hesitancy before stepping into real-world conversations.

    In research conducted in Hungary, clinicians reported feeling more confident and prepared after interacting with simulated patients. The opportunity to rehearse responses, receive feedback and explore multiple conversational pathways helped clinicians understand what to say — and how and when to say it.

    Simulating conversations between clinicians and patients can help clinicians prepare for actual encounters.
    (Shutterstock)

    Practising communication

    We believe chatbots can be used to train clinicians in a type of presumptive language known as the AIMS method (announce, inquire, mirror and secure trust). Similar approaches, drawing on motivational interviewing, have been tested in Québec, where it has demonstrated success in helping clinicians increase vaccine confidence and uptake among new parents.

    This kind of intervention will simulate conversations with patients with vaccine questions, allowing physicians to practice AIMS techniques in a low-stakes environment. For example, the chatbot could play the role of a parent, and the physician would begin by announcing that it is time for the parents to vaccinate their children.

    Then, if the “parent” (the chatbot) expresses vaccine hesitancy, the physician would inquire about what is driving the hesitancy. Importantly, when the “parent” responds to the questions, the AIMS approach teaches the physician not to respond directly to the concerns, but instead first mirror the response to show the parent that they are being heard and understood.

    Finally, and sometimes after multiple rounds of inquiry and mirroring, the physician can move on to securing the parent’s trust.

    Becoming adept at methods of conversational approaches like AIMS takes practice. That’s what a chatbot can offer: repeated, flexible, low-risk rehearsal. Think of it like a flight simulator for conversations.

    Staying ahead of misinformation

    The landscape of misinformation is constantly shifting. New conspiracy theories, viral videos and misleading anecdotes can gain traction in days. Clinicians shouldn’t have to confront these narratives for the first time during a brief patient visit.

    By having the AI model underlying the chatbot constantly trawling the web for the latest misleading claims and updating chatbot scenarios regularly, we can help clinicians recognize and respond to the kinds of misinformation circulating now. This is especially important when trust in institutions is wavering and personalized, empathetic responses are most needed.

    Conversations build trust

    While we propose chatbots can be used to teach doctors how to address vaccine skepticism, motivational interviewing has already been employed via AI-based chatbots to address smoking cessation, with some promising results.

    A similar approach has also been used to encourage the uptake of stress-reduction behaviours. Though the use of chatbots in education is a growing area of inquiry, the specific use of chatbots to train physicians in motivational interviewing approaches is a new field of study.

    Using this approach as part of (continuing) clinical education could help better prepare the frontlines to serve as a successful bulwark against vaccine concerns not rooted in science.

    In the face of falling vaccination rates and rising distrust, clinicians are on the front lines of public health. We owe them better tools to prepare and build trust.

    Trust isn’t built in a moment. It’s built in conversation. And those can be practised.

    Jaigris Hodson is on the advisory board of the Clarity Foundation. She receives funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada.

    Heather Lanthorn is a senior advisor to the Clairity Foundation.

    David Rand has received funding from Google, Meta, and the Gates Foundation.

    Heather Lanthorn is the Senior Advisor to the Clarity Foundation.

    – ref. Chatbots can help clinicians become better communicators, and this could boost vaccine uptake – https://theconversation.com/chatbots-can-help-clinicians-become-better-communicators-and-this-could-boost-vaccine-uptake-255045

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: Sly Stone: influential funk pioneer who embodied the contradictions at the heart of American life

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Adam Behr, Senior Lecturer in Popular and Contemporary Music, Newcastle University

    There’s immense variety in popular music careers, even beyond the extremes of one-hit wonders and the long-haulers touring stadiums into their dotage. There are those who embody a specific era, burning briefly and brightly, and those whose legacy spans decades.

    Straddling both of those, and occupying a distinctive space in popular music history, is Sylvester Stewart, better known as Sly Stone, who died at the age of 82 on Monday June 9.

    A pioneer of funk whose sound spread far beyond the genre, his band Sly and the Family Stone synthesised disparate strands of American popular music into a unique melange, tracking the musical and social shifts as the 1960s wore into the 1970s.

    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.

    A musical prodigy and multi-instrumentalist from a young age, Stone was born in Texas in 1943 and raised in California, in a religious Pentecostal family. He had put out his first single aged 13 – a locally released gospel song with three of his siblings, who would later join him in Sly and the Family Stone.

    A record producer and DJ by his early twenties, he imbibed the music of British acts like The Beatles and Rolling Stones, and applied his eclectic tastes and musical versatility to producing local psychedelic and garage rock acts in the emergent San Francisco scene.

    By the time commercial popular culture had flowered into a more exploratory “counterculture” in 1967’s Summer of Love, the ebb and flow of personnel across local bands had coalesced into a line-up including the Stone siblings – Sly, Freddie, and their sister Vaetta, with their other sister Rose joining in 1968. Pioneering socially, as well as aesthetically, Sly and the Family Stone had diversity at its core – a mixed sex, multi-racial and musically varied band.

    This was notable for a mainstream act in an America still emerging from the depths of segregation, and riven with strife over the struggle for civil rights. While their first album in 1967 A Whole New Thing enjoyed comparatively little traction, 1968‘s Dance to the Music presaged a run of hits.

    Their sonic collision of sounds from across the commercial and social divide – psychedelic rock, soul, gospel and pop – struck a chord with audiences simultaneously looking forward with hope to changing times, and mindful of the injustice that was still prevalent.

    Singles like Everyday People, Stand, and I Want to Take You Higher, melded a party atmosphere with social statements. They were calls for action, but also for unity: celebratory, but pushing the musical envelope.

    While the band wore its innovations lightly at first, their reach was long. Bassist Larry Graham was a pioneer of the percussive slap bass that became a staple of funk and fusion. And their overall sound brought a looser, pop feel to the funk groove, in comparison to the almost militaristic tightness of that other funk pioneer, James Brown.

    Where Brown’s leadership of his group was overt, exemplified by his staccato musical directions in the songs, and the call and response structure, Stone’s band had more of an ensemble feel. Musical lines and solos were overlaid upon one another, often interweaving – more textured rather than in lock-step. It was a sound that would reach an almost chaotic apogée with George Clinton’s Funkadelic later in the 1970s.

    The party couldn’t last. As the optimism of the 1960s gave way to division in the 1970s, Stone’s music took a darker turn, even if the funk remained central. The album There’s A Riot Going On (1971), and its lead single It’s Family Affair contained lyrics depicting social ills more explicitly. The music – mostly recorded by Sly himself – was sparser, the vocals more melancholic.

    The unity of the band itself was also fracturing, under pressure from Stone’s growing cocaine dependency. The album Fresh (1973) featured classics like In Time and If You Want Me To Stay, but they were running out of commercial road by 1974’s Small Talk, and broke up soon after.

    Periodic comebacks were punctuated by a troubled personal life, including, at its nadir, reports of Stone living out of a van in Los Angeles, and arrests for drug possession. By the time he achieved a degree of stability, his star may have faded, but his legacy was secure.

    Stone embodied the contradictions of American popular music – arguably even America itself: brash and light-hearted on the one hand, with a streak of darkness and self-destructiveness on the other.

    The handclaps and joyous shouts harked back to his gospel roots, but his embrace of electric instruments aligned soul with rock and pop. He was a funk artist who played at the archetypal hippie festival, Woodstock, and a social commentator whose party sounds were shot through with urgency.

    He paved the way for the likes of Prince and Outkast, but also informed jazz and fusion. Jazz pioneer Miles Davis acknowledged Stone’s influence on his own turn towards electric and funk sounds in the late 1960s and early 1970s on landmark albums like Bitches Brew.

    Sly Stone’s joyful provocations may not have lasted at the commercial centre, but his mark was indelible. His struggles were both personal and social, but his sense of groove, and of a collective voice, demonstrated the value of aligning traditions with new ideas – a musical America that was fractious, but still a family affair.

    Adam Behr has received funding from the Arts and Humanities Research Council

    – ref. Sly Stone: influential funk pioneer who embodied the contradictions at the heart of American life – https://theconversation.com/sly-stone-influential-funk-pioneer-who-embodied-the-contradictions-at-the-heart-of-american-life-258616

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: The political opportunism behind Reform UK’s support for abolition of the two-child limit on benefits

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Chris Grover, Professor in Social Policy, Lancaster University

    The leader of Reform UK, Nigel Farage, recently announced that if in government, his party would abolish the two-child limit on benefits. This social security policy restricts the payment of means-tested benefits to the first two children of a family.

    Farage explained the announcement as being pro-natalist – intended to encourage a higher birth rate – as well as being “pro-worker”. Farage said that the abolition of the two-child limit “makes having children just a little bit easier” for “lower paid workers”.

    He noted that Reform wanted “to encourage people to have children”. Such arguments are familiar in the European political right, although the UK’s Conservative opposition criticised Reform’s proposal.

    To be in government, Reform has two possible routes: to build a coalition of voters for it, or to split left-leaning voters. Its proposal to abolish the two-child limit may be aimed at both.

    On the one hand, it might be supported by left-leaning voters who are able to accept Reform’s broader policy agenda. On the other hand, it might be aimed at encouraging left-leaning voters who find Reform’s agenda problematic to move to parties (such as the Greens and Liberal Democrats) who are less equivocal in their commitment to abolishing the two-child limit than the Labour government.

    Social security policies winning votes

    Social security policies have long been used as part of political strategising. The situation with the two-child limit is complicated, though, because both anti- and pro-natalist views of social security (and it predecessors) have been popular at particular moments.

    Political and popular arguments have long been made that supporting the poorest families leads to them having too many children. This, so the argument goes, reproduces, rather than addresses, the poverty they face. Examples can be found, for instance, in the 1834 poor law commission report in relation to “bastardy” and large families, Sir Keith Joseph’s 1970s focus upon the “cycle of deprivation”, as well as “underclass” arguments in the 1980s and 1990s.

    The two-child limit was announced in the 2015 budget and introduced in 2017 with the reasoning that “those in receipt of tax credits should face the same financial choices about having children as those supporting themselves solely through work.”

    The two-child limit on benefits restricts welfare payments for children to the first two children in a family.
    Len44ik/Shutterstock

    In contrast, the architect of the British welfare state, William Beveridge, noted in 1942 that children’s allowances (now child benefit) would help “housewives as mothers” in their “vital work in ensuring the adequate continuance of the British race and of British ideals in the world.” The 1945 Labour election victory in support of the welfare state suggests pro-natalist policies can contribute to electoral success.

    The expansion of tax credits in the 1990s and 2000s were partly explained in pro-natalist terms. Tony Blair, for instance, noted: “The working tax credit enables half a million mothers to choose to stay at home.” That, in other words, tax credits enabled women to choose having and raising children over paid work.

    Recent polling, however, suggests that the anti-natalist two-child limit polls well among voters, especially Reform voters. In 2024, for example, YouGov found 60% of Britons thought the two-child limit should be kept. The figure was 84% for Reform voters.

    Targeting voters

    The abolition of the two-child limit may have been adopted to increase Reform’s appeal to left-leaning voters. Providing additional support for families through social security may be attractive to voters concerned with social injustice. The two-child limit increases child poverty. Affected families are unable to provide even the most basic needs, such as food, clothing and heating.

    Nevertheless, Reform’s proposal is also embedded in caveats and would be paid for through means appealing to its existing voters. So, for example, Farage emphasised that the abolition of the two-child limit would be restricted to only British families. It would not be extended to families “who come into the country and suddenly decide to have a lot of children”.

    By keeping the two-child limit for migrant families, Reform’s proposals are consistent with existing immigration and asylum policies. It has been observed in an inquiry by All Party Parliamentary Groups on poverty and on migration that policies like this are, at least in part, “designed to push people into poverty in the hope that it will deter others from moving to the UK.” And, therefore, the abolition of the two-child limit can be seen as part of Reform’s pledge to severely curtail immigration.

    Farage also argued that the abolition of the two-child limit would be paid for by other policies that are central to Reform’s electoral agenda. These include stopping asylum seekers being housed in hotels and the abolition of net zero policies. It is also consistent with Reform’s view that jobs in Britain should be filled by British people. This, it believes, will help reduce reliance on migrant labour from overseas.

    There is little evidence that the introduction of the two-child limit had the desired impact on lowering poorer households’ birth rates. And it is unclear whether the proposed abolition of the two-child limit rooted in a British-only, pro-natalist agenda is enough to attract left-leaning voters.

    These voters might, for example, be more concerned with Reform’s position on immigration and asylum seeking, as well as the social injustice of the undoubted poverty in which families subjected to the two child limit on benefits live.

    Reform’s strategy then may be to further encourage those voters to turn from its closest rival – the Labour party – to other political parties. Whichever is the case, the situation will undoubtedly shift if the Labour government does take the step of abolishing the two-child limit.

    Chris Grover 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 political opportunism behind Reform UK’s support for abolition of the two-child limit on benefits – https://theconversation.com/the-political-opportunism-behind-reform-uks-support-for-abolition-of-the-two-child-limit-on-benefits-258042

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: Spending review: Rachel Reeves is about to make a £600 billion gamble on growth

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Steve Schifferes, Honorary Research Fellow, City Political Economy Research Centre, City St George’s, University of London

    UK chancellor Rachel Reeves faces her biggest test with the government’s departmental spending plans for the three years from next April until the general election. With nearly £600 billion a year to spend, her decisions will impact on every aspect of public life and shape the political weather for years to come.

    She believes the key to reviving Labour’s fortunes as its poll ratings tumble lies in boosting economic growth.

    So the government has promised that its policies will increase the UK’s anaemic growth rate and enhance productivity. Reeves is looking to capital spending on big projects that will boost the economy, such as the £14.2 billion government investment in a new nuclear power plant at Sizewell in Suffolk.

    Last year she revised the government’s fiscal rules to give herself the space to borrow an extra £113 billion over three years to transform Britain’s ageing infrastructure. She has already made it clear that she wants to boost transport investment outside of London, as well as invest in research and development, including green energy.

    But there are challenges ahead. In the first place, the effect of infrastructure investment takes a long time to feed through. This is partly because of the lag between planning the projects and when they come on-stream.

    It will take time before the full effect will be felt on productivity, which has been growing more slowly than expected. The Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR) suggested in March that the latest government plans for planning reform might increase productivity by just 0.2% in the longer term.

    There are also some real trade-offs as to where the increased capital investment will go – and which sectors will benefit most. The chancellor has emphasised her commitment to putting more money into projects outside London and south-east England that have had less public investment in the past.

    But London and the south-east is where productivity is highest and where further investment might have a bigger effect on economic growth.

    It appears that there may be less funding for social housing, which may threaten the government’s ambitious target of building 1.5 million homes over the parliament. There may also be less available to repair schools and hospitals.

    And the plans to boost defence spending on expensive military equipment – such as frigates and fighter planes – will also count as capital spending. As such, it could further reduce the amount available for infrastructure investment.

    The departmental trade-offs

    Despite the relative abundance of cash for infrastructure, the tighter fiscal rules on day-to-day spending mean that many departments are facing a squeeze on their budgets. The government plans to allow total day-to-day departmental spending on average to rise by just 1.2% per year in real terms during the next three years. This probably spells a real-terms cut for some “unprotected” departments.

    This is because the money will not be distributed equally. The Department of Health and Social Care gets 40% of all departmental spending and is likely to be the big winner.

    It has already received a big increase in the last spending round, with an 11% increase in capital spending is likely to get even more to realise an ambitious ten-year plan for improving services in the NHS in England.

    If health spending were to go up by 2.5% (well under its historic average), this could mean very little increase for many other government departments. And if it is increased by 3.5% this will imply real-terms cuts for other areas.

    The situation is made more difficult by the government’s decision to prioritise two other areas: defence and schools. For defence, it is committed to raising spending to 2.5% by 2027 and to 3% in the next parliament.

    And for education, Reeves has pledged an extra £4.5 billion per year for more teachers, childcare places and free school meals. The decisions have a strong political dimension, as health and education tend to be the most popular spending priorities among the public.

    Boosting the education spend tends to play well with the UK public.
    Monkey Business Images/Shutterstock

    The spending review, however, only covers half of total government spending. The more unpredictable part is annually managed expenditure, mainly on benefits and interest payments on government debt.

    The Treasury sets an overall target (known as the spending envelope) on how much will be spent in these areas. But it now faces a crunch point over the unpopular decisions to cut disability benefits and keep the two-child benefit cap.

    Reeves’ partial U-turn on the winter fuel payment, which will now be paid to 9 million pensioners, will cost an additional £1.25 billion a year but may have been a political necessity.

    But a full U-turn on the two other issues will be much more expensive. Taken together, such a change might breach the fiscal rules, which give only £10 billion of “headroom” in a total government budget of more than £1.2 trillion. So while there will be some rowing back, the finances suggest any more major U-turns are unlikely.

    To make matters worse, these spending plans are based on an economic forecast made by the OBR in March. This did not include the effect of US president Donald Trump’s tariff plans. Since then, both the IMF and the OECD downgraded their UK growth forecasts for both 2025 and 2026, and despite a recent small upgrade by the IMF, growth is still significantly lower than previously expected.

    Even though Britain seems to have secured a deal with the US, the effect of tariffs on global growth will still damage the UK’s prospects as a trading nation.

    This will make it harder for the government to meet its fiscal targets in the autumn budget while sticking to the departmental spending plans. The chancellor will then have three options. She can look for more cuts in benefits spending.

    She could try to find other sources of tax revenue, for example by tweaking the rules on taxing pensions or extending the freeze on upgrading tax bands. Or, more radically, she could modify the fiscal rules to give herself more flexibility – for example by having only one economic forecast a year, as the IMF has suggested.

    Ultimately Labour’s electoral prospects will depend on whether it has succeeded in boosting living standards. While the productivity drive could work, the UK economy remains at the mercy of wider global economic forces.

    Steve Schifferes 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. Spending review: Rachel Reeves is about to make a £600 billion gamble on growth – https://theconversation.com/spending-review-rachel-reeves-is-about-to-make-a-600-billion-gamble-on-growth-258526

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: Why ultra wealthy donors like Elon Musk and Zia Yusuf may just be fundamentally incompatible with the politics of the radical right

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Sam Power, Lecturer in Politics, University of Bristol

    Former chairman Zia Yusuf has rejoined Reform after quitting days previously. Yusuf had said he no longer wanted to work to get the party into government when new MP Sarah Pochin called for a ban on burqas in the UK. However, he seems to have had a change of heart and will return, ostensibly to lead the party’s “department of government efficiency”.

    Donald Trump and Elon Musk’s bromance, however, is on much rockier ground. There’s no sign of the world’s richest man reconciling with the US president, his former employer.

    These spats, at first glance, might seem like little more than, put politely, teething problems in (relatively) new political operations. Or, a little less politely, the unedifying spectacle of people in or seeking power being completely unable to act like adults.

    However, it also points to something more akin to a canary in the coalmine for radical right parties around the world. Their increasing reliance on an ultra-wealthy donor class presents an ideological puzzle that may not be solvable.

    Want more politics coverage from academic experts? Every week, we bring you informed analysis of developments in government and fact check the claims being made.

    Sign up for our weekly politics newsletter, delivered every Friday.

    Reform currently operates on what has been described as vibes alone. That is to say, there’s very little meaningful common ground between the people who vote for Reform and the party elite. The only continuity is their sense of anger at the current political system.

    This, as we are seeing in election after election, is an incredibly powerful (and compelling) force. The problem is, of course, that you can’t oppose forever. You often end up having to actually do something. All boxers, Mike Tyson will be glad to tell you, have a plan – until they get punched in the face.

    And what makes them such a powerful force at the moment, is precisely that which may cause challenges further down the line. At least for me, given it’s my bread and butter research-wise, I see this when I follow the money.

    And I’m increasingly asked a lot of questions about the kind of people who are either giving money to Reform – or who Reform are courting (and at the moment it is decidedly the latter which is the case).

    My position is that they very broadly fit into three categories. First are disaffected traditional Conservatives who are increasingly seeing a party – in the words of Farage – “worth investing in”. In the donations figures released on June 10, these are represented by bussinessmen Bassim Haidar and Mohammed Amersi.

    Then you have a Silicon Valley-reared tech-bro libertarian. This group already runs on a “move fast and break things” philosophy so the idea of an insurgent party which proclaims, on entering parliament, that “the fox is in the henhouse” naturally appeals.

    The final pot of money is filled via small donations, ballooning membership and a whole chunk of votes from a disaffected white working-class population to whom the language of economic and cultural grievances resonates.

    There are some places where the interests of these groups align – most notably a distaste for government interference and red tape (though not necessarily a smaller state in terms spending on public services). They also share a sense that progressive politics, broadly defined, ought to be pegged back a bit (but with an emphasis on a bit).

    They differ on a great deal else, to the extent that you can only really please two out of the three, but never everybody. And, unfortunately, without all three the project starts collapsing. This is what we have been seeing in the fractious relationships between Trump and Musk and Farage and Yusuf.

    Two out of three ain’t bad – but it’s not enough

    Yusuf (and Musk) are very much representative of the new tech-bro class. And, when Yusuf called questions about banning the burqa “dumb” he was speaking at both an ideological and organisational level.

    At the ideological level it is, frankly, a bit rich for his blood, because “philosophically I am always a bit uneasy about banning things which, for example, would be unconstitutional in the United States”.

    Organisationally, it pushes Reform much closer to what journalist Fraser Nelson calls “a tactic more akin to the old BNP”. Indeed, Reform started “just asking questions” about burqas at the same time as it started twisting footage to claim that Anas Sarwar, leader of Scottish Labour, wants to prioritise the needs of Pakistanis.

    This kind of dog-whistle politics appeals to some, but puts off a lot more, including, I think, some of the (saner) tech-bro right.

    Indeed, Ian Ward at Politico perceptively notes that if we want to explain the current Musk-Trump meltdown we should look back to Christmas 2024, when cracks first started appearing over immigration policy.

    The tech-bro right are, generally speaking, much less hardline on the flow of people than the Maga-populist right (think Steve Bannon and Tommy Robinson). In fact, they are pro-high skilled immigration as it tends to benefit them and their business interests.

    Tech-bros also like the idea of moving fast and breaking things in theory. But when things start moving fast and actually breaking in practice (or Tesla stocks start to plummet), they tend to get a bit freaked out.

    In other words, it’s not just that they don’t like government, they don’t like governing and the inevitable compromise that comes with it. When they say move fast and break things, I get the sense what they really mean is “leave me alone so I can make billions in peace”.

    This, of course, is quite appealing to traditional hedge-fund conservatives, but is also the politics that literally built the economic grievances that much of the white-working class support for the populist radical right is, in turn, built on.

    Two out of three ain’t bad, but you do need all three. So, don’t be surprised if despite Farage’s seemingly genuine affection for Yusuf, it all falls apart again before long.

    Ultimately, Reform will need to decide how they are going to spin these plates. The good news is that it might well be that they can, indeed, get by on vibes alone until the next general election. The bad news, unfortunately, is that winning an election is the easy bit. Just ask Boris Johnson and Keir Starmer. After all, everyone has a plan.

    Sam Power receives funding from the Economic and Social Research Council and the Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council.

    – ref. Why ultra wealthy donors like Elon Musk and Zia Yusuf may just be fundamentally incompatible with the politics of the radical right – https://theconversation.com/why-ultra-wealthy-donors-like-elon-musk-and-zia-yusuf-may-just-be-fundamentally-incompatible-with-the-politics-of-the-radical-right-258512

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: What the new British zoo standards mean for animal welfare

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Samantha Ward, Associate Professor of Zoo Animal Welfare, Nottingham Trent University

    Mila Supinskaya Glashchenko/Shutterstock

    If you visit a zoo, you might be captivated by the animals you see — majestic lions, curious meerkats, soaring birds of prey. But this is not always the case. Some zoos don’t always give us that impression of “happy animals” where they can behave naturally and be left alone by visitors if they wish.

    The UK, Scottish and Welsh governments recently released new zoo standards for Great Britain. So what does this mean for the future of zoos?

    I have been working in and with zoos for over 20 years. I am a bit of a zoo-nerd but that doesn’t mean that I like them all. I am an advocate for good animal welfare in zoos and so I can recognise the ones that are good and not so good.

    Britain is one of a few countries such as Belgium, South Korea and New Zealand that have specific zoo legislation. The new British standards will be enforced in 2027, giving below-par zoos two years to up their game.

    Get your news from actual experts, straight to your inbox. Sign up to our daily newsletter to receive all The Conversation UK’s latest coverage of news and research, from politics and business to the arts and sciences.

    I speak here in my role as associate professor of zoo animal welfare at Nottingham Trent University, but I also sit on the UK Zoos Expert Committee and helped to write the new standards. One of the biggest changes is the replacement of the word “should” with “must”. The standards now say: “Zoos must provide appropriate accomodation”. This makes all elements of the guidance much more enforceable.

    One of the most common complaints I hear when I say I work with zoos is that the animals don’t have as much space as they do in the wild. That is correct: zoos cannot provide the same amount of space for a lot of species. But good quality space can allow these animals to behave like they would in wild habitats.

    One of the most controversial animals when talking about space is elephants. In 2017 the UK government issued updated requirements for them which brought in enclosure-size requirements, something that had never happened for any species in British zoos before.

    Under the new standards, zoos will have until 2040 to increase their elephant provisions. Indoor space allocation for a herd of up to four females has been doubled to 600m². This then increases by 100m² for each additional elephant (compared to 80m² in the 2017 requirements).

    Bull facilities – zoos that house individual male elephants – need to provide 320m² of indoor space per bull. Outdoor areas for bull and cow elephants must provide a minimum shared space of 20,000m² (or 2.8 UK sized football pitches) for up to five group-living adults. This must be increased by at least 2,500m² for each additional animal over two years old. This is over 30 times larger than the current standards.

    The new standards stipulate that zoos must provide more natural habitats that better replicate how elephants live in the wild. There are also requirements for more detailed behavioural monitoring and things that help keep elephants active and engaged in their environment.

    Howver, animal welfare charity the RSPCA still feels that these updates are not good enough. It believes that elephants (and some other species) are not suitable for captivity as they have complex cognitive needs and space requirements.

    From my perspective, Britain has the most specific (and now) welfare-driven standards for elephants in the world. If Britain were to ban the housing of elephants, we would be shipping them to lower quality habitats, care and monitoring. Is this really what we want for the elephants in British zoos?

    What else is changing

    Another area where there has been much criticism in the past relates to providing animals from specific climates or environments with the correct conditions, such as reptiles, amphibians, tropical birds and primates. While a high number of animals seem to cope well in the UK’s colder climate, there is research to show that some animals need specialised environments, without which they can suffer from severe health problems, low welfare and even death.

