NewzIntel.com

Category: Global

  • MIL-OSI Global: In talking with Tehran, Trump is reversing course on Iran – could a new nuclear deal be next?

    Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Jeffrey Fields, Associate Professor of the Practice of International Relations, USC Dornsife College of Letters, Arts and Sciences

    A mural on the outer walls of the former US embassy in Tehran depicts two men in negotiation. Majid Saeedi/Getty Images

    Negotiators from Iran and the United States are set to meet again in Oman on April 26, prompting hopes the two countries might be moving, albeit tentatively, toward a new nuclear accord.

    The scheduled talks follow the two previous rounds of indirect negotiations that have taken place under the new Trump administration. Those discussions were deemed to have yielded enough progress to merit sending nuclear experts from both sides to begin outlining the specifics of a potential framework for a deal.

    The development is particularly notable given that Trump, in 2018, unilaterally walked the U.S. away from a multilateral agreement with Iran. That deal, negotiated during the Obama presidency, put restrictions on Tehran’s nuclear program in return for sanctions relief. Trump{,} instead turned to a policy that involved tightening the financial screws on Iran through enhanced sanctions while issuing implicit military threats.

    But that approach failed to disrupt Iran’s nuclear program.

    Now, rather than revive the maximum pressure policy of his first term, Trump – ever keen to be seen as a dealmaker – has given his team the green light for the renewed diplomacy and even reportedly rebuffed, for now, Israel’s desire to launch military strikes against Tehran.

    Jaw-jaw over war-war

    The turn to diplomacy returns Iran-US relations to where they began during the Obama administration, with attempts to encourage Iran to curb or eliminate its ability to enrich uranium.

    Only this time, with the U.S. having left the previous deal in 2018, Iran has had seven years to improve on its enrichment capability and stockpile vastly more uranium than had been allowed under the abandoned accord.

    As a long-time expert on U.S. foreign policy and nuclear nonproliferation, I believe Trump has a unique opportunity to not only reinstate a similar nuclear agreement to the one he rejected, but also forge a more encompassing deal – and foster better relations with the Islamic Republic in the process.

    The front pages of Iran’s newspapers in a sidewalk newsstand in Tehran, Iran, on April 13, 2025.
    Alireza/Middle East Images/AFP via Getty Images

    There are real signs that a potential deal could be in the offing, and it is certainly true that Trump likes the optics of dealmaking.

    But an agreement is by no means certain. Any progress toward a deal will be challenged by a number of factors, not least internal divisions and opposition within the Trump administration and skepticism among some in the Islamic Republic, along with uncertainty over a succession plan for the aging Ayatollah Khamenei.

    Conservative hawks are still abundant in both countries and could yet derail any easing of diplomatic tensions.

    A checkered diplomatic past

    There are also decades of mistrust to overcome.

    It is an understatement to say that the U.S. and Iran have had a fraught relationship, such as it is, since the Iranian revolution of 1979 and takeover of the U.S. embassy in Tehran the same year.

    Many Iranians would say relations have been strained since 1953, when the U.S. and the United Kingdom orchestrated the overthrow of Mohammad Mossadegh, the democratically elected prime minister of Iran.

    Washington and Tehran have not had formal diplomatic relations since 1979, and the two countries have been locked in a decadeslong battle for influence in the Middle East. Today, tensions remain high over Iranian support for a so-called axis of resistance against the West and in particular U.S. interests in the Middle East. That axis includes Hamas in Palestine, Hezbollah in Lebanon and the Houthis in Yemen.

    For its part, Tehran has long bristled at American hegemony in the region, including its resolute support for Israel and its history of military action. In recent years that U.S. action has included the direct assaults on Iranian assets and personnel. In particular, Tehran is still angry about the 2020 assassination of Qassem Soleimani, the head of the Quds Force of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps.

    Standing atop these various disputes, Iran’s nuclear ambitions have proved a constant source of contention for the United States and Israel, the latter being the only nuclear power in the region.

    The prospect of warmer relations between the two sides first emerged during the Obama administration – though Iran sounded out the Bush administration in 2003 only to be rebuffed.

    U.S. diplomats began making contact with Iranian counterparts in 2009 when Undersecretary of State for Political Affairs William Burns met with an Iranian negotiator in Geneva. The so-called P5+1 began direct negotiations with Iran in 2013. This paved the way for the eventual Iran nuclear deal, or Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), in 2015. In that agreement – concluded by the U.S., Iran, China, Russia and a slew of European nations – Iran agreed to restrictions on its nuclear program, including limits on the level to which it could enrich uranium, which was capped well short of what would be necessary for a nuclear weapon. In return, multilateral and bilateral U.S. sanctions would be removed.

    Many observers saw it as a win-win, with the restraints on a burgeoning nuclear power coupled with hopes that greater economic engagement with the international community that might temper some of Iran’s more provocative foreign policy behavior.

    Yet Israel and Saudi Arabia worried the deal did not entirely eliminate Iran’s ability to enrich uranium, and right-wing critics in the U.S. complained it did not address Iran’s ballistic missile programs or support for militant groups in the region.

    Benjamin Netanyahu, Prime Minister of Israel, draws a red line on a graphic of a bomb while discussing Iran at the United Nations on Sept. 27, 2012.
    Mario Tama/Getty Images

    When Trump first took office in 2016, he and his foreign policy team pledged to reverse Obama’s course and close the door on any diplomatic opening. Making good on his pledge, Trump unilaterally withdrew U.S. support for the JCPOA despite Iran’s continued compliance with the terms of the agreement and reinstated sanctions.

    Donald the dealmaker?

    So what has changed? Well, several things.

    While Trump’s withdrawal from the JCPOA was welcomed by Republicans, it did nothing to stop Iran from enhancing its ability to enrich uranium.

    Meanwhile, Saudi Arabia, eager to transform its image and diversify economically, now supports a deal it opposed during the Obama administration.

    In this second term, Trump’s anti-Iran impulses are still there. But despite his rhetoric of a military option should a deal not be struck, Trump has on numerous occasions stated his opposition to U.S. involvement in another war in the Middle East.

    In addition, Iran has suffered a number of blows in recent years that has left it more isolated in the region. Iranian-aligned Hamas and Hezbollah have been seriously weakened as a result of military action by Israel. Meanwhile, strikes within Iran by Israel have shown the potential reach of Israeli missiles – and the apparent willingness of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to use them. Further, the removal of President Bashar al-Assad in Syria has deprived Iran of another regional ally.

    Tehran is also contending with a more fragile domestic economy than it had during negotiations for JCPOA.

    With Iran weakened regionally and Trump’s main global focus being China, a diplomatic avenue with Iran seems entirely in line with Trump’s view of himself as a dealmaker.

    A deal is not a given

    With two rounds of meetings completed and the move now to more technical aspects of a possible agreement negotiated by experts, there appears to be a credible window of opportunity for diplomacy.

    This could mean a new agreement that retains the core aspects of the deal Trump previously abandoned. I’m not convinced a new deal will look any different from the previous in terms of the enrichment aspect.

    There are still a number of potential roadblocks standing in the way of any potential deal, however.

    As was the case with Trump’s meetings with North Korean leader Kim Jong-un during his first term, the president seems to be less interested in details than spectacle. While it was quite amazing for an American leader to meet with his North Korean counterpart, ultimately, no policy meaningfully changed because of it.

    On Iran and other issues, the president displays little patience for complicated policy details. Complicating matters is that the U.S. administration is riven by intense factionalism, with many Iran hawks who would be seemingly opposed to a deal – including Secretary of State Marco Rubio and national security adviser Mike Waltz. They could rub up against newly confirmed Undersecretary of Defense for policy Elbridge Colby and Vice President JD Vance, both of whom have in the past advocated for a more pro-diplomacy line on Iran.

    As has become a common theme in Trump administration foreign policy – even with its own allies on issues like trade – it’s unclear what a Trump administration policy on Iran actually is, and whether a political commitment exists to carry through any ultimate deal.

    Top Trump foreign policy negotiator Steve Witkoff, who has no national security experience, has exemplified this tension. Tasked with leading negotiations with Iran, Witkoff has already having been forced to walk back his contention that the U.S. was only seeking to cap the level of uranium enrichment rather than eliminate the entirety of the program.

    For its part, Iran has proved that it is serious about diplomacy, previously having accepted Barack Obama’s “extended hand.”

    But Tehran is unlikely to capitulate on core interests or allow itself to be humiliated by the terms of any agreement.

    Ultimately, the main question to watch is whether a deal with Iran is to be concluded by pragmatists – and then to what extent, narrow or expansive – or derailed by hawks within the administration.

    Jeffrey Fields receives funding from the Carnegie Corporation of New York.

    – ref. In talking with Tehran, Trump is reversing course on Iran – could a new nuclear deal be next? – https://theconversation.com/in-talking-with-tehran-trump-is-reversing-course-on-iran-could-a-new-nuclear-deal-be-next-254770

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: Tensions over Kashmir and a warming planet have placed the Indus Waters Treaty on life support

    Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Fazlul Haq, Postdoctoral Scholar at the Byrd Polar and Climate Research Center, The Ohio State University

    The Indus River Valley in the cold desert of Ladakh, India. Pallava Bagla/Getty Images

    In 1995, World Bank Vice President Ismail Serageldin warned that whereas the conflicts of the previous 100 years had been over oil, “the wars of the next century will be fought over water.”

    Thirty years on, that prediction is being tested in one of the world’s most volatile regions: Kashmir.

    On April 24, 2025, the government of India announced that it would downgrade diplomatic ties with its neighbor Pakistan over an attack by militants in Kashmir that killed 26 tourists. As part of that cooling of relations, India said it would immediately suspend the Indus Waters Treaty – a decades-old agreement that allowed both countries to share water use from the rivers that flow from India into Pakistan. Pakistan has promised reciprocal moves and warned that any disruption to its water supply would be considered “an act of war.”

    The current flareup escalated quickly, but has a long history. At the Indus Basin Water Project at the Ohio State University, we are engaged in a multiyear project investigating the transboundary water dispute between Pakistan and India.

    Fazlul Haq walks through the Gargo Glacier floodplain in the Upper Indus Basin.
    Fazlul Haq/Indus Basin Water Project/Ohio State University, CC BY-SA

    I am currently in Pakistan conducting fieldwork in Kashmir and across the Indus Basin. Geopolitical tensions in the region, which have been worsened by the recent attack in Pahalgam, Indian-administered Kashmir, do pose a major threat to the water treaty. So too does another factor that is helping escalate the tensions: climate change

    A fair solution to water disputes

    The Indus River has supported life for thousands of years since the Harappan civilization, which flourished around 2600 to 1900 B.C.E. in what is now Pakistan and northwest India.

    After the partition of India in 1947, control of the Indus River system became a major source of tension between the two nations that emerged from partition: India and Pakistan. Disputes arose almost immediately, particularly when India temporarily halted water flow to Pakistan in 1948, prompting fears over agricultural collapse. These early confrontations led to years of negotiations, culminating in the signing of the Indus Waters Treaty in 1960.


    Fazlul Haq/Bryan Mark/Byrd Polar and Climate Research Center/Ohio State University, CC BY

    Brokered by the World Bank, the Indus Waters Treaty has long been hailed as one of the most successful transboundary water agreements.

    It divided the Indus Basin between the two countries, giving India control over the eastern rivers – Ravi, Beas and Sutlej – and Pakistan control over the western rivers: Indus, Jhelum and Chenab.

    At the time, this was seen as a fair solution. But the treaty was designed for a very different world. Back then, India and Pakistan were newly independent countries working to establish themselves amid a world divided by the Cold War.

    When it was signed, Pakistan’s population was 46 million, and India’s was 436 million. Today, those numbers have surged to over 240 million and 1.4 billion, respectively.

    Today, more than 300 million people rely on the Indus River Basin for their survival.

    This has put increased pressure on the precious source of water that sits between the two nuclear rivals. The effects of global warming, and the continued fighting over the disputed region of Kashmir, has only added to those tensions.

    Impact of melting glaciers

    Many of the problems of today are down to what wasn’t included in the treaty, rather than what was.

    At the time of signing, there was a lack of comprehensive studies on glacier mass balance. The assumption was that the Himalayan glaciers, which feed the Indus River system, were relatively stable.

    This lack of detailed measurements meant that future changes due to climate variability and glacial melt were not factored into the treaty’s design, nor were factors such as groundwater depletion, water pollution from pesticides, fertilizer use and industrial waste. Similarly, the potential for large-scale hydraulic development of the region through dams, reservoirs, canals and hydroelectricity were largely ignored in the treaty.

    Reflecting contemporary assumptions about the stability of glaciers, the negotiators assumed that hydrological patterns would remain persistent with the historic flows.

    Instead, the glaciers feeding the Indus Basin began to melt. In fact, they are now melting at record rates.

    Construction site of the Diamer-Bhasha Dam along the Indus River.
    Fazlul Haq/Indus Basin Water Project/Ohio State University

    The World Meteorological Organization reported that 2023 was globally the driest year in over three decades, with below-normal river flows disrupting agriculture and ecosystems. Global glaciers also saw their largest mass loss in 50 years, releasing over 600 gigatons of water into rivers and oceans.

    The Himalayan glaciers, which supply 60-70% of the Indus River’s summer flow, are shrinking rapidly. A 2019 study estimates they are losing 8 billion tons of ice annually.

    And a study by the International Center for Integrated Mountain Development found that Hindu Kush-Karakoram-Himalayan glaciers melted 65% faster in 2011–2020 compared with the previous decade.

    The rate of glacier melt poses a significant challenge to the treaty’s long-term effectiveness to ensure essential water for all the people who rely on the Indus River Basin. While it may temporarily increase river flow, it threatens the long-term availability of water.

    Indeed, if this trend continues, water shortages will intensify, particularly for Pakistan, which depends heavily on the Indus during dry seasons.

    Another failing of the Indus Waters Treaty is that it only addresses surface water distribution and does not include provisions for managing groundwater extraction, which has become a significant issue in both India and Pakistan.

    In the Punjab region – often referred to as the breadbasket of both nations – heavy reliance on groundwater is leading to overexploitation and depletion.

    Groundwater now contributes a large portion – about 48% – of water withdrawals in the Indus Basin, particularly during dry seasons. Yet there is no transboundary framework to oversee the shared management of this resource as reported by the World Bank.

    A disputed region

    It wasn’t just climate change and groundwater that were ignored by the drafters of the Indus Waters Treaty. Indian and Pakistan negotiators also neglected the issue and status of Kashmir.

    Kashmir has been at the heart of India-Pakistan tensions since Partition in 1947. At the time of independence, the princely state of Jammu and Kashmir was given the option to accede to either India or Pakistan. Though the region had a Muslim majority, the Hindu ruler chose to accede to India, triggering the first India-Pakistan war.

    This led to a U.N.-mediated ceasefire in 1949 and the creation of the Line of Control, effectively dividing the territory between Indian-administered and Pakistani-administered Kashmir. Since then, Kashmir has remained a disputed territory, claimed in full by both countries and serving as the flashpoint for two additional wars in 1965 and 1999, and numerous skirmishes.

    A ruined village in Jammu and Kashmir, India, during the war between India and Pakistan in 1965.
    Hulton-Deutsch Collection/Corbis via Getty Images

    Despite being the primary source of water for the basin, Kashmiris have had no role in negotiations or decision-making under the treaty.

    The region’s agricultural and hydropower potential has been limited due to restrictions on the use of its water resources, with only 19.8% of hydropower potential utilized. This means that Kashmiris on both sides — despite living in a water-rich region — have been unable to fully benefit from the resources flowing through their land, as water infrastructure has primarily served downstream users and broader national interests rather than local development.

    Some scholars argue that the treaty intentionally facilitated hydraulic development in Jammu and Kashmir, but not necessarily in ways that served local interests.

    India’s hydropower projects in Kashmir — such as the Baglihar and Kishanganga dams — have been a major point of contention. Pakistan has repeatedly raised concerns that these projects could alter water flows, particularly during crucial agricultural seasons.

    However, the Indus Waters Treaty does not provide explicit mechanisms for resolving such regional disputes, leaving Kashmir’s hydrological and political concerns unaddressed.

    Tensions over hydropower projects in Kashmir were bringing India and Pakistan toward diplomatic deadlock long before the recent attack.

    The Kishanganga and Ratle dam disputes, now under arbitration in The Hague, exposed the treaty’s growing inability to manage transboundary water conflicts.

    Then in September 2024, India formally called for a review of the Indus Waters Treaty, citing demographic shifts, energy needs and security concerns over Kashmir.

    Indian Border Security Force soldiers patrol on a boat along the Pargwal area of the India-Pakistan international border.
    Nitin Kanotra/Hindustan Times via Getty Images

    The treaty now exists in a state of limbo. While it technically remains in force, India’s formal notice for review has introduced uncertainty, halting key cooperative mechanisms and casting doubt on the treaty’s long-term durability.

    An equitable and sustainable treaty?

    Moving forward, I argue, any reform or renegotiation of the Indus Waters Treaty will, if it is to have lasting success, need to acknowledge the hydrological significance of Kashmir while engaging voices from across the region.

    Excluding Kashmir from future discussions – and neither India nor Pakistan has formally proposed including Kashmiri stakeholders – would only reinforce a long-standing pattern of marginalization, where decisions about its resources are made without considering the needs of its people.

    As debates on “climate-proofing” the treaty continue, ensuring Kashmiri perspectives are included will be critical for building a more equitable and sustainable transboundary water framework.

    Nicholas Breyfogle, Madhumita Dutta, Alexander Thompson, and Bryan G. Mark at the Indus Basin Water Project at the Ohio State University contributed to this article.

    Fazlul Haq 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. Tensions over Kashmir and a warming planet have placed the Indus Waters Treaty on life support – https://theconversation.com/tensions-over-kashmir-and-a-warming-planet-have-placed-the-indus-waters-treaty-on-life-support-244699

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: Why sitting down – and getting back up – might be the most important health test you do today

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Catherine Norton, Associate Professor Sport & Exercise Nutrition, University of Limerick

    Ruslan Huzau/Shutterstock

    If you or someone you love finds it difficult to stand up from the toilet without using your hands, it might seem like a small issue. But in health and ageing, this movement – known as the “sit-to-stand” – can be a red flag. It’s one of the strongest indicators of frailty, a condition that can threaten independence and quality of life.

    Frailty increases the risk of falls, hospital stays, slower recovery from illness, and early death. It’s more than just about being thin or weak – it’s about reduced muscle mass, strength and energy – and it’s one of the main reasons older adults lose the ability to live on their own.

    This loss of muscle strength and function isn’t just about growing old. It often begins as early as your 30s and accelerates after 60. The good news? It’s not inevitable. Frailty can be prevented – and even reversed – with simple, targeted changes in diet and physical activity.

    Surprisingly, carrying a bit of extra weight in older age can be beneficial. Studies suggest that being in the “overweight” BMI range is often linked to better outcomes than being underweight – as long as you’re carrying muscle, not just fat.

    What matters most is body composition – the ratio of muscle to fat. Lean muscle supports mobility, balance and resilience during illness or injury. In contrast, excess visceral fat (around the internal organs) increases the risk of disease.

    Muscle is made of protein and, as we age, our bodies become less efficient at using it. That means older adults need to eat more protein than younger people – not less. Aim for 1 to 1.2 grams of protein per kilogram of body weight per day. For a 70kg person, that’s around 70–85 grams daily, ideally spread across all meals.

    Good protein sources include:
    • Eggs, milk, cheese and yoghurt
    • Chicken, turkey, beef and oily fish
    • Lentils, beans, tofu and soy products
    • Nuts, seeds, and whole grains

    Also, don’t forget total calorie intake. If you’re undereating overall – especially during illness – your body will break down muscle to compensate, even if protein intake is adequate.

    Move it or lose it

    Muscle only stays if you use it – the “move it or lose it” mantra applies here. Regular strength training is one of the best things you can do to stay independent and strong.

    Aim for two to three sessions per week focused on strength. You don’t need a gym – bodyweight exercises at home count too.

    Effective strength activities include:

    • Sit-to-stand repetitions from a chair
    • Functional movements like stair climbing, gardening, or carrying groceries
    • Squats, lunges and push-ups
    • Using resistance bands or light weights

    Walking, swimming and cycling are great for cardiovascular and joint health, but they aren’t enough on their own to maintain muscle mass. Challenge your muscles regularly – even in small ways.

    Things to watch out for:

    • Struggling to stand up from low chairs or the toilet
    • Clothes feeling looser around the thighs or arms
    • Feeling weaker carrying bags or household items
    • Avoiding stairs or certain movements you used to do easily

    Catching these signs early can help you act before it affects your independence.

    Here are five things you can do for healthy ageing

    1. Prioritise protein: include it in every meal. Think eggs for breakfast, beans at lunch, and fish or chicken for dinner.
    2. Strength train weekly: find something you enjoy and can stick with – gardening, resistance bands, or a local class.
    3. Don’t fear healthy weight gain: especially if you’ve recently lost weight unintentionally. Focus on building muscle, not fat.
    4. Stay active daily: every movement counts – walking, stretching, or lifting household objects.
    5. Monitor your function: the sit-to-stand test is a simple way to track your strength. If it’s getting harder, take action.

    We can’t stop ageing, but we can age well. That means making muscle health a priority – not just for appearance, but for independence, dignity and quality of life.

    So, whether you’re thinking about your future or supporting an older loved one, remember this: building and maintaining muscle is one of the most powerful tools we have for healthy ageing.

    With the right habits, you can protect your strength, mobility and independence.

    And next time you sit down – think about how easily you get back up. That small action might be the most important health check you do all day.

    Catherine Norton receives funding organisations e.g. Food for Health Ireland, DAFM, Enterprise Ireland

    – ref. Why sitting down – and getting back up – might be the most important health test you do today – https://theconversation.com/why-sitting-down-and-getting-back-up-might-be-the-most-important-health-test-you-do-today-255057

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: Trump can’t decide who to blame for a failing peace deal that would only lead to further conflict

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Stefan Wolff, Professor of International Security, University of Birmingham

    After a second consecutive night of deadly Russian air attacks – against the capital Kyiv on April 23 and the eastern Ukrainian city of Pavlohrad on April 24 – a ceasefire in Ukraine seems as unrealistic as ever.

    With Russian commitment to a deal clearly lacking, the situation is not helped by US president Donald Trump. He can’t quite seem to decide who he will ultimately blame if his efforts to agree a ceasefire fall apart.

    Before the strikes on Kyiv, Trump blamed Ukrainian president, Volodymyr Zelensky, for holding up a deal by refusing to recognise Crimea as Russian. The following day, he chided Vladimir Putin for the attacks, calling them “not necessary, and very bad timing” and imploring Putin to stop.

    The main stumbling bloc on the path to a ceasefire is what a final peace agreement might look like and what concessions Kyiv – and its European allies – will accept. Ukraine’s and Europe’s position on this is unequivocal: no recognition of the illegal Russian annexation.

    This position is also backed by opinion polls in Ukraine, which indicate only limited support for some, temporary concessions to Russia. The mayor of Kyiv, Vitali Klitschko, also suggested that temporarily giving up territory “can be a solution”.

    The deal that Trump’s envoy Steve Witkoff apparently negotiated over three rounds of talks in Russia was roundly rejected by Ukraine and Britain, France and Germany, who lead the “coalition of the willing” of countries pledging support for Ukraine.



    Read more:
    Could Trump be leading the world into recession?

    This prompted Witkoff and US secretary of state Marco Rubio to pull out of follow-up talks in London on April 24. These ended with a fairly vacuous statement about a commitment to continuing “close coordination and … further talks soon”.

    And even this now appears as quite a stretch. Coinciding with Witkoff’s fourth trip to see Putin on April 25, European and Ukrainian counterproposals were released that reject most of the terms offered by Trump or at least defer their negotiation until after a ceasefire is in place.

    Why is it failing?

    The impasse is unsurprising. Washington’s proposal included a US commitment to recognise Crimea as Russian, a promise that Ukraine would not join Nato and accept Moscow’s control of the territories in eastern Ukraine that it currently illegally occupies. It also included lifting all sanctions against Russia.

    In other words, Ukraine would give up large parts of territory and receive no security guarantees, while Russia is rewarded with reintegration into the global economy.

    It is the territorial concessions asked of Kyiv which are especially problematic. Quite apart from the fact that they are in fundamental breach of basic principles of international law – the sovereignty and territorial integrity of states – they are unlikely to provide solid foundations for a durable peace.

    Much like the idea of Trump’s Ukraine envoy, Keith Kellogg, to divide Ukraine like post-1945 Berlin, it betrays a fundamental misunderstanding of what, and who, drives this war.

    Recent London peace talks in April failed to make progress.

    Kellogg later clarified that he was not suggesting a partition of Ukraine, but his proposal would have exactly the same effect as Trump’s most recent offer.

    Both proposals accept the permanent loss to Ukraine of territory that Russia currently controls. Where they differ is that Kellogg wants to introduce a European-led reassurance force west of the river Dnipro, while leaving the defence of remaining Ukrainian-controlled territory to Kyiv’s armed forces.

    If accepted by Russia – unlikely as this is given Russia’s repeated and unequivocal rejection of European peacekeeping troops in Ukraine – it would provide at best a minimal security guarantee for a part of Ukrainian territory.

    What it would almost inevitably mean, however, is a repeat of the permanent ceasefire violations along the disengagement zone in eastern Ukraine where Russian and Ukrainian forces would continue to face each other.

    This is what happened after the ill-fated Minsk accords of 2014 and 2015, which were meant to settle the conflict after Russia’s invasion of Donbas in 2014. A further Russian invasion could be just around the corner once the Kremlin felt that it had sufficiently recovered from the current war.



    Read more:
    Ukraine deal: Europe has learned from the failed 2015 Minsk accords with Putin. Trump has not

    The lack of a credible deterrent is one key difference between the situation in Ukraine as envisaged by Washington and other historical and contemporary parallels, including Korea and Cyprus.

    Korea was partitioned in 1945 and has been protected by a large US military presence since the Korean war in 1953. After the Turkish invasion of 1974, Cyprus was divided between Greek and Turkish Cypriots along a partition line secured by an armed UN peacekeeping mission.

    Trump has ruled out any US troop commitment as part of securing a ceasefire in Ukraine. And the idea of a UN force in Ukraine, briefly floated during the presidency of Petro Poroshenko between 2014 and 2019, never got any traction, and is not likely to be accepted by Putin now.

    The assumed parallels with the situation in Germany after the second world war are even more tenuous. Not only did Nazi Germany unconditionally surrender in May 1945 but its division into allied zones of occupation was formally and unanimously agreed by the victorious allies in Potsdam in August 1945.

    Muddling up Potsdam and Munich?

    By the time two separate German states of East and West Germany were established in 1949, the western allies had fallen out with Stalin but remained firmly united in Nato and western Europe. So the west German state was firmly protected under the US nuclear umbrella.

    The agreements made in Potsdam didn’t have the same implication of permanence as the US suggestion to formally recognise Crimea as Russian territory. The suggestion was always that the allied forces would pull out of Germany at some stage, and restore the country’s sovereignty.

    Most importantly, the allies did not reward the aggressor in the war or create the conditions for merely a brief interruption for an aggressor’s revisionist agenda.

    After all, what has driven Putin’s war against Ukraine is his conviction that “the collapse of the Soviet Union was the greatest geopolitical catastrophe of the century”.

    The Trump administration deludes itself that it is applying the lessons of Potsdam by recognising Russia’s territorial conquests in Ukraine and handing them over. Instead it is falling into the trap of the 1938 Munich Agreement. Negotiators in Munich tried, but failed, to avoid the second world war by appeasing and not deterring an insatiable aggressor – a historical lesson that doesn’t need repeating.

    Stefan Wolff is a past recipient of grant funding from the Natural Environment Research Council of the UK, the United States Institute of Peace, the Economic and Social Research Council of the UK, the British Academy, the NATO Science for Peace Programme, the EU Framework Programmes 6 and 7 and Horizon 2020, as well as the EU’s Jean Monnet Programme. He is a Trustee and Honorary Treasurer of the Political Studies Association of the UK and a Senior Research Fellow at the Foreign Policy Centre in London.

    Tetyana Malyarenko 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. Trump can’t decide who to blame for a failing peace deal that would only lead to further conflict – https://theconversation.com/trump-cant-decide-who-to-blame-for-a-failing-peace-deal-that-would-only-lead-to-further-conflict-254841

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: Trump’s ‘Garden of American Heroes’ is a monument to celebrity and achievement – paid for with humanities funding that benefits everyday Americans

    Source: The Conversation – USA – By Jennifer Tucker, Professor of History, Wesleyan University

    Donald Trump speaks in front of a wax statue of John Wayne at the John Wayne Museum in Winterset, Iowa, during the 2016 GOP primaries. Al Drago/CQ Roll Call via Getty Images

    Donald Trump first came up with his plan for a “National Garden of American Heroes” at the end of his first term, before President Joe Biden quietly tabled it upon replacing Trump in the White House.

    Now, with Trump back in the Oval Office – and with the country’s 250th anniversary fast approaching – the project is back. The National Endowment for the Humanities is seeking to commission 250 statues of famous Americans from a predetermined list, to be displayed at a location yet to be determined.

    It isn’t clear who compiled the list of 250 to be honored. It includes names that are largely recognizable and whose accomplishments are well-known: politicians like Abraham Lincoln and John F. Kennedy; jurists Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Antonin Scalia; activists such as Martin Luther King, Jr. and Harriet Tubman; celebrities such as John Wayne and Julia Child; and sports stars like Kobe Bryant and Babe Ruth.

    Donald Trump announces some famous Black Americans he plans to include in his ‘National Garden of American Heroes’ during a Black History Month event on Feb. 20, 2025, at the White House.

    The statue garden coincides with an executive order from March 2025 in which the Trump administration denounced what it saw as historical revisionism that had recast the country’s “unparalleled legacy of advancing liberty, individual rights, and human happiness.” Instead, it had constructed a story of the nation that portrayed it “as inherently racist, sexist, oppressive, or otherwise irredeemably flawed,” which “fosters a sense of national shame.”

    “We don’t need to overemphasize the negative,” explained Lindsey Halligan, a 35-year-old insurance lawyer who is named in the order as one of the people tasked with reforming museums that receive government funds.

    Trump often casts himself as a man of the people. But as historians, we don’t see a garden of heroes as a populist effort. To us, it represents a top-down approach to U.S. history, akin to the hagiography that Americans already regularly get from movies, television and professional sports.

    And it comes at a cost: It’s going to be paid for with funds that had been previously allotted to tell stories about people and places that may be less familiar than the proposed figures for Trump’s garden. But they’re nonetheless meaningful to countless communities across the nation.

    Only the movers and shakers matter

    Trump’s fixation on America’s luminaries is adjacent to the “great man” theory of history.

    In 1840, Scottish philosopher and historian Thomas Carlyle published “On Heroes, Hero-Worship, and the Heroic in History,” in which he argued that “The History of the world is but the Biography of great men.”

    American biologist and eugenicist Frederick Adams Woods embraced the great man theory in his 1913 work, “The Influence of Monarchs: Steps in a New Science of History.” In it, he investigated 386 rulers in Western Europe from the 12th century until the French Revolution. He proposed a scientific measurement to quantify the relative impact these rulers had on the course of civilization.

    Then and now, many other historians and sociologists have pushed back, arguing that the “Great Man” view of history oversimplifies the past by attributing major historical events to the actions of a few influential individuals, while ignoring broader social, economic and cultural forces.

    Nonetheless, it continues to have broad appeal. It’s very popular among corporate leaders, for example, many of whom like to portray themselves as visionaries, with their business successes proof of their genius.

    Trump’s garden of heroes reflects his penchant for celebrating wealth, champions and successes, akin to what Walt Disney tried to capture with his Disney World ride Carousel of Progress, which highlights American technological advances.

    A national redundancy?

    However, the U.S. already has a national statuary hall, which opened in the U.S. Capitol in 1870. Each state has contributed two statues; for example, Massachusetts honors Samuel Adams and John Winthrop, while Ohio celebrates James Garfield and Thomas Edison.

    Today there are 102 statutes, though just 14 women.

    Importantly, the roster is fluid – not set in stone – and reflects debates over whom the nation ought to celebrate.

    Over time, the representation has become slightly more inclusive. The first woman, Illinois educator Frances Willard, was added in 1905. Only in 2022 did a Black American appear, when educator Mary Bethune replaced a Confederate general from Florida. And in 2024, Johnny Cash replaced James Paul Clarke, a former governor and senator from Arkansas with Confederate sympathies.

    Family members and elected officials attend the unveiling of the statue of Johnny Cash at the U.S. Capitol on Sept. 24, 2024.
    Kent Nishimura/Getty Images

    What about everyday Americans?

    We don’t think there’s anything wrong with celebrating and honoring popular figures in American history. But we do think there’s an issue when it comes at the expense of other historical and archival projects.

    The New York Times reported that US$34 million for the project would come from funds formerly allocated to the National Endowment for the Arts and National Endowment for the Humanities, whose budget has been cut by 85%.

    Many of the grants that have been slashed explore, celebrate and preserve history in ways that stand in stark contrast to a statue garden. They involve, as Gal Beckerman writes in the Atlantic, efforts that “are about asking questions, about uncovering hidden or overlooked experiences, about closely examining texts or adding to the public record.”

    They include one that supports the digitization of local newspapers and archival records; another to collect and preserve oral histories of local communities; a grant that funds the production of documentaries and podcasts about local communities; traveling exhibitions that bring items from the Smithsonian’s collection to small towns and rural areas; and a grant to fund the collection of first-person accounts of Native Americans who attended U.S. government-run boarding schools.

    These and countless similar history projects serve millions of people far from Washington, and they have broad support from lawmakers and citizens of all political stripes.

    In 1938, as forces of fascism gathered in Europe, a Connecticut high school social science teacher said, “The greatest need of America, on the threshold of the greatest epoch of its history, is citizens who understand the past out of which the nation has grown. … Let us look into the souls of the leaders and the common people who have made America great.”

    In his 2016 campaign, Trump promised to work on behalf of everyday Americans – the “forgotten man and woman.” But the proposed statue garden of famous figures cuts out the common people from America’s story – not just as subjects of history, but as its stewards for future generations.

    With funds slashed from organizations dedicated to local history, we wonder how many more stories will go untold.

    Jennifer Tucker has received funding from the National Endowment for the Humanities for research that examines the social and cultural role of modern technology, such as facial recognition, through a historical lens.

    Peter Rutland 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. Trump’s ‘Garden of American Heroes’ is a monument to celebrity and achievement – paid for with humanities funding that benefits everyday Americans – https://theconversation.com/trumps-garden-of-american-heroes-is-a-monument-to-celebrity-and-achievement-paid-for-with-humanities-funding-that-benefits-everyday-americans-254564

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: Why predicting battery performance is like forecasting traffic − and how researchers are making progress

    Source: The Conversation – USA – By Emmanuel Olugbade, Ph.D. Candidate in Mechanical Engineering, Missouri University of Science and Technology

    How much charge is left? It can be hard to know for sure. Olemedia/E+ via Getty Images

    Lithium-ion batteries are quietly powering large parts of the world, including electric vehicles and smartphones. They have revolutionized how people store and use energy. But as these batteries become more central to daily life, they bring more attention to the challenges of managing them and the energy they store safely, efficiently and intelligently.

    I’m a mechanical engineer who studies these nearly ubiquitous batteries. They have been around for decades, yet researchers like me are still trying to fully understand how these batteries behave – especially when they are working hard.

    Batteries may seem simple, but they are as complicated as the real-world uses people devise for them.

    The big picture

    At their core, lithium-ion batteries rely on the movement of charged particles, called ions, of the element lithium between two electric poles, or electrodes. The lithium ions move from the positive electrode to the negative one through a conductive substance called an electrolyte, which can be a solid or a liquid.

    The basics of how a lithium-ion battery works.

    How much energy these batteries store and how well they work depends on a tangle of factors, including the temperature, physical structure of the battery and how the materials age over time.

    Around the world, researchers are trying to answer questions about each of these factors individually and in concert with each other. Some research focuses on improving lifespan and calculating how batteries degrade over time. Other projects are tackling safety under extreme conditions, such as fast-charging use in extreme climates – either hot or cold. Many are exploring entirely new materials that could make batteries cheaper, longer-lasting or safer. And a significant group – including me – are working with computer simulations to improve real-time battery monitoring.

    Real‑time monitoring in your electric vehicle’s battery system functions like a health check: It tracks voltage, current and temperature to estimate how much energy remains so you won’t be stranded with a dead battery.

    But it’s difficult to precisely measure how well each of the energy cells within the battery is performing as they age or as the weather changes from cold in winter to hotter in summer. So the battery management system uses a computer simulation to estimate those factors. When combined with real-time monitoring, the system can prevent overusing the battery, balance charging speed with long-term health, avoid power failures and keep performance high. But there are a lot of variables.

    The traffic analogy

    One of the best ways to understand this challenge is to think about city traffic.

    Let’s say you want to drive across town and need to determine whether your car has enough charge to travel the best route. If your navigation simulator accounted for every stoplight, every construction zone and every vehicle on the road, it would give you a very accurate answer. But it might take an hour to run, by which time the circumstances would have changed and the answer would likely be wrong. That’s not helpful if you’re trying to make a decision right now.

    A simpler model might assume that every road is clear and every car is moving at the speed limit. That simulation delivers a result instantly – but its results are very inaccurate when traffic is heavy or a road is closed. It doesn’t capture the reality of rush hour.

    While you’re driving, the battery management system would do a similar set of calculations to see how much charge is available for the rest of the trip. It would look at the battery’s temperature, how old it is and how much energy the car is asking for, like when going up a steep hill or accelerating quickly to keep up with other cars. But like the navigation simulations, it has to strike a balance between being extremely accurate and giving you useful information before your battery runs out in the middle of your trip.

    The most accurate models, which simulate every chemical reaction inside the battery, are too slow for real-time use. The faster models simplify things so much that they miss key behaviors – especially under stress, such as fast charging or sudden bursts of energy use.

    Managing the flow of electrons to and from a battery is as complicated as managing the flow of traffic on local streets.
    AP Photo/Julio Cortez

    How researchers are bridging the gap

    This trade-off between speed and accuracy is at the heart of battery modeling research today. Scientists and engineers are exploring many ways to solve it.

    Some are rewriting modeling software to make the physics calculations more efficient, reducing complexity without losing the key details. Others, like me, are turning to machine learning – training computers to recognize patterns in data and make fast, accurate predictions without having to solve every underlying equation.

    In my recent work, I used a high-accuracy battery simulator – one of the ones that’s really accurate but very slow – to generate a massive amount of data about how a battery functions when charging and discharging. I used that data to train a machine learning algorithm called XGBoost, which is particularly good at finding patterns in data.

    Then I used software to pair the XGBoost system with a simple, fast-running battery model that captures the basic physics but can miss finer details. The simpler model puts out an initial set of results, and the XGBoost element fine-tunes those to make corrections on the fly, especially when the battery is under strain.

    The result is a hybrid model that is able to respond both quickly and accurately to changes in driving conditions. A driver who floors the accelerator with just the simple model wouldn’t get enough energy; a more detailed model would give the right amount of energy only after it finished all its calculations. My hybrid model delivers a rapid boost of energy without delays.

    Other teams are working on similar hybrid approaches, blending physics and artificial intelligence in creative ways. Some are even building digital twins – real-time virtual replicas of physical batteries – to offer sophisticated simulations that update constantly as conditions change.

    Battery storage pods like these in Arizona can store electricity between when it is generated and when it is needed.
    AP Photo/Ross D. Franklin

    What’s next

    Battery research is moving quickly, and the field is already seeing signs of change. Models are becoming more reliable across a wider range of conditions. Engineers are using real-time monitoring to extend battery life, prevent overheating and improve energy efficiency. Machine learning lets researchers train battery management systems to optimize performance for specific applications, such as high power demands in electric vehicles, daily cycles of home electricity use, short power bursts for drones, or long-duration requirements for building-scale battery systems.

    And there’s more to come: Researchers are working to include other important factors into their battery models, such as heat generation and mechanical stress.

    Some teams are taking hybrid models and compiling their software into lightweight code that runs on microcontrollers inside battery hardware. In practice, that means each battery pack carries its own brain on-board, calculating state-of-charge, estimating aging and tracking thermal or mechanical stress in near-real time. By embedding the model in the device’s electronics, the pack can autonomously adjust its charging and discharging strategy on the fly, making every battery smarter, safer and more efficient.

    As the energy landscape evolves – with more electric vehicles on the road, more renewable energy sources feeding into the grid, and more people relying on batteries in daily life – the ability to understand what a battery is doing in real time becomes more critical than ever.

    Emmanuel Olugbade receives funding from the National Science Foundation.

    – ref. Why predicting battery performance is like forecasting traffic − and how researchers are making progress – https://theconversation.com/why-predicting-battery-performance-is-like-forecasting-traffic-and-how-researchers-are-making-progress-253572

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: ‘Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence’ − an astronomer explains how much evidence scientists need to claim discoveries like extraterrestrial life

    Source: The Conversation – USA – By Chris Impey, University Distinguished Professor of Astronomy, University of Arizona

    The universe is filled with countless galaxies, stars and planets. Astronomers may find life one day, but they will need extraordinary proof. ESA/Euclid/Euclid Consortium/NASA, image processing by J.-C. Cuillandre (CEA Paris-Saclay), G. Anselmi

    The detection of life beyond Earth would be one of the most profound discoveries in the history of science. The Milky Way galaxy alone hosts hundreds of millions of potentially habitable planets. Astronomers are using powerful space telescopes to look for molecular indicators of biology in the atmospheres of the most Earth-like of these planets.

    But so far, no solid evidence of life has ever been found beyond the Earth. A paper published in April 2025 claimed to detect a signature of life in the atmosphere of the planet K2-18b. And while this discovery is intriguing, most astronomers – including the paper’s authors – aren’t ready to claim that it means extraterrestrial life exists. A detection of life would be a remarkable development.

    The astronomer Carl Sagan used the phrase, “Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence,” in regard to searching for alien life. It conveys the idea that there should be a high bar for evidence to support a remarkable claim.

    I’m an astronomer who has written a book about astrobiology. Over my career, I’ve seen some compelling scientific discoveries. But to reach this threshold of finding life beyond Earth, a result needs to fit several important criteria.

    When is a result important and reliable?

    There are three criteria for a scientific result to represent a true discovery and not be subject to uncertainty and doubt. How does the claim of life on K2-18b measure up?

    First, the experiment needs to measure a meaningful and important quantity. Researchers observed K2-18b’s atmosphere with the James Webb Space Telescope and saw a spectral feature that they identified as dimethyl sulfide.

    On Earth, dimethyl sulfide is associated with biology, in particular bacteria and plankton in the oceans. However, it can also arise by other means, so this single molecule is not conclusive proof of life.

    Second, the detection needs to be strong. Every detector has some noise from the random motion of electrons. The signal should be strong enough to have a low probability of arising by chance from this noise.

    The K2-18b detection has a significance of 3-sigma, which means it has a 0.3% probability of arising by chance.

    That sounds low, but most scientists would consider that a weak detection. There are many molecules that could create a feature in the same spectral range.

    The “gold standard” for scientific detection is 5-sigma, which means the probability of the finding happening by chance is less than 0.00006%. For example, physicists at CERN gathered data patiently for two years until they had a 5-sigma detection of the Higgs boson particle, leading to a Nobel Prize one year later in 2013.

    The announcement of the discovery of the Higgs boson took decades from the time Peter Higgs first predicted the existence of the particle. Scientists, such as Joe Incandela shown here, waited until they’d reached that 5-sigma level to say, ‘I think we have it.’

    Third, a result needs to be repeatable. Results are considered reliable when they’ve been repeated – ideally corroborated by other investigators or confirmed using a different instrument. For K2-18b, this might mean detecting other molecules that indicate biology, such as oxygen in the planet’s atmosphere. Without more and better data, most researchers are viewing the claim of life on K2-18b with skepticism.

    Claims of life on Mars

    In the past, some scientists have claimed to have found life much closer to home, on the planet Mars.

    Over a century ago, retired Boston merchant turned astronomer Percival Lowell claimed that linear features he saw on the surface of Mars were canals, constructed by a dying civilization to transport water from the poles to the equator. Artificial waterways on Mars would certainly have been a major discovery, but this example failed the other two criteria: strong evidence and repeatability.

    Lowell was misled by his visual observations, and he was engaging in wishful thinking. No other astronomers could confirm his findings.

    Mars, as taken by the OSIRIS instrument on the ESA Rosetta spacecraft during its February 2007 flyby of the planet and adjusted to show color.
    ESA & MPS for OSIRIS Team MPS/UPD/LAM/IAA/RSSD/INTA/UPM/DASP/IDA, CC BY-SA

    In 1996, NASA held a press conference where a team of scientists presented evidence for biology in the Martian meteorite ALH 84001. Their evidence included an evocative image that seemed to show microfossils in the meteorite.

    However, scientists have come up with explanations for the meteorite’s unusual features that do not involve biology. That extraordinary claim has dissipated.

    More recently, astronomers detected low levels of methane in the atmosphere of Mars. Like dimethyl sulfide and oxygen, methane on Earth is made primarily – but not exclusively – by life. Different spacecraft and rovers on the Martian surface have returned conflicting results, where a detection with one spacecraft was not confirmed by another.

    The low level and variability of methane on Mars is still a mystery. And in the absence of definitive evidence that this very low level of methane has a biological origin, nobody is claiming definitive evidence of life on Mars.

    Claims of advanced civilizations

    Detecting microbial life on Mars or an exoplanet would be dramatic, but the discovery of extraterrestrial civilizations would be truly spectacular.

    The search for extraterrestrial intelligence, or SETI, has been underway for 75 years. No messages have ever been received, but in 1977 a radio telescope in Ohio detected a strong signal that lasted only for a minute.

    This signal was so unusual that an astronomer working at the telescope wrote “Wow!” on the printout, giving the signal its name. Unfortunately, nothing like it has since been detected from that region of the sky, so the Wow! Signal fails the test of repeatability.

    ‘Oumuamua is the first object passing through the solar system that astronomers have identified as having interstellar origins.
    European Southern Observatory/M. Kornmesser

    In 2017, a rocky, cigar-shaped object called ‘Oumuamua was the first known interstellar object to visit the solar system. ‘Oumuamua’s strange shape and trajectory led Harvard astronomer Avi Loeb to argue that it was an alien artifact. However, the object has already left the solar system, so there’s no chance for astronomers to observe it again. And some researchers have gathered evidence suggesting that it’s just a comet.

    While many scientists think we aren’t alone, given the enormous amount of habitable real estate beyond Earth, no detection has cleared the threshold enunciated by Carl Sagan.

    Claims about the universe

    These same criteria apply to research about the entire universe. One particular concern in cosmology is the fact that, unlike the case of planets, there is only one universe to study.

    A cautionary tale comes from attempts to show that the universe went through a period of extremely rapid expansion a fraction of a second after the Big Bang. Cosmologists call this event inflation, and it is invoked to explain why the universe is now smooth and flat.

    In 2014, astronomers claimed to have found evidence for inflation in a subtle signal from microwaves left over after the Big Bang. Within a year, however, the team retracted the result because the signal had a mundane explanation: They had confused dust in our galaxy with a signature of inflation.

    On the other hand, the discovery of the universe’s acceleration shows the success of the scientific method. In 1929, astronomer Edwin Hubble found that the universe was expanding. Then, in 1998, evidence emerged that this cosmic expansion is accelerating. Physicists were startled by this result.

    Two research groups used supernovae to separately trace the expansion. In a friendly rivalry, they used different sets of supernovae but got the same result. Independent corroboration increased their confidence that the universe was accelerating. They called the force behind this accelerating expansion dark energy and received a Nobel Prize in 2011 for its discovery.

    On scales large and small, astronomers try to set a high bar of evidence before claiming a discovery.

    Chris Impey receives funding from the Natonal Science Foundation and the Howard Hughes Medical Institute.

    – ref. ‘Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence’ − an astronomer explains how much evidence scientists need to claim discoveries like extraterrestrial life – https://theconversation.com/extraordinary-claims-require-extraordinary-evidence-an-astronomer-explains-how-much-evidence-scientists-need-to-claim-discoveries-like-extraterrestrial-life-254914

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: ‘I were but little happy, if I could say how much’: Shakespeare’s insights on happiness have held up for more than 400 years

    Source: The Conversation – USA – By Cora Fox, Associate Professor of English and Health Humanities, Arizona State University

    Joanna Vanderham as Desdemona and Hugh Quarshie as the title character in a Royal Shakespeare Company production of ‘Othello.’ Robbie Jack/Corbis via Getty Images

    What is “happiness” – and who gets to be happy?

    Since 2012, the World Happiness Report has measured and compared data from 167 countries. The United States currently ranks 24th, between the U.K. and Belize – its lowest position since the report was first issued. But the 2025 edition – released on March 20, the United Nations’ annual “International Day of Happiness” – starts off not with numbers, but with Shakespeare.

    “In this year’s issue, we focus on the impact of caring and sharing on people’s happiness,” the authors explain. “Like ‘mercy’ in Shakespeare’s ‘Merchant of Venice,’ caring is ‘twice-blessed’ – it blesses those who give and those who receive.”

    Shakespeare’s plays offer many reflections on happiness itself. They are a record of how people in early modern England experienced and thought about joy and satisfaction, and they offer a complex look at just how happiness, like mercy, lives in relationships and the caring exchanges between people.

    Contrary to how we might think about happiness in our everyday lives, it is more than the surge of positive feelings after a great meal, or a workout, or even a great date. The experience of emotions is grounded in both the body and the mind, influenced by human physiology and culture in ways that change depending on time and place. What makes a person happy, therefore, depends on who that person is, as well as where and when they belong – or don’t belong.

    Happiness has a history. I study emotions and early modern literature, so I spend a lot of my time thinking about what Shakespeare has to say about what makes people happy, in his own time and in our own. And also, of course, what makes people unhappy.

    From fortune to joy

    Shakespeare’s birthplace in Stratford-upon-Avon, England.
    Tony Hisgett/Flickr via Wikimedia Commons, CC BY-SA

    “Happiness” derives from the Old Norse word “hap,” which meant “fortune” or “luck,” as historians Phil Withington and Darrin McMahon explain. This earlier sense is found throughout Shakespeare’s works. Today, it survives in the modern word “happenstance” and the expression that something is a “happy accident.”

    But in modern English usage, “happy” as “fortunate” has been almost entirely replaced by a notion of happiness as “joy,” or the more long-term sense of life satisfaction called “well-being.” The term “well-being,” in fact, was introduced into English from the Italian “benessere” around the time of Shakespeare’s birth.

    The word and the concept of happiness were transforming during Shakespeare’s lifetime, and his use of the word in his plays mingles both senses: “fortunate” and “joyful.” That transitional ambiguity emphasizes happiness’ origins in ideas about luck and fate, and it reminds readers and playgoers that happiness is a contingent, fragile thing – something not just individuals, but societies need to carefully cultivate and support.

    For instance, early in “Othello,” the Venetian senator Brabantio describes his daughter Desdemona as “tender, fair, and happy / So opposite to marriage that she shunned / The wealthy, curled darlings of our nation.” Before she elopes with Othello she is “happy” in the sense of “fortunate,” due to her privileged position on the marriage market.

    Later in the same play, though, Othello reunites with his new wife in Cyprus and describes his feelings of joy using this same term:

    …If it were now to die,
    ‘Twere now to be most happy, for I fear
    My soul hath her content so absolute
    That not another comfort like to this
    Succeeds in unknown fate.

    Desdemona responds,

    The heavens forbid
    But that our loves and comforts should increase
    Even as our days do grow!

    They both understand “happy” to mean not just lucky, but “content” and “comfortable,” a more modern understanding. But they also recognize that their comforts depend on “the heavens,” and that happiness is enabled by being fortunate.

    “Othello” is a tragedy, so in the end, the couple will not prove “happy” in either sense. The foreign general is tricked into believing his young wife has been unfaithful. He murders her, then takes his own life.

    The seeds of jealousy are planted and expertly exploited by Othello’s subordinate, Iago, who catalyzes the racial prejudice and misogyny underlying Venetian values to enact his sinister and cruel revenge.

    James Earl Jones playing the title role and Jill Clayburgh as Desdemona in a 1971 production of ‘Othello.’
    Kathleen Ballard/Los Angeles Times/UCLA Library via Wikimedia Commons, CC BY-SA

    Happy insiders and outsiders

    “Othello” sheds light on happiness’s history – but also on its politics.

    While happiness is often upheld as a common good, it is also dependent on cultural forces that make it harder for some individuals to experience. Shared cultural fantasies about happiness tend to create what theorist Sara Ahmed calls “affect aliens”: individuals who, by nature of who they are and how they are treated, experience a disconnect between what their culture conditions them to think should make them happy and their disappointment or exclusion from those positive feelings. Othello, for example, rightly worries that he is somehow foreign to the domestic happiness Desdemona describes, excluded from the joy of Venetian marriage. It turns out he is right.

    Because Othello is foreign and Black and Desdemona is Venetian and white, their marriage does not conform to their society’s expectations for happiness, and that makes them vulnerable to Iago’s deceit.

    Similarly, “The Merchant of Venice” examines the potential for happiness to include or exclude, to build or break communities. Take the quote about mercy that opens the World Happiness Report.

    The phrase appears in a famous courtroom scene, as Portia attempts to persuade a Jewish lender, Shylock, to take pity on Antonio, a Christian man who cannot pay his debts. In their contract, Shylock has stipulated that if Antonio defaults on the loan, the fee will be a “pound of flesh.”

    “The quality of mercy is not strained,” Portia lectures him; it is “twice-blessed,” benefiting both giver and receiver.

    It’s a powerful attempt to save Antonio’s life. But it is also hypocritical: Those cultural norms of caring and mercy seem to apply only to other Christians in the play, and not the Jewish people living alongside them in Venice. In that same scene, Shylock reminds his audience that Antonio and the other Venetians in the room have spit on him and called him a dog. He famously asks why Jewish Venetians are not treated as equal human beings: “If you prick us, do we not bleed?”

    Actor Henry Irving as Shylock in a late 19th-century performance of ‘The Merchant of Venice.’
    Lock & Whitfield/Folger Shakespeare Library via Wikimedia Commons, CC BY-SA

    Shakespeare’s plays repeatedly make the point that the unjust distribution of rights and care among various social groups – Christians and Jews, men and women, citizens and foreigners – challenges the happy effects of benevolence.

    Those social factors are sometimes overlooked in cultures like the U.S., where contemporary notions of happiness are marketed by wellness gurus, influencers and cosmetic companies. Shakespeare’s plays reveal both how happiness is built through communities of care and how it can be weaponized to destroy individuals and the fabric of the community.

    There are obvious victims of prejudice and abuse in Shakespeare’s plays, but he does not just emphasize their individual tragedies. Instead, the plays record how certain values that promote inequality poison relationships that could otherwise support happy networks of family and friends.

    Systems of support

    Pretty much all objective research points to the fact that long-term happiness depends on community, connections and social support: having systems in place to weather what life throws at us.

    And according to both the World Happiness Report and Shakespeare, contentment isn’t just about the actual support you receive but your expectations about people’s willingness to help you. Societies with high levels of trust, like Finland and the Netherlands, tend to be happier – and to have more evenly distributed levels of happiness in their populations.

    Shakespeare’s plays offer blueprints for trust in happy communities. They also offer warnings about the costs of cultural fantasies about happiness that make it more possible for some, but not for all.

    Cora Fox has received funding from an NEH grant for activities not directly related to this research.

    – ref. ‘I were but little happy, if I could say how much’: Shakespeare’s insights on happiness have held up for more than 400 years – https://theconversation.com/i-were-but-little-happy-if-i-could-say-how-much-shakespeares-insights-on-happiness-have-held-up-for-more-than-400-years-198583

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: Trump’s ‘Garden of American Heroes’ is a monument to celebrity and achievement – paid for with history funding that benefits everyday Americans

    Source: The Conversation – USA – By Jennifer Tucker, Professor of History, Wesleyan University

    Donald Trump speaks in front of a wax statue of John Wayne at the John Wayne Museum in Winterset, Iowa, during the 2016 GOP primaries. Al Drago/CQ Roll Call via Getty Images

    Donald Trump first came up with his plan for a “National Garden of American Heroes” at the end of his first term, before President Joe Biden quietly tabled it upon replacing Trump in the White House.

    Now, with Trump back in the Oval Office – and with the country’s 250th anniversary fast approaching – the project is back. The National Endowment for the Humanities is seeking to commission 250 statues of famous Americans from a predetermined list, to be displayed at a location yet to be determined.

    It isn’t clear who compiled the list of 250 to be honored. It includes names that are largely recognizable and whose accomplishments are well-known: politicians like Abraham Lincoln and John F. Kennedy; jurists Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Antonin Scalia; activists such as Martin Luther King, Jr. and Harriet Tubman; celebrities such as John Wayne and Julia Child; and sports stars like Kobe Bryant and Babe Ruth.

    Donald Trump announces some famous Black Americans he plans to include in his ‘National Garden of American Heroes’ during a Black History Month event on Feb. 20, 2025, at the White House.

    The statue garden coincides with an executive order from March 2025 in which the Trump administration denounced what it saw as historical revisionism that had recast the country’s “unparalleled legacy of advancing liberty, individual rights, and human happiness.” Instead, it had constructed a story of the nation that portrayed it “as inherently racist, sexist, oppressive, or otherwise irredeemably flawed,” which “fosters a sense of national shame.”

    “We don’t need to overemphasize the negative,” explained Lindsey Halligan, a 35-year-old insurance lawyer who is named in the order as one of the people tasked with reforming museums that receive government funds.

    Trump often casts himself as a man of the people. But as historians, we don’t see a garden of heroes as a populist effort. To us, it represents a top-down approach to U.S. history, akin to the hagiography that Americans already regularly get from movies, television and professional sports.

    And it comes at a cost: It’s going to be paid for with funds that had been previously allotted to tell stories about people and places that may be less familiar than the proposed figures for Trump’s garden. But they’re nonetheless meaningful to countless communities across the nation.

    Only the movers and shakers matter

    Trump’s fixation on America’s luminaries is adjacent to the “great man” theory of history.

    In 1840, Scottish philosopher and historian Thomas Carlyle published “On Heroes, Hero-Worship, and the Heroic in History,” in which he argued that “The History of the world is but the Biography of great men.”

    American biologist and eugenicist Frederick Adams Woods embraced the great man theory in his 1913 work, “The Influence of Monarchs: Steps in a New Science of History.” In it, he investigated 386 rulers in Western Europe from the 12th century until the French Revolution. He proposed a scientific measurement to quantify the relative impact these rulers had on the course of civilization.

    Then and now, many other historians and sociologists have pushed back, arguing that the “Great Man” view of history oversimplifies the past by attributing major historical events to the actions of a few influential individuals, while ignoring broader social, economic and cultural forces.

    Nonetheless, it continues to have broad appeal. It’s very popular among corporate leaders, for example, many of whom like to portray themselves as visionaries, with their business successes proof of their genius.

    Trump’s garden of heroes reflects his penchant for celebrating wealth, champions and successes, akin to what Walt Disney tried to capture with his Disney World ride Carousel of Progress, which highlights American technological advances.

    A national redundancy?

    However, the U.S. already has a national statuary hall, which opened in the U.S. Capitol in 1870. Each state has contributed two statues; for example, Massachusetts honors Samuel Adams and John Winthrop, while Ohio celebrates James Garfield and Thomas Edison.

    Today there are 102 statutes, though just 14 women.

    Importantly, the roster is fluid – not set in stone – and reflects debates over whom the nation ought to celebrate.

    Over time, the representation has become slightly more inclusive. The first woman, Illinois educator Frances Willard, was added in 1905. Only in 2022 did a Black American appear, when educator Mary Bethune replaced a Confederate general from Florida. And in 2024, Johnny Cash replaced James Paul Clarke, a former governor and senator from Arkansas with Confederate sympathies.

    Family members and elected officials attend the unveiling of the statue of Johnny Cash at the U.S. Capitol on Sept. 24, 2024.
    Kent Nishimura/Getty Images

    What about everyday Americans?

    We don’t think there’s anything wrong with celebrating and honoring popular figures in American history. But we do think there’s an issue when it comes at the expense of other historical and archival projects.

    The New York Times reported that US$34 million for the project would come from funds formerly allocated to the National Endowment for the Arts and National Endowment for the Humanities, whose budget has been cut by 85%.

    Many of the grants that have been slashed explore, celebrate and preserve history in ways that stand in stark contrast to a statue garden. They involve, as Gal Beckerman writes in the Atlantic, efforts that “are about asking questions, about uncovering hidden or overlooked experiences, about closely examining texts or adding to the public record.”

    They include one that supports the digitization of local newspapers and archival records; another to collect and preserve oral histories of local communities; a grant that funds the production of documentaries and podcasts about local communities; traveling exhibitions that bring items from the Smithsonian’s collection to small towns and rural areas; and a grant to fund the collection of first-person accounts of Native Americans who attended U.S. government-run boarding schools.

    These and countless similar history projects serve millions of people far from Washington, and they have broad support from lawmakers and citizens of all political stripes.

    In 1938, as forces of fascism gathered in Europe, a Connecticut high school social science teacher said, “The greatest need of America, on the threshold of the greatest epoch of its history, is citizens who understand the past out of which the nation has grown. … Let us look into the souls of the leaders and the common people who have made America great.”

    In his 2016 campaign, Trump promised to work on behalf of everyday Americans – the “forgotten man and woman.” But the proposed statue garden of famous figures cuts out the common people from America’s story – not just as subjects of history, but as its stewards for future generations.

    With funds slashed from organizations dedicated to local history, we wonder how many more stories will go untold.

    Jennifer Tucker has received funding from the National Endowment for the Humanities for research that examines the social and cultural role of modern technology, such as facial recognition, through a historical lens.

    Peter Rutland 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. Trump’s ‘Garden of American Heroes’ is a monument to celebrity and achievement – paid for with history funding that benefits everyday Americans – https://theconversation.com/trumps-garden-of-american-heroes-is-a-monument-to-celebrity-and-achievement-paid-for-with-history-funding-that-benefits-everyday-americans-254564

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: Colors are objective, according to two philosophers − even though the blue you see doesn’t match what I see

    Source: The Conversation – USA – By Elay Shech, Professor of Philosophy, Auburn University

    What appear to be blue and green spirals are actually the same color. Akiyoshi Kitaoka

    Is your green my green? Probably not. What appears as pure green to me will likely look a bit yellowish or blueish to you. This is because visual systems vary from person to person. Moreover, an object’s color may appear differently against different backgrounds or under different lighting.

    These facts might naturally lead you to think that colors are subjective. That, unlike features such as length and temperature, colors are not objective features. Either nothing has a true color, or colors are relative to observers and their viewing conditions.

    But perceptual variation has misled you. We are philosophers who study colors, objectivity and science, and we argue in our book “The Metaphysics of Colors” that colors are as objective as length and temperature.

    Perceptual variation

    There is a surprising amount of variation in how people perceive the world. If you offer a group of people a spectrum of color chips ranging from chartreuse to purple and asked them to pick the unique green chip – the chip with no yellow or blue in it – their choices would vary considerably. Indeed, there wouldn’t be a single chip that most observers would agree is unique green.

    Generally, an object’s background can result in dramatic changes in how you perceive its colors. If you place a gray object against a lighter background, it will appear darker than if you place it against a darker background. This variation in perception is perhaps most striking when viewing an object under different lighting, where a red apple could look green or blue.

    Of course, that you experience something differently does not prove that what is experienced is not objective. Water that feels cold to one person may not feel cold to another. And although we do not know who is feeling the water “correctly,” or whether that question even makes sense, we can know the temperature of the water and presume that this temperature is independent of your experience.

    Similarly, that you can change the appearance of something’s color is not the same as changing its color. You can make an apple look green or blue, but that is not evidence that the apple is not red.

    Under different lighting conditions, objects take on different colors.
    Gyozo Vaczi/iStock via Getty Images Plus

    For comparison, the Moon appears larger when it’s on the horizon than when it appears near its zenith. But the size of the Moon has not changed, only its appearance. Hence, that the appearance of an object’s color or size varies is, by itself, no reason to think that its color and size are not objective features of the object. In other words, the properties of an object are independent of how they appear to you.

    That said, given that there is so much variation in how objects appear, how do you determine what color something actually is? Is there a way to determine the color of something despite the many different experiences you might have of it?

    Matching colors

    Perhaps determining the color of something is to determine whether it is red or blue. But we suggest a different approach. Notice that squares that appear to be the same shade of pink against different backgrounds look different against the same background.

    The smaller squares may appear to be the same color, but if you compare them with the strip of squares at the bottom, they’re actually different shades.
    Shobdohin/Wikimedia Commons, CC BY-SA

    It’s easy to assume that to prove colors are objective would require knowing which observers, lighting conditions and backgrounds are the best, or “normal.” But determining the right observers and viewing conditions is not required for determining the very specific color of an object, regardless of its name. And it is not required to determine whether two objects have the same color.

    To determine whether two objects have the same color, an observer would need to view the objects side by side against the same background and under various lighting conditions. If you painted part of a room and find that you don’t have enough paint, for instance, finding a match might be very tricky. A color match requires that no observer under any lighting condition will see a difference between the new paint and the old.

    Is the dress yellow and white or black and blue?

    That two people can determine whether two objects have the same color even if they don’t agree on exactly what that color is – just as a pool of water can have a particular temperature without feeling the same to me and you – seems like compelling evidence to us that colors are objective features of our world.

    Colors, science and indispensability

    Everyday interactions with colors – such as matching paint samples, determining whether your shirt and pants clash, and even your ability to interpret works of art – are hard to explain if colors are not objective features of objects. But if you turn to science and look at the many ways that researchers think about colors, it becomes harder still.

    For example, in the field of color science, scientific laws are used to explain how objects and light affect perception and the colors of other objects. Such laws, for instance, predict what happens when you mix colored pigments, when you view contrasting colors simultaneously or successively, and when you look at colored objects in various lighting conditions.

    The philosophers Hilary Putnam and Willard van Orman Quine made famous what is known as the indispensability argument. The basic idea is that if something is indispensable to science, then it must be real and objective – otherwise, science wouldn’t work as well as it does.

    For example, you may wonder whether unobservable entities such as electrons and electromagnetic fields really exist. But, so the argument goes, the best scientific explanations assume the existence of such entities and so they must exist. Similarly, because mathematics is indispensable to contemporary science, some philosophers argue that this means mathematical objects are objective and exist independently of a person’s mind.

    The color of an animal can exert evolutionary pressure.
    Paul Starosta/Stone via Getty Images

    Likewise, we suggest that color plays an indispensable role in evolutionary biology. For example, researchers have argued that aposematism – the use of colors to signal a warning for predators – also benefits an animal’s ability to gather resources. Here, an animal’s coloration works directly to expand its food-gathering niche insofar as it informs potential predators that the animal is poisonous or venomous.

    In fact, animals can exploit the fact that the same color pattern can be perceived differently by different perceivers. For instance, some damselfish have ultraviolet face patterns that help them be recognized by other members of their species and communicate with potential mates while remaining largely hidden to predators unable to perceive ultraviolet colors.

    In sum, our ability to determine whether objects are colored the same or differently and the indispensable roles they play in science suggest that colors are as real and objective as length and temperature.

    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. Colors are objective, according to two philosophers − even though the blue you see doesn’t match what I see – https://theconversation.com/colors-are-objective-according-to-two-philosophers-even-though-the-blue-you-see-doesnt-match-what-i-see-234467

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: These 4 tips can make screen time good for your kids and even help them learn to talk

    Source: The Conversation – USA – By Erika Squires, Assistant Professor, Wayne State University

    Getting involved when your kids are watching digital media can make it an educational experience, rather than just entertainment. damircudic/E+ via Getty Images

    Screen time permeates the lives of toddlers and preschoolers. For many young children, their exposure includes both direct viewing, such as watching a TV show, and indirect viewing, such as when media is on in the background during other daily activities.

    As many parents will know, research points to several negative effects of screen time. As scholars who specialize in speech pathology and early childhood development, we are particularly interested in the recent finding that too much screen time is associated with less parent-child talk, such as fewer conversational turns between parents and children.

    As a result, the American Academy of Pediatrics and World Health Organization suggest limiting screen time for children.

    Beyond quantity, they also emphasize the quality of a child’s engagement with digital media. Used in moderation, certain kinds of media can have educational and social benefits for children – and even contribute to language development.

    These tips may help parents structure and manage screen time more effectively.

    No. 1: Choose high-quality content

    Parents can enhance their children’s screen-time value by choosing high-quality media – that is, content with educational benefit. PBS Kids has many popular shows, from “Nature Cat” to “Sid the Science Kid,” that would qualify as educational.

    Two other elements contribute to the quality of screen time.

    First, screen content should be age-appropriate – that is, parents should choose shows, apps and games that are specifically designed for young children. Using a resource such as Common Sense Media allows parents to check recommended ages for television shows, movies and apps.

    Second, parents can look for shows that use evidence-based educational techniques, such as participatory cues. That’s when characters in shows break the “third wall” by directly talking to their young audience to prompt reflection, action or response. Research shows that children learn new words better when a show has participatory cues – perhaps because it encourages active engagement rather than passive viewing.

    Many classic, high-quality television shows for young children feature participatory cues, including “Mickey Mouse Clubhouse,” “Dora the Explorer,” “Go Diego Go!” and “Daniel Tiger’s Neighborhood.”

    No. 2: Join in on screen time

    The American Academy of Pediatrics recommends that parents and children watch media together whenever possible.

    Screen time doesn’t have to look like this.
    kbeis/DigitalVision Vectors via Getty Images

    This recommendation is based on the evidence that increased screen media use can reduce parent-child conversation. This, in turn, can affect language development. Intentionally discussing media content with children increases language exposure during screen time.

    Parents may find the following joint media engagement strategies useful:

    • Press pause and ask questions.
    • Point out basic concepts, such as letters and colors.
    • Model more advanced language using a “think aloud” approach, such as, “That surprised me! I wonder what will happen next?”

    No. 3: Connect what’s on screen to real life

    Learning from media is challenging for young children because their brains struggle to transfer information and ideas from screens to the real world. Children learn more from screen media, research shows, when the content connects to their real-life experiences.

    To maximize the benefits of screen time, parents can help children connect what they are viewing with experiences they’ve had. For example, while watching content together, a parent might say, “They’re going to the zoo. Do you remember what we saw when we went to the zoo?”

    This approach promotes language development and cognitive skills, including attention and memory. Children learn better with repeated exposure to words, so selecting media that relates to a child’s real-life experiences can help reinforce new vocabulary.

    No. 4: Enjoy screen-free times

    Ensuring that a child’s day is filled with varied experiences, including periods that don’t involve screens, increases language exposure in children’s daily routines.

    Two ideal screen-free times are mealtimes and bedtime. Mealtimes present opportunities for back-and-forth conversation with children, exposing them to a lot of language. Additionally, bedtime should be screen-free, as using screens near bedtime or having a TV in children’s bedrooms disrupts sleep.

    Alternatively, devoting bedtime to reading children’s books accomplishes the dual goals of helping children wind down and creating a language-rich routine.

    Having additional screen-free, one-on-one, parent-child play for at least 10 minutes at some other point in the day is good for young children. Parents can maximize the benefits of one-on-one play by letting their children decide what and how to play.

    Even in small doses, parent-child playtime is important.
    Vera Livchak/Moment via Getty Images

    A parent’s role here is to follow their child’s lead, play along, give their child their full attention – so no phones for mom or dad, either – and provide language enrichment. They can do this by labeling toys, pointing out shapes, colors and sizes. It can also be done by describing activities – “You’re rolling the car across the floor” – and responding when their child speaks.

    Parent-child playtime is also a great opportunity to extend interests from screen time. Including toys of your child’s favorite characters from the shows or movies they love in playtime transforms that enjoyment from screen time into learning.

    Lucy (Kathleen) McGoron receives funding from Michigan Health Endowment fund and SAMHSA.

    Erika Squires 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. These 4 tips can make screen time good for your kids and even help them learn to talk – https://theconversation.com/these-4-tips-can-make-screen-time-good-for-your-kids-and-even-help-them-learn-to-talk-242580

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: Hotter and drier climate in Colorado’s San Luis Valley contributes to kidney disease in agriculture workers, new study shows

    Source: The Conversation – USA – By Katherine Ann James, Associate Professor of Environmental and Occupational Health, University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus

    Agricultural workers exposed to a hotter and drier climate are at an increased risk of kidney damage. George Rose/via Getty Images

    Heat and humidity contributed to kidney damage and disease in the San Luis Valley in Colorado between 1984 and 1998, according to our recently published work in the peer-reviewed journal Weather, Climate, and Society.

    The San Luis Valley is the largest high valley desert in North America. Many of its residents work in agriculture and are exposed to worsening air quality. That decline is due to increased wildfires, dust and temperatures, in combination with low humidity. This change was in part caused by the region’s climate becoming more arid due to a 23-year drought.

    I’m an environmental epidemiologist with an engineering background. For nearly two decades, I have partnered with the San Luis Valley community to investigate how water systems affect human health. Over the past eight years, my team’s research has focused on the far-reaching human health effects of the drought in the area.

    In this study, we used data from a cohort of people in the San Luis Valley who were originally recruited for research on the risk factors for Type 2 diabetes. Researchers often look to established datasets to evaluate new hypotheses because it avoids the need to recruit new study participants. This dataset includes 15 years of clinical, behavioral, demographic, genetic and environmental exposure data. Using it in our recent study allowed us to evaluate the impacts of drought conditions on kidney health.

    Our study suggests that a 10% decline in humidity is associated with a 2% increase in risk for acute kidney injury, while accounting for known risk factors for kidney disease. Those risk factors include age, sex, diabetes and hypertension.

    These findings are supported by our previous study that examined the effects of drought and heat on emergency and urgent care visits for kidney-related issues between 2003 and 2017 in the San Luis Valley.

    The two studies align with growing evidence that climate-related changes, particularly heat and humidity, are contributing to kidney injury. Over time, this means that more people are developing chronic kidney disease.

    Why it matters

    Globally, 10% of the population has kidney disease. In 2021, kidney diseases were the ninth leading cause of death worldwide, according to the World Health Organization. People experiencing poverty or limited access to health care are disproportionately affected.

    In the U.S., more than 1 in 7 adults has chronic kidney disease. That does not account for those with undiagnosed kidney disease.

    Extended exposure to drought conditions coupled with inadequate water intake has been linked to kidney stones, acute kidney injury and chronic kidney disease.

    Dehydration, especially in outdoor workers who labor in hot or dry conditions, is a known contributor to both acute kidney injury and chronic kidney disease.

    Acute kidney injury is characterized by a reduction in kidney function that is reversible.

    Chronic kidney disease is kidney damage that is progressive and may not be reversible.

    Studies in Florida and California have shown declining kidney health in agriculture workers as working conditions are becoming hotter and drier.

    Outdoor workers in agriculture, forestry, mining, ranching and construction are susceptible to the effects of changing outdoor conditions coupled with physical labor. This combination exacerbates dehydration and leads to acute and chronic kidney disease.

    What other research is being done

    In addition to these studies, our research team is involved in other projects aimed at addressing the health impacts of a changing climate.

    One such initiative is the Mountain West Climate-Health Engagement Hub, which focuses on reducing exposure to decreased air quality. This includes the deployment of do-it-yourself air filters and development of low-cost, point-of-use water filters to mitigate exposure to the secondary effects of drought.

    Do-it-yourself air filters can reduce exposure to decreased air quality.
    The Washington Post/Getty Images

    In the Centers for Health, Work & Environment, where I am affiliated, multiple national and international studies are focused on agriculture workers, farm owners and ranchers.

    These studies examine how heat, air quality and drought affect kidney, cardiovascular and mental health. These broader studies aim to inform policy and interventions to safeguard the health of workers globally and particularly in regions most vulnerable to climate change.

    The Research Brief is a short take on interesting academic work.

    Katherine Ann James receives funding from National Institutes of Health and CDC-National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health

    – ref. Hotter and drier climate in Colorado’s San Luis Valley contributes to kidney disease in agriculture workers, new study shows – https://theconversation.com/hotter-and-drier-climate-in-colorados-san-luis-valley-contributes-to-kidney-disease-in-agriculture-workers-new-study-shows-248402

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: Florida, once considered a swing state, is firmly Republican – a social anthropologist explains what caused this shift

    Source: The Conversation – USA – By Alexander Lowie, Postdoctoral associate in Classical and Civic Education, University of Florida

    Florida has attracted new residents since the pandemic, as well as a growth in conservative politics. iStock / Getty Images Plus

    Florida has undergone a dramatic political transformation over the past decade from a swing state to Republican stronghold.

    Florida’s recent congressional special election on April 1, 2025, showcased the state’s increasingly conservative identity, when Republicans won both congressional seats.

    Still, Democrats felt hopeful about these results, since the two Democratic contenders lost by slimmer margins in the 1st and 6th districts than in other recent elections.

    As a political anthropologist who has conducted fieldwork in central Florida, I’ve spent over five years tracking the growth of conservative political groups like the Proud Boys and Moms for Liberty, whose leaderships are based in Florida.

    I’ve seen firsthand how conservative activist networks and the growth of culture war politics, among other factors, have reshaped Florida’s political identity.

    Florida’s Republican state Sen. Randy Fine holds a victory party on April 1, 2025, in Ormond Beach, Fla.
    Joe Raedle/Getty Images

    The state that stopped swinging

    Although political strategists have historically considered Florida a swing state in presidential elections, it has consistently voted Republican since 1948.

    It has only voted for Democratic presidential candidates five times since 1964, for Lyndon B. Johnson, Jimmy Carter, Bill Clinton and twice for Barack Obama. President Donald Trump has won Florida three times in a row, most recently winning the 2024 election in all but six of Florida’s 67 counties.

    The main battleground since 2000 has been the I-4 Corridor, which connects Tampa, Orlando and Daytona. In 2000, President George W. Bush won the corridor by 4,400 votes. Since Bush only won Florida by 537 votes, and thus the presidency, the area became a top priority for both political parties.

    Some Democrats have said Florida’s political evolution happened gradually and then all at once.

    In 2012, there were almost 1.5 million more registered Democratic voters than Republicans in Florida. In 2020, Democrats’ advantage dropped to about 97,000. And by September 2024, there were almost 1 million more registered Republicans than Democrats.

    Steve Schale, the head of Obama’s 2008 campaign in Florida, argues that this shift happened because the Democratic Party lost the support of some white voters.

    Republicans have also actively courted Hispanic voters, while Democrats falsely believed that young Hispanics would inherently lean toward their party.

    This assumption has hurt the Democratic cause because, for example, some Hispanic voters in Florida, like many Cuban Americans, have long favored Republican. In fact, Trump performed so well with Hispanics in Florida in 2024 that it was the only state in which he received more of the Hispanic vote than Kamala Harris.

    State-level conservative success

    Florida has also had a Republican governor since 1998, a state Senate Republican majority since 1995 and a state House majority since 1997. This Republican dominance has only grown since Trump’s 2016 election.

    In 2018, Florida Governor Ron DeSantis received Trump’s endorsement and went from being relatively unknown in the gubernatorial primaries to the Republican nominee. He ultimately assumed office in 2019.

    Since then, DeSantis has successfully passed a slew of laws and policies reflecting the conservative values of what he saw as the new Floridian electorate.

    For example, DeSantis passed a six-week abortion ban measure into law in 2023.

    With DeSantis’ approval, Florida’s state Legislature also blocked diversity, equity and inclusion programs in state colleges in 2023 and banned lessons on sexual orientation and gender identity for public grade school students that same year.

    In 2023, the Florida governor also signed a law that allowed people to carry concealed weapons without a permit.

    The pandemic factor

    Some conservative political pundits and DeSantis supporters say that the governor’s COVID-19 policies are among the factors that have attracted newcomers to the state.

    Almost 300,000 people moved from out of state to Florida between April 2020 and April 2021, equal to roughly 903 people relocating to the state each day.

    The governor ordered Floridians to stay at home during April 2020, but many of his restrictions were lifted at the end of the month.

    DeSantis did not enforce mask mandates, vaccine requirements and other measures that were common in other states.

    During my fieldwork in Florida from 2022 through 2024, I met multiple people who moved to rural parts of the state because they did not want their lives to be severely restricted during the pandemic.

    One man in his early 50s stated, “During COVID my wife and I realized how screwed we were if things got really bad. We hated the lockdowns and got scared about not having enough food. If things got really bad, we didn’t want to trust other people, we wanted to be self-sufficient. So, we decided to get a place in the middle of the woods, on our own property, that we could go to if everything went to hell.”

    This couple settled on moving from out of state to a rural area of Florida, where they thought they had the best chance of avoiding future lockdown restrictions.

    DeSantis’ policy successes and his “freedom first” response to the pandemic have been celebrated by conservatives nationally.

    Moms for Liberty members in Viera, Fla., protest student face mask mandates in 2023.
    Paul Hennessy/SOPA Images/LightRocket via Gety Images

    Florida’s home for the alt-right

    As Florida lawmakers have continued to push conservative policies since the pandemic, Florida-based activist groups like Moms for Liberty have mobilized to support and expand them.

    Moms for Liberty was founded in 2021 by three Florida former school board members who opposed COVID-19 regulations during the pandemic.

    Moms for Liberty is headquartered in Melbourne, Florida, and is focused on reshaping public school curriculum to exclude what its members see as “woke” themes, like sexual orientation.

    The group lobbied for the 2022 Parental Rights in Education Act and the Stop-Woke Act, referred to by critics as the “Don’t Say Gay” law. This law restricts Florida classrooms from teaching kids in kindergarten through third grade about sexual orientation and gender identity, and also limits instruction on these subjects in higher grades.

    Florida has increasingly become a stronghold for other kinds of political activists, some of whom were instrumental in the Capitol riots on Jan. 6, 2021. Florida was home to 11.5% of the 716 people who were initially charged with participating in the Capitol riots.

    The most notable of these Jan. 6 arrests is Enrique Tarrio, a Miami native who has served as the symbolic leader of the Proud Boys, an alt-right “Western chauvinist” group.

    Alt-right activists are a minority of Florida’s conservative population. In my fieldwork, I have spoken to many Florida conservatives who did not identify with the Proud Boys or other alt-right groups – but were still sympathetic to many of their populist and conservative causes.

    No longer in play?

    Florida is now a major Republican stronghold with Floridians becoming increasingly prominent in national politics. Trump’s Cabinet has 23 people – 16 of them are connected to Florida.

    These include Secretary of State Marco Rubio, who served as a senator in Florida, and Attorney General Pam Bondi, who served as Florida’s state attorney general.

    Though some Democrats may feel optimistic about the special election results, they have lost the Sunshine State, at least for now.

    Alexander Lowie 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. Florida, once considered a swing state, is firmly Republican – a social anthropologist explains what caused this shift – https://theconversation.com/florida-once-considered-a-swing-state-is-firmly-republican-a-social-anthropologist-explains-what-caused-this-shift-253905

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: Iran nuclear deal: future stability of Middle East hangs on its success but initial signs are not good

    Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Simon Mabon, Professor of International Relations, Lancaster University

    For the second week in a row, senior officials from the United States and Iran will get together to take part in talks about the Iranian nuclear programme. It’s the second round in the latest negotiations – the first having taken place in Oman on April 12.

    But recent statements from both the White House and senior Iranian officials, including a difference of opinion on where the talks should be held, suggest that rapid diplomatic successes may not be forthcoming.

    Donald Trump’s stance on Iran has been unsurprisingly belligerent. It was the first Trump administration that withdrew from the 2015 nuclear deal and imposed the policy of “maximum pressure” on Iran. Since returning to the Oval Office, Trump has reimposed this policy of maximum pressure.



    Read more:
    Donald Trump backs out of Iran nuclear deal: now what?

    Posting on X, the US special envoy to the Middle East, Steve Witkoff, declared that “Iran must stop and eliminate its nuclear enrichment and weaponization program”. He also called for verification of any missiles stockpiled in the Islamic republic.

    Iranian officials vociferously rejected these US demands, with the foreign minister, Abbas Araghchi, asserting that the missile programme is not for discussion.

    Tehran needs a deal

    There is little doubt that Iran wants a deal, perhaps even needs a deal. It has been hit hard by sanctions over the past decade, which have hollowed out the country’s middle class.

    Israel’s military strikes on Iran and its allies over the past year have eroded the ideological and military clout of the Islamic Republic and wider “axis of resistance”. With the weakening of many of its allies, Iran’s missiles possess even greater importance as a deterrence.

    The strong line taken by the Trump administration leaves little room for manoeuvre. It risks further emboldening hardline elements in Iran, who are perhaps less willing to engage diplomatically. But any belligerent rhetoric from voices in Iran risks pouring fuel on an already incendiary situation.

    At the same time, the Islamic Republic faces a range of serious pressures domestically, such as that seen in the Woman, Life, Freedom movement, as well as increasingly vocal opposition from abroad – notably from the self-proclaimed Crown Prince Reza Pahlavi, the son of the Shah who was ousted in 1979.

    Though Iran may want a deal, it cannot capitulate – particularly after the events of the last year. And nor should it.

    US weighs its strategy

    Hawks in the US, Israel and elsewhere have, of course, heralded the Trump administration’s stance. Fears of an Iranian nuclear programme continue to drive the actions of Israel’s prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, and others – although reports have just emerged that proposed Israeli strikes on targets in Iran were vetoed by Trump in favour of more negotiation.

    While the Gulf states would once have celebrated a tough stance on Iran, the situation is different now. Iran’s long-time rival, Saudi Arabia, has put aside decades of animosity in the hope of a more prosperous shared future.

    In a 2023 agreement mediated by China, Saudi Arabia and Iran agreed to normalise relations, reopening embassies and embarking on a series of coordinated military exercises. For Saudi Arabia, and in particular its crown prince and de facto ruler Mohammed bin Salman, regional stability is essential in realising the ambitious Vision2030 programme – which leans heavily into global investor confidence and trust.

    As a result, the kingdom undertook a pragmatic shift in its regional affairs, embarking on a process of diplomatic rapprochement that surprised many observers. Riyadh has also taken steps towards normalisation with Israel, though the ongoing destruction of Gaza has paused such moves, at least for now.

    At the same time as the nuclear negotiations take place, Israeli strikes on targets in Syria continue. The fall of the Assad regime at the end of 2024 – and the back seat taken by its long-time supporter, Russia – has dramatically altered the political landscape of Syria.

    Though its former president, Bashar al-Assad, has found refuge in Russia, Moscow has taken a watching brief, eager not to antagonise Syria’s new regime and jeopardise its strategically important military bases on the Mediterranean coast. Members of groups previously favoured by the Assad regime, notably the Alawi communities, have fled to the Russian naval base at Latakia in search of protection.

    But thousands of others have been killed amid increasing violence as the forces of the new regime, led by Ahmad al-Shara, seek to extinguish all remnants of the Assad regime – a series of events that looks eerily similar to what occurred in Iraq 20 years ago, when the process of “de-Ba’athification” attempted to remove all traces of Saddam Hussein’s regime from public life.

    Fragile regional order

    The situation across the region is precarious, with the actions of global powers continuing to reverberate. While Washington puts pressure on Tehran and Moscow waits, the scope for Chinese influence in the region increases.

    Ironically, Trump’s tariffs on China may push Beijing further into the Middle East, seeking to capitalise on available opportunities. Its Belt and Road Initiative positions the Middle East firmly within China’s strategic interests. This is likely to open up a new front in the rivalry between Washington and Beijing.

    All the while, it is the people of the Middle East who continue to pay the heaviest price. Ongoing wars and insecurity, fears of a regional conflict, and precarious political conditions – as well as rising food prices and healthcare pressures – are creating a perfect storm that heightens the pressures and challenges of daily life.

    Simon Mabon receives funding from the Carnegie Corporation of New York. He is a Senior Research Fellow at the Foreign Policy Centre in London.

    – ref. Iran nuclear deal: future stability of Middle East hangs on its success but initial signs are not good – https://theconversation.com/iran-nuclear-deal-future-stability-of-middle-east-hangs-on-its-success-but-initial-signs-are-not-good-254817

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: MRP poll puts Reform ahead of Labour and the Tories – here’s why the finding should be treated with caution

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Paul Whiteley, Professor, Department of Government, University of Essex

    Thinktank More in Common recently published an MRP (multi-level regression with post-stratification) poll which appears to show that if there was a general election in the near future, Reform would win 180 seats. According to the analysis, Labour and the Conservatives would win 165 seats each and the Liberal Democrats 67. The modelling suggests that Labour could lose 246 seats including 153 to Reform and 64 to the Conservatives.

    More in Common claims that this is not a prediction of the result of the next election, writing: “With four and a half years before the next general election must be called this model is unlikely to represent anything close to the ultimate result and should not be seen as a projection of the election.” Despite this health warning, the poll has spooked some political journalists.

    It is worth remembering how MRP surveys work. Agencies ask a very large sample of electors about their voting intentions – enough to have an average sample size of about 25 respondents in each of the 632 constituencies in Great Britain. This allows them to use data from the census and other sources to identify constituency characteristics which influence individual voting decisions, such as social class, age and income.

    These are then combined with the survey data to get a prediction of how people are likely to vote in each constituency. This can then be used to predict seats won or lost by the parties in the election.

    More in Common did well in forecasting the results of the 2024 general election. Just prior to polling day it conducted a regular poll alongside an MRP poll, and it turned out that the regular one was more accurate in predicting the result than the MRP poll.

    A general problem with MRP polls

    This appears to be a general problem when MRP poll estimates are compared with traditional polls. The difficulty is that the MRP estimates can vary widely depending on the details of the modelling. In addition, the conditions required for MRP to work well are not always met by practitioners.

    To illustrate this last point, the models rely on demographic variables such as social class, gender and age at the constituency level to work well. If the relationship between these variables and constituency voting is strong, this will help to explain individual voting behaviour identified in the survey.

    But if the relationships are weak, the demographics will not be much help. This is a problem because the relationship between demographics, particularly social class, and voting, has been weakening over time.

    Social class and voting

    The chart below shows the relationship between the size of the working class in constituencies across Britain and voting Labour in the 1964 general election. Each dot represents a constituency, and social class is measured in the 1961 census by occupational status with, for example, labourers defined as working class and doctors as middle class.

    Labour leader, Harold Wilson, did a good job in mobilising working class voters in constituencies across Britain and went on to win in 1964. This was possible because of the strong positive relationship between the size of the working class and Labour voting apparent in the chart.

    Working class electors and Labour votes, 1964:

    The relationship between working class electors and Labour voting in 1964.
    P Whiteley, CC BY-ND

    Fast forward 55 years to the 2019 election and we see something completely different. By then the relationship between the size of the working class and Labour voting at the constituency level had largely disappeared.

    This means that in the 1964 election, constituency information about class would have been very helpful in conducting an MRP survey. However, by 2019 it would have been of little use.

    To understand voting behaviour, we need a clear theory of why people vote the way they do. In 1967, political sociologist Peter Pulzer wrote: “In British party politics, social class is everything, all else is embellishment and detail.” This is no longer true.

    Working class electors and Labour votes, 2019:

    The relationship between working class electors and Labour voting in 2019.
    P Whiteley, CC BY-ND

    Now we are in an age of performance politics with parties judged on their ability to deliver the things that people want, like economic growth, low inflation and efficient public services. Class ties are increasingly irrelevant to this because electors will change their votes if they think another party will do a better job.

    In relation to the upcoming local elections, this means that potholes are likely to be more important to voters than their social class identities. If the 2021 census had asked about attitudes to potholes that would be very useful in constructing an MRP, but unfortunately it did not.

    This means that the constituency data used in MRP polling often comes from other surveys rather than from the census, which has the advantage of interviewing everyone. More in Common explains that it used post-election polling to approximate the demographics needed at the constituency level, which of course is an additional source of potential error.

    MRPs are now a feature of the polling landscape, and they are useful in the run-up to a general election. But it’s questionable whether it is worth spending a lot of money to acquire the large samples needed to make them work when the election is years into the future.

    Paul Whiteley has received funding from the British Academy and the ESRC.

    – ref. MRP poll puts Reform ahead of Labour and the Tories – here’s why the finding should be treated with caution – https://theconversation.com/mrp-poll-puts-reform-ahead-of-labour-and-the-tories-heres-why-the-finding-should-be-treated-with-caution-255296

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: The ski-jumping cheating scandal: how suits were illegally altered for unfair advantage

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Bryce Dyer, Associate Professor of Sports Technology, Bournemouth University

    In this age of artificial intelligence, data tampering and genetic manipulation, it seems that the nature of fraud and deception in competitive sport is becoming increasingly sophisticated. So, it seems almost surprising to see cheating in sport take a relatively old-fashioned form of late: tampering with equipment.

    Yet that’s precisely what unfolded last month in ski jumping, a winter sport whereby athletes soar down a ramp, take flight and aim to maximise both distance and technique. Over the last few months, several ski jumpers and their management have been suspended from the sport due to the intentional illegal tampering and modification of the suits they wear.

    The case first came to light during the 2025 FIS Nordic World Ski Championships held in Trondheim in March. Two Norwegian athletes, Marius Lindvik and Johann Andre Forfang, were subsequently disqualified from the men’s large hill event due to allegations of illegal ski jump suit manipulation with the intention of improving their performance.

    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.

    A subsequent investigation revealed that their ski suits had been illegally altered. In response, the International Ski and Snowboard Federation (FIS) provisionally suspended the two athletes, along with three Norwegian national team officials – including the head coach and their equipment manager. Both athletes ultimately admitted the illegal alterations.

    The scandal then intensified as FIS expanded its investigation which then subsequently led to the suspension of three other Norwegian ski jumpers. Several members of the team were all found to have been involved in the decision to modify the suits for the championships.

    This wasn’t the sport’s first brush with controversy surrounding its suits. At the 2022 Winter Olympics, several jumpers there were disqualified for wearing suits that were deemed too large, again raising concerns about fairness.

    What did the cheating intend to achieve?

    A successful ski jump can be divided into several phases: in-run, take-off, early flight, stable flight, landing preparation, and landing. The suit contributes to enhancing the performance in all of these phases by directly affecting the aerodynamics and flight characteristics of the athlete. As a result, the size and shape of the suit is heavily regulated.

    In the case of this scandal, the Norwegian Ski Federation general manager told a news conference that a reinforced thread or an extra seam had been put in the jumpsuits of the first two athletes that were suspended.

    This additional material was inserted into the crotch area of the suits, increasing the surface area and stiffness, potentially providing extra lift during a jump’s flight phases. This extra lift would essentially translate into an increase in flight time and therefore a potential increase in the jumping distance. These modifications were not detectable through standard visual inspection and were only discovered upon detailed examination of the suits by then tearing them open.

    Of course, cheating in sport is not a new phenomenon. However, in some cases, such controversies are not cheating per se, but merely new technologies emerging that challenge our perceptions of a sport and its values.

    Some examples of this were the use of full-body swimsuits at the Sydney Olympics in 2000, or the potential use of prosthetic legs in track athletics at the Beijing Olympics in 2008.

    However, sometimes cheating can occur whereby sports equipment is intentionally modified physically to provide a competitive advantage. A recent example of this is the Australian cricket ball tampering scandal in 2018 where balls were intentionally scuffed by players to change their behaviour when bowled.

    Improving a piece of sports equipment to increase its performance is the field of mechanical ergogenics, or, when illicitly performed, colloquially known as “technodoping”.

    Some consider that the physical capabilities of athletes in some sports have now plateaued to the extent that any future improvements in performance will need to rely predominantly on technological innovation. So perhaps it can be understood why the suits were targeted in this particular sport.

    In April 2025, the FIS decided to lift the provisional suspensions of the five Norwegian athletes under investigation for suspected involvement in suit tampering because it is the competitive off-season.

    However, the ban for the officials involved remains in place. In the wake of the scandal, FIS has now implemented stricter regulations to prevent future instances of equipment manipulation. These key measures included limiting athletes to a single, pre-approved suit for the year’s competitions, and the FIS storing and inspecting all suits.

    These reforms aim to uphold the integrity of ski jumping and will hopefully restore confidence in the sport itself. The 2025 scandal stands as a clear reminder that in the pursuit of victory, sports must remain vigilant – because when innovation outpaces fair play, integrity is the first casualty.

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

    – ref. The ski-jumping cheating scandal: how suits were illegally altered for unfair advantage – https://theconversation.com/the-ski-jumping-cheating-scandal-how-suits-were-illegally-altered-for-unfair-advantage-254854

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: Popcorn lung: how vaping can scar your lungs for life

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Donal O’Shea, Professor of Chemistry, RCSI University of Medicine and Health Sciences

    Pixel-Shot/Shutterstock

    A US teenager was recently reported to have developed the oddly named medical condition “popcorn lung” after vaping in secret for three years. Officially known as bronchiolitis obliterans, popcorn lung is a rare but serious and irreversible disease that damages the tiny airways in the lungs, leading to persistent coughing, wheezing, fatigue and breathlessness.

    The term “popcorn lung” dates back to the early 2000s when several workers at a microwave popcorn factory developed lung problems after inhaling a chemical called diacetyl – the same ingredient used to give popcorn its rich, buttery taste.

    Diacetyl, or 2,3-butanedione, is a flavouring agent that becomes a toxic inhalant when aerosolised. It causes inflammation and scarring in the bronchioles (the smallest branches of the lungs), making it increasingly difficult for air to move through. The result: permanent, often disabling lung damage.

    While diacetyl is the most infamous cause, popcorn lung can also be triggered by inhaling other toxic chemicals, including volatile carbonyls like formaldehyde and acetaldehyde – both of which have also been detected in e-cigarette vapours.

    The scariest part? There’s no cure for popcorn lung. Once the lungs are damaged, treatment is limited to managing symptoms. This can include bronchodilators, steroids, and in extreme cases, lung transplantation. For this reason, prevention – not treatment – is the best and only defence.

    And yet, for young vapers, prevention isn’t so straightforward.

    The vaping trap

    Vaping is especially popular among teenagers and young adults, possibly due to the thousands of flavoured vape products available – from bubblegum to cotton candy to mango ice. But those fruity, candy-like flavours come with a chemical cost.

    E-liquids may contain nicotine, but they also include a chemical cocktail designed to appeal to users. Many of these flavouring agents are approved for use in food. That doesn’t mean they’re safe to inhale.

    Here’s why that matters: when chemicals are eaten, they go through the digestive system and are processed by the liver before entering the bloodstream. That journey reduces their potential harm. But when chemicals are inhaled, they bypass this filtration system entirely. They go straight into the lungs – and from there, directly into the bloodstream, reaching vital organs like the heart and brain within seconds.

    That’s what made the original popcorn factory cases so tragic. Eating butter-flavoured popcorn? Totally fine. Breathing in the buttery chemical? Devastating.

    Vaping’s chemical complexity

    With vaping, the situation is even murkier. Experts estimate there are over 180 different flavouring agents used in e-cigarette products today. When heated, many of these chemicals break down into new compounds – some of which have never been tested for inhalation safety. That’s a major concern.



    Read more:
    Flavoured vapes may produce many harmful chemicals when e-liquids are heated – new research

    Diacetyl, though removed from some vape products, is still found in others. And its substitutes – acetoin and 2,3-pentanedione – may be just as harmful. Even if diacetyl isn’t the sole culprit, cumulative exposure to multiple chemicals and their byproducts could increase the risk of popcorn lung and other respiratory conditions.

    This was tragically echoed in the story of the American teen who developed the disease. Her case is reminiscent of the 2019 Evali crisis (e-cigarette or vaping product use-associated lung injury), which saw 68 deaths and over 2,800 hospitalisations in the US. That outbreak was eventually linked to vitamin E acetate – a thickening agent in some cannabis vape products. When heated, it produces a highly toxic gas called ketene.

    More recent studies are raising alarm bells about vaping’s impact on young people’s respiratory health. A multi-national study found that adolescents who vape report significantly more respiratory symptoms, even when adjusting for smoking status. Certain flavour types, nicotine salts, and frequency of use were all linked to these symptoms.

    So, what does this all mean?

    It’s clear that history is repeating itself. Just as workplace safety rules were overhauled to protect popcorn factory workers, we now need similar regulatory urgency for the vaping industry – especially when it comes to protecting the next generation.

    Learning from the past, protecting the future

    Popcorn and vaping might seem worlds apart, but they’re connected by a common thread: exposure to inhaled chemicals that were never meant for the lungs. The danger lies not in what these chemicals are when eaten, but in what they become when heated and inhaled.

    If we apply the lessons from industrial safety to today’s vaping habits – particularly among young people – we could avoid repeating the same mistakes. Regulations, clear labelling, stricter ingredient testing, and educational campaigns can help minimise the risks.

    Until then, stories like that of the American teen serve as powerful reminders that vaping, despite its fruity flavours and sleek designs, is not without consequence. Sometimes, what seems harmless can leave damage that lasts a lifetime.

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

    – ref. Popcorn lung: how vaping can scar your lungs for life – https://theconversation.com/popcorn-lung-how-vaping-can-scar-your-lungs-for-life-254414

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: How human connections shaped the spread of farming among ancient communities

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Javier Rivas, Senior Lecturer in Economics, University of Bath

    Yuangeng Zhang/Shutterstock

    If you’ve ever wondered how farming spread far and wide, our research on past human societies offers one explanation: contact between different groups often drives change.

    In a recent paper, together with our colleagues Enrico R. Crema, Stephen Shennan and Oreto García-Puchol among others, we used a mathematical model to analyse what happens when communities with different cultures interact.

    We used a model from predator-prey equations that usually describe how animal populations compete. Our results, published in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, showed that when one group of foragers and another group of farmers share the same space, their interaction can determine the speed at which agriculture is adopted.

    In many parts of the world, people lived by hunting, fishing and gathering until groups of farmers arrived. This date varies depending on region. For instance, farming arrived at around 1000BC in Japan but at around 5600BC in Iberia.

    Archaeologists have long debated whether farming spread because local foragers took it up themselves or because farmers from elsewhere moved in and outnumbered or replaced them.

    Our model builds on the view that in some cases locals might have adopted farming from newcomers either through exchange or intermarriage but in other cases they might have been displaced or killed by the incoming farmers.

    We tested simulated data against real data from Eastern Iberia, Denmark and the island of Kyushu (Japan) to see which explanations fit best. Considering a period of 1,000 years, we combined equations for population growth, mortality resulting from species’ competition, migration and something called an assimilation parameter, which represents how many foragers became farmers in each time step.

    This allowed us to assess the role of competition and collaboration between groups during the transition to farming.

    To check whether this theory makes sense in real life, we looked at three regions where farming was introduced to local foragers.

    1. Eastern Iberia (Spain)

    Agriculture seems to have arrived around 5600-5500BC in this area and took hold relatively quickly, within about 300-400 years. Small groups of farmers probably arrived by sea, which meant weaker ties to their original communities.

    As a result, they had only two options: perish or expand, since they could not rely all that much on the support of their original groups. Their attempt to expand farming may have failed if they didn’t integrate with or eliminate locals.

    This opens the door to potential “failed attempts”, not captured by the archaeological record. There are recorded “failed” attempts at farming in other areas throughout the world in the archaeological record.

    2. Denmark

    Further north, the process was slower, taking up to 600-800 years. Farmers and foragers appear to have lived close to one another for centuries before the rapid turnover, with a stable “frontier” between the two groups for centuries.

    3. Kyushu (Japan)

    Wet rice farming was introduced by multiple waves of migrants from the Korean peninsula around 1,000BC. We found that, although the farming population grew at a modest rate, mixing with locals was limited. Foragers did, however, decline faster and grow slower than in the other two areas.

    Farming was introduced to Japan around 1000BC.
    Chatrawee Wiratgasem/Shutterstock

    Why contact matters

    Our findings show how human interaction can drive the adoption of farming. Our approach considers that small-scale human relationships can have big consequences.

    Imagine a small community of farmers setting up near a river that local hunter-gatherers frequently visit. Soon they start trading, and a few foragers learn how to cultivate plants. Over time, more people see the benefits of a stable crop supply and switch from hunting to farming.

    Likewise, picture groups of farmers clearing woods to create spaces for husbandry and agriculture. In doing so, they can (even inadvertently) ruin hunting spots during the process, forcing the hunter-gatherers to move elsewhere.

    These scenarios might seem obvious, but considering them pushes us to look for more nuanced explanations further than environmental drivers. While such drivers can play a role, our findings suggest that the demographic makeup, how many farmers there are compared to foragers, and how likely foragers are to jump ship, can be crucial in the spread of farming.

    The same dynamics might explain other moments in human history where two groups interacted. For instance, sometimes early humans migrating into Neanderthal territory mixed with the local populations.

    On the other hand, the spread of horse-riding groups over Eurasia from 3000BC provoked a major demographic turnover. People adapt to their ever-changing contexts, which causes a snowball effect.

    Perhaps the biggest takeaway is that human connectivity is key for cultural and technological change. Our approach isn’t meant to exclude other explanations like climate fluctuations. But it does remind us to think about how simple social exchanges; marriages, friendships or alliances, as well as conflicts, can shape communities.

    Today we think nothing of adopting a new app or gadget once enough people around us use it, in the same way that we often stick to our good ol’ way of doing things, despite being aware of better alternatives.

    Ancient groups might have shown similar patterns on a massive scale during the spread of farming. Seeing these parallels helps us understand how humans behave in groups, whether in a prehistoric village, or a modern metropolis.

    Alfredo Cortell receives funding from the European Commission: MSCA-IF ArchBiMod project H-2020-MSCA-IF-2020 actions (Grant No. 101020631) and The Humboldt Foundation (Grant ID: 1235670). This work has received funding from the following projects: ERC-StG project ENCOUNTER (Grant No. 801953); Synergy Grant project COREX: From Correlations to Explanations: towards a new European Prehistory (Grant Agreement No. 95138). The projects PID2021-127731NB-C21 EVOLMED “Evolutionary cultural patterns in the contexts of the neolithization process in the Western Mediterranean,” MCIN/AI/10.13039/ 501100011033 ERDF A way of making Europe are funded by the Spanish Government, and Prometeo/2021/007 NeoNetS “A Social Network Approach to Understanding the Evolutionary Dynamics of Neolithic Societies (C. 7600–4000 cal. BP)” is funded by the Generalitat Valenciana. Open access funding has been provided by the Max Planck Society.

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

    – ref. How human connections shaped the spread of farming among ancient communities – https://theconversation.com/how-human-connections-shaped-the-spread-of-farming-among-ancient-communities-254852

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: Endometriosis: our research shows changing your diet may reduce pain symptoms

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Philippa Saunders, Professor of Reproductive Health, University of Edinburgh

    In our study, the majority of participants had tried changing their diet to improve endometriosis pain. Perfect Wave/ Shutterstock

    Endometriosis affects nearly 200 million people worldwide. This chronic condition is characterised by tissue resembling the lining of the womb growing outside of the uterus.

    This common condition has devastating impacts on patients’ wellbeing. It causes chronic pain (particularly during their periods), infertility and symptoms similar to irritable bowel syndrome, including bloating, constipation, diarrhoea and pain during bowel movements.

    While there are ways of managing endometriosis, these treatments can be invasive and often don’t work for everyone. This is why many patients seek out their own ways of managing their symptoms.

    A frequent question we get from patients is, “Can you recommend a diet that will help me manage my pain and gut symptoms?” While ample advice exists online, there’s little information from clinical studies to adequately answer whether or not diet can have an effect on endometriosis symptoms.

    So, we conducted an international online survey, inviting people with endometriosis to share their experiences of how diet has affected their endometriosis pain symptoms.

    Diet and pain

    Before publishing the survey online, we collaborated with a local Scottish endometriosis patient support group to come up with appropriate questions.

    The final survey included multiple-choice and free-text questions about the participant’s demographics, their pain, their use of diet in managing symptoms and their sources of dietary advice. It was promoted online through social media and patient support groups. The survey received 2,599 responses from 51 countries. The age of participants ranged from 16-71.

    Most respondents reported experiencing pelvic pain (97%) and frequent abdominal bloating (91%). This highlighted how common these symptoms are in people with endometriosis.

    Participants were also asked to rate the average level of their abdominal and pelvic pain over the past month, on a scale from zero to ten. The responses highlighted a wide range of pain experiences, though the majority of respondents either rated their average pain a four (can mostly be ignored but with difficulty) or a seven (makes it difficult to concentrate, interferes with sleep and takes effort to function as normal).

    The majority (83%) of respondents also reported making dietary changes to control symptoms. Around 67% noted this had a positive effect on pain.

    The survey listed 20 different diets (plus “other”), allowing participants to select all the diets they’d tried and explain which had affected their pain symptoms. Some of the most popular diets patients had tried included: reducing alcohol intake, going gluten-free, going dairy-free, drinking less caffeine and reducing intake of processed foods and sugar.

    Giving up processed and sugary foods was a common diet change many women with endometriosis made.
    Tatjana Baibakova/ Shutterstock

    Around half of participants reported improvements in their pain after adopting at least one of these diets. For the most popular diets, a reduction in pain was reported by 53% who reduced alcohol consumption, 45% who went gluten-free and dairy-free and 43% who reduced caffeine intake.

    Reducing inflammation

    This survey, which was the largest of its kind to date, was only conducted in English. This might have limited participation. Additionally, the observed changes were all self-reported, meaning we cannot confirm that the dietary modifications directly caused the changes in pain.

    Still, our findings show diet may be an important tool in managing the pain caused by endometriosis. Importantly, no specific diet benefits everyone, so it may take some trial and error to figure out what works best. It’s also worth noting that diet changes appeared to be less beneficial for those with the most severe symptoms.

    Research into why people with endometriosis experience pain has identified excess inflammation as a key factor. Inflammation is the body’s mechanism for fighting off an infection or recovering from an injury. In people with endometriosis, it’s thought that the inflammatory response is overstimulated – triggering sensitisation of nerves and amplifying the perception of pain.

    Certain foods may also promote inflammation in the body. For instance, it’s thought that gluten and dairy could promote inflammation due to the way they interact with the cells lining the gut and the by-products they produce when broken down by the gut microbes. These by-products have the potential to move around the body and cause more widespread inflammation. Alcohol is also known to be pro-inflammatory.

    Reducing intake of certain foods may therefore help reduce overall inflammation levels in people with endometriosis. This may explain why the participants in our study, and others, reported seeing improvements in their symptoms as a result of cutting out inflammatory foods.

    Moving forward, we need properly controlled clinical studies that monitor food intake, real-time recording of pain and IBS-like symptoms, and precise measurement of inflammation in the body, in order to understand the reasons why diet may help people with endometriosis.

    This is something our research team is already working on. We’re launching a large-scale study with more than 1,000 people who have endometriosis. Each participant will donate stool and blood samples, record food intake details and report on the use of pain medications, supplements, prebiotics, probiotics and dietary modifications. The long-term goal with this project is to support a more holistic and personalized approach to caring for people with endometriosis.

    Philippa Saunders has received funding from The Medical Research Council. She is a Fellow of the Academy of Medical Sciences and sits on the Scientific Advisory Group of the Royal College of Obstetrics and Gynaecology.

    Andrew Horne reports receiving grants from the National Institute for Health and Care Research, Chief Scientist Office, Wellbeing of Women, Roche Diagnostics, and European Union, receiving consultancy and lecture fees from Theramex, Roche Diagnostics and Gedeon Richter, and having patents issued for a UK patent application No. 2217921.2 and international patent application No. PCT/GB2023/053076 outside the submitted work. He is President-elect of the World Endometriosis Society and Trustee to Endometriosis UK. He is Specialty Advisor to the Scottish Government’s Chief Medical Officer for Obstetrics and Gynaecology.

    Francesca Hearn-Yeates 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. Endometriosis: our research shows changing your diet may reduce pain symptoms – https://theconversation.com/endometriosis-our-research-shows-changing-your-diet-may-reduce-pain-symptoms-254424

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: ‘Piracy’ to legitimacy: how companies like French ride-hailing platform Heetch can make their mark

    Source: The Conversation – France – By Maxime Massey, Docteur en Sciences de Gestion & Innovation – Chercheur affilié à la Chaire Improbable, ESCP Business School

    The 2024 arrest and subsequent release of activist Paul Watson, the founder of the NGO Sea Shepherd that fights to protect ocean biodiversity, highlighted a division between two opposing camps. There are those who want to stay true to the NGO’s DNA by continuing to practice strong activism against poaching states, and those who believe there is too much at stake in remaining confrontational and advocate instead for more measured actions to institutionalize the NGO. This opposition reflects the dilemma faced by many “pirate organizations”, a concept introduced by scholars Rudolph Durand and Jean-Philippe Vergne.

    What are pirate organizations?

    Pirate organizations are defined by three key characteristics.

    • they develop innovative activities by exploiting legal loopholes

    • they defend a “public cause” to support neglected communities, who in turn support them

    • by introducing innovations that address specific social needs, they disrupt monopolies and contribute to transforming economic and social systems


    A weekly e-mail in English featuring expertise from scholars and researchers. It provides an introduction to the diversity of research coming out of the continent and considers some of the key issues facing European countries. Get the newsletter!

    However, to do these things effectively, pirate organizations must become legitimate. An organization is considered legitimate when its various audiences (customers, media, the state, etc.) perceive its actions as desirable according to prevailing values, norms and laws. Legitimacy is built through a process known as legitimation. For pirate organizations, this is particularly challenging, as they are often viewed as both illegal and illegitimate by the state and established industry players. These actors apply pressure to hinder legitimation. So how do pirate organizations build their legitimacy? We examined this question through the emblematic case of Heetch.

    A case study of a pirate organization

    Heetch is a French urban transport start-up launched in 2013 when its founders observed that “young people in Paris and its suburbs struggle to travel at night due to a lack of suitable options”. They decided to create a ride-hailing platform connecting private drivers with passengers.

    This business model, based on the principles of the “sharing economy”, encroached on the monopoly of taxis and the regulated sector of professional chauffeur-driven vehicles (VTCs). Despite challenges, Heetch gradually built its legitimacy through three distinct phases, responding to pressures in different ways.

    Stage 1: ‘clandestine pragmatism’ (2013-2015)

    When Heetch launched in 2013, a conflict was brewing in the urban transport sector. On one side, there were new applications for VTC services (such as Uber) and for private driver platforms (such as UberPop and Heetch); on the other, there were traditional taxis and their booking departments (such as G7). The latter, along with government authorities, began exerting pressure to shut down the apps, with Uber receiving most of the media attention.

    During this phase, Heetch adopted a strategy of “clandestine pragmatism”. The start-up avoided direct confrontations and stayed “under the radar” of the media. This approach is similar to “bootlegging” – concealing an innovative activity during its early stages. Heetch built a pragmatic legitimacy among its immediate audience using informal techniques such as word-of-mouth. However, its legitimacy remained limited, because it operated outside media scrutiny and without state approval.

    Stage 2: ‘subversive activism’ (2015-2017)

    In June 2015, taxi drivers organized massive protests against the “unfair competition” posed by new ride-hailing apps. The Paris police issued a ban on UberPop-like applications, including Heetch’s.

    While Uber shut down UberPop, Heetch exploited a legal loophole – its name was not explicitly mentioned in the ban – and continued operations. In response, the state cracked down on Heetch: around 100 drivers were placed in police custody and the founders were summoned to court, facing charges of “illegal facilitation of contact” with drivers, “complicity in unlawful taxi operations” and “misleading commercial practices”.

    Heetch reacted by engaging in “subversive activism”. The founders spoke out in the media to defend their service, emphasizing its public utility, particularly for young suburban residents needing nighttime mobility. The start-up generated buzz by releasing a satirical video featuring altered images of political figures in their youth. Heetch leveraged its pragmatic legitimacy, already established within its community, to gain media legitimacy among a broader audience of people, including journalists and policymakers. The organization gained public recognition, but also faced increasing legal battles.

    Stage 3: ‘tempered radicalism’ (2017-present)

    In March 2017, a court ruled against Heetch, deeming its operations illegal. Heetch temporarily suspended its service but relaunched two weeks later with a new business model employing professional drivers. Two months later, Heetch attempted to reintroduce private drivers, but, after facing additional legal action, it abandoned this approach after six months to focus exclusively on legal transportation services.

    During this phase, Heetch practised “tempered radicalism”. The company integrated into the system while continuing its “fight” in a more moderate manner, avoiding direct confrontation with the state and industry players. It adopted three key strategies:

    • compliance – respecting the law

    • compromise – balancing its transportation service with its public mission

    • manipulation – lobbying to influence regulations

    Through this approach, Heetch secured regulatory legitimacy while strengthening its existing pragmatic and media legitimacy. The company was recognized by the French government and included in the French Tech 120 and Next 40 programmes for the country’s most promising start-ups. It also became the first ride-hailing platform to attain “mission-driven company” status.

    Is ‘piracy’ a growth accelerator?

    Ultimately, our study highlights the value of piracy as a strategy for kickstarting the growth of an organization that serves a public cause. By embracing this approach, a pirate organization can drive systemic change to address social or environmental challenges.

    That said, piracy carries an inherent risk: at some point, it will likely face a legitimacy crisis triggered by resistance from monopolies or public authorities. The recent struggles of Paul Watson serve as testament. As he aptly puts it: “You can’t change the world without making waves”.

    Les auteurs ne travaillent pas, ne conseillent pas, ne possèdent pas de parts, ne reçoivent pas de fonds d’une organisation qui pourrait tirer profit de cet article, et n’ont déclaré aucune autre affiliation que leur organisme de recherche.

    – ref. ‘Piracy’ to legitimacy: how companies like French ride-hailing platform Heetch can make their mark – https://theconversation.com/piracy-to-legitimacy-how-companies-like-french-ride-hailing-platform-heetch-can-make-their-mark-253079

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Israel’s endgame for tormented Gaza is political and physical erasure

    COMMENTARY: By Nour Odeh

    There was faint hope that efforts to achieve a ceasefire deal in Gaza would succeed. That hope is now all but gone, offering 2.1 million tormented and starved Palestinians dismal prospects for the days and weeks ahead.

    Last Saturday, the Israeli Prime Minister once again affirmed he had no intention to end the war. Benjamin Netanyahu wants what he calls “absolute victory” to achieve US President Donald Trump’s so-called vision for Gaza of ethnic cleansing and annexation.

    To that end, Israel is weaponising food at a scale not seen before, including immediately after the October 7 attack by Hamas. It has not allowed any wheat, medicine boxes, or other vital aid into the Gaza Strip since 2 March.

    This engineered starvation has pushed experts to warn that 1.1 million Palestinians face imminent famine.

    Many believe this was Israel’s “maximum pressure” plan all along: massive force, starvation, and land grabs. It’s what the Israeli Minister of Defence, Israel Katz, referred to in March when he gave Palestinians in Gaza an ultimatum — surrender or die.

    A month after breaking the ceasefire, Israel has converted nearly 70 percent of the tiny territory into no-go or forced displacement zones, including all of Rafah. It has also created a new so-called security corridor, where the illegal settlement of Morag once stood.

    Israel is bombing the Palestinians it is starving while actively pushing them into a tiny strip of dunes along the coast.

    Israel only interested in temporary ceasefire
    This mentality informed the now failed ceasefire talks. Israel was only interested in a temporary ceasefire deal that would keep its troops in Gaza and see the release of half of the living Israeli captives.

    In exchange, Israel reportedly offered to allow critically needed food and aid back into Gaza, which it is obliged to do as an occupying power, irrespective of a ceasefire agreement.

    Israel also refused to commit to ending the war, just as it did in the Lebanon ceasefire agreement, while also demanding that Hamas disarm and agree to the exile of its prominent members from Gaza.

    Disarming is a near-impossible demand in such a context, but this is not motivated by a preserved arsenal that Hamas wants to hold on to. Materially speaking, the armaments Israel wants Hamas to give up are inconsequential, except in how they relate to the group’s continued control over Gaza and its future role in Palestinian politics.

    Symbolically, accepting the demand to lay down arms is a sign of surrender few Palestinians would support in a context devoid of a political horizon, or even the prospect of one.

    While Israel has declared Hamas as an enemy that must be “annihilated”, the current right-wing government in Israel doesn’t want to deal with any Palestinian party or entity.

    The famous “no Hamas-stan and no Fatah-stan” is not just a slogan in Israeli political thinking — it is the policy.

    Golden opportunity for mass ethnic cleansing
    This government senses a golden opportunity for the mass ethnic cleansing of Palestinians and the annexation of Gaza and the West Bank — and it aims to seize it.

    Hamas’s chief negotiator Khalil al-Hayya recently said that the movement was done with partial deals. Hamas, he said, was willing to release all Israeli captives in exchange for ending the war and Israel’s full withdrawal from Gaza, as well as the release of an agreed-on number of Palestinian prisoners.

    But the truth is, Hamas is running out of options.

    Netanyahu does not consider releasing the remaining Israeli captives as a central goal. Hamas has no leverage and barely any allies left standing.

    Hezbollah is out of the equation, facing geographic and political isolation, demands for disarmament, and the lethal Israeli targeting of its members.

    Armed Iraqi groups have signalled their willingness to hand over weapons to the government in Baghdad in order not to be in the crosshairs of Washington or Tel Aviv.

    Meanwhile, the Houthis in Yemen have sustained heavy losses from hundreds of massive US airstrikes. Despite their defiant tone, they cannot change the current dynamics.

    Tehran distanced from Houthis
    Finally, Iran is engaged in what it describes as positive dialogue with the Trump administration to avert a confrontation. To that end, Tehran has distanced itself from the Houthis and is welcoming the idea of US investment.

    The so-called Arab plan for Gaza’s reconstruction also excludes any role for Hamas. While the mediators are pushing for a political formula that would not decisively erase Hamas from Palestinian politics, some Arab states would prefer such a scenario.

    As these agendas and new realities play out, Gaza has been laid to waste. There is no food, no space, no hope. Only despair and growing anger.

    This chapter of the genocide shows no sign of letting up, with Israel under no international pressure to cease the bombing and forced starvation of Gaza. Hamas remains defiant but has no significant leverage to wield.

    In the absence of any viable Palestinian initiative that can rally international support around a different dialogue altogether about ending the war, intervention can only come from Washington, where the favoured solution is ethnic cleansing.

    This is a dead-end road that pushes Palestinians into the abyss of annihilation, whether by death and starvation or political and material erasure through mass displacement.

    Nour Odeh is a political analyst, public diplomacy consultant, and an award-winning journalist. She also reports for Al Jazeera. This article was first published by The New Arab and is republished under Creative Commons.

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-OSI Global: Far-right AfD tops German poll for first time – just weeks after Friedrich Merz’s election win

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Ed Turner, Reader in Politics, Co-Director, Aston Centre for Europe, Aston University

    The far-right Alternative for Germany (AfD) has topped a national poll for the first time, prompting the popular Bild newspaper to carry the headline: “AfD breaks the magic barrier”. The poll put the AfD on 26% and the Christian democratic CDU/CSU on 25%.

    This is just one opinion poll, but since February’s early federal election, the direction of travel has been clear. Governments sometimes become unpopular mid-term, but Germany isn’t mid-term. The federal election was just two months ago, and the new government hasn’t yet been formed (this routinely takes months in Germany). Nor has CDU leader Friedrich Merz become chancellor; the date pencilled in for that is May 6.

    Democracy in decline? The risk and rise of authoritarianism

    Democracy is under pressure around the world in 2025. But is this part of a larger historical cycle or does it signal a deeper, more fundamental shift? Join us for a free event in central London on May 8 to discuss these important questions. Come for a panel discussion and stay for food, drinks and conversation.

    Get tickets here

    So these clear polling shifts (with the CDU/CSU down about 3% on the federal election, the AfD up about 5%) are striking. They owe little to any finesse by the party that has taken the lead, the AfD, and much more to the unusual circumstances in which Germany’s mainstream parties have found themselves. They also pose a salutary warning about possible future developments.

    Following the recent election, the AfD has a record 152 parliamentarians and is currently embroiled in an argument about whether, given its expanded size, it can take over a meeting room currently occupied by the SPD – a sensitive topic as it is named after Otto Wels, a social democrat who opposed Hitler’s seizure of power.

    So far, its approach has been to attack the political mainstream it brands “cartel parties”. In the new Bundestag’s first meeting, the AfD’s Stephan Brandner took to insulting other parties (the SPD and Greens were “political dwarf Germans”, mainstream parties were “lying” and “cheating”). None of this seems likely to have driven the party’s poll surge – although the AfD does find some traction when accusing Merz of betraying conservative voters.

    What has, however, affected the polls is Merz himself. The CDU leader presented himself as a fiscal hawk during the federal election campaign, but within days of his win, he performed a volte-face. He agreed to relax Germany’s constitutional restrictions on debt so defence spending above 1% of GDP would no longer be counted, likewise a new €500 billion fund for infrastructure.

    The change also meant Germany’s states could also run a modest deficit. These moves owed much to pressure from the social democrat SPD – the infrastructure demand in particular was a key condition from Merz’s only possible coalition partner. But there was also a clear need to spend more on defence (given global developments) and infrastructure, with no other funds being available.

    Early April’s Politbarometer poll showed just 36% thinking it “good” if Merz became chancellor (59% “not good”). On a scale of 5 to -5, respondents rate Merz -0.8. Even though the public backs the changes to debt rules he has made, there is a sense that Merz was not honest with them in the election campaign.

    These poor ratings are in spite of coalition talks between CDU/CSU and SPD having gone reasonably well. Not only did they agree on the debt rule reform, but a coalition treaty is now being voted on by SPD members. The CDU will agree it at the end of the month while the Bavarian CSU has already given the green light.

    It includes significant tightening of migration policy (at the outer reaches of what the SPD would agree to), some cuts to VAT and corporation tax, and nods in the direction of income tax cuts for lower and middle earners and a higher minimum wage. That said, there has already been public argument between CDU/CSU and SPD about how binding these commitments are – not a good omen for future co-operation.

    Pressure on both sides

    So while this poll doesn’t change the fact that Merz will almost certainly be voted in as chancellor leading a CDU/CSU coalition with the SPD, it does show that the coalition is already facing an age-old problem for “grand coalitions” between centre-left and centre-right parties.

    The risk is always that they will end up strengthening support for parties to their left and right. The SPD faces a serious threat from the Greens and the resurgent Left Party amongst those who would favour a more open attitude to immigration and higher taxes for top earners, for example.

    No matter how far Merz goes on immigration and tax cuts, the AfD will accuse him of betraying core conservative values and may continue to gain ground as a result. Some leading CDU politicians have suggested treating the AfD as a more “normal” opponent (for instance in allowing it to chair parliamentary committees). But that would hardly be a game-changer.

    Merz’s difficulties are heightened by the global economic situation: Germans are already deeply pessimistic about economic developments, and the impacts and instability generated by US tariffs, whether implemented or potential, put the country in the eye of the storm, making the job of governing more difficult still.

    A clear majority of German voters still rejects any prospect of the AfD joining the government, but they may have to get used to it being ahead in opinion polls.

    Ed Turner receives funding from the German Academic Exchange Service.

    – ref. Far-right AfD tops German poll for first time – just weeks after Friedrich Merz’s election win – https://theconversation.com/far-right-afd-tops-german-poll-for-first-time-just-weeks-after-friedrich-merzs-election-win-255254

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: What will the UK Supreme Court gender ruling mean in practice? A legal expert explains

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Alexander Maine, Senior Lecturer in Law, City St George’s, University of London

    jeep2499/Shutterstock

    The Supreme Court’s decision in For Women Scotland Ltd v The Scottish Ministers will mean changes in how trans people in the UK access services and single-sex spaces.

    In the highly anticipated judgment announced April 17, the court ruled that the definition of “sex”, “man” and “woman” in the Equality Act refers to “biological sex”. It found that this does not include those who hold a gender recognition certificate (trans people who have had their chosen gender legally recognised). In simple terms, “women” does not include transgender women.

    It is important to note that the court’s remit was focused on interpretation of existing laws, not creating policy. The court affirmed that trans people should not be discriminated against, nor did they intend to provide a definition of sex or gender outside of the application of the Equality Act.

    The prime minister has said he welcomes the “real clarity” brought by the ruling. But while it may bring some legal clarity, questions remain about the practical implementation. The judgment also raises new questions about the operation of the Gender Recognition Act, and what it now means to hold a gender recognition certificate.

    What was the court case?

    The gender-critical feminist group For Women Scotland challenged the Scottish government’s guidance on the operation of the Equality Act in relation to a Scottish law that sets targets for increasing the proportion of women on public boards.

    The definition of a “woman” for the purposes of that law included trans women who had undergone, or were proposing to undergo, gender reassignment.

    The issue that the court had to address was whether a person with a full gender recognition certificate (GRC) which recognises that their gender is female, is a “woman” for the purposes of the Equality Act 2010. The act gives protection to people who are at risk of unlawful discrimination.

    The court’s decision was that the meaning of “sex” was biological and so references in the act to “women” and “men” did not, therefore, apply to trans women or trans men who hold GRCs.

    What has changed with this ruling?

    Prior to the ruling, there were contested views as to whether trans people could access certain single-sex spaces – some of the most contentious being prisons, bathrooms and domestic abuse shelters.

    The ruling does not require services to exclude trans people from all single-sex spaces. It does, however, clarify that if a service operates a single-sex space, for example a gym changing room, then exclusion is based on biological sex and not legal sex. Neither the court nor the government has said how “biological sex” would be defined or proven.

    A service provider may operate a single-sex space on the basis of privacy or safety of users. To base this on biological sex must be a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim – for example, the safety of women in a group for abuse survivors. This means that service providers may still operate trans-inclusive policies, but they may open themselves to legal challenge.



    Read more:
    What does the UK Supreme Court’s gender ruling mean for trans men?

    What does this mean for the Gender Recognition Act?

    The Gender Recognition Act 2004 introduced gender recognition certificates (GRCs), which certify that a person’s legal gender is different from their assigned gender at birth. A trans person can apply for a GRC in order to change their gender on their birth certificate. For legal purposes, they are then recognised as their acquired gender.

    The ruling does not strike down or affect the operation of the Gender Recognition Act. But it does give the impression that the GRA – and holding a GRC – is now less effective.

    The ruling clarifies that a trans woman who has a GRC and is recognised legally in her acquired gender can be excluded from single-sex spaces on the ground of biological sex, as would a trans woman without a GRC. Before the ruling, a trans person with a GRC would have been able to access many single-sex spaces and services that match the gender on their GRC.

    In order to be granted a GRC, a person must show that they have lived in their acquired gender for at least two years and that they intend to live in that gender until death. Their application must be approved by two doctors, but – in what was a world-first at the time it was introduced – does not require any medical transition.

    The Supreme Court states that trans people (with or without a GRC) will still be protected from discrimination. Sex and gender reassignment are both protected characteristics under the Equality Act. This means that trans people may still rely on the law to protect them from direct or indirect discrimination levelled at them on the basis of being trans, or because of their perceived sex.

    The court uses the example that a trans woman applying for a job being denied that job on the basis of being trans would still be entitled to sue for discrimination.

    How will single-sex services operate?

    The key question now, both for service providers and trans people, is what spaces trans people will be able to use. It is not the Supreme Court’s job to issue guidance on this – and the judgment is notably silent on the practical implementation of the ruling.

    Service providers may choose to offer unisex spaces, for example gender neutral bathrooms. British Transport Police have already confirmed that strip searches of those arrested on the network would be conducted based on biological sex, and other services will likely follow.

    It is up to service providers, employers and healthcare providers to interpret the ruling and decide how to apply it. The government has said that further guidance will be issued by the Equality and Human Rights Commission. But how the ruling is implemented in practice, and what it means for other laws like the Gender Recognition Act, will likely be debated for some time.

    Alexander Maine 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 will the UK Supreme Court gender ruling mean in practice? A legal expert explains – https://theconversation.com/what-will-the-uk-supreme-court-gender-ruling-mean-in-practice-a-legal-expert-explains-255043

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Trump signs ‘deeply dangerous’ order to fast-track deep sea mining

    An ocean conservation non-profit has condemned the United States President’s latest executive order aimed at boosting the deep sea mining industry.

    President Donald Trump issued the “Unleashing America’s offshore critical minerals and resources” order on Thursday, directing the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) to allow deep sea mining.

    The order states: “It is the policy of the US to advance United States leadership in seabed mineral development.”

    NOAA has been directed to, within 60 days, “expedite the process for reviewing and issuing seabed mineral exploration licenses and commercial recovery permits in areas beyond national jurisdiction under the Deep Seabed Hard Mineral Resources Act.”

    Ocean Conservancy said the executive order is a result of deep sea mining frontrunner, The Metals Company, requesting US approval for mining in international waters, bypassing the authority of the International Seabed Authority (ISA).

    US not ISA member
    The ISA is the United Nations agency responsible for coming up with a set of regulations for deep sea mining across the world. The US is not a member of the ISA because it has not ratified UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS).

    “This executive order flies in the face of NOAA’s mission,” Ocean Conservancy’s vice-president for external affairs Jeff Watters said.

    “NOAA is charged with protecting, not imperiling, the ocean and its economic benefits, including fishing and tourism; and scientists agree that deep-sea mining is a deeply dangerous endeavor for our ocean and all of us who depend on it,” he said.

    He said areas of the US seafloor where test mining took place more than 50 years ago still had not fully recovered.

    “The harm caused by deep sea mining isn’t restricted to the ocean floor: it will impact the entire water column, top to bottom, and everyone and everything relying on it.”

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

    Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-OSI Global: When rock music met ancient archeology: the enduring power of Pink Floyd Live at Pompeii

    Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Craig Barker, Head, Public Engagement, Chau Chak Wing Museum, University of Sydney

    Sony Music

    The 1972 concert film Pink Floyd Live at Pompeii, back in cinemas this week, remains one of the most unique concert documentaries ever recorded by a rock band.

    The movie captured the band on the brink of international stardom, released seven months before their breakout album Dark Side of the Moon, which would go on to sell 50 million copies and spend 778 weeks on the Billboard charts.

    The film was the first time a rock concert took place in the ruins of an archaeological site. This intermingling of art and archaeology would change the way many thought of Pompeii.

    The amphitheatre of Pompeii

    The amphitheatre of Pompeii has quite a history as a venue for spectacles.

    Constructed around 70 BCE, it was one of the first permanent constructed amphitheatres in Italy, designed to hold up to 20,000 spectators.

    From graffiti and advertisements, we know it was used in antiquity for gladiatorial fights and displays and hunts of wild beasts and athletic contests.

    The Amphitheatre of Pompeii was constructed around 70 BCE.
    Marco Ober/Wikimedia Commons, CC BY-SA

    Famously we are told by Roman historian Tactius in 59 CE a deadly brawl occurred between Pompeiians and residents of the nearby town of Nuceria during games, resulting in a ten-year ban on gladiatorial contests at the venue. The amphitheatre was destroyed by the eruption of Vesuvius in 79 CE.

    There is a long tradition of authors, artists, filmmakers and designers taking inspiration from the site and its destruction. A 13-year-old Mozart’s visit to the Temple of Isis at the site inspired The Magic Flute in 1791.

    This fresco depicts the amphitheatre riots of 59 CE, which would lead to gladiatorial contests being banned at the venue for a decade.
    National Archaeological Museum of Naples/Wikimedia Commons

    In the rock music era, Pompeii has inspired numerous artists, especially around themes of death and longing. Cities in Dust (1985) by Siouxsie and the Banshees was perhaps the most famous until Bastille’s 2013 hit Pompeii. In The Decemberists’ Cocoon (2002), the destruction of Pompeii acts as a metaphor for the guilt and loss in the aftermath of the September 11 attacks.

    Since 2016, the amphitheatre has hosted concerts – with audiences this time. Appropriately, one of the first was a performance by Pink Floyd’s guitarist David Gilmour. His show over two nights in July 2016 took place 45 years after first playing at the site.

    But how did Pink Floyd come to play at Pompeii in 1972?

    Rethinking rock concert movies

    It was the peak era of rock concert documentaries. Woodstock (1970) and The Rolling Stone’s Gimme Shelter (1970), and other documentaries of the era, placed the cameras in the audience, giving the cinema-goer the same perspective as the concert audience.

    As a concept, it was getting stale.

    Filmmaker Adrian Maben had been interested in combining art with Pink Floyd’s music. He initially pitched a film of the band’s music over montages of paintings by artists such as Rene Magritte. The band rejected the idea.

    Maben returned to them after a holiday in Naples, realising the ambience of Pompeii suited the band’s music. A performance without an audience provided the antithesis of the era’s concert films.

    Roger Waters during the film Pink Floyd Live at Pompeii.
    Sony Music

    The performance would become iconic, particularly the scenes of Roger Waters banging a large gong on the upper wall of the amphitheatre, and the cameras panning past the band’s black road case to reveal the band in the ancient arena.

    It was as far away from Woodstock as possible.

    The performance was filmed over six days in October 1971 in the ancient amphitheatre, with the band playing three songs in the ancient venue: Echoes, A Saucerful of Secrets, and One of These Days.

    Ancient history professor Ugo Carputi of the University of Naples, a Pink Floyd fan, had persuaded authorities to allow the band to film and to close the site for the duration of filming. Besides the film crew, the band’s road crew – and a few children who snuck in to watch – the venue was closed to the public.

    In addition to the performance, the four band members were filmed walking over the volcanic mud around Boscoreale, and their performances in the film both were interspersed with images of antiquities from Pompeii.

    The movie itself was fleshed out with studio performances in a Paris TV studio and rehearsals at Abbey Road Studios.

    Marrying art and music

    Famously the Pink Floyd film blends images of antiquities from the Naples Archaeological Museum with the band’s performances.

    Roman frescoes and mosaics are highlighted during particular songs. Profiles of bronze statues meld with the faces of band members, linking past and present.

    Later scenes have the band backdropped by images of frescoes from the famed Villa of the Mysteries and of the plaster casts of eruption victims.

    The band’s musical themes of death and mystery link with ancient imagery, and it would have been the first time many audience members had seen these masterpieces of Roman art.

    The Memento mori mosaic features significantly during the performance of the song Careful with that Axe, Eugene.
    Naples National Archaeological Museum/Wikimedia Commons

    Pink Floyd Live at Pompeii marked a brave experiment in rock concert movies.

    Watching it more than 50 years later, it is a timepiece of early 70s rock and a remarkable document of a band on the brink of fame.

    Because of their progressive rock sound, sonic experimentation and philosophical lyrics, it was often said by Pink Floyd’s fans that they were “the first band in space”. They even eventually had a cassette of their music played in space.

    But many are not aware of their earlier roots in the dust of ancient Pompeii. The re-release of the film gives an opportunity to enjoy the site’s unlikely role in music history.

    Pink Floyd at Pompeii – MCMLXXII is in cinemas from Thursday.

    Craig Barker 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. When rock music met ancient archeology: the enduring power of Pink Floyd Live at Pompeii – https://theconversation.com/when-rock-music-met-ancient-archeology-the-enduring-power-of-pink-floyd-live-at-pompeii-252744

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: Inside the elaborate farewell to Pope Francis

    Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Carole Cusack, Professor of Religious Studies, University of Sydney

    ➡️ View the full interactive version of this article here.

    Carole Cusack 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. Inside the elaborate farewell to Pope Francis – https://theconversation.com/inside-the-elaborate-farewell-to-pope-francis-255020

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: The UK’s social security system falls way below international human rights standards: new report

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Koldo Casla, Senior Lecturer, Essex Law School, University of Essex

    9to9studio/Shutterstock

    The right to social security is enshrined in several international agreements on human rights. But the UK’s system – even before the disability benefits cuts announced earlier this year – falls way below these standards.

    For a new report published today, Amnesty International asked my colleague Lyle Barker and me to review the evidence about the state of the UK’s social security in relation to international human rights law.

    The UK has signed and ratified a number of international agreements on human rights. One of these is the 1966 International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR), which lays out the right to social security. An accompanying document defines the three key principles of this right as:

    • Availability A social security system established in law, administered publicly, and materially reachable by those who need it.

    • Adequacy Benefits must be suitable, both in amount and in duration, to realise essential socioeconomic rights.

    • Accessibility Everyone should be covered by the social security system, paying particular attention to disadvantaged and marginalised individuals and groups.

    The conclusion of our study for Amnesty International is crystal clear: even disregarding the cuts announced in March, the UK’s social security system does not meet these standards.

    Availability

    Our review of the literature shows a widespread underclaiming of benefits. It has been estimated that in 2024, £22.7 billion in income-related benefits went unclaimed, a £4 billion increase from the previous year.

    Gaps in official data hinder a clear understanding of why many people are missing out on the support they are entitled to. But qualitative evidence suggests this is largely due to fear, stigma, bureaucratic and digital hurdles, and eligibility cliff edges for means-tested benefits.

    In recent years, the UK government has adopted a contentious and punitive stance toward benefit recipients. Media and political rhetoric have portrayed those who claim benefits as idle or undeserving scroungers.

    This stigma harms the mental health and self-esteem of people experiencing poverty. It can result in shame and secrecy, and create barriers to people accessing support they are entitled to.

    Our research for Amnesty International concludes that UK claimants do not get enough information and support about their rights to benefits. Combined with the stigma of claiming, the UK is falling far short of making benefits “available” in line with international standards.

    Adequacy

    Since the austerity policies of the 2010s, the UK’s social security system has become significantly less adequate in supporting vulnerable people and families. The basic rate of universal credit (the main benefit for working-age people on a low income) is at 40-year low in real terms amid a cost of living crisis.

    Restrictive policies, such as the benefit cap (introduced in 2013 to set a maximum limit to the total benefits received by a household) and the two-child limit have curtailed access to essential benefits. Although inflation adjustments in the last two years provided some relief, many benefits still fail to keep up with rising living costs.

    The two-child limit is the cruellest expression of the inadequacy of the UK’s social security system. Introduced by the Conservative government in 2017, the two-child limit restricts financial support through universal credit to two children. It is likely to be the most significant single cause of child poverty in the UK, including in families where adults work but do not earn enough to make ends meet.

    When Labour returned to power, there was much speculation about whether they would reverse the two-child limit. But despite pleas from experts and people with direct experience, the government has persisted in retaining it.



    Read more:
    Our research shows the harm the two-child limit on benefits is doing. Only scrapping it can end this

    Accessibility

    Our study lays out the many barriers to accessibility in the UK’s system. For example, the bureaucratic hurdles in the assessment process, and the disproportionate impact of punitive sanctions on lone mothers and on minority ethnic claimants.

    The UK operates a benefits sanction regime, which imposes penalties on claimants who fail to meet certain conditions. These include attending jobcentre appointments or accepting job offers. In general, sanctions and the fear of sanctions erode the trust between benefit claimants and the social security system.

    Benefits sanctions are just one of the barriers to accessing social security.
    1000words/Shutterstock

    As it did in its previous review in 2016, in February the UN Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights recommended that the UK review the use of benefit sanctions to ensure they are used proportionately and are subject to prompt and independent dispute resolution mechanisms.

    Another accessibility concern is the shift to a digital-by-default system in the 2010s. While intended to make accessing benefits more efficient, it has become an administrative barrier.

    Many people, particularly the elderly and others who are less digitally literate, struggle to navigate the benefits system. It excludes people without reliable internet access, underscoring a digital divide that prevents meaningful access to social security.

    Meeting standards

    Given the evidence, it is no surprise that earlier this year, the UN Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights urged the UK government to assess the cumulative effects of the austerity measures introduced in the 2010s.

    In particular, the committee recommended reversing the two-child limit, the benefit cap and the five-week delay for the first universal credit payment, and increasing the budget allocated to social security. These recommendations were made before the changes announced in the spring statement.

    To live up to the internationally recognised right to social security, the UK should recognise in law, policy and practice that social security is a human right. And, that it is essential to the fulfilment of other human rights.

    Amnesty International recommends the government set up a commission with statutory powers, to produce a strategy for “wholesale reform” of the social security system. The UK must establish a minimum support level and an essentials guarantee, to ensure beneficiaries can consistently meet their basic needs. A good way to start would be abolishing the two-child limit once and for all.

    Koldo Casla and Lyle Barker wrote the study underpinning Amnesty International’s report on the state of the right to social security in the UK.

    – ref. The UK’s social security system falls way below international human rights standards: new report – https://theconversation.com/the-uks-social-security-system-falls-way-below-international-human-rights-standards-new-report-254528

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: Malaria scorecard: battles have been won and advances made, but the war isn’t over

    Source: The Conversation – Africa – By Shüné Oliver, Medical scientist, National Institute for Communicable Diseases

    Sub-Saharan Africa continues to bear the brunt of malaria cases in the world. In this region 11 countries account for two-thirds of the global burden.

    World Malaria Day is marked on 25 April. What progress has been made against the disease, where are the gaps and what’s being done to plug them?

    As scientists who research malaria in Africa, we believe that the continent can defeat the disease. New, effective tools have been added to the malaria toolbox.

    Researchers and malaria programmes, however, must strengthen collaborations. This will ensure the limited resources are used in ways that make the most impact.

    The numbers

    Some progress has been made, but in some cases there have been reverses.

    • Between 2000 and 2015 there was an 18% reduction in new cases from 262 million in 2000 to 214 million in 2015. Since then, progress has stalled.

    • The World Health Organization estimates that approximately 2.2 billion cases have been prevented between 2000 and 2023. Additionally, 12.7 million deaths have been avoided. In 2025, 45 countries are certified as malaria free. Only nine of those countries are in Africa. These include Egypt, Seychelles and Lesotho.

    • The global target set by the WHO was to reduce new cases by 75% compared to cases in 2015. Africa should have reported approximately 47,000 cases in 2023. Instead there were 246 million.

    • Almost every African country with ongoing malaria transmission experienced an increase in malaria cases in 2023. Exceptions to this were Rwanda and Liberia.

    So why is progress stagnating and in many cases reversing?

    The setbacks

    Effective malaria control is extremely challenging. Malaria parasite and mosquito populations evolve rapidly. This makes them difficult to control.

    Africa is home to malaria mosquitoes that prefer biting humans to other animals. These mosquitoes have also adapted to avoid insecticide-treated surfaces.

    It has been shown in South Africa that mosquitoes may feed on people inside their homes, but will avoid resting on the sprayed walls.

    Mosquitoes have also developed mechanisms to resist the effects of insecticides. Malaria vector resistance to certain insecticides used in malaria control is widespread in endemic areas. Resistance levels vary around Africa.

    Resistance to the pyrethroid class is most common. Organophosphate resistance is rare, but present in west Africa. As mosquitoes become resistant to the chemicals used for mosquito control, both the spraying of houses and insecticide treated nets become less effective. However, in regions with high malaria cases, nets still provide physical protection despite resistance.

    An additional challenge is that malaria parasites continue to develop resistance to anti-malarial drugs. In 2007 the first evidence began to emerge in south-east Asia that parasites were developing resistance to artemisinins. These are key drugs in the fight against malaria.

    Recently this has been shown to be happening in some African countries too. Artemisinin resistance has been confirmed in Eritrea, Rwanda, Tanzania and Uganda. Molecular markers of artemisinin resistance were recently detected in parasites from Namibia and Zambia.

    Malaria parasites have also developed mutations that prevent them from being being detected by the most widely used rapid diagnostic test in Africa.

    Countries in the Horn of Africa, where parasites with these mutations are common, have changed the malaria rapid diagnostic tests used to ensure early diagnosis.

    The progress

    Nevertheless, the fight against malaria has been strengthened by novel control strategies.

    Firstly, after more than 30 years of research, two malaria vaccines – RTS,S and R21 – have finally been approved by the WHO. These are being deployed in 19 African countries.

    These vaccines have reduced disease cases and deaths in the high-risk under-five-years-old age group. They have reduced cases of severe malaria by approximately 30% and deaths by 17%.

    Secondly, effectiveness of long-lasting insecticide-treated nets has been improved.

    New insecticides have been approved for use. Chemical components that help to manage resistance have also been included in the nets.

    Thirdly, novel tools are showing promise. One option is attractive toxic sugar baits. This is because sugar is what mosquitoes naturally eat. Biocontrol by altering the native gut bacteria of mosquitoes may also prove effective.

    Fourthly, reducing mosquito populations by releasing sterilised male or genetically modified mosquitoes into wild mosquito populations is also showing promise. Trials are currently happening in Burkina Faso. Genetically sterilised males have been released on a small scale. This strategy has shown promise in reducing the population.

    Fifthly, two new antimalarials are expected to be available in the next year or two. Artemisinin-based combination therapies are standard treatment for malaria. An improvement to this is triple artemisinin-based combination therapy. This is a combination of this drug with an additional antimalarial. Studies in Africa and Asia have shown these triple combinations to be very effective in controlling malaria.

    The second new antimalarial is the first non-artemisinin-based drug to be developed in over 20 years. Ganaplacide-lumefantrine has been shown to be effective in young children. Once available, it can to be used to treat parasites that are resistant to artemisinin. This is because it has a completely different mechanism of action.

    The end game

    It has been several years since the malaria control toolbox has been strengthened with novel tools and strategies that target both the vector and the parasite. This makes it an ideal time to double down in the fight against this deadly disease.

    In 2020, the WHO identified 25 countries with the potential to stop malaria transmission within their borders by 2025. While none of these countries eliminated malaria, some have made significant progress. Costa Rica and Nepal reported fewer than 100 cases. Timor-Leste reported only one case in recent years.

    Three southern African countries are included in this group: Botswana, Eswatini and South Africa. Unfortunately, all these countries showed increases in cases in 2023.

    With the new tools, these and other countries can eliminate malaria, getting us closer to the dream of a malaria-free world.

    Shüné Oliver receives funding from the National Research Foundation of South Africa and the South African Medical Research Council. She is associated with both the National Institute for Communicable Diseases and the Wits Research Institte for Malaria.

    Jaishree Raman receives funding from the Gates Foundation, Global Fund, Wellcome Trust, National Research Foundation, National Institute for Communicable Diseases, South African Medical Research Council, and the Research Trust. She is affiliated with the National Institute for Communicable Diseases, the Wits Institute for Malaria Research, University of Witwatersrand, and the Institute for Sustainable Malaria Control, University of Pretoria.

    – ref. Malaria scorecard: battles have been won and advances made, but the war isn’t over – https://theconversation.com/malaria-scorecard-battles-have-been-won-and-advances-made-but-the-war-isnt-over-255230

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: AI policies in Africa: lessons from Ghana and Rwanda

    Source: The Conversation – Africa – By Thompson Gyedu Kwarkye, Postdoctoral Researcher, University College Dublin

    Artificial intelligence (AI) is increasing productivity and pushing the boundaries of what’s possible. It powers self-driving cars, social media feeds, fraud detection and medical diagnoses. Touted as a game changer, it is projected to add nearly US$15.7 trillion to the global economy by the end of the decade.

    Africa is positioned to use this technology in several sectors. In Ghana, Kenya and South Africa, AI-led digital tools in use include drones for farm management, X-ray screening for tuberculosis diagnosis, and real-time tracking systems for packages and shipments. All these are helping to fill gaps in accessibility, efficiency and decision-making.

    However, it also introduces risks. These include biased algorithms, resource and labour exploitation, and e-waste disposal. The lack of a robust regulatory framework in many parts of the continent increases these challenges, leaving vulnerable populations exposed to exploitation. Limited public awareness and infrastructure further complicate the continent’s ability to harness AI responsibly.

    What are African countries doing about it?
    To answer this, my research mapped out what Ghana and Rwanda had in place as AI policies and investigated how these policies were developed. I looked for shared principles and differences in approach to governance and implementation.

    The research shows that AI policy development is not a neutral or technical process but a profoundly political one. Power dynamics, institutional interests and competing visions of technological futures shape AI regulation.

    I conclude from my findings that AI’s potential to bring great change in Africa is undeniable. But its benefits are not automatic. Rwanda and Ghana show that effective policy-making requires balancing innovation with equity, global standards with local needs, and state oversight with public trust.

    The question is not whether Africa can harness AI, but how and on whose terms.

    How they did it

    Rwanda’s National AI Policy emerged from consultations with local and global actors. These included the Ministry of ICT and Innovation, the Rwandan Space Agency, and NGOs like the Future Society, and the GIZ FAIR Forward. The resulting policy framework is in line with Rwanda’s goals for digital transformation, economic diversification and social development. It includes international best practices such as ethical AI, data protection, and inclusive AI adoption.

    Ghana’s Ministry of Communication, Digital Technology and Innovations conducted multi-stakeholder workshops to develop a national strategy for digital transformation and innovation. Start-ups, academics, telecom companies and public-sector institutions came together and the result is Ghana’s National Artificial Intelligence Strategy 2023–2033.

    Both countries have set up or plan to set up Responsible AI offices. This aligns with global best practices for ethical AI. Rwanda focuses on local capacity building and data sovereignty. This reflects the country’s post-genocide emphasis on national control and social cohesion. Similarly, Ghana’s proposed office focuses on accountability, though its structure is still under legislative review.

    Ghana and Rwanda have adopted globally recognised ethical principles like privacy protection, bias mitigation and human rights safeguards. Rwanda’s policy reflects Unesco’s AI ethics recommendations and Ghana emphasises “trustworthy AI”.

    Both policies frame AI as a way to reach the UN’s Sustainable Development Goals. Rwanda’s policy targets applications in healthcare, agriculture, poverty reduction and rural service delivery. Similarly, Ghana’s strategy highlights the potential to advance economic growth, environmental sustainability and inclusive digital transformation.

    Key policy differences

    Rwanda’s policy ties data control to national security. This is rooted in its traumatic history of identity-based violence. Ghana, by contrast, frames AI as a tool for attracting foreign investment rather than a safeguard against state fragility.

    The policies also differ in how they manage foreign influence. Rwanda has a “defensive” stance towards global tech powers; Ghana’s is “accommodative”. Rwanda works with partners that allow it to follow its own policy. Ghana, on the other hand, embraces partnerships, viewing them as the start of innovation.

    While Rwanda’s approach is targeted and problem-solving, Ghana’s strategy is expansive, aiming for large-scale modernisation and private-sector growth. Through state-led efforts, Rwanda focuses on using AI to solve immediate challenges such as rural healthcare access and food security. In contrast, Ghana looks at using AI more widely – in finance, transport, education and governance – to become a regional tech hub.

    Constraints and solutions

    The effectiveness of these AI policies is held back by broader systemic challenges. The US and China dominate in setting global standards, so local priorities get sidelined. For example, while Rwanda and Ghana advocate for ethical AI, it’s hard for them to hold multinational corporations accountable for breaches.

    Energy shortages further complicate large-scale AI adoption. Training models require reliable electricity – a scarce resource in many parts of the continent.

    To address these gaps, I propose the following:

    Investments in digital infrastructure, education and local start-ups to reduce dependency on foreign tech giants.

    African countries must shape international AI governance forums. They must ensure policies reflect continental realities, not just western or Chinese ones. This will include using collective bargaining power through the African Union to bring Africa’s development needs to the fore. It could also help with digital sovereignty issues and equitable access to AI technologies.

    Finally, AI policies must embed African ethical principles. These should include communal rights and post-colonial sensitivities.

    Thompson Gyedu Kwarkye 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. AI policies in Africa: lessons from Ghana and Rwanda – https://theconversation.com/ai-policies-in-africa-lessons-from-ghana-and-rwanda-253642

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: How Pope Francis became a climate change influencer

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Will de Freitas, Environment + Energy Editor, UK edition

    “The Earth, our home, is beginning to look more and more like an immense pile of filth.” These aren’t the words of a radical sociologist or rogue climate scientist. They aren’t the words of a Conversation editor either. Nor are these:

    “A selfish and boundless thirst for power and material prosperity leads both to the misuse of available natural resources and to the exclusion of the weak and disadvantaged.”

    These are in fact quotes from Pope Francis, who died last weekend.

    This roundup of The Conversation’s climate coverage comes from our award-winning weekly climate action newsletter. Every Wednesday, The Conversation’s environment editor writes Imagine, a short email that goes a little deeper into just one climate issue. Join the 40,000+ readers who’ve subscribed.

    I never thought this job would have me writing newsletters in praise of a papal climate influencer, but here we are. You can read various obits and interesting takes on Pope Francis and what’s next for the Catholic church elsewhere on The Conversation. But here I want to focus on his thoughts on climate change and the impact he had.

    Our common home

    In 2015, two years after becoming pope, Francis published Laudato Si (Praise Be to You), a 183-page papal letter sent to all Catholic bishops on “care for our common home”. It was a significant intervention made just a few months before the climate summit that led to the Paris agreement.

    Writing at the time, sustainability professor Steffen Böhm said that what made it so radical “isn’t just [Pope Francis’s] call to urgently tackle climate change. It’s the fact he openly and unashamedly goes against the grain of dominant social, economic and environment policies.”

    For Böhm, who was then at the University of Essex but now works at Exeter, this radical message “puts him on a confrontation course with global powerbrokers and leaders of national governments, international institutions and multinational corporations”.

    He quotes a section where the Pope says “those who possess more resources [and] power seem seem mostly to be concerned with masking the problems or concealing their symptoms, simply making efforts to reduce some of the negative impacts of climate change”. The Pope warns that “such effects will continue to worsen if we continue with current models of production and consumption”.

    Böhm points out the Pope “might be the only person with both the clout and the desire to meaningfully deliver a message like this”.



    Read more:
    Pope’s climate letter is a radical attack on the logic of the market

    Bernard Laurent of EM Business School in Lyon, says that in France the Pope’s message “managed to bring together both conservative currents – such as the Courant pour une Écologie Humaine (Movement for a Human Ecology), created in 2013 – and more open-minded Catholic intellectuals such as Gaël Giraud, a Jesuit and author of Produire Plus, Polluer Moins : l’Impossible Découplage? (Produce more, Pollute Less: the Impossible Decoupling?)”



    Read more:
    Pope Francis and Laudato Si’: an ecological turning point for the Catholic Church

    Clearly, this was a unique figure able to reach people who might not listen to a Greta Thunberg or an Al Gore.

    But, while it’s great the Paris agreement was signed, it was still filled with the exact sort of market logic and buck-passing – carbon credits, “emit now, clean up later”, and so on – the Pope had criticised a few months previously. And climate change itself only got worse. In the years following, Pope Francis spoke at the UN and published a series of other “exhortations” related to climate change.

    Did any of this make any difference?

    Celia Deane-Drummond is a theology professor at the University of Oxford and director of a research institute named after the 2015 papal letter. In a piece published the same day Pope Francis’s death was announced, she looked at his influence on the global climate movement.

    Deane-Drummond notes Pope Francis’s emphasis on listening to Indigenous people for instance in his lesser-known exhortation Querida Amazonia, which means “beloved Amazonia”, from February 2020.

    “This exhortation resulted from his conversations with Amazonian communities and helped put Indigenous perspectives on the map. Those perspectives helped shape Catholic social teaching in the [papal letter] Fratelli Tutti, which means ‘all brothers and sisters’, published on October 3 2020.”

    A key influencer

    Perhaps the Pope’s biggest influence was on activists rather than policymakers. Deane-Drummond says he was often mentioned by participants in a research project on religion, theology and climate change she was part of.

    “When we asked more than 300 [religious] activists representing six different activist groups who most influenced them to get involved in climate action, 61% named Pope Francis as a key influencer.”

    The 2015 papal letter also gave rise to the Laudato Si movement which Deane-Drummond points out “coordinates climate activism across the globe. It has 900 Catholic organisations as well as 10,000 of what are known as Laudato Si ‘animators’, who are all ambassadors and leaders in their respective communities.”



    Read more:
    Three ways Pope Francis influenced the global climate movement

    There are specific religious arguments he was able to make to appeal to these groups, note Joel Hodge and Antonia Pizzy of Australian Catholic University.

    They write that: “Francis argued combating climate change relied on the ‘ecological conversion’ of the human heart, so that people may recognise the God-given nature of our planet and the fundamental call to care for it. Without this conversion, pragmatic and political measures wouldn’t be able to counter the forces of consumerism, exploitation and selfishness.”



    Read more:
    Pope Francis has died, aged 88. These were his greatest reforms – and controversies

    It’s not an argument that will particularly work on me. But then addressing the climate crisis will require all sorts of people to be persuaded of the need for serious action, including policy wonks, tech bros, radical activists, worried parents and, yes, people motivated by their religion.

    The last pope didn’t have to say anything about the climate crisis. It’s not necessarily in the job description. But it’s a good thing that Pope Francis did speak about it and, as Deane-Drummond says: “We can only hope [the next pope] will build on his legacy and influence political change for the good, from the grassroots frontline right up to the highest global ambitions.”

    – ref. How Pope Francis became a climate change influencer – https://theconversation.com/how-pope-francis-became-a-climate-change-influencer-255086

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –