NewzIntel.com

Category: Global

  • MIL-Evening Report: Decoding PNG leader Marape’s talks with French President Macron

    ANALYSIS: By Scott Waide, RNZ Pacific PNG correspondent

    The recent series of high-level agreements between Papua New Guinea and France marks a significant development in PNG’s geopolitical relationships, driven by what appears to be a convergence of national interests.

    The “deepening relationship” is less about a single personality and more about a calculated alignment of economic, security, and diplomatic priorities with PNG, taking full advantage of its position as the biggest, most strategically placed island player in the Pacific.

    An examination of the key outcomes reveals a partnership of mutual benefit, reflecting both PNG’s strategic diversification and France’s own long-term ambitions as a Pacific power.

    A primary driver is the shared economic rationale. From Port Moresby’s perspective, the partnership offers a clear path to economic diversification and resilience.

    But many in PNG have been watching with keen interest and asking: how badly does PNG want this?

    While Prime Minister James Marape offered France a Special Economic Zone in Port Moresby (SEZ) for French businesses, he also named the lookout at Port Moresby’s Variarata National Park after President Emmanuel Macron drawing the ire of many in the country.

    The proposal to establish a SEZ specifically for French industries is a notable attempt to attract capital from beyond PNG’s traditional partners.

    Strategically coupled
    This is strategically coupled with securing the future of the multi-billion-dollar Papua LNG project.

    Macron’s personal undertaking to work with TotalEnergies to keep the project on schedule provides crucial stability for one of PNG’s most significant economic ventures.

    For France, these arrangements secure a major energy investment for its national corporate champion and establish a stronger economic foothold in a strategically vital region between Asia and the Pacific.

    In the area of security, the relationship addresses tangible needs for both nations.

    PNG is faced with the immense challenge of monitoring a 2.4 million sq km Exclusive Economic Zone, making it vulnerable to illegal, unreported, and unregulated (IUU) fishing.

    The finalisation of a Shiprider Agreement with France provides a practical force-multiplier, leveraging French naval assets to enhance PNG’s maritime surveillance capabilities. This move, along with planned defence talks on air and maritime cooperation, allows PNG to diversify its security architecture.

    For France, a resident power with Pacific territories like New Caledonia and French Polynesia, participating in regional security operations reinforces its role and commitment to stability in the Indo-Pacific.

    Elevating diplomatic influence
    The partnership is also a vehicle for elevating diplomatic influence.

    Port Moresby has noted the significance of engaging with a partner that holds permanent membership on the UN Security Council and seats at the G7 and G20.

    This alignment provides PNG with a powerful channel to global decision-making forums. The reciprocal move to establish a PNG embassy in Paris further cements the relationship on a mature footing.

    The diplomatic synergy is perhaps best illustrated by France’s full endorsement of PNG’s bid to host a future UN Ocean Conference. This support provides PNG with a major opportunity to lead on the world stage, while allowing France to demonstrate its credentials as a key partner to the Pacific Islands.

    This deepening PNG-France partnership does not exist in a vacuum.

    It is unfolding within a broader context of heightened geopolitical competition across the Pacific.

    The West’s view of China’s rapid emergence as a dominant economic and military force in the region has reshaped the strategic landscape, prompting traditional powers to re-engage with renewed urgency.

    increased diplomatic footprint
    The United States has responded by significantly increasing its diplomatic and security footprint, a move marked by Secretary of State Antony Blinken’s visit to Port Moresby to sign the Defence Cooperation Agreement.

    Similarly, Australia, PNG’s traditional security partner, is working to reinforce its long-standing influence through initiatives like the multi-million-dollar deal to establish a PNG team in its National Rugby League (NRL), a soft-power exercise reportedly linked to security outcomes.

    This competitive environment has, in turn, created greater agency for Pacific nations, allowing them to diversify their partnerships beyond old allies and providing a fertile ground for European powers like France to assert their own strategic interests.

    A strong foundation for the relationship is a shared public stance on environmental stewardship. The agreement on the need for rigorous scientific studies before any deep-sea mining occurs aligns PNG’s national policy with a position of environmental caution.

    This common ground extends to broader climate action, where France’s commitment to conservation in the Pacific resonates with PNG’s status as a frontline nation vulnerable to climate change.

    This alignment on values provides a durable and politically important basis for cooperation, allowing both nations to jointly advocate for climate justice and ocean protection.

    For the Papua New Guinea economy, this deepening partnership with France is critically important as it provides high-level stability for the multi-billion-dollar Papua LNG project and creates a direct pathway for new investment through a proposed SEZ for French businesses.

    Vital economic resource
    Furthermore, by moving to finalise a Shiprider Agreement to combat illegal fishing, the government is actively protecting a vital economic resource.

    For Marape’s credibility in local politics, these outcomes are tangible successes he can present to the nation as he battles a massive credibility dip in recent years.

    Securing a personal undertaking from the leader of a G7 nation, gaining support for PNG to host a future UN Ocean Conference, and enhancing national security demonstrates effective leadership on the world stage.

    This allows him to build a narrative of a competent statesman who, through “warm, personal relationships”, can deliver on promises of economic opportunity and national security while strengthening his political standing at home.

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Decoding PNG leader Marape’s talks with French President Macron

    ANALYSIS: By Scott Waide, RNZ Pacific PNG correspondent

    The recent series of high-level agreements between Papua New Guinea and France marks a significant development in PNG’s geopolitical relationships, driven by what appears to be a convergence of national interests.

    The “deepening relationship” is less about a single personality and more about a calculated alignment of economic, security, and diplomatic priorities with PNG, taking full advantage of its position as the biggest, most strategically placed island player in the Pacific.

    An examination of the key outcomes reveals a partnership of mutual benefit, reflecting both PNG’s strategic diversification and France’s own long-term ambitions as a Pacific power.

    A primary driver is the shared economic rationale. From Port Moresby’s perspective, the partnership offers a clear path to economic diversification and resilience.

    But many in PNG have been watching with keen interest and asking: how badly does PNG want this?

    While Prime Minister James Marape offered France a Special Economic Zone in Port Moresby (SEZ) for French businesses, he also named the lookout at Port Moresby’s Variarata National Park after President Emmanuel Macron drawing the ire of many in the country.

    The proposal to establish a SEZ specifically for French industries is a notable attempt to attract capital from beyond PNG’s traditional partners.

    Strategically coupled
    This is strategically coupled with securing the future of the multi-billion-dollar Papua LNG project.

    Macron’s personal undertaking to work with TotalEnergies to keep the project on schedule provides crucial stability for one of PNG’s most significant economic ventures.

    For France, these arrangements secure a major energy investment for its national corporate champion and establish a stronger economic foothold in a strategically vital region between Asia and the Pacific.

    In the area of security, the relationship addresses tangible needs for both nations.

    PNG is faced with the immense challenge of monitoring a 2.4 million sq km Exclusive Economic Zone, making it vulnerable to illegal, unreported, and unregulated (IUU) fishing.

    The finalisation of a Shiprider Agreement with France provides a practical force-multiplier, leveraging French naval assets to enhance PNG’s maritime surveillance capabilities. This move, along with planned defence talks on air and maritime cooperation, allows PNG to diversify its security architecture.

    For France, a resident power with Pacific territories like New Caledonia and French Polynesia, participating in regional security operations reinforces its role and commitment to stability in the Indo-Pacific.

    Elevating diplomatic influence
    The partnership is also a vehicle for elevating diplomatic influence.

    Port Moresby has noted the significance of engaging with a partner that holds permanent membership on the UN Security Council and seats at the G7 and G20.

    This alignment provides PNG with a powerful channel to global decision-making forums. The reciprocal move to establish a PNG embassy in Paris further cements the relationship on a mature footing.

    The diplomatic synergy is perhaps best illustrated by France’s full endorsement of PNG’s bid to host a future UN Ocean Conference. This support provides PNG with a major opportunity to lead on the world stage, while allowing France to demonstrate its credentials as a key partner to the Pacific Islands.

    This deepening PNG-France partnership does not exist in a vacuum.

    It is unfolding within a broader context of heightened geopolitical competition across the Pacific.

    The West’s view of China’s rapid emergence as a dominant economic and military force in the region has reshaped the strategic landscape, prompting traditional powers to re-engage with renewed urgency.

    increased diplomatic footprint
    The United States has responded by significantly increasing its diplomatic and security footprint, a move marked by Secretary of State Antony Blinken’s visit to Port Moresby to sign the Defence Cooperation Agreement.

    Similarly, Australia, PNG’s traditional security partner, is working to reinforce its long-standing influence through initiatives like the multi-million-dollar deal to establish a PNG team in its National Rugby League (NRL), a soft-power exercise reportedly linked to security outcomes.

    This competitive environment has, in turn, created greater agency for Pacific nations, allowing them to diversify their partnerships beyond old allies and providing a fertile ground for European powers like France to assert their own strategic interests.

    A strong foundation for the relationship is a shared public stance on environmental stewardship. The agreement on the need for rigorous scientific studies before any deep-sea mining occurs aligns PNG’s national policy with a position of environmental caution.

    This common ground extends to broader climate action, where France’s commitment to conservation in the Pacific resonates with PNG’s status as a frontline nation vulnerable to climate change.

    This alignment on values provides a durable and politically important basis for cooperation, allowing both nations to jointly advocate for climate justice and ocean protection.

    For the Papua New Guinea economy, this deepening partnership with France is critically important as it provides high-level stability for the multi-billion-dollar Papua LNG project and creates a direct pathway for new investment through a proposed SEZ for French businesses.

    Vital economic resource
    Furthermore, by moving to finalise a Shiprider Agreement to combat illegal fishing, the government is actively protecting a vital economic resource.

    For Marape’s credibility in local politics, these outcomes are tangible successes he can present to the nation as he battles a massive credibility dip in recent years.

    Securing a personal undertaking from the leader of a G7 nation, gaining support for PNG to host a future UN Ocean Conference, and enhancing national security demonstrates effective leadership on the world stage.

    This allows him to build a narrative of a competent statesman who, through “warm, personal relationships”, can deliver on promises of economic opportunity and national security while strengthening his political standing at home.

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Attack on Iran’s state media – Israel bombs IRIB building in new war crime

    Pacific Media Watch

    Israel targeted one of the buildings of the state-run Islamic Republic of Iran Broadcasting (IRIB) in Tehran on the fourth day of attacks on Iran, interrupting a live news broadcast, reports Press TV.

    The attack, involving at least four bombs, struck the central building housing IRIB’s news department, while a live news broadcast was underway.

    The transmission was briefly interrupted before Hassan Abedini, IRIB’s news director and deputy for political affairs, appeared on air to condemn the “terrorist crime”.

    At the time of the attack, news anchor Sahar Emami was presenting the news. Despite the building trembling under the first strike, she stood her ground and continued the broadcast.

    “Allah o Akbar” (God is Great), she proclaimed, drawing global attention to the war crime committed by Israel against Iran’s national broadcaster.

    Moments later, another blast filled the studio with smoke and dust, forcing her to evacuate. She returned shortly after to join Abedini and share her harrowing experience.

    “If I die, others will take my place and expose your crimes to the world,” she declared, looking straight into the camera with courage and composure.

    Casualties unconfirmed
    While the number of casualties remains unconfirmed, insiders reported that several journalists inside the building had been injured in the bombing.

    Israel’s war ministry promptly claimed responsibility for the attack.

    Iran’s foreign ministry condemned the aggression on the state broadcaster as a “war crime” and called on the United Nations to take immediate action against the regime.

    . . . But after a brief interruption on screen as debris fell from a bomb strike, Sahar Emami was back courageously presenting the news and denouncing the attack. Image: AJ screenshot APR

    Foreign Ministry spokesman Esmaeil Baghaei denounced the attack and urged the international community to hold the regime accountable for its assault on the media.

    “The world is watching: targeting Iran’s news agency #IRIB’s office during a live broadcast is a wicked act of war crime,” Baghaei wrote on X.

    The Islamic Revolution Guards Corps (IRGC) also condemned the bombing of the IRIB news building, labeling it an “inhuman, criminal, and a terrorist act.”

    CPJ ‘appalled’ by Israeli attack
    The Committee to Protect Journalists said it was “appalled by Israel’s bombing of Iran’s state TV channel while live on air.”

    “Israel’s killing, with impunity, of almost 200 journalists in Gaza has emboldened it to target media elsewhere in the region,” Sara Qudah, the West Asia representative for CPJ, said in a statement after the attack on an IRIB building.

    The Israeli regime has a documented history of targeting journalists globally. Since October 2023, it has killed more than 250 Palestinian journalists in the besieged Gaza Strip.

    The regime launched its aggression against the Islamic Republic, including Tehran, early on Friday, leading to the assassination of several high-ranking military officials, nuclear scientists, and civilians, including women and children.

    In response, Iran launched a barrage of missiles and drones late Friday night, followed by more retaliatory operations on Saturday and Sunday as part of Operation True Promise III.

    In Israel, 24 people have been killed and hundreds wounded since hostilities began. In Iran, 224 people have been killed.

    Plumes of black smoke billowing after an Israeli attack against Iran’s state broadcaster yesterday. Image: PressTV

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: US travel ban on Pacific 3 – countries have right to decide over borders, Peters says

    RNZ Pacific

    New Zealand’s Foreign Minister Winston Peters says countries have the right to choose who enters their borders in response to reports that the Trump administration is planning to impose travel restrictions on three dozen nations, including three in the Pacific.

    But opposition Labour’s deputy leader Carmel Sepuloni says the foreign minister should push back on the US proposal.

    Tonga, Tuvalu and Vanuatu have reportedly been included in an expanded proposal of 36 additional countries for which the Trump administration is considering travel restrictions.

    The plan was first reported by The Washington Post. A State Department spokesperson told the outlet that the agency would not comment on internal deliberations or communications.

    The White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

    Peters said countries had the right to decide who could cross their borders.

    “Before we all get offended, we’ve got the right to decide in New Zealand who comes to our country. So has Australia, so has . . . China, so has the United States,” Peters said.

    US security concerns
    He said New Zealand would do its best to address the US security concerns.

    “We need to do our best to ensure there are no misunderstandings.”

    Peters said US concerns could be over selling citizenship or citizenship-by-investment schemes.

    Vanuatu runs a “golden passport” scheme where applicants can be granted Vanuatu citizenship for a minimum investment of US$130,000.

    Peters says citizenship programmes, such as the citizenship-by-investment schemes which allow people to purchase passports, could have concerned the Trump administration. Image: 123rf/RNZ Pacific

    Peters said programmes like that could have concerned the Trump administration.

    “There are certain decisions that have been made, which look innocent, but when they come to an international capacity do not have that effect.

    “Tuvalu has been selling passports. You see where an innocent . . . decision made in Tuvalu can lead to the concerns in the United States when it comes to security.”

    Sepuloni wants push back
    However, Sepuloni wants Peters to push back on the US considering travel restrictions for Pacific nations.

    Labour Party Deputy Leader Carmel Sepuloni . . . “I would expect [Peters] to be pushing back on the US and supporting our Pacific nations to be taken off that list.” Image: RNZ/Angus Dreaver

    Sepuloni said she wanted the foreign minister to get a full explanation on the proposed restrictions.

    “From there, I would expect him to be pushing back on the US and supporting our Pacific nations to be taken off that list,” she said.

    “Their response is, ‘why us? We’re so tiny — what risk do we pose?’”

    Wait to see how this unfolds – expert
     Massey University associate professor in defence and security studies Anna Powles said Vanuatu has appeared on the US’ bad side in the past.

    “Back in March Vanuatu was one of over 40 countries that was reported to be on the immigration watchlist and that related to Vanuatu’s golden passport scheme,” Dr Powles said.

    However, a US spokesperson denied the existence of such a list.

    “What people are looking at . . . is not a list that exists here that is being acted on,” State Department spokeswoman Tammy Bruce said, according to a transcript of her press briefing.

    “There is a review, as we know, through the president’s executive order, for us to look at the nature of what’s going to help keep America safer in dealing with the issue of visas and who’s allowed into the country.”

    Dr Powles said it was the first time Tonga had been included.

    “That certainly has raised some concern among Tongans because there’s a large Tongan diaspora in the United States.”

    She said students studying in the US could be affected; but while there was a degree of bemusement and concern over the issue, there was also a degree of waiting to see how this unfolded.

    Trump signed a proclamation on June 4 banning the nationals of 12 countries from entering the United States, saying the move was needed to protect against “foreign terrorists” and other security threats.

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

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-OSI Global: Why does my phone sometimes not ring when people call? A communications expert explains

    Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Jairo Gutierrez, Professor, Department of Computer and Information Sciences, Auckland University of Technology

    Tada Images

    There’s a certain feeling I get in the pit of my stomach when I’m waiting for an important call to come through. You know the type – maybe a call from your boss, a potential new employer or news of a loved one who’s due to give birth.

    In these situations, I usually stare at my phone, willing it to ring. I make sure – over and again – it’s not on silent or “do not disturb” mode. When the screen is out of my sight, I imagine I can hear the familiar ringtone.

    Then it pops up – the missed call notification. But the phone never rang. What happened?

    How do mobile calls work?

    When making a mobile call using 4G or 5G networks, the caller dials a number and their network operator (Telstra or OneNZ, for example) routes the request to the recipient’s device.

    For this to work, both phones must be registered with an IP Multimedia Subsystem – or IMS – which automatically happens when you turn on your phone. IMS is the system that allows the combination of voice calls, messages and video communications.

    Both phones must also be connected to a 4G or 5G cell phone tower. The caller’s network sends an invite to the recipient’s device, which will then start to ring.

    This process is usually very fast. But as generations of cellular networks have evolved (remember 3G?), becoming faster and with greater capacity, they have also become more complex, with new potential points of failure.

    From phone failures to ‘dead zones’

    Mobile phones use Voice over LTE (VoLTE) for 4G networks or Voice over New Radio (VoNR) for 5G. These are technologies that enable voice calls over those two types of networks and they use the above mentioned IMS.

    In some countries such as New Zealand, if either of these aren’t enabled or supported on your device (some phones have VoLTE disabled by default), it may attempt to fall back to the 3G network, which was switched off in Australia in 2024 and is currently being phased out in New Zealand.

    If this fallback fails or is delayed, the recipient’s phone may not ring or may go straight to voicemail.

    Another possibility is that your phone may have failed to register with the IMS network. If this happens – due to something like a software glitch, SIM issue, or network problem – a phone won’t receive the call signal and won’t ring.

    Then there are handover issues. Each cell phone tower covers a particular area, and if you are moving, your call will be handed over to the tower that provides the best coverage. Sometimes your phone uses 5G for data but 4G for voice; if the handover between 5G and 4G is slow or fails, the call might not ring. If 5G is used for both data and voice, VoNR is used, which is still not widely supported and may fail.

    Mobile apps introduce other potential problems. For example, on Android, aggressive battery-saving features can restrict background processes, including the phone app, preventing it from responding to incoming calls. Third-party apps such as call blockers, antivirus tools, or even messaging apps can also interfere with call notifications.

    Finally, if your phone is in an area with poor reception, it may not receive the call signal in time to ring. These so-called “dead zones” are more common than telcos would like to admit. I live at the end of a long driveway in a well-covered suburb of Auckland in New Zealand. But, depending on where I am in the house, I still experience dead zones and often the WiFi-enabled phone apps will more reliably cause the phone to ring.

    Battery-saving features on phones can restrict background processes, including the phone app, preventing it from responding to incoming calls.
    ymgerman/Shutterstock

    What can I do to fix it?

    If your phone frequently doesn’t ring on 4G or 5G there are a few things you can do:

    • make sure VolTE/VoNR is enabled in your network settings
    • restart your phone and toggle airplane mode to refresh network registration
    • check battery optimisation settings and exclude the phone app you are using
    • contact your carrier to confirm VoLTE/VoNR support and provisioning.

    But ultimately, sometimes a call will just fail – and there’s very little an everyday person can do about it. Which yes, is annoying. But it also means you have a failsafe, expert-approved excuse for missing a call from your boss.

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

    – ref. Why does my phone sometimes not ring when people call? A communications expert explains – https://theconversation.com/why-does-my-phone-sometimes-not-ring-when-people-call-a-communications-expert-explains-258400

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: Pelvic floor dysfunction: what every woman should know

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Holly Ingram, Midwifery Lecturer, Anglia Ruskin University

    megaflopp/Shutterstock

    Did you know that around one in two women in the UK will experience symptoms of pelvic floor dysfunction at some point in their lives? And for women who engage in high-intensity exercise, that figure rises to 63%.

    The female pelvic floor is a remarkable yet often overlooked structure: a complex “hammock” of muscles and ligaments that stretches from the front of the pelvis to the tailbone.

    These muscles support the bladder, bowel and uterus, wrap around the openings of the urethra, vagina and anus and work in sync with your diaphragm, abdominal and back muscles to maintain posture, continence and core stability. It’s not an exaggeration to say your pelvic floor is the foundation of your body’s core.

    Throughout a woman’s life, various events can challenge the pelvic floor. Pregnancy, for example, increases the weight of the uterus, placing added pressure on these muscles. The growing baby can cause the abdominal muscles to stretch and separate, naturally increasing the load on the pelvic floor. Childbirth, particularly vaginal delivery, may result in perineal trauma, directly injuring pelvic floor tissues.

    However, contrary to popular belief, pelvic floor problems aren’t only caused by pregnancy and childbirth. In fact, research shows that intense physical activity, even in women who have never been pregnant or given birth, can contribute to dysfunction.

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

    Exercise is essential for overall health and is often recommended to ease symptoms of menopause and menstruation. But one side effect that’s not talked about enough is the effect that repeated strain, such as heavy lifting or high impact movement, can have on the pelvic floor. The increased intra-abdominal pressure during these activities can gradually weaken the pelvic floor muscles, especially if they’re not trained to cope.

    Pelvic floor dysfunction often results when these muscles aren’t strong enough to match the workload demanded of them, whether from daily life, exercise, or other core muscles. And it’s a growing issue, affecting more women than ever before.

    Common symptoms include leaking urine or faeces when coughing, sneezing or exercising, a dragging or heavy sensation in the lower abdomen or vaginal area, painful sex, changes in bowel habits, visible bulging in the vaginal area (a sign of prolapse). The emotional toll can also be significant, leading to embarrassment, anxiety, low confidence and a reluctance to stay active – all of which affect quality of life.

    Prevention

    The good news? Help is available and, better yet, pelvic floor dysfunction is often preventable.

    If you’re experiencing symptoms, speak to your GP. You may be referred to a women’s health physiotherapist, available through both the NHS and private services. But whether you’re managing symptoms or hoping to avoid them in the first place, there are practical steps you can take:

    Stay active and maintain a healthy weight

    Drink enough water to encourage healthy bladder function

    Go to the toilet only when your body signals the need; avoid going “just in case”

    Prevent constipation through a high-fibre diet and good bowel habits

    Don’t hold your breath when lifting or exercising

    Most importantly, build strength with regular pelvic floor exercises. Here’s how to do a basic pelvic floor contraction:

    1. Imagine you’re trying to stop yourself passing wind – squeeze and lift the muscles around your back passage.

    2. Then, imagine stopping the flow of urine mid-stream – engage those muscles too.

    3. Now, lift both sets of muscles upwards inside your body, as if pulling them into the vagina.

    4. Hold the contraction for a few seconds, then fully relax. Repeat.

    If you’re just starting, it may be easier to practise while sitting. With time and consistency, you’ll be able to hold contractions for longer and incorporate them into your daily routine, like brushing your teeth or waiting for the kettle to boil.

    Like any muscle, the pelvic floor gets stronger with training, making it more resilient to strain from childbirth, ageing, or strenuous activity. Research shows that a well-conditioned pelvic floor recovers faster from injury.

    So be proud of your pelvic floor. Support it, strengthen it – and don’t forget to do those squeezes.

    Holly Ingram 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. Pelvic floor dysfunction: what every woman should know – https://theconversation.com/pelvic-floor-dysfunction-what-every-woman-should-know-258427

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: Israel, Iran and the US: why 2025 is a turning point for the international order

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Brian Brivati, Visiting Professor of Contemporary History and Human Rights, Kingston University

    Israel’s large-scale attack against Iran on June 13, which it conducted without UN security council approval, has prompted retaliation from Tehran. Both sides have traded strikes over the past few days, with over 200 Iranians and 14 Israelis killed so far.

    The escalation has broader consequences. It further isolates institutions like the UN, International Criminal Court (ICC) and International Court of Justice (ICJ), which have found themselves increasingly sidelined as Israel’s assault on Gaza has progressed. These bodies now appear toothless.

    The world appears to be facing an unprecedented upending of the post-1945 international legal order. Israel’s government is operating with a level of impunity rarely seen before. At the same time, the Trump administration is actively undermining the global institutions designed to enforce international law.

    Other global powers, including Russia and China, are taking this opportunity to move beyond the western rules-based system. The combination of a powerful state acting with impunity and a superpower disabling the mechanisms of accountability marks a global inflection point.

    It is a moment so stark that we may have to rethink what we thought we knew about the conduct of international relations and the management of conflict, both for the Palestinian struggle and the international system of justice built after the second world war.

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

    The Israeli government is, in addition to its preemptive air campaign against Iran’s nuclear programme, advancing with impunity on three other fronts. It is tightening its hold on Gaza, with the prospect of a lasting occupation increasingly possible.

    Senior Israeli ministers have also outlined plans for the annexation of large parts of the occupied West Bank through settlement expansion. This is now proceeding unchecked. Israel confirmed plans in May to create 22 new settlements there, including the legalisation of those already built without government authorisation.

    This is being accompanied by provocative legislation such as a bill that would hike taxes on foreign-funded non-governmental organisations. The Israeli government is also continuing its attempts to reduce the independence of the judiciary.

    Hardline elements of Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s cabinet say they will collapse the government if he changes course.

    The ICJ moved with urgency in response to Israel’s actions in Gaza and the West Bank. In January 2024, it found evidence that Palestinians in Gaza were at risk of genocide and ordered Israel to implement provisional measures to prevent further harm.

    Then, in May 2024, as Israeli forces pressed an offensive, the ICJ issued another ruling ordering Israel to halt its military operation in the southern Gazan city of Rafah immediately. It also called on Israel to allow unimpeded humanitarian access to the Gaza Strip.

    The court went further in July, issuing a landmark advisory opinion declaring Israel’s occupation of Palestinian territory illegal. The ICC took bold action by issuing arrest warrants for Netanyahu, his former defence minister Yoav Gallant, and the leaders of Hamas.

    Disregarding international law

    These dramatic attempts to enforce international law failed. Israel only agreed to a temporary ceasefire in Gaza in January 2025 when Washington insisted, demonstrating that the only possible brake on Israel remains the US.

    But the second Trump administration is even more transactional than the first. It prioritises trade deals and strategic alliances – particularly with the Gulf states – over the enforcement of international legal norms.

    In January, Trump issued an executive order authorising sanctions on the ICC over the court’s “illegitimate” actions against the US and its “close ally Israel”. These sanctions came into effect a little over a week before Israel launched its strikes on Iran.

    Trump then withdrew the US from the UN human rights council and extended a funding ban on Unrwa, the UN relief agency for Palestinian refugees.

    A further executive order issued in February directed the state department to withhold portions of the US contribution to the UN’s regular budget. And Trump also launched a 180-day review of all US-funded international organisations, foreshadowing further exits or funding cuts across the multilateral system.

    In May 2025, the US and Israel then advanced a new aid mechanism for Gaza run by private security contractors operating in Israeli-approved “safe zones”. Aid is conditional on population displacement, with civilians in northern Gaza denied access unless they relocate.

    This approach, which has been condemned by humanitarian organisations, contravenes established humanitarian principles of neutrality and impartiality.

    In effect, one pillar of the post-war order is attacking another. The leading founder of the UN is now undermining the institution from within, wielding its security council veto to block action while simultaneously starving the organisation of resources. The US vetoed a UN security council resolution calling for a ceasefire in Gaza on June 4.

    The implications of this turning point in the international order are already playing out across the globe. Russia is continuing its war of aggression in Ukraine despite rulings from the ICJ and extensive evidence of war crimes. It knows that enforcement mechanisms are weak and fragmented and the alternative Trumpian deal making can be played out indefinitely.

    And China is escalating military pressure on Taiwan. It is employing grey-zone tactics, that do everything possible in provocation and disinformation below the threshold of open warfare, undeterred by legal commitments to peaceful resolution.

    These cases are symptoms of a collapse in the credibility of the post-1945 legal order. Israel’s policy in Gaza and its attack on Iran are not exceptions but the acceleration. They are confirmation to other states that law no longer constrains power, institutions can be bypassed, and humanitarian principles can be used for political ends.

    Brian Brivati is executive director of the Britain Palestine Project. He is writing this article in a personal capacity.

    – ref. Israel, Iran and the US: why 2025 is a turning point for the international order – https://theconversation.com/israel-iran-and-the-us-why-2025-is-a-turning-point-for-the-international-order-258044

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: AI is gobbling up water it cannot replace – I’m working on a solution

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Muhammad Wakil Shahzad, Associate Professor and Head of Subject, Mechanical and Construction Engineering, Northumbria University, Newcastle

    Data centres are the invisible engines of our digital world. Every Google search, Netflix stream, cloud-stored photo or ChatGPT response passes through banks of high-powered computers housed in giant facilities scattered across the globe.

    These datacentres consume a staggering amount of electricity and increasingly, a surprising amount of water. But unlike the water you use at home, much of the water used in datacentres never returns to the water reuse cycle. This silent drain is drawing concern from environmental scientists. One preprint study (not yet reviewed by other scientists) from 2023 predicted that by 2027 global AI use could consume more water in a year than half of that used by the UK in the same time.

    Datacentres typically contain thousands of servers, stacked and running 24/7. These machines generate immense heat, and if not properly cooled, can overheat and fail. This happened in 2022 when the UK endured a heatwave that saw temperatures reach a record-breaking 40° Celsius in some areas, which knocked off Google and Oracle datacentres in London.

    To prevent this, datacentres rely heavily on cooling systems, and that’s where water comes in.

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

    One of the most common methods for cooling datacentres involves mechanical chillers, which work like large fridges. These machines use a fluid called a refrigerant to carry heat away from the servers and release it through a condenser. A lot of water is lost as it turns into vapour during the cooling process, and it cannot be reused.

    A 1 megawatt (MW) datacentre (that uses enough electricity to power 1,000 houses) can use up to 25.5 million litres annually. The total data centre capacity in the UK is estimated at approximately 1.6 gigawatts (GW). The global data centre capacity stands at around 59 GW.

    Unlike water used in a dishwasher or a toilet, which often returns to a treatment facility to be recycled, the water in cooling systems literally vanishes into the air. It becomes water vapour and escapes into the atmosphere. This fundamental difference is why data centre water use is not comparable to that of typical household use, where water cycles back through municipal systems.

    As moisture in the atmosphere that can return to the land as rain, the water datacentres use remains part of Earth’s water cycle – but not all rain water can be recovered.

    The water is effectively lost to the local water balance, which is especially critical in drought-prone or water-scarce regions – where two-thirds of datacentres since 2022 have been built. The slow return of this water makes its use for cooling datacentres effectively non-renewable in the short term.

    The rise of AI tools like ChatGPT, image generators and voice assistants has made datacentres work much harder. These systems need a lot more computing power, which creates more heat. To stay cool, data centres use more water than ever.

    This growing demand is leading to a greater reliance on water-intensive cooling systems, driving up total water consumption even further. The International Energy Agency reported in April 2025 that datacentres now consume more than 560 billion litres of water annually, possibly rising to 1,200 billion litres a year by 2030.

    What’s the alternative?

    Another method, direct evaporative cooling, pulls hot air from datacentres and passes it through water-soaked pads. As the water evaporates, it cools the air, which is then sent back into server rooms.

    While this method is energy-efficient, especially in warmer climates, the added moisture in the air can damage sensitive server equipment. This method requires additional systems to manage and control humidity, which necessitates more complex datacentre design.

    My research team and I have developed another method which separates moist and dry air streams in datacentres with a thin aluminium foil, similar to kitchen foil. The hot, dry air passes close to the wet air stream, and heat is transferred through the foil without allowing any moisture to mix. This cools the server rooms in datacentres without adding humidity that could interfere with the equipment.

    Trials of this method at Northumbria University’s datacentre have shown it can be more energy-efficient than conventional chillers, and use less water. Powered entirely by solar energy, the system operates without compressors or chemical refrigerants.

    As AI continues to expand, the demand on datacentres is expected to skyrocket, along with their water use. We need a global shift in how we design, regulate and power digital infrastructure.

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

    Get a weekly roundup in your inbox instead. Every Wednesday, The Conversation’s environment editor writes Imagine, a short email that goes a little deeper into just one climate issue. Join the 45,000+ readers who’ve subscribed so far.

    Muhammad Wakil Shahzad is the founder of EcoTechX.
    EcoTechX received PoC funding from Northern Accelerator.

    – ref. AI is gobbling up water it cannot replace – I’m working on a solution – https://theconversation.com/ai-is-gobbling-up-water-it-cannot-replace-im-working-on-a-solution-258518

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: MPs could vote on two proposals to decriminalise abortion in England and Wales – the debate explained

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Ruth Fletcher, Professor of Law, Queen Mary University of London

    Protesters in summer 2023 demanding decriminalisation of abortion. Loredana Sangiuliano/Shutterstock

    Legal protection of abortion rights in England and Wales is fragile. Abortion has popular support and is readily available on the NHS, but has also generated a series of criminal investigations. Nicola Packer is one of the most recent abortion-seekers facing criminalisation rather than care. She was found innocent in May after a five year ordeal.

    Amid concerns about investigations for illegal abortions, MPs may vote on June 17 on legislative action to decriminalise abortion. Political opinion is divided, however, on how to do it. In the absence of a broader push for the kind of inquiries that produced full decriminalisation in Northern Ireland in 2019, MPs will consider two different legal proposals: NC1 and NC20.

    In England and Wales, people do not have explicit abortion rights as a matter of domestic law. They may feel that they have when they get good abortion care. But as a matter of law, abortion is only permissible under the Abortion Act 1967 if two conditions are met.

    Two doctors must approve, and the case must meet the legal grounds outlined in the act. These are that there must be a risk to health up to 24 weeks gestation or, after 24 weeks, a risk to life, a risk of grave permanent injury to health or a serious foetal anomaly.

    If these conditions are not met, then someone who voluntarily ends a pregnancy could be criminally liable. This is because old criminal provisions against abortion – under the Offences against the Person Act 1861 and the Infant Life (Preservation) Act 1929 – are still on the books.

    Each of the two amendments being put forward would decriminalise abortion by amending a government bill that is already making its way through parliament, the crime and policing bill, rather than by adopting a standalone piece of legislation for abortion.

    The two amendments

    NC1, proposed by Labour MP Tonia Antoniazzi, is for a partial decriminalisation that would entail the “removal of women from the criminal law related to abortion”. This would put a stop to criminal investigations of women and pregnant people on suspicion of abortion, and mean that abortion-seekers no longer face the possibility of prosecution.

    The proposed amendment has the support of over 130 MPs, has been negotiated with and has the backing of abortion providers, including the British Pregnancy Advisory Service (Bpas), MSI Reproductive Choices and the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists. But it would not repeal or remove the existing criminal law. The criminal offences in the Offences against the Person Act and the Infant Life (Preservation) Act would remain in place.

    Neither would abortion providers, or those who assist or support abortion-seekers, including friends and family buying abortion pills on the internet, be exempted from criminal liability.

    NC20, the second amendment, is for full decriminalisation and is proposed by MP Stella Creasy. It has the support of over 100 MPs, but apparently not the support of abortion providers according to Bpas.

    Creasy’s proposal is more complex and wider in scope. This amendment would fully decriminalise abortion by repealing the criminal provisions altogether. It would maintain the Abortion Act 1967 as the legal framework for abortion care, so the legal grounds for abortion would remain the same.

    The proposed amendments to decriminalise abortion come after several high-profile cases.
    Brizmaker/Shutterstock

    Most importantly, this amendment aims to make abortion a human right, and protect the law from being restricted in the future. It does this by requiring that the secretary of state apply to England and Wales the human rights recommendations that led to decriminalisation in Northern Ireland. These are outlined in a 2018 UN report on the elimination of discrimination against women.

    The report’s recommendations establish full decriminalisation as a baseline standard that must be achieved. They also require minimum legal standards of allowing abortion in cases where there is a risk to health, where the pregnancy results from rape, and in cases of severe foetal anomaly.

    The Abortion Act 1967 already delivers these standards. But the recommendations – and Creasy’s proposed amendment – would set out a framework that could be applied in the future to other questions around bodily autonomy.

    No change in the law will happen immediately after the vote as the crime and policing bill has several more stages to pass in parliament. But the debate should give observers an indication of the direction of travel when it comes to the future of reproductive rights in England and Wales.

    Ruth Fletcher is Chairperson of the Abortion Support Network.

    – ref. MPs could vote on two proposals to decriminalise abortion in England and Wales – the debate explained – https://theconversation.com/mps-could-vote-on-two-proposals-to-decriminalise-abortion-in-england-and-wales-the-debate-explained-258966

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: Itamar Ben-Gvir and Bezalel Smotrich: the Netanyahu government extremists sanctioned by the UK

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Leonie Fleischmann, Senior Lecturer in International Politics, City St George’s, University of London

    The UK’s decision to impose sanctions on two far-right Netanyahu government ministers has put it at loggerheads with the Trump administration over Israel. Announcing on June 10 that Britain would join Canada, Australia, New Zealand and Norway in sanctioning Israel’s minister for national security, Itamar Ben-Gvir, and minister of finance, Bezalel Smotrich, the UK foreign secretary David Lammy said the pair had “incited extremist violence and serious abuses of Palestinian human rights”.

    US secretary of state Marco Rubio criticised the decision, releasing a statement the same day saying the sanctions did not “advance US-led efforts to achieve a ceasefire, bring all hostages home, and end the war”. He added: “We remind our partners not to forget who the real enemy is. The United States urges the reversal of the sanctions and stands shoulder-to-shoulder with Israel.”

    Britain and its allies also called on the Netanyahu government to respond to extremist Israeli settler violence in the West Bank and to “cease the expansion of illegal settlements which undermine a future Palestinian state”. This has brought the spotlight back to the West Bank, where decades of settler violence towards Palestinians and a planning system which favours the Israeli settlers, have led to the gradual displacement of Palestinian communities.



    Read more:
    Israeli plan to occupy all of Gaza could open the door for annexation of the West Bank

    The announcement seemed to signal a possible breach in relations between the UK government and the Netanyahu government. But with conflict escalating between Israel and Iran, the UK’s chancellor of the exchequer, Rachel Reeves, has said the government may be willing to provide military support for Israel.

    Smotrich responded to the sanctions, speaking on his “contempt” at Britain’s decision and referring to Britain’s history of administration of what he called “our homeland”. He said: “Britain has already tried once to prevent us from settling the cradle of our homeland, and we will not allow it to do so again. We are determined to continue building.”

    In retaliation for the sanctions, Smotrich pledged to collapse the Palestinian Authority, by taking measures to prevent Israeli banks for corresponding with Palestinian banks. This has been vital for sustaining the Palestinian economy.

    UK foreign secretary, David Lammy, explains why the government has sanctioned the two Israeli ministers.

    Ben-Gvir and Smotrich and their ultra-nationalist followers actually represent a relatively small fraction of Israeli society, but they hold the balance of power in Netanyahu’s coalition, controlling 20 seats in Netanyahu’s 67-seat coalition. This has enabled them to consolidate decades of settler activity outside of parliamentary legitimacy into influencing government policy.

    Itamar Ben-Gvir

    Ben-Gvir is an admirer of the late racist rabbi Meir Kahane, who founded the far-right Kach party which was labelled a terrorist organisation in 2008 having been banned from running in parliamentary elections. In 2007 he was convicted for incitement to racism and being a supporter of a terrorist organisation.

    He subsequently told an event to honour Kahane that, while he admired Kahane, he would not try to pass laws to expel all Arabs from Israel and the West Bank or to create a regime which involved ethnic segregation. But Kahane’s violent anti-Arab ideology and desire to establish a theocratic Jewish state has influenced the next generation of ultra-nationalists.

    The national security minister has been convicted eight times for offences that include racism and support for a terrorist organisation. He gained prominence as a successful defence lawyer for Jews accused of violence against Palestinians. The political party he heads, Otzma Yehudit, advocates for the annexation of the entire West Bank without granting Palestinians Israeli citizenship.

    Ben-Gvir has become infamous for his provocative statements. In August 2023, he declared in an interview with Israel’s Channel 12, that his rights trump those of Palestinians in the occupied West Bank.

    “My right, and my wife’s and my children’s right to get around on the roads in Judea and Samaria, is more important than the right to movement for Arabs,” he said, effectively advocating for a regime of apartheid. He has consistently pushed Netanyahu to maintain the war in Gaza, blocking past attempts to reach a ceasefire.

    Bezalel Smotrich

    Smotrich also has a history of making inflammatory statements. In February 2023, three days after settler vigilantes rampaged through the West Bank town of Huwara, he called for Israel to wipe the town off the map. He later apologised for this comment after being criticised by both the opposition leader, Yair Lapid, and the US government, saying he hadn’t meant it to be a call for vigilante violence.

    Smotrich believes the West Bank and the Gaza Strip are part of the biblical land of Israel and rightfully belong to the Jewish people. He has dedicated his career to ensuring the establishment of Jewish settlements.

    In 2006, he helped establish a non-governmental organisation called Regavim as a pressure group to increase settlement of the West Bank. The left-leaning Israeli newspaper Haaretz has criticised Regavim as “an organisation waging a total war on Palestinian construction in the West Bank”.

    Since Smotrich was given increased control over civil affairs on the West Bank in early 2023, the building of illegal settlements in the occupied West Bank has accelerated. He is reported to have recently directed his office to “formulate an operational plan for applying sovereignty” over the West Bank.

    He told a group touring new settlements approved by the Israeli government that: “”We will not stop until the entire area receives its full legal status and becomes an inseparable part of the State of Israel. We are changing the face of the settlement enterprise not just as a slogan, but through real action.”

    Rightward shift

    The prominence of Ben-Gvir and Smotrich reflects a rightward shift in the Israeli electorate that has brought ultra-nationalist settler ideology into the mainstream. However, their meteoric rise is also due to their holding the balance of power, which has enabled Netanyahu to remain in office. That Netanyahu remains prime minister is widely believed to be partly responsible for the slow progress of his trials for bribery, fraud and breach of trust.

    Before the November 2022 Knesset election, Netanyahu reportedly brokered a deal whereby Smotrich’s Religious Zionism Party and Ben-Gvir’s Jewish Home party joined forces. This ensured they won enough seats to ensure Netanyahu could form a coalition. And so these two extremists bent on thwarting any hope for Palestinian independence became kingmakers.

    While they have such influence over the Netanyahu government, there is no possibility for a Palestinian state. Instead it is more likely that the violence towards Palestinians and the dispossession of their land will continue to increase.

    Leonie Fleischmann 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. Itamar Ben-Gvir and Bezalel Smotrich: the Netanyahu government extremists sanctioned by the UK – https://theconversation.com/itamar-ben-gvir-and-bezalel-smotrich-the-netanyahu-government-extremists-sanctioned-by-the-uk-258644

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: Why is Stalin back in the Moscow metro?

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Jeremy Hicks, Professor of Post-Soviet Cultural History and Film, Queen Mary University of London

    A statue of Soviet dictator Joseph Stalin was unveiled in the Taganskaya metro station in Moscow in May, recreating a mural that was dismantled decades ago. It is the first such statue to be erected in central Moscow since Stalin’s death in 1953 and marks a disturbing new stage in Russia’s authoritarian path.

    Tens of millions of people died as a direct result of Stalin’s policies between 1924 and his death. These policies included the forced collectivisation of agriculture, the Gulag labour camp system and the “great terror” – a wave of mass arrests between 1937 and 1938, including of key figures in the army.

    Yet ultimate victory over Nazi Germany in 1945, with the support of Britain and the US, redeems Stalin in the eyes of Russia’s current rulers. For the Russian president, Vladimir Putin, this victory was one of the crowning achievements of the Soviet Union and remains a unifying force in modern Russia.

    De-Stalinisation, which from 1956 to the late 1960s saw the dismantling of Stalin’s policies and legacy, meant no statues of him were erected from his death until the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991. But 110 monuments have been built since then (at the last count in 2023), with 95 of them erected in the Putin era. The rate of construction multiplied after Russia’s 2014 annexation of Crimea.

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

    These statues initially tended to be in peripheral parts of the Russian Federation, such as Yakutia, North Ossetia and Dagestan, and not in city centres. The renaming by presidential decree of the airport in Volgograd as Stalingrad in April 2025, to echo the city’s wartime name, was thus a significant moment.

    But the statue in the Moscow metro, an architectural gem in the centre of Russia’s capital that is used by millions of people each day, is an even more important symbolic statement.

    ‘Stalinwashing’

    Stalin’s reputation in Russia continues to recover. According to a poll from 2015, 45% of the Russian population thought the deaths caused by Stalin’s actions were justified (up from 25% in 2012). By 2023, 63% of Russians had an overall positive view of his leadership.

    This reflects the view promoted in schools and amplified by the Russian media, where criticism of Stalin is rare. Even the 2017 British comedy, The Death of Stalin, was banned in Russia for fear of popping the bubble of public approval.

    The purpose of rehabilitating Stalin is about boosting support for Putin’s regime, training Russians’ conformity reflex, and instilling pride in their history. But it also has external ramifications.

    With the partial exception of Georgia, his birthplace, Stalin is widely reviled by Russia’s neighbours which were often the victims of Stalin’s repressive policies. This is especially true of Ukraine. A famine known to Ukrainians as the Holodomor was deliberately imposed there between 1932 and 1933 as part of collectivisation and killed as many as 3.8 million people.

    As a result, his death unleashed de-Stalinisation accompanied by the destruction of his statues all over eastern Europe. This began during the 1956 Budapest uprising and was followed by later such reactions in Prague and elsewhere.

    The statue of Stalin in Budapest was torn down by demonstrators in 1956.
    Fortepan adományozó / Wikimedia Commons, CC BY-NC-SA

    After the uprisings were put down, Stalin’s place was typically taken by the less controversial Vladimir Lenin, the revolutionary leader who founded the Soviet Union.

    But since the 2014 Maidan revolution in Ukraine, which culminated in the ousting of pro-Russian president Viktor Yanukovych, Ukrainians have also been pulling down statues of Lenin. Other Soviet-era symbols have also been torn down in a wave of demonstrations known as Leninopad or Leninfall.

    This is what has informed the latest intensification of Stalin-washing. The Ukrainian refutation of the symbolic heritage of the Soviet Union seems to have supercharged the Russian embrace of it, Stalin included.

    Russia has restored statues of Lenin in the Ukrainian territories it occupies. And it has now also started erecting statues of Stalin, notably in the southeastern city of Melitopol, where a statue was unveiled in May to commemorate the 80th anniversary of the Soviet Union’s victory in the second world war.

    This is against the law in Ukraine, where there is a ban on pro-Communist (and pro-totalitarian) symbolism. Russian forces have meanwhile been destroying memorials to the Holodomor in a battle over the meaning of the Soviet legacy.

    Russia’s military strength

    The re-elevation of Stalin promotes a narrow interpretation of his rule, stressing Russia’s military strength. Modern statues typically portray Stalin in a military uniform and evoke a sense of him as a victorious wartime leader.

    In fact, some of the appeal of the symbol of Stalin lies in welfare provisions of his leadership where, despite imposing an often cruelly authoritarian system, education and healthcare were free for all. The same can be said for his use of fear as a work incentive. Russians sometimes still denounce complacent or inept officials with the imprecation: “If only Stalin was here to sort you out” (Stalina na vas net in Russian).

    Nevertheless, it is the imperial version of Stalin that dominates, vindicating Russian refusal to reckon with its colonial past as the centre of the Soviet Union. Stalin’s record is sometimes defended within Russia on the basis that Winston Churchill, for instance, remains a British national hero despite a bloody past (such as his role in the Bengal famine of 1943).

    While there is an element of truth in this, the difference is that Churchill’s shortcomings and complicity in the death toll attributable to the British empire are publicly discussed. Such criticism of Stalin is not permitted in Russia. Even the new statue in Moscow was erected under cover of the night, evading public scrutiny and debate.

    The fact that the UK subjects its historical heroes to scrutiny is what distinguishes it from Russia, and defines it as democratic. At least for the time being.

    Jeremy Hicks is a member of the UK Labour Party

    – ref. Why is Stalin back in the Moscow metro? – https://theconversation.com/why-is-stalin-back-in-the-moscow-metro-258006

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: Is there really a religious revival in England? Why I’m sceptical of a new report

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By David Voas, Emeritus Professor of Social Science, UCL

    Jantanee Runpranomkorn/Shutterstock

    The Bible Society recently published a report claiming that church attendance in England and Wales increased by more than half between 2018 and 2024. The revival was especially striking among young men, with reported church attendance jumping from 4% to 21% over this short period.

    As a quantitative social scientist who has studied religious change in modern societies for more than 25 years, I’m surprised – and sceptical. I do not doubt that the Bible Society acted in good faith, but they haven’t engaged with the mountain of evidence, some of it very recent, pointing to religious decline.

    The annual British Social Attitudes survey – widely regarded as the best and most reliable source of data on such matters – shows that the share of adults in England and Wales who said that they were Christian and went to church at least monthly fell by nearly a quarter (from 12.2% to 9.3%) between 2018 and 2023, the last year available. The Bible Society surveys suggest that churchgoers were 8% of the adult population in 2018 and 12% in 2024.

    The main Christian denominations (Anglican, Catholic, Methodist, Baptist) conduct and publish their own attendance counts every year. Those show that while churchgoing continues to rebound from the lows of the COVID lockdown, attendance at worship services remains substantially lower than it was in 2019, before the pandemic. In the Church of England, average weekly attendance is down about 20% from pre-pandemic levels, and the story is similar in other denominations.

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

    The Bible Society report claims that “Catholicism has risen sharply.” According to their figures, Catholics were 23% of churchgoers in 2018 and 31% in 2024. As total churchgoing supposedly increased by 56% over that period, from 3.7 million to 5.8 million, the implication is that Catholic mass attendance has more than doubled.

    We know from the Catholic church itself, however, that the reality is far different. The Catholic Bishops’ Conference of England and Wales counted 701,902 people attending Sunday mass in 2019. In 2023, there were 554,913 – a drop of 21%.

    The findings are also inconsistent with other data from YouGov, the polling firm that collected the data for the Bible Society. A decade ago, the British Election Study (BES) commissioned YouGov to create an online panel. This panel, which includes more people than the Bible Society surveys, was asked about religious affiliation and church attendance in 2015, 2022 and 2024.

    According to YouGov’s data for the BES internet panel, the share of Christian churchgoers in England and Wales declined from 8.0% to 6.6% between 2015 and 2024, whereas YouGov’s surveys for the Bible Society apparently show an increase from 8% to 12% between 2018 and 2024.

    The fact that the findings were completely different in the two cases suggests that this kind of polling is not a reliable way of measuring trends in church attendance.

    What could be the problem with the data?

    Gold standard social surveys are based on random (probability) samples of the population: everyone has a chance to be included. The British Social Attitudes survey is one such example – and found that churchgoing fell by nearly a quarter from 2018-23.

    By contrast, people opt in to YouGov’s survey panel and are rewarded after completing a certain number of surveys. The risk of low-quality or even bogus responses is considerable.

    YouGov creates a quota sample from its large self-selected panel. The sample will match the population on a number of key characteristics, such as age and sex, but that does not make it representative in all respects. As quota samples do not give each person in the population a known chance of being selected, statistical inference is not possible and findings cannot be reliably generalised.

    To write (as in the Bible Society report) that because thousands of people participated in the two surveys, they “give a 1% margin of error at a 99% confidence level” is misleading.

    This study is not the first time such non-probability sampling has led to dubious findings. In late 2023, the Economist ran the story that one in five young Americans believed that the Holocaust was a myth, based on another YouGov poll. A study by the Pew Research Center showed that that finding was almost certainly fallacious, and the Economist added a disclaimer acknowledging the problem.

    The trouble with young adults

    The Bible Society claims that the alleged religious revival is being driven by young people flocking to church (and reading their Bibles). There are numerous reasons to be sceptical of survey findings about young adults. They are what survey researchers call a hard-to-reach population. They tend to be in transition between the parental home and education or employment; they are often out of the house and difficult for interviewers to find or for online survey companies to recruit.

    Those who do respond to surveys may not be representative of their age group. They are more likely to be living with their parents, less likely to be out with friends, more likely to be compliant, less likely to be suspicious of authority, and so on. Such characteristics are associated with religious participation.

    The Bible Society report claims 21% of men aged 18-24 are regular churchgoers.
    Yuri A/Shutterstock

    Other findings from the report are also surprising. The Bible Society asserts: “Men are now more likely to attend church than women.” Most churchgoers would probably be surprised by this news, which would make England and Wales an exception to the religious gender gap present in most western countries. For example, recent research by Pew in the US has found that, although the gender gap is less pronounced among the youngest adults, “women remain more religious than men … by a variety of measures”.

    It would be fascinating to probe all of these issues further, but regrettably the Bible Society has not published the dataset. (When contacted about this, the Bible Society pointed to aggregate statistics published by YouGov and said it plans to publish more summary tables in the coming months.) Open access to all data is now a basic expectation in scientific work.

    That the Bible Society report has generated some enthusiastic coverage is not surprising – it appears to challenge conventional wisdom, and there are plenty of anecdotes to be provided as supporting “evidence”.

    But this doesn’t mean the data should be taken at face value. We need to place more trust in surveys based on probability sampling and less in data collected from opt-in online panels. That’s particularly the case when people are pushing a story that runs counter to everyday experience – and years of data.

    In response to the arguments made in this article, the Bible Society said it was committed to producing rigorous and high-quality research that equips the church and provokes conversation in culture. “We are well aware of the limits of non-probability panels, but also the demonstrated strength of this method in producing valid and actionable insights when paired with quota controls and post-stratification, as widely acknowledged in existing survey methodology literature according to academic standards. [Our data] points to both increased engagement with Christianity and a changing spiritual atmosphere, and we are happy to acknowledge it may be on the upper end of a range that future data sets will nuance.”

    A spokesperson for YouGov said: “YouGov’s methodology is robust. We have a proprietary panel of millions of people to take part in our surveys. YouGov draws a sub-sample of the panel that is representative of British adults by range of demographic factors, and invites this sub-sample to complete a survey.”

    David Voas 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 his academic appointment.

    – ref. Is there really a religious revival in England? Why I’m sceptical of a new report – https://theconversation.com/is-there-really-a-religious-revival-in-england-why-im-sceptical-of-a-new-report-257863

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: Jaws at 50: a cinematic masterpiece – and an incredible piece of propaganda

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Colin Alexander, Senior Lecturer in Political Communications, Nottingham Trent University

    Jaws turns 50 on June 20. Last year, Quentin Tarantino called Stephen Spielberg’s film “possibly the greatest movie ever made”. Though he was quick to add that it isn’t the best film in terms of script, cinematography or acting, he was convinced that its overall quality as a movie remains unmatched.

    I’m not so sure if Jaws is the best movie ever made – but it’s certainly the movie that I like to watch the most. It is as fascinating and multilayered as it is entertaining and depressing. As a researcher of political propaganda, I believe that Jaws had political purpose.

    I have watched Jaws well over 50 times and still, with every viewing, I spot a new detail. Just last week I noticed that when police chief Brody (Roy Scheider) leaves his office after the first shark attack, he opens a gate in a white picket fence.

    The white picket fence is often used to symbolise the American dream and Brody’s actions are likely intended to symbolise the disruption to the dream’s pursuit of capitalism as he seeks to close the beaches and potentially ruin the town’s tourism season.

    Looking for something good? Cut through the noise with a carefully curated selection of the latest releases, live events and exhibitions, straight to your inbox every fortnight, on Fridays. Sign up here.

    The film was released in June 1975. Just in time for summer holidays spent splashing in the waves (or not!). However, despite its continued acclaim, it didn’t win any of the big Academy Awards in 1976. One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest dominated that year. Composer John Williams did, however, win the Oscar for best original score, which I assume you are now humming in your head.



    Read more:
    One Flew Over The Cuckoo’s Nest: 50 years on Jack Nicholson’s greatest performance is as fresh as ever

    The film is based on the book by Peter Benchley, published a year earlier in 1974. The book’s plot is somewhat different to the film. For example, Matt Hooper – the shark specialist played by Richard Dreyfuss in the film – is eaten by the shark, possibly as an act of retribution for his sins on land. He survives in the film.

    Benchley was US president Lyndon Johnson’s (1963-1969) communications advisor before he became an author and so knew Washington’s priorities well. The film was then commissioned before the book had time to become a commercial success, which is somewhat unusual.

    The trailer for Jaws.

    The shark – powerful, mysterious, dark eyed, stalking the American people and killing without emotion – represents the threat posed by communism. The defeat of this “menace” will require the reunification of American society following its disastrous and fractious involvement in the Vietnam war and political scandals like Watergate.

    Hence, the white public sector worker (Brody), the scientist (Hooper) and the military veteran (Quint), put their differences aside to band together on a rickety and ill-equipped boat – the Orca – which was possibly meant to symbolise the wobbling US of its time.

    So while Jaws is a parable of societal repair, it is also a story of exclusively white unification amid external threats. The civil rights movement and Vietnam are inextricably linked through the service of young black men to the cause, and yet black characters are conspicuous by their absence from the book and the film. The only black presence in the book is an anonymous gardener who rapes wealthy white women.

    Human will to dominate the natural world

    In the book, the horror focuses upon human, rather than animal, behaviour. This comes in the form of political corruption, mafia influence, adultery, snobbery, racial prejudice, community disconnect and dishonest journalism. And it occurs as much on land as it does at sea. There is a large section midway through the book where the shark plays no part in the, at times, highly sexual plot.

    Spielberg removed many of the undercurrents and insinuations of the book for his adaptation. The film gives less attention to life in the town of Amity and focuses largely on the shark and the horror of its actions.

    The irony is that so many characters feel personally offended by an animal capable of instinct alone, when they as humans – capable of reason and choice – behave so badly towards each other. Indeed, the lack of an eco-centric character to defend the shark in both the book or the film is telling.

    Brody yells for people to ‘get out of the water’.

    The overwhelming horror is instead found in the treatment of the shark and the assertion that it must be killed rather than respected and left alone. Indeed, Jaws represents a parable of the modern human perception of battle against nature. Wherein Brody, Hooper and Quint, despite their differences, are united in their assumption of human superiority and their perspective that the problem ought to be dealt with using violence.

    The story of Jaws also speaks to George Orwell’s essay Shooting an Elephant from 1936. It captured the author’s dilemma while working as a police officer in colonial Burma when an elephant disrupted the regular process of capitalism by trampling through a local market.

    The philosophers Max Horkheimer and Theodor Adorno referred to the enlightenment as having created a “new barbarity” wherein humans are engaged in a project of destruction. Here then, a shark has had the audacity to behave in an inconvenient way to man’s profiteering from tourism and must be killed.

    Indeed, one of the biggest criticisms of the film, which Spielberg has subsequently acknowledged, is its inaccurate representation of shark behaviour and the extent to which the film’s success contributed to the decline of the species.

    Ultimately then, Jaws – the book, the film and the reaction of audiences to it – serves as a testimony to the role played by fear within human decision-making. The fear of “others”. Fear of the unknown. Fear of the natural world. Fear of loss of status or reputation.

    It’s a testament to the susceptibility of humans to become insular and violent when they are scared, but also to the distorting influence of propagandists in determining what they ought to be afraid of.

    This article features references to books that have been included for editorial reasons, and may contain links to bookshop.org. If you click on one of the links and go on to buy something from bookshop.org The Conversation UK may earn a commission.

    Colin Alexander 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. Jaws at 50: a cinematic masterpiece – and an incredible piece of propaganda – https://theconversation.com/jaws-at-50-a-cinematic-masterpiece-and-an-incredible-piece-of-propaganda-253498

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: What dinosaur fossils could teach us about cancer

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

    Ilnaz Bagautdinov/Shutterstock

    When you think of dinosaurs, you might imagine towering predators or gentle giants roaming prehistoric landscapes. But what if these ancient creatures could teach us about one of humanity’s most persistent challenges: cancer?

    In a new study, my team and I explored how fossilised soft tissues, preserved for tens of millions of years, could reveal new insights into ancient proteins that might one day help the study of cancer.

    For decades, dinosaur research has focused on bones, which are much more likely to be preserved. But bones alone can’t tell the full story of how these animals lived, or how they died. Advances in technology, like paleoproteomics (the study of ancient proteins) are now allowing scientists to analyse delicate fragments of soft tissues preserved in fossils.

    In 2016, I read an article about the discovery of a new fossil in Romania with a tumour in its jaw. Those remains were from a dinosaur called Telmatosaurus transsylvanicus, a duck-billed, plant-eating “marsh bird”. The specimen had lived between 66-70 million years ago in the Hateg Basin in present-day Romania.

    I was fascinated by what we might learn from this. Although there were a handful of previous reports of cancers in other dinosaur bones, and previous findings of soft tissues like blood vessels in fossils, no one had ever described soft tissues in an ancient tumour.

    The Telmatosaurus specimen.
    Pramodh Chandrasinghe, CC BY-NC-SA

    To understand more, my team went to Romania and collected the specimen. We brought it back, and made a tiny hole into it with a drill the width of a human hair, taking a miniscule sample.

    Then we mounted it onto a powerful microscope, called a scanning electron microscope. Inside it, we saw images of blood cells, which contain proteins.

    In the original Jurassic Park film, the scientists create or clone dinosaurs from ancient genetic material. But in reality over millions of years the DNA is completely broken down.

    Proteins however, unlike DNA, can be remarkably stable over time. Research has shown that they can persist in fossils for millions of years under the right conditions, acting as molecular time capsules. Studying these proteins can help us reconstruct biological processes, including diseases like cancer, that affected dinosaurs.

    Cancer’s deep evolutionary roots

    Cancer is often seen as a modern plague, but it has ancient origins. Large, long-lived animals, from elephants to whales, are a paradox. Their size and longevity should make them cancer-prone, yet many have evolved remarkable defences.

    Elephants, for example, carry extra copies of the TP53 gene, a tumour suppressor. Bowhead whales which can live for over 200 years, have ultra-efficient DNA repair mechanisms and damage to DNA is the root cause of cancer. Dinosaurs, as some of the largest animals to ever exist, probably faced similar problems.

    My team’s research builds on growing evidence that dinosaurs weren’t immune to cancer. Fossilised tumours have been found in species like Tyrannosaurus rex and Telmatosaurus, ranging from benign growths to aggressive cancers. My team is aiming to uncover the molecular tools dinosaurs used to suppress tumours in the future.

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

    Bones tell us about anatomy, but soft tissues hold the keys to biology. In my team’s study, the red blood cell-like structures we found in Telmatosaurus fossils represent gateways to understanding the dinosaur’s physiology.

    Proteins preserved in these tissues could reveal how dinosaurs managed oxidative stress which is linked to cancer, inflammation, or even immune responses to cancer. For instance, certain proteins might indicate mechanisms for detecting and destroying faulty cells before tumours can form.

    This work also highlights a a need for a critical shift in paleontology: to preserve soft tissues, not just skeletons. Museums and researchers often prioritise intact bones, but fragments of fossilised skin, blood vessels, or cells can harbour molecular secrets. As technology advances, these overlooked specimens could become invaluable for studying disease evolution.

    Bridging past and present

    The link between dinosaurs and humans might seem distant, but evolution often repurposes ancient biological tools. Modern oncology already draws inspiration from nature and many chemotherapies come from plants or trees. The drug trabectedin, for example, used to treat soft-tissue sarcoma, comes from a marine organism called the sea squirt.

    Expanding our search to extinct species could open a library of evolutionary solutions. If we can identify cancer-suppressing or cancer-promoting proteins in dinosaurs, these molecules might inspire new lessons about human cancers.

    It’s taken nearly a decade to get this far. Like so much work, this research underscores the importance of patience and we’re not there yet. A real breakthrough might come when advances in research allows us to study ancient proteins in detail, tracking how cancer mechanisms evolved over millions of years.

    Bridging paleontology and oncology is not only uncovering ancient history. We’re potentially writing a new chapter in the fight against cancer.

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

    – ref. What dinosaur fossils could teach us about cancer – https://theconversation.com/what-dinosaur-fossils-could-teach-us-about-cancer-257919

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: Iran-Israel ‘threshold war’ has rewritten nuclear escalation rules

    Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Farah N. Jan, Senior Lecturer in International Relations, University of Pennsylvania

    Smoke rises from locations targeted in Tehran amid the third day of Israel’s waves of strikes against Iran, on June 15, 2025. Photo by Khoshiran/Middle East Images/AFP via Getty Images

    Israel’s conflict with Iran represents far more than another Middle Eastern crisis – it marks the emergence of a dangerous new chapter in nuclear rivalries that has the potential to reshape global proliferation risks for decades to come.

    What began with Israeli strikes on Iranian nuclear facilities and other targets on June 13, 2025 has now spiraled into the world’s first full-scale example of what I as an expert in nuclear security call a “threshold war” – a new and terrifying form of conflict where a nuclear weapons power seeks to use force to prevent an enemy on the verge of nuclearization from making that jump. As missiles continue to rain down on both Tehran and Tel Aviv – with hundreds dead in Iran and at least 24 killed in Israel – the international community is witnessing the collapse of traditional deterrence frameworks in real time.

    Unlike traditional nuclear rivalries where both sides possess declared arsenals – like India and Pakistan, who despite their tensions operate under mutual deterrence – this new threshold dynamic creates an inherently unstable escalation spiral. Iran increasingly believes it cannot deter Israeli aggression without nuclear weapons, yet every step toward acquiring them invites more aggressive Israeli strikes. Israel, for its part, cannot permanently eliminate Iran’s nuclear knowledge through military means – it can only delay it through means that would seemingly guarantee future Iranian determination to acquire the ultimate deterrent.

    Under this dynamic, neither side can step back without accepting an intolerable outcome: for Israel, an Iran more determined than even in becoming a nuclear weapons nation capable of deterring Israeli action and ending its regional military dominance; for Iran, the risk of regime change through devastating Israeli strikes. The consequences of this deadly logic extend far beyond the Middle East.

    Flames rise from an oil storage facility after it appeared to have been hit by an Israeli strike in Tehran, Iran, on June 15, 2025.
    AP Photo/Vahid Salemi

    The preventive strike precedent

    The stakes could not be higher, as Iranian officials have called the attack “a declaration of war” and vowed that destroyed nuclear facilities “would be rebuilt.” Israel, meanwhile has warned its campaign will continue “for as many days as it takes.”

    Most ominously, the scheduled nuclear talks between the U.S. and Iran were called off, with Tehran dismissing any such dialogue as “meaningless.” This may suggest diplomacy’s window – which opened for just a few months under Trump’s second administration, after being closed during his first – was deliberately slammed shut.

    More broadly, the Israeli strikes mark a dangerous evolution in international norms around preventive warfare. While Israeli officials called this a “preemptive strike,” the legal and strategic reality is different. Preemptive strikes respond to imminent threats – like Israel’s 1967 Six-Day War against Arab armies preparing to attack. Preventive strikes, by contrast, target distant future threats when conditions seem favorable – like Japan’s attack on Pearl Harbor in 1941.

    Israel justified its action by claiming Iran could rapidly assemble up to 15 nuclear bombs. Yet, as the International Atomic Energy Agency director, Rafael Grossi, warned beforehand, an Israeli strike could solidify rather than deter Iran’s nuclear ambitions, potentially prompting withdrawal from the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. True to that warning, on June 16, Iran announced it was preparing a parliamentary bill that would see the country leave the 1968 treaty.

    Israel’s calculations in opting to strike build on the same erosion of international legal frameworks that has legitimized preemptive warfare since the United States’ military action in Afghanistan and Iraq after the Sept. 11, 2001 attack. America’s “war on terror” fundamentally challenged sovereignty norms through practices like drone strikes and preemptive attacks. More recently, operations in Gaza and elsewhere have demonstrated that violations of international humanitarian law carry limited consequences in practice. For Israel, this permissive environment has seemingly created both opportunity and justification regarding striking Iran – something that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has been pursuing for decades.

    Already, Russia’s attacks on Ukraine’s Zaporizhzhia nuclear plant demonstrated nuclear facilities’ vulnerability in modern warfare. I believe Israel’s actions further risk normalizing attacks on nuclear infrastructure, potentially legitimizing similar preventive actions by India, China or the U.S. against emerging nuclear programs elsewhere.

    From strikes to regional conflagration

    Israel’s initial strike quickly triggered inevitable escalation. Iran’s retaliation came in waves: first hundreds of drones and missiles on June 13, then sustained barrages throughout the following days. By the morning of June 15, both countries were trading strikes on energy infrastructure, military bases and civilian areas, with no immediate end in sight.

    The Houthis in Yemen have since joined the fight, by launching ballistic missiles at Tel Aviv. Notably absent are Hezbollah, Hamas and Iran’s Iraqi militias – all significantly damaged by recent action by Israel. This degradation of Iran’s “axis of resistance” – its traditional forward deterrent – fundamentally alters Tehran’s strategic calculations. Without strong proxies to threaten retaliation, Iran is more exposed to Israeli strikes, making nuclear weapons seem like the only reliable deterrent against future attacks.

    The escalation pattern illustrates what can happen when when a government casts aggression as prevention. Having initiated the recent escalation of hostilities, Israel now faces the consequences. Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian’s vow that destroyed facilities “would be rebuilt” underscores that Israeli action designed to prevent nuclearization may instead result in Iran pursuing it with renewed determination.

    The commitment trap

    This creates what strategists call the “commitment trap” – a dynamic where both sides face escalating costs but cannot back down. Israel faces its own strategic dilemma. The strikes may ultimately accelerate rather than prevent Iranian nuclearization, yet backing down would mean accepting a nuclear Iran. Netanyahu’s promise that current strikes are “nothing compared to what they will feel in coming days” shows how quickly strikes sold as preventative escalate toward total war.

    Missiles fired from Iran are pictured in the night sky over Jerusalem on June 14, 2025.
    Photo by Menahem Kahana/AFP via Getty Images

    Unlike established nuclear powers that can negotiate from positions of strength, threshold states, such as Iran, face a stark choice: remain vulnerable to preventive strikes and regime change or race toward the protection that nuclear deterrence provides.

    North Korea offers the clearest example of this dynamic. Despite decades of sanctions and military threats, Pyongyang’s nuclear program has made it essentially immune to preventive strikes. Iranian leaders understand this lesson well – the question is whether they can reach the same protected status before suffering decisive preventive action.

    Traditional nuclear deterrence theory assumes rational actors operating under mutual vulnerability. But threshold wars break these assumptions in fundamental ways. Iran cannot fully deter Israeli action because it lacks confirmed weapons, while Israel cannot rely on deterrence to prevent Iranian weaponization because Iran’s nuclear program continues advancing.

    This creates “use it or lose it” dynamics: Israel faces shrinking windows to act preventively as Iran approaches weaponization; Iran faces incentives to accelerate its program before suffering additional strikes.

    The absence of effective external mediation compounds these risks. U.S. President Donald Trump’s response to the strikes reveals this dynamic starkly. Initially opposing military action and preferring diplomacy to “bombing the hell out of” Iran, Trump pivoted dramatically after the strikes began, and warned that “there’s more to come. A lot more.”

    His post on Truth Social – “Two months ago I gave Iran a 60-day ultimatum to ‘make a deal.’ They should have done it!” – demonstrates how quickly diplomatic efforts can collapse once threshold wars begin.

    Global implication

    The international response reveals how thoroughly Israel’s Operation Rising Lion has normalized aggression against nuclear facilities. While European leaders called for “maximum restraint,” none condemned Israel’s initial attacks. Russia and China condemned the attacks but took no concrete action. The U.N. Security Council produced only statements of “concern” about “escalation.”

    This normalization sets what I believe to be a catastrophic precedent. The threshold war model threatens to unravel decades of nuclear governance based on deterrence rather than preemption.

    Indeed, the Iran-Israel threshold war sets dangerous precedents for other regional nuclear competitions. Successful preventive strikes could incentivize similar actions elsewhere, eroding diplomatic nonproliferation efforts. Conversely, rapid nuclearization by Iran could encourage other threshold states, like Saudi Arabia, to pursue nuclear capabilities swiftly and secretly.

    When preventive strikes become the enforcement mechanism for nonproliferation norms, the entire architecture of nuclear governance begins to crumble. Without these frameworks, the world faces an unstable future defined by cycles of preventive strikes and accelerated nuclear proliferation – far more dangerous than the Cold War-era standoffs that shaped nuclear governance.

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

    – ref. Iran-Israel ‘threshold war’ has rewritten nuclear escalation rules – https://theconversation.com/iran-israel-threshold-war-has-rewritten-nuclear-escalation-rules-258965

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: Iran-Israel ‘threshold war’ has rewritten nuclear escalation rules

    Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Farah N. Jan, Senior Lecturer in International Relations, University of Pennsylvania

    Smoke rises from locations targeted in Tehran amid the third day of Israel’s waves of strikes against Iran, on June 15, 2025. Photo by Khoshiran/Middle East Images/AFP via Getty Images

    Israel’s conflict with Iran represents far more than another Middle Eastern crisis – it marks the emergence of a dangerous new chapter in nuclear rivalries that has the potential to reshape global proliferation risks for decades to come.

    What began with Israeli strikes on Iranian nuclear facilities and other targets on June 13, 2025 has now spiraled into the world’s first full-scale example of what I as an expert in nuclear security call a “threshold war” – a new and terrifying form of conflict where a nuclear weapons power seeks to use force to prevent an enemy on the verge of nuclearization from making that jump. As missiles continue to rain down on both Tehran and Tel Aviv – with hundreds dead in Iran and at least 24 killed in Israel – the international community is witnessing the collapse of traditional deterrence frameworks in real time.

    Unlike traditional nuclear rivalries where both sides possess declared arsenals – like India and Pakistan, who despite their tensions operate under mutual deterrence – this new threshold dynamic creates an inherently unstable escalation spiral. Iran increasingly believes it cannot deter Israeli aggression without nuclear weapons, yet every step toward acquiring them invites more aggressive Israeli strikes. Israel, for its part, cannot permanently eliminate Iran’s nuclear knowledge through military means – it can only delay it through means that would seemingly guarantee future Iranian determination to acquire the ultimate deterrent.

    Under this dynamic, neither side can step back without accepting an intolerable outcome: for Israel, an Iran more determined than even in becoming a nuclear weapons nation capable of deterring Israeli action and ending its regional military dominance; for Iran, the risk of regime change through devastating Israeli strikes. The consequences of this deadly logic extend far beyond the Middle East.

    Flames rise from an oil storage facility after it appeared to have been hit by an Israeli strike in Tehran, Iran, on June 15, 2025.
    AP Photo/Vahid Salemi

    The preventive strike precedent

    The stakes could not be higher, as Iranian officials have called the attack “a declaration of war” and vowed that destroyed nuclear facilities “would be rebuilt.” Israel, meanwhile has warned its campaign will continue “for as many days as it takes.”

    Most ominously, the scheduled nuclear talks between the U.S. and Iran were called off, with Tehran dismissing any such dialogue as “meaningless.” This may suggest diplomacy’s window – which opened for just a few months under Trump’s second administration, after being closed during his first – was deliberately slammed shut.

    More broadly, the Israeli strikes mark a dangerous evolution in international norms around preventive warfare. While Israeli officials called this a “preemptive strike,” the legal and strategic reality is different. Preemptive strikes respond to imminent threats – like Israel’s 1967 Six-Day War against Arab armies preparing to attack. Preventive strikes, by contrast, target distant future threats when conditions seem favorable – like Japan’s attack on Pearl Harbor in 1941.

    Israel justified its action by claiming Iran could rapidly assemble up to 15 nuclear bombs. Yet, as the International Atomic Energy Agency director, Rafael Grossi, warned beforehand, an Israeli strike could solidify rather than deter Iran’s nuclear ambitions, potentially prompting withdrawal from the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. True to that warning, on June 16, Iran announced it was preparing a parliamentary bill that would see the country leave the 1968 treaty.

    Israel’s calculations in opting to strike build on the same erosion of international legal frameworks that has legitimized preemptive warfare since the United States’ military action in Afghanistan and Iraq after the Sept. 11, 2001 attack. America’s “war on terror” fundamentally challenged sovereignty norms through practices like drone strikes and preemptive attacks. More recently, operations in Gaza and elsewhere have demonstrated that violations of international humanitarian law carry limited consequences in practice. For Israel, this permissive environment has seemingly created both opportunity and justification regarding striking Iran – something that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has been pursuing for decades.

    Already, Russia’s attacks on Ukraine’s Zaporizhzhia nuclear plant demonstrated nuclear facilities’ vulnerability in modern warfare. I believe Israel’s actions further risk normalizing attacks on nuclear infrastructure, potentially legitimizing similar preventive actions by India, China or the U.S. against emerging nuclear programs elsewhere.

    From strikes to regional conflagration

    Israel’s initial strike quickly triggered inevitable escalation. Iran’s retaliation came in waves: first hundreds of drones and missiles on June 13, then sustained barrages throughout the following days. By the morning of June 15, both countries were trading strikes on energy infrastructure, military bases and civilian areas, with no immediate end in sight.

    The Houthis in Yemen have since joined the fight, by launching ballistic missiles at Tel Aviv. Notably absent are Hezbollah, Hamas and Iran’s Iraqi militias – all significantly damaged by recent action by Israel. This degradation of Iran’s “axis of resistance” – its traditional forward deterrent – fundamentally alters Tehran’s strategic calculations. Without strong proxies to threaten retaliation, Iran is more exposed to Israeli strikes, making nuclear weapons seem like the only reliable deterrent against future attacks.

    The escalation pattern illustrates what can happen when when a government casts aggression as prevention. Having initiated the recent escalation of hostilities, Israel now faces the consequences. Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian’s vow that destroyed facilities “would be rebuilt” underscores that Israeli action designed to prevent nuclearization may instead result in Iran pursuing it with renewed determination.

    The commitment trap

    This creates what strategists call the “commitment trap” – a dynamic where both sides face escalating costs but cannot back down. Israel faces its own strategic dilemma. The strikes may ultimately accelerate rather than prevent Iranian nuclearization, yet backing down would mean accepting a nuclear Iran. Netanyahu’s promise that current strikes are “nothing compared to what they will feel in coming days” shows how quickly strikes sold as preventative escalate toward total war.

    Missiles fired from Iran are pictured in the night sky over Jerusalem on June 14, 2025.
    Photo by Menahem Kahana/AFP via Getty Images

    Unlike established nuclear powers that can negotiate from positions of strength, threshold states, such as Iran, face a stark choice: remain vulnerable to preventive strikes and regime change or race toward the protection that nuclear deterrence provides.

    North Korea offers the clearest example of this dynamic. Despite decades of sanctions and military threats, Pyongyang’s nuclear program has made it essentially immune to preventive strikes. Iranian leaders understand this lesson well – the question is whether they can reach the same protected status before suffering decisive preventive action.

    Traditional nuclear deterrence theory assumes rational actors operating under mutual vulnerability. But threshold wars break these assumptions in fundamental ways. Iran cannot fully deter Israeli action because it lacks confirmed weapons, while Israel cannot rely on deterrence to prevent Iranian weaponization because Iran’s nuclear program continues advancing.

    This creates “use it or lose it” dynamics: Israel faces shrinking windows to act preventively as Iran approaches weaponization; Iran faces incentives to accelerate its program before suffering additional strikes.

    The absence of effective external mediation compounds these risks. U.S. President Donald Trump’s response to the strikes reveals this dynamic starkly. Initially opposing military action and preferring diplomacy to “bombing the hell out of” Iran, Trump pivoted dramatically after the strikes began, and warned that “there’s more to come. A lot more.”

    His post on Truth Social – “Two months ago I gave Iran a 60-day ultimatum to ‘make a deal.’ They should have done it!” – demonstrates how quickly diplomatic efforts can collapse once threshold wars begin.

    Global implication

    The international response reveals how thoroughly Israel’s Operation Rising Lion has normalized aggression against nuclear facilities. While European leaders called for “maximum restraint,” none condemned Israel’s initial attacks. Russia and China condemned the attacks but took no concrete action. The U.N. Security Council produced only statements of “concern” about “escalation.”

    This normalization sets what I believe to be a catastrophic precedent. The threshold war model threatens to unravel decades of nuclear governance based on deterrence rather than preemption.

    Indeed, the Iran-Israel threshold war sets dangerous precedents for other regional nuclear competitions. Successful preventive strikes could incentivize similar actions elsewhere, eroding diplomatic nonproliferation efforts. Conversely, rapid nuclearization by Iran could encourage other threshold states, like Saudi Arabia, to pursue nuclear capabilities swiftly and secretly.

    When preventive strikes become the enforcement mechanism for nonproliferation norms, the entire architecture of nuclear governance begins to crumble. Without these frameworks, the world faces an unstable future defined by cycles of preventive strikes and accelerated nuclear proliferation – far more dangerous than the Cold War-era standoffs that shaped nuclear governance.

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

    – ref. Iran-Israel ‘threshold war’ has rewritten nuclear escalation rules – https://theconversation.com/iran-israel-threshold-war-has-rewritten-nuclear-escalation-rules-258965

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: Highways to hell: west Africa’s road networks are the preferred battleground for terror groups

    Source: The Conversation – Africa – By Olivier Walther, Associate Professor in Geography, University of Florida

    What’s the connection between roads and conflict in west Africa? This may seem like an odd question. But a study we conducted shows a close relationship between the two.

    We are researchers of transnational political violence. We analysed 58,000 violent events in west Africa between 2000 to 2024. Our focus was on identifying patterns of violence in relation to transport infrastructure.

    Anecdotal evidence suggests that roads, bridges, pipelines and other transport systems are increasingly attacked across west Africa, but little is known about the factors that explain when, where and by whom.

    Violence in west Africa involves a complex mix of political, economic and social factors. Weak governance, corruption, urban-rural inequalities and marginalised populations have been exploited by numerous armed groups, including transnational criminal networks and religious extremists.

    West Africa has been one of the world’s most violent regions since the mid 2010s. In 2024 alone, the Armed Conflict Location and Event Data initiative recorded over 10,600 events of political violence in the region. These ranged from battles between armed groups, explosions and other forms of remote violence, to attacks on unarmed civilians. An estimated 25,600 people were killed. This has been the status quo in the region for nearly a decade.

    The results of our study show that 65% of all the attacks, explosions, and violence against civilians recorded between 2000 and 2024 were located within one kilometre of a road.

    Only 4% of all events were located further than 10km from a road. This pattern was consistent across all road types but most pronounced near highways and primary roads.

    We think the reason for this pattern is that there is fierce competition between state and non-state actors for access to and use of roads.

    Governments need well-developed road networks for a host of reasons, including the ability to govern, enabling economic activity, and security. Roads enable military mobility and reduce potential safe havens for insurgents in remote regions.

    Insurgent groups also see transport networks as prime targets. They create opportunities to blockade cities, ambush convoys, kidnap travellers, employ landmines, and destroy key infrastructure.

    Our research is part of a long line of work that explored the role of infrastructure in relation to security in west Africa. Our latest research reinforces earlier findings linking the two. Transport networks have become battlegrounds for extremist groups seeking to destabilise states, isolate communities and expand their influence.

    The network

    The west African road network is vast, estimated at over 709,000km of roads by the Global Roads Inventory Project. It compares unfavourably with other African regions. For example, paved roads remain relatively scarce in west Africa (17% of the regional network) when compared with north Africa (83%).

    Poorly maintained roads impose costs on west African countries. They increase transport time of perishable goods, shorten the operational life of trucks, cause more accidents, and reduce social interactions between communities.

    Still, significant variations in road quality are found across the region. The percentage of paved roads ranges from a high of 37% in Senegal to just over 7% in Mali. Nigeria has the largest road network in west Africa with an estimated 195,000km, but much of it has deteriorated because of poor maintenance.

    Road-related violence is on the rise

    We found that road-related attacks have been on the rise since jihadist groups emerged in the mid-2010s. Only 31 ambushes against convoys were reported in Burkina Faso, Chad, Mali and Niger from 2000-2015, against 497 from 2016-2023.

    Attacks frequently occur along the same road segments, such as around Boni in the Gourma Mounts, where Jama’at Nusrat ul-Islam wa al-Muslimin (JNIM) conducted nine attacks against Malian forces and Wagner mercenaries between 2019 and 2024.

    Violence was the most clustered near roads in 2011, with 87% of all violent events located within 1km of a road. Our analysis shows that, though still high, there’s been a decline post-2000: 59% in 2022 and 60% in 2024. This evolution reflects the ruralisation of conflict in west Africa. As jihadist insurgents target rural areas and small towns more and more, an increasing share of violent events also occurs far away from roads.

    We’ve studied the root causes of west Africa’s violence for nearly a decade, documenting the ever-intensifying costs paid by its people. In the process, we’ve uncovered overlooked aspects of the turmoil, including the centrality of the road networks to an understanding of where the violence is happening.

    The most dangerous roads of west Africa

    Our findings show that violence against transport infrastructure is very unevenly distributed in west Africa and that specific road segments have been repeatedly targeted. This was particularly the case in the Central Sahel, Lake Chad basin, and western Cameroon.

    For example, the 350km ring road linking Bamenda to Kumbo and Wum in Cameroon is the most violent road in west Africa, with 757 events since 2018, due to the conflict between the government and the Ambazonian separatists.

    The longest segments of dangerous roads are in Nigeria, particularly those connecting Maiduguri in Borno State to Damaturu, Potiskum, Biu and Bama.

    In the central Sahel, the road between Mopti/Sévaré and Gao is by far the most violent transport axis, with 433 events since the beginning of the civil war in Mali in 2012. South of Gao, National Road 17 leading to the Nigerien border, and National Road 20 heading east toward Ménaka have experienced 177 and 139 events respectively since the Islamic State – Sahel Province (ISSP) intensified its activities in the region in 2017.

    In Burkina Faso, all the roads leading to Djibo near the border with Mali have experienced high levels of violence since the early 2020s.

    Building transport infrastructure to promote peace

    Roads are an important part of state counterinsurgency strategies and a strategic target for local militants. Yes, as our work highlights, transport infrastructure is largely ignored in debates that emphasise more state interventions as a means of combating insecurity. Sixty years after the independence of many west African countries, road accessibility remains elusive in the region.

    Peripheral cities such as Bardaï, Bilma, Kidal and Timbuktu, where rebel movements have historically developed, are still not connected to the national network by tarmac roads.

    The duality of the transport infrastructure, as both a facilitator and target of violence, has put government forces at a disadvantage. Regular forces are heavily constrained by the sparsity and poor conditions of the road network, which makes them vulnerable to attacks without necessarily allowing them to project their military power over long distances.

    Rather than building transport infrastructure, states have focused on strengthening security by investing in military bases. The military coups in Burkina Faso, Mali and Niger have further reinforced this trend, with the creation of a joint force by the countries of the Alliance of Sahel States.

    Strengthening security has taken precedence over developmental support for peripheral communities, who experience the worst of the violence.

    Olivier Walther receives funding from the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development.

    Alexander John Thurston receives funding from the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development.

    Steven Radil receives funding from the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development.

    – ref. Highways to hell: west Africa’s road networks are the preferred battleground for terror groups – https://theconversation.com/highways-to-hell-west-africas-road-networks-are-the-preferred-battleground-for-terror-groups-258517

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: Kenya’s peacebuilding efforts hold valuable lessons for the rest of the world, but gaps remain

    Source: The Conversation – Africa – By Leonor Oliveira Toscano, PhD Candidate in Political Science, University of Oslo

    Kenya has been praised as a “model for the world” when it comes to peacebuilding efforts to manage outbreaks of violence within its borders. The country has systematically put in place a peacebuilding architecture rooted in a history of local peace initiatives. These date back to the early 1990s.

    Over this period, the Wajir Peace and Development Committee emerged in the country’s north-eastern region. The committee successfully addressed decades of inter-clan violence in Wajir, an arid county bordering Somalia. It also inspired the emergence of numerous local peace committees across the country.

    These committees have been set up in some other African countries – like Ghana, South Africa, Sierra Leone and Burundi – and continue to contribute informally to local peacebuilding in these states.



    Read more:
    Training local leaders in mediation can reduce violence: positive results in Nigeria

    In Kenya, the committees became institutionalised after post-election violence in 2007-08 and a mediation process led by former UN secretary general Kofi Annan. They now form part of the national peacebuilding architecture.

    Violence triggered by the contested 2007 presidential election outcome resulted in the killing of more than 1,000 people. The mediation process led to a power-sharing agreement signed by the presidential contenders Mwai Kibaki and Raila Odinga.

    The country’s peacebuilding architecture is now supported by several policies and frameworks. These include the constitution of 2010. The system that’s been built has the capacity to connect a wide variety of peacebuilding actors – both state and non-state, formal and informal – at all levels of society. This helps resolve conflict and build resilience.

    The Kenyan government initiated a review of the peacebuilding architecture in 2023. It involved a lengthy consultation process and high levels of participation among Kenyans. The National Steering Committee on Peacebuilding and Conflict Management led the way, assisted by an independent panel of 13 peacebuilding experts.

    Released at the end of 2024, the review looked at the strengths and weaknesses of the architecture.

    It offers a vision for building a robust peacebuilding system, along with an actionable roadmap. One lesson is that Kenya can use the capacities and unique approaches of different peacebuilding actors. At the local level, peace committees showed that they made contributions to early warning systems and building confidence in communities.

    However, insufficient resources and a consistent focus on electoral violence prevent the system from addressing other drivers of conflict.

    The strengths

    Local peace committees, with membership typically drawn from ordinary citizens, religious groups or local civil society organisations, play a crucial role. They support dialogue around conflict issues. They promote trust and understanding, and can build a constructive environment for conflict resolution.

    Their information gathering feeds into the regional Intergovernmental Authority on Development’s Conflict Early Warning and Response System (CEWARN) to prevent election violence. Local peace committees have contributed to negotiating local disputes. They have also helped de-polarise ethnic identities and facilitated local peace agreements. One example was the Modogashe Declaration. It sets ground rules to solve conflict and local disputes over pasture, water access and cattle rustling.



    Read more:
    Kenya violence: 5 key drivers of the decades-long conflict in the north and what to do about them

    We are researchers in Norway on a project focusing on civilian agency, local peace and resilience building. Our own interviews with committee members in Nakuru – a county greatly affected by the violence in 2007-08 – found that peace committee members continued to work together and share conflict-sensitive information with local stakeholders. These include administration officers and religious leaders, and covered periods during and after the 2022 elections.

    Further, local peace committees can offer women valuable opportunities for participation in conflict management. This contributes to their protection, for example from sexual violence.

    The weaknesses

    Despite these successes, Kenya’s peacebuilding architecture faces pressing challenges.

    First, local peace committees aren’t perfect. They can be manipulated by politicians seeking to build local support. They can also compete with traditional actors such as elders in conflict resolution.

    Kenya’s institutionalisation of local peacebuilding strengthened information flow across all levels. But it also threatens to undermine local peacebuilding agency and autonomy. Formalising local peace committees can spur an unhealthy monetisation of peacebuilding, with some members joining for financial gain. This threatens to erode the voluntary character of peacebuilding as a common good and undermine genuine priorities for peace.



    Read more:
    How women in Kenya mobilised for peace after surviving violence

    Second, elite-level politics in Kenya creates the persistent risk of electoral violence. This diverts attention and resources away from other long-standing causes of conflict. The drivers of violence in Kenya are varied and region specific. They include disputes over access to land, and marginalisation of ethnic and religious communities. Climate change threatens to worsen competition and conflict between pastoralists and farming communities.

    Our analysis of event data from Armed Conflict Location & Event Data shows that communal violence is the deadliest form of political violence in Kenya. For their part, fatalities related to election violence have decreased. This underscores the urgent need to consistently invest in prevention and local peacebuilding beyond narrow electoral periods.

    Fatalities in Kenya by type of armed violence: 2010-2023

    Electoral competition can escalate violence between pastoralists and farmers, but it’s the persistence of communal conflicts that represents a serious threat. Communal violence particularly affects Kenya’s arid and semi-arid areas in the Rift Valley, eastern and north-eastern regions.

    What next

    Our interviews with local peace committee members show that funding for their activities diminishes outside election years. This hampers their capacity to address conflict outside these periods.

    Yet research has shown that local peacebuilding can build social resilience against recurrent communal violence. Peacebuilding interventions grounded in local realities are also vital for countering insurgent violence. This is especially important as counterterrorism operations by state forces often trigger cycles of violence rather than resolving underlying issues.



    Read more:
    Drivers of electoral violence in Kenya: red flags to watch out for

    Our research finds that Kenyans place significant trust in local peacebuilders, such as community leaders, elders and women. The review of the country’s peacebuilding architecture proposes a 40% quota for women, youth and people with disabilities in local peace committees.

    However, quotas alone may not be sufficient to address the political and cultural challenges that entrench inequality.

    Ultimately, political elites need to transform Kenya’s “win at all costs” politics. This way, the country’s mediators and peacebuilders can address the deep social and economic grievances that underpin cycles of violence.

    Leonor Toscano’s doctoral research is supported by the grant from the European Research Council’s Horizon 2020 Research and Innovation Program (852816; PI: Jana Krause). Leonor Toscano conducted interviews with LPC members in Kenya.

    Jana Krause received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 Research and Innovation Programme under grant number 852816 (ResilienceBuilding).

    Marika Miner’s post-doctoral research is also supported by the grant from the European Research Council’s Horizon 2020 Research and Innovation Program (852816; PI: Jana Krause).

    – ref. Kenya’s peacebuilding efforts hold valuable lessons for the rest of the world, but gaps remain – https://theconversation.com/kenyas-peacebuilding-efforts-hold-valuable-lessons-for-the-rest-of-the-world-but-gaps-remain-257761

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: A new book of Edward Gorey’s drawings shows what’s lost when the artist’s sexuality is glossed over

    Source: The Conversation – USA – By Elizabeth Wolfson, Assistant Director of Campus Partnerships for the Office of Public Scholarship, Washington University in St. Louis

    Edward Gorey on the set he designed for the Broadway revival of Bram Stoker’s ‘Dracula’ in 1977. Jack Mitchell/Getty Images

    Artist, illustrator and writer Edward Gorey would have turned 100 this year, and the recently published “From Ted to Tom: The Illustrated Envelopes of Edward Gorey” is a fitting celebration of his wit and talent.

    The book reproduces, in stunning detail, a series of 50 elaborately illustrated envelopes Gorey created in the mid-1970s. But when I started reading “From Ted to Tom,” I felt confused – and a little let down.

    The book makes no mention of Gorey’s queerness. To me, this is a missed opportunity to shed light on how being gay may have fueled some of his most personal work.

    The master of macabre

    Today, Edward Gorey is widely known for his sprawling, macabre-yet-humorous body of work, which spans nearly every medium.

    There are dozens of his own books, notably “The Doubtful Guest” and “The Gashlycrumb Tinies,” as well as cover designs for many others; sets and costumes for the 1977 Tony Award-winning revival of Bram Stoker’s “Dracula”; the opening credit sequence for the PBS television series “Mystery!”; “The Fantod Pack,” a deck of Tarot-like cards; and hand-sewn, surrealist dolls.

    His stories often feature adults and children alike who meet untimely ends through mostly hilarious, unlikely accidents – and, yes, the occasional straight-up murder. But they’re never gratuitous, nor do they glorify violence for violence’s sake.

    As for his personal life, Gorey may have been what today we’d call asexual; Gorey himself used the term “undersexed,” but he also acknowledged, when asked directly about his sexuality, that he “supposed” he was gay.

    Mark Dery’s 2018 Gorey biography, “Born to be Posthumous: The Eccentric Life and Mysterious Genius of Edward Gorey,” documents the artist’s participation in postwar gay life. The book details a handful of crushes Gorey had on various men, at least one of which – a brief affair with a man named Victor – involved some physical intimacy.

    To whatever extent Gorey entertained sex or romance, it was with men. As Dery points out, however, this fact largely goes unaddressed in discussions of the artist’s work.

    A chance encounter

    “From Ted to Tom” reinforces this silence.

    The “Tom” is Tom Fitzharris, the author of the book’s introduction and some commentary at the book’s end.

    In the introduction, Fitzharris explains that before he met Gorey, he was already collecting the artist’s “small, exquisite books.”

    After attending a gallery exhibit of Gorey’s work in 1974, Fitzharris mailed him one of the books from his collection to request Gorey’s signature, along with a cryptic inquiry about two of the book’s characters. Gorey obliged and returned the book with a similarly cryptic reply.

    Soon after this exchange, Fitzharris spotted Gorey on the street and introduced himself. The two soon began meeting regularly “for dinner, the theater, coffee, and especially the ballet, his great passion,” one that Fitzharris shared. When Gorey left to summer on Cape Cod, he began sending Fitzharris the envelopes collected in “From Ted to Tom.”

    Fitzharris shares almost no information about himself in the book, and he has never commented publicly about his own sexuality. However, even his dry, minimalist narration cannot conceal the intensity of their connection.

    Describing his first visit to Gorey’s apartment, he writes: “I thought I’d be at Gorey’s for ten minutes, but I left two hours later.” Whether Fitzharris lost track of time as the two explored their “dozens of shared interests” or simply couldn’t tear himself away, when he finally made it back to work, he was surprised that he still had a job.

    The envelope as canvas

    Given this voracious drive to create, it is no surprise that Gorey saw an object as humble as a letter envelope as a creative opportunity. As Dery points out, Gorey was also making his illustrated envelopes as the mail art movement was becoming popular. Sparked by artist Ray Johnson in the 1960s – who, like Gorey, lived in New York City – it involved artists using the postal service to exchange works of art, using it as an alternative to the commercial galleries and museums that artists had largely depended on.

    The 50 envelopes reproduced in “From Ted to Tom” was not Gorey’s first dalliance with the envelope as canvas; he’d experimented with it six years earlier, while in the midst of a collaboration with author and editor Peter Neumeyer, with whom he produced three children’s books.

    In his drawings to Neumeyer, Gorey mostly seems to be having fun playing around with a new formal challenge: how to integrate drawings with the prerequisite address text in a satisfying way.

    Because I study how people use images to make sense of the world, I couldn’t help but notice key differences between the Neumeyer envelopes and those that Gorey sent to Fitzharris.

    The Fitzharris series is poised and polished from the jump. Gorey’s distinctive hand-lettering is crisp, precise and perfectly straight, each envelope a complete scene. Some scenes are more complex than others, but each is a complete thought.

    There’s another notable difference between the Neumeyer and Fitzharris envelopes. While the former features a revolving cast of real and imaginary creatures, the latter has two co-stars: two black-and-white dogs, sides emblazoned with matching, serifed T’s.

    In his introduction to the book, Fitzharris confirms that the animals represent Gorey and him. Fitzharris is also clearly more than the lucky witness to a burst of creative genius. He is its muse.

    ‘Pen pal’ or something more?

    Whatever Gorey’s artistic ambitions for the project, it is also a visual diary of sorts: an album of their shared experiences, their common interests and hobbies, and a document of Gorey’s goings-on while they were apart.

    Take, for example, an envelope that depicts the canine duo standing amid a vast assemblage of blue bottles, with Fitzharris’ address displayed as labels.

    “All the blue bottles are a recollection of a window full of them in one of the antique shops I stopped in after you left that Sunday,” Gorey wrote in the accompanying letter. “The sun coming through them is not reproducible, at least by me.”

    In the same letter, Gorey struggles to convey the depth of his feeling upon receiving a recent letter from Fitzharris.

    “I used to maintain that if it couldn’t be put into words it didn’t exist; if anything I believe rather the opposite now. All of which is rather a strangled attempt to say that I appreciated your letter of the 23rd very much, but that I don’t know how to say so directly. Yes.”

    What did Fitzharris’ letter say that moved Gorey so much? What is the meaning of his singular, elliptical “yes”? Is it simply stylistic? Or is it a response?

    We’ll likely never know. But evidently whatever Fitzharris said moved him deeply.

    There are other poignant scenes. In his notes to “From Ted to Tom,” Fitzharris takes credit for introducing Gorey to the French phrase “heure bleue,” which translates to “the blue hour” and refers to the time of day just after the sun sets. Gorey’s delight is reflected in a lovely scene of quiet companionship.

    Tom and Ted stand at a low fence or porch railing, sharing drinks and gazing up at a darkening sky as dusk settles over thick foliage. For once leaving nothing to the imagination, he inscribes “HEURE BLEUE” next to the image in thick, bold letters – a rare act of captioning.

    This unusual relative directness continues into the accompanying letter. Though he can hardly bear admitting it, Gorey describes their recent visit as “a happy day,” immediately qualifying the comment as a “revolting phrase.”

    One “cannot help but think how seldom in life one knows one is having one at the time,” he continues. The phrasing is somewhat innocuous. But I wonder how much pleasure Gorey must have felt – and how strong his need to convey it must have been – to overcome the force of his “revulsion.”

    This push and pull between attraction to one another and repulsion at one’s own spontaneous emotion supplies the dynamism that make the drawings in “From Ted to Tom” so compelling.

    Despite this powerful current, Fitzharris, who is credited as the book’s editor, leaves the topic of Gorey’s sexuality untouched in both his introduction to the book and its end notes, where he provides a guide to some of the personal and cultural references in Gorey’s drawings and letters. The book’s back cover refers to Fitzharris as the artist’s “pen pal.”

    Denied access to the underlying details driving this dynamism, the reader loses the chance to reflect on the source of this electrical current, its impact on his art, and how Gorey’s struggles with intimacy and desire, which are all too universal, were also undoubtedly shaped by the challenge of being gay in a deeply homophobic society.

    Rather than limiting the understanding of his work, accounting for Gorey’s queerness invites viewers of his art and readers of his work into deeper communion with the artist – and themselves.

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

    – ref. A new book of Edward Gorey’s drawings shows what’s lost when the artist’s sexuality is glossed over – https://theconversation.com/a-new-book-of-edward-goreys-drawings-shows-whats-lost-when-the-artists-sexuality-is-glossed-over-257938

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: Conflicted, disillusioned, disengaged: The unsettled center of Jewish student opinion after Oct. 7

    Source: The Conversation – USA – By Jonathan Krasner, Associate Professor of Jewish Education Research, Brandeis University

    Pro-Palestinian students pass the flag of Israel while walking out of commencement in protest at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology on May 30, 2024. AP Photo/Charles Krupa

    As commencement season comes to a close, many campuses remain riven by the Israel-Hamas war. At the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, the undergraduate class president was banned from walking at her graduation after delivering a fiery – and unauthorized – speech accusing her school of complicity in Israel’s campaign to “wipe out Palestine off the face of the earth.” Anti-Israel protests broke out at graduation ceremonies across the United States, from Columbia to the University of California at Berkeley.

    Since Hamas’ Oct. 7, 2023, attack and Israel’s retaliatory invasion of Gaza, many American campuses have been punctuated by vigils, demonstrations and disruptions. But the loudest voices aren’t necessarily the most representative. Activists’ pronouncements on either side fail to capture the range of student opinion about the war and its reverberations at home, including the documented rise in antisemitism and Islamophobia.

    This is certainly true for Jewish students – buffeted by the war, the hostage crisis, campus protests and federal politics. Since January 2025, the Trump administration has used campus antisemitism and anti-Zionism as a pretext to assault higher education and implement hard-line immigration policies.

    Indeed, one of the most striking findings of my study
    on Jewish undergraduate attitudes, published in May 2025, is how many students described themselves as conflicted, uncertain, disaffected and even detached. Interviews across the country convinced my research team that any attempt to gauge Jewish student opinion with either/or categories are reductive and misleading.

    Moving beyond numbers

    In the wake of Oct. 7, my office hours quickly became a refuge for distraught Jewish students as they processed their thoughts. Few were content with pat answers.

    Students at USC attend a vigil on Oct. 10, 2023, days after Hamas’ attack on Israel.
    Luis Sinco/Los Angeles Times via Getty Images

    I began wondering how representative they were. Tufts researchers Eitan Hersh and Dahlia Lyss found that since Oct. 7, more students were valuing and prioritizing their Jewish identities, even while an increased number were hiding their Jewishness on campus.

    My Brandeis colleagues Graham Wright, Leonard Saxe and their research team, meanwhile, found that a clear majority of Jewish students said they felt a connection to Israel but were sharply divided in their views of its government. While most considered statements calling for the country’s destruction to be antisemitic, they differed about where to draw the line between reasonable and illegitimate criticisms of Israel.

    These findings were instructive. But I was interested in learning more about the “how” and the “why” behind the numbers. Over the spring 2024 semester, my team and I interviewed 38 students on 24 campuses across 16 states and the District of Columbia. Participants reflected the broad religious, political, economic, geographical, sexual and racial diversity within the American Jewish population, particularly among Jews under 30. Some of the campuses were relatively placid; others were hotbeds of protest.

    The ‘missing middle’

    As my team analyzed transcripts, we identified six categories.

    About one-third of the Jewish students we spoke with were actively engaged on either side of the conflict, whether through demonstrations or online advocacy. “Affirmed” students’ connection to Israel deepened after Oct. 7. “Aggrieved” students, on the other hand, had joined anti-war protests and voiced anger at Jewish organizations for ignoring Israel’s culpability for Palestinian suffering.

    Many more of our participants, however, were ambivalent, despondent or even apathetic. As journalist Arno Rosenfeld put it in an article about my research, the majority of Jewish students inhabit a “great missing middle” in Israeli-Palestinian discourse.

    Two-thirds of the students we spoke with are in this “missing middle,” divided into four categories:

    • “Conflicted” students were inconclusively grappling with the moral and political complexities of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
    • “Disillusioned” students struggled to reconcile their sentimental attachment to Israel with their disappointment – their sense that the country betrayed its own values in its treatment of Palestinians.
    • “Retrenched” students turned inward, fearful of being identified as Jewish on campuses they perceived as hostile to Jews.
    • The last category, “disengaged” students, were detached or actively steering clear of controversy.
    Students gather at the University of Maryland to celebrate Hanukkah with a menorah lighting ceremony in 2007.
    Jahi Chikwendiu/The Washington Post via Getty Images

    Out of the fray

    The most straightforward of these categories is the “disengaged” students. Some, like Bella, on the West Coast – all of the names in this article are pseudonyms – knew little about the conflict before the war. What they learned since convinced them it was unsolvable and that they were powerless to promote change.

    The distance that some students felt from events in Israel and Gaza made it all the more baffling and odious to them when peers protested in ways that implied Jewish Americans were complicit.

    “I’m not personally doing anything,” complained Salem, a first-year student in the Midwest. “I don’t have anything to do with this.”

    Students whom we classified as “retrenched” reported anxiety, loss of sleep and a sense of isolation. Many of them were concerned that rejecting Zionism – that is, the movement supporting the creation and preservation of Israel as a national homeland for the Jewish people – had become a litmus test in their progressive circles. That was untenable for these students, because they viewed Zionism as a constituent part of being Jewish.

    Interviewees like Jack, a junior in the Pacific Northwest, spoke of removing their Star of David necklaces and censoring elements of their biography, because they perceived a social penalty for being Jewish.

    Since the start of the war, more students have said they try to hide their Jewish identity at times.
    Maor Winetrob/iStock via Getty Images

    Rejecting simple narratives

    By far, the largest group of Jewish students were struggling with mixed feelings about the war and its reverberations. What united these “conflicted” or “disillusioned” students was wariness of grand narratives and talking points that reduce the Israeli-Palestinian conflict to a contest between good and evil, or the powerful and the powerless. They also eschewed labels such as “Zionist” or “anti-Zionist,” saying they lacked nuance.

    Consider Elana, a “conflicted” sophomore in the mid-Atlantic, who told us she was uncomfortable in most Jewish spaces on campus because they effectively demanded that she declare her Israel politics at the door. It seemed to her that activists on both sides were more comfortable retreating into echo chambers than engaging in dialogue across differences.

    Then there was Shira, a “disillusioned” first year in the Midwest who viewed Israeli-Palestinian coexistence, however implausible, as the only alternative to mutual destruction. She refused to participate in anti-war demonstrations on her campus because she couldn’t abide the organizers’ confrontational tactics – but also to avoid blowback from pro-Israel family and friends.

    Students from Bowdoin College light Shabbat candles during a visit to Shaarey Tphiloh Synagogue in Portland, Maine, in 2011.
    Gregory Rec/Portland Press Herald via Getty Images

    ‘Safe spaces’ and ‘groupthink’

    One unambiguous finding from our study was how often our interviewees used language prevalent in progressive discourse. They spoke repeatedly about the importance of “safe spaces,” and felt that listeners’ understandings mattered more than speakers’ intentions when evaluating “hate speech” and “microaggressions.”

    Leo, a “conflicted” junior in the Deep South who uses they/them pronouns, acknowledged that some protesters who chant slogans such as “Free Palestine” and “Globalize the Intifada” may not recognize how many Jewish students interpret them: as antisemitic calls for Israel’s destruction. But that was no excuse, they insisted. “What I’ve noticed is that the people who are at those demonstrations have created their own definition of antisemitism,” without input from the vast majority of Jews – something progressive protesters would not have stood for if another racial, religious or ethnic minority were being discussed.

    The use of provocative and arguably antisemitic language was responsible for keeping Jews like Leo and Shira, who evinced deep sympathy for the plight of the Palestinians, from joining the protests.

    Fundamentally, however, many of the Jewish students we spoke with said they’d welcome opportunities to discuss the war and the broader conflict. But the “groupthink” on campus was stifling, they complained, whether in Hillel centers that toe a reflexively pro-Israel line or student organizations that demand unquestioned buy-in to a set of progressive orthodoxies.

    Joe, a “disillusioned” student in New England who just received his diploma two weeks ago, reflected, “When my friends complain that the ‘Free Palestine’ stickers on my campus are antisemitic, I think they just don’t want to be uncomfortable.” Discomfort can be productive, he added – as long as it is expressed in an environment that values intellectual risk-taking, dialogue across difference, and empathy.

    Research discussed in this article was sponsored by the Mandel Center for Studies in Jewish Education at Brandeis University.

    – ref. Conflicted, disillusioned, disengaged: The unsettled center of Jewish student opinion after Oct. 7 – https://theconversation.com/conflicted-disillusioned-disengaged-the-unsettled-center-of-jewish-student-opinion-after-oct-7-257521

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: Sleep loss rewires the brain for cravings and weight gain – a neurologist explains the science behind the cycle

    Source: The Conversation – USA – By Joanna Fong-Isariyawongse, Associate Professor of Neurology, University of Pittsburgh

    Getting enough sleep is one of the most effective ways to restore metabolic balance in the brain and body. SimpleImages/Moment via Getty Images

    You stayed up too late scrolling through your phone, answering emails or watching just one more episode. The next morning, you feel groggy and irritable. That sugary pastry or greasy breakfast sandwich suddenly looks more appealing than your usual yogurt and berries. By the afternoon, chips or candy from the break room call your name. This isn’t just about willpower. Your brain, short on rest, is nudging you toward quick, high-calorie fixes.

    There is a reason why this cycle repeats itself so predictably. Research shows that insufficient sleep disrupts hunger signals, weakens self-control, impairs glucose metabolism and increases your risk of weight gain. These changes can occur rapidly, even after a single night of poor sleep, and can become more harmful over time if left unaddressed.

    I am a neurologist specializing in sleep science and its impact on health.

    Sleep deprivation affects millions. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, more than one-third of U.S. adults regularly get less than seven hours of sleep per night. Nearly three-quarters of adolescents fall short of the recommended 8-10 hours sleep during the school week.

    While anyone can suffer from sleep loss, essential workers and first responders, including nurses, firefighters and emergency personnel, are especially vulnerable due to night shifts and rotating schedules. These patterns disrupt the body’s internal clock and are linked to increased cravings, poor eating habits and elevated risks for obesity and metabolic disease. Fortunately, even a few nights of consistent, high-quality sleep can help rebalance key systems and start to reverse some of these effects.

    How sleep deficits disrupt hunger hormones

    Your body regulates hunger through a hormonal feedback loop involving two key hormones.

    Ghrelin, produced primarily in the stomach, signals that you are hungry, while leptin, which is produced in the fat cells, tells your brain that you are full. Even one night of restricted sleep increases the release of ghrelin and decreases leptin, which leads to greater hunger and reduced satisfaction after eating. This shift is driven by changes in how the body regulates hunger and stress. Your brain becomes less responsive to fullness signals, while at the same time ramping up stress hormones that can increase cravings and appetite.

    These changes are not subtle. In controlled lab studies, healthy adults reported increased hunger and stronger cravings for calorie-dense foods after sleeping only four to five hours. The effect worsens with ongoing sleep deficits, which can lead to a chronically elevated appetite.

    Sleep is as important as diet and exercise in maintaining a healthy weight.

    Why the brain shifts into reward mode

    Sleep loss changes how your brain evaluates food.

    Imaging studies show that after just one night of sleep deprivation, the prefrontal cortex, which is responsible for decision-making and impulse control, has reduced activity. At the same time, reward-related areas such as the amygdala and the nucleus accumbens, a part of the brain that drives motivation and reward-seeking, become more reactive to tempting food cues.

    In simple terms, your brain becomes more tempted by junk food and less capable of resisting it. Participants in sleep deprivation studies not only rated high-calorie foods as more desirable but were also more likely to choose them, regardless of how hungry they actually felt.

    Your metabolism slows, leading to increased fat storage

    Sleep is also critical for blood sugar control.

    When you’re well rested, your body efficiently uses insulin to move sugar out of your bloodstream and into your cells for energy. But even one night of partial sleep can reduce insulin sensitivity by up to 25%, leaving more sugar circulating in your blood.

    If your body can’t process sugar effectively, it’s more likely to convert it into fat. This contributes to weight gain, especially around the abdomen. Over time, poor sleep is associated with higher risk for Type 2 diabetes and metabolic syndrome, a group of health issues such as high blood pressure, belly fat and high blood sugar that raise the risk for heart disease and diabetes.

    On top of this, sleep loss raises cortisol, your body’s main stress hormone. Elevated cortisol encourages fat storage, especially in the abdominal region, and can further disrupt appetite regulation.

    Sleep is your metabolic reset button

    In a culture that glorifies hustle and late nights, sleep is often treated as optional. But your body doesn’t see it that way. Sleep is not downtime. It is active, essential repair. It is when your brain recalibrates hunger and reward signals, your hormones reset and your metabolism stabilizes.

    Just one or two nights of quality sleep can begin to undo the damage from prior sleep loss and restore your body’s natural balance.

    So the next time you find yourself reaching for junk food after a short night, recognize that your biology is not failing you. It is reacting to stress and fatigue. The most effective way to restore balance isn’t a crash diet or caffeine. It’s sleep.

    Sleep is not a luxury. It is your most powerful tool for appetite control, energy regulation and long-term health.

    Joanna Fong-Isariyawongse does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

    – ref. Sleep loss rewires the brain for cravings and weight gain – a neurologist explains the science behind the cycle – https://theconversation.com/sleep-loss-rewires-the-brain-for-cravings-and-weight-gain-a-neurologist-explains-the-science-behind-the-cycle-255726

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: Most Americans believe misinformation is a problem — federal research cuts will only make the problem worse

    Source: The Conversation – USA – By H. Colleen Sinclair, Associate Research Professor of Social Psychology, Louisiana State University

    Americans say the government and social media companies need to do something about misinformation and disinformation. Boris Zhitkov/Getty Images

    Research on misinformation and disinformation has become the latest casualty of the Trump administration’s restructuring of federal research priorities.

    Following President Donald Trump’s executive order on “ending federal censorship,” the National Science Foundation canceled hundreds of grants that supported research on misinformation and disinformation.

    Misinformation refers to misleading narratives shared by people unaware that content is false. Disinformation is deliberately generated and shared misleading content, when the sharer knows the narrative is suspect.

    The overwhelming majority of Americans – 95% – believe misinformation’s misleading narratives are a problem.

    Americans also believe that consumers, the government and social media companies need to do something about it. Defunding research on misinformation and disinformation is, thus, the opposite of what Americans want. Without research, the ability to combat misleading narratives will be impaired.

    The attack on misleading narrative research

    Trump’s executive order claims that the Biden administration used research on misleading narratives to limit social media companies’ free speech.

    The Supreme Court had already rejected this claim in a 2024 case.

    Still, Trump and GOP politicians continue to demand disinformation researchers defend themselves, including in the March 2025 “censorship industrial complex” hearings, which explored alleged government censorship under the Biden administration.

    The U.S. State Department, additionally, is soliciting all communications between government offices and disinformation researchers for evidence of censorship.

    Trump’s executive order to “restore free speech,” the hearings and the State Department decision all imply that those conducting misleading narrative research are enemies of the First Amendment’s guarantee of free speech.

    These actions have already led to significant problems – death threats and harassment included – for disinformation researchers, particularly women.

    So let’s tackle what research on misinformation and disinformation is and isn’t.

    Misleading content

    Misinformation and disinformation researchers examine the sources of misleading content. They also study the spread of that content. And they investigate ways to reduce its harmful impacts.

    For instance, as a social psychologist who studies disinformation and misinformation, I examine the nature of misleading content. I study and then share information about the manipulation tactics used by people who spread disinformation to influence others. My aim is to better inform the public about how to protect themselves from deception.

    Sharing this information is free speech, not barring free speech.

    Yet, some think this research leads to censorship when platforms choose to use the knowledge to label or remove suspect content or ban its primary spreaders. That’s what U.S. Rep. Jim Jordan argued in launching investigations in 2023 into disinformation research.

    It is important to note, however, that the constitutional definition of censorship establishes that only the government – not citizens or businesses – can be censors.

    So private companies have the right to make their own decisions about the content they put on their platforms.

    Trump’s own platform, Truth Social, bans certain material such as “sexual content and explicit language,” but also anything moderators deem as trying to “trick, defraud, or mislead us and other users.” Yet, 75% of the conspiracy theories shared on the platform come from Trump’s account.

    Further, both Trump and Elon Musk, self-proclaimed free speech advocates, have been accused of squelching content on their platforms that is critical of them.

    Musk claimed the suppression of accounts on X was a result of the site’s algorithm reducing “the reach of a user if they’re frequently blocked or muted by other, credible users.” Truth Social representatives claim accounts were banned due to “bot mitigation” procedures, and authentic accounts may be reinstated if their classification as inauthentic was invalid.

    Research shows that conservatives are more susceptible to misinformation than liberals.
    klevo/Getty Images

    Is it censorship?

    Republicans say social media companies have been biased against their content, censoring it or banning conservatives unfairly.

    The “censorship industrial complex” hearings held by the House Foreign Affairs South and Central Asia Subcommittee were based on the premise that not only was misleading narrative research part of the alleged “censorship industrial complex,” but that it was focused on conservative voices.

    But there isn’t evidence to support this assertion.

    Research from 2020 shows that conservative voices are amplified on social media networks.

    When research does show that conservative authors have posts labeled or removed, or that their accounts are suspended at higher rates than liberal content, it also reveals that it is because conservative posts are significantly more likely to share misinformation than liberal posts.

    This was found in a recent study of X users. Researchers tracked whose posts got tagged as false or misleading more in “community notes” – X’s alternative and Meta’s proposed alternative to fact checking – and it was conservative posts, because they were more likely to include false content than liberal posts.

    Furthermore, an April 2025 study shows conservatives are more susceptible to misleading content and more likely to be targeted by it than liberals.

    Misleading America

    Those accusing misleading narrative researchers of censorship misrepresent the nature and intent of the research and researchers. And they are using disinformation tactics to do so.

    Here’s how.

    The misleading information about censorship and bias has been repeated so much through the media and from political leaders, as evident in Trump’s executive order, that many Republicans believe it’s true. This repetition produces what psychologists call the illusory truth effect, where as few as three repetitions convince the human mind something is true.

    Researchers have also identified a tactic known as “accusation in a mirror.” That’s when someone falsely accuses one’s perceived opponents of conducting, plotting or desiring to commit the same transgressions that one plans to commit or is already committing.

    So censorship accusations from an administration that is removing books from libraries, erasing history from monuments and websites, and deleting data archives constitute “accusations in a mirror.”

    Other tactics include “accusation by anecdote.” When strong evidence is in short supply, people who spread disinformation point repeatedly to individual stories – sometimes completely fabricated – that are exceptions to, and not representative of, the larger reality.

    Facts on fact-checking

    Similar anecdotal attacks are used to try to dismiss fact-checkers, whose conclusions can identify and discredit disinformation, leading to its tagging or removal from social media. This is done by highlighting an incident where fact-checkers “got it wrong.”

    These attacks on fact-checking come despite the fact that many of those most controversial decisions were made by platforms, not fact-checkers.

    Indeed, fact-checking does work to reduce the transmission of misleading content.

    Research shows little bias in choice of who is fact-checked.
    Liudmila Chernetska/Getty Images

    In studies of the perceived effectiveness of professional fact-checkers versus algorithms and everyday users, fact-checkers are rated the most effective.

    When Republicans do report distrust of fact-checkers, it’s because they perceive the fact-checkers are biased. Yet research shows little bias in choice of who is fact-checked, just that prominent and prolific speakers get checked more.

    When shown fact-checking results of specific posts, even conservatives often agree the right decision was made.

    Seeking solutions

    Account bans or threats of account suspensions may be more effective than fact-checks at stopping the flow of misinformation, but they are also more controversial. They are considered more akin to censorship than fact-check labels.

    Misinformation research would benefit from identifying solutions that conservatives and liberals agree on.

    Examples include giving people the option, like on social media platform Bluesky, to turn misinformation moderation on or off.

    But Trump’s executive order seeks to ban that research. Thus, instead of providing protections, the order will likely weaken Americans’ defenses.

    H. Colleen Sinclair receives funding from a variety of government and foundation sources. The statements and opinions included in this The Conversation article are solely the author’s. Any statements and opinions included in these pages are not those of the Social Research and Evaluation Center, the College of Human Sciences & Education, the Louisiana State University, or the LSU Board of Supervisors.

    – ref. Most Americans believe misinformation is a problem — federal research cuts will only make the problem worse – https://theconversation.com/most-americans-believe-misinformation-is-a-problem-federal-research-cuts-will-only-make-the-problem-worse-255355

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: Is Mars really red? A physicist explains the planet’s reddish hue and why it looks different to some telescopes

    Source: The Conversation – USA – By David Joffe, Associate Professor of Physics, Kennesaw State University

    Siccar Point, photographed by the Curiosity rover, is near Mars’ Gale Crater. NASA/JPL-Caltech/MSSS; Processing & License: Kevin M. Gill

    Curious Kids is a series for children of all ages. If you have a question you’d like an expert to answer, send it to CuriousKidsUS@theconversation.com.

    Is Mars really as red as people say it is? – Jasmine, age 14, Everson, Washington

    People from cultures across the world have been looking at Mars since ancient times. Because it appears reddish, it has often been called the red planet.

    The English name for the planet comes from the Romans, who named it after their god of war because its color reminded them of blood. In reality, the reddish color of Mars comes from iron oxide in the rocks and dust covering its surface.

    Your blood is also red because of a mixture of iron and oxygen in a molecule called hemoglobin. So in a way, the ancient connection between the planet Mars and blood wasn’t completely wrong. Rust, which is a common form of iron oxide found here on Earth, also often has a reddish color.

    Iron oxide, found in rust on old metal machinery, is the compound that colors rocks and dust on Mars’ surface reddish brown.
    Lars Hammar/Flickr, CC BY-NC-SA

    In my current research on exoplanets, I observe different types of signals from planets beyond Earth. Lots of interesting physics goes into how researchers perceive the colors of planets and stars through different types of telescopes.

    Observing Mars with probes

    If you look closely at pictures of Mars taken by rovers on its surface, you can see that most of the planet isn’t purely red, but more of a rusty brown or tan color.

    You can see Mars’ rusty color in this photo taken by the Viking lander.
    NASA/JPL

    Probes sent from Earth have taken pictures showing rocks with a rusty color. A 1976 picture from the Viking lander, the very first spacecraft to land on Mars, shows the Martian ground covered with a layer of rusty orange dust.

    Not all of Mars’ surface has the same color. At the poles, its ice caps appear white. These ice caps contain frozen water, like the ice we usually find on Earth, but these ice caps are also covered by a layer of frozen carbon dioxide – dry ice.

    This layer of dry ice can evaporate very quickly when sunlight shines on it and grows back again when it becomes dark. This process causes the white ice caps to grow and shrink in size depending on the Martian seasons.

    This picture from the Hubble Space Telescope shows the planet with the same rusty color covering large parts of its surface.
    NASA, ESA, Zolt G. Levay (STScI)

    Beyond visible light

    Mars also gives off light in colors that you can’t see with your eyes but that scientists can measure with special cameras on telescopes.

    Light itself can be thought of not only as a wave but also as a stream of particles called photons. The amount of energy carried by each photon is related to its color. For example, blue and violet photons have more energy than orange and red photons.

    The rainbow of visible light that you can see is only a small slice of all the kinds of light. Some telescopes can detect light with a longer wavelength, such as infrared light, or light with a shorter wavelength, such as ultraviolet light. Others can detect X-rays or radio waves.
    Inductiveload, NASA/Wikimedia Commons, CC BY-SA

    Ultraviolet photons have even more energy than the photons you can see with your eyes. These photons are found in direct sunlight, and because they have so much energy, they can damage the cells in your body. You can use sunscreen to protect yourself from them.

    Infrared photons have less energy than the photons you can see with your eyes, and you don’t need any special protection from them. This is how some types of night-vision goggles work: They can see light in the infrared spectrum as well as the visible color spectrum. Scientists can take pictures of Mars in the infrared spectrum using special cameras that work almost like night-vision goggles for telescopes.

    The Hubble Space Telescope could take pictures in both visible light and infrared light.
    NASA, James Bell (Cornell University), Justin Maki (NASA-JPL), Mike J. Wolff (SSI)

    The colors on the infrared picture aren’t really what the infrared light looks like, because you can’t see those colors with your eyes. They are called “false colors,” and researchers add them to look at the picture more easily.

    When you compare the visible color picture and the infrared picture, you can see some of the same features – and the ice caps are visible in both sets of colors.

    A UV view of Mars with the MAVEN spacecraft.
    NASA/LASP/CU Boulder

    NASA’s MAVEN spacecraft, launched in 2013, has even taken pictures with ultraviolet light, giving scientists a different view of both the surface of Mars and its atmosphere.

    Each new type of picture tells scientists more about the Martian landscape. They hope to use these details to answer questions about how Mars formed, how long it had active volcanoes, where its atmosphere came from and whether it had liquid water on its surface.

    Astronomers are always looking for new ways to take telescope pictures outside of the regular visible spectrum. They can even make images using radio waves, microwaves, X-rays and gamma rays. Each part of the spectrum they can use to look at an object in space represents new information they can learn from.

    Even though people have been looking at Mars since ancient times, we still have much to learn about this fascinating neighbor.

    Hello, curious kids! Do you have a question you’d like an expert to answer? Ask an adult to send your question to CuriousKidsUS@theconversation.com. Please tell us your name, age and the city where you live.

    And since curiosity has no age limit – adults, let us know what you’re wondering, too. We won’t be able to answer every question, but we will do our best.

    David Joffe receives funding from the NASA Office of STEM Engagement through a grant from the Georgia Space Grant Consortium

    – ref. Is Mars really red? A physicist explains the planet’s reddish hue and why it looks different to some telescopes – https://theconversation.com/is-mars-really-red-a-physicist-explains-the-planets-reddish-hue-and-why-it-looks-different-to-some-telescopes-256398

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: RNA has newly identified role: Repairing serious DNA damage to maintain the genome

    Source: The Conversation – USA – By Francesca Storici, Professor of Biological Sciences, Georgia Institute of Technology

    Double-strand breaks in DNA can be deadly. Victor Golmer/iStock via Getty Images Plus

    Your DNA is continually damaged by sources both inside and outside your body. One especially severe form of damage called a double-strand break involves the severing of both strands of the DNA double helix.

    Double-strand breaks are among the most difficult forms of DNA damage for cells to repair because they disrupt the continuity of DNA and leave no intact template to base new strands on. If misrepaired, these breaks can lead to other mutations that make the genome unstable and increase the risk of many diseases, including cancer, neurodegeneration and immunodeficiency.

    Cells primarily repair double-strand breaks by either rejoining the broken DNA ends or by using another DNA molecule as a template for repair. However, my team and I discovered that RNA, a type of genetic material best known for its role in making proteins, surprisingly plays a key role in facilitating the repair of these harmful breaks.

    These insights could not only pave the way for new treatment strategies for genetic disorders, cancer and neurodegenerative diseases, but also enhance gene-editing technologies.

    Sealing a knowledge gap in DNA repair

    I have spent the past two decades investigating the relationship between RNA and DNA in order to understand how cells maintain genome integrity and how these mechanisms could be harnessed for genetic engineering.

    A long-standing question in the field has been whether RNA in cells helps keep the genome stable beyond acting as a copy of DNA in the process of making proteins and a regulator of gene expression. Studying how RNA might do this has been especially difficult due to its similarity to DNA and how fast it degrades. It’s also technically challenging to tell whether the RNA is directly working to repair DNA or indirectly regulating the process. Traditional models and tools for studying DNA repair have for the most part focused on proteins and DNA, leaving RNA’s potential contributions largely unexplored.

    RNA plays a key role in protein synthesis.

    My team and I were curious about whether RNA might actively participate in fixing double-strand breaks as a first line of defense. To explore this, we used the gene-editing tool CRISPR-Cas9 to make breaks at specific spots in the DNA of human and yeast cells. We then analyzed how RNA influences various aspects of the repair process, including efficiency and outcomes.

    We found that RNA can actively guide the repair process of double-strand breaks. It does this by binding to broken DNA ends, helping align sequences of DNA on a matching strand that isn’t broken. It can also seal gaps or remove mismatched segments, further influencing whether and how the original sequence is restored.

    Additionally, we found that RNA aids in double-strand break repair in both yeast and human cells, suggesting that its role in DNA repair is evolutionary conserved across species. Notably, even low levels of RNA were sufficient to influence the efficiency and outcome of repair, pointing to its broad and previously unrecognized function in maintaining genome stability.

    RNA in control

    By uncovering RNA’s previously unknown function to repair DNA damage, our findings show how RNA may directly contribute to the stability and evolution of the genome. It’s not merely a passive messenger, but an active participant in genome maintenance.

    One type of RNA that has been effectively used in treatments is mRNA.
    Aldona/iStock via Getty Images Plus

    These insights could help researchers develop new ways to target the genomic instability that underlies many diseases, including cancer and neurodegeneration. Traditionally, treatments and gene-editing tools have focused almost exclusively on DNA or proteins. Our findings suggest that modifying RNA in different ways could also influence how cells respond to DNA damage. For example, researchers could design RNA-based therapies to enhance the repair of harmful breaks that could cause cancer, or selectively disrupt DNA break repair in cancer cells to help kill them.

    In addition, these findings could improve the precision of gene-editing technologies like CRISPR by accounting for interactions between RNA and DNA at the site of the cut. This could reduce off-target effects and increase editing precision, ultimately contributing to the development of safer and more effective gene therapies.

    There are still many unanswered questions about how RNA interacts with DNA in the repair process. The evolutionary role that RNA plays in maintaining genome stability is also unclear. But one thing is certain: RNA is no longer just a messenger, it is a molecule with a direct hand in DNA repair, rewriting what researchers know about how cells safeguard their genetic code.

    Francesca Storici consults at Tessera Therapeutics. She has received funding from the National Institutes of Health and the National Science Foundation.

    – ref. RNA has newly identified role: Repairing serious DNA damage to maintain the genome – https://theconversation.com/rna-has-newly-identified-role-repairing-serious-dna-damage-to-maintain-the-genome-256429

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: Will AI take your job? The answer could hinge on the 4 S’s of the technology’s advantages over humans

    Source: The Conversation – USA – By Bruce Schneier, Adjunct Lecturer in Public Policy, Harvard Kennedy School

    Sometimes speed matters – and sometimes it doesn’t. Korakrich Suntornnites/iStock via Getty Images

    If you’ve worried that AI might take your job, deprive you of your livelihood, or maybe even replace your role in society, it probably feels good to see the latest AI tools fail spectacularly. If AI recommends glue as a pizza topping, then you’re safe for another day.

    But the fact remains that AI already has definite advantages over even the most skilled humans, and knowing where these advantages arise — and where they don’t — will be key to adapting to the AI-infused workforce.

    AI will often not be as effective as a human doing the same job. It won’t always know more or be more accurate. And it definitely won’t always be fairer or more reliable. But it may still be used whenever it has an advantage over humans in one of four dimensions: speed, scale, scope and sophistication. Understanding these dimensions is the key to understanding AI-human replacement.

    Speed

    First, speed. There are tasks that humans are perfectly good at but are not nearly as fast as AI. One example is restoring or upscaling images: taking pixelated, noisy or blurry images and making a crisper and higher-resolution version. Humans are good at this; given the right digital tools and enough time, they can fill in fine details. But they are too slow to efficiently process large images or videos.

    AI models can do the job blazingly fast, a capability with important industrial applications. AI-based software is used to enhance satellite and remote sensing data, to compress video files, to make video games run better with cheaper hardware and less energy, to help robots make the right movements, and to model turbulence to help build better internal combustion engines.

    Real-time performance matters in these cases, and the speed of AI is necessary to enable them.

    Scale

    The second dimension of AI’s advantage over humans is scale. AI will increasingly be used in tasks that humans can do well in one place at a time, but that AI can do in millions of places simultaneously. A familiar example is ad targeting and personalization. Human marketers can collect data and predict what types of people will respond to certain advertisements. This capability is important commercially; advertising is a trillion-dollar market globally.

    AI models can do this for every single product, TV show, website and internet user. This is how the modern ad-tech industry works. Real-time bidding markets price the display ads that appear alongside the websites you visit, and advertisers use AI models to decide when they want to pay that price – thousands of times per second.

    Scope

    Next, scope. AI can be advantageous when it does more things than any one person could, even when a human might do better at any one of those tasks. Generative AI systems such as ChatGPT can engage in conversation on any topic, write an essay espousing any position, create poetry in any style and language, write computer code in any programming language, and more. These models may not be superior to skilled humans at any one of these things, but no single human could outperform top-tier generative models across them all.

    It’s the combination of these competencies that generates value. Employers often struggle to find people with talents in disciplines such as software development and data science who also have strong prior knowledge of the employer’s domain. Organizations are likely to continue to rely on human specialists to write the best code and the best persuasive text, but they will increasingly be satisfied with AI when they just need a passable version of either.

    How AI is affecting the job market.

    Sophistication

    Finally, sophistication. AIs can consider more factors in their decisions than humans can, and this can endow them with superhuman performance on specialized tasks. Computers have long been used to keep track of a multiplicity of factors that compound and interact in ways more complex than a human could trace. The 1990s chess-playing computer systems such as Deep Blue succeeded by thinking a dozen or more moves ahead.

    Modern AI systems use a radically different approach: Deep learning systems built from many-layered neural networks take account of complex interactions – often many billions – among many factors. Neural networks now power the best chess-playing models and most other AI systems.

    Chess is not the only domain where eschewing conventional rules and formal logic in favor of highly sophisticated and inscrutable systems has generated progress. The stunning advance of AlphaFold2, the AI model of structural biology whose creators Demis Hassabis and John Jumper were recognized with the Nobel Prize in chemistry in 2024, is another example.

    This breakthrough replaced traditional physics-based systems for predicting how sequences of amino acids would fold into three-dimensional shapes with a 93 million-parameter model, even though it doesn’t account for physical laws. That lack of real-world grounding is not desirable: No one likes the enigmatic nature of these AI systems, and scientists are eager to understand better how they work.

    But the sophistication of AI is providing value to scientists, and its use across scientific fields has grown exponentially in recent years.

    Context matters

    Those are the four dimensions where AI can excel over humans. Accuracy still matters. You wouldn’t want to use an AI that makes graphics look glitchy or targets ads randomly – yet accuracy isn’t the differentiator. The AI doesn’t need superhuman accuracy. It’s enough for AI to be merely good and fast, or adequate and scalable. Increasing scope often comes with an accuracy penalty, because AI can generalize poorly to truly novel tasks. The 4 S’s are sometimes at odds. With a given amount of computing power, you generally have to trade off scale for sophistication.

    Even more interestingly, when an AI takes over a human task, the task can change. Sometimes the AI is just doing things differently. Other times, AI starts doing different things. These changes bring new opportunities and new risks.

    For example, high-frequency trading isn’t just computers trading stocks faster; it’s a fundamentally different kind of trading that enables entirely new strategies, tactics and associated risks. Likewise, AI has developed more sophisticated strategies for the games of chess and Go. And the scale of AI chatbots has changed the nature of propaganda by allowing artificial voices to overwhelm human speech.

    It is this “phase shift,” when changes in degree may transform into changes in kind, where AI’s impacts to society are likely to be most keenly felt. All of this points to the places that AI can have a positive impact. When a system has a bottleneck related to speed, scale, scope or sophistication, or when one of these factors poses a real barrier to being able to accomplish a goal, it makes sense to think about how AI could help.

    Equally, when speed, scale, scope and sophistication are not primary barriers, it makes less sense to use AI. This is why AI auto-suggest features for short communications such as text messages can feel so annoying. They offer little speed advantage and no benefit from sophistication, while sacrificing the sincerity of human communication.

    Many deployments of customer service chatbots also fail this test, which may explain their unpopularity. Companies invest in them because of their scalability, and yet the bots often become a barrier to support rather than a speedy or sophisticated problem solver.

    Where the advantage lies

    Keep this in mind when you encounter a new application for AI or consider AI as a replacement for or an augmentation to a human process. Looking for bottlenecks in speed, scale, scope and sophistication provides a framework for understanding where AI provides value, and equally where the unique capabilities of the human species give us an enduring advantage.

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

    – ref. Will AI take your job? The answer could hinge on the 4 S’s of the technology’s advantages over humans – https://theconversation.com/will-ai-take-your-job-the-answer-could-hinge-on-the-4-ss-of-the-technologys-advantages-over-humans-258469

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-Evening Report: ‘Be brave’ warning to nations against deepsea mining from UNOC

    By Laura Bergamo in Nice, France

    The UN Ocean Conference (UNOC) concluded today with significant progress made towards the ratification of the High Seas Treaty and a strong statement on a new plastics treaty signed by 95 governments.

    Once ratified, it will be the only legal tool that can create protected areas in international waters, making it fundamental to protecting 30 percent of the world’s oceans by 2030.

    Fifty countries, plus the European Union, have now ratified the Treaty.

    New Zealand has signed but is yet to ratify.

    Deep sea mining rose up the agenda in the conference debates, demonstrating the urgency of opposing this industry.

    The expectation from civil society and a large group of states, including both co-hosts of UNOC, was that governments would make progress towards stopping deep sea mining in Nice.

    UN Secretary-General Guterres said the deep sea should not become the “wild west“.

    Four new pledges
    French President Emmanuel Macron said a deep sea mining moratorium is an international necessity. Four new countries pledged their support for a moratorium at UNOC, bringing the total to 37.

    Attention now turns to what actions governments will take in July to stop this industry from starting.

    Megan Randles, Greenpeace head of delegation regarding the High Seas Treaty and progress towards stopping deep sea mining, said: “High Seas Treaty ratification is within touching distance, but the progress made here in Nice feels hollow as this UN Ocean Conference ends without more tangible commitments to stopping deep sea mining.

    “We’ve heard lots of fine words here in Nice, but these need to turn into tangible action.

    “Countries must be brave, stand up for global cooperation and make history by stopping deep sea mining this year.

    “They can do this by committing to a moratorium on deep sea mining at next month’s International Seabed Authority meeting.

    “We applaud those who have already taken a stand, and urge all others to be on the right side of history by stopping deep sea mining.”

    Attention on ISA meeting
    Following this UNOC, attention now turns to the International Seabed Authority (ISA) meetings in July. In the face of The Metals Company teaming up with US President Donald Trump to mine the global oceans, the upcoming ISA provides a space where governments can come together to defend the deep ocean by adopting a moratorium to stop this destructive industry.

    Negotiations on a Global Plastics Treaty resume in August.

    John Hocevar, oceans campaign director, Greenpeace USA said: “The majority of countries have spoken when they signed on to the Nice Call for an Ambitious Plastics Treaty that they want an agreement that will reduce plastic production. Now, as we end the UN Ocean Conference and head on to the Global Plastics Treaty negotiations in Geneva this August, they must act.

    “The world cannot afford a weak treaty dictated by oil-soaked obstructionists.

    “The ambitious majority must rise to this moment, firmly hold the line and ensure that we will have a Global Plastic Treaty that cuts plastic production, protects human health, and delivers justice for Indigenous Peoples and communities on the frontlines.

    “Governments need to show that multilateralism still works for people and the planet, not the profits of a greedy few.”

    Driving ecological collapse
    Nichanan Thantanwit, project leader, Ocean Justice Project, said: “Coastal and Indigenous communities, including small-scale fishers, have protected the ocean for generations. Now they are being pushed aside by industries driving ecological collapse and human rights violations.

    “As the UN Ocean Conference ends, governments must recognise small-scale fishers and Indigenous Peoples as rights-holders, secure their access and role in marine governance, and stop destructive practices such as bottom trawling and harmful aquaculture.

    “There is no ocean protection without the people who have protected it all along.”

    The anticipated Nice Ocean Action Plan, which consists of a political declaration and a series of voluntary commitments, will be announced later today at the end of the conference.

    None will be legally binding, so governments need to act strongly during the next ISA meeting in July and at plastic treaty negotiations in August.

    Republished from Greenpeace Aotearoa with permission.

    Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: ‘Be brave’ warning to nations against deepsea mining from UNOC

    By Laura Bergamo in Nice, France

    The UN Ocean Conference (UNOC) concluded today with significant progress made towards the ratification of the High Seas Treaty and a strong statement on a new plastics treaty signed by 95 governments.

    Once ratified, it will be the only legal tool that can create protected areas in international waters, making it fundamental to protecting 30 percent of the world’s oceans by 2030.

    Fifty countries, plus the European Union, have now ratified the Treaty.

    New Zealand has signed but is yet to ratify.

    Deep sea mining rose up the agenda in the conference debates, demonstrating the urgency of opposing this industry.

    The expectation from civil society and a large group of states, including both co-hosts of UNOC, was that governments would make progress towards stopping deep sea mining in Nice.

    UN Secretary-General Guterres said the deep sea should not become the “wild west“.

    Four new pledges
    French President Emmanuel Macron said a deep sea mining moratorium is an international necessity. Four new countries pledged their support for a moratorium at UNOC, bringing the total to 37.

    Attention now turns to what actions governments will take in July to stop this industry from starting.

    Megan Randles, Greenpeace head of delegation regarding the High Seas Treaty and progress towards stopping deep sea mining, said: “High Seas Treaty ratification is within touching distance, but the progress made here in Nice feels hollow as this UN Ocean Conference ends without more tangible commitments to stopping deep sea mining.

    “We’ve heard lots of fine words here in Nice, but these need to turn into tangible action.

    “Countries must be brave, stand up for global cooperation and make history by stopping deep sea mining this year.

    “They can do this by committing to a moratorium on deep sea mining at next month’s International Seabed Authority meeting.

    “We applaud those who have already taken a stand, and urge all others to be on the right side of history by stopping deep sea mining.”

    Attention on ISA meeting
    Following this UNOC, attention now turns to the International Seabed Authority (ISA) meetings in July. In the face of The Metals Company teaming up with US President Donald Trump to mine the global oceans, the upcoming ISA provides a space where governments can come together to defend the deep ocean by adopting a moratorium to stop this destructive industry.

    Negotiations on a Global Plastics Treaty resume in August.

    John Hocevar, oceans campaign director, Greenpeace USA said: “The majority of countries have spoken when they signed on to the Nice Call for an Ambitious Plastics Treaty that they want an agreement that will reduce plastic production. Now, as we end the UN Ocean Conference and head on to the Global Plastics Treaty negotiations in Geneva this August, they must act.

    “The world cannot afford a weak treaty dictated by oil-soaked obstructionists.

    “The ambitious majority must rise to this moment, firmly hold the line and ensure that we will have a Global Plastic Treaty that cuts plastic production, protects human health, and delivers justice for Indigenous Peoples and communities on the frontlines.

    “Governments need to show that multilateralism still works for people and the planet, not the profits of a greedy few.”

    Driving ecological collapse
    Nichanan Thantanwit, project leader, Ocean Justice Project, said: “Coastal and Indigenous communities, including small-scale fishers, have protected the ocean for generations. Now they are being pushed aside by industries driving ecological collapse and human rights violations.

    “As the UN Ocean Conference ends, governments must recognise small-scale fishers and Indigenous Peoples as rights-holders, secure their access and role in marine governance, and stop destructive practices such as bottom trawling and harmful aquaculture.

    “There is no ocean protection without the people who have protected it all along.”

    The anticipated Nice Ocean Action Plan, which consists of a political declaration and a series of voluntary commitments, will be announced later today at the end of the conference.

    None will be legally binding, so governments need to act strongly during the next ISA meeting in July and at plastic treaty negotiations in August.

    Republished from Greenpeace Aotearoa with permission.

    Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Samoan fashion designer fatally shot at Salt Lake City ‘no kings’ protest

    RNZ Pacific

    A renowned Samoan fashion designer was fatally shot at the “No Kings” protest in Salt Lake City on Saturday, the Salt Lake City Police Department (SLCPD) has confirmed.

    Arthur Folasa Ah Loo, known as Afa Ah Loo, an “innocent bystander” at the protest, died despite efforts by paramedics to save his life, police said.

    Ah Loo, a Utah resident, died at the hospital. The Utah Office of the Medical Examiner will determine the official cause and manner of death.

    The SLPCD said the incident began about 7.56pm local time when a sergeant assigned to the SLCPD Motor Squad reported hearing gunfire near 151 South State Street.

    It said the sergeant and his squad were working to facilitate traffic and help to ensure public safety during a permitted demonstration that drew an estimated 10,000 participants.

    “As panic spread throughout the area, hundreds of people ran for safety, hiding in parking garages, behind barriers, and going into nearby businesses.

    “The first officers on scene notified SLCPD’s incident management team using their police radios.”

    The SLCPD said officers quickly moved in to secure the scene and search for any active threats and found a man who had been shot and immediately began life-saving efforts.

    “Our thoughts are with the family and friends of the 39-year-old man who was killed, and with the many community members who were impacted by this traumatic incident,” Salt Lake City police chief Brian Redd said.

    “When this shooting happened, the response of our officers and detectives was fast, brave, and highly coordinated. It speaks to the calibre of this great department and our law enforcement partners.”

    Detectives working to thoroughly investigate
     The SLCPD said about 8pm, members of its Violent Criminal Apprehension Team (VCAT) and Gang Unit were flagged down near 102 South 200 East, where officers found a man crouching among a group of people with a gunshot wound.

    The man is identified as 24-year-old Arturo Gamboa, who was dressed in all black clothing and wearing a black mask.

    “As officers approached, community members pointed out a nearby firearm, which was described as an AR15-style rifle.

    “Officers also located a gas mask, black clothing, and a backpack in close proximity. The items were collected and processed by the SLCPD Crime Lab.

    “Paramedics took Gamboa to the hospital. Detectives later booked Gamboa into the Salt Lake County Metro Jail on a charge of murder.

    Police said officers also detained two men who were wearing high-visibility neon green vests and carrying handguns.

    Peacekeeping team
    These men were apparently part of the event’s peacekeeping team.

    According to the police, detectives learned during interviews that the two peacekeepers saw Gamboa move away from the crowd and move into a secluded area behind a wall — behavior they found suspicious.

    “One of the peacekeepers told detectives he saw Gamboa pull out an AR15-style rifle from a backpack and begin manipulating it.

    “The peacekeepers drew their firearms and ordered Gamboa to drop the weapon.

    “Witnesses reported Gamboa instead lifted the rifle and began running toward the crowd gathered on State Street, holding the weapon in a firing position.

    “In response, one of the peacekeepers fired three rounds. One round struck Gamboa, while another tragically wounded Mr Ah Loo.”

    “Our detectives are now working to thoroughly investigate the circumstances surrounding this incident,” Redd said.

    “We will not allow this individual act to create fear in our community.”

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

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Samoan fashion designer fatally shot at Salt Lake City ‘no kings’ protest

    RNZ Pacific

    A renowned Samoan fashion designer was fatally shot at the “No Kings” protest in Salt Lake City on Saturday, the Salt Lake City Police Department (SLCPD) has confirmed.

    Arthur Folasa Ah Loo, known as Afa Ah Loo, an “innocent bystander” at the protest, died despite efforts by paramedics to save his life, police said.

    Ah Loo, a Utah resident, died at the hospital. The Utah Office of the Medical Examiner will determine the official cause and manner of death.

    The SLPCD said the incident began about 7.56pm local time when a sergeant assigned to the SLCPD Motor Squad reported hearing gunfire near 151 South State Street.

    It said the sergeant and his squad were working to facilitate traffic and help to ensure public safety during a permitted demonstration that drew an estimated 10,000 participants.

    “As panic spread throughout the area, hundreds of people ran for safety, hiding in parking garages, behind barriers, and going into nearby businesses.

    “The first officers on scene notified SLCPD’s incident management team using their police radios.”

    The SLCPD said officers quickly moved in to secure the scene and search for any active threats and found a man who had been shot and immediately began life-saving efforts.

    “Our thoughts are with the family and friends of the 39-year-old man who was killed, and with the many community members who were impacted by this traumatic incident,” Salt Lake City police chief Brian Redd said.

    “When this shooting happened, the response of our officers and detectives was fast, brave, and highly coordinated. It speaks to the calibre of this great department and our law enforcement partners.”

    Detectives working to thoroughly investigate
     The SLCPD said about 8pm, members of its Violent Criminal Apprehension Team (VCAT) and Gang Unit were flagged down near 102 South 200 East, where officers found a man crouching among a group of people with a gunshot wound.

    The man is identified as 24-year-old Arturo Gamboa, who was dressed in all black clothing and wearing a black mask.

    “As officers approached, community members pointed out a nearby firearm, which was described as an AR15-style rifle.

    “Officers also located a gas mask, black clothing, and a backpack in close proximity. The items were collected and processed by the SLCPD Crime Lab.

    “Paramedics took Gamboa to the hospital. Detectives later booked Gamboa into the Salt Lake County Metro Jail on a charge of murder.

    Police said officers also detained two men who were wearing high-visibility neon green vests and carrying handguns.

    Peacekeeping team
    These men were apparently part of the event’s peacekeeping team.

    According to the police, detectives learned during interviews that the two peacekeepers saw Gamboa move away from the crowd and move into a secluded area behind a wall — behavior they found suspicious.

    “One of the peacekeepers told detectives he saw Gamboa pull out an AR15-style rifle from a backpack and begin manipulating it.

    “The peacekeepers drew their firearms and ordered Gamboa to drop the weapon.

    “Witnesses reported Gamboa instead lifted the rifle and began running toward the crowd gathered on State Street, holding the weapon in a firing position.

    “In response, one of the peacekeepers fired three rounds. One round struck Gamboa, while another tragically wounded Mr Ah Loo.”

    “Our detectives are now working to thoroughly investigate the circumstances surrounding this incident,” Redd said.

    “We will not allow this individual act to create fear in our community.”

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

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-OSI Global: Living on Mars: are there lessons from prisons?

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Lucy Berthoud, Professor of Space Systems Engineering, University of Bristol

    I have been researching the possibility of living on Mars for several years. But it took an invitation to give a talk about space at HMP Erlestoke in England – a category C men’s prison – to make me realise that there are a surprising number of similarities between the challenges that would be faced by would-be Martians and daily life in jail.

    The talk was part of a literary festival called “Penned Up”. As I discussed the parallels between Mars and prison with those incarcerated at HMP Erlestoke, the men agreed with me that, despite seeming so different, they both would share long-term isolation, confinement and psychological challenges (not to mention bad food).

    So, as plans for exploration of Mars advance and we consider how to survive on this distant and hostile world, could there be important lessons from an environment closer to home – the modern prison? Understanding this overlap could be critical for ensuring the wellbeing of those we send to Mars. We know the terrible conditions of prisons can have a severe impact on people, and perhaps we can learn from that to help keep others safe and well.

    It’s important to recognise the fundamental distinction between prisons and space exploration. Prisons are a punitive measure, depriving individuals of their freedom, while space exploration is a highly selective, paid endeavour undertaken by choice. As I saw, living in prison is a profoundly challenging environment. Despite legal minimum standards, overcrowding and shortages mean many prisons fail to uphold them.

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

    The profoundly negative impact of poor prison conditions highlights the urgent need for effective solutions. But the knowledge gained from this could also then help support people in other challenging and remote environments, such as space exploration.

    We have many years’ experience of studying psychological and team challenges from isolated, confined and extreme environments such as submarines, polar research stations, space simulators on Earth and space stations. But few people have looked to the public prisons on our doorstep for what we can learn.

    Extreme routine

    Daily life in both a prison and in space is governed by structured routines. In prisons, days are often planned down to the minute, dictating everything from waking to sleeping. This rigid scheduling is mirrored by mission-controlled timetables for astronauts.

    Mandatory work is another common thread. Prison routines often include assigned tasks, such as kitchen or laundry duty, which serve the needs of the facility. Similarly, Martian astronauts would need to perform scientific experiments, equipment maintenance and resource production duties. Mandatory work can sometimes lead to resentment if there’s little autonomy.

    Basic food and limited sleep is another common factor. When I asked the inmates what the food was like, they laughed. A staff member explained that the budget is £3.08 per person (the government benchmark figure is even less at £2.70 per person per day). Prison food can be of low nutritional value and meal times are fixed, impacting both health and morale.

    The author, Lucy Berthoud, giving a talk at HMP Erlestoke.
    Photo by Andy Aitchison., CC BY-SA

    On Mars, astronauts would consume carefully planned dehydrated meals, which would no doubt have a higher budget and be nutritionally richer, but it is not as good as freshly cooked food back on Earth.

    Sleep, a fundamental need, can also be elusive in both environments. In prisons, it can be disrupted by noise and poor conditions. Astronauts aboard the International Space Station are continuously exposed to an average noise level of 72 decibels, which is equivalent to the sound of motorway traffic from a distance of 15 metres.

    Limited space

    Prison cells are famously small, often measuring little more than a few square metres, and frequently housing several people. They offer minimal personal space and little privacy. The European standard – if it’s upheld – is a minimum of four square metres per person in a single cell.

    Similarly, Martian habitats, designed to function with the minimum resources and with a focus on life support, will also be challenging space-wise.

    For example, the Apollo Command and Service module which went to lunar orbit had a volume of just 6.2 cubic metres for three astronauts. This lack of personal space and privacy in both settings can lead to heightened stress levels and challenges to emotion regulation.

    Both places also provide a potentially high-risk environment. The threats may be different – often interpersonal in prisons – from violence, sexual assault, and extortion to potential staff abuse-, mainly environmental – radiation, cold and lack of air on Mars. But they can lead to a persistent state of vigilance which can significantly impact mental well-being in both cases.

    Dealing with isolation

    Perhaps the biggest parallels lie in the psychological challenges arising from prolonged isolation. Imprisonment involves a significant separation from family, friends, and the outside world, leading to feelings of isolation and loneliness.

    While astronauts on a mission to Mars are highly trained professionals and have chosen to go, they too will operate under a significant degree of control. With a likely round trip time of two years, astronauts embarking on a mission to Mars may also experience isolation. This could lead to feelings of disconnection and homesickness, as has been studied in volunteers on Earth.

    Prisoners experience a near-complete lack of control over even the most basic aspects of their daily existence. You can see the importance of feelings of control in the fact that even astronauts and cosmonauts sometimes rail against or even disobey mission control’s strict guidelines, as the Nasa astronaut Clayton Anderson has written about in his candid book The Ordinary Spaceman.

    Social dynamics

    Both groups require living in close quarters with a limited, unchanging set of companions. In prison, people are confined to a relatively small social environment, which can lead to complex subcultures and the potential for interpersonal conflict and violence, though supportive relationships can also be a crucial resource.

    Equally, for Martian crews, strong group cohesion and mutual support will be absolutely essential. However, the inherent stress of the mission, confined living conditions and significant communication delays with Earth could still lead to tensions.

    So we see that lessons learned from studying the experiences of people in jails can provide valuable insights for mitigating the negative impacts of life on Mars.

    Strategies such as designing habitats to maximise personal space and privacy, improving food and maximising autonomy will be needed for Martian travel. It will be important to provide access to meaningful activities to combat monotony, ensuring access to comprehensive mental health support and fostering strong social connections and support networks. These have all been studied in prisons.

    By trying to improve prison conditions and continuing to learn from prisons, we can better prepare our pioneers for the unprecedented challenges of making a home on Mars, improving their chances of survival and their ability to thrive.

    Lucy Berthoud receives funding from UK Space Agency and UKRI.

    – ref. Living on Mars: are there lessons from prisons? – https://theconversation.com/living-on-mars-are-there-lessons-from-prisons-258502

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –