Category: Asia Pacific

  • MIL-OSI Asia-Pac: DARPG organized the 5th National Workshop on “Sevottam and Effective Redressal of Public Grievances”, at the Institute of Management in Government (IMG), Kerala.

    Source: Government of India

    DARPG organized the 5th  National Workshop on “Sevottam and Effective Redressal of Public Grievances”, at the Institute of Management in Government (IMG), Kerala.

    More than 100officials from ATIs and State Governments participated in the workshop held on 25th April, 2025 at the Institute of Management in Government (IMG), Thiruvananthapuram, Kerala

    Workshop formulated the roadmap forward for Capacity Building and Effective Redressal of Public Grievances in line with the directions of the Prime Minister

    Posted On: 28 APR 2025 4:05PM by PIB Delhi

    In line with the Prime Minister’s emphasis on effective grievance resolution as a cornerstone of transparent and accountable governance, the Department of Administrative Reforms and Public Grievances (DARPG) organized the5thNational Workshop on “Sevottam and Effective Redressal of Public Grievances” on April 25th, 2025, at the Institute of Management in Government (IMG), Kerala.

    The Workshop commencedin the presence of Shri K. Jayakumar, Director, Institute of Management in Government (IMG), Shri V Srinivas, Secretary, DARPG , Jaya Dubey, Joint Secretary, DARPG and other participants from various State Government ATIs and AR Departments.  The inaugural session featured a keynote presentation by Shri V. Srinivas, Secretary, DARPG, which outlined key reforms in grievance redressal including multilingual support via Bhashini, advanced CPGRAMS features, and strengthened monitoring, aimed at enhancing citizen satisfaction. 18 Speakers from Government of Kerala, Government of India, non-profit foundations and technological organisations apart from NIC and NeGD attended the event.

    The workshop unfolded across five sessions, each featuring practitioner oriented presentations regarding best practices in public grievances, use of technology tools and role of non-profit organisations in grievance redressal. Separate sessions were held by the Administrative Staff College of India (ASCII) who in their role as knowledge partner of which were supposed to suggest model capacity building modules for ATIs. Certain draft Sevottam rules were also opened for discussion with various State Governments by Professor Nirmalaya Bagchi of ASCII. Shri Chakravarthy T. Kannan, Secretary General, Quality Council of India, shared insights on the evolving categorization framework in CPGRAMS and its impact in simplifying grievance filing – making the process more intuitive, accessible, and citizen-centric.Centre for Good Governance, Hyderabad released their draft model for ranking of State Governments on Grievance Redressal. Suggestion on both the above points wererequested from all State ATIs and State Governments. Representatives of Government of Kerala includedSmt. Anu Kumari, District Collector Trivandrum, Smt. Veena Madhavan, Special Secretary Administrative Reforms, and Shri Sreeram Sambasiva Rao, Special Secretary, IT. Shri Amitabh Nag, CEO Bhashini, Shri K Krishnakumar, CTO, e-Gov Foundation, Shri Varun Hemachandran Team Lead Agami and Shri Nisheeth Srivastava, Professor, IIT Kanpur also spoke in the event. Key areas of focus included policy reforms, best practices, capacity building, and innovative solutions aimed at enhancing service delivery and boosting citizen satisfaction.

    Under this Sevottam Scheme, DARPG provides financial support to State ATIs/CTIs for setting up Sevottam Training Cells. Over the past three financial years (2022-23, 2023-24, and 2024-25), as part of Sevottam, 756 training courses have been conducted, training 24,942 officers from various State Governments. In the past financial year 2 National Workshops on “Effective Redressal of Public Grievances” on November 18, 2024, in New Delhi and February 20, 2025, in Bhopal, with participation from Central Ministries, State Governments, and State Administrative Training Institutes (ATIs) were already conducted. The National workshop served as a vital platform for knowledge exchange and collaboration, bringing together diverse stakeholders to deliberate on best practices, innovative strategies, and key reforms in grievance redressal.

    ***

    NKR/PSM

    (Release ID: 2124854) Visitor Counter : 88

    MIL OSI Asia Pacific News

  • MIL-OSI Asia-Pac: “Ink Art Ensembles” exhibition series in the Greater Bay Area – “Ink Impressions and Silk Inspirations” staged in Shenzhen (with photos)

    Source: Hong Kong Government special administrative region

    Jointly organised by the Art Promotion Office under the Leisure and Cultural Services Department (LCSD) and the Shenzhen Fringe Art Center, the first thematic exhibition “Ink Impressions and Silk Inspirations” of the “Ink Art Ensembles” exhibition series in the Greater Bay Area (GBA) is currently on display at the Guangming Culture and Art Center, Shenzhen. The exhibition features ink art works by Hong Kong artist Raymond Fung, and fashion creations by Shenzhen-based artist Xing Lili using traditional silk fabric xiangyun sha, initiating a cross-media and trans-regional artistic dialogue. The exhibition runs until June 9 with free admission.

    The Art Promotion Office and the Shenzhen Fringe Art Center jointly organised the “Ink Art Ensembles” exhibition series in the GBA from 2024. Guest curated by Hong Ko and Eric Zhu, the series features five exhibitions in four cities, namely Shenzhen, Guangzhou, Foshan and Dongguan in the GBA. The series focuses on ink art as the subject or primary creative medium of the Hong Kong artists, while other GBA artists respond through diverse creative forms with the aim to create a platform for in depth artistic dialogues and to highlight contemporary artistic experimentation and innovation.

    MIL OSI Asia Pacific News

  • MIL-OSI Asia-Pac: Union Public Service Commission announces Recruitment Results for the month of March, 2025

    Source: Government of India

    Posted On: 28 APR 2025 4:02PM by PIB Delhi

    The following Recruitment Results have been finalized by the Union Public Service Commission during the month of March 2025. The recommended candidates have been informed individually by post. Applications of other candidates were duly considered but regretted that it has not been possible to call them for interview/recommend them for the post.

    Click here to see Result.

    ***

    NKR/PSM

    (Release ID: 2124853) Visitor Counter : 29

    MIL OSI Asia Pacific News

  • MIL-OSI Asia-Pac: India’s Index of industrial production records growth of 3% in March 2025

    Source: Government of India

    India’s Index of industrial production records growth of 3% in March 2025

    Quick Estimate of Index of Industrial Production and Use-Based Index for the Month of March 2025

    (BASE 2011-12=100)

    Posted On: 28 APR 2025 4:00PM by PIB Delhi

    As per the revised calendar, the Quick Estimate of Index of Industrial Production (IIP) will now be released on 28th of every month (or next working day if 28th is a holiday). The index is compiled with data received from source agencies, which in turn receive the data from the producing factories/ establishments. These Quick Estimates will undergo revision in subsequent releases as per the revision policy of IIP.

    2.        Key Highlights:

    1.  The IIP growth rate for the month of March 2025 is 3.0 percent which was 2.9 percent (Quick Estimate) in the month of February 2025.
    2.  The growth rates of the three sectors, Mining, Manufacturing and Electricity for the month of March 2025 are 0.4 percent, 3.0 percent and 6.3 percent respectively.
    3.  The Quick Estimates of IIP stands at 164.8 against 160.0 in March 2024. The Indices of Industrial Production for the Mining, Manufacturing and Electricity sectors for the month of March 2025 stand at 156.8, 160.9 and 217.1 respectively.
    4.  Within the manufacturing sector, 13 out of 23 industry groups at NIC 2 digit-level have recorded a positive growth in March 2025 over March 2024. The top three positive contributors for the month of March 2025 are – “Manufacture of basic metals” (6.9%), “Manufacture of motor vehicles, trailers and semi-trailers” (10.3%) and “Manufacture of electrical equipment” (15.7%).
    5.  In the industry group “Manufacture of basic metals”, item groups “Flat products of Alloy Steel “, “Pipes and tubes of Steel”, “Bars and Rods of Mild steel” have shown significant contribution in growth.
    6. In the industry group “Manufacture of motor vehicles, trailers and semi-trailers”, item groups “Auto components/ spares and accessories”, “Axle”, “Bodies of trucks, lorries and trailers” have shown significant contribution in growth.
    7. In the industry group “Manufacture of electrical equipment” item groups “Electric heaters”, “Transformers (Small)”, “End facing connector for optical fibres and cables” have shown significant contribution in growth.
    8.  As per the use base classification, the indices stand at 168.2 for Primary Goods, 134.8 for Capital Goods, 173.1 for Intermediate Goods and 212.3 for Infrastructure/ Construction Goods for the month of March 2025. Further, the indices for Consumer durables and Consumer non-durables stand at 138.5 and 147.9 respectively.
    9.  The corresponding growth rates of IIP as per Use-based classification in March 2025 over March 2024 are 3.1 percent in Primary goods, 2.4 percent in Capital goods, 2.3 percent in Intermediate goods, 8.8 percent in Infrastructure/ Construction Goods, 6.6 percent in Consumer durables and (-)4.7 percent in Consumer non-durables (Statement III).  Based on use-based classification, top three positive contributors to the growth of IIP for the month of March 2025 are – Infrastructure/ construction goods, Primary goods, Consumer durables.
    10.   Monthly Indices and Growth Rate (in %) of IIP for the last 13 months

     

    3.       Along with the Quick Estimate of IIP for the month of March 2025, the indices for December 2024, January 2025 and February 2025 have undergone final revision in the light of the updated data received from the source agencies. The Quick Estimate for March 2025, has been compiled at weighted response rate of 88 percent, whereas the weighted response rate for December 2024, January 2025 and February 2025 were 95 percent, 94 percent and 94 percent respectively.

    4.     Details of Quick Estimates of the Index of Industrial Production for the month of March 2025 at Sectoral, 2-digit level of National Industrial Classification (NIC-2008) and by Use-based classification are given at Statements I, II and III respectively. Also, for users to appreciate the changes in the industrial sector, Statement IV provides month-wise indices for the last 13 months, by industry groups (as per 2-digit level of NIC-2008) and sectors.

    5.     Release of the Index for April 2025 will be on Wednesday, 28th May 2025.

     

     

    Note: –

    1. This Press release (English and Hindi Version) is also available at the Ministry’s Website –http://www.mospi.gov.in.
    2. Detailed information pertaining to IIP is available at https://mospi.gov.in/iip and https://esankhyiki.mospi.gov.in/

     

    STATEMENT I: INDEX OF INDUSTRIAL PRODUCTION – SECTORAL

     

    (Base: 2011-12=100)

     

    Month

    Mining

    Manufacturing

    Electricity

    General

    (14.372472)

    (77.63321)

    (7.994318)

    (100)

    2023-24

    2024-25

    2023-24

    2024-25

    2023-24

    2024-25

    2023-24

    2024-25

    Apr

    122.6

    130.9

    138.8

    144.6

    192.3

    212.0

    140.7

    148.0

    May

    128.1

    136.5

    143.1

    150.4

    201.6

    229.3

    145.6

    154.7

    Jun

    122.3

    134.9

    141.6

    146.6

    205.2

    222.8

    143.9

    151.0

    Jul

    111.9

    116.1

    142.1

    148.8

    204.0

    220.2

    142.7

    149.8

    Aug

    111.9

    107.1

    144.4

    146.1

    220.5

    212.3

    145.8

    145.8

    Sep

    111.5

    111.7

    141.5

    147.2

    205.9

    206.9

    142.3

    146.9

    Oct

    127.4

    128.5

    142.1

    148.4

    203.8

    207.8

    144.9

    150.3

    Nov

    131.3

    133.8

    139.3

    147.0

    176.3

    184.1

    141.1

    148.1

    Dec

    139.5

    143.2

    151.6

    157.2

    181.6

    192.8

    152.3

    158.0

    Jan

    144.3

    150.7

    150.8

    159.5

    197.1

    201.9

    153.6

    161.6

    Feb

    139.7

    141.9

    144.4

    148.4

    187.2

    194.0

    147.1

    151.1

    Mar*

    156.2

    156.8

    156.2

    160.9

    204.2

    217.1

    160.0

    164.8

    Average

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

    Apr-Mar

    128.9

    132.7

    144.7

    150.4

    198.3

    208.4

    146.7

    152.5

    Growth over the corresponding period of previous year

     

     

     

     

    Feb

    8.1

    1.6

    4.9

    2.8

    7.6

    3.6

    5.6

    2.7

    Mar*

    1.3

    0.4

    5.9

    3.0

    8.6

    6.3

    5.5

    3.0

    Apr-Mar

    7.5

    2.9

    5.5

    3.9

    7.1

    5.1

    5.9

    4.0

    * Figures for March 2025 are Quick Estimates.

    NOTE : Indices for the months of Dec’24, Jan’25 and Feb’25 incorporate updated production data.

     

    STATEMENT II:  INDEX OF INDUSTRIAL PRODUCTION – (2-DIGIT LEVEL)

    (Base: 2011-12=100)

    Industry

    Description

    Weight

    Index

    Cumulative Index

    Percentage growth

     

    code

     

     

    Mar’24

    Mar’25*

    Apr-Mar*

    Mar’25*

    Apr-Mar*

     

     

     

     

     

     

    2023-24

    2024-25

     

    2024-25

     

    10

    Manufacture of food products

    5.302

    142.4

    131.0

    134.5

    130.9

    -8.0

    -2.7

     

    11

    Manufacture of beverages

    1.035

    124.2

    128.0

    110.9

    114.1

    3.1

    2.9

     

    12

    Manufacture of tobacco products

    0.798

    78.3

    96.6

    81.1

    84.5

    23.4

    4.2

     

    13

    Manufacture of textiles

    3.291

    106.9

    112.1

    107.6

    109.2

    4.9

    1.5

     

    14

    Manufacture of wearing apparel

    1.322

    143.0

    144.8

    109.9

    116.7

    1.3

    6.2

     

    15

    Manufacture of leather and related products

    0.502

    95.9

    87.8

    95.0

    91.6

    -8.4

    -3.6

     

    16

    Manufacture of wood and products of wood and cork, except furniture; manufacture of articles of straw and plaiting materials

    0.193

    111.4

    116.9

    98.3

    103.9

    4.9

    5.7

     

    17

    Manufacture of paper and paper products

    0.872

    83.0

    77.9

    79.4

    78.3

    -6.1

    -1.4

     

    18

    Printing and reproduction of recorded media

    0.680

    91.6

    80.9

    89.3

    83.8

    -11.7

    -6.2

     

    19

    Manufacture of coke and refined petroleum products

    11.775

    142.4

    145.3

    133.0

    137.3

    2.0

    3.2

     

    20

    Manufacture of chemicals and chemical products

    7.873

    132.3

    129.0

    127.4

    129.3

    -2.5

    1.5

     

    21

    Manufacture of pharmaceuticals, medicinal chemical and botanical products

    4.981

    228.0

    217.5

    233.6

    230.9

    -4.6

    -1.2

     

    22

    Manufacture of rubber and plastics products

    2.422

    116.3

    117.9

    109.1

    113.7

    1.4

    4.2

     

    23

    Manufacture of other non-metallic mineral products

    4.085

    165.4

    179.4

    144.1

    150.5

    8.5

    4.4

     

    24

    Manufacture of basic metals

    12.804

    232.1

    248.0

    214.1

    228.0

    6.9

    6.5

     

    25

    Manufacture of fabricated metal products, except machinery and equipment

    2.655

    115.0

    108.9

    92.4

    98.0

    -5.3

    6.1

     

    26

    Manufacture of computer, electronic and optical products

    1.570

    134.7

    163.6

    121.7

    132.9

    21.5

    9.2

     

    27

    Manufacture of electrical equipment

    2.998

    124.7

    144.3

    106.7

    130.5

    15.7

    22.3

     

    28

    Manufacture of machinery and equipment n.e.c.

    4.765

    145.4

    157.1

    121.0

    125.1

    8.0

    3.4

     

    29

    Manufacture of motor vehicles, trailers and semi-trailers

    4.857

    130.5

    143.9

    127.8

    133.6

    10.3

    4.5

     

    30

    Manufacture of other transport equipment

    1.776

    175.7

    165.6

    144.7

    161.4

    -5.7

    11.5

     

    31

    Manufacture of furniture

    0.131

    296.4

    237.8

    192.9

    225.1

    -19.8

    16.7

     

    32

    Other manufacturing

    0.941

    90.0

    88.0

    85.3

    81.3

    -2.2

    -4.7

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

    05

    Mining

    14.372

    156.2

    156.8

    128.9

    132.7

    0.4

    2.9

     

    10-32

    Manufacturing

    77.633

    156.2

    160.9

    144.7

    150.4

    3.0

    3.9

     

    35

    Electricity

    7.994

    204.2

    217.1

    198.3

    208.4

    6.3

    5.1

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

    General Index

    100.00

    160.0

    164.8

    146.7

    152.5

    3.0

    4.0

     

    * Figures for March 2025 are Quick Estimates.

                 

     

     

    STATEMENT III: INDEX OF INDUSTRIAL PRODUCTION – USE-BASED

    (Base :2011-12=100)

     

    Primary goods

    Capital goods

    Intermediate goods

    Infrastructure/ construction goods

    Consumer durables

    Consumer non-durables

    Month

    (34.048612)

    (8.223043)

    (17.221487)

    (12.338363)

    (12.839296)

    (15.329199)

     

    2023-24

    2024-25

    2023-24

    2024-25

    2023-24

    2024-25

    2023-24

    2024-25

    2023-24

    2024-25

    2023-24

    2024-25

    Apr

    142.2

    152.2

    92.4

    95.0

    152.0

    157.8

    169.8

    184.2

    108.1

    119.5

    154.7

    150.9

    May

    149.9

    160.9

    102.6

    105.3

    156.9

    162.4

    173.2

    186.3

    115.6

    130.2

    149.8

    154.0

    Jun

    146.7

    156.0

    107.4

    111.3

    154.2

    159.1

    170.9

    184.9

    116.8

    127.1

    146.7

    145.2

    Jul

    141.8

    150.1

    102.1

    114.0

    153.8

    164.6

    170.3

    179.7

    117.0

    126.6

    153.5

    147.1

    Aug

    145.4

    141.6

    107.4

    107.4

    157.4

    162.3

    176.8

    181.5

    123.2

    129.8

    148.3

    141.8

    Sep

    138.8

    141.3

    112.6

    116.5

    154.2

    160.8

    172.8

    178.8

    125.0

    132.9

    142.6

    145.7

    Oct

    146.1

    149.8

    106.1

    109.2

    157.5

    165.0

    175.9

    184.2

    123.0

    129.8

    142.4

    146.4

    Nov

    143.8

    147.7

    98.0

    106.7

    151.3

    158.5

    164.2

    177.3

    106.5

    121.5

    157.2

    158.1

    Dec

    151.9

    157.7

    103.8

    114.7

    159.8

    170.1

    180.3

    195.4

    114.5

    123.8

    179.7

    166.9

    Jan

    154.3

    162.8

    108.3

    119.3

    163.8

    172.5

    186.6

    200.2

    121.4

    130.0

    164.9

    165.1

    Feb

    148.2

    152.3

    106.7

    115.4

    157.6

    159.1

    179.5

    191.7

    121.9

    126.4

    149.9

    146.7

    Mar*

    163.1

    168.2

    131.6

    134.8

    169.2

    173.1

    195.2

    212.3

    129.9

    138.5

    155.2

    147.9

    Average

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

    Apr-Mar

    147.7

    153.4

    106.6

    112.5

    157.3

    163.8

    176.3

    188.0

    118.6

    128.0

    153.7

    151.3

    Growth over the corresponding period of previous year

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

    Feb

    5.9

    2.8

    1.7

    8.2

    8.6

    1.0

    8.3

    6.8

    12.6

    3.7

    -3.2

    -2.1

    Mar*

    3.0

    3.1

    7.0

    2.4

    6.1

    2.3

    7.4

    8.8

    9.5

    6.6

    5.2

    -4.7

    Apr-Mar

    6.1

    3.9

    6.3

    5.5

    5.3

    4.1

    9.7

    6.6

    3.6

    7.9

    4.1

    -1.6

    * Figures for March 2025 are Quick Estimates.

    NOTE: Indices for the months of Dec’24, Jan’25 and Feb’25 incorporate updated production data.

     

    STATEMENT IV:  MONTHLY INDEX OF INDUSTRIAL PRODUCTION – (2-DIGIT LEVEL)

    (Base: 2011-12=100)

    Industry code

    Description

    Weight

    Mar-24

    Apr-24

    May-24

    Jun-24

    Jul-24

    Aug-24

    Sep-24

    Oct-24

    Nov-24

    Dec-24

    Jan-25

    Feb-25

    Mar-25

    10

    Manufacture of food products

    5.3025

    142.4

    119.8

    116.4

    118.3

    119.9

    122.3

    120.5

    130.5

    136.5

    154.2

    159.2

    142.7

    131.0

    11

    Manufacture of beverages

    1.0354

    124.2

    123.8

    136.4

    125.2

    112.9

    100.3

    101.8

    102.7

    99.4

    104.2

    117.1

    116.9

    128.0

    12

    Manufacture of tobacco products

    0.7985

    78.3

    61.1

    88.1

    83.2

    81.3

    78.5

    91.2

    92.3

    80.3

    88.2

    96.9

    76.3

    96.6

    13

    Manufacture of textiles

    3.2913

    106.9

    105.3

    107.0

    106.2

    109.1

    109.4

    109.3

    111.1

    106.2

    114.2

    113.7

    106.7

    112.1

    14

    Manufacture of wearing apparel

    1.3225

    143.0

    105.1

    123.6

    122.6

    111.7

    112.5

    103.7

    104.0

    110.3

    119.1

    121.1

    121.4

    144.8

    15

    Manufacture of leather and related products

    0.5021

    95.9

    89.3

    102.6

    99.2

    102.0

    94.3

    89.5

    87.0

    76.3

    89.2

    93.8

    88.1

    87.8

    16

    Manufacture of wood and products of wood and cork, except furniture; manufacture of articles of straw and plaiting materials

    0.1930

    111.4

    84.3

    100.3

    103.8

    99.1

    108.1

    106.7

    103.2

    98.2

    115.0

    104.4

    106.8

    116.9

    17

    Manufacture of paper and paper products

    0.8724

    83.0

    75.6

    81.0

    79.8

    81.7

    83.0

    81.2

    78.3

    75.0

    76.9

    76.7

    72.2

    77.9

    18

    Printing and reproduction of recorded media

    0.6798

    91.6

    82.1

    91.9

    85.3

    84.4

    83.3

    84.7

    78.0

    82.6

    89.9

    83.3

    78.9

    80.9

    19

    Manufacture of coke and refined petroleum products

    11.7749

    142.4

    135.4

    140.7

    132.2

    140.9

    130.8

    128.8

    132.8

    135.6

    147.4

    146.3

    131.8

    145.3

    20

    Manufacture of chemicals and chemical products

    7.8730

    132.3

    127.0

    133.2

    131.7

    135.2

    129.5

    129.4

    129.4

    123.2

    131.0

    130.7

    121.9

    129.0

    21

    Manufacture of pharmaceuticals, medicinal chemical and botanical products

    4.9810

    228.0

    244.4

    245.0

    218.8

    224.7

    212.6

    222.9

    216.9

    251.4

    259.1

    246.1

    211.8

    217.5

    22

    Manufacture of rubber and plastics products

    2.4222

    116.3

    108.9

    112.4

    114.5

    116.9

    115.5

    117.6

    116.6

    103.6

    107.0

    118.7

    114.6

    117.9

    23

    Manufacture of other non-metallic mineral products

    4.0853

    165.4

    148.7

    149.1

    154.1

    136.3

    139.8

    137.6

    144.3

    136.7

    157.7

    162.3

    159.8

    179.4

    24

    Manufacture of basic metals

    12.8043

    232.1

    220.7

    225.9

    219.2

    223.7

    225.6

    219.7

    228.2

    222.0

    236.8

    242.2

    224.3

    248.0

    25

    Manufacture of fabricated metal products, except machinery and equipment

    2.6549

    115.0

    85.0

    97.8

    89.5

    93.7

    92.8

    99.5

    100.2

    95.2

    107.4

    104.0

    102.2

    108.9

    26

    Manufacture of computer, electronic and optical products

    1.5704

    134.7

    114.2

    136.5

    134.8

    130.9

    146.6

    146.7

    124.2

    115.9

    115.1

    126.0

    139.9

    163.6

    27

    Manufacture of electrical equipment

    2.9983

    124.7

    110.4

    122.7

    136.8

    131.8

    127.7

    128.1

    125.9

    121.1

    163.9

    131.4

    122.1

    144.3

    28

    Manufacture of machinery and equipment n.e.c.

    4.7653

    145.4

    108.0

    118.1

    125.3

    126.2

    122.9

    131.7

    120.2

    117.7

    127.5

    121.7

    124.4

    157.1

    29

    Manufacture of motor vehicles, trailers and semi-trailers

    4.8573

    130.5

    126.5

    134.4

    128.9

    133.5

    129.2

    132.6

    133.4

    134.4

    116.0

    148.3

    142.0

    143.9

    30

    Manufacture of other transport equipment

    1.7763

    175.7

    140.3

    153.2

    153.4

    155.0

    156.4

    189.0

    184.5

    159.4

    142.2

    180.0

    157.8

    165.6

    31

    Manufacture of furniture

    0.1311

    296.4

    220.8

    246.0

    217.0

    209.2

    226.2

    246.6

    211.4

    201.7

    239.0

    212.1

    233.8

    237.8

    32

    Other manufacturing

    0.9415

    90.0

    96.5

    72.5

    74.6

    83.3

    86.9

    99.5

    91.8

    57.0

    77.9

    76.6

    71.5

    88.0

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

    5

    Mining

    14.3725

    156.2

    130.9

    136.5

    134.9

    116.1

    107.1

    111.7

    128.5

    133.8

    143.2

    150.7

    141.9

    156.8

    10-32

    Manufacturing

    77.6332

    156.2

    144.6

    150.4

    146.6

    148.8

    146.1

    147.2

    148.4

    147.0

    157.2

    159.5

    148.4

    160.9

    35

    Electricity

    7.9943

    204.2

    212.0

    229.3

    222.8

    220.2

    212.3

    206.9

    207.8

    184.1

    192.8

    201.9

    194.0

    217.1

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

    General Index

    100

    160.0

    148.0

    154.7

    151.0

    149.8

    145.8

    146.9

    150.3

    148.1

    158.0

    161.6

    151.1

    164.8

    Note: The figures for March 2025 are provisional

    *********

    Samrat/Allen

    (Release ID: 2124850) Visitor Counter : 146

    MIL OSI Asia Pacific News

  • MIL-OSI Asia-Pac: India and Bhutan hold 6th Joint Group of Customs (JGC) Meeting in Thimphu, Bhutan, on 24th-25th April 2025

    Source: Government of India

    India and Bhutan hold 6th Joint Group of Customs (JGC) Meeting in Thimphu, Bhutan, on 24th-25th April 2025

    India and Bhutan reaffirm shared commitment to strengthen Customs cooperation, enhancing trade facilitation, and ensuring secure and efficient border management

    Posted On: 28 APR 2025 5:13PM by PIB Delhi

    The 6th Joint Group of Customs (JGC) Meeting between India and Bhutan was held on 24th-25th April 2025 in Thimphu, Bhutan. The meeting was co-chaired by Mr. Surjit Bhujabal, Special Secretary and Member (Customs), Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs (CBIC), Government of India, and Mr. Sonam Jamtsho, Director General, Department of Revenue and Customs, Ministry of Finance, Royal Government of Bhutan.

    India is Bhutan’s top trade partner both as an import source and as an export destination accounting for about 80% of Bhutan’s overall trade. Trade with Bhutan through the land Customs Stations is significant as Bhutan is a land-locked country. The India-Bhutan Joint Group of Customs meetings are held annually to discuss issues relating to re-defining and re-engineering of Customs procedures, promote Customs cooperation and Cross-border trade facilitation with alignment to global best practices. There are 10 Land Customs Stations along the India-Bhutan Border in the States of West Bengal (6) and Assam (4).

    The 6th JGC meeting discussed a host of bilateral issues for enhancing trade and transit between the two countries. The automation and digitisation of transit processes, Coordinated Border Management (CBM), pre-arrival exchange of Customs data, Customs Mutual Assistance Agreement (CMAA) and movement of transit cargo under Electronic Cargo Tracking System (ECTS) were discussed, among others. The meeting concluded on an optimistic note.

    Bhutanese side extended their sincere thanks to CBIC for their continued support, especially recognising the capacity-building workshop titled ‘Advancing India Bhutan Trade and Economic Partnership’, held from 29th July to 1st August, 2024, which played a vital role in easing export processes and addressing trade-related concerns. India proposed extending capacity building programmes in the areas of Risk Management System (RMS), Authorised Economic Operator (AEO), Food Safety Standards besides need-based capacity building for importers and exporters from the Bhutanese side.

    Both sides reaffirmed their shared commitment to strengthening Customs cooperation, enhancing trade facilitation, and ensuring secure and efficient border management.

    ****

    NB/KMN

    (Release ID: 2124887) Visitor Counter : 46

    MIL OSI Asia Pacific News

  • MIL-OSI Asia-Pac: Inter-Governmental Agreement inked with France for 26 Rafale-Marine aircraft for Indian Navy

    Source: Government of India

    Posted On: 28 APR 2025 3:53PM by PIB Delhi

    The Governments of India and France have signed an Inter-Governmental Agreement (IGA) for the procurement of 26 Rafale Aircraft (22 Single-Seater and four Twin-Seater) for the Indian Navy. It includes Training, Simulator, Associated Equipment, Weapons and Performance-Based Logistics. It also includes additional equipment for the existing Rafale fleet of the Indian Air Force (IAF).

    The IGA has been signed by Raksha Mantri Shri Rajnath Singh and Minister of Armed Forces of France Mr Sebastien Lecornu. The signed copies of the agreement, aircraft package supply protocol and weapons package supply protocol were exchanged by Indian and French officials in the presence of Defence Secretary Shri Rajesh Kumar Singh at Nausena Bhawan, New Delhi on April 28, 2025.

     

     

    In line with the Government’s thrust on Aatmanirbhar Bharat, the agreement includes Transfer of Technology for integration of indigenous weapons in India. It also includes setting up of production facility for Rafale Fuselage as well as Maintenance, Repair and Overhaul facilities for aircraft engine, sensors and weapons in India. The deal is expected to generate thousands of jobs and revenue for a large number of MSMEs in setting up, production and running of these facilities.

    Manufactured by France’s Dassault Aviation, the Rafale-Marine is a carrier-borne combat-ready aircraft with proven operational capabilities in maritime environment. The delivery of these aircraft would be completed by 2030, with the crew undergoing training in France and India.

    Rafale-Marine has commonality with the Rafale being operated by IAF. Its procurement will substantially enhance joint operational capability, besides optimising training and logistics for the aircraft for both Indian Navy and IAF. The induction would lead to the addition of a potent force multiplier to the Indian Navy’s aircraft carriers, substantially boosting the nation’s air power at sea.

    ******

    VK/SR/Savvy

    (Release ID: 2124851) Visitor Counter : 244

    MIL OSI Asia Pacific News

  • MIL-OSI Asia-Pac: Acquisition of the Private Paper Collection of Dr. A.P.J. Abdul Kalam

    Source: Government of India

    Posted On: 28 APR 2025 5:11PM by PIB Delhi

    The National Archives of India (NAI) is the custodian of the non-current records of the Government of India and holds them in trust for the use of administrators and researchers, as per the provisions of the Public Records Act, 1993. As a premier archival institution, the National Archives of India plays a key role in guiding and shaping archival consciousness in the country. Apart from its vast collection of public records, the NAI also houses a rich and ever-growing collection of private papers of eminent Indians from all walks of life, who have made significant contributions to the nation.

    Taking the legacy forward, the National Archives of India (NAI) today acquired the private papers of Late Dr. A.P.J. Abdul Kalam, comprising original correspondences, Passport, Aadhar card, Pan card, tour reports, and the lecture delivered by Dr. Kalam in various universities as well as organizations. The collection also comprises several original photographs. The collection was donated by Dr. APJM Nazema Maraikayar, niece of Dr. Kalam, Shri APJMJ Sheik Saleem, Grand Nephew of Dr. Kalam to National Archives of India. Shri. Arun Singhal (IAS), Director General, National Archives signed an agreement   with Dr. APJM Nazema Maraikayar. The ceremony was also attended by Shri APJM Jainulabudeen, nephew of Dr. Kalam and Shri APJMJ Sheik Dawood, grand nephew of Dr. Kalam.

    Dr. Avul Pakir Jainulabdeen Abdul Kalam(1931–2015), widely known as the “Missile Man of India,” was an eminent scientist and the 11th President of India (2002–2007). Born on 15 October 1931 in Rameswaram, Tamil Nadu, into a humble family, Kalam rose through sheer hard work and determination. After studying physics and aerospace engineering, he contributed significantly to India’s missile development programs and played a pivotal role in the Pokhran-II nuclear tests of 1998. Working with organizations like DRDO and ISRO, he helped strengthen India’s defense and space capabilities. His achievements earned him numerous honors, including the Bharat Ratna, India’s highest civilian award.

    Beyond his scientific contributions, Dr. Kalam was deeply passionate about inspiring the youth of India. He authored several influential books such as “Wings of Fire,” “Ignited Minds,” and “India 2020,” all centered around dreaming big and building a stronger nation. Known as the “People’s President” for his humble and approachable nature, Kalam dedicated his post-presidency years to education and mentoring young minds. His life remains a symbol of simplicity, perseverance, and visionary leadership. Dr. Kalam passed away on 27 July 2015, doing what he loved most — teaching — leaving behind a legacy that continues to inspire generations.

    ***

    Sunil Kumar Tiwari

    pibculture[at]gmail[dot]com

    (Release ID: 2124884) Visitor Counter : 73

    MIL OSI Asia Pacific News

  • MIL-OSI Asia-Pac: CHP investigates confirmed Mpox case

    Source: Hong Kong Government special administrative region

    The Centre for Health Protection (CHP) of the Department of Health (DH) said today (April 28) that it is investigating a confirmed Mpox (also known as Monkeypox) case, and urged the public to be vigilant and avoid close physical contact with persons suspected of contracting Mpox. Meanwhile, high-risk target groups are advised to receive Mpox vaccinations.

    The case involves a 33-year-old male with good past health. He developed rashes and lymphadenopathy on April 22, and attended the Yau Ma Tei Male Social Hygiene Clinic of the DH on April 25. He is in stable condition, and is being arranged for treatment and isolation at Princess Margaret Hospital.

         A preliminary investigation revealed that he did not receive Mpox vaccination and had a history of high-risk exposure in Hong Kong. No epidemiological linkages have been established between this case and other confirmed cases previously recorded in Hong Kong. The CHP is continuing its epidemiological investigations of the case and will report the case to the World Health Organization.

    The CHP reminded high-risk target groups to receive Mpox vaccinations in order to lower the risk of infection or the possibility of having more severe symptoms after infection. In addition, persons who experience Mpox symptoms (including rashes, fever, chills, swollen lymph nodes, exhaustion, muscle pain, and severe headaches) or suspect themselves of being infected are advised to seek medical attention and receive treatment at once. They should not engage in activities with others that may expose others to their skin rash or body fluids. Members of the public should maintain good personal and hand hygiene to prevent virus transmission or infection through contact. They should also avoid close physical contact with persons or animals suspected of being infected.

    The CHP has set up an Mpox telephone hotline (2125 2373), which operates from Monday to Friday from 9am to 5pm, excluding public holidays. Those who suspect or are concerned that they may have had high-risk contact with confirmed cases, particularly men who have sex with men or those who have sexual practices with strangers, can use the hotline to make enquiries and receive relevant health advice.

    Furthermore, the DH provides vaccination services to high-risk groups of Mpox. The following high-risk target groups are eligible for Mpox vaccinations on a voluntary basis:
     

    1. Individuals with high-risk sexual practices, e.g. having multiple sexual partners, sex workers, or having a history of sexually transmitted infection within the past 12 months;
    2. Healthcare workers responsible for caring for patients with confirmed Mpox;
    3. Laboratory personnel working with zoonotic pox viruses; and
    4. Animal care personnel with high risk of exposure in case of Mpox occurrences in animals in Hong Kong.

    The high-risk target groups can receive Mpox walk-in vaccinations at any of the DH’s Social Hygiene Service Clinics (SocHS) (namely Chai Wan SocHS, Wan Chai Male SocHS, Wan Chai Female SocHS, Yau Ma Tei Male SocHS, Yau Ma Tei Female SocHS, Yung Fung Shee SocHS, Fanling SocHS and Tuen Mun SocHS) and the DH’s Yau Ma Tei Integrated Treatment Centre.
     
    Meanwhile, the DH’s Kowloon Bay Integrated Treatment Centre and the Hospital Authority’s Special Medical Clinics at Queen Elizabeth Hospital and Princess Margaret Hospital also provide Mpox vaccination services for their clients.
     
    For more details, please visit the CHP’s page on Mpox and Mpox Vaccination Programme.

    MIL OSI Asia Pacific News

  • MIL-OSI Asia-Pac: Coastal States Fisheries Meet 2025: Union Minister Shri Rajiv Ranjan Singh Launches Projects Worth Rs.255 Crores in Mumbai; Awards First Ever Aqua Insurance to Fisherfolk

    Source: Government of India

    Coastal States Fisheries Meet 2025: Union Minister Shri Rajiv Ranjan Singh Launches Projects Worth Rs.255 Crores in Mumbai; Awards First Ever Aqua Insurance to Fisherfolk

    5th Marine Fisheries Census Goes Digital: VyAS-NAV App Enabled Tablets Distributed; Guidelines on Turtle Excluder Device & SOP for Vessel Communication and Support System Issued

    Posted On: 28 APR 2025 4:33PM by PIB Mumbai

    Mumbai, 28 April 2025

     

    A “Coastal States Fisheries Meet: 2025” was organized today on 28th April 2025 in  Mumbai under the chairmanship of Union Minister, Ministry of Fisheries, Animal Husbandry and Dairying (MoFAH&D) and Ministry of Panchayati Raj, Shri Rajiv Ranjan Singh alias Lalan Singh. The event also saw the gracious presence of Prof. S.P. Singh Baghel, Minister of State, MoFAH&D and Ministry of Panchayati Raj and Shri George Kurian, Minister of State, MoFAH&D and Ministry of Minority Affairs along with Governors and  Fisheries Ministers of several coastal states and UTs. On this occasion, Union Minister Shri Rajiv Ranjan Singh, inaugurated and laid the foundation for key projects for 7 coastal states and UTs with a total outlay of Rs.255 crores under Pradhan Mantri Matsya Sampada Yojana (PMMSY). Key initiatives like the 5th Marine Fisheries Census Operations, PMMSY Guidelines on Turtle Excluder Device and release of Standard Operating Procedure for Vessel Communication and Support System were also launched at the Coastal States Fisheries Meet. The Union Minister also distributed tablets enabled with Digital Application VyAS-NAV  and awarded the first ever aqua insurance (One Time Incentive Sanction-cum-Release Order) to beneficiaries under the Pradhan Mantri Matsya Kisan Samridhi Sah-Yojana (PM-MKSSY) on this occasion. Today marks the beginning of the 5th Marine Census operations which involves training of the supervisors, recruitment and training the village wise data enumerators, followed by the actual census activity spread across 3 months. The entire operation will be completed by December 2025.

     

    5th Marine Fisheries Census Goes Digital: VyAS-NAV App

    In a major preparatory step for India’s 5th Marine Fisheries Census (MFC 2025), a mobile application VyAS-NAV has been launched for the digital based data collection with an aim to boost transparency and efficiency. Marking a shift from traditional method to a geo-referenced, app-based digital system, the MFC 2025 will cover a 1.2 million fisher households nationwide bringing in real-time validation. This mammoth exercise is coordinated by the Department of Fisheries (DoF) of the Ministry of Fisheries, Animal Husbandry and Dairying under the Pradhan Mantri Matsya Sampada Yojana (PMMSY). VyAS-NAV was developed by the ICAR-Central Marine Fisheries Research Institute (CMFRI) which is the nodal agency for implementing the marine fisheries census in nine coastal states. VyAS-NAV app will be used by supervisors for field verification of fishing villages, fish landing centres and fishing harbours. This is a foundational step towards ensuring comprehensive coverage and accuracy of the census frame.  This app has features to record summary picture of villages based on primary and secondary sources. The supervisors are staff of CMFRI, Fishery Survey of India and the Fisheries Departments across the coastal states.

     

    About Marine Fisheries Census-2025

    The Marine Fisheries Census (MFC) -2025 focuses on the exhaustive, precise, and timely documentation of every marine fisher family, fishing village, fishing craft and gear, as well as infrastructure facilities associated with fishing harbours and fish landing centres across the country. Unlike in the past, customized mobile and tablet-based applications created by CMFRI will be used for data collection in a bid to reduce manual errors and accelerate data compilation for policy-level use. This MFC is a process that starts with the signaling of field operations and ends with the reporting. The reference period where the household enumeration takes place is the core activity. In this case it is November – December 2025. Various constituents of this process are referred to as census operations. As of now, many such activities are planned in the pre core census phase. The first of it is, validation of Marine Fisheries villages is inaugurated today. This will be followed by a round of workshops followed two rounds of training. These all, form part of the Marine Fisheries Census. Roughly 3500 villages and 1.2 million households will be covered in this exercise at various points in time. The village enumeration will be finalized by May- June, while family level data and other facilities will be covered during Nov-Dec, which will be done by enumerators from the village and probably fishing community. In nutshell the operations span from April to December. The village list finalization and landing centres data will be covered by staff of CMFRI, FSI and DoF and the same has started from today. The core activity, scheduled for November–December 2025, involves trained enumerators preferably from the local community, visiting each marine fisher household with smart devices. This is preceded by a robust preparatory phase. Emphasis will be given to record finer details of fishers like their demographic and socio-economic status, alternative livelihood options, and how and where government schemes can influence their status, all collected through a robust online digital platform. Officials will train enumerators in digital data collection and will validate village and infrastructure details using VyAS-NAV.

     

    Summary of Activities and Timeline:

    Timeline

    Activity

    Nov 21, 2024

    Official announcement and approval during World Fisheries Day celebrations

    Nov 2024 – April 2025

    Preparatory work: schedule finalization, development of VyAS-NAV application and preliminary groundwork

    April 2025 – Nov 2025

    Pre-census marine fishing village list validation, enumerator identification, staff recruitment, training of supervisors/enumerators, App development and testing, craft & gear census (across harbours and landing centres)

    Nov – Dec 2025

    45-day full-scale Marine Fisheries Census field exercise – Enumerators will visit each marine fisher household in the identified marine fishing villages under supervision at district, state, regional, and national levels

     

    No. of marine fishing villages, Census 2016

    State

    Fishing
    villages

    West Bengal

    171*

    Odisha

    739

    Andhra Pradesh

    533

    Tamil Nadu

    575

    Puducherry

    39

    Kerala

    220

    Karnataka

    162

    Goa

    41

    Maharashtra

    526

    Gujarat

    280

    Daman & Diu

    12

    Lakshadweep

    10

    Andaman & Nicobar

    169

    Total

    3477

    * Subsequent reference to villages actually means Gram Panchayat in West Bengal

    About Aquaculture Insurance

    The Pradhan Mantri Matsya Kisan Samridhi Sah-Yojana (PM-MKSSY), a sub-scheme launched under the Pradhan Mantri Matsya Sampada Yojana offers a comprehensive aquaculture insurance. The aquaculture insurance focuses on mitigating risks and extending financial incentive particularly to small and marginalized farmers. Through the National Fisheries Digital Platform (NFDP), the Sub-scheme offers seamless digital access to insurance, helping safeguard the incomes of fishers and fish farmers against unexpected losses while also promoting better tracking and formalization within the fisheries sector. Eligible beneficiaries include registered aquafarmers, firms, companies, societies, cooperatives, Fish Farmer Producer Organizations (FFPOs), and other entities involved in the fisheries value chain as identified by the Department of Fisheries. For intensive aquaculture systems such as recirculatory aquaculture systems, the premium is capped at ₹1 lakh per farmer for 1800 m³. Farmers can choose between Basic Insurance, which covers losses from natural calamities and other parametric risks, and the Comprehensive Insurance, which includes Basic Insurance and disease coverage. Additionally, Scheduled Caste (SC), Scheduled Tribe (ST), and women beneficiaries are eligible for an extra 10% incentive, further promoting inclusivity. The insurance covers one crop cycle only thereby stabilizing income and encouraging investment in aquaculture.

    Notably, the government has introduced Aqua Insurance for the first time, offering dedicated financial protection to aquafarmers. This landmark initiative ensures targeted insurance coverage, digital accessibility, and focused support for marginalized communities in the fisheries sector. The beneficiaries awarded today were Shri D.R.Ravikumar, Tamil Nadu, Shri Mohan Sathiyamoorthy, Tamil Nadu, Shri Sivaramakrishnan, Tamil Nadu, Shri Gandhi Palanivelu, Tamil Nadu, Shri Patnala Subrahmanyam, Andhra Pradesh, Shri Penki Ravi Kumar, Andhra Pradesh, Shri Chiluvuri Ravi Teja, Andhra Pradesh and Shri Korapati Venkata Subba Lakshmi, Andhra Pradesh.

     

    For PMMSY Guidelines on Turtle Excluder Device: Click Here

     

    * * *

    PIB Mumbai |  AA/ NJ/ DR

    Follow us on social media: @PIBMumbai    /PIBMumbai     /pibmumbai   pibmumbai[at]gmail[dot]com  /PIBMumbai     /pibmumbai

    (Release ID: 2124862) Visitor Counter : 12

    MIL OSI Asia Pacific News

  • MIL-OSI Asia-Pac: CE meets Deputy Prime Minister of Slovak Republic (with photo)

    Source: Hong Kong Government special administrative region

    CE meets Deputy Prime Minister of Slovak Republic (with photo) 
    Mr Lee said that Hong Kong is striving to become an international innovation and technology (I&T) centre, and the Slovak Republic has announced various long-term digital transformation development strategies in recent years. He said he believes that there is ample room for future co-operation between Hong Kong and the Slovak Republic in the application of I&T. The MOU is an important milestone in strengthening the ties between Hong Kong and the Slovak Republic on the I&T front, encouraging exchanges among scientific research organisations, scientific and technological talent and enterprises of the two places, and promotes co-operation in scientific research and innovation as well as the transfer of technology and innovation outcomes, contributing to the high-quality development of the two economies.
     
    In terms of economic and trade development, Mr Lee said that the HKSAR Government will continue to maintain close ties with the Slovak business community, and will organise promotion activities of various natures to keep them abreast of the latest developments and opportunities in Hong Kong. The HKSAR Government will also promote Hong Kong’s strengths and development potential, including the city’s close connections with international and Mainland markets, as well as the tremendous development opportunities brought by the Guangdong-Hong Kong-Macao Greater Bay Area development and the Belt and Road Initiative.   
    Issued at HKT 19:15

    NNNN

    MIL OSI Asia Pacific News

  • MIL-OSI: Lightspark: Built for the Next Century of Money

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    LOS ANGELES, April 28, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Three years ago, Lightspark started with a simple conviction: The way money moves should match the speed, openness, and intelligence of the Internet itself. Since then, the world has responded to a new kind of value — digital, borderless, and instant. But the infrastructure to move that value remains outdated, closed, cumbersome, and expensive.

    Everything Lightspark does aims to change that.

    Today, Lightspark unveils a bold new identity that reflects who they are and where they’re going. It’s a system designed for developers ready to move beyond the constraints of legacy infrastructure and toward faster, more innovative, and more open payments.

    A Brand Built for the Network Lightspark’s Building

    Lightspark’s new identity reflects how money is evolving. Not just a new logo or color palette – it’s a design system built to move as dynamically as the network behind it. Lightspark has rethought everything — from typography to motion — to echo the principles that drive us: open access, instant settlement, global reach. This is the new face of a faster financial future. Powered by Bitcoin and built on the Money Grid.

    Lightspark’s technology is already powering some of the most important financial experiences in the world:

    • Instant Bitcoin payments on Coinbase
    • Seamless payouts via UMA between the US, Mexico, Latin America, Asia and Europe
    • Real-time settlement for exchanges, wallets, and digital banks
    • Stablecoin issuance on Bitcoin via Spark

    The New Mark: Beyond the Bolt

    Lightspark is moving beyond the lightning bolt. The new mark signals the origin point of the Money Grid — inspired by the Cartesian co-ordinate system’s X, Y, and Z axes and the Right-Hand Rule from physics, a principle used in electromagnetism that connects to light waves—a nod to Lightspark’s name and mission. The design symbolizes precision, direction, and interconnected movement, reinforcing the role in powering a more efficient and intelligent global financial network. More than a symbol. It’s a navigation point for the Money Grid.

    Typography: Precision, Clarity, and Scale

    At the foundation of Lightspark’s new identity is Suisse Int’l—a modern interpretation of the classic Swiss Grotesk. Chosen for its clean geometry, timeless clarity, and international versatility, it reflects the qualities Lightspark values in the infrastructure built: strength, reliability, and precision.

    Suisse Int’l brings a functional elegance that allows information, not decoration, to lead. Its wide range of weights, global character support, and structural harmony make it ideal for scaling across surfaces, from product UIs to international campaigns. It’s a typographic system built for clear communication at scale, designed to move as fluidly as the Money Grid Lightspark is powering.

    A Palette Built to Move

    Money doesn’t stop at borders — and neither does Lightspark’s color system. Designed to be bold, expressive, and highly functional, Lightspark’s palette reflects the extensible nature of the Money Grid itself. This is a working color system from high-visibility colors used in interfaces and signals, like Spark, Universal Money Address, and Connect, to a range of neutral tones for structure and contrast. One that scales across products, touchpoints, and cultures. The palette is clean where it needs to be, and loud when necessary. It’s built for scale and flexible enough to adapt to how color is seen, felt, and used across cultures.

    Bringing it all Together

    The future doesn’t need to be imagined; it’s here. With Lightspark’s partners – digital banks, crypto exchanges, non-custodial wallets, developers, marketplaces, and the entrepreneurs shaping the Money Grid – Lightspark is just getting started.

    The MIL Network

  • MIL-OSI Global: How Trump is prompting China to change its relationship with the world

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Ming Gao, Research Scholar of East Asia Studies, Lund University

    China has spent much of the past two months shoring up friendships both near and far. Two rounds of ministerial meetings with regional rivals Japan and South Korea took place in Tokyo and Seoul at the end of March.

    And earlier in April the red carpet was rolled out for the Spanish prime minister, Pedro Sánchez, for his second visit to Beijing in less than seven months. This came shortly before the Chinese president, Xi Jinping, embarked on his first overseas trip of 2025 – a charm offensive to Vietnam, Malaysia and Cambodia.

    Central to these diplomatic moves is Donald Trump, whose return to the White House has clearly unsettled the boundaries between friend and foe.

    China, Japan and South Korea have historically approached one another with caution. This is a legacy of imperial aggression, unresolved territorial disputes and diverging security alignments with the US.

    But the unpredictability of the Trump administration, which has most recently been demonstrated by the imposition of sweeping trade tariffs, seems to be bringing the three countries closer together.

    At the ministerial meeting in Tokyo in March, their respective governments agreed to extend the tenure of the secretary-general and deputy secretaries of the Trilateral Cooperation Secretariat from two years to three. This still relatively unknown international organisation was established in 2011 in an effort to promote cooperation between the three countries.

    The decision, while seemingly a minor administrative adjustment, symbolises a growing mutual trust between these nations. China’s foreign minister, Wang Yi, has explicitly acknowledged that the extension represents a full endorsement of the organisation’s role. And China has now called on Japan for a coordinated response to US tariffs.

    This renewed momentum in regional cooperation set the stage for Xi’s broader diplomatic offensive through south-east Asia, where China sought to reinforce strategic ties and assert its leadership.

    China rolled out an elaborate diplomatic programme for Xi’s stop in Vietnam. It aimed to reaffirm ideological ties of “comrades and brothers” and counter Hanoi’s recent deepening relations with Washington.

    Following talks with Xi, the general secretary of the Communist party of Vietnam, To Lam, said that his country has always regarded developing relations with China as “a strategic choice and top priority”.

    Malaysia, on the other hand, is one of the earliest supporters of Xi’s signature belt and road initiative. It officially joined the Brics group of emerging economies as a “partner country” in 2025 and currently holds the rotating chairmanship of the Asean group of south-east Asian states. This gives Malaysia a central role in coordinating China’s relations with the bloc.

    During Xi’s visit, the Malaysian prime minister, Anwar Ibrahim, made the alignment between the two countries clear. He stated that Malaysia “stands with China” in the face of US threats. Malaysia is one of China’s main trading partners.

    Cambodia is also considered one Beijing’s most loyal partners in south-east Asia. In May 2024, it even named a road in the capital, Phnom Penh, “Xi Jinping Avenue” to thank China for its contribution to Cambodia’s development.

    The authorities pulled out all the stops for Xi’s latest visit. Cambodia’s king, Norodom Sihamoni, personally greeted Xi at the airport in an unprecedented break from protocol. And the two countries elevated their ties to an “all-weather” partnership, a label signalling that their relationship is resilient to external shifts.

    Relations with Europe

    Sánchez’s April visit to Beijing, meanwhile, marked an important point in relations between China and the EU. Following the ramping up of US tariffs, Xi called for the EU and China to “jointly resist unilateral bullying”. This appears to have resonated in Madrid.

    The Spanish delegation carried a message that Washington’s tariff hikes were “neither fair nor just” and had harmed the EU economy. It also said that Europe must “strengthen unity and coordination to safeguard its own interests”.

    This message appears to be filtering through wider European circles, with some leaders signalling their interest in stabilising ties with Beijing. Ursula von der Leyen, the president of the European Commission, for example, has engaged in “constructive” discussions with Chinese premier Li Qiang to address potential trade disruptions from US tariffs.

    Yet the EU faces an obvious dilemma: whether to engage China as an alternative economic partner or push back against a likely surge in redirected Chinese exports that would threaten European industries and deepen existing political tensions.

    Spain, for its part, has its own strategic calculations. Sánchez’s return to China highlights Madrid’s interest in positioning itself as the European leader in renewable energy, with Chinese investment expected to play a central role in this transition.

    This helps explain why, when asked about the EU’s tariff policy on China during a press briefing in September 2024, Sánchez remarked that “Europe needs to reconsider this decision”. Spain ultimately chose to abstain in the EU’s vote on imposing tariffs on the Chinese EV industry.

    China’s message to the world is clear. It is a stable partner and a defender of free trade. Whether China can persuade the world to trust its leadership amid deepening geopolitical uncertainty remains an open question.