    The new standards require zoos to develop detailed environmental management plans for species that rely on artificial life-support systems such as aquariums, vivariums, tropical houses or desert habitats. Animals also cannot be removed from their enclosures for interactions or talks with the public.

    These environmental management plans outline the environmental parameters required for that animal to thrive and behave naturally, and they need to be monitored to ensure that provisions do not slip.

    Birds of prey have new welfare protections in British zoos.
    chrisdorney/Shutterstock

    There are also extra requirements for birds of prey. Although controversial, tethering is currently a recognised management practice for birds of prey, including owls, hawks and falcons. You don’t need to be a welfare scientist to understand how a bird might feel about being tethered to a post for long periods of time.

    The 2012 standards stipulated that tethered birds should be flown at least four times per week, though there were no time restrictions on how long they could be tethered. The new standards emphasise that birds can only be tethered for a maximum of four hours in a 24 hour period and only as a management tool that benefits the bird (such as training for flight displays, transportation or veterinary treatment).

    There is new emphasis on what is known as behavioural enrichment. Whether it’s puzzle feeders for primates, scent trails for big cats or novel objects for parrots, enrichment helps prevent boredom, reduce stress and promote natural behaviour.

    Enrichment can be resource intensive and therefore difficult to implement, but the new standards make it a core requirement. Enrichment activities must aim to replicate natural behaviour such as foraging, climbing or problem solving. Zoos are required to document and evaluate these activities, track how animals respond and adjust strategies accordingly.

    These updates reflect a deeper understanding of what animals need to thrive, not just survive. As a zoo welfare scientist, I feel there is always more that can be done to improve the welfare of animals in zoos (such as banning touch pools and tethering altogether).

    But it is important that zoos and aquariums evaluate the costs (to the animals) and benefits (to the visitors) to make ethical and welfare-based decisions themselves.

    These new standards will improve the conditions for animals in zoos, as well as help zoos to make the right decisions about the animals they house and care for.

    Samantha Ward is the welfare specialist on the Zoo Experts Committee, part of DEFRA, who helped write the new zoo standards.

    – ref. What the new British zoo standards mean for animal welfare – https://theconversation.com/what-the-new-british-zoo-standards-mean-for-animal-welfare-258001

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: Rosebank oilfield: why more UK oil means more global emissions

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Fergus Green, Associate Professor in Political Theory and Public Policy, UCL

    Frode Koppang / shutterstock

    The UK government will soon face a momentous decision over whether to approve production in the Rosebank oilfield off the coast of Shetland.

    Rosebank is the UK’s biggest undeveloped field. Its proponents – the largest of which is Norwegian state-owned petroleum company, Equinor – estimate that it will produce the equivalent of up to 500 million barrels of oil between 2026 and 2051. When burned, this oil will generate up to 200 million tonnes of carbon dioxide, which is more than the combined annual emissions of 28 low-income countries.

    Thanks to recent court cases, the climate effects of those “combustion emissions” will need to be taken into account by the government when it decides whether to approve production at Rosebank. In a new report, two colleagues and I reviewed the evidence concerning the implications of new oil and gas fields in the UK.

    Get your news from actual experts, straight to your inbox. Sign up to our daily newsletter to receive all The Conversation UK’s latest coverage of news and research, from politics and business to the arts and sciences.

    There is a rapidly dwindling global carbon budget for holding temperature increases to below 1.5°C of warming (the more conservative end of the Paris agreement’s temperature goal).

    Globally, the emissions from burning the fossil fuels in oil and gas fields and coalmines that are already operating or under development far exceed that budget. In this context, Rosebank’s combustion emissions are highly significant, as they add considerably to that excess.

    We also found that the projected production from existing fields is sufficient to meet or exceed global oil and gas demand in modelled economic scenarios in which climate warming is restrained to within 1.5°C. This is further evidence that new fields are not consistent with achieving globally agreed temperature goals.

    However, it is often asserted by supporters of new fields that keeping UK oil in the ground won’t reduce global emissions, because another producer will supply the demand and reap the benefits. This is a gross and dangerous oversimplification which, according to the United Nations Environment Programme, “defies basic economics of supply and demand”.

    Allowing a new field like Rosebank would increase the supply of oil globally, resulting in a fall in its price which, though small, would cause more oil to be consumed. As UK government advisers at the Climate Change Committee have acknowledged, new petroleum projects “support a larger global market overall” for petroleum. Stopping Rosebank would have the opposite effect, and lead to less oil consumed.

    Rosebank is found about 80 miles west of Shetland and its puffins.
    Philippe Clement / shutterstock

    The oil industry likes to trumpet the UK’s relatively low upstream emissions – that is, from the process of extracting oil – compared with those of competitors overseas. But this is a distraction from the bigger issue: the additional greenhouse gases emitted from consuming the extra oil that new fields produce.

    A recent peer-reviewed study by economists and experts in the emissions-intensity of oil and gas production concluded that limiting oil supply will almost always lead to lower overall emissions, regardless of the intensity of upstream emissions from different fields. It is highly likely that leaving Rosebank’s oil in the ground will result in lower global greenhouse gases than would occur if the field were developed.

    However, this focus on Rosebank’s aggregate emissions ignores two further reasons the field’s development consent should be refused on climate grounds.

    A litmus test of climate leadership

    First, exploiting new sources of oil supply like Rosebank locks in future oil and gas production, ultimately making it economically, politically and legally harder to wind the industry down.

    Second, as the Climate Change Committee also stated, decisions by the UK government concerning petroleum production have an important “signalling effect” internationally and at home.

    Internationally, the UK government has rightly acknowledged that climate action “must be accelerated drastically” to keep the average global temperature rise “below 1.5°C”.

    The UK has a proud reputation for climate leadership. It was the first country to enact a legally binding framework to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, it rapidly phased out coal-fired power generation, and in 2019 it became the first country to adopt a net zero emissions target.

    Building on this legacy, the foreign secretary David Lammy has vowed to “push for the ambition needed to keep 1.5 degrees alive”. But approving Rosebank would signal to the world that the UK government is not sincere about keeping the Paris agreement’s 1.5°C goal “alive”, after all.

    Some might think that aspirations to climate leadership are futile given the Trump administration’s “drill, baby, drill” approach to fossil fuels. But Trump’s recklessness at a critical time for global climate efforts makes UK climate leadership more important than ever.

    The UK already chairs a suite of international energy transition alliances focused on the international phase-out of coal-fired power, the scale-up of renewables, and the financing of these transitions. It could plug a gap in its influence by rejecting Rosebank and joining the Beyond Oil & Gas Alliance, a “club” of (currently) 25 national and sub-national governments that are working to phase-out oil and gas production and persuade other countries to follow suit.

    And it could deepen cooperation with the EU to drive down oil and gas demand and scale up clean energy throughout the region, yielding benefits that will outlive the Trump administration.

    Domestically, rejecting Rosebank would send a powerful signal to investors about the sincerity of the government’s commitment to achieve economic growth by becoming a “clean energy superpower”, as the governing Labour party pledged to do at the last election.

    But the benefits of clean prosperity must extend to the people and communities caught up in the transition, too. The UK’s North Sea oil and gas reserves, along with the jobs their production supports, are in terminal decline.

    Oil and gas workers and the communities in which they are based already face a volatile future. New fields like Rosebank would create some additional jobs in this declining industry. But they cannot arrest its long-term decline.

    The government recognises that this transition is already taking place and will continue. With targeted regional and industrial investment, support for workers and their families, and careful planning that meaningfully involves affected communities, the UK has an opportunity to demonstrate to the world how to achieve a just transition away from oil and gas.

    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.

    Fergus Green has received consulting fees from and provided expert evidence on behalf of an environmental nongovernmental organisation engaged in climate-related litigation against a fossil fuel company. He informally consults with a number of environmental nongovernmental organisations in relation to fossil fuel production issues in the UK and elsewhere. He is a member of the Just Transition Expert Group of the Powering Past Coal Alliance (the role is unremunerated).

    – ref. Rosebank oilfield: why more UK oil means more global emissions – https://theconversation.com/rosebank-oilfield-why-more-uk-oil-means-more-global-emissions-253055

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: Why the salmon on your plate contains less omega-3 than it used to – and how the industry can address that

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Richard Newton, Lecturer in Aquaculture, University of Stirling

    Maria_Usp/Shutterstock

    Farmed Atlantic salmon has become one of the most highly traded food commodities in the world, enjoyed for its versatility as much as for its health benefits. It has long been known that eating oily fish such as salmon is the best way to consume long-chain omega-3 fatty acids. These are essential for brain development, mental health and cognition.

    In salmon, omega-3 fatty acids must come from the fish’s diet. For farmed fish, this means fishmeal and fish oil – so–called “marine ingredients” made from ground-up wild fish such as anchovy and fish by-products.

    But the global supply of omega-3s is severely limited, whether from farmed or wild seafood. Many of the key fisheries supplying marine ingredients reached full exploitation in the mid-1990s. Since the growth of salmon aquaculture, increasing volumes of the limited marine ingredients supply have been taken up by fish farming.

    This has raised concerns over sustainability and inflated the cost of these ingredients. The result has been a steady decline in the proportion of fish oil in farmed salmon diets, which has been replaced by plant oils. But these oils do not contain long-chain omega-3s.

    In turn, the amount of omega-3s in a portion of salmon halved between 2006 and 2015. However, the salmon industry increasingly uses omega-3 as a key selling point for its product – two portions of farmed Scottish salmon per week would meet the recommended intake for an adult at current levels.

    If the salmon industry is to continue to grow and maintain the omega-3 targets, it must be more efficient. And the seafood industry as a whole must do more to prevent omega-3 losses through its value chains. Part of the efficiency journey has been to produce more fish oil.

    This can be done by harnessing the value of fishery and aquaculture byproducts such as trimmings, skins and heads, so that more omega-3s are kept in the food (and feed) system.

    There is a growing incentive to use the whole fish – consequently there has been good progress in improving the use of byproducts. It is now estimated that around half of global fish oil supply is sourced from fishery, and particularly aquaculture, processing sources. However, there is still a lot of waste and logistical difficulties in storing and transporting seafood byproducts.

    Much of the industry incentive to use byproducts has been economic, as the global shortage of fish oil pushed prices above US$8,000 (£5,900) per tonne in 2024. Evidence from the past 20 years suggests that overall use of wild fish in the European salmon industry has dropped (replaced by plant ingredients), while production has grown several-fold.

    Despite improvements and reductions in the use of marine ingredients, the industry still comes under huge pressure from NGOs and conservation groups. They are concerned about the use of fish as feed, which may damage public perceptions of the aquaculture industry.

    To assess the use of fish as feed in aquaculture, the “fish in fish out” (Fifo) ratio was conceived, which measures the ratio of fish biomass included in fish feeds to the biomass of fish ultimately produced for consumption. The goal is for more fish to be produced for human consumption than is used as feed, and this would result in a Fifo of less than 1.

    New measure for nutrients

    Certification bodies such as the Aquaculture Stewardship Council and Best Aquaculture Practices have adopted different forms of the Fifo metric. However, until now, Fifo has not addressed one of the fundamental reasons for including marine ingredients in aquafeeds – providing omega-3s to consumers. It has neither considered the omega-3 content within feed fish, nor in the final product.

    Similarly, studies examining nutrient retention in salmon have only looked at that from feed to the farmed fish. The omega-3 lost in the process of turning the fish raw material in feed is not currently measured. By introducing our new measure, the nutrient Fifo (nFifo), nutrients can be followed from wild fish capture, its separation into meal and oil, and through to the final product sold to consumers.

    Certification bodies like the Aquaculture Stewardship Council could adopt the new metric for nutrition.
    T. Schneider/Shutterstock

    The method used in nFifo favours the use of byproduct resources over virgin raw materials, so that diets containing byproducts receive a lower nFifo. In theory, this should promote circular economy initiatives.

    This is crucial in the marine ingredients industry. Seafood is highly perishable and the byproducts especially so. But they are also some of the richest sources of omega-3s, such as from herring or mackerel.

    However, the cost of retaining, stabilising, storing and transporting byproducts is often prohibitive. This is especially true on board fishing boats, where space is at a premium and byproducts are often dumped at sea.

    Introducing metrics that prevent bioresources being wasted is essential for sustainable food production. Current salmon feed contains around 20% to 25% marine ingredients, but only around 5% is from byproducts. This results in a nFIFO of 2.17.

    Incorporating only marine ingredients sourced from byproducts reduces that nFifo to below 0.5. Crucially, this still provides the same level of omega-3s to the consumer.

    If the seafood industry is serious about sustainable production, it needs to become much more efficient with resources. The nFifo metric links the use of wild fish to omega-3s consumed in farmed salmon for the first time – but it could also be applied to other species and nutrients.

    The methodology is similar to that used for environmental impact indicators for climate change, land or water use. It makes it possible to assess the trade-offs of including and substituting marine ingredients in fish diets at different points of production.

    For example, while marine ingredients may raise concerns around their impact on fisheries, they have comparatively low carbon footprints and almost no land or water footprints compared to plant ingredients. This could potentially lead to more balanced and sustainable approaches to seafood production.

    It is hoped that the nFifo metric and an accessible tool for calculating it (there is one provided on the Blue Food Performance website) will be adopted by certifiers. It could also lead to more complex sustainability indicators becoming mainstream, letting consumers make informed choices about the nutritional and environmental credentials of the products they buy.

    Richard Newton is the Chair of the Climate Action Committe for Best Aquaculture Practice and the Stakeholder Advisory Group for Seafood Watch. He has previously received funding in 2019 and 2013 from the International Fishmeal Fishoil Organisation to map supplies of underutilised by-product resources.

    Dave Little has received funding from various organisations supporting sustainable aquaculture development and has been affiliated to various organisations working to to improve farmed seafood assurance

    – ref. Why the salmon on your plate contains less omega-3 than it used to – and how the industry can address that – https://theconversation.com/why-the-salmon-on-your-plate-contains-less-omega-3-than-it-used-to-and-how-the-industry-can-address-that-258228

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: Beards and microbes: what the evidence shows

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Primrose Freestone, Senior Lecturer in Clinical Microbiology, University of Leicester

    Bernardo Emanuelle/Shutterstock.com

    Beards have long attracted suspicion, sometimes seen as stylish, sometimes as unsanitary. But how dirty are they, really?

    Human skin is home to billions of microorganisms – mainly bacteria, but also fungi and viruses – and facial hair provides a unique environment for them to thrive. Research shows that beards, in particular, support a dense and diverse microbial population, which has fuelled a persistent belief that they are inherently unhygienic. The Washington Post recently reported that some toilets contain fewer germs than the average beard.

    But are beards truly a hygiene risk? A closer look at the evidence reveals a nuanced picture.

    The microbial population on skin varies by location and is influenced by factors such as temperature, pH, humidity and nutrient availability. Beards create a warm, often moist environment where food debris and oils can accumulate – ideal conditions for microbial growth.

    These microbes thrive not just because of the warm, moist conditions beards provide, but also because of constant exposure to new contaminants and microbes, especially from hands that frequently touch surfaces and the face.

    Get your news from actual experts, straight to your inbox. Sign up to our daily newsletter to receive all The Conversation UK’s latest coverage of news and research, from politics and business to the arts and sciences.

    Concerns among scientists about beard hygiene date back over 50 years. Early studies showed that facial hair could retain bacteria and bacterial toxins even after washing. This led to the enduring idea that beards act as bacterial reservoirs and could pose an infection risk to others.

    For healthcare workers, this has made beards a point of controversy, especially in hospitals where pathogen transmission is a concern. However, hospital-based research has shown mixed results. One study found that bearded healthcare workers had higher bacterial loads on their faces than clean-shaven colleagues.

    Another investigation, looking at whether it would be hygienic to evaluate dogs and humans in the same MRI scanner, found that most men’s beards contained significantly more microbes than dog fur, including a greater presence of harmful bacteria. The researchers concluded: “Dogs are no risk to humans if they use the same MRI.”

    Dogs and humans can share the same MRI scanner.
    Dmytro Zinkevych/Shutterstock.com

    However, other studies have challenged the idea that beards increase infection risk. For example, one investigation found no significant difference in bacterial colonisation between bearded and clean-shaven healthcare workers.

    The same study also reported that bearded doctors were less likely to carry Staphylococcus aureus, a major cause of hospital infections, and that there was no increase in infection rates among patients treated by bearded surgeons wearing surgical masks.

    Beards can sometimes spread skin infections, such as impetigo — a contagious rash often caused by S aureus, which is commonly found in facial hair.

    In rare cases, parasites like pubic lice – which usually live in the groin area – can also show up in beards, eyebrows or eyelashes, particularly in cases of poor hygiene or close contact with an infected person.

    The case for good beard hygiene

    Neglected beards can foster irritation, inflammation and infection. The skin beneath a beard – rich in blood vessels, nerve endings and immune cells – is highly sensitive to microbial and environmental stressors. When sebum, dead skin, food debris and pollutants accumulate, they can irritate the skin and provide fuel for fungal and bacterial growth.

    Experts strongly recommend washing your beard and face every day. Doing so removes dirt, oils, allergens and dead skin, helping prevent microbial buildup.

    Dermatologists also advise moisturising to prevent dryness, using a beard comb to clear debris, and trimming to control loose hairs and reduce shedding. These steps help maintain not only hygiene but also beard health and appearance.

    So, are beards dirty? Like most things, it depends on how well you care for them. With daily hygiene and proper grooming, beards pose little risk and may even be healthier than we once thought.

    Primrose Freestone 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. Beards and microbes: what the evidence shows – https://theconversation.com/beards-and-microbes-what-the-evidence-shows-256917

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: The National Gallery at 200: is this rehang a bold relaunch or rinse and repeat?

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Jonathan Conlin, Professor of Modern History, University of Southampton

    The National Gallery has recently rehung its entire collection. Taking hundreds of paintings off the wall and replacing them in a new arrangement requires considerable mental and physical labour on the part of curators, conservators and technicians.

    A rehang tends to elicit strong reactions from anyone with a stake in the collection – and in the case of a public gallery, “anyone” means “everyone”.
    Unsurprisingly then, it has only been done twice at the National Gallery since the second world war.

    Last month, I attended a launch party for the gallery’s new Sainsbury Wing entrance. It marked the end of NG200, a year-long programme of events celebrating the gallery’s 200th birthday. As the author of the gallery’s authorised bicentenary history, I had written about the refurbishment, albeit with only computer-generated impressions of what it would look like. Now I could see for myself.

    Inside the launch party for the gallery’s new Sainsbury Wing entrance.
    Jonathan Conlin, CC BY-SA

    Back in 1946, the director of the National Gallery was eager to offer both reassurance about his rehang and the promise of striking new juxtapositions. “The traditional grouping by schools has been largely maintained,” Sir Philip Hendy noted, “but a good many exceptions have been made, partly for the sake of a more harmonious and stimulating ensemble and partly for the sake of historical truth.”

    The rehang, Hendy argued, would show how “the spirit of the time is usually more important than national boundaries, and that ideas can transcend both”. A striking example was Hendy hanging Bronzino’s An Allegory With Venus and Cupid (1545) next to Holbein’s The Ambassadors, painted just 12 years earlier.

    “I enjoyed the intellectual shocks provided, lavishly, in the juxtaposition of unexpected artists,” wrote one regular visitor from Godalming in Surrey. But she soon found herself wondering if there was “some subtle plan” behind “having the Botticellis all in different rooms, the Venetians just anywhere, and the Rembrandts torn asunder?”

    Evacuation of paintings from the National Gallery during the second world war, shortly before the last rehang.
    Imperial War Museum

    The Bronzino and the Holbein were split up fairly quickly, perhaps in response to criticism from other confused visitors. While they have not been reunited on the same wall, as I stood back from The Ambassadors in room four, I could turn my head to the left and see Venus and Cupid neatly framed by the door to neighbouring room two.

    At least, I could have seen it, had Neil MacGregor not been standing in front of it. The National Gallery’s director from 1987 to 2002, MacGregor oversaw the last complete rehang as well as the construction of the Sainsbury Wing, which opened in 1991.

    This article is part of our State of the Arts series. These articles tackle the challenges of the arts and heritage industry – and celebrate the wins, too.

    At that time, the gallery’s then-head of exhibitions, Michael Wilson, replaced the traditional grouping by schools with the wing system, which organised the hang around three broad pan-European epochs. It was a profound shift, perhaps linked to broader pan-European political visions that would lead to the introduction of a common European currency in 1999.

    Former National Gallery trustee Robert Benson (as drawn by John Singer Sargent) believed art should be hung chronologically.
    Wiki Commons

    This was a world away from the previous arrangement. “Pictures must be hung in historical sequence,” trustee Robert Benson noted in 1914. “A salon carré, or a Tribuna, of masterpieces of all schools is an objective far ahead.”

    For Benson, it was clear that the collection could only be understood “school by school”. Each painter “must be appreciated and judged in relation to the chef d’école of whose artistic lineage, or entourage, he forms part”. Collecting works from the “period of eclecticism and decadence” that followed each chef d’école (the initiator or leader of a school of painting) was of secondary importance.

    But as a result, in the National Gallery that Benson (a wannabe gallery director) helped create and that MacGregor inherited, there were shocks aplenty as the visitor jumped from one school to another.

    Having followed the French school through from Corneille de Lyon’s Man in a Black Biretta (c. 1538-61) through Jacques-Louis David’s Jacobus Blauw (1795) to Cézanne’s Hillside in Provence (c. 1890-1912), you then jumped four or more centuries back to start over again with the Dutch or the Italians.

    The redesigned wing

    These shocks were compounded by gestures towards period interiors: terrazzo tile for the Italians, dark wood panelling for the Dutch. Opened in 1975, the northern extension’s carpet, suspended ceilings and floating walls were hailed as “a model of discretion and reticence in comparison to the grandeur of the Victorian interiors”.

    Under MacGregor’s wing system, “the spirit of the time” came first – nowhere more so than in the Sainsbury Wing, designed to set up a conversation between the artists of the Northern Renaissance and the Italian Renaissance. The system recognised that the Alps had not been a barrier to the exchange of artistic ideas, and had been criss-crossed by many Renaissance artists, including Albrecht Dürer.

    The postmodern American architects chosen to design the Sainsbury Wing, Robert Venturi and Denise Scott Brown, larded their design with a series of knowing, sometimes mannered quotations from much older buildings.

    The redesign of this Grade I-listed building by the American architect Annabelle Selldorf has now opened up Venturi and Scott Brown’s dark, crypt-like ground floor foyer. Squat columns originally intended to create a sense of anticipation have been thinned and in some cases removed. As the Twentieth Century Society noted in its planning objection, “the key sense of compression” (released upon climbing the stair) has been lost.

    Artemisia Gentileschi’s Self-Portrait as Saint Catherine of Alexandria has not been hung in a specific women artists room.
    National Gallery

    A ‘tamer’ rehang

    Upstairs in the galleries, theme rooms have been introduced, scattered among the otherwise chronological hang. The choice of themes is tamer than the 2023 rehang of European paintings at the Metropolitan Museum in New York, where some of the themes feel forced – such as “Tiepolo and multiracial Europe”.

    The National Gallery has resisted the temptation to devote a gallery to women artists: Artemisia Gentileschi’s Self Portrait as Saint Catherine of Alexandria (c. 1615-17) hangs between Caravaggios in room three, not next to Elizabeth Vigée Le Brun’s Self Portrait in a Straw Hat (1782) in room 15.

    Those who admired the way in which MacGregor invited non-believers to engage with Christian art on an emotional level may nonetheless feel that an opportunity has been lost. This is a rehang that could have shocked more than it did.

    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.

    Jonathan Conlin is the author of the National Gallery’s authorised bicentenary history, The National Gallery: A History.

    – ref. The National Gallery at 200: is this rehang a bold relaunch or rinse and repeat? – https://theconversation.com/the-national-gallery-at-200-is-this-rehang-a-bold-relaunch-or-rinse-and-repeat-258334

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: The world needs bold, equitable climate action at the 2025 G7 summit

    Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Sharon E. Straus, Professor, Department of Medicine, University of Toronto

    As climate change and disrupted weather patterns impact countries around the world, leaders must act to mitigate the negative effects on public health.

    Leaders from six western countries and Japan will soon gather in Kananaskis, Alta., for the Group of Seven (G7) meeting from June 15 to 17, 2025. In the lead-up to this meeting, the Royal Society of Canada hosted the Science 7 (S7). This is an engagement meeting of the leading academies of the G7 member countries.

    Following discussion and deliberation, three statements aimed at advancing science for society were published, entitled Advanced Technologies and Data Security, Sustainable Migration and Climate Action and Health Resilience.

    One of us (Sharon Straus) oversaw the S7 statement on Climate Action and Health Resilience. This statement draws attention to the health impacts of climate change and recommends several mitigation strategies.

    Wide-ranging health impacts

    Experts on health and climate change have outlined the growing impact of delayed climate action. The data are clear. Extreme weather events such as heat, floods, droughts and wildfires are having wide-ranging health impacts.

    In the 10 years between 2014-2023, there was a 167 per cent increase in heat-related deaths in those aged 65 years and older compared with the 10 years between 1990-99. Extreme weather events also directly impact food and water security, as well as infectious diseases and chronic diseases.

    The health consequences of climate change are not only the result of environmental factors. Of equal importance are recent decisions eliminating funding for programs that mitigate the risks of climate change.

    Consider for example, the multiple threats to recent progress in eliminating malaria. The World Malaria Report published in December 2024 by the World Health Organization estimated that 2.2 billion malaria cases and 12.7 million malaria deaths were averted between 2000 and 2023.

    Now, many countries anticipate a malaria resurgence. Antimalarial drug resistance, mosquito resistance to insecticides, changes in temperature and humidity affecting mosquito survival and the emergence of new mosquito species linked to climate change — combined with the recent abrupt funding freeze from the United States — are leading to a perfect storm.

    Economic impact of climate change

    The economic burden of climate change, which includes more health-care use, lost productivity, adaptation and mitigation expenses — to say nothing of the costs of rebuilding — is massive.

    Much of that burden is borne by those who live in low- and middle-income countries (80 per cent of the world’s population) and who are the lowest contributors to carbon dioxide emissions.

    To put this in perspective, in 2021, the United Nations Environment Program estimated the costs of annual adaptation for vulnerable countries at US$70 billion and predicted this would increase to US$140-300 billion by 2030.

    In addition to the costs of adaptation aimed at reducing vulnerability to climate change, there are the costs associated with losses resulting from climate change. The 2024 Lancet Countdown estimated that the average annual economic losses due to extreme weather-related events reached US$227 billion between 2019-2023. This value exceeds the gross domestic product of approximately 60 per cent of the world’s economies.

    What about Canada?

    In Canada, warming is happening at twice the global rate with resulting heat, wildfires and floods. There is also evidence of significant impacts on mental health and chronic diseases, leading to an increased need for health care.

    Indigenous communities, older adults and those who have experienced homelessness are disproportionately impacted by climate change. Indigenous Peoples, especially those living in remote and northern areas, are particularly vulnerable.

    Currently there are 37 long-term and 40 short-term drinking water advisories in First Nations communities across Canada. The lack of safe, clean drinking water can exacerbate climate-related food and water insecurity and lead to infectious disease transmission.

    The number of people experiencing homelessness is growing and many of these individuals are over 50 years old. These older adults are physiologically 15-20 years older than their housed counterparts and are at higher risk of chronic diseases, including those exacerbated by climate change.

    Similarly, frail older adults are at higher risk of health effects of climate change. It is worth remembering the impact of poor air quality and lack of air conditioning during the COVID-19 pandemic on those living in long-term care homes.

    Climate change costs health-care systems more each year. The Canadian Institute for Climate Choices recently estimated that health-related hospitalizations will increase by 21 per cent by mid-century. Our health systems are not prepared for this.

    In addition, the costs of death and reduced quality of life from heat-related climate change is estimated to rise between $3 billion and $3.9 billion by the middle of this century. Factoring in other impacts such as those from air pollution, flooding and wildfires, the total estimated costs are in the tens to hundreds of billions.

    S7’s recommendations

    The S7 statement on Climate Action and Health Resilience includes seven recommendations. Addressing the disproportionate impact of climate change on populations who are particularly vulnerable and investing in innovative solutions are among them. Particularly critical are societal and political innovations that involve affected communities, including Indigenous communities.

    The S7’s climate and health resilience recommendations include:

    • Developing and optimizing climate change mitigation strategies to transform health and social services (such as early warning infectious disease systems and biomonitoring).

    • Developing new regulations nationally and internationally to transform health, public health and social services, increasing their readiness and safeguarding health from climate change impact.

    • Providing economic and regulatory incentives to foster adaptation and resiliency of health systems.

    • Investing in innovative solutions (including vaccine development for emerging diseases, wastewater surveillance) to mitigate climate change and its health risks.

    The G7 summit is an opportunity to centre climate change discussions and act on the S7 recommendations. Bold investment in innovations that address the health challenges resulting from climate change will benefit us all and drive new economic activity and resilience.

    Climate change is a health issue, a social justice issue and an economic issue, and the time to act is now. Scientists, policymakers, clinicians and the public must work together.

    Sharon E. Straus receives research funding from the Canadian Institutes of Health Research and the Public Health Agency of Canada. She is a Fellow of the Royal Society of Canada.

    Françoise Baylis is a Fellow of the Royal Society of Canada.

    – ref. The world needs bold, equitable climate action at the 2025 G7 summit – https://theconversation.com/the-world-needs-bold-equitable-climate-action-at-the-2025-g7-summit-256876

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: Teens say they can access firearms at home, even when parents lock them up, new research shows

    Source: The Conversation – USA – By Katherine G. Hastings, PhD Candidate in Population and Public Health, University of British Columbia

    Most households that own firearms have more than one − and owners often don’t secure all of them. StockPlanets/E+ via Getty Images

    More than half of U.S. teens living in households with firearms believe they can access and load a firearm at home. Even when their parents report storing all firearms locked and unloaded, more than one-third of teens still believe they could access and load one. These are the main findings of our new study, published in the journal JAMA Network Open.

    We are behavioral scientists investigating youth injury prevention and youth safety. In this study, we analyzed national survey data from nearly 500 parents who owned firearms and their teens. One survey asked the parents to report how many firearms they had in the home and how they stored each one. Another asked their teens to estimate how quickly they could access and load a firearm at home.

    While the presence of unlocked and loaded firearms in the home was weakly linked to perceived access among teens, we found that parents’ storage practices alone were a poor predictor of whether teens believed they could access a firearm. What’s more, in households with more than one firearm, locking up more firearms was not at all linked to perceived access among teens if at least one remained unsecured.

    In short, just one unlocked firearm can undo the protective benefit of securing all other firearms in the home, our results showed.

    Why it matters

    In the U.S., firearms are now the leading cause of death among children and teens. In most of these cases, the firearm used belonged to a parent, relative or friend.

    Our study focused on teens’ beliefs about firearm access, not their actual access. However, these perceptions may provide important clues around firearm access and use. Prior research shows that teens who believe they can access a firearm are more likely to access and carry one. This is particularly concerning for teens who already have a higher risk for dying by suicide.

    One of the most widely supported ways to reduce teen injuries and deaths by firearms is to encourage owners to keep firearms locked and unloaded. However, most firearm-owning households in the U.S. have multiple firearms, and owners often store some firearms securely but not all.

    Firearms are the leading cause of death among children and teens.
    Kypros/Stock Photos Gun Safe via Getty Images

    Despite evidence that securely storing firearms saves lives, efforts to promote that messaging may be less effective when it is not universally applied to all firearms in the home or when teens still know how to access them.

    Our study also points to the need for messaging and safety strategies that consider teen behavior amid household firearm dynamics. For example, teens may observe where firearms are stored or know where keys or combinations are kept and unlock firearms in moments of impulsivity or emotional distress. Beyond securely storing firearms, encouraging parents to treat every firearm in the household as a potential source of risk and talking with teens about how to address conflicts and promote mental and emotional well-being may also be protective.

    Additionally, our study adds support for universal laws that require securely storing all firearms in homes in which children live and mandating routine assessments of teen firearm access by pediatricians.

    What still isn’t known

    It is still unclear how teens’ beliefs about their access to firearms affects whether they actually seek them out – or how the variability of parents’ practices on storing firearms affects teen access.

    Another important question is how teens’ perceptions of their access to firearms at home may vary depending on cultural backgrounds, geography and different households’ attitudes and beliefs around firearm use.

    Additionally, our study looked only at teens ages 14 to 18. Further research is needed to explore these associations among younger children in firearm-owning households.

    The Research Brief is a short take on interesting academic work.

    Rebeccah Sokol receives funding from the National Institutes of Health and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

    Katherine G. Hastings 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. Teens say they can access firearms at home, even when parents lock them up, new research shows – https://theconversation.com/teens-say-they-can-access-firearms-at-home-even-when-parents-lock-them-up-new-research-shows-256550

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: 5 benefits Africa’s new space agency can deliver

    Source: The Conversation – Africa – By Scott Firsing, Senior Research Associate, University of South Africa

    The African Space Agency was officially inaugurated in Cairo’s Space City in April 2025. The event marked a milestone in a process that had been in the works since the early 2000s. Drawing inspiration from the European Space Agency, it unites African Union (AU) member states to harness space technology for development. This is in line with the AU’s Agenda 2063, aimed at advancing Africa into a prosperous future.



    Read more:
    Africa has ambitious goals for 2063: plans for outer space hold the key to success

    The agency’s goal is to:

    • coordinate and implement Africa’s space ambitions by promoting collaboration among the AU’s 55 member states

    • harness space technologies for sustainable development, climate resilience and socio-economic growth

    • oversee the African Space Policy and Strategy to enhance access to space-derived data

    • foster partnerships with international space agencies like the European Space Agency and others.

    Over 20 African countries operate space programmes and more than 65 African satellites have been launched. It is my view as a global space diplomacy expert that the agency can help ensure that Africa isn’t a bystander in the space economy. This sector is projected to be worth US$1.8 trillion by 2035.

    The space agency positions Africa to address pressing challenges and take advantage of opportunities in the global space economy. These include using satellite data, boosting connectivity, driving economic growth, fostering global partnerships and training future leaders.

    Five benefits

    Valuable eyes in the sky

    Space assets, particularly Earth observation satellites, offer a number of advantages. The continent faces significant climate risks like droughts, fires and floods. This is particularly problematic as the agricultural sector is approximately 35% of Africa’s GDP and employs about half of its people across over 1 billion hectares of arable land.

    Satellite data optimises crop yields, supports climate-resilient farming, and enhances sustainable fisheries and port modernisation. Nigeria’s National Space Research and Deveopment Agency, for example, has used satellites like the NigSat-2 to monitor crop health and predict yields.

    Beyond agriculture, satellites assist in project planning in cities across Africa. Kenya uses a satellite to track urban development trends and enhance municipal urban planning capacities.

    Satellites also keep an eye on Africa’s resource-abundant territories while tackling problems like armed conflict, deforestation, and illegal migration and mining.

    The African Space Agency will help provide access to AI-enhanced satellite data. This will enable even nations with constrained resources to tackle local needs. For instance, Côte d’Ivoire’s first locally made satellite, launched in 2024, shows how African nations are building their own capabilities.



    Read more:
    Côte d’Ivoire is launching its first satellite for Earth observation – and it’s locally made

    By making it easier to share data, the African Space Agency also positions the continent to generate revenue in the global space data market. That fuels innovation.

    Enhancing connectivity and enabling cutting-edge technology

    Africa’s digital divide is stark. Only 38% of its population was online in 2024, compared to the global average of 68%. The African Space Agency aims to bridge this gap through satellite-based communications. This technology can deliver broadband to remote regions where cell towers and undersea cables are impractical.

    Connectivity enables education, e-commerce and telemedicine.

    Satellite services, like those provided by SpaceX’s Starlink in 21 African countries, will drive digital inclusion. In turn this promises to reduce unemployment and help entrepreneurs.

    The African Space Agency is also positioning Africa to embrace new space technologies. Examples include Japan’s 2025 demonstration of beaming solar power from space, following a US achievement in 2023.

    This could revolutionise energy access. Space-based solar power captures solar energy in orbit via satellite and transmits it as microwaves to Earth. This offers a solution to Africa’s energy poverty. It could provide reliable power to remote areas without extensive grid infrastructure.

    The African Space Agency’s role in coordinating satellite launches and data sharing will make these technologies more accessible and cost-effective.

    Driving economic growth and innovation

    Africa’s space sector, now worth over US$20 billion, is growing rapidly. The industry has seen an increase of private companies and investor support, moving beyond sole dependence on government funding. Investment is being fuelled by 327 NewSpace firms, a term used for the new emerging commercial space industry in nations such as Egypt, Nigeria, and South Africa. These firms often excel in satellite communication, Earth observation and component manufacturing.

    But many African nations lack resources. The agency will lower barriers by fostering collaboration, coordinating national space programmes, and reducing duplication.For example, the African Space Agency’s efforts to streamline satellite development and launches will spur local manufacturing and tech hubs.

    This means that smaller economies will be able to participate.

    Strengthening regional and global connections

    Africa’s space sector relies on partnerships with space agencies and commercial space companies based in the “space powers”. These include the US, Russia, China, France, India, Italy, Japan, Israel and the United Arab Emirates. These institutions provide launch services, satellite development and ground stations.

    An example is Senegal’s GaindeSAT-1A, a CubeSat launched in 2024 via America’s SpaceX with French collaboration.

    Meanwhile, countries like South Africa are exploring local rocket programmes to enhance the agency’s self-reliance. Africa’s space ground stations are already located across the continent, supporting the European Space Agency and commercial missions. They will soon host a deep space ground station for America’s National Aeronautics and Space Administration.

    Funding remains a challenge. African nations allocated just US$426 million to space programmes in 2025. That’s less than 1% of global spending. The European Space Agency has an US$8 billion budget.

    However, initiatives like the €100 million Africa-EU Space Partnership Programme (2025–2028) aim to boost Africa’s space sovereignty and innovation.

    The agency’s vision extends beyond Earth, with an eye on the Moon. Some members, notably Angola, Nigeria and Rwanda, have already signed the US-led Artemis Accords for lunar exploration. For their part Egypt and South Africa are collaborating with China and Russia on the International Lunar Research Station.



    Read more:
    Outer space: Rwanda and Nigeria sign an accord for more responsible exploration – why this matters

    Training the next generation

    A skilled workforce is critical to Africa’s space industry. The Africa Space Agency Space City plans to host a training academy. It will build on Egypt’s programmes in space project management, satellite design, and orbital simulation.

    Partnerships like the Africa-EU programme offer scholarships, while private initiatives, such as the Pathways to Space programme by Boeing and the Future African Space Explorers STEM Academy, engage students in 63 schools in Ethiopia, Nigeria, and Tanzania.

    Scott Firsing 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. 5 benefits Africa’s new space agency can deliver – https://theconversation.com/5-benefits-africas-new-space-agency-can-deliver-258098

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-Evening Report: French Polynesia president announces huge highly protected marine area

    RNZ Pacific

    French Polynesia’s president has announced his administration will establish one of the world’s largest networks of highly protected marine areas (MPAs).

    The highly protected areas will safeguard 220,000 sq km of remote waters near the Society Islands and 680,000 sq km near the Gambier Islands.

    Speaking at the UN Ocean Conference in Nice, France, President Moetai Brotherson pledged to protect nearly 23 percent of French Polynesia’s waters.

    “In French Polynesia, the ocean is much more than a territory — it’s the source of life, culture, and identity,” he said.

    “By strengthening the protection of Tainui Atea (the existing marine managed area that encompasses all French Polynesian waters) and laying the foundations for future marine protected areas . . .  we are asserting our ecological sovereignty while creating biodiversity sanctuaries for our people and future generations.”

    Once implemented, this would be one of the world’s single-largest designations of highly protected ocean space in history.

    Access will be limited, and all forms of extraction, such as fishing and mining, will be banned.

    Highly protected
    The government is also aiming to create a highly protected artisanal fishing zone that extends about 28 km from the Austral, Marquesas, and Gambier islands and 55.5 km around the Society Islands.

    Fishing in that zone will be limited to traditional single pole-and-line catch from boats less than 12m long.

    Together, the zones encompass an area about twice the size of continental France.

    President Brotherson also promised to create additional artisanal fishing zones and two more large, highly protected MPAs within the next year near the Austral and Marquesas islands.

    He also committed to bolster conservation measures within the rest of French Polynesia’s waters.

    Donatien Tanret, who leads Pew Bertarelli Ocean Legacy’s work in French Polynesia, said local communities had made it clear that they wanted to see stronger protections that reflected both scientific guidance and their ancestral culture for future generations.

    “These protections and commitments to future designations are a powerful example of how local leadership and traditional measures such as rāhui can address modern challenges.”

    Samoa announces MPAs
     Before the conference, Samoa adopted a legally binding Marine Spatial Plan — a step to fully protect 30 percent and ensure sustainable management of 100 percent of its ocean.

    The plan includes the establishment of nine new fully protected MPAs, covering 36,000 sq km of ocean.

    Toeolesulsulu Cedric Schuster, Samoa’s Minister for Natural Resources and Environment, said Samoa was a large ocean state and its way of life was under increased threat from issues including climate change and overfishing.

    “This Marine Spatial Plan marks a historic step towards ensuring that our ocean remains prosperous and healthy to support all future generations of Samoans — just as it did for us and our ancestors.”

    This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-OSI Global: Violence against women in Ghana is deeply rooted in culture and family ties – study

    Source: The Conversation – Africa – By Eric Y Tenkorang, Professor of Sociology,, Memorial University of Newfoundland

    Intimate partner violence is controlling behaviour that results in harm to victims. This can be physical, sexual, emotional, psychological, economic or spiritual harm. Women are overwhelmingly the victims and survivors of intimate partner violence.

    Globally, about one third of women have experienced some type of intimate partner violence. In Ghana too, one third of women have experienced physical and sexual abuse.

    Research has linked women’s experiences of intimate partner violence to their socio-economic marginalisation, although it can happen to wealthy women too. Beyond the socio-economic reasons, some also make cultural arguments.

    One such factor is lineage: lines of ancestry. Lineage is a major source of wealth, privileges and responsibilities in Ghana and more broadly in sub-Saharan Africa.

    Some people trace their ancestry through maternal kin members. Women in these matrilineal societies wield socio-economic and cultural power because inheritance goes through the female line. As carriers of the lineage, women have some cultural value.

    In a patrilineage, people trace their ancestry through men. Inheritance goes through the male line. Women cannot source wealth from the lineage. There is noticeable gender ordering and hierarchies in patrilineal societies. Male children are considered the carriers of the lineage.

    Despite these two predominant lineage systems, there is also bilateral descent. In bilateral systems, kinship is traced to both maternal and paternal sides of the family.

    Recent studies have suggested a link exists between lineage and intimate partner violence. But there is limited evidence as to why this might be the case.

    One of my research interests is violence against women in African cultures and I have published extensively on this subject. For a recent study, my team collected survey data, including in-depth interviews, from the three ecological areas of Ghana – coastal, middle and northern. These reflect differences in ecology, culture and modernity.

    About 1,700 women responded to our survey questions on lineage and intimate partner violence. Of these, about 30 women were followed up for an in-depth interview.

    We found differences in experiences of violence between women depending on the lineage system they were part of. Awareness of this pattern could inform efforts to prevent violence and empower women.

    What we found

    A major finding was that women in matrilineal communities experienced lower levels of intimate partner violence than women in patrilineal communities or bilateral ones. Part of the reason is women’s access to resources.

    We also found that bride price payments elevated patrilineal women’s risks of experiencing intimate partner violence. Bride price payment is an exchange of resources from the groom to the family of the bride. This is in acknowledgement that marriage has taken place. Women in patrilineal systems were more likely to experience physical, sexual and emotional violence when bride price was fully paid than when it was partially paid.

    Unlike patrilineal women, matrilineal and bilateral women only experienced emotional and physical violence when bride price was fully paid.

    The backdrop

    Ghana passed its landmark Domestic Violence Act in 2007. It criminalises acts that are likely to result in intimate partner violence. This opened the door to the establishment of a Domestic Violence and Victim Support Unit to prosecute perpetrators. Structures are also in place to provide support for victims of abuse.

    But criminalising intimate partner violence offers only a partial remedy to the problem. This is particularly true when behaviours that lead to such acts of violence are deeply rooted in inequality, culture and patriarchy.

    Despite recent efforts to bridge gender inequality, Ghana continues to lag behind other societies in this area. Ghanaian women are discriminated against socially and culturally. They are excluded from participating in major decisions related to their households and communities. They are also marginalised economically, creating less opportunity for upward mobility.

    The patriarchal nature of Ghanaian society has not helped. It has worked in tandem with existing social arrangements to deepen inequality and further render women powerless.

    In my view, part of matrilineal women’s reduced risk of experiencing intimate partner violence may be explained by access to maternal resources, where they benefit more than their patrilineal and bilateral counterparts.

    This background also helps explain why bride price arrangements make a difference. Contemporary feminist analysis of the payment of bride price suggests it may be interpreted as “wife ownership and purchase”. This can be a tool for oppressing and controlling women.

    These findings support the argument that bride price payment may have negative consequences for Ghanaian women. This is especially so for those in patrilineal cultures where the norms and expectations associated with these payments are stronger.

    A path to safety

    Establishing cultural reasons why some women are at greater risk than others of experiencing intimate partner violence is important for policy in Ghana and has implications for sub-Saharan Africa.

    Our research findings point to the need to empower women by providing them with the resources they need to flourish and fight abuse. It shows lineage can be a conduit for resource exchange and distribution.

    Also, public education can help correct narratives of ownership and purchase which are linked to intimate partner violence. Bride price payments should have symbolic, not commercial, significance.

    Eric Y Tenkorang received funding from the Harry Frank Guggenheim Foundation.

    – ref. Violence against women in Ghana is deeply rooted in culture and family ties – study – https://theconversation.com/violence-against-women-in-ghana-is-deeply-rooted-in-culture-and-family-ties-study-257947

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: What keeps girls from school in Malawi? We asked them and it’s not just pregnancy

    Source: The Conversation – Africa – By Rachel Silver, Assistant Professor, York University, Canada

    Coverage of the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic shutdowns on girls in Malawi emphasised the risks they faced as a result of not attending school. In particular, concerns about pregnancy garnered significant media attention.

    The United Nations Children’s Fund, for example, published an article in March 2021 entitled “Schoolgirl shakes off COVID-19 regret: Lucy’s return to school”. Under a glossy photograph of a smiling girl, readers learn about 16-year-old Lucy, one of 13,000 Malawian students who became pregnant during COVID-19 school closures. The story went on to detail the dire consequences of sexual activity to Lucy’s well-being, and the redemptive power of an eventual return to school.

    The Unicef piece echoed thousands of similar publications circulated after March 2020 that analysed COVID-19’s unique risk for girls in the global south and lamented lost returns to girls’ education.

    In response to COVID-19 surges, Malawian schools closed for over seven months, during which the percentage of pregnancies to young women aged 10-19 did increase from 29% to 35% of total pregnancies.

    Yet, our research has demonstrated that international development organisations and media outlets focused mostly on narrow, sexualised framings of risk to African girls and women rather than on the many intersecting and ongoing barriers to their well-being and school retention. These challenges both predate and extend beyond COVID-19.

    As scholars of international development education who have conducted research in Malawi for over a decade, we decided to join Malawian educational activist and collaborator Stella Makhuva to research how girls themselves narrated their experiences of the COVID-19 years. What did they consider a risk to their schooling?

    Together, we designed a longitudinal study from 2020 to 2023 that included multiple rounds of interviews and participatory journalling methods with 22 upper primary and secondary school girls in southern Malawi.

    We found that for girls in our study, COVID-19 was less a rupture – an unusual event that threatened their education in unprecedented ways – than an added variable in the already complex calculations girls and their families made about whether and how to remain in school.

    We argue that it was not pregnancy itself, but escalating resource constraints, that kept girls from school. And that interventions must do something about the real problem: inequitable systems.

    The stories told by the girls illustrate this. (All the names are pseudonyms.)

    Their stories

    When Faith joined our study in 2020, she was attending a peri-urban
    primary school near her home. She lived in a mud and grass-thatched house with her parents, both subsistence farmers who supported Faith’s and her siblings’ education. During school closures, she studied with friends to keep up with academic content when she was not helping with her parents’ farm.

    Yet school costs threatened Faith’s return to school upon reopening. Despite primary school being officially “free” by government mandate, students at her school were required to contribute 800 Malawi kwacha (close to US$1 at the time) per term to a school fund for infrastructure projects and upkeep. Not paying into the fund resulted in exclusion from classes.



    Read more:
    Does free schooling give girls a better chance in life? Burundi study shows the poorest benefited most

    When Faith eventually passed the Primary School Leaving Certificate Exam and enrolled in secondary school, the costs to schooling rose from 5,000 kwacha (about US$6.50 in early 2021) to 20,000 kwacha (about US$19 in late 2022). Faith worried about whether her parents, whose maize and tomato yields suffered from poor rains, would be able to pay.

    On top of this, Faith paid other costs, from exam fees and bicycle rental fees to supplemental lessons in which she learned material never covered during school hours. She said she and her family often sacrificed eating sufficiently to save money.

    Still, Faith was repeatedly pushed out of school until her fee balance was met. Before, during, and after COVID-19 school closures, girls like her were pushed out of school for a lack of regular fee payments.

    Faith’s school-going was also threatened by warming temperatures and new rain patterns that left her family with diminished food and income. Added to this were volatility in government agricultural subsidies to small farmers, inflated school fees, and the increasing privatisation of public education in Malawi.



    Read more:
    Malawi faces a food crisis: why plans to avert hunger aren’t realistic and what can be done

    Like Faith, all of the girls in our study worked to supplement their schooling with part time lessons, holiday classes, or by repeating grades given educational quality concerns. Based in under-resourced schools with low exam pass rates, girls knew that they were provided an incomplete education.

    According to Brightness,

    We do not learn fully what we are supposed to cover, and some teachers tend to be absent during their lessons. This makes us lag behind … As a result during exams they ask some questions which some of us … did not learn.

    Empirical evidence has shown how teacher engagement has long been influenced by the region’s high disease burden, especially due to HIV/Aids. This has left teachers both ill and caring for ill relatives.

    While teacher disengagement, therefore, reflected factors such as competing care responsibilities, professional dissatisfaction and stress, girls were deeply frustrated by what felt like abandonment.

    Rethinking pregnancy and parenting

    Mainstream discourses that missed key barriers to girls’ school retention and performance, such as privatisation and food insecurity, misrepresented student pregnancy as an emergent “crisis”.

    Prior to the pandemic, sexuality and school-going already overlapped for many girls in Malawi, where adolescent pregnancy rates were threefold the global average. Still, girls in our study countered the idea that schooling and sex were incompatible. They also challenged the idea that school was inherently safe and that it was pregnancy that kept them from school.



    Read more:
    Education and gender equality: focus on girls isn’t fair and isn’t enough — global study

    Many of the girls’ stories emphasised continuity with what came before the pandemic.

    We have found this in past research. Schooling and sexuality are not necessarily opposed; but parents and teachers try to protect girls from sexuality; and parenting and non-parenting girls alike face significant resource-related barriers to schooling.

    Conclusion

    If girls’ choices, particularly around sexuality, do not represent the greatest or only source of risk for girls’ schooling, interventions must respond to this reality. They should support well-being and address the broader conditions in which girls live and learn. The problem is inequity, not pregnant girls.

    Rachel Silver has received funding from the National Academy of Education/Spencer Foundation and the Social Science and Humanities Research Council of Canada.

    Alyssa Morley 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. What keeps girls from school in Malawi? We asked them and it’s not just pregnancy – https://theconversation.com/what-keeps-girls-from-school-in-malawi-we-asked-them-and-its-not-just-pregnancy-258401

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: Is Israel’s interception of the Gaza Freedom Flotilla legal?

    Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Priya Gupta, Associate Professor of Law, McGill University

    Israel’s interception of a ship launched by the Freedom Flotilla Coalition (FFC) — a grassroots group that campaigns in solidarity with the Palestinian people — in international waters approximately 185 kilometres from Gaza has raised serious questions about the legality of its actions.

    The Madleen — a small, British-flagged civilian vessel named for Gaza’s first fisherwoman — was carrying 11 activists, one journalist and a small cargo of humanitarian aid, including flour, baby formula and children’s prostheses. Israeli forces detained all passengers, including well-known Swedish climate activist Greta Thunberg and French European Parliamentarian Rima Hassan.

    The FFC uses non-violent direct action to attempt to break the blockade Israel has imposed on Gaza since 2007, and to raise awareness about the “ongoing brutality inflicted upon civilians in Gaza.”

    At approximately 3 a.m. local time on June 9, Israeli forces rammed and boarded the Madleen. Shortly before that, military drones hovered above it and the activists took video of Israeli forces of spraying a white substance on board that “caused burning eyes and general discomfort.”

    Israel says it intercepted the Madleen to enforce “a legal naval blockade.” The FFC, however, has called Israel’s actions an “illegal attack” and “a small extension of their war crimes in Gaza.”

    Past attacks on humanitarian flotillas

    Israel’s interception of the Madleen is not without precedent. On May 2, the FFC ship Conscience was seriously damaged during a drone attack while carrying humanitarian aid bound for Gaza. The attack ended its journey.

    In 2010, a group of six vessels called the Gaza Aid Flotilla sailed to Gaza to breach the Israeli blockade. The largest of the ships, the Mavi Marmara, was carrying more than 500 passengers when it was raided by Israeli forces in international waters, killing 10 people and wounding 56.

    Israel’s attack on the Mavi Marmara triggered international legal scrutiny and condemnation. The United Nations secretary-general immediately established an inquiry that determined the Israeli attack had resulted in “unacceptable” death, injury and mistreatment of detainees.

    Additionally, the UN Human Rights Council established a fact-finding mission that found that “no case can be made for the legality of the interception.”

    The Union of the Comoros, where the vessel was registered, referred the situation to the International Criminal Court (ICC), alleging war crimes and crimes against humanity. A chamber of the court found there was evidence Israeli soldiers committed “systematic abuse” of detained passengers.

    In the end, the case did not proceed because the prosecutor decided the incident was of “insufficient gravity,” in part because they could not identify a plan or policy on the part of Israel to carry out war crimes on a large scale.

    Israel’s ongoing crimes in Gaza

    It would be difficult to make the same conclusion regarding the situation in Gaza today.

    Israel is downplaying the severity of its attack on the Madleen, casting it as a sort of rescue mission as the Israeli foreign ministry posted a photo of activists being offered sandwiches. But Israel’s actions must be evaluated within the context of legal findings that have already been made by the International Court of Justice (ICJ) and the ICC.

    In January 2024, the ICJ found there was a “real and imminent risk” that Israel would commit genocide in Gaza. Two months later, it ordered Israel not to impede the provision of humanitarian assistance.

    In November 2024, the ICC issued arrest warrants against Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former defence minister Yoav Gallant based on reasonable grounds that they “intentionally and knowingly deprived the civilian population in Gaza of objects indispensable to their survival” and that this deprivation “created conditions of life calculated to bring about the destruction of part of the civilian population.”

    In separate proceedings in July 2024, the ICJ found that Israel’s occupation of Palestinian territory, including Gaza and its surrounding waters, was unlawful and must come to an end “as rapidly as possible.”

    Against this backdrop, the interception of the flotilla could be seen as furthering Israel’s unlawful blockade, occupation and attack against the civilian population of Gaza, in addition to constituting unlawful targeting of the civilians on board. Amnesty International’s Secretary General, Agnès Callamard, has accused Israel of once again flouting “its legal obligations towards civilians in the occupied Gaza Strip” with the interception of the boat.

    Arbitrary detention, degrading treatment

    Thunberg, along with four other activists, has already been deported from Israel. Eight passengers who Israel says chose not “to sign deportation documents” remain in detention in an Israeli prison and will soon appear in court.

    Israeli Defence Minister Israel Katz said they would be forced to watch video footage of the Oct. 7, 2023 attack by Hamas on Israel. He later said they refused to watch the video.

    This detention and its circumstances may constitute violations of the protection against arbitrary deprivation of liberty under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, to which Israel is a signatory.

    Israel cannot legally block aid

    Israel is not permitted to prevent humanitarian aid from reaching Palestinians in Gaza. The ICJ has ordered Israel to “ensure the unhindered provision at scale of urgently needed humanitarian assistance” and not do anything that would constitute a violation of the Genocide Convention “including by preventing, through any action, the delivery” of aid.

    The Geneva Convention also outlaws collective punishment of civilian populations and requires free passage of aid.

    Israel seemingly anticipated these arguments. Israeli officials mocked the Madleen, calling it a “selfie yacht” carrying a “tiny amount of aid” and proclaiming that “the show is over.” These statements could serve to cast the FFC as a disingenuous humanitarian mission.

    Israel also claims that the aid on board will be distributed through “real humanitarian channels.” This is likely an attempt by Israel to signal it’s not violating international humanitarian law by blocking assistance.

    These arguments, however, fail to acknowledge that the size of a humanitarian mission is irrelevant to the protection accorded to civilians and the requirement to allow delivery of aid.

    Disregarding the courts

    Israel has disregarded the ICJ’s orders to facilitate the delivery of urgently needed food and supplies to Gaza and has been accused of gunning down starving civilians at aid distribution centres.

    The Madleen’s mission was to force the world to acknowledge, in real time, Israel’s disregard for international law. In this aim, it succeeded. Israel’s interception of the Madleen could end up being prosecuted in the domestic courts of the passengers’ home countries, in the United Kingdom — where the boat was registered — or at the ICC.

    Humanitarians have vowed to continue to try to breach Israel’s blockade on Gaza. The Madleen’s voyage is a precursor to the March on Gaza scheduled for June 15, where thousands of activists will attempt to reach the Rafah crossing. The world will be watching.

    Heidi Matthews receives funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council and is an advisor to the Legal Centre for Palestine.

    Priya Gupta 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. Is Israel’s interception of the Gaza Freedom Flotilla legal? – https://theconversation.com/is-israels-interception-of-the-gaza-freedom-flotilla-legal-258511

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: Defence firms must adopt a ‘flexible secrecy’ to innovate for European rearmament

    Source: The Conversation – France – By Sihem BenMahmoud-Jouini, Associate Professor, HEC Paris Business School

    In the face of US President Donald Trump’s wavering commitments and Russian President Vladimir Putin’s inscrutable ambitions, the talk in European capitals is all about rearmament.

    To that end, the European Commission has put forward an €800 billion spending scheme designed to “quickly and significantly increase expenditures in defence capabilities”, in the words of Commission President Ursula von der Leyen.

    But funding is only the first of many challenges involved when pursuing military innovation. Ramping up capabilities “quickly and significantly” will prove difficult for a sector that must keep pace with rapid technological change.

    Of course, defence firms don’t have to do it alone: they can select from a wide variety of potential collaborators, ranging from small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) to agile start-ups. Innovative partnerships, however, require trust and a willingness to share vital information, qualities that appear incompatible with the need for military secrecy.

    That is why rearming Europe requires a new approach to secrecy.

    A paper I co-authored with Jonathan Langlois of HEC and Romaric Servajean-Hilst of KEDGE Business School examines the strategies used by one leading defence firm (which we, for our own secrecy-related reasons, renamed “Globaldef”) to balance open innovation with information security. The 43 professionals we interviewed – including R&D managers, start-up CEOs and innovation managers – were not consciously working from a common playbook. However, their nuanced and dynamic approaches could serve as a cohesive role model for Europe’s defence sector as it races to adapt to a changing world.

    How flexible secrecy enables innovation

    Our research took place between 2018 and 2020. At the time, defence firms looked toward open innovation to compensate for the withdrawal of key support. There was a marked decrease in government spending on military R&D across the OECD countries. However, even though the current situation involves more funding, the need for external innovation remains prevalent to speed up access to knowledge.

    When collaborating to innovate, firms face what open innovation scholars have termed “the paradox of openness”, wherein the value to be gained by collaborating must be weighed against the possible costs of information sharing. In the defence sector – unlike, say, in consumer products – being too liberal with information could not only lead to business losses but to grave security risks for entire nations, and even prosecution for the executives involved.

    Although secrecy was a constant concern, Globaldef’s managers often found themselves in what one of our interviewees called a “blurred zone” where some material could be interpreted as secret, but sharing it was not strictly off-limits. In cases like these, opting for the standard mode in the defence industry – erring on the side of caution and remaining tight-lipped – would make open innovation impossible.


    A weekly e-mail in English featuring expertise from scholars and researchers. It provides an introduction to the diversity of research coming out of the continent and considers some of the key issues facing European countries. Get the newsletter!

    Practices that make collaboration work

    Studying transcripts of more than 40 interviews along with a rich pool of complementary data (emails, PowerPoint presentations, crowdsourcing activity, etc.), we discerned that players at Globaldef had developed fine-grained practices for maintaining and modulating secrecy, even while actively collaborating with civilian companies.

    Our research identifies these practices as either cognitive or relational. Cognitive practices acted as strategic screens, masking the most sensitive aspects of Globaldef’s knowledge without throttling information flow to the point of preventing collaboration.

    Depending on the type of project, cognitive practices might consist of one or more of the following:

    • Encryption: relabelling knowledge components to hide their nature and purpose.

    • Obfuscation: selectively blurring project specifics to preserve secrecy while recruiting partners.

    • Simplification: blurring project parameters to test the suitability of a partner without revealing true constraints.

    • Transposition: transferring the context of a problem from a military to a civilian one.

    Relational practices involved reframing the partnership itself, by selectively controlling the width of the aperture through which external parties could view Globaldef’s aims and project characteristics. These practices might include redirecting the focus of a collaboration away from core technologies, or introducing confidentiality agreements to expand information-sharing within the partnership while prohibiting communication to third parties.

    When to shift strategy in defence projects

    Using both cognitive and relational practices enabled Globaldef to skirt the pitfalls of its paradox. For example, in the early stages of open innovation, when the firm was scouting and testing potential partners, managers could widen the aperture (relational) while imposing strict limits on knowledge-sharing (cognitive). They could thereby freely engage with the crowd without violating Globaldef’s internal rules regarding secrecy.

    As partnerships ripened and trust grew, Globaldef could gradually lift cognitive protections, giving partners access to more detailed and specific data. This could be counterbalanced by a tightening on the relational side, eg requiring paperwork and protocols designed to plug potential leaks.

    As we retraced the firm’s careful steps through six real-life open innovation partnerships, we saw that the key to this approach was in knowing when to transition from one mode to the other. Each project had its own rhythm.

    For one crowdsourcing project, the shift from low to high cognitive depth, and high to low relational width, was quite sudden, occurring as soon as the partnership was formalised. This was due to the fact that Globaldef’s partner needed accurate details and project parameters in order to solve the problem in question. Therefore, near-total openness and concomitant confidentiality had to be established at the outset.

    In another case, Globaldef retained the cognitive blinders throughout the early phase of a partnership with a start-up. To test the start-up’s technological capacities, the firm presented its partner with a cognitively reframed problem. Only after the partner passed its initial trial was collaboration initiated on a fully transparent footing, driven by the need for the start-up to obtain defence clearance prior to co-developing technology with Globaldef.

    How firms can lead with adaptive secrecy

    Since we completed and published our research, much has changed geopolitically. But the high-stakes paradox of openness is still a pressing issue inside Europe’s defence firms. Managers and executives are no doubt grappling with the evident necessity for open innovation on the one hand and secrecy on the other.

    Our research suggests that, like Globaldef, other actors in Europe’s defence sector can deftly navigate this paradox. Doing so, however, will require employing a more subtle, flexible and dynamic definition of secrecy rather than the absolutist, static one that normally prevails in the industry. The defence sector’s conception of secrecy must also progress from a primarily legal to a largely strategic framework.

    Sihem BenMahmoud-Jouini ne travaille pas, ne conseille pas, ne possède pas de parts, ne reçoit pas de fonds d’une organisation qui pourrait tirer profit de cet article, et n’a déclaré aucune autre affiliation que son organisme de recherche.

    – ref. Defence firms must adopt a ‘flexible secrecy’ to innovate for European rearmament – https://theconversation.com/defence-firms-must-adopt-a-flexible-secrecy-to-innovate-for-european-rearmament-258302

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: There are clear laws on enforcing blockades – Israel’s interception of the Madleen raises serious questions

    Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Shannon Bosch, Associate Professor (Law), Edith Cowan University

    On June 9, the Madleen, a UK-flagged civilian ship carrying humanitarian aid to Gaza, was stopped by Israeli forces in international waters, about 200 kilometres off the coast.

    The Freedom Flotilla Coalition had organised the voyage, setting sail from Sicily on June 1. The vessel’s 12 passengers included climate activist Greta Thunberg, European Parliament member Rima Hassan, two French journalists and several other activists from around the world.

    The Israeli military boarded the ship and diverted it to the Israeli port of Ashdod. The aid it carried — baby formula, food, medical supplies, water desalination kits — was confiscated. All passengers were detained and now face deportation.

    This interception has sparked international condemnation. Importantly, it also raises questions about whether Israel’s actions comply with international law.

    Legal conditions for naval blockades

    Naval blockades are not automatically illegal. Under the San Remo Manual on International Law Applicable to Armed Conflicts at Sea (1994), a blockade may be used in wartime, but only if five legal conditions are met:

    • it must be formally declared and publicly notified
    • it must be effectively enforced in practice
    • it must be applied impartially to all ships
    • it must not block access to neutral ports or coastlines
    • it must not stop the delivery of humanitarian aid to civilians.

    If even one of these conditions is not met, the blockade may be considered illegal under customary international humanitarian law.

    The fifth condition is especially important here. According to a comprehensive study of international humanitarian law conducted by the International Committee of the Red Cross, the parties to a conflict must allow the rapid and unimpeded delivery of humanitarian relief to civilians in need.

    A blockade that prevents this could be in breach of international law.

    Israel and Egypt have imposed a blockade of varying degrees on Gaza since 2007 when Hamas came to power. Israeli Defence Minister Israel Katz claims the purpose of the blockade is to “prevent the transfer of weapons to Hamas”. Critics say it amounts to collective punishment.

    The Madleen was operating in compliance with three binding International Court of Justice orders (from January 2024, March 2024 and May 2024) requiring unimpeded humanitarian access to Gaza.

    Freedom of navigation

    International law also strongly protects the freedom of navigation, particularly in international waters beyond any state’s territorial limits.

    There are only a few exceptions when a country can lawfully stop a foreign ship in international waters – if it is involved in piracy, slave trading, unauthorised broadcasting, or the vessel itself is stateless. A country can also stop a ship if it is enforcing a lawful blockade or acting in self-defence under Article 51 of the UN Charter.

    So, if Israel’s actions do not fully meet the international legal requirements for enforcing a blockade during wartime, it would not have the right to intercept the Madleen in international waters.

    Protections for humanitarian workers

    More broadly speaking, international humanitarian law, including the Fourth Geneva Convention, protects civilians during conflict. This protection extends to people delivering humanitarian aid, so long as they do not directly take part in hostilities.

    To be considered directly participating in hostilities, a person must:

    • intend to cause military harm
    • have a direct causal link to that harm, and
    • be acting in connection with one side of the conflict.

    Bringing aid to civilians, even if politically controversial, does not meet this legal threshold. As a result, the Madleen’s passengers remain protected civilians and should not be treated as combatants or detained arbitrarily.

    International law also sets out how civilians detained in conflict situations must be treated. Under the Fourth Geneva Convention, detainees must be given access to medical care, lawyers and consular representatives. They must also not be punished without fair legal processes.

    Reports that Madleen passengers have been detained and are facing deportation raise concerns about whether these standards are being upheld.

    In response to the ship’s interception, the Hind Rajab Foundation, a nonprofit advocacy group, has filed a complaint with the UK Metropolitan Police War Crimes Unit. The complaint alleges a number of breaches of international humanitarian law, including forcible detention, obstruction of humanitarian relief, and degrading treatment.

    Previous flotilla intercepted

    This is not the first time Israel has stopped an aid ship and faced accusations of violating the law of the sea and humanitarian law.

    In 2010, the Israeli military raided a flotilla of six ships organised by international activists aiming to deliver humanitarian aid to Gaza and challenge the blockade.

    Violence broke out on the largest vessel, the Mavi Marmara, resulting in the deaths of nine Turkish nationals and injuries to dozens of others. The incident drew international condemnation. Israel agreed to ease its blockade after the incident.

    A fact-finding mission established by the UN Human Rights Council found that Israel violated a number of international laws and that its blockade was “inflicting disproportionate damage upon the civilian population”.

    This is not just a political or moral issue – it’s a legal one. International law lays out clear rules for when and how a country can enforce blockades, intercept vessels and treat civilians.

    Based on these rules, serious legal questions remain about Israel’s handling of the Madleen and its passengers.

    Shannon Bosch 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. There are clear laws on enforcing blockades – Israel’s interception of the Madleen raises serious questions – https://theconversation.com/there-are-clear-laws-on-enforcing-blockades-israels-interception-of-the-madleen-raises-serious-questions-258562

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: In Trump’s America, the shooting of a journalist is not a one-off. Press freedom itself is under attack

    Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Peter Greste, Professor of Journalism and Communications, Macquarie University

    The video of a Los Angeles police officer shooting a rubber bullet at Channel Nine reporter Lauren Tomasi is as shocking as it is revealing.

    In her live broadcast, Tomasi is standing to the side of a rank of police in riot gear. She describes the way they have begun firing rubber bullets to disperse protesters angry with US President Donald Trump’s crackdown on illegal immigrants.

    As Tomasi finishes her sentence, the camera pans to the left, just in time to catch the officer raising his gun and firing a non-lethal round into her leg. She said a day later she is sore, but otherwise OK.

    Although a more thorough investigation might find mitigating circumstances, from the video evidence, it is hard to dismiss the shot as “crossfire”. The reporter and cameraman were off to one side of the police, clearly identified and working legitimately.

    The shooting is also not a one-off. Since the protests against Trump’s mass deportations policy began three days ago, a reporter with the LA Daily News and a freelance journalist have been hit with pepper balls and tear gas.

    British freelance photojournalist Nick Stern also had emergency surgery to remove a three-inch plastic bullet from his leg.

    In all, the Los Angeles Press Club has documented more than 30 incidents of obstruction and attacks on journalists during the protests.

    Trump’s assault on the media

    It now seems assaults on the media are no longer confined to warzones or despotic regimes. They are happening in American cities, in broad daylight, often at the hands of those tasked with upholding the law.

    But violence is only one piece of the picture. In the nearly five months since taking office, the Trump administration has moved to defund public broadcasters, curtail access to information and undermine the credibility of independent media.

    International services once used to project democratic values and American soft power around the world, such as Voice of America, Radio Free Europe and Radio Free Asia, have all had their funding cut and been threatened with closure. (The Voice of America website is still operational but hasn’t been updated since mid-March, with one headline on the front page reading “Vatican: Francis stable, out of ‘imminent danger’ of death”).

    The Associated Press, one of the most respected and important news agencies in the world, has been restricted from its access to the White House and covering Trump. The reason? It decided to defy Trump’s directive to change the name of the Gulf of Mexico to Gulf of America.

    Even broadcast licenses for major US networks, such as ABC, NBC and CBS, have been publicly threatened — a signal to editors and executives that political loyalty might soon outweigh journalistic integrity.

    The Committee to Protect Journalists is more used to condemning attacks on the media in places like Russia. However, in April, it issued a report headlined: “Alarm bells: Trump’s first 100 days ramp up fear for the press, democracy”.

    A requirement for peace

    Why does this matter? The success of American democracy has never depended on unity or even civility. It has depended on scrutiny. A system where power is challenged, not flattered.

    The First Amendment to the US Constitution – which protects freedom of speech – has long been considered the gold standard for building the institutions of free press and free expression. That only works when journalism is protected — not in theory but in practice.

    Now, strikingly, the language once reserved for autocracies and failed states has begun to appear in assessments of the US. Civicus, which tracks declining democracies around the world, recently put the US on its watchlist, alongside the Democratic Republic of Congo, Italy, Serbia and Pakistan.

    The attacks on the journalists in LA are troubling not only for their sake, but for ours. This is about civic architecture. The kind of framework that makes space for disagreement without descending into disorder.

    Press freedom is not a luxury for peacetime. It is a requirement for peace.

    Peter Greste is Professor of Journalism at Macquarie University and the Executive Director for the advocacy group, the Alliance for Journalists’ Freedom.

    – ref. In Trump’s America, the shooting of a journalist is not a one-off. Press freedom itself is under attack – https://theconversation.com/in-trumps-america-the-shooting-of-a-journalist-is-not-a-one-off-press-freedom-itself-is-under-attack-258578

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: Dismal ticket sales, grumblings from fans and clubs – is FIFA’s latest attempt to establish a global club game doomed before it starts?

    Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Stefan Szymanski, Professor of Sport Management, University of Michigan

    FIFA is hoping that Lionel Messi can draw the crowds. Megan Briggs/Getty Images

    The FIFA World Club Cup, which kicks off in the U.S. on June 14, 2025, may seem like a new competition.

    Certainly, soccer’s governing body, FIFA, is promoting it as is it were, marketing the monthlong competition between 32 of the world’s biggest soccer teams as the “pinnacle of club football,” with up to US$125 million in prize money for the winning team and $250 million set aside for promoting “football solidarity.”

    In reality, the competition is the latest chapter in FIFA’s long-running quest – going all the way back to 1960 – to create a global championship that would determine which club really is the best in the world.

    The organizing body has trumpeted a $1 billion prize pot for the World Club Cup. But FIFA has been less vocal about the broadcasting deal underpinning the event, which is being financed by Saudi Arabia reportedly to tune of $1 billion. That deal was announced just days before Saudi Arabia was confirmed as the host of the men’s 2034 World Cup – a lucrative prize for the Gulf kingdom.

    This sounds more like the FIFA we all know, with the whiff of corruption and dodgy dealing that has dogged the organizing body for decades.

    FIFA’s president, Gianni Infantino.
    Fabrice Coffrini/AFP via Getty Images

    FIFA’s critics argue that the competition is nothing more than an attempt to line the governing body’s coffers. FIFA’s line is that it will not keep “one dollar” from the event, and instead plans to distribute revenue to the clubs.

    Not helping FIFA’s case is the fact that clubs and players are similarly unimpressed, protesting that the event is an unnecessary addition to an already-overburdened soccer calendar.

    As always, the litmus test for success will come from the fans. So far, things are not going well on that front. Falling prices on Ticketmaster bode ill for the competition. Just days before the games were due to begin, FIFA slashed prices for the opening match: MLS club Inter Miami against Egypt’s Al-Ahly. Reports suggest that less than a third of tickets at the 65,000-seat venue for the opener, Hard Rock Stadium in Miami, had sold – despite the likely presence of soccer superstar Lionel Messi.

    Of course, the declining number of tourists coming to the U.S. since the second inauguration of Donald Trump – and the president’s recently announced travel ban affecting 19 countries – hasn’t helped encourage fans of the global game to the U.S., even if none of the competing clubs come from one of those countries.

    FIFA vs. UEFA

    So, given all the problems and controversies, why is FIFA so invested?

    As someone who has long researched the nexus of soccer, money and power, I see the World Club Cup as part of a struggle between UEFA, the European governing body that runs the Champions League – currently seen as the pinnacle of soccer club competition – and FIFA, which wants to supplant the Champions League with its own competition.

    UEFA’s power stems from hosting the world’s biggest clubs. Only one club from outside Europe appears in soccer data website Transfermarkt’s list of the 50 most valuable squads – with Palmeiras from Brazil squeaking in at 50.

    Top players in their prime rarely quit Europe to play on another continent – the high-profile names that opt to play in the U.S. or Saudi leagues tend to be veterans cashing in on their name.

    Meanwhile, the world’s soccer talent flocks to European clubs. It’s not just that big clubs like Real Madrid, Liverpool or Bayern Munich that can pay top dollar for the star players – less storied clubs like Brentford, Real Sociedad or VfB Stuttgart have the wherewithal to fish in the global player market.

    The wealth and status of these clubs form the muscle behind UEFA. And the jewel in the UEFA crown is the Champions League, an annual competition that brings together the best clubs in Europe.

    A game of two halves

    While UEFA also has its own national competition, the Euros, its pull is nowhere near as great as FIFA’s World Cup.

    This division – with FIFA dominating the international team competition and UEFA the club competition – dates back to the 1960s and the early years of mass television.

    When the 1966 World Cup was hosted by England, it was one of the very first global sports events, watched by an estimated audience of 400 million people worldwide.

    The 1970 World Cup, a legendary event in the eyes of boomer soccer fans, established the four-year ritual that surpasses even the Olympics as a global sporting event.

    At this time, UEFA’s Euros were barely a competition at all. The 1968, 1972 and 1976 editions – played in Italy, Belgium and Yugoslavia, respectively – each had only four teams and only four or five games.

    UEFA had by then established its role in club competition. The European Cup, as the Champions League was then called, started in 1955.

    But the game remembered today for establishing the dominance of European club competition is the 1960 final between Real Madrid and Eintract Frankfurt – a 10-goal thriller that Los Blancos won 7-3.

    Ferenc Puskas of Real Madrid scores his team’s sixth goal during the European Cup final against Eintracht Frankfurt at Hampden Park in Glasgow, Scotland, on May 18, 1960.
    Keystone/Getty Images

    Witnessed by a crowd of 128,000 at Hampden Park in Glasgow, Scotland, the more important statistic was the estimated 70 million television audience in Europe.

    The 1968 final at London’s Wembley Stadium, when Manchester United overcame Benfica in honor of the “Busby Babes” – Manchester players who died in a 1958 Munich air disaster while traveling home from a European Cup game – saw a TV audience of 270 million.

    A history of failure

    The ambition to create a club world cup to rival the European Cup goes back to the 1950s. Soccer powerhouses Brazil and Argentina in particular promoted the idea that the top clubs in Europe should face off against the top South American teams.

    The resulting Intercontinental Cup ran from 1960 to 2004, with the top teams from UEFA and CONMEBOL, the South American soccer federation, taking part.

    But played in midseason, it barely made an impression on the fans.

    In 2000, FIFA created the Club World Championship, with eight teams drawn from the five international federations.

    It also attracted little love, and the 2001-to-2004 editions had to be canceled for lack of financial backing.

    In the early years, it seemed like an excuse to emulate the Intercontinental Cup, and the first three winners were South American. However, since 2006, all the winners bar one – Brazil’s Corinthians in 2012 – have been European.

    Europe is ‘on the beach’

    Then, in 2017, Gianni Infantino, the FIFA president, announced plans to expand the competition and move it to the summer. With 32 teams, the competition will look more like the World Cup and will receive a lot of TV coverage.

    The fact that it will be free to watch will help. So too will the presence of Messi.

    Yet the overwhelming feeling going into the competition is that, like its predecessors, the revamped FIFA club competition is destined for failure.

    With the European domestic leagues all completed and the Champions League final – the unofficial marker of the end of the soccer season – having taken place on May 31, players and fans appear to be “on the beach,” to use a favorite phrase of soccer commentators.

    Ultimately, FIFA’s revamped World Club Cup faces the same issues that beset its forerunners: European teams are overwhelmingly tipped to win.

    Rather than the global soccer “solidarity” that FIFA hopes, the competition sets to reinforce the dominance of European clubs – and of Europe’s governing body when it comes to club competition.

    Stefan Szymanski 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. Dismal ticket sales, grumblings from fans and clubs – is FIFA’s latest attempt to establish a global club game doomed before it starts? – https://theconversation.com/dismal-ticket-sales-grumblings-from-fans-and-clubs-is-fifas-latest-attempt-to-establish-a-global-club-game-doomed-before-it-starts-258378

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –