Source: Republic of Taiwan – Ministry of Foreign Affairs
MOFA response to joint statement by leaders of Japan and Finland emphasizing importance of Taiwan Strait peace and stability
Date：2025-06-12
Data Source：Department of East Asian and Pacific Affairs
June 12, 2025
Japanese Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba and Finnish President Alexander Stubb met in Tokyo on June 11. In a joint statement, they said that Japan and Finland strongly opposed any unilateral attempts to change the status quo in the South and East China Seas by force or coercion, emphasized the importance of peace and stability across the Taiwan Strait as an indispensable element in the security and prosperity of the international community, and encouraged the peaceful resolution of cross-strait issues.
This is the first time that the leaders of Japan and Finland have expressed their high concern for Taiwan Strait peace in a joint statement. Minister of Foreign Affairs Lin Chia-lung welcomes this concrete action by Japan and Finland to support peace and stability across the Taiwan Strait and appreciates Japan and other like-minded nations continuing to call the international community’s attention to the Taiwan Strait situation during international gatherings, including the US-Japan leaders’ summit in February, the meeting between Prime Minister Ishiba and NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte in April, and Japan’s summit meetings with Latvia and Guatemala in May. This shows the high degree of consensus and common interest that the international community has for maintaining peace and stability across the Taiwan Strait.
The Ministry of Foreign Affairs hopes that democracies around the world will continue to take preventative action and countermeasures to stop the expansion of authoritarianism from posing a threat to regional peace and stability and challenging the rules-based global democratic order. Taiwan will uphold the ideals of integrated diplomacy as it continues to deepen cooperation with friends and allies, jointly advancing peace, stability, and prosperity throughout the Indo-Pacific region and around the globe.
MOFA response to joint statement by leaders of Japan and Finland emphasizing importance of Taiwan Strait peace and stability
Date：2025-06-12 Data Source：Department of East Asian and Pacific Affairs
June 12, 2025Japanese Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba and Finnish President Alexander Stubb met in Tokyo on June 11. In a joint statement, they said that Japan and Finland strongly opposed any unilateral attempts to change the status quo in the South and East China Seas by force or coercion, emphasized the importance of peace and stability across the Taiwan Strait as an indispensable element in the security and prosperity of the international community, and encouraged the peaceful resolution of cross-strait issues.This is the first time that the leaders of Japan and Finland have expressed their high concern for Taiwan Strait peace in a joint statement. Minister of Foreign Affairs Lin Chia-lung welcomes this concrete action by Japan and Finland to support peace and stability across the Taiwan Strait and appreciates Japan and other like-minded nations continuing to call the international community’s attention to the Taiwan Strait situation during international gatherings, including the US-Japan leaders’ summit in February, the meeting between Prime Minister Ishiba and NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte in April, and Japan’s summit meetings with Latvia and Guatemala in May. This shows the high degree of consensus and common interest that the international community has for maintaining peace and stability across the Taiwan Strait.The Ministry of Foreign Affairs hopes that democracies around the world will continue to take preventative action and countermeasures to stop the expansion of authoritarianism from posing a threat to regional peace and stability and challenging the rules-based global democratic order. Taiwan will uphold the ideals of integrated diplomacy as it continues to deepen cooperation with friends and allies, jointly advancing peace, stability, and prosperity throughout the Indo-Pacific region and around the globe.
A Texas man is facing federal charges after allegedly purchasing powerful explosives in New Mexico and expressing plans to use them to harm law enforcement officers and government officials during riots in California.
According to court documents, on June 12, 2025, Grzegorz Vandenberg, 48, visited a travel center in Lordsburg, New Mexico, to purchase fireworks. During the transaction, Vandenberg requested assistance in selecting fireworks that could be thrown directly at people to cause harm. He told store employees that he was prior special forces military and claimed he could make pipe bombs. Vandenberg further stated that he was traveling to Los Angeles, California, for the riots, with the intent to kill law enforcement officers or government officials.
“This man allegedly intended to use the chaotic riots in Los Angeles as an opportunity to commit deadly violence against law enforcement officers,” said Attorney General Pamela Bondi. “Threats like these strike at the heart of law and order — we will not hesitate to bring federal charges against anyone who seeks to harm law enforcement or endanger the safety of our communities.”
“Our message is clear: If you come after law enforcement officers, the FBI will spare no effort to find you and bring you to justice,” said FBI Director Kash Patel. “This defendant allegedly intended to use explosives to attack police officers currently conducting law enforcement operations in Los Angeles and – with the help of a store cashier who took down his license plate information – we were able to put a stop to that plan. Law enforcement officers put their lives on the line to serve the American people and the FBI will always do our part to protect them.”
“Targeting law enforcement with violence is not protest – it’s a crime,” said U.S. Attorney Ryan Ellison for the District of New Mexico. “Anyone who attempts to harm officers or undermine public safety will be held accountable. Protecting the safety of our communities and upholding the integrity of lawful demonstrations are priorities, and those who cross the line into violence will be prosecuted swiftly and to the fullest extent of the law.”
Store staff reported that Vandenberg asked for the largest explosives available and invited an employee to join him and his platoon in California. He also claimed to have mortar explosives in his possession and reiterated his plan to use them at the riots to kill officers. Vandenberg purchased six mortars, each containing 60 grams of gunpowder, and 36 large fireworks before leaving the store in a vehicle with Montana license plates, heading west on Interstate 10.
Vandenberg is charged with transporting explosives in interstate commerce with the knowledge and intent that they would be used to kill, injure, or intimidate individuals. He will remain in custody pending trial, which has not yet been scheduled. If convicted of the current charges, Vandenberg faces up to 10 years in federal prison.
The Las Cruces Resident Agency of the FBI’s Albuquerque Field Office investigated this case with assistance from the Tucson Resident Agency of the FBI’s Phoenix Field Office, Tucson Police Department, U.S. Air Force Office of Special Investigations, and Homeland Security Investigations (HSI) El Paso.
Assistant U.S. Attorneys Joni Stahl and Grant Gardner for the District of New Mexico are prosecuting the case, with valuable assistance provided by Trial Attorney Patrick Cashman of the National Security Division’s Counterterrorism Section.
A criminal complaint is merely an allegation. All defendants are presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law.
A Texas man is facing federal charges after allegedly purchasing powerful explosives in New Mexico and expressing plans to use them to harm law enforcement officers and government officials during riots in California.
According to court documents, on June 12, 2025, Grzegorz Vandenberg, 48, visited a travel center in Lordsburg, New Mexico, to purchase fireworks. During the transaction, Vandenberg requested assistance in selecting fireworks that could be thrown directly at people to cause harm. He told store employees that he was prior special forces military and claimed he could make pipe bombs. Vandenberg further stated that he was traveling to Los Angeles, California, for the riots, with the intent to kill law enforcement officers or government officials.
“This man allegedly intended to use the chaotic riots in Los Angeles as an opportunity to commit deadly violence against law enforcement officers,” said Attorney General Pamela Bondi. “Threats like these strike at the heart of law and order — we will not hesitate to bring federal charges against anyone who seeks to harm law enforcement or endanger the safety of our communities.”
“Our message is clear: If you come after law enforcement officers, the FBI will spare no effort to find you and bring you to justice,” said FBI Director Kash Patel. “This defendant allegedly intended to use explosives to attack police officers currently conducting law enforcement operations in Los Angeles and – with the help of a store cashier who took down his license plate information – we were able to put a stop to that plan. Law enforcement officers put their lives on the line to serve the American people and the FBI will always do our part to protect them.”
“Targeting law enforcement with violence is not protest – it’s a crime,” said U.S. Attorney Ryan Ellison for the District of New Mexico. “Anyone who attempts to harm officers or undermine public safety will be held accountable. Protecting the safety of our communities and upholding the integrity of lawful demonstrations are priorities, and those who cross the line into violence will be prosecuted swiftly and to the fullest extent of the law.”
Store staff reported that Vandenberg asked for the largest explosives available and invited an employee to join him and his platoon in California. He also claimed to have mortar explosives in his possession and reiterated his plan to use them at the riots to kill officers. Vandenberg purchased six mortars, each containing 60 grams of gunpowder, and 36 large fireworks before leaving the store in a vehicle with Montana license plates, heading west on Interstate 10.
Vandenberg is charged with transporting explosives in interstate commerce with the knowledge and intent that they would be used to kill, injure, or intimidate individuals. He will remain in custody pending trial, which has not yet been scheduled. If convicted of the current charges, Vandenberg faces up to 10 years in federal prison.
The Las Cruces Resident Agency of the FBI’s Albuquerque Field Office investigated this case with assistance from the Tucson Resident Agency of the FBI’s Phoenix Field Office, Tucson Police Department, U.S. Air Force Office of Special Investigations, and Homeland Security Investigations (HSI) El Paso.
Assistant U.S. Attorneys Joni Stahl and Grant Gardner for the District of New Mexico are prosecuting the case, with valuable assistance provided by Trial Attorney Patrick Cashman of the National Security Division’s Counterterrorism Section.
A criminal complaint is merely an allegation. All defendants are presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law.
Earlier this year, in March 2025, public protests broke out in several cities in Indonesia. The focus of the protests was changes to the law that governs the country’s military. Last year, in August, the were mass protests over proposals to amend the local election laws, which were subsequently scrapped. Other government actions have also seen people take to the streets over the past few months. Civil society groups have been involved in supporting and organizing different protests, with the bulk of protesters being university students. Academics have also raised concerns about government transparency and approaches to dissent.
Indonesia is a country that has experienced significant upheavals in the form and structures of its government over the past century, including colonial governance under Dutch rule, Japanese occupation during World War II, a successful fight for independence following the war, a failed coup and subsequent mass killings in the mid-1960s, a military dictatorship that lasted from 1967 to 1998, a period of major reforms starting in the late 1990s and early 2000s as part of a shift to democracy (reformasi period), and concerns in more recent years about changes to laws and structures that some feel impinge on democratic values.
A recently published report on the Law Library’s website, Indonesia: Civil Space Legal Framework, provides information on the rights and freedoms protected in the 1945 Constitution of Indonesia following its amendment during the reformasi period and on protections in several other laws enacted during that period, including laws on human rights, the press and broadcasting, expressing opinions in public, and trade or labor unions. It also provides information on the 1946 Criminal Code and the new 2023 Criminal Code, as well as provisions in the 2008 Law on Electronic Information and Transactions, that can be used to restrict certain rights, such as the freedom of expression. Various court challenges to these and other laws are also noted in the report. In addition, the report provides an overview of the laws that regulate civil society organizations.
Read the report here.
The report on the civic space legal framework in Indonesia is part of a series of Law Library reports covering the frameworks in several other countries, including Peru, Finland, Romania, Thailand, Spain, and Morocco. These reports are contained in the Law Library’s Legal Reports (Publications of the Law Library of Congress) collection, which includes over 4,000 historical and contemporary legal reports covering a variety of jurisdictions, researched and written by foreign law specialists with expertise in each area. To receive alerts when new reports are published, you can subscribe to email updates and the RSS feed for Law Library Reports (click the “subscribe” button on the Law Library’s website). The Law Library also publishes articles related to Indonesia[add link to search results] in the Global Legal Monitor.
Subscribe to In Custodia Legis – it’s free! – to receive interesting posts drawn from the Law Library of Congress’s vast collections and our staff’s expertise in U.S., foreign, and international law.
Source: United States Senator Peter Welch (D-Vermont)
WASHINGTON, D.C. – U.S. Senator Peter Welch (D-Vt.) joined U.S. Senator Jeanee Shaheen, Ranking Member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, and eight Democratic colleagues in urging Secretary of State Marco Rubio to preserve the staff and programs administered by the Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights and Labor (DRL) amid the Department’s proposed reorganization.
“The proposed reorganization of DRL raises serious concerns about the Department’s prioritization of democracy and human rights and the role of DRL in advancing U.S. national security priorities—concerns that were the basis for Congress’s bipartisan codification in statute an Assistant Secretary for Democracy, Human Rights and Labor and the directive ‘to promote the increased observance of internationally recognized human rights by all countries’ as a principal goal of U.S. foreign policy,” wrote the Senators. “The proposed reorganization would result in a structural and substantive demotion of human rights promotion that runs counter to the spirit of the law and your personal legacy working on these issues.”
“Over 80% of DRL’s programs support human rights defenders working in closed, anti-democratic societies, including Cuba, China, Nicaragua, North Korea, Iran, Russia, Venezuela, and others which the Trump Administration has identified as adversaries of the U.S.,” continued the Senators.
The Senators concluded: “As you stated in the subcommittee hearing previously mentioned, ‘millions of people around the world who live in societies dominated by fear and oppression look to the United States of America to champion their cause to fully exercise their God-given rights. There are no greater champions more capable of advancing this noble cause than the dedicated staff in DRL. We need these champions in the Department.”
In addition to Senators Welch and Shaheen, the letter is cosigned by Senate Minority Whip Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) and Sens. Chris Coons (D-Del.), Tim Kaine (D-Va.), Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), Cory Booker (D-N.J.), Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii), Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), and Jacky Rosen (D-Nev.).
Read and download the full text of the letter.
ast night, Governor Hochul was a guest on MSNBC’s “The Briefing with Jen Psaki.”
AUDIO: The Governor’s remarks are available in audio form here.
A rush transcript of the Governor’s remarks is available below:
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
Governor Hochul: Do you want to know what I really think?
Rebecca Lewis, City & State: Please.
Governor Hochul: It’s bullshit. How dare they—
(END VIDEO CLIP)
Jen Psaki, MSNBC: Couldn’t have said it better myself. That was New York Governor Kathy Hochul, today, reacting to the arrest of New York City Comptroller and Mayoral candidate Brad Lander. And Governor Kathy Hochul joins me. Now, Governor, thank you so much for being here with me tonight.
You rushed down to the courthouse today after Brad Lander was arrested to demand his release. We heard a little bit from him earlier. Can you just walk us through what happened today, including your interaction with officers at the building?
Governor Hochul: Yes, and thank you for your coverage of this deeply troubling story that seems to be unfolding all across our country, Jen. I literally was in a part of Brooklyn, known as Little Haiti. I was walking the streets talking to people who were so frightened — living in the shadows of a once vibrant street was now almost a ghost town because people are terrified. And then while I’m out there trying to meet these people, let them know we’re, we see them, we’re gonna support them.
Then I get the word that one of our elected officials for the City of New York has been arrested. And I know Brad Lander. I went right down there. And I wanted to see him. I went up to the ninth floor. And they wouldn’t let me come in. But I had a chance to talk to ICE officers and the people in charge, and my Head of Homeland Security came down and Head of my Counterintelligence and all the professionals that I work with. We all stood there and I said, “I’m not leaving until you let him out. I want him released. Because what are the charges? What are you possibly saying? We all saw the video.”
And after about an hour of me waiting and talking to a lot of people, they said they’d release him without charges, but Brad Lander has all the attorneys and attention on this he needs. I mean, he can take care of himself. I’m confident of that, but what I cannot get out of my mind are all the people that are so terrified right now are the ones who go into those courtrooms following the law and the procedure — told, show up this date for your court appearance. And then they’re sitting ducks while they’re in the courtroom. They withdraw their legal status and they walk out and they’re captured.
This is beyond the pale, and we have to stand up and call it out for what it is and say we are a better country than this. And the voices that we heard during the marches over the last weekend, the people who stood up there, the elected officials who are doing their part — we have to stand up and say no more. And I’ll tell you this, as I said, under eight hours of questioning in Congress just a few days ago — I will work with the Trump administration to remove the people he said he was going after. I will help you get the criminals out of here, the ones who are violent criminals who are hurting other people, the human traffickers, the people who are dealing in drugs, people with guns — I want them gone.
I’ll help you but don’t take care of the home healthcare aides, the 160 who are gonna lose their jobs that I’ve met today and talked to. They’ll lose their jobs and they lose their status. And you know what? That means there’s 160 vulnerable New Yorkers who are gonna lose their caregivers and the people who work in the restaurants and hospitality, let them get jobs, pay their taxes, be part of our communities – like my grandpa was a migrant farm worker. Everybody comes and starts out and struggles. But you know what? Over time it works. It’s the American dream, and that dream is dissipating by the moment here in this country, and we cannot let it go.
Jen Psaki, MSNBC: No question about it. And I know, and I just mentioned that you had announced today the State is dedicating $50 million for legal assistance for immigrants. And I want to ask you about that in one moment.
I think one of the things that was so striking about today, many things was that, you know, Brad Lander was released without charges. You said earlier today that to your knowledge, the charges have been dropped and that he walks out of there free man.
But the US Attorney’s Office said that it is investigating his action still and would decide later whether to charge him with a crime. This is all on video, which we played the full video. Are you confident there won’t be charges? And I raise this because he’s just escorting immigrants to the courthouses who are trying to abide by their court hearings.
Governor Hochul: That’s all he is doing, and he did it without any fanfare over a number of times. Just a lot of people are volunteering. These people are terrified. I mean, these are our neighbors. These are people who’ve lived among us for many, many years sometimes. And people are just doing the right thing. They’re showing their humanity. He showed up and just escorting someone and speaking to him and just trying to let him know it’s going to be okay. The best we can. And then you have them ripped apart and terrorized the way they were and go after elected officials. I mean, no, no. It’s wrong. It’s wrong.
And again, we will help the Trump administration — we have been doing this for years — get rid of the true criminals. But coming here to seek asylum as they have for the last few years, or coming with temporary protected status like 300,000 Venezuelans did. And people from Haiti. They had legal status when they came. So when you take it away, once they’re here, it’s just like a cruel joke on them.
So, they’re not the criminals. Let’s find them a legal pathway. Let’s give them work authorization. I know the Trump administration is capable of doing this. They can do this, and there’ll be a lot of employers, including the people in my State, New York — I have 400,000 open jobs as we speak. They’re not taking someone’s job. They’ll be doing an important service to us.
Let’s have a conversation. Let’s ask Congress. Why you won’t do something as simple as passing common sense, bipartisan legislation to reform our immigration laws, find legal pathways. Yes, we have to secure our borders. No one doubts that, but the people who are here and already contributing, come on. We’re a nation of immigrants. That’s why we’re so great.
Jen Psaki, MSNBC: I mentioned a couple times that you announced the $50 million for legal assistance, which is very powerful and as Brad Lander mentioned, a lot of these people don’t have legal representation.
Governor Hochul: That’s right.
Jen Psaki, MSNBC: This tactic though, which I called dirty earlier because I think it’s dirty of these agents showing up at courthouses and kind of stalking people who don’t have criminal records are not trying to, are just trying to abide by what they’re supposed to be doing. Is there anything you can do as Governor to stop those tactics or other Governors can ban together and do?
Governor Hochul: No, they’re not allowed in New York state courts. You know, and, and let’s think about this, when this was passed a few years ago, law enforcement supported this because people who’ve been victims of the crimes are witnesses of crimes, if they think that if they go in to be involved in the criminal justice system to maybe to solve a crime, that they could be removed instantaneously. We want to make sure that we are working to protect our community. People are safer when people feel they can come forward, but apparently in federal courthouses, here in New York City and all across America, they’re basically staking out people who walk in the front door to keep an appointment they were given. They’re told to go before this judge on this date or check in.
I mean, a heartbreaking story just a couple weeks ago. A mom takes her two boys, 19 and 20-year-old down to make sure they’re legally checking in as they’re told to do. Guess what? She walks out without them. Because they took them away from her. And she doesn’t know where they are. We’re all human beings.
Jen Psaki, MSNBC: Yeah.
Governor Hochul: If we can’t find some compassion in our hearts at this moment and do what’s right, history will judge us very poorly. That’s why we’re urging the administration — go after the really bad ones like you said you would. That’s my plea. Go after the bad ones. We’ll help you. Every state will help you. But can we just leave these law abiding people alone? Can we just do that?
Jen Psaki, MSNBC: There are so many stories, like the ones you mentioned and the ones we saw play out today. Governor Kathy Hochul, I know you’ve had a day, so thank you so much for being here with us, helping explain all of the video footage we’ve just showed everybody watching. Really appreciate you being here.
SINGAPORE, June 18, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — With Bitcoin holding steady at the $100,000 mark for a long time, the cryptocurrency market has once again attracted global attention. Many analysts now agree that a full-blown bull run has returned. But unlike in the past, this bull run favors flexible, high-leverage strategies over traditional HODLing. To help traders seize the moment, BexBack offers an unparalleled trading experience with up to 100x leverage, 100% deposit bonus, and a $50 welcome bonus – all without KYC certification.
Why Use 100x Leverage to Trade Crypto?
While Bitcoin’s bullish momentum is clear, price swings remain sharp and fast. High-leverage futures trading is an essential tool for traders aiming to:
Multiply Profits: Control 100x larger positions with the same capital — turn 1 BTC into a 100 BTC trading power.
React Fast: Open and close trades quickly to capture short-term price movements.
Profit in Any Market: Go long or short and profit whether prices rise or fall.
Boost ROI: With leverage and BexBack’s deposit bonuses, even modest price changes can produce exponential returns.
Example: With BTC at $100,000, a trader opens a 1 BTC long contract using 100x leverage (position size = 100 BTC). If BTC rises just 5% to $105,00, the trader earns 5 BTC in profit — a 500% return. With BexBack’s 100% deposit bonus, that ROI could double to 1000%.
What Is the Double Deposit Bonus?
When you deposit to BexBack, you can receive 100% of your deposit as trading bonus.
Example: Deposit 1 BTC → Get 1 BTC in bonus funds.
The bonus can’t be withdrawn directly, but it can:
Be used as margin to open larger positions.
Help absorb market volatility by reducing liquidation risk.
Generate profits that can be fully withdrawn once earned.
Demo Account — Practice risk-free with 10 BTC virtual balance
Powerful Platform — Available via Web and Mobile, with no spread or slippage
Global Support — 24/7 customer service available worldwide
Affiliate Program — Earn up to 50% commission sharing
About BexBack
BexBack is a global cryptocurrency derivatives exchange offering futures trading with up to 100x leverage on over 50 major crypto assets, including BTC, ETH, XRP, ADA, and SOL. Headquartered in Singapore, BexBack also has offices in Hong Kong, Japan, the U.S., the U.K., and Argentina. The platform is fully licensed under the U.S. FinCEN MSB (Money Services Business) registration and currently serves more than 500,000 users worldwide, including traders in the U.S., Canada, and Europe.
Start Today— Unlock Your Path to Wealth on BexBack
If you missed the last crypto bull run, now is your chance. With Bitcoin holding strong above $105,000, traders are flocking to high-leverage platforms to capture fast gains. BexBack is giving you everything you need — $50 bonus, 100% deposit match, 100x leverage, and no KYC.
Sign Up Now on BexBack — Start your journey to rapidly accumulate wealth and enjoy a better life.
Disclaimer: This content is provided by BexBack.The statements, views, and opinions expressed in this content are solely those of the content provider and do not necessarily reflect the views of this media platform or its publisher. We do not endorse, verify, or guarantee the accuracy, completeness, or reliability of any information presented. We do not guarantee any claims, statements, or promises made in this article. This content is for informational purposes only and should not be considered financial, investment, or trading advice.Investing in crypto and mining-related opportunities involves significant risks, including the potential loss of capital. It is possible to lose all your capital. These products may not be suitable for everyone, and you should ensure that you understand the risks involved. Seek independent advice if necessary. Speculate only with funds that you can afford to lose. Readers are strongly encouraged to conduct their own research and consult with a qualified financial advisor before making any investment decisions. However, due to the inherently speculative nature of the blockchain sector—including cryptocurrency, NFTs, and mining—complete accuracy cannot always be guaranteed.Neither the media platform nor the publisher shall be held responsible for any fraudulent activities, misrepresentations, or financial losses arising from the content of this press release. In the event of any legal claims or charges against this article, we accept no liability or responsibility. Globenewswire does not endorse any content on this page.
Legal Disclaimer: This media platform provides the content of this article on an “as-is” basis, without any warranties or representations of any kind, express or implied. We assume no responsibility for any inaccuracies, errors, or omissions. We do not assume any responsibility or liability for the accuracy, content, images, videos, licenses, completeness, legality, or reliability of the information presented herein. Any concerns, complaints, or copyright issues related to this article should be directed to the content provider mentioned above.
Photos accompanying this announcement are available at:
SINGAPORE, June 18, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — With Bitcoin holding steady at the $100,000 mark for a long time, the cryptocurrency market has once again attracted global attention. Many analysts now agree that a full-blown bull run has returned. But unlike in the past, this bull run favors flexible, high-leverage strategies over traditional HODLing. To help traders seize the moment, BexBack offers an unparalleled trading experience with up to 100x leverage, 100% deposit bonus, and a $50 welcome bonus – all without KYC certification.
Why Use 100x Leverage to Trade Crypto?
While Bitcoin’s bullish momentum is clear, price swings remain sharp and fast. High-leverage futures trading is an essential tool for traders aiming to:
Multiply Profits: Control 100x larger positions with the same capital — turn 1 BTC into a 100 BTC trading power.
React Fast: Open and close trades quickly to capture short-term price movements.
Profit in Any Market: Go long or short and profit whether prices rise or fall.
Boost ROI: With leverage and BexBack’s deposit bonuses, even modest price changes can produce exponential returns.
Example: With BTC at $100,000, a trader opens a 1 BTC long contract using 100x leverage (position size = 100 BTC). If BTC rises just 5% to $105,00, the trader earns 5 BTC in profit — a 500% return. With BexBack’s 100% deposit bonus, that ROI could double to 1000%.
What Is the Double Deposit Bonus?
When you deposit to BexBack, you can receive 100% of your deposit as trading bonus.
Example: Deposit 1 BTC → Get 1 BTC in bonus funds.
The bonus can’t be withdrawn directly, but it can:
Be used as margin to open larger positions.
Help absorb market volatility by reducing liquidation risk.
Generate profits that can be fully withdrawn once earned.
Demo Account — Practice risk-free with 10 BTC virtual balance
Powerful Platform — Available via Web and Mobile, with no spread or slippage
Global Support — 24/7 customer service available worldwide
Affiliate Program — Earn up to 50% commission sharing
About BexBack
BexBack is a global cryptocurrency derivatives exchange offering futures trading with up to 100x leverage on over 50 major crypto assets, including BTC, ETH, XRP, ADA, and SOL. Headquartered in Singapore, BexBack also has offices in Hong Kong, Japan, the U.S., the U.K., and Argentina. The platform is fully licensed under the U.S. FinCEN MSB (Money Services Business) registration and currently serves more than 500,000 users worldwide, including traders in the U.S., Canada, and Europe.
Start Today— Unlock Your Path to Wealth on BexBack
If you missed the last crypto bull run, now is your chance. With Bitcoin holding strong above $105,000, traders are flocking to high-leverage platforms to capture fast gains. BexBack is giving you everything you need — $50 bonus, 100% deposit match, 100x leverage, and no KYC.
Sign Up Now on BexBack — Start your journey to rapidly accumulate wealth and enjoy a better life.
Disclaimer: This content is provided by BexBack.The statements, views, and opinions expressed in this content are solely those of the content provider and do not necessarily reflect the views of this media platform or its publisher. We do not endorse, verify, or guarantee the accuracy, completeness, or reliability of any information presented. We do not guarantee any claims, statements, or promises made in this article. This content is for informational purposes only and should not be considered financial, investment, or trading advice.Investing in crypto and mining-related opportunities involves significant risks, including the potential loss of capital. It is possible to lose all your capital. These products may not be suitable for everyone, and you should ensure that you understand the risks involved. Seek independent advice if necessary. Speculate only with funds that you can afford to lose. Readers are strongly encouraged to conduct their own research and consult with a qualified financial advisor before making any investment decisions. However, due to the inherently speculative nature of the blockchain sector—including cryptocurrency, NFTs, and mining—complete accuracy cannot always be guaranteed.Neither the media platform nor the publisher shall be held responsible for any fraudulent activities, misrepresentations, or financial losses arising from the content of this press release. In the event of any legal claims or charges against this article, we accept no liability or responsibility. Globenewswire does not endorse any content on this page.
Legal Disclaimer: This media platform provides the content of this article on an “as-is” basis, without any warranties or representations of any kind, express or implied. We assume no responsibility for any inaccuracies, errors, or omissions. We do not assume any responsibility or liability for the accuracy, content, images, videos, licenses, completeness, legality, or reliability of the information presented herein. Any concerns, complaints, or copyright issues related to this article should be directed to the content provider mentioned above.
Photos accompanying this announcement are available at:
Interoil Exploration and Production ASA (the “Company“) has today requested Nordic Trustee AS to summon for a bondholders’ written resolution (the “Summons“) for the Company’s senior secured callable bonds with ISIN NO 001 0729908 (the “Bonds“).
The purpose of the written resolution is to approve a proposal to amend the bond terms regarding the settlement of the interest payment on the Bonds falling due on 31 July 2025 (the “July Interest Payment“) in kind by the issuance and delivery of additional Bonds (“JulyPIK Bonds“) with terms and conditions substantially equal to those of the outstanding Bonds and the same interest rate as the outstanding Bonds at a rate of eight point fifty per cent (8.50%).
In addition, the Company kindly request a waiver of the requirement in (i) Clause 13.2.1 paragraph (c) of the bond terms to publish its financial statements for year 2024 on its website within 120 days from the end of its financial year and (ii) Clause 13.2.1 paragraph (d) of the bond terms to publish its interim accounts for Q1 2025 on its website within 60 days after the end of Q1.
For further background and details of the proposed resolutions, please see the attached Summons.
The proposed resolutions will be passed if a simple majority of the voting bonds vote in favor of the proposed resolution prior to the expiry of the voting period. The voting period shall expire ten (10) business days after the date of the Summons, i.e., at 5 pm Oslo time on 3 July 2025.
Interoil Exploration and Production ASA is a Norwegian based exploration and production company – listed on the Oslo Stock Exchange with focus on Latin America. The Company is operator and license holder of several production and exploration assets in Colombia and Argentina with headquarter in Oslo.
This information is subject to the disclosure requirements pursuant to section 5-12 of the Norwegian Securities Trading Act.
Interoil Exploration and Production ASA (the “Company“) has today requested Nordic Trustee AS to summon for a bondholders’ written resolution (the “Summons“) for the Company’s senior secured callable bonds with ISIN NO 001 0729908 (the “Bonds“).
The purpose of the written resolution is to approve a proposal to amend the bond terms regarding the settlement of the interest payment on the Bonds falling due on 31 July 2025 (the “July Interest Payment“) in kind by the issuance and delivery of additional Bonds (“JulyPIK Bonds“) with terms and conditions substantially equal to those of the outstanding Bonds and the same interest rate as the outstanding Bonds at a rate of eight point fifty per cent (8.50%).
In addition, the Company kindly request a waiver of the requirement in (i) Clause 13.2.1 paragraph (c) of the bond terms to publish its financial statements for year 2024 on its website within 120 days from the end of its financial year and (ii) Clause 13.2.1 paragraph (d) of the bond terms to publish its interim accounts for Q1 2025 on its website within 60 days after the end of Q1.
For further background and details of the proposed resolutions, please see the attached Summons.
The proposed resolutions will be passed if a simple majority of the voting bonds vote in favor of the proposed resolution prior to the expiry of the voting period. The voting period shall expire ten (10) business days after the date of the Summons, i.e., at 5 pm Oslo time on 3 July 2025.
Interoil Exploration and Production ASA is a Norwegian based exploration and production company – listed on the Oslo Stock Exchange with focus on Latin America. The Company is operator and license holder of several production and exploration assets in Colombia and Argentina with headquarter in Oslo.
This information is subject to the disclosure requirements pursuant to section 5-12 of the Norwegian Securities Trading Act.
When you think about ticks, you might picture nightmarish little parasites, stalking you on weekend hikes or afternoons in the park.
Your fear is well-founded. Tick-borne diseases are the most prevalent vector-borne diseases – those transmitted by living organisms – in the United States. Each tick feeds on multiple animals throughout its life, absorbing viruses and bacteria along the way and passing them on with its next bite. Some of those viruses and bacteria are harmful to humans, causing diseases that can be debilitating and sometimes lethal without treatment, such as Lyme, babesiosis and Rocky Mountain spotted fever.
In many cases, human actions long ago are the reason ticks carry these diseases so widely today. And that’s what makes ticks fascinating for environmental historians like me.
Ticks can be tiny and hard to spot. This is an adult and nymph Ixodes scapularis on an adult’s index finger. CDC
Changing forests fueled tick risks
During the 18th and 19th centuries, settlers cleared more than half the forested land across the northeastern U.S., cutting down forests for timber and to make way for farms, towns and mining operations. With large-scale land clearing came a sharp decline in wildlife of all kinds. Predators such as bears and wolves were driven out, as were deer.
As farming moved westward, Northeasterners began to recognize the ecological and economic value of trees, and they returned millions of acres to forest.
The woods regrew. Plant-eaters such as deer returned, but the apex predators that once kept their populations in check did not.
As a result, deer populations carrying borrelia burgdorferi, the bacterium that causes Lyme disease, grew rapidly. And with the deer came deer ticks (Ixodes scapularis). When a tick feeds on an infected deer, it can take up the bacteria. The tick isn’t harmed, but it can pass the bacteria to its next victim. In humans, Lyme disease can cause fever and fatigue, and if left untreated it can affect the nervous system.
For centuries, changing patterns of human settlements and the politics of land use have shaped the role of ticks and tick-borne illnesses within their environments.
In short, humans have made it easier for ticks to thrive and spread disease in our midst.
In California, the Northern Inner Coast and Santa Cruz mountain ranges that converge on San Francisco from the north and south were never clear-cut, and predators such as mountain lions and coyotes still exist there. But competition for housing has pushed human settlement deeper into wildland areas to the north, south and east of the city, reshaping tick ecology there.
While western black-legged ticks (Ixodes pacificus) tend to swarm in large forest preserves, the Lyme-causing bacterium is actually more prevalent in small, isolated patches of greenery. In these isolated patches, rodents and other tick hosts can thrive, safe from large predators, which need more habitat to move freely. But isolation and lower diversity also means infections are spread more easily within the tick’s host populations.
People tend to build isolated houses in the hills, rather than large, connected developments. As the Silicon Valley area south of San Francisco sprawls outward, this checkerboard pattern of settlement has fragmented the natural landscape, creating a hard-to-manage public health threat.
Fewer hosts, more tightly packed, often means more infected hosts, proportionally, and thus more dangerous ticks.
Domesticated livestock have also shaped the disease threat posed by ticks.
In 1892, at a meeting of cattle ranchers at the Stock Raiser’s Convention in Austin, Texas, Dr. B.A. Rogers introduced a novel theory that ticks were behind recent devastating plagues of Texas cattle fever. The disease had arrived with cattle imported from the West Indies and Mexico in the 1600s, and it was taking huge tolls on cattle herds. But how the disease spread to new victims had been a mystery.
Editors of Daniel’s Texas Medical Journal found the idea of ticks spreading disease laughable and lampooned the hypothesis, publishing a satire of what they described as an “early copy” of a forthcoming report on the subject.
The tick’s “fluid secretion, it is believed, is the poison which causes the fever … [and the tick] having been known to chew tobacco, as all other Texans do, the secretion is most probably tobacco juice,” they wrote.
Fortunately for the ranchers, not to mention the cows, the U.S. Department of Agriculture sided with Rogers. Its cattle fever tick program, started in 1906, curbed cattle fever outbreaks by limiting where and when cattle should cross tick-dense areas.
This innovative use of natural space as a public health tool helped to functionally eradicate cattle fever from 14 Southern states by 1943.
Ticks are products of their environment
When it comes to tick-borne diseases the world over, location matters.
Take the hunter tick (Hyalomma spp.) of the Mediterranean and Asia. As a juvenile, or nymph, these ticks feed on small forest animals such as mice, hares and voles, but as an adult they prefer domesticated livestock.
It’s probably too much to ask for sympathy for any ticks you meet this summer. They are bloodsucking parasites, after all.
Still, it’s worth remembering that the tick’s malevolence isn’t its own fault. Ticks are products of their environment, and humans have played many roles in turning them into the harmful parasites that seek us out today.
The world’s most developed economies have also burnt the most oil and coal (fossil fuels) over the years, causing the most climate change damage. Preventing further climate change means a global fossil fuel phase-out must happen by 2050. Climate change mitigation scientists Sven Teske and Saori Miyake analysed the potential for renewable energy in each of the G20 countries. They concluded that the G20 is in a position to generate enough renewable energy to supply the world. For African countries to benefit, they must adopt long term renewable energy plans and policies and secure finance from G20 countries to set up renewable energy systems.
Why is the G20 so important in efforts to limit global warming?
The G20 group accounts for 67% of the world’s population, 85% of global gross domestic product, and 75% of global trade. The member states are the G7 (the US, Japan, Germany, the UK, France, Italy, Canada), plus Australia, China, India, Indonesia, Republic of Korea, Russia, Türkiye, Saudi Arabia, South Africa, Mexico, Brazil and Argentina.
We wanted to find out how G20 member states could limit global warming. Our study examined the solar and wind potential for each of G20 member countries (the available land and solar and wind conditions). We then compared this with projected electricity demands for 2050. This is, to our knowledge, the first research of its kind.
We found that the potential for renewable energy in G20 countries is very high – enough to supply the projected 2050 electricity demand for the whole world. They have 33.6 million km² of land on which solar energy projects could be set up, or 31.1 million km² of land on which wind energy projects could be set up.
This potential varies by geography. Not all G20 countries have the same conditions for generating solar and wind energy, but collectively, the G20 countries have enough renewable energy potential to supply the world’s energy needs.
But for the G20 countries to limit global warming, they also need to stop emitting greenhouse gases. Recent figures show that the G20 countries were responsible for generating 87% of all energy-related carbon dioxide emissions that cause global warming.
On the other hand, African Union countries (apart from South Africa, which is a high greenhouse gas emitter), were responsible for only 1.2% of the global total historical emissions until 2020.
The G20 countries with the highest renewable energy potential (especially Australia and Canada) are major exporters of the fossil fuels that cause global warming. Along with every other country in the world, the G20 nations will need to end their human-caused carbon emissions by 2050 to prevent further climate change.
Where does Africa fit into the picture?
African countries cannot set up new electricity plants based on burning fossil fuels, like coal. If they do that, the world will never end human-caused greenhouse gas emissions by 2050. The continent must generate electricity for the 600 million Africans who do not currently have it but will need to move straight past fossil fuels and into renewable energy.
For this, Africa will need finance. The African Union hosts the G20 summit later this year. This meeting begins just after the world’s annual climate change conference (now in its 30th year and known as COP30). These two summits will give Africa the chance to lobby for renewable energy funding from wealthier nations.
Africa already has the conditions needed to move straight into renewable energy. The continent could be generating an amount of solar and wind power that far exceeds its projected demand for electricity between now and 2050.
We are launching an additional analysis of the solar and wind potential of the entire African continent in Bonn, Germany on 19 June 2025 at a United Nations conference. This shows that only 3% of Africa’s solar and wind potential needs to be converted to real projects to supply Africa’s future electricity demand.
This means that Africa has great untapped potential to supply the required energy for its transition to a middle-income continent – one of the African Union’s goals in Agenda 2063, its 50 year plan.
But to secure enough finance for the continent to build renewable energy systems, African countries need long-term energy policies. These are currently lacking.
So what needs to be done?
The countries who signed up to the 2015 international climate change treaty (the Paris Agreement) have committed to replacing polluting forms of energy such as coal, fuelwood and oil with renewable energy.
South Africa, through its G20 presidency, must encourage G20 nations to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions and support renewable energy investment in Africa.
Because financing the global energy transition is already high on the priority list of most countries, South Africa should push for change on three fronts: finance, sound regulations and manufacturing capacity for renewable technologies. These are the among the main obstacles for renewables, particularly in Africa.
Finance: Financing the energy transition is among the highest priorities for COP30. Therefore, the COP30 meeting will be an opportunity for the African Union to negotiate finance for its renewable energy infrastructure needs.
For this, fair and just carbon budgets are vital. A carbon budget sets out how much carbon dioxide can still be emitted in order for the global temperature not to rise more than 2°C higher than it was before the 1760 industrial revolution.
A global carbon budget (the amount of emissions the whole world is allowed) has been calculated, but it needs to be divided up fairly so that countries that have polluted most are compelled to limit this.
To divide the global carbon budget fairly, energy pathways need to be developed urgently that consider:
future developments of population and economic growth
current energy supply systems
transition times for decarbonisation
local renewable energy resources.
The G20 platform should be used to lobby for fair and just carbon budgets.
Sound regulations that support the setting up of new factories: Governments must put policies in place to support African solar and wind companies. These are needed to win the trust of investors to invest in a future multi-billion dollar industry. Long-term, transparent regulations are needed too.
These regulations should:
say exactly how building permits for solar and wind power plants will be granted
prioritise linking renewable energy plants to national electricity grids
release standard technical specifications for stand-alone grids to make sure they’re all of the same quality.
Taking steps now to speed up big renewable energy industries could mean that African countries end up with more energy than they need. This can be exported and increase financial income for countries.
Sven Teske receives funding from the European Climate Foundation and Power Shift Africa (PSA).
Saori Miyake receives funding from European Climate Foundation and Power Shift Africa.
MOSCOW, RUSSIA, June 18, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — The St. Petersburg International Economic Forum (SPIEF) 2025 opened in St. Petersburg on June 18 with a high-level session hosted by the Russia National Centre, highlighting fintech innovation and strategies for global economic growth.
The forum’s business program opened on June 18 with the session “Shaping a New Platform for Global Growth,” where the final report on the results of the International Open Dialogue of the Russia National Centre was presented. The discussion focused on key challenges of modernity: economic and political fragmentation, demographic shifts, the implementation of breakthrough technologies, and the growing social and technological gap within and between states.
The CEO of Tanssi Foundation, Tiago Rudiger (Brazil), emphasised that the real fintech revolution is happening in Global South countries.
“Forget Wall Street – the fintech revolution is happening in Global South countries. Thanks to blockchain, money and assets are becoming programmable, and combined with artificial intelligence, this provides a powerful impulse for transforming the entire financial sector. Fintech is changing the game’s rules, affecting traditional banks and opening new opportunities for millions of people,” believes Tiago Rudiger.
He noted that Brazil and Russia are sharing their experiences in these areas with each other.
“I read that this will help people reduce transaction costs in global financial markets. I’m ready to discuss this with enthusiasm. I look forward to when these processes arrive in Brazil and worldwide,” emphasised Tiago Rudiger.
Maxim Oreshkin, Deputy Chief of Staff of the Presidential Administration of the Russian Federation, moderated the session. He emphasised that this year, the St. Petersburg International Economic Forum is taking place against turbulent world events.
“This year, the St. Petersburg International Economic Forum is taking place against turbulent world events. This includes the situation in the Middle East and trade wars. Much time will be devoted to this current agenda at the forum. We must not forget which long-term trends and challenges are basic and defining. It is important to conduct an open dialogue about how we build the world of the future and how to form a new platform for global growth. In which countries does this global growth occur, on which technologies will it be built, and on which principles and cultural code? Our task is to ensure that forward movement benefits people in all countries that, like Russia, are working on the future. It is through open dialogue that our future and its understanding are built,” emphasised Maxim Oreshkin.
At the session organised by the Russia National Centre, speakers also discussed the report on the results of the Open Dialogue prepared by the Centre for Cross-Industry Expertise “Third Rome.” The session took place in sequential discussions, in which speakers discussed economics, technologies, and people in a rapidly changing world.
The results of the session “Shaping a New Platform for Global Growth” became the foundation for the subsequent business program of SPIEF-2025. The recording of the session can be viewed on the Russia National Centre website.
MOSCOW, RUSSIA, June 18, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — The St. Petersburg International Economic Forum (SPIEF) 2025 opened in St. Petersburg on June 18 with a high-level session hosted by the Russia National Centre, highlighting fintech innovation and strategies for global economic growth.
The forum’s business program opened on June 18 with the session “Shaping a New Platform for Global Growth,” where the final report on the results of the International Open Dialogue of the Russia National Centre was presented. The discussion focused on key challenges of modernity: economic and political fragmentation, demographic shifts, the implementation of breakthrough technologies, and the growing social and technological gap within and between states.
The CEO of Tanssi Foundation, Tiago Rudiger (Brazil), emphasised that the real fintech revolution is happening in Global South countries.
“Forget Wall Street – the fintech revolution is happening in Global South countries. Thanks to blockchain, money and assets are becoming programmable, and combined with artificial intelligence, this provides a powerful impulse for transforming the entire financial sector. Fintech is changing the game’s rules, affecting traditional banks and opening new opportunities for millions of people,” believes Tiago Rudiger.
He noted that Brazil and Russia are sharing their experiences in these areas with each other.
“I read that this will help people reduce transaction costs in global financial markets. I’m ready to discuss this with enthusiasm. I look forward to when these processes arrive in Brazil and worldwide,” emphasised Tiago Rudiger.
Maxim Oreshkin, Deputy Chief of Staff of the Presidential Administration of the Russian Federation, moderated the session. He emphasised that this year, the St. Petersburg International Economic Forum is taking place against turbulent world events.
“This year, the St. Petersburg International Economic Forum is taking place against turbulent world events. This includes the situation in the Middle East and trade wars. Much time will be devoted to this current agenda at the forum. We must not forget which long-term trends and challenges are basic and defining. It is important to conduct an open dialogue about how we build the world of the future and how to form a new platform for global growth. In which countries does this global growth occur, on which technologies will it be built, and on which principles and cultural code? Our task is to ensure that forward movement benefits people in all countries that, like Russia, are working on the future. It is through open dialogue that our future and its understanding are built,” emphasised Maxim Oreshkin.
At the session organised by the Russia National Centre, speakers also discussed the report on the results of the Open Dialogue prepared by the Centre for Cross-Industry Expertise “Third Rome.” The session took place in sequential discussions, in which speakers discussed economics, technologies, and people in a rapidly changing world.
The results of the session “Shaping a New Platform for Global Growth” became the foundation for the subsequent business program of SPIEF-2025. The recording of the session can be viewed on the Russia National Centre website.
Source: The Conversation – UK – By Chee Meng Tan, Assistant Professor of Business Economics, University of Nottingham
After the second world war, the US and its western allies created a set of international agreements and institutions to govern attitudes to mutual defence, economics and human rights. For decades this created stable alliances and predictable economic plans.
But, unlike his predecessors, Donald Trump believes that international organisations undermine US interests and sovereignty. He has withdrawn the US from the World Health Organization, and there is speculation he could reduce US commitment to the UN. US investment in Nato’s mutual defence pact remains under discussion.
But while Washington is busy sounding the retreat from the very world order it had a hand in building, Beijing is looking to increase its international role. Chinese leadership in international agencies affiliated with the UN has increased over the years, and so has its financial commitment to international institutions.
That’s not all. China is also a prominent member of trade coalitions such as the
15-member Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership, and the ten-member Brics group (led by Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa). These groups not only promote greater economic integration among its members, but may reduce members’ reliance on the US economy and the US dollar. Amid an increasingly volatile US, China’s presence as the second largest economy in the world in these trade groups would be useful.
Now with the whole world negotiating new US trade deals, most nations see their relationship with the US as unstable. China sees this as a golden opportunity to position itself as a global counterbalance to the US. One of its policies is to “deliver greater security, prosperity and respect for developing countries”, and this is particularly relevant in African nations, where US aid is being reduced rapidly.
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 US-Sino trade deal was reached in London on June 10 2025. US tariffs on Chinese goods now stand at 55%, while Chinese tariffs on US imports will remain at 10%. But how long this trade deal will last remains uncertain, when Trump has a tendency to change his mind.
There are few details of the US trade deal with China so far.
Just a month earlier, on May 12, Washington and Beijing concluded a major trade accord in Geneva aimed at diffusing massive trade tensions. Unfortunately, this deal only lasted for 18 days before Trump started accusing China of violating the agreement.
But Trump’s tendency to escalate trade tensions and then diffuse them is not just China’s problem. His allies are also a victim of his frequent wavering. This leaves nations around the world, whether traditional US partners or not, in a crisis of not knowing what the US’s next move will be, and whether their economy will suffer.
In February 2025, Trump imposed 25% tariffs on Mexico and Canada but temporarily called off the tariffs a month later. Then in early April 2025, Trump raised tariffs on 60 countries and trading blocs, including traditional US allies such as the EU (20%), Japan (24%), South Korea (25%) and Taiwan (32%). Hours later, Trump unexpectedly rescinded these tariffs, but that caused massive damage to the global economy.
If there is a time that the world needs a more predictable partner it would be now. But it isn’t a Trump-helmed US. A recent annual report on democracy and national attitudes indicates that for first time, respondents across 100 countries view China more favourably than they do the US. So, could China be the partner that the world seeks?
Unlike liberal democracies that derive their legitimacy through elections, a large part of Beijing’s legitimacy comes from its ability to deliver sustained economic prosperity to the Chinese people. But with a battered economy that was first triggered by a real estate crisis in 2021, this task of maintaining legitimacy has become more difficult.
Exporting its way of out the economic slump may have been on Beijing’s books, as this was one of China’s traditional methods for promoting economic growth. But Trump’s trade war has made this an increasingly difficult prospect, especially to the US which imports 14.8% of total Chinese exports.
As a result, fixing China’s economy has become a priority for the Chinese government, and it is because of this that Xi tours neighbouring Asean countries such as Vietnam, Malaysia and Cambodia to promote trade and strategic plans to maintain economic stability.
Obstacles for China
Despite everything that China is doing, its image remains a problem, for some. For instance, China has claimed sovereignty over the South China Sea and has built ports, military installations and airstrips on artificial islands across the region, despite territorial disputes with its neighbours including Vietnam, the Philippines, Taiwan, Malaysia and Brunei.
But there are other concerns about China. The country’s rapid advancements in military technology, for example, have the potential to destabilise security within the Indo Pacific, potentially allowing China to take control of strategically placed islands to use as bases for its navy. China is also becoming a dominant hacking threat, according to UK cyber expert Richard Horne, which is likely to cause problems for worldwide cybersecurity.
Polish prime minister Donald Tusk once remarked: “With a friend like Trump, who needs enemies?” Many other national leaders are likely to share Tusk’s sentiment today, and may see opportunities to extend trade deals with China as an alternative to a turbulent relationship with Trump.
Chee Meng Tan 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.
We forecast U.S. ethane exports will decrease by 80,000 barrels per day (b/d) this year and by 177,000 b/d in 2026 in our June Short-Term Energy Outlook because of new licensing requirements for U.S. exports of ethane to China. Any policy changes that relax licensing requirements, such as the outcome of trade negotiations between the United States and China, would lead us to increase our forecasts for U.S. ethane exports again.
China is the largest destination for U.S. ethane exports, accounting for 47% of U.S. ethane exports in 2024. All U.S. ethane exports to China come from two terminals on the U.S. Gulf Coast. Enterprise operates the Orbit terminal in Morgan’s Point, Texas, and Energy Transfer operates a terminal in Nederland, Texas. These terminals have long-term contracts with ethane cracking facilities in China. Both companies announced they received notice from the U.S. Department of Commerce’s Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS) that they need to apply for a special license to export ethane to China. Both Enterprise and Energy Transfer report that BIS said ethane exports to China pose an “unacceptable risk” that the material could be used for military purposes.
According to Vortexa data, as of June 16, seven Very Large Ethane Carriers (VLECs), nearly a quarter of the VLEC fleet, are stalled along the U.S. Gulf Coast. Two stalled VLECs are laden with nearly 1 million barrels of ethane each. Typically, these loaded VLECs would be headed to China through the Panama Canal, indicating that they were likely loaded before the export licenses were denied. Three VLECs that typically go to China are ballast (empty) and moored off the U.S. Gulf Coast. Two vessels that typically carry ethane from the U.S. Gulf Coast to China on long-term agreements have been diverted to ethane crackers in Dahej, India. The last shipment of U.S. ethane to China left May 23 from Energy Transfer’s terminal on the U.S. Gulf Coast.
Ethane is a natural gas liquid extracted from wet natural gas during processing and is primarily used to produce ethylene. Ethylene is a crucial component in the petrochemical industry and a building block for plastics, resins, and synthetic rubber.
Average annual U.S. ethane exports have increased every year since 2014 except 2020, when exports fell slightly due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Growing U.S. ethane exports have been supported by rising global petrochemical demand, ethane’s cost advantage in ethylene production over other feedstocks such as naphtha and propane, and increased ethane tanker fleet shipping capacity.
Crackers in China that can only use ethane as a feedstock, such as Satellite Petrochemical, have already shut down, according to Argus, because no alternative sources for ethane imports exist. Other crackers in China can switch feedstock to naphtha or liquified petroleum gas (propane and butane), such as SP Chemical’s Taixing cracker.
HOUSTON, June 18, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Tokio Marine HCC (TMHCC), based in Houston, Texas, today announced the appointment of Elizabeth Geary to the newly created role of President & CEO of North America P&C. She will be responsible for the growth and leadership of TMHCC’s North America P&C business units. Ms. Geary assumes her new role on June 30, 2025, reporting to Susan Rivera, TMHCC’s CEO, and will be based in New York City.
Ms. Geary brings more than two decades of underwriting and senior leadership experience to TMHCC. She joins from Liberty Mutual, where, as President of Insurance Solutions, she was responsible for the launch and development of a new organization, focused on proactively managing brokers’ and clients’ evolving risk needs with a focus on cyber, energy transition, and alternative risk solutions. Ms. Geary began her career at TransRe, gaining underwriting experience across the spectrum of specialty classes, starting with US Property and Healthcare, progressing to Global Head of Cyber, and ultimately serving in a dual role as Chief Underwriting Officer, North America, and President, Global Portfolio Management.
This announcement is the latest in a series of key executive appointments at TMHCC, with Barry Cook promoted to the role of Deputy CEO in April 2025, as the business evolves and expands its leadership structure to maintain its growth momentum.
Ms. Rivera said, “Appointing Liz to the new role of President & CEO of our North America P&C business units is a statement of intent for our business. Her talent and track record of underwriting acumen, product strategy, and leadership are exceptional. As TMHCC continues to expand and evolve, driven by our commitment to enhancing our offerings to reflect the needs of insureds in a rapidly changing risk environment, we will need to attract the leading talent in the market who share our specialized focus and approach. Liz is an example of this approach in action, and I look forward to working with her to successfully harness the opportunities present in this expansive sector of the insurance market.”
Ms. Geary added, “Tokio Marine HCC’s North American business has become a market leader in its chosen sectors, and its specialty insurance reputation is second to none. TMHCC is known for its long-term commitment to markets, underwriting excellence, and top-notch financial strength. I am delighted to be joining Susan and her team and look forward to helping the business realize its profitable growth ambitions in North America while providing market-leading solutions for our brokers and insureds.”
About Tokio Marine HCC Tokio Marine HCC is a member of the Tokio Marine Group, a premier global company founded in 1879 with a market capitalization of $74 billion as of March 31, 2025. Headquartered in Houston, Texas, Tokio Marine HCC is a leading specialty insurance group with offices in the United States, Mexico, the United Kingdom and Continental Europe. Tokio Marine HCC’s major domestic insurance companies have financial strength ratings of ‘A+’ (Strong) from S&P Global Ratings, ‘A++’ (Superior) from AM Best, and ‘AA-’ (Very Strong) from Fitch Ratings; its major international insurance companies have financial strength ratings of ‘A+’ (Strong) from S&P Global Ratings. Tokio Marine HCC is the marketing name used to describe the affiliated companies under the common ownership of HCC Insurance Holdings, Inc., a Delaware-incorporated insurance holding company. For more information about Tokio Marine HCC, please visit www.tokiomarinehcc.com.
Contact: Doug Busker, Vice President – Public Relations Tokio Marine HCC 713-996-1192
HOUSTON, June 18, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Tokio Marine HCC (TMHCC), based in Houston, Texas, today announced the appointment of Elizabeth Geary to the newly created role of President & CEO of North America P&C. She will be responsible for the growth and leadership of TMHCC’s North America P&C business units. Ms. Geary assumes her new role on June 30, 2025, reporting to Susan Rivera, TMHCC’s CEO, and will be based in New York City.
Ms. Geary brings more than two decades of underwriting and senior leadership experience to TMHCC. She joins from Liberty Mutual, where, as President of Insurance Solutions, she was responsible for the launch and development of a new organization, focused on proactively managing brokers’ and clients’ evolving risk needs with a focus on cyber, energy transition, and alternative risk solutions. Ms. Geary began her career at TransRe, gaining underwriting experience across the spectrum of specialty classes, starting with US Property and Healthcare, progressing to Global Head of Cyber, and ultimately serving in a dual role as Chief Underwriting Officer, North America, and President, Global Portfolio Management.
This announcement is the latest in a series of key executive appointments at TMHCC, with Barry Cook promoted to the role of Deputy CEO in April 2025, as the business evolves and expands its leadership structure to maintain its growth momentum.
Ms. Rivera said, “Appointing Liz to the new role of President & CEO of our North America P&C business units is a statement of intent for our business. Her talent and track record of underwriting acumen, product strategy, and leadership are exceptional. As TMHCC continues to expand and evolve, driven by our commitment to enhancing our offerings to reflect the needs of insureds in a rapidly changing risk environment, we will need to attract the leading talent in the market who share our specialized focus and approach. Liz is an example of this approach in action, and I look forward to working with her to successfully harness the opportunities present in this expansive sector of the insurance market.”
Ms. Geary added, “Tokio Marine HCC’s North American business has become a market leader in its chosen sectors, and its specialty insurance reputation is second to none. TMHCC is known for its long-term commitment to markets, underwriting excellence, and top-notch financial strength. I am delighted to be joining Susan and her team and look forward to helping the business realize its profitable growth ambitions in North America while providing market-leading solutions for our brokers and insureds.”
About Tokio Marine HCC Tokio Marine HCC is a member of the Tokio Marine Group, a premier global company founded in 1879 with a market capitalization of $74 billion as of March 31, 2025. Headquartered in Houston, Texas, Tokio Marine HCC is a leading specialty insurance group with offices in the United States, Mexico, the United Kingdom and Continental Europe. Tokio Marine HCC’s major domestic insurance companies have financial strength ratings of ‘A+’ (Strong) from S&P Global Ratings, ‘A++’ (Superior) from AM Best, and ‘AA-’ (Very Strong) from Fitch Ratings; its major international insurance companies have financial strength ratings of ‘A+’ (Strong) from S&P Global Ratings. Tokio Marine HCC is the marketing name used to describe the affiliated companies under the common ownership of HCC Insurance Holdings, Inc., a Delaware-incorporated insurance holding company. For more information about Tokio Marine HCC, please visit www.tokiomarinehcc.com.
Contact: Doug Busker, Vice President – Public Relations Tokio Marine HCC 713-996-1192
AUSTIN, Texas, June 18, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — EZCORP, Inc. (NASDAQ:EZPW), a leading provider of pawn loans in the United States and Latin America, announced today that it has acquired 40 pawn stores across 13 states in Mexico. The stores, operating under the names “Monte Providencia” and “Tu Empeño Efectivo” offer traditional pawn loans, as well as auto pawn transactions, some of which are in stand-alone auto pawn stores. With this acquisition, the Company also takes over the management of 7 additional Monte Providencia stores, which it plans to acquire in the coming months.
Lachie Given, Chief Executive Officer, stated: “The Monte Providencia acquisition realizes our strategic objective of geographic expansion, increasing our footprint by 40 stores in Mexico. Mexico continues to be one of our most attractive markets with strong financial performance and robust growth potential. We are excited that these stores also bring diversification of our pawn portfolio with the expansion into auto pawn, a growing segment of the pawn industry in Mexico, that enables higher dollar auto loan transactions and engages a new customer base.”
EZCORP now operates a total of 1,332 pawn stores, 787 of which are in Latin America, including 602 in Mexico.
ABOUT EZCORP
Formed in 1989, EZCORP has grown into a leading provider of pawn transactions in the United States and Latin America. We also sell pre-owned and recycled merchandise, primarily collateral forfeited from pawn lending operations and merchandise purchased from customers. We are dedicated to satisfying the short-term cash needs of consumers who are both cash and credit constrained, focusing on an industry-leading customer experience. EZCORP is traded on NASDAQ under the symbol EZPW and is a member of the S&P 1000 Index and Nasdaq Composite Index.
FORWARD LOOKING STATEMENTS
This announcement contains certain forward-looking statements regarding the Company’s strategy, initiatives, and expected performance. These statements are based on the Company’s current expectations as to the outcome and timing of future events. All statements, other than statements of historical facts, including all statements regarding the Company’s strategy, initiatives and future performance, that address activities or results that the Company plans, expects, believes, projects, estimates or anticipates, will, should or may occur in the future, including future financial or operating results, are forward-looking statements. Actual results for future periods may differ materially from those expressed or implied by these forward-looking statements due to a number of uncertainties and other factors, including operating risks, liquidity risks, legislative or regulatory developments, market factors, current or future litigation and risks associated with pandemics. For a discussion of these and other factors affecting the Company’s business and prospects, see the Company’s annual, quarterly and other reports filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission. The Company undertakes no obligation to update or revise forward-looking statements to reflect changed assumptions, the occurrence of unanticipated events or changes to future operating results over time.
esterday, Governor Kathy Hochul visited Brooklyn’s Little Haiti neighborhood to visit community leaders and discuss the impact of President Trump’s policies on the Haitian-American community.
PHOTOS of the meeting are available on the Governor’s Flickr page.
“With the Statue of Liberty in our harbor, New York has always welcomed immigrants who come to this country seeking a better life. That’s especially true for our Haitian American community who have become a large, vibrant part of New York’s culture and civic life. Haitian American leaders have opened small businesses, provided essential healthcare as front line workers, produced extraordinary arts and culture, and served at the highest levels of elected office. These are our fellow Americans — and our fellow New Yorkers,” said Governor Hochul. We know the Haitian American community has been under attack by cynical political leaders. Haiti has been characterized in ways that are too vile to put in writing, and politicians have spread false rumors about Haitian Americans in Ohio. Now, the federal government is banning travel between Haiti and the United States, cutting hundreds of thousands of New Yorkers off from their loved ones and family. As leaders of the Empire State, we stand united against this outrageous travel ban. The ban is cruel and does nothing to make us safer. Instead of doubling down on hate, New York will continue our efforts to lift up the Haitian American community with support and resources to ensure their safety and well-being. We stand united in the face of this bigotry, and we will not back down.”
Assemblymember Michaelle C. Solages, Chair of the NYS Black, Puerto Rican, Hispanic & Asian Legislative Caucus said, “This policy is not rooted in national security. It is rooted in racism, xenophobia, and a cruel desire to slam the door on families fleeing hardship. As the first person of Haitian descent elected to the New York State Legislature, this is deeply personal. I understand what our community has faced and continues to endure. Haitian New Yorkers are caregivers, small business owners, students, faith leaders, and essential workers who contribute to our economy and enrich New York every day. Banning Haitians and others from entering the United States under the guise of safety is not only wrong, it is a stain on our nation’s moral fabric. We cannot allow fear and bigotry to dictate immigration policy. We must reject this shameful act and continue fighting for an immigration system that reflects compassion and human dignity.”
Assemblymember Rodneyse Bichotte Hermelyn said, “New York has always been a welcoming beacon for immigrant communities to build a better life. The President’s inhumane and xenophobic policy banning citizens from 12 countries – including Haiti – from entry and travel to the U.S. is not only unjust — it causes real harm by cutting families off from their loved ones in a time of dire crisis. Further, the sudden, blatantly racist ban targets millions who have legally called our nation and state home, and will wreak havoc on our economy while causing dangerous discord for our nation that is built on the backs of immigrants. As the first Haitian-American State Legislator elected to represent NYC, I resolutely stand with Governor Hochul in opposition. In the face of xenophobic rhetoric and harmful policies that unfairly target Haitians, and the Black and brown immigrants from 11 nations, New York must, and will, lead with compassion, strength, and resolve.”
Assemblymember Clyde Vanel said, “Policies like these serve only to further isolate Haiti and its people during a time when international support is most needed. Thousands of constituents in my district, including myself, have close relatives in Haiti. This ban will do nothing except to make unifying families and visiting loved ones next to impossible. It will also further worsen the humanitarian crisis already occurring in Haiti.”
Councilmember Farah N. Louis said, “The decision to impose travel restrictions on 12 countries represents a despicable and deeply troubling moment for our community. Haiti is once again being unfairly targeted in an intentional attack on our identity, dignity, and humanity. I commend Governor Hochul for standing with Haitian New Yorkers and reaffirming that our state will not be complicit in cruelty. New York’s leaders are showing the country what it means to protect all people, regardless of nationality or status. I will continue to join efforts to safeguard our community, uplift Haitian voices, and fight back against federal policies rooted in discrimination and fear.”
Councilmember Mercedes Narcisse said, “As a proud Haitian-American, I stand with my community and Governor Hochul in opposing the federal travel ban that will only deepen the suffering of those already facing unimaginable challenges. Haiti is in the midst of a devastating crisis, and for many, the United States represents their last hope for safety, medical care, and a better life. By cutting off access to this lifeline, the federal government is turning its back on the Haitian people, and also disregarding the very values that define this nation, compassion, humanity, and support for those in need.”
Source: US Whitehouse
President Donald J. Trump’s One Big Beautiful Bill will be an economic windfall for working and middle-class Americans, delivering the largest tax cut in history, higher wages, higher take-home pay, and much more — coupled with generational spending cuts and deficit reduction that will position the U.S. for real prosperity. Its massive benefits will be felt by Americans in all 50 states, according to a new state-by-state analysis from the Council of Economic Advisers:
State
Long-run wage increase(Inflation-adjusted)
Take-home pay increase(Typical family with two kids)
Alabama
$4,800 to $9,100
$6,500 to $10,800
Alaska
$6,400 to $12,200
$8,100 to $13,900
Arizona
$5,800 to $11,100
$7,500 to $12,800
Arkansas
$4,500 to $8,600
$6,200 to $10,300
California
$7,500 to $14,300
$9,200 to $16,000
Colorado
$7,000 to $13,300
$8,700 to $15,000
Connecticut
$7,300 to $14,000
$7,300 to $14,000
Delaware
$6,100 to $11,700
$7,800 to $13,400
Florida
$5,800 to $11,000
$7500 to $12,700
Georgia
$5,800 to $11,000
$7,500 to $12,700
Hawaii
$7,000 to $13,300
$8,700 to $15,000
Idaho
$5,500 to $10,500
$7,200 to $12,200
Illinois
$6,200 to $11,800
$7,900 to $13,500
Indiana
$5,100 to $9,800
$6,800 to $11,500
Iowa
$5,200 to $10,000
$6,900 to $11,700
Kansas
$5,200 to $10,000
$6,900 to $11,700
Kentucky
$4,700 to $8,900
$6,400 to $10,600
Louisiana
$4,700 to $8,900
$6,400 to $10,600
Maine
$5,400 to $10,300
$7,100 to $12,000
Maryland
$7,200 to $13,800
$8,900 to $15,500
Massachusetts
$7,700 to $14,800
$9,400 to $16,500
Michigan
$5,200 to $10,000
$6,900 to $11,700
Minnesota
$6,300 to $12,100
$8,000 to $13,800
Mississippi
$4,300 to $8,100
$6,000 to $9,800
Missouri
$5,200 to $9,900
$6,900 to $11,600
Montana
$5,300 to $10,000
$7,000 to $11,700
Nebraska
$5,700 to $10,800
$7,400 to $12,500
Nevada
$5,800 to $11,000
$7,500 to $12,700
New Hampshire
$7,000 to $13,300
$8,700 to $15,000
New Jersey
$7,700 to $14,700
$9,400 to $16,400
New Mexico
$4,800 to $9,100
$6,500 to $10,800
New York
$6,800 to $13,000
$8,500 to $14,700
North Carolina
$5,500 to $10,500
$7,200 to $12,200
North Dakota
$5,500 to $10,500
$7,200 to $12,200
Ohio
$5,200 to $10,000
$6,900 to $11,700
Oklahoma
$4,800 to $9,100
$6,500 to $10,800
Oregon
$6,000 to $11,400
$7,700 to $13,100
Pennsylvania
$5,700 to $10,900
$7,400 to $12,600
Rhode Island
$6,300 to $12,000
$8,000 to $13,700
South Carolina
$5,200 to $9,900
$6,900 to $11,600
South Dakota
$5,400 to $10,300
$7,100 to $12,000
Tennessee
$5,300 to $10,000
$7,000 to $11,700
Texas
$6,000 to $11,300
$7,700 to $13,000
Utah
$6,600 to $12,500
$8,300 to $14,200
Vermont
$5,900 to $11,300
$7,600 to $13,000
Virginia
$6,900 to $13,100
$8,600 to $14,800
Washington
$7,200 to $13,800
$8,900 to $15,500
West Virginia
$4,300 to $8,200
$6,000 to $9,900
Wisconsin
$5,500 to $10,400
$7,200 to $12,000
Wyoming
$5,200 to $9,900
$6,900 to $11,600
Methodological notes:
The Council of Economic Advisers (CEA) calculates how investment, GDP, and wages increase in response to lower effective tax rates (lower statutory rates, bigger deduction for pass-through businesses, and full expensing that businesses will enjoy on new equipment, R&D, and factories) using standard academic methods that were successful in accurately forecasting the effects of the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA).
Take-home pay — defined as after-tax earnings — increases because wages rise and less money is taken out of workers’ paychecks.
The CEA also looks at the further boost to GDP from the stronger incentive to work (lower taxes boost labor supply) and the greater spending power that Americans will have.
More about the methodology can be found here.
Source: International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) –
The IAEA Board of Governors will convene its regular September meeting at the Agency’s headquarters starting at 10:30 CEST on Monday, 9 September, in Board Room C, Building C, 4th floor, in the Vienna International Centre (VIC).
Board discussions are expected to include, among others: nuclear and radiation safety; nuclear security; strengthening the Agency’s activities related to nuclear science, technology and applications; verification and monitoring in the Islamic Republic of Iran in light of United Nations Security Council resolution 2231 (2015); application of safeguards in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea; implementation of the NPT safeguards agreement in the Syrian Arab Republic; NPT Safeguards Agreement with the Islamic Republic of Iran; nuclear safety, security and safeguards in Ukraine; transfer of the nuclear materials in the context of AUKUS and its safeguards in all aspects under the NPT; application of IAEA safeguards in the Middle East; and the restoration of sovereign equality of Member States in the IAEA.
The Board of Governors meeting is closed to the press.
Director General Rafael Mariano Grossi will open the meeting with an introductory statement which will be released to journalists after delivery and posted on the IAEA website. The IAEA will provide video footage here and will make photos available on Flickr.
Press Conference:
Director General Grossi is expected to hold a press conference at 13:00 CEST on Monday, 9 September, in the Press Room of the M building.
A live video stream of the press conference will be available. The IAEA will provide video footage here and will make photos available on Flickr.
Photo Opportunity:
There will be a photo opportunity with the IAEA Director General and the Chair of the Board, Ambassador Holger Federico Martinsen of Argentina, before the start of the Board meeting, on 9 September at 10:30 CEST in Board Room C, in the C building in the VIC.
Press Working Area:
The Press Room on the M-Building’s ground floor will be available as a press working area starting from 9:00 CEST on 9 September.
Accreditation:
All journalists interested in covering the meeting in person must register with the Press Office by 16:00 CEST on Thursday, 5 September. Please email press@iaea.org. We encourage those journalists who do not yet have permanent accreditation to request it at UNIS Vienna.
Please plan your arrival to allow sufficient time to pass through the VIC security check.
Source: International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) –
Scientists and experts from around the world will meet at the IAEA Scientific Forum this week to discuss how nuclear science and technology innovations under the framework of Atoms4Food can contribute to enhancing sustainable agrifood systems, improving food security and addressing climate challenges.
IAEA Director General Rafael Mariano Grossi will open the forum on Tuesday alongside HE Musalia Mudavadi, Prime Cabinet Secretary of Kenya, Mr Abdulhamid Alkhalifa, President of the OPEC Fund, MrLiu Jing, Vice Chairman, China Atomic Energy Authority, China, HE MrSidi Tiémoko Touré, Minister of Animal and Fisheries Resources, Cote d’Ivoire, HE MsLeila Benali, Minister of Energy Transition and Sustainable Development, Kingdom of Morocco, HE MrFernando Mattos, Minister of Livestock, Uruguay, and Mr Giorgio Silli, Undersecretary of Foreign Affairs and International Cooperation, Italy. Director General Grossi will conclude the Forum on Wednesday alongside HE MrAnxious Jongwe Masuka, Minister of Lands, Agriculture, Fisheries, Water and Rural Development from Zimbabwe, HE MrAmadou Dicko, Deputy Minister, Ministry of Agriculture, Animal Resources and Fisheries, Burkina Faso and other distinguished representatives from Member States and International Organizations.
The event under the title Atoms4Food – Better Agriculture for Better Life, takes place from Tuesday, 17 September, 9:30 CEST to Wednesday, 18 September 2024, 13:00 CEST in Board Room D on the 4th floor of the C-Building of the Vienna International Centre (VIC). Open to the media and streamed live, the event will showcase how nuclear science can drive agricultural advancements and support global efforts to combat food insecurity.
The forum will feature three technical sessions, where international experts will explore the critical role of nuclear science and technology in advancing sustainable agriculture, food production and nutrition. Speakers will discuss innovations using nuclear and isotopic techniques in agriculture and food production, the interconnectedness of agricultural practices with environmental conservation and socioeconomic equity, and the importance of partnering with stakeholders to scale up results and ensure sustainability. More details about the Scientific Forum can be found on the IAEA website and social media (Facebook, Instagram, LinkedIn, X, Weibo). Photos of the Forum will also be available on Flickr.
The detailed programme and full list of speakers can be found here. For those interested in interviewing speakers, please contact the IAEA Press Office, and we will assist with interview arrangements.
Accreditation
Journalists with permanent credentials to the VIC or journalists who have already obtained accreditation for the IAEA’s General Conference need no additional credentials. We encourage those journalists who do not yet have permanent accreditation to request it at UNIS Vienna.
Others should contact the IAEA Press Office for accreditation.
Source: United Kingdom – Executive Government & Departments
A systematic review published in the Journal for the American Heart Association looks at ocean microplastic pollution and the risk of cardiometabolic disease in US coastline counties.
Prof Oliver Jones, Professor of Chemistry, RMIT University, said:
“I fear this paper will lead to more “plastics cause scary disease X” headlines, but, to my mind, the evidence in this paper is quite weak.
“Firstly, the authors don’t claim that microplastics cause disease, but rather that they found an association between microplastic exposure and type 2 diabetes (T2D), coronary artery disease (CAD), and stroke. An association between two things does not necessarily mean that one caused the other; it is simply an observation. There is also a large amount of overlap in the datasets, even between the very low and very high exposure scenarios, and the authors clearly state in the paper that their “results do not imply causation”.
“Perhaps more importantly, the authors didn’t measure either microplastic exposure or the health factors they studied directly; both were estimates. Microplastic concentrations were estimated from ocean measurements, some of which were taken up to 230 miles offshore and thus may not accurately represent what coastal communities are exposed to. The rates of disease occurrence were estimated from county-level survey data, which does not provide data on individuals. Potential cofounders were limited to those listed in the survey data, meaning some potentially confounding factors could not be controlled for.
“The authors all appear to be medics, rather than chemists or environmental scientists. The paper makes a lot of incorrect generalisations about microplastics, for example, referring to “microplastic compounds like phthalates”. Phthalates are not microplastics, and not all phthalates are the same. They claim that bisphenol A and phthalates promote adverse health outcomes through their endocrine-disrupting properties, which is incorrect. The paper also refers to toxicity studies on polystyrene particles, neglecting the fact that polystyrene is far from the most common type of plastic in the environment.
“So, while the work raises interesting research questions, I do not think the evidence of harm is strong, and people living near the coast don’t need to panic”
Dr Ria Devereux, Environmental Research Fellow, the Sustainable Research Institute, the University of East London, said:
Does the press release accurately reflect the science?
“It is important to note that this research focuses solely on the United States, particularly its coastal counties, and specifically examines marine microplastics. It does not consider other types of microplastics, such as those found in marine sediment, beach sediment, atmospheric microplastics, or microplastics in soil. The title, “Living near an ocean polluted by microplastics may increase cardiometabolic disease risk,” could give the incorrect impression that these findings apply globally, which is not justified by this data.
“Both sizes of plastic particles come from the chemical breakdown (decomposition) of larger plastic waste, including food packaging (like single-use water bottles), synthetic fabrics and personal care products.” This statement is also slightly incorrect. Microplastics can also be found in the form primary microplastics (nurdles) which are made to be a particular size and are not the result of degradation. Plastics are also subjected to mechanical, biological degradation as well as chemical.
Is this good quality research? Are the conclusions backed up by solid data?
“It is very interesting research which does need further research to investigate some of the limitations of the study conducted. One major limitation that is not addressed is that microplastics contain chemicals which have been found to be harmful to human health. There is no mention in this study regarding data on water quality. For example, is there a higher abundance of chemicals found within plastics in the water surrounding these coastal communities which may be a contributing factor.
How does this work fit with the existing evidence?
“The production of plastic and its associated pollution are increasingly recognized for their potential implications on human health. Research conducted on wildlife has demonstrated severe consequences, including choking hazards and hormonal disruptions.
“Recent studies have identified plastics in various human tissues, including the placenta [1],breastmilk [2] and stool [3].
“In addition to the presence of microplastics in the human body, chemicals commonly used in plastic production have been found to pose health risks. Research indicates that exposure to these chemicals can lead to various health issues, including skin irritation, respiratory diseases, hormonal disruptions, and certain cancers [4].
Have the authors accounted for confounders? Are there important limitations to be aware of?
“The dataset from NOAA presents several limitations. It does not account for when the samples were collected—such as during storms—or the duration of the sampling periods. Additionally, there may be a lack of studies in many coastal counties. For instance, most samples from the Gulf of Mexico are concentrated around Tampa and the southern region of Florida, with only two data points near New Orleans. While the authors briefly mention this issue in relation to the Atlantic and Pacific coasts, they do not address it for the Gulf of Mexico. They note that “study design, spatial coverage, and oceanic transport dynamics” may contribute to differences observed in previous studies.
“The authors also acknowledge that theabsence of data on the types of microplastics—such as fragments and fibers—constitutes a limitation. However, this statement should also include the lack of information regarding polymer types and plastic sizes.
“Additionally, it would be relevant to consider how many people in these coastal areas consume seafood and whether it is locally sourced or imported.
“As for the timeframe investigated, How long must someone live near the coast for it potentially to impact their health?
“Regarding groundwater, the authors mention that only “35% of drinking water in the United States is supplied by groundwater.” Is the proportion of coastal residents who drink groundwater higher than that of individuals living in other parts of America?
“Perhaps the most critical issue that the authors have not fully addressed is that almost all plastic production plants in the United States, which are involved in petrochemical and petroleum manufacturing, are located either in coastal counties along the Gulf of Mexico or on the Atlantic Ocean side (according to the Plastics Inventory Map [5]). This study indicates that cases of heart disease and similar health issues are higher in these areas. Many chemicals used in plastic production, such as BPA and phthalates, have been previously linked to these health problems [6]
What are the implications in the real world? Is there any over-speculation?
“This study highlights the need for further investigation into the health impacts of plastics on human well-being throughout their entire lifecycle. While this research primarily focuses on marine microplastics, it is essential to recognize that microplastics are also present in soil, air, and water. Additionally, it is important to understand that the risks associated with plastic do not stop at ingestion or inhalation, the entire lifecycle of plastic poses threats to public health. This includes hazards linked to petroleum extraction, the use of chemicals in production, and the leaching of these substances into our environment during manufacturing and disposal.
“It is important to note that this study cannot establish a cause-and-effect relationship between ocean microplastic levels (which were assessed only in water, not in sediment or fish) and the development of certain diseases due to its limitations in data and design. Further research is needed to determine whether microplastics and associated chemicals are present in higher concentrations near coastlines in soil, water, and air, as well as within the human body, to fully evaluate the potential health implications of living closer to the coast. Additionally, this study should be expanded to explore whether this trend is observed worldwide.
“Unfortunately, many individuals around the globe view plastic pollution solely as an environmental issue, overlooking its potential implications for human health. Studies like this one play a crucial role in raising awareness of these risks.
Extra commentary from Dr Ria Devereux on wider context
“The adverse effects of chemicals used in plastic production are particularly pronounced in the Gulf of Mexico, an area often referred to as “Cancer Alley.” This region experiences a higher-than-average incidence of cancer, diabetes, and respiratory diseases, which are concentrated in particular areas. The reason behind this is the concentration of petrochemical, petroleum and production plants involved in plastic production and an increase in the presence of chemicals used within the plastic production such as BPA and Phthalates [7,8].
“Although the Plastics Treaty acknowledges that human health is a critical factor in regulating plastic production and the associated chemicals, reports indicate that “chemicals of concern in plastic products” are at threat of being excluded from the current treaty text [9,10,11].
“In regards to America, we may find in the future that this types of disparity in human health and microplastics become worse due to Trumps “America first” narrative on top of increasing tariffs which will cause an increase in the plastics industry to align with the needs of the consumer and manufacturers. On top of this Trump has bought plastic straws back to America [12] and has started to dismantle key government institutions such as NOAA ( The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration)[13] and the Environmental Protection Agency [14] which will push back Americas efforts to reduce plastic waste.”
‘Marine Microplastic Levels and the Prevalence of Cardiometabolic Diseases in US Coastline Counties’byMakwanaet al.will be published in Journal for the American Heart Association at 10:00UK time on Wednesday 18th June.
DOI:10.1161/JAHA.124.039891
Declared interests
Dr Ria Devereux None
Prof Oliver Jones “I am a Professor of Chemistry at RMIT University in Melbourne, Australia. I conduct research into environmental pollution and its effects on biological systems. I don’t have any conflicts of interest to declare.”
Source: International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) –
Nobel’s spotlight on our perilous path and how we change course
I want to start by congratulating Nihon Hidankyō and the hibakusha for their Nobel Peace Prize.
As a young diplomat almost 40 years ago, I was fortunate to be part of a UN disarmament fellowship programme and to visit Hiroshima. There, fellows had an opportunity to meet the hibakusha and I had a conversation with an ailing victim. I have carried to every meeting, to every negotiation, and to every posting, the memory this woman’s silent testimony. When I asked her about that morning in 1945, she struggled to express the horror in words. She tried to articulate some words but stayed silent. Looking at me, right into my eyes. The look in her eyes has stayed with me ever since, like a powerful reminder, a secret mandate, to work so that her suffering is never repeated.
For decades after the Second World War, the international community has been dealing with this unique dilemma: we built robust norms and passed nonproliferation and disarmament treaties. Instead of dozens of countries armed with nuclear weapons, as was the concern in the 1960s, there are less than ten. Stockpiles of nuclear weapons have shrunk from tens of thousands to thousands.
But on its journey through the perils of the atomic age, the world has come to a crucial crossroads. Our deep psychological connection caused by collectively seeing the horror of the consequences of nuclear war seems to be evaporating, taking with it our joint resolve to do everything possible to prevent a repetition.
Like a giant spotlight, this year’s Nobel Peace Prize has lit up our path ahead. It has done it, by reminding us of the past, and of the consequences of ignoring the perils of nuclear weapons use.
Context of conflicts
To understand the important challenges we face, we must look at the global context, at what is happening around the world.
War has returned to Europe, and it directly involves a nuclear weapon state. The conflict in Ukraine is also an indirect confrontation between the world’s biggest nuclear weapon states, the first since the end of the Cold War. But nuclear exercises and open references to the use of nuclear weapons in the theatre of this war are increasing the risks and can not be ignored.
In the Middle East, the conflict of the past year has ignited smoldering tensions between Israel and Iran and led to the unprecedented step of direct exchanges and attacks between the two. Here there is also a nuclear weapons dimension. On one side, the assumed presence of nuclear weapons looms in the background. On the other, the very real potential of nuclear proliferation is raising the stakes.
We find ourselves in a harmful loop: the erosion of the restraints around nuclear weapons is making these conflicts more dangerous. Meanwhile, these conflicts are contributing to the erosion of the restraints. The vicious circle dynamic is in motion.
An unfortunate change of direction
Doctrines regarding the use of nuclear weapons are being revised or reinterpreted. The quantity and quality of nuclear weapon stockpiles are being increased.
And in some non-nuclear weapon states – states that are important in their region – leaders are asking “why not us?”. And they are asking this openly!
At the start of the nuclear arms race, J Robert Oppenheimer described the USSR and the US as “two scorpions in a bottle” each capable of killing the other, but only by risking their own life.
Oppenheimer’s blunt statement would later be developed and elaborated under the roof of deterrence and the more sophisticated concept of “Mutual Assured Destruction,” or MAD.
Today, independent of the vantage point of the observer, there is widespread concern that the risk of mutual destruction through nuclear war is higher than it has been for more than a generation.
Lessons from history
But it does not have to be this way. We can do better. History has shown that effective dialogue among superpowers has, more often than not, led to confidence and, as a result, also to arms limitation and even disarmament. At certain moments in history, world leaders took the right decisions, to tone down, or, to use today’s parlance, to de-escalate. Let’s see:
The end of the Cuban Missile Crisis happened thanks to the direct engagement of Soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev and US President John F Kennedy. Decades later, at the Geneva Summit of 1985, Mikhail Gorbachev and President Ronald Reagan agreed a crucial axiom: “Nuclear war cannot be won and should never be fought.” They met again the next year in Reykjavik and significant reductions in nuclear arsenals followed. Nuclear weapon reductions and the elimination of a whole category of weapon, through the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces, or INF, Treaty, were agreed. These steps towards rapprochement took leadership and courage. They often happened despite skepticism and voices against them.
Diplomacy and dialogue (and the duty of nuclear weapon states)
A return to diplomacy and dialogue is urgently needed, and this, not only in things nuclear. Shutting the other side out has never solved a problem and almost certainly aggravates it. Top leadership involvement is simply indispensable when nuclear weapons are involved. President Trump took the initiative and talked to Kim Jong Un. More of this is needed. Some have said these talks were ill prepared. I say, this is important. Nuclear weapon policy and limitations does not work bottom up. It is of course the other way around.
We must be proactive in building the trust and protections that lower the risk of close calls and of brinkmanship, especially during today’s tensions. Not taking active steps means we rely on luck – or the assumption that the other side will show restraint – to save us from nuclear war. The longer you rely on luck, the more likely it is to run out.
Conflict and tensions compel nations to arm themselves. Diplomacy and compromise create conditions in which they can disarm.
The road to a nuclear weapon-free world is long and winding. The disarmament landscape is complex, and it’s worth acknowledging that. This does not diminish the responsibility nuclear weapons states have to make progress. After all, they committed themselves to this goal back in 1968, through the Non-Proliferation Treaty.
Steps can be taken to decrease the reliance on nuclear weapons, both in their production and the scenarios for their use.
Nuclear weapon states, through their actions at home and on the world stage, have a responsibility to avoid a scenario in which more countries seek nuclear weapons. Pushing ahead with increases in arsenals leads to despair, cynicism, and a growing skepticism about the value of past commitments. Disengagement and unilateralism fuel sentiments of vulnerability in other countries, and with that, the notion nuclear weapons could be the ultimate protection against outside threats.
Engagement among the five permanent members of the Security Council is indispensable. Such engagement can take many different shapes, starting with direct contact among themselves, bilaterally or as a group. This dialogue, which still exists, has been reduced to a very low level, virtually without real impact. Perhaps its revival could be assisted by an international organization, or facilitated with the support of a respected, impartial leader. Therefore, it’s essential that the United Nations, other international organizations, and their leaders work effectively to ensure their continued relevance amid the changing needs of their stakeholders.
Do not make things worse (by falling for the siren call of proliferation)
The IAEA has played its indispensable technical role during past attempts of nuclear proliferation, particularly in the Middle East. As the difficult experiences in Iraq, Libya and Syria remind us, the draw of nuclear weapons is real and so is the geopolitical and military response.
Today’s tensions are prompting even leaders of important counties that, so far, are in good standing with the NPT to ask: “Why shouldn’t we have a nuclear weapon too?”
To this, I would say, “Do not make things worse.” Acquiring a nuclear weapon will not increase national security, it will do the opposite. Other countries will follow. And this will contribute to the unravelling of a nonproliferation regime that has had its ups and downs – and it still has its limitations – but none-the-less it has served humanity extraordinarily well. The problem and challenge to the NPT regime may come from those nuclear armed but also those who, while not having nuclear weapons, may feel the NPT has failed as a catalyst to disarmament.
Weakening the non-proliferation treaty under the argument that progress on nuclear disarmament has been slow and more drastic approaches are required, would be totally misguided and may make us throw away existing international measures committing nuclear weapon states and non-nuclear weapon states in this field.
I come from a non-nuclear weapon state. I understand the frustration that some people feel about the “haves” and “have-nots” of nuclear weapons. But I have also seen the legacy of peace and prosperity left by leaders who resisted that siren call. In the 1980s, vision, resolve and dialogue meant Brazil and Argentina changed course and did not go down the path to nuclear arms. Today, Latin America is a nuclear weapon free zone.
Multilateral leaders: step up by stepping in
Many wonder whether there’s still a role for multilateralism in guiding us through this maze of conflicting interests. Yes, there is. During difficult times in the past, international organizations have had a big impact on peace and security. But it only happens when leaders of these organizations get off the side lines and use their mandate and their own good offices effectively.
We prove our relevance in extraordinary times.
Each organization has different tools, a different mandate, a different membership, and each of their leaders will determine how to act. I can speak for the IAEA. We have nuclear science at our core, and we are the world’s nuclear weapons watchdog. Let me give you an example:
For almost three years, Ukraine, the world and the IAEA have been confronted with a completely unprecedented situation – never before has a military conflict involved the seizure of a nuclear power plant and been fought among the facilities of a major nuclear power programme.
At the beginning of the war, Ukraine’s biggest nuclear power plant – the biggest nuclear power plant in Europe, with nearly 6 gigawatts of installed capacity – was taken by Russia. This established a hotspot in the middle of a combat zone. The chance of an incident – or accident – causing terrible radiological consequences became real.
Observing this from the outside was never, in my mind, an option. Staying on the sidelines and later reflecting on “lessons learned” may have been the more traditional – or expected – path for an international organization. But to me this would have been a dereliction of duty. So, we leaned into our core mission, crossed the front lines of war, and established a permanent presence of IAEA experts at all Ukraine’s nuclear power plants. That makes us the only international organization operating independently in occupied territory. We are informing the world of what’s going on and reducing the chance that a radiological incident enflames the conflict and causes even more devastation.
We did the same by going to Kursk when a Russian nuclear reactor was at risk of coming into the line of fire. I am in constant communication with both sides.
I have been meeting with President Zelenskyy, and President Putin regularly. Nuclear safety and security during this conflict must have the buy-in and continued involvement of both leaders. Talking to only one of them would not achieve this important goal. At the same time, I am keeping an open dialogue with leaders on all continents and briefing the UN Security Council. When it comes to nuclear safety in Ukraine it has been possible to build a level of agreement that is rare during the divisions of this conflict. Where there is agreement, there is hope for more agreement.
Ukraine is not our only hotspot.
In Iran, the IAEA’s job is to verify the exclusively peaceful nature of a growing nuclear programme. Iran has now enriched uranium to a level that is hard to justify. It has not yet answered the IAEA’s questions completely and it has made our work more difficult by taking away some of our cameras and blocking some of our most experienced safeguards inspectors from going into the country. This has caused concern and led to a pattern of mistrust and recriminations. In diplomacy, progress often requires prompting, catalyzing, and suggesting ways forward. This presents a role for an impartial, honest and effective broker. It is a role I, in my capacity as the IAEA’s Director General, have been playing. In fact, I returned from my latest visit to Tehran just a few weeks ago where I presented alternatives and ideas to reduce the growing tensions, and hopefully to retain Iran within the NPT and the non-proliferation norms.
The danger of playing it safe
When it comes to working on behalf of peace and security, playing it safe is dangerous.
Silence and indifference can be deadly.
Dag Hammerskjold, the second Secretary General of the United Nations, said: “It is when we all play safe that we create a world of utmost insecurity.”
A new path
This week, the Norwegian Nobel Committee looked beyond today’s conflicts. In its own way, it did not play it safe. Instead, it shined a light on the horrors of nuclear war and the people who have been warning us about them for many decades.
In doing that, the Nobel Committee, Nihon Hidankyō and the hibakusha have illuminated the danger of the path we are now on.
We have to make a new path.
First, the leaders of the nuclear weapon states must recognize the need for a responsible management of their nuclear arsenals. Experiences from the past confirm that even at times of crisis and conflict it has been possible to recognize the unique terminal power of these weapons and the responsibility that comes with it. What Kennedy, Khrushchev, Reagan, Gorbachev, or Trump did by reaching out to a nuclear-armed adversary, sets a precedent, a useful one. Such contacts, either bilateral or at the P5 level could possibly be facilitated by a competent broker. These are the first steps to bringing down the tone so that nuclear sabre rattling recedes and the commitments to the unequivocal undertakings to move towards a nuclear free world can be fulfilled.
Secondly, an iron-clad resolve to observe and strengthen the global non-proliferation regime needs to be adopted. Nuclear weapon and nuclear non-weapon states must work together to ensure the non-proliferation of nuclear weapons.
Ladies and gentlemen,
We need to walk through perilous times by recognizing limitations and keeping our eyes on our common objectives.
Nuclear disarmament cannot be imposed on the nuclear armed.
Realism is not defeatism. Diplomacy is not weakness.
Difficult times call for enlightened leadership, at the national level, and at the international level as well.
Putting the international system back on track is within our reach. World leaders, including those at the top of the multilateral system, have a duty and an irrevocable responsibility to work towards this.
Personally, I am convinced. Perhaps, because the secret mandate I received that day in Hiroshima from a hibakusha burns in me, stronger than ever. Thank you.
Source: International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) –
The IAEA Board of Governors will convene its regular November meeting at the Agency’s headquarters starting at 10:30 CET on Wednesday, 20 November, in Board Room C, Building C, 4th floor, in the Vienna International Centre (VIC).
Board discussions are expected to include, among others: applications for membership of the Agency; report of the Technical Assistance and Cooperation Committee; verification and monitoring in the Islamic Republic of Iran in light of United Nations Security Council resolution 2231 (2015); nuclear verification: the conclusion of safeguards agreements and of additional protocols (if any), staff of the Department of Safeguards to be used as Agency inspectors, application of safeguards in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, implementation of the NPT safeguards agreement in the Syrian Arab Republic, naval nuclear propulsion: Australia and naval nuclear propulsion: Brazil, and NPT safeguards agreement with the Islamic Republic of Iran; nuclear safety, security and safeguards in Ukraine; transfer of the nuclear materials in the context of AUKUS and its safeguards in all aspects under the NPT; and restoration of the Sovereign Equality of Member States in the IAEA.
The Board of Governors meeting is closed to the press.
Director General Rafael Mariano Grossi will open the meeting with an introductory statement, which will be released to journalists after delivery and posted on the IAEA website.
Press Conference
Director General Grossi is expected to hold a press conference at 13:00 CET on Wednesday, 20 November, in the Press Room of the M building.
A live video stream of the press conference will be available. The IAEA will provide video footage of the press conference and the Director General’s opening statement here and will make photos available on Flickr.
Photo Opportunity
There will be a photo opportunity with the IAEA Director General and the Chair of the Board, Ambassador Philbert Abaka Johnson of Ghana, before the start of the Board meeting, on 20 November at 10:30 CET in Board Room C, in the C building in the VIC.
Press Working Area
The Press Room on the M-Building’s ground floor will be available as a press working area, starting from 9:00 CET on 20 November.
Accreditation
All journalists interested in covering the meeting in person – including those with permanent accreditation – are requested to inform the IAEA Press Office of their plans. Journalists without permanent accreditation must send copies of their passport and press ID to the IAEA Press Office by 14:00 CET on Tuesday, 19 November.
We encourage those journalists who do not yet have permanent accreditation to request it at UNIS Vienna.
Please plan your arrival to allow sufficient time to pass through the VIC security check.
2. Combating the sexual abuse and sexual exploitation of children and child sexual abuse material and replacing Council Framework Decision 2004/68/JHA (recast) ***I (debate)
Report on the proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on combating the sexual abuse and sexual exploitation of children and child sexual abuse material and replacing Council Framework Decision 2004/68/JHA (recast) [COM(2024)0060 – C9-0028/2024 – 2024/0035(COD)] – Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs. Rapporteur: Jeroen Lenaers (A10-0097/2025)
Jeroen Lenaers introduced the report.
The following spoke: Magnus Brunner (Member of the Commission).
The following spoke: Heléne Fritzon (rapporteur for the opinion of the FEMM Committee), Javier Zarzalejos, on behalf of the PPE Group, Marina Kaljurand, on behalf of the S&D Group, Susanna Ceccardi, on behalf of the PfE Group, Assita Kanko, on behalf of the ECR Group, Veronika Cifrová Ostrihoňová, on behalf of the Renew Group, Saskia Bricmont, on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group, Irene Montero, on behalf of The Left Group, Mary Khan, on behalf of the ESN Group, Michał Wawrykiewicz, Alex Agius Saliba, Anders Vistisen, who also answered a blue-card question from Jeroen Lenaers, Paolo Inselvini, Laurence Farreng, Alice Kuhnke, Nikos Pappas, Zsuzsanna Borvendég, Monika Beňová, Lukas Sieper, on comments made by some of the previous speakers (the President took note), Ewa Kopacz, Maria Guzenina, Margarita de la Pisa Carrión, Georgiana Teodorescu, Moritz Körner, Nicolae Ştefănuță, Anja Arndt, who also declined to take a blue-card question from Moritz Körner, Malika Sorel, Elissavet Vozemberg-Vrionidi, Juan Fernando López Aguilar, Mathilde Androuët, Gheorghe Piperea, Ana Miguel Pedro, who also answered a blue-card question from João Oliveira, Laura Ballarín Cereza, Elisabeth Dieringer, Chiara Gemma, Péter Magyar, who also answered a blue-card question from Jorge Buxadé Villalba, Jaak Madison, Isabel Wiseler-Lima, Lara Magoni and François-Xavier Bellamy, who also answered a blue-card question from Petras Gražulis.
The following spoke under the catch-the-eye procedure: Eleonora Meleti, Maria Grapini, Viktória Ferenc, Sebastian Tynkkynen, Nina Carberry, Vytenis Povilas Andriukaitis, Annamária Vicsek, João Oliveira and Alessandra Moretti.
IN THE CHAIR: Pina PICIERNO Vice-President
The following spoke under the catch-the-eye procedure: Sunčana Glavak and Lukas Sieper.
The following spoke: Magnus Brunner and Jeroen Lenaers.
The debate closed.
Vote: 17 June 2025.
3. European Ocean Pact (debate)
Commission statement: European Ocean Pact (2025/2744(RSP))
Costas Kadis (Member of the Commission) made the statement.
The following spoke: Isabelle Le Callennec, on behalf of the PPE Group, Christophe Clergeau, on behalf of the S&D Group, Silvia Sardone, on behalf of the PfE Group, Bert-Jan Ruissen, on behalf of the ECR Group, Stéphanie Yon-Courtin, on behalf of the Renew Group, Isabella Lövin, on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group, Emma Fourreau, on behalf of The Left Group, Siegbert Frank Droese, on behalf of the ESN Group, Carmen Crespo Díaz, André Rodrigues, António Tânger Corrêa, Nora Junco García, Ana Vasconcelos, Rasmus Nordqvist, Nikolas Farantouris, Paulo Do Nascimento Cabral, who also answered a blue-card question from João Oliveira, Antonio Decaro, André Rougé, who also answered a blue-card question from Christophe Clergeau, Michal Wiezik, Mélissa Camara, Catarina Martins, Željana Zovko, Sofie Eriksson, France Jamet, Gerben-Jan Gerbrandy, Sebastian Everding, Francisco José Millán Mon, Thomas Bajada, who also answered a blue-card question from Lukas Sieper, Yvan Verougstraete, Luke Ming Flanagan, Sander Smit, Nicolás González Casares, Billy Kelleher, Fredis Beleris, Sakis Arnaoutoglou, Salvatore De Meo, Giuseppe Lupo, César Luena and Idoia Mendia.
The following spoke under the catch-the-eye procedure: Ingeborg Ter Laak, Sebastian Tynkkynen and João Oliveira.
The following spoke: Costas Kadis.
The debate closed.
(The sitting was suspended at 11:57.)
IN THE CHAIR: Roberta METSOLA President
4. Resumption of the sitting
The sitting resumed at 12:06.
5. Formal sitting – Address by His Majesty King Abdullah II, King of the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan
The President made an address to welcome His Majesty Abdullah II, King of the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan.
King Abdullah II addressed the House.
(The sitting was suspended for a few moments.)
IN THE CHAIR: Antonella SBERNA Vice-President
6. Resumption of the sitting
The sitting resumed at 12:33.
***
The following spoke: Fernand Kartheiser on the response time for written questions (the President provided some clarifications) and Alexander Jungbluth (the President cut him off as remarks did not constitute a point of order).
7. Voting time
For detailed results of the votes, see also ‘Results of votes’ and ‘Results of roll-call votes’.
7.1. Amending Regulation (EU) No 228/2013 as regards additional assistance and further flexibility to outermost regions affected by severe natural disasters and in the context of cyclone Chido devastating Mayotte ***I (vote)
Proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Regulation (EU) No 228/2013 as regards additional assistance and further flexibility to outermost regions affected by severe natural disasters and in the context of cyclone Chido devastating Mayotte (COM(2025)0190 – C10-0071/2025 – 2025/0104(COD)) –Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development
(Majority of the votes cast)
COMMISSION PROPOSAL
Approved(P10_TA(2025)0115)
Detailed voting results
7.2. Combating the sexual abuse and sexual exploitation of children and child sexual abuse material and replacing Council Framework Decision 2004/68/JHA (recast)***I(vote)
Report on the proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on combating the sexual abuse and sexual exploitation of children and child sexual abuse material and replacing Council Framework Decision 2004/68/JHA (recast) [COM(2024)0060 – C9-0028/2024 – 2024/0035(COD)] – Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs. Rapporteur: Jeroen Lenaers (A10-0097/2025)
(Majority of the votes cast)
COMMISSION PROPOSAL and AMENDMENTS
Approved (P10_TA(2025)0116)
REQUEST FOR REFERRAL BACK TO COMMITTEE
Approved
The following had spoken:
Jeroen Lenaers (rapporteur), after the vote on the Commission proposal, to request that the matter be referred back to the committee responsible, for interinstitutional negotiations in accordance with Rule 60(4).
Detailed voting results
7.3. Agreement between the European Union and Ukraine amending the Agreement between the European Union and Ukraine on the carriage of freight by road of 29 June 2022***(vote)
Recommendation on the draft Council decision on the conclusion, on behalf of the Union, of the Agreement between the European Union and Ukraine amending the Agreement between the European Union and Ukraine on the carriage of freight by road of 29 June 2022 [16072/2024 – C10-0226/2024 – 2024/0290(NLE)] – Committee on Transport and Tourism. Rapporteur: Elissavet Vozemberg-Vrionidi (A10-0102/2025)
(Majority of the votes cast)
DRAFT COUNCIL DECISION
Approved (P10_TA(2025)0117)
Parliament consented to the conclusion of the agreement.
Detailed voting results
7.4. Termination of the Voluntary Partnership Agreement between the European Union and the Republic of Cameroon on forest law enforcement governance and trade in timber and derived products to the Union***(vote)
Recommendation on the draft Council decision on the termination of the Voluntary Partnership Agreement between the European Union and the Republic of Cameroon on forest law enforcement, governance and trade in timber and derived products to the Union [05673/2025 – C10-0012/2025 – 2024/0245(NLE)] – Committee on International Trade. Rapporteur: Karin Karlsbro (A10-0089/2025)
(Majority of the votes cast)
DRAFT COUNCIL DECISION
Approved (P10_TA(2025)0118)
Parliament consented to the termination of the agreement.
Detailed voting results
7.5. Termination of the Voluntary Partnership Agreement between the European Union and the Republic of Cameroon on forest law enforcement governance and trade in timber and derived products to the Union (Resolution) (vote)
Report containing a motion for a non-legislative resolution on the proposal for a Council decision on the termination of the Voluntary Partnership Agreement between the European Union and the Republic of Cameroon on forest law enforcement, governance and trade in timber and derived products to the Union [2024/0245M(NLE)] – Committee on International Trade. Rapporteur: Karin Karlsbro (A10-0094/2025)
(Majority of the votes cast)
MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION
Adopted by single vote (P10_TA(2025)0119)
Detailed voting results
7.6. Electoral rights of mobile Union citizens in European Parliament elections * (vote)
Report on the proposal for a Council directive laying down detailed arrangements for the exercise of the right to vote and stand as a candidate in elections to the European Parliament for Union citizens residing in a Member State of which they are not nationals (recast) [09789/2024 – C10-0001/2024 – 2021/0372(CNS)] – Committee on Constitutional Affairs. Rapporteur: Sven Simon (A10-0090/2025)
(Majority of the votes cast)
COUNCIL DRAFT
Approved(P10_TA(2025)0120)
Detailed voting results
7.7. Amendments to Parliament’s Rules of Procedure concerning the declaration of input (Article 8 of Annex I to the Rules of Procedure) (vote)
Report on amendments to Parliament’s Rules of Procedure concerning the declaration of input (Article 8 of Annex I to the Rules of Procedure) [2025/2067(REG)] – Committee on Constitutional Affairs. Rapporteur: Sven Simon (A10-0086/2025)
(Majority of Parliament’s component Members required)
PROPOSAL FOR A DECISION
Adopted (P10_TA(2025)0121)
This amendment would enter into force on the first day of the following part-session.
The following had spoken:
Sven Simon (rapporteur), before the vote, to make a statement on the basis of Rule 165(1).
Detailed voting results
7.8. Strengthening rural areas in the EU through cohesion policy (vote)
Report on strengthening rural areas in the EU through cohesion policy [2024/2105(INI)] – Committee on Regional Development. Rapporteur: Denis Nesci (A10-0092/2025)
The debate had taken place on 16 June 2025 (minutes of 16.6.2025, item 22).
(Majority of the votes cast)
MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION
Adopted by single vote (P10_TA(2025)0122)
Detailed voting results
7.9. Financing for development – ahead of the Fourth International Conference on Financing for Development in Seville (vote)
Report on financing for development – ahead of the Fourth International Conference on Financing for Development in Seville [2025/2004(INI)] – Committee on Development. Rapporteur: Charles Goerens (A10-0101/2025)
(Majority of the votes cast)
MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION
Rejected
The following had spoken:
Charles Goerens (rapporteur), before the vote, to make a statement under Rule 165(4), and after the vote on the resolution as a whole.
Detailed voting results
9
(The sitting was suspended for a few moments.)
8. Resumption of the sitting
The sitting resumed at 12:57.
9. Approval of the minutes of the previous sitting
The following spoke: Marion Maréchal, to make a personal statement in the light of the comments made by Benedetta Scuderi during the previous day’s sitting, before the adoption of the agenda (minutes of 16.6.2025, item 16).
The minutes of the previous sitting were approved.
10. Implementation report on the Recovery and Resilience Facility (debate)
Report on the implementation of the Recovery and Resilience Facility [2024/2085(INI)] – Committee on Budgets – Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs. Rapporteurs: Victor Negrescu and Siegfried Mureşan (A10-0098/2025)
Victor Negrescu and Siegfried Mureşan introduced the report.
The following spoke: Raffaele Fitto (Executive Vice-President of the Commission).
The following spoke: Carla Tavares (rapporteur for the opinion of the BUDG Committee), Marie-Pierre Vedrenne (rapporteur for the opinion of the EMPL Committee), Jonas Sjöstedt (rapporteur for the opinion of the ENVI Committee), Giuseppe Lupo (rapporteur for the opinion of the TRAN Committee), Markus Ferber, on behalf of the PPE Group, Jean-Marc Germain, on behalf of the S&D Group, Enikő Győri, on behalf of the PfE Group, Denis Nesci, on behalf of the ECR Group, and Ľudovít Ódor, on behalf of the Renew Group.
IN THE CHAIR: Sabine VERHEYEN Vice-President
The following spoke: Nikolas Farantouris on behalf of The Left Group, Rada Laykova, on behalf of the ESN Group, Karlo Ressler, who also answered a blue-card question from João Oliveira, Jonás Fernández, Julien Sanchez, who also answered a blue-card question from Lukas Sieper, Ruggero Razza, Rasmus Andresen, Jussi Saramo, Alexander Jungbluth, who also answered a blue-card question from Radan Kanev, Thomas Geisel, Dirk Gotink, Costas Mavrides, Klara Dostalova, Bogdan Rzońca, Gordan Bosanac, who also answered a blue-card question from Sunčana Glavak, Milan Mazurek, Danuše Nerudová, Pierre Pimpie, Aurelijus Veryga, Radan Kanev, Alex Agius Saliba, Tomasz Buczek, Dick Erixon, Gheorghe Falcă, Idoia Mendia, Angéline Furet, Giovanni Crosetto, Georgios Aftias, Nils Ušakovs, Marlena Maląg, Kinga Kollár, who also answered a blue-card question from Enikő Győri, Evelyn Regner, Marion Maréchal, Angelika Winzig, Eero Heinäluoma, Adrian-George Axinia, Hanna Gronkiewicz-Waltz, Sandra Gómez López, Jacek Ozdoba, Adnan Dibrani, César Luena and Damian Boeselager.
The following spoke under the catch-the-eye procedure: Nikolina Brnjac, Maria Grapini, Sebastian Tynkkynen, Diana Iovanovici Şoşoacă and Hélder Sousa Silva.
The following spoke: Raffaele Fitto, Victor Negrescu and Siegfried Mureşan.
The debate closed.
Vote: 18 June 2025.
11. The Commission’s 2024 Rule of Law report (debate)
Report on The Commission’s 2024 Rule of Law report [2024/2078(INI)] – Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs. Rapporteur: Ana Catarina Mendes (A10-0100/2025)
Ana Catarina Mendes introduced the report.
The following spoke: Michael McGrath (Member of the Commission).
IN THE CHAIR: Christel SCHALDEMOSE Vice-President
The following spoke: Isabel Wiseler-Lima (rapporteur for the opinion of the AFET Committee), Ilhan Kyuchyuk (rapporteur for the opinion of the JURI Committee), Michał Wawrykiewicz, on behalf of the PPE Group, Birgit Sippel, on behalf of the S&D Group, Jorge Buxadé Villalba, on behalf of the PfE Group, Alessandro Ciriani, on behalf of the ECR Group, Moritz Körner, on behalf of the Renew Group, Daniel Freund, on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group, Gaetano Pedulla’, on behalf of The Left Group, Milan Uhrík, on behalf of the ESN Group, Dolors Montserrat, who also declined to take a blue-card question from Juan Fernando López Aguilar, Marco Tarquinio, Fabrice Leggeri, Mariusz Kamiński, Veronika Cifrová Ostrihoňová, Mary Khan, Ondřej Dostál, Javier Zarzalejos, Chloé Ridel, András László, who also answered a blue-card question from Gabriella Gerzsenyi, Patryk Jaki (the President reminded the House of the rules on conduct), Irena Joveva, Marcin Sypniewski, who also answered a blue-card question from Arkadiusz Mularczyk, Zoltán Tarr, Alessandro Zan, Marieke Ehlers, Nicolas Bay, Nikola Minchev, Sven Simon, Marc Angel, Gilles Pennelle, Dainius Žalimas, Paulo Cunha, who also answered a blue-card question from João Oliveira, Matjaž Nemec, Csaba Dömötör, David Casa, Katarina Barley, who also answered a blue-card question from Patryk Jaki, and Loucas Fourlas.
The following spoke under the catch-the-eye procedure: Gabriella Gerzsenyi, Juan Fernando López Aguilar, Arkadiusz Mularczyk, Katrin Langensiepen, Petras Gražulis and Maria Zacharia.
The following spoke: Michael McGrath and Ana Catarina Mendes.
The debate closed.
Vote: 18 June 2025.
12. 2023 and 2024 reports on Montenegro (debate)
Report on the 2023 and 2024 Commission reports on Montenegro [2025/2020(INI)] – Committee on Foreign Affairs. Rapporteur: Marjan Šarec (A10-0093/2025)
Marjan Šarec introduced the report.
The following spoke: Marta Kos (Member of the Commission).
The following spoke: Reinhold Lopatka, on behalf of the PPE Group, Costas Mavrides, on behalf of the S&D Group, Jaroslav Bžoch, on behalf of the PfE Group, and Şerban Dimitrie Sturdza, on behalf of the ECR Group.
IN THE CHAIR: Nicolae ŞTEFĂNUȚĂ Vice-President
The following spoke: Vladimir Prebilič, on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group, Giorgos Georgiou, on behalf of The Left Group, Davor Ivo Stier, Matjaž Nemec, Matthieu Valet, Carlo Ciccioli, Thomas Waitz, who also answered a blue-card question from Tomislav Sokol, Katarína Roth Neveďalová, Željana Zovko, Tonino Picula, Annamária Vicsek, Stephen Nikola Bartulica, Sunčana Glavak, Carla Tavares, Liudas Mažylis and Tomislav Sokol.
The following spoke under the catch-the-eye procedure: Vytenis Povilas Andriukaitis and Lukas Sieper.
The following spoke: Marta Kos and Marjan Šarec.
The debate closed.
Vote: 18 June 2025.
13. 2023 and 2024 reports on Moldova (debate)
Report on 2023 and 2024 Commission reports on Moldova [2025/2025(INI)] – Committee on Foreign Affairs. Rapporteur: Sven Mikser (A10-0096/2025)
Sven Mikser introduced the report.
The following spoke: Marta Kos (Member of the Commission).
The following spoke: Andrzej Halicki, on behalf of the PPE Group, Marta Temido, on behalf of the S&D Group, Cristian Terheş, on behalf of the ECR Group, Dan Barna, on behalf of the Renew Group, Virginijus Sinkevičius, on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group, Jonas Sjöstedt, on behalf of The Left Group, Alexander Sell, on behalf of the ESN Group, Andrey Kovatchev, Victor Negrescu, Eugen Tomac, Davor Ivo Stier, Marcos Ros Sempere, Karin Karlsbro, Mika Aaltola, Kristian Vigenin and Krzysztof Brejza.
The following spoke under the catch-the-eye procedure: Maria Grapini, Vytenis Povilas Andriukaitis and Lukas Sieper.
The following spoke: Marta Kos and Sven Mikser.
The debate closed.
Vote: 18 June 2025.
14. Two years since the devastating Tempi rail accident (debate)
Commission statement: Two years since the devastating Tempi rail accident (2025/2698(RSP))
The President provided some procedural clarifications.
Apostolos Tzitzikostas (Member of the Commission) made the statement.
IN THE CHAIR: Esteban GONZÁLEZ PONS Vice-President
The following spoke: Elissavet Vozemberg-Vrionidi, on behalf of the PPE Group, Yannis Maniatis, on behalf of the S&D Group, Afroditi Latinopoulou, on behalf of the PfE Group, Emmanouil Fragkos, on behalf of the ECR Group, Sandro Gozi, on behalf of the Renew Group, Virginijus Sinkevičius, on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group, Konstantinos Arvanitis, on behalf of The Left Group, and Siegbert Frank Droese, on behalf of the ESN Group.
The following spoke: Apostolos Tzitzikostas.
The debate closed.
15. Corrigenda (Rule 251) (action taken)
Corrigendum P9_TA(2024)0348(COR02) had been announced on 16 June 2025 (minutes of 16.6.2025, item 15).
As no requests for a vote had been made in accordance with Rule 251(4), the corrigendum was deemed approved.
16. Delegated acts (Rule 114(6)) (action taken)
The recommendation from the AGRI Committee to raise no objections to a delegated act had been announced in plenary on 16 June 2025(minutes of 16.6.2025, item 14).
As no objections to the recommendation had been raised in accordance with Rule 114(6), the recommendation was deemed approved.
17. Interpretations of the Rules of Procedure (action taken)
The AFCO Committee had provided interpretations of Article 3(5), first subparagraph, of Annex I and Article 8 of Annex I to the Rules of Procedure. The interpretations had been announced in plenary on 16 June 2025(minutes of 16.6.2025, item 11).
As they had not been contested by a political group or Members reaching at least the low threshold in accordance with Rule 242(4), the interpretations were appended to the Rules (P10_TA(2025)0123).
18. EU framework conditions for competitive, efficient and sustainable public transport services at all levels (debate)
Commission statement: EU framework conditions for competitive, efficient and sustainable public transport services at all levels (2025/2742(RSP))
Apostolos Tzitzikostas (Member of the Commission) made the statement.
The following spoke: Dariusz Joński, on behalf of the PPE Group, Johan Danielsson, on behalf of the S&D Group, Roman Haider, on behalf of the PfE Group, Antonella Sberna, on behalf of the ECR Group, Jan-Christoph Oetjen, on behalf of the Renew Group, Lena Schilling, on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group, Elena Kountoura, on behalf of The Left Group, Milan Uhrík, on behalf of the ESN Group, Nina Carberry, François Kalfon, Annamária Vicsek, Kosma Złotowski, Cynthia Ní Mhurchú, Kai Tegethoff, Kostas Papadakis, Elena Nevado del Campo, Rosa Serrano Sierra, Julien Leonardelli, Péter Magyar, who also answered a blue-card question from Annamária Vicsek, Sérgio Gonçalves, who also answered a blue-card question from João Oliveira, Sérgio Humberto, who also answered a blue-card question from João Oliveira, Matteo Ricci, Nikolina Brnjac and Regina Doherty.
The following spoke under the catch-the-eye procedure: Sebastian Tynkkynen, Lefteris Nikolaou-Alavanos, Maria Zacharia and Lukas Sieper.
The following spoke: Apostolos Tzitzikostas.
The debate closed.
(The sitting was suspended for a few moments.)
IN THE CHAIR: Sabine VERHEYEN Vice-President
19. Resumption of the sitting
The sitting resumed at 19:33.
20. Latest developments on the revision of the air passenger rights and airline liability regulations (debate)
Council and Commission statements: Latest developments on the revision of the air passenger rights and airline liability regulations (2025/2743(RSP))
Adam Szłapka (President-in-Office of the Council) and Apostolos Tzitzikostas (Member of the Commission) made the statements.
The following spoke: Andrey Novakov, on behalf of the PPE Group, Matteo Ricci, on behalf of the S&D Group, Roman Haider, on behalf of the PfE Group, Kosma Złotowski, on behalf of the ECR Group, Jan-Christoph Oetjen, on behalf of the Renew Group, Vicent Marzà Ibáñez, on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group, Arash Saeidi, on behalf of The Left Group, Stanislav Stoyanov, on behalf of the ESN Group, Jens Gieseke, Johan Danielsson, Julien Leonardelli, Michele Picaro, Oihane Agirregoitia Martínez, Nina Carberry, Rosa Serrano Sierra, Annamária Vicsek, Cynthia Ní Mhurchú, Borja Giménez Larraz, François Kalfon, Ernő Schaller-Baross, Nikolina Brnjac, Sérgio Gonçalves, Barbara Bonte, Sophia Kircher, Isabella Tovaglieri, Markus Ferber and Elżbieta Katarzyna Łukacijewska.
The following spoke under the catch-the-eye procedure: Sérgio Humberto, Ana Miranda Paz, Elena Kountoura and Magdalena Adamowicz.
The following spoke: Apostolos Tzitzikostas and Adam Szłapka.
The debate closed.
21. Situation in the Middle East (joint debate)
Statement by the Vice-President of the Commission / High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy: Risk of further instability in the Middle East following the Israel-Iran military escalation (2025/2770(RSP))
Statement by the Vice-President of the Commission / High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy: Review of the EU-Israel Association Agreement and the ongoing humanitarian crisis in Gaza (2025/2747(RSP))
Kaja Kallas (Vice President of the Commission / High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy) made the statements.
The following spoke: Michael Gahler, on behalf of the PPE Group, Iratxe García Pérez, on behalf of the S&D Group, Sebastiaan Stöteler, on behalf of the PfE Group, Bert-Jan Ruissen, on behalf of the ECR Group, Bart Groothuis, on behalf of the Renew Group, Hannah Neumann, on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group, Rima Hassan, on behalf of The Left Group, Antonio López-Istúriz White, Yannis Maniatis and Elena Donazzan.
IN THE CHAIR: Younous OMARJEE Vice-President
The following spoke: Bernard Guetta, Mounir Satouri, Marc Botenga, Lefteris Nikolaou-Alavanos, Hildegard Bentele, Kathleen Van Brempt, Rihards Kols, Barry Andrews, Villy Søvndal, Kathleen Funchion, Ruth Firmenich, Reinhold Lopatka, Ana Catarina Mendes, Alexandr Vondra, Irena Joveva, Catarina Vieira, Catarina Martins, Erik Kaliňák, Wouter Beke, Leire Pajín, Alberico Gambino, Abir Al-Sahlani, Saskia Bricmont, João Oliveira, Maria Zacharia, Nicolás Pascual de la Parte, who also answered a blue-card question from Ana Miranda Paz, Marta Temido, Geadis Geadi, Leoluca Orlando, Luke Ming Flanagan, Fidias Panayiotou, Maria Walsh, Thijs Reuten, Cynthia Ní Mhurchú, Alice Kuhnke, Danilo Della Valle, David Casa, Chloé Ridel, Gerben-Jan Gerbrandy, Majdouline Sbai, Céline Imart, Vasile Dîncu, Michael McNamara, Anna Strolenberg, Michał Szczerba, Aodhán Ó Ríordáin, Evin Incir and Regina Doherty.
The following spoke under the catch-the-eye procedure: Vytenis Povilas Andriukaitis, Sebastian Tynkkynen, Ana Miranda Paz, Jaume Asens Llodrà, Lukas Sieper and Katarína Roth Neveďalová.
The following spoke: Kaja Kallas.
The debate closed.
22. Assassination attempt on Senator Miguel Uribe and the threat to the democratic process and peace in Colombia (debate)
Statement by the Vice-President of the Commission/High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy: Assassination attempt on Senator Miguel Uribe and the threat to the democratic process and peace in Colombia (2025/2749(RSP))
Kaja Kallas (Vice President of the Commission / High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy) made the statement.
The following spoke: Davor Ivo Stier, on behalf of the PPE Group, Leire Pajín, on behalf of the S&D Group, Sebastian Kruis, on behalf of the PfE Group, Carlo Fidanza, on behalf of the ECR Group, Cristina Guarda, on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group, Anthony Smith, on behalf of The Left Group, Francisco José Millán Mon, Javi López, Jorge Martín Frías, Reinhold Lopatka, Julien Sanchez and Rody Tolassy.
The following spoke under the catch-the-eye procedure: Sebastian Tynkkynen.
The following spoke: Kaja Kallas.
The debate closed.
23. Oral explanations of votes (Rule 201)
23.1. Combating the sexual abuse and sexual exploitation of children and child sexual abuse material and replacing Council Framework Decision 2004/68/JHA (recast) (A10-0097/2025) Cristian Terheş
23.2. Strengthening rural areas in the EU through cohesion policy (A10-0092/2025) Cristian Terheş,Kathleen Funchion
24. Explanations of votes in writing (Rule 201)
Explanations of votes given in writing would appear on the Members’ pages on Parliament’s website
25. Agenda of the next sitting
The next sitting would be held the following day, 18 June 2025, starting at 09:00. The agenda was available on Parliament’s website.
26. Approval of the minutes of the sitting
In accordance with Rule 208(3), the minutes of the sitting would be put to the House for approval at the beginning of the afternoon of the next sitting.
27. Closure of the sitting
The sitting closed at 22:52.
LIST OF DOCUMENTS SERVING AS A BASIS FOR THE DEBATES AND DECISIONS OF PARLIAMENT
I. Documents received
The following documents had been received from committees:
– ***I Report on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on the welfare of dogs and cats and their traceability (COM(2023)0769 – C9-0443/2023 – 2023/0447(COD)) – AGRI Committee – Rapporteur: Veronika Vrecionová (A10-0104/2025)
When 35-year-old Oscar Escobar completed his term as the youngest elected mayor in his Colombian hometown in 2023, he was accepted into a program at Harvard University’s John F. Kennedy School of Government tailored to aspiring global leaders like him.
If the Trump administration gets its way, Escobar may be among the last foreign students for the foreseeable future to attend the Kennedy School, widely considered one of the world’s best schools for preparing future policymakers.
Last month, the Department of Homeland Security sought to revoke Harvard’s ability to enroll international students and force those who are there to transfer or lose their legal status. It accused the university of “fostering violence, antisemitism, and coordinating with the Chinese Communist Party.”
In early June, President Donald Trump doubled-down by issuing a proclamation to bar U.S. entry for foreign nationals planning to study at Harvard and directed the State Department to consider revoking visas for those already enrolled. Trump argued that Harvard has tolerated crime on campus and that its relationships with China threatened national security.
Harvard said the orders – which affect thousands of students – were illegal and amounted to retaliation for rejecting government’s demands to control its governance and curriculum among other things. It said it was addressing concerns about antisemitism and campus threats.
A federal judge has temporarily blocked both orders while the courts review legal challenges, but if allowed to stand, they would represent a huge blow to Harvard, and the Kennedy School in particular.
Over the past five years, 52% of Kennedy students have come from outside the United States, the school’s media office said. With students from more than 100 countries, it is “the most global” school at Harvard.
The large foreign contingent is a big part of why the school has been so successful as a training ground for future leaders, including Americans, said Nicholas Burns, a Kennedy School professor and a former U.S. diplomat.
“It’s by design,” Burns said in an interview, referring to the number of international students. “It’s a decision that the Kennedy School leadership made because it replicates the world as it is.”
Kennedy counts an impressive list of foreign leaders among its alumni, including former Mexican President Felipe Calderon and former Canadian Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau.
Another is Maia Sandu, who was elected president of Moldova in 2020 after she graduated. She has since emerged as an important regional voice against Russian influence, spearheading the country’s drive to join the European Union and taking a stand against Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.
“At Harvard I met interesting people from all over the world, everyone with his or her own story,” Sandu said in a 2022 address to Kennedy School graduates. “And, very quickly, I realized that my country was not the only one which had been struggling for decades. I realized that development takes time.”
‘SOFT POWER’
For the school’s defenders, foreign students bring more benefits than risks. They say educating future world leaders means boosting U.S. “soft power,” a concept coined in the 1980s by Harvard political scientist Joseph Nye, later a Kennedy School dean, to refer to non-coercive ways to promote U.S. values such as democracy and human rights.
Singapore Prime Minister Lawrence Wong, a Kennedy School graduate who must now navigate the rivalry between the United States and China in Southeast Asia, has acknowledged the influence of American culture on him.
He says he decided to study in the U.S. in part because his favorite musicians were Americans. Last year, Wong posted a TikTok video of himself playing Taylor Swift’s “Love Song” on acoustic guitar, dedicating the performance to teachers.
To be sure, the Kennedy School has courted its share of controversies – including criticism over who it accepts into its programs and who it invites to teach and speak to its students.
A notable example came in 2022 when Kennedy’s Carr Center for Human Rights Policy offered a fellowship to Kenneth Roth, former executive director of Human Rights Watch, and then rescinded it. Roth said at the time he believed the school caved to pressure from supporters of Israel who believed HRW had an anti-Israel bias. Kennedy denied that, but eventually reversed course amid widespread criticism that it was limiting debate.
Smiling as he posed for graduation photos with his family in May, Escobar said it was a bittersweet moment to complete his studies at Kennedy.
“If this university cannot receive international students anymore, of course we are missing an opportunity,” said Escobar, who has since returned to Colombia to work on the presidential campaign of leftist politician Claudia Lopez, also a former Harvard fellow.
“If what President Donald Trump wants is to make America great again, it will be a mistake.”
SAN SALVADOR, El Salvador, June 18, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Bitget Wallet, the leading non-custodial crypto wallet, is rolling out a new weekly program called Fomo Thursdays, offering users recurring access to early-stage token projects through a low-cost, gamified staking mechanism. It reflects the company’s broader push to simplify token participation by embedding launch activities directly within the wallet interface.
Each Thursday, users can stake $10 worth of tokens to receive a randomized allocation of project tokens. The format removes high entry thresholds, trading requirements, and point-based systems common in traditional launch models. Rewards are distributed on-chain, and users can reclaim their full stake after each round. Unlike models that rely on sustained trading or large holdings, Fomo Thursdays offers a fixed-entry experience with transparent allocation logic and no principal risk.
“Fomo Thursdays is a shift in how product launches can engage users directly,” said Jamie Elkaleh, CMO of Bitget Wallet. “By lowering barriers and introducing a weekly rhythm, we’re turning passive announcements into active, repeatable participation.”
The first event features Bombie, a LINE-based mini-game developed by the team behind Catizen. As the first LINE Mini DApp to conduct a token launch, Bombie will allocate over 40 million BOMB tokens through Bitget Wallet’s exclusive TGE (token generation event) claim interface. Participants will have a chance to receive rewards, with the top prize set at $888 equivalent in BOMB tokens. With over 12 million users across LINE and Telegram, Bombie reflects a growing trend toward integrating casual messaging-based apps with tokenized infrastructure.
The first staking window opens June 18 at 8:00 UTC and closes June 19 at 8:00 UTC, with token claims available starting June 19 at 10:00 UTC. Winners will receive BOMB tokens directly in-wallet, while all users may reclaim their staked USDT.
About Bitget Wallet Bitget Wallet is a non-custodial crypto wallet designed to make crypto simple and secure for everyone. With over 80 million users, it brings together a full suite of crypto services, including swaps, market insights, staking, rewards, DApp exploration, and payment solutions. Supporting 130+ blockchains and millions of tokens, Bitget Wallet enables seamless multi-chain trading across hundreds of DEXs and cross-chain bridges. Backed by a $300+ million user protection fund, it ensures the highest level of security for users’ assets. Its vision is Crypto for Everyone — to make crypto simpler, safer, and part of everyday life for a billion people. For more information, visit: X | Telegram | Instagram | YouTube | LinkedIn | TikTok | Discord | Facebook For media inquiries, contact media.web3@bitget.com