    Ming Gao receives funding from the Swedish Research Council. This research was produced with support from the Swedish Research Council grant “Moved Apart” (nr. 2022-01864). Ming Gao is a member of Lund University Profile Area: Human Rights.

    ref. How Trump is prompting China to change its relationship with the world – https://theconversation.com/how-trump-is-prompting-china-to-change-its-relationship-with-the-world-253567

    MIL OSI – Global Reports

  • MIL-OSI China: Regular Press Conference of the Ministry of National Defense on April 24, 2025 2025-04-29 Senior Colonel Zhang Xiaogang, spokesperson for the Ministry of National Defense (MND) of the People’s Republic of China, answers questions at a regular press conference on the afternoon of April 24, 2025.

    Source: People’s Republic of China – Ministry of National Defense 2

    By Senior Colonel Zhang Xiaogang, Spokesperson for the Ministry of National Defense (MND)

    Senior Colonel Zhang Xiaogang, spokesperson for the Ministry of National Defense (MND) of the People’s Republic of China (PRC), answers questions at a regular press conference on the afternoon of April 24, 2025. (mod.gov.cn/Photo by Zhang Zhicheng)

    (The following English text is for reference. In case of any divergence of interpretation, the Chinese text shall prevail.)

    Zhang Xiaogang: Friends from the media, welcome to this month’s regular press conference of the Ministry of National Defense (MND).

    Today, I have one piece of information to announce on the top.

    The inaugural Navigator Meeting of the Beijing Xiangshan Forum will be held in Beijing from April 28 to 30. The theme of the meeting will be “Opportunities and Challenges Facing Global Security”. Over 200 defense officials, experts, scholars and media representatives from more than 30 countries and international organizations will attend the event. Through multilateral seminars and dialogues, the meeting aims to enhance the effectiveness of international participation and contribute insights to global security governance. Bilateral and multilateral meetings as well as cultural and technological visits will also be arranged on the margins of the event.

    Journalist: It’s reported that President Xi Jinping paid a visit to Malaysia. With a focus on building a high-level strategic China-Malaysia community with a shared future, he underlined the importance of deepening exchanges and cooperation on national security, defense and law enforcement. Please share with us what measures will the Chinese side take to bolster China-Malaysia military-to-military relationship.

    Zhang Xiaogang: President Xi Jinping paid a state visit to Malaysia upon invitation from April 15 to 17, which ushered in the next “golden 50 years” for bilateral relations. China and Malaysia are neighbors across the sea with a millennium-old friendship. Under the strategic guidance of leaders of our two countries, the Chinese and Malaysian militaries have had productive cooperation in different areas. A 2+2 diplomatic and defense dialogue mechanism will be established to deepen exchanges and cooperation on national security, defense and law enforcement. Exercise Aman Youyi, initiated by China and Malaysia, has become a brand of military cooperation with significant influence in the region.

    Senior Colonel Zhang Xiaogang, spokesperson for the Ministry of National Defense (MND) of the People’s Republic of China (PRC), answers questions at a regular press conference on the afternoon of April 24, 2025. (mod.gov.cn/Photo by Li Xiaowei)

    The Chinese and Malaysian people both believe that solidarity brings strength. We are ready to work with the Malaysian side to deliver on the important consensus between leaders of our two countries, strengthen high-level engagements, and deepen strategic trust. Our two sides will have more cooperation in areas such as joint exercises, maritime security, and multilateral coordination, and promote greater quality-oriented growth of our military-to-military relationship.

    Journalist: It’s reported that the US, the Philippines and other countries are conducting Exercise Balikatan. As part of drills, the US military has, for the first time, deployed anti-ship missile system to the Luzon Strait north of the Philippines. Some analysts believe that this is to simulate the blockade of the Bashi Channel during a crisis in the Taiwan Strait. The Philippines and the US also organized Exercise Cope Thunder previously. What’s your comment on this?

    Zhang Xiaogang: We always hold that military cooperation between countries should not target or hurt the interests of any third party, nor should it jeopardize regional peace and stability. The South China Sea should be a sea of peace, cooperation and friendship. However, the Philippines holds a candle to the devil by currying favor and colluding with the US and other outside countries to make provocations. It frequently conducts the so-called joint patrols and exercises, and invites and deploys strategic and tactical weapons, which seriously undermines the common interests of regional countries. We firmly oppose any country strengthening military deployment in the region and provoking tensions and confrontation under the excuse of the Taiwan question. Regardless of external challenges and turbulence, the Chinese side will resolutely safeguard our territorial sovereignty and maritime rights and interests, and firmly maintain peace and stability in the region.

    Journalist: The Chinese and Egyptian air forces are conducting their first joint training. Could you please brief us what are the strategic and tactical achievements of this training?

    Zhang Xiaogang: Thanks for your attention. Eagles of Civilization 2025 joint air force training is the first joint training between the Chinese and Egyptian armed forces. The two sides deployed fighter jets, AEW&Cs, tankers and helicopters to the activity. Drills on air combat and air refueling began on April 19, and subjects of air support and battlefield search and rescue will also be covered. The training will run until early May. The participating PLAAF aircraft will train in collaboration with assets of the Egyptian Air Force. This will help enhance capabilities of the two air forces and deepen substantive cooperation between the Chinese and Egyptian militaries.

    Journalist: I have two questions. Firstly, the US Secretary of Defense reportedly claimed that China is building an army specifically designed to destroy the US. He said that China’s hypersonic missiles can destroy all US aircraft carriers in 20 minutes. In every war game played by the Pentagon, the US loses to China. In addition, the Commander of the US Indo-Pacific Command stated that China is producing warplanes and warships much faster than the US, and is capable of denying US air superiority along the first island chain. Do you have any comment on that? My second question is about the on-going vessel open-day events held by the PLA Navy in 10 cities. Some netizens asked when will the Chinese aircraft carrier also open to the public? What’s your comment on this?

    Zhang Xiaogang: On your first question, some individuals in the US see the Chinese military through colored lens and keep hyping up the so-called “China military threat”. I think this is an obstacle hindering engagements between the Chinese and US militaries. Non-conflict, non-confrontation and peaceful coexistence is in the most fundamental interests of both China and the US, and meets the common expectation of people across the world. We have a sober understanding of the state of our development. We hope the US side will break away from “persecution mania” and stop using others as excuses.

    On your second question, I fully understand the public’s interest in China’s aircraft carriers, and I believe their wish will come true sometime in the future.

    Journalist: It’s reported that President Xi Jinping paid a visit to Cambodia. At his talks with Cambodian Prime Minister Hun Manet, President Xi pointed out the importance of ensuring greater security. Please share with us the Chinese side’s consideration in advancing China-Cambodia military-to-military relationship.

    Zhang Xiaogang: President Xi Jinping paid a state visit to Cambodia upon invitation from April 17 to 18. During his visit, he met with leaders of Cambodia to chart the way forward for jointly building an all-weather China-Cambodia community with a shared future in the new era. China and Cambodia are friends with ironclad bonds. No matter how the international landscape evolves, China and Cambodia always stand by each other in good faith, support each other, and pursue shared success. Under the strategic guidance of leaders of our two countries, the Chinese and Cambodian armed forces have had close high-level engagements and productive cooperation in different areas. The China-Cambodia Joint Support and Training Center at Port Ream has been put into operation. The two sides have held Exercise Golden Dragon and Exercise Peace Angel. Exchanges in areas including demining, medical care and publicity continue to deepen. Our military relationship is rock-solid and unbreakable.

    Senior Colonel Zhang Xiaogang, spokesperson for the Ministry of National Defense (MND) of the People’s Republic of China (PRC), answers questions at a regular press conference on the afternoon of April 24, 2025. (mod.gov.cn/Photo by Sun Yue)

    Standing at a new starting point, we are ready to work with the Cambodian side to implement the important consensus between leaders of our two countries and make good use of the newly-established 2+2 strategic dialogue mechanism. The two sides will further enrich and expand substantive cooperation in areas such as education and training, joint exercises, medical service, and equipment and technology, and will elevate our military-to-military relationship to a new level.

    Journalist: I have two questions. Firstly, as revealed by Taiwan media outlets, there is a wave of resignation inside the troops of Taiwan. Many military officers on the ground chose early decommissioning or resignation to avoid fighting in war. Some analysts think that it’s because they don’t want to be cannon fodder for “Taiwan independence” separatists. What’s your comment on this? Secondly, the Japanese Ministry of Foreign Affairs issued Diplomatic Bluebook 2025. In the document, the Japanese side labeled China as an “unprecedented strategic security challenge” and hyped up situations in the East China Sea and the South China Sea as well as military cooperation between China and Russia. In addition, the Japanese Defense Minister said that Japan will invest nearly 2 trillion yen in 2 Aegis system equipped vessels. Each of them will have a displacement of over 10,000 tons and firepower far beyond the need required for defense. The Japanese side keeps violating its “exclusively defense-oriented policy” and accelerates the building of offensive capabilities. What’s your comment on this?

    Zhang Xiaogang: On your first question, this is another evidence that “Taiwan independence” separatists have no support from the people of Taiwan and will collapse like a house of cards.

    On your second question, we firmly oppose the Japanese side playing up the so-called “China military threat”, hyping up tensions in the region, and deliberately provoking confrontation. China follows a path of peaceful development and pursues a national defense policy that is defensive in nature. Our military development is aimed at safeguarding our national sovereignty, security and development interests. We have no intention to challenge or threaten any country. Engagements and cooperation between the Chinese and Russian militaries feature non-alignment, non-confrontation and non-targeting any third party.

    In recent years, the Japanese side has drastically increased defense budget, and sought breakthroughs in military build-up. Its behaviors have led to serious concerns among its Asian neighbors and the international community. We urge the Japanese side to recalibrate its strategic perception of China, stop provoking bloc confrontation, be prudent with its words and actions in the military and security domain, and contribute more to regional peace and stability.

    Journalist: The Japanese Defense Minister reportedly claimed that Chinese military drones operate frequently near Japan’s airspace and are expanding their flying zone, which concerns the Japanese side and the international community. He also said that the Japanese side will take comprehensive measures for vigilance and reconnaissance. The Japanese Defense Ministry said that the number of emergency scrambles conducted in response to Chinese military drones in 2024 more than doubled year-on-year. May I have your comments on this?

    Zhang Xiaogang: The Chinese military’s operations in relevant waters and airspace are in line with international law and practices, and do not target any specific entity. They are aimed at enhancing our capability to safeguard national sovereignty, security and development interests. There is absolutely no need for the Japanese side to be paranoid. We require the Japanese side to stop its hype and stop monitoring and disrupting operations of the Chinese side. This will help avoid misunderstanding and miscalculation, prevent accidents at sea and in the air, and avert negative impacts on the relationship between the two countries.

    Journalist: This year marks the 35th year of the Chinese military’s participation in United Nations peacekeeping operations (UNPKOs). Since the Chinese military dispatched military observers for the first time to UNPKOs in April 1990, it has now become a major troop contributor. Could you provide an overview of the Chinese military’s participation in UNPKOs?

    Zhang Xiaogang: Since our first deployment 35 years ago, the Chinese military has participated in 25 peacekeeping missions, and dispatched over 50,000 personnel to more than 20 countries and regions, including the Democratic Republic of Congo, Lebanon and South Sudan. Chinese peacekeepers completed tasks such as mine clearance and explosive ordinance disposal, medical treatment, security escorts, and protection of civilians. China’s Blue Helmets have stepped forward for world peace with courage and persistence in despite of difficulties and dangers. 17 Chinese service members, including Liu Mingfang, Du Zhaoyu and Shen Liangliang, have made the ultimate sacrifice for the UN peacekeeping cause.

    It’s our objective to preserve peace and protect the people. China is the largest troop contributor to UNPKOs among the permanent members of the UN Security Council, and the second largest contributor to UN peacekeeping assessments. We maintain an 8,000-strong peacekeeping standby force, which consists of 28 units in 10 categories, such as infantry, medical and rapid response units. The Chinese military has conducted exchanges and cooperation on peacekeeping with over 90 countries and 10 international and regional organizations. We have built “Shared”series, an international brand of peacekeeping operations. As we speak, approximately 1800 Chinese peacekeepers are executing tasks in the UN headquarters and seven mission areas. The Chinese military will continue to deepen and expand our participation in UNPKOs, and contribute more to the implementation of the Global Security Initiative and the building of a community with a shared future for mankind.

    Journalist: According to reports, the US Chief of Naval Operations announced that a large-scale inter-service joint-operation exercise will be conducted in the Pacific Ocean as a “stress test” to evaluate the combat capabilities of the US military. The US side claimed that the exercise aims to prepare the military for potential conflicts with China in the Pacific. In addition, a US B-1B bomber task force has arrived at the Misawa Air Base in Japan, and US MQ-4C long-endurance drones will be deployed to Okinawa. Do you have any comment on this?

    Zhang Xiaogang: The Asia-Pacific is a promising land for peace and development, not a “hunting ground” for geopolitical games. Show of force and provocation are “stress tests” that no regional country wants to see or take. We hope the US side will do more to promote peace and stability in the region, rather than the opposite. China remains a force for peace, stability and progress in the Asia-Pacific, and will never be swayed by fallacies, deterred by intimidation, or cowed by pressure. We will resolutely safeguard our national sovereignty, security and development interests.

    Journalist: It’s reported that the commander of the US Indo-Pacific Command said in a recent Senate hearing that “China’s increasingly aggressive actions near Taiwan are not just exercises, but rehearsals for attacking Taiwan”. He suggested that the US should significantly advance autonomous systems and deploy them in the Taiwan Strait, so as to build a “hellscape” to deter China. What’s your comment on this?

    Zhang Xiaogang: The Taiwan question is purely an internal affair of China. How to resolve it is a matter for the Chinese, which brooks no foreign interference. Some individuals of the US side point fingers at and make groundless speculations on the legitimate and necessary measures taken by the Chinese side to safeguard our national sovereignty and territorial integrity. They also attempt to bluff us with a fancy slogan. This exposes their true motive of clinging to US hegemony and selfish interests at the cost of destroying others’ homeland. Threats and intimidation will never work on China or the Chinese military.

    Journalist: I have two questions. The first one is that the Philippine corvette BRP Apolinario Mabini (PS-36) invaded into China’s territorial waters of Huangyan Dao on April 20. The naval force of the Southern Theater Command carried out tracking, monitoring, warning and repelling in accordance with law. Analysts believe that by changing the subject of its harassing activities from fishing boats, PCG vessels to warships, the Philippine side is attempting to escalate the South China Sea issue from law enforcement by coast guard to military conflict, leaving space for following diplomatic and public opinion manipulations. What’s your comment on this? Secondly, according to Japanese media outlets, the Japanese and Philippine governments will make legal arrangements to facilitate military intelligence exchanges. The Japanese Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba will visit the Philippines at the end of April to reach an agreement on starting discussions as soon as possible for signing the General Security of Military Information Agreement. The Philippines signed with the US a military intelligence-sharing agreement last year. If it signs another with Japan, the three countries will be able to share intelligence regarding the East China Sea and the South China Sea. Analysts believe that this is aimed at monitoring and deterring military presence of the PLA in this region. Do you have any comment?

    Zhang Xiaogang: On your first question, the PLA Southern Theater Command has issued a statement in response. We urge the Philippine side to stop right-infringing provocations. If it keeps barreling down the wrong path and acting recklessly, it will do itself more harm than good and taste the bitter fruit of its own doing.

    On your second question, the Philippine side soliciting foreign support to stir up troubles in the South China Sea will not work. External countries meddling in the South China Sea issue will bring about chaos and is not welcomed.

    Journalist: I have two questions. Firstly, it’s reported that the troops in Taiwan started the computer-assisted command post drill (computer-simulated war games) under  Exercise Han Kuang 41 on April 5. The drill will last for 14 days and 13 nights. The scenarios include the so-called potential operations by the Chinese mainland, such as “gray-zone harassment” and “transition from exercise to war”. Koo Li-hsiung, Head of Taiwan’s military authorities, said that as it takes the PLA shorter time to shift from training to war, the troops in Taiwan needs to test and enhance its ability to respond to potential situations at any time. What’s your comment on this?

    The second one is that it is reported that the DPP authorities is considering using over 13,000 convenience stores as “wartime hubs” in the event of “a cross-Strait war”. This is one of the plans under discussion for the ”Whole of Society Defence Resilience Committee”, a unit set up by the Lai Ching-te authorities. May I have your comments on this?

    Zhang Xiaogang: On your first question, the military elements of “Taiwan independence” separatist forces put on a flashy show by conducting exercises. This does nothing more than embolden and comfort themselves. No matter how many drills they carry out, they will not be able to escape from their destined failure.

    Senior Colonel Zhang Xiaogang, spokesperson for the Ministry of National Defense (MND) of the People’s Republic of China (PRC), answers questions at a regular press conference on the afternoon of April 24, 2025. (mod.gov.cn/Photo by Sun Yue)

    On your second question, for its selfish gains, the DPP authorities hysterically hype up the so-called “mainland’s threat”, stir up social panic, and double down on their “combat readiness for Taiwan independence”. If left unchecked, their behaviors will surely plunge Taiwan into war. The DPP authorities’ so-called “whole-of-society defence” actually harms the whole society, as they take the Taiwan island as a battlefield and coerce the local people into cannon fodders for “Taiwan independence”. Their actions are shameful. The PLA is committed to fighting against “Taiwan independence” separatists, promoting national reunification, and safeguarding China’s national sovereignty and territorial integrity. We hope our Taiwan compatriots recognize the true nature of the DPP authorities as a source of chaos and disasters, take active actions to oppose “Taiwan independence”, and protect their own well-being and livelihood. We hope the two sides of the Taiwan Strait will join hands to promote national reunification and rejuvenation.

    Journalist: According to reports from Taiwan media, the US side sent a retired four-star army general, who was also a former commander of US Forces Korea, to serve as the senior observer for the war games of this year’s Han Kuang Exercise. In addition, the war games revealed five potential patterns of joint operations between Taiwan and the US in wartime. May I have your comment on this?

    Zhang Xiaogang: We firmly oppose any form of military collusion between the US and Taiwan. To embolden and support “Taiwan independence” separatists is to ruin peace and stability across the Taiwan Strait. Those who do that will get burned for playing with fire, and taste the bitter fruit of their own doing. We urge the US side to stop stirring up troubles on the Taiwan question, earnestly abide by the one-China principle and the stipulations of the three China-US joint communiqués, and deliver on its promise of not supporting “Taiwan independence”. We solemnly warn the DPP authorities that those who solicit US support for “Taiwan independence” will be stabbed in the back, and be abandoned as a useless pawn.

    Zhang Xiaogang: If no other questions, this concludes today’s press conference. Thank you.

    MIL OSI China News

  • MIL-OSI Global: Five ways to make cities more resilient to climate change

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Paul O’Hare, Lecturer in Human Geography and Urban Development, Manchester Metropolitan University

    John_T/Shutterstock

    Climate breakdown poses immense threats to global economies, societies and ecosystems. Adapting to these impacts is urgent. But many cities and countries remain chronically unprepared in what the UN calls an “adaptation gap”.

    Building climate resilience is notoriously difficult. Economic barriers limit investment in infrastructure and technology. Social inequities undermine the capacity of vulnerable populations to adapt. And inconsistent policies impede coordinated efforts across sectors and at scale.

    My research looks at how cities can better cope with climate change. I have identified five ways to catalyse more effective – and ultimately more progressive – climate adaptation and resilience.

    1. Don’t just ‘bounce back’ after a crisis

    When wildfires, storms or floods hit, all too often governments prioritise rebuilding as rapidly as possible.

    Though understandable, resilience doesn’t just entail coping with the effects of climate change. Instead of “bouncing back” to a pre-shock status, those in charge of responding need to encourage “bouncing forward”, creating places that are at less risk in the first place.

    After the Christchurch earthquake in February 2011, the New Zealand authorities “built back better”, improving building codes and regulations and relocating vulnerable communities. Critics suggested reconstruction provided too much uncertainty and failed to acknowledge private property rights. But the rebuild did encourage better integration of planning policies and land use practices.




    Read more:
    ‘Build back better’ sounds great in theory, but does the government really know what it means in practice?


    Swales and sustainable urban drainage in Gorton climate resilient park, Manchester, UK.
    Paul O’Hare, CC BY-NC-ND

    2. Informed by risk

    It can be difficult to predict what the consequences of a crisis might be. Cities are complex, interconnected places. Transboundary risks – the consequences that ripple across a place – must be taken into account.

    The best climate adaptation plans recognise that vulnerability varies across places, contexts and over time. The most effective are holistic: tailored to specific locations and every aspect of society.

    Assessments must also consider both climatic and non-climatic features of risk. In 2015, in the UK, a flood affected one of Lancaster’s electrical substations, causing a city-wide power failure that took several days to rectify. In this instance, as with so many others, people had to deal not just with the direct impacts of flooding, but the ‘cascading’ or knock-on impacts of infrastructure damage.




    Read more:
    Giving rivers room to move: how rethinking flood management can benefit people and nature


    Many existing assessments have limited scope. But others do acknowledge how ageing infrastructures and pressures to develop land to accommodate ever intensifying urban populations exacerbate urban flood risk. Others too, such as the recently published Cambridge climate risk plan, detail how climate risk intersects with the range of services provided by local government.

    Systems thinking – an approach to problem-solving that views problems as part of wider, interconnected systems – can be applied to identify interdependencies with other drivers of change.

    Good risk assessments will, for example, take note of demographics, age profiles and the socio-economic circumstances of neighbourhoods, enabling targeted support for particularly vulnerable communities. This can help ensure communities and systems adapt to evolving challenges as climate change intensifies, and as society evolves over time.

    Complex though this might be, city leaders can access advice about improving risk assessments, including from the C40 network, a global coalition of 100 mayors committed to addressing climate change.

    3. Transformative action

    There is no such thing as a natural disaster. The effects of disasters including floods and earthquakes are influenced by pre-existing, often chronic, social and economic conditions such as poverty or poor housing.

    Progressive climate resilience looks beyond the immediacy of shocks, attending to the underlying root causes of vulnerability and inequality. This ensures that society is not only better prepared to withstand adverse events in the future, but thrives in the face of uncertainty.

    Progressive climate resilience therefore demands tailored responses depending on the population and place. In Bangladesh, for instance, communities are building floating gardens to grow crops during floods. These enhance food security and provide a sustainable livelihood option in flood-prone areas.

    Floating vegetable gardens in Bangladesh.
    Mostafijur Rahman Nasim/Shutterstock



    Read more:
    Climate change isn’t fair but Tony Juniper’s new book explains how a green transition could be ‘just’


    4. Collective approaches

    Effective climate resilience demands collective action. Sometimes referred to as a “whole of society” response, this entails collaboration and shared responsibility to address the multifaceted challenges posed by a changing climate.

    The most effective initiatives avoid self-protection, of people, buildings and cities alike, and consider both broader and longer-term risks. For instance, developments not at significant risk should still incorporate adaptation measures including rainwater harvesting or enhanced greening to lower a city’s climate risk profile and benefit local communities, neighbouring authorities and surrounding regions.

    So, progressive resilience is connected, comprehensive and inclusive. Solidarity is key, leveraging resources to address common challenges and fostering a sense of shared purpose and mutual support.

    Solar panels on the surface of a reservoir not only provide a source of renewable energy but also provide shade and therefore help conserve water.
    Tom Wang/Shutterstock

    5. Exploiting co-benefits

    The most effective resilience projects exploit co-benefits – what the UN calls “multiple resilience dividends” – to leverage additional benefits across sectors and policies, reducing vulnerability to shocks while addressing other social and environmental challenges.

    In northern Europe, for example, moorlands can be restored to retain water helping alleviate downstream flooding, but also to capture carbon and provide vital habitats for biodiversity.

    In south-East Asia solar panels installed on reservoirs generate renewable energy to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, while providing shade to reduce evaporation and conserve water resources during droughts.

    In short, adaptation is obviously crucial for tackling climate change across the globe. But the real challenge is to deal with the impacts of climate change while simultaneously creating communities that are fairer, healthier, and better equipped to face any manner of future risks.

    Don’t have time to read about climate change as much as you’d like?

    Get a weekly roundup in your inbox instead. Every Wednesday, The Conversation’s environment editor writes Imagine, a short email that goes a little deeper into just one climate issue. Join the 40,000+ readers who’ve subscribed so far.


    Paul O’Hare receives funding from the UK’s Natural Environment Research Council (NERC). Award reference NE/V010174/1.

    ref. Five ways to make cities more resilient to climate change – https://theconversation.com/five-ways-to-make-cities-more-resilient-to-climate-change-252853

    MIL OSI – Global Reports

  • MIL-OSI Global: Colon cancer rates are rising among young people – could changes to children’s gut bacteria explain why?

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Justin Stebbing, Professor of Biomedical Sciences, Anglia Ruskin University

    Irina WS/Shutterstock

    Alarming trends show that colon – or bowel – cancer is increasing in younger people. If the rise continues, colorectal cancer is projected to become the leading cause of cancer-related deaths among young adults globally by 2030.

    Until recently, the reasons for this surge were largely unclear or unknown. Now research points to a surprising suspect: gut bacteria.

    A recent study reveals that exposure during childhood or adolescence to a toxin produced by certain strains of E coli, whose growth is encouraged by highly processed diets, may lay the groundwork for aggressive bowel cancers decades later. This discovery could help explain why people under 50 are at the heart of one of the fastest-growing cancer epidemics of our time.

    Colon cancer is currently the second biggest cause of cancer death, yet only one in three cases are diagnosed in the earliest stages. Often symptomless in its early forms, colon cancer typically begins as polyps and can take ten to 15 years to develop. This slow progression makes regular screening crucial, especially because many patients experience no early warning signs.

    For the new research, an international team analysed the complete DNA sequences of 981 colorectal cancer tumours from patients across 11 countries. They discovered striking geographic patterns in the mutations that lead to cancer.

    Two specific mutational signatures – SBS88 and ID18 – stood out for their association with colibactin, a DNA-damaging toxin produced by some E coli strains. These bacterial “fingerprints” were 3.3 times more common in patients diagnosed before age 40 than in those over 70. Significantly, these mutations appear early in tumour development, suggesting the damage may occur years – even decades – before cancer is diagnosed.




    Read more:
    Why eating yoghurt regularly could lower your risk of bowel cancer


    Gut microbiome

    Colibactin doesn’t cause random DNA damage. The study found it tends to target the APC gene, a vital tumour suppressor that normally controls cell growth.

    In colibactin-positive cancers, about 25% of APC mutations bore the toxin’s unique signature. This direct hit to the body’s internal “brake system” could explain why these cancers appear earlier in life.

    Molecular analysis indicated that colibactin-associated mutations often emerge within the first ten years of life. While this suggests the toxin may silently colonise children’s guts and initiate cancerous changes early, it’s important to note that this remains a theory; the study didn’t directly examine children or young adults.

    Still, the research maps out a microbial pattern of cancer risk. These gut bacteria are not the same as those that cause food poisoning – they often live within us and perform beneficial roles.

    But their composition can vary widely by region. Countries including Argentina, Brazil, and Russia – where colorectal cancer rates are climbing – showed higher levels of colibactin-related mutations.

    This may reflect regional differences in gut microbiomes influenced by diet (particularly ultraprocessed foods), antibiotic use and environmental factors. In contrast, Japan and South Korea, where rates are historically high but stable, showed different mutational patterns, suggesting other causes may dominate there.

    Perhaps the most provocative finding relates to when this bacterial damage occurs. Unlike lifestyle risks that build up over decades, colibactin seems to strike during a narrow window – when the microbiome is still forming in childhood or early adulthood.

    Potential triggers could include repeated antibiotic use that disrupts healthy gut bacteria, highly processed diets that favour E. coli growth and urban living that reduces exposure to diverse microbial environments.

    Not just genes and lifestyle

    These findings may also point to new prevention strategies. Screening programs could focus on younger adults carrying these high-risk bacterial strains, using stool tests to detect colibactin genes.

    Diets high in fibre and low in processed foods might promote a healthier gut microbiome, potentially suppressing harmful bacteria. The research also adds weight to calls for lowering colorectal cancer screening ages worldwide, since many early-onset cases go undetected under current guidelines.

    While this study is a major step forward, many questions remain. Why do some people carry colibactin-producing bacteria but never develop cancer? How do modern lifestyle factors amplify – or mitigate – these microbial risks? What we do know is that cancer results from the complex interplay between our genes and our environment – including the microscopic world within us.

    As researchers continue to connect the dots, one thing is clear: the colorectal cancer epidemic of the 21st century may have begun with silent microbial battles in our guts, decades before diagnosis. This emerging view of cancer not just as a genetic or lifestyle disease, but also as a microbial one – could fundamentally reshape how we think about prevention for future generations.

    Justin Stebbing 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. Colon cancer rates are rising among young people – could changes to children’s gut bacteria explain why? – https://theconversation.com/colon-cancer-rates-are-rising-among-young-people-could-changes-to-childrens-gut-bacteria-explain-why-255176

    MIL OSI – Global Reports

  • MIL-OSI Global: How a small vaccine drop could see measles becoming endemic again – new study

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Anastasia A. Theodosiou, Infectious Diseases and Microbiology Academic Clinical Lecturer, University of Glasgow

    Family Stock/Shutterstock.com

    It takes just a spark to start a wildfire, and when it comes to measles, the embers are already glowing.

    A new modelling study published in Jama sounded the alarm: recent drops in childhood vaccination rates could reignite diseases that were nearly extinguished.

    The researchers used a simulation to predict the effect of falling vaccination coverage for measles, rubella, polio and diphtheria. Even at current coverage, measles alone could soon infect more than 850,000 people in the US every year, leading to over 2,500 deaths annually.

    The study also warned how quickly the situation could get worse. A further 10% drop in vaccination rates could lead to more than 11 million cases annually.

    Measles is particularly concerning because of how easily it spreads. It is one of the most contagious diseases known – a single person with measles can infect between 12 and 18 others, each of whom can infect 12 to 18 more, and so on. This is much higher than for diseases such as influenza and COVID, where one person, on average, infects one to four others.

    To stop measles from spreading from person to person, at least 95% of the population needs to be vaccinated. But coverage is falling short – not just in the US, but worldwide. In 2024, less than 84% of five-year-olds in England had received both doses of the measles, mumps and rubella (MMR) vaccine.

    This matters because measles is far from harmless. About one in five children with measles need hospital care, one in 20 develop pneumonia and one in 1,000 suffer encephalitis (a brain infection that can cause seizures and deafness).

    Up to three in every 1,000 children who catch measles will die.

    Although measles poses the greatest immediate threat because of how contagious it is, further drops in vaccination rates could see other serious infections return. Rubella can cause devastating birth defects, polio can lead to permanent paralysis, and diphtheria is fatal in up to 30% of unvaccinated children.

    Before vaccines, these diseases were endemic around the world – circulating constantly, not just in outbreaks. In regions where vaccine coverage has never reached the 95% target, including parts of Africa and south Asia, they remain endemic.

    But in countries where vaccines had all but eliminated them, falling coverage risks undoing decades of progress. And this isn’t just hypothetical – already this year, the US has reported nearly 900 measles cases, including three deaths.

    The MMR vaccine is extremely effective, protecting more than 97% of those who receive both doses. However, some people can’t have the vaccine, including pregnant women, babies and those with a weakened immune system or serious allergy to the vaccine ingredients.

    This is why herd immunity is so important: when over 95% of people in a community are vaccinated, the virus can’t circulate freely, so everyone is protected – including the most vulnerable.

    There are many reasons vaccination rates have fallen. COVID caused the biggest drop in global vaccination in 30 years, and many countries are still catching up. Conflict and natural disasters also contribute, with Yemen reporting over 10,000 measles cases in the past six months.

    Some people choose not to vaccinate their children or themselves. This may be due to vaccine fatigue, concerns about side-effects or underestimating the risks of infection. In this respect, vaccines are victims of their own success – it can be hard to imagine the consequences of infections that have largely disappeared thanks to vaccines.

    As with all medical treatments, vaccines have side-effects, but most are mild and resolve quickly, such as fever, rash and swollen glands.

    Persistent misinformation

    A major contributor to vaccine hesitancy is misinformation, particularly through social media.

    One of the most persistent myths is that the MMR vaccine is linked to autism – a claim based on falsified data in a discredited and retracted study from 1998. Since then, multiple studies have disproved this, including a meta-analysis (a study that combines data from several studies) of over 1.25 million children that found no link between the MMR vaccine and autism.

    Despite clear scientific evidence, these false claims linger, fanning the flames of doubt with real-world consequences. Indeed, the World Health Organization has listed vaccine hesitancy as one of the top ten threats to global health.

    No parent takes decisions about their child’s health lightly. It’s natural to want to weigh the risks and benefits. But when vaccination rates drop, it doesn’t just put unvaccinated children at risk. It threatens those who cannot be vaccinated – including all infants under a year old, who are too young for the MMR vaccine.

    Vaccination remains one of the most powerful tools we have to protect the health of all children. Diseases like measles don’t wait for conflicts to end or for trust to rebuild – they simply spread wherever they can.

    We came close to extinguishing measles and other vaccine-preventable diseases, but any drop in vaccine coverage is a match to kindling. As this new research shows, it doesn’t take much for the embers to flare into a wildfire beyond our control.

    Antonia Ho receives funding from MRC, UKRI, Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, and Public Health Scotland.

    Chrissie Jones is affiliated with the Immunising Pregnant Women and Neonates (IMPRINT) network, funded by the MRC. She runs clinical trials of vaccines on behalf of the University of Southampton, but does not receive any personal funding for this.

    Anastasia A. Theodosiou 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 a small vaccine drop could see measles becoming endemic again – new study – https://theconversation.com/how-a-small-vaccine-drop-could-see-measles-becoming-endemic-again-new-study-255327

    MIL OSI – Global Reports

  • MIL-OSI USA: Duckworth Joins Schatz, Murray, Colleagues in Condemning Labor Department’s Cancellation of Funding to Address Child Labor, Human Trafficking Worldwide

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Illinois Tammy Duckworth
    April 23, 2025
    [WASHINGTON, D.C.] – U.S. Senator Tammy Duckworth (D-IL) joined U.S. Senators Brian Schatz (D-HI), Patty Murray (D-WA) and 10 Senate Democratic colleagues in condemning the Trump Administration’s cuts to federal funding that for decades helped address child labor, forced labor and human trafficking globally.
    “These cuts are inconsistent with bipartisan laws passed by Congress providing federal funds to combat child labor, forced labor, human trafficking, and enforce labor standards in over 40 countries,” the Senators wrote in a letter to Labor Secretary Lori M. Chavez-DeRemer. “Cancelling all existing cooperative agreements will only harm American workers, lower international labor standards, and hurt children.”
    The Senators continued, “ILAB grants level the playing field for American workers and ensure businesses cannot profit from labor abuses by stopping the problems at their source. Offshoring work will only drive down wages, incentivize abusive labor practices abroad, and take jobs away from hard working Americans. For example, the President and CEO of the American Apparel & Footwear Association (AAFA) has said that the cancellation of ILAB contracts will harm both their consumers and 3.5 million American workers. The only winners here will be the multinational corporations who want cheap labor, and our adversaries that benefit from these practices.”
    “We ask that you live up to your comments and urge you to take immediate steps to protect children, American workers, and other vulnerable populations by using funds Congress appropriated for ILAB for that purpose,” the Senators concluded.
    Along with Duckworth, Schatz and Murray, the letter was co-signed by U.S. Senators Bernie Sanders (I-VT), Tammy Baldwin (D-WI), Tim Kaine (D-VA), Chris Van Hollen (D-MD), Richard Blumenthal (D-CT), Alex Padilla (D-CA), Cory Booker (D-NJ), Jeff Merkley (D-OR) and Ruben Gallego (D-AZ).
    The full text of the letter is available on Senator Duckworth’s website and below.
    Dear Secretary Chavez-DeRemer:
    We write to express our serious concerns about the Department of Labor (DOL)’s decision to terminate all existing cooperative agreements at the Bureau of International Labor Affairs (ILAB). DOL and the United States Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) Service have announced the cancellation of $577 million in cooperative agreements. These cuts are inconsistent with bipartisan laws passed by Congress providing federal funds to combat child labor, forced labor, human trafficking, and enforce labor standards in over 40 countries. We note that the Trump Administration identifies labor practices, including failures by foreign governments to protect internationally recognized worker rights, as a foreign trade barrier in the recently issued National Trade Estimate Report on Foreign Trade Barriers. Cancelling all existing cooperative agreements will only harm American workers, lower international labor standards, and hurt children.
    ILAB was created by President Truman after World War II. Since its creation, it has served at the forefront of global efforts to eliminate child labor. Under international standards, child labor applies to work below the minimum age established under national legislation—usually 14 or 15 years old— and includes slavery, commercial sexual exploitation, illicit activities, and hazardous work that is likely to harm health or safety. Global estimates from the International Labor Organization (ILO) indicate that there are 160 million children between 5-17 years old in child labor, roughly half of them in hazardous conditions.
    ILAB also works to combat forced labor and human trafficking – serious violations of human rights. According to the most recent figures available, there are 5.4 victims of modern slavery for every 1,000 people in the world, with women and girls disproportionately affected. Additionally, the ILO estimated that 24.9 million people around the globe were in forced labor as of 2016. Victims are rarely able to seek help for various reasons, due to language barriers, poverty, or unstable immigration status. Furthermore, ILAB plays a key role in addressing China’s use of slave labor as a member of the Forced Labor Enforcement Task Force to enforce the Uyghur Forced Labor Prevention Act.
    Critically, the findings from ILAB and ILAB funds provided by Congress have led to improved adherence to international labor standards that support American workers. Since 2019, ILAB has invested in eliminating the roughly 1.56 million instances of child labor violations in the production of cocoa in Ghana and Cote d’Ivoire—countries that produce cocoa for chocolate bought by American consumers, as well as nearly 60 percent of the world’s cocoa each year. Recently, DOL’s November 2024 framework of action included improving access to quality education, as well as technical and vocational training, strengthening social services and social protection, and empowering women, youth and workers in cocoa-growing communities. Uzbekistan was pushed to address forced labor and child labor in the cotton sector, which unfairly competes with American cotton growers and exporters. Argentina’s government and private sector built technical assistance programs developed by DOL in the blueberry sector, ensuring that children and teenagers had access to child care and enrichment programs. In Honduras, one DOL cooperative agreement disbursed more than $13 million to fight child labor and other exploitation, resulting in more than 6,000 children enrolling in educational programs, aiding more than 1,800 families, and helping train around 500 inspectors on child labor exploitation and other labor laws.
    Unfortunately, your actions will prevent this work from continuing. A few of the contracts that have been eliminated by you and DOGE include the “Global Better Work Program (I)” and “Better Work Global (II)” in Haiti, Jordan, Cambodia, Bangladesh, Indonesia, Vietnam to establish strong labor enforcement and transparency; “Supporting Safe and Inclusive Work Environments in Lesotho” to stop violence against women; “Research, Innovation and Strategic Engagement Project (RISE-global)” in Brazil, Colombia, Cote D’Ivoire, Indonesia, and Guatemala to educate workers on their rights and how to protect them; and “Promoting Safe and Healthy Workplaces in Honduras, Guatemala, and El Salvador” to improve worker safety and discourage migration to the United States. The cancellation of these contracts is neither efficient nor puts America’s interests first. Instead, we believe it will cause devastating, widespread harm to our most vulnerable populations, and put American workers at a disadvantage.
    Additionally, we are concerned about the economic impacts of this decision. One of the major missions of ILAB is to enforce the labor provisions in U.S. trade agreements. ILAB grants level the playing field for American workers and ensure businesses cannot profit from labor abuses by stopping the problems at their source. Offshoring work will only drive down wages, incentivize abusive labor practices abroad, and take jobs away from hard working Americans. For example, the President and CEO of the American Apparel & Footwear Association (AAFA) has said that the cancellation of ILAB contracts will harm both their consumers and 3.5 million American workers. The only winners here will be the multinational corporations who want cheap labor, and our adversaries that benefit from these practices.
    In your confirmation hearing on February 19th, you testified to the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions that we must protect children from labor exploitation. You said this in response to questions from members on both sides of the aisle. We ask that you live up to your comments and urge you to take immediate steps to protect children, American workers, and other vulnerable populations by using funds Congress appropriated for ILAB for that purpose.
    Sincerely,
    -30-

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI USA: April 28th, 2025 Heinrich, Luján Blast Trump Admin’s Attacks on Head Start, Demand RFK Jr. Immediately Unfreeze Head Start Funding & Reverse Firings of Early Childhood Education Workers

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for New Mexico Martin Heinrich

    WASHINGTON — U.S. Senator Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.) and U.S. Senator Ben Ray Luján (D-N.M.), one of only two Head Start graduates to serve in the Senate, sent a letter to Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. to demand the Trump Administration stop its attacks on Head Start programs. In their letter, Heinrich and Luján reminded Secretary Kennedy of his legal obligation to administer Head Start, and demanded that HHS immediately unfreeze Head Start funding, reverse the mass firing of Head Start workers, and stop  gutting offices that ensure high-quality early childhood education services are available for thousands of children and families in New Mexico and nationwide.

    In New Mexico, Head Start and early Head Start programs serve 8,800 children living below the poverty line, including 271 children experiencing homelessness, and 139 children in foster care in 2022. 

    “We write to express our strong opposition to the actions you have taken to directly attack and undermine the federal Head Start program. Since day one, this Administration has taken unacceptable actions to withhold and delay funding, fire Head Start staff, and gut high-quality services for children. Already this year, this Administration has withheld almost $1 billion in federal grant funding from Head Start programs, a 37 percent decrease compared to the amount of funding awarded during the same period last year,” the senators wrote in a letter to Secretary Kennedy. “It is abundantly clear that these actions are part of a broader effort to ultimately eliminate the program altogether, as the Administration reportedly plans to do in its fiscal year 2026 budget proposal.”

    The senators detailed how the program plays an instrumental role in supporting kids and families across the country, writing: “Head Start provides early childhood education and comprehensive health and social services to nearly 800,000 young children every year in communities across this country, and employs about 250,000 dedicated staff. Head Start is a critical source of child care for working families, particularly in rural and Tribal communities, where Head Start programs are often the only option for high-quality child care services. Head Start programs ensure children receive appropriate health and dental care, nutrition support, and referrals to other critical services for parents, such as job training, adult education, nutrition services, and housing support.”

    “You even acknowledged the value of Head Start following a recent visit to a Virginia Head Start center,” the senators wrote, contrasting that statement of support with the Trump administration’s actions. “However, as a result of your actions to withhold and delay funding and undermine the administration of this vital program, Head Start centers are in serious jeopardy and have already had their day to day operations impacted. Programs are increasingly worried that they will not be able to make payroll, pay rent, and remain open to serve the hundreds of thousands of children and families who depend on their services in communities across the nation.”

    “Since the very start of this Administration, Head Start programs have been under attack,” the senators wrote, detailing office closures and funds that were frozen for Head Start grants across the country. “At one point, the National Head Start Association reported 37 programs serving nearly 15,000 children across the country could not access their federal funding. Head Start programs operate with thin margins and on short-term budgets from HHS, and without any communication from the Administration about the status of funding, programs were forced to temporarily close or to lay off staff.”

    The senators underscored how the gutting of Head Start offices and the firing of staff who keep the federal program running puts the entire program in jeopardy, “On April 1st, you abruptly closed five of the ten regional offices that help local grantees administer Head Start programs in 22 states. This left hundreds of programs without dedicated points of contact to address mission critical issues like approving grant renewals and modifications, investigating child health and safety incidents, and providing training and technical assistance to ensure high-quality services for children. While some grantees were assigned a new program specialist, we understand many have not been receiving responses to their inquiries. This is on top of the estimated 97 Office of Head Start central office staff that were terminated due to their probationary status and the recent reduction in force. You promised ‘radical transparency’ as Secretary, yet it is unclear how these actions will improve Head Start programs, and you and your staff refuse to respond to basic inquiries and requests for information.”

    Importantly, the senators noted that if Head Start funding is kept frozen by the Trump Administration, many more programs could be forced to close. 

    “Head Start grantees are still waiting on payments and grant renewals from the Office of Head Start, including programs whose grants end on April 30th, 2025. These notices should have gone out by now, yet we are concerned to hear programs report they have received little to no correspondence regarding their grant renewals,” the senators continued, detailing how local HeadStart programs are receiving no notice for the path forward for grant funding. “Additionally, because we started fiscal year 2025 under a short-term continuing resolution, as is usual, some grantees have only received partial funding for the first few months of the year. But with a full year funding bill in place, these grantees should have received full funding by now, yet some are reporting that they have not received the full amount of their grants and will run out of funds this month or next. On Wednesday, April 16th, the delays in Head Start funding led to the closure of Head Start centers serving more than 400 children in Sunnyside, Washington.”

    “The Administration has a legal and moral obligation to disburse Head Start funds to programs and to uphold the program’s promise to provide high-quality early education services to low income children and families across this country,” the senators stated. “There is no justifiable reason for the delay in funding we have seen over the last two months, and you have refused to offer any kind of explanation.”

    The senators concluded by warning that eliminating Head Start would be devastating, demanding answers on the Trump Administration’s actions, and demanding the reversal of these actions: “[W]e urge you to immediately reinstate fired staff across all Offices of HeadStart, and cease all actions to delay the awarding and disbursement of funding to Head Start programs across this country.”

    Community leaders in New Mexico are weighing in on the grave consequences of the Trump Administration’s continuous assault on Head Start for children’s futures:

    “As a Head Start Leader for over 40 years, I have witnessed firsthand the transformative impact Head Start has on children, families, and communities. Eliminating Head Start would be nothing less than a national tragedy. It would be a direct attack on the country’s most vulnerable children and families – those who have the least and need the most.” said Patricia Grovey Evans, President of New Mexico Head Start Association.

    “Defunding the Head Start program would be a grave injustice to young Zuni children, who depend on this vital resource to embark on their educational journey steeped in cultural identity and moral values. Early childhood education is not merely about teaching; it lays the foundation for self-awareness and community connection that will guide them throughout their lives. Cutting this crucial funding threatens to strip away their opportunity to nurture the skills and cultural heritage essential for their growth and future success,” said Anthony Sanchez, Head Councilman for Zuni Tribe.

    “Jemez Pueblo’s Walatowa Head Start Language Immersion Program offers a unique and valuable community-based education delivered solely in our Towa language. Education of our youngest community members is important and to have that education provided in our native language is of the utmost importance. As Native people, it was vital that our Head Start program incorporated the Pueblo’s vibrant traditional calendar through art, music and dance while also incorporating other subjects like math and science. Walatowa Head Start Language Immersion Program serves as a model for other tribal Head Start programs who wish to teach the children in their native language. Our community worked for over a decade to make this education culturally responsive and if funding for Head Start were to disappear, so would our community’s work. We cannot allow this to happen,” said Carnell Chosa, First Lieutenant Governor of Jemez Pueblo.

    “As someone working on the front lines of early childhood education in New Mexico, I am deeply alarmed by the proposed cuts to Head Start in President Trump’s leaked budget. At the Now Mexico Association for the Education of Young Children (NMAEYC), we see firsthand how essential this program is especially for families in our rural and underserved communities. Head Start has been a cornerstone for opportunity and stability for low-income families for 60 years. Eliminating this program would jeopardize early learning, health, and nutrition services for more than 150,000 children across the country, including thousands here in New Mexico. Head Start is not just a program- it’s a lifeline. Gutting this critical funding, would harm our most vulnerable children, undermine family stability, and set our state back for generations. Continued investment in Head Start is not optional – it’s essential to ensuring that every New Mexico child, regardless of zip code, has a fair shot at success,” said Alicia B. Borrego, MBA, Executive Director of New Mexico Association for the Education of Young Children.

    “Head Start has been a massively important force in changing the game for young children. The science tells us that 85% of brain development happens before age 5, so this is a common sense investment, and one that has contributed to decades of American prosperity,” said Kate Noble, President and CEO of Growing Up New Mexico. 

    “Thanks to my experience working as a Head Start teacher in Santa Fe, I’ve seen firsthand how the Head Start Program change lives – giving our youngest leaners the solid foundation they need to succeed in school and beyond. Cutting this program would mean turning our backs on the children who need us most. This program isn’t just early education; it’s lifeblood for families who are doing their best with so little. Taking it away would break something sacred in our community.” said Deyanira Contreras, Director of Kids Campus at SFCC. 

    Alongside Heinrich and Luján, the letter is signed by U.S. Senators Patty Murray (D-Wash.), Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.), Jack Reed (D-R.I.), Mazie K. Hirono (D-Hawaii), Andy Kim (D-N.J.), Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), Lisa Blunt Rochester (D-Del.), Peter Welch (D-Vt.), Gary Peters (D-Mich.), Michael Bennet (D-Colo.), Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.), Ruben Gallego (D-Ariz.), Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Jacky Rosen (D-Nev.), Tina Smith (D-Minn.), John Fetterman (D-Pa.), Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.), Chris Coons (D-Del.), Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), Mark Kelly (D-Ariz.), Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.), Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), Catherine Cortez Masto (D-Nev.), Tim Kaine (D-Minn.), Alex Padilla (D-Calif.), Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), Elissa Slotkin (D-Minn.), Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), Raphael Warnock (D-Ga.), Cory Booker (D-N.J.), Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.), Ed Markey (D-Mass.), Angus King (I-Maine), Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii), Angela Alsobrooks (D-Md.), and Mark Warner (D-Va.). 

    The full text of the letter is here and below:

    Dear Secretary Kennedy:

    We write to express our strong opposition to the actions you have taken to directly attack and undermine the federal Head Start program. Since day one, this Administration has taken unacceptable actions to withhold and delay funding, fire Head Start staff, and gut high-quality services for children. Already this year, this Administration has withheld almost $1 billion in federal grant funding from Head Start programs, a 37 percent decrease compared to the amount of funding awarded during the same period last year. It is abundantly clear that these actions are part of a broader effort to ultimately eliminate the program altogether, as the Administration reportedly plans to do in its fiscal year 2026 budget proposal. 

    Head Start provides early childhood education and comprehensive health and social services to nearly 800,000 young children every year in communities across this country, and employs about 250,000 dedicated staff. Head Start is a critical source of child care for working families, particularly in rural and Tribal communities, where Head Start programs are often the only option for high-quality child care services. HeadStart programs ensure children receive appropriate health and dental care, nutrition support, and referrals to other critical services for parents, such as job training, adult education, nutrition services, and housing support.

    You even acknowledged the value of Head Start following a recent visit to a Virginia Head Start center, where you said, “I had a very inspiring tour. I saw a devoted staff and a lot of happy children. They are getting the kind of education and socialization they need, and they are also getting a couple of meals a day.”

    However, as a result of your actions to withhold and delay funding and undermine the administration of this vital program, Head Start centers are in serious jeopardy and have already had their day to day operations impacted. Programs are increasingly worried that they will not be able to make payroll, pay rent, and remain open to serve the hundreds of thousands of children and families who depend on their services in communities across the nation.

    Since the very start of this Administration, Head Start programs have been under attack. On January 27th, 2025, the Office of Management and Budget issued a memo (M-25-13) that suddenly froze the disbursement of grant funding for federal programs and services government-wide, including Head Start. Despite the Administration’s clarification that Head Start programs would not be the target of the funding freeze, many Head Startprograms across the country were unable to draw down their grant funds through the Payment Management System (PMS) for weeks. At one point, the National Head StartAssociation reported 37 programs serving nearly 15,000 children across the country could not access their federal funding. Head Start programs operate with thin margins and on short-term budgets from HHS, and without any communication from the Administration about the status of funding, programs were forced to temporarily close or to lay off staff. In Wisconsin, the National Centers for Learning Excellence, which serves more than 200 children and their families, shut down for a week and laid off staff due to the funding freeze.

    On April 1st, you abruptly closed five of the ten regional offices that help local grantees administer Head Start programs in 22 states. This left hundreds of programs without dedicated points of contact to address mission critical issues like approving grant renewals and modifications, investigating child health and safety incidents, and providing training and technical assistance to ensure high-quality services for children. While some grantees were assigned a new program specialist, we understand many have not been receiving responses to their inquiries. This is on top of the estimated 97 Office of Head Start central office staff that were terminated due to their probationary status and the recent reduction in force. You promised “radical transparency” as Secretary, yet it is unclear how these actions will improve Head Start programs, and you and your staff refuse to respond to basic inquiries and requests for information.

    On March 14th, 2025, the Office of Head Start (OHS) notified all Head Start programs that “the use of federal funding for any training and technical assistance or other program expenditures that promote or take part in diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives” will not be approved and that any questions should be directed to regional offices. Programs have not received any guidance for what would be considered “DEI” but this policy is potentially in direct conflict with statutory and regulatory program requirements, such as providing culturally and linguistically appropriate instructional services for English learners. Many programs cannot direct questions to regional staff, as half of regional offices were abruptly closed, and as unprecedented actions are being taken to delay and withhold funding, Head Start programs have been intentionally left with little to no guidance.

    Head Start programs are now arbitrarily required to provide justifications for each draw down of funds that is necessary to operate their programs, despite already receiving a federal grant award for these purposes. As of April 14th, Head Startprograms have reportedly received correspondence from an email address “defendthespend@hhs.gov” requiring programs to submit a “specific description of why the funds are necessary and why they are aligned to the award” before programs can have funding disbursed. It has been reported that political appointees must sign off on every draw down of funds. This creates an illusion of improving oversight but only serves to add unnecessary red tape by requiring the manual sign off on hundreds of thousands of individual actions annually across the Department based on two to three sentence justifications. Already some grantees have reported delays in receiving funds, and have reported that furloughs or closures are imminent if funds are not released. For an administration that purports to value local autonomy and efficiency in federally funded programs, your actions have achieved the exact opposite.

    Finally, Head Start grantees are still waiting on payments and grant renewals from the Office of Head Start, including programs whose grants end on April 30th, 2025. These notices should have gone out by now, yet we are concerned to hear programs report they have received little to no correspondence regarding their grant renewals. Additionally, because we started fiscal year 2025 under a short-term continuing resolution, as is usual, some grantees have only received partial funding for the first few months of the year. But with a full year funding bill in place, these grantees should have received full funding by now, yet some are reporting that they have not received the full amount of their grants and will run out of funds this month or next. On Wednesday, April 16th, the delays in Head Start funding led to the closure of Head Start centers serving more than 400 children in Sunnyside, Washington.

    The Administration has a legal and moral obligation to disburse Head Start funds to programs and to uphold the program’s promise to provide high-quality early education services to low income children and families across this country. The fiscal year 2025 appropriations act provided $12.3 billion for Head Start, the same as the fiscal year 2024 level. The Head Start Act includes an explicit formula for how appropriated funds should be allocated. There is no justifiable reason for the delay in funding we have seen over the last two months, and you have refused to offer any kind of explanation. However, this week leaked fiscal year 2026 budget documents indicated the Office of Management and Budget was directing the Department, consistent with the Administration’s proposal to eliminate Head Start in fiscal year 2026, to “ensure to the extent allowable FY2025 funds are available to close out the program.” If this explains any of the delay in awarding fiscal year 2025 funding, we want to be clear, no funds were provided in fiscal year 2025 to “close out the program,” and it would be wholly unacceptable and likely illegal if the Department tries to carry out this directive.

    Finally, the leaked budget documents provided a justification, albeit brief, for eliminating Head Start in fiscal year 2026 that makes this Administration’s priorities clear and puts the Department’s actions over the last several months in context. The Administration argues that eliminating Head Start, “is consistent with the Administration’s goals of returning education to the States and increasing parental choice.” It is shocking to see an argument that eliminating a program that provides comprehensive early childhood care and education to 800,000 children and their families would increase parental choice. It is particularly concerning to see that argument in the context of the significant delay in awarding fiscal year 2025 appropriated funds and what that indicates about the intent behind the Department’s actions. We believe it is obvious that eliminating Head Start would be detrimental to hundreds of thousands of children and families. Similarly, we believe it is obvious that delaying funding like we have seen over the last two months, forcing Head Startprograms to close, and leaving families to scramble to find quality, affordable alternatives puts the education and well-being of some of the most vulnerable young children in America at risk. In our view, that is unacceptable.

    Therefore, we urge you to immediately reinstate fired staff across all Offices of HeadStart, and cease all actions to delay the awarding and disbursement of funding to HeadStart programs across this country. 

    Please provide us with a written response to the questions below no later than 10 days from receipt:

    1. Will you reinstate the staff who administer Head Start programs and reopen the closed regional offices responsible for overseeing Head Start programs in 22 states?

    a) When is HHS going to share information on the reorganization plan for the consolidation of the regional offices?

    b) Please provide the contact information for each program specialist designated to the 22 states who lost their regional office.

    c) Who is responsible for ensuring there are no delays or lapses in funding, nor any disruptions to Head Start program operations now that these states do not have a regional office?

    2. How many employees at the Offices of Head Start have been terminated, including the five regional offices and the central office?

    a) Which officials at HHS were involved in the staffing reduction decisions for OHS and what planning, if any, was undertaken prior to these reductions? Please describe the events that unfolded and name each office that was involved in the decision. Further, please name the official(s) who approved the staffing reductions.

    3. Can you confirm that the Administration will distribute all Head Start funds appropriated by Congress to Head Start programs in FY 25, as required by the HeadStart Act?

    4. Please provide a list of all grantees with 5-year Head Start grant renewals that startbetween now and the end of the fiscal year: May 1st, June 1st, July 1st, August 1st, and September 1st.

    a) Will any funding be delayed for grantees that are due to receive their annual funding on May 1st or beyond?

    5. Why are funding awards delayed for grantees that received partial awards during the first continuing resolution for FY25?

    a) When can HHS guarantee that all funds will be awarded for partially funded Head Start programs?

    6. What is the “Tier 2” department for review that is delaying drawn down for HeadStart programs in the Payment Management System?

    a) When should programs expect to receive their funds?

    b) Please provide all communication that went to Head Start grantees on the new review process.

    7. What guidance and clarifications have been provided to Head Start grantees on DEI expenditures?

    a) How is HHS evaluating Head Start programs’ expenditures and grant awards for DEI?

    b) What justifications are being used to prohibit DEI?

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI Security: Assistant Attorney General Gail Slater Delivers First Antitrust Address at University of Notre Dame Law School

    Source: United States Attorneys General

    Remarks as prepared for delivery, “The Conservative Roots of America First Antitrust Enforcement”

    Good afternoon. Thank you so much for having me. It is an honor to be here at Notre Dame to give my first formal address as Assistant Attorney General for the Antitrust Division. I’ve had many offers to speak since I began my tenure at the Department of Justice, but it seemed appropriate that I present the conservative case for vigorous antitrust enforcement here at Notre Dame Law School. Notre Dame has a storied role in the development of American conservatism’s first principles. I hold those principles dear and, as I will discuss today, our enforcement of the antitrust laws will reflect those principles. Indeed, we seek to bring these shared principles to our work every day: they include American patriotism; textualism and adherence to precedent; and a firm commitment to law enforcement.

    I also wanted to deliver an address here in Indiana because the state’s economic history underscores the importance of those conservative first principles to the work I’m now honored to lead at the Antitrust Division. Indiana also played a role in molding the young President Benjamin Harrison into the man he would become. Although many know President Harrison as the U.S. President with the most impressive beard in American history, he was also the President who signed the Sherman Act of 1890 into law.

    But more on that in a minute. Let’s begin with some words of thanks.

    First, I am deeply grateful to President Trump for entrusting me with the responsibility to lead the Antitrust Division. When he nominated me, President Trump assailed the use of “market power to crack down on the rights of so many Americans.” I am so honored to have the chance to defend the American people’s rights at this critical juncture in our history.

    I am similarly grateful to the 78 Senators, from both sides of the aisle, who voted to confirm me in an incredible show of broad bipartisan support for vigorous antitrust enforcement.

    And I am grateful to Attorney General Pam Bondi, Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche, and all the leadership of the Department for their support and for being so welcoming and for being such strong supporters of the Antitrust Division. And, of course, I’m grateful for the team of Deputies, including my Principal Deputy Roger Alford who is here today, for joining me in this endeavor.

    My earnest thanks also go to the men and women of the Antitrust Division. My first two months in the building have confirmed that the Antitrust Division employs some of the very best of the very best. Our cases consistently pit a small army of Davids against the Goliaths of Big Law defending Big Business. Yet, as we showed in the Google Ad Tech case, our teams more often than not win the battle on behalf of the American people.

    The stakes of that fight are so high. The American people are once again facing a generation of economic and industrial change. We are adapting trade policies to put America First and undertaking deregulation that will unleash innovation in AI and other technologies3 and reshape our economy.

    But we face a choice in who will order this realignment and how. Will the American people shape tomorrow’s economy, or will others decide what gets made, where it is made, and who makes it? Will our laws be written by Congress and enforced by politically accountable appointees in the Trump Administration, or by technocrats and lobbyists elsewhere?

    Indiana has seen firsthand the consequences of getting these choices wrong for millions of Americans. If recent decades have shown us anything, it is that we need an economy that works for the American people, not the other way around. We also need public policies that afford our fellow countrymen and women the dignity they deserve as American citizens. Of course, antitrust is not a cure-all, but it can surely play an important role in building a more resilient economy going forward.

    To better understand what this future might look like we first need to look to the past. As I like to say, the past is prologue. We all know the story of the decline in manufacturing in this state. Indiana was at the heart of the United States’ thriving manufacturing industry for much of the 20th century.

    But then in the 1960s and ’70s the factories started shutting down. The Studebaker factory closed here in South Bend in 1963, and other Indiana cities experienced similar population declines as manufacturing moved overseas. It took decades for cities such as South Bend to recover, and some have still not recovered.

    Of course, change is inevitable in a dynamic and innovative economy. Economists call this creative destruction and shrug it off as merely market forces at play. But neoliberal public policy also played a role in enabling this creative destruction, and not always for the better. Policymakers in Washington, D.C. voted for free trade agreements that shipped jobs overseas; they opened up our southern border to mass migration; and they underenforced our century-old antitrust laws for several decades. In D.C., these neoliberal policies are collectively referred to as the “Washington Consensus,” and they were the foundation of our economic policy for several decades. They were born out of the optimism that followed the end of the Cold War, sometimes referred to as “the end of history.” They promoted globalization and the financialization of the U.S. economy, and they initially spurred economic growth and prosperity. But that growth left many Americans behind, which brings us to today.

    Some say that free trade and open borders result in a larger pie. But it begs the question as to the size of the slice that each community in our society received. At the same time that global labor arbitrage traded American jobs for cheap manufacturing abroad, growing profit margins diverted the economic gains for many goods from American consumers and workers to our coastal elites. Too many communities hollowed out here in Indiana and across the nation. This hollowing out in turn created the conditions for a weakened middle class, fractured families, and in some cases deaths of despair. What was good for a few powerful global corporations, it turned out, was often bad for the dynamic businesses and innovators that made us the greatest nation on earth. It was also bad for the communities in which those businesses once thrived.

    Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent recently said something incredibly important about all this. “Access to cheap goods,” he said, “is not the essence of the American dream.” The American Dream “is not ‘let them eat flat screens.’” Instead, he said, and I agree with this, that “The American dream is rooted in the concept that any citizen can achieve prosperity, upward mobility, and economic security.”

    Antitrust law enforcement plays an indispensable role in achieving the American Dream because competitive markets enable individuals to achieve prosperity, upward mobility, and economic security. That’s the premise of free market capitalism. In free markets, the American people shape the economy toward their own flourishing by starting and growing their own business, and through their choices in markets as buyers and sellers. Competitive markets enable the American people to build the lives they want, not just as consumers and producers, but as citizens.

    That’s the main thing I want you to take away from my remarks today. People ask me what my agenda will be. I get asked this question every week—how does antitrust fit in with the realignment underway in the Republican Party?

    I tell them it’s America First Antitrust.

    America First Antitrust empowers America’s forgotten men and women to shape their own economic destinies in the free market. We will stand for America’s forgotten consumers. We will stand for America’s forgotten workers. And we will stand for the small businesses and innovators, from Little Tech, to manufacturing, to family farms, that were forgotten by our economic policies for too long.

    How will we accomplish this and what are our guiding principles? I submit we need only look to the past and to our conservative roots to find these principles. America First Antitrust roots are grounded in the Sherman Antitrust Act, but they in fact date back to our nation’s founding. Let us not forget that the Boston Tea Party was a protest not only against the British government’s taxation without representation, but also against the monopoly granted to the British East India Company.

    The Granger Movement at the end of the 19th century planted the early seeds for antitrust enforcement. It was born and raised by conservative hillbillies in the heartland in defense of their fundamental values. Finally, America First Antitrust continues the legacy of the Ohio Republican Senator John Sherman, the namesake of the Sherman Act, a true economic populist who never went to college, was a self-taught engineer, and became a lawyer under the apprenticeship of his brother.

    With the remainder of my time today, I’d like to talk about the conservative values that underpin America First Antitrust. This speech is not intended to be an LLM thesis, so I’ll address three that matter most immediately to the work of the Antitrust Division:

    • First, the protection of individual liberty from both government and corporate tyranny;
    • Second, a healthy respect for textualism, originalism, and precedent grounded in a commitment to robust and fair law enforcement; and
    • Third, a healthy fear of regulation that saps economic opportunity by stifling rather than promoting competition.

    Let me address each principle in turn.

    I have to begin with the value that defines both conservatism and America—freedom. We are a nation born from opposition to tyranny in defense of individual liberty. As a new American, I cherish the freedom that comes from being an American citizen. As I testified at my Senate confirmation hearing earlier this year, “In our Constitutional Republic, American citizens can speak their minds, earn a living, and invent new technologies free from unwarranted interference. These freedoms are not guaranteed in so many countries around the world, so they must be cherished and defended by us all.”

    How does this bedrock American value translate into antitrust?

    Antitrust respects the moral agency of individuals by protecting their individual liberty from the tyranny of monopoly.

    Here at Notre Dame, the principle of individual moral agency is second nature. And though few were Catholic themselves, the Founders believed philosopher Thomas Aquinas when he argued that humans are imago dei—beings made in the image of God whose exercise of individual moral agency defines us. We realize our goodness and define our own flourishing through our freedom of choice. And so the Founders penned the Declaration of Independence, reaffirming that it is “self-evident” that humans are “endowed by their Creator” with the “Rights” to “Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness.”

    With that, they threw off the tyranny of King George. In so doing, they rejected his grants of monopolies in the colonies as inconsistent with their natural rights. That same year – 1776 – the Scottish philosopher Adam Smith published his seminal book on economics The Wealth of Nations in which he wrote “People of the same trade seldom meet together, even for merriment and diversion, but the conversation ends in a conspiracy against the public, or in some contrivance to raise prices.”

    Ill-gotten monopolies inherently restrain human liberty by depriving individuals of choices as both consumers and producers. That is why popular opposition to the East India Company monopoly led directly to the Boston Tea Party and played an important motivating role in the Founding.

    Of course, monopolies at that point in history required the grant of a king, protected by his law. With the success of the Revolution, they largely disappeared from American life for a time. As a result, innovation flourished over the ensuing century, and many new inventions—from the cotton gin to the lightbulb and telephone—launched technological revolutions that improved the lives of all Americans.

    But the 19th century also saw the emergence of a new kind of monopoly—a private empire of oil, railroad, and agricultural robber barons.

    These private monopolies threatened liberty just as King George once had. Although the identity of the tyrant changed, the threat posed by monopoly to the American people’s endowed natural rights to liberty had not.

    The Grangers were among the first to point this out. In the 1860s, midwestern farmers—known then as grangers—began to unite against railroad and grain elevator monopolies that deprived farmers of fair, competitive returns for their crops.

    In 1873, the Grangers echoed our founding principles in their “Farmer’s Declaration of Independence.” “The history of the present railway monopoly,” the Grangers declared, “is a history of repeated injuries and oppressions, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute tyranny over the people of these states unequalled in any monarchy of the old world….” And so they called for government action to constrain private tyranny. This was the perspective that, in 1890, drove an Ohio Republican from the foothills of the Appalachians to draft the nation’s first federal antitrust law constraining private monopolization. Senator Sherman saw his bill as an extension of the Founders’ rejection of the tyranny of monopoly in defense of liberty. “If we will not endure a King as a political power,” Sherman said, “we should not endure a King over the production, transportation, and sale of the necessaries of life.”

    To ensure care and precision in using government power against private monopolies, the Sherman Act preserves liberty by promoting economic competition that benefits consumers, workers, inventors, and other trading partners in the free markets.

    We are now in the midst of another fundamental change in the nature of monopoly. While the Grangers and Senator Sherman saw the first emergence of privately organized monopolies, we are experiencing the emergence of new durable forms of monopoly power altogether, the likes of which the Grangers and Senator Sherman could not even begin to fathom. These monopolies are driving a Republican realignment away from big business and—under President Trump’s leadership—toward the working class that is reconnecting the party with its roots, recognizing antitrust as a critical tool in protecting individual liberty.

    In Senator Sherman’s day, a monopoly could control prices and exclude competition. Today’s online platforms can do so much more. They control not just the prices of their services, but the flow of our nation’s commerce and communication. These platforms play a critical role in our digital public square. They are key not only to the ordinary citizen’s free expression, but also to how elections are won or lost, and how our news is disseminated or not.

    This point is being made again and again by members of the new right who are driving the realignment in antitrust policy. Sohrab Ahmari points out that just as conservatives fear Tyranny.gov, they should fear Tyranny.com. Oren Cass underscores how “[c]onservativism is hugely skeptical of power.” Senate Antitrust Subcommittee Chair Mike Lee has explained that “concentrated economic power can be just as dangerous as concentrated political power,” and other influential Senators like Josh Hawley and Chuck Grassley similarly support robust antitrust enforcement aimed at tackling unchecked market power. Vice President Vance has been similarly outspoken—he has decried the “weird idea that something can’t be tyrannical if it comes through the operation of a free market” amidst an environment where companies “control the flow of information” in our society.

    I echoed this growing sentiment on the right at my confirmation hearing earlier this year when I testified that “we have grown to appreciate that personal liberty and economic liberty are closely connected; that in many ways they are two sides of the same coin. And Americans have also come to see that economic liberty often hinges on competitive markets.”

    So that’s the first principle of America First Antitrust—antitrust enforcement serves the deep-rooted conservative goal of protecting individual liberty from the tyranny of coercive monopoly power. And it serves those goals where it matters most, to protect our liberty online and to ensure that we protect Americans on pocketbook issues such as housing, healthcare, groceries, transportation, insurance, entertainment, and similar markets that directly impact their lives.

    Antitrust law enforcement should adhere to the rule of law and respect binding precedent and the original meaning of the statutory text.

    The next core conservative value underpinning our antitrust enforcement begins with the important acknowledgement that government itself can be a coercive force that threatens our liberty. This is the so-called Tyranny.gov I just talked about. Conservatives have long been skeptical of government regulation that deprives businesses of their economic freedom and makes our economy less dynamic and prosperous. We must respect originalism and the rule of law and ensure that our enforcement derives from the will of the democratically elected Congress as interpreted by the courts.

    A truly conservative approach to antitrust law starts with first principles and text. This means that antitrust agencies should enforce the laws passed by Congress, not the laws they wish Congress had passed. Perhaps most importantly, antitrust in the United States is law enforcement. It is not regulation. Congress enacted the antitrust laws as a legal regime, declined to provide any authority to regulate the details of the Sherman or Clayton Acts, and instead gave the Attorney General the duty to pursue cases before the courts as she does any other action. To recognize federal antitrust law as law enforcement in the American tradition requires a strong commitment to our Constitutional separation of powers, including Executive enforcement prerogative, statutory meaning, and judicial precedent. A faithful humility to law’s limits is the cornerstone of much conservative legal theory. If we are true to our principles, antitrust cannot be an exception.

    In the play A Man for All Seasons, Saint Thomas More discusses an England “planted thick” with the common law and says he would “give the Devil benefit of law” before accepting the lawless reality of a society without them.

    The English common law tradition of Saint Thomas More has more to do with federal antitrust enforcement than many realize. Senator Sherman designed the Sherman Act to incorporate a general body of common law in the American states and England on restraints of trade and monopoly. That is why the Act used specific terms of art from the common law, including “restraint of trade” and “monopolize,” whose original public meaning must be understood with respect to the common law that they emerged from. In so doing, the Sherman Act incorporated prohibitions on price-fixing and concerns with restraints of trade harming both workers and end consumers, among many other foundational principles of the common law. The antitrust laws must be interpreted in light of their purpose and context to codify the common law and state antitrust laws.

    Respecting the rule of law critically requires giving meaning to the statutory text and applying the binding precedents interpreting it—both old and new. Innovations in economic theory and practice may shape more recent law, but they do not render older precedent a dead letter. That is the Supreme Court’s prerogative.

    As we move forward with merger enforcement, there will be important debates about the weight we should place on older versus newer precedent as we make enforcement decisions. Those are important debates to have, and I have an open mind. But at the end of those discussions, our merger enforcement will apply our prosecutorial discretion based on the best interpretations of the laws on the books, and analysis of economic facts and data, respecting the original public meaning of the statutory text and the binding nature of Supreme Court and other relevant precedent. This is a deeply conservative position and there is nothing radical about it. To the contrary, what is radical is the notion that we should as antitrust enforcers ignore the text of the law and divorce ourselves from binding precedent, old and new alike.

    Respecting the statutory text also helps us defend ordinary Americans who need competition for their work to raise wages and improve working conditions. When Congress prohibited restraints of trade, the term was understood to include restraints on working a trade, as Justice Story explained in his commentaries on the common law. Or as Justice Kavanaugh recently said in Alston, “price-fixing labor is price-fixing labor.”

    Our recent Las Vegas nursing case is a great example. A jury convicted a Nevada man of a three-year conspiracy to fix the wages of home healthcare nurses by capping their wages. Hundreds of hard working nurses were affected, and they deserved better. Nursing work is not only important and difficult, but it is a backbone of our middle class and our communities. I am so proud of our team for standing up for those nurses—that is what America First Antitrust is all about.

    We will also stand up for workers when dominant firms impose restraints of trade, whether directly on workers or on the businesses who employ workers for them. Because the antitrust laws protect labor market competition, any conduct that harms competition for workers can violate not only the spirit but the letter of the antitrust laws.

    Antitrust law enforcement should support deregulation by enabling free market competition that prevents the need for government regulation of consolidated power.

    The last conservative value I’d like to talk about today is a preference for litigation over regulation. Conservatives abhor anticompetitive government regulations that unnecessarily sap the free markets of dynamism. Aggressive antitrust enforcement supports a competitive process that enables markets to regulate themselves, providing a bulwark against market power that often leads to regulatory intervention.

    In recent decades, we have seen markets tilt toward regulation as they became more concentrated. The poster child here is the regulatory intervention that followed the 2008 financial collapse. You all were mostly kids when the 2008 financial collapse wreaked havoc on the economy, but those of us living in D.C. saw financial institutions that were considered “too big to fail” rapidly succumb to new regulation in the wake of the collapse.

    For many, an important question that arose was less about the merits or demerits of the regulations that followed in the wake of 2008, and more about how these financial institutions became “too big to fail” in the first place. Relatedly, many questioned whether these regulations could have been avoided had these markets not become so highly concentrated. Finally, they questioned the role antitrust played in allowing this state of affairs to exist.

    This view was at the heart of the enforcement philosophy of one of my most famous predecessors as AAG, Robert Jackson who earned public acclaim as the lead Nuremberg prosecutor after World War II and as a Supreme Court associate justice. In a 1937 speech, then-AAG Jackson noted that “[t]he antitrust laws represent an effort to avoid detailed government regulation of business by keeping competition in control of prices.” Through the antitrust laws, he said, “[i]t was hoped” that the government could “confine its responsibility to seeing that a true competitive economy functions.” As Robert Jackson noted then, enforcement of the antitrust laws “is the lowest degree of government control that business can expect.” This is a limited role I am happy to take on and defend today.

    As I have analogized, antitrust is a scalpel, and regulation is a sledgehammer. Free markets often fail, and one cannot wish away monopolies and cartels with false economic theories of self-correction. The scalpel is necessary to make targeted, incisive cuts to remove the cancer of collusion and monopoly abuse. That is America First conservatives’ preferred approach to cure market ills. It imposes government obligations only on parties that violate the law, and only for the limited time necessary to restore competition. In contrast, ex ante regulations cover all parties in an industry for time immemorial, permanently distorting the free market rather than merely curing diseases that were destroying the market.

    Worse still, a system of anti-competitive regulation can be co-opted by monopolies and their lobbyists, such that the state’s power actually amplifies, rather than diminishes, corporate power, and leads to the proliferation of government regulations that serve corporate interests rather than the people and drown out new innovations. Scholars like George Stigler have explored regulatory capture and how an industry can “use the state for its purposes,” seeking regulations that operate primarily for the industry’s benefit, for example to control entry or insulate prices. Corporate lobbyists using their power to undermine free markets is ubiquitous in our system, and small but powerful groups can dominate regulatory processes at the expense of the diffuse interests of individual citizens. The alliance of Big Business and Big Government must be broken.

    To combat against such laws and regulations that stifle rather than promote competition, we have launched the Anticompetitive Regulations Task Force. Consistent with the Trump Administration’s deregulatory efforts, the Antitrust Division’s Task Force will seek to identify and eliminate laws and regulations that undermine the operation of the free market and harm consumers, workers, and businesses. We look forward to working with the FTC and with partner agencies throughout the government on these efforts.

    Let me finish where I started, with an appreciation for the economic conditions here in the Midwest and a healthy dose of humility at the challenges we face re-centering the American people in the functioning of our economy. America First Antitrust cares deeply about the average American in the heartland, and our efforts will focus on those markets that most directly affect their lives. We are here to serve all Americans and wish to move away from the deeply technocratic and elitist mindset that has imbued antitrust law and enforcement for several decades.

    I humbly submit that if a farmer in Indiana or Iowa cannot make sense of our work, the fault lies with us, not with the farmer. I may not be invited to cocktail parties in Georgetown or speaking engagements at Stanford or Cornell Law School following my remarks here today, but I will gladly trade this for coffee with Senator Grassley at Cracker Barrel or his own beloved Dairy Queen whenever he can fit me in his schedule.

    We will not restore the vitality to our long-forgotten communities overnight. It will take complementary work across many domains—from trade to antitrust to deregulatory policy and so many others.

    But with President Trump’s clear commitment to fight in all those arenas for this country’s forgotten people, and with deep-rooted conservative principles to guide us, I believe we can build a truly great future for our children.

    I look forward to that work.

    Thank you.

    MIL Security OSI

  • MIL-Evening Report: Five ways to make cities more resilient to climate change

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Paul O’Hare, Lecturer in Human Geography and Urban Development, Manchester Metropolitan University

    John_T/Shutterstock

    Climate breakdown poses immense threats to global economies, societies and ecosystems. Adapting to these impacts is urgent. But many cities and countries remain chronically unprepared in what the UN calls an “adaptation gap”.

    Building climate resilience is notoriously difficult. Economic barriers limit investment in infrastructure and technology. Social inequities undermine the capacity of vulnerable populations to adapt. And inconsistent policies impede coordinated efforts across sectors and at scale.

    My research looks at how cities can better cope with climate change. I have identified five ways to catalyse more effective – and ultimately more progressive – climate adaptation and resilience.

    1. Don’t just ‘bounce back’ after a crisis

    When wildfires, storms or floods hit, all too often governments prioritise rebuilding as rapidly as possible.

    Though understandable, resilience doesn’t just entail coping with the effects of climate change. Instead of “bouncing back” to a pre-shock status, those in charge of responding need to encourage “bouncing forward”, creating places that are at less risk in the first place.

    After the Christchurch earthquake in February 2011, the New Zealand authorities “built back better”, improving building codes and regulations and relocating vulnerable communities. Critics suggested reconstruction provided too much uncertainty and failed to acknowledge private property rights. But the rebuild did encourage better integration of planning policies and land use practices.




    Read more:
    ‘Build back better’ sounds great in theory, but does the government really know what it means in practice?


    Swales and sustainable urban drainage in Gorton climate resilient park, Manchester, UK.
    Paul O’Hare, CC BY-NC-ND

    2. Informed by risk

    It can be difficult to predict what the consequences of a crisis might be. Cities are complex, interconnected places. Transboundary risks – the consequences that ripple across a place – must be taken into account.

    The best climate adaptation plans recognise that vulnerability varies across places, contexts and over time. The most effective are holistic: tailored to specific locations and every aspect of society.

    Assessments must also consider both climatic and non-climatic features of risk. In 2015, in the UK, a flood affected one of Lancaster’s electrical substations, causing a city-wide power failure that took several days to rectify. In this instance, as with so many others, people had to deal not just with the direct impacts of flooding, but the ‘cascading’ or knock-on impacts of infrastructure damage.




    Read more:
    Giving rivers room to move: how rethinking flood management can benefit people and nature


    Many existing assessments have limited scope. But others do acknowledge how ageing infrastructures and pressures to develop land to accommodate ever intensifying urban populations exacerbate urban flood risk. Others too, such as the recently published Cambridge climate risk plan, detail how climate risk intersects with the range of services provided by local government.

    Systems thinking – an approach to problem-solving that views problems as part of wider, interconnected systems – can be applied to identify interdependencies with other drivers of change.

    Good risk assessments will, for example, take note of demographics, age profiles and the socio-economic circumstances of neighbourhoods, enabling targeted support for particularly vulnerable communities. This can help ensure communities and systems adapt to evolving challenges as climate change intensifies, and as society evolves over time.

    Complex though this might be, city leaders can access advice about improving risk assessments, including from the C40 network, a global coalition of 100 mayors committed to addressing climate change.

    3. Transformative action

    There is no such thing as a natural disaster. The effects of disasters including floods and earthquakes are influenced by pre-existing, often chronic, social and economic conditions such as poverty or poor housing.

    Progressive climate resilience looks beyond the immediacy of shocks, attending to the underlying root causes of vulnerability and inequality. This ensures that society is not only better prepared to withstand adverse events in the future, but thrives in the face of uncertainty.

    Progressive climate resilience therefore demands tailored responses depending on the population and place. In Bangladesh, for instance, communities are building floating gardens to grow crops during floods. These enhance food security and provide a sustainable livelihood option in flood-prone areas.

    Floating vegetable gardens in Bangladesh.
    Mostafijur Rahman Nasim/Shutterstock



    Read more:
    Climate change isn’t fair but Tony Juniper’s new book explains how a green transition could be ‘just’


    4. Collective approaches

    Effective climate resilience demands collective action. Sometimes referred to as a “whole of society” response, this entails collaboration and shared responsibility to address the multifaceted challenges posed by a changing climate.

    The most effective initiatives avoid self-protection, of people, buildings and cities alike, and consider both broader and longer-term risks. For instance, developments not at significant risk should still incorporate adaptation measures including rainwater harvesting or enhanced greening to lower a city’s climate risk profile and benefit local communities, neighbouring authorities and surrounding regions.

    So, progressive resilience is connected, comprehensive and inclusive. Solidarity is key, leveraging resources to address common challenges and fostering a sense of shared purpose and mutual support.

    Solar panels on the surface of a reservoir not only provide a source of renewable energy but also provide shade and therefore help conserve water.
    Tom Wang/Shutterstock

    5. Exploiting co-benefits

    The most effective resilience projects exploit co-benefits – what the UN calls “multiple resilience dividends” – to leverage additional benefits across sectors and policies, reducing vulnerability to shocks while addressing other social and environmental challenges.

    In northern Europe, for example, moorlands can be restored to retain water helping alleviate downstream flooding, but also to capture carbon and provide vital habitats for biodiversity.

    In south-East Asia solar panels installed on reservoirs generate renewable energy to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, while providing shade to reduce evaporation and conserve water resources during droughts.

    In short, adaptation is obviously crucial for tackling climate change across the globe. But the real challenge is to deal with the impacts of climate change while simultaneously creating communities that are fairer, healthier, and better equipped to face any manner of future risks.

    Don’t have time to read about climate change as much as you’d like?

    Get a weekly roundup in your inbox instead. Every Wednesday, The Conversation’s environment editor writes Imagine, a short email that goes a little deeper into just one climate issue. Join the 40,000+ readers who’ve subscribed so far.


    Paul O’Hare receives funding from the UK’s Natural Environment Research Council (NERC). Award reference NE/V010174/1.

    ref. Five ways to make cities more resilient to climate change – https://theconversation.com/five-ways-to-make-cities-more-resilient-to-climate-change-252853

    MIL OSI AnalysisEveningReport.nz

  • MIL-OSI Economics: Investing in American leadership in quantum technology: the next frontier in innovation

    Source: Microsoft

    Headline: Investing in American leadership in quantum technology: the next frontier in innovation

    Artificial intelligence has captured the public imagination—and with good reason. It’s transforming how we work, create, learn, and navigate the world. But as AI carries the headlines, we also are on the cusp of another technological frontier: quantum computing. Long the domain of theory, quantum technologies are edging closer to reality, with profound implications for the world and American national competitiveness and security. As basic research and private sector advancements accelerate, a new global race is picking up steam. Now is the time for the United States and its allies to double down and invest in their strengths to claim the quantum frontier.

    Quantum technologies harness the mysterious and powerful behaviors of particles at the atomic level, offering unprecedented capabilities in computing, communication, and sensing. A single quantum computer at scale could offer more computing power than collectively exists in all of today’s computers. And like AI, quantum computing not only has the potential to transform entire sectors of our economy, but tackle previous insurmountable problems, opening pathways in science, medicine, and technology. The possibilities for chemistry, drug discovery, materials, energy, and agriculture provide promise in solving some of the defining challenges of our time.

    Microsoft’s recent quantum breakthrough adds to the breadth and pace of quantum science innovation. The development of our Majorana quantum chip leverages the unique properties of so-called “Majorana quasiparticles,” creating qubits that are more stable and less prone to decoherence. This approach promises to overcome one of the biggest challenges in quantum computing, enabling the construction of scalable and more efficient quantum systems. We believe it’s the type of advancement that can help accelerate the timeline for practical quantum applications.

    Countries around the world understand the criticality of quantum technology to their own economic competitiveness and security. During his confirmation hearing earlier this year, Michael Kratsios, the White House Director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP), rightfully emphasized that the shape of the global order “will be defined by whomever leads across AI, quantum, nuclear, and other critical and emerging technologies.” It is no surprise that over the past decade, governments around the world have poured resources into the fiercely competitive global quantum race. China, in particular, seeks to challenge American leadership in quantum through significant investments in infrastructure, research, and workforce skilling.

    The Trump administration’s long-standing leadership in quantum science

    Since the earliest days of quantum sciences, the United States has led the research and development of this technology. While most believe that the United States still holds the lead position, we cannot afford to rule out the possibility of a strategic surprise or that China may already be at parity with the United States. Simply put, the United States cannot afford to fall behind, or worse, lose the race entirely.

    The Trump administration understands well the national imperative and the risks of falling behind. During his first term, President Trump set the foundation for sustained leadership in the quantum sciences. This included the passage of the National Quantum Initiative Act in December 2018 (currently up for reauthorization), which accelerated quantum research and development. The Trump administration inaugurated the National Quantum Coordination Office (NQCO) within the OSTP. This office was empowered to oversee interagency coordination, serve as a central point of contact for federal quantum activities, and promote public outreach and early application of quantum technologies. These initiatives underscored the administration’s commitment to maintaining the American leadership and fostering quantum innovation.

    Last month, President Trump emphasized that actions during his first term “established the foundation for national quantum supremacy” and tasked newly confirmed Director Kratsios to “blaze a trail to the next frontiers of science.” Meeting the moment demands another round of decisive action—one that must be rooted in the very principles that gave rise to the past century of American primacy in the sciences.

    Harnessing America’s heritage of scientific innovation

    For the last 80 years, the United States has led the world with its scientific and technological prowess, resulting in transformative products and capabilities. This federally funded science and technology ecosystem is essentially America’s golden goose. It generates immense wealth and benefits for society by supporting scientific progress that in turn drives economic growth, extends life expectancy, and boosts national power. In many respects, it is the envy of the world.

    The United States has not always prioritized federal funding in scientific research. In fact, before World War II, the United States played a minor role in supporting research at U.S. colleges and universities. Instead, research institutions relied on philanthropic endowments or funding from private companies, often with vested interests. “Curiosity-driven” science, a cornerstone of discovery and innovation, was stymied in the process.

    This limitation changed dramatically after World War II when the federal government recognized the strategic importance of scientific research. In November 1944, thinking ahead to the end of the war, President Franklin D. Roosevelt wrote to Director of the Office of Scientific Research and Development, Vannevar Bush, asking how the successful application of scientific knowledge to wartime problems could be carried over into peacetime—and requesting recommendations on a national policy for science. This initiative led to the creation of many of the research institutions and funding mechanisms that have driven American innovation for decades.

    For 80 years, American innovation has been driven by two critical ingredients. The first is basic research. This is based on curiosity rather than a profit motive, supported by federal funding, and pursued mostly by scientists at our universities and national labs. The second is private sector investment in product development by companies of all sizes. The United States, more than any other country, has mastered the process of bringing these together.

    This combination has led to spectacular discoveries with profound implications for our health, safety, and quality of life. Innovative cancer treatments, the laser, MRI, touchscreens, GPS, the internet, and even artificial intelligence are just a few of the successes from federal investment in research. These innovations have not only advanced science and improved lives but have also created entirely new industries and millions of jobs.

    The United States will need this extraordinary combination of resources more than ever to sustain its quantum leadership, especially as China invests more in its own quantum work.

    China’s focus on gaining quantum supremacy

    Since at least 2000, China has made quantum technology a cornerstone of its national technological strategy and has invested heavily to assert dominance in the quantum sciences. Over this time, China’s public spending on overarching R&D has grown 16-fold, placing it second in the world behind the United States for total spending. It surpassed Japan in 2009 and the combined R&D expenditures of the European Union countries over a dozen years ago, in 2013.

    The scale and focus of China’s efforts continue to accelerate. Last year alone, China announced a 10 percent increase in R&D with public reports indicating that China has increased government spending in quantum research to approximately $15 billion. This represents more than double what the European Union has pledged in quantum spending and eight times what the U.S. government previously planned to allocate. And earlier this year, China launched a government-backed venture fund worth 1 trillion yuan (approximately $138 billion) to support high-risk, long-term projects across various sectors, including quantum computing.

    In addition to state-directed quantum R&D funding, China has prioritized quantum infrastructure and domestic capabilities. The creation of the National Laboratory for Quantum Information Sciences, backed by over $1 billion, alongside a separate $10 billion investment in key projects such as the Micius satellite[1], and the Beijing–Shanghai backbone, underscores China’s ambition to dominate quantum technology—with the Chinese government hoping this institutional infrastructure will provide it with a significant advantage in developing and deploying quantum technologies at scale.[2] Moreover, during the last five years, China has methodically nationalized quantum efforts to pursue strategic, government-coordinated efforts that transition scientific breakthroughs into practical applications.[3]

    The importance of the federal research triad

    Given these coordinated efforts in China, sustained American quantum leadership will require continuing support across the federal government. Coordinated in substantial part by OSTP, American strength rests in substantial part on three federal agencies that collectively serve as the driving force of this leadership. The Department of Defense (DOD), the Department of Energy (DOE), and the National Science Foundation (NSF) possess the legislative authority and institutional capability to advance quantum technology research and development under existing Congressional mandates. This “research triad” provides a resilient science and technology research infrastructure as a bulwark against threats to our technological superiority. Indeed, perhaps more than any military capability, this American research triad is largely responsible for the preeminence of the United States’ global leadership over the past century.

    Each prong of this triad uniquely and collectively contributes to ensuring American technological superiority.

    For example, DOD, through the military labs and defense industrial base, provides a strong and reliable foundation for military readiness and battlefield dominance. There are several notable examples of research efforts funded by DOD for military applications that eventually found enormous civilian uses—the internet, GPS, and voice recognition are among countless other breakthrough technologies.

    DOE, through the network of national laboratories and university partnerships, provides a vital link to state and local communities across a range of national security priorities, such as maintenance of our strategic weapons (e.g., our nuclear weapons arsenal), energy security and innovation, and high-performance computing.

    And the NSF is perhaps the most robust frontline agency that supports workforce development goals in addition to promoting hugely important translational research through federal grants. Specifically, the NSF provides critical incentives for U.S. students to enter STEM fields from early education through post-graduate schooling by way of subsidizing their apprenticeships in research laboratories in colleges and institutions so they can learn from leading scientists and engineers who otherwise would not have the funds or resources to take on students.

    Three strategic actions to ensure American quantum leadership

    Winning the quantum race will require us to deploy and reinvest in our greatest American strengths: our intellect, our curiosity, and our drive to innovate and build. All these qualities are carried forward by the three great and enduring federal agencies that comprise our research triad. We will need to activate all three to succeed in the race to develop next-generation quantum technologies. More specifically, to win this race, we must deploy our research triad in three key areas: driving innovation through robust government-funded quantum research and innovation; developing quantum talent and a skilled quantum workforce; and directing efforts to secure the quantum supply chain.

    These strategic actions—described more fully below—will require DOD, DOE, and the NSF to work together to ensure our competitive edge in the face of intense global competition.

    1. Increase funding for quantum research and development

    To ensure leadership in quantum research, the U.S. government should consider prioritizing federal funding in quantum technologies through a directed approach. A survey by the Information Technology and Innovation Foundation (ITIF), a Washington-based think tank, suggested that China’s centralized funding approach might offer comparative advantages over the fragmented approach in the United States, where competing priorities can hinder systemic progress.

    To start with, the United States cannot win the quantum race without significant and sustained federally funded quantum research. While federal funding in quantum sciences more than doubled between 2019 and 2022 (from $456M in FY 2019 to $1,041M in FY2022), this funding started to decline during the last three years of the Biden Administration (from $1,041M in FY2022 to $998M in President Biden’s requested budget authority for FY25).[4] This means that the United States is not keeping pace—either with itself or with our global competitors.

    The first and most important step this Administration must take is fully funding research and grant programs in the basic and fundamental sciences across DOD, DOE national labs, and the NSF. As noted above, this research triad has been largely responsible for the sustained period of American technological leadership. We cannot make strides in the quantum race without reinvesting and building on these critical capabilities.

    Specific to the quantum sciences, Congress can begin by reauthorizing the National Quantum Initiative Act and this administration should work to ensure that all its programs are fully funded. This must include the Quantum Leap Challenge Institutes funded through the NSF, as well as the important work being led by the DOE’s National Quantum Initiative Centers. These initiatives were established through the National Quantum Initiative Act and are already demonstrating results, with each dollar of federal funding typically leveraging additional private sector investment. Expanding these proven programs would spur innovation in every region of the country while advancing American leadership in critical technologies of strategic importance.

    But even as we expand federal funding for the basic sciences and quantum research, the administration must simultaneously increase funding for government evaluation and validation programs that are focused on identifying scientific breakthroughs and supporting their continued development. DARPA’s Quantum Benchmarking Initiative (QBI) is the nation’s flagship program and must be expanded as public and private sector investments in quantum technology begin to bear fruit and achieve tangible results.

    2. Promote workforce and talent development

    Winning the quantum race requires the world’s best talent. While the United States and its institutions—both public and private—have thus far been able to leverage unique, highly skilled technical talent, the state of the domestic talent pipeline is alarming and requires immediate action. At a topline level, the U.S. science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) workforce is comprised of 36.8 million people of which foreign-born individuals make up 43 percent of doctorate-level scientists and engineers. That number is likely to increase given the wide gap between the United States and global competitors at the undergraduate level. In 2000, for example, the United States awarded 900,000 undergraduate degrees in STEM fields, compared to 2 million degrees in China and 2.5 million in India.[5]

    It is therefore no surprise that, when including all education levels, India and China were the leading birthplaces of foreign-born STEM workers in the United States, accounting for 29 percent and 12 percent respectively. The good news is that many international students have chosen to stay in the United States after completing their studies, contributing to the country’s technology innovation ecosystem. For example, according to the 2024 State of U.S. Science and Engineering Report, from 2018-2021, temporary visa holders—primarily from China or India—represented 37 percent of U.S. science and engineering research doctorate recipients. Over 70 percent of these doctorate recipients expressed an intention to reside in the United States following graduation. The same report indicated that when these doctorate recipients were surveyed in 2021 across all countries of citizenship and degree fields, the 5-year stay rate for those who were on temporary visas at graduation was 71 percent and the 10-year stay rate was 65 percent.

    In the quantum fields specifically, the number of quantum job postings globally outstrips qualified talent by as much as three to one. Currently, the European Union has the highest concentration of quantum talent, followed by India, China, and then the United States.[6] The United States faces a critical shortage of quantum-ready talent, particularly as other nations invest significant resources in their own national quantum programs and quantum research capabilities. Without concerted action by the federal government to address this skilling gap, even the most advanced quantum research programs will fail to translate into practical capabilities or economic benefits.

    The Trump administration can begin by launching a series of concerted efforts to expand the domestic pipeline. One historical analog is the National Defense Education Act of 1958, enacted in response to the Sputnik challenge. The NDEA provides a useful precedent for how targeted federal investment in technical education can rapidly address strategic workforce gaps.

    For starters, comprehensive STEM education programs must be introduced at all levels of education, from primary schools to universities, to develop a robust domestic pipeline of talent. Research has shown that elementary and secondary education in mathematics and science are the foundation for entry into postsecondary STEM majors and STEM-related occupations. To develop this pipeline, the Trump administration can leverage the existing strength and reach of the NSF. NSF programs, such as those specifically focused on the quantum sciences like the National Q-12 Education Partnership, are ready-made vehicles to promote awareness of STEM and quantum technology in K-12 institutions.

    Second, the United States can provide grants for quantum research and education to encourage students to pursue careers in this field, focusing not only on traditional four-year colleges but also community colleges and vocational programs that are often entry points for many Americans pursuing higher education. In 2021, the U.S. government supported 15 percent of full-time STEM graduate students (mostly doctoral degree students), a decline from the most recent high of 21 percent in 2004. Here, again, the administration should activate and expand NSF research initiatives, including the NSF Research Experiences for Undergraduates (REU) and Research Experiences for Teachers (RET) programs,[7] as well as those focused specifically on the quantum sciences such as the Next Generation Quantum Leaders Pilot Program envisioned by the CHIPS and Science Act. The National Quantum Virtual Laboratory is another promising initiative that would create shared research infrastructure and make quantum education more accessible to students and researchers across the country. Collectively, these national incentives enable the best and brightest of the world to conduct their cutting-edge research in the labs of the United States as opposed to the labs of our adversaries.

    Beyond looking to the NDEA to attract and develop the unique talent to lead the world in quantum development, the Trump administration can focus on three additional priorities.

    First, building on the themes described above, the administration should address the current talent gap in the current STEM workforce. Although there is no substitute for graduate degree programs to drive innovation in the quantum sciences, the broader quantum ecosystem would benefit greatly from an increase in the STEM workforce. To this end, the administration can again utilize the reach of the NSF to promote adult education, retraining, and professional development programs to facilitate current workers’ transition into quantum-related roles.

    Second, research universities also play a pivotal role as powerful economic engines in their communities, often ranking among the largest employers in their congressional districts while generating high-tech spin-off companies that create well-paying jobs. The presence of federally-funded research and development centers (FFRDCs) and university-affiliated research centers (UARCS)—which are not-for-profit organizations established to meet special long-term engineering, research, development, or other analytic needs—also attract private sector investment and create innovation clusters. But most importantly, these entities lead to organic skilling initiatives to up-level the existing labor market.

    Finally, with regard to foreign talent, it’s imperative that the United States continue to attract the world’s best and brightest. This requires developing fast-track immigration pathways for highly skilled individuals with unique technical expertise in the quantum sciences, and expanding the number of visas available to employ quantum STEM PhDs trained at American institutions. This also requires the United States to promote, coordinate, and potentially fund international research initiatives with strategic allies to facilitate cross-pollination of expertise and develop the talent pool within a sphere of select, like-minded countries.

    This includes deepening ties with strategic allies to advance our collective success in the quantum race. Denmark, for example, has continued the great legacy of Niels Bohr by creating a vibrant hub for quantum innovation—one that benefits not only Denmark, but the entire Nordic region and the United States. Through a steady, long-term strategy that has brought together the government, academic, private sector, and startup communities—including multilateral institutions, such as NATO’s Deep Tech Lab-Quantum hosted at the Niels Bohr Institute—Denmark has become a hotbed for quantum talent, as well as quantum research and early commercialization. For our part, Microsoft has benefited greatly from this rich ecosystem of talent and innovation through the Microsoft Quantum Lab on the outskirts of Copenhagen, where later this year we will expand our presence by opening a new state-of-the-art quantum research center.

    3. Ensure supply chain security for quantum technologies

    Securing our leadership in quantum technology requires a reliable supply chain and onshoring of key capabilities within the United States. This is a complex task that cannot be achieved without direct action by the federal government that tightly aligns to specific strategic objectives. To that end, the Trump administration could task the National Quantum Initiative Advisory Committee or another board of advisors to develop a detailed national strategy and execution plan aimed at de-risking the quantum supply chain. This strategy would focus on making the supply chain more independent, increasing the availability of quantum components, lowering prices, and introducing incentives to encourage the private sector to make the necessary investments in the United States for chip fabrication and assembly.

    More specifically, the U.S. strategy to secure the quantum supply chain must include at least three critical action items. First, the federal government can take a direct role through the Departments of Commerce and Energy to promote the diversification of essential quantum components and materials. This can be achieved through government-organized long-term purchase agreements and the deployment of strategic capital for widely needed components such as dilution refrigerators, superconducting cables, amplifiers, circulators, attenuators, lasers, and fiber at frequencies relevant for quantum technologies.

    Second, the administration should work to establish specialized facilities dedicated to the fabrication, packaging, prototyping, and manufacturing of quantum systems and their essential components, such as cryogenic systems, lasers, and advanced chips. By developing, testing, and ultimately producing essential components domestically, this initiative would reduce our dependence on foreign sources and work to mitigate the risk of supply chain disruptions.

    Finally, and most importantly, it is imperative to onshore domestic manufacturing of advanced technologies tailored for quantum devices and additional capabilities needed by American companies and research organizations. This includes design and fabrication of advanced lasers and optics, amplifiers, and advanced chip design and fabrication. It also includes critical capabilities for domestic cryogenic electronics fabrication and design, advanced metrology to characterize chips for quantum computing, and advanced packaging and 3D integration for quantum components.

    The way forward

    At the start of his second term, President Trump signed an executive order to advance American leadership in artificial intelligence. President Trump should now do the same with quantum by setting national priorities that support robust funding, promote a skilled workforce, and protect supply chain security through incentivized onshoring. Taken together, these strategic actions will not only bolster our nation’s security and competitive edge against competitors and adversaries, but it will also drive innovation and economic growth at home towards a new frontier of American prosperity.


    [1] Karen Kwon, “China Reaches New Milestone in Space-Based Quantum Communications,” Scientific American, June 29, 2020, https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/china-reaches-new-milestone-in-space-based-quantum-communications.

    [2] One likely goal of these massive projects is undoubtedly to signal that the People’s Republic of China backs these investments, thereby attracting and retaining skilled professionals. According to the 2024 State of U.S. Science and Engineering Report developed, a regular report mandated by Congress, China is the top overall producer of science and engineering publications and international patents. For decades, the United States was the unparalleled leader in science and engineering doctorate awards until 2019 when we were surpassed by China. That being said, the United States remains the destination of choice for internationally mobile students, hosting 15% of all international students worldwide in 2020. National Science Board, The State of U.S. Science and Engineering 2024, March 2024, https://ncses.nsf.gov/pubs/nsb20243/talent-u-s-and-global-stem-education-and-labor-force.

    [3] Hodan Omaar and Martin Makaryan, How Innovative is China, Information Technology & Innovation Foundation, September 2024, https://www2.itif.org/2024-chinese-quantum-innovation.pdf.

    [4] National Science and Technology Council:  Subcommittee on Quantum Information Science, National Supplement to the President’s FY 2025 Budget, April 24, 2025, https://nqi.gov/supplement-fy2025-budget.

    [5] National Science Board, “The State of U.S. Science and Engineering 2024,” March 2024, https://ncses.nsf.gov/pubs/nsb20243/talent-u-s-and-global-stem-education-and-labor-force.

    [6] McKinsey & Company, “Quantum Technology Monitor,”  April 2023,  https://www.mckinsey.com/~/media/mckinsey/business functions/mckinsey digital/our insights/quantum technology sees record investments progress on talent gap/quantum-technology-monitor-april-2023.pdf (defining quantum talent as “[g]raduates of master’s level or equivalent in 2019 in biochemistry, chemistry, electronics and chemical engineering, information and communications technology, mathematics and statistics, and physics.”).

    [7] National Science Foundation, “NSF Research Experiences for Undergraduates,” accessed April 24, 2025, https://www.nsf.gov/funding/initiatives/reu; National Science Foundation, “NSF 24-503: Research Experiences for Teachers in Engineering and Computer Science,” accessed April 24, 2025, https://www.nsf.gov/funding/opportunities/research-experiences-teachers-engineering-computer-science/nsf24-503/solicitation.

    Tags: AI, quantum, STEM, Technology, United States

    MIL OSI Economics

  • MIL-OSI: XRP News: XenDex Raises More Than 50% of Its Presale in Just 4 Days Amid XRP SEC Lawsuit And XRP ETF Updates

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    SYDNEY, Australia, April 28, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — In a historic week for XRP, with Brazil approving the first XRP Spot ETF and major legal wins strengthening Ripple’s standing, XenDex is riding the wave of momentum, and it’s doing so at breakneck speed.

    In just four days, XenDex has sold over 50% of its $XDX presale allocation, far surpassing early expectations. As confidence in XRP’s future skyrockets, investors are racing to secure $XDX tokens before allocations dry up and prices move higher.

    Buy $XDX Now Before Presale Ends

    Whales, retail investors, and XRP community veterans alike are rallying around XenDex which is the first all-in-one decentralized exchange on XRPL offering AI-powered copy trading, non-custodial lending and borrowing, and cross-chain trading, all built with a sleek, intuitive interface for mass adoption.

    Apparently, the $XDX Presale is moving faster than anyone predicted

    Presale Key Details:

    • Token: $XDX
    • Exchange Rate: 1 XRP = 10 XDX
    • Minimum Buy: 150 XRP (1,500 XDX)

    Secure your position now, join the Presale Now Before It Sells Out: https://xendex.net/presale

    With momentum stronger than ever and supply steadily shrinking, every hour counts.

    XenDex isn’t just another DEX. It’s delivering real solutions to real gaps on XRP Ledger:

    • AI-Powered Copy Trading — Follow elite trading strategies in real-time
    • Non-Custodial Lending & Borrowing — Borrow and lend your XRP and $XDX tokens to earn rewards
    • Cross-Chain Trading — Swap and trade XRP tokens across major blockchain networks like Solana and BNB
    • Staking and Yield Farming — Earn rewards by supplying liquidity to the platform’s liquidity pool
    • DAO Governance — $XDX holders vote on the features, upgrades of XenDex

    Participate In $XDX Presale Now

    With more than half the presale tokens sold and thousands joining the XenDex community across Telegram and Twitter, the race is intensifying. Investors know that early entry not only locks in the best price but also unlocks premium rewards, staking benefits, and governance power once the platform fully launches.

    Between the surge in XRP market optimism and XenDex’s fast-moving presale, the opportunity to buy $XDX at launch pricing is disappearing quickly. Missing out now could mean paying much higher prices post-listing or worse, missing the breakout altogether.

    Visit Official XenDex Links

    Website: https://xendex.net
    Presale: https://xendex.net/presale
    Telegram: https://t.me/xendexcommunity
    Twitter/X: https://x.com/xendex_xrp
    Docs: https://xdxdocs.gitbook.io

    Contact:
    Frank Richards
    Frank@xendex.net

    Disclaimer: This is a paid post provided by XenDex. The statements, views, and opinions expressed in this content are solely those of the content provider and do not necessarily reflect the views of this media platform or its publisher. We do not endorse, verify, or guarantee the accuracy, completeness, or reliability of any information presented. We do not guarantee any claims, statements, or promises made in this article. This content is for informational purposes only and should not be considered financial, investment, or trading advice. Investing in crypto and mining-related opportunities involves significant risks, including the potential loss of capital. It is possible to lose all your capital. These products may not be suitable for everyone, and you should ensure that you understand the risks involved. Seek independent advice if necessary. Speculate only with funds that you can afford to lose. Readers are strongly encouraged to conduct their own research and consult with a qualified financial advisor before making any investment decisions. However, due to the inherently speculative nature of the blockchain sector—including cryptocurrency, NFTs, and mining—complete accuracy cannot always be guaranteed. Neither the media platform nor the publisher shall be held responsible for any fraudulent activities, misrepresentations, or financial losses arising from the content of this press release. In the event of any legal claims or charges against this article, we accept no liability or responsibility. GlobeNewswire does not endorse any content on this page.

    Legal Disclaimer: This media platform provides the content of this article on an “as-is” basis, without any warranties or representations of any kind, express or implied. We assume no responsibility for any inaccuracies, errors, or omissions. We do not assume any responsibility or liability for the accuracy, content, images, videos, licenses, completeness, legality, or reliability of the information presented herein. Any concerns, complaints, or copyright issues related to this article should be directed to the content provider mentioned above.

    A photo accompanying this announcement is available at https://www.globenewswire.com/NewsRoom/AttachmentNg/68525264-6d6d-484c-ab32-1540403e6ade

    The MIL Network

  • MIL-OSI USA: Reps. Huffman, Pallone, and Castor Introduce Bills to Permanently Protect the Pacific and Atlantic Oceans from Offshore Drilling

    Source: United States House of Representatives – Congressman Jared Huffman Representing the 2nd District of California

    April 22, 2025

    Washington, D.C. – On Earth Day, Representatives Jared Huffman (D-Calif.), Frank Pallone (D-N.J.), and Kathy Castor (D-Fla.), along with Senators Alex Padilla (D-Calif.), Cory Booker (D-N.J.), and Jack Reed (D-R.I.), announced a package of legislation to permanently protect the Pacific and Atlantic Ocean from the dangers of fossil fuel drilling. This package includes Rep. Huffman’s West Coast Ocean Protection Act, Rep. Pallone’s Clean Ocean and Safe Tourism (COAST) Anti-Drilling Act, and Rep. Castor’s Florida Coast Protection Act

    This legislation comes days after the 15th anniversary of the Deepwater Horizon oil spill, which resulted in the deaths of 11 workers, 134 million gallons of oil spilled into the Gulf over 87 days, the demise of thousands of marine mammals and sea turtles, and billions of dollars in economic losses from the fishing, outdoor recreation, and tourism industries.  

    “It’s clear that in the 15 years since the most catastrophic oil spill disaster in history, Republicans in the pocket of Big Oil have learned nothing. Offshore drilling poses significant threats to our public health, coastal economies, and marine life. The science is clear, and so is the public sentiment: we need to speed up our transition to a clean energy future, not lock ourselves into another generation of fossil fuel fealty,” said Ranking Member Huffman. “We cannot let history repeat itself. My Democratic colleagues aren’t standing idly by as the Trump administration tries to reverse all of our progress so they can give handouts to Big Oil. Our legislation will cut pollution and ramp up clean energy, ensuring our coasts remain safe, clean, and open to all Americans— not turned into open season for fossil fuel billionaires looking to drill, spill, and cash in.”

    “We must end offshore oil drilling in coastal waters once and for all,” said Senator Padilla. “Over 50 years ago, after a catastrophic oil spill off the coast of Santa Barbara, Californians rose up and demanded environmental protections, spurring the modern environmental movement and creating the very first Earth Day. As the Trump Administration threatens to recklessly open our coasts to new drilling, California and the West Coast need permanent safeguards to protect our communities from the devastation of fossil fuels and disastrous oil spills. We must act now to fulfill the promises we made to our children and our constituents to meet the urgency of this environmental crisis with bold action.” 

    “This week marks both Earth Day and the 15th anniversary of the Deepwater Horizon oil disaster,” said Senator Booker. “I’m standing alongside my colleagues in the House and Senate to reaffirm our commitment to protecting our communities and our environment. Offshore drilling endangers our coastal communities – both their lives and their livelihoods – and threatens marine species and ecosystems. The COAST Act, along with this critical package of legislation, will ensure that marine seascapes along the Atlantic and Pacific Coasts, and the wildlife, industries, and communities that rely on them, are protected from the dangers of fossil fuel drilling. 

    “Offshore drilling in the Atlantic Ocean would open up the eastern seaboard to considerable risk, and we have seen the destruction that an accident can cause. This legislation is about more than simply protecting the environment, it’s also about protecting the tourism and fishing industries that create jobs and help power Rhode Island’s economy,” said Senator Reed.

    “For decades, I’ve fought to protect our coasts from the dangers of oil and gas development, and this legislative package reaffirms that commitment. Offshore drilling risks devastating spills, accelerates climate change, and threatens the livelihoods of coastal communities like those in New Jersey. On Earth Day and every day, we must stand up to Big Oil and prioritize renewable energy that actually protects our planet,” Congressman Frank Pallone, Jr., Ranking Member of the House Energy and Commerce Committee.

    “Florida is a beautiful but fragile place, and we depend on clean water and healthy beaches,” said Rep. Castor. “I’m proud to lead the Florida Coastal Protection Act as part of this larger package to stop dangerous oil drilling near our coasts for good. The Deepwater Horizon disaster served as a wake-up call, as the blowout hurt people, our environment and our economy. We can’t let that happen again. Our beaches, fishing, and tourism are too important to risk. We must protect our oceans, our way of life and our future.”

    These bills reaffirm vital protections for America’s coastal communities and ecosystems. Under President Biden, more than 625 million acres of U.S. ocean waters—including the entire East Coast, the eastern Gulf of Mexico, the Pacific coasts of Washington, Oregon, and California, and parts of the Northern Bering Sea—were permanently protected from offshore oil and gas drilling. President Trump wasted no time trying to rollback those protections, attempting to illegally reopen those same areas to drilling on day one of his second term. His record speaks for itself: during his first administration, the Interior Department proposed a sweeping plan to open 47 offshore oil and gas lease areas across nearly every U.S. coastline, from California to New England.

    Congressional Democrats are taking a stand to protect coastal communities, economies, and ecosystems. U.S. coastal counties support 54.6 million jobs, $10 trillion in goods and services, and pay $4 trillion in wages. Offshore drilling poses significant threats to our public health, coastal economies, and marine life. Our oceans are home to diverse marine wildlife, including the California sea lion, North Atlantic right whale, yellowtail flounder, and countless other economically, ecologically, and culturally important species. There is a long history of bipartisan efforts to protect U.S. coasts from offshore drilling to safeguard our oceans’ enormous environmental, economic, and cultural values, safeguard coastal communities, restore ecosystems, and defend against climate change. 

    Rep. Huffman’s West Coast Ocean Protection Act prohibits new oil and gas leases off the coast of California, Oregon, and Washington. Companion legislation was introduced today by Sen. Padilla.

    Rep. Pallone’s COAST Anti-Drilling Act permanently prohibits the U.S. Department of Interior from issuing leases for the exploration, development, or production of oil and gas in the North Atlantic, Mid-Atlantic, South Atlantic, and Straits of Florida Planning Areas of the U.S. Outer Continental Shelf. Companion legislation was introduced by Sen. Booker and Sen. Reed.

    Rep. Castor’s Florida Coast Protection Act places a permanent moratorium on oil and natural gas preleasing, leasing, and related activities off Florida’s coast. 

    Other offshore drilling legislation introduced by House Democrats include: 

    • New England Coastal Protection Act of 2025 (Rep. Magaziner)
    • Defend our Coast Act (Rep. Ross)
    • California Clean Coast Act of 2025 (Rep. Carbajal)
    • Southern California Coast and Ocean Protection Act (Rep. Levin)
    • Central Coast of California Conservation Act of 2025 (Rep. Panetta)

    Original cosponsors of the West Coast Ocean Protection Act

    House: Representatives Jared Huffman (D-Calif.), Nanette Barragán (D-Calif.), Suzanne Bonamici (D-Ore.), Julia Brownley (D-Calif.), Lou Correa (D-Calif.), Judy Chu (D-Calif.), Suzan DelBene (D-Wash.), Mark DeSaulnier (D-Calif.), Val Hoyle (D-Ore.), Sara Jacobs (D-Calif.), Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.), Rick Larsen (D-Wash.), Mike Levin (D-Calif.), Ted Lieu (D-Calif.), Doris Matsui (D-Calif.), Jimmy Panetta (D-Calif.), Scott Peters (D-Calif.), Eric Swalwell (D-Calif.), Jill Tokuda (D-Hawaii), Kathy Castor (D-Fla.), Salud Carbajal (D-Calif.), Adam Smith (D-Wash.), Brad Sherman (D-Calif.), Jerrold Nadler (D-N.Y.), Dave Min (D-Calif.), Kevin Mullin (D-Calif.), Lou Correa (D-Calif.), and Zoe Lofgren (D-Calif.), 

    Senate: Senators Cory Booker (D-N.J.), Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.), Edward J. Markey (D-Mass.), Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), Patty Murray (D-Wash.), Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.) and Ron Wyden (D-Ore.).

    Original cosponsors of the COAST Anti-Drilling Act 

    House: Representatives Frank Pallone (D-N.J.), Suzanne Bonamici (D-Ore.), Ed Case (D-Hawaii), Kathy Castor (D-Fla.), Diana DeGette (D-Colo.), Brian Fitzpatrick (R-Pa.), Jared Huffman (D-Calif.), Thomas Kean Jr. (R-N.J.), Mike Levin (D-Calif.), Seth Magaziner (D-R.I.), Jim McGovern (D-Mass.), Robyn McIver (D-N.C.), Rob Menendez (D-N.J.), Jerrold Nadler (D-N.Y.), Eleanor Holmes Norton (D-D.C.), Jimmy Panetta (D-Calif.), Chellie Pingree (D-Maine), Nellie Pou (D-N.J.), Deborah Ross (D-N.C.), David Scott (D-Ga.), Mikie Sherrill (D-N.J.), Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.), Jill Tokuda (D-Hawaii), and Bonnie Watson Coleman (D-N.J.).

    Senate: Senators Jack Reed (D-R.I.), Alex Padilla (D-Calif.), Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.), Angus King (I-Maine), Edward Markey (D-Mass.), Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), Chris Coons (D-Del.), Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), and Ron Wyden (D-Ore.).

    Original cosponsors of the Florida Coast Protection Act 

    House: Representatives Kathy Castor (D-Fla.), Vern Buchanan (R-Fla.), Darren Soto (D-Fla.), Gus Bilirakis (R-Fla.), Frederica Wilson (D-Fla.), Lois Frankel (D-Fla.), Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-Fla.), and Brian Fitzpatrick (R-Pa.).

    Read Statements of Support

    Supporters of the COAST Anti-Drilling Act include Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC), Oceana, Surfrider Foundation, Earthjustice, Turtle Island Restoration Network, Nassau Hiking & Outdoor Club, Lee (MA) Greener Gateway Committee, South Shore Audubon Society (Freeport, NY), Sierra Club, League of Conservation Voters, Futureswell, Ocean Conservancy, Environment America, Food & Water Watch, Waterspirit, Business Alliance to Protect the Atlantic, Clean Ocean Action, Jersey Coast Anglers Association (NJ), American Littoral Society, Save Coastal Wildlife, Environmental Protection Information Center, Defenders of Wildlife, Ocean Defense Initiative, Center for Biological Diversity, The Ocean Project, North Carolina Coastal Federation, Animal Welfare Institute, Wild Cumberland, Climate Reality Project – North Broward and Palm Beach County Chapter, U.S. Climate Action Network, National Aquarium, American Bird Conservancy, and Hispanic Access Foundation.

    Supporters of the West Coast Protection Act include Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC), Oceana, Defenders of Wildlife, Earthjustice, Surfrider Foundation, Seattle Aquarium, Turtle Island Restoration Network, Nassau Hiking & Outdoor Club, Lee (MA) Greener Gateway Committee, South Shore Audubon Society (Freeport, NY), Sierra Club, League of Conservation Voters, Futureswell, Ocean Conservancy, Environment America, WILDCOAST, Food & Water Watch, Environmental Protection Information Center, Ocean Defense Initiative, Center for Biological Diversity, The Ocean Project, Business Alliance to Protect the Pacific Coast, Animal Welfare Institute, Wild Cumberland, Climate Reality Project – North Broward and Palm Beach County Chapter, U.S. Climate Action Network, American Bird Conservancy, Surf Industry Members Association, Business Alliance for Protecting the Pacific Coast (BAPPC), Clean Ocean Action, and Hispanic Access Foundation.

    Supporters of the Florida Coastal Protection Act include Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC), Oceana, Defenders of Wildlife, Earthjustice, Healthy Gulf, League of Conservation Voters, Environment America, Surfrider Foundation, Turtle Island Restoration Network, Nassau Hiking & Outdoor Club, Lee (MA) Greener Gateway Committee, South Shore Audubon Society (Freeport, NY), Sierra Club, Ocean Conservancy, Food & Water Watch, Ocean Defense Initiative, Center for Biological Diversity, The Ocean Project, Animal Welfare Institute, Wild Cumberland, Climate Reality Project – North Broward and Palm Beach County Chapter, U.S. Climate Action Network, American Bird Conservancy, Clean Ocean Action, and Hispanic Access Foundation.

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI Economics: Christopher J Waller: Welcoming remarks – “Fed Listens”

    Source: Bank for International Settlements

    Thank you, Alberto, it is great to be back in St. Louis. And thank you to everyone here for this great turnout, which is itself a big part of what we are trying to accomplish today.1

    Fed Listens is about hearing from the public on the Federal Reserve’s approach to monetary policy, and that begins with active and broad participation. Your interest and engagement in the work of the Fed is an essential first step in this process of consultation. In addition to the valuable information that Fed policymakers receive at these events, engagement with the public contributes to a broader understanding of the important role that monetary policy plays in the economy.

    As we have heard from President Musalem, the Federal Reserve was, in important ways, actually designed to promote this kind of engagement and input from the public. Unusually among agencies of the federal government, the Fed is located in and part of every region of the United States. Reserve Banks such as the St. Louis Fed carry out a number of important functions, but among the most important is ensuring that the concerns and priorities of the communities each Reserve Bank serves are reflected in monetary policy decisions made in Washington.

    This is something I know very well, having served here as executive vice president and research director for nearly a dozen years. I advised on monetary policy while engaging with people throughout the Eighth District, hearing their concerns about how they were faring in the economy, and how they were affected by inflation, interest rates, and the state of the job market. I learned a lot about the economies of Missouri, Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky, Tennessee, Mississippi, and Arkansas (see, I haven’t forgotten!). But I learned just as much about how important it is to hear from people directly about their experiences as well as their perceptions, which are sometimes just as consequential for the economy. We call this part of the “soft” data that supplements the hard numbers of the government statistics that policymakers eagerly await. The “hard” data is indispensable for setting monetary policy, but we can’t get a full and detailed picture of the economy without the soft data you can provide.

    Fed Listens is directly connected to the Fed’s review of our long-run goals and strategy for monetary policy, referred to as our framework, which was last updated five years ago. But in a larger sense, it is part of a broader process of consultation with the public that never stops. We know that individuals, families, businesses, and communities are significantly affected by decisions we make to promote a healthy economy. We want-in fact, we need-to know how you have been impacted. We need to know how inflation and interest rates are affecting consumers. We need to know how rates are affecting the cost and access to credit by businesses small and large. We need to know how you expect the economy to evolve over the coming months and years, and how that is influencing your plans for the future.

    In conclusion, I will say again how great it is to be back in St. Louis, and I look forward to hearing from all of you.

    Thank you.


    MIL OSI Economics

  • MIL-OSI Economics: François Villeroy de Galhau: Preserving our transatlantic values, beyond present unpredictability

    Source: Bank for International Settlements

    Ladies and Gentlemen, 

    It is my pleasure to be here in New York City; and I would like to express my sincere gratitude to Noel Lateef and the Board of Directors of the Foreign Policy Association (FPA) for organising this event and awarding me the FPA medal. It really strikes a chord with me, as I will explain, and even more today when our transatlantic ties are so unfortunately under stress. 

    I. A very special gratitude to the FPA, and to your country

    I am both honoured and humbled to be included among the distinguished recipients of the FPA medal. These include prominent central bankers, such as Paul Volcker of the Federal Reserve or Jean-Claude Trichet of the European Central Bank (ECB) and the Banque de France. This medal also has a personal resonance. I discovered in depth your beautiful country in March 1990, during a month-long trip of 15 so called “Young European leaders” invited by the German Marshall Fund. The United States welcomed us with open arms, taking us from New York City to Seattle, and from Detroit to Raleigh (NC). This was a time of hope, four months after the fall of the Berlin Wall; this was a time of mutual trust across the Atlantic built on the victory of freedom and democracy. This trip left me with a lasting friendship and admiration for the American people. 

    In a more collective dimension, I like to think that this medal is a testament to the common values and principles that this Association and the central banking community both strive to uphold. Your Association was founded at the end of the First World War by Americans committed [with President Woodrow Wilson] to creating closer ties between nations. It has since worked tirelessly to foster meaningful dialogue on the most pressing international issues, notably through its famous World Leadership Forum. This is especially important at a time when multilateralism is experiencing an unprecedented crisis. 

    Another common value, beside dialogue, is the importance of public engagement. For more than a century, the FPA and its Great Decisions programme have successfully promoted a more effective participation by American citizens in international affairs. Greater knowledge is indeed the key to informed opinion, and thus to a stronger democracy. At both the Banque de France and the ECB, fostering engagement with the wider public is also a priority. We regularly organise events directly involving the public such as the “Rencontres de la politique monétaire” [Monetary Policy Forums] similar to the “US Fed listens”. Greater clarity and transparency for our fellow citizens also helps to better anchor inflation expectations and thus to better ensure our price stability mandate.

    II. How to restore trust?

    Hence, let me please speak here not only as the French Governor, but as a committed friend of your country and a dedicated European. It is more crucial than ever, across the Atlantic, (1) to tell the truth, (2) to fully assess the damage of a trade war, and (3) to open the way for a possible positive dialogue.

    1) Telling the truth

    We, Europeans, heard with surprise some weeks ago that “the EU was created to screw the US”. With due respect, let me recall history. The European Union was constructed after WWII to lastingly establish peace, democracy and the market economy in Europe. These are three key American values, and this Union was legitimately founded with American support, as was the Franco-German reconciliation – so difficult, yet so decisive. 

    Furthermore, it is important to set the record straight on economics. No, international trade is not a zero-sum game, where one country’s gain is necessarily another country’s loss. On the contrary, it is the most effective way to prosper together by exchanging goods and services, ideas, talent, and innovation. And yes, our transatlantic bond is deep, balanced and mutually beneficial. The United States and the EU are the world’s two largest economies, maintaining one of the largest bilateral economic relationships, which amounted to around USD 900 billion in goods and USD 800 billion in services in 2023i. While the EU runs a trade in goods surplus with the United States (USD 234 billion in 2023), the services deficit has widened substantially in the last years (USD 125 billion in 2023)ii. Net primary income flows in favor of US firms – mostly composed of investment income such as profits and asset returns – also offset the trade in goods surplus, ultimately leading to a balanced current account (USD 19 billion in 2023). The effective applied tariffs between the EU and the United States were close before recent developments, with the EU imposing a 3.95% tariff on US products, while the United States applied a 3.5% tariff on EU productsiii. And let me remind here the obvious: value-added tax (VAT) is not a customs duty; it is levied on the final value of imported and domestically produced goods equally, like the sales tax in the US. EU and US firms have long established a robust investment presence in each other’s markets. European majority-owned affiliates directly employed an estimated 5.3 million US workers in 2023iv. European-based investors play a crucial role in the strength of the US economy, representing close to 50% of all foreign holdings of US securities in 2023v

    2) The possible damage of a trade war is huge

    The new measures announced as well as the increasing unpredictability, constitute a major negative shock to the global economy, but first and foremost to the US economy. 

    According to convergent analyses by several US and international banks and today by the IMF, the United States could suffer in 2025 from an average estimated loss of around one percentage point in annual growth and a similar-sized rise in underlying inflation. But bad news for the US is bad news for all, and for Europe. According to preliminary assessments, there could be a direct negative impact of at least a quarter of a percentage point to euro area GDP growth in 2025. Nevertheless, this depends on the outcome of the 90-day pause on reciprocal tariffs. The impact on inflation remains more uncertain but could be as a whole negative. Our baseline scenario for France and the euro area remains however that of an exit from inflation – returning to our 2% target this year – without a recession.

    Financial markets reacted very negatively to these trade announcements with the unusual combination of a sharp drop in US equity indexes, a rise in US long term bond yields, and a broad-based decline in the US dollar value. The economic uncertainty may possibly threaten financial stability. Such deeply negative financial effects would also result from attacks on the independence and credibility of central banks, as we saw very recently. 

    I don’t mean that the latest globalisation wave was a fairy tale: it had its problems and its imbalances, both social and financial. But the current lose-lose game will obviously increase them, and in no way solve them.

    3) Is there a way for a possible positive dialogue?

    I still hope there is, and let me share three more positive reflections to conclude with:

    a) Let us use the 90-day pause to seriously talk. The least economically harmful option would be indeed to negotiate – a bold European proposal, zero-for-zero tariffs for industrial goods, is already on the table – and then de-escalate the situation rather than setting off a transatlantic spiral of tariff hikes. So far, Europeans have reacted in a remarkably united and calm manner. The European Commission has prepared a series of retaliatory measures – in case it would be unfortunately needed – but deferred its application. It is also in Europe’s interest to maintain open trade ties with a maximum amount of partners from the Americas to Asia: increasing the number of balanced free trade agreements – including Mercosur – is a strategic priority.

    b) Europe and France also need to become stronger. The only positive I see in this situation, as I said already last November with my German colleague Joachim Nagel , it is a wake-up call for Europe. This is of course the case in terms of defence. But also, in economic matters, where we have the duty and the means to better master our own destiny. We need a “general mobilisation” focusing on three imperatives, 3 ‘i’s taking the best of the impressive economic success of America, or if you prefer, size multiplied by muscle multiplied by speed. First, we need to integrate the single market more. This means playing on its size – as large in GDP terms as the United States – by removing internal barriers in several areas such as services and energy. We also need to invest better, giving priority to the most promising breakthrough innovations, and particularly those related to AI. To succeed, we need to build financial muscle through a genuine Savings and Investments Union (SIU) fostering more our abundant private savings towards equity and venture capital. Finally, we need to innovate faster. Europe needs simplification: less bureaucracy, fewer procedures and shorter deadlines. But simplification is not deregulation, the European approachvii  will remain firm on the objectives, but be more nimble in design. And to successfully implement these three imperatives, we urgently need a binding, visible and not too distant calendar: such a calendar will mobilise all our political and economic forces, as did in the past the 1 January 1993 for the single market and the 1 January 1999 for the single currency.

    c) Europe and the United States can still commit to a “pragmatic multilateralism”, more focused on some practical themes of common interest, to name just a few: financial stability, cross-border payments and crypto-assets, cybersecurity, the fight against financial crime and the prevention of extreme climate events. Let us preserve the multilateral institutions such as the IMF and World Bank, born and hosted in this great country, with more focused ambitions.

    I will conclude by quoting Alexis de Tocqueville, a famous Frenchman – you may recall his influential work “Democracy in America” – who also had the privilege of discovering America during a memorable study trip two hundred years ago. “There is nothing more fruitful in wonders than the art of being free”.viii I mentioned shared transatlantic values: one cardinal value, freedom, is the driving force behind America’s outstanding economic performance. Let us continue as much as possible to cultivate it together, through trade, innovation and robust dialogue! Thank you for your attention. 


    MIL OSI Economics

  • MIL-OSI Economics: Chia Der Jiun: Charting a steady course in a changing world

    Source: Bank for International Settlements

    IMAS EXCO
    Ms Carmen Wee, IMAS CEO
    Ladies and Gentlemen

    Good morning. I am delighted to join you today at the 28th IMAS Annual Investment Conference.

    This year’s conference theme – “Navigating an Evolving Landscape” – is apt but may be understating the environment we are in today. Fundamental shifts in trade policy and the geo-strategic landscape have led us into a period of heightened uncertainty in the global economy and volatility in financial markets. In this new landscape of uncertainty and volatility, the asset management industry plays an important role in sustaining investor confidence and contributing to the resilience of markets.

    Role of Asset Management Industry to Manage Uncertainty 

    Let me focus on 3 areas that the asset management industry can help in:

    a. One, build more resilient markets;
    b. Two, provide products and portfolios that meet investors’ diversification and retirement needs; and
    c. Three, support better informed investors.

    Resilient Markets

    There are several components that contribute towards more resilient markets. Transparency, market integrity and settlement efficiency are fundamental. Regulators have a role in putting these right. Market infrastructure operators also have a role. Trading venues should be liquidity enhancing rather than liquidity fragmenting. Margin requirements should be set at levels that avoid amplifying funding stresses.

    Market participants too play a role. Leverage needs to be deployed carefully to mitigate procyclical deleveraging. To be clear, market functionality has generally remained resilient through stress episodes, including through the sharp market repricing of risks and uncertainty in April. But we are also all aware of episodes where volatility spiked and market functionality deteriorated. In August last year, Japanese equities fell sharply and VIX spiked following the unwinding of leveraged carry trades. Earlier this month, 10-year Treasuries rose 50bps over a short period of time, while the dollar weakened. A commonly heard attribution has been the unwind of leveraged trades. Crowded leveraged trades are vulnerable to changing policy, economic and market conditions. Market resilience is better assured through a diversity of market participants, employing a myriad of strategies which provides depth and two-way flows. Let me give the example of Singapore’s FX market, where MAS had sought to foster a diverse ecosystem of market participants to support depth and stability.

    a. In FX markets, we made efforts since 2018 via our Foreign Exchange E-Trading (“FXET”) initiative, to strengthen infrastructure capabilities. This has improved pricing and trade-fill efficiency while reducing latency. Over time, a diverse group of FX players have anchored their matching and pricing engines in Singapore to serve regional market participants. This enhancement of FX capabilities and infrastructure has supported FX price discovery and market functionality in this region during both Business-as-Usual and under stressed periods. Our eFX ecosystem continues to grow well with a diversity of market participants including platforms, banks, real money, hedge funds, and corporate treasuries. This has contributed to Singapore’s continued growth as a leading FX hub in Asia, with the average daily traded volumes crossing US$ 1 trillion in 2024.1

    At this time of heightened uncertainty, MAS is closely watching that Singapore’s foreign exchange and S$ money markets continue to function in an orderly manner. We also monitor the functionality of key funding markets in coordination with central banks globally.

    Products and Portfolios that Meet Diversification and Retirement Needs

    Let me turn to my second point. Asset managers are key to providing fund products that serve the savings and retirement needs for our region. Their products should contribute to portfolio diversification and help investors manage market volatility while investing for the long term. In building and delivering such products,:

    a. Asset managers must have in place an effective liquidity and market risk management framework. There is a need to run regular stress testing on your portfolio risks under conditions when volatility spikes and correlations break down. Funds should also stress your ability to handle redemption spikes amidst adverse market movements. Global regulatory bodies such as the FSB and IOSCO have made calls for further enhancements to strengthen the industry’s resilience in both normal and stressed market conditions, by reinforcing consistency between the funds’ investment strategy and liquidity of fund assets, with redemption terms. In line with this, MAS will study the need to review the current framework for liquidity risk management by asset managers, and will engage the industry when ready.
    b. Product distributors and providers should also ensure that marketing and advertisements are fair and balanced. Marketing should not over-emphasise product features that are not sustainable across a robust range of scenarios. A sudden withdrawal of such product features could cause a loss of confidence and a redemption spike.
    c. Clear and timely disclosures should be provided to investors, to enable them to make well-informed investment decisions in fast-changing market conditions.

    To provide retail investors with a wider set of investment choices, MAS is also currently consulting on a framework for private market investment funds for retail investors.

    a. Private market investments, such as private equity and infrastructure, generally have longer investment horizons and a differentiated set of risk factors that are different than public market investments. Retail investors may be interested in gaining exposure to this asset class as part of a well-diversified investment portfolio.
    b. We welcome feedback from all IMAS members as we work towards developing a balanced and risk-calibrated framework that can support the growth of a robust and sustainable market for such retail funds.

    Support Better Informed Investors

    Third, asset managers support better informed investors, through continued partnership with MAS and the MoneySense community on investor education.

    When MAS launched the national financial education programme MoneySense in 2003, one of its goals was to support consumers in becoming more self-reliant in financial affairs. This was important as consumers needed to exercise their judgement, evaluate the suitability of investments for their own needs, even as more complex and varied products entered the financial markets.

    Over the years, industry associations, including IMAS, community organisations and consumer bodies have been valuable partners. Together, MoneySense’s activities and programmes were launched to enhance consumers’ understanding of financial affairs, whether it is in managing money, insurance protection, or investing and planning for retirement.

    IMAS’ Contributions to Industry

    Let me say a few words of appreciation for IMAS’ role in galvanizing the industry.

    I am happy to see IMAS’ continued efforts to bring partners together to uplift the asset management sector. As I mentioned earlier, IMAS has played an important role in improving public education through your ongoing partnerships with MoneySense, SGX and FundSingapore. IMAS has also contributed efforts towards reskilling and upskilling for industry professionals by developing the iLEARN platform since 2019 as a one-stop platform for relevant training programmes in line with market shifts.

    I am also encouraged to know that IMAS has taken the lead to support its members to deepen expertise in sustainable finance. I am happy today to be part of a significant milestone – the launch of the IMAS Climate Handbook in partnership with Amundi. This practical guide will enable asset managers to integrate climate considerations into risk assessments as well as investment frameworks.

    In closing, as regulator and developer of the asset management industry, we share a common goal with market participants to keep our markets stable and vibrant and to ensure its sustainable growth in the face of global headwinds. MAS will continue to partner with IMAS and its members to build a more resilient, competitive, and innovative asset management ecosystem.

    Thank you and wishing you all a fulfilling Conference ahead.


    MIL OSI Economics

  • MIL-OSI USA: Heinrich, Luján Blast Trump Admin’s Attacks on Head Start, Demand RFK Jr. Immediately Unfreeze Head Start Funding & Reverse Firings of Early Childhood Education Workers

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator Ben Ray Luján (D-New Mexico)
    In a letter to RFK Jr., Heinrich & Luján demand answers on Trump Admin’s actions to undermine Head Start as Trump reportedly plans to eliminate the program
    WASHINGTON — U.S. Senator Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.) and U.S. Senator Ben Ray Luján (D-N.M.), one of only two Head Start graduates to serve in the Senate, sent a letter to Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. to demand the Trump Administration stop its attacks on Head Start programs. In their letter, Heinrich and Luján reminded Secretary Kennedy of his legal obligation to administer Head Start, and demanded that HHS immediately unfreeze Head Start funding, reverse the mass firing of Head Start workers, and stop  gutting offices that ensure high-quality early childhood education services are available for thousands of children and families in New Mexico and nationwide.
    In New Mexico, Head Start and early Head Start programs serve 8,800 children living below the poverty line, including 271 children experiencing homelessness, and 139 children in foster care in 2022. 
    “We write to express our strong opposition to the actions you have taken to directly attack and undermine the federal Head Start program. Since day one, this Administration has taken unacceptable actions to withhold and delay funding, fire Head Start staff, and gut high-quality services for children. Already this year, this Administration has withheld almost $1 billion in federal grant funding from Head Start programs, a 37 percent decrease compared to the amount of funding awarded during the same period last year,” the senators wrote in a letter to Secretary Kennedy. “It is abundantly clear that these actions are part of a broader effort to ultimately eliminate the program altogether, as the Administration reportedly plans to do in its fiscal year 2026 budget proposal.”
    The senators detailed how the program plays an instrumental role in supporting kids and families across the country, writing: “Head Start provides early childhood education and comprehensive health and social services to nearly 800,000 young children every year in communities across this country, and employs about 250,000 dedicated staff. Head Start is a critical source of child care for working families, particularly in rural and Tribal communities, where Head Start programs are often the only option for high-quality child care services. Head Start programs ensure children receive appropriate health and dental care, nutrition support, and referrals to other critical services for parents, such as job training, adult education, nutrition services, and housing support.”
    “You even acknowledged the value of Head Start following a recent visit to a Virginia Head Start center,” the senators wrote, contrasting that statement of support with the Trump administration’s actions. “However, as a result of your actions to withhold and delay funding and undermine the administration of this vital program, Head Start centers are in serious jeopardy and have already had their day to day operations impacted. Programs are increasingly worried that they will not be able to make payroll, pay rent, and remain open to serve the hundreds of thousands of children and families who depend on their services in communities across the nation.”
    “Since the very start of this Administration, Head Start programs have been under attack,” the senators wrote, detailing office closures and funds that were frozen for Head Start grants across the country. “At one point, the National Head Start Association reported 37 programs serving nearly 15,000 children across the country could not access their federal funding. Head Start programs operate with thin margins and on short-term budgets from HHS, and without any communication from the Administration about the status of funding, programs were forced to temporarily close or to lay off staff.”
    The senators underscored how the gutting of Head Start offices and the firing of staff who keep the federal program running puts the entire program in jeopardy, “On April 1st, you abruptly closed five of the ten regional offices that help local grantees administer Head Start programs in 22 states. This left hundreds of programs without dedicated points of contact to address mission critical issues like approving grant renewals and modifications, investigating child health and safety incidents, and providing training and technical assistance to ensure high-quality services for children. While some grantees were assigned a new program specialist, we understand many have not been receiving responses to their inquiries. This is on top of the estimated 97 Office of Head Start central office staff that were terminated due to their probationary status and the recent reduction in force. You promised ‘radical transparency’ as Secretary, yet it is unclear how these actions will improve Head Start programs, and you and your staff refuse to respond to basic inquiries and requests for information.”
    Importantly, the senators noted that if Head Start funding is kept frozen by the Trump Administration, many more programs could be forced to close.
    “Head Start grantees are still waiting on payments and grant renewals from the Office of Head Start, including programs whose grants end on April 30th, 2025. These notices should have gone out by now, yet we are concerned to hear programs report they have received little to no correspondence regarding their grant renewals,” the senators continued, detailing how local Head Start programs are receiving no notice for the path forward for grant funding. “Additionally, because we started fiscal year 2025 under a short-term continuing resolution, as is usual, some grantees have only received partial funding for the first few months of the year. But with a full year funding bill in place, these grantees should have received full funding by now, yet some are reporting that they have not received the full amount of their grants and will run out of funds this month or next. On Wednesday, April 16th, the delays in Head Start funding led to the closure of Head Start centers serving more than 400 children in Sunnyside, Washington.”
    “The Administration has a legal and moral obligation to disburse Head Start funds to programs and to uphold the program’s promise to provide high-quality early education services to low income children and families across this country,” the senators stated. “There is no justifiable reason for the delay in funding we have seen over the last two months, and you have refused to offer any kind of explanation.”
    The senators concluded by warning that eliminating Head Start would be devastating, demanding answers on the Trump Administration’s actions, and demanding the reversal of these actions: “[W]e urge you to immediately reinstate fired staff across all Offices of Head Start, and cease all actions to delay the awarding and disbursement of funding to Head Start programs across this country.”
    Community leaders in New Mexico are weighing in on the grave consequences of the Trump Administration’s continuous assault on Head Start for children’s futures:
    “As a Head Start Leader for over 40 years, I have witnessed firsthand the transformative impact Head Start has on children, families, and communities. Eliminating Head Start would be nothing less than a national tragedy. It would be a direct attack on the country’s most vulnerable children and families – those who have the least and need the most.” said Patricia Grovey Evans, President of New Mexico Head Start Association.
    “Defunding the Head Start program would be a grave injustice to young Zuni children, who depend on this vital resource to embark on their educational journey steeped in cultural identity and moral values. Early childhood education is not merely about teaching; it lays the foundation for self-awareness and community connection that will guide them throughout their lives. Cutting this crucial funding threatens to strip away their opportunity to nurture the skills and cultural heritage essential for their growth and future success,” said Anthony Sanchez, Head Councilman for Zuni Tribe.
    “Jemez Pueblo’s Walatowa Head Start Language Immersion Program offers a unique and valuable community-based education delivered solely in our Towa language. Education of our youngest community members is important and to have that education provided in our native language is of the utmost importance. As Native people, it was vital that our Head Start program incorporated the Pueblo’s vibrant traditional calendar through art, music and dance while also incorporating other subjects like math and science. Walatowa Head Start Language Immersion Program serves as a model for other tribal Head Start programs who wish to teach the children in their native language. Our community worked for over a decade to make this education culturally responsive and if funding for Head Start were to disappear, so would our community’s work. We cannot allow this to happen,” said Carnell Chosa, First Lieutenant Governor of Jemez Pueblo.
    “As someone working on the front lines of early childhood education in New Mexico, I am deeply alarmed by the proposed cuts to Head Start in President Trump’s leaked budget. At the Now Mexico Association for the Education of Young Children (NMAEYC), we see firsthand how essential this program is especially for families inour rural and underserved communities. Head Start has been a cornerstone for opportunity and stability for low-income families for 60 years. Eliminating this program would jeopardize early learning, health, and nutrition services for more than 150,000 children across the country, including thousands here in New Mexico. Head Start is not just a program- it’s a lifeline. Gutting this critical funding, would harm our most vulnerable children, undermine family stability, and set our state back for generations. Continued investment in Head Start is not optional – it’s essential to ensuring that every New Mexico child, regardless of zip code, has a fair shot at success,” said Alicia B. Borrego, MBA, Executive Director of New Mexico Association for the Education of Young Children.
    “Children are our most precious resource. Cutting funding for Head Start and Early Head Start, which serve nearly 8,800 of New Mexico’s most vulnerable children, jeopardizes our children’s future, our community’s wellbeing, and our economy. These programs provide vital education and support families and their health, improving immunization rates, healthcare access, and social-emotional, language, and cognitive development. While New Mexico has made bold investments in early childhood, strong federal support is essential for every child to succeed in school and to flourish in life,” said Gabrielle Uballez, Executive Director of New Mexico Voices for Children.
    “Head Start has been a massively important force in changing the game for young children. The science tells us that 85% of brain development happens before age 5, so this is a common sense investment, and one that has contributed to decades of American prosperity,” said Kate Noble, President and CEO of Growing Up New Mexico.
    “Thanks to my experience working as a Head Start teacher in Santa Fe, I’ve seen firsthand how the Head Start Program change lives – giving our youngest leaners the solid foundation they need to succeed in school and beyond. Cutting this program would mean turning our backs on the children who need us most. This program isn’t just early education; it’s lifeblood for families who are doing their best with so little. Taking it away would break something sacred in our community.” said Deyanira Contreras, Director of Kids Campus at SFCC.
    Alongside Heinrich and Luján, the letter is signed by U.S. Senators Patty Murray (D-Wash.), Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.), Jack Reed (D-R.I.), Mazie K. Hirono (D-Hawaii), Andy Kim (D-N.J.), Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), Lisa Blunt Rochester (D-Del.), Peter Welch (D-Vt.), Gary Peters (D-Mich.), Michael Bennet (D-Colo.), Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.), Ruben Gallego (D-Ariz.), Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Jacky Rosen (D-Nev.), Tina Smith (D-Minn.), John Fetterman (D-Pa.), Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.), Chris Coons (D-Del.), Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), Mark Kelly (D-Ariz.), Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.), Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), Catherine Cortez Masto (D-Nev.), Tim Kaine (D-Minn.), Alex Padilla (D-Calif.), Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), Elissa Slotkin (D-Minn.), Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), Raphael Warnock (D-Ga.), Cory Booker (D-N.J.), Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.), Ed Markey (D-Mass.), Angus King (I-Maine), Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii), Angela Alsobrooks (D-Md.), and Mark Warner (D-Va.).
    The full text of the letter is here and below:
    Dear Secretary Kennedy:
    We write to express our strong opposition to the actions you have taken to directly attack and undermine the federal Head Start program. Since day one, this Administration has taken unacceptable actions to withhold and delay funding, fire Head Start staff, and gut high-quality services for children. Already this year, this Administration has withheld almost $1 billion in federal grant funding from Head Start programs, a 37 percent decrease compared to the amount of funding awarded during the same period last year. It is abundantly clear that these actions are part of a broader effort to ultimately eliminate the program altogether, as the Administration reportedly plans to do in its fiscal year 2026 budget proposal.
    Head Start provides early childhood education and comprehensive health and social services to nearly 800,000 young children every year in communities across this country, and employs about 250,000 dedicated staff. Head Start is a critical source of child care for working families, particularly in rural and Tribal communities, where Head Start programs are often the only option for high-quality child care services. HeadStart programs ensure children receive appropriate health and dental care, nutrition support, and referrals to other critical services for parents, such as job training, adult education, nutrition services, and housing support.
    You even acknowledged the value of Head Start following a recent visit to a Virginia Head Start center, where you said, “I had a very inspiring tour. I saw a devoted staff and a lot of happy children. They are getting the kind of education and socialization they need, and they are also getting a couple of meals a day.”
    However, as a result of your actions to withhold and delay funding and undermine the administration of this vital program, Head Start centers are in serious jeopardy and have already had their day to day operations impacted. Programs are increasingly worried that they will not be able to make payroll, pay rent, and remain open to serve the hundreds of thousands of children and families who depend on their services in communities across the nation.
    Since the very start of this Administration, Head Start programs have been under attack. On January 27th, 2025, the Office of Management and Budget issued a memo (M-25-13) that suddenly froze the disbursement of grant funding for federal programs and services government-wide, including Head Start. Despite the Administration’s clarification that Head Start programs would not be the target of the funding freeze, many Head Startprograms across the country were unable to draw down their grant funds through the Payment Management System (PMS) for weeks. At one point, the National Head StartAssociation reported 37 programs serving nearly 15,000 children across the country could not access their federal funding. Head Start programs operate with thin margins and on short-term budgets from HHS, and without any communication from the Administration about the status of funding, programs were forced to temporarily close or to lay off staff. In Wisconsin, the National Centers for Learning Excellence, which serves more than 200 children and their families, shut down for a week and laid off staff due to the funding freeze.
    On April 1st, you abruptly closed five of the ten regional offices that help local grantees administer Head Start programs in 22 states. This left hundreds of programs without dedicated points of contact to address mission critical issues like approving grant renewals and modifications, investigating child health and safety incidents, and providing training and technical assistance to ensure high-quality services for children. While some grantees were assigned a new program specialist, we understand many have not been receiving responses to their inquiries. This is on top of the estimated 97 Office of Head Start central office staff that were terminated due to their probationary status and the recent reduction in force. You promised “radical transparency” as Secretary, yet it is unclear how these actions will improve Head Start programs, and you and your staff refuse to respond to basic inquiries and requests for information.
    On March 14th, 2025, the Office of Head Start (OHS) notified all Head Start programs that “the use of federal funding for any training and technical assistance or other program expenditures that promote or take part in diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives” will not be approved and that any questions should be directed to regional offices. Programs have not received any guidance for what would be considered “DEI” but this policy is potentially in direct conflict with statutory and regulatory program requirements, such as providing culturally and linguistically appropriate instructional services for English learners. Many programs cannot direct questions to regional staff, as half of regional offices were abruptly closed, and as unprecedented actions are being taken to delay and withhold funding, Head Start programs have been intentionally left with little to no guidance.
    Head Start programs are now arbitrarily required to provide justifications for each draw down of funds that is necessary to operate their programs, despite already receiving a federal grant award for these purposes. As of April 14th, Head Startprograms have reportedly received correspondence from an email address “defendthespend@hhs.gov” requiring programs to submit a “specific description of why the funds are necessary and why they are aligned to the award” before programs can have funding disbursed. It has been reported that political appointees must sign off on every draw down of funds. This creates an illusion of improving oversight but only serves to add unnecessary red tape by requiring the manual sign off on hundreds of thousands of individual actions annually across the Department based on two to three sentence justifications. Already some grantees have reported delays in receiving funds, and have reported that furloughs or closures are imminent if funds are not released. For an administration that purports to value local autonomy and efficiency in federally funded programs, your actions have achieved the exact opposite.
    Finally, Head Start grantees are still waiting on payments and grant renewals from the Office of Head Start, including programs whose grants end on April 30th, 2025. These notices should have gone out by now, yet we are concerned to hear programs report they have received little to no correspondence regarding their grant renewals. Additionally, because we started fiscal year 2025 under a short-term continuing resolution, as is usual, some grantees have only received partial funding for the first few months of the year. But with a full year funding bill in place, these grantees should have received full funding by now, yet some are reporting that they have not received the full amount of their grants and will run out of funds this month or next. On Wednesday, April 16th, the delays in Head Start funding led to the closure of Head Start centers serving more than 400 children in Sunnyside, Washington.
    The Administration has a legal and moral obligation to disburse Head Start funds to programs and to uphold the program’s promise to provide high-quality early education services to low income children and families across this country. The fiscal year 2025 appropriations act provided $12.3 billion for Head Start, the same as the fiscal year 2024 level. The Head Start Act includes an explicit formula for how appropriated funds should be allocated. There is no justifiable reason for the delay in funding we have seen over the last two months, and you have refused to offer any kind of explanation. However, this week leaked fiscal year 2026 budget documents indicated the Office of Management and Budget was directing the Department, consistent with the Administration’s proposal to eliminate Head Start in fiscal year 2026, to “ensure to the extent allowable FY2025 funds are available to close out the program.” If this explains any of the delay in awarding fiscal year 2025 funding, we want to be clear, no funds were provided in fiscal year 2025 to “close out the program,” and it would be wholly unacceptable and likely illegal if the Department tries to carry out this directive.
    Finally, the leaked budget documents provided a justification, albeit brief, for eliminating Head Start in fiscal year 2026 that makes this Administration’s priorities clear and puts the Department’s actions over the last several months in context. The Administration argues that eliminating Head Start, “is consistent with the Administration’s goals of returning education to the States and increasing parental choice.” It is shocking to see an argument that eliminating a program that provides comprehensive early childhood care and education to 800,000 children and their families would increase parental choice. It is particularly concerning to see that argument in the context of the significant delay in awarding fiscal year 2025 appropriated funds and what that indicates about the intent behind the Department’s actions. We believe it is obvious that eliminating Head Start would be detrimental to hundreds of thousands of children and families. Similarly, we believe it is obvious that delaying funding like we have seen over the last two months, forcing Head Startprograms to close, and leaving families to scramble to find quality, affordable alternatives puts the education and well-being of some of the most vulnerable young children in America at risk. In our view, that is unacceptable.
    Therefore, we urge you to immediately reinstate fired staff across all Offices of HeadStart, and cease all actions to delay the awarding and disbursement of funding to HeadStart programs across this country.
    Please provide us with a written response to the questions below no later than 10 days from receipt:
    1. Will you reinstate the staff who administer Head Start programs and reopen the closed regional offices responsible for overseeing Head Start programs in 22 states?
    a) When is HHS going to share information on the reorganization plan for the consolidation of the regional offices?
    b) Please provide the contact information for each program specialist designated to the 22 states who lost their regional office.
    c) Who is responsible for ensuring there are no delays or lapses in funding, nor any disruptions to Head Start program operations now that these states do not have a regional office?
    2. How many employees at the Offices of Head Start have been terminated, including the five regional offices and the central office?
    a) Which officials at HHS were involved in the staffing reduction decisions for OHS and what planning, if any, was undertaken prior to these reductions? Please describe the events that unfolded and name each office that was involved in the decision. Further, please name the official(s) who approved the staffing reductions.
    3. Can you confirm that the Administration will distribute all Head Start funds appropriated by Congress to Head Start programs in FY 25, as required by the HeadStart Act?
    4. Please provide a list of all grantees with 5-year Head Start grant renewals that startbetween now and the end of the fiscal year: May 1st, June 1st, July 1st, August 1st, and September 1st.
    a) Will any funding be delayed for grantees that are due to receive their annual funding on May 1st or beyond?
    5. Why are funding awards delayed for grantees that received partial awards during the first continuing resolution for FY25?
    a) When can HHS guarantee that all funds will be awarded for partially funded Head Start programs?
    6. What is the “Tier 2” department for review that is delaying drawn down for HeadStart programs in the Payment Management System?
    a) When should programs expect to receive their funds?
    b) Please provide all communication that went to Head Start grantees on the new review process.
    7. What guidance and clarifications have been provided to Head Start grantees on DEI expenditures?
    a) How is HHS evaluating Head Start programs’ expenditures and grant awards for DEI?
    b) What justifications are being used to prohibit DEI?

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI Security: Defense News: Southern Lightning: NIWC Atlantic, NSWC Crane Advance Navy’s Unmanned Mission

    Source: United States Navy

    SULLIVAN’S ISLAND, S.C. — Naval Information Warfare Center (NIWC) Atlantic completed a week of intensive research and communications testing on April 18 involving unmanned autonomous systems off the coast of Sullivan’s Island in partnership with Indiana-based Naval Surface Warfare Center, Crane Division (NSWC Crane) and U.S. Fleet Forces Command.

    MIL Security OSI

  • MIL-OSI Australia: New netball courts now open in Jacka

    Source: Northern Territory Police and Fire Services

    The fenced courts offer Gungahlin residents more options for community sport and leisure.

    In brief:

    • Four new netball courts have opened in Jacka, with plans for more.
    • Upgrades are also taking place at the five other district courts in Canberra.

    Four new netball courts are now open and ready to use in Jacka.

    The fenced courts offer Gungahlin residents more options for community sport and leisure.

    Netball is extremely popular in Canberra. Over 12,000 people play it, and this number is increasing.

    Courts suitable for both training and competition

    The Jacka courts have been designed in accordance with the Netball Australia Technical Standards.

    A second stage is planned, including:

    • an additional eight netball courts
    • LED lighting for night play
    • a pavilion.

    A city-wide program of upgrades

    The Jacka courts are part of an ongoing ACT Government investment into netball in ACT.

    All five district netball facilities are being upgraded. Work at each site includes court replacement and drainage improvements.

    Upgrades have already been completed at the:

    • Arawang Netball Association facility in Stirling
    • Canberra Netball Association facility in Lyneham.

    The next stage of upgrades began last month at the:

    • South Canberra Netball Association facility in Deakin
    • Tuggeranong Netball Association facility in Calwell
    • Belconnen Netball Association facility in Charnwood.

    These are expected to be finished in March 2025 – in time for the start of the winter netball season.

    Ready for community use

    The Jacka courts can be hired for training and play through the ACT Government Sportsground Booking System.

    The courts are not locked. This allows the community to use them when they are not booked.

    “Netball ACT is excited to see the four new netball courts at Jacka open to the community,” CEO of Netball ACT Sally Clark said.

    “Netball is the number one sport for women and girls in the ACT and with the population expanding in the north it is fantastic that the ACT Government has supported this growth with appropriate sporting facilities.”


    Get ACT news and events delivered straight to your inbox, sign up to our email newsletter:


    MIL OSI News

  • MIL-OSI: BexBack Introduces 100x Leverage, No KYC, and Exclusive Bonuses Amid Crypto Market Volatility

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    SINGAPORE, April 28, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — As Bitcoin has surged to new highs, reaching $95,000, BexBack, a fast-growing cryptocurrency derivatives platform, is positioning itself to help traders capitalize on market opportunities. Offering up to 100x leverage and no KYC, BexBack is redefining what it means to trade freely in today’s volatile market.

    In light of U.S. economic policies, such as recent tax adjustments and fiscal concerns, cryptocurrency has remained an attractive hedge. BexBack offers a suite of features that empower traders, including high leverage and enticing bonuses, to navigate the uncertain market with greater flexibility.

    Leverage Trading Made Simple

    With up to 100x leverage, BexBack enables traders to open larger positions with smaller capital. A small price movement in Bitcoin could result in significant gains, especially for those utilizing high leverage. However, traders are advised to manage risk carefully, as higher leverage also increases potential risks.

    Exclusive Bonuses to Maximize Profits

    1. $100 Welcome Bonus: Available to new users who deposit at least 0.01 BTC or 1000 USDT and complete their first trade. This bonus can help offset potential losses, offering a cushion as you start trading.
    2. 100% Deposit Bonus: Double your funds by applying for the 100% deposit bonus. While this bonus can’t be withdrawn, it can be used as margin, helping you open larger positions and trade with greater flexibility. Profits generated from trading with this bonus are fully withdrawable.

    Why Choose BexBack?

    • No KYC Requirements: BexBack prioritizes privacy, offering anonymous trading without the need for identity verification.
    • No Slippage, No Spread: Trades are executed at the set price, even with large positions, ensuring better price certainty.
    • Global Access: Available to users in the U.S., Canada, Europe, and more, with 24/7 customer support.
    • High-Leverage Trading: Trade with up to 100x leverage, maximizing your capital’s potential.

    About BexBack

    Launched in May 2024 and headquartered in Singapore, BexBack has quickly attracted over 500,000 users worldwide. The platform offers 100x leverage on Bitcoin, Ethereum, Solana, Cardano, and more, with no deposit fees and powerful promotional offers.

    Sign up on BexBack now, claim your exclusive bonus and start accumulating more BTC today!

    Website: www.bexback.com

    Contact: business@bexback.com

    Contact:
    Amanda
    business@bexback.com

    Disclaimer: This content is provided by BexBack. The statements, views, and opinions expressed in this content are solely those of the content provider and do not necessarily reflect the views of this media platform or its publisher. We do not endorse, verify, or guarantee the accuracy, completeness, or reliability of any information presented. We do not guarantee any claims, statements, or promises made in this article. This content is for informational purposes only and should not be considered financial, investment, or trading advice.Investing in crypto and mining-related opportunities involves significant risks, including the potential loss of capital. It is possible to lose all your capital. These products may not be suitable for everyone, and you should ensure that you understand the risks involved. Seek independent advice if necessary. Speculate only with funds that you can afford to lose. Readers are strongly encouraged to conduct their own research and consult with a qualified financial advisor before making any investment decisions. However, due to the inherently speculative nature of the blockchain sector—including cryptocurrency, NFTs, and mining—complete accuracy cannot always be guaranteed.

    Neither the media platform nor the publisher shall be held responsible for any fraudulent activities, misrepresentations, or financial losses arising from the content of this press release. In the event of any legal claims or charges against this article, we accept no liability or responsibility. Globenewswire does not endorse any content on this page.

    Legal Disclaimer: This media platform provides the content of this article on an “as-is” basis, without any warranties or representations of any kind, express or implied. We assume no responsibility for any inaccuracies, errors, or omissions. We do not assume any responsibility or liability for the accuracy, content, images, videos, licenses, completeness, legality, or reliability of the information presented herein. Any concerns, complaints, or copyright issues related to this article should be directed to the content provider mentioned above.

    Photos accompanying this announcement are available at:

    https://www.globenewswire.com/NewsRoom/AttachmentNg/b4b71c86-c6be-4be1-9564-7a837253637d

    https://www.globenewswire.com/NewsRoom/AttachmentNg/475f2845-0af3-4e33-8834-614f685b323a

    https://www.globenewswire.com/NewsRoom/AttachmentNg/43201cc0-e110-426c-b827-95701fced70b

    https://www.globenewswire.com/NewsRoom/AttachmentNg/fd260378-e7b1-46fa-a657-925c5dff1c0b

    The MIL Network