Category: Europe

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Written question – Protecting human rights in the Republic of Peru – E-000730/2025

    Source: European Parliament

    Question for written answer  E-000730/2025
    to the Vice-President of the Commission / High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy
    Rule 144
    Anthony Smith (The Left), Rima Hassan (The Left), Leila Chaibi (The Left)

    In July 2024, Amnesty International published a report entitled ‘Who called the shots?’, which notes that Dina Boluarte could be held criminally responsible, as commander-in-chief of the Peruvian armed forces and national police, for the deaths that occurred during the protests between December 2022 and March 2023.

    In a speech on 6 February 2025, Dina Boluarte was extremely critical of the activities of international NGOs, maintaining that they weaponise respect for human rights to ‘undermine the authority of the state and delegitimise the principle of order’.

    In the same vein, the bill amending Law No 27692, considered by the Peruvian Congress in 2024, was aimed at significantly restricting the work of civil society organisations in receipt of international cooperation funds. The bill was shelved after diplomatic intervention by the US, which was concerned about the repercussions of such a text on democracy in Peru.

    Could the Vice-President of the Commission / High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy:

    • 1.state her opinion on these government attacks on both democracy and respect for human rights in Peru;
    • 2.condemn government attempts to block the work of international NGOs?

    Submitted: 18.2.2025

    Last updated: 3 March 2025

    MIL OSI Europe News

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Written question – Implementation of NextGenerationEU funds – E-000831/2025

    Source: European Parliament

    Question for written answer  E-000831/2025
    to the Commission
    Rule 144
    Esther Herranz García (PPE)

    Under the NextGenerationEU programme, Member States have committed to funding public infrastructure works aimed at establishing low-emission zones and ushering in the sustainable and digital transformation of urban transport.

    During the implementation period of the projects, it came to light that some proposals would lead to duplication or could cause greater harm than the improvements set out to be achieved and it was therefore decided not to implement them. As a result, some municipalities have come forward as being open to refunding the share corresponding to measures with which such issues have been identified, without prejudicing the implementation of the rest.

    However, some national governments are demanding repayment of the full amount of aid, since it is not possible to repay only the part corresponding to the projects that have not been implemented. This has a negative impact both on those projects that have been implemented and on municipal coffers.

    • 1.Are there any EU rules requiring full reimbursement or preventing the reimbursement of NextGenerationEU funds only for the part corresponding to unimplemented projects?
    • 2.Does the Commission interpret NextGenerationEU funds in such a way that the Member States are to regard the funds received by the municipalities as a single, indivisible fund which does not take account of the various projects to be carried out under those funds?

    Submitted: 25.2.2025

    Last updated: 4 March 2025

    MIL OSI Europe News

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Written question – Protestant schools in France not allowed to take part in Erasmus+ – E-000871/2025

    Source: European Parliament

    Question for written answer  E-000871/2025
    to the Commission
    Rule 144
    Bert-Jan Ruissen (ECR)

    Erasmus+ is a worthwhile programme geared to social inclusion and youth participation. At her Parliament hearing on 12 November 2024, Roxana Mînzatu said that she would be aiming for more inclusiveness[1]. Erasmus+ is largely managed by national agencies. French private schools (établissements privés hors contrat), such as Protestant schools and Montessori schools, are being excluded by the French Government from Erasmus+ Key Action 1 (Learning Mobility of Individuals). This is national gold-plating of European policy that is putting French pupils at a disadvantage by comparison with their peers in other EU countries.

    • 1.Can the Commission confirm that Erasmus+ is intended for all pupils from all schools in the EU with nationally recognised qualifications, regardless of their legal status (private or public)?
    • 2.Is the Commission aware that the French authorities are excluding private-school pupils and teachers from Erasmus+? If so, what does the Commission think about this?
    • 3.What scope does the Commission see of nonetheless allowing pupils and teachers from the schools concerned to take part in Erasmus+ projects, and does the Commission intend to engage with the French authorities on this matter?

    Submitted: 27.2.2025

    • [1] Quote: ‘I will strengthen Erasmus: first, by making it more inclusive; but second, also I want to look at how we will tackle those that are more in need.’
    Last updated: 4 March 2025

    MIL OSI Europe News

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Written question – Tsunami preparedness in the European Union – E-000787/2025

    Source: European Parliament

    Question for written answer  E-000787/2025
    to the Commission
    Rule 144
    Michalis Hadjipantela (PPE)

    Tsunamis – characterised by sudden, powerful waves caused by undersea earthquakes, volcanic eruptions, or landslides – pose significant threats to coastal regions.

    Climate change, contributing to rising sea levels that may intensify seismic activity, could increase the frequency and severity of tsunamis. This growing threat poses significant risks to the EU’s islands and coastal regions, where dense populations and critical infrastructure are concentrated.

    Recent events in the Aegean Sea, in particular near the island of Santorini, have caused concern among Europeans living on islands and in coastal areas about the possibility of tsunamis affecting EU territory.

    Given the foregoing:

    • 1.Have evaluations been made regarding the potential increase in tsunami occurrences and their severity in EU coastal regions due to climate change?
    • 2.How does the Commission facilitate collaboration between Member States to enhance tsunami preparedness, early detection and early warning systems?
    • 3.What strategies and protocols are currently in place to ensure the readiness of Member States, in particular Cyprus, for dealing with potential tsunamis, particularly as regards public education and emergency response plans?

    Submitted: 20.2.2025

    Last updated: 4 March 2025

    MIL OSI Europe News

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Written question – Commission’s response to the incomplete implementation of the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities in Member States – E-000810/2025

    Source: European Parliament

    Question for written answer  E-000810/2025
    to the Commission
    Rule 144
    Jagna Marczułajtis-Walczak (PPE), Martine Kemp (PPE), Hristo Petrov (Renew), András Tivadar Kulja (PPE), Kamila Gasiuk-Pihowicz (PPE), Reinier Van Lanschot (Verts/ALE), Dariusz Joński (PPE), Diana Iovanovici Şoşoacă (NI), Elena Kountoura (The Left), Oihane Agirregoitia Martínez (Renew), Marc Angel (S&D), Veronika Cifrová Ostrihoňová (Renew), Maria Walsh (PPE), Katrin Langensiepen (Verts/ALE), Ciaran Mullooly (Renew), Andrzej Halicki (PPE), Andrzej Buła (PPE), Krzysztof Śmiszek (S&D), Elio Di Rupo (S&D), Sirpa Pietikäinen (PPE), Branislav Ondruš (NI), Tilly Metz (Verts/ALE), Aodhán Ó Ríordáin (S&D), Giusi Princi (PPE), Kathleen Funchion (The Left), Chiara Gemma (ECR), Ewa Zajączkowska-Hernik (ESN), Catarina Martins (The Left), Olivier Chastel (Renew), Nikos Pappas (The Left), Magdalena Adamowicz (PPE), Salvatore De Meo (PPE), Romana Tomc (PPE), Ewa Kopacz (PPE), Miriam Lexmann (PPE), Jadwiga Wiśniewska (ECR), Michał Kobosko (Renew), Marie Toussaint (Verts/ALE), Lara Magoni (ECR), Gabriella Gerzsenyi (PPE), Alex Agius Saliba (S&D), Krzysztof Brejza (PPE), Merja Kyllönen (The Left), Michał Wawrykiewicz (PPE), Bartosz Arłukowicz (PPE), Marta Wcisło (PPE), Adam Jarubas (PPE), Mirosława Nykiel (PPE), Elżbieta Katarzyna Łukacijewska (PPE), Hanna Gronkiewicz-Waltz (PPE), Michał Szczerba (PPE)

    Since ratifying the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) in 2010, the EU has been legally bound to uphold the right to independent living (Article 19 CRPD). However, disparities persist among Member States, particularly in transitioning from institutional care to community-based support.

    Reports highlight ongoing barriers for persons with disabilities in accessing personal assistance, accessible housing and inclusive services. Additionally, EU funds are still being allocated to institutional care rather than community-based alternatives, contradicting CRPD objectives.

    In the light of these challenges, could the Commission clarify:

    • 1.What measures are in place to ensure that EU funds support deinstitutionalisation and independent living, in full compliance with the CRPD?
    • 2.What mechanisms are in place to monitor and enforce Member States’ compliance with Article 19?
    • 3.Is the Commission considering stricter funding conditions, requiring verifiable progress in deinstitutionalisation and community-based services as a prerequisite for financial support?

    Submitted: 21.2.2025

    MIL OSI Europe News

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Written question – Addressing digital inequality in education, treating it as a threat to EU cohesion – E-000814/2025

    Source: European Parliament

    Question for written answer  E-000814/2025
    to the Commission
    Rule 144
    Nikos Pappas (The Left)

    Digital education is a key pillar of the EU strategy for the future of learning, as demonstrated by the Digital Education Action Plan (2021-2027). However, unequal access to digital technologies and infrastructure is creating serious educational disparities between Member States, regions and socio-economic groups, undermining Europe’s social cohesion and competitiveness.

    Pupils in rural or remote areas, as well as in low-income families, have limited access to fast-speed internet, modern digital devices and adequate training in new technologies, thereby lagging behind their peers from more well-off urban settings. At the same time, Member States’ educational systems vary widely in terms of integration of digital tools in teaching.

    In view of the above, can the Commission answer the following:

    • 1.How does it plan to address inequalities in digital education in the context of the revision of the Digital Education Action Plan, ensuring equal learning opportunities for pupils across the EU, regardless of their geographical or socio-economic situation?
    • 2.Which funding instruments could be used to pay for technological equipment and digital infrastructure for the EU’s most vulnerable school communities?
    • 3.How does it intend to ensure that Member States adopt common digital education standards to reduce inequalities and give shape to a more cohesive European Education Area?

    Submitted: 21.2.2025

    Last updated: 3 March 2025

    MIL OSI Europe News

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Written question – Clarification on State aid conditions for JEDU II (Dukovany II nuclear power plant) – E-000736/2025

    Source: European Parliament

    Question for written answer  E-000736/2025
    to the Commission
    Rule 144
    Tomáš Zdechovský (PPE)

    In the light of the Commission’s decision to approve State aid for the construction of the Dukovany II nuclear power plant in the Czech Republic (SA.58207) and the related press release dated 30 April 2024[1], we would like to request clarification on the following points:

    • 1.The press release states that ‘market prices provide incentives to reduce production and plan maintenance and refuelling when market prices are low’. Given that nuclear reactor fuel cycles are fixed and outages cannot be flexibly planned based on short-term market conditions, can the Commission explain on what analysis this claim is based?
    • 2.According to the Bank of America report of May 2023 entitled ‘The nuclear necessity’, the real system costs of renewable energy, including grid adaptation and backup costs, are higher than those of nuclear energy. On what basis did the Commission conclude that limiting nuclear production in favour of renewables will lead to lower CO₂ emissions overall?
    • 3.Who specifically on the Czech side approved the final terms of the agreement with the Commission, and was the Czech Ministry of Industry and Trade (MPO) obliged to accept the changes proposed by the Commission, or was there room for negotiation on alternative solutions?

    Submitted: 18.2.2025

    • [1] https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_24_2366.
    Last updated: 3 March 2025

    MIL OSI Europe News

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Written question – Business-as-usual with Azerbaijan – E-000694/2025

    Source: European Parliament

    Question for written answer  E-000694/2025
    to the Vice-President of the Commission / High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy
    Rule 144
    Emmanouil Fragkos (ECR)

    On 24 October, the European Parliament adopted the resolution ‘on situation in Azerbaijan, violation of human rights and international law and relations with Armenia’, in which MEPs unilaterally rejected the idea of business-as-usual with the Aliyev dictatorship regime.

    However, on 4 December, the newly-elected Vice-President of the Commission / High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, Kaja Kallas met with Azerbaijan’s Foreign Affairs Minister, Jeyhun Bayramov, in the margins of the 31st OSCE Ministerial Council. The EU representative later posted that the meeting had been ‘good’ and that the two sides discussed the EU-Azerbaijan partnership.

    In view of the above, can the Vice-President of the Commission / High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy answer the following:

    • 1.What was so ‘good’ about the meeting? Did the Aliyev regime’s foreign affairs minister commit to release more than 320 political prisoners, repatriate Armenian hostages and give assurances about a dignified return of Armenians to Artsakh, in line with the legally binding rulings of the International Court of Justice?
    • 2.Why can’t the EU do away with the policy of appeasement when dealing with dictatorial states like Azerbaijan?
    • 3.Will the VP/HR continue to work with Azerbaijan’s dictatorship regime as normal?

    Submitted: 13.2.2025

    Last updated: 3 March 2025

    MIL OSI Europe News

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Written question – Rare diseases – P-000845/2025

    Source: European Parliament

    Priority question for written answer  P-000845/2025
    to the Commission
    Rule 144
    Tomislav Sokol (PPE), Elena Nevado del Campo (PPE), Liesbet Sommen (PPE), Peter Liese (PPE), Adam Jarubas (PPE), András Tivadar Kulja (PPE), Dan-Ştefan Motreanu (PPE), Michalis Hadjipantela (PPE)

    More than 6 000 distinct rare diseases have been identified, each affecting a relatively small number of individuals but collectively impacting millions. In the EU alone, it is estimated that between 27 to 36 million people are living with a rare disease. Alarmingly, 75 % of rare diseases appear in childhood, often leading to severe disability, chronic health complications or even life-threatening conditions. Many of these diseases remain under-researched, with limited treatment options.

    • 1.Given these figures, does the Commission plan to prioritise rare diseases by adopting a comprehensive EU strategy for rare diseases that will provide concrete objectives, funding, clear benchmarks and a defined timeline to ensure progress in research, prevention, diagnosis, treatment and patient support?
    • 2.Does the Commission intend to simplify the rules on cross-border healthcare to facilitate faster and more equitable access to treatment for rare disease patients, given that many rare disease patients face significant challenges in accessing specialised treatment across borders on account of complex administrative procedures?
    • 3.Given the high cost of rare disease treatments and the financial burden on national health systems, does the Commission plan to establish a framework for supporting Member States in facilitating access to cross-border healthcare for rare disease patients?

    Submitted: 26.2.2025

    Last updated: 3 March 2025

    MIL OSI Europe News

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Written question – Objection period for amendments to International Health Regulations (IHR) – P-000805/2025

    Source: European Parliament

    Priority question for written answer  P-000805/2025
    to the Commission
    Rule 144
    Gerald Hauser (PfE)

    The objection period has been shortened from 18 to 10 months, from the date of notification by the WHO Director-General. According to the answer to question E-001627/2024[1], the notification was given on 19 September 2024.

    However, it is important to note that WHO has often applied deadlines incorrectly and in its favour in the past. The organisation has violated Article 55 of the IHR by not submitting the proposed amendments to the Member States in due time.

    The 2022 World Health Assembly (WHA) amendments to shorten the deadline from 24/18 to 12/10 months entered into force on 31 May 2024, although the exact date of the notification is not known. Three days does not seem realistic, however. Against this background, we believe that the deadline for objections should be checked.

    • 1.When were the 2022 WHA amendments to reduce the deadline from 24/18 to 12/10 months notified to the EU/Member States?
    • 2.Has the Commission checked the deadline for submitting objections to the IHR amendments?
    • 3.Do amendments become invalid if deadlines such as the four-month deadline for submitting documents before the vote are not met?

    Submitted: 21.2.2025

    • [1] https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/E-10-2024-001627-ASW_EN.html
    Last updated: 3 March 2025

    MIL OSI Europe News

  • MIL-OSI Security: Major Nuclear Repository Adopts New Fully Searchable Digital Platform

    Source: International Atomic Energy Agency – IAEA

    The IAEA’s International Nuclear Information System, a multi-million strong digital library, has been further strengthened with the addition of a modern repository platform – that offers full text search for the first time.

    Founded in 1970, the International Nuclear Information System (INIS) Repository hosts a massive library of nearly five million reports, books, scientific articles, conference papers and other knowledge products covering topics in nuclear science, reactor technology, materials science, medical applications, decommissioning, and all other areas the IAEA is involved in.

    Using Invenio, an open-source platform developed by the European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN) and tailoring it to its own needs the Agency was to make advancements in automation and accessibility as well as a major increase in capacity for handling new knowledge product entries in INIS. The new functionalities built with the platform allow INIS to connect with other repositories, facilitating the sharing of content and expanding the utility of all participating databases. INIS will be the first large repository to implement full-text search with Invenio – searching both the metadata and the text of a PDF.

    “In today’s knowledge-based economy, information is considered one of the most valuable resources. It is critical for research, innovation, decision making, efficiency and productivity, knowledge sharing and continuous learning,” said Dibuleng Mohlakwana, Head of the IAEA’s Nuclear Information Section. “This new platform will help INIS expand its role as a global player in open science improving its capabilities as an information hub that facilitates the pursuit of nuclear science for peaceful purposes.”

    INIS relies on contributions from more than 130 countries and 11 international organizations, with well over 100 000 new knowledge products being added each year.  INIS staff supplement national contributions by harvesting information from some of the largest publishers, including Elsevier, Nature-Springer and the Institute of Physics.

    The landscape of scientific publishing has changed greatly in the years since INIS was founded, with an increasing emphasis on open access. Publishers are providing more information and making it freely available, while repositories such as arXiv, the Directory of Open Access Journals, PubMed, etc. have made scientific knowledge more accessible than ever before.

    “One of the great things about this platform is that whatever we develop here can be shared with all the other organizations. So not only are we sharing scientific information with the world, but we’re also sharing what we develop with Invenio,” said Astrit Ademaj, Nuclear Systems Support Analyst and Project Manager for the implementation of Invenio. INIS is the first large repository to implement full-text search – searching both the metadata and the text of a PDF.

    Knowledge products entered into Invenio will be automatically categorized and tagged with descriptors. This had previously been done manually in what had been a highly time-consuming endeavour. This work will now primarily be handled by NADIA (Nuclear Artificial intelligence for Document Indexing and Analysis), an AI tool developed by the IAEA. Previously, contributors sent their entries using a unique language and format. Now a user-friendly form is provided, so specialized knowledge and training are no longer necessary.

    “Many of the items available on INIS are quite fascinating,” said Brian Bales, INIS Coordinator. “One of the most popular recent additions is the Prospective Study Bluebook on Nuclear Energy to Support Low Carbon – a cooperative effort between nuclear companies in China and France to address the challenges of climate change. Over the last 5 years, we’ve added over 600 000 such knowledge products.”

    MIL Security OSI

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Written question – Summit on Ukraine and Security in Europe – the Commission’s mandate – E-000729/2025

    Source: European Parliament

    Question for written answer  E-000729/2025/rev.1
    to the Commission
    Rule 144
    Erik Kaliňák (NI)

    The Summit on Ukraine and Security in Europe was held on 17 February 2025 in Paris. The summit, organised by the French President, was attended by selected Member States and the United Kingdom. According to media reports, the main topic under discussion was the deployment of troops from the participating states to the territory of Ukraine. Not all Member States were invited to the summit, but top EU officials, namely the President of the European Council and the President of the European Commission, were present.

    In the light of the foregoing:

    • 1.What was the reason for the Commission President’s attendance at a summit of selected states, given that the main topic of the meeting does not fall within the EU’s competences?
    • 2.When and how did the Commission receive a mandate from the Council of the European Union to attend and in any way speak on behalf of the EU at the summit convened by Emmanuel Macron?

    Submitted: 18.2.2025

    Last updated: 3 March 2025

    MIL OSI Europe News

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Written question – Financial assistance for air carriers during the COVID-19 pandemic – E-000816/2025

    Source: European Parliament

    Question for written answer  E-000816/2025
    to the Commission
    Rule 144
    Michalis Hadjipantela (PPE)

    During the COVID-19 pandemic, the Commission approved various forms of financial assistance for air carriers to mitigate the impact of the crisis. These measures included state aid schemes, direct grants and loans, provided under the State Aid Temporary Framework.

    Can the Commission clarify:

    • 1.Which air carriers registered and operating within the European single market received some form of financial assistance or state aid during the COVID-19 pandemic, either from national or European funds?
    • 2.What forms of financial assistance, whether grants, loans or other support mechanisms, were granted to these carriers and on what conditions?
    • 3.Has the repayment of loans or other repayable instruments begun, and if so, what proportion has been repaid so far?

    Submitted: 21.2.2025

    Last updated: 3 March 2025

    MIL OSI Europe News

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Written question – Impact studies on measures taken under the Green Deal – E-000625/2025

    Source: European Parliament

    Question for written answer  E-000625/2025/rev.1
    to the Commission
    Rule 144
    Erik Kaliňák (NI)

    On 8 February 2025, an interview with former Commission Vice-President Věra Jourová was published in the Czech media.[1] Among other things, it was noted that the Commission had not carried out impact studies on the measures it is promoting under the Green Deal.

    These are worrying allegations, suggesting that the Commission flagrantly breached its obligations under EU law, while the measures it is taking proving extremely damaging to EU competitiveness and destructive to EU industry.

    Following the media interview with Věra Jourová, I would like to ask the Commission:

    • 1.Can the Commission confirm the veracity of Věra Jourová’s claims about the failure to carry out impact studies on Green Deal action plans, or are these claims false?
    • 2.If the Commission seeks to distance itself from Věra Jourová’s claims, can it confirm that proper impact studies were indeed carried out for all the measures adopted under the Green Deal? If so, surely the Commission intends to take legal action against Věra Jourová?
    • 3.If the Commission confirms that Věra Jourová’s allegations are true, whom will the Commission hold to account, and how, for the failure to carry out impact studies and, in particular, for the damage that the measures taken under the Green Deal have caused to EU industry?

    Submitted: 11.2.2025

    • [1] https://www.idnes.cz/zpravy/domaci/vera-jourova-evropska-unie-komise-green-deal-trump-musk.A250207_164349_domaci_stud
    Last updated: 3 March 2025

    MIL OSI Europe News

  • MIL-Evening Report: The strategies and risks European powers must consider when it comes to tackling Trump

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Jessica Genauer, Senior Lecturer in International Relations, Flinders University

    Since commencing his second term as United States president, Donald Trump has distanced the US from Ukraine and warmed relations with Russia.

    This presents a predicament for European nations.

    A changing landscape

    Europe relies on the US for military and technology capability.

    The US is responsible for more than a third of the total funds spent on defence worldwide.

    It is also a critical member of the NATO security alliance and has more than 80,000 troops on the European continent.

    Since January 20, the Trump administration has coupled economic isolationism with a surprisingly interventionist foreign policy agenda.

    This is driven by a realist, interests-based approach to political leadership.

    Trump’s actions align with a worldview that emphasises material advantage over values and ideas – the interests of great and regional powers are considered to be the only ones that matter.

    The heated exchange between Trump, Vice President JD Vance and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky on February 28 underscored the crumbling architecture and protocols of the international rules-based order in place since the second world war.

    It appears the Trump administration may expect unilateral concessions from Ukraine to Russia for peace. This would likely include ceding significant territory to Russia.




    Read more:
    In siding with Russia over Ukraine, Trump is not putting America first. He is hastening its decline


    A rock and a hard place

    Ukraine borders four EU and NATO-member countries: Hungary, Poland, Romania and Slovakia. This poses a serious security risk.

    Europe’s foremost security challenge is to deter Russia from further offensive action on the continent.

    European countries have a direct interest in stopping the war, because a continuing conflict presents a costly threat, draining resources in military and humanitarian aid.

    According to the Kiel institute for the World Economy, since the full-scale invasion of Ukraine, European countries have collectively committed more than $US138 billion ($A222 billion) in military and non-military aid.

    European countries want to see an end to the war that leaves Ukraine a safe and sovereign nation state. For European countries, it is crucial that any political settlement effectively deters Russia from further incursions into Ukrainian or Eastern European territory.

    Without deterrence measures in place, there is no guaranteed prevention of wider state-to-state conflict on the European continent in future.

    On the one hand, Europe needs the US military and economic might. On the other hand, Europe has pressing security concerns that drive a divergence from the US in its position on Ukraine.

    How far will Trump go with Russia?

    A key question on European leaders’ minds is: will the NATO alliance hold if there is an incursion into NATO-member territory?

    If the borders of Poland or a Baltic state are violated, NATO’s article 5 will be triggered. This article requires the collective defense by all NATO allies of any ally under attack.

    This could mean the US is obliged to join a direct confrontation with Russia.

    Would Trump actually commit US military support to a fight with Russia? Or would the US abandon their NATO treaty obligations?

    Trump’s rhetoric and actions so far suggest European countries should prepare for the latter possibility.




    Read more:
    How Trump’s spat with Zelensky threatens the security of the world – including the US


    Strategic autonomy and deterrence

    Given this dilemma, Europe needs to focus on strategic autonomy and deterrence.

    Strategic autonomy includes not only defence, but also economics, environment, energy and values.

    In terms of defence, strategic autonomy means Europe taking more responsibility for its own security. Former European Defence Agency chief Jorge Domecq notes this includes having the ability to “develop, operate, modify and maintain the full spectrum of defence capabilities”.

    Effective deterrence of further Russian aggression on the continent requires providing substantive security guarantees to Ukraine. This may include a multilateral security structure for European countries (without the US) that could guarantee Ukraine’s security.

    The idea of a European Army has also reemerged. This would go beyond defence cooperation to full military and strategic integration. Such an entity could underpin a European peacekeeping force in Ukraine.

    At a summit in London on March 2, EU countries and the UK proposed a one-month truce that could be followed by European troops on the ground in Ukraine to maintain the peace.

    What does Ukraine want from Europe?

    A Gallup survey in late 2024 suggests the percentage of Ukrainians who want a negotiated end to the war has increased from about 20% in early 2022 to more than 50% in late 2024.

    Over the same period, those who favour fighting for a military solution has declined from more than 70% to just under 40%.

    The same survey revealed most Ukrainians prefer a key role for the EU in negotiations (70%) and the UK (63%), with less than half preferring a significant role from Trump.

    Interestingly, more than 40% supported a central role for Turkey in negotiations.

    China: a country to watch

    China’s approach to Russia and the war could have an impact on Europe’s security and political stability.

    China is mostly concerned with domestic economic growth and regime stability, and it has not directly involved itself in the war in Ukraine.

    However, China is a close friend of Russia and a security ally of North Korea, which is currently fighting in the Kursk province of Russia against Ukrainian forces.

    In 2023, China put forward its own “peace plan” proposal for Ukraine.

    A rapprochement between the US and Russia may be viewed unfavourably by China which could see this as a threat to its own regional geopolitical influence.

    China maintains significant influence over Russian President Vladimir Putin due to economic and security ties.

    If China senses a fundamental shift in the international order, it may become more assertive in attempting to influence Russia and the trajectory of the war in Ukraine.

    For Europe, distancing from the US may mean getting closer to China.

    However, this comes with its own risks.

    Jessica Genauer does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

    ref. The strategies and risks European powers must consider when it comes to tackling Trump – https://theconversation.com/the-strategies-and-risks-european-powers-must-consider-when-it-comes-to-tackling-trump-251253

    MIL OSI AnalysisEveningReport.nz

  • MIL-OSI United Kingdom: First Minister’s statement on solidarity with Ukraine

    Source: Scottish National Party

    The First Minister told the Scottish Parliament:

    Just last Monday, all of Scotland’s political leaders took part in a powerful and moving ceremony at Edinburgh Castle to mark three years since the start of Russia’s illegal invasion of Ukraine.

    We stood together, with members of the Ukrainian community living here in Scotland, to commemorate the time that has passed since the start of that invasion but also to reaffirm our support for the people of Ukraine.

    Though we disagree on points of policy and politics in this chamber – which is right and proper in a parliamentary democracy – when it comes to upholding the values and principles of modern democracy, the Scottish Parliament stands behind Ukraine, resolute and unwavering.

    Regardless of our political views, everyone in this chamber understands that democracy is hard fought for and must never be taken for granted.

    Democracy must be cherished, defended, and enhanced.

    This is the lesson of the 20th century.

    This is the lesson the people of Ukraine live, and struggle, and fight, to teach us every day.

    The courage demonstrated by President Zelenskyy – and by all Ukrainians, since the first day of Russia’s illegal, full-scale invasion – reaches far beyond the protection and preservation of their own homeland.

    Ukrainians struggle, and fight for all of Europe – and for the protection and preservation of all democratic nations.

    It is a struggle for the rule of law, for human rights, and to uphold the international norms which once ensured Europe knew guaranteed peace.

    The Ukrainian people are fighting for their homeland, for their future, but also for our future too.

    3 years ago, Russia expected to flatten Ukrainian resistance within days.

    But despite a war that has caused years of unnecessary misery in a peaceful, sovereign, and democratic nation, the power of the fight for democracy, and all its freedoms, has given the Ukrainian people their purpose, as well as their most potent advantage.

    Ukraine’s people are fighting to defend her independence, her territorial integrity and her security in the face of appalling, unprovoked violence.

    Violence which has destroyed lives, separated families, wounded hundreds of thousands of citizens, and razed cities to the ground.

    And yet, President Zelenskyy has not wavered in strength or dignity.

    His people have not laid down arms.

    Russia has not succeeded in reaching its war aims, despite sending hundreds of thousands of troops to their deaths, or to be wounded, on the frontlines.

    But, now, as a result of all this unnecessary carnage, millions of Ukrainian children have never known peace, while Western democracy has never been under such relentless attack from within.

    Misinformation. Propaganda. Malicious interpretations of history…

    Arrogance, ignorance, prejudice, and hate, are being used to divide us.

    Only yesterday, after Russia launched a drone attack on a civilian building in Kharkiv, the Kremlin spokesman, Dmitry Peskov, said:

    “We see that the collective West has started to become less collective. A fragmentation of the collective West has begun.”

    That is precisely what Russia wants its people and the world to believe.

    That is precisely what Putin wants us to believe.

    We must be ever vigilant to the threat of disinformation, which takes the shape of the Kremlin’s talking points.

    Russia was not provoked to invade Ukraine, in 2014 or in 2022.

    No credence should be given to deflection tactics, blaming NATO expansion for Russian aggression.

    Each and every country in NATO is a democracy that has made its own sovereign choice to become a member.

    And many of the countries on NATO’s eastern flank have recent experience of living under Russian threat.

    The strong, international solidarity and dedication to achieving peace in Ukraine was evident for all to see at the security summit in London this weekend.

    And the vast majority of European leaders have only one message – their unreserved condemnation of illegal Russian aggression.

    Therefore, Ukraine’s allies should all have one aim and one aim only – to support Ukraine’s independence, her territorial integrity and her security.

    So, I wholeheartedly welcome the Prime Minister’s “coalition of the willing” initiative to provide Ukraine with security guarantees after a ceasefire agreement, as well as the £1.6 billion missile deal for Ukraine.

    I also accept the case for peacekeeping forces to avert further conflict, subject to proper scrutiny and a vote in the House of Commons.

    And I understand the delicate balance of diplomacy the Prime Minister and the UK Government must navigate in this matter.

    So, I want to make clear my commitment and the commitment of my government to a united front. My commitment to do all that I can to support Ukraine to succeed.

    But, I am sure like the many European leaders who expressed their solidarity with President Zelenskyy this weekend, I am very disturbed by how his meeting with the US President and Vice President played out last week.

    I agree with President Zelenskyy’s statement that Ukraine wants “its partners to remember who the aggressor is in this war.”

    And we must see unwavering unity across the political spectrum in full solidarity with Ukraine on this essential point.

    The events at that Oval Office meeting with President Zelenskyy, and the announcement made this morning of a pause in US military aid to Ukraine, can only run the risk of emboldening Russia, the aggressor.

    As I said this weekend, if this were to remain the posture of the US government, a second state visit for US President Donald Trump becomes unthinkable.

    I know there are people in this Chamber and across this country who will disagree, who will say that we should not contemplate this stance or who will say that President Trump should not be invited under any circumstances.

    I understand and respect those points of view.

    But I cannot share them.

    Right now, today, as we stand here, men, women and children in Ukraine are putting their lives and their freedom on the line to defend their country and all of our democracies.

    We say we support them – and we do. But that means being willing to do things that are hard; things that we would rather not do.

    So, if a state visit could help solidify US support for Ukraine, if that is part of what supporting Ukraine means in practice, then it is a possibility.

    For that to be true, however, the US would have to sustain the steadfast support of Ukraine, her independence and territorial integrity.

    As we think through all these issues, the important questions are the hard-headed, clear-eyed consideration of what is best for Ukraine and European security today.

    For my government, that means standing steadfast behind Ukraine and alongside the United Kingdom Government and our European allies, and that is exactly what Scotland will do.

    My hope is that US and European leaders can once again find a way to speak with one voice on the matter of this conflict.

    There are no grey areas when one country chooses to send troops and tanks into the peaceful territory of an another.

    My Government supports the approach of the UK Government in committing to secure international solidarity in support of Ukraine’s long-term future.

    We welcome the 100-year Partnership recently agreed by the UK and Ukraine, and Scotland will play our part – whether as part of the UK or as an independent nation in the future – in helping to deliver it.

    I also welcome the approach of the Prime Minister and the proposed four-point plan to end the war and defend Ukraine from Russia.

    As I have already stated, Scotland accepts the case for the deployment of any peacekeeping forces to avert future conflict, subject to scrutiny and a vote by MPs in the House of Commons.

    And my Government remains committed to supporting Ukraine, until a just peace is secured – not a peace at any cost, which strips Ukraine of her sovereignty in wartime.

    So, let me once again make clear, there can be no truly sincere or constructive peace talks about the future of Ukraine, without Ukraine present at the negotiating table.

    And securing the future of Ukraine is utterly vital to securing the peace we have enjoyed in Europe for so long.

    Ukraine’s future, and her fate, is our future and our fate.

    So, we must aspire to be as courageous as the people of Ukraine and stand by them, always, in their hour of need.

    And, we must maintain unity with our partners across Europe and the Western world – unity like that demonstrated in London this weekend and at Edinburgh Castle last week.

    Because events in Ukraine are having, and will continue to have, a direct negative impact on Scotland’s economy, security, and society.

    Presiding Officer,

    Scotland’s approach, internationally, will continue to be led and guided by our compassion for Ukraine.

    I know this chamber will continue to work together on these matters, and to put any differences aside in respect of our common efforts to uphold justice.

    Now, 25 years into the life of this modern Parliament, Scotland chooses to stand for democracy, for human rights and the rule of law, at home and among our courageous allies like Ukraine.

    These are the underpinnings of democracy, of prosperity, and of every freedom democracy provides.

    This is the solidarity among allies that will deliver Ukraine from Russia’s barbaric aggression, while protecting her heritage, her culture, and her social and economic future.

    We have been honoured, across Scotland, that thousands of Ukrainians have made their home in our country.

    My message to people from Ukraine living here in Scotland, is that you are – and always will be – very welcome here.

    Providing support and sanctuary for Ukrainian people displaced by Russia’s brutal war continues to be a priority for the Scottish Government.

    I want Ukrainians everywhere to know that they also have Scotland’s fullest support.

    I know many of them will be deeply concerned by what has unfolded over the last few days.

    It is for those brave Ukrainians, and every person protected by democracy, that Scotland will never be silent.

    Here in Scotland, we will, forever, stand with Ukraine.

    MIL OSI United Kingdom

  • MIL-OSI United Kingdom: Securing the future of an independent Ukraine

    Source: Scottish Government

    First Minister commits to international solidarity.

    First Minister John Swinney has pledged the support of the Scottish Government to “securing international solidarity” for the long-term future of an independent Ukraine.

    Addressing the Scottish Parliament, he condemned Russia’s illegal, full-scale invasion and the subsequent three years of “barbaric” aggression that have followed, while commending Ukraine’s people for their fight to defend the independence, territorial integrity and security of their country.

    Mr Swinney said that providing support and sanctuary for displaced Ukrainians continues to be a priority for the Scottish Government.

    The First Minister warned that pausing military aid “can only run the risk of emboldening Russia”, stressing the United States must remain “steadfast” in its support for Ukraine alongside the United Kingdom Government, European allies and partners across the wider western world. He also accepted the case for peacekeeping forces to avert further conflict, subject to proper democratic scrutiny.

    The First Minister said:

    “Right now, today, as we stand here, men, women and children in Ukraine are putting their lives and their freedom on the line to defend their country and all of our democracies.

    “My hope is that US and European leaders can once again find a way to speak with one voice on the matter of this conflict. There are no grey areas when one country chooses to send troops and tanks into the peaceful territory of another.

    “My Government supports the approach of the United Kingdom Government, in committing to secure international solidarity in support of Ukraine’s long-term future. My Government remains committed to supporting Ukraine, until a just peace is secured – not a peace at any cost, which strips Ukraine of her sovereignty in wartime.

    “Scotland’s approach, internationally, will continue to be led and guided by our compassion for Ukraine. Now, 25 years into the life of this modern Parliament, Scotland chooses to stand for democracy, for human rights and the rule of law, at home and among our courageous allies like Ukraine.

    “These are the underpinnings of democracy, of prosperity, and of every freedom democracy provides. This is the solidarity among allies that will deliver Ukraine from Russia’s barbaric aggression, while protecting her heritage, her culture, and her social and economic future.

    “Ukraine’s future, and her fate, is our future and our fate.”

    Background

    International solidarity to support Ukraine: First Minister’s statement – 4 March 2025 – gov.scot

    MIL OSI United Kingdom

  • MIL-OSI Global: Banning first cousin marriage would be eugenic and ineffective – expert view

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Dominic Wilkinson, Consultant Neonatologist and Professor of Ethics, University of Oxford

    AliAshraf/Shutterstock

    A bill that proposes to ban first-cousin marriage in the UK will receive its second reading in the House of Commons on March 7.

    The bill, proposed by Conservative former minister Richard Holden, follows the introduction of a ban on cousin marriages that came into effect in Norway in 2023 and a planned ban in Sweden from mid-2026.

    Different reasons might be given for proposing to ban first-cousin marriage. However, one significant reason given by supporters of these bans is concern for public health. Holden claimed in his speech to parliament that: “First-cousin marriage should be banned on the basis of health risk alone.”

    In the UK, a long-standing research study of childhood outcomes in Bradford, where there has traditionally been a high rate of cousin marriages within the Pakistani community, recently found that children of first cousin parents had higher rates of learning and speech problems and more visits to hospitals and doctors.

    The increased incidence of certain genetic illnesses in children of related parents has long been recognised. When parents are closely related, they are more likely to carry the same faulty genes.

    If both parents pass on the same faulty gene to their child, the child has a higher chance of developing a genetic illness (about double the risk of parents who aren’t related). The Bradford study had earlier found that first-cousin marriages were linked to 30% of cases of birth defects in the studied population.

    The recent study suggests that even once you exclude those children diagnosed with recessive genetic conditions – and even after adjusting for other risk factors such as poverty – the children had higher rates of illness and developmental problems.

    Although it is laudable to wish to seek measures to prevent health and learning problems in future children, there is a fundamental ethical challenge.

    Banning first-cousin marriage will not prevent children from having genetic illness or health problems, rather, it will prevent some children from being born and mean that different children (with a lower chance of genetic or other problems) are born instead.

    Harm principle

    A basic legal and ethical principle, defended by the 19th-century philosopher John Stuart Mill, is that states are only justified in restricting the basic freedoms of individuals to prevent harm to others. But if we take the “harm principle” seriously, then the health case for a marriage ban dissolves. There will be no child who is saved from illness or harm because of a law banning first-cousin marriage.

    It might be thought that a ban would still be justified, based on community health rather than for the sake of specific children. The idea would be that it would be important to prevent first-cousin marriage because of the high rate of genetic illness in offspring. Perhaps the hope would be to reduce pressure on the health system. But there are several problems with this argument.

    First, most children of parents who are first cousins are healthy. The rate of genetic or congenital problems is 6% (compared with 3% in parents who are not related). This means that 94% of children will not have genetic or congenital problems. Or to put it another way, given the small additional risk, over 30 couples would have to be prevented from marrying to prevent one child from being born with an inherited genetic problem. The same argument applies to the extra learning problems seen in the Bradford study that were not diagnosed as genetic problems: most children of first-cousin parents did not have learning difficulties or serious illness.

    Next, a ban on cousin marriage to reduce the rates of illness or learning problems in their offspring would represent an attempt to prevent certain people from having children for the sake of benefiting the population. But once we frame it in that way, it is clear that such an effort would be eugenic, based on a particular group’s perceived genetic fitness to reproduce.

    Such a policy would be an example of some of the most troubling forms of eugenics: restricting basic freedoms (the freedom to marry and have children) for the sake of the common good.

    Third, the health-based reason to ban first-cousin marriages is because of the elevated rate of birth defects and health problems in children. However, the rate of these problems is also increased in parents who are related more distantly. And in close-knit ethnic groups there can be shared genes and increased rate of congenital problems (so-called endogamy), even without cousin marriage.

    If we ban first-cousin marriages, families could shift to others within their extended family. Or, if we wanted to prevent higher rates of birth defects, we might need to ban not just first- and second-cousin marriages, but also marriage within ethnic communities. But that would look even more problematic.

    How should we respond then to the high rates of health and learning problems in communities like those in Bradford?

    One important response is to be aware of the additional needs of those communities (Bradford has areas that are among the most deprived in the UK) and to ensure that the needs of children are addressed.

    A second response is to provide education to families and to young people who are potentially marrying so that they are aware of the increased risks associated with cousin marriage and can make informed decisions.

    Finally, there are more sophisticated and targeted ways of identifying risks for couples while respecting their reproductive rights. So-called expanded reproductive carrier screening could identify before they become pregnant, whether both partners in a couple are carriers for the same genetic illness. That could help them to decide whether to have children together, whether to use other techniques – such as IVF – to prevent genetic illness or to adopt. That expanded screening isn’t currently available on the NHS, but it could be made available to couples who are related.

    We should be concerned about higher rates of illness in the children of parents who are related. But the ethical answer isn’t to ban them from getting married.

    Dominic Wilkinson receives funding from the Wellcome Trust.

    ref. Banning first cousin marriage would be eugenic and ineffective – expert view – https://theconversation.com/banning-first-cousin-marriage-would-be-eugenic-and-ineffective-expert-view-251187

    MIL OSI – Global Reports

  • MIL-OSI USA: Cortez Masto, Wyden Lead Colleagues in Reaffirming Congress’ Authority to Maintain Trade Restrictions on Russia

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Nevada Cortez Masto
    Washington, D.C. – U.S. Senator Catherine Cortez Masto (D-Nev.) and Senate Finance Committee Ranking Member Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) led eight of their Senate colleagues in a letter to President Donald Trump reaffirming Congress’ authority to maintain trade restrictions on the Russian Federation while it continues its war of aggression against Ukraine. Their letter follows the devolution of talks between the United States and Ukraine last Friday, just two weeks after the President claimed that Ukraine “should have never started [the war].”
    “Vladimir Putin is a ruthless dictator who has led the Russian Federation into a war of aggression against Ukraine with the explicit goal of denying Ukraine and its people their collective rights to independence, sovereignty, and territorial integrity,” wrote the Senators. “Our country, in coordination with our allies and partners and with bipartisan support has imposed sweeping financial sanctions, stringent export controls, and aggressive trade restrictions on the Russian Federation.”
    In 2022, Congress passed the Suspending Normal Trade Relations with Russia and Belarus Act which revoked Russia’s permanent normal trade relations (PNTR) status to ensure Russian goods and services do not enjoy privileged, “most-favored nation” access to the U.S. market. Congress also passed the Ending Importation of Russian Oil Act which banned the importation of all energy products from the Russian Federation.
    According to these laws, the Russian Federation must reach an agreement relating to the withdrawal of its forces and cessation of military hostilities that is accepted by the free and independent government of Ukraine, recognize the right of the people of Ukraine to independently and freely choose their own government, and pose no immediate military threat of aggression to any NATO member before the President can restore normal trade relations.
    “In light of your worrisome statements, we wish to remind you that you must not—and cannot, under statute—attempt to restore normal trade relations or lift the import ban on Russian energy products unless and until Ukraine’s peace demands are met and their free and independent government has accepted a peace agreement,” continued the Senators. “Ukraine must be at the table to determine its future, and conditions for peace cannot be imposed on Ukraine.”
    Additional signatories to the letter include Senators Michael Bennet (D-Colo.), Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.), Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), Gary Peters (D-Mich.), Jacky Rosen (D-Nev.), Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), Raphael Warnock (D-Ga.), and Peter Welch (D-Vt.).
    The full letter can be found here.
    Senator Cortez Masto has consistently advocated for the U.S. to stand up to Russian aggression and support Ukrainian sovereignty. Earlier this year, Senators Cortez Masto and Cornyn (R-Tex.) introduced the HONOR Act to prevent businesses from claiming a foreign tax credit or deduction against taxes paid to fund the Russian government’s war machine. She has voted to pass bipartisan legislation to support Ukraine and helped pass bipartisan economic sanctions that were signed into law to hold Russia accountable for its illegal invasion of Ukraine. She voted in support of sanctions against Russia and its Nord Stream 2 pipeline, and she supported similar sanctions in the 2020 and 2021 National Defense Authorization Acts.

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI Security: Murder investigation launched after teenage boy was shot in Stockwell

    Source: United Kingdom London Metropolitan Police

    The Met has launched a murder investigation after a boy was shot in Stockwell.

    Police were called at around 14:30hrs on Tuesday, 4 March to reports of a shooting in Paradise Road, SW4.

    Officers attended the scene along with London’s Air Ambulance and London Ambulance Service.

    Sadly, despite the best efforts of paramedics, the 16-year-old boy was pronounced dead at the scene.

    Officers are working at pace to identify the teenager and contact his next of kin.

    Superintendent Gabriel Cameron, who is leading the local policing response, said:

    “This is an enormously shocking incident which I imagine will cause huge distress to the local community.

    “Our thoughts are with the young boy’s family at this devastating time.

    “Local officers are on the scene gathering CCTV and speaking to witnesses to piece together what has happened. They will be supported by specialist homicide investigators shortly.

    “Please rest assured we will work around the clock to identify and find those responsible.”

    No arrests have been made at this early stage of the investigation.

    A crime scene and cordons remain in place while emergency services undertake their enquiries, which are ongoing.

    If you were a witness or have any information, please call police on 101 with the reference 4116/4MAR.

    You can also contact the independent charity Crimestoppers on 0800 555 if you want to remain anonymous.

    MIL Security OSI

  • MIL-OSI Global: Decolonising Ireland’s education system remains vital despite the country’s wealth and privilege

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Aoife Lynam, Assistant Professor in Psychology of Education, Trinity College Dublin

    BearFotos / Shutterstock

    Ireland urgently needs to decolonise its higher education system. British rule spanned several centuries in Ireland and policies during this time sought to replace Irish culture with British norms, leaving a legacy that continues to influence Irish higher education.

    Today, Ireland is a wealthy and confident nation state. But this hides a colonial past which saw its language, culture and intellectual heritage systematically suppressed. Our education system has long been shaped by English-speaking and, recently, specifically American intellectual ideas. This has left limited space for Irish perspectives and thinkers.

    Ireland has grown close in many respects to nations which were once colonising powers. It has taken on many of their entrenched practices. For education, this includes the export of western “expertise” to non-western countries, known as “helicopter research”. This is where researchers from wealthy countries study communities in lower-income countries without involving local researchers.

    Another well-known phenomenon, known as “white saviourism”, positions western experts as heroic figures, bringing solutions to “underdeveloped” regions without understanding the local context. Irish professionals are not exempt from this dynamic.

    Grassroots, student-led initiatives such as “Why Is My Curriculum White?” and “Liberate My Degree” have emerged from students’ demands to challenge the Eurocentric dominance of university teaching. These initiatives also push for greater inclusivity and representation within higher education.

    Our university, Trinity College Dublin (TCD), continues to address its colonial legacy through various initiatives, such as denaming the college library, repatriating human remains and honouring female scholars with new busts in the library.

    Recently, a movement emerged, led by Trinity College Dublin’s Students’ Union (TCDSU), advocating for greater recognition of Irish language rights within the university. The union prominently displayed a banner reading “Cá bhfuil an Ghaeilge?” (“Where is the Irish?”) on the university’s iconic Campanile (its bell tower). These efforts aimed to draw attention to the need for stronger representation of the national language in signage, official communications and advertisements: a call that TCD promptly addressed.

    Questioning hierarchies

    As mentioned, English and American frameworks continue to shape much of Irish university education, sidelining Ireland’s intellectual traditions. This affords little space to Irish thinkers in fields such as Initial Teacher Education (ITE) or psychology.

    This issue also finds expression in cultural practices, such as the frequent mispronunciation of Irish names. Names like Siobhán, Aoife, and Tadhg are often treated as comedic challenges in US media, which is widely consumed in Ireland, reducing their rich linguistic and cultural significance to punchlines. While seemingly trivial, this reinforces a broader disregard for linguistic diversity and reflects the ways Irish identity has been marginalised, even in the modern era.

    Addressing these challenges requires more than tokenistic gestures. In higher education, decolonisation involves reclaiming neglected voices and critically examining our assumptions and biases. Decolonisation is not about simply adding Irish or non-western thinkers to reading lists but about fundamentally reshaping how knowledge is framed, taught and contextualised.

    Efforts to decolonise must address the specifics of Irish identity, such as the revival of the Irish language and culture. Post-independence, these efforts have faced accusations of elitism and uneven implementation. Future efforts must take an inclusive approach that integrates perspectives from migrants and minority communities, reflecting the multicultural reality of today’s Ireland.

    Decolonising the higher education system in Ireland requires an approach that acknowledges the legacies of colonialism and privilege, and recognises that Ireland takes part in many practices today that come from that colonial mindset.

    But by taking the right approaches, Ireland can create an education system that authentically represents its past, present and future.

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

    ref. Decolonising Ireland’s education system remains vital despite the country’s wealth and privilege – https://theconversation.com/decolonising-irelands-education-system-remains-vital-despite-the-countrys-wealth-and-privilege-251186

    MIL OSI – Global Reports

  • MIL-OSI Global: Police in Northern Ireland unlawfully spied on journalists – this is not how covert policing is meant to work

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Steve Christopher, Senior Lecturer in Criminal Justice (Police Programmes), De Montfort University

    At the end of last year, the Investigatory Powers Tribunal (an independent judiciary body) made a shocking landmark judgement. The tribunal found that the Police Service of Northern Ireland (PSNI) and the Metropolitan Police had unlawfully conducted surveillance into two investigative journalists.

    The PSNI was forced to pay £4,000 in damages to Barry McCaffrey and Trevor Birney, producers of No Stone Unturned, a 2017 documentary about alleged police collusion in the unsolved Loughinisland massacre in 1994.

    The two journalists were arrested in 2018 by the PSNI over leaked documents that appeared in the film. Their arrest was later ruled unlawful. Suspecting that this was one of multiple attempts by the police to identify their sources, McCaffrey and Birney brought a complaint. The tribunal’s subsequent investigation and ruling has revealed the extent of the surveillance on the pair, and drawn attention to more examples of surveillance on journalists. These are now being investigated by a review set up after the tribunal’s ruling.

    The PSNI admitted last year to making 823 applications for communications data for journalists and lawyers over 13 years. Additionally, more than 4,000 phone communications between 12 journalists were monitored by police over three months.

    The force also admitted employing covert tactics against 320 journalists while intercepting over 4,000 telephone calls and texts between McCaffrey, Birney and a dozen BBC journalists. This is espionage on an industrial scale.

    The treatment of the journalists has rightly raised concerns about press freedom. But as a senior detective who specialised in covert policing, and who now lectures criminal investigation students about the practice, I find this case extremely worrying for the future integrity of covert policing in the UK.

    Covert policing and human rights

    Covert policing refers to a combination of clandestine policing tactics used to
    lawfully access information and evidence that may not otherwise be obtainable. These tactics are an essential investigative tool in tackling contemporary organised and serious crime – they are not intended to police the 4th estate.

    Journalistic confidentiality is a privilege legally protected from covert policing, other than in exceptional circumstances. These privileges (along with legal and medical) are basic and sacrosanct, and cannot simply be ignored or trampled upon. Hence, the reason for the checks and balances in the process of authorising covert policing.

    With the advent of the UK Human Rights Act in 1998, an accountability framework was necessary for covert policing to satisfy the rights set out in the European convention on human rights.

    I was a member of various national working groups which worked tirelessly around the turn of the millennium to legitimise and regulate clandestine tactics through the introduction of the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act and its associated codes of practice.

    To comply with human rights, the deployment of covert policing must be justified, necessary, proportionate and lawful. Law enforcement agencies employing theses tactics are held accountable through oversight by the Investigatory Powers Tribunal.

    This framework has largely proved to be very effective and compliant with the relevant laws and human rights. Although there has been a rise in the number of complaints by private individuals to the IPT since 2017, less than 4% were actually found to have failed to comply with the framework.

    UK law enforcement and the public are still coming to terms with serious and systematic abuses by undercover police officers targeting campaigners over a period of 40 years. Against that backdrop, it is imperative that the deployment of covert policing by law enforcement agencies complies with the governance regime put in place.

    The tribunal found that in the case of Birney and McCaffrey, the former PSNI chief constable did not comply with the necessary legal requirements to authorise the surveillance operation. They said that the constable failed to “consider whether there was an overriding public interest justifying an interference with the integrity of a journalistic source”. Clearly, there is public interest in identifying who was responsible for the Loughinisland massacre, which is what the journalists were seeking to do with their documentary.

    Trust in police

    At the heart of this calamity lies public confidence and legitimacy in policing. The British public believes in press freedom to expose unacceptable behaviour, especially by public servants, and greatly dislikes the abuse of power by the police to prevent that.

    In this case, the police service has again overstepped the mark by its egregious conduct. And I am concerned that it is merely the tip of the iceberg. Given the collaboration between the PSNI and Met police reported in this case, it would be very surprising if such proactive “monitoring” of journalists was not underway in many forces.

    McCaffrey, Birney and others are right to call for a public inquiry to establish the extent of such covert operations by the police service. There is a clear and significant danger when the police extend their clandestine reach to unjustifiably and unnecessarily spy on journalists. A review of the extent of such operations across the UK would be in the interests of transparency and accountability. It would also go a long way to repairing the damage caused to public trust in the police and covert policing by this case.

    Steve Christopher does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

    ref. Police in Northern Ireland unlawfully spied on journalists – this is not how covert policing is meant to work – https://theconversation.com/police-in-northern-ireland-unlawfully-spied-on-journalists-this-is-not-how-covert-policing-is-meant-to-work-247628

    MIL OSI – Global Reports

  • MIL-OSI USA: Senator Reverend Warnock Leads Bipartisan, Bicameral Oversight Effort Demanding Answers from Defense Department on Servicemember Food Access, Quality to Promote Military Readiness

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator Reverend Raphael Warnock – Georgia

    Senator Reverend Warnock Leads Bipartisan, Bicameral Oversight Effort Demanding Answers from Defense Department on Servicemember Food Access, Quality to Promote Military Readiness

    Senator Reverend Warnock led a bipartisan, bicameral oversight effort demanding answers from Department of Defense Leadership regarding a lack of nutrient-dense food, food shortages, and inconsistent adherence to the Army’s nutrition policy
    A lack of nutrient-dense food, shortages, and inconsistent adherence to the Army’s nutrition policy negatively affects junior enlisted servicemembers, impacting military readiness and retention rates
    A champion for Georgia’s military communities, Senator Reverend Warnock expects transparency from military leadership on servicemembers’ access to quality, healthy food options
    Senator Reverend Warnock, lawmakers to Secretary Hegseth: “Through your experience as a junior officer, you can empathize with the importance of a reliable, nutritious dining facility, and its importance to morale. You are now ultimately responsible for the welfare of these servicemembers”
    ICYMI from Military.com: Army’s Use of Soldier Food Allowances Spurs Bipartisan Inquiry from Congress
    Washington, D.C. – Today, U.S. Senator Reverend Raphael Warnock (D-GA) led a bipartisan, bicameral oversight effort demanding answers from Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth regarding issues in providing servicemembers adequate and healthy food on military bases. The new oversight effort follows recent reporting on issues with food quality and access at several Army installations’ dining facilities. Senator Warnock and the lawmakers are expressing their concerns over underinvestment in food options for members of the military, which has a direct relation to military readiness and retention rates.
    Poor-quality meals and food shortages force servicemembers to perform grueling physical and mental training exercises without the proper energy, which negatively impacts military readiness and serves as a poor testament to the federal government’s obligation to protect and serve those who put their lives on the line for our nation’s freedoms.
    “The article also found that a lack of nutrient-dense food, shortages, and inconsistent adherence to the Army’s nutrition policy negatively affects junior enlisted servicemembers specifically because they often live in unaccompanied housing on installations.”
    Congress provides servicemembers with the food allowances to help them afford meals. Senator Warnock and the lawmakers wrote that if this funding is not given to servicemembers for meals because the government provides them instead, then that funding should be used to cover the costs and investments needed to serve those meals.
    “Our servicemembers are the best among us and expect fair compensation from their government. If a servicemember is losing money from their paycheck because they are being given a meal, it is reasonable for them to expect that funding will be used only to cover the costs of providing it and to ensure it is of the highest possible quality. We trust you will move expeditiously to answer our inquiries. Thank you for your earnest attention to this matter.”
    The oversight letter closes with a series of questions for Secretary Hegseth, seeking clarity on how investment decisions are made for on-post food service operations, answers on how DOD will improve quality and nutrition of food, and more.
    Senator Warnock is leading the charge in demanding answers on this issue. Additional senators signing onto the effort include U.S. Senators Jon Ossoff (D-GA), Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY), Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), Michael Bennet (D-CO), Mazie Hirono (D-HI), and John Hickenlooper (D-CO). The bicameral effort is being championed in the House of Representatives by Congressmembers Jen Kiggans (R-VA-02) and Jimmy Panetta (D-CA-19), as well as Rob Wittman (R-VA-01), Don Bacon (R-NE-02), Derrick Van Orden (R-WI-03), Sanford Bishop (D-GA-02), Seth Moulton (D-MA-06), Abraham Hamadeh (R-AZ-08), John McGuire (R-VA-05), Lance Gooden (R-TX-05), Mikie Sherrill (D-NJ-11), Chrissy Houlahan (D-PA-06), Don Davis (D-NC-01), and Salud Carbajal (D-CA-24).
    A copy of the letter can be found HERE and full text is below:
    Dear Secretary Hegseth,
    We write to express our concern about the Department of Defense’s (DOD) apparent underinvestment in food options for members of the military. Recent public reporting in military.com highlighted that DOD spends far less on food for servicemembers who are afforded subsistence-in-kind than would be given directly to those servicemembers in Basic Allowance for Subsistence (BAS) if they were not eligible for government-provided meals. Previous reporting also highlighted DOD’s challenges in providing healthy food for servicemembers. This reporting underscores the ongoing challenges the military services have in ensuring our servicemembers have access to high-quality and nutritious meals. 
    Current law states that most servicemembers who receive basic pay are entitled to receive BAS to help them afford the cost of food. It also gives the Secretary of Defense, in consultation with the Service Secretaries, the ability to prescribe policies regarding the use of dining facilities. Current DOD policy requires most servicemembers who receive government-provided meals to pay for their meals, including through BAS deductions managed by Defense Financial Accounting Service. The current policy delegates the use of those collected funds to the military services.
    The report noted that many installations’ current spending on DFAC operations represented only a small percentage of the BAS collected from servicemembers serving on those installations. The findings, which include 2024 financial records from eleven of the largest Army installations, show that more than $151 million of the $225 million in BAS collected from servicemembers on these installations was not spent on food costs. That figure does not include the additional garrisons under the Army’s control, nor does it include spending at installations managed by the other military services suggesting the issue may be much more widespread.  
    Congress provides servicemembers with BAS to help them afford meals. If BAS is taken from servicemembers for meals the government gives them, then that funding should be used to cover the costs and investments needed to serve those meals. Additionally, for Congress to effectively conduct its oversight responsibilities, it must be fully apprised of how the funding provided is appropriated and must ensure open transparency on behalf of the services. 
    The article also found that a lack of nutrient-dense food, shortages, and inconsistent adherence to the Army’s nutrition policy negatively affects junior enlisted servicemembers specifically because they often live in unaccompanied housing on installations. These junior enlisted servicemembers are also disproportionately affected by the loss of their BAS as it represents a significant portion of their overall compensation.
    Through your experience as a junior officer, you can empathize with the importance of a reliable, nutritious dining facility, and its importance to morale. You are now ultimately responsible for the welfare of these servicemembers, and we request your prompt response to the following questions by April 31, 2025:
    1.     What elements of DOD funding are used to provide meals to servicemembers?
    a.     How do the military services program through the Future Years Defense Program (FYDP) fund food service operations?
    2.     How do the military services make decisions regarding investments in their on-post food service operations?
    a.     How do you consider including nutritious options on their menus?
    3.     Are there barriers to the military services providing healthy and nutritious meals to servicemembers living in unaccompanied housing on military installations?
    a.     If so, what are they?
    b.     Does the Department or the military services require additional resources or authorities to provide healthy and affordable food options to these servicemembers? If so, what are they?
    4.     How do you plan to improve the quality and nutrition of food at dining facilities and other food service providers across the Joint Force to meet the needs of the modern warfighter?
    Our servicemembers are the best among us and expect fair compensation from their government. If a servicemember is losing money from their paycheck because they are being given a meal, it is reasonable for them to expect that funding will be used only to cover the costs of providing it and to ensure it is of the highest possible quality. We trust you will move expeditiously to answer our inquiries. Thank you for your earnest attention to this matter.

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI United Kingdom: College kicks off UK-wide national security awareness sessions

    Source: United Kingdom – Executive Government & Departments

    News story

    College kicks off UK-wide national security awareness sessions

    College for National Security is raising awareness of the importance of national security and training opportunities across the civil service.

    Andrew Millar, Head of College for National Security

    A series of awareness sessions  will get underway this month to boost understanding of the College for National Security and the importance of national security across the Civil Service.

    Booking is already open for the first awareness event which will be in Edinburgh on 19th March. Email cfns@cabinetoffice.gov.uk for sign-up details.

    It will be followed by similar events in Cardiff, Bristol and other cities in subsequent months.

    Key mission

    “National security is foundational for all of the government’s key missions and that  makes our own drive to increase awareness of its importance and impact even more pressing,” said Andrew Millar, pictured, head of the College for National Security. 

    Online course

    The College for National Security recently launched its new online course What is national security to break down barriers to understanding national security threats and to help civil servants integrate considerations related to national security into their jobs.

    Each event  will feature a keynote speaker who will share insights on the importance of national security and interactive networking  sessions on topics such as AI.

    The online course What is national security is available on Civil Service Learning now.

    Updates to this page

    Published 4 March 2025

    MIL OSI United Kingdom

  • MIL-OSI Russia: Congratulations to Svetlana Yankelevich on her new appointment!

    Translartion. Region: Russians Fedetion –

    Source: State University of Management – Official website of the State –

    Svetlana Yankelevich, a graduate of the Academic Reserve educational program, has been appointed acting rector of the Siberian State University of Geosystems and Technologies (SSUGT).

    The educational program for training the personnel management reserve in the field of science and education “Academic Reserve” is implemented by the State University of Management by order of the Ministry of Science and Higher Education of the Russian Federation. Svetlana Yankelevich graduated from the program in 2023.

    In 1995, Svetlana Yankelevich graduated from the Siberian State Geodetic Academy (since 2014 – SSUGiT) with a degree in Cartography. In 1998, she completed her postgraduate studies at the same university. Associate Professor, Candidate of Technical Sciences. Author of 101 scientific articles, 4 educational publications and 1 collective monograph.

    Svetlana Yankelevich has dedicated her entire career to her native university. She started her career as an assistant, then became a senior lecturer, head of the department of cartography and geoinformatics at SSUGIT. Since 2017 – Vice-Rector for Academic and Educational Work at SSUGIT. Since 2022 – Vice-Rector for Academic and Educational Work and Youth Policy. Since 2025 – Acting Rector of SSUGIT.

    Awarded the Certificate of Honor and the medal of the Ministry of Education and Science of Russia “For contribution to the implementation of state policy in the field of education”.

    Congratulations to Svetlana Sergeevna on her new appointment! It is gratifying to see how graduates of the GUU family are climbing the career ladder. We are confident that the knowledge and connections gained will contribute to the successful completion of work tasks and the further development of USTUGIT!

    Subscribe to the TG channel “Our GUU” Date of publication: 03/04/2025

    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.

    MIL OSI Russia News

  • MIL-OSI Security: Superseding Indictment Charges Two Brothers and a City Mayor’s Assistant with Tax Fraud, Public Corruption, and Money Laundering

    Source: Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) State Crime Alerts (c)

    CLEVELAND – A federal grand jury returned a 32-count superseding indictment charging Zubair Mehmet Abdur Razzaq Al Zubair, 42, recently of Bratenahl, Ohio, his brother Muzzammil Muhammad Al Zubair, 31, recently of Pepper Pike, Ohio, and their associate Michael Leon Smedley, 56, of Cleveland, with multiple fraud, tax fraud, money laundering, and public corruption schemes. The initial 22-count indictment was issued Jan. 24, 2024.

    All three defendants were charged with conspiracy to commit bribery concerning programs receiving federal funds, conspiracy to commit honest services wire fraud, and Hobbs Act conspiracy. The Al Zubair brothers were both charged with conspiracy to commit wire fraud, 13 counts of wire fraud, money laundering conspiracy, four counts of money laundering, theft of government funds, and aiding and assisting in the preparation of a false tax return. Zubair Al Zubair was also charged with harboring a fugitive and willful failure to file a tax return.

    According to court documents, from June 2020 through August 2023, the Al Zubair brothers allegedly employed several deceptive strategies to obtain money and property from victims. Their schemes involved investment fraud, a Small Business Administration COVID-19 relief Emergency Income Disaster Loan, cryptocurrency mining, and commercial and residential real estate transactions.

    One scheme was international in scope and involved military munitions. After the Al Zubair brothers found a buyer who was looking to purchase military-grade weapons, they made contact with individuals in Romania, the United Arab Emirates, Indonesia, and New York about finding sources to supply the munitions their buyer was seeking. The true intent was not the actual sale of the munitions, but rather to convince the purchaser to transfer a commission to the brothers for arranging the transaction.

    The Al Zubair brothers’ ill-gotten proceeds allowed them to acquire a trove of jewelry, luxury timepieces and vehicles, as well as more than 80 firearms. Zubair Al Zubair also leased a high-end residential property in Bratenahl, Ohio, before being evicted in August 2023.

    The superseding indictment alleges that the two made exorbitant claims about their extraordinary wealth and government connections. Zubair Al Zubair said he was a member of the royal family of the United Arab Emirates through his marriage to a princess. His brother, Muzzammil, claimed to be a hedge fund manager. According to the superseding indictment, he was not registered with the Securities and Exchange Commission or as a broker with the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, and his only education on hedge funds came from watching YouTube videos. Using the illusion of being extremely educated, successful, and well-connected, the brothers befriended a public official employed with the city of East Cleveland to help them to carry out their elaborate and deceptive plots.

    As the chief of staff and executive assistant to the mayor of East Cleveland, Smedley allegedly used his position to help navigate red-tape bureaucracy and obtain specific outcomes for the Al Zubair brothers in return for things of value including checks, food and meals at high-end restaurants, and offers of future employment. For example, Smedley secured official letters on city letterhead to sway administrative and judicial proceedings, helped obtain appointment of Zubair Al Zubair as an International Economic Advisor to the city, obtained city business cards in Zubair Al Zubair’s name, and even provided the brothers with City of East Cleveland Police Badges.

    An indictment is only a charge and is not evidence of guilt. The defendants are entitled to a fair trial in which it will be the government’s burden to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

    If convicted, each defendant’s sentence will be determined by the court after review of actors unique to this case. These include each defendant’s prior criminal record, if any, role in the offense, and the characteristics of the violation. In all cases, the sentence will not exceed the statutory maximum, and in most cases, it will be less than the maximum.

    This case is being investigated by the FBI Cleveland Division and the IRS−Criminal Investigation. The case is being prosecuted by Assistant U.S. Attorneys Matthew W. Shepherd and Om Kakani for the Northern District of Ohio. 

    MIL Security OSI

  • MIL-OSI United Nations: Readout of the Secretary-General’s meeting with H.E. Mr. António Costa, President of the European Council

    Source: United Nations secretary general

    The Secretary-General met on Monday, 3 March with H.E. Mr. António Costa, President of the European Council.  They discussed cooperation between the United Nations and the European Union on various issues of global importance.  The Secretary-General and the President of the European Council also exchanged views on the situations in the Middle East, in Africa and in Ukraine.
     

    MIL OSI United Nations News

  • MIL-OSI USA: Durbin: We Need To Stand Behind NATO And Ukraine, Hitching Our Star To Vladimir Putin Is A Fool’s Errand

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Illinois Dick Durbin

    March 03, 2025

    On Illinois’ Pulaski Day, Durbin condemns President Trump’s shameful outburst toward Ukrainian President Zelenskyy in the Oval Office on Friday

    WASHINGTON  In a speech on the Senate floor, U.S. Senate Democratic Whip Dick Durbin (D-IL) Co-Chair of the Senate Ukraine Caucus, slammed President Trump and Vice President Vance’s tense and embarrassing meeting in the Oval Office on Friday with Ukrainian President Zelenskyy. Durbin began his remarks by reflecting on Casimir Pulaski Day—a local holiday observed in Illinois on the first Monday of March in memory of Casimir Pulaski, a Revolutionary War cavalry officer born in Poland. This morning in Chicago, Durbin attended an event honoring Pulaski Day with the President of Poland, Andrzej Duda. He also attended a large rally in support of Ukraine yesterday. During his speech, Durbin also highlighted the critical relationship between Poland and the United States and how strengthening the NATO alliance is more important now than ever in light of Russian President Putin and Trump’s actions.

    “As I said today, it was a Pulaski moment. The United States and Poland stand together again for the future of both their nations. I believe in NATO, and I don’t know what we’ll do without it, but now we have to consider that. This new President [Trump] just a few weeks into his presidency is threatening the very future and existence of NATO. If we walk away from it, if the United States disengages from NATO, the question is whether or not Europe can stand on its own feet. I think they will eventually, but in the meantime, countries like Poland, the Baltic nations, and many others are vulnerable to Putin’s aggression,” Durbin said.

    “I am saddened, shocked, stunned at what happened in the Oval Office last week with President Zelenskyy. To have that display on live television breaks my heart. To think that… we would humiliate our ally in Ukraine and at the same time talk about the greatness of Vladimir Putin—I just find it disgusting,” Durbin continued.  

    Three years after Putin’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine, approximately 46,000 Ukrainians have died defending their country. Durbin detailed how President Trump has spewed outrageous comments when talking about Ukraine. Trump has claimed Ukraine started the war with Russia and attacked the legitimacy of Zelenskyy—who was democratically elected in a free and fair election. Trump called Zelenskyy a “dictator without elections.” Both comments are similar to propaganda lies said by Putin. 

    “What in the world is he [President Trump] talking about? These people have been fighting to the death, millions have been displaced, and they have been standing up for the values we cherish in this country. To walk away from them and subject their leader to what we saw last Friday in the Oval Office is disgusting. [It’s] humiliating and below the dignity of the United States,” Durbin said.

    “I stand behind Ukraine because I believe those people are fighting for the very values that we treasure. And they stood by the United States and they said ‘thank you’ many, many times to me and to others. We need to stand behind NATO and Ukraine and stand for the values that are important. Hitching our star to Vladimir Putin is a fool’s errand. It’s a disaster waiting to happen. I hope to goodness we don’t reach that point,” Durbin concluded.  

    Last week, Durbin introduced the Protecting our Guests During Hostilities in Ukraine Act, legislation that would provide temporary guest status to Ukrainians and their immediate family members who are already in the United States through the “Uniting for Ukraine” parole process. The bill allows Ukrainians to stay and work in the U.S. until the Secretary of State determines that hostilities in Ukraine have ceased and it is safe for them to return. U.S. Senators Lisa Murkowski (R-AK), Tammy Duckworth (D-IL), Richard Blumenthal (D-CT), Jacky Rosen (D-NV), Chris Van Hollen (D-MD), Peter Welch (D-VT), Amy Klobuchar (D-MN), Michael Bennet (D-CO), and Alex Padilla (D-CA) are cosponsors of the legislation. Bill text can be found here.  

    Durbin also joined U.S. Senators Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH), Thom Tillis (R-NC), Roger Wicker (R-MS), and others in leading a simple resolution last week that expresses continued solidarity with the people of Ukraine and condolences for the loss of thousands of lives to Russian aggression; rejects Russia’s attempts to militarily seize sovereign Ukrainian territory; reaffirms U.S. support for the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Ukraine; and states unequivocally that Ukraine must be at the table for negotiations on its future.

    Video of Durbin’s remarks on the Senate floor is available here.

    Audio of Durbin’s remarks on the Senate floor is available here.

    Footage of Durbin’s remarks on the Senate floor is available here for TV Stations.

    -30-

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Minister Burke and Minister Dillon address inaugural plenary of the Employment Law Review Group

    Source: Government of Ireland – Department of Jobs Enterprise and Innovation

    The Minister for Enterprise, Tourism and Employment, Peter Burke and Minister of State for Small Businesses and Retail, Alan Dillon attended the inaugural plenary meeting of the Employment Law Review Group (ELRG). 

    Professor Michael Doherty, Chair of the ELRG welcomed the members before both Minister Burke and Minister Dillon addressed the ELRG.

    Minister Burke congratulated members on their appointments and spoke about what the Government wishes to achieve to support workers and conditions

    The Minister for Enterprise, Tourism and Employment, Peter Burke said: 

    “The Government has a strong record on strengthening workers’ rights. The ELRG will be a valuable resource in conducting ongoing assessments of employment law to ensure our legal framework is fit for purpose and adapts to changes in the evolving contemporary workplace.” 

    Minister Dillon thanked the members for their commitment to the important role in reviewing and monitoring Ireland’s employment and redundancy laws to ensure they serve their intended function.

    Minister of State for Small Businesses and Retail, Alan Dillon said:

    “It is very important that the work of the Group balance carefully the need to ensure legislation remains fit for purpose while not placing an undue or additional burden on business, in particular small and medium enterprises.”

    The ELRG will work in accordance with the work programme, which will be determined by the Minister after consultation with the Group. During the inaugural plenary, the ELRG discussed items for this work programme as part of this consultation. The relevant legislative enactments which may be considered in the work programme are listed in the appendix below.

    Following the meeting, the full membership of the Employment Law Review Group has been announced. The full membership of the group and their nominating bodies, as appointed by the Minister is as follows:

    1.

    Michael Doherty (Chair)

    Nominated by Minister for ETE

    2.

    Cathy Smith

    Nominated by Minister for ETE 

    3.

    Kevin Duffy

    Nominated by Minister for ETE 

    4.

    Claire Bruton

    Nominated by Minister for ETE 

    5.

    Desmond Ryan

    Nominated by Minister for ETE 

    6.

    Anne Lyne

    Nominated by Minister for ETE 

    7.

    Deirdre Malone

    Nominated by Minister for ETE 

    8.

    Dónal Hamilton

    Law Society of Ireland

    9.

    Mary Paula Guinness

    Employment Bar Association

    10.

    Gavin Smith

    Restructuring and Insolvency Ireland

    11.

    Nichola Harkin

    Ibec

    12.

    Rachael Ryan

    ICTU 

    13.

    John Barry

    ISME 

    14.

    Áine Maher

    DETE 

    15.

    Orlaith Mannion

    Department of Social Protection 

    16.

    Jane Ann Duffy

    Department of Children, Equality, Disability, Integration and Youth

    17.

    Gwendolen Morgan

    Workplace Relations Commission 

    18.

    Lorraine Williams

    Chief State Solicitor’s Office 

    19.

    Deirdre O’Kane

    Office of the Attorney General 

    20.

    Jim Finn

    Courts Service 

    21.

    Appointment Pending

    Labour Court

    The ELRG’s function is to monitor, review, and advise on all aspects of employment and redundancy law, with a specific focus on promoting good workplace relations in the State, simplifying the operation of employment and redundancy law in the State, and ensuring that the State’s suite of employment rights and redundancy legislation remains relevant and fit for purpose and is updated to reflect international developments. 

    The ELRG’s focus is expert, technical, and legal rather than representative of stakeholders’ interests. Members will engage with the work programme of the ELRG and contribute to ELRG reports.

    ENDS

    APPENDIX – List of Relevant Employment and Redundancy Enactments

    Part 1 – Acts of the Oireachtas

    1. Payment of Wages Act 1991
    2. Adoptive Leave Act 1995
    3. Protection of Young Persons (Employment) Act 1996
    4. Transnational Information and Consultation of Employees Act 1996
    5. Organisation of Working Time Act 1997
    6. Parental Leave Act 1998
    7. National Minimum Wage Act 2000
    8. Carer’s Leave Act 2001
    9. Protection of Employees (Part-Time Work) Act 2001
    10. Protection of Employees (Fixed-Term Work) Act 2003
    11. Maternity Protection Acts 1994 and 2004
    12. Minimum Notice and Terms of Employment Acts 1973 to 2005
    13. Employees (Provision of Information and Consultation) Act 2006
    14. Unfair Dismissals Acts 1977 to 2007
    15. Employment Equality Acts 1998 to 2011
    16. Protection of Employees (Employers’ Insolvency) Acts 1984 to 2012
    17. Protection of Employees (Temporary Agency Work) Act 2012
    18. Redundancy Payments Acts 1967 to 2014
    19. Protection of Employment Acts 1977 to 2014
    20. Terms of Employment (Information) Acts 1994 to 2014
    21. Paternity Leave and Benefit Act 2016
    22. Parent’s Leave and Benefit Act 2019
    23. Sick Leave Act 2022

    Part 2 – Provisions of Acts of Oireachtas

    1. Part IV of the Industrial Relations Act 1946
    2. Section 4 (1) of the Protections for Persons Reporting Child Abuse Act 1998
    3. Section 8A (5) of the Prevention of Corruption (Amendment) Act 2001
    4. Section 50 of the Competition Act 2002
    5. Section 60 (3) of the Employment Permits Act 2024
    6. Section 8 of the Industrial Relations (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 2004
    7. Section 55M (1) of the Health Act 2004
    8. Section 27 of the Safety, Health and Welfare at Work Act 2005
    9. Section 87 of the Consumer Protection Act 2007
    10. Section 26 (1) of the Chemicals Act 2008
    11. Section 62 (1) of the Charities Act 2009
    12. Section 223 (3) of the National Asset Management Agency Act 2009
    13. Section 38 of the Inland Fisheries Act 2010
    14. Section 20 (1) of the Criminal Justice Act 2011
    15. Section 67 (5) of the Property Services (Regulation) Act 2011
    16. Section 35 of the Further Education and Training Act 2013
    17. Section 41 (1) of the Central Bank (Supervision and Enforcement) Act 2013
    18. Section 12 (1) of the Protected Disclosures Act 2014
    19. Part 2 of the Industrial Relations (Amendment) Act 2015
    20. Part 3 of the Work Life Balance and Miscellaneous Provisions Act 2023
    21. Section 6(3) of the Protected Disclosures Act 2014

    Part 3 – Statutory Instruments

    1. European Communities (Parental Leave) Regulations 2000 (S.I. No. 231 of 2000)
    2. European Communities (Protection of Employment) Regulations 2000 (S.I. No. 488 of 2000)
    3. European Communities (Protection of Employees on Transfer of Undertakings) Regulations 2003 (S.I. No. 131 of 2003)
    4. European Communities (Organisation of Working Time) (Activities of Doctors in Training) Regulations 2004 (S.I. No. 494 of 2004)
    5. Organisation of Working Time (Inclusion of Transport Activities) Regulations 2004 (S.I. No. 817 of 2004)
    6. Organisation of Working Time (Inclusion of Offshore Work) Regulations 2004 (S.I. No. 819 of 2004)
    7. European Communities (Organisation of Working Time) (Mobile Staff in Civil Aviation) Regulations 2006 (S.I. No. 507 of 2006)
    8. European Communities (European Public Limited – Liability Company) (Employee Involvement) Regulations 2006 (S.I. No. 623 of 2006)
    9. European Communities (European Cooperative Society) (Employee Involvement) Regulations 2007 (S.I. No. 259 of 2007)
    10. European Union (Cross-Border Conversions, Mergers and Divisions) Regulations 2023 (S.I. No. 233 of 2023)
    11. European Communities (Working Conditions of Mobile Workers engaged in Interoperable Cross-border Services in the Railway Sector) Regulations 2009 (S.I. No. 377 of 2009)
    12. European Communities (Road Transport) (Organisation of Working Time of Persons Performing Mobile Road Transport Activities) Regulations 2012 (S.I. No. 36 of 2012)
    13. European Union (Posting of Workers) Regulations 2016 (S.I. No. 412 of 2016)

    MIL OSI Europe News

  • MIL-OSI United Kingdom: Touchstone 2024 award winners announced

    Source: United Kingdom – Executive Government & Departments

    News story

    Touchstone 2024 award winners announced

    Winners demonstrate an ongoing commitment to hallmarking activities and to developing new external partnerships.

    The British Hallmarking Council (BHC) is delighted to announce that Hull City Trading Standards have won the prestigious Touchstone Award for 2024.

    The UK has one of the most rigorous and long-established hallmarking regimes in the world, which delivers significant benefits to UK consumers and legitimate businesses.

    Each year the Council invites applications to be submitted for the Touchstone Award from Trading Standards professionals across the UK. The award, sponsored by the four UK Assay Offices and the National Association of Jewellers, is presented for the most innovative activity related to hallmarking enforcement and education.

    Hull City Trading Standards were judged to be highly worthy winners due to:

    • the demonstration of their consistent, ongoing commitment to hallmarking activities
    • their commitment to developing new external partnerships
    • the wide breadth of audiences engaged across both physical and online retail domains
    • the positive outcomes of inspections (including one ongoing case of fraud)

    The judging panel welcomed the quality of applications overall and the ongoing commitment of Trading Standards to this valuable work. 

    The solid silver Touchstone Award was formally awarded at the Chartered Trading Standards Institute annual conference dinner in June. A presentation, luncheon and hallmarking training event was also held at The Goldsmiths’ Company Assay Office in London in November.

    Applications for the 2025 Touchstone Award will re-open in January 2025.

    Updates to this page

    Published 4 March 2025

    MIL OSI United Kingdom