The incident occurred in central Gaza on Sunday, according to media reports, which said that four other people also lost their lives due to the Israeli airstrike.
The Israeli military said it had been targeting a terrorist but a “technical error” saw the munition stray off course.
Uphold protection of children
UNICEF Executive Director Catherine Russell noted that the incident came just days after several women and children were killed while lining up for nutritional supplies.
“The Israeli authorities must urgently review the rules of engagement and ensure full compliance with international humanitarian law, notably the protection of civilians, including children,” she wrote in a statement posted on X.
The UN has repeatedly deplored the killing of Palestinians seeking food aid amid the dire humanitarian situation in Gaza, where food security experts have warned that the entire population is not getting enough to eat.
Stockpiles of food available
Meanwhile, “truckloads of food and medical supplies are waiting in warehouses” just outside the enclave, UN Palestine refugee agency UNRWA said in a tweet.
It included a quote from one of its health workers who said that “in the past, I only saw such cases of malnutrition in textbooks and documentaries. Today, I am treating them face to face in the health centre.”
UNRWA appealed for starvation of civilians to stop and for the siege to be lifted.
“Let the UN, including UNRWA, do its lifesaving work,” the tweet said.
West Bank annexation ‘well underway’
Separately, UNRWA also highlighted the situation of Palestinians in the occupied West Bank against the backdrop of the war in Gaza.
Agency chief Philippe Lazzarini told an international conference in Switzerland on Monday that “annexation is well underway.”
UNRWA said “this is not just destruction: it is part of systematic forced displacement, a violation of international law, and a form of collective punishment.”
In January, Israeli forces launched operations in Tulkarm and Jenin in the West Bank, which UNRWA has previously said are the most extensive in two decades.
Humanitarians reported last week that the operations are causing massive destruction and displacement while attacks by Israeli settlers have intensified.
A responsive justice system is essential to ensuring survivors of gender-based violence are supported, and people committing these crimes are held to account. To support survivors of gender-based violence, Alberta’s government is launching a new grant program to strengthen support services across the province.
Through the Community Pathways to Justice grant, $1.25 million in one-time funding will be made available to help community-based organizations and Indigenous communities enhance access to justice and provide survivor-centered services. This initiative is part of Alberta’s 10-year strategy to end gender-based violence by preventing harm, holding offenders accountable and empowering those impacted. The grant supports programs that focus on victim support, education and awareness, legal navigation, system coordination and restorative justice.
“We are making this significant investment because gender-based violence has no place in society. This funding empowers community programs to help survivors identify gender-based violence, know how to respond and have the support they need to move forward if they are impacted. Alberta’s government is standing with survivors and the organizations that support them.”
“We are leading with action. This grant delivers real support when and where survivors need it most, a key part of our made-in-Alberta strategy to end gender-based violence.”
Funding will be awarded to eligible Alberta-based organizations, including registered not-for-profits, charities, and Indigenous communities. Grants range from $50,000 to $150,000 and must be used for operational activities. The application process will open on July 14 and will close on August 1.
“No one should have to live in fear of violence, and no survivor should have to face their journey to justice alone. Supported by our National Action Plan to End Gender-based Violence, this grant is a meaningful step in making sure more Albertans can access the support, advocacy and safety they deserve. Our federal government is proud to partner with Alberta to help build a future where gender-based violence has no place, and where every survivor knows they are seen, heard and supported.”
Alberta’s 10-year Strategy to End Gender-Based Violence builds on our province’s strengths – across government and with community partners – to achieve our vision of a province where every Albertan lives in safety, free from gender-based violence.
Quick facts
For more information on eligibility criteria, funding priorities and how to apply, interested applicants may attend an upcoming virtual information session.
Details can be found here: https://www.alberta.ca/grant-to-support-survivors-of-gender-based-violence.
The Community Pathways to Justice grant is one of the short-term actions identified in the 10-year Strategy to End Gender-Based Violence to support survivors and all those impacted where and when they need it.
Funding for this grant is part of Alberta’s four-year, $54-million bilateral agreement with the federal government that was announced in 2023.
Through Budget 2025, Alberta’s government is committing $188 million in direct supports to programs and services that address gender-based violence and support survivors.
Gender-based violence refers to acts of violence, intimidation or coercion aimed at people where the victim’s gender is a relevant factor, and can take many forms, including intimate partner and family violence, sexual violence, stalking, harassment, human trafficking, financial abuse and online exploitation.
Related information
Ending gender-based violence | Alberta.ca
Supports for girls and women
Related news
Alberta takes action: Ending gender-based violence (May 13, 2025)
Supporting survivors of gender-based violence (May 20, 2025)
Building safer futures free from family violence (June 3, 2025)
Early planning has begun for two new joint-use elementary schools in Saskatoon as the Government of Saskatchewan released a Request for Proposal (RFP) to engage a consultant team to provide design services for both schools.
The procurement for design services is for two joint-use schools in Saskatoon, one in the Brighton neighbourhood and the other in the Aspen Ridge neighbourhood.
“I am very pleased that we are advancing these two joint-use schools,” SaskBuilds and Procurement Minister David Marit said. “These projects reflect our ongoing commitment to support growing communities and ensuring that high-quality education is locally accessible.”
The new Brighton elementary school will be a Kindergarten to Grade 8 joint-use school of approximately 22,000 square metres, with an integrated 90-seat child care centre, accommodating a maximum student enrollment of 2,050. The future site is in Saskatoon’s Brighton neighbourhood, adjacent to Brighton Core Park.
“It is exciting to see these new schools progress as they begin the early planning process,” Education Minister Everett Hindley said. “The Brighton and Aspen Ridge joint-use elementary schools will be a significant addition to the communities and families they serve and will provide students with a positive and high-quality learning experience for generations to come.”
The Aspen Ridge Kindergarten to Grade 8 joint-use school is anticipated to be of similar size and scope as the Brighton School. The future site is adjacent to the future Aspen Ridge core park.
“We are pleased that new elementary schools in rapidly growing parts of Saskatoon are progressing,” Board of Education Chair for Greater Saskatoon Catholic Schools Diane Boyko said. “Education has changed a lot over the decades, so designing schools that meet the needs of today’s students and staff is an important part of the construction process.”
“These new school buildings will empower us to serve students and families as Saskatoon grows,” Director of Education for Saskatoon Public Schools Shane Skjerven said. “We are excited to see these projects continue as we look forward to the rich learning that will take place in these future schools.”
The Request for Proposal is available on SaskTenders at sasktenders.ca.
There are now 11 new or replacement schools underway in Saskatoon, which builds on the 11 new schools already completed in Saskatoon since 2008.
Provincewide, since 2008, the Government of Saskatchewan has committed approximately $2.8 billion toward school infrastructure which includes 74 new schools, 31 major renovation projects and 10 minor renovation projects.
-30-
For more information, contact: Media Desk SaskBuilds and Procurement Regina Phone: 306-520-3607 Email: media.sbp@gov.sk.ca
Media Relations Education Regina Phone: 306-533-6391 Email: mediaed@gov.sk.ca
Early planning has begun for two new joint-use elementary schools in Saskatoon as the Government of Saskatchewan released a Request for Proposal (RFP) to engage a consultant team to provide design services for both schools.
The procurement for design services is for two joint-use schools in Saskatoon, one in the Brighton neighbourhood and the other in the Aspen Ridge neighbourhood.
“I am very pleased that we are advancing these two joint-use schools,” SaskBuilds and Procurement Minister David Marit said. “These projects reflect our ongoing commitment to support growing communities and ensuring that high-quality education is locally accessible.”
The new Brighton elementary school will be a Kindergarten to Grade 8 joint-use school of approximately 22,000 square metres, with an integrated 90-seat child care centre, accommodating a maximum student enrollment of 2,050. The future site is in Saskatoon’s Brighton neighbourhood, adjacent to Brighton Core Park.
“It is exciting to see these new schools progress as they begin the early planning process,” Education Minister Everett Hindley said. “The Brighton and Aspen Ridge joint-use elementary schools will be a significant addition to the communities and families they serve and will provide students with a positive and high-quality learning experience for generations to come.”
The Aspen Ridge Kindergarten to Grade 8 joint-use school is anticipated to be of similar size and scope as the Brighton School. The future site is adjacent to the future Aspen Ridge core park.
“We are pleased that new elementary schools in rapidly growing parts of Saskatoon are progressing,” Board of Education Chair for Greater Saskatoon Catholic Schools Diane Boyko said. “Education has changed a lot over the decades, so designing schools that meet the needs of today’s students and staff is an important part of the construction process.”
“These new school buildings will empower us to serve students and families as Saskatoon grows,” Director of Education for Saskatoon Public Schools Shane Skjerven said. “We are excited to see these projects continue as we look forward to the rich learning that will take place in these future schools.”
The Request for Proposal is available on SaskTenders at sasktenders.ca.
There are now 11 new or replacement schools underway in Saskatoon, which builds on the 11 new schools already completed in Saskatoon since 2008.
Provincewide, since 2008, the Government of Saskatchewan has committed approximately $2.8 billion toward school infrastructure which includes 74 new schools, 31 major renovation projects and 10 minor renovation projects.
-30-
For more information, contact: Media Desk SaskBuilds and Procurement Regina Phone: 306-520-3607 Email: media.sbp@gov.sk.ca
Media Relations Education Regina Phone: 306-533-6391 Email: mediaed@gov.sk.ca
As Canada’s new government negotiates a new economic and security partnership with the United States, it is also taking action to protect Canadian workers and businesses from unfair trade practices.
Today, the Honourable Joël Lightbound, Minister of Government Transformation, Public Works and Procurement announced that the government has implemented a new Interim Policy on Reciprocal Procurement. Under this new policy, suppliers from countries that limit Canadian access to their own government contracts can be restricted from bidding on Canadian federal contracts. This measure will prioritize suppliers from Canada and from our reliable trading partners that provide reciprocal access to suppliers from Canada through trade agreements.
The policy applies to all federal departments and agencies and will be implemented in two phases:
Phase 1, the interim policy, will focus on applying the policy based on the location of suppliers, started with the roll-out of training and tools on June 30, 2025, to support implementation. The interim policy is effective as of July 14, 2025.
Phase 2, the complete policy, will determine supplier eligibility based on the origin of goods and services being offered, and will be introduced at a later date.
As shared earlier this year, the government is also exploring additional ways to maximize the use of Canadian steel and aluminum in government-funded projects, including in coordination with Canadian provinces and territories.
By enforcing fair and reciprocal procurement access, the government will protect Canadian innovation, jobs, and economic growth, and ensure that Canadian suppliers remain competitive in the global marketplace. We will defend the interests of Canadians, safeguard Canada’s workers and businesses, and build one Canadian economy – the strongest economy in the G7.
As Canada’s new government negotiates a new economic and security partnership with the United States, it is also taking action to protect Canadian workers and businesses from unfair trade practices.
Today, the Honourable Joël Lightbound, Minister of Government Transformation, Public Works and Procurement announced that the government has implemented a new Interim Policy on Reciprocal Procurement. Under this new policy, suppliers from countries that limit Canadian access to their own government contracts can be restricted from bidding on Canadian federal contracts. This measure will prioritize suppliers from Canada and from our reliable trading partners that provide reciprocal access to suppliers from Canada through trade agreements.
The policy applies to all federal departments and agencies and will be implemented in two phases:
Phase 1, the interim policy, will focus on applying the policy based on the location of suppliers, started with the roll-out of training and tools on June 30, 2025, to support implementation. The interim policy is effective as of July 14, 2025.
Phase 2, the complete policy, will determine supplier eligibility based on the origin of goods and services being offered, and will be introduced at a later date.
As shared earlier this year, the government is also exploring additional ways to maximize the use of Canadian steel and aluminum in government-funded projects, including in coordination with Canadian provinces and territories.
By enforcing fair and reciprocal procurement access, the government will protect Canadian innovation, jobs, and economic growth, and ensure that Canadian suppliers remain competitive in the global marketplace. We will defend the interests of Canadians, safeguard Canada’s workers and businesses, and build one Canadian economy – the strongest economy in the G7.
Source: United States House of Representatives – Representative Mike Johnson (LA-04)
WASHINGTON — This morning, Speaker Johnson appeared on Fox News’ Sunday Morning Futures with Maria Bartiromo to discuss the historic One Big Beautiful Bill and how House Republicans are keeping their foot on the gas after President Trump signed it into law.
Watch the full interview here
On the One Big Beautiful Bill adding jet fuel to the US economy:
The big beautiful bill, people call it a spending bill. It wasn’t. The only increases in spending were for those two priorities, border and national defense. Everything else was carving back and saving money from the budget, which is why you call it a reconciliation bill. So we would have actually achieved, and we will, in excess of $1.6 trillion in savings. That is an historic number. No congress, no legislative body in the history of planet Earth has ever saved so much in a bill. Now, it’s just the first step though, Maria, as we point out, we have a $37 trillion federal debt. You and I talk about this all the time. We all do. And we have to have a combination of reduced spending and greater economic growth.
We put jet fuel into the economy with the one big beautiful bill. It will be that. Extraordinary growth, we’re projecting 3% going forward and $4 trillion in new revenue, just out of the legislation. But more is ahead. And the tariff policy and the other policies of the Trump administration have been wildly successful. In fact, we had a budget surplus, as you know, in the month of June, the first time since 2017 when President Trump was last in the White House. So more of that is ahead. Every American will feel it. And the big beautiful bill was geared and written for lower- and middle-class earners in the country. They’re going to be feeling really good as we go into that midterm election in 2026.
On House Republicans legislative agenda going forward:
We’re implementing a playbook that we designed well over a year ago, about 15 months ago. We began this process understanding and believing that we would win unified government, that we’d have the White House, the Senate, and the House in Republican hands, and that we would not want to waste this historic opportunity with President Trump coming back to the White House and us having the responsibility of fixing every metric of public policy that Biden and Harris and the Democrats destroyed over the previous four years. So, the big beautiful bill was the first big step in that. But we have multiple steps ahead of us. We have long planned for at least two, possibly three reconciliation bills, one in the fall and one next spring that would continue to allow us to do this on a partisan basis, where we only need Republican votes and we don’t have to drag Democrats along. They are in no appetite to fix any of the mess. We have to do it ourselves. So yes, that’s next.
In addition to that, we will continue to get the country back on a path to fiscal responsibility by rescissions packages that will come from the White House that we’ll enact, and claw back spending and eliminate fraud, waste, and abuse in the multiple reconciliation packages, and in appropriating at lower levels of funding. All these things will be done while we’re codifying more of President Trump’s executive orders. He’s been very busy. We will be as well. We have a lot more work ahead of us.
On codifying President Trump’s executive orders:
Almost 30 of them were included in the big beautiful Bill. So that was a lawmaking exercise; the president has now signed them into law and they’re codified. So it’s not a temporary thing, they’ll be permanent in the law. And we’ve done a number, about 15 or 20 additional executive orders that we’ve already codified in the House. We’ll continue that process. We wanted to get as many of them as we could into the reconciliation package because we knew that we were certain that that would actually be signed into law and it wouldn’t just be a feelgood exercise. So more of that will continue going forward. The president’s been one of the most prolific, I think arguably the most successful president in the first six months of this term than any previous president. Look how many things have been accomplished? A lot of it has been done through executive order, so Congress has its role to play now as well.
Source: United States House of Representatives – Representative Mike Johnson (LA-04)
WASHINGTON — This morning, Speaker Johnson appeared on Fox News’ Sunday Morning Futures with Maria Bartiromo to discuss the historic One Big Beautiful Bill and how House Republicans are keeping their foot on the gas after President Trump signed it into law.
Watch the full interview here
On the One Big Beautiful Bill adding jet fuel to the US economy:
The big beautiful bill, people call it a spending bill. It wasn’t. The only increases in spending were for those two priorities, border and national defense. Everything else was carving back and saving money from the budget, which is why you call it a reconciliation bill. So we would have actually achieved, and we will, in excess of $1.6 trillion in savings. That is an historic number. No congress, no legislative body in the history of planet Earth has ever saved so much in a bill. Now, it’s just the first step though, Maria, as we point out, we have a $37 trillion federal debt. You and I talk about this all the time. We all do. And we have to have a combination of reduced spending and greater economic growth.
We put jet fuel into the economy with the one big beautiful bill. It will be that. Extraordinary growth, we’re projecting 3% going forward and $4 trillion in new revenue, just out of the legislation. But more is ahead. And the tariff policy and the other policies of the Trump administration have been wildly successful. In fact, we had a budget surplus, as you know, in the month of June, the first time since 2017 when President Trump was last in the White House. So more of that is ahead. Every American will feel it. And the big beautiful bill was geared and written for lower- and middle-class earners in the country. They’re going to be feeling really good as we go into that midterm election in 2026.
On House Republicans legislative agenda going forward:
We’re implementing a playbook that we designed well over a year ago, about 15 months ago. We began this process understanding and believing that we would win unified government, that we’d have the White House, the Senate, and the House in Republican hands, and that we would not want to waste this historic opportunity with President Trump coming back to the White House and us having the responsibility of fixing every metric of public policy that Biden and Harris and the Democrats destroyed over the previous four years. So, the big beautiful bill was the first big step in that. But we have multiple steps ahead of us. We have long planned for at least two, possibly three reconciliation bills, one in the fall and one next spring that would continue to allow us to do this on a partisan basis, where we only need Republican votes and we don’t have to drag Democrats along. They are in no appetite to fix any of the mess. We have to do it ourselves. So yes, that’s next.
In addition to that, we will continue to get the country back on a path to fiscal responsibility by rescissions packages that will come from the White House that we’ll enact, and claw back spending and eliminate fraud, waste, and abuse in the multiple reconciliation packages, and in appropriating at lower levels of funding. All these things will be done while we’re codifying more of President Trump’s executive orders. He’s been very busy. We will be as well. We have a lot more work ahead of us.
On codifying President Trump’s executive orders:
Almost 30 of them were included in the big beautiful Bill. So that was a lawmaking exercise; the president has now signed them into law and they’re codified. So it’s not a temporary thing, they’ll be permanent in the law. And we’ve done a number, about 15 or 20 additional executive orders that we’ve already codified in the House. We’ll continue that process. We wanted to get as many of them as we could into the reconciliation package because we knew that we were certain that that would actually be signed into law and it wouldn’t just be a feelgood exercise. So more of that will continue going forward. The president’s been one of the most prolific, I think arguably the most successful president in the first six months of this term than any previous president. Look how many things have been accomplished? A lot of it has been done through executive order, so Congress has its role to play now as well.
Source: United States House of Representatives – Representative Mike Johnson (LA-04)
WASHINGTON — This morning, Speaker Johnson appeared on Fox News’ Sunday Morning Futures with Maria Bartiromo to discuss the historic One Big Beautiful Bill and how House Republicans are keeping their foot on the gas after President Trump signed it into law.
Watch the full interview here
On the One Big Beautiful Bill adding jet fuel to the US economy:
The big beautiful bill, people call it a spending bill. It wasn’t. The only increases in spending were for those two priorities, border and national defense. Everything else was carving back and saving money from the budget, which is why you call it a reconciliation bill. So we would have actually achieved, and we will, in excess of $1.6 trillion in savings. That is an historic number. No congress, no legislative body in the history of planet Earth has ever saved so much in a bill. Now, it’s just the first step though, Maria, as we point out, we have a $37 trillion federal debt. You and I talk about this all the time. We all do. And we have to have a combination of reduced spending and greater economic growth.
We put jet fuel into the economy with the one big beautiful bill. It will be that. Extraordinary growth, we’re projecting 3% going forward and $4 trillion in new revenue, just out of the legislation. But more is ahead. And the tariff policy and the other policies of the Trump administration have been wildly successful. In fact, we had a budget surplus, as you know, in the month of June, the first time since 2017 when President Trump was last in the White House. So more of that is ahead. Every American will feel it. And the big beautiful bill was geared and written for lower- and middle-class earners in the country. They’re going to be feeling really good as we go into that midterm election in 2026.
On House Republicans legislative agenda going forward:
We’re implementing a playbook that we designed well over a year ago, about 15 months ago. We began this process understanding and believing that we would win unified government, that we’d have the White House, the Senate, and the House in Republican hands, and that we would not want to waste this historic opportunity with President Trump coming back to the White House and us having the responsibility of fixing every metric of public policy that Biden and Harris and the Democrats destroyed over the previous four years. So, the big beautiful bill was the first big step in that. But we have multiple steps ahead of us. We have long planned for at least two, possibly three reconciliation bills, one in the fall and one next spring that would continue to allow us to do this on a partisan basis, where we only need Republican votes and we don’t have to drag Democrats along. They are in no appetite to fix any of the mess. We have to do it ourselves. So yes, that’s next.
In addition to that, we will continue to get the country back on a path to fiscal responsibility by rescissions packages that will come from the White House that we’ll enact, and claw back spending and eliminate fraud, waste, and abuse in the multiple reconciliation packages, and in appropriating at lower levels of funding. All these things will be done while we’re codifying more of President Trump’s executive orders. He’s been very busy. We will be as well. We have a lot more work ahead of us.
On codifying President Trump’s executive orders:
Almost 30 of them were included in the big beautiful Bill. So that was a lawmaking exercise; the president has now signed them into law and they’re codified. So it’s not a temporary thing, they’ll be permanent in the law. And we’ve done a number, about 15 or 20 additional executive orders that we’ve already codified in the House. We’ll continue that process. We wanted to get as many of them as we could into the reconciliation package because we knew that we were certain that that would actually be signed into law and it wouldn’t just be a feelgood exercise. So more of that will continue going forward. The president’s been one of the most prolific, I think arguably the most successful president in the first six months of this term than any previous president. Look how many things have been accomplished? A lot of it has been done through executive order, so Congress has its role to play now as well.
Source: United States House of Representatives – Representative Mike Johnson (LA-04)
WASHINGTON — Today, Speaker Johnson published an op-ed on X titled, “The True Meaning of ‘The Separation of Church and State.’”
“As we approach the 250th birthday of our great nation, it has never been more important to defend truth on every front, repair our foundations, and hold fast to who we are and what we stand for,” Speaker Johnson wrote.
Read Speaker Johnson’s full op-ed on X here or below:
Amid all the other big news this week, a landmark development in a federal court in Texas drew less attention than expected. On Monday, the IRS agreed to a consent judgment that will restore the First Amendment rights of churches and religious non-profit organizations to speak freely without losing their tax-exempt status. The court should quickly approve that proposed settlement of a lawsuit filed by the National Religious Broadcasters and Texas churches, which was brought to overturn a 1950s-era provision in the tax code known as “the Johnson Amendment.”
As a former constitutional law litigator, I – along with many of my former colleagues – have long argued that the Johnson Amendment is unconstitutional. President Trump understands this well, and in his speech to the 2017 National Prayer Breakfast, he resolved to “get rid of and totally destroy the Johnson Amendment and allow our representatives of faith to speak freely and without fear of retribution.” Resolving the Texas case will be key to ensuring that people of faith are no longer censored and silenced because of the tax code – and hopefully it will serve as a teachable moment about one of the most misunderstood subjects in our culture.
Most people today who insist upon a rigid “separation between church and state” are unaware the phrase derives not from the Constitution, but from a personal letter that President Thomas Jefferson wrote to the Danbury Baptist Association in 1802.
He explained that because “religion is a matter which lies solely between Man & his God,” the language of the First Amendment is a vital safeguard for our “rights of conscience.” Jefferson said he revered “that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should ‘make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,’ thus building a wall of separation between Church & State.”
Jefferson clearly did not mean that metaphorical “wall” was to keep religion from influencing issues of civil government. To the contrary, it was meant to keep the federal government from impeding the religious practice of citizens. The Founders wanted to protect the church from an encroaching state, not the other way around.
The majority of the Founders, having personally witnessed the abuses of the Church of England, were determined to prevent the official establishment of any single national denomination or religion. However, they very deliberately listed religious liberty (the free exercise of religion) as the first freedom protected in the Bill of Rights **because they wanted everyone to freely live out their faith – as that would ensure a robust presence of moral virtue in the public square and the free marketplace of ideas.**
Volumes written on this topic can be summarized by reference to the sentiments of our first two presidents. In his historic Farewell Address, “the Father of our Country,” George Washington, declared: “Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports.” John Adams warned directly: “Our Constitution is made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.”
What these two Founders and their fellow patriots all understood from history was that there are many important rules and practices that can help build and sustain a healthy republic. But the key – and the essential foundation – of a system of government like ours must be a common commitment among the citizenry to the principles of religion and morality.
The Founders acknowledged in the Declaration the self-evident truths that all men are created equal, and that God gives all men the same inalienable rights. However, they knew that in order to maintain a government “of the people, by the people and for the people,” as Lincoln articulated, in “this nation, under God,” those inalienable rights must be exercised in a responsible manner. They thus believed in liberty that is legitimately constrained by a common sense of morality – and a healthy fear of the Creator, who granted all men our rights.
The Founders understood that all men are fallen and that power corrupts. They also knew that no amount of institutional checks and balances or decentralization of power in civil authorities would be sufficient to maintain a just government if the men in charge had no fear of eternal judgment by a power HIGHER than their temporal institutions.
A free society and a healthy republic depend upon religious and moral virtue- not only because they help prevent political corruption and the abuse of power – but also because those convictions in the minds and hearts of the people make it possible to preserve their essential freedoms by emphasizing and inspiring individual responsibility, self-sacrifice, the dignity of hard work, the rule of law, civility, patriotism, the value of family and community, and the sanctity of every human life. Without those virtues, “indispensably supported” by religion and morality, every nation will ultimately fall.
Inscribed on the third panel of the Jefferson Memorial here in Washington, D.C., is his sobering reminder to every American: “God who gave us life gave us liberty. Can the liberties of a nation be secure when we have removed a conviction that these liberties are the gift of God? Indeed I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just, that his justice cannot sleep forever.”
The experience of history teaches that these principles are universal and timeless, and they certainly apply to our nation today. Alexis de Tocqueville is credited with the keen observation that “America is great because she is good, and if she ever ceases to be good, she will cease to be great.” That has been the key to our exceptionalism. Our republic depends upon it now more than ever, and it is our job to instill and preserve it.
As we approach the 250th birthday of our great nation, it has never been more important to defend truth on every front, repair our foundations, and hold fast to who we are and what we stand for. Anyone who has been misled to believe that religious principles and viewpoints must be separated from public affairs should be reminded to review their history. Let us hope the federal court in Texas accepts the IRS consent judgment as yet another acknowledgment of these essential truths.
Source: United States House of Representatives – Representative Mike Johnson (LA-04)
WASHINGTON — Today, Speaker Johnson published an op-ed on X titled, “The True Meaning of ‘The Separation of Church and State.’”
“As we approach the 250th birthday of our great nation, it has never been more important to defend truth on every front, repair our foundations, and hold fast to who we are and what we stand for,” Speaker Johnson wrote.
Read Speaker Johnson’s full op-ed on X here or below:
Amid all the other big news this week, a landmark development in a federal court in Texas drew less attention than expected. On Monday, the IRS agreed to a consent judgment that will restore the First Amendment rights of churches and religious non-profit organizations to speak freely without losing their tax-exempt status. The court should quickly approve that proposed settlement of a lawsuit filed by the National Religious Broadcasters and Texas churches, which was brought to overturn a 1950s-era provision in the tax code known as “the Johnson Amendment.”
As a former constitutional law litigator, I – along with many of my former colleagues – have long argued that the Johnson Amendment is unconstitutional. President Trump understands this well, and in his speech to the 2017 National Prayer Breakfast, he resolved to “get rid of and totally destroy the Johnson Amendment and allow our representatives of faith to speak freely and without fear of retribution.” Resolving the Texas case will be key to ensuring that people of faith are no longer censored and silenced because of the tax code – and hopefully it will serve as a teachable moment about one of the most misunderstood subjects in our culture.
Most people today who insist upon a rigid “separation between church and state” are unaware the phrase derives not from the Constitution, but from a personal letter that President Thomas Jefferson wrote to the Danbury Baptist Association in 1802.
He explained that because “religion is a matter which lies solely between Man & his God,” the language of the First Amendment is a vital safeguard for our “rights of conscience.” Jefferson said he revered “that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should ‘make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,’ thus building a wall of separation between Church & State.”
Jefferson clearly did not mean that metaphorical “wall” was to keep religion from influencing issues of civil government. To the contrary, it was meant to keep the federal government from impeding the religious practice of citizens. The Founders wanted to protect the church from an encroaching state, not the other way around.
The majority of the Founders, having personally witnessed the abuses of the Church of England, were determined to prevent the official establishment of any single national denomination or religion. However, they very deliberately listed religious liberty (the free exercise of religion) as the first freedom protected in the Bill of Rights **because they wanted everyone to freely live out their faith – as that would ensure a robust presence of moral virtue in the public square and the free marketplace of ideas.**
Volumes written on this topic can be summarized by reference to the sentiments of our first two presidents. In his historic Farewell Address, “the Father of our Country,” George Washington, declared: “Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports.” John Adams warned directly: “Our Constitution is made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.”
What these two Founders and their fellow patriots all understood from history was that there are many important rules and practices that can help build and sustain a healthy republic. But the key – and the essential foundation – of a system of government like ours must be a common commitment among the citizenry to the principles of religion and morality.
The Founders acknowledged in the Declaration the self-evident truths that all men are created equal, and that God gives all men the same inalienable rights. However, they knew that in order to maintain a government “of the people, by the people and for the people,” as Lincoln articulated, in “this nation, under God,” those inalienable rights must be exercised in a responsible manner. They thus believed in liberty that is legitimately constrained by a common sense of morality – and a healthy fear of the Creator, who granted all men our rights.
The Founders understood that all men are fallen and that power corrupts. They also knew that no amount of institutional checks and balances or decentralization of power in civil authorities would be sufficient to maintain a just government if the men in charge had no fear of eternal judgment by a power HIGHER than their temporal institutions.
A free society and a healthy republic depend upon religious and moral virtue- not only because they help prevent political corruption and the abuse of power – but also because those convictions in the minds and hearts of the people make it possible to preserve their essential freedoms by emphasizing and inspiring individual responsibility, self-sacrifice, the dignity of hard work, the rule of law, civility, patriotism, the value of family and community, and the sanctity of every human life. Without those virtues, “indispensably supported” by religion and morality, every nation will ultimately fall.
Inscribed on the third panel of the Jefferson Memorial here in Washington, D.C., is his sobering reminder to every American: “God who gave us life gave us liberty. Can the liberties of a nation be secure when we have removed a conviction that these liberties are the gift of God? Indeed I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just, that his justice cannot sleep forever.”
The experience of history teaches that these principles are universal and timeless, and they certainly apply to our nation today. Alexis de Tocqueville is credited with the keen observation that “America is great because she is good, and if she ever ceases to be good, she will cease to be great.” That has been the key to our exceptionalism. Our republic depends upon it now more than ever, and it is our job to instill and preserve it.
As we approach the 250th birthday of our great nation, it has never been more important to defend truth on every front, repair our foundations, and hold fast to who we are and what we stand for. Anyone who has been misled to believe that religious principles and viewpoints must be separated from public affairs should be reminded to review their history. Let us hope the federal court in Texas accepts the IRS consent judgment as yet another acknowledgment of these essential truths.
Source: United States House of Representatives – Representative Mike Johnson (LA-04)
WASHINGTON — Today, Speaker Johnson published an op-ed on X titled, “The True Meaning of ‘The Separation of Church and State.’”
“As we approach the 250th birthday of our great nation, it has never been more important to defend truth on every front, repair our foundations, and hold fast to who we are and what we stand for,” Speaker Johnson wrote.
Read Speaker Johnson’s full op-ed on X here or below:
Amid all the other big news this week, a landmark development in a federal court in Texas drew less attention than expected. On Monday, the IRS agreed to a consent judgment that will restore the First Amendment rights of churches and religious non-profit organizations to speak freely without losing their tax-exempt status. The court should quickly approve that proposed settlement of a lawsuit filed by the National Religious Broadcasters and Texas churches, which was brought to overturn a 1950s-era provision in the tax code known as “the Johnson Amendment.”
As a former constitutional law litigator, I – along with many of my former colleagues – have long argued that the Johnson Amendment is unconstitutional. President Trump understands this well, and in his speech to the 2017 National Prayer Breakfast, he resolved to “get rid of and totally destroy the Johnson Amendment and allow our representatives of faith to speak freely and without fear of retribution.” Resolving the Texas case will be key to ensuring that people of faith are no longer censored and silenced because of the tax code – and hopefully it will serve as a teachable moment about one of the most misunderstood subjects in our culture.
Most people today who insist upon a rigid “separation between church and state” are unaware the phrase derives not from the Constitution, but from a personal letter that President Thomas Jefferson wrote to the Danbury Baptist Association in 1802.
He explained that because “religion is a matter which lies solely between Man & his God,” the language of the First Amendment is a vital safeguard for our “rights of conscience.” Jefferson said he revered “that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should ‘make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,’ thus building a wall of separation between Church & State.”
Jefferson clearly did not mean that metaphorical “wall” was to keep religion from influencing issues of civil government. To the contrary, it was meant to keep the federal government from impeding the religious practice of citizens. The Founders wanted to protect the church from an encroaching state, not the other way around.
The majority of the Founders, having personally witnessed the abuses of the Church of England, were determined to prevent the official establishment of any single national denomination or religion. However, they very deliberately listed religious liberty (the free exercise of religion) as the first freedom protected in the Bill of Rights **because they wanted everyone to freely live out their faith – as that would ensure a robust presence of moral virtue in the public square and the free marketplace of ideas.**
Volumes written on this topic can be summarized by reference to the sentiments of our first two presidents. In his historic Farewell Address, “the Father of our Country,” George Washington, declared: “Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports.” John Adams warned directly: “Our Constitution is made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.”
What these two Founders and their fellow patriots all understood from history was that there are many important rules and practices that can help build and sustain a healthy republic. But the key – and the essential foundation – of a system of government like ours must be a common commitment among the citizenry to the principles of religion and morality.
The Founders acknowledged in the Declaration the self-evident truths that all men are created equal, and that God gives all men the same inalienable rights. However, they knew that in order to maintain a government “of the people, by the people and for the people,” as Lincoln articulated, in “this nation, under God,” those inalienable rights must be exercised in a responsible manner. They thus believed in liberty that is legitimately constrained by a common sense of morality – and a healthy fear of the Creator, who granted all men our rights.
The Founders understood that all men are fallen and that power corrupts. They also knew that no amount of institutional checks and balances or decentralization of power in civil authorities would be sufficient to maintain a just government if the men in charge had no fear of eternal judgment by a power HIGHER than their temporal institutions.
A free society and a healthy republic depend upon religious and moral virtue- not only because they help prevent political corruption and the abuse of power – but also because those convictions in the minds and hearts of the people make it possible to preserve their essential freedoms by emphasizing and inspiring individual responsibility, self-sacrifice, the dignity of hard work, the rule of law, civility, patriotism, the value of family and community, and the sanctity of every human life. Without those virtues, “indispensably supported” by religion and morality, every nation will ultimately fall.
Inscribed on the third panel of the Jefferson Memorial here in Washington, D.C., is his sobering reminder to every American: “God who gave us life gave us liberty. Can the liberties of a nation be secure when we have removed a conviction that these liberties are the gift of God? Indeed I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just, that his justice cannot sleep forever.”
The experience of history teaches that these principles are universal and timeless, and they certainly apply to our nation today. Alexis de Tocqueville is credited with the keen observation that “America is great because she is good, and if she ever ceases to be good, she will cease to be great.” That has been the key to our exceptionalism. Our republic depends upon it now more than ever, and it is our job to instill and preserve it.
As we approach the 250th birthday of our great nation, it has never been more important to defend truth on every front, repair our foundations, and hold fast to who we are and what we stand for. Anyone who has been misled to believe that religious principles and viewpoints must be separated from public affairs should be reminded to review their history. Let us hope the federal court in Texas accepts the IRS consent judgment as yet another acknowledgment of these essential truths.
A federal jury convicted a Washington man on Friday for tax evasion and filing false tax returns related to a scheme to conceal income received from his commercial property business.
The following is according to court documents and evidence presented at trial: Steven Loo, of Seattle, controlled and operated eight companies that owned commercial real estate. Each was managed by independent property management companies, which were responsible for managing the day-to-day operations of the real estate. Loo diverted the income he earned from his real estate by instructing the property management companies to issue checks, categorized as asset management fees, to two other entities that Loo controlled. Loo knew that the funds deposited into these bank accounts, totaling more than $4.8 million, were income to him and that he was required to report and pay tax on the funds. Nevertheless, Loo filed tax returns for 2015 through 2020 that did not report or pay tax on these funds.
Evidence presented at trial showed that Loo owes $1.6 million in taxes on his unreported income.
Loo is scheduled to be sentenced on Oct. 9. He faces a maximum penalty of three years in prison for each of the false tax return charges and a maximum penalty of five years in prison for each of the tax evasion charges for which he was convicted. A federal district court judge will determine any sentence after considering the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines and other statutory factors.
Acting Deputy Assistant Attorney General Karen E. Kelly of the Justice Department’s Tax Division, and U.S. Attorney Teal Luthy Miller for the Western District of Washington made the announcement.
IRS Criminal Investigation investigated the case.
Trial Attorney Regina Jeon of the Tax Division and Assistant U.S. Attorneys Michael Dion and Sean Waite for the Western District of Washington prosecuted the case.
A federal jury convicted a Washington man on Friday for tax evasion and filing false tax returns related to a scheme to conceal income received from his commercial property business.
The following is according to court documents and evidence presented at trial: Steven Loo, of Seattle, controlled and operated eight companies that owned commercial real estate. Each was managed by independent property management companies, which were responsible for managing the day-to-day operations of the real estate. Loo diverted the income he earned from his real estate by instructing the property management companies to issue checks, categorized as asset management fees, to two other entities that Loo controlled. Loo knew that the funds deposited into these bank accounts, totaling more than $4.8 million, were income to him and that he was required to report and pay tax on the funds. Nevertheless, Loo filed tax returns for 2015 through 2020 that did not report or pay tax on these funds.
Evidence presented at trial showed that Loo owes $1.6 million in taxes on his unreported income.
Loo is scheduled to be sentenced on Oct. 9. He faces a maximum penalty of three years in prison for each of the false tax return charges and a maximum penalty of five years in prison for each of the tax evasion charges for which he was convicted. A federal district court judge will determine any sentence after considering the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines and other statutory factors.
Acting Deputy Assistant Attorney General Karen E. Kelly of the Justice Department’s Tax Division, and U.S. Attorney Teal Luthy Miller for the Western District of Washington made the announcement.
IRS Criminal Investigation investigated the case.
Trial Attorney Regina Jeon of the Tax Division and Assistant U.S. Attorneys Michael Dion and Sean Waite for the Western District of Washington prosecuted the case.
A federal jury convicted a Washington man on Friday for tax evasion and filing false tax returns related to a scheme to conceal income received from his commercial property business.
The following is according to court documents and evidence presented at trial: Steven Loo, of Seattle, controlled and operated eight companies that owned commercial real estate. Each was managed by independent property management companies, which were responsible for managing the day-to-day operations of the real estate. Loo diverted the income he earned from his real estate by instructing the property management companies to issue checks, categorized as asset management fees, to two other entities that Loo controlled. Loo knew that the funds deposited into these bank accounts, totaling more than $4.8 million, were income to him and that he was required to report and pay tax on the funds. Nevertheless, Loo filed tax returns for 2015 through 2020 that did not report or pay tax on these funds.
Evidence presented at trial showed that Loo owes $1.6 million in taxes on his unreported income.
Loo is scheduled to be sentenced on Oct. 9. He faces a maximum penalty of three years in prison for each of the false tax return charges and a maximum penalty of five years in prison for each of the tax evasion charges for which he was convicted. A federal district court judge will determine any sentence after considering the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines and other statutory factors.
Acting Deputy Assistant Attorney General Karen E. Kelly of the Justice Department’s Tax Division, and U.S. Attorney Teal Luthy Miller for the Western District of Washington made the announcement.
IRS Criminal Investigation investigated the case.
Trial Attorney Regina Jeon of the Tax Division and Assistant U.S. Attorneys Michael Dion and Sean Waite for the Western District of Washington prosecuted the case.
Hallowell, Maine– The Maine Public Utilities Commission (Commission) has issued a Request for Proposals (RFP) for the sale of energy or renewable energy credits (RECs) to promote the economic reuse of contaminated land through clean energy development, in accordance with 35-A M.R.S. 3210-J (statute).
The RFP seeks proposals for energy or RECs from eligible Class IA renewable resources. Proposals must be submitted by 11:59 PM on July 25, 2025. The Commission seeks to procure up to 1,573,026 MWh in this solicitation.
“This RFP demonstrates Maine’s strong commitment to both advancing clean energy and supporting the reuse of contaminated land for economic benefit,” said Commission Chair Philip L. Bartlett II. By prioritizing projects on PFAS-contaminated agricultural land, were helping communities turn environmental challenges into opportunities for sustainable development and cost savings for ratepayers.
To be eligible, a Class IA resource must:
-Qualify as a Maine RPS Class IA resource;
-Begin commercial operations on or after September 19, 2023; and
-Have either an executed interconnection agreement or a system impact study underway, if required by the applicable regional transmission organization, independent system operator, or administrator.
Proposals will be evaluated based on the requirements of the statute, and the criteria detailed in the RFP. To be selected, a project must demonstrate that it is likely to produce net benefits to ratepayers that exceed its costs.
In accordance with the statute, the Commission will give primary preference to projects located on contaminated land-specifically agricultural land contaminated by PFAS. Projects sited on contaminated land will be awarded contracts before other qualifying projects that are not sited on contaminated land. To qualify for this preference, at least 90% of the project footprint must be located on such land.
For more information, please visit the Commissions website at:
CONTACT: Susan Faloon, Media Liaison CELL: 207-557-3704 EMAIL: susan.faloon@maine.gov
Source: United States Department of Justice Criminal Division
A federal jury convicted a Washington man on Friday for tax evasion and filing false tax returns related to a scheme to conceal income received from his commercial property business.
The following is according to court documents and evidence presented at trial: Steven Loo, of Seattle, controlled and operated eight companies that owned commercial real estate. Each was managed by independent property management companies, which were responsible for managing the day-to-day operations of the real estate. Loo diverted the income he earned from his real estate by instructing the property management companies to issue checks, categorized as asset management fees, to two other entities that Loo controlled. Loo knew that the funds deposited into these bank accounts, totaling more than $4.8 million, were income to him and that he was required to report and pay tax on the funds. Nevertheless, Loo filed tax returns for 2015 through 2020 that did not report or pay tax on these funds.
Evidence presented at trial showed that Loo owes $1.6 million in taxes on his unreported income.
Loo is scheduled to be sentenced on Oct. 9. He faces a maximum penalty of three years in prison for each of the false tax return charges and a maximum penalty of five years in prison for each of the tax evasion charges for which he was convicted. A federal district court judge will determine any sentence after considering the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines and other statutory factors.
Acting Deputy Assistant Attorney General Karen E. Kelly of the Justice Department’s Tax Division, and U.S. Attorney Teal Luthy Miller for the Western District of Washington made the announcement.
IRS Criminal Investigation investigated the case.
Trial Attorney Regina Jeon of the Tax Division and Assistant U.S. Attorneys Michael Dion and Sean Waite for the Western District of Washington prosecuted the case.
NEW YORK, July 14, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Global Policy Advisors® LLC (GPA), a strategic advisory firm focused on sovereign wealth funds, has released a new SWF 2050™ briefing authored by Salar Ghahramani, titled Federated “Midas” U.S. Sovereign Wealth Fund Launched, with a focus on how recent developments are transforming the United States’ approach to sovereign wealth investing, with significant implications for markets and strategic sectors like rare earths.
The briefing builds upon Ghahramani’s April 2025 SWF 2050™ report, Strategic Expansion in Critical Resources: New Directions for U.S. Sovereign Wealth Fund Investments, which anticipated the growing role of a U.S. sovereign wealth fund in securing critical minerals, reshaping market dynamics, and mitigating supply chain vulnerabilities. In the latest analysis, Ghahramani details how these forecasts are beginning to materialize through concrete transactions and policy frameworks.
Ghahramani, who describes this emerging model as “Midas” to signify the use of sovereign capital to create transformative value across financial markets, supply chains, and strategic industries, writes that transactions like the Department of Defense’s equity stake in MP Materials exemplify this shift. “This is sovereign capital being deployed not merely for financial return, but to actively influence market structure, manage supply chain risks, and catalyze private investment—particularly in strategic industries such as rare earths,” Ghahramani said. “It’s an outside-the-box and highly creative approach, representing a significant departure from traditional sovereign wealth fund models and introducing new considerations for market participants.”
Unlike conventional sovereign wealth funds that operate as single, centralized entities, Ghahramani explains that the U.S. appears to be developing a federated architecture in which multiple Executive Branch agencies act as conduits and pillars of sovereign wealth investing. The Department of Defense, leveraging authorities under the Defense Production Act (DPA), can engage in direct equity stakes and strategic market interventions. The Development Finance Corporation (DFC) is positioned to deploy capital into critical sectors tied to economic and national security objectives. The Department of the Treasury may emerge as a coordinating force, managing financial instruments and structuring sovereign investment strategies. Other agencies, including the Departments of Energy and Commerce, contribute through grants, loan guarantees, and sector-specific initiatives.
In the report, Ghahramani analyzes how this decentralized approach operates within existing statutory frameworks, offering regulatory pathways for sovereign-style investments through instruments such as equity stakes, loans, price floors, and revenue-sharing agreements.
Global Policy Advisors® LLC is a boutique sovereign wealth fund advisory to corporations, boards of directors, and institutional investors—including hedge funds, private equity firms, pension funds, and SWFs. GPA’s expertise is delivering actionable insights, strategy sessions, and executive briefings on the governance, operations, and investment strategies of sovereign wealth funds. The company is recognized for devising the first governance and policy roadmap for a U.S. sovereign wealth fund.
Preliminary economic losses are estimated at US$18–22 billion, reflecting both residential and infrastructure damages.
Understanding the anatomy of this flash flood, and unravelling the complex interplay of meteorological, geomorphological and hydrological forces, forms the foundation for a comprehensive assessment of what happened. This information is vital to help prevent future similar tragedies from occurring.
The July 2025 flood event in central Texas was triggered by a rare and potent meteorological configuration.
Atmospheric anomalies are weather conditions that differ from what’s expected. Analysis of the July 2025 atmospheric anomalies reveals exceptional thermodynamic conditions that directly contributed to the flood’s severity.
The total precipitation over the core impact zone in the Hill Country during July 3 to 6 is estimated to have delivered more than 15 billion cubic metres of water — an extraordinary volume.
This deluge was supported by persistent temperature anomalies ranging from 5.4 to 6.9 degrees Celsius above the mean. Such elevated temperatures increased the atmosphere’s capacity to retain moisture.
At these anomaly levels, the air mass could store 35 to 50 per cent more water vapour than normal.
Simultaneously, specific humidity anomalies reflected a 60 to 70 per cent increase over July baselines for central Texas. Specific humidity, which quantifies the actual mass of water vapour per kilogram of air, provides a more direct metric of latent moisture available for precipitation.
The convergence of these extreme thermodynamic variables created an ideal environment for deep, moisture-laden convection, supporting prolonged intense rainfall.
This map of Texas highlights the core impact zone in Hill Country, where rainfall totals exceeded 430 millimetres, more than four times the regional July average. (H. Bonakdari/GSMaP), CC BY
Terrain impacts
While meteorological extremes initiated the July 2025 flood event, the morphology of the Guadalupe River — its shape, behaviour and flows — was pivotal in transforming heavy rainfall into a catastrophic flash flood.
The upper basin’s physical geography, drainage configuration and valley structure contributed to the rapid concentration and propagation of floodwaters.
Known as “Flash Flood Alley,” the terrain of the upper Guadalupe River basin amplified the July 2025 flood through a combination of steep slopes, shallow soils and karstic geology.
These steep slopes limited infiltration and led to rapid soil saturation under intense rainfall. The predominance of karstic limestone — limestone that has been shaped by water creating plains and sinkholes — further reduced storage below the surface, resulting in minimal delay between rainfall and discharge.
Additionally, narrow valley sections created hydraulic bottlenecks, accelerating flow and increasing flood depth, particularly affecting residential areas and campsites.
A map showing the relationships between steep headwaters, tributary confluences and vulnerable downstream communities. (H. Bonakdari/NASA), CC BY
In contrast, broader valleys allowed for the water to spread laterally; there was still destructive momentum due to upstream forcing. These geomorphic traits, compounded by the extreme atmospheric moisture, created an environment where floodwaters accumulated rapidly and struck with devastating force, especially along confluence zones and densely occupied riverfronts.
Excessive runoff
Prior to the July 2025 event, central Texas had already experienced elevated soil moisture conditions due to above-average rainfall during June and early July. Antecedent moisture indices that measure how wet the ground is before rainfall approached 90 to 100 per cent saturation, meaning that the ground was effectively primed for rapid runoff generation.
The region’s karst terrain — characterized by shallow, rocky soils — offered less than five per cent effective porosity, severely limiting absorption into the ground. Simultaneously, regional groundwater tables had risen underground, further reducing the ground’s capacity to absorb water.
This set the stage for an outsized response to the incoming deluge. When intense rainfall arrived, the ground was quickly and completely saturated, resulting in immediate and rapid surface runoff.
Water flows fast down the slopes and through underground limestone channels, leaving little time for it to soak into the ground. As a result, rivers such as the Guadalupe can swell rapidly, rising several feet in a short time, which causes fast-moving flood impacts in narrow valleys and low-lying communities.
Multiple forces
The July floods in Texas were devastatingly deadly. A confluence of various meteorological and topographical factors were to blame.
An overheated atmosphere, saturated with water vapour, unleashed record-breaking rainfall. The unique terrain of Texas Hill Country funnelled that rain swiftly into the river system, while the region’s hydrology, already primed by previous storms, converted nearly all of it into runoff.
By understanding how these atmospheric, geographic and hydrological elements combined, we can better anticipate future risks in “Flash Flood Alley” and improve early warning systems to save lives.
Hossein Bonakdari 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 – Canada – By Melise Panetta, Lecturer of Marketing in the Lazaridis School of Business and Economics, Wilfrid Laurier University
For years, the expression “the robot took my job” has brought to mind visions of machines replacing workers on factory floors. But Gen Z is facing a new challenge: the loss of internships and other entry-level positions to AI.
Internships and junior roles have historically provided a predictable ladder into the workforce by providing new workers with the experience and skills needed for long-term career development.
Entry-level roles traditionally involve low-complexity, high-frequency tasks such as data entry, scheduling or drafting reports — tasks that generative AI can do significantly cheaper and faster than a human. This almost certainly means fewer traditional bottom rungs on the career ladder.
We are already seeing the impact of this: entry-level jobs are becoming scarcer, with candidates competing against a 14 per cent hike in applications per role, according to LinkedIn.
No one’s 20s and 30s look the same. You might be saving for a mortgage or just struggling to pay rent. You could be swiping dating apps, or trying to understand childcare. No matter your current challenges, our Quarter Life series has articles to share in the group chat, or just to remind you that you’re not alone.
Meanwhile, nearly two-thirds of executives say they are willing to use AI tools to drive up productivity at the expense of losing staff. Conversely, only one in three executives are willing to keep their staff at the expense of higher expected productivity.
It is also projected that declines in traditional entry-level or junior roles in sectors such as food services, customer service, sales and office support work could account for nearly 84 per cent of the occupational shifts expected by 2030.
Talent and entry-level role shortages in the future
Data on AI and the future of work also points to another potential problem: a talent shortage for certain skill sets. A 2024 report from Microsoft and LinkedIn found that leaders are concerned with shortages in areas such as cybersecurity, engineering and creative design.
Though this data might appear contradictory, it signals that in addition to fewer entry level positions being available, changes to job roles and skill sets are also on the horizon.
As a result, competition for entry-level roles is expected to increase, with greater value put on candidates who can use AI tools to improve their productivity and effectiveness.
Rather than simply eliminating jobs, many roles are evolving to require new capabilities. There is also growing demand for specialized talent where AI cannot yet fully augment human abilities.
AI literacy is the new entry requirement
As AI becomes more prevalent in the workforce, “entry-level” roles are no longer just about completing basic tasks, but about knowing how to work effectively with new technologies, including AI.
Employers are beginning to place immense value on AI literacy. Two-thirds of managers say they wouldn’t hire someone without AI skills and 71 per cent say they would prefer a less experienced candidate with AI skills over a more experienced one without them.
With fewer entry-level positions available, young workers will need to figure out how to stand out in a competitive job market. But despite these challenges, Gen Z may also be the best-positioned to adapt to these changes.
As digital natives, many Gen Z are already integrating AI tools into their work. A report from LinkedIn and Microsoft found 85 per cent are bringing AI tools like ChatGPT or Copilot into the workplace, indicating they are both comfortable and eager to make use of this technology.
This trend mirrors broader trends across the workforce. One report found 76 per cent of professionals believe they need AI-related skills to remain competitive. That same Microsoft and LinkedIn report found there has been a 160 per cent surge in learning courses for AI literacy.
This growing emphasis on AI skills is part of a wider shift toward “upskilling” — the process of enhancing skill sets to adapt to the changing conditions of the job market. Today, upskilling means leaning how to use AI to enhance, accelerate and strengthen your performance in the workplace.
A new kind of entry-level job
Since AI literacy is becoming a core career skill, being able to present yourself as a candidate with AI skills is important for standing out in a crowded entry-level job market. This includes knowing how to use AI tools, evaluate their outputs critically and apply them in a workplace context. It also means learning how to present AI skills on a resume and in interviews.
Employers also have a role to play in all this. If they want to attract and retain employees, they need to redesign entry-level roles. Instead of eliminating entry-level roles, they should refocus on higher-value activities that require critical thinking or creativity. These are the areas where humans outperform machines, and where AI can act as a support rather than a replacement.
The future of work isn’t about humans being replaced by robots, but about learning how to use the technology to enhance skills and creating new entry points into the professional world.
Melise Panetta 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.
In the wake of recent strikes by Israel and the United States on Iranian cities, military sites and nuclear facilities, a troubling paradox has emerged: actions intended to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons may actually be accelerating its pursuit of them and encouraging other countries to follow suit.
On June 13, Israel launched Operation Rising Lion, a military campaign aimed at dismantling Iran’s nuclear program. The operation began with a series of co-ordinated strikes targeting Iran’s top nuclear scientists, senior military officials and key members of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps.
Despite establishing air dominance, Israel did not possess the capability to destroy Iran’s most heavily fortified nuclear facilities — especially the Fordow enrichment site, which is buried deep within a mountain.
On June 21, the U.S. carried out major airstrikes targeting Iran’s critical nuclear sites at Fordow, Natanz and Isfahan. Using B-2 stealth bombers equipped with bunker-busting bombs, the operation aimed to cripple Iran’s deeply fortified nuclear infrastructure.
Three days later, Iran and Israel agreed to a ceasefire, bringing the 12-day conflict to an end. While both sides declared aspects of the campaign successful, the war marked a dangerous escalation in regional tensions and raised renewed concerns over the future of nuclear nonproliferation and security in the Middle East.
History of nuclear negotiations
The U.S. has consistently asserted that Iran must never be allowed to acquire nuclear weapons. In 2006, Iran was subjected to international sanctions after the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) reported the government was not in compliance with its nuclear energy obligations.
Under former president Barack Obama, the U.S. government pursued a diplomatic path, culminating in the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA). Under the deal, Iran agreed to limit uranium enrichment to 3.67 per cent and allow intrusive IAEA inspections. In exchange, it received relief from some international sanctions.
The Biden administration sought to revive the JCPOA, but Iran demanded binding guarantees that future U.S. governments would not again withdraw — an assurance Biden could not provide.
In the aftermath, Iran significantly escalated its nuclear activities. According to IAEA reports, Iran has more than 400 kilograms of enriched uranium to 60 per cent — an amount that, if further refined to 90 per cent, could be sufficient to produce 10 to 12 nuclear weapons.
The second Trump administration resumed negotiations for a new nuclear deal aimed at imposing stronger constraints on Iran’s nuclear program.
Although five rounds of negotiations were held, a sixth round scheduled for June 15 was disrupted when Israel conducted a military strike on Iran two days earlier. The attack escalated tensions and derailed the diplomatic process, further complicating the possibility of reaching a renewed agreement.
Although it maintains ambiguity about its nuclear program, Israel is seen to be the only country in the Middle East to possess nuclear weapons. It has taken military action to prevent other countries in the region from developing nuclear programs.
The Israeli government may have calculated that airstrikes could also effectively work against Iran. However, the difference is that Iran’s nuclear program is far more advanced than Syria or Iraq’s were. While the recent strikes may have set the program back by two years, Iran retains the knowledge and capacity to rebuild.
Ironically, the Israeli and U.S. strikes, which aimed to eliminate Iran’s nuclear capabilities, may instead encourage Iranian officials to accelerate their efforts. Following the war, Iran ended all co-operation with the IAEA, expelling inspectors and cutting off access to its nuclear sites. Without IAEA personnel on the ground, it has become extremely difficult to monitor or verify the scope of Iran’s nuclear activities.
Bombing Iran’s nuclear facilities each time it advances its nuclear program is not a sustainable strategy. Israel had hoped that a decisive military strike would trigger widespread unrest and potentially lead to the Iranian government’s collapse.
Instead, the opposite occurred: the Iranian public rallied around the flag, perceiving the attack as a blatant violation of national sovereignty. As a result, the government strengthened its domestic legitimacy and further suppressed political opposition.
For now, Iranian officials have maintained that they do not intend to develop a nuclear weapon. However, the Iranian parliament is preparing legislation to withdraw from the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, of which Iran is currently a signatory.
Exiting the treaty would remove a major legal and diplomatic constraint on Iran’s pursuit of nuclear weapons. Should Iran decide to go down that path, it would likely trigger a nuclear arms race in the region.
Saudi Arabia has indicated that if Iran builds a nuclear weapon, it will seek to do the same.
The most effective way to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons is through sustained diplomacy and a renewed nuclear agreement. A credible deal that includes robust verification mechanisms and IAEA inspections and sanctions relief remains the most viable solution.
Military strikes, by contrast, tend to backfire, and will likely reinforce the belief in Iran — and elsewhere — that only a nuclear deterrent can shield them from external threats.
Saira Bano 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 wellbeing of children is under the spotlight in the UK, after a 2025 report from Unicef ranked the UK at 21 out of 36 wealthy countries on child wellbeing. With growing concerns about mental health, rising screen time, and fewer chances to play – as well as the well-known links between physical activity and better mood – one solution seems obvious. Get kids moving more.
But our new research suggests that it’s not just about more activity. It’s about better experiences. Feeling safe, capable and free to choose matters is more important for children than just the number of minutes they spend running around.
Our findings from a national study of over 16,000 children aged seven to 11 across Wales found that while physical activity is clearly important, its benefits for mental health were more connected to how children felt while moving than to how much they moved.
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.
We found that children who thought that they had control over how they were active, felt confident taking part in physical activity and believed they were good at it scored higher on wellbeing scales. These factors – autonomy, confidence and competence – were stronger predictors of wellbeing than more traditional measures like deprivation (normally we’d expect deprivation to positively or negatively affect wellbeing) or even total time spent being active.
We also found that children who felt safe where they lived, no matter how wealthy or deprived the area, were more likely to feel happy and well.
Yet too often, their chances to play and move are limited. Sometimes it’s because adults worry about safety, and so don’t permit children to roam or play in the potentially risky ways they might prefer. Other times, it’s because the places around them just aren’t built with children in mind.
Rethinking what we tell children
Interestingly, we found that knowledge of why activity is good for you – often taught in schools or health campaigns – was associated with lower wellbeing. This suggests that top-down, adult-led messaging that focuses on why physical activity leads to physical fitness or maintaining a healthy weight might be missing the mark.
For some children, it could even feel like pressure. Messaging from schools and organisations may be harmful if they focus on outcomes rather than experience.
The feeling of control or choice was strongly associated with better mental health and fewer behavioural issues. These findings echo what young people have previously told us: they want more opportunities to play, to choose how they move, and to enjoy being active without pressure.
Being able to choose how they are active matters for children’s wellbeing. chomplearn/Shutterstock
That’s not to say movement doesn’t matter. Children who moved more and sat less generally felt better about themselves. Less sedentary time was consistently associated with better wellbeing and lower emotional and behavioural difficulties.
But again, it wasn’t just the behaviour — it was the feeling behind it that mattered. Our analysis showed that the most significant predictor of low emotional difficulties was feeling safe. For behavioural difficulties it is feelings of autonomy and competence that played a key role.
We also found that girls were more likely to report emotional difficulties (trouble controlling emotions or acting on feelings), while boys were more likely to experience behavioural ones (trouble controlling behaviour). This suggests a gendered difference in how wellbeing challenges show up.
This tells us that supporting wellbeing isn’t a one-size-fits-all solution. The more we can listen to and work with children to shape activity around their needs, the more likely we are to reach those who might otherwise miss out.
How we move matters
For schools and youth organisations, this means rethinking how physical activity is promoted. Rather than more sports, more drills and more rules, children need inclusive, safe spaces where they feel confident to participate and free to choose.
A simple solution to this could include longer breaks between lessons and more free time to play, or varied activities that cater to different interests and skill levels.
It also means listening to what children say they need. In our previous research during the pandemic, children consistently asked for more time, safer spaces and permission to be active in ways that feel good to them.
If we want to support children’s wellbeing, we must shift from performance to participation. It’s not just about how fast they can run or how long they can play. It’s about whether they feel safe, capable, and in control.
Michaela James receives funding from ADR Wales.
Mayara Silveira Bianchim receives funding from Cystic Fibrosis Trust.
At the beginning of 2025, panic about fraud and human trafficking erupted on Chinese social media. It started when a Chinese actor called Wang Xing was tricked into travelling to Thailand for an audition, where he was abducted by criminals and taken to a scam centre in Myanmar.
Wang was reported missing and, within three days, the Thai police had located and returned him to Thailand. Details of the operation were not revealed, leading to speculation that withholding more information was part of a deal that led to Wang’s release.
Inside the compound, Wang’s head was shaved and he told the police he was forced to undergo the first phase of training on how to carry out scams.
One such scam is known as “pig butchering”. This type of scam began attracting attention in China around 2019, and is typically carried out by Chinese organised crime groups. Scammers establish fake romantic and trusting relationships with victims before luring them into fraudulent investments or other financial traps.
Pig-butchering scammers have stolen billions of dollars from victims worldwide. In one notable example from 2023, a banker from Kansas in the US called Shan Hanes embezzled US$47 million (£34.6 million) from his bank to cover his losses after falling victim to a pig butchering scam. Hanes was subsequently sentenced to more than 24 years in prison. So, what do we know about how pig butchering scams work?
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.
A pig butchering scam consists of three stages: hunting, raising and killing. These stages correspond to scammers finding victims online, talking with them to build trust and then getting them to invest large amounts of money in fraudulent schemes.
There are some similarities between a pig butchering scam and a traditional romance scam. Scammers may, as in a traditional scam, approach their victims by posing as a possible romantic partner on a dating app or a friend on social media.
But the key difference lies in how the scam is executed. In a traditional romance scam, trust is based on the victim’s desire to maintain a romantic relationship with the scammer. Because of this, traditional romance scams can sometimes last for years.
Pig butchering scams, in comparison, generally take place over a shorter time frame. Rather than focusing on extracting money solely through emotional manipulation, they lean heavily on the victim’s desire to make money together with the scammer. They often involve just a few months of talking with the victim.
The scammers present themselves as financially successful and confident people with broad networks and attractive investment opportunities. Once a victim makes a small initial investment, scammers rapidly escalate the process and push them into making much larger financial commitments.
In one example from 2024, a woman in the US state of Connecticut called Jacqueline Crenshaw met a man on an online dating site. He was posing as a widower with two children and frequently spoke with Crenshaw over the phone. Within two months, they began discussing investing in cryptocurrency.
Crenshaw sent him US$40,000 (£29,500) initially and received screenshots from him showing supposedly huge profits from the cryptocurrency investment. The scammer soon encouraged Crenshaw to invest much more, which ultimately led to her losing nearly US$1 million (£738,000).
Organised crime groups
Pig butchering scams are typically run by highly organised criminal groups. These groups have management teams, provide training to new recruits and often hire people as models who occasionally interact with victims.
The Chinese government has taken several steps to combat fraud in recent years. It enacted the Anti-Telecom Fraud Law in 2022, which was designed specifically to prevent and punish the use of telecommunications and internet technologies to defraud individuals and organisations. It was introduced in response to the growing prevalence of pig butchering scams in China.
The Chinese Ministry of Public Security has also developed a mobile application called the National Anti-Fraud Center App. The app allows the public to report scams and access real-time risk alerts related to fraud. Alongside the work of other government departments, it has helped intercept 4.7 billion scam calls and 3.4 billion fraudulent text messages since the beginning of 2024.
The crackdown on fraud within China has made it more difficult for criminal groups to operate domestically, prompting many to relocate their bases abroad. South-east Asian countries – particularly Cambodia, Laos and Myanmar – have become a preferred destination for such groups.
Regions of northern Myanmar, such as Kokang and Wa State, have become breeding grounds for organised fraud over the past few years. Chinese is widely spoken in both of these areas and local customs closely resemble those in China.
Organised fraud has evolved into a key pillar of the local economy in certain parts of south-east Asia. The profits generated from online scams are estimated to amount to 40% of the combined GDP of Cambodia, Laos and Myanmar.
Criminal leaders have established tightly controlled compounds that serve as hubs for online scams, with their primary activities centred on pig butchering. These compounds are frequently presented as “technology parks”, which helps recruit workers. However, many people are forced to work in the scam centres.
Pig butchering scams can inflict severe financial harm on victims. But are also closely tied to violent crime, human trafficking and other forms of organised criminal activity. They pose a growing threat to regional and global security.
Bing Han 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.
When pop star Katy Perry and five other women made a much-publicised trip to the edge of space earlier this year, they faced sharp criticism across both social and traditionalmedia, with sceptics questioning multiple aspects of the mission.
Much of the backlash centred on the emphasis the crew – which included broadcaster Gayle King and Jeff Bezos’s now-wife, journalist Lauren Sánchez – placed on glamour. Detractors saw their uniforms as at odds with the traditional image of astronauts as explorers, scientific pioneers and envoys of humankind venturing into space.
The flight suits were designed by New York fashion house Monse Maison’s co-founders, Fernando Garcia and Laura Kim. They also created Sánchez’s 2024 Met Gala look.
The celebrity crew were first revealed in a photo shared by Blue Origin on April 12, two days before the launch. The unveiling was followed by a series of pre-flight interviews that touched on topics such as makeup, lash extensions and hair styling.
In one such segment, Perry quipped that the crew “put ass in astronaut”. It’s the type of comment that, while playful, reinforced the criticism that the flight prioritised spectacle over substance.
Having previously conducted research on governance of space suit design and astronaut safety, I think much of the backlash targeting the crew’s emphasis on glamour is misplaced. Fashion and style has long played a role in space exploration, a defining feature of both science fiction and real-world missions.
The all-women crew of Blue Origin, in their own way, carried forward this tradition, reinforcing the enduring connection between style symbolism, and space travel.
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.
Space-faring nations spend millions getting both public and private companies to design suits for intravehicular activity (IVA suits) and extravehicular activities (EVA suits). The priority is not just functionality and safety, but also creating impressive designs.
High fashion house Prada is currently collaborating with Axiom Inc. to design suits for the forthcoming Artemis Mission, a lunar exploration mission led by Nasa. Another Nasa next-generation spacesuit features an exterior cover designed by Esther M. Marquis, who was enlisted for the project after showcasing her visionary spacesuit designs in For All Mankind, an Apple TV Sci-Fi series.
The European Space Agency (ESA), meanwhile, has contracted Maison Pierre Cardin to design the uniforms for training in its new lunar mission simulation facility, Luna, in Germany.
These and many other similar collaborations represent a continuation of the longstanding interplay between art, fashion and space technology. Science fiction books and movies have both influenced and been influenced by advancements developed for space travel.
Modern space fashion
Photos and videos from inside the International Space Station (ISS) reveal that their intravehicular activity (IVA) suits are designed for functionality and comfort rather than style.
It’s a sensible approach, as most crew stay there for extended periods to conduct scientific experiments. In contrast, two of the billionaires most associated with space tourism – Jeff Bezos and Richard Branson – take a different approach. In competing to promote their emerging space tourism ventures, their own trips to space have been carefully curated – with fashion playing a key role.
From launch to landing, Bezos’ own suborbital space travel with Blue Origin in 2021 lasted 11 minutes, while Branson’s travel in Virgin Galactic’s VSS Unity lasted approximately 90 minutes, with four minutes of experience of weightlessness. However, they ensured that their “look” as they walked to their spacecraft would remain entrenched in our memories.
Jimmy Fallon jokes about Bezos’s cowboy hat.
Branson entrusted sports brand Under Armour to make a statement with a dark blue jumpsuit. Nine days later, Bezos appeared on the flight platform sporting a cowboy hat with his light blue flight suit.
Branson’s crew won more fashion points with their sleek and streamlined suits – and he flew before Bezos – beating Blue Origin’s flight by nine days. Yet Bezos and his crew travelled to a higher altitude.
As of the date of this article, Blue Origin has flown 58 people into space, whereas Virgin Galactic have flown 61 passengers, including crew. Space suits are an integral part of the experience. No less than a picture-perfect design will be expected for the high price tag.
Elon Musk’s SpaceX, is the foremost private space enterprise of our time and arguably the one with the most political influence – although the effects of the recent fallout between SpaceX founder Elon Musk and the US president, Donald Trump, on the company remain uncertain.
SpaceX has also stepped up its design efforts before the first-ever commercial astronaut spacewalk during the Polaris Dawn spaceflight, it unveiled its new EVA suit, dubbed the “space tuxedo”.
SpaceX’s ‘space tuxedo’ suit reveal.
During spacewalks, EVA suits are essential for keeping humans alive, making them a vital piece of wearable technology. The space tux was designed by Hollywood costume designer, Jose Fernandez, who also designed the suits for Iron Man and Captain America (an interesting twist given the film version of Iron Man’s alter ego, Tony Stark was reportedly partly inspired by Musk).
Musk reportedly demanded both IVA and EVA suits to look “badass” while remaining practical. The mission was a success, as the four-member civilian team, led by billionaire Jared Isaacman, travelled further into space than any humans since the Apollo Missions to the moon.
As we continue to explore the cosmos, fashion will continue to play a role in how we present ourselves to the universe. Whether for scientific missions or private ventures, how we dress for space will reflect our identity and aspirations as a species. This phenomenon did not begin with these glamorous star-studded women embarking on space ventures in their signature bold styles, nor will it end with the scrutiny and negative publicity they have faced.
Berna Akcali Gur 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.
More than 180 plants were stolen from a well-loved public park in Nottingham called Arboretum in May 2025. This incident took place just days after volunteers had re-planted flowers and shrubs to repair damage from a previous theft in March. In April 2025, the nearby Forest Recreation Ground community garden was also targeted – roses and crops grown by volunteers were stolen, even a pond went missing.
Plant theft may seem trivial, but environmental and wildlife crime tend to be overlooked. This is precisely one of the reasons why it is on the rise. Research suggests an annual growth rate in environmental crime of 5%-7%, making it the third largest criminal sector in the world.
Globally, environmental crime has been valued at US$70-213 billion (£52-158 billion) annually. As with most crime, its true scale is difficult to estimate as it remains hidden. This is even more true for environmental crime that goes undetected.
Plant thefts in Nottingham where I am based are small in comparison, but they tell the same story of lucrative illicit opportunities for criminals where law enforcement and potential sanctions are low. It’s most likely that people steal local plants to sell on for profit.
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.
Another reason for overlooking this growing trend in wildlife crime is that perpetrators, as well as much of society, may feel that this is a “victimless crime”. Where plants, animals, watercourses or soil are “the victim”, people don’t feel as strongly because our ethics and value systems generally prioritise fellow humans and do not recognise non-humans as victims.
People may be more likely to care about mammals such as elephants targeted in illegal ivory trade, but environmental crime permeates every community in the UK, as the recent Nottingham cases indicate.
Stolen benefits
As a researcher in environmental sociology, I believe wildlife crime and environmental damage should gain higher priority in terms of public attention, law enforcement and potential sanctions. Not only because of the intrinsic value that non-human nature has in its own right, but because of the value nature brings to us humans.
Parks and green spaces known as “green infrastructure” are central to our wellbeing in cities. They bring environmental and social benefits in terms of air quality, urban heat island effect, surface flooding, carbon storage, biodiversity and health.
After the COVID pandemic, the importance of accessing quality green spaces for our mental and physical wellbeing became even more apparent. Visits to parks can reduce loneliness and anxiety, as well as foster a sense of belonging and community.
This has the potential to benefit the public purse too. Nottingham is currently involved in a national green social prescribing test and learn programme to demonstrate the benefits of nature-based activity.
Public parks are often also significant in terms of cultural heritage. This is not a new discovery. Historically, public parks were introduced in cities to improve living conditions, quality of life and as educational resources. The Arboretum – the city centre park recently targeted by thieves – was the first such public park to open in Nottingham in 1845.
When valued green spaces are the victim of crime, this is not a mere aesthetic problem. Wider social and environmental harms are inflicted upon communities and nature that depend on open green spaces to thrive.
This matters in cities like Nottingham that suffer from high levels of deprivation and poor health outcomes. My own research has shown that while Nottingham is often celebrated for leadership in green initiatives, it suffers from deep-seated social inequality and deprivation that are long-term challenges.
Social inequality is associated with crime and disorder in urban areas that creates a vicious cycle when the crimes target community assets such as public parks. It is beyond doubt that public parks being ransacked will negatively impact the quality of life in Nottingham.
It is likely that these crimes get dismissed as a minor nuisance because “only plants” were stolen, but this attitude serves to mask the broader trend of growing environmental crime and the damage this brings to communities. Unfortunately, this will further contribute to the likelihood of such crimes spreading in future.
Don’t have time to read about climate change as much as you’d like?
Jenni Cauvain 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.
For generations, chicken soup has been a go-to remedy for people feeling under the weather. It holds a cherished place in many cultures as a comforting treatment for colds and flu. But is there any real science behind the idea that soup can help us recover from respiratory infections?
Alongside colleagues, I conducted a systematic review to explore this question, which examined the scientific evidence on the role of soup in managing acute respiratory tract infections, such as the common cold, influenza and COVID-19.
Out of more than 10,000 records, we identified four high-quality studies involving 342 participants. These studies tested a variety of soups, including traditional chicken broth, barley soup and herbal vegetable blends. While still early-stage, the evidence was promising.
Get your news from actual experts, straight to your inbox.Sign up to our daily newsletter to receive all The Conversation UK’s latest coverage of news and research, from politics and business to the arts and sciences.
One study found that people who ate soup recovered up to 2.5 days faster than those who didn’t. Symptoms such as nasal congestion, sore throat and fatigue were milder. Some participants also showed reduced levels of inflammation-related markers: substances in the blood that rise when the immune system is fighting an infection.
Specifically, levels of IL-6 and TNF-α – two proteins that help trigger inflammation – were lower in those who consumed soup. This suggests that soup may help calm an overactive immune response, potentially making symptoms less severe and recovery more comfortable.
However, none of the studies examined how consuming soup influenced everyday outcomes of acute respiratory tract infections, such as whether people took fewer days off work or were less likely to end up in hospital. That’s a major gap in the evidence, and one that future research needs to address.
There’s also a strong cultural and behavioural aspect to food-based self-care: when people use food not just for nourishment, but as an intentional part of managing illness and promoting recovery.
In many households, food becomes medicine not only because of its ingredients, but because it symbolises care, routine and reassurance.
My previous research found that parents, in particular often turn to traditional remedies, like soup, as a first line of defence when illness strikes, often well before seeking professional medical advice.
This reflects a growing interest in home remedies and the importance of culturally familiar treatments: remedies that feel safe, trusted and emotionally resonant because they’re part of a person’s upbringing or community norms. These kinds of treatments can increase confidence and comfort when self-managing illness at home.
They help people manage mild illness, reduce unnecessary antibiotic use and avoid placing additional strain on GPs or emergency departments for minor ailments that can be safely treated at home. Even a simple phone message about the common cold – “Most common colds get better in a few days and don’t need treatment from your GP” – has been shown to reduce appointment demand by 21%, highlighting how low-cost, home-based care could ease pressure across the system.
The Local Government Association (LGA) reports that GPs handle approximately 57 million cases of minor conditions such as coughs and colds annually, costing the NHS over £2 billion a year. It argues that educating people about effective self-care could help save GPs an hour a day on average.
Soup fits the bill
So chicken soup is easy to prepare, affordable, safe for most people and widely recognised as a comforting, familiar home remedy for minor illness.
Still, our review highlighted a clear need for more research. Future studies could examine standardised soup recipes and investigate whether particular combinations of nutrients or herbs work best: does chicken soup have the same effect as barley broth or vegetable potage? Is there a difference if it’s homemade versus canned?
Just as importantly, future research needs to measure meaningful outcomes: how quickly people return to work or school, how well they sleep during illness, how they rate their comfort and energy levels, for example.
Soup isn’t a replacement for medicine. But alongside rest, fluids and paracetamol, it might offer a simple way to ease symptoms and help people feel better.
Sandra Lucas 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.
NIST Hurricane Maria Program | Technical Update (July 2025)
The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) has released a video update and press release on its study of Hurricane Maria’s impacts on Puerto Rico.
Hurricane Maria, which struck Puerto Rico on Sept. 20, 2017, was one of the most devastating and costly hurricanes in U.S. history. The storm caused nearly 3,000 deaths and more than $90 billion in damages. While nature cannot be controlled, communities can reduce the impacts of natural hazards by making their buildings and infrastructure more resilient, upgrading emergency preparedness plans for critical facilities, and strengthening evacuation and communication protocols.
In 2018, the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) launched an investigation into Hurricane Maria’s impacts to learn what went wrong and to take steps to make Americans safer from future hurricanes.
“Our goal is to learn from that event to recommend improvements to building codes, standards and practices that will make communities more resilient to hurricanes and other hazards, not just in Puerto Rico but across the United States,” said NIST’s lead Hurricane Maria investigator Joseph Main.
The investigation has been an enormous undertaking. NIST experts have conducted hundreds of surveys and interviews, analyzed dozens of buildings, conducted laboratory experiments, and more. As NIST’s National Construction Safety Team nears the end of its investigation, it has released a video update that highlights significant milestones and preliminary findings.
What Made Hurricane Maria So Dangerous?
Hurricane Maria set off a cascade of building and infrastructure failures across Puerto Rico that had lasting impacts on society, including health care, business and education. The storm itself was a Category 4 hurricane, with peak gusts as high as 140 mph over flat terrain, strong enough to topple trees and lift roofs off houses. The wind was even stronger along the ridges of hills and mountains, where power lines and cellphone towers were located. Those lines and towers were damaged or destroyed, knocking out electric, phone and internet service for almost the entire island.
The steep mountains of Puerto Rico also intensified the rainfall, resulting in extensive flooding and more than 40,000 landslides. This destroyed roads and bridges, blocking routes to hospitals and shelters for those who badly needed them. The hospitals and shelters themselves were heavily damaged by the storm, lifesaving medical equipment was destroyed, and parts of the buildings became uninhabitable. Each of these impacts intensified others. For example, the loss of electricity made it more difficult to move patients and supplies within some hospitals because elevators stopped working.
Why NIST?
NIST has a long history of studying disasters and building failures. Under the National Construction Safety Team (NCST) Act, NIST is authorized to establish teams “to assess building performance and emergency response and evacuation procedures in the wake of any building failure that has resulted in substantial loss of life or that posed significant potential of substantial loss of life.”
Additionally, the National Windstorm Impact Reduction Act gives NIST responsibility for “carrying out research and development to improve model building codes, voluntary standards, and best practices for the design, construction, and retrofit of buildings, structures, and lifelines” with the purpose of achieving “measurable reductions in the losses of life and property from windstorms.”
Previous NIST investigations have led to building code improvements for tornadoes and fires that can save lives in communities across the country.
Responding to Hurricane Maria, NIST created a team of experts in structural and civil engineering, public health, epidemiology, medicine, anthropology, communications, sociology and economics. These experts came from NIST, other federal agencies and universities, including outside experts based in Puerto Rico.
“Having a local presence has been critical in carrying out this work, especially during the pandemic,” said Maria Dillard, investigation associate lead.
The Investigation So Far
The investigation is wide-ranging and has included reconnaissance of the island, creation of a detailed map of wind speeds during the hurricane, long-term measurements of wind speeds at cell towers, and wind tunnel tests. The NIST team conducted hundreds of interviews with emergency communicators; family members of the deceased; hospital, school and shelter staff members; shipping and transportation sector representatives; infrastructure officials; and others impacted by the storm. They also surveyed more than 1,500 households, 450 businesses, 300 schools and 16 hospitals for the project.
Understanding the impact on hospitals and emergency shelters was a high priority for the investigators, who conducted detailed evaluations of five hospitals and five shelter facilities.
This information went into computer models to understand how the hurricane and the long recovery process unfolded.
During the course of the investigation, Puerto Rico was buffeted by more disasters, including a series of earthquakes that started in 2019, the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020, Hurricane Fiona in 2022, and Tropical Storm Ernesto in 2024. These events made the recovery from Hurricane Maria more difficult and presented additional challenges for the investigation.
Importance of NIST’s Hurricane María Investigation
Preliminary Findings
The complete report will not be released until 2026, so these findings may change before the report is finalized. However, in the video Main and Dillard share the following major preliminary findings, which they anticipate will be included in the final version.
While peak wind speeds over flat terrain reached as high as 140 mph (225 kmh), those winds were accelerated to over 200 mph (322 kmh) in some areas by the shape of steep hills and mountains. The mountains also intensified the rainfall. The most extreme rainfall reached 30 inches (76 centimeters) in some areas.
A major challenge for the investigation was that many weather-measuring devices were damaged during the storm. Only three out of 22 weather stations were fully functional throughout the hurricane. A Doppler weather radar site was destroyed by high winds, and the majority of rain gauges failed during the storm.
Surveys with family members of those who died in the two weeks following the hurricane showed that only about one-tenth of the deaths occurred on the day of landfall and that only a small fraction of the deaths were caused by storm-related injuries. Reduced access to health care was found to be a significant factor in the deaths that occurred. The most common causes of death were noncommunicable medical conditions such as cardiovascular disease, diabetes and kidney disease, as those who suffered from these conditions had difficulty obtaining the medical care they needed.
Landslides, collapsed bridges and fallen trees blocking roads kept people from getting help. Such road disruptions were estimated to have cut off hospital access for just over half of the population immediately following the hurricane. Many patients sought medical care at multiple places before receiving treatment. After arriving at hospitals, patients encountered additional disruptions in care from hospital buildings that were damaged, flooded and without electrical power.
The investigation also found that 95.3% of schools lost power, for an average of over 100 days. Lack of potable water was also an issue for school recovery. One school emphasized that students needed to bring their own water because the school’s water was not safe to drink.
Success Stories
One important preliminary finding from the study is that emergency preparations work. Businesses, schools and hospitals that prepared before Hurricane Maria were able to resume operations more quickly afterward. Preparations included preestablished emergency plans, designated risk mitigation funds, and backup power sources.
Preliminary findings also showed that financial assistance was effective. Statistically, businesses, schools and hospitals that received financial assistance were able to recover more quickly than those that did not.
Anticipated Recommendations
Through the National Construction Safety Team (NCST) Act, NIST has a responsibility to use investigation findings to create recommendations and help implement them.
Recommendations from the Hurricane Maria Program are anticipated to result in:
New building standards to account for faster winds caused by mountains and hills.
New standards for storm shelters and refuge areas.
Measures that will help hospitals and other critical facilities maintain services during and after hurricanes, such as requiring standby generators for elevators and air-conditioning.
Guidance on recording damage to communications systems in a way that will prioritize recovery.
More robust tools for measuring wind, rainfall and flooding.
New standards for creating death certificates during an emergency.
These changes will be important for hurricane-prone regions throughout the U.S., not just Puerto Rico. Hurricane Helene, which carved a destructive path from Florida through North Carolina in 2024, shared many similarities with Hurricane Maria, such as significant rainfall in mountainous areas that led to flooding and landslides; neighborhoods and communities being cut off from road access; massive infrastructure failure; and at least one hospital requiring evacuation.
By applying the lessons of Hurricane Maria, this investigation can help the increasing number of communities that are experiencing intense hurricanes prepare for, respond to, and recover from them.
Clearly angered by the intensification of Russia’s air campaign against Ukraine, Donald Trump has pivoted from the suspension of US military assistance to Ukraine to promising its resumption. Russia’s strikes on major cities killed more civilians in June than have died in any single previous month, according to UN figures.
Over the past two weeks, the US president has made several disparaging comments about his relationship with Vladimir Putin, including on July 13 that the Russian president “talks nice and then he bombs everybody in the evening”.
Not only will the US resume delivery of long-promised Patriot air defence missiles, Trump is now also reported to be considering a whole new plan to arm Ukraine, including with offensive capabilities. And he has talked about imposing new sanctions on Putin’s regime.
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.
This is the background against which the eighth Ukraine Recovery Conference took place in Rome on July 10 and 11. The event, attended by many western leaders and senior business executives, was an important reminder that while the war against Ukraine will be decided on the battlefield, peace will only be won as the result of rebuilding Ukraine’s economy and society.
Ending the war anytime soon and on terms favourable to Kyiv will require an enormous effort by Ukrainians and their European allies. But the country’s recovery afterwards will be no less challenging.
According to the World Bank’s latest assessment, at the end of 2024 Ukraine’s recovery needs over the next decade stood at US$524 billion (£388 billion). And with every month the war continues, these needs are increasing. Ukraine’s three hardest-hit sectors are housing, transport and energy infrastructure, which between them account for around 60% of all damage.
At the same time, the International Monetary Fund (IMF) provided a relatively positive assessment of Ukraine’s overall economic situation at the end of June, forecasting growth of between 2% and 3% for 2025 – likely to grow to over 4% in 2026 and 2027. But the IMF also cautioned that this trajectory – and the country’s macroeconomic stability more generally – will remain heavily dependent on external support.
Taking into account a new €2.3 billion package from the EU, consisting of €1.8 billion of loan guarantees and €580 million of grants, the cumulative pledge of over €10 billion (£8.7 billion) made by countries attending the Ukraine recovery conference is both encouraging and sobering.
It is encouraging in the sense that Ukraine’s international partners remain committed to the country’s social and economic needs, not merely its ability to resist Russia on the battlefield.
But it is also sobering that even these eye-watering sums of public money are still only a fraction of Ukraine’s needs. Even if the EU manages to mobilise its overall target of €40 billion for Ukraine’s recovery, by attracting additional contributions from other donors and the private sector, this would be less than 8% of Ukraine’s projected recovery needs as of the end of 2024.
As the war continues and more of the (diminishing) public funding is directed towards defence expenditure by Kyiv’s western partners, this gap is likely to grow.
Overcoming the trauma of war
Money is not the only challenge for Ukraine recovery efforts. Rebuilding the country is not simply about undoing the physical damage.
The social impact of Russia’s aggression is hard to overstate. Ukraine has been deeply traumatised as a society since the beginning of Russia’s full-scale invasion in February 2022.
Generally reliable Ukrainian casualty counts – some 12,000 civilians and 43,000 troops killed since February 2022 – are still likely to underestimate the true number of people who have died as a direct consequence of the Russian aggression. And each of these will have left behind family members struggling to cope with their loss. In addition, there are hundreds of thousands of war veterans.
Even before the full-scale invasion of Ukraine, there were nearly half a million veterans from the “frozen” conflict that followed Russia’s annexation of Crimea and incursion into eastern Ukraine. By the end of 2024, this number had more than doubled to around 1 million. Most of them have complex social, economic, medical and psychological needs that will have to be considered as part of a society-wide recovery effort.
Returning refugees
According to data from the UN refugee agency (UNHCR), there are also some 7 million refugees from Ukraine and 3.7 million internally displaced people (IDPs). This is equivalent to one quarter of the country’s population. The financial needs of UNHCR’s operations in Ukraine are estimated at $800 million in 2025, of which only 27% was funded as of the end of April.
Once the fighting in Ukraine ends, refugees are likely to return in greater numbers. Their return will provide a boost to the country’s economic growth by strengthening its labour force and bringing with them skills and, potentially, investment. But like many IDPs and veterans, they may not be able to return to their places of origin, either because these are not inhabitable or remain under Russian occupation.
Some returnees are likely to be viewed with suspicion or resentment by those Ukrainians who stayed behind and fought. Tensions with Ukrainians who survived the Russian occupation in areas that Kyiv may recover in a peace deal are also likely, given Ukraine’s harsh anti-collaboration laws.
As a consequence, reintegration – in the sense of rebuilding and sustaining the country’s social cohesion – will be a massive challenge, requiring as much, if not more, of Ukraine’s partners’ attention and financial support as physical reconstruction and the transition from a war to a peace-time economy.
Given the mismatch between what is needed and what has been provided for Ukraine’s recovery, one may well be sceptical about the value of the annual Ukraine recovery conferences. But, to the credit of their organisers and attendees, they recognise that the foundations for post-war recovery need to be built before the war ends. The non-military challenges of war and peace must not fall by the wayside amid an exclusive focus on battlefield dynamics.
Stefan Wolff is a past recipient of grant funding from the Natural Environment Research Council of the UK, the United States Institute of Peace, the Economic and Social Research Council of the UK, the British Academy, the NATO Science for Peace Programme, the EU Framework Programmes 6 and 7 and Horizon 2020, as well as the EU’s Jean Monnet Programme. He is a Trustee and Honorary Treasurer of the Political Studies Association of the UK and a Senior Research Fellow at the Foreign Policy Centre in London.
The election of Zambia’s president, Hakainde Hichilema, in 2021 was widely interpreted as a victory for democracy. Zambia had suffered rising repression under former leader Edgar Lungu, but Hichilema promised democratic accountability. However, there are now concerns that his government is promoting constitutional changes that would entrench ruling-party dominance.
Hichilema has proposed a bill that would increase the number of MPs by over 60%. It would also introduce elements of proportional representation to create a “mixed” electoral system, and create reserved seats for women, young people and those with disabilities.
Zambia’s ruling United Party for National Development (UPND) claims the amendments are needed to correct historical exclusion. But many civil society groups believe this is “gender washing” – using inclusive rhetoric to mask an authoritarian agenda.
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.
This scepticism is rooted in recent political developments and the text itself. The bill has emerged alongside other legislation that would tighten state control over civic and political space, at a time when infringements on fundamental freedoms in Zambia are growing.
Many of the bill’s provisions are also vague and some undermine democratic checks and balances, while the progressive aspects are ill-conceived. This makes the proposed reforms, in the words of well-known Zambian constitutional expert O’Brien Kaaba: “deeply problematic and counterproductive”.
I take no pleasure in saying this. The last time I wrote such an article about Zambia, it was to condemn the persecution of Hichilema after he was arrested in 2017 on trumped up treason charges. I was honoured to receive a letter of thanks upon his release.
Like many Zambians and international observers, I was hopeful for the new administration. Yet, while the government has kept some campaign promises and negotiated a difficult deal on the country’s debt burden, efforts to restore democracy are now going backwards.
Weakening a fragile system
As prominent Zambian civil society leaders like Laura Miti and Linda Kasonde have warned, a number of the proposed changes could enable the government to all-but-guarantee itself a majority in the next elections scheduled for 2026.
First, the bill would add 55 new constituency-based MPs – more than the total number to be elected through proportional representation. There are concerns that most of these new constituencies will be created in UPND strongholds, helping the party retain a majority even if it loses support.
These fears have been magnified by the government’s failure to release the Boundary Delimitation Report, which sets out the redrawing of electoral boundaries. This has prevented independent scrutiny of the process and its motivations.
Second, the rule that parliament must be dissolved 90 days before elections is also being revoked on the basis that this unfairly shortens office terms for MPs. Although MPs would not be supposed to conduct parliamentary business after this point, such a change would exacerbate existing problems. These include the use of government resources and vehicles in the ruling party’s campaign.
And third, the constitutional amendment increases the number of MPs the president can appoint from eight to ten. In a system already adding reserved seats for underrepresented groups, this lacks justification. Taken together, these changes threaten to further empower the government and explain why a collective of civil society groups recently demanded “an immediate halt” to the process.
At the same time, the government has not taken the opportunity to remove problematic clauses from Zambia’s constitution. These include the right of the president to dissolve the National Assembly if it fails to “reasonably” perform its duties.
The government has justified the bill by emphasising the historical underrepresentation of women and marginalised groups in Zambian politics. This is a serious problem, but the bill will not fix it.
The amendments only create 20 seats for women, 12 for young people, and three for those with disabilities. In a 256-seat chamber, this will do little to address the imbalance and falls well short of the Southern African Development Community’s target of 30% female representation.
Poorly designed quotas can also reinforce marginalisation. Parties may push women toward quota seats, limiting their participation in regular constituency races. The amendment may thus create a new ceiling: if women only run in reserved seats, female representation would almost halve from 15% now to just 8% in the next parliament.
A similar issue arises with the proportional representation system more broadly. When only a small proportion of seats are allocated this way, it fails to deliver the benefits of fairness that are associated with true proportionality.
In other words, the constitutional amendment bill gives the appearance of inclusivity while carefully preserving the government’s incumbency advantage.
A constitutional rush-job
Perhaps the most striking flaw in the bill has been the process itself. The amendments have seen such scant public consultation that, in June, the Law Association of Zambia called for them to be withdrawn.
This concern is shared by the constitutional court, which recently found the government had failed to meet constitutional requirements for public participation. The court recommended restarting a more inclusive process.
Hichilema, perhaps aware of the likely verdict, preempted the ruling by announcing shortly before the court’s decision that he would pause the process to allow for wider consultation. This is a welcome, but insufficient, development. As the Law Association has argued, the amendments are so badly designed that they do not represent a viable foundation for constitutional review.
Compounding its other flaws, the legislation is poorly written and vague. In many cases, it also fails to explain how new provisions would actually work in practice. The bill therefore needs to be withdrawn, not revised or deferred.
Zambia needs a new constitution, but it deserves one that is rooted in evidence, consultation and democratic principles. Anything less threatens to undermine the country’s hard-won democratic gains and Hichilema’s own legacy.
Nic Cheeseman 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 Dale Pankhurst, PhD candidate and Tutor in the School of History, Anthropology, Philosophy and Politics, Queen’s University Belfast
The British government announced in early July that a far-right group called the Russian Imperial Movement (RIM) will be banned under terrorism legislation. This will make it a criminal offence in the UK to be a member of the group or to express support for it.
The RIM was at the centre of a string of letter bomb attacks targeting high-profile people and institutions in Spain in 2022. These included a bomb addressed to the official residence of Spanish prime minister Pedro Sánchez, which was intercepted by his security detail.
Six more letter bombs were mailed to targets including the American and Ukrainian embassies in Madrid, military installations, and weapons manufacturing companies that supply arms to Ukraine. No one was killed in the attacks, which US officials considered to be acts of terrorism.
Investigators soon announced that they suspected the RIM of being involved. US and European officials alleged that the group was directed to carry out the attacks by Russian intelligence officers.
What is the RIM?
The RIM is an ultra-nationalist, neo-nazi and white supremacist organisation based in Russia. It was created in 2002 by Stanislav Anatolyevich Vorobyev, a Russian national who is designated a terrorist by the US government.
The group seeks to create a new Russian empire, and uses the Russian imperial flag as its sign. The previous Russian empire (1721-1917) encompassed all of modern-day Russia, Belarus, Ukraine, Poland, Finland, Georgia, Armenia and the Baltic states, as well as parts of China.
The movement does not recognise Ukrainian sovereignty. It sees Ukraine as part of what it calls a global Zionist conspiracy designed to undermine Russia and promote Jewish interests. The RIM has engaged in Holocaust denial and is formally outlawed in the US, Canada and now the UK.
It also has a paramilitary wing called the Imperial Legions, which operates at least two training facilities in the Russian city of St. Petersburg. The US State Department believes these facilities are being used to train RIM members in woodland and urban assault, tactical weapons and hand-to-hand combat.
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.
Denis Valliullovich Gariyev, the Imperial Legions’ leader, has in the past called on “young orthodox men” to join the Legions and defend Novorossiya – a term used to describe Russia’s claim over Ukraine. As of 2020, the Imperial Legions was estimated to have several thousand members.
The RIM and its paramilitary wing have engaged in a wide range of activities and operations. These range from passive alliances with other far-right groups in Europe to providing paramilitary training for terrorist organisations. They have also participated directly in bomb attacks.
Since 2014, when the conflict in eastern Ukraine began, the movement has trained and sent members as mercenaries to bolster the pro-Russian separatist groups fighting there. Its members have also actively supported the Russian armed forces in Ukraine after the full-scale invasion in 2022.
After the invasion, posts related to the RIM on various social media platforms such as Vkontakte and Telegram revealed a ramping up of recruitment to join operations in Ukraine. Its fighters have posted videos of themselves in Ukraine armed with weaponry from sniper rifles to anti-tank missiles.
According to analysts, the movement also maintains strong ties with the Russian private military company, the Wagner Group. Imperial Legions fighters are believed to have operated alongside Wagner mercenaries in Syria, Libya and possibly the Central African Republic.
Outside of these activities, the movement has been active in supporting far-right organisations in Europe. These include the Nordic Resistance Movement in Sweden and similar groups in Germany, Spain and elsewhere.
It provides training to these groups through its so-called “Partizan” (Russian for guerrilla) programme. The training includes bombmaking, marksmanship, medical and survival skills, military topography and other tactics. According to the UK government, the Partizan programme aims to increase the capacity of attendees to conduct terrorist attacks.
Two Swedish nationals who took part in the programme later committed a series of bombings against refugee centres in Gothenburg, a city on Sweden’s west coast, in late 2016 and early 2017. The men were convicted in Sweden, with the prosecutor crediting RIM for their terrorist radicalisation and training.
The RIM has also provided specific paramilitary training to far-right groups in Finland. Some members of these groups have fought on Russia’s side in Ukraine, while others have attempted to establish a Finnish cell of the international neo-nazi Atomwaffen Division. Police raids in 2023 also unveiled plans to assassinate the then Finnish prime minister, Sanna Marin.
Links with the Russian state
The movement has previously been critical of the Russian government. It initially believed the approach of Russia’s leader, Vladimir Putin, to Ukraine was too soft, while the group’s promotion of white supremacy and neo-nazism is at odds with Putin’s pragmatic nationalism within Russia.
In 2012, the RIM even took part in discussions with other far-right groups in Russia to form an opposition movement called New Force to challenge Putin’s rule. However, the crisis in Ukraine that erupted in 2014 after pro-Russian president Viktor Yanukovych was ousted from power has caused the Kremlin and RIM’s political objectives to converge.
Indeed, the group can now be viewed as one of the core Russian proxy paramilitaries operating in Ukraine at a time when Putin needs more recruits to continue the war. Western intelligence agencies now believe it has a relationship with officials from Russian state intelligence.
It is difficult to pinpoint the total number of RIM fighters operating in Ukraine as the involvement of mercenary groups there is a closely guarded secret. However, based on previous intelligence reports on the group’s activities, it is reasonable to assume the number is in the hundreds to low thousands.
The decision by the British government to proscribe the RIM indicates concern that the far-right group is increasing its operational capacity both in Ukraine and throughout Europe. With its extensive network, the movement will become an increasing threat to security if it is allowed to continue acting as a proxy for Putin’s foreign policy objectives.
Dale Pankhurst 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.
