NewzIntel.com

    • Checkout Page
    • Contact Us
    • Default Redirect Page
    • Frontpage
    • Home-2
    • Home-3
    • Lost Password
    • Member Login
    • Member LogOut
    • Member TOS Page
    • My Account
    • NewzIntel Alert Control-Panel
    • NewzIntel Latest Reports
    • Post Views Counter
    • Privacy Policy
    • Public Individual Page
    • Register
    • Subscription Plan
    • Thank You Page

Category: Middle East

  • MIL-OSI United Kingdom: Lost World War One Soldier Found in France

    Source: United Kingdom – Government Statements

    News story

    Lost World War One Soldier Found in France

    Relatives of a World War 1 Derbyshire soldier gathered in France today to witness his burial with full military honours alongside his comrades – more than a century after he was killed in action.  

    Sjt Ashton’s new headstone, with a personal inscription from his descendants (Crown Copyright)

    A burial service has been held in France for a lost World War One soldier more than a century after his death. The service was supported by Padre John Storey of 5th Bn The Rifles, and soldiers from 1st Bn The Rifles who flew in from Cyprus to support the service.

    Soldiers from 1st Bn The Rifles and Buglers from The Band & Bugles of The Rifles stand with members of Sjt Ashton’s family (Crown Copyright)

    Serjeant Henry Ashton from Derby, who died aged 44 in 1917, was the first named soldier to be buried and laid to rest at the Commonwealth War Graves Commission’s Loos British Cemetery Extension yesterday (10 June 2025). All other soldiers buried at the new Extension to date are unnamed.   

    His remains were discovered during construction work for a new hospital in Lens, and research showed that the remains belonged to a man of the Durham Light Infantry (DLI), with extensive pre-war service demonstrated by the tattered remains of medal ribbons still attached to his uniform. DNA testing then led to formal identification of Sjt Henry Ashton. 

    The service was organised by the MOD’s Joint Casualty and Compassionate Centre (JCCC), also known as the ‘MOD War Detectives’. 

    Alexia Clark, MOD War Detective said: 

    It has been a privilege to identify Sjt Ashton, and to be able to organise this burial service for him. When you consider the half-a-million men still missing from the First and Second World Wars, every one we can identify feels like an achievement. I am delighted that Sjt Ashton’s family have now been able to give him the dignified burial he had been denied for so long.

    Lt Fintan Yeatman of 1st Bn The Rifles presents the flag from Sjt Ashton’s coffin to his great-grandson Paul.

    Sjt Ashton initially served 12½ years with the Seaforth Highlanders before working for the Midland Railway Company. He rejoined the army in March 1915, first with the Derbyshire Yeomanry before transferring to the 14th Battalion Durham Light Infantry in October 1916. 

    Sjt Ashton was killed on 22 April 1917 during operations near Lens. A letter received at home from his officer, Captain Allden Owles, stated that he had died instantly and served bravely. Following the war Henry’s body was not recovered, and he was listed on the Memorial to the Missing at Loos.  

    Commemorations Casework Manager at the CWGC, David Royle, said:  

    It has been an honour to be involved in the identification of Serjeant Henry Ashton. Burial ceremonies like these are a reminder that the work of the CWGC continues and are as important today as when we were first founded. We will care for his grave, and those of his comrades, in perpetuity.

    Share this page

    The following links open in a new tab

    • Share on Facebook (opens in new tab)
    • Share on Twitter (opens in new tab)

    Updates to this page

    Published 12 June 2025

    MIL OSI United Kingdom –

    June 12, 2025
  • MIL-Evening Report: Global outrage over Gaza has reinforced a ‘siege mentality’ in Israel – what are the implications for peace?

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Eyal Mayroz, Senior Lecturer in Peace and Conflict Studies, University of Sydney

    After more than 20 months of devastating violence in Gaza, the right-wing Israeli government’s pursuit of two irreconcilable objectives — “destroying” Hamas and releasing Israeli hostages — has left the coastal strip in ruins.

    At least 54,000 Palestinians have been killed by the Israeli military, close to two million have been forcibly displaced, and many are starving. These atrocities have provoked intense moral outrage around the world and turned Israel into a pariah state.

    Meanwhile, Hamas is resolved to retain control over Gaza, even at the cost of sacrificing numerous innocent Palestinian lives for its own survival.

    Both sides have been widely accused of war crimes, crimes against humanity, and mainly in Israel’s case, genocide.

    While the obstacles to ending the fighting remain stubbornly difficult to overcome, a troubling pattern has become increasingly apparent.

    The very outrage that succeeded in mobilising, sustaining and swelling international opinion against Israel’s actions — a natural psychological response to systematic injustice — has also reinforced a “siege mentality” already present among many in its Jewish population.

    This siege mentality may have undermined more proactive Israeli Jewish public support for a ceasefire and “day-after” concessions.

    A toxic cocktail of emotions

    Several dominant groups have shaped the conflict’s dynamics, each driven by a distinct set of emotional responses.

    For many Israeli Jews, the massacres of October 7 have aggravated longstanding feelings of victimhood and mistrust, fears of terrorist attacks, perceptions of existential threats, intergenerational traumas stemming from the Holocaust, and importantly, the strong sense of siege mentality.

    Together, these emotions have produced a toxic blend of anger, hatred and intense desire for revenge.

    For the Palestinians, Israel’s devastation of Gaza has followed decades of oppressive occupation, endless rights violations, humiliation and dispossession. This has exacerbated feelings of hopelessness, fear and abandonment by the world.

    The wider, global pro-Palestinian camp has been driven by moral outrage over the atrocities being committed in Gaza, alongside empathy for the victims and a sense of guilt over Western governments’ complicity in the killings through the provision of arms to Israel.

    Similarly, for Israel’s supporters around the world, anger and resentment have led to feelings of persecution, and in turn, victimisation and a sense of siege.

    Many on both sides have become prisoners of this moral outrage. And this has suppressed compassion for the suffering of the “other” — those we perceive as perpetrators of injustice against the side we support.

    Complaints of bias and content omissions

    Choosing sides in a conflict translates almost inevitably into biases in how we select, process and assess new information.

    We search for content that confirms what we already believe. And we discount information that would go against our pre-existing perceptions.

    This tendency also increases our sensitivity to omissions of facts we deem important for our cause.

    Since early in the crisis, voices in the two camps have accused the mainstream media in the West of biased coverage in favour of the “other”. These feelings have added fuel to the moral outrage and sense of injustice among both sides.

    Outrage in the pro-Israel camp has focused mainly on a perceived global conspiracy to absolve Hamas of any responsibility.

    In that view, Israel has been singled out as the only culpable party for the killings in Gaza. This is despite the fact Hamas unleashed the violence on October 7, used the Gazan population as human shields while hiding in tunnels, and refused to release all the Israeli hostages to end the fighting.

    On the other side, pro-Palestinian outrage has focused on “blatant” omissions by the media and Western governments of important historical facts that could provide context for the October 7 attacks.

    These included:

    • the 1948 Nakba

    • Israel’s decades-long occupation of the West Bank and Gaza (turning the strip into an “open-air prison”), and

    • the silence of much of the world in the face of Israel’s endless violations of international laws and human rights treaties.

    On both sides, then, significant focus has been placed on omissions of facts that could support one’s own narrative or cause.

    A siege mentality in Israel

    Many Israelis continue to relive October 7 while remaining decidedly blind to the daily horrors their military inflicts on Gaza in their name. For them, the global outrage has reinforced a long-existing and potent siege mentality.

    This mindset has been fed by a reluctance to directly challenge Israeli soldiers risking their lives and other rally-around-the-flag effects. It’s also been bolstered by the desire for revenge and an intense campaign of dehumanising all Palestinians — Hamas or not.

    The so-called “ring of fire” created around Israel by Iran and its proxies —Hezbollah, Hamas, Islamic Jihad and the Houthis — has further amplified this siege mentality. Their stated objective is the destruction of Israel.

    I’ve conducted an exploratory study of Israeli media, government statements and English Jewish diaspora publications from October 2023 to May 2025, reviewing some 5,000 articles and video clips.

    In this research, I’ve identified strong, consistent uses of siege mentality language, phrases such as:

    • “never again is now”
    • “forced to stand alone”
    • “surrounded by enemies”
    • “existential threat”
    • “we will forever live by the sword”, and
    • “no choice but to fight”.

    In a detailed analysis of 65 English articles from major Israeli outlets, such as The Jerusalem Post and Times of Israel, and Jewish publications in the United States, United Kingdom and Australia, I found siege mentality language in nearly nine out of ten searches.

    Importantly, nearly half of these occurrences were in response to pro-Palestinian rhetoric or advocacy: campus protests and actions targeting Israelis or Jews, university groups refusing to condemn October 7, or foreign governments’ recognition of Palestinian statehood.

    The sharp increase in attacks on Jews and Jewish installations since October 7 has also sparked global debates over rising antisemitism. Distinguishing honest critiques of Israel’s actions in Gaza from antisemitic rhetoric has become contentious, as has the use of antisemitism claims by Israeli leaders to dismiss much of this criticism.

    Moving forward

    When viewed through the prism of injustice, the strong asymmetry between Israeli and Palestinian suffering has long been apparent. But it’s grown even wider following Israel’s brutal responses to October 7.

    The culpability of Israel’s government and Hamas for the atrocities in Gaza is incontestable. However, many in the Israeli-Jewish public must also share some of the blame for refusing to stand up to – or by actively supporting – their extremist government’s policies.

    The pro-Palestine movement’s justice-driven campaigns have done much to combat international bystanding and motivate governments to act. At the same time, the unwillingness to unite behind a clearer unequivocal condemnation of Hamas’ massacres may have been a strategic mistake.

    By ignoring or minimising the targeting of civilians, the hostage-taking and the reports of sexual violence committed by Hamas, a vocal minority of advocates has weakened the movement’s otherwise strong moral authority with some of the audiences it needed to influence most. First and foremost, this is people in Israel itself.

    My research suggests that while injustice-based outrage can be effective at generating attention and engagement, it can also produce negative side effects. One adverse impact has been the polarisation of the public debate over Gaza, which, in turn, has contributed to the intensification of Israelis’ siege mentality.

    Noam Chomsky, a well-known Jewish academic and fierce critic of Israel’s treatment of Palestinians, once noted in relation to Palestinian advocacy:

    You have to ask yourself, when you conduct some tactic, what the effect is going to be on the victims. You don’t pursue a tactic because it makes you feel good.

    The question, then, is how to harness the strong mobilising power of moral outrage for positive ends – preventing bystander apathy to atrocities – without the potential negative consequences. These include polarisation, expanded violence, feeding a siege mentality (when applicable), and making peace negotiations more difficult.

    The children in Gaza and elsewhere in the world deserve advocacy that will prioritise their welfare over the release of moral outrage — however justified.

    So, what approaches would most effectively help end the suffering?

    Most immediately, the solution rests primarily with Israel and, by extension, the Trump administration as the only international actor powerful enough to force Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s government to halt the killings.

    Beyond that, and looking toward the future, justice-based activism should be grounded in universal moral principles, acknowledge all innocent victims, and work to create space for both societies to recognise each other’s humanity.

    I served as a counterterrorism specialist with the Israeli Defence Forces in the 1980s.

    – ref. Global outrage over Gaza has reinforced a ‘siege mentality’ in Israel – what are the implications for peace? – https://theconversation.com/global-outrage-over-gaza-has-reinforced-a-siege-mentality-in-israel-what-are-the-implications-for-peace-258561

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

    June 12, 2025
  • MIL-Evening Report: Caitlin Johnstone: Staring down the barrel of war with Iran once again

    Report by Dr David Robie – Café Pacific. –

    COMMENTARY: By Caitlin Johnstone

    Well it looks like the US is on the precipice of war with Iran again.

    US officials are telling the press that they anticipate a potential impending Israeli attack on Iran while the family members of US military personnel are being assisted with evacuation from bases in the region.

    This comes as Tehran issues a warning that it will strike all US military bases within range of its missiles if it comes under attack. There are reportedly some 50,000 US troops in 10 bases which could come under fire should this occur.

    The US is also evacuating its embassy in Iraq, and has authorised the departure of non-essential personnel from its embassies in Kuwait and Bahrain.

    Asked by the press about the evacuations, President Trump said, “They are being moved out because it could be a dangerous place, and we’ll see what happens. We’ve given notice to move out.”

    Trump is openly declaring a willingness to strike Iran if nuclear negotiations fall through, while saying he is now “much less confident” that any deal will be made.


    Staring down the barrel of war with Iran.    Video: Caitlin Johnstone

    “If they don’t make a deal, they’re not gonna have a nuclear weapon; if they do make a deal they’re not gonna have a nuclear weapon too,” the president said in an interview published on Wednesday, adding that “it would be nicer to do it without warfare, without people dying.”

    If the US backs an Israeli attack on Iran and then Iran retaliates by killing a bunch of US military personnel, we could be looking at a full-scale direct war between the US and Iran.

    As I’ve said in this space many times before, this would be the absolute worst-case nightmare scenario for the Middle East, unleashing horrors that dwarf all the other terrible abuses currently happening in the region.

    As Trump’s now-Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard said in 2019 (back when she publicly opposed Trump’s warmongering), “What is important that the American people know is a war with Iran would make the war in Iraq look like a cakewalk.”

    It’s so stupid that this keeps happening. This could all be avoided by the US simply ceasing to support the genocidal apartheid state of Israel no matter what it does.

    The fact that Washington has continued to pour weapons into Israel despite all its warmongering and genocide since 2023 means the US supports everything that Israel has been doing.

    If a war with Iran does occur, you will doubtless hear Western pundits and politicians trying to spin this as America getting “drawn into” another war in the Middle East, or Trump being tricked or manipulated into war.

    But make no mistake: the US could have turned away from this path at any time, and still can.

    If this Pandora’s box is opened, it will be because the US empire knowingly chose to open it.

    Caitlin Johnstone is an Australian independent journalist and poet. Her articles include The UN Torture Report On Assange Is An Indictment Of Our Entire Society. She publishes a website and Caitlin’s Newsletter. This article is republished with permission.

    This article was first published on Café Pacific.

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

    June 12, 2025
  • UN to vote on resolution demanding immediate Gaza ceasefire

    Source: Government of India

    Source: Government of India (4)

    The United Nations General Assembly will vote on Thursday on a draft resolution that demands an immediate, unconditional and permanent ceasefire in the war in Gaza after the United States vetoed a similar effort in the Security Council last week.

    The 193-member General Assembly is likely to adopt the text with overwhelming support, diplomats say, despite Israel lobbying countries this week against taking part in what it called a “politically-motivated, counter-productive charade.”

    General Assembly resolutions are not binding but carry weight as a reflection of the global view on the war. Previous demands by the body for an end to the war between Israel and Palestinian militants Hamas have been ignored. Unlike the U.N. Security Council, no country has a veto in the General Assembly.

    Thursday’s vote also comes ahead of a U.N. conference next week that aims to reinvigorate an international push for a two-state solution between Israel and the Palestinians. The United States has urged countries not to attend.

    In a note seen by Reuters, the U.S. warned that “countries that take anti-Israel actions on the heels of the conference will be viewed as acting in opposition to U.S. foreign policy interests and could face diplomatic consequences.”

    The U.S. last week vetoed a draft U.N. Security Council resolution that also demanded an “immediate, unconditional and permanent ceasefire” and unhindered aid access in Gaza, arguing it would undermine U.S.-led efforts to broker a ceasefire.

    The other 14 countries on the council voted in favor of the draft as a humanitarian crisis grips the enclave of more than 2 million people, where the U.N. warns famine looms and aid has only trickled in since Israel lifted an 11-week blockade last month.

    ‘FALSE AND DEFAMATORY’

    The draft resolution to be voted on by the General Assembly on Thursday demands the release of hostages held by Hamas, the return of Palestinian prisoners detained by Israel and the full withdrawal of Israeli forces from Gaza.

    It demands unhindered aid access and “strongly condemns the use of starvation of civilians as a method of warfare and the unlawful denial of humanitarian access and depriving civilians … of objects indispensable to their survival, including willfully impeding relief supply and access.”

    “This is both false and defamatory,” Israel’s U.N. Ambassador Danny Danon wrote in a letter to U.N. member states, sent on Tuesday and seen by Reuters.

    Danon described the General Assembly draft resolution as an “immensely flawed and harmful text,” urging countries not to take part in what he said was a “farce” that undermines hostage negotiations and fails to condemn Hamas.

    In October 2023 the General Assembly called for an immediate humanitarian truce in Gaza with 120 votes in favor. In December 2023, 153 countries voted to demand an immediate humanitarian ceasefire. Then in December last year the body demanded – with 158 votes in favor – an immediate, unconditional and permanent ceasefire.

    The war in Gaza has raged since 2023 after Hamas militants killed 1,200 people in Israel in an October 7 attack and took some 250 hostages back to the enclave, according to Israeli tallies. Many of those killed or captured were civilians.

    Israel responded with a military campaign that has killed over 54,000 Palestinians, according to Gaza health authorities. They say civilians have borne the brunt of the attacks and that thousands more bodies have been lost under rubble.

    (Reuters)

    June 12, 2025
  • US begins uneasy FIFA World Cup countdown as Trump moves Marines to Los Angeles

    Source: Government of India

    Source: Government of India (4)

    U.S. cities hosting next year’s FIFA World Cup faced questions on Wednesday about how to reassure international fans concerned by President Donald Trump’s immigration crackdown and travel ban as the year-to-go countdown began.

    The United States, along with Canada and Mexico, is set to co-host the finals, which will feature 48 teams and a record 104 matches in a tournament that FIFA boss Gianni Infantino said would usher in a new generation of soccer fans.

    Celebrities and soccer stars were due to walk the red carpet at the Fox Studio Lot in Los Angeles – one of the host cities – for the year-to-go event there, a day after President Trump deployed Marines and the National Guard to quell protests.

    California Governor Gavin Newsom described the deployment as an “unmistakable step toward authoritarianism,” while Trump officials defended it and branded the protests as lawless, blaming local and state Democrats for permitting upheaval.

    Los Angeles is one of several host cities marking the year-to-go occasion.

    New York-New Jersey held a waterside party on Wednesday, where local officials and fans celebrated against the backdrop of Ellis Island.

    Asked about comments Vice President JD Vance made last month warning World Cup travellers not to overstay their welcome, New York-New Jersey host Committee CEO Alex Lasry said: “Our goal is to make sure everyone who comes to New York-New Jersey has an incredible time.”

    “Something that you have to kind of know, when you’re putting on mega sporting events … is the world is still going on. The world doesn’t stop for these sporting events,” said Lasry.

    “And you kind of have to go with the flow and make sure that you’re able to adapt.”

    Minky Worden, director of global initiatives at Human Rights Watch, said FIFA needed to work with the U.S. government to ensure the rights of competitors, support staff, fans and media were protected regardless of their identities or views.

    “FIFA should publicly acknowledge the threat US immigration and other anti-human rights policies pose to the tournament’s integrity … (and) should establish clear benchmarks and timelines for the US policy changes needed to ensure respect for immigrants’ rights during the 2026 World Cup and beyond,” she said.

    The Sport & Rights Alliance, a global coalition of non-governmental organisations that promotes human rights in sports, on Wednesday said that it had identified “areas where government policies in the 2026 host countries, particularly the United States under President Donald Trump, pose significant and immediate risks to the human rights of immigrants.”

    Special Assistant to the President and Principal Deputy Press Secretary Harrison Fields told Reuters: “President Trump is proud to have secured our great country as one of the hosts for the 2026 World Cup, and he is eager to welcome fans from across the globe to celebrate America and this great pastime.”

    “The Trump Administration will work diligently to facilitate the entry of law-abiding and applicable fans, ensure that all attendees are properly vetted and that these are the most secure and historic games,” said Fields.

    U.S. Democratic leaders, meanwhile,raised concerns over a national crisis on Tuesday as Trump moved U.S. Marines into Los Angeles to tackle civilian protests over his immigration policies.

    “There are certainly things that are happening at the national level, the international level, there are going to be geopolitical issues that we don’t even know right now that are going to affect the tournament,” Meg Kane, a host city executive for Philadelphia told reporters at a Paley Center event on Monday.

    “So we recognise that we’re planning within uncertainty.”

    FIFA did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

    INFANTINO CONFIDENT

    FIFA President Gianni Infantino said last month after meeting Trump that he was confident the world would be welcomed in for the 2026 World Cup and this year’s Club World Cup, which runs from June 14 to July 13.

    But the task of reassuring international fans was complicated by a travel ban that went into effect on Monday, cracking down on what Trump called “foreign terrorists”.

    Of the 12 countries facing travel bans, Iran is the only one that has qualified for the 2026 tournament so far. Tehran said on Saturday that the ban showed “deep hostility” toward Iranians and Muslims.

    European fans, supporter groups and former players contacted by Reuters said it was too early for anyone to be thinking about revising schedules or reevaluating plans for attending the World Cup.

    Alina Hudak, the Miami host committee president and CEO, told Reuters she had been in touch with the local consular corps to address their concerns and to offer support.

    “My responsibility is to make sure that we’re ready, that we’re safe, that we’re coordinating logistically with all of our law enforcement agencies, that we’ve done everything we can to ensure that our mass transit system is ready and can handle the volume,” said Hudak.

    “And so for me, you know, what’s happening outside of that is something that we’re monitoring, but not something that, quite frankly, I have an impact (on).”

    REUTERS

    June 12, 2025
  • MIL-OSI USA: Senator Coons Statement on Joint Resolution of Disapproval Vote

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Delaware Christopher Coons
    WASHINGTON – U.S. Senator Chris Coons (D-Del.) issued the following statement after voting against two Joint Resolutions of Disapproval over U.S. arms sales to Qatar and the United Arab Emirates:
    “In just a few months, Donald Trump has shown that his second term will be the most corrupt in American history. He needs to be held accountable for this corruption by the courts and by Congress, and I have repeatedly worked to do so over the past several months. I appreciate my colleagues’ efforts to shine a light on this stunning level of corruption by exploring new avenues to do so while we are in the minority.
    “Unfortunately, these resolutions don’t hold President Trump accountable. Instead, they target other countries for the actions of our president, countries that host more than 10,000 U.S. troops on strategically important bases and are our partners. President Trump himself will feel no consequences.”
    “President Trump and his administration are both creating a more dangerous world and driving wedges between our nation and nearly every one of our partners and allies. Canceling these long-planned sales won’t just weaken two nations the world relies on for stability in a region made more volatile by President Trump’s actions, they will also distance us from key partners at a time we cannot afford to do so.
    “The United States negotiated contracts for these arms sales years ago. Many nations already know they cannot count on our president to keep his word. I am concerned that passing these resolutions would send a message that they can’t count on Congress to do so, either.”
    Senator Coons is Ranking Member of the Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Defense and a member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.

    MIL OSI USA News –

    June 12, 2025
  • MIL-OSI China: Real Madrid announce squad for Club World Cup

    Source: People’s Republic of China – State Council News

    New Real Madrid coach Xabi Alonso has named a 34-player squad for the upcoming FIFA Club World Cup in the United States.

    Alonso has included several players recovering from injury, such as Eder Militao, Dani Carvajal, Ferland Mendy, Antonio Rudiger and Eduardo Camavinga.

    Kylian Mbappe (R) of Real Madrid vies with Josko Gvardiol of Manchester City during the UEFA Champions League knockout phase play-off second leg football match between Real Madrid and Manchester City in Madrid, Spain, on Feb. 19, 2025. (Photo by Gustavo Valiente/Xinhua)

    The former Bayer Leverkusen manager has also called up new signings Dean Huijsen and Trent Alexander-Arnold, along with 10 players from the club’s B-team.

    Real Madrid also announced that Alexander-Arnold will be officially presented to the press on Thursday at the club’s Valdebebas training ground.

    The team is set to fly to the U.S. on Thursday. Real Madrid opens the tournament against Saudi Arabia’s Al-Hilal on June 18 in Miami, followed by matches against Mexico’s Pachuca on June 22 and Austria’s RB Salzburg on June 27.

    Full Squad:

    Goalkeepers: Thibaut Courtois, Andriy Lunin, Fran Gonzalez, Sergio Mestre.

    Defenders: Dani Carvajal, Eder Militao, David Alaba, Trent Alexander-Arnold, Lucas Vazquez, Fran Garcia, Antonio Rudiger, Ferland Mendy, Dean Huijsen, Youssef, Jacobo, Raul Asencio, Fortea, Diego Aguado.

    Midfielders: Jude Bellingham, Eduardo Camavinga, Fede Valverde, Luka Modric, Aurelien Tchouameni, Arda Guler, Dani Ceballos, Chema, Victor Munoz, Mario Martin.

    Forwards: Vinicius Jr., Kylian Mbappe, Rodrygo, Endrick, Brahim Diaz, Gonzalo.

    MIL OSI China News –

    June 12, 2025
  • United Nations to vote to demand immediate Gaza ceasefire over US, Israel opposition

    Source: Government of India

    Source: Government of India (4)

    The United Nations General Assembly will vote on Thursday on a draft resolution that demands an immediate, unconditional and permanent ceasefire in the war in Gaza after the United States vetoed a similar effort in the Security Council last week.

    The 193-member General Assembly is likely to adopt the text with overwhelming support, diplomats say, despite Israel lobbying countries this week against taking part in what it called a “politically-motivated, counter-productive charade.”

    General Assembly resolutions are not binding but carry weight as a reflection of the global view on the war. Previous demands by the body for an end to the war between Israel and Palestinian militants Hamas have been ignored. Unlike the U.N. Security Council, no country has a veto in the General Assembly.

    Thursday’s vote also comes ahead of a U.N. conference next week that aims to reinvigorate an international push for a two-state solution between Israel and the Palestinians. The United States has urged countries not to attend.

    In a note seen by Reuters, the U.S. warned that “countries that take anti-Israel actions on the heels of the conference will be viewed as acting in opposition to U.S. foreign policy interests and could face diplomatic consequences.”

    The U.S. last week vetoed a draft U.N. Security Council resolution that also demanded an “immediate, unconditional and permanent ceasefire” and unhindered aid access in Gaza, arguing it would undermine U.S.-led efforts to broker a ceasefire.

    The other 14 countries on the council voted in favor of the draft as a humanitarian crisis grips the enclave of more than 2 million people, where the U.N. warns famine looms and aid has only trickled in since Israel lifted an 11-week blockade last month.

    ‘FALSE AND DEFAMATORY’

    The draft resolution to be voted on by the General Assembly on Thursday demands the release of hostages held by Hamas, the return of Palestinian prisoners detained by Israel and the full withdrawal of Israeli forces from Gaza.

    It demands unhindered aid access and “strongly condemns the use of starvation of civilians as a method of warfare and the unlawful denial of humanitarian access and depriving civilians … of objects indispensable to their survival, including willfully impeding relief supply and access.”

    “This is both false and defamatory,” Israel’s U.N. Ambassador Danny Danon wrote in a letter to U.N. member states, sent on Tuesday and seen by Reuters.

    Danon described the General Assembly draft resolution as an “immensely flawed and harmful text,” urging countries not to take part in what he said was a “farce” that undermines hostage negotiations and fails to condemn Hamas.

    In October 2023 the General Assembly called for an immediate humanitarian truce in Gaza with 120 votes in favor. In December 2023, 153 countries voted to demand an immediate humanitarian ceasefire. Then in December last year the body demanded – with 158 votes in favor – an immediate, unconditional and permanent ceasefire.

    The war in Gaza has raged since 2023 after Hamas militants killed 1,200 people in Israel in an October 7 attack and took some 250 hostages back to the enclave, according to Israeli tallies. Many of those killed or captured were civilians.

    Israel responded with a military campaign that has killed over 54,000 Palestinians, according to Gaza health authorities. They say civilians have borne the brunt of the attacks and that thousands more bodies have been lost under rubble.

    -Reuters

    June 12, 2025
  • MIL-Evening Report: What’s the potential effect of sanctions on Israeli ministers? Here’s what my research shows

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Anton Moiseienko, Senior Lecturer in Law, Australian National University

    Australia, Canada, New Zealand, Norway and the UK this week announced sanctions against two members of the Israeli cabinet: National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir and Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich.

    This is a momentous development. The governments concerned make it clear that they consider Ben-Gvir and Smotrich to be involved in “serious abuses of Palestinian human rights”, including “a serious abuse of the right of individuals not to be subjected to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment”.

    This is an allegation rarely levelled against sitting ministers of a democratic state, predictably causing the Israeli government to protest.

    While diplomatic consequences play out, what are sanctions anyway, and what do they mean for Ben-Gvir and Smotrich?

    3 direct consequences

    “Sanctions” is a broad umbrella term. Whole countries can be sanctioned, but so can be individuals.

    Sanctions on individuals are imposed by means of a government placing them on its national sanctions list, such as Australia’s Consolidated List (which now features both Ben-Gvir and Smotrich).

    Three direct consequences flow from such a sanctions designation.

    First, all of the sanctioned person’s assets in the relevant country are frozen. This means that, while in principle they remain the sanctioned person’s property, they cannot be used or sold. This places those assets in limbo, potentially for a very long time.

    Second, no person within the sanctioning state’s jurisdiction – that is, no one in its territory, nor any of its citizens or residents – is allowed to make money or other resources available for the benefit of the sanctioned person.

    So, it is an offence for anyone in Australia to send funds to anyone on the Consolidated List. Interestingly, there is no prohibition on receiving money from sanctioned persons.

    Third, sanctioned persons are subject to an entry ban.

    So, if a foreigner is sanctioned by the Australian government, their permission to enter Australia will be denied or revoked.

    Legal challenges are possible. For example, in 2010, the daughter of a Burmese general studying at Western Sydney University unsuccessfully sued the foreign minister for sanctioning her and cancelling her visa based on her family ties.

    The sanctions against Ben-Gvir and Smotrich are what’s known as “Magnitsky” sanctions.

    This refers not to the substance of sanctions, but rather the reasons for their adoption, namely alleged corruption or human rights abuse, rather than other forms of wrongdoing. The imposition of sanctions on those grounds was pioneered by two US statutes named after Sergei Magnitsky, a Russian whistleblower killed in a Moscow prison.

    In the case of the Israeli ministers, human rights abuses are alleged.

    Sanctions can hurt in other ways, too

    But what is the practical effect of these kinds of sanctions designations?

    After all, many people sanctioned by Australia will not have any property in the country, will never receive any money from Australia, and may never contemplate visiting.

    One might be tempted to conclude that, in those circumstances, sanctions are ineffectual. But the reality is more complicated.

    In 2023, together with the London-based International Lawyers Project, I conducted the first study of the effect (or impact) of “Magnitsky” sanctions, focussing on the first 20 individuals sanctioned for alleged corruption under the US Global Magnitsky Act 2016.

    We found there were no less than ten types of effects that sanctions might have.

    And in at least two-thirds of the case studies we looked at, sanctions had an impact.

    This may be skewed by the high-profile nature of those first 20 corruption-related designations under the 2016 act, which included former heads of states and major businesspeople. Still, sanctions can mean more than their direct impact.

    Of these categories of effects, private sector action is especially important. This involves businesses globally dropping the targeted person as a customer even when not legally required to do so.

    For example, non-Australian banks are not bound by Australian sanctions. But, once Australian sanctions are in place, they feed into major private-sector sanctions databases that are used by banks worldwide.

    Global banks may well decide that – once someone is accused of human rights abuse, corruption or other misconduct by a credible government – keeping the targeted person on the books is no longer worthwhile, not least reputationally.

    For US sanctions, this effect is turbocharged by the fact virtually all banks need to route US dollar transactions via the US financial system, and they cannot do so on behalf of a sanctioned person. Banks soon drop such customers.

    In a famous example, Carrie Lam, the chief executive of Hong Kong, complained of having to keep piles of cash at home due to US sanctions precluding any Hong Kong bank from taking her on as a customer. (To be clear, the US has not imposed any sanctions on Ben-Gvir and Smotrich, and has opposed their designation by Australia and others.)

    Could Ben-Gvir and Smotrich fight these sanctions?

    Australian sanctions would not have such a profound impact, but they are a reputational irritant at the very least.

    This may account for the (failed) judicial challenges brought against Australian sanctions by two Russian oligarchs, Alexander Abramov and Oleg Deripaska, as well as another billionaire’s more successful petitioning of Australia’s foreign minister to lift the sanctions against him.

    In general, contesting sanctions in court is exceedingly difficult. Few claimants succeed, in Australia or elsewhere.

    It is far more likely the sanctions against Ben-Gvir and Smotrich will result in diplomatic discussions and lobbying behind the scenes.

    Anton Moiseienko has received funding from the Open Society Foundations in connection with the research cited in this article.

    – ref. What’s the potential effect of sanctions on Israeli ministers? Here’s what my research shows – https://theconversation.com/whats-the-potential-effect-of-sanctions-on-israeli-ministers-heres-what-my-research-shows-258692

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

    June 12, 2025
  • MIL-Evening Report: What will be the effect of Australia’s sanctions on Israeli ministers? Here’s what my research shows

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Anton Moiseienko, Senior Lecturer in Law, Australian National University

    Australia, Canada, New Zealand, Norway and the UK this week announced sanctions against two members of the Israeli cabinet: National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir and Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich.

    This is a momentous development. The governments concerned make it clear that they consider Ben-Gvir and Smotrich to be involved in “serious abuses of Palestinian human rights”, including “a serious abuse of the right of individuals not to be subjected to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment”.

    This is an allegation rarely levelled against sitting ministers of a democratic state, predictably causing the Israeli government to protest.

    While diplomatic consequences play out, what are sanctions anyway, and what do they mean for Ben-Gvir and Smotrich?

    3 direct consequences

    “Sanctions” is a broad umbrella term. Whole countries can be sanctioned, but so can be individuals.

    Sanctions on individuals are imposed by means of a government placing them on its national sanctions list, such as Australia’s Consolidated List (which now features both Ben-Gvir and Smotrich).

    Three direct consequences flow from such a sanctions designation.

    First, all of the sanctioned person’s assets in the relevant country are frozen. This means that, while in principle they remain the sanctioned person’s property, they cannot be used or sold. This places those assets in limbo, potentially for a very long time.

    Second, no person within the sanctioning state’s jurisdiction – that is, no one in its territory, nor any of its citizens or residents – is allowed to make money or other resources available for the benefit of the sanctioned person.

    So, it is an offence for anyone in Australia to send funds to anyone on the Consolidated List. Interestingly, there is no prohibition on receiving money from sanctioned persons.

    Third, sanctioned persons are subject to an entry ban.

    So, if a foreigner is sanctioned by the Australian government, their permission to enter Australia will be denied or revoked.

    Legal challenges are possible. For example, in 2010, the daughter of a Burmese general studying at Western Sydney University unsuccessfully sued the foreign minister for sanctioning her and cancelling her visa based on her family ties.

    The sanctions against Ben-Gvir and Smotrich are what’s known as “Magnitsky” sanctions.

    This refers not to the substance of sanctions, but rather the reasons for their adoption, namely alleged corruption or human rights abuse, rather than other forms of wrongdoing. The imposition of sanctions on those grounds was pioneered by two US statutes named after Sergei Magnitsky, a Russian whistleblower killed in a Moscow prison.

    In the case of the Israeli ministers, human rights abuses are alleged.

    Sanctions can hurt in other ways, too

    But what is the practical effect of these kinds of sanctions designations?

    After all, many people sanctioned by Australia will not have any property in the country, will never receive any money from Australia, and may never contemplate visiting.

    One might be tempted to conclude that, in those circumstances, sanctions are ineffectual. But the reality is more complicated.

    In 2023, together with the London-based International Lawyers Project, I conducted the first study of the effect (or impact) of “Magnitsky” sanctions, focussing on the first 20 individuals sanctioned for alleged corruption under the US Global Magnitsky Act 2016.

    We found there were no less than ten types of effects that sanctions might have.

    And in at least two-thirds of the case studies we looked at, sanctions had an impact.

    This may be skewed by the high-profile nature of those first 20 corruption-related designations under the 2016 act, which included former heads of states and major businesspeople. Still, sanctions can mean more than their direct impact.

    Of these categories of effects, private sector action is especially important. This involves businesses globally dropping the targeted person as a customer even when not legally required to do so.

    For example, non-Australian banks are not bound by Australian sanctions. But, once Australian sanctions are in place, they feed into major private-sector sanctions databases that are used by banks worldwide.

    Global banks may well decide that – once someone is accused of human rights abuse, corruption or other misconduct by a credible government – keeping the targeted person on the books is no longer worthwhile, not least reputationally.

    For US sanctions, this effect is turbocharged by the fact virtually all banks need to route US dollar transactions via the US financial system, and they cannot do so on behalf of a sanctioned person. Banks soon drop such customers.

    In a famous example, Carrie Lam, the chief executive of Hong Kong, complained of having to keep piles of cash at home due to US sanctions precluding any Hong Kong bank from taking her on as a customer. (To be clear, the US has not imposed any sanctions on Ben-Gvir and Smotrich, and has opposed their designation by Australia and others.)

    Could Ben-Gvir and Smotrich fight these sanctions?

    Australian sanctions would not have such a profound impact, but they are a reputational irritant at the very least.

    This may account for the (failed) judicial challenges brought against Australian sanctions by two Russian oligarchs, Alexander Abramov and Oleg Deripaska, as well as another billionaire’s more successful petitioning of Australia’s foreign minister to lift the sanctions against him.

    In general, contesting sanctions in court is exceedingly difficult. Few claimants succeed, in Australia or elsewhere.

    It is far more likely the sanctions against Ben-Gvir and Smotrich will result in diplomatic discussions and lobbying behind the scenes.

    Anton Moiseienko has received funding from the Open Society Foundations in connection with the research cited in this article.

    – ref. What will be the effect of Australia’s sanctions on Israeli ministers? Here’s what my research shows – https://theconversation.com/what-will-be-the-effect-of-australias-sanctions-on-israeli-ministers-heres-what-my-research-shows-258692

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

    June 12, 2025
  • Amid Iran tensions, U.S. withdraws diplomats, military families from West Asia over security concerns

    Source: Government of India

    Source: Government of India (4)

    The US State and Defence Departments have begun moving non-essential personnel out of several locations across West Asia amid growing regional tensions, CNN reported citing US officials and sources familiar with the matter.

    While the exact cause of the shift in posture remains unclear, a defence official told CNN that US Central Command (CENTCOM) is monitoring “developing tension in the Middle East.”

    President Donald Trump, commenting on the situation, said, “They are being moved out because it could be a dangerous place… we’ve given notice to move out, and we’ll see what happens.

    CNN reported that the voluntary departure of military dependents from locations across the region has been authorized by Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth. “The safety and security of our service members and their families remains our highest priority,” an official said.

    CENTCOM commander Gen. Michael Kurilla postponed his scheduled testimony before a Senate committee due to the evolving situation, according to a defence official. The State Department, in coordination with the Pentagon, is also preparing to order the departure of non-essential personnel from US embassies in Iraq, Bahrain, and Kuwait, as well as the consulate in Erbil, Iraqi Kurdistan, CNN reported.

    A local Iraqi official, however, stated that the movements were not connected to the security environment in Iraq. A State Department spokesperson said, “President Trump is committed to keeping Americans safe, both at home and abroad… Based on our latest analysis, we decided to reduce the footprint of our Mission in Iraq.” The department also updated its travel advisory, citing “heightened regional tensions” as the reason for the ordered departure.

    CNN further reported that President Trump expressed waning confidence in reaching a new nuclear agreement with Iran, telling a New York Post podcast that Tehran may be “delaying” the deal. “I’m getting more and more less confident about it… Something happened to them,”

    Trump said, adding that his instincts suggest the deal is increasingly unlikely. In a related development, CNN cited sources saying Trump told Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu during a phone call on Monday to stop discussing a potential attack on Iran. The call, according to Trump, went “very well, very smooth.”

    Last month, CNN reported the US had obtained intelligence suggesting that Israel was preparing for a potential strike on Iranian nuclear facilities. US officials noted signs of Israeli military posturing, including the movement of air munitions and completion of an air exercise, though a final decision by Israeli leadership had not been confirmed.

    Amid these developments, Iran’s Defence Minister Brigadier General Aziz Nasirzadeh issued a stern warning. As per Iran’s state-run IRNA news agency, he said if nuclear talks fail and conflict erupts, the US would be “forced to leave the region,” asserting that all US bases are within the reach of Iranian forces. “The adversary will certainly suffer heavier casualties,” he added, though he did not clarify whether he was referring to the US, Israel, or both. (ANI)

    June 12, 2025
  • MIL-OSI China: US partially evacuate embassy staff from Iraq

    Source: People’s Republic of China – State Council News

    Non-essential U.S. embassy staff and their dependents have been ordered to leave Iraq due to unspecified security risks, sources from the U.S. State Department said on Wednesday.

    “Based on our latest analysis, we decided to reduce the footprint of our mission in Iraq,” the State Department said in a statement.

    “We are constantly assessing the appropriate personnel posture at all our embassies,” it added.

    Aslo on Wednesday, U.S. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth approved the voluntary departure of U.S. military dependents from the Middle East.

    The security risks leading to the ordered departure from Iraq are not immediately clear. According to media reports, Iran recently threatened to strike U.S. bases in the region if negotiations over Iran’s nuclear program fail.

    U.S. President Donald Trump told a podcast on Wednesday that he was growing less confident in reaching a nuclear deal with Iran.

    “I don’t know,” Trump told the “Pod Force One” podcast when asked about talks over the Iran nuclear program. “I don’t know. I did think so, and I’m getting more and more – less confident about it.”

    Later on Wednesday, when asked why families of U.S. military personnel were authorized to leave the Middle East, Trump said: “You will have to see.”

    White House special envoy Steve Witkoff is expected to meet Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi this weekend for a sixth round of nuclear talks. 

    MIL OSI China News –

    June 12, 2025
  • MIL-Evening Report: ER Report: A Roundup of Significant Articles on EveningReport.nz for June 12, 2025

    ER Report: Here is a summary of significant articles published on EveningReport.nz on June 12, 2025.

    Trump may try to strike a deal with AUKUS review, but here’s why he won’t sink it
    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By John Blaxland, Professor, Strategic and Defence Studies Centre, Australian National University The Pentagon has announced it will review the massive AUKUS agreement between the United States, United Kingdom and Australia to ensure it’s aligned with US President Donald Trump’s “America first” agenda. The US undersecretary of defence

    Why are sunsets so pretty in winter? There’s a simple explanation
    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Chloe Wilkins, Associate Lecturer and PhD Candidate, Solar Physics, University of Newcastle nelo2309/Shutterstock If you live in the southern hemisphere and have been stopped in your tracks by a recent sunset, you may have noticed they seem more vibrant lately. The colours are brighter and bolder, and

    After weeks of confusion and chaos, Tasmania heads back to the polls on July 19
    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Robert Hortle, Deputy Director, Tasmanian Policy Exchange, University of Tasmania The Tasmanian government has called a state election for July 19, the fourth in a little over seven years. Following days of high drama, Governor Barbara Baker finally granted Liberal Premier Jeremy Rockliff’s election request, saying there

    Goodbye to all that? Rethinking Australia’s alliance with Trump’s America
    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Mark Beeson, Adjunct professor, Australia-China Relations Institute, University of Technology Sydney Even the most ardent supporters of the alliance with the United States – the notional foundation of Australian security for more than 70 years – must be having some misgivings about the second coming of Donald

    A reversal in US climate policy will send renewables investors packing – and Australia can reap the benefits
    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Christian Downie, Professor, Australian National University President Donald Trump is trying to unravel the signature climate policy of his predecessor Joe Biden, the Inflation Reduction Act, as part of a sweeping bid to dismantle the United States’ climate ambition. The Inflation Reduction Act, or IRA, is a

    ‘Hard to measure and difficult to shift’: the government’s big productivity challenge
    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Stephen Bartos, Professor of Economics, University of Canberra Higher productivity has quickly emerged as an economic reform priority for Labor’s second term. Prime Minister Anthony Albanese has laid down some markers for a productivity round table in August, saying he wants it to build the “broadest possible

    Extreme weather could send milk prices soaring, deepening challenges for the dairy industry
    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Milena Bojovic, Lecturer, Sustainability and Environment, University of Technology Sydney Australia’s dairy industry is in the middle of a crisis, fuelled by an almost perfect storm of challenges. Climate change and extreme weather have been battering farmlands and impacting animal productivity, creating mounting financial strains and mental

    201 ways to say ‘fuck’: what 1.7 billion words of online text shows about how the world swears
    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Martin Schweinberger, Lecturer in Applied Linguistics, The University of Queensland Our brains swear for good reasons: to vent, cope, boost our grit and feel closer to those around us. Swear words can act as social glue and play meaningful roles in how people communicate, connect and express

    Were the first kings of Poland actually from Scotland? New DNA evidence unsettles a nation’s founding myth
    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Darius von Guttner Sporzynski, Historian, Australian Catholic University An illustration from a 15th-century manuscript showing the coronation of the first king of Poland, Boleslaw I. Chronica Polonorum by Mathiae de Mechovia For two centuries, scholars have sparred over the roots of the Piasts, Poland’s first documented royal

    Medical scans are big business and investors are circling. Here are 3 reasons to be concerned
    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Sean Docking, Research Fellow, School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University wedmoments.stock/Shutterstock Timely access to high-quality medical imaging can be lifesaving and life-altering. Radiology can confirm a fractured bone, give us an early glimpse of our baby or detect cancer. But behind the x-ray, ultrasound,

    ‘Microaggressions’ can fly under the radar in schools. Here’s how to spot them and respond
    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Rachel Leslie, Lecturer in Curriculum and Pedagogy with a focus on Educational Psychology, University of Southern Queensland Klaus Vedfelt/ Getty Images Bullying is sadly a common experience for Australian children and teenagers. It is estimated at least 25% experience bullying at some point in their schooling. The

    New Zealand’s ‘symbolic’ sanctions on Israel too little, too late, say opposition parties
    By Russell Palmer, RNZ News political reporter Opposition parties say Aotearoa New Zealand’s government should be going much further, much faster in sanctioning Israel. Foreign Minister Winston Peters overnight revealed New Zealand had joined Australia, Canada, the UK and Norway in imposing travel bans on Israel’s Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich and National Security Minister Itamar

    More deaths reported out of Sugapa in West Papua clashes with military
    By Caleb Fotheringham, RNZ Pacific journalist Further reports of civilian casualties are coming out of West Papua, while clashes between Indonesia’s military and the armed wing of the Free Papua Movement continue. One of the most recent military operations took place in the early morning of May 14 in Sugapa District, Intan Jaya in Central

    Q+A follows The Project onto the scrap heap – so where to now for non-traditional current affairs?
    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Denis Muller, Senior Research Fellow, Centre for Advancing Journalism, The University of Melbourne Two long-running television current affairs programs are coming to an end at the same time, driving home the fact that no matter what the format, they have a shelf life. The Project on Channel

    Sanctioning extremist Israeli ministers is a start, but Australia and its allies must do more
    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Jessica Whyte, Scientia Associate Professor of Philosophy and ARC Future Fellow, UNSW Sydney The Australian government is imposing financial and travel sanctions on two far-right Israeli ministers: Itamar Ben-Gvir (the national security minister) and Bezalel Smotrich (finance minister). This is a significant development. While Australia has previously

    Malaria has returned to the Torres Strait. What does this mean for mainland Australia?
    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Cameron Webb, Clinical Associate Professor and Principal Hospital Scientist, University of Sydney Aspect Drones/Shutterstock Malaria is one of the deadliest diseases spread by mosquitoes. Each year, hundreds of millions of people worldwide are infected and half a million people die from the disease. While mainland Australia was

    Is regulation really to blame for the housing affordability crisis?
    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Nicole Gurran, Professor of Urban and Regional Planning, University of Sydney ymgerman/Shutterstock The Albanese government has a new mantra to describe the housing crisis, which is showing no signs of abating: homes have simply become “too hard to build” in Australia. The prime minister and senior ministers

    NZ’s goal is to get smoking rates under 5% for all population groups this year – here’s why that’s highly unlikely
    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Janet Hoek, Professor in Public Health, University of Otago Getty Images Next week is “scrutiny week” in parliament – one of two weeks each year when opposition MPs can hold ministers accountable for their actions, or lack thereof. For us, it’s a good time to take stock

    Labor’s win at the 2025 federal election was the biggest since 1943, with its largest swings in the cities
    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Adrian Beaumont, Election Analyst (Psephologist) at The Conversation; and Honorary Associate, School of Mathematics and Statistics, The University of Melbourne We now have the (almost!) final results from the 2025 federal election – with only Bradfield still to be completely resolved. Labor won 94 of the 150

    What are the ‘less lethal’ weapons being used in Los Angeles?
    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Samara McPhedran, Principal Research Fellow, Griffith University After United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents arrested multiple people on alleged immigration violations, protests broke out in Los Angeles. In response, police and military personnel have been deployed around the greater LA area. Authorities have been using

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

    June 12, 2025
  • MIL-OSI USA: ICYMI—Hagerty Joins America’s Newsroom on Fox News to Discuss Iran Nuclear Talks, Chinese Nationals

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Tennessee Bill Hagerty
    WASHINGTON—Today, United States Senator Bill Hagerty (R-TN), a member of the Senate Appropriations, Banking, and Foreign Relations Committees and former U.S. Ambassador to Japan, joined America’s Newsroom on Fox News to discuss Iran nuclear talks, along with deporting Chinese nationals that are in the country illegally.

    *Click the photo above or here to watch*
    Partial Transcript
    Hagerty on Iran nuclear talks: “If you think about it, we would not be in this position had we stayed with the ‘Maximum Pressure Campaign’ that President [Donald] Trump put in place in the first administration. When I was Ambassador to Japan, that was part of my role to get the Japanese to stop buying Iranian crude [oil]. We did that all over the world. We brought Iranian reserves down to almost nothing. The pressure was enormous on them. They were ready to deal. [Former President] Joe Biden comes into office, immediately relaxes all of the sanctions. Money starts flowing back to Iran. Terror starts flowing in the region. Iran is the heart of all of the terror that’s happening in the Middle East right now. And this is their tactic. They go back to obfuscating, trying to kick the can down the road, drawing out time. President Trump has dealt with them. He understands this—and I’m certain he’s disappointed with it—but he also strategically needs to bring them back to the table. And Iran needs to understand we will not tolerate their behavior. We’re not going to tolerate their funding [of] terrorism, and they will not have a nuclear weapon.”
    Hagerty on the stark difference between Obama’s and Trump’s negotiations with Iran: “If you think about what’s happened since that time, the Bidens allowed a lot more money to flow into Iran. Iran has advanced the ball much further in terms of their enrichment capabilities. That would’ve never happened at President Trump’s state in office. But again, the overarching objective is to stop Iran and stop this regime from funding terror and also do not allow them to get in a position to threaten the rest of the world with nuclear competence. That means they’re not going to get a nuclear weapon. So, the terms broadly are the same. The conditions are quite different though, and they’re much worse thanks to the Biden administration that stepped in and made [it] difficult for President Trump the first time, with the pallets of cash that [Former President Barack] Obama gave them, even though the Iranians never abided by the original negotiation, the original deal that they struck as well.”
    Hagerty on deporting illegal Chinese nationals: “This threat wouldn’t exist [had] Joe Biden not collapsed our southern border. These people are here illegally in the first place. The many that have been deported now recently were here illegally coming from China, coming from all over the world, many without our best interests at heart. The other piece of this, though—and let’s not forget what China has done on fentanyl as well—the precursors that continue to flow into this country. They’re waging war on us in multiple ways. This agroterrorism is a part of a biotechnology effort that China has going on, that the [Chinese Communist Party] has going on. I’ve fought hard here with my Biosecure Act to prevent U.S. funds from supporting biotechnology research that would happen here with Chinese equipment. We don’t want them to have access to our DNA data, certainly our genomic data. They’re trying at every front to gain advantage. And this agroterrorism was deeply, deeply concerning. If that had happened, if we’d not caught that, who knows what might’ve happened to our crops. It would’ve been devastating. So, we need to be much more diligent at every level. President Trump’s certainly trying to do that, and by making certain that these Chinese nationals, as well as many others, that are here illegally that may not have our best interest at heart. Sending them back out of the country is the right move.”

    MIL OSI USA News –

    June 12, 2025
  • MIL-OSI USA: Ernst Bill Protecting Americans from Foreign-Directed Crimes Passes Senate

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator Joni Ernst (R-IA)

    WASHINGTON – The U.S. Senate advanced Senators Joni Ernst (R-Iowa) and Maggie Hassan’s (D-N.H.) Deterring External Threats and Ensuring Robust Responses to Egregious and Nefarious Criminal Endeavors Act (DETERRENCE) Act, which increases criminal penalties for individuals who commit, or attempt to commit, violent crimes in the United States on behalf of foreign governments.
    The bill’s passage comes after two Eastern European organized crime leaders were convicted in March 2025 of targeting an American journalist in a murder-for-hire scheme on behalf of the Iranian government. Additionally, a recent report detailed how the Iranian government ordered an operative to assassinate President Donald Trump before the 2024 election.
    “America will not allow foreign adversaries, like Iran, to finance violent crimes on our soil,” said Senator Ernst. “Peace through strength is back and that includes right here at home. I look forward to the House swiftly passing this commonsense bill to create severe consequences for those who wish to harm our citizens.”
    “It is a direct assault on our national security when foreign adversaries recruit criminals to commit violence on American soil,” said Senator Hassan. “This bipartisan legislation will strengthen criminal penalties on gangs and criminals who engage in violent behavior on behalf of a foreign government. The Senate has sent a clear message that such behavior will be met with severe consequences, and I urge my colleagues in the House to quickly pass this bill to strengthen our national security.” 
    The DETERRENCE Act now heads to the U.S. House of Representatives.

    MIL OSI USA News –

    June 12, 2025
  • MIL-OSI New Zealand: Operation Gallant Phoenix deployment extended

    Source: New Zealand Government

    New Zealand has extended its commitment the Operation Gallant Phoenix multinational intelligence mission in Jordan, the Government announced today.

    The deployment of up to 10 New Zealand Defence Force and Police personnel has been extended for two years until June 2027. 

    “This operation is essential to our commitment to a safe and secure New Zealand,” Foreign Affairs Minister Winston Peters says.

    “Our personnel are working with counterparts from other countries to help us understand and respond to current, evolving and future terrorist and violent extremist threats to New Zealanders at home and abroad.”

    Defence Minister Judith Collins says New Zealand brings valuable resources and expertise to this global effort to counter terrorism and violent extremism.

    “In return, New Zealand is able to enhance relationships with a wide range of countries and expand our information networks.”

    Police Minister Mark Mitchell says the deployment provides our personnel with specialised experience working with overseas partners.

    “It also provides Police and other agencies with valuable insights and information to help keep New Zealanders safe.”

    Operation Gallant Phoenix was established in 2014 and is a mission where partners collect and share information about potential and existing terrorist threats, irrespective of threat ideology. It comprises a large number of countries and agencies, including law enforcement, military and civilian personnel. 

    MIL OSI New Zealand News –

    June 12, 2025
  • MIL-OSI Australia: Public country-by-country (CBC) reporting

    Source: New places to play in Gungahlin

    WARNING!

    Public CBC reporting and country-by-country (CBC) reporting are different measures. For information about CBC reporting, go to Country-by-country reporting

    What is Public CBC reporting

    Public country-by-country (CBC) reporting is a regime (the regime) that requires certain large multinational enterprises to publish selected tax information to the public. This information must be reported either on a CBC basis or on an aggregated basis. Under the regime, the parent entity generally has the reporting obligation, rather than the Australian subsidