Source: United States House of Representatives – Congressman Cliff Bentz (R-Ontario)
Washington, D.C.—This week in the Natural Resources Committee, Congressman Cliff Bentz’s (R-OR) bill, The Dalles Watershed Development Act, was included in the full committee markup. This critical legislation, if enacted, would transfer 150 acres of U.S. Forest Service land within The Dalles’ municipal watershed to city ownership.
Said Congressman Bentz: “On April 29, 2025, my bill H.R. 655, was included in the Federal Lands Subcommittee hearing marking the critical first step in the legislative process. The bill received support among the subcommittee as well as the acknowledgement of the United States Forest Service that a land transfer would greatly benefit the community. The bill has now moved to the second step which is today’s “markup”. It was voted out of committee and will now move to the floor. If passed across the floor, it will move to the Senate.”
The City of The Dalles has long relied on its municipal watershed for 80% of its annual water supply. Protecting this watershed is essential to maintaining water quality, meeting future demand, and ensuring public safety. This bill would allow the city to expand the size of its reservoir and allow much less red tape in taking action to protect city water infrastructure works and the city’s watershed.
“The City of The Dalles has maintained a great working relationship with the Forest Service, but the need for expansion of the reservoir, on land owned by the federal government, would be unnecessarily burdened by lengthy federally required administrative reviews.” said Congressman Bentz.“To afford to expand its water storage capacity, avoiding unnecessary costs is absolutely crucial. This transfer of land would help avoid costs. Water security is a top priority, and this legislation will provide the land needed to meet the city’s future growth.”
Congressman Bentz will continue to work with the Natural Resources Committee, House Leadership, local leaders and federal agencies to advance this legislation.
Source: United States House of Representatives – Congressman Cliff Bentz (R-Ontario)
WASHINGTON, D.C.– To be clear – I do support and encourage sale or exchange of parcels of federal land when there is a clear economic or social demand for such disposition, and when that disposition follows appropriate procedure and is generally supported by those affected. I include congressional action as an appropriate procedure. I do not support a mandated disposition of millions of acres of federal land, the amount of which was arbitrarily established, the primary goal not being to respond to demand, but instead being the removal of land from federal ownership.
A policy to permanently dispose of massive amounts of land currently owned and managed for multiple use by the federal government should not be included in a reconciliation package where debate, by design, is truncated or completely avoided. A decision to irreversibly divest the nation of federally owned land is an important policy issue that must be carefully discussed with and designed by those of us representing states impacted by this policy.
Of particular concern in making any decision to sell public land is the sale’s impact on those who have rights in the land or currently have some type of use of the land. Indian Tribes, neighbors, grazing permittees, those utilizing public access across the land, hunters, watershed function, holders of easements, and environmental impact are some of the issues that must be taken into account in making a decision to alter ownership. These realities make the process used in selecting parcels of federal land offered for sale extremely important.
Some might argue that the abject failure of the federal government to adequately manage BLM and Forest Service land justifies its sale. But sale of this land to someone else is no way to assure it’s proper management. The best way to protect this land is to identify and correct the reasons these agencies are failing in their mission. The easiest observation to make is that environmental organizations, using the ESA, CWA, CAA, and other environmental laws, compliant federal judges, and the Access to Justice Act, (an act that pays the attorney fees of plaintiffs who successfully sue the federal government) through protracted and expensive litigation, make a mockery of agency’s attempts to craft management plans. If our nation is to be a landowner (and it is), it must take care of that land. This means that the laws that are being perverted to line the pockets of environmental organizations at the expense of the taxpayer and our forests and rangelands, must be changed so that such perversion is stopped.
Source: United States House of Representatives – Representative Diana Harshbarger (R-TN)
WASHINGTON, D.C.– Today, U.S. Representative Diana Harshbarger (R-TN), a practicing pharmacist before being elected to Congress, and U.S. Representative Mikie Sherrill (D-NJ) reintroduced the bipartisanPrescription Information Modernization Act. This legislation would allow the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to move forward with a proposed rule allowing drug manufacturers to transmit prescribing information electronically to doctors and pharmacists, as opposed to printed copy, as currently required.
“Pharmacists and physicians deserve timely, accurate data when making decisions that impact patient health, not pages of printed material that often arrive late and are immediately discarded,”said Rep. Harshbarger.“This bipartisan bill is a practical update that empowers healthcare professionals with real-time digital access, cuts waste, and ensures patients are receiving the most up-to-date information. Thank you to my colleague, Representative Sherrill for working with me to bring prescribing information into the 21st century.”
“I’m focused on improving our healthcare system to ensure healthcare providers are able to provide the best possible care to patients. Under outdated rules, providers are prohibited from receiving prescribing information for medications digitally. This legislation would finally modernize our system, allowing pharmacists to access real-time updates on prescription medications that will ensure they can dispense medicines to patients safely while reducing waste at the same time.” said Rep. Sherrill.
Under the current policy, which has not been updated since 1962, prescribing information sent to providers that contain important information related to a specific drug must be printed, running an average of 45 pages per prescription. This information is not intended for patients but rather contains the drug’s chemical makeup and information that informs a healthcare professional on the drug’s interaction with other drugs. In 2014, the FDA proposed a rule that would allow the electronic distribution of prescribing information. Since then, Congress has used the appropriations process to prevent the agency from finalizing that rule, requiring the bulky paper labels to be printed and distributed, even though many are immediately discarded by healthcare professionals for being outdated.
The Harshbarger-Sherrill legislation would give healthcare professionals the option to choose how they receive prescribing information. In most cases, healthcare professionals choose to receive the information digitally because the information is available in real-time. Printed information takes approximately 8-12 months from printing to shipment, and information is often outdated by the time it reaches the recipient.
This legislation has drawn support from leading pharmacy and healthcare advocacy organizations, including theAlliance to Modernize Prescribing Information (AMPI)and the following groups: Academy of Managed Care Pharmacy (AMCP), Allergy & Asthma Network, American Pharmacists Association, AmGen, Asthma and Allergy Foundation of America, Association for Accessible Medicines, Beyond Type 1, Biotechnology Innovation Organization, BioNJ, BioUtah, Boomer Esiason Foundation, Environmental Paper Network, Georgia Bio, Healthcare Distribution Alliance, HealthCare Institute of New Jersey, LUNGevity Foundation, Lupin, Maryland Tech Council, MassBio, McKesson, National Association of Chain Drug Stores, National Consumers League, National Grange, NewYorkBIO, North Carolina Biosciences Organization, Texas Healthcare and Biosciences Institute, and Zero Cancer.
Additional sponsors of this legislation include Reps. David Valadao (R-CA), Don Davis (D-NC), Ken Calvert (R-CA), Scott Peters (D-CA), Julia Letlow (R-LA), Deborah Ross (D-NC), Brad Schneider (D-IL), Steve Womack (R-AR), and Paul Tonko (D-NY).
Source: Africa Press Organisation – English (2) – Report:
Download logo
The Executive Board of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) concluded the Article IV Consultation with Libya.[1] The Executive Board’s decision was taken on a lapse-of-time basis.
Real GDP growth is estimated to have declined to around 2 percent in 2024 from 10 percent in 2023, driven by a contraction in the hydrocarbon sector. At the same time, non-hydrocarbon growth remained robust on the back of sustained government spending. Both the current and the fiscal accounts have swung from a surplus in 2023 to a deficit in 2024. Reported inflation remained low.
The outlook continues to be dominated by developments in the oil sector. Real GDP growth is projected to rebound in 2025, primarily driven by an expansion of oil production, before moderating to about 2 percent over the medium term. Non-hydrocarbon growth is set to remain between 5 and 6 percent in the medium term, supported by sustained government spending. The current account is slated to post a small surplus in 2025 (0.7 percent of GDP) before turning into a small deficit over the medium term, as oil prices remain subdued. The fiscal balance is projected to remain in deficit—albeit at a much lower level than in 2024—under the weight of continued large government spending.
Risks are tilted to the downside. Domestic risks stem from political instability, potentially evolving into active conflict, disrupting oil production and exports, and preventing progress on much-needed economic reforms. The economy is exposed to global downside risks through its heavy dependence on oil exports and a large import bill.
Executive Board Assessment[2]
Economic activity and fiscal and external accounts are poised to remain heavily dependent on developments in the oil sector and subject to downside risks. Following a rebound in oil production, economic growth is expected to be in double digits in 2025, before moderating over the medium term. Despite the expected increase in oil exports, the current account and fiscal balances are set to remain in deficit over most of the forecast horizon, weighed down by the projected softening of oil prices and large fiscal spending. The outlook is subject to downside risks, including the potential intensification of domestic political tensions, which could disrupt oil production and exports, and adverse global economic and geopolitical developments, which would put additional downward pressure on oil prices. To mitigate these risks, accelerating reforms aimed at restraining fiscal spending and diversifying the economy away from oil will be crucial.
Controlling expenditure will be key to ensure sustainability and to achieve intergenerational equity. The authorities should remain steadfast in their efforts to agree on a unified budget that outlines priority spending and enhances the transparency and credibility of government fiscal operations. Until such an agreement is reached, pressures to increase spending on salaries and subsidies should be resisted. Over the medium term, a sizable adjustment will be required to set the fiscal position on a sustainable trajectory and preserve intergenerational equity. The adjustment should be carefully designed to rationalize current spending, particularly wages and energy subsidies, and mobilize non-oil revenues, while maintaining capital expenditures at levels that support economic diversification.
A well-designed monetary and exchange rate policy framework will be essential to help manage economic cycles and mitigate the depreciation pressures. Introducing a well-defined policy rate will enhance the CBL’s capacity in smoothing the economic cycle and alleviating pressures on the dinar and provide a benchmark for the pricing of credit by both conventional and Islamic banks. Phasing out the foreign exchange tax alongside other exchange restrictions in line with Libya’s Article VIII obligations will reduce distortions, lower economic agents’ need to resort to the parallel market and help unify the exchange rate.
Reforms are needed to reinforce the banking sector’s contribution to economic activity. Impediments to a more active role by banks in the economy remain pervasive. Introducing well-designed savings plans will help to reduce cash hoarding, expand banks’ deposit base, establish bank-customer relationships, and support the provision of credit to the private sector. Enhancing transparency and accountability within the banking sector and promoting financial literacy among the public would foster confidence in banks and increase their footprint in Libya’s economy. Strengthening the AML/CFT framework, including by aligning it with international standards, will be paramount to support the stability of correspondent banking relationships and to ensure that Libyan banks’ operations remain uninterrupted.
Structural and governance reforms would foster the emergence of a diversified, sustainable, and private sector-led economy. Forging a comprehensive reform program aimed at reducing dependence on oil revenues should be at the top of the authorities’ agenda. Key elements of the reform program should promote a more active engagement of the private sector in economic activity, including by enhancing the business environment and access to finance and introducing labor market measures that encourage private sector employment. Taking decisive actions to tackle corruption, strengthen governance, and enhance the rule of law will support economic diversification further.
There is a need to enhance data provision and statistical capacity. Data gaps continue to significantly hamper staff’s ability to conduct analysis and provide policy advice. There is a need for the authorities to implement the technical assistance recommendations in the areas of national accounts and external sector statistics, and monetary and financial statistics, and improve data collection and reporting.
Net credit to the government (Libyan Dinar, billion)
-94.1
-114.9
-110.9
-128.8
-130.4
-121.4
-112.7
-104.6
-96.8
-89.3
Credit to the economy (% of GDP)
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
(In billions of U.S. dollars, unless otherwise indicated)
Balance of payments
Exports
25.9
32.1
30.9
28.4
32.0
31.3
31.6
32.0
32.5
32.9
Of which: Hydrocarbon
24.5
30.0
28.8
26.3
29.9
29.1
29.2
29.7
30.3
29.9
Imports
17.0
17.2
17.7
21.6
21.9
20.5
20.6
20.8
21.0
21.2
Current account balance
5.7
10.0
8.0
-2.0
0.3
-0.3
-0.2
-0.2
-0.1
-0.1
(As percent of GDP)
16.1
23.2
18.3
-4.2
0.7
-0.5
-0.4
-0.3
-0.3
-0.1
Capital Account (including E&O)
-7.0
-5.3
-3.8
6.5
-2.8
-1.4
-1.4
-1.4
-1.3
-1.3
Overall balance 2/
1.1
4.7
4.3
4.5
-2.5
-1.7
-1.6
-1.5
-1.5
-1.4
Reserves
Gross official reserves
69.4
74.1
78.4
82.9
81.1
79.4
77.8
76.3
74.8
73.4
In months of next year’s imports
32.2
32.8
34.2
29.6
31.0
32.3
31.5
30.5
29.6
28.8
Gross official reserves in percentage of Broad Money
317.0
318.2
261.3
250.3
262.9
246.4
230.9
215.6
201.4
188.2
Total foreign assets
79.7
84.2
88.5
93.6
91.6
89.7
87.9
86.2
84.5
82.9
Exchange rate
Official exchange rate (LD/US$, period average)
4.5
4.8
4.8
4.8
…
…
…
…
…
…
Parallel market exchange rate (LD/US$, period average)
5.1
5.1
5.2
6.9
…
…
…
…
…
…
Parallel market exchange rate (LD/US$, end of period)
5.0
5.2
6.1
6.4
…
…
…
…
…
…
Crude oil production (millions of barrels per day – mbd)
1.2
1.0
1.2
1.1
1.4
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
Of which: Exports
1.0
0.8
1.0
0.9
1.1
1.2
1.2
1.2
1.2
1.2
Crude oil price (US$/bbl) 3/
64.4
89.6
75.0
73.6
66.9
62.4
62.7
63.6
64.3
64.9
Sources: Libyan authorities; and IMF staff estimates and projections.
1/ Nominal GDP data are at market prices.
2/ Includes revaluation of gold holdings of U$10.5 billion in 2024.
3/ The crude oil price was adjusted for Libya up to 2024.
[1] Under Article IV of the IMF’s Articles of Agreement, the IMF holds bilateral discussions with members, usually every year. A staff team visits the country, collects economic and financial information, and discusses with officials the country’s economic developments and policies. On return to headquarters, the staff prepares a report, which forms the basis for discussion by the Executive Board.
[2] The Executive Board takes decisions under its lapse-of-time procedure when the Board agrees that a proposal can be considered without convening formal discussions.
Source: Africa Press Organisation – English (2) – Report:
Beneath the shade of oil palms, a quiet yet powerful revolution is underway. The Dukundane Cooperative, led by women (95% of its members), stands as a beacon of resilience and innovation, having transformed a once small-scale activity into a thriving semi-industrial enterprise.
Founded in 2014 following women’s leadership training under the Women’s Peace and Humanitarian Fund (WPHF), the cooperative initially brought together women crafting and selling brooms from palm fibers. By 2020, they had taken a transformative step – launching artisanal palm oil production.
The foundation for this transformation was laid in 2018 under axe 6 of the WPHF, which supports the socio-economic recovery and political participation of women and girls in peacebuilding contexts. That year, 175 women peace actors and dialogue facilitators – locally known as Abakanguriramahoro or “women mediators”—received financial support in Karonda. These women had already been active in conflict prevention and community mediation.
With a grant of USD 180,000 from the WPHF, they expanded their economic activities using a holistic approach to palm tree valorization: from palm oil extraction to soap production from palm nuts and organic fertilizer from processing residues.
This marked a turning point in women’s economic empowerment in the region. Yet, the initiative still faced challenges due to limited equipment and technical capacity, underscoring the need for more structured support.
By 2025, with new backing from the Peacebuilding Fund (PBF) and UN Women, the group officially became the Dukundane Cooperative. With a total investment of 603 million Burundian francs, a modern semi-industrial processing plant was established with the help of the implementing partner FVS “Amie des Enfants.” The plant features: a Sterilizer, Sorting table, Destemmer, Kneader, Oil press, Decanters, Steam cooking pots, Water tank and Steam boiler.
Today, the cooperative processes 10,000 kg of palm bunches daily, yielding approximately 2,500 to 3,000 liters of oil under the Tamura Oil brand.
“We thank all our partners who made it possible to establish this semi-industrial unit capable of producing refined oil that can compete in the market,” — Frida Ndagijimana, President of the 185-member cooperative, including 175 women.
A Tool for Peace and Empowerment
Beyond oil production, the cooperative now manages over two hectares of oil palm plantations. The facility includes a sorting shed, storage shed, staff toilets and changing rooms, and an office building.
With support from national technical bodies such as the National Center for Food Technology (CNTA), Burundi Bureau of Standards (BBN), Palm Oil Office (OHP), and implementing partner CREOP-JEUNES, Dukundane has become a national model for women’s economic empowerment and local development.
But the story doesn’t end with economic gains. This initiative is a concrete manifestation of UN Security Council Resolution 1325, which emphasizes the critical role of women in peacebuilding. In Karonda, that vision is now firmly rooted—and bearing fruit.
Source: Africa Press Organisation – English (2) – Report:
Download logo
Djibouti has been navigating regional tensions well, with robust growth, moderate inflation, and recovering reserves. In response to global uncertainties and domestic debt challenges, the authorities plan significant fiscal consolidation, including leveraging state-owned enterprises (SOE) dividends meaningfully, and advancing creditor dialogue. The authorities remain dedicated to investing in human capital and creating favorable investment conditions for job creation.
Djibouti’s economic resilience and contribution to regional stability
Djibouti helps maintain regional stability by supporting maritime security and facilitating humanitarian responses during crises. Djibouti’s GDP per capita has effectively doubled over the past decade thanks to significant investments that have contributed to the modernization of the economy. However, declining government revenues and increasing debt service have placed considerable strain on public finances, leading to unsustainable levels of public debt and diminishing reserves. Growth has not created enough jobs in the formal sector, while fiscal space to finance development needs is limited.
The authorities are leveraging Djibouti’s growth resilience to advance fiscal consolidation and rebuild reserves. Growth is expected to have exceeded 6.5 percent in 2024 due to increased transshipments amid Red Sea tensions, while moderate international food and energy prices kept inflation in check. The government deficit was reduced from 3.5 percent of GDP in 2023 to 2.6 percent in 2024 following a brief period of fiscal overruns and deficit monetization, and reserves have begun to recover partially offsetting the decline observed since late 2023, though they remain below the monetary base.
The outlook is positive but subject to risks in an uncertain global context. Growth is projected to remain dynamic at around 6 percent this year and to continue over the medium term, albeit at a slower pace. Ethiopia’s robust economy is expected to boost Djibouti’s port activities; however, fiscal consolidation and the phasing out of large-scale investments may temper growth. Key risks include regional conflicts potentially increasing migration and affecting social stability amid a constrained fiscal space, and trade policy shifts that could depreciate the dollar and Djibouti franc, enhancing service exports but also raising inflation. Nonetheless, it is worth noting that Djibouti has successfully navigated several shocks over the past few years, including COVID-19, the 2022 Tigray crisis, the Ukraine war, and the 2024 Red Sea maritime disruptions.
Leveraging resilience for fiscal sustainability and rebuilding reserves
In the face of high global and regional uncertainty, Djibouti needs to quickly strengthen its economic resilience by restoring debt sustainability, safeguarding the currency board, and fostering inclusive growth. To this end, the authorities intend to strengthen fiscal consolidation and enhance financial transparency and governance of state-owned enterprises (SOEs) to unlock sustainable and meaningful dividend contributions to the national budget, restore reserves, and encourage private sector growth while protecting vulnerable populations.
Durable fiscal consolidation is essential for restoring debt sustainability. The substantial fiscal adjustment frontloaded in the 2025 budget and the balanced budget target for 2026 onward are welcome steps. To sustain progress, it is essential that all governmental entities endorse annual fiscal targets that align with a medium-term fiscal consolidation strategy. Success depends on robust expenditure management via the diligent operationalization of the recently approved Public Financial Management Reform Strategy and Action Plan 2024–27. Furthermore, a comprehensive fiscal roadmap should continue to broaden the tax base by enhancing VAT and capital income taxation, rationalizing tax exemptions included in the investment code and the Free Zones regime, and finalizing the digitization of tax agencies. The effective establishment of the tax policy unit remains a priority for accurately assessing tax bases and enhancing tax reform efficiency. Operationalizing the recently created large taxpayer office will also bolster compliance and revenue collection.
As Djibouti negotiates new terms for debt liabilities with creditors, well-managed and profitable SOEs can significantly aid national fiscal consolidation and restore reserves at the Central Bank of Djibouti (CBD), particularly following the dissolution of the Sovereign Wealth Fund (SWF). Building on ongoing efforts to improve SOE transparency and governance, it will be critical for the Executive Secretariat in charge of the State Portfolio (SEPE) to collect all SOEs’ financial statements and monitor their performance. Swiftly implementing the Code of Good Governance is also essential for establishing a more transparent dividend policy tied to SOE performance, thereby mobilizing dividends more consistently and meaningfully for the budget, improving SOE efficiency and services, and appropriately right-size them. Additionally, fiscal transparency can be strengthened by discontinuing financial settlement practices for clearing government arrears with SOEs, and by improving coordination among the Ministry of Budget, line ministries, and SEPE for more effective budget risk management.
Alongside fiscal consolidation, completing ongoing debt negotiations and addressing outstanding arrears with external partners are critical for debt sustainability. Equally important is implementing binding limits on borrowing for the central government, SOEs, including their participation in public-private partnerships, and ensuring these are enforced by the Public Sector Debt Committee.
The mission is encouraged by the recent recovery in reserves and urges continued progress. To strengthen the currency board, the authorities plan to amend the CBD law to enhance its autonomy, which will help sustain reserves, exchange rate, and inflation stability. They also plan to introduce reserve requirements as a prudential tool, with implementation expected to follow a phased approach. Additionally, under MENAFATF’s enhanced monitoring, Djibouti is reforming its AML/CFT framework, improving the business climate, and enhancing oversight of the banking sector due to its significant offshore component and rising government exposure. To facilitate policy making, the authorities are leveraging technical assistance provided by the IMF to enhance their coverage and quality of statistics relevant to surveillance, with a focus on national accounts, the fiscal and external sectors.
Advancing inclusivity through private sector development and employment creation
The government aims to foster economic growth and social equity. They aim to improve the existing targeting of the current fuel subsidy scheme. In order to create a more effective and equitable social protection system and reduce budget exposure to international energy prices, the authorities should gradually replace the current subsidy system with the strengthening of targeted cash transfers to the most vulnerable households, relying on the national social register. To attract investments and create jobs, they are enhancing access to education and job training under the 2021–35 education master plan. They aim to diversify the economy in sectors such as logistics and connectivity, tourism, agribusiness, and fisheries. To enable economic diversification, it is essential to develop a comprehensive roadmap with specific actions aimed at enhancing access to finance, streamlining administrative procedures, and expanding reliable and affordable internet services and electricity, including through increased bill collection, technical efficiency, and the adoption of cost-efficient renewable energy. These initiatives will enhance Djibouti’s business environment, which is already supported by a stable macroeconomic climate, a currency board, ports infrastructure, and connectivity to Ethiopia’s large market, all aligning with the objectives of Djibouti Vision 2035.
“The mission team expresses deep appreciation to the Djiboutian authorities and other counterparts for their warm hospitality, excellent cooperation and candid discussions, and looks forward to continuing close engagement.”
Source: Africa Press Organisation – English (2) – Report:
Ahead of the 59th session of the UN Human Rights Council (HRC) which is scheduled to decide on numerous draft resolutions between 4th and 7th July, among them a resolution to extend the mandate of the Special Rapporteur on Eritrea and another to end the mandate of the Special Rapporteur, Amnesty International’s Regional Director for East and Southern Africa, Tigere Chagutah, said:
“The Special Rapporteur’s work in Eritrea is far from finished – member states of the UN Human Rights Council must vote to extend the Special Rapporteur’s mandate and address the ongoing human rights violations as well as the lack of accountability for ongoing and past abuses. The European Union, which is leading the resolution to extend the mandate, should further strengthen it and heed the Special Rapporteur’s calls on the need for accountability, as we prepare to mark a decade since the Commission of Inquiry on Human Rights in Eritrea warned that crimes against humanity may have been committed in the country.
“Eritrea’s attempt to table a counter resolution, designed to force an end to the Special Rapporteur’s mandate, is a cynical attempt to undermine the UN human rights system. HRC member states should reject this show of open defiance against the body’s mechanisms by voting against it”
Background
The mandate of the UN Special Rapporteur on the human rights situation in Eritrea was created by the UN Human Rights Council in 2012 and supplemented by a two-year Commission of Inquiry on Human Rights in Eritrea from 2014 to 2016.
Initial resolutions maintaining the Special Rapporteur on Eritrea were led by Djibouti and Somalia since 2012 until 2019.
Speaking to the ongoing HRC session on 16 June the Special Rapporteur emphasized that “nearly a decade has passed since the Commission of Inquiry on Human Rights in Eritrea concluded that crimes against humanity may have been committed in a context of widespread and systematic human rights violations. Yet, no meaningful progress has been made toward accountability.”
Following this presentation, Eritrea announced that it would counter the annual EU-led resolution with a resolution of its own to terminate the mandate of the Special Rapporteur.
Source: Africa Press Organisation – English (2) – Report:
Download logo
UN Women Executive Board’s visit to Zimbabwe from 4-10 May 2025 marked a pivotal moment in the country’s ongoing efforts to advance gender equality and women’s empowerment. The visit, led by H.E. Ms. Nicola Clase, Ambassador and Permanent Representative of Sweden to the United Nations and President of the UN Women Executive Board, provided an opportunity to showcase the impact of UN Women’s programming in the country while strengthening strategic partnerships with key stakeholders.
“I note the strong legal frameworks for gender equality and women’s empowerment,”acknowledged Ambassador Nicola Clase, President of the UN Women Executive Board. “We encourage the government and partners to focus on the effective implementation of these laws.”
High-Level Engagements
Throughout the week, the delegation engaged with government officials, development partners, civil society organizations, traditional leaders, the private sector, and women’s rights organizations to deepen collaboration and assess progress on gender-responsive policies and initiatives.
In a productive meeting with the country’s president , H.E Emmerson Mnangagwa, there was reaffirmation of Zimbabwe’s commitment to gender equality. “We believe gender equality is not only a fundamental right, but also a necessity for national growth. Zimbabwe remains steadfast in its commitment to empowering women and girls,” assured President Mnangagwa.
The delegation also met Senator Monica Mutsvangwa, Minister of Women Affairs, Community, and Small and Medium Enterprises Development. She highlighted the government’s ongoing initiatives saying,”Zimbabwe has made significant strides in advancing women’s rights, and will continue to strengthen policies that ensure women’s full participation in economic and social development.”
Jacob Francis Mudenda, Speaker of Parliament, emphasized the importance of inclusive governance. “Ensuring women’s full participation in governance and business will drive Zimbabwe forward into a more inclusive future,” he said.
Field Visits Showcasing Impact
The Executive Board members visited Umzingwane Safe Market, Epworth Safe Market, Maker Space Innovation Hub, and the Knowledge Hub at Rosaria Memorial Trust where the team saw the impact of innovative approaches to supporting women’s economic empowerment and safety in informal marketplaces. These engagements demonstrated UN Women’s commitment to creating sustainable opportunities for women, improving livelihoods, and fostering gender-responsive practices.
Speaking about her transformation as a clothing trader in the market, Sarah Muchengeti had this to say, “The biggest challenge before the Epworth Safe Market was finding a secure and reliable place to work. This initiative gave me a proper workspace, where I can now take larger orders and grow my operation. My vision has changed—I am no longer just working to survive; I am building a legacy. My family now sees me as a successful businesswoman, and my children are inspired by what I have accomplished.”
Reflections from the Region and Country
The visit by the board was a proud moment for the UN Women Zimbabwe team, whose extensive preparations ensured a seamless and impactful experience.
Anna Mutavati, Regional Director for East and Southern Africa, emphasized the significance of the engagement, “This visit reinforced the importance of partnerships in driving change. It is inspiring to see the Executive Board acknowledge the progress we’ve made in Zimbabwe.”
Fatou Lo, UN Women Zimbabwe Country Representative, who spearheaded the visit, highlighted the collaborative effort involved, “This was a collective achievement, the dedication of our teams and partners made it possible to showcase our work and deepen strategic discussions on gender equality.”
Lovenes Makonense, Deputy Country Representative, reflecting on the experience, said, “Being able to present the tangible impact of our work was incredibly rewarding. The enthusiasm from stakeholders reaffirmed our mission to empower women across all sectors.”
Looking Ahead
As the Executive Board concluded its visit, the momentum gained from these discussions will continue to shape UN Women’s programming in Zimbabwe. The visit amplified the power of collaboration and the need for sustained investment in gender equality initiatives.
UN Women Zimbabwe remains deeply appreciative of all partners, stakeholders, and government officials who contributed to the success of this visit. As the team reflects on the week-long engagements, one message remains clear: the commitment to empowering women in Zimbabwe is stronger than ever.
Source: United States Senator for Wyoming Cynthia Lummis
June 25, 2025
Washington, D.C.— Senate Banking Subcommittee on Digital Assets Chair Cynthia Lummis (R-WY) led the Digital Asset Subcommittee Hearing entitled “Exploring Bipartisan Legislative Frameworks for Digital Asset Market Structure” highlighting the need to clearly allocate jurisdiction among regulators in order to maintain the United States’ leadership in financial innovation.
“The days of America sitting on the sidelines while the digital asset industry moves overseas are over,” said Lummis. “For the first time in our nation’s history, we have the most pro-digital asset president in U.S. history, and we have a chairman at the helm of the Banking Committee who sees the immense value in the United States leading on digital assets. We must work to immediately pass comprehensive market structure legislation to secure our financial future for generations to come. Digital assets are the future, and we must ensure the United States leads the way.”
Source: United States House of Representatives – Congressman Hakeem Jeffries (8th District of New York)
Today, Democratic Leader Hakeem Jeffries appeared on MSNBC’s Morning Joe where he emphasized that Iran is a sworn enemy of the United States and the Trump administration must follow the Constitution and stop hiding its actions in the Middle East from Congress and the American people.
JOE SCARBOROUGH: Leader Jeffries, thanks so much for being with us. I’m wondering, do you consider his win last night in New York City, do you think it provides a roadmap for Democrats running in 2026 on how to energize the base?
LEADER JEFFRIES: I think what’s clear is that the relentless focus on affordability had great appeal all across the City of New York. He also clearly out-worked, out-organized and out-communicated the opposition. And when someone is successful in being able to do all three things at the same time, it’s usually going to work out for them.
JOE SCARBOROUGH: Yeah, The New York Times editorialized that he was not qualified to be mayor. Of course, The Wall Street Journal and others say that he is far too extreme on economic issues and even issues involving Israel. I’m curious what your thoughts are on him ideologically. Is that—does he have an ideology that you would want your candidates in 2026 to have?
LEADER JEFFRIES: Well, from the standpoint of House Democrats and what our focus has been, clearly, we have an affordability crisis in the United States of America, and our focus will continue to be on driving down the high cost of living in this country. Donald Trump promised to lower costs on day one. Costs haven’t gone down. They’re going up. He’s crashing the economy in real time, his tariffs are going to impose thousands of dollars in additional cost on everyday Americans per year and he may even be driving us toward a recession. That’s the reason why Donald Trump has become so unpopular, it’s because he’s failed the country on the economy. And so, our vision is going to be for an affordable America—work hard, play by the rules, live the good life, provide a comfortable living for yourself and for your family. That means being able to actually afford a home, educate your children, have access to healthcare, go on vacation with your children and your family every now and then and, of course, Joe, one day retire with grace and dignity.
JOE SCARBOROUGH: Democrats look at Donald Trump’s approval ratings and you have a lot of other Democrats and people on media asking the question, why is the Democratic Party’s approval ratings, why are they lower than Donald Trump’s? I take it that’s something that you all grapple with every day. Why has the Democratic Party over the past year found itself at sort of its lowest ebb in recent history? And how do Democrats get out of that?
LEADER JEFFRIES: Yeah, no, it’s a very important question and, listen, institutions are unpopular right now in the United States of America and that includes, of course, the Democratic Party and the Republican Party. The dynamics that we have to work through, of course, one, Donald Trump and Republicans have given the American people every reason to run away from them, and it’s going to be important for us to continue to make clear why this administration failed on the economy, failed foreign policy, trying to take away healthcare from tens of millions of Americans, ripping food out of the mouths of children and seniors and veterans. Of course, all of that is problematic, all of that is unpopular. That’s why the One Big Ugly Bill has such a high disapproval rate in the United States of America.We also recognize, as Democrats, that it’s going to be important for us to articulate our affirmative agenda, what we stand for, this principle of working hard and playing by the rules, being able to live the good life, an affordable life for hardworking American taxpayers. And that is something that we’re going to have to lean into. The other thing I’d note, Joe, as you know, perhaps the most important thing in terms of a midterm election dynamic, is what’s the generic ballot say to us? Every single significant generic ballot poll has House Democrats beating House Republicans consistently, including a recent Fox News poll that had us up by about eight points. And so, at the end of the day, yes, we have to lean into improving the Democratic brand. But at the end of the day, what will be most significant, most important is how our vision contrasts with the management of this President, which has been a failure in the United States of America.
JONATHAN LEMIRE: Leader Jeffries, let’s turn you now to the situation in Iran. We played some sound from you earlier in the show, expressing unhappiness that the administration briefing was postponed. The White House saying it’s well, it’s so Secretary of State and the Secretary of Defense can be part of it later this week. Is that acceptable to you, and do you have concerns that the administration is not being fully forthcoming as to what actually transpired in Iran over the weekend?
LEADER JEFFRIES: Yes, there’s every reason to be concerned. There was this briefing that had been scheduled to take place in the House of Representatives and in the Senate. There was absolutely no reason that we’ve been provided that it should have been canceled in terms of the important questions that need to be asked and answered by the Trump administration. What was the imminent threat to the safety and security of the United States of America that justified this strike without seeking the congressional authorization required by the Constitution? What is the assessment of the damage that was done to Iran’s nuclear program? Was it completely and totally decimated? No evidence to date has been provided to suggest that that representation made by Donald Trump is accurate. What is the plan to avoid another costly failed war in the Middle East? Why was aggressive diplomacy abandoned by the Trump administration, notwithstanding the success that had taken place under President Obama’s administration in actually pushing back Iran’s nuclear aspirations. These are questions that need to be answered by the administration. And the fact that they continue to run away from confronting these situations on Capitol Hill is very problematic.
JONATHAN LEMIRE: So, Leader Jeffries, to that point, you and many people who have had your position in the decades before this, have expressed frustration when presidents don’t seek congressional authority for military action like this. Do you feel like that a greater good was achieved here if Iran’s program was, if not destroyed, but at least significantly delayed? What should be the next steps for this administration in this process?
LEADER JEFFRIES: Well, to be clear, Iran can never be allowed to become a nuclear-capable power. Iran is a sworn enemy of the United States, of Israel, of Jordan, of our allies in the Middle East, a sworn enemy of the free world. But the question, of course, is, was this strike successful in meaningfully pushing back Iran’s nuclear aspirations, or is it going to complicate things in the Middle East in ways that put our men and women in uniform, American troops and America in harm’s way? That’s simply the reason that having an all-Member briefing on Capitol Hill sooner rather than later is important so these answers can be obtained for the American people, the representatives of the American People, in the United States Congress. That is the reason, fundamentally, why it’s been Congress that was given the power to declare war, to authorize military force and when administrations act differently, they have an obligation and a responsibility to provide the facts, the evidence and the truth, justifying their actions to the American people.
JOE SCARBOROUGH: Well, this has been the debate, and we talked about it yesterday with another Member of Congress. This has been a debate going back 30, 40, 50 years. Obviously Republicans were saying this after Barack Obama attacked Libya. Republicans were saying this with Bill Clinton in the 1990s on Kosovo. But if you’re going to have a surprise attack with B-2 bombers that are going to be going over to Iran, striking their nuclear facilities. Do you think it’s a good idea to inform 535 members of Congress before that operation takes off?
LEADER JEFFRIES: Well, the key here is what was the imminent nature of the threat that justified immediate military action and surprise military action—
JOE SCARBOROUGH: Right—
LEADER JEFFRIES: If there was no imminent threat—
JOE SCARBOROUGH: Well, the United Nations, I’m curious if you’re concerned, like the United Nation’s nuclear agency, the IAEA had said that Iran had already enriched uranium up to 60 percent, and as you know, the jump from 60 to 100 percent is negligible, and had enough enriched uranium for several weapons. Would you consider that to be considerable enough? A considerable enough threat to strike Iran under those circumstances?
LEADER JEFFRIES: Well, certainly it’s a challenging situation, but one of the reasons why we need a briefing, Joe, is to have an understanding, was that enriched uranium even damaged or was it removed by the Iranians prior to the strike? We don’t know the answers to that question. It certainly is something that should be talked about, and the American people should be informed about the reality of whether it was a successful strike or not. In terms of the Iranian nuclear threat, I think we’ve all been clear that Iran can never be permitted to become nuclear capable. But the constitution is not a mere inconvenience, it’s the reality and if members of the executive branch, if hawkish individuals across the country want to change things, there’s Article I, Section 8, Clause 11. They can put forward a constitutional amendment but the framers of this country saw fit to vest this authority within the House and the Senate, not the executive branch.
JOE SCARBOROUGH: Right. And at what point should that be triggered? Should it be triggered by every strike, like, for instance, Barack Obama in 2011 in Libya, or countless strikes by the Bush administration and the Obama administration after September the 11th? Is it every strike or is it when you are going in sending troops in? When do you think that action is triggered?
LEADER JEFFRIES: Seems to me, and it’s a great question, Joe, that it has to relate to whether the step that was taken, one, is in response to an imminent threat to American interests, and two, whether it’s an act of war. And part of the reason why, after the fact, it’s important for Members of Congress to be able to have a briefing with the administration that is comprehensive and that gives Members the opportunity to ask questions so we can provide these answers to the American people who clearly do not want another failed, costly, deadly war in the Middle East.
JOE SCARBOROUGH: All right. Leader Hakeem Jeffries, thank you so much for being with us.
Source: United States House of Representatives – Congressman Morgan Griffith (R-VA)
The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) has awarded STEP Inc., located in Franklin County, Virginia, a $1,296,059 grant. The funding supports head start and early head start projects. U.S. Congressman Morgan Griffith (R-VA) issued the following statement:
“Solutions that Empower People (STEP) serves communities in Franklin and Patrick Counties.
“This grant for nearly $1.3 million helps STEP support its head start and early head start programs.”
BACKGROUND
According to its website, Solutions That Empower People (STEP), Inc. is a dynamic community action agency that provides services at significant milestones throughout life. Programs are designed to partner with individuals and families to help them overcome adversity and enhance their quality of life through community, economic, personal, and family development.
In a recent Health Subcommittee hearing with Congressman Griffith present, Secretary Kennedy noted President Trump’s Budget request recommends Head Start continue to receive funding equal to the FY 2025 enacted level.
Source: United States House of Representatives – Congressman Morgan Griffith (R-VA)
Congressman Morgan Griffith (R-VA), member of the House Committee on Energy and Commerce, participated in a markup hearing to advance several energy-related measures. His bill to help keep baseload power plants online, H.R. 3632 the Power Plant Reliability Act of 2025, was favorably reported by the Committee.
Congressman Griffith’s remarks on his bill can be found here or below.
BACKGROUND
The Power Plant Reliability Act of 2025 amends Section 207 of the Federal Power Act to allow a Regional Transmission Organization (RTO) or a state Public Utility Commission to petition the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) to issue an order to keep a power plant open and allocate costs for fixing a reliability issue.
Congressman Griffith has long held concerns about the early retirement of Virginia’s and regional electric power plants, including the impacts on electric bills in Southwest Virginia.
Congressman Griffith’s recent e-newsletter on blackouts and brownouts can be found here.
In the 119th Congress, Congressman Griffith is serving his first term as chairman of the House Committee on Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Environment.
Following the Environmental Protection Agency’s June announcement proposing rollbacks of power plant rules, Congressman Griffith issued his support in a statement.
Congressman Griffith serves as Co-Chair of the Congressional Coal Caucus.
Source: United States House of Representatives – Congressman Rick Allen (R-GA-12)
Today, Congressman Rick W. Allen (GA-12), Chairman of the Subcommittee on Health, Employment, Labor, and Pensions (HELP), and Congresswoman Lucy McBath (GA-06), introduced the Health Care for Energy Workers Act to increase access to care for current and former energy workers.
Specifically, this bipartisan, bicameral legislation would update the Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Program Act (EEOICPA) to allow nurse practitioners (NPs) and physician assistants (PAs) to order care for current and former Department of Energy (DOE) workers who receive health care under this Department of Labor (DOL) program. The EEOICPA provides compensation and medical benefits to employees who work or have worked in the nuclear weapons industry. Under current EEOICPA regulations, NPs and PAs are unable to order home health care services for patients, creating unnecessary barriers to care, especially for patients in rural communities.
Upon introducing the bill, Congressman Allen issued the following statement:
“Georgia’s 12th District is home to thousands of energy workers employed at Plant Vogtle and the Savannah River Site, many of whom qualify under the EEOICPA for their health care needs. However, those who live in rural areas are often hours away from the nearest physician, highlighting the need for greater flexibility to ensure these beneficiaries receive the care they deserve. I am proud to lead this bill with Congresswoman McBath to cut unnecessary red tape and improve access to care for energy workers in Georgia and nationwide,” said Congressman Allen.
“America’s workers deserve access to the health care that will help them lead full lives,”said Rep. McBath.“Too often, necessary treatments might not be available in rural communities. This bill represents an important next step in ensuring more frontline workers have access to quality and efficient care as they serve our communities.”
NOTE: The Health Care for Energy Workers Act would benefit over 7,000 Georgia energy workers, including many employed at Plant Vogtle and the Savannah River Site. A Senate companion bill has been introduced by U.S. Senators Marsha Blackburn (R-TN), John Hickenlooper (D-CO), and Patty Murray (D-WA).
Headline: Alleged Perpetrator of Terror Attack in Colorado Charged with Hate Crimes
An indictment was unsealed today in Denver charging Mohamed Sabry Soliman with 12 hate crime counts, including nine counts of violating 18 U.S.C. § 249 and three counts of violating 18 U.S.C. § 844(h), for using Molotov cocktails to attack members of the group “Run for Their Lives” and others who had gathered in the park in front of the Boulder County Courthouse on June 1. Soliman had previously been charged by complaint with a federal hate crime offense on June 2.
Headline: The Justice Department Files Complaint Challenging Minnesota Laws Providing In-State Tuition Benefits for Illegal Aliens
Today the United States is challenging laws in Minnesota that provide reduced in-state tuition — and in some cases, free tuition — for illegal aliens. These laws unconstitutionally discriminate against U.S. citizens, who are not afforded the same privileges, in direct conflict with federal law. The Department of Justice has filed the complaint in the District of Minnesota. This challenge builds upon a recently successful lawsuit against the state of Texas on a similar law.
he Oregon Department of Human Services (ODHS) was recognized in a national Government Technology Case Study for its excellence in the use of smart technology in rolling out the Summer EBT program. As a result, more than 362,000 children were able to get more food during summer 2024.
About Summer EBT
Thousands of children in Oregon rely on free or reduced-price school meals. But what happens in the summer months when these meals are gone? This is called the summer hunger gap. To address this gap, the federal government last year rolled out a new program to provide food to school-aged children during the summer months.
Oregon was one of 35 states to pick up on the federal Summer Electronic Benefits Transfer (EBT) program, which provided a total of $120 in nutrition benefits for each eligible child when school is out.
Summer EBT qualification is based on income. For families to qualify, the household income needs to be under 185 percent of the federal poverty level.
“The majority of the people we served are working. It could be part time or they’re just starting off – they are bringing in income but it’s just not enough. The Summer EBT helps supplement their food budget for their children,” Singer said.
A tight timeline
It was go-time for ODHS in early 2024. There was only 16 weeks to set up a new program, bring in community partners, identify and reach out to eligible families, create communication plans and products, and establish the innovative technology needed to accomplish this task. ODHS is the lead agency and administers this program in partnership with the Oregon Department of Education (ODE).
“It was a very short amount of time to build an entire system. The challenge was to quickly build a system to deliver quality services not only for this year but next year also,” Nate Singer, ODHS Oregon Eligibility Partnership (OEP) Director, said. OEP is responsible for determining eligibility for people applying for benefits and processing applications to deliver those benefits.
Goal setting
Initial estimates in 2024 projected that Oregon would provide Summer EBT to at least 294,000 children.
“The one thing I wanted for the project was to exceed that expectation because that would mean we would be providing more services for families and we could increase our outreach for all the of the services ODHS offers,” said Christine Doody, Self-Sufficiency Programs Policy Business Manager and Program Manager for Summer EBT.
The expectation was exceeded about 68,000, meaning more than 362,000 children were able to get food benefits last summer.
Innovation in action
To identify eligible children, OEP used data from ODHS and ODE. Most children who received the benefit were “automatically eligible” because they receive other benefits. These families didn’t need to apply, and the benefit was automatically added to their Oregon EBT card.
Other families needed to apply. ODHS brought in contractors Amazon Web Services and Deloitte Consulting to help with the technology and planning to make applying easy.
“We tried to make it simple as possible. People could apply with a paper application or online. The online application could be done on a mobile phone. If someone had questions about whether they needed to apply or needed help to apply, they could call the Summer EBT Call Center to talk to someone. The call wait time was below five minutes. People could hear right then, on the phone, they would get their benefits if they applied. It took minutes,” Singer said.
The Oregon Summer EBT Call Center included an Interactive Voice Response system offering self-service options for supported languages: English, Spanish, Russian, Vietnamese, Somali, Mandarin, Cantonese, Arabic, Ukrainian, and Chuukese. For other languages, or for other assistance, the calls could be routed to help.
“This gave families the ability to take control of their case. They could use voice activation to say, ‘I want text messages’ from us, or they could change their demographic information or ask for a new card. The family could do that on their own,” Doody said.
This population of customers – families with children in school – are used to getting texts and email from their schools, so they were already familiar with getting information this way. In fact, 99 percent of families that needed to apply chose to use the online application rather than a paper application. Those that used the online caption reported a 96 percent satisfaction rating.
Communications and community engagement
There was also communications and community engagement support, as well as an effective feedback loop. A workgroup with community representatives, such as the Oregon Food Bank and Partners for a Hunger Free Oregon, was in place. The community partners advised on all communication products such as news releases, the application design and social media kits.
“We worked together to get the information as far out to communities as we could. We were also able to get good data from the Call Center to let us know how we were doing. We had a strong feedback loop that we responded to quickly,” Christy Sinatra, ODHS Senior Communications Advisor, said.
For example, people asked if children in charter, private schools, or home schools could be included in Summer EBT. The answer was, yes, if they are found to be eligible. It was also important to communicate to people that the Summer EBT benefits expired after 122 days – so it was important to use them before then.
“We are trying to increase equity and access. There’s not just one approach. We pushed many communications and engagement levers – technology, in-person outreach, digital communications, community partnerships, media exposure. All those things working together to make the program successful and making sure every eligible kid gets this,” Sinatra said.
“The Oregon Summer EBT program demonstrated the strength of cross-agency collaboration and intentional program design. Staff were equipped with thoughtful tools and invited to shape how the program would operate, ensuring that those on the ground had a voice in critical decisions. That partnership—from planning to implementation—meant that families and children not only received meaningful support but also felt seen, heard, and cared for. The feedback from the community speaks volumes about the impact of that collective effort,” Singer said.
“The project was just overwhelmingly amazing. I just hope that people read this and apply for this summer,” Doody said.
2025 Summer EBT began May 22
The 2025 Summer EBT launched Thursday, May 22, 2025. Applications will be accepted through Wednesday, September 3, 2025.
ODHS will be running the whole program this summer – setting a goal of serving 375,000 children.
“We will be doing additional outreach, based on data and staff feedback, and providing new ways to engage with people such as going out to more schools and community events,” Doody said.
The program is set to: expand tactics to better reach people and communities that data showed were underserved; help schools connect families to Summer EBT; and increase strategic partnerships that serve priority audiences.
Resources:
Learn more about Summer EBT including how to apply for this benefit for your children: https://www.oregon.gov/odhs/food/pages/sebt.aspx.
Double Up Food Bucks Oregon: Visit https://doubleuporegon.org/ to learn how to double your SNAP and Summer EBT dollars at farmer’s markets, produce stands, community supported agriculture programs and grocery stores.
An indictment was unsealed today in Denver charging Mohamed Sabry Soliman with 12 hate crime counts, including nine counts of violating 18 U.S.C. § 249 and three counts of violating 18 U.S.C. § 844(h), for using Molotov cocktails to attack members of the group “Run for Their Lives” and others who had gathered in the park in front of the Boulder County Courthouse on June 1. Soliman had previously been charged by complaint with a federal hate crime offense on June 2.
According to the indictment, on June 1, Soliman entered the park carrying both a backpack weed sprayer that contained a flammable liquid and a black plastic container that held at least 18 glass bottles and jars, all of which contained a flammable liquid and several of which had red rags stuffed through the top to act as wicks (commonly referred to as Molotov cocktails).
At approximately 1:30 p.m., Soliman approached the Run for Their Lives group and threw two Molotov cocktails that he had ignited. When throwing one of the Molotov cocktails, he shouted, “Free Palestine!”
A handwritten document was later recovered from the vehicle driven by Soliman. The document included the following statements: “Zionism is our enemies untill [sic] Jerusalem is liberated and they are expelled from our land,” and further described Israel as a “cancer entity.”
The indictment further alleges that during an interview with law enforcement, Soliman stated, among other things, that he viewed “anyone supporting the exist [sic] of Israel on our land” to be “Zionist.” The defendant stated that he “decide[d] to take [his] revenge from these people” and “search[ed] the internet looking for any Zionist event.” Soliman stated that he learned of the Run for Their Lives group through internet searches for “Zionist” events and that he identified the “Zionist” group when he saw the flags and signs they carried at the courthouse.
The case is being investigated by the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the Boulder Police Department.
The U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Colorado and the Civil Rights Division’s Criminal Section are prosecuting the case.
An indictment is merely an allegation. All individuals are presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt at trial.
Today the United States is challenging laws in Minnesota that provide reduced in-state tuition — and in some cases, free tuition — for illegal aliens. These laws unconstitutionally discriminate against U.S. citizens, who are not afforded the same privileges, in direct conflict with federal law. The Department of Justice has filed the complaint in the District of Minnesota. This challenge builds upon a recently successful lawsuit against the state of Texas on a similar law.
“No state can be allowed to treat Americans like second-class citizens in their own country by offering financial benefits to illegal aliens,” said Attorney General Pamela Bondi. “The Department of Justice just won on this exact issue in Texas, and we look forward to taking this fight to Minnesota in order to protect the rights of American citizens first.”
In the complaint, the United States seeks to enjoin enforcement of Minnesota laws that require public colleges and universities to provide in-state tuition rates (and free tuition under certain circumstances, including if they meet a certain income threshold) for illegal aliens who maintain state residency, regardless of whether those aliens are lawfully present in the United States. Federal law prohibits institutions of higher education from providing postsecondary education benefits to aliens that are not offered to U.S. citizens. These laws blatantly conflict with federal law and thus are unconstitutional under the Supremacy Clause of the U.S. Constitution.
This lawsuit follows two executive orders recently signed by President Trump that seek to ensure illegal aliens are not obtaining taxpayer benefits or preferential treatment.
Noon Briefing by Stéphane Dujarric, Spokesperson for the Secretary-General.
———————————
Highlights:
Secretary-General/Responsibility to Protect
Security Council
Occupied Palestinian Territory
Democratic Republic of the Congo
SALIENT 2.0
Day of the Seafarer
**Guests
__________________________________________
SECRETARY-GENERAL/RESPONSIBILITY TO PROTECT
This morning, the Secretary-General was at the General Assembly, where he delivered remarks on the Responsibility to Protect.
Mr. Guterres warned that we are witnessing the highest number of armed conflicts since the end of the Second World War. These are marked by rising identity-based violence, widespread violations of international humanitarian law and human rights law, as well as deepening impunity.
Mr. Guterres said that we must recognize that the Responsibility to Protect is more than just a principle. It is a moral imperative, rooted in our shared humanity and the UN Charter.
He added that credibility as the guardian of peace and security, development, and human rights requires consistency with the [UN] Charter.
And tomorrow, at 10 a.m., in the General Assembly, the Secretary-General will deliver remarks to commemorate the Eightieth Anniversary of the Signing of the Charter of the United Nations.
SECURITY COUNCIL
This morning, the Security Council heard a briefing from Virginia Gamba, the Secretary-General’s Special Representative for children and armed conflict, who was presenting the Secretary-General’s report. She said, and as you have seen in the report, that 2024 marked a devastating new record: the United Nations verified 41,370 grave violations against children—a staggering 25 per cent increase compared to 2023. She added that the report she is presenting also includes the highest number of children killed or maimed since the mandate was established by the Security Council. Cases of sexual violence, she added, also rose by 35 per cent with 1,982 verified cases.
The way forward is clear, she said, we must call on all parties to conflict, particularly the armed forces and groups listed in the annexes to the report, to engage with the United Nations to develop, to sign, and to fully implement action plans that end and prevent grave violations against children.
Also briefing from the UN side was Sheema Sen Gupta, UNICEF’s Director of Child Protection. She said that we cannot allow these grave violations against children to continue unchecked, and she called on council members to act with urgency, with courage and with the conviction that every child, no matter where they are, deserves to live in peace.
Full Highlights:
https://www.un.org/sg/en/content/noon-briefing-highlight?date%5Bvalue%5D%5Bdate%5D=25%20June%202025
Noon Briefing by Stéphane Dujarric, Spokesperson for the Secretary-General.
———————————
Highlights:
Secretary-General/Responsibility to Protect
Security Council
Occupied Palestinian Territory
Democratic Republic of the Congo
SALIENT 2.0
Day of the Seafarer
**Guests
__________________________________________
SECRETARY-GENERAL/RESPONSIBILITY TO PROTECT
This morning, the Secretary-General was at the General Assembly, where he delivered remarks on the Responsibility to Protect.
Mr. Guterres warned that we are witnessing the highest number of armed conflicts since the end of the Second World War. These are marked by rising identity-based violence, widespread violations of international humanitarian law and human rights law, as well as deepening impunity.
Mr. Guterres said that we must recognize that the Responsibility to Protect is more than just a principle. It is a moral imperative, rooted in our shared humanity and the UN Charter.
He added that credibility as the guardian of peace and security, development, and human rights requires consistency with the [UN] Charter.
And tomorrow, at 10 a.m., in the General Assembly, the Secretary-General will deliver remarks to commemorate the Eightieth Anniversary of the Signing of the Charter of the United Nations.
SECURITY COUNCIL
This morning, the Security Council heard a briefing from Virginia Gamba, the Secretary-General’s Special Representative for children and armed conflict, who was presenting the Secretary-General’s report. She said, and as you have seen in the report, that 2024 marked a devastating new record: the United Nations verified 41,370 grave violations against children—a staggering 25 per cent increase compared to 2023. She added that the report she is presenting also includes the highest number of children killed or maimed since the mandate was established by the Security Council. Cases of sexual violence, she added, also rose by 35 per cent with 1,982 verified cases.
The way forward is clear, she said, we must call on all parties to conflict, particularly the armed forces and groups listed in the annexes to the report, to engage with the United Nations to develop, to sign, and to fully implement action plans that end and prevent grave violations against children.
Also briefing from the UN side was Sheema Sen Gupta, UNICEF’s Director of Child Protection. She said that we cannot allow these grave violations against children to continue unchecked, and she called on council members to act with urgency, with courage and with the conviction that every child, no matter where they are, deserves to live in peace.
Full Highlights:
https://www.un.org/sg/en/content/noon-briefing-highlight?date%5Bvalue%5D%5Bdate%5D=25%20June%202025
Source: The Conversation – UK – By Natasha Lindstaedt, Professor in the Department of Government, University of Essex
During Donald Trump’s first term, he made clear that he wanted his foreign policy to be as unpredictable as possible, stating: “I don’t want them to know what I’m thinking.”
With the US’s recent attack on Iran, Trump certainly kept everyone in suspense. While US enemies may not have known what Trump was thinking, the problem was neither did US allies nor US legislators. Trump apparently did not bother to inform his own vice-president, J.D. Vance, when he had made the decision.
Trump has portrayed this as a strength, that he is the only one capable of getting certain things done in foreign policy because his unpredictability and risk-taking behaviour gives him more leverage.
But thus far he has had fewer successes than wins with this approach. His dalliance with North Korean leader Kim Jong-un in Trump’s first term only resulted in the acceleration of North Korea’s nuclear programme.
His great relationship with Vladimir Putin has so far led to no concessions from Moscow regarding the war in Ukraine, even causing Trump to effectively give up trying to resolve that crisis, at least for now.
Get your news from actual experts, straight to your inbox.Sign up to our daily newsletter to receive all The Conversation UK’s latest coverage of news and research, from politics and business to the arts and sciences.
In Trump’s second term his Maga base has been a bit more divided than in his first. On the issue of tariffs, key Republican senators begged him to backpedal with concerns that the new tariffs would be catastrophic for the US economy – one of the issues that propelled him to victory. Yet he went ahead with the tariffs anyway, as some members of his base were in support.
With the Middle East crisis, Trump supporters appeared to be mostly against the US getting involved in a foreign conflict, with “no more wars” being a common slogan on the campaign trail.
In the lead up to the US strikes, key leaders in the Maga movement criticised the idea of the US getting involved in the conflict. Right-wing podcaster Tucker Carlson told hawkish Senator Ted Cruz that he should know far more about the regime that the senator wanted to topple. Former Trump strategist Steve Bannon and Representative Marjorie Taylor Green were also calling for the US to stay out of the conflict.
Before the attacks, a YouGov poll showed that 60% of Americans did not want the US to get involved in the conflict, which has since increased to 80%. However when asked more specifically about support for US strikes on Iran’s nuclear facilities, as many as 94% of Maga Republicans gave their approval.
Trump announces that the US has carried out air strikes on Iran.
Is there voter backing?
Trump also believes he can sell the strikes on Iranian nuclear sites as a huge win, making good on his promise to eradicate Iran’s nuclear programme. The US intelligence community is saying otherwise, but Trump has rejected this.
Trump took an early victory lap, claiming that Iran’s nuclear programme had been “completely destroyed”. It was arguably comparable to George W. Bush’s “mission accomplished” announcement in May 2003, after Saddam Hussein’s regime in Iraq was ousted by US-led forces. Bush’s approval ratings were as high as 70% in the immediate aftermath, but had plunged by 40 points by 2008 after five years of fighting the Iraqi insurgency that emerged in Hussein’s absence.
Trump seems to be revelling in taking more risks and being more unpredictable. As he has become increasingly bold in his second term, he has been more willing to test the loyalty of his base when they don’t agree with his instincts. Though the isolationist wing of Maga has been critical, Trump assumes that his base will unite and rally around him.
Trump was more careful to not betray his base in his first term. Trump had ordered strikes on Iran in 2019, but backed down at the last minute. But now he has gone so far as to suggest the door may be open to regime change in Tehran.
With the ceasefire now in place (at least in theory), Trump is heralding his action as a huge win. Iran has backed down after a limited attack on its nuclear facilities.
Just weeks ago, the US seemed less relevant in the Middle East, and more likely to follow Israel’s instructions than the other way around. With Trump’s confidence growing, it is now Trump that is telling Israel that he is not happy.
For Trump the risks involved were huge. There may appear to be the potential for some short-term domestic political gains if the ceasefire holds. But Trump may not have thought through the long-term implications of his decision on stability in the Middle East more generally, or what voters will think about his foreign policy gambles when the next election rolls around.
Natasha Lindstaedt does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
Source: The Conversation – UK – By Natasha Lindstaedt, Professor in the Department of Government, University of Essex
During Donald Trump’s first term, he made clear that he wanted his foreign policy to be as unpredictable as possible, stating: “I don’t want them to know what I’m thinking.”
With the US’s recent attack on Iran, Trump certainly kept everyone in suspense. While US enemies may not have known what Trump was thinking, the problem was neither did US allies nor US legislators. Trump apparently did not bother to inform his own vice-president, J.D. Vance, when he had made the decision.
Trump has portrayed this as a strength, that he is the only one capable of getting certain things done in foreign policy because his unpredictability and risk-taking behaviour gives him more leverage.
But thus far he has had fewer successes than wins with this approach. His dalliance with North Korean leader Kim Jong-un in Trump’s first term only resulted in the acceleration of North Korea’s nuclear programme.
His great relationship with Vladimir Putin has so far led to no concessions from Moscow regarding the war in Ukraine, even causing Trump to effectively give up trying to resolve that crisis, at least for now.
Get your news from actual experts, straight to your inbox.Sign up to our daily newsletter to receive all The Conversation UK’s latest coverage of news and research, from politics and business to the arts and sciences.
In Trump’s second term his Maga base has been a bit more divided than in his first. On the issue of tariffs, key Republican senators begged him to backpedal with concerns that the new tariffs would be catastrophic for the US economy – one of the issues that propelled him to victory. Yet he went ahead with the tariffs anyway, as some members of his base were in support.
With the Middle East crisis, Trump supporters appeared to be mostly against the US getting involved in a foreign conflict, with “no more wars” being a common slogan on the campaign trail.
In the lead up to the US strikes, key leaders in the Maga movement criticised the idea of the US getting involved in the conflict. Right-wing podcaster Tucker Carlson told hawkish Senator Ted Cruz that he should know far more about the regime that the senator wanted to topple. Former Trump strategist Steve Bannon and Representative Marjorie Taylor Green were also calling for the US to stay out of the conflict.
Before the attacks, a YouGov poll showed that 60% of Americans did not want the US to get involved in the conflict, which has since increased to 80%. However when asked more specifically about support for US strikes on Iran’s nuclear facilities, as many as 94% of Maga Republicans gave their approval.
Trump announces that the US has carried out air strikes on Iran.
Is there voter backing?
Trump also believes he can sell the strikes on Iranian nuclear sites as a huge win, making good on his promise to eradicate Iran’s nuclear programme. The US intelligence community is saying otherwise, but Trump has rejected this.
Trump took an early victory lap, claiming that Iran’s nuclear programme had been “completely destroyed”. It was arguably comparable to George W. Bush’s “mission accomplished” announcement in May 2003, after Saddam Hussein’s regime in Iraq was ousted by US-led forces. Bush’s approval ratings were as high as 70% in the immediate aftermath, but had plunged by 40 points by 2008 after five years of fighting the Iraqi insurgency that emerged in Hussein’s absence.
Trump seems to be revelling in taking more risks and being more unpredictable. As he has become increasingly bold in his second term, he has been more willing to test the loyalty of his base when they don’t agree with his instincts. Though the isolationist wing of Maga has been critical, Trump assumes that his base will unite and rally around him.
Trump was more careful to not betray his base in his first term. Trump had ordered strikes on Iran in 2019, but backed down at the last minute. But now he has gone so far as to suggest the door may be open to regime change in Tehran.
With the ceasefire now in place (at least in theory), Trump is heralding his action as a huge win. Iran has backed down after a limited attack on its nuclear facilities.
Just weeks ago, the US seemed less relevant in the Middle East, and more likely to follow Israel’s instructions than the other way around. With Trump’s confidence growing, it is now Trump that is telling Israel that he is not happy.
For Trump the risks involved were huge. There may appear to be the potential for some short-term domestic political gains if the ceasefire holds. But Trump may not have thought through the long-term implications of his decision on stability in the Middle East more generally, or what voters will think about his foreign policy gambles when the next election rolls around.
Natasha Lindstaedt 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.
Whether customers are pleased to hear it or not, firms are selling “upcycled” food to tackle food waste internationally.
Food with ingredients that were saved from the waste heap via verifiable supply chains is said to be “upcycled”. The term originated in the US, though it’s also been adopted on this side of the Atlantic.
This rather broad definition includes byproducts from the food industry, such as spent grains left over from beer manufacturing, or apple pulp that doesn’t make it into juice.
If you’re not familiar with the idea, perhaps you have already bought upcycled produce in the form of wonky carrots and potatoes. This is food that does not meet the visual standards of most supermarkets but is nevertheless still tasty to eat. Elsewhere, food manufacturers are making products that include upcycled ingredients.
Get your news from actual experts, straight to your inbox.Sign up to our daily newsletter to receive all The Conversation UK’s latest coverage of news and research, from politics and business to the arts and sciences.
Why upcycle food in the first place? The US Environmental Protection Agency rates it as just as effective as donating or redistributing food to restaurants and shelters for reducing the environmental impact of the food system. Wasted food, after all, can generate potent greenhouse gases such as methane if left to rot in landfills.
So it’s good for the planet if ingredients that would not have gone to human consumption are transformed into new food-grade products. But just how good exactly?
How much of a product contains upcycled ingredients will influence its sustainability credentials. If they are listed at the beginning of the ingredients on the packaging then that indicates a large percentage of inclusion. Far down at the bottom suggests a smaller percentage.
Of course, there is only so much of an upcycled ingredient that can be added to food before it affects the colour, taste or flavour of the final product. It is important to keep a balance.
According to the US upcycled food certification standard, a product only needs to contain a minimum of 10% upcycled inputs by weight in order to be certified as upcycled. This may only make a slight difference to a single product’s overall sustainability.
Compare it with organic food. Both in the US and in the EU, a product must contain a minimum of 95% of certified organic ingredients to be labelled organic. The EU loosely defines “organic” as food that “respects the environment and animal welfare”.
This is very far from the 10% required by the certified standard for upcycling used in the US. Of course, it would be quite hard to make an upcycled product with at least 95% upcycled ingredients. Think about a biscuit. Most of the major ingredients – flour, butter, sugar – would need to be upcycled. On the other hand, would 10% be enough to encourage you to buy food certified as upcycled?
Before you spend on spent grain …
While I believe that attempts to include upcycled ingredients in food formulations should be encouraged, however big or small, it is important to have rules in place.
In the EU, upcycled foods are not regulated and there are no certification standards, though some product packaging may claim it contains upcycled ingredients. Consumers might buy a product with a sprinkling of upcycled ingredients thinking that it is a more sustainable choice.
For example, a loaf of bread recently sold in Tesco was reported to contain 2.5% spent grain by weight. In other cases, the level of inclusion appears to be quite substantial. Granola sold in Ireland claims 30% spent grain from brewers, but it is not clearly stated in the ingredient list.
Often, consumers are asked to pay more for upcycled food, even though it contains ingredients that would have otherwise gone to waste. This is because the producers are often small start-ups with high production costs that they must recoup with high prices.
If sustainability claims are at stake, and if consumers are asked to pay more for upcycled foods, it is important to prevent deceptive marketing that could present products as more sustainable than they actually are. One way to do so is by carrying out a life-cycle assessment, a measurement of a product’s environmental impact from its production to its disposal. The manufacturer could do this as a way of reassuring the consumer and backing up any claims with evidence.
If we want upcycled foods to become more common, and so reduce waste, we have to make sure consumers aren’t being misled. If consumers trust, value and understand these products, they are more likely to succeed in the market.
Don’t have time to read about climate change as much as you’d like?
Simona Grasso 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.
Whether customers are pleased to hear it or not, firms are selling “upcycled” food to tackle food waste internationally.
Food with ingredients that were saved from the waste heap via verifiable supply chains is said to be “upcycled”. The term originated in the US, though it’s also been adopted on this side of the Atlantic.
This rather broad definition includes byproducts from the food industry, such as spent grains left over from beer manufacturing, or apple pulp that doesn’t make it into juice.
If you’re not familiar with the idea, perhaps you have already bought upcycled produce in the form of wonky carrots and potatoes. This is food that does not meet the visual standards of most supermarkets but is nevertheless still tasty to eat. Elsewhere, food manufacturers are making products that include upcycled ingredients.
Get your news from actual experts, straight to your inbox.Sign up to our daily newsletter to receive all The Conversation UK’s latest coverage of news and research, from politics and business to the arts and sciences.
Why upcycle food in the first place? The US Environmental Protection Agency rates it as just as effective as donating or redistributing food to restaurants and shelters for reducing the environmental impact of the food system. Wasted food, after all, can generate potent greenhouse gases such as methane if left to rot in landfills.
So it’s good for the planet if ingredients that would not have gone to human consumption are transformed into new food-grade products. But just how good exactly?
How much of a product contains upcycled ingredients will influence its sustainability credentials. If they are listed at the beginning of the ingredients on the packaging then that indicates a large percentage of inclusion. Far down at the bottom suggests a smaller percentage.
Of course, there is only so much of an upcycled ingredient that can be added to food before it affects the colour, taste or flavour of the final product. It is important to keep a balance.
According to the US upcycled food certification standard, a product only needs to contain a minimum of 10% upcycled inputs by weight in order to be certified as upcycled. This may only make a slight difference to a single product’s overall sustainability.
Compare it with organic food. Both in the US and in the EU, a product must contain a minimum of 95% of certified organic ingredients to be labelled organic. The EU loosely defines “organic” as food that “respects the environment and animal welfare”.
This is very far from the 10% required by the certified standard for upcycling used in the US. Of course, it would be quite hard to make an upcycled product with at least 95% upcycled ingredients. Think about a biscuit. Most of the major ingredients – flour, butter, sugar – would need to be upcycled. On the other hand, would 10% be enough to encourage you to buy food certified as upcycled?
Before you spend on spent grain …
While I believe that attempts to include upcycled ingredients in food formulations should be encouraged, however big or small, it is important to have rules in place.
In the EU, upcycled foods are not regulated and there are no certification standards, though some product packaging may claim it contains upcycled ingredients. Consumers might buy a product with a sprinkling of upcycled ingredients thinking that it is a more sustainable choice.
For example, a loaf of bread recently sold in Tesco was reported to contain 2.5% spent grain by weight. In other cases, the level of inclusion appears to be quite substantial. Granola sold in Ireland claims 30% spent grain from brewers, but it is not clearly stated in the ingredient list.
Often, consumers are asked to pay more for upcycled food, even though it contains ingredients that would have otherwise gone to waste. This is because the producers are often small start-ups with high production costs that they must recoup with high prices.
If sustainability claims are at stake, and if consumers are asked to pay more for upcycled foods, it is important to prevent deceptive marketing that could present products as more sustainable than they actually are. One way to do so is by carrying out a life-cycle assessment, a measurement of a product’s environmental impact from its production to its disposal. The manufacturer could do this as a way of reassuring the consumer and backing up any claims with evidence.
If we want upcycled foods to become more common, and so reduce waste, we have to make sure consumers aren’t being misled. If consumers trust, value and understand these products, they are more likely to succeed in the market.
Don’t have time to read about climate change as much as you’d like?
Simona Grasso does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
The recent US attack on Iran’s nuclear sites has prompted renewed questions about whether the UN charter’s prohibition on the use of force is meaningful.
Considered one of the keystones of international law, article 2(4) of the charter specifically forbids member states from using force – or threatening to do so – against the territorial integrity or political independence of another state, or “in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations”.
A significant amount of commentary exists about what the prohibition entails. This tries to clarify ambiguities around the terms “force”, “threats of force”, “territorial integrity” and “political independence”. Although no absolute consensus has been reached, it is commonly thought that member states are prohibited from launching armed attacks against other states, or threatening to do so, unless acting in self-defence or with the authorisation of the UN security council.
Other exceptions have been suggested. These include use of force as part of a larger humanitarian intervention operation. There’s also a question of whether it’s permissible when a state is rescuing its nationals abroad. But the legality of either of these situations is contentious and remains unsettled.
Get your news from actual experts, straight to your inbox.Sign up to our daily newsletter to receive all The Conversation UK’s latest coverage of news and research, from politics and business to the arts and sciences.
Early in its existence, the UN made concerted efforts to protect and respect article 2(4) and to comply with its provisions. In 1950, the security council authorised UN member states to provide South Korea with the assistance necessary to repel the armed attack launched by North Korea, triggering the increased internationalisation of the Korean war.
While article 2(4) was not explicitly mentioned in resolution 83, it was alluded to through repeated references to North Korea’s “armed attack” against South Korea. As such, it can be interpreted as an effort by the security council to use its authority to address a violation of article 2(4), even if it did not clearly frame it in those terms.
The security council also authorised member states in 2011 to take all necessary measures to protect civilians in Libya. Unfortunately, it quickly became apparent that the member states may have exceeded their authority in Libya and carried out acts that could themselves be construed as violations of the UN charter.
Rather than just protecting civilians, as the security council resolution instructed, legal experts were concerned they had effectively intervened in a civil war. Any possible violations went unpunished by the security council.
Security council actions taken with regard to Korea were, in many ways, the high watermark for the prohibition of the use of force, given the scale of the conflict. There are two reasons for that. First, a significant proportion of the wars taking place after 1945 have been domestic and not subject to the provisions of article 2(4). The prohibition specifically applies to a member state’s international relations so is not inapplicable when a member state attacks a group within its own borders.
Second, the UN has failed to address many of the acts occurring after 1945 that might fall under the provisions of article 2(4). The reason for this inaction lies primarily in the flawed structure on which the UN is built.
Chapter VII of the charter makes the security council responsible for addressing acts of aggression that would constitute uses of force under article 2(4). But it has repeatedly failed to fill that role, allowing states to commit these acts without meaningful response.
The UN veto problem
UN security council decisions can only be enacted when at least nine members vote in favour. This must also include the affirmative vote or abstention of all five of the permanent members: the US, Russia, China, the UK and France. This essentially gives each of the permanent members the right to veto security council resolutions.
Permanent members have commonly used the threat of their veto in their own political interests. This can be seen in a variety of instances, most notably the 2003 US invasion of Iraq and the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine. Both situations clearly involved uses of force prohibited by article 2(4), and in both situations the security council was prevented from acting by some of its permanent members.
This inaction is consistent with the UN’s failure to address many other acts that might fall under the provisions of article 2(4), including US involvement in south-east Asia in the 1960s and the Russian invasion of Afghanistan in the 1980s.
The security council’s failure to adequately perform its role has caused some to try and find a workaround. The Council of Europe, disappointed at the lack of accountability for Russia’s acts of aggression against Ukraine, has entered into an agreement with Ukraine to establish a special tribunal for the crime of aggression against Ukraine.
In the special tribunal’s draft statute, an act of aggression is defined to almost exactly mirror the type of conduct that would constitute a use of force under the UN charter.
Bombing Iran
Which brings us to the current situation in Iran. There is little question that the US violated article 2(4) when it bombed Iranian nuclear sites in Fordo, Natanz and Isfahan on the evening of Saturday June 21. This is a clear use of force against the territory of another state.
But even if the attacks themselves were not enough to establish a violation, they were also accompanied by US president Donald Trump’s suggestion that a regime change in Iran might be appropriate. These comments, coming immediately after the initial attack, could be construed as a threat of further force against Iran’s political independence should such a change not occur.
Under the UN charter, such threats and uses of force should elicit a response from the security council. But just as with Iraq in 2003 and Ukraine in 2022, none will probably be forthcoming as the US will block any efforts to hold it to account.
But equally chilling is the lack of condemnation of the US actions by its allies. German chancellor Friedrich Merz saw “no reason to criticise” the bombings, and Nato secretary general Mark Rutte insisted that the bombings did not violate international law.
As the respected Dutch scholar of international law André Nollkaemper suggests, this refusal to condemn a clear violation of the prohibition of the use of force creates a real danger that the bar for when a state can legally use force will be lowered.
Should that be allowed to happen it could further hollow out the prohibition, effectively making it less likely that states will be held to account for violating international law. Further, it could also lead to the return of a world where “might makes right”. This would undo more than a century of legal evolution.
Caleb H. Wheeler 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.
A man having his continuous glucose monitor checked by his doctor.Halfpoint/Shutterstock
The cure for diabetes is a life free from daily insulin injections. Based on that criterion, ten out of 12 people (83%) in a new clinical trial were cured of their diabetes one year after receiving an advanced stem cell therapy.
This study used laboratory-grown pancreatic islet cells. They were infused into the liver, where they took up residence. Within a year, most participants no longer required insulin injections.
One of the most striking benefits was the rapid prevention of dangerously low blood sugar levels, called hypoglycaemia. Before transplantation, all participants had at least two episodes of severe hypoglycaemia within the previous year.
After transplantation, these episodes disappeared for all participants.
These are impressive results, but what are stem cell therapies? How does the treatment work? How do they compare to other treatments? And what are the possible side-effects?
Get your news from actual experts, straight to your inbox.Sign up to our daily newsletter to receive all The Conversation UK’s latest coverage of news and research, from politics and business to the arts and sciences.
What are stem cell therapies?
Stem cells are cells that can be turned into almost any other cell type. The major benefit is that scientists in the lab can create the correct cells, the ones needed to treat a disease, and in the desired amount.
In the case of type 1 diabetes, the required cells are pancreatic islets. Most of the cells in these islets make insulin.
How does the treatment work?
The laboratory-grown cells are infused into the body. A common place is in a liver vein, where the cells attach. The advantage here is that insulin delivered towards the liver works much better than, say, just under the skin.
This is because switching off excessive liver glucose production is the primary action of insulin to correct blood sugar levels.
In the current study, the function of the transplanted cells, a treatment called XV-880, improved within the first three months. Blood glucose levels were better controlled. No severe hypoglycaemia was found and a marker of insulin production improved.
Throughout the first year, participants were able to reduce the amount of insulin they took, until most were free from insulin injections.
What are the side-effects?
The biggest downside of this new treatment is that all participants will need to take immunosuppressant drugs for the rest of their lives. This will reduce the immune system’s ability to recognise the transplanted cells and remove them.
This increases the risk of infections and certain types of cancer. That’s because the immune system plays an important role in removing potentially cancerous cells.
In this new study, two participants died. On closer inspection, these were unrelated to the treatment itself. Most participants had upset tummies, with diarrhoea as the most common side-effect, in 11 of 14 people. More than half also had headaches and nausea.
Is it better than other treatments?
For many years, people struggling with severe hypoglycaemia have been able to receive new pancreatic islets from deceased donors. For a minority, this also leads to freedom from insulin injections over the longer term.
Typically, two or three donor pancreases need to be pooled together to give to one recipient. People may also need a second infusion within a relatively short time frame. Islet transplants are typically limited by the amount of donor cells available, which is not enough.
This new approach gives a standardised dose of cells, of known quality. The timing of the procedure is also not tied to the deaths of donors.
This new study is also not the first. In 2024, a 25-year-old woman with type 1 diabetes received a stem cell-derived islet transplant, which also led to freedom from insulin injections.
A 59-year-old man with poorly controlled type 2 diabetes was also cured with another type of stem cell transplant.
Both of these treatments will require lifelong immunosuppression. This is undesirable for many people and may limit uptake.
This is driving efforts to create treatment versions that do not require immunosuppression. There are efforts to enclose the transplanted cells inside devices that let insulin out but prevent the immune cells from getting in. There are also genetic editing techniques being used to cloak cells from the immune system.
However, these approaches are further behind in clinical development.
When might this be more widely available?
This is difficult to estimate. Larger trials with XV-880 are planned. The same company planned to test an immunosuppression-free version of their cell therapy, called XV-264. However, this failed to work well enough in a small pilot study and will no longer progress through trials.
There is also the issue of cost. It is not yet clear how much a treatment like this will cost. This will affect who can access advanced cell therapies. We also don’t yet know if and when the transplanted cells may start to fail.
In this trial, the company is monitoring recipients for ten years in total. An initial five-year follow-up then a five-year extension study.
This gives an idea of how long we might need to wait. Despite this, the recent developments give reason for cautious optimism. It may be possible in the not-so-distant future to have a life without daily insulin injections.
Craig Beall currently receives funding from Diabetes UK, Breakthrough T1D, Steve Morgan Foundation Type 1 Diabetes Grand Challenge, Medical Research Council, NC3Rs, Society for Endocrinology and British Society for Neuroendocrinology.
Source: The Conversation – UK – By Blane Savage, Lecturer in MA Creative Media Practice and BA(Hons) Graphic Art & Moving Image, University of the West of Scotland
Artist, writer, playwright, illustrator – and the man who made the Oscar-winning film Poor Things possible – Alasdair Gray was one of Scotland’s great creative polymaths and eccentrics, now celebrated every year on “Gray Day” (February 25). A new exhibition at the Kelvingrove Art Gallery in Glasgow has opened to reveal a selection of nine previously unseen artworks from The Morag McAlpine Bequest.
This is the first time works have been on display from the bequest gifted by him to Glasgow Life Museums following the death of his wife in 2014, which comprises artworks he created for her on anniversaries, birthdays and Christmas.
A small show like this cannot fully do justice to the vibrancy and volume of Gray’s output, but these nine pieces give a broad flavour of the artist’s working style and idiosyncratic idea development.
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.
Gray was a graduate of Glasgow School of Art where he specialised in murals and stained glass. In addition to being a talented artist and writer, he was also a professor of creative writing at Glasgow University.
His landmark novel Lanark: A Life in Four Books (1981), a story within a story of adolescence, with the mythical Unthank standing in for Glasgow, has been praised as a modern classic.
His influence on the Scottish art and literary scene was a powerful one. Regarded as the father figure of the Scottish Renaissance in art and literature, Gray’s postmodern work was a merging of realism, fantasy and science fiction, interwoven with his socialist political views. This was supported by his own book illustrations and typography. He inspired many young Scottish writers, including Irvine Welsh and Iain Banks.
Gray was also a strong Scottish nationalist. Inspired by a poem by Dennis Lee, Gray’s epigram, “Work as if you live in the early days of a better nation” was inscribed on the wall of the new Scottish Parliament building when it opened in 2004.
His creative works are deeply embedded in the psyche of the west end of Glasgow. Several of his murals are on display there, such as the one at the top of the escalators in Hillhead subway station, the surreal collages in The Ubiquitous Chip restaurant and the extraordinary night-sky ceiling fresco in Òran Mór, a church-turned-bar. These murals are a hybrid of styles, often black and white linear illustrations filled with colour, traditional painting and printmaking techniques.
These “new” artworks on display show different aspects, stages and details of Gray’s creative practice when designing artwork for print, such as the Tippex-infused works that allowed him to merge disparate elements of his cut-out collages.
The highlights of the show include the original artwork for his novel Poor Things, a subversive post-modern rewrite of Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein, set in and around Glasgow, and adapted by filmmaker Yorgos Lanthimos in 2023.
The illustration features the anti-hero Godwin Baxter hugging two smaller figures – the reanimated Bella Baxter and Archibald McCandless MD, the primary narrator of the novel. They are surrounded by anatomical illustrations of body parts and in the centre a woman’s head has been cut open revealing her brain. Gray’s illustrative style utilises bold ink outlines, watercolour washes and solid blocks of colour.
The front cover illustration of Agnes Owen’s A Working Mother (1994) with black line work and solid acrylic colour washes, reflects Gray’s interest in everyday life and how alcohol smooths over the cracks. Hung beside it are two versions of working class figurative character sketches for People Like That (1996), in a similar style.
A black and white illustrated jacket design for Old Negatives (1989), Gray’s four-verse sequence describing aspects of love in its “absences and reverses”, has been designed using solid blocks of black with repeating motifs engraved within them.
Also included is a self-portrait of Gray as playwright, together with a series of 12 small black-and-white portraits of the performers of his play in Working Legs: A Play for Those Without Them (1997) performed by the Bird of Paradise Theatre Company. Set in a world of wheelchair users, those who can walk are monitored by the welfare state.
Gray was known for illustrating friends and family as revealed in his artwork Simon Berry and Bill MacLellan, Glasgow Publishers, Jim Taylor, Australian Writer and Printer, Shelley Killen, USA artist, where are all the figures of the title are roughly drawn with pencil and ink. The solid blue background is painted in acrylic, overlaid with Gray’s inked observations of each.
On the ground floor is what Gray called “my best big oil painting”, of a Cowcaddens streetscape in the 1950s which is by far the strongest piece on display here. Gray takes a wide-angled, almost fish-eye lens perspective to capture a famous Glasgow neighbourhood that was partially demolished and modernised in postwar development.
St Aloysius Church in Garnethill and Speir’s Wharf at Port Dundas can still be clearly seen, connecting us to the Glasgow of the present day. Gray’s narrative-driven imagery of daily life plays out, with local characters, playing children and besuited pals going out for the evening, all framed by street lamps and tenements immersed in a dark foreboding industrialised landscape.
Gray’s illustrations and artworks resonate not only with a celebration of Glasgow’s places, characters and life, they also give us insights into the intensely personal psyche of a creative genius. It’s a shame that more of this particular bequest could not have been displayed, but an opportunity to see these previously unseen works is most welcome.
Alasdair Gray: Works from the Morag McAlpine Bequest will be on show at the Fragile Gallery, Kelvingrove Art Gallery and Museum, Glasgow until June 2026
This article features references to books that have been included for editorial reasons, and may contain links to bookshop.org. If you click on one of the links and go on to buy something, The Conversation UK may earn a commission.
Blane Savage does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
Source: The Conversation – UK – By Daniel Conway, Reader in Politics and International Studies, University of Westminster
The allegations of a “white genocide” against Afrikaner farmers that emerged during the tense Oval Office meeting between the US president, Donald Trump, and South Africa’s president, Cyril Ramaphosa, on May 21 shocked many around the world. But it was merely the latest example of what has been a long-running obsession for Trump, which has been evident since well before he took office in January.
In early February, Trump issued an executive order: “Addressing Egregious Actions of The Republic of South Africa”. The order included the allegation of “unjust racial discrimination” against the white Afrikaner community and recommended the establishment of an Afrikaner refugee scheme. In his meeting with Ramaphosa, Trump doubled down on US hostility to the South African government. He repeatedly claimed – and produced purported evidence of – so-called genocide against Afrikaner farmers.
This level of hostility towards multi-racial, post-apartheid South Africa may seem to have come out of the blue. Some may think it was inspired by Trump’s close relationship, at the time at least, with South Africa-born business leader Elon Musk – who could be seen standing in the corner of the Oval Office watching the uncomfortable scene unfold. But the claim that white Afrikaners are victims of violent and vengeful black South Africans has a much longer history.
It’s a history that goes back almost five decades. It connects white supremacy in southern Africa and the apartheid government’s international disinformation strategy with the evangelical Christian right in American politics. Some of the individuals and institutions that were vocal advocates of white-minority rule against the threat of black government in South Africa are the same people who have the Trump administration’s ear today.
As the South African academic Nicky Falkof has observed, the claim of white victimhood is nothing new. She believes that “entire political agendas develop around the idea that white people must be protected because they face exceptional threats”.
The idea that white South Africans face an existential threat emerged in the violent final decade of apartheid rule. It was a key narrative that the National Party government of president P.W. Botha liked to present to the outside world.
In 2021, a former apartheid intelligence officer named Paul Erasmus published his autobiography detailing his work for Stratcom, the apartheid government’s international covert communications and intelligence agency. Erasmas detailed his work in the US and, in particular, Stratcom’s close links with Republican policymakers.
One of the primary US conservative contacts was said to be Dr Edwin Feulner, a founder and president of the Heritage Foundation. Erasmus wrote that Feulner, who was a foreign policy advisor to Ronald Reagan in the 1980s, was “already well positioned to serve Stratcom the kind of high-level advice that we needed to temper growing international affection for the ANC as the first ruling party of a democratic South Africa”.
The Conversation approached Dr Feulner through the Heritage Foundation to seek his comments on specifically whether he had any past association with the apartheid-era government in South Africa and received no reply on the matter. But in 1986, during Feulner’s presidency of the Heritage Foundation, it published a report presenting alleging “close links between the ANC [African National Congresss] and the communists and the way in which the communists exploit the ANC to manipulate Western opinion”.
This history is key to understanding Trump Oval Office meeting with the South African president. The Heritage Foundation continues to have close links with Afrikaner nationalists. And it is well known that the foundation is central to Trump’s governing strategy, having published its Project 2025 on which much of this administration’s policy is based.
The South African media outlet, the Daily Maverick, has investigated links between the self-defined Afrikaner minority rights movement, Afriforum, the Heritage Foundation and the Republican Party. Since Trump was first inaugurated in 2017, Afriforum representatives – including CEO Kallie Kriel and his deputy Dr Ernst Roets – have made several visits to Washington, most recently in February 2025, to speak with senior representatives of the Trump administration and representatives of the Heritage Foundation. For some time, Afriforum has claimed there is a white genocide against Afrikaner farmers.
When asked directly about its relationship with Afriforum, a Heritage Foundation spokesperson denied any particularly close links between the two organisations, saying: “We meet with hundreds of individuals and groups every year.” He pointed to the Heritage Foundation’s recent round table and stressed the foundations’s “well-documented and long-running effort to work with leaders from across Africa”.
In May 2024, the Heritage Foundation called for the cancellation of US aid to South Africa. It accused the ANC government of supporting Hamas and not aligning “with American values”.
Religious links
America’s evangelical Christian community was a strong supporter of the apartheid regime in South Africa. This is a key constituency of Trump’s electoral base. The historian Augusta Dell’Omo has documented the South African government lobbying of US televangelists such as Pat Robertson – an outspoken supporter of apartheid South Africa. As Dell’Omo argues, Christian evangelicals were not just vexed by threats to apartheid in South Africa. They were drawing a “direct link between the causes of Black grievances in the US and South Africa and a global threat to conservative and religious values”.
There is not just an historical – but also an ideological – link between Trump’s attitudes to farm killings and land expropriation in South Africa and his vehement opposition to diversity, equality and inclusion (DEI) programmes in the US. This white grievance politics continues to consider South Africa as a symbol of the overthrow of white privilege and the disorder that multiculturalism and black-led government ostensibly creates.
As academic Nicky Falkof has argued in The Conversation: “The architecture of white supremacy depends on the idea that white people are extraordinary victims. This is the driving notion beneath the great replacement theory, a far-right conspiracy theory claiming that Jews and non-white foreigners are plotting to ‘replace’ whites.”
Trump’s accusations against the current government in South Africa have their roots in the murky international disinformation campaigns of apartheid’s final years and the willing cooperation of key actors on the right of US politics and society. That white-supremacist politics from the past would continue to have currency in today’s White House is shocking. It should be opposed by all who support a democratic, multiracial and prosperous South Africa.
Daniel Conway does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
Source: United States Senator for Washington Maria Cantwell
06.25.25
Cantwell Statement on Continued Lee Efforts to Sell Off America’s Public Lands: “The Latest Lee Proposal Is Just One More Attempt To See If Congress Blinks”
WASHINGTON, D.C. – Today, U.S. Senator Maria Cantwell (D-WA), senior member of the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, released the following statement in response to the latest proposal from U.S. Senator Mike Lee (R-UT) to sell off America’s public lands to the highest bidder.
Lee’s most recent draft comes after the Senate Parliamentarian rejected his opening gambit because it fails to meet strict Senate rules governing the budget process that Senate Republicans are relying on to circumvent the Senate filibuster, which normally curtails divisive partisan proposals. It is expected that Lee will continue to modify his controversial land sales proposal to pass muster with the parliamentarian until right up to the Senate votes on the measure later this week as part of the larger reconciliation bill. After the Senate Parliamentarian rejected Lee’s opening gambit — deeming the proposal ineligible under budget reconciliation process rules — Lee responded, “I’m doing everything I can to support President Trump and move this forward.” He promised, “We’re just getting started.”
“Republicans seem hell bent on trying to sell public lands. Members need to stand up and stop this giveaway of our natural heritage. The latest Lee proposal is just one more attempt to see if Congress blinks. A massive change to our public land policy should not be included in a budget bill. We need climbers, hikers, hunters, gateway communities, and everyone who loves the outdoors to call their elected representatives right away to say our public lands are not for sale,” Sen. Cantwell said.
Lee’s revised language would require the Secretary of Interior to sell between 0.25 percent and 0.50 percent of Bureau of Land Management (BLM) land in the 11 Western states, minus Montana. It would also allow for the nominations of BLM land to be sold. The land would have to be in a 5-mile radius of the border of a population center.
Yesterday, Sen. Cantwell hosted a virtual press conference to push back on Lee’s proposal. She was joined by Boise Mayor Lauren McLean, professional athletes and outdoorsmen Tommy Caldwell and Graham Zimmerman, REI leader Susan Viscon, and Backcountry Hunters & Anglers spokesperson Kaden McArthur.
READ MORE:
The Associated Press: GOP plan to sell more than 3,200 square miles of federal lands is found to violate Senate rules
The Seattle Times: Pitch to sell public lands hits snag. What does that mean for WA?
The Spokesman Review: Public land sales provision would violate Senate rule, but its backer pledges to try again
The Tri-City Herald: What public lands near Tri-Cities could be sold under new Trump tax plan?
Video of yesterday’s virtual press conference is available HERE; a transcript of Sen. Cantwell’s opening remarks is HERE.
Source: United Kingdom – Executive Government & Departments
A observational study published in PLOS Water looks at the link between nitrate in drinking water and premature births.
Prof Oliver Jones, Professor of Chemistry, RMIT University, said:
“The headline on this research may sound scary; however, to my mind, there are several issues with this paper.
“Firstly, the data are from 1970-1988 and so are not current. Secondly, the author did not perform any measurements themselves but instead used public health data and water quality data. The water quality data was self-reported and so may not be accurate, and it only comes from one place in the USA, so it does not reflect conditions elsewhere.
“This data was used to show a very weak possible association between estimated early prenatal nitrate exposure and birth outcomes. An association between two factors does not mean one causes the other. The apparent relationship can be due to a range of different factors that have nothing to do with the two variables being considered. I am inclined to think that this is the case here because there is a large overlap in the data and because the effect disappears above 10 mg/L, which does not make sense from a toxicological point of view. Other factors that may affect health, such as the mother’s health or diet, were not available, so could not be taken into account. This is quite important in this case since at concentrations of less than 10 mg/L, the main source of nitrate is actually food, not water. It is thus possible that the results reflect diet, not nitrate.
“Arguing that a policy change is needed on a very well-studied compound based on a single paper that at best only found a weak statistical association from 40-year old data from one part of the USA and which shows no increased risk at the higher exposure concentrations, is, in my view, possibly a little overzealous.”
‘Early prenatal nitrate exposure and birth outcomes: A study of Iowa’s public drinking water (1970-1988) by Semprini was published in PLOS Water at 19:00 UK time on Wednesday 25th June.
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pwat.0000329
Declared Interests
Prof Oliver Jones “I am a Professor of Chemistry at RMIT University in Melbourne, Australia. I have no direct conflicts of interest to declare; however, I have received research funding from the Water Industry and EPA Victoria for research on environmental pollution in the past.”
