Israel targeted one of the buildings of the state-run Islamic Republic of Iran Broadcasting (IRIB) in Tehran on the fourth day of attacks on Iran, interrupting a live news broadcast, reports Press TV.
The attack, involving at least four bombs, struck the central building housing IRIB’s news department, while a live news broadcast was underway.
The transmission was briefly interrupted before Hassan Abedini, IRIB’s news director and deputy for political affairs, appeared on air to condemn the “terrorist crime”.
At the time of the attack, news anchor Sahar Emami was presenting the news. Despite the building trembling under the first strike, she stood her ground and continued the broadcast.
“Allah o Akbar” (God is Great), she proclaimed, drawing global attention to the war crime committed by Israel against Iran’s national broadcaster.
Moments later, another blast filled the studio with smoke and dust, forcing her to evacuate. She returned shortly after to join Abedini and share her harrowing experience.
“If I die, others will take my place and expose your crimes to the world,” she declared, looking straight into the camera with courage and composure.
Casualties unconfirmed While the number of casualties remains unconfirmed, insiders reported that several journalists inside the building had been injured in the bombing.
Israel’s war ministry promptly claimed responsibility for the attack.
Iran’s foreign ministry condemned the aggression on the state broadcaster as a “war crime” and called on the United Nations to take immediate action against the regime.
. . . But after a brief interruption on screen as debris fell from a bomb strike, Sahar Emami was back courageously presenting the news and denouncing the attack. Image: AJ screenshot APR
Foreign Ministry spokesman Esmaeil Baghaei denounced the attack and urged the international community to hold the regime accountable for its assault on the media.
“The world is watching: targeting Iran’s news agency #IRIB’s office during a live broadcast is a wicked act of war crime,” Baghaei wrote on X.
The Islamic Revolution Guards Corps (IRGC) also condemned the bombing of the IRIB news building, labeling it an “inhuman, criminal, and a terrorist act.”
CPJ ‘appalled’ by Israeli attack The Committee to Protect Journalists said it was “appalled by Israel’s bombing of Iran’s state TV channel while live on air.”
“Israel’s killing, with impunity, of almost 200 journalists in Gaza has emboldened it to target media elsewhere in the region,” Sara Qudah, the West Asia representative for CPJ, said in a statement after the attack on an IRIB building.
The Israeli regime has a documented history of targeting journalists globally. Since October 2023, it has killed more than 250 Palestinian journalists in the besieged Gaza Strip.
The regime launched its aggression against the Islamic Republic, including Tehran, early on Friday, leading to the assassination of several high-ranking military officials, nuclear scientists, and civilians, including women and children.
In response, Iran launched a barrage of missiles and drones late Friday night, followed by more retaliatory operations on Saturday and Sunday as part of Operation True Promise III.
In Israel, 24 people have been killed and hundreds wounded since hostilities began. In Iran, 224 people have been killed.
Plumes of black smoke billowing after an Israeli attack against Iran’s state broadcaster yesterday. Image: PressTV
New Zealand’s Foreign Minister Winston Peters says countries have the right to choose who enters their borders in response to reports that the Trump administration is planning to impose travel restrictions on three dozen nations, including three in the Pacific.
But opposition Labour’s deputy leader Carmel Sepuloni says the foreign minister should push back on the US proposal.
Tonga, Tuvalu and Vanuatu have reportedly been included in an expanded proposal of 36 additional countries for which the Trump administration is considering travel restrictions.
The plan was first reported by The Washington Post. A State Department spokesperson told the outlet that the agency would not comment on internal deliberations or communications.
The White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
Peters said countries had the right to decide who could cross their borders.
“Before we all get offended, we’ve got the right to decide in New Zealand who comes to our country. So has Australia, so has . . . China, so has the United States,” Peters said.
US security concerns He said New Zealand would do its best to address the US security concerns.
“We need to do our best to ensure there are no misunderstandings.”
Peters said US concerns could be over selling citizenship or citizenship-by-investment schemes.
Vanuatu runs a “golden passport” scheme where applicants can be granted Vanuatu citizenship for a minimum investment of US$130,000.
Peters says citizenship programmes, such as the citizenship-by-investment schemes which allow people to purchase passports, could have concerned the Trump administration. Image: 123rf/RNZ Pacific
Peters said programmes like that could have concerned the Trump administration.
“There are certain decisions that have been made, which look innocent, but when they come to an international capacity do not have that effect.
“Tuvalu has been selling passports. You see where an innocent . . . decision made in Tuvalu can lead to the concerns in the United States when it comes to security.”
Sepuloni wants push back However, Sepuloni wants Peters to push back on the US considering travel restrictions for Pacific nations.
Labour Party Deputy Leader Carmel Sepuloni . . . “I would expect [Peters] to be pushing back on the US and supporting our Pacific nations to be taken off that list.” Image: RNZ/Angus Dreaver
Sepuloni said she wanted the foreign minister to get a full explanation on the proposed restrictions.
“From there, I would expect him to be pushing back on the US and supporting our Pacific nations to be taken off that list,” she said.
“Their response is, ‘why us? We’re so tiny — what risk do we pose?’”
Wait to see how this unfolds – expert Massey University associate professor in defence and security studies Anna Powles said Vanuatu has appeared on the US’ bad side in the past.
“Back in March Vanuatu was one of over 40 countries that was reported to be on the immigration watchlist and that related to Vanuatu’s golden passport scheme,” Dr Powles said.
However, a US spokesperson denied the existence of such a list.
“What people are looking at . . . is not a list that exists here that is being acted on,” State Department spokeswoman Tammy Bruce said, according to a transcript of her press briefing.
“There is a review, as we know, through the president’s executive order, for us to look at the nature of what’s going to help keep America safer in dealing with the issue of visas and who’s allowed into the country.”
Dr Powles said it was the first time Tonga had been included.
“That certainly has raised some concern among Tongans because there’s a large Tongan diaspora in the United States.”
She said students studying in the US could be affected; but while there was a degree of bemusement and concern over the issue, there was also a degree of waiting to see how this unfolded.
In The Spare Room, Judy Davis lights up the stage with a singularly vivid performance.
Adapted by Eamon Flack from Helen Garner’s 2008 novel of the same name, Davis plays sharp-tongued Helen (or Hel) to the irrational Nicola (Elizabeth Alexander), who visits seeking alternative treatments for her cancer-ridden body.
But unfortunately, the production does not match Davis’ star performance.
A shaky reality
Set and costume, by Mel Page, echo Garner tropes: bed linen, windows, back door onto shared backyard with family as neighbours, curtains, lounge, kitchen, vodka, music, bicycle and miniature pink backpack.
But I’m increasingly unable to suspend belief in stage designs whose purpose is to mimic reality. A curtain is used inconsistently to indicate a change of space. The kitchen table is appropriated for medical professionals’ desks and magician’s table without any change of lighting or further demarcation of space and time.
Kitchens and cooking are important to Garner’s domestic settings. There’s a brief smashing of apricot kernels. Bananas, licorice bullets and lemonade get a mention. But Hel’s chopping of a limp celery comes out of nowhere, and means very little.
Garner’s writing captures the minutiae of the home. This is echoed on stage. Brett Boardman/Belvoir
If the adaptation is going to use food, meal preparation and cooking, then use it substantially as a motif.
For time changes, Hel yells out the day. The pace is speedy, with Davis firing off dialogue and scampering across stage. We get no sense of the dragging time that Hel experiences as carer.
The same actors playing multiple characters without much change of physical appearance lacks credulity. Nicola, in particular, is presented as a cliché of an older, suburban woman – not Garner’s wealthy bohemian. Nicola is based on Jenya Osborne – a friend of Garner and her third husband, Murray Bail, who described Osborne as “alternative virtually everything”.
Garner is the queen of sustained metaphor. In the novel, a broken mirror and a creature scuttling in dried leaves are early images of death.
In Flack’s adaptation, the mirror is only spoken of, accompanied by a strum across the cello by Anthea Cottee (music composed by Steve Francis).
A live cello, played by Anthea Cottee, accompanies the play. Brett Boardman/Belvoir
There may have been a flourish of flamenco on the cello as Hel prances in imitation of the liveliness of her granddaughter, Bess (who is only referred to once), but it is too unimpactful to recall.
At one point, Hel plays on a toy piano accompanying the cello, a comedic reference to Garner’s most acclaimed novel The Children’s Bach (1984).
On death and dying
The clearest image of dying and death is central in the play: a magician’s show that Hel has to review. “The most beautiful things happen secretly and privately”, the magician (Alan Dukes) says, as he whisks away then recovers various objects.
A failure of both Garner’s book and the stage adaptation is that Hel complains of exhaustion after only a few weeks caring for Nicola. But many people spend years caring for a sick loved one, giving up another possible trajectory of their own lives.
Hel complains of exhaustion after only a few weeks caring for Nicola. Brett Boardman/Belvoir
The balance is wrong, too, between the humanity of Hel and Nicola: the audience guffawed at Hel’s exasperated wit and Nicola’s investment in fraudulent therapies. This, perhaps, is a feature of Garner’s work. While Garner is self-critical in her writing, she also consistently exposes others.
Bail is critical of Garner’s use of their friend’s life as fodder for a novel. He writes:
[Osbourne] was all kindness and consideration, which was rewarded as she was dying by being portrayed in [Garner’s book], where her harmless foolishness was pitied and scorned.
In Garner’s novel, Nicola and Hel “[dissect] with cheerful meanness the latest escapades” of her ex-husband. But in the play, Hel recounts her acts of revenge against him in their Sydney flat, drawing on Garner’s third diary, How to End a Story: Diaries 1995–1998, published in 2021. Bail is not named in either play or novel, but fans of Garner’s work know of whom she speaks.
The play is part monologue by Davis. Monologues and choruses effectively give oversight and insight to the narrative, but here it only further spotlights Hel’s story, not Nicola’s who is the one dying in pain.
With some details in the dialogue of Nicola’s dying processes – and with her plan to take an entourage for residency in an expensive hotel – Hel then “handed her over”.
As the play opens with a reference to the life-filled antics of Hel’s granddaughter, we know that the granddaughter, now assumed to be recovered from a cold, can be handed over to her. It is a rational ending, but lacking vitality.
The Spare Room is at Belvoir, Sydney, until July 13.
Moya Costello 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.
New research has found that while Australians generally support strong punishments, people living in the bush are significantly more likely than city dwellers to want to punish more harshly those who break the law.
It means Australians living in rural and regional areas are more likely to support tougher penalties for crime than those in the cities.
However, it’s not for the reasons you might expect.
So, what drives this divide?
In short: fear of crime and a lack of confidence in the justice system.
Our research, published today in the Journal of Rural Studies, surveyed a representative sample of Australians to better understand their views on punishment and what shaped their views.
We found city residents with tough attitudes toward crime tend to focus on the individual and personal blame, thinking offenders commit crime due to internal attributes (such as having “a poor moral compass”). They tended to see lawbreakers as lacking the capacity to redeem themselves.
But in rural areas, people are more likely to focus on what’s happening around them. Specifically, we found support for tougher penalties for crime was related to wider concerns about rising crime rates and a general lack of confidence in the criminal justice system.
Consider the role of ‘rurality’
To understand these differences, we thought about how living in rural areas may shape punitive attitudes.
Contrary to popular belief, crimes occur at higher rates in many rural communities than in some urban areas.
Crime may also be more visible and more confronting because towns are smaller. Personal relationships are denser, meaning people often know the victims or the offenders.
This closeness creates a stronger emotional response and a heightened sense of risk at the local level – even if the actual chances of being victimised are statistically low.
There’s also the issue of access to the criminal justice system. Courts may sit infrequently, meaning it can take a long time to get a case heard in court. In some cases, victims and offenders are forced to share courtroom space due to limited facilities.
Police stations might not be staffed around the clock.
Add to this long wait times for justice, and it’s no wonder rural Australians may feel the system isn’t working for them.
The power of perception
It’s important to understand perception doesn’t always match reality.
Urban areas often have more total crime, but rural areas may have higher rates of certain offences, especially violent ones.
But what really matters in shaping public opinion is not necessarily the total numbers, but how close, immediate and personal crime feels.
Other research has found people who feel crime is psychologically “close” – meaning, that’s likely to happen to them or someone they know – are much more worried about it.
That worry can translate into calls for tougher sentencing, stricter laws, and less tolerance for rehabilitation.
This fear is made worse by a lack of confidence in the justice system. Many rural residents feel the system is too slow, too distant, or simply doesn’t understand local issues.
When people feel justice won’t be done, they’re more likely to demand punishment that feels immediate and severe.
Why it matters
These findings are more than just a snapshot of attitudes; they have real implications for public policy.
Politicians often draw on public opinion when shaping criminal justice policies.
If rural voters are more likely to support tough-on-crime platforms, that can influence laws that affect the whole country.
But one-size-fits-all solutions won’t work.
The factors shaping crime perceptions in Brisbane or Sydney are very different from those in Longreach or Wagga Wagga.
To build trust and improve safety, we need justice strategies that take into account local realities, especially in rural areas.
This means investing in better access to police and courts, improving communication between justice systems and rural communities, and helping the public understand what crime is really happening and what’s not.
Australians in rural areas aren’t more punitive because they’re harsher people. Our research shows they are more worried, feel less supported, and have less confidence in the system designed to protect them.
Understanding this difference is key to building smarter, fairer justice policies because when people feel seen, heard, and safe, they’re less likely to demand punishment to solve feelings of insecurity and more likely to support holistic solutions.
What’s needed now
Rural communities need tailored strategies that improve access to justice, rebuild trust, and respond to their unique experiences of crime.
That means policymakers need to go beyond reactive, headline-driven responses.
Rural justice strategies should include mobile court services, better resourcing for regional police and victim support, and culturally appropriate services for Indigenous communities.
Community education campaigns can also help close the gap between crime perception and reality.
Importantly, involving local voices in justice reform, through consultation and community partnerships, can help rebuild trust and ensure policies reflect rural realities, not just urban assumptions.
As political debate over law and order grows, especially in rural communities, leaders must address the divide in how city and country Australians view crime and punishment.
Kyle Mulrooney is a Senior Lecturer in Criminology and co-director of the Centre for Rural Criminology at the University of New England.
Caitlin Davey and Sue Watt do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
Speculation is swirling around the future of the A$368 billion AUKUS agreement, following Washington’s decision to review the nuclear submarine deal to ensure it meets President Donald Trump’s “America first” agenda.
Prime Minister Anthony Albanese was planning to use talks with Trump at the G7 to demand the US continue to back the deal – but the meeting has been cancelled.
With the Pentagon taking another look at AUKUS, we ask five experts whether the government should rethink Australia’s own commitment to the pact.
Jennifer Parker
Expert Associate, National Security College, Australian National University
Absolutely not. Another review would consume time and capacity better spent delivering AUKUS on its tight timelines.
To understand why, we must put the decision in context.
The leaked details of the US Department of Defense review does not alter the position of any of the three AUKUS partners. Much of the commentary has missed the broader picture: Washington is undertaking its regular review of defence strategy.
It makes sense the Pentagon would also assess AUKUS – a central element of its Indo-Pacific posture.
While some have fixated on Colby’s supposed scepticism, the reality is different. In March, Colby told the US Senate Armed Services Committee the US should do everything in its power to make AUKUS work.
Why now? Because the strategy review is being accelerated under the new administration. As for the leak, it is plausible it was designed to apply pressure to Australia over its defence spending commitments.
The more important question is: what is the likely outcome? While nothing is certain, AUKUS enjoys strong bipartisan support in the US, as it does in Australia. Secretary of State Marco Rubio has called it a “blueprint” for cooperation, echoed by other senior officials.
Crucially, the real driver of this so-called “America First” review is what the US gets out of AUKUS. The answer is quite a lot. It secures access to Southeast and Northeast Asia from a location beyond the range of most Chinese missiles, adds a fourth maintenance site for Virginia-class submarines, and delivers an ally with an independent nuclear-powered submarine industrial base.
Beyond AUKUS, Australia has expanded its support for Marine and bomber rotations and other posture initiatives. Australia is central to US strategy in the Indo-Pacific. They need us as much as we need them. All signs point to a constructive outcome from this short, sharp review.
While AUKUS carries risks and Australia must remain clear-eyed, alarmism is unhelpful. Much of the public debate has taken that tone. Nothing fundamental has changed since the optimal pathway was announced in 2023. The risks we face now were known then.
There is no basis for an Australian review at this point. It would only distract from delivering this ambitious program. If core assumptions materially change, then a review may be warranted. But until then, such talk is a distraction.
Albert Palazzo
Adjunct Professor in the School of Humanities and Social Sciences at UNSW Canberra, UNSW Sydney
The AUKUS review should be welcomed by all Australians as an opportunity for the Albanese government to scrap the agreement and wean itself off US dependency.
The review is a chance for our political leaders to exercise their most important responsibility: asserting the nation’s sovereignty and equipping Australia to provide for its national security on its own.
Since AUKUS already contains clauses the US could use to cancel the pact, a termination now would benefit Australia. It would save the nation huge sums of money, and force the government to formulate a more useful and appropriate security policy.
Elbridge Colby has previously questioned the logic of “giving away” America’s “crown jewels”, namely its nuclear-powered submarines, and argued the US will need all its boats against China.
Elbridge Colby is in charge of the AUKUS review.
More alarmingly, in his book The Strategy of Denial, Colby concludes the ideal way for the US to deny China regional hegemony is to use its allies to minimise its own “risks, commitment and expense”. Additionally, he says the US needs to retain the opportunity to walk away from a China conflict if that proves to be in America’s best interest.
Colby’s track record suggests he will recommend Australia make a larger military contribution to the alliance — as his boss Pete Hegseth demanded at the Shangri-La Dialogue. This is even as the US reserves its right to desert us at a time of its own choosing, as the United Kingdom did during the second world war with the Singapore Strategy.
At one time, the existing defence policy of reliance on the US made a degree of sense. But that is no longer the case. Instead, Australia’s leaders have an opportunity to recalibrate defence policy from one of dependency to one of self-defence.
As I outline in my forthcoming book, The Big Fix, Australia should adopt the philosophy of “strategic defensive”. This is a method of waging war in which the defender only needs to prevent an aggressor from achieving its objectives.
This would eliminate the risks and enormous cost of AUKUS while securing the nation’s future. A strategic defensive approach is well within Australia’s capabilities to implement on its own.
While it would be an ironic act of dependency if the US was to save Australia from itself by either cancelling AUKUS or by making it too unpalatable to swallow, the chance to reconsider should not be missed.
AUKUS remains an affront to Australian sovereignty.
Ian Langford
Executive Director, Security & Defence PLuS and Professor, UNSW Sydney
Australia should not walk away from AUKUS in light of the Pentagon’s newly announced review. However, it should seize the moment to increase defence spending to meet short-term challenges not addressed by the submarine deal.
Despite the noise, AUKUS remains Australia’s most straightforward path to acquiring nuclear-powered submarines, deepening strategic interoperability with the United States and United Kingdom, and embedding itself in the advanced defence technology ecosystems of its closest allies.
But clinging to AUKUS without confronting the deeper risks it now exposes would be a strategic mistake. From an Australian perspective, the submarine pathway is on a slow fuse: first deliveries are not expected until the early 2030s.
Meanwhile, the risk of major power conflict in the Indo-Pacific is accelerating, with a potential flashpoint involving China and the US as early as 2027. Naval brinkmanship in the Taiwan Strait and the South and East China Seas is already routine.
Submarines that arrive too late do little to shape the strategic balance in the next five years. Canberra must therefore confront a hard truth: AUKUS may enhance Australia’s deterrence posture in the 2030s, but it does little to prepare the ADF for a near-term fight.
That fight, should it come, will demand capabilities the ADF currently lacks in sufficient quantity: long-range missiles, deployable air defence, survivable command and control, and more surface combatants.
Yet under current spending plans, Australia is trying to fund both the AUKUS build and short-term deterrence within a constrained budget. It will not work. Even after recent increases, defence spending remains around 2% of GDP. This is well below the level needed to fund both long-term deterrence and immediate readiness.
Without a step change – closer to 2.5–3% of GDP – or a major reprioritisation of big-ticket programs, the ADF faces a dangerous capability gap through the second half of this decade.
Australia should hold firm on AUKUS. The strategic upside is real, and the alliance commitments it reinforces are indispensable. But we should not pretend it is cost-free.
Unless the defence budget is significantly expanded, AUKUS risks hollowing out the rest of the Defence Force. The result would be a future submarine fleet paired with an underpowered ADF, unready to meet the threats of today.
In reaffirming AUKUS, Australia must confront the complex reality that it won’t address the threats of this decade, and should plan accordingly.
Maria Rost Rublee
Professor, International Relations Social and Political Sciences, The University of Melbourne
Let’s be honest – Australia is not going to withdraw from AUKUS.
The United States is our most important military and diplomatic partner; in the words of the 2024 National Defence Strategy, “our alliance with the US remains fundamental to Australia’s national security”.
Unilaterally extracting ourselves from AUKUS would significantly damage our relationship with the US. Given the bipartisan and public support for the alliance within Australia, it simply won’t happen.
As we navigate the complexities of AUKUS under Trump 2.0, we should remember that as a defence industrial agreement, AUKUS creates numerous benefits for Australia. In both Pillar I (nuclear submarines) and Pillar II (advanced defence capabilities), Australia is developing deep partnerships, collaboration and even integration with both the US and the UK in shipbuilding, advanced technology, and stronger supply chains.
In addition, a rarely discussed benefit of AUKUS is the total life-cycle climate impacts, given nuclear submarines are superior to diesel alternatives. Diesel is a non-renewable energy source with significant global warming potential, while nuclear power is generally acknowledged to be low-carbon.
However, AUKUS does offer very significant risks for Australia. Flexibility is baked into the arrangement for the three partner nations – leading to the very situation we are in today. There are significant concerns Washington may not sell nuclear Virginia-class submarines to Australia in the 2030s, as agreed.
We have known for years the US is not producing enough nuclear attack submarines for its own domestic use, but we seem to have hoped this would change or the US would sell us the subs anyway.
The current US review of AUKUS makes it clear Australia needs to think seriously about other options for submarines. Without the Virginia-class, we will be without any subs at all, at least until the SSN-AUKUS submarines are delivered by the mid-2040s.
Our current ageing Collins-class subs, already beset with operational problems, will not be fit for purpose much past mid-2030. At this point, the most likely viable option is off-the-shelf conventional submarines from Japan or South Korea.
The fact is, while Australia is unlikely to withdraw from AUKUS, the US may force the issue by refusing to sell us its nuclear-powered submarines. Refusing to acknowledge this does not change the risks.
President Donald Trumps wants US allies to lift their defence spending. Rawpixel/Shutterstock
David Andrews
Senior Manager, Policy & Engagement, Australian National University
I want AUKUS to succeed. It offers a unique opportunity to substantially upgrade Australia’s maritime capabilities with access to world-leading submarine technology and a suite of advanced and emerging technologies.
However, we cannot realistically pursue “AUKUS at any cost”. There must be an upper limit to how much time, effort and resources are committed before the costs – financial, political and strategic – outweigh the potential long-term benefits.
Of course, the government must not be hasty. Any decision should wait until the completion of the US review. Likewise, AUKUS should not be abandoned merely because it is being reviewed.
Reviews are not inherently negative processes. A review after four years of a project of this size and significance is not a particularly surprising development. As seen in the UK, reviews can refocus efforts and commit greater resources, if needed.
However, it doesn’t look like that’s what the US review is setting out to do. Rather, it’s focused on ensuring AUKUS is aligned with the America First agenda. That indicates an altogether different set of considerations.
People often describe Trump as a “dealmaker” or “transactional”, but these are misleading euphemisms. This review, and recent language from senior US officials, gives the impression of a shakedown – of coercion, not partnership.
The need to “win” and extract money from alliances is antithetical to their purpose. It misunderstands their nature and the fundamental importance of trust between partners. AUKUS is not an ATM.
Past behaviour suggests no deal Trump makes will last without further demands being imposed. No amount of money is likely to be satisfactory. Even if Australia’s defence spending was lifted to 3.5% of GDP, the question would be “why isn’t it 5%?” For AUKUS, there is no such thing as an offer he cannot refuse.
I do not say this lightly, but if the outcome of this process is a series of gratuitous or untenable demands by the US, the Albanese government should strongly consider walking away from AUKUS.
The consequences would be significant, so the threshold of such a decision would need to be similarly calibrated. But no single project should be put above the integrity of our wider defence enterprise and the sovereign decision-making of our government.
David Andrews has not personally received funding from any relevant external bodies, but he has previously worked on projects funded by the Australian Departments of Foreign Affairs and Trade, Home Affairs, and Defence. David is a member of the Australian Labor Party and Australian Institute of International Affairs, and previously worked for the Australian Department of Defence.
Albert Palazzo is not a member of a political party but does occasional volunteer work for The Greens. In 2019, he retired from the Department of Defence. He was the long-serving Director of War Studies for the Australian Army.
Ian Langford is affiliated with Security & Defence PLuS, a collaboration between the University of New South Wales, Arizona State University and Kings College, London.
Maria Rost Rublee has received grant funding from the Australian Department of Defence and the US Institute of Peace. She is affiliated with Women in International Security-Australia and Women in Nuclear-Australia.
Jennifer Parker 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.
The fire at New World Victoria Park is not yet under control, with firefighters facing challenges in reaching the fire.
Crews were alerted by fire alarm activation to the fire around 11.18am. Currently there are 20 trucks and support vehicles are on the scene, with further resources still responding.
This includes the Hamilton aerial appliance, which has been deployed as backup for the three Auckland aerials already in use.
Incident Controller Vaughan Mackereth says the fire is currently burning on the mezzanine floor and in the roof.
“This means accessing it is difficult for our crews,” he says.
“We are only fighting the fire from outside the building as it is too dangerous at this stage for internal firefighting.
“We are expecting to be here into the evening and overnight.”
All persons have been accounted for.
The public is advised to continue to avoid the area, with the roads around the supermarket closed.
An Emergency Mobile Alert was issued for people southwest of the fire to stay inside with their windows and doors closed due to the smoke.
Fire Investigators are on scene but it is too early to speculate on the cause.
Federated Farmers is calling on Revenue Minister Simon Watts to urgently rule out changes to Fringe Benefit Tax (FBT) that would cost every farmer thousands of dollars each year.
Inland Revenue has proposed major changes to the way FBT applies to utes, which are common and essential work tools for most farmers across New Zealand.
“This could very quickly become a ‘Ute Tax 2.0’ and it seems to be being pushed through by stealth,” says Federated Farmers transport spokesperson Mark Hooper.
“Farmers will be incredibly concerned that the government are consulting on new rules that could add thousands of dollars of additional tax payments each year.
“This would be a huge cost for farmers, tradies and other productive New Zealanders and unfairly punish the legitimate use of these work vehicles.
“The previous Government’s Ute Tax was bad enough, but at least that was a one-off cost. These new FBT charges would be annual and cost farmers an arm and a leg each year.”
Under the proposal, utes costing over $80,000 and provided to farm owners or other major shareholders would be taxed at 100% of their value (capped at $80,000), even if used almost exclusively for farm work.
That would result in an annual tax bill of between $5,500 and $8,200.
Everyone else, like employees and sharemilkers, would be taxed on 35% of the ute’s value. That’s around $1,800 to $2,700 annually for a $50,000 vehicle.
“The old system at least allowed people to keep logbooks and potentially pay less tax if the private use was genuinely small,” Hooper says.
“Now the Government wants to scrap all that and slap a flat tax on nearly every farm ute in the country, even if the ute almost never leaves the farm except to drive home.”
Federated Farmers says the proposal completely ignores the reality of how farmers use their vehicles, often crossing public roads between blocks or driving into town for supplies at Farmlands or the vet.
“These are not Queen Street vanity purchases. A four-wheel drive ute is a core piece of equipment that farmers need to do their job each day,” Hooper says.
“If it leaves the farm to get fencing gear or pick something up from the vet, that’s still work. But under these new rules, it would be taxed as private use.”
The IRD consultation period closed on 5 May, but Federated Farmers says the lack of clear direction from the Minister is causing anxiety in the rural sector.
“The recently announced Investment Boost tax deduction was incredibly well received by farmers and has generated real economic activity, particularly at Fieldays,” Hooper says.
“Unfortunately, all that good work risks being undone if the Government is giving with one hand and taking with the other.
“We understand this is just a proposal and no final decisions have been made, but we’re calling on Simon Watts to move quickly and take these potential FBT changes off the table.
“There’s no way the Government should be introducing taxes that would unfairly punish farmers for driving legitimate work vehicles.”
Federated Farmers is calling on Revenue Minister Simon Watts to categorically rule out the Ute Tax 2.0.
There’s a certain feeling I get in the pit of my stomach when I’m waiting for an important call to come through. You know the type – maybe a call from your boss, a potential new employer or news of a loved one who’s due to give birth.
In these situations, I usually stare at my phone, willing it to ring. I make sure – over and again – it’s not on silent or “do not disturb” mode. When the screen is out of my sight, I imagine I can hear the familiar ringtone.
Then it pops up – the missed call notification. But the phone never rang. What happened?
How do mobile calls work?
When making a mobile call using 4G or 5G networks, the caller dials a number and their network operator (Telstra or OneNZ, for example) routes the request to the recipient’s device.
For this to work, both phones must be registered with an IP Multimedia Subsystem – or IMS – which automatically happens when you turn on your phone. IMS is the system that allows the combination of voice calls, messages and video communications.
Both phones must also be connected to a 4G or 5G cell phone tower. The caller’s network sends an invite to the recipient’s device, which will then start to ring.
This process is usually very fast. But as generations of cellular networks have evolved (remember 3G?), becoming faster and with greater capacity, they have also become more complex, with new potential points of failure.
From phone failures to ‘dead zones’
Mobile phones use Voice over LTE (VoLTE) for 4G networks or Voice over New Radio (VoNR) for 5G. These are technologies that enable voice calls over those two types of networks and they use the above mentioned IMS.
In some countries such as New Zealand, if either of these aren’t enabled or supported on your device (some phones have VoLTE disabled by default), it may attempt to fall back to the 3G network, which was switched off in Australia in 2024 and is currently being phased out in New Zealand.
If this fallback fails or is delayed, the recipient’s phone may not ring or may go straight to voicemail.
Another possibility is that your phone may have failed to register with the IMS network. If this happens – due to something like a software glitch, SIM issue, or network problem – a phone won’t receive the call signal and won’t ring.
Then there are handover issues. Each cell phone tower covers a particular area, and if you are moving, your call will be handed over to the tower that provides the best coverage. Sometimes your phone uses 5G for data but 4G for voice; if the handover between 5G and 4G is slow or fails, the call might not ring. If 5G is used for both data and voice, VoNR is used, which is still not widely supported and may fail.
Mobile apps introduce other potential problems. For example, on Android, aggressive battery-saving features can restrict background processes, including the phone app, preventing it from responding to incoming calls. Third-party apps such as call blockers, antivirus tools, or even messaging apps can also interfere with call notifications.
Finally, if your phone is in an area with poor reception, it may not receive the call signal in time to ring. These so-called “dead zones” are more common than telcos would like to admit. I live at the end of a long driveway in a well-covered suburb of Auckland in New Zealand. But, depending on where I am in the house, I still experience dead zones and often the WiFi-enabled phone apps will more reliably cause the phone to ring.
Battery-saving features on phones can restrict background processes, including the phone app, preventing it from responding to incoming calls. ymgerman/Shutterstock
What can I do to fix it?
If your phone frequently doesn’t ring on 4G or 5G there are a few things you can do:
make sure VolTE/VoNR is enabled in your network settings
restart your phone and toggle airplane mode to refresh network registration
check battery optimisation settings and exclude the phone app you are using
contact your carrier to confirm VoLTE/VoNR support and provisioning.
But ultimately, sometimes a call will just fail – and there’s very little an everyday person can do about it. Which yes, is annoying. But it also means you have a failsafe, expert-approved excuse for missing a call from your boss.
Jairo Gutierrez 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.
Source: United States Senator for Kansas Roger Marshall
Washington – On Monday, U.S. Senator Roger Marshall, M.D. (R-Kansas) introduced a resolution to celebrate the 250th birthday of the United States Army, honoring its storied history from the American Revolution to the Global War on Terror.
The resolution also honors the bravery and patriotism of soldiers and veterans from Fort Riley and Fort Leavenworth, Kansas, the former of which recently joined Senator Marshall at the Army’s 250th birthday parade on Saturday, June 14, in Washington, D.C.
“It was a pleasure and honor to host 450 troops from Kansas’ own Fort Riley, honoring the ‘Big Red One,’ especially as they passed the storied 1st Division Monument, which holds special meaning as we celebrate the Army’s 250th birthday and honor all those who gave the ultimate sacrifice,” said Senator Marshall. “These young men and women are the best of the best, the first division that the President calls to defend our freedoms. This event was an important demonstration of patriotism that American citizens need to see, and it is a breath of fresh air to finally have a President who is going above and beyond to honor our nation’s heroes.”
Senator Marshall comes from a long line of Americans who served in the US Army, including his son, brother, father, and grandfather. Specifically, Senator Marshall was honorably discharged from the National Guard with the rank of Captain in 1991.
Click here to read the full text of the resolution.
Background:
Kansas is home to critical military installations, including Fort Riley, home of the First Infantry Division – the oldest continuously serving division in the U.S. Army – and Fort Leavenworth, home of the U.S. Army’s Combined Arms Center (CAC) and the U.S. Army Command and General Staff College.
Fort Leavenworth, established in 1827, is the oldest continuously operating military installation west of the Mississippi River and the oldest permanent settlement in Kansas. Known historically as the “intellectual center of the Army,” all modern 5-star Army generals have passed through and studied at Fort Leavenworth, including George Marshall, Douglas MacArthur, Henry Arnold, Dwight Eisenhower, and Omar Bradley.
The 1st Infantry Division, currently garrisoned at Fort Riley, is the oldest continuously serving division in the Army and was constituted on May 24, 1917. The Division has consistently been the first division to deploy into the wars of the United States, sending the first troops into World War I, World War II, the Vietnam War, and Desert Shield and Desert Storm. During World War II, the 1st Infantry Division was the first to reach England, the first to fight the enemy in North Africa and Sicily, the first on the beaches in Normandy during D-Day, and the first to capture a major German city.
Senator Marshall recently attended the 250th birthday parade celebration of the U.S. Army, alongside 450 troops from Fort Riley’s ‘Big Red One.’
Senator Marshall worked for seven years on the FIRST Act, legislation that added 631 names of Big Red One Soldiers to the First Infantry Division Monument.
Source: United States Senator for Kansas Roger Marshall
Washington – On Monday, U.S. Senator Roger Marshall, M.D. (R-Kansas) published an op-ed in The Washington Times, marking the celebration of the 250th Birthday of the United States Army, and reflecting on how these celebrations can restore pride in America again.
Read the full op-ed HERE or below:
The Army’s 250th Birthday: A Personal and National Triumph
Senator Roger Marshall
The Washington Times
June 16, 2024
Standing in a quiet room at Gettysburg last month, I read about Lincoln’s Address—many headlines from 1863 called it “silly,” others “a perfected gem.” That’s the America I love: where we speak freely, protest boldly, and debate fiercely. Yet, as I scanned coverage of the U.S. Army’s 250th birthday celebration on June 14, 2025, one truth was missing: 1.3 million soldiers gave their lives to protect those freedoms. The grand parade and festival on the National Mall weren’t just a showcase of strength; it was a rebirth of patriotism, a moment that hit me personally and resonated for our nation.
My family’s story is woven into the Army’s 250 years. Every generation has served. Three ancestors fell in the Civil War’s brutal fields. A great-uncle, along with many other brave soldiers, suffocated from nerve gas in the Argonne Forest during World War I, the “war to end all wars.” Two other great-uncles stormed Normandy’s beaches; later in the Second World War, my wife lost an uncle. My dad served, my brother served, I served, and my son serves today. I’ve always believed every American should serve, not just for duty, but to feel the weight of sacrifice. At this great celebration, watching my grandsons’ eyes light up as tanks rumbled by on the Mall, I saw history spark their young hearts. This celebration wasn’t just about the past; it was about inspiring the future.
I’ve lived through patriotism’s highs and lows. The Korean War, before my time, sparked questions about America’s global role. Vietnam, which I watched as a kid, left us confused—protests clashed with America First pride. The Gulf Wars came, and as 9/11’s memory faded, we debated how far was too far. Over the last four years, an open border signaled a nation adrift, with our military and law enforcement wondering if their commander-in-chief had their backs. Patriotism seemed shattered. But June 14 was a new day. The first-ever Army birthday celebration on the National Mall, with 6,600 soldiers marching, felt like a reset—a bold reclaiming of national pride.
My daughter and niece, there with their young kids, saw it too. They said the parade taught their children military history, American pride, and gratitude for freedoms won through sacrifice. Veterans at home, glued to their TVs, felt seen—many watched every moment, marveling at “cool weapons,” tanks, and drones. Nearby us was a mom whose son re-enlisted, sworn in by President Trump. Tears streamed down her face as she waved her flag, her Army shirt emblazoned with her son’s regiment. “This is for all who served,” she said. I wish every veteran could’ve been flown to D.C. to feel that joy.
The celebration’s significance ran deeper. It honored a legacy: the Army, born a year before the Declaration of Independence, secured our freedom in the Revolutionary War and defended us through the Civil War, World Wars, and modern conflicts. It showcased unity, with events like the wreath-laying at the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier echoing the Army’s motto, “This We’ll Defend.” It highlighted innovation—radar, the internet, wireless tech—all rooted in Army ingenuity that shaped global progress. It inspired, with the “Be All You Can Be” campaign driving recruitment to 85% of 2025’s target, promising the strongest class in years. And as a prelude to America’s 250th anniversary in 2026, it set the stage for national reflection.
While too much of the media focused on other issues, no one can doubt that this celebration restored pride, boosted military morale, and sent a message to the world. As my grandson exclaimed, “America’s Army is undefeated,” rolling through 250 years of victories. To those burning flags or kneeling during the anthem, it’s a gut punch—a pain that breaks the hearts of those who served. I wish they’d served, felt the cost of freedom, had held a dying soldier in their arms as they said their last words, or joined a Chaplain as they delivered the news of a lost loved one to a young wife and children. As riots flare, let’s remember: millions died so we can stand, debate, and rebuild.
Regardless, when the President calls, the Army is rolling along!
Source: United States Senator for New York Kirsten Gillibrand
Proposal Would Increase Costs, Put Rural Hospitals At Risk Of Closure, Threaten Nursing Home Operations, And Make It Harder For Kids To Access Care
If Bill Passes, An Estimated 45,000 People Would Lose Health Insurance And 31,000 Risk Losing Some Or All SNAP Benefits In The Buffalo Area Alone
Today, U.S. Senator Kirsten Gillibrand visited the St. Joseph Campus of Catholic Health to highlight how President Trump’s so-called “Big Beautiful Bill” will hurt Buffalo hospitals and families. If passed, this legislation would cause 10.9 million Americans, including up to 1.5 million New Yorkers, to lose their health insurance coverage by 2034, and 11million would be at risk of having their SNAP benefits reduced or eliminated.
President Trump’s bill would cause Americans to lose their benefits by imposing work requirements on people receiving Medicaid and even stricter, more onerous work requirements for SNAP recipients. This would force families with children and people with disabilities to jump through more hoops to access benefits, and it would generate additional administrative costs for the program. In New York State, work requirements for Medicaid will cost an estimated $510 million annually to administer and enforce.
President Trump’s bill would also put rural hospitals at risk of closure by limiting the use of provider taxes, which help make it possible for rural and urban hospitals and clinics to remain open and care for patients by providing maternity, emergency, and behavioral health care. Funds collected by states through provider taxes are often directed to health care providers whose costs far exceed base Medicaid payment rates. These providers are typically located in rural America – where health care services are hard to find – or in dense urban areas, where the cost to deliver health care is high and health care providers are serving more people with Medicaid.
“President Trump’s bill is not ‘beautiful’—it’s a betrayal of millions of hard-working Americans,”said Senator Gillibrand.“This bill includes the largest cuts to Medicaid and SNAP in history, and it puts the future of our state’s critical rural hospitals in jeopardy. Congress and the Trump administration should be focused on bringing down the cost of essentials, not limiting access to the health care and benefits that so many New Yorkers rely on to get care and put food on the table. This is an unacceptable piece of legislation, and I will do everything in my power to stop it from passing.”
“As an Occupational Therapist, I’ve seen firsthand the impacts of delayed and diminished healthcare,”said Rep. Kennedy (NY-26).“Treatable conditions become chronic illnesses, quality of life decreases, and ultimately, lives are cut short. The Republican reconciliation bill is a direct attack on working families and the healthcare they rely on in every community across our nation. This bill will make Americans less healthy and hurt Western New Yorkers.”
Gillibrand was joined by Joyce Markiewicz, President and CEO of Catholic Health, and Denise Abbott, President of the Buffalo Central Labor Council.
Source: Northern Territory Police and Fire Services
A 31-year-old man has been arrested after allegedly threatening staff at a convenience store in Alice Springs in the early hours of this morning.
Around 2:50am, the Joint Emergency Services Communication Centre (JESCC) received a report of an aggravated robbery at a convenience store on Todd Street. The offender had allegedly entered the store armed with a knife, threatened a staff member, and stolen items before leaving the store.
The offender was tracked by police CCTV operators, resulting in his arrest by police within 3 minutes of the alleged offending. CCTV operators were also able to assist police in locating the discarded knife, which was seized.
He was charged with Going armed in public and Aggravated Robbery, and was remanded in custody to appear in court on 18 June.
Detective Acting Senior Sergeant Michael Curtiss said, “I want to acknowledge the excellent police work by our CCTV operators, alongside members on the ground, which resulted in the swift arrest of the offender.”
Police continue to urge anyone who witnesses crime or antisocial behaviour to contact police on 131 444. In an emergency dial 000. Anonymous reports can be made through Crime Stoppers on 1800 333 000 or online via https://crimestoppersnt.com.au/.
A woman has been charged over two robberies at Port Adelaide yesterday.
Just before 3pm on Monday 16 June, it will be alleged a woman armed with a machete entered the service station on Grand Junction Road and demanded money from staff.
The woman stole food items and left the store. Thankfully no one was physically injured.
Police quickly responded and arrested a 30-year-old woman from Munno Para who was still in the area. The machete was safely recovered.
Officers searched the woman and also found a taser in her bag.
Western District Police will allege that the woman was also involved in an attempt robbery at another service station on Grand Junction Road just prior to this incident occurring.
The woman was charged with two counts of attempt robbery, theft and possess dangerous article and is expected to face court later today.
Anyone with information that may assist with investigation is asked to contact Crime Stoppers. You can anonymously provide information to Crime Stoppers online at www.crimestopperssa.com.au or freecall 1800 333 000
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Melinda Jackson, Associate Professor at Turner Institute for Brain and Mental Health, School of Psychological Sciences, Monash University
If you’ve been on social media lately – perhaps scrolling in the middle of the night, when you know you shouldn’t but you just can’t sleep – you might have seen those videos promoting a get-to-sleep technique called “cognitive shuffling”.
The idea, proponents say, is to engage your mind with random ideas and images via a special formula:
pick a random word (such as “cake”)
focus on the first letter of the word (in this case, C) and list a bunch of words starting with that letter: cat, carrot, calendar and so on
visualise each word as you go along
when you feel ready, move onto the next letter (A) and repeat the process
continue with each letter of the original word (so, in this case, K and then E) until you feel ready to switch to a new word or until you drift off to sleep.
It’s popular on Instagram and TikTok, but does “cognitive shuffling” have any basis in science?
Where did this idea come from?
The cognitive shuffling technique was made famous by Canada-based researcher Luc P. Beaudoin more than a decade ago, when he published a paper about how what he called “serial diverse imagining” could help with sleep.
One of Beaudoin’s hypothetical examples involved a woman thinking of the word “blanket”, then thinking bicycle (and imagining a bicycle), buying (imagining buying shoes), banana (visualising a banana tree) and so on.
Soon, Beaudoin writes, she moves onto the letter L, thinking about her friend Larry, the word “like” (imagining her son hugging his dog). She soon transitions to the letter A, thinking of the word “Amsterdam”:
and she might very vaguely imagine the large hand of a sailor gesturing for another order of fries in an Amsterdam pub while a rancid accordion plays in the background.
a neutral or pleasant target and frequently [switch] to unrelated targets (normally every 5-15 seconds).
Don’t try to relate one word with another or find a link between the words; resist the mind’s natural tendency toward sense-making.
While the research into this technique is still in its infancy, the idea is grounded in science. That’s because we know from other research good sleepers tend to have different kinds of thoughts in bed to bad sleepers.
People with insomnia are more focused on worries, problems, or noises in the environment, and are often preoccupied with not sleeping.
Good sleepers typically have dream-like, hallucinatory, less ordered thoughts before nodding off. fran_kie/Shutterstock
Sorting the pro-somnolent wheat from the insomnolent chaff
Cognitive shuffling attempts to mimic the thinking patterns of good sleepers by simulating the dream-like and random thought patterns they generally have before drifting off to sleep.
In particular, Beaudoin’s research describes two types of sleep-related thoughts: insomnolent (or anti-sleep) and pro-somnolent (sleep-promoting) thoughts.
Insomnolent thoughts include things such as worrying, planning, rehearsing, and ruminating on perceived problems or failings.
Pro-somnolent thoughts on the other hand involve thoughts that can help you fall asleep, such as dream-like imagery or having a calm, relaxed state of mind.
Cognitive shuffling aims to distract from or interfere with insomnolent thought. It offers a calm, neutral path for your racing mind, and can reduce the stress associated with not sleeping.
Cognitive shuffling also helps tell your brain you are ready for sleep.
In fact, the process of “shuffling” between different thoughts is similar to the way your brain naturally drifts off to sleep. During the transition to sleep, brain activity slows. Your brain starts to generate disconnected images and fleeting scenes, known as hypnagogic hallucinations, without a conscious effort to make sense of them.
By mimicking these scattered, disconnected, and random thought patterns, cognitive shuffling may help you transition from wakefulness to sleep.
And the preliminary research into this is promising. Beaudoin and his team have foundserial diverse imagining helps to lower arousal before sleep, improve sleep quality and reduce the effort involved in falling asleep.
However, with only a small number of research studies, more work is needed here.
It didn’t work. Now what?
As with every new strategy, however, practise makes perfect. Don’t be disheartened if you don’t see an improvement straight away; these things take time.
Stay consistent and be kind to yourself.
And what works for some won’t work for others. Different people benefit from different types of strategies depending on how they relate to and experience stress or stressful thoughts.
Other strategies to help create the right conditions for sleep include:
keeping a consistent pre-bedtime routine, so your brain can wind down
writing down worries or to-do lists earlier in the day so you don’t think about them at bedtime.
If, despite all your best efforts, night time thoughts continue to impact your sleep or overall wellbeing, consider seeking professional help from your doctor or a trained sleep specialist.
Melinda Jackson has received funding from the Medical Research Future Fund, the National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC), Aged Care Research & Industry Innovation Australia (ARIIA) and Dementia Australia. She a board member of the Australasian Sleep Association.
Eleni Kavaliotis has previously received funding from an Australian government Research Training Program (RTP) scholarship. She is a member of the Australasian Sleep Association’s Insomnia and Sleep Health Council.
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Melinda Jackson, Associate Professor at Turner Institute for Brain and Mental Health, School of Psychological Sciences, Monash University
If you’ve been on social media lately – perhaps scrolling in the middle of the night, when you know you shouldn’t but you just can’t sleep – you might have seen those videos promoting a get-to-sleep technique called “cognitive shuffling”.
The idea, proponents say, is to engage your mind with random ideas and images via a special formula:
pick a random word (such as “cake”)
focus on the first letter of the word (in this case, C) and list a bunch of words starting with that letter: cat, carrot, calendar and so on
visualise each word as you go along
when you feel ready, move onto the next letter (A) and repeat the process
continue with each letter of the original word (so, in this case, K and then E) until you feel ready to switch to a new word or until you drift off to sleep.
It’s popular on Instagram and TikTok, but does “cognitive shuffling” have any basis in science?
Where did this idea come from?
The cognitive shuffling technique was made famous by Canada-based researcher Luc P. Beaudoin more than a decade ago, when he published a paper about how what he called “serial diverse imagining” could help with sleep.
One of Beaudoin’s hypothetical examples involved a woman thinking of the word “blanket”, then thinking bicycle (and imagining a bicycle), buying (imagining buying shoes), banana (visualising a banana tree) and so on.
Soon, Beaudoin writes, she moves onto the letter L, thinking about her friend Larry, the word “like” (imagining her son hugging his dog). She soon transitions to the letter A, thinking of the word “Amsterdam”:
and she might very vaguely imagine the large hand of a sailor gesturing for another order of fries in an Amsterdam pub while a rancid accordion plays in the background.
a neutral or pleasant target and frequently [switch] to unrelated targets (normally every 5-15 seconds).
Don’t try to relate one word with another or find a link between the words; resist the mind’s natural tendency toward sense-making.
While the research into this technique is still in its infancy, the idea is grounded in science. That’s because we know from other research good sleepers tend to have different kinds of thoughts in bed to bad sleepers.
People with insomnia are more focused on worries, problems, or noises in the environment, and are often preoccupied with not sleeping.
Good sleepers typically have dream-like, hallucinatory, less ordered thoughts before nodding off. fran_kie/Shutterstock
Sorting the pro-somnolent wheat from the insomnolent chaff
Cognitive shuffling attempts to mimic the thinking patterns of good sleepers by simulating the dream-like and random thought patterns they generally have before drifting off to sleep.
In particular, Beaudoin’s research describes two types of sleep-related thoughts: insomnolent (or anti-sleep) and pro-somnolent (sleep-promoting) thoughts.
Insomnolent thoughts include things such as worrying, planning, rehearsing, and ruminating on perceived problems or failings.
Pro-somnolent thoughts on the other hand involve thoughts that can help you fall asleep, such as dream-like imagery or having a calm, relaxed state of mind.
Cognitive shuffling aims to distract from or interfere with insomnolent thought. It offers a calm, neutral path for your racing mind, and can reduce the stress associated with not sleeping.
Cognitive shuffling also helps tell your brain you are ready for sleep.
In fact, the process of “shuffling” between different thoughts is similar to the way your brain naturally drifts off to sleep. During the transition to sleep, brain activity slows. Your brain starts to generate disconnected images and fleeting scenes, known as hypnagogic hallucinations, without a conscious effort to make sense of them.
By mimicking these scattered, disconnected, and random thought patterns, cognitive shuffling may help you transition from wakefulness to sleep.
And the preliminary research into this is promising. Beaudoin and his team have foundserial diverse imagining helps to lower arousal before sleep, improve sleep quality and reduce the effort involved in falling asleep.
However, with only a small number of research studies, more work is needed here.
It didn’t work. Now what?
As with every new strategy, however, practise makes perfect. Don’t be disheartened if you don’t see an improvement straight away; these things take time.
Stay consistent and be kind to yourself.
And what works for some won’t work for others. Different people benefit from different types of strategies depending on how they relate to and experience stress or stressful thoughts.
Other strategies to help create the right conditions for sleep include:
keeping a consistent pre-bedtime routine, so your brain can wind down
writing down worries or to-do lists earlier in the day so you don’t think about them at bedtime.
If, despite all your best efforts, night time thoughts continue to impact your sleep or overall wellbeing, consider seeking professional help from your doctor or a trained sleep specialist.
Melinda Jackson has received funding from the Medical Research Future Fund, the National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC), Aged Care Research & Industry Innovation Australia (ARIIA) and Dementia Australia. She a board member of the Australasian Sleep Association.
Eleni Kavaliotis has previously received funding from an Australian government Research Training Program (RTP) scholarship. She is a member of the Australasian Sleep Association’s Insomnia and Sleep Health Council.
Source: United States Senator for Kentucky Mitch McConnell
Washington, D.C. – U.S. Senator Mitch McConnell (R-KY), Chairman of the Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Defense, issued the following statement in advance of the June 17th closed hearing with Tulsi Gabbard, Director of National Intelligence, John Ratcliffe, Director of the Central Intelligence Agency, and Lieutenant General William J. Hartman, Acting Director of the National Security Agency:
“U.S. national security depends on the professionalism, objectivity, and integrity of a well-resourced intelligence community. As I’ve observed before, fighting conflict is far costlier than deterring it. And the costs of strategic surprise – the failure of intelligence – can be catastrophic. That’s why the defense subcommittee takes very seriously its responsibility to equip the IC for an array of sensitive and evolving missions.
“In return, we expect the nation’s seniormost intelligence officials to provide candid observations on the challenges facing both the IC and the decisionmakers their work informs. I look forward, in particular, to thorough assessments of U.S. interests in ongoing conflicts:
“I will expect Director Gabbard, Director Ratcliffe, and General Hartman to address the current state of Russia’s war in Ukraine, the potential consequences of an outcome that strengthens Vladimir Putin, and the potential damage to U.S. alliances and partnerships of withholding further support to Ukraine.
“Likewise, I will expect them to assess Israel’s ongoing response to Iran’s decades-long war against America, Israel, and our Arab partners, and the stakes of allowing Iran to continue its nuclear enrichment operations and support for terrorist proxies.
“Even more broadly, I will expect the leaders of the IC to demonstrate their grasp of the undeniable alignment and coordination of America’s adversaries. I expect them to outline how Chinese economic support for Iran and Iranian material support for Russia’s war informs the global assessments they offer to the Commander-in-Chief.
“Allies and partners from Europe to Japan are looking to the United States to meet this coordinated aggression with a coordinated response. Retreating from this mantle of leadership will not strengthen or advance American interests.”
Source: United States Senator for Kentucky Mitch McConnell
Washington, D.C. – U.S. Senator Mitch McConnell (R-KY), Chairman of the Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Defense, issued the following statement in advance of the June 17th closed hearing with Tulsi Gabbard, Director of National Intelligence, John Ratcliffe, Director of the Central Intelligence Agency, and Lieutenant General William J. Hartman, Acting Director of the National Security Agency:
“U.S. national security depends on the professionalism, objectivity, and integrity of a well-resourced intelligence community. As I’ve observed before, fighting conflict is far costlier than deterring it. And the costs of strategic surprise – the failure of intelligence – can be catastrophic. That’s why the defense subcommittee takes very seriously its responsibility to equip the IC for an array of sensitive and evolving missions.
“In return, we expect the nation’s seniormost intelligence officials to provide candid observations on the challenges facing both the IC and the decisionmakers their work informs. I look forward, in particular, to thorough assessments of U.S. interests in ongoing conflicts:
“I will expect Director Gabbard, Director Ratcliffe, and General Hartman to address the current state of Russia’s war in Ukraine, the potential consequences of an outcome that strengthens Vladimir Putin, and the potential damage to U.S. alliances and partnerships of withholding further support to Ukraine.
“Likewise, I will expect them to assess Israel’s ongoing response to Iran’s decades-long war against America, Israel, and our Arab partners, and the stakes of allowing Iran to continue its nuclear enrichment operations and support for terrorist proxies.
“Even more broadly, I will expect the leaders of the IC to demonstrate their grasp of the undeniable alignment and coordination of America’s adversaries. I expect them to outline how Chinese economic support for Iran and Iranian material support for Russia’s war informs the global assessments they offer to the Commander-in-Chief.
“Allies and partners from Europe to Japan are looking to the United States to meet this coordinated aggression with a coordinated response. Retreating from this mantle of leadership will not strengthen or advance American interests.”
Source: United States Senator Alex Padilla (D-Calif.)
Padilla, Van Hollen, Kaine Introduce Legislation to Sanction Salvadoran Officials for Human Rights Abuses, Collusion with Trump Administration in Violation of Constitutional Rights
WASHINGTON, D.C. — U.S. Senators Alex Padilla (D-Calif.), Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), and Tim Kaine (D-Va.) introduced new legislation in a continuation of their efforts to hold El Salvador accountable for its human rights abuses and its collusion with the Trump Administration to imprison people from the United States without due process. The Senators’ legislation would apply sanctions on Salvadoran officials and others who have engaged in international human rights violations or worked to deprive individuals residing in the United States of their rights under the U.S. Constitution.
The legislation would additionally explicitly sanction Salvadoran President Bukele and Vice President Ulloa, as well as El Salvador’s Ministers of Foreign Relations, Defense, and Justice and Public Security, among others. In addition to its actions alongside the Trump Administration to imprison people from the United States, Bukele and his government have continued to jail and persecute innocent Salvadoran citizens, including journalists and human rights advocates such as Ruth López.
“President Bukele and his regime are continuing to commit abhorrent human rights atrocities and eradicate due process,” said Senator Padilla. “We must hold Bukele and all responsible parties accountable for the suspension of constitutional rights and continued collusion with the Trump Administration to imprison people from the United States without due process. Imposing economic sanctions and visa restrictions on Bukele and his corrupt government is a necessary step to push El Salvador to finally uphold international human rights law and respect fundamental civil liberties.”
“President Bukele and the Government of El Salvador are colluding with the Trump Administration, taking American taxpayer dollars to imprison people as part of a scheme to violate their constitutional rights. We must hold Bukele and his cronies accountable for these wrongful actions as well as for the gross violations of human rights they are committing in El Salvador. This legislation would do just that by placing sanctions on Bukele and those in his government who are responsible for these abuses. We must send a clear signal that these injustices are unacceptable and must end,” said Senator Van Hollen.
“Under President Bukele, tens of thousands of Salvadorans and even U.S. residents remain jammed in megaprisons without due process. President Bukele may think he has a friend in President Trump, but he should know that Americans will not tolerate his efforts to undermine the rule of law and democratic institutions—whether in El Salvador or here in the United States,” said Senator Kaine. “That’s why I’m introducing this legislation with my colleagues to sanction foreign nationals complicit in Bukele’s behavior and the Trump Administration’s illegal actions to deny due process to people living in the United States.”
The Senators’ legislation is supported by the Latin America Working Group, the Washington Office on Latin America, Human Rights Watch, and Immigration Hub.
Additional Background:
Sanctions: Imposes property-blocking and visa sanctions on President Bukele, key members of his cabinet, and other foreign persons working on behalf of the Salvadoran government that have:
engaged in gross violations of internationally recognized human rights, including in connection with the ongoing “state of exception” in El Salvador;
engaged in the scheme, including by accepting U.S. taxpayer dollars, to deprive individuals residing in the United States of their Constitutional rights; or
provided material support to any person that has engaged in the above activities.
Termination/Snapback of Sanctions: Sanctions cannot be terminated until at least four years after the bill is enacted and unless the President certifies to Congress that the Government of El Salvador is no longer engaged in gross violations of internationally recognized human rights and no longer engaged in the scheme, including by accepting U.S. taxpayer dollars, to deprive individuals residing in the United States of their Constitutional rights. If the President determines that either of those conditions resume, then sanctions shall be reimposed.
Reporting Requirements: Requires reports to Congress that provide transparency on Salvadoran officials subject to a variety of sanctions authorities, U.S. government assistance to El Salvador, bilateral written agreements between the United States and El Salvador, and compliance with U.S. laws including the Leahy Laws and the Global Magnitsky Human Rights Accountability Act. Also requires a report on the actions of Salvadoran officials, including President Bukele, to use cryptocurrency as a mechanism for gross corruption, graft, and sanctions evasion.
Blocking International Financial Assistance: Instructs the United States to use its voice and vote in international financial institutions to oppose financial assistance to the Government of El Salvador until the appropriate Presidential certification is transmitted to Congress.
Prohibiting U.S. Funds for El Salvador: Prohibits any U.S. funding for the Government of El Salvador until the appropriate Presidential certification is transmitted to Congress.
“Senators Van Hollen, Kaine, and Padilla’s bill to impose sanctions on the regime of President Nayib Bukele is timely and importantly puts a spotlight on the gross violation of human rights that have occurred under President Bukele’s state of exception. Since March 2022, 85,000 people have been detained, constitutional guarantees have been suspended, and over 350 people have died while under state custody. Systemic torture and persecution are state policies. Significantly, the bill also addresses the pervasive corruption that has occurred since President Bukele took office and prevents the IMF and other international financial institutions not to lend support. Not one penny of our tax dollars should support this regime until there is an end to the human rights violations, and the rule of law, judicial independence, and government transparency are restored. All Members of Congress should get behind this bill,” said Vicki Gass, Executive Director, Latin America Working Group.
“Targeted individual sanctions for gross human rights violations are a critical diplomatic tool the U.S. can use to push for change and hold authoritarian actors accountable; as El Salvador’s political and human rights crisis deepens, strong international action like this becomes essential,” said Ana María Méndez-Dardón, Director for Central America at the Washington Office on Latin America.
“We are heartened to see Senators confronting the human rights abuses of government officials in El Salvador. This bill an important reminder that uncritical US government support to President Bukele will not last forever and a recognition that nobody should be deported to Salvadoran prisons,” said Juan Pappier, Deputy Director of the Americas division, Human Rights Watch.
Source: United States Senator Alex Padilla (D-Calif.)
Padilla, Van Hollen, Kaine Introduce Legislation to Sanction Salvadoran Officials for Human Rights Abuses, Collusion with Trump Administration in Violation of Constitutional Rights
WASHINGTON, D.C. — U.S. Senators Alex Padilla (D-Calif.), Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), and Tim Kaine (D-Va.) introduced new legislation in a continuation of their efforts to hold El Salvador accountable for its human rights abuses and its collusion with the Trump Administration to imprison people from the United States without due process. The Senators’ legislation would apply sanctions on Salvadoran officials and others who have engaged in international human rights violations or worked to deprive individuals residing in the United States of their rights under the U.S. Constitution.
The legislation would additionally explicitly sanction Salvadoran President Bukele and Vice President Ulloa, as well as El Salvador’s Ministers of Foreign Relations, Defense, and Justice and Public Security, among others. In addition to its actions alongside the Trump Administration to imprison people from the United States, Bukele and his government have continued to jail and persecute innocent Salvadoran citizens, including journalists and human rights advocates such as Ruth López.
“President Bukele and his regime are continuing to commit abhorrent human rights atrocities and eradicate due process,” said Senator Padilla. “We must hold Bukele and all responsible parties accountable for the suspension of constitutional rights and continued collusion with the Trump Administration to imprison people from the United States without due process. Imposing economic sanctions and visa restrictions on Bukele and his corrupt government is a necessary step to push El Salvador to finally uphold international human rights law and respect fundamental civil liberties.”
“President Bukele and the Government of El Salvador are colluding with the Trump Administration, taking American taxpayer dollars to imprison people as part of a scheme to violate their constitutional rights. We must hold Bukele and his cronies accountable for these wrongful actions as well as for the gross violations of human rights they are committing in El Salvador. This legislation would do just that by placing sanctions on Bukele and those in his government who are responsible for these abuses. We must send a clear signal that these injustices are unacceptable and must end,” said Senator Van Hollen.
“Under President Bukele, tens of thousands of Salvadorans and even U.S. residents remain jammed in megaprisons without due process. President Bukele may think he has a friend in President Trump, but he should know that Americans will not tolerate his efforts to undermine the rule of law and democratic institutions—whether in El Salvador or here in the United States,” said Senator Kaine. “That’s why I’m introducing this legislation with my colleagues to sanction foreign nationals complicit in Bukele’s behavior and the Trump Administration’s illegal actions to deny due process to people living in the United States.”
The Senators’ legislation is supported by the Latin America Working Group, the Washington Office on Latin America, Human Rights Watch, and Immigration Hub.
Additional Background:
Sanctions: Imposes property-blocking and visa sanctions on President Bukele, key members of his cabinet, and other foreign persons working on behalf of the Salvadoran government that have:
engaged in gross violations of internationally recognized human rights, including in connection with the ongoing “state of exception” in El Salvador;
engaged in the scheme, including by accepting U.S. taxpayer dollars, to deprive individuals residing in the United States of their Constitutional rights; or
provided material support to any person that has engaged in the above activities.
Termination/Snapback of Sanctions: Sanctions cannot be terminated until at least four years after the bill is enacted and unless the President certifies to Congress that the Government of El Salvador is no longer engaged in gross violations of internationally recognized human rights and no longer engaged in the scheme, including by accepting U.S. taxpayer dollars, to deprive individuals residing in the United States of their Constitutional rights. If the President determines that either of those conditions resume, then sanctions shall be reimposed.
Reporting Requirements: Requires reports to Congress that provide transparency on Salvadoran officials subject to a variety of sanctions authorities, U.S. government assistance to El Salvador, bilateral written agreements between the United States and El Salvador, and compliance with U.S. laws including the Leahy Laws and the Global Magnitsky Human Rights Accountability Act. Also requires a report on the actions of Salvadoran officials, including President Bukele, to use cryptocurrency as a mechanism for gross corruption, graft, and sanctions evasion.
Blocking International Financial Assistance: Instructs the United States to use its voice and vote in international financial institutions to oppose financial assistance to the Government of El Salvador until the appropriate Presidential certification is transmitted to Congress.
Prohibiting U.S. Funds for El Salvador: Prohibits any U.S. funding for the Government of El Salvador until the appropriate Presidential certification is transmitted to Congress.
“Senators Van Hollen, Kaine, and Padilla’s bill to impose sanctions on the regime of President Nayib Bukele is timely and importantly puts a spotlight on the gross violation of human rights that have occurred under President Bukele’s state of exception. Since March 2022, 85,000 people have been detained, constitutional guarantees have been suspended, and over 350 people have died while under state custody. Systemic torture and persecution are state policies. Significantly, the bill also addresses the pervasive corruption that has occurred since President Bukele took office and prevents the IMF and other international financial institutions not to lend support. Not one penny of our tax dollars should support this regime until there is an end to the human rights violations, and the rule of law, judicial independence, and government transparency are restored. All Members of Congress should get behind this bill,” said Vicki Gass, Executive Director, Latin America Working Group.
“Targeted individual sanctions for gross human rights violations are a critical diplomatic tool the U.S. can use to push for change and hold authoritarian actors accountable; as El Salvador’s political and human rights crisis deepens, strong international action like this becomes essential,” said Ana María Méndez-Dardón, Director for Central America at the Washington Office on Latin America.
“We are heartened to see Senators confronting the human rights abuses of government officials in El Salvador. This bill an important reminder that uncritical US government support to President Bukele will not last forever and a recognition that nobody should be deported to Salvadoran prisons,” said Juan Pappier, Deputy Director of the Americas division, Human Rights Watch.
Today’s introduction of the Employment Relations Amendment Bill to Parliament shows that the ACT Party – a fringe libertarian party with the support of fewer than one in ten New Zealanders – is now the leading force in Christopher Luxon’s “hands-off” Government and has been given a green light to drag Aotearoa backwards with a disastrous suite of anti-worker ‘reforms’.
“It’s clear that Brooke van Velden and the ACT Party are now redefining the future of workers in New Zealand with the blessing of a negligent Prime Minister,” said Dennis Maga, Workers First Union General Secretary.
“These are the most significant anti-worker law changes that this country has seen in decades, and they will make life worse for every working person in the country to the benefit of exploitative employers.”
The Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) wants feedback on an application to import or manufacture Tower, a new herbicide used to control certain broadleaf and grass weeds in wheat and barley crops.
Adama New Zealand Limited has applied to introduce the new herbicide, which contains the active ingredients:
– chlorotoluron at 250 g/L
– pendimethalin at 300 g/L
– diflufenican at 40 g/L.
Chlorotoluron is a new active ingredient to Aotearoa New Zealand. It has been approved in Europe. Pendimethalin and diflufenican have previously been assessed and substances containing these active ingredients are already approved for use in New Zealand.
Adama says the product offers a new mode of action and should reduce the risk of resistance developing when used as part of an integrated weed management programme.
Almost 100,000 hectares of New Zealand land is used for wheat and barley production. Annual crop sales total around $300 million for both crops combined.
The EPA has carried out a human health and environmental risk assessment and is now inviting submissions on this application.
If approved, Tower could only be used by professionals in commercial settings using ground-based application. It would be applied after sowing and before wheat and barley plants emerge.
Dr Lauren Fleury, EPA Hazardous Substances Applications Manager, says the EPA is making strong progress to boost efficiency in assessing applications, with eight applications for new active ingredients currently in progress.
“We understand the importance of timely access to new products. Since 1 July 2024, we have reduced the queue of hazardous substance release applications by 21 percent, and we are on track to complete the highest number of decisions in five years.”
NSW Health is advising people to be alert for signs and symptoms of measles after being notified of a confirmed case who was infectious on an international flight and while visiting several locations in Sydney. The case recently returned from South-East Asia where there are ongoing outbreaks of measles in several countries including Thailand, Vietnam, and Indonesia. People who were on board the below flight or attended the following locations should watch for the development of symptoms. These locations do not pose an ongoing risk. Monday 10 March:
Vietnam Airlines flight VN773 departed Ho Chi Minh City 9:20pm Sunday 9 March, arriving in Sydney 9:50am Monday 10 March. Sydney International Airport arrivals terminal and baggage claim from 10am to midday.
Thursday 13 March:
The Children’s Hospital Westmead Emergency Department waiting room entering via the Westmead Precinct entrance 10 from 10:30am to 5pm.
South Western Sydney Local Health District A/Director of Public Health, Dr Mitchell Smith, said anyone who travelled on flight VN773 or visited the above locations at those times you should monitor for symptoms. Measles is a vaccine preventable disease that is spread through the air when someone who is infectious coughs or sneezes. “Symptoms to watch out for include fever, runny nose, sore eyes and a cough, usually followed three or four days later by a red, blotchy rash that spreads from the head and face to the rest of the body,” Dr Smith said. “It can take up to 18 days for symptoms to appear after an exposure, so it’s important for people who visited these locations to look out for symptoms until the end of March 2025. “It’s important for people to stay vigilant if they’ve been exposed, and if they develop symptoms, to please call ahead to their GP or emergency department to ensure they do not spend time in the waiting room with other patients. “We want to remind the community to make sure they are up-to-date with their vaccinations. The measles vaccine can prevent the disease even after exposure, if given early enough. “This should be a reminder for everyone to check that they are protected against measles, which is highly infectious. “Anyone born after 1965 needs to ensure they have had two doses of measles vaccine. This is especially important before overseas travel, as measles outbreaks are occurring in several regions of the world at the moment.” The measles-mumps-rubella (MMR) vaccine is safe and effective, and is given free for children at 12 and 18 months of age. It is also free in NSW for anyone born after 1965 who hasn’t already had two doses. Children under the age of 12 months can have their first dose of MMR up to six months earlier if they are travelling to areas with a high risk for measles. Parents should consult their GP. People who are unsure of whether they have had two doses should get a vaccine, as additional doses are safe. This is particularly important prior to travel. MMR vaccine is available from GPs (all ages) and pharmacies (people over 5 years of age). For more information on measles, view the measles fact sheet. If you, or a loved one, is experiencing measles symptoms, or have questions about measles, please call your GP or healthdirect on 1800 022 222.
Source: People’s Republic of China – State Council News
BEIJING, June 16 — China’s intangible cultural heritage workshops are proving a powerful force for rural revitalization, with over 11,000 such workshops preserving traditional crafts, creating jobs and boosting local economies, official data shows.
These workshops are distributed across 2,005 county-level regions, including 670 formerly impoverished counties and 135 key counties designated to receive rural revitalization assistance, and have generated employment for more than 1.2 million people in related industries.
Notably, over 4,300 workshops operate directly in villages, providing flexible work arrangements particularly suited to elderly residents, women, and people with disabilities through home-based production and daily wage models.
The Chinese government has actively promoted the role of intangible cultural heritage in cultural preservation and economic development. In December 2021, the Ministry of Culture and Tourism and other central government departments issued a policy document specifically guiding the establishment and operation of these workshops, emphasizing talent cultivation, job creation and industrial support.
At the local level, 18 provinces have introduced policies to certify and manage these workshops, offering funding, marketing assistance and resource coordination.
In Zhejiang Province, for example, the Xiaoshan district has paired workshops with villages. The provincial-level Xiaoshan pickled radish intangible cultural heritage workshop has connected over 40,000 farmers through contract-based production, generating an output value of 300 million yuan (about 42 million U.S. dollars) in 2024.
As of March this year, the number of national-level intangible cultural heritage inheritors has grown to nearly 4,000.
Source: People’s Republic of China – State Council News
China welcomes Vietnam to join as a BRICS partner country, a Chinese foreign ministry spokesperson said on Monday.
Spokesperson Guo Jiakun made the remarks at a regular news briefing when asked to comment on the news that the BRICS chair Brazil announced the formal admission of Vietnam as a partner country of the group on Friday.
China welcomes Vietnam to join the BRICS as a partner country, Guo said, noting that Vietnam’s participation in BRICS cooperation will not only benefit its own development but also align with the common interests of BRICS and the Global South.
“We believe that Vietnam will make positive contributions to the BRICS mechanism,” the spokesperson added.
A new partner to the BRICS family marks a further expansion of the mechanism’s representativeness and highlights its appeal and influence, Guo said, noting that China stands ready to work with other member and partner countries to build a more comprehensive, close, practical, and inclusive partnership, advance the high-quality development of “BRICS Plus” cooperation, and make greater contributions to upholding multilateralism, defending fairness, and promoting shared development.
Source: People’s Republic of China – State Council News
An explosion at a fireworks factory in central China’s Hunan Province on Monday had left one person dead, six missing and nine injured as of 5 p.m., local authorities said.
The explosion occurred at Shanzhou Fireworks Co., Ltd. in Linli County under Changde City at approximately 8:23 a.m. Monday, the county Party committee’s publicity department said, adding that all the injured are receiving medical treatment, with non-life-threatening conditions.
The blast site is a single-story reinforced concrete structure. Established in July 2017, the factory employs over 150 people, most of whom were outside the explosion zone when the accident occurred.
Immediately following the accident, emergency teams at various levels were mobilized to the scene. Rescue efforts remain focused on locating the missing, treating the injured, evacuating nearby residents, and investigating the cause of the accident.
Source: People’s Republic of China – State Council News
China has always supported Latin American and Caribbean countries, including Panama, in upholding their independence and autonomy and opposing hegemony, bullying and foreign interference, a Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson said on Monday.
Spokesperson Guo Jiakun made the remarks in response to reports that the U.S. Embassy in Panama stated the United States will work with Panama to install seven new communications towers with U.S. technology, replacing Chinese company Huawei’s equipment. Panamanian President Jose Raul Mulino has urged the U.S. embassy to refrain from making public declarations regarding decisions made solely by the Panamanian government.
Addressing a regular press briefing, Guo said that the United States has long conducted surveillance and cyberattacks in Latin America and the Caribbean, causing adverse effects across the Western Hemisphere and leaving countries in the Americas feeling insecure.
He added that while carrying out friendly cooperation with Latin American and Caribbean countries, China has always adhered to the principles of mutual respect, equality, mutual benefit, openness, inclusiveness and win-win collaboration. “China never seeks spheres of influence, nor does it engage in geopolitical competition, let alone coerce other countries into taking sides,” the spokesperson said.
Noting that Latin America and the Caribbean are not anyone’s backyard, Guo urged the United States to stop politicizing economic, trade, and scientific and technological issues, stop interfering in other countries’ internal affairs and undermining their sovereignty and independence, stop coercing other countries into taking sides or restricting cooperation with China, and instead focus on promoting regional peace, stability, development and prosperity.
Source: People’s Republic of China – State Council News
At the upcoming Second China-Central Asia Summit to be held later this week, heads of state will jointly draw a new blueprint for future cooperation, open up new space for Belt and Road cooperation and build an even closer China-Central Asia community with a shared future, a Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson said in Beijing on Monday.
Spokesperson Guo Jiakun made the remarks at a press briefing when answering a related query.
Noting Central Asia is not only the place where the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) was first proposed, but also a pace-setter in high-quality Belt and Road cooperation, Guo said that all five Central Asian countries have signed BRI cooperation documents with China, and China and Central Asian countries have implemented a series of signature projects designed to boost development and make lives better for the people.
Trade between China and Central Asian countries hit a record high of 674.15 billion yuan in 2024, up by 116 percent compared with that of 2013. Guo said that all sides have found a new model of mutually beneficial cooperation through the China-Kazakhstan Crude Oil Pipeline project and the China-Central Asia Gas Pipeline project. The China-Tajikistan highway, the China-Kyrgyzstan-Uzbekistan highway and the China-Kyrgyzstan-Uzbekistan railway have taken regional connectivity to new levels, and practical cooperation is expanded to digital economy and green transition.
“China has mutual visa exemption with Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan. The Luban Workshops project is picking up speed. People-to-people and cultural exchanges have moved onto the fast lane and brought our peoples close to each other,” Guo said, pointing out that high-quality Belt and Road cooperation is increasingly becoming a key focus of China-Central Asia cooperation.
Source: People’s Republic of China – State Council News
The opening ceremony of Kazakhstan’s “China Tourism Year” was held on Monday at the National Museum of Kazakhstan, with around 300 guests from China and Kazakhstan in attendance.
Chinese Minister of Culture and Tourism Sun Yeli and Kazakh Minister of Tourism and Sports Yerbol Myrzabosynov delivered speeches at the event.
As a major highlight of the “China Tourism Year” in Kazakhstan, the exhibition titled “Silk and the Silk Road: From China to Kazakhstan” also opened on the same day at the National Museum.
The exhibition is divided into three sections, “The Origin of Silk,” “The Road of Silk,” and “The Use of Silk”, aiming to showcase the historical richness and modern development of Silk Road culture, as well as the friendship and cultural exchange between China and countries along the Silk Road.
The exhibition will run through August 8.
The opening ceremony also featured cultural performances, a Hanfu fashion show, and hands-on experiences with intangible cultural heritage. In addition, a memorandum of cooperation was signed between the China National Silk Museum and the National Museum of Kazakhstan.
