Pauline Donalda c1906A film created by an Aberdeen academic exploring the life of a soprano whose musical rise was supported by a former University chancellor has won awards and been included in the official selection of a number of international film festivals.
Madame Donalda by Professor Alan Marcus, Chair in Creative and Cultural Practice, examines the life of Pauline Lightstone, who performed as Madame Donalda. Filmed in Montreal, London and Aberdeen, it has generated much international interest.
Donalda’s stage name was a tribute to Donald Smith, who became Lord Strathcona (1820-1914) a Scottish-born Canadian businessman who became a leading philanthropist after making his fortune from investments in land, railways, and banking.
Born in Forres, Moray, in 1899 he was appointed Lord Rector of the University of Aberdeen and later became its Chancellor.
As a 15-year-old, the purity of Pauline’s voice was recognised during musical rehearsals at a synagogue and she was then awarded a place at the Royal Victoria College (RVC), originally the women’s college at McGill University.
Lord Strathcona was a champion of women’s education at McGill and was a proponent of the education of women and furthering women’s opportunities.
He agreed to support Pauline’s ‘fully rounded musical education’ including study at Conservatoire de Paris.
Lord Strathcona’s second benefaction to the College was made under his middle name of Donald and the women supported by ‘the Donalda Endowment’ proudly called themselves ‘the Donaldas’ – a tradition adopted by Pauline Lighthouse who appeared on stage as Pauline Donalda.
After a successful debut in Nice, France, in 1904, her artistic career quickly took off. In 1905, she sang at London’s Covent Garden for the Queen and at The Brussels Royal Opera House.
These performances earned her tremendous acclaim and for many years she sang the leading operatic roles at Covent Garden and the great opera houses of Europe. She also toured Britain and sang at Aberdeen’s Musical Hall. When World War I broke out, she suspended her international career and organised benefit concerts to support the war effort.
From 1922 she devoted herself to teaching voice and in 1942 founded the Opera Guild of Montreal, which went on to stage the first Canadian performances of many operas.
Professor Marcus, whose own father Rudy Marcus received his degrees from McGill including an honorary doctorate, and at 101 is the oldest living Nobel laureate (Chemistry, 1992) in North America, said he was inspired by a story which pulls together many threads of his own life.
“I was told the story of Madame Donalda aka Pauline Lightstone by a great uncle of mine some 35 years ago when I learned that she was a relative of ours, and it made a sufficient impression on me that I was hopeful one day I might be able to tell it in film form,” he added.
“The key elements of the story involving a daughter of European immigrants to Montreal, who against the odds rose to become in her early-20s one of the great sopranos of her day, adapts well to film, because through moving image and sound one can provide a more vivid impression and sense of presence.
“During the years of research and drawing upon archives in London, Montreal and Ottawa, I was able to piece together through news items and her personal correspondence and much archival imagery, the various components of Donalda’s life.
“What was unexpected was the Aberdeen connection and the fact that her patron, from whom she took her stage name, Madame Donalda, was a keen proponent of women’s education and served both as Chancellor of McGill, where she studied, and the University of Aberdeen. The personal connection I and my family have with Aberdeen and McGill added an immediacy to the story.”
The film has received Best Documentary and Best Editing awards at the Experimental Dance and Music Film Festival 2024 in Toronto, the Best Classical Music film award at the Buenos Aires 11th Music Film Festival 2025, and official selection at ten other film festivals including the Los Angeles Film and Documentary Awards 2024.
Professor Marcus said: “It is gratifying that the film has been included in various international film festivals and won awards, but what I hope is that when people view the film they not only learn of Donalda’s talents and be intrigued with her extraordinary accomplishments, but also be enthralled by the short performances in her old recordings, and more recently through the participation in the film of Bulgarian soprano, Sofia Dimitrova, who brings the musical pieces to life with great passion.”
The General Services Committee has agreed to launch an independent inquiry into the Connaught Care Home Extension project in a bid to understand the delayed project completion and associated costs.
The Committee has sought expertise from off-island and the inquiry will be led by Martin Thornton, who is a Judge in the Guernsey Magistrates Court.
Chair of the General Services Committee, Iain Macfarlane, stated:
“This will not be just a tick-box exercise. The inquiry will thoroughly examine key processes and procedures relating to the project, ensuring that overall accountability for the perceived failings is identified. The findings will be made public in due course. Additionally, the Committee has requested that the report includes recommendations for future projects to prevent similar issues from occurring.”
The General Services Committee recognises the community’s frustrations over the delivery of this project and it’s perceived shortcomings and remains committed to transparency and responsible management of public funds.
Further updates will be provided as the inquiry progresses.
Ends
States of Alderney media enquiries:Publications@alderney.gov.gg
(L-R) Diane Cordner (World Triathlon Level 2 Coach and Advanced Sport Nutrition Advisor.); Gail McComiskey (Movement Matters NI); Deputy Lord Mayor, Cllr Kyle Savage; Constable Victoria Elliot (PSNI); Patricia Gibson (PCSP Manager); Constable Diarmuid Sands (PSNI) and Lynette Cooke (PCSP Development Manager).
Over 100 people attended the ‘Run Safe, Run Well’ event to highlight personal safety while running and the importance of good nutrition to support performance, injury prevention and recovery.
The event was organised by Armagh, Banbridge and Craigavon Policing and Community Safety Partnership (PCSP) along with Armagh City, Banbridge and Craigavon Borough Council’s Sports Development team and PSNI.
Whether it’s for fun, to be active or to run competitively, running is a hugely popular activity for people of all ages and abilities across the borough. Each week hundreds of people join a running community to take on the local parkrun at Armagh, Craigavon and Lurgan.
Speaking at the event, Deputy Lord Mayor Councillor Kyle Savage said:
“One of the Council’s key goals is to create ‘a happy, healthy and connected community’. This event is an important step towards achieving that vision, however personal safety while out running remains a real concern, particularly for females.
“Tonight’s event has been a great opportunity to raise awareness about staying safe and how to report issues and concerns. The nutrition advice and tips will also go a long way to supporting people in their journey to lead fitter and healthier lives.”
Representatives from Lurgan and Armagh Neighbourhood Policing teams and PSNI were on hand to offer advice and guidance on risk aversion, particularly when running alone.
Local World Triathlon Level 2 Coach and Advanced Sport Nutrition Advisor Diane Cordner shared tips and advice on the importance of a healthy balanced diet and its role in performance and recovery.
Gail McComiskey from Movement Matters NI, shared valuable insights into how to reduce injuries while running and how to support recovery.
Closing the event, Chair of PCSP, Alderman Mark Baxter said: “It has been fantastic to welcome everyone along to this event. I wish to extend a very special thank you to our guest speakers who delivered lots of key messages on the importance of staying safe, healthy and active, and ourlocal independent retailers and exhibitorswho generously sponsored spot prizes.”
The event was supported by local business including McKeever Sports, Armagh Sports and Trophies, Donaghy’s and support service Start 360!
Four secondary schools in Coventry have been taking part in a national No More Knives tour provided by The Message Trust.
The No More Knives tour is an award-winning initiative aimed at tackling knife crime among young people and is making a powerful impact in schools across the UK.
The project has been touring some of the city’s secondary schools this week.
Sessions are run which allow students to listen to first-hand stories from those who have been involved in knife crime. It also combines storytelling with music and education for an impactful session that highlights the devastating impact of knife crime. Each session provides students with the knowledge and confidence they need to say “no” to knives and make positive choices.
The schools taking in the tour include, Blue Coat Church of England, West Coventry Academy, Coundon Court and Sidney Stringer.
Partners involved include the Council, Coventry Police, Hope Coventry – representing local churches and The Message Trust, and the West Midlands Violence Reduction Partnership.
The work forms part of Coventry’s campaign to be a child friendly city – called Child Friendly Cov – and to enable children and young people to have their voice heard in matters that affect them.
Cllr Pat Seaman Cabinet Member for Children and Young People at the Council, said:
“We are really ambitious for Coventry to be the best city in the UK for children to grow up in. Child Friendly Cov aims to create a child and young person friendly city, ensuring that Coventry is a place where children and young people are valued, supported, and enjoy themselves.
“The No More Knives tour tackles such an important issue for young people, and it is a chance for them to explore the issues and help put into practise the positive messages highlighted in the tour.”
Paul Drover, Police Commander, Coventry Local Policing Area, added:
“Knife crime has hit the headlines in recent years and all the communities in Coventry must work together to protect our children and young people from becoming involved, the police cannot tackle this problem alone.”
The Message Trust is a Christian charity with over 30 years’ experience of school’s work, who are passionate about young people knowing their true worth and identity.
Sam Ward, CEO of the Message Trust, said: “Knife crime and its devasting impact is sadly never far from the headlines today, but we know there is a better way. Though the No More Knives tour we want to tell young people how knives aren’t the answer, equip them with the skills they need to say ‘no’ and let them know there is hope.”
Steve Elton, HOPE Coventry, added: “It has been wonderful to partner with the local police, council, churches and schools in being able to bring the Message Trust and their No More Knives tour into the city for the second time!
“The 2024 tour was a great success, with students and teachers in the three schools commending the empowering message and engaging delivery around the emotive, challenging and important subject of knife crime. We are expectant that this years tour will have the same notable impact as it plays its part alongside the excellent work already taking place in this area, as we stand together, with young people across Coventry to say ‘No More Knives’ in our city!”
Funding was provided for the tour by the Council, Hope Coventry and The Message Trust.
Feedback from schools so far:
Lou Peet, Blue Coat School Chaplain, said:
“Seeing our young people so engaged and interactive today has been a joy… To see our students genuinely contemplative, reflecting, and willing to pledge to never carry a knife is a precious and potentially life-saving thing.”
“I feel a lot more safer knowing that a lot more kids would agree to not carrying a knife.” – Olivia, Year 7 student.
“I really enjoyed it. The music was exciting and gave a positive spin on a difficult topic.”- Holly, Year 7 Student.
“What a wonderful, inspiring, interactive experience for our students. The buzz around school was heart-warming! The messages were loud and clear and so well received by all students and staff. Thank you so much for this fantastic opportunity.” – Mrs Claire Franklin, Safeguarding Lead
Source: United Kingdom – Executive Government & Departments 3
Speech
NPT Safeguards Agreement with Iran: Quad statement to the IAEA Board, March 2025
UK Ambassador Corinne Kitsell’s statement on behalf of France, Germany, the UK and United States (the Quad) to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) Board meeting about Iran’s implementation of its obligations under its Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) Safeguards Agreement
Chair,
France, Germany, the United Kingdom and the United States commend the Agency for its continued efforts to engage Iran to clarify the outstanding issues related to the implementation of Iran’s NPT-required Safeguards Agreement. We thank the Director General for his report on these issues, which are critical to understanding the nature of Iran’s nuclear programme.
We deeply regret that, for more than five years, Iran has refused to provide required clarifications regarding nuclear material detected at multiple undeclared locations in Iran. The Director General and the Board have made clear repeatedly that Iran is legally required to provide this cooperation. Iran has failed to do so despite the concerted efforts of the Director General and this Board to provide Iran every opportunity. As a result of Iran’s longstanding denials, the Agency is still unable to provide critical assurances that Iran’s nuclear programme is exclusively peaceful and that there are no undeclared nuclear materials or activities in Iran. These issues are fundamental to Iran’s safeguards obligations and the broader non-proliferation regime. No State can be allowed to violate its safeguards obligations with impunity. Iran must fully cooperate, or the Board must be prepared to find Iran in noncompliance. Until now, Iran has made its choice. Let us be clear: unless Iran changes course, it will force the Board to make its own choice. Time is not on Iran’s side.
This report recalls the IAEA’s assessment of some of the deeply concerning activities that Iran did not declare, at Turquzabad, Varamin, Marivan and Lavisan-Shian. It is of significant concern that due to the lack of information being provided by Iran, the IAEA concluded it would be unable to continue its efforts to resolve the safeguards issues at Lavisan-Shian. We note that the IAEA’s technical assessment of the activities at Marivan has not changed, that Iran has not provided technically credible information, and therefore the issue remains unresolved. We also want to highlight the lack of progress towards resolving the discrepancy issue at Jaber Ibn Hayan Laboratory, which still has to be explained by Iran. Iran continues to reject and challenge the IAEA’s technical assessment of the activities at these undeclared sites rather than engaging the IAEA constructively towards resolving the outstanding issues. We reiterate our support for the IAEA’s critical work. We underscore the value of the IAEA’s technical expertise and authority to investigate these issues to address concerns around the possibility of undeclared nuclear material and activity in Iran today.
Chair,
In his latest report, the Director General reiterates that Iran continues to refuse to provide design information for new nuclear facilities as legally required under modified Code 3.1. This is in contravention of Iran’s safeguards agreement. Iran’s unwillingness to provide the Agency with this information should be especially concerning given Iran’s history of building covert nuclear facilities. We also note that Iran has refused to accept the designation of four additional experienced inspectors. We recall the Director General’s statement that Iran’s previous decision to withdraw the designations of inspectors seriously affects the Agency’s ability to conduct its verification activities in Iran. We echo his deep regret that Iran did not accept these new designations.
Iran’s refusal to cooperate with the IAEA and its refusal to abide by its obligations under its safeguards agreement is deeply concerning in the context of Iran’s continuous escalation of its nuclear programme to levels with no credible civilian justification. Our concern is intensified by the increasing number of senior Iranian officials who have publicly claimed that Iran has the technical capability to build a nuclear weapon and called for a change to Iran’s so-called “nuclear doctrine”. We recall that the Director General assessed in his report in May 2024 that such remarks increased his concerns about the correctness and completeness of Iran’s safeguards declarations.
We commend the Agency’s efforts to engage Iran to seek progress. However, after years of delay, Iran must finally and fully meet its commitments and obligations rather than dangle promises of discussions in the future which we have heard many times before.
Chair,
It is important that the Board supports the IAEA by the strongest means necessary to pursue clarity on the nature of Iran’s nuclear programme. The Board adopted two resolutions in 2024, which once again urged Iran to cooperate. Iran ignored these, as it has ignored opportunities in previous years. We reiterate our call on Iran to resume urgently full cooperation with the IAEA and to implement fully its safeguards agreement.
We recall that this Board, in its last resolution of November 2024, mandated the Director General to produce a comprehensive and updated assessment of the possible presence or use of undeclared nuclear material in Iran in connection with past and present outstanding issues. This document will provide a clear, technical and objective foundation to assess Iran’s compliance with its safeguards agreement. As the resolution sets out, it will include the Agency’s assessment of its ability to verify the implementation of Iran’s safeguards obligations and the non-diversion of nuclear material. The assessment will also include a full account of Iran’s cooperation with the Agency on the issues to date.
It is up to Iran to provide the technically credible explanations and substantive cooperation needed to inform the Agency. We regret that despite having the time and opportunity to do so, Iran has not made any progress in the four months since this resolution was adopted. In recognition of the Director General’s last report, which states that “the Agency is at an impasse” with regard to resolving these issues, we believe the comprehensive assessment should be delivered as soon as possible. It should be based on all information available to the Agency to provide the full picture, in order to inform the Board’s next steps on these issues. Iran has had many opportunities to resolve the issues.
Chair,
Our patience has been long, but it is not unlimited. We underscore, if there is no concrete, technically credible progress reported by the Director General, the Board must be prepared to consider finding Iran in non-compliance with its safeguards agreement.
We do not take such a course lightly. We reiterate that our efforts are intended to provide resolute support to the Agency in its safeguards investigations in Iran, for the sake of international security and the integrity of the global non-proliferation architecture.
More than ever, there is an urgent need to address the lack of transparency and assurances on the nature of Iran’s advancing nuclear programme. Iran’s full cooperation with the IAEA on its safeguards obligations is long overdue. Iran has had many chances over many years to cooperate, but Iran has instead chosen a path of escalation, obfuscation, and delay. Iran must be held to account if it continues along this path.
We again express our thanks for the IAEA’s continued efforts and ask for the report to be made public.
In any negotiation, understanding your counterpart’s style is paramount. The Ukraine conflict, and especially the heated discussion between presidents Trump and Zelensky in the Oval Office recently, has revealed a critical disconnect between the two administrations.
Volodymyr Zelensky later called the fiery showdown with President Trump and vice-president J.D. Vance “regrettable” and wrote to Trump to say he was ready to negotiate. But the Ukrainian president and his European allies have approached talks from a principles-based position. In terms of negotiating style, this means they tend to emphasise multilateral mechanisms, such as collegial decision-making, long-term relationship-building and cultural sensitivity.
Trump is a businessman and operates from a fundamentally different negotiation paradigm. Unfortunately, this misalignment has significant implications for Ukraine’s strategic position and for European security.
Research my colleagues and I conducted, comparing US and Italian negotiation styles, has shown that US negotiators typically use a more competitive, transactional approach. They might appear unilateral or domineering but are also adept at connecting different parts of a deal and trading concessions across issues to achieve their goals.
Trump, however, combines this with highly competitive tactics and emotional rhetoric. Unlike typical US negotiators who are thought to avoid emotional expression, as shown in our study, Trump uses anger and confrontation to dominate discussions and control narratives.
He frames negotiations in zero-sum terms, where every deal must have a clear winner and loser. This reinforces his public image as a strong leader.
And most importantly, Trump appears to negotiate selectively. He enters discussions only when he believes he holds the stronger position.
Our study shows that Americans prioritise bottom-line outcomes and use competitive tactics when they perceive themselves to be in positions of power.
Trump exemplifies this approach but adds his own distinctive elements – emotional pressure, public posturing and an unwavering commitment to his positions until a more favourable alternative emerges.
Zelensky’s miscalculation
President Zelensky’s primary negotiation error has been attempting to engage in a principles-based negotiation with a counterpart who favours transactional deal-making. When Zelensky appeals to democratic principles, territorial integrity and international law, he’s speaking a negotiation language that Trump doesn’t understand.
Classic negotiation research suggests Zelensky should have structured negotiations around US economic interests rather than western unity or moral imperatives.
Trump has made clear that he will protect Ukraine and Europe only insofar as it serves these economic interests. Zelensky is negotiating from a dependant position (Ukraine needs aid to survive). As such, the key is making the deal appealing to the stronger party while protecting his own interests.
In our study, we also found that the Italian negotiators often emphasise emotional engagement, treating counterparts as collaborators rather than adversaries. They tend to focus on mutual interests and their approach balances technical considerations with human relationships.
It is underpinned by principles such as liberal values and adherence to international norms. This chimes with other findings on the evolution of negotiation styles within the EU.
But this approach can be ineffective against Trump’s confrontational, power-based tactics. Emotional engagement may be misinterpreted as a weakness, and consensus-driven approaches fail when the counterpart insists on domination.
The liberal world order appears unprepared to negotiate at Trump’s level. It still expects rational, interest-based discussions rather than emotionally charged confrontations.
The rest of the world will have to adapt to Trump’s approach.
The EU’s experience negotiating Brexit provides a relevant template for addressing the Ukraine conflict. The appointment of Michel Barnier as chief negotiator, backed by a bloc of 27 nations, proved effective despite initial scepticism.
A similar approach could work for Ukraine. Appointing an authoritative chief negotiator with a clear mandate could be successful. Barnier, economist and former Italian prime minister Mario Draghi or ex-German chancellor Angela Merkel are obvious candidates. This structure might neutralise Trump’s preference for one-on-one, power-based deals and force negotiations on terms more aligned with European interests.
But to engage Trump, European and Ukrainian leaders need to reframe their approach.
First, proposals should be presented in terms of economic benefits. Trump prioritises trade, jobs and business opportunities over security or moral arguments. The negotiation landscape should emphasise the actual distribution of aid to Ukraine, highlighting that European nations collectively have provided substantial financial and humanitarian support.
Second, objective data and power-based arguments are better than moral appeals. Economic impact assessments and strategic calculations will resonate more effectively than principles-based reasoning.
Third, competitive tactics should be matched with controlled confrontation. Emotional engagement must be strategic, reinforcing firm but pragmatic positioning rather than appearing defensive.
Finally, win-win scenarios will allow Trump to claim victory. Trump negotiates to win, and deals must enable him to declare personal success in front of his own supporters.
The path forward requires strategic adaptation, not ideological entrenchment. Zelensky and European leaders must recognise that negotiating with Trump demands an understanding of his approach to international relations, perhaps favouring pragmatism over idealism.
A crucial insight from previous research on Trump’s negotiation behaviour is this: he rarely backtracks explicitly but frequently pivots to new objectives when they become more appealing. This should inspire European leaders to develop attractive alternatives that serve both Trump’s interests and Europe’s security needs.
Deal-making may not be the most desirable approach to geopolitical negotiations, but Trump’s return to power makes it the current reality. After decades of business negotiators learning from politicians, we now face a reversal. Political negotiators must learn from business tactics.
In the high-stakes arena of international security, understanding your counterpart’s negotiation style isn’t just good practice – it may be essential for survival. The lessons from Trump’s first term suggest that principled stands alone won’t secure Ukrainian or European interests. Pragmatic deal-making (underpinned with principles) offers a more promising path forward.
Andrea Caputo 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 US president, Donald Trump, is set to introduce a “gold card” visa that would allow wealthy foreigners to buy permanent US residency – and a path to citizenship – for US$5 million (£3.9 million).
Speaking at the Oval Office on February 25, Trump said: “I think it’s going to be very treasured. I think it’s going to do very well. And we’re going to start selling, hopefully, in about two weeks.”
US commerce secretary Howard Lutnick has touted the plan as a way to raise revenue to bring down US national debt, which currently stands at over US$36 trillion. As Trump put it when answering questions from reporters at the White House: “We’ll be able to sell maybe a million of these cards, maybe more than that. And if you add up the numbers, they’re pretty good. As an example, a million cards would be worth US$5 trillion.”
Trump has also suggested that the gold-card holders can help stimulate the US economy. “They’ll be wealthy, and they’ll be successful, and they’ll be spending a lot of money and paying a lot of taxes,” he said. When asked whether Russian oligarchs would qualify for the visa, Trump responded: “Hey, I know some Russian oligarchs that are very nice people. It’s possible.”
The idea that wealthy foreigners can address a nation’s faltering economy is not new. Trump’s gold visas will themselves replace the current EB-5 immigrant investor visa, which offers permanent US residency in return for job-creating investments of at least US$1 million.
In the aftermath of the 2008 global financial crisis, various European nations also floated similar golden visa schemes as a means of reversing their economic downturns. The visas offered by Spain, Greece, Hungary and Portugal, for example, all cost significantly less than Trump’s proposed scheme.
A Spanish gold visa, which will no longer be available from April 2025, is granted in return for €500,000 (£417,000) in real estate investment. The required investment in Greece and Hungary is €250,000. And people looking to obtain a gold visa in Portugal have two options: a €250,000 donation to the restoration of national heritage, or a €500,000 property investment.
There is little data to support the argument that such policies boost the national coffers. Some experts have suggested that golden visa schemes typically bring in no more than 0.3% of GDP in revenue. So, it’s no surprise that there is plenty of scepticism around whether Trump’s gold card scheme can reduce US national debt.
Critics of the plan argue that the scheme will not add trillions of US dollars to the economy, as Trump has claimed. This is because demand for any such programme is likely to be limited to thousands of people.
In a recent poll conducted by Forbes, 18 billionaires were asked if they would like to take advantage of an American gold card visa. Most of them (13) said they would not be interested. Many of the ultra-rich foreigners interviewed simply did not think they needed American citizenship and don’t want it.
“If you’re a billionaire, you don’t need it,” said one Canadian billionaire. “I don’t have to come to the United States to invest in the United States.”
Marginal benefits
The global rich are unlikely to be queuing up for Trump’s gold cards. At about US$5 million per application, it is “the most expensive” golden visa option in the world. Any potential buyer will carry out cost-benefit analysis prior to committing to such a deal.
Two reasons a wealthy person might invest in a second or third passport are to ensure greater mobility and protect their wealth.
US tax laws have traditionally reduced the attractiveness of American residency or citizenship for the global rich. American citizens and residents are required to pay income tax on their US earnings as well as any income they earn overseas.
Trump has said that gold-card holders would not be subject to taxes on their overseas income. This tax loophole could open the door to more wealthy foreigners looking to protect their wealth. However, many details about the scheme remain unclear.
Notwithstanding this, golden visas in many other nations provide better opportunities than those offered by a Trump gold card. In terms of mobility, the US passport ranks eighth on an index of 198 different passports. American passport holders can travel to 171 countries without needing a visa.
Spain ranks second, with a Spanish passport allowing access to 177 countries without a visa. And Portugal, Greece and a host of other European nations follow closely behind, with their passports allowing visa-free travel to 176 countries.
The most powerful passport in the world is offered by the United Arab Emirates (UAE), allowing access to 179 countries visa-free. The UAE government introduced a golden visa in 2019, offering long-term residence in exchange for roughly US$550,000 of investment.
The US passport is ranked eight in the world by the 2025 Passport Index. KieferPix / Shutterstock
An American passport also has its own inherent limitations and hazards. A US-born colleague of mine who acquired Irish citizenship through lineage has never used his American passport while out of the country.
He believed that in a crisis situation, such as being taken hostage, a US citizen was far more vulnerable and exposed to danger than a non-American counterpart. In his opinion, people were far more prejudiced and hostile towards a US citizen than those belonging to other nations.
The return on investment of a Trump gold card remains unpredictable. The asking price is extremely high and the benefits it promises buyers are – at best – marginal. The offer comes with enough holes to sink a ship.
Amalendu Misra is a recipient of British Academy and Nuffield Foundation fellowships.
Difficult relationship: Franklin D. Roosevelt, with Charles de Gaulle, and Winston Churchill at a conference in Casablanca January 1943.U.S. National Archives and Records Administration
Eighty-five years before Volodymyr Zelensky visited Downing Street in search of support for Ukrainian democracy, a Frenchman arrived in London with a similar request.
Charles de Gaulle was not the French prime minister. That job belonged to Paul Reynaud. De Gaulle had been undersecretary of state for defence in Reynaud’s government for less than two weeks.
He started June 1940 as commander of a tank squadron fighting to stem the German advance. But his decision later that month to leave France rather than surrender – and to proclaim himself the leader of all Frenchmen who wished to fight on – was the foundation of his political career.
French citizens became aware of de Gaulle as a wartime political leader through his broadcasts on the BBC. The most famous of these, the “Appeal of 18th June”, was actually heard by very few in France – but for those that did listen, it contained the core of de Gaulle’s message of defiance.
He arrived at the BBC at 6pm to record the four-minute speech which was transmitted by the BBC at 10pm. De Gaulle said: “Nothing is lost for France.” He insisted that: “She has a vast Empire behind her. She can align with the British Empire that holds the sea and can continue the fight. She can, like England, use without limit the immense industry of the United States.”
Transmission of this speech is widely regarded as the moment when French resistance was born. The BBC describes it as “one of the most remarkable pieces in the history of radio broadcasting”.
Had the US president, Franklin D. Roosevelt (FDR), responded positively to Churchill and Reynaud’s impassioned pleas in June 1940, to actively support France and Britain, de Gaulle might have remained a dynamic and courageous military officer. But Roosevelt refused, Reynaud resigned, and Marshall Henri Philippe Pétain led France into collaboration.
FDR was a Democrat and author of the new deal, the economic policy that helped America recover from the Great Depression. He had little in common with Donald Trump, but they shared one instinct: a reluctance to spend American blood and treasure in foreign wars.
When Churchill honoured his promise to Reynaud and told the 32nd US president now “is the moment for you to strengthen Reynaud the utmost you can, and try to tip the balance in favour of the best and longest possible French resistance”. Roosevelt replied that he was not committed to military participation. He reminded Churchill that only Congress could declare war.
When Zelensky arrived at the White House on February 28, he hoped to sign a minerals deal and secure continued American support for his country’s battle for freedom and independence. Instead he found himself accused by Trump of risking a third world war and showing too little gratitude to the US.
In an extraordinary failure of diplomatic norms, Trump and his viscerally isolationist vice-president, J.D. Vance, berated and humiliated Zelensky before a worldwide television audience.
Roosevelt’s contempt for de Gaulle was less bluntly expressed, but it was real. The US recognised Pétain’s regime and granted Vichy France, the collaborationist regime which governed southern France during the German occupation of northern France, full diplomatic recognition.
Roosevelt agreed when his ambassador to Vichy, Admiral William D. Leahy, described de Gaulle as “an apprentice dictator”. There is a chilling echo in Trump’s description of Volodymyr Zelensky as a “dictator” who refuses to have elections and has done “a terrible job”.
US and France: ‘difficult’ relationship
At the end of June 1940, Roosevelt decided that France was beaten – and that Britain was likely to follow its ally and neighbour into defeat and collapse. He dismissed de Gaulle as an irritation with no democratic credentials.
His opinion did not change when the US entered the war in December 1941. Indeed, Roosevelt believed France could not have a recognised leader until it had been liberated by American arms and helped to organise fully democratic elections.
When he needed someone to represent French interests, Roosevelt preferred to choose senior French military officers who would obey US orders. His choices included Admiral François Darlan who had served Marshall Pétain as Vichy’s minister of foreign affairs and minister of national defence. Darlan, who was loathed by the Free French and scorned by Churchill, nevertheless attracted favourable coverage in the US.
De Gaulle’s June 22 broadcast to the free French people.
Well aware of Roosevelt’s hostility, de Gaulle never gave up. The BBC microphone allowed him to reach a growing audience in Vichy and German occupied France. He ended his initial June 18 talk by announcing that he would broadcast again.
The BBC had not actually made any commitment to a second broadcast – but the ruse worked, and de Gaulle made a second appeal to French public on June 22. This broadcast was heard more widely (in fact very few people heard the June 18 speech and no recording survives). Soon the Free French were given five minutes per day on BBC radio.
De Gaulle was a soldier who used radio to inspire hope and organise resistance. When he returned to France in 1944, many of his countrymen recognised his voice before they became familiar with his appearance.
Zelensky began his career as a comedian and appeared as a fictional president of Ukraine in a TV series called Servant of the People. He was widely recognised before he became a war leader.
Both have provoked the enmity of US presidents and reminded different generations that America first isolationism is a deep-seated and enduring instinct that can cross political divides.
Tim Luckhurst has received funding from News UK and Ireland Ltd. He is a fellow of the Royal Society of Arts and a member of the Society of Editors and the Free Speech Union.
Source: United States Senator Reverend Raphael Warnock – Georgia
Following Public Pressure from Senator Reverend Warnock, Trump Administration Partially Reinstates Critical CDC Workforce
Since the 10% Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) workforce cuts were announced last month, the Senator has hammered the Trump Administration on the disastrous impending consequences to public health
Last month, Senator Reverend Warnock went to the Senate floor to defend the critical work of the Georgia-based CDC and the agency’s work to combat chronic diseases and protect the nation from health-related national security threats
The Senator’s work to champion the CDC continues the legacy of Georgia Republican Senator Isakson, who worked to expand and invest in the centers
Washington, D.C. – Today, following weeks of pressure from U.S. Senator Reverend Raphael Warnock (D-GA), the Trump Administration announced it was reinstating some Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) probationary staff and fellows who work on public health threats. The reinstatement, reported by PoliticoPro, comes after the Senator went to the Senate floor and defended the life-saving work on the Georgia-based CDC.
“Today’s announcement is a welcome relief, but until all fired CDC employees are restored, our country’s public health and national security will continue to be at risk,” said Senator Reverend Raphael Warnock. “The CDC works to ensure our food and water are safe, our brave servicemembers stay healthy when serving abroad, and top researchers have the resources they need to combat heart disease, maternal mortality, cancer, and diabetes. I’m glad my defense of the CDC was heard by the leadership of the Trump Administration, which is why I’m calling on the Trump Administration to reinstate all CDC employees.”
Last year, the Senator visited the CDC in Atlanta, Georgia for the first time as Senator to learn about the agency’s efforts to protect public health, including work to combat the maternal mortality crisis and how federal funding plays a role in keeping Georgia and the country safe from infectious diseases. During Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy’s nomination hearing in committee, Senator Warnock spoke at length defending the importance of the CDC which employs over 10,000 hardworking Georgians. Shortly after, the Senator spoke for nearly an hour on the Senate floor, in large part in defense of the CDC’s critical work to defend public health and national security. The Senator continued to pressure HHS Secretary Kennedy to reverse the CDC firings.
Source: State University of Management – Official website of the State –
On March 5, 2025, within the framework of the Exhibition and Forum of Educational Technologies, Infrastructure and Intellectual Solutions MMCO.EXPO-2025, an expert discussion “Rectors’ Club” was held, in which the rector of the State University of Management Vladimir Stroev took part.
The conversation focused on the transformation of the university in the context of adjustments to the higher education system in Russia: the topic of technological sovereignty, the Priority 2030 and Advanced Engineering School projects, and the international track of cooperation. The issue of forming a personnel reserve for rectors in the context of the realities of interdepartmental tasks that university leaders solve was also raised.
Together with Vladimir Stroev, the discussion was attended by the rector of the Nizhny Novgorod State University named after N. I. Lobachevsky Oleg Trofimov, the rector of the National Research University MPEI Nikolay Rogalev, the rector of the Financial University under the Government of the Russian Federation Stanislav Prokofiev, the rector of the National Research Nuclear University MEPhI Vladimir Shevchenko and other heads of universities.
The speakers said that a large flow of talented young people is flocking to the capital and the largest cities, leaving their native regions. This problem can be solved by developing high-quality distance education. It was also noted that currently there is no need for specialists with a wide profile; it is necessary to concentrate on training professionals in the industries.
In his speech, the rector of the State University of Management Vladimir Stroyev noted the importance of education for industry leaders, which instills in them confidence in the successful results of their work, which in turn protects them from stagnation in their positions. Vladimir Vitalyevich also drew the attention of his colleagues to the need to promote domestic technologies on the world market, export and import of education and intensive training of personnel.
Subscribe to the TG channel “Our GUU” Date of publication: 03/05/2025
Please note: This information is raw content directly from the source of the information. It is exactly what the source states and does not reflect the position of MIL-OSI or its clients.
Although “all-out” Isle of Wight Council elections have been postponed until 2026, voters are being reminded that town, parish and community council elections will go ahead as planned on Thursday 1 May 2025.
To take part in these elections, voters should ensure they are on the electoral register, especially if they have moved home recently. Any new applications to be on the register should be made by Friday, 11 April to be able to vote in an election on 1 May.
Anyone who cannot get to a polling station can apply for a postal vote – this deadline is Monday 14 April, 5pm.
At present there is one vacancy on Isle of Wight Council, which will be filled through a by-election in Central Rural ward, which includes the villages of Godshill, Merstone, Arreton and Rookley. This by-election will also take place on 1 May 2025.
Officers investigating the death of Fredi Rivero in Islington last week are continuing to appeal for witnesses.
Police were called to Seven Sister’s Road, close to the junction of Holloway Road at 23:35hrs on Thursday, 27 February following reports of Fredi being located with serious injuries.
Fredi, 75 was taken to hospital where he sadly died on Friday, 28 February. His family continue to be supported by specialist officers.
Three teenage girls, aged 14, 16 and 17 have been charged with manslaughter in connection with Fredi’s death.
Investigating officers are now in the positon to release a CCTV image of Fredi Rivero, showing what he was last seen wearing.
Detective Inspector Devan Taylor from Specialist Crime North said:
“Fredi Rivero was a much loved father, whose family are devastated by his death. I also know his death has also shocked this tight-knit community.
“Three girls have been charged in connection with this investigation and we continue at pace with our enquiries.
“If you remember seeing Fredi or have any information which could support with the investigation, please contact us.
HOUSTON, March 05, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Tokio Marine HCC, based in Houston, Texas, today announced that Mike Schell will retire from his role as President of the company on March 31, 2025. Barry Cook, CEO of Tokio Marine HCC International, will additionally assume a newly created position of Deputy CEO, effective April 1, 2025.
Mr. Schell joined Tokio Marine HCC in 2002 and retires after more than 50 years in the insurance industry, including 25 years at St. Paul Companies and five years at Insurance Company of North America.
“Mike’s contribution to our leadership team, to our culture, to our business and to our industry has been immense. For 23 years, he has been a central figure at Tokio Marine HCC. He has guided us through market cycles, helped us overcome industry challenges and been a key player in the growth and success of our business,” said Susan Rivera, Tokio Marine HCC’s CEO. “His experience, insights and expertise have been invaluable assets to me, my colleagues on the leadership team and throughout Tokio Marine HCC. We will miss him and his counsel dearly.”
Ms. Rivera continued, “As we close out another record year, Mike can be proud of his contributions in making Tokio Marine HCC one of the best-performing specialty insurers.”
Reflecting on his time at the company, Mr. Schell said, “I am proud of what we have achieved at Tokio Marine HCC over the past 23 years. The business is unrecognizable from the company I joined due to its expanded product offering and global reach. It has been a privilege to be a part of its countless successes, to work with such talented and resolute people, and to be part of the journey.”
Mr. Cook commented, “Mike is a market stalwart who has made an exceptional contribution to Tokio Marine HCC and to our industry. His dedication and commitment throughout an incredible career have set a standard which few will match.”
About Tokio Marine HCC Tokio Marine HCC is a member of the Tokio Marine Group, a premier global company founded in 1879 with a market capitalization of $70 billion as of December 31, 2024. Headquartered in Houston, Texas, Tokio Marine HCC is a leading specialty insurance group with offices in the United States, Mexico, the United Kingdom and Continental Europe. Tokio Marine HCC’s major domestic insurance companies have financial strength ratings of ‘A+’ (Strong) from S&P Global Ratings, ‘A++’ (Superior) from AM Best, and ‘AA-’ (Very Strong) from Fitch Ratings; its major international insurance companies have financial strength ratings of ‘A+’ (Strong) from S&P Global Ratings. Tokio Marine HCC is the marketing name used to describe the affiliated companies under the common ownership of HCC Insurance Holdings, Inc., a Delaware-incorporated insurance holding company. For more information about Tokio Marine HCC, please visit www.tokiomarinehcc.com.
Contact:
Doug Busker, Vice President – Public Relations Tokio Marine HCC 713-996-1192
Three major waste management firms have been selected to progress to the next stage of the procurement process to appoint a contractor to fix and operate Sinfin waste treatment centre.
Following a first stage selection process, Biffa, Thalia and Viridor have been identified by Derby City Council and Derbyshire County Council as the most suitable qualified companies to move forward to the Competitive Dialogue phase.
This marks a significant step in the councils’ joint project to secure a long-term waste management solution for Derby and Derbyshire, ensuring efficiency, sustainability, and value for residents.
The timeline for the next steps in the procurement are:
Competitive Dialogue – October 2025
Contract award (Cabinet decision) – December 2025
End of due diligence and commencement of rectification phase – June 2027
Start of commissioning – June 2028
First waste acceptance – November 2028
Completion of commissioning and transition to normal operations – Winter 2028 – Winter 2031
Over the next six months the councils and selected bidders will enter ‘Competitive Dialogue’ – structured discussions designed to provide equal treatment of all three companies to clarify, specify and enhance their proposed solution to fix and operate the facility.
The process enables both the Councils and bidders to assess approaches and ensure opportunities that strike the right balance between cost and quality are explored.
Both councils remain committed to a transparent and thorough process to ensure the best possible outcome for waste management in Derby and Derbyshire.
A spokesperson for Derbyshire County Council said:
We were confident we had developed a procurement process and commercial proposition that would be attractive to the right companies. Shortlisting three major players in the UK waste market proves there’s a competitive market for this project, and operators with the skills and experience to successfully deliver it and its expected benefits.
Fixing and operating the facility was found to be the most viable, cost-effective, and sustainable long-term solution to manage household waste which residents in Derby and Derbyshire either cannot or choose not to recycle.
A spokesperson for Derby City Council said:
This is an important milestone in our commitment to securing a sustainable and cost-effective waste management solution for Derby and Derbyshire. Reaching this stage with three leading waste management companies demonstrates both the strength of our approach and the level of industry interest in this project.
The council is keen to ensure a sustainable way to dispose of residents’ waste in the long term and seeks to find the most cost effective solution.
The decision to fix and operate the facility takes into account the councils’ ongoing commitment to encourage residents to reduce, reuse and recycle more of their waste.
Source: United Kingdom – Executive Government Non-Ministerial Departments
News story
GAD’s interest rate advice for the Ukraine loan
GAD advised HM Treasury on the interest rate to be charged on the UK’s £2.26 billion loan to Ukraine.
Credit: Max Kukurudziak, Unsplash
We analysed and advised HM Treasury on the options around setting an interest rate on UK’s loan to Ukraine.
The Chancellor Rachel Reeves and Ukraine’s Finance Minister Sergii Marchenko signed the UK-Ukraine Bilateral agreement at the beginning of March, witnessed by the Prime Minister and President Zelenskyy at a ceremony in Downing Street.
GAD assessed financial considerations for setting an interest rate on the loan of £2.26 billion to Ukraine. It will be paid back using the extraordinary profits generated on sanctioned Russian sovereign assets held in the EU.
This is the UK’s contribution to the G7 Extraordinary Revenue Acceleration (ERA) Loans to Ukraine scheme, through which G7 countries will collectively provide $50 billion to support Ukraine.
Repaying the loan
The loan is novel in that its repayments will be drawn from a future income stream derived from the profits on immobilised Russian sovereign assets. This means that careful consideration of the potential income stream of these assets had to be considered in our calculations.
Our analysis and supporting assumptions formed the basis of our advice to HM Treasury around the level and structure of the interest rate on the loan.
Credit: iStock Photo
UK commitment
Deputy Government Actuary Matt Gurden said: “The work we undertook to advise on the interest rate played a key part in ensuring the suitability of the UK government’s loan contribution to Ukraine.”
The funding will be delivered in 3 equal annual payments of £752m. The announcement of the loan agreement is on top of the £3 billion a year commitment by the UK to provide military aid for Ukraine.
Source: United States Senator for Kansas Roger Marshall
Washington – U.S. Senator Roger Marshall, M.D. (R-Kansas) released the following statement on President Donald Trump’s address to a joint session of Congress last night.
“The theme of last night’s speech was ‘Renewal of the American Dream,’ and it could have also been called ‘Promises Made, Promises Kept,’” said Senator Marshall. “Since he took office, President Trump has been working hard to deliver on the promises he made during the 2024 election. His Administration is securing our border, deporting criminal aliens, eliminating waste, fraud, and abuse through the DOGE initiative, strengthening our economic position across the world through reciprocal tariffs and trade agreements, and pushing for an end to the destructive war in Ukraine.”
“Kansans will benefit directly from these amazing America First achievements,” continued Senator Marshall. “With the confirmation of fighters for rural America like Secretary of Agriculture Brooke Rollins and U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer, we will secure new markets for our hard-working farmers and ranchers to export their goods and ensure that American taxpayer dollars serve American interests and workers first.”
The President’s topline achievements to date in his second term include:
Eliminating over $100 billion in government waste, fraud, and abuse through the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE)
Shutting down border crossings, with record low attempts in February
Terminating all taxpayer-funded public benefits for illegal aliens
ICE increasing arrest rates of illegals by over 600%
Signing the Laken Riley Act into law, which requires illegal immigrants arrested or charged with theft or violence to be detained
Securing nearly $2 trillion in new investments and bringing manufacturing back to America
Investing $1 billion for the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) to combat Avian Flu and reduce egg prices
Fulfilling his promise to make America energy independent with more energy companies announcing increases in production
Restoring American strength on the world stage by freeing hostages, eliminating terrorists, and pushing for peace in Europe
Ending the radical, un-American indoctrination of America’s children by eliminating support for radical gender ideology and equity ideology, and protecting parents’ rights
Eliminating discriminatory Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) offices, employees, and practices and returning to merit-based hiring
Restoring common sense to America by successfully pushing for athletic leagues to remove biological men from women’s sports
Ensuring the official policy of the U.S. government declares there are only two genders
Calling on hospitals around the nation to cease distribution of puberty blockers
All the while, Democrats refused to stand up and applaud common sense actions that the majority of Americans support, including:
The capturing of an ISIS terrorist that masterminded the Abbey Gate attack
A call to lower taxes for middle-class Americans
Protecting women’s sports
Unleashing American energy
Ending waste, fraud, and abuse in government
Ending taxes on tips, overtime, and Social Security
Scotland’s safe access zones have protected patients and staff and kept protesters at bay, says Scottish Green MSP Gillian Mackay.
Ms Mackay was commenting on the first day of anti-choice protests near the Queen Elizabeth Hospital in Glasgow. At present there are no signs of protesters breaching the safe access zone.
Ms Mackay introduced the bill that secured 200 metre wide safe access zones, or buffer zones, around abortion service providers to stop the intimidating anti-choice protests that have taken place across Scotland.
“Safe access zones were introduced to protect patients and staff at our hospitals and to keep the protesters at bay, and that is what they have done.
“The fact that only a small number of protesters turned up and they have been consigned to roads that are further from the hospital is an important step forward.
“Nobody should have to pass graphic banners and placards to access healthcare, and I hope that these protests will become a thing of the past.
“I urge the protesters to read the testimony of the many women who have felt intimidated and judged by their actions and to ask themselves if they really want to be responsible for such hurt.
“Over the days ahead we will learn from the implementation of the Act and how we can best protect people accessing healthcare.
“I encourage anyone who has been badly impacted by today’s protests to get in touch with myself or the Scottish Government so that we can consider what else we can do going forward.”
Ms Mackay added:
“Abortion rights are human rights. The ignorant claims from the US Vice President have emboldened trolls on social media, but the vast majority of people in Scotland support the right to go to hospital without harassment.”
Source: Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe – OSCE
Headline: Azerbaijan 2024 early presidential and parliamentary elections: ODIHR observation missions final reports
Azerbaijan’s 2024 early presidential and early parliamentary elections took place in a restrictive environment marred by the absence of genuine political alternatives and a lack of political will to bring the country’s elections closer in line with international standards and OSCE commitments.
These were the first elections to be held throughout the internationally recognized territory of the Republic of Azerbaijan. Longstanding limits on the exercise of constitutionally guaranteed fundamental freedoms remain both in law and in practice, and result in a shrinking space for independent media, civil society and political parties. While both votes were efficiently prepared and election day proceeded in an orderly way in both elections, significant procedural irregularities and a deliberate lack of safeguards against manipulation raised serious concerns about whether ballots were counted and reported honestly, the OSCE Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights (ODIHR) concluded in its final reports.
The reports offer recommendations to bring elections in Azerbaijan closer in line with OSCE commitments and other international standards for democratic elections.
Key recommendations include:
Making efforts to enable a genuine pluralistic and competitive political environment that fosters freedom of association
Bringing legislation on elections and fundamental freedoms in line with international standards through an inclusive consultative process
Guaranteeing every individual’s enjoyment of the right to freedom of expression by removing restrictions and overly burdensome requirements
Ensuring the independence and impartiality of election commissions at all levels
Removing undue restrictions on citizen observers to enhance transparency and accountability
Safeguarding the integrity of the electoral process, in particular during counting and tabulation to generate public confidence
Facilitating women’s active participation in public and political life through comprehensive legal, institutional, and educational initiatives.
The ODIHR election observation missions also assessed the country’s efforts to implement previous recommendations through changes in legislation, procedures and practices. For Azerbaijan, the ODIHR missions evaluated the follow-up to recommendations from the 2018 early presidential election and the 2020 early parliamentary elections, and concluded that two recommendations had been mostly implemented, and eight are partially addressed, while others are still outstanding. A full list can be found on p.29 of both reports.
All 57 countries across the OSCE region have formally committed to follow up promptly on ODIHR’s election assessments and recommendations. The ODIHR Electoral Recommendations Database tracks the extent to which recommendations are implemented by states across the OSCE region.
Source: United Kingdom – Executive Government & Departments
Written statement to Parliament
Updates to National Technical Specification Notices for rail interoperability
Following a comprehensive review, the government will publish updates to 7 NTSNs.
The government will shortly publish updates to 7 National Technical Specification Notices (NTSNs) for Great Britain’s (GB) railway. This follows a comprehensive review aimed at improving standards for the safety, reliability, technical compatibility, accessibility and environmental protection of our railway.
NTSNs set mandatory technical requirements and procedures for the design, build, operation and maintenance of rail vehicles, infrastructure and components. NTSNs apply to both passenger rail and freight on both the conventional mainline and high-speed rail networks (HS1 and HS2) as well as the UK section of the Channel Tunnel.
NTSNs replaced EU regulations called Technical Specifications for Interoperability (TSIs). Britain’s railways were built with significant technical differences from those of continental Europe, meaning that full alignment with TSIs was never possible. In several cases, while an EU member state, we had to make use of national specific cases and exemptions from TSI requirements, both of which are permitted within the EU framework.
The European Commission updated these regulations in 2023, prompting the UK to consider the benefits of adopting similar requirements or taking a different approach. This also presented an opportunity to fix many issues within the current NTSN requirements.
Department for Transport (DfT) officials worked closely with industry through working groups and consultations facilitated by the Rail Safety and Standards Board (RSSB) to review the newly published TSIs, so that our decisions on NTSNs could be informed by those who will apply them. RSSB submitted recommendations for change in 2024, reflecting the balance of views of its industry members.
RSSB’s review found benefits in maintaining consistency with TSIs on technical requirements for the design and manufacture of rail products. This will be critical in ensuring that the rail industry continues to benefit from international supply chains and from the deployment of new rail technology being rolled out across Europe. Additionally, the review identified some areas where taking a different approach from TSIs would reduce or avoid costs, improve clarity, and deliver a safer, more interoperable and accessible railway in Great Britain.
The previous government committed to informing Parliament through a written ministerial statement if it planned to diverge substantively from TSIs, and we intend to honour this commitment. However, it is in the interest of Britain’s rail industry that we retain the ability to act quickly to correct problems, for example where requirements prove unworkable, stakeholders find errors or where safety authorities identify an urgent need for change.
I should therefore clarify that, for the purpose of that commitment, we are now defining substantive divergence as any new difference between TSIs and NTSNs that could prevent a product from complying with both sets of standards. We understand that this was Parliament’s concern when this commitment was made, and that Parliament wished to avoid placing additional costs on manufacturers operating in both the UK and EU markets by requiring separate production lines for each market.
Five NTSN specifications will meet the definition of substantive divergence from EU TSIs. Two will maintain higher accessibility requirements for train doors and seats, and one will maintain a higher safety requirement for a key train driving component. This will mean that meeting the TSIs’ specifications will not necessarily mean that the NTSNs’ higher specifications are met. The other 2 changes will set more pragmatic requirements for freight wagon brakes and electric train pantographs, meaning that products meeting the NTSNs’ specifications will not necessarily meet the requirements in the TSI.
We will also make other changes that will differ from TSIs but do not meet our definition of substantive divergence. These changes mainly concern operational requirements, processes and responsibilities for building, enhancing and maintaining the GB mainline railway, or for integrating equipment within the rail system. Differing from the TSIs in these areas will reduce or avoid regulatory burdens and costs. They also concern areas where British technical requirements already differ from TSIs due to the distinct historic legacy of Britain’s railways and take account of differences between the UK and EU regulatory frameworks, for example by referring to UK rather than EU legislation and to UK bodies rather than EU institutions. These changes have unanimous support from the GB rail industry, including manufacturers.
We are satisfied from the evidence of the industry review and consultation that differing from TSIs in these areas will not increase costs and remains consistent with the essential requirements of Britain’s rail interoperability framework.
My officials have thoroughly assessed industry’s proposals in discussion with RSSB, Network Rail and key industry bodies, and we intend to incorporate them within the updated NTSNs, with minor modifications to ensure they work in practice and are legally robust. We have also revised the introductory sections to clarify their intended purpose and scope, to ensure that these standards are applied proportionately, effectively and as intended, for example by clarifying the scope for alternative solutions where there may be better ways of achieving the same outcomes. My officials have prepared a de minimis assessment of the changes, which was cleared by the government’s Better Regulation Unit.
Our approach is fully compliant with our international obligations, which include the EU-UK Trade and Cooperation Agreement, the Convention concerning International Carriage by Rail (COTIF) and the Windsor Framework, which requires continued application of TSIs in Northern Ireland. We are also assured that this approach is consistent with formal arrangements to ensure international rail traffic through the Channel Tunnel.
Publishing these updated NTSNs is an important first step in improving Britain’s rail standards framework, but there remains much more to be done. The public consultation that informed the NTSN revisions identified further areas for NTSN changes that could improve efficiency and reduce cost, including on rail electrification. We are keen to explore these and anticipate further updates to the NTSNs over the coming months and years. We are also considering options for reforming the rail technical standards framework itself to create a system fit for the improved railway this government will deliver through Great British Railways. We will consult on these options in due course.
Source: United Kingdom – Executive Government & Departments
A cohort study published in JAMA Network Open looks at the association between vaping and smoking cessation rates.
Dr Jamie Hartmann-Boyce, Assistant Professor of Health Policy and Management, University of Massachusetts Amherst, said:
Is this good quality research? Are the conclusions backed up by solid data?
“The authors do a thorough job of investigating results from a large, representative US survey. The type of methods they use mean they can talk about associations – whether something is more or less likely – but not about causal relationships. This research cannot establish whether e-cigarettes cause more or fewer people to stop smoking.
How does this work fit with the existing evidence?
“There is a large, high certainty body of evidence from randomized controlled trials that nicotine e-cigarettes help people quit smoking. Randomized controlled trials are considered the best way to establish the effects of an intervention, where feasible.
Have the authors accounted for confounders? Are there important limitations to be aware of?
“The authors have accounted for a large range of confounders, but rightly note that there could be additional unmeasured confounders which affect relationships between vaping and subsequent smoking cessation. The most important limitation is that this is an observational data set, and the techniques they use cannot establish causality.
What are the implications in the real world? Is there any overspeculation?
“The authors conclude that these data “suggest vaping prolongs smoking and nicotine dependence among US smokers.” As noted above, substantial randomized controlled trial evidence – considered the gold standard – shows the opposite – namely that when you give people who smoke e-cigarettes, it helps them quit smoking.”
Prof Peter Hajek, Professor of Clinical Psychology, and Director of the Health and Lifestyle Research Unit, Queen Mary University of London (QMUL), said:
“The study, like several earlier ones, compared future smoking cessation in people who at baseline did and did not use vapes BUT SMOKED and reports that vaping does not help with quitting smoking. This raises a question of how is that possible when randomised controlled trials as well as epidemiological data show that vaping is one of the most effective ways there are of helping smokers quit. The answer is that the study used a method that automatically generates skewed results. In the vaping group, only those unable to stop smoking despite using vapes were included. Vapers who stopped smoking were excluded. This makes it an obviously unfair comparison, a bit like staging a competition between two schools after removing the best competitors from one of them.”
‘Daily or Nondaily Vaping and Smoking Cessation Among Smokers’by Quash et al. was published in JAMA Network Open at 16:00 UK time on Wednesday 5th February.
DOI:10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2025.0089
Declared interests
Dr Jamie Hartmann-Boyce “I receive research funding for related work from Cancer Research UK and the NIH-FDA in the US.”
Source: United Kingdom – Executive Government & Departments
A study published in Nature suggests that Asprin enhances the immune response against cancer metastasis in mice.
Dr Harvey Roweth, a cancer biologist at the University of Reading, said:
“I don’t think we can say that cancer patients should be taking aspirin – at least, not yet.
“Aspirin is a very accessible drug, with relatively few side effects. This study in mice suggests we should further assess a role for aspirin in human metastatic cancer. It is worth noting that prior clinical studies that tested aspirin as a tool in fighting metastasis in human patients have been conflicting and often inconclusive. There are even some reports that conclude that aspirin may do more harm than good.”
“The mouse models don’t capture the full complexity of metastatic disease. Plus, in this study, the mouse models used predominantly look at melanoma cells that metastasises to the lungs. So, the paper doesn’t account for different cancers and spread to other organs.
“As a cancer biologist, the finding that is most exciting to me is that aspirin can preserve T-cell immune responses in an animal model.
“What we need now – and I strongly agree with the authors on this – are new randomised controlled trials that focus on finding biomarkers of the patient’s immune response. This is how we will find out which cancers and which patients are most likely to benefit from aspirin.
“It will also be important to consider that aspirin can be unsafe for certain individual patients. It can cause disruption of the stomach lining and increase the risk of bleeding in the gut. The study does not account for such side effects.
“There is some promise that aspirin will help patients in the future. It will need to be considered alongside existing therapies – aspirin is extremely unlikely to become a stand-alone treatment for cancers.”
Prof Mangesh Thorat, Honorary Reader, Queen Mary University of London & Consultant Breast Surgeon (Locum), Homerton University Hospital, London, said:
“We have known for a while that the beneficial effect of aspirin in preventing deaths from certain cancers is greater in magnitude than its effect in preventing development of these cancers. This can only happen if aspirin prevented or abrogated metastases from such cancers. Although it was thought to be mediated through the anti-platelet role of aspirin, the exact mechanism remained elusive. This elegant study in mice sheds light on how aspirin’s anti-platelet action reverses the suppression of certain immune cells, which then prevent development of metastases. In many ways, this study provides the missing piece of the jigsaw puzzle. There are several ongoing clinical trials of aspirin in certain cancers. The new insights from this study will now allow us to investigate data and materials from these trials to see if aspirin use can be personalised through use of biomarkers to achieve a more favourable benefit-harm balance. These insights will also allow us to develop new studies to investigate if aspirin and other immune-directed therapies can work in a synergistic manner to improve outcomes in advanced cancers.
“It is important to acknowledge that since it aimed to elucidate a specific mechanism, the study looked at only a few cancer types and only at lung and liver as metastatic sites. Although different cancers share many common pathways, each cancer type (and subtype) is unique. This means that the magnitude of effect likely varies between different cancers. It is therefore quite possible that the beneficial effects of aspirin will be limited to certain cancer types as the epidemiological data suggest. We will need to wait for mature data from the current trials before aspirin’s use as a cancer treatment can be considered.
“If you are a cancer patient, don’t rush to your local pharmacy to buy aspirin just yet, but actively consider participation in ongoing or upcoming trials of aspirin.”
Professor Alan Melcher, Professor of Translation Immunotherapy at The Institute of Cancer Research, London, said:
“We have known for some time that aspirin can potentially boost the immune response to cancer. What this research tells us is a new mechanism of action that aspirin may be using to do this in mice.
“This is an interesting finding but will not directly change how people should be using aspirin. The side effects of the drug are not trivial – such as stomach bleeding. Currently, there are large trials underway to determine the risk versus benefit of using aspirin as part of the treatment of cancer. This new research may help to design better, more targeted drugs, that interfere with the mechanism discovered here to do the good things that aspirin does, without the harmful side effects.”
‘Aspirin prevents metastasis by limiting platelet TXA2 suppression of T cell immunity’ by Jie Yang et al. will be published in Nature at 16:00 UK time on Wednesday 5 March 2025.
DOI: 10.1038/s41586-025-08626-7
Declared interests
Prof Mangesh Thorat: No Financial interests to declare. Mangesh Thorat is a member of data monitoring committees of a few multi-national trials investigating aspirin, for example, ADD-Aspirin, CaPP3 and COLOPREVENT.
Unpaid carers of adults and children are being asked to have their say to help design services that support them.
The survey will help to fully understand what life is like for carers and how effectively they are being supported when they need it.
It also aims to explore how carers feel about their role and their views on any support they may be receiving.
This survey is for all carers. This includes children and young people under 18 who care for a family member or friend – to understand what support they receive and from who, such as their school or college or a carers support service.
The survey can be filled in online by visiting www.stoke.gov.uk/carerssurvey. Alternatively, people can call 01782 231550 and leave a message – then a member of the team will call back to complete the survey over the phone.
The survey runs from 5 March until 2 April.
Councillor Sarah Hill – Cabinet Member for Children’s Services at Stoke-on-Trent City Council – said: “Unpaid carers play a really important role providing essential care for family members, friends or neighbours.”
“Lots of carers, especially young carers, don’t identify themselves as carers. They simply see themselves as a relative, friend or neighbour. That means they could be missing out on valuable support.
“We want them and the person they care for to feel included, have a voice and tell us how they feel so we can make the best decisions.”
Councillor Duncan Walker – Cabinet Member for Adult Services at Stoke-on-Trent City Council – said: “We are currently talking to unpaid carers to fully understand what life is like for them and how they are being supported when they need support themselves.
“It is vital we know how carers feel about their role – and the findings from this survey will help us to see how well carers are supported and if there are areas we need to improve on.”
North Staffs Carers provide a support service for all carers. They work alongside a number of local partner organisations, as well as the council’s Young Carers Assessment Team and Adult Social Care, to maximise support and bring together services to form a clear pathway forward.
This aims to ensure carers receive seamless individualised support throughout their caring journey.
New and upgraded schools, a major roads project, continuing investment in the city centre, and increased support for vulnerable and disadvantaged citizens form the basis of Aberdeen City Council’s 2025/26 Budget, which was approved today.
The Council is to spend £247 million on schools over the next five years, including £121m on the new Hazlehead Academy. There is a commitment to expand facilities at Harlaw Academy, refurbish St Peter’s Roman Catholic School and Ferryhill Primary, and progress an extension for Bucksburn Academy.
To help reduce congestion, £55 million will go to the Berryden Corridor Improvement Project, with work starting next year. In the city centre, £13m will be used to enhance the Castlegate as a public space.
The Budget also makes £1.534m available to the Fairer Aberdeen Fund in 2025/26, £1m through the Anti-Poverty and Inequality Committee for people struggling with the cost of living, and an extra £9.5m to deliver social care, bringing the Council’s total award to the Integration Joint Board (IJB) to £140m for the coming 12 months.
Councillor Alex McLellan, convener of the Finance and Resources Committee, said: “Despite the Council operating in incredibly challenging circumstances, we remain focussed on delivering essential public services and assisting people through the ongoing cost-of-living crisis.
“Aberdeen City Council is continuing to invest in the school estate, in roads, and other key infrastructure such as the regeneration of the city centre and beach area.
“These actions will ensure Aberdeen continues to be a place people want to live, want to work, want to raise a family, and want to start a business.”
The Budget allocates £668m to delivering public services in 2025/26 and £709m to capital projects over the next five years.
The Common Good Fund will help provide nearly £1.5m for to 15 external organisations for 2025/26, supporting recommendations put forward by the Culture Investment Panel. Aberdeen Performing Arts was awarded £961,000.
Sport Aberdeen, which operates the city’s leisure venues, will receive £4.1m for 2025/26.
And the Council will also fund a Cruyff Court in Kincorth – the city’s 4th – in partnership with the Denis Law Legacy Trust.
The gap between income and expenditure was estimated at £18.1m for 2025/26. To help address the shortfall and maintain service delivery, Council Tax is to rise by 9.85% in 2025/26.
For the next 12 months the Council’s Carbon Budget was set at 22,567 tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent, a maximum target on the road to Next Zero emissions by 2045.
Actions agreed include:
Completing a £19m investment in a Hydrogen Hub, a joint venture with bp to produce and distribute green hydrogen;
£9m to enlarge the electric vehicle charging network.
Aberdeen’s fourth Cruyff Court will be constructed in Kincorth, it was announced today (5 March) at the Full Council Budget meeting.
The court will be built on pitches close to the site of the former Kincorth Academy building as part of the ongoing successful partnership comprising Aberdeen City Council, The Denis Law Legacy Trust and The Cruyff Foundation.
The new facility, once completed, will provide a space for multiple sports that will be free for the local community to use.
Aberdeen is already one of only two UK cities, the other being London, that has three Cruyff Courts. This additional fourth court will mean the city will equal London’s four Cruyff Courts.
Convener of Finance and Resources Committee Councillor Alex McLellan said: “This new Cruyff Court will be a real asset for the community of Kincorth and will directly benefit many young people.
“I’m delighted that we have approved the funding today for what will be Aberdeen’s fourth Cruyff Court and I look forward to working with partners, and the local community, to see the project delivered.”
Convener of Communities, Housing and Public Protection Committee Councillor Miranda Radley said: “This commitment by Aberdeen City Council, to deliver a Cruyff Court in Kincorth, will be a huge benefit to the young people in the area and I look forward to this free to access, accessible sports facility, being delivered for the community of Kincorth.”
Mark Williams, Chief Operating Officer of the Denis Law Legacy Trust said: “It’s exciting to help create and introduce another impactful safe space that will help benefit thousands of people both physically and mentally whilst supporting young people to grow and enjoy friendships at the same time”
David Suttie, Trustee of the Denis Law Legacy Trust said: “The previous 3 Courts in the city have made a big difference in their communities. The Partnership with Aberdeen City Councill, the Johan Cruyff Foundation and ourselves continues to be very successful and we all look forward to delivering something special once again.”
Simon Wood from the Johan Cruyff Foundation said: “It’s great to work with long time partners Denis Law Legacy Trust and Aberdeen City Council again to look at delivering a 4th Cruyff Court to Aberdeen city.”
The Cruyff Courts are a worldwide project by The Cruyff Foundation with the aim of providing safe spaces for communities to play outside and enjoy the benefits of team games and making new friends.
The new Cruyff Court in Kincorth will become Aberdeen’s fourth court alongside Cruyff Court Denis Law in Catherine Street, Cruyff Court Neale Cooper in Tullos and Cruyff Court Willie Miller in Tillydrone.
A rally for science drew a big crowd during the American Geophysical Union’s meeting in San Francisco.MarcioJoseSanchez/AP, CC BY
March 7 has been recognized as the “Day of the Stand Up for Science Movement”, launched in 2017 in response to the anti-science actions of the first Trump administration. Under the second, attacks on scientists and scientific inquiry have escalated into a systematic assault–tantamount to a coup d’Etat against science itself.
While Donald Trump is often portrayed as erratic, his policies in this area have followed a consistent trajectory. His new administration has once again declared ‘war’ on evidence-based national policymaking and science diplomacy in foreign affairs as evidenced by several early actions. Immediately after taking office, Donald Trump issued executive orders freezing or canceling tens of billions in research funding. All National Science Foundation projects have been halted pending review, while the National Institutes of Health faces suspensions under Health and Human Services directives. The US has withdrawn from the Paris Agreement and the World Health Organization, alongside a sweeping review of 90% of USAID-funded projects, signaling a major retreat from climate and global health diplomacy. Federal agencies and universities are in turmoil, leaving thousands of research-professors in limbo amid a politically driven funding freeze. The 2025 March simply calls for the restoration of federal research funding and an end to government censorship and political interference in science.
Du lundi au vendredi + le dimanche, recevez gratuitement les analyses et décryptages de nos experts pour un autre regard sur l’actualité. Abonnez-vous dès aujourd’hui !
The US is the world’s undisputed scientific superpower–for now
While the Trump administration is not the sole force undermining academia worldwide, its actions are particularly striking coming from the world’s leading scientific superpower. Moreover, the situation is especially concerning because developments in the United States often have a ripple effect, shaping policies in other regions in the years that follow.
Neither of the world’s top two scientific superpowers–Washington and Beijing–is positioned to champion academic freedom. China, having failed a liberal constitutional tradition and academic independence since the 1920s, restricts academic freedom to the confines of one-party rule. Caught between these rival scientific giants–both partners and competitors–the “old” Europe and like-minded coutries remain the only actors capable of setting new standards for academic freedom.
A Nobel prize for academic freedom
A decisive step toward its legal protection would be formal recognition by the Nobel Committees for Peace and Science of academic freedom’s fundamental role–both in ensuring scientific excellence and as a pillar of free, democratic societies.
For the past decade, the Scholars at Risk association (SAR) has documented a broader global decline in academic freedom in its annual Free to Think Report. The 2024 edition highlights particularly alarming situations in 18 countries and territories (including the United States), which recorded 391 attacks on scholars, students, or institutions across 51 regions in a year. Data from the Academic Freedom Index in Berlin confirm that more than half of the world’s population lives in regions where academic freedom is either entirely or severely restricted. Some of the most concerning conditions are in emerging scientific ecosystems such as Turkey, Brazil, Egypt, South Africa, or Saudi Arabia. The overall trend is deteriorating: only 10 out of 179 countries have improved, while many democratic regimes are increasingly affected.
Academic freedom in the European Union remains relatively high compared to the rest of the world. However, nine EU member states fall below the regional average, and in eight of them, it has declined over the past decade–signaling a gradual erosion of this fundamental value. Hungary ranks the lowest among EU countries, placing in the bottom 20–30% worldwide. Recent laws have further weakened university autonomy across the EU: financial autonomy in Austria, Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, and Slovakia; organizational autonomy in Slovenia, Estonia, and Denmark; staffing autonomy in Croatia and Slovakia; and academic autonomy in Denmark and Estonia. Moreover, the European Parliament’s first report on academic freedom (2023) highlights emerging threats in France–political, educational, and societal–that impact the freedom of research, teaching, and study.
Academic freedom, a professional right granted to a few for the benefit of all
Freedom of expression, a fundamental pillar of academic freedom, has long been established as a human right, overcoming centuries of censorship and authoritarian control. In contrast, academic freedom is a more recent principle, granting scholars–recognized by their peers–the right and responsibility to research and teach freely in pursuit of knowledge. Like press freedom for journalists, it is a right granted to a few for the benefit of all.
Rooted in medieval Europe, academic freedom has evolved from a privilege granted to students in the Quartier Latin to a recognized principle in international rights frameworks. It gained a collective and concrete dimension in the late 18th and early 19th centuries with the rise of the modern university. Wilhelm von Humboldt, founder of the modern public university in Berlin (1810), articulated the concept of ‘freedom of science’ (Wissenschaftsfreiheit), later enshrined in the Weimar Constitution of 1919, which declared that “art, science, and education are free.” The rise of American universities around the same time reshaped the concept, giving rise to “professional academic freedom.” This was formalized in the American Association of University Professors’ 1915 Declaration of Principles on Academic Freedom and Tenure, which affirmed the scholar’s primary duty to seek and establish truth. Though its roots lie in Germany, academic freedom ultimately became a cornerstone of American academic discourse.
In the United States, academic freedom draws from multiple sources, with its protection varying by state laws, customs, institutional practices, and the status of higher education institutions. However, U.S. Supreme Court rulings have gradually reinforced its constitutional foundation, particularly after the McCarthy era, by invoking the First Amendment. Landmark cases such as Adler v. Board of Education (1952), Wieman v. Updegraff (1952), and Sweezy v. New Hampshire (1957) helped establish a constitutional doctrine on academic freedom. Finally, Keyishian v. Board of Regents (1967) extended First Amendment protections to academia, ruling that mandatory loyalty oaths violated both academic freedom and freedom of association.
Interestingly, the American interpretation of academic freedom is currently more restrictive than the German model in certain respects. Article 5(3) of the 1989 Basic Law affirms the “right to adopt public organizational measures essential to protect a space of freedom, fostering independent scientific activity”. In contrast, the U.S. places greater emphasis on prohibitions and prioritizing individual rights over institutional autonomy.
The ‘right to be wrong’
Despite local variations, academic freedom is fundamentally tied to a shared vision of the university that upholds freedom of thought, with rationality and pluralism at its core. It includes the genuine “right to be wrong”–the understanding that a scientific opinion may be incorrect or even proven so does not diminish its protection. This stands in stark contrast to the anti-science, scientistic, or techno-nationalist approach, which views knowledge as a tool of power to serve a predetermined truth and objective of dominance. Authoritarian science, driven by power interests, seeks to diminish critical humanities and social sciences while elevating religion. It tends to reject interdisciplinary work, is exclusively mathematized, and is oriented toward a centralized yet deregulated autocratic tech-utopian state model.
Since 1945, we have operated under the illusion that academic freedom is an indispensable condition for scientific excellence. However, we have recently learned that no systematic link exists between academic freedom and breakthrough scientific innovation in our era of new technologies. Given these circumstances, this proposal advocates for a nomination for the Nobel Peace Prize, for the first time in its history, in recognition of academic freedom.
The Nobel Prize Committees for Science and Peace share the responsibility of using their prestigious platforms to uphold fundamental scientific and democratic values. They are uniquely positioned to champion humanist science, reinforcing its importance for scholars, students, and civil societies worldwide. Since the 1950s, around 90% of Nobel Prize laureates in scientific fields have either been US citizens or have studied and worked at Ivy League research institutions.
While some US scientists are contesting actions of the Trump administration in court, academics worldwide should stand in solidarity with their American colleagues in resisting the erosion of science. To strengthen their efforts, they require the support of the Nobel Prize Committees.
Stéphanie Balme ne travaille pas, ne conseille pas, ne possède pas de parts, ne reçoit pas de fonds d’une organisation qui pourrait tirer profit de cet article, et n’a déclaré aucune autre affiliation que son organisme de recherche.
Source: The Conversation – France – By Benoît Grémare, Chercheur associé à l’Institut d’Etudes de Stratégie et de Défense, Université Jean Moulin Lyon 3
In February 2020, French President Emmanuel Macron said it was time to reflect on the European dimension of French nuclear deterrence. He proposed a strategic dialogue as well as joint nuclear exercises between European partners. Five years later, Germany’s likely next chancellor, Friedrich Merz, responded to this call, advocating an extension of the French nuclear umbrella to Germany – while a US led by President Donald Trump no longer appears to be a reliable partner for protecting Europe.
But does France have the capacity to defend Europe? Would the deployment of the French nuclear umbrella in Eastern Europe make Europe strategically autonomous, giving it the means to defend itself independently?
French nuclear deterrence against the Russian threat
France originally developed its nuclear arsenal in response to the threat of Soviet invasion and to avoid any dependence on the US. According to a stable doctrine that political leaders regularly reaffirmed, the state [would use] its strategic arsenal by air and submarine in the event of an attack against its vital interests.
Certainly, the explosive power of thermonuclear warheads, combined with the range of the French M51 strategic sea-to-land ballistic missile, would make it possible to destroy the main Russian cities, including Moscow.
These scenarios recall the spectre of adversaries destroying enemy cities in a piecemeal atomic exchange, in which Russia could rely on its vastness to win through attrition. This potential for reciprocity must be kept in mind amid the mutual bet of nuclear deterrence.
To boost the impact of French nuclear deterrence, a partnership could be envisaged with the United Kingdom. A nuclear power since 1952, London now only has ballistic missiles launched by submarine and has decided, since Brexit, to increase its arsenal to 260 warheads. But although they share common interests, these two European nuclear powers are not equivalent.
Unlike the UK, which is a member of NATO’s nuclear planning group and whose warheads are designed in the US, France produces its weapons on its own territory and is not subject to any NATO obligations. This gives Paris a great deal of leeway in defining its doctrine. France can also speak on behalf of the European Union, of which it has been a part since its creation.
French nuclear power: an alternative to US deterrence
France officially became an atomic power in 1960 by relying on its own resources, with US support fluctuating according to events. The emergence of an independent French strategic force long annoyed Washington, which sought to restrict it by means of international accords such as the 1963 treaty limiting atmospheric nuclear tests and the 1968 Non-Proliferation Treaty. Since 1974, the French nuclear force has officially had a specific dissuasive role within NATO, contributing to the overall security of the transatlantic alliance by complicating the calculations of potential adversaries.
Almost 60 years ago, US president Lyndon Johnson reinforced doubts about the White House’s determination to fully commit to the defence of Europe. Today, Trump’s desire to end US support for Ukraine confirms these suspicions. Consequently, increasingly insistent voices are calling for the acceptance of a French nuclear force that would extend to the European level.
A French nuclear umbrella in Eastern Europe
Merz’s call for the French nuclear umbrella to extend to Germany aligns with Paris’s proposal to establish a dialogue involving Europeans in a common approach. As France’s defence minister has pointed out, the precise definition of vital interest is up to its president. However, the use of nuclear weapons to protect Europe requires a strategic discussion to define the power to be acquired, the interests to be defended and the method of nuclear fire command.
Moving toward a Europeanisation of nuclear force means increasing deterrent capabilities and, therefore, expanding the French arsenal so it can respond to threats affecting all 27 EU member states. This would require the creation of additional stocks of fissile material and the reactivation of production plants in Pierrelatte and Marcoule, which were dismantled in the late 1990s.
Dogma about what constitutes a sufficient arsenal must also be questioned. If 290 nuclear warheads represent the value that France places on defending its existence, this price seems to neglect the scale of the European continent, and logic confirms it: continent-sized nuclear powers such as the US and Russia – and soon, China – are deploying an arsenal of around 1,000 thermonuclear warheads.
Ramping up power would take time and require a budgetary effort to increase the number of missiles and carrier aircraft. In addition to the construction of new infrastructure in European partner countries, the cost could exceed €10 billion per year, not including indirect costs related to maintenance and logistics. This is a lot to take into account, especially since the political and strategic offer of extended nuclear protection evolves according to circumstances.
Until now, Germany preferred that France assume a role that was simply complementary to the extended deterrence of the US, but Washington’s threatened abandonment of Ukraine increases the Russian threat. As Macron has indicated, France could respond by proposing the pre-positioning of its nuclear forces in Eastern European countries with the idea of eventually replacing the US.
This French nuclear umbrella would give concrete form to European strategic autonomy through the deployment of nuclear-capable combat aircraft, a sign of European political solidarity that would make Moscow’s calculations more difficult.
The visible presence of these aircraft in Eastern Europe could prevent Russia from attacking countries in the region with conventional means, as such an attack could provoke a French nuclear response on behalf of Europe.
Benoît Grémare ne travaille pas, ne conseille pas, ne possède pas de parts, ne reçoit pas de fonds d’une organisation qui pourrait tirer profit de cet article, et n’a déclaré aucune autre affiliation que son organisme de recherche.
Source: United Kingdom – Executive Government & Departments
News story
Storage facility for over 900 vehicles completed at MOD Ashchurch
An advanced storage facility with capacity to house over 900 Army vehicles has opened at MOD Ashchurch under the Vehicle Storage and Support Programme (VSSP).
Brig Matt Wilkinson and VSSP Senior Responsible Owner Belinda Lunn cut the ribbon to the new building, accompanied by representatives of DIO, the Army, Skanska and Mace. Copyright Skanksa.
As the largest Army infrastructure programme currently in delivery, VSSP is enhancing operational readiness and future capability through provision of modern, sustainable storage and maintenance solutions for the Army’s vehicle and equipment fleet.
The programme is delivering dedicated inspection and maintenance facilities, essential office space and Controlled Humidity Environment (CHE) storage, which will reduce vehicle maintenance costs and unnecessary deterioration caused by extreme drops or rises in temperature.
The largest CHE storage building on site, which is equivalent in size to around five football pitches at around 25,300m2, has now been handed into service, with the first vehicle rolling into the facility at an official opening ceremony on 3 March.
A vehicle breaks the ribbon as the first vehicle to be stored in the new building. Copyright Skanksa.
Belinda Lunn, Senior Responsible Owner of VSSP, said:
The handover of this new CHE storage building is a fantastic milestone in our programme to deliver this exceptional facility for the Field Army. This is the fifth building to be completed under VSSP in the past year and represents a step change in the capability of the site. We look forward to further progress over coming months as we continue our collaboration with DIO and industry partners, to improve working infrastructure for personnel at MOD Ashchurch.
VSSP is being delivered for the Army by the Defence Infrastructure Organisation (DIO) contracting to Skanska for construction and Mace as project manager. Overall, the programme will deliver 13 new buildings alongside demolition of 58 existing buildings and renewal of site-wide infrastructure. All buildings adhere to the latest sustainability standards and support the Army’s contribution to government net zero targets, with provision to generate solar energy on site.
Warren Webster, DIO MPP Programme Director – Army, said:
It is always gratifying to celebrate a significant milestone for a complex construction project. The excellent progress we’ve made at VSSP has been achieved thanks to the collaborative effort of DIO, Army, Skanska and Mace project teams, and their supply chain. We are proud to be delivering modern, sustainable infrastructure that will meet the enduring requirements of the Army’s fleet and benefit military personnel.
Terry Muckian, Skanska Executive Vice President, said:
Working within a live military environment presents unique challenges, but through close collaboration with site personnel, we were able to maintain their operations while continuing to deliver this significant infrastructure project on schedule. Our partnership with DIO, Mace, and our supply chain was instrumental in achieving these results. Additionally, through meticulous design and construction efforts, we have ensured that the vehicle storage building not only meets but surpasses the required air tightness specifications, enhancing its durability and operational efficiency.
Graham Seage, Director of Defence and National Security at Mace, said:
The completion of this state-of-the-art storage facility is a significant step forward in ensuring the long-term resilience of the British Army’s estate and assets. The level of collaboration across all partners to reach this milestone has been first rate and, importantly, has extended to teams working across the wider defence estate, drawing on lessons and experience from around the DIO portfolio to drive efficiencies and innovations.
MOD Ashchurch is owned by Defence Equipment & Support (DE&S) and VSSP is due to complete at the site in 2027.
Kiteboarding championship trials off of Eastney Beach in Portsmouth – (Picture: Vernon Nash)
Portsmouth has a potential opportunity to create a new watersports centre in the south-east of the city, on the site of the closed Eastney Swimming Pool. This ambition was set out in the Council’s Seafront Masterplan in 2013 and was also included in the updated plan in 2021.
This area of the seafront has become a hotspot for kiteboarding and kitesurfing over the past decade, leading to the city hosting the Formula Kite European Championships in 2023.
Creating a watersports centre will establish a hub for these sports, alongside others such as open water rowing, kayaking, and stand-up paddleboarding. Participants in these sports could have facilities to change, leave their valuables, and shower afterwards.
It could also open an area of the seafront that has been previously inaccessible, allowing access to the listed World War II pillbox currently hidden on the site. The listed World War II anti-tank defences could also be sensitively incorporated into the design.
The Council will be consulting with the public on what they would like to see as part of the centre. This could include a café, a restaurant, creative studios, or retail space as part of the mix of facilities on offer. The consultation will begin from April this year.
Cllr Steve Pitt, Leader of Portsmouth City Council, said:
“We have a real opportunity here to potentially create a watersports facility that the community can be proud of. With investment in a new leisure centre at Bransbury Park, renovation work at Mountbatten Centre, and the regeneration of Hilsea Lido, we are demonstrating that we are serious about sport in the city. I’m looking forward to hearing what facilities for watersports the public want to see in the future.”
Eastney Swimming Pool, which is currently on the site, has been closed permanently since 2020. The poor condition of the building means that it presents a significant danger to staff and the public. Multiple surveys have shown the 120-year-old building is in very poor condition, with extensive structural issues with the walls and roof. The pool structure is cracked and is now filling up with groundwater.
To renovate the building to make it safe to use for another purpose would be extremely expensive, not appropriate for a watersports centre, and a poor use of public money. Historic England has also declined to list the building on two occasions, as it does not have any special architectural and historic interest required for it to be listed.
Following the decision made today, the Council will apply for planning permission to demolish this building. Brand new swimming facilities, including a learner pool, will be available in nearby Bransbury Park when the new leisure centre and GP surgery are completed in 2027.
Feature image credit: Vernon Nash
Frequently asked questions:
Why can’t you just re-open the pool?
Eastney Swimming Pool has closed permanently. As a standalone pool it needed considerable subsidy to keep it open, and the building is at the end of its life. It would cost many millions to re-open the existing building.
Even if we did, it would not be able to accommodate a learner pool, modern changing facilities and a gym in the existing building. The gym is essential to the centre operating without a significant annual subsidy. The new facility at Bransbury Park, less than a mile away. should operate without significant subsidy and is the most cost-effective way to provide a new swimming pool for the local community.
I’ve seen claims that a new leisure centre at Eastney will be half the cost of one at Bransbury Park. Is this true?
No, and we do not know where this estimate has come from. To build the same building at Eastney would cost the same amount – if not more to account for flood protection.
We do know that refurbishing Eastney Swimming Pool “as-is” would cost up to £8 million. However, even after this investment, the pool would:
Remain unsuitable for early stages swimming lessons.
Have significant accessibility issues.
Be inconvenient for residents, too far from local schools, and poorly served by public transport.
Still be an aging building with high ongoing maintenance costs and requiring substantial subsidies.
This £8m estimate does not include additional facilities suggested in “alternative proposals” that have been floated online. These added a learner pool, new changing rooms, a GP surgery, an open-air pool and water sports facilities. Any project to provide these additional facilities on site would have to deal with the variable ground levels there, while integrating new buildings with old. It would have to address the poor accessibility of the existing building, its poor energy rating, the fact that the pool tank leaks, and that the building needs a new roof.
It, like Bransbury Park, is also in a flood zone, but the existing building is set considerably lower in the ground. The most cost-effective way of dealing with these issues would be to demolish the existing building and build a whole new facility at a higher ground level. This would cost at least as much as building it at Bransbury Park, and probably more. It would also not fit on the footprint of the site.
This demonstrates that the alternative proposals are uncosted, unfeasible, and unrealistic.
While a new building at Bransbury Park does require significant upfront capital investment, it offers better value for residents in the long term by offering lower ongoing costs for the Council, reduced reliance on subsidies as a combined pool and fitness centre, and greater energy efficiency, with a substantial portion of its power generated by solar panels on the roof.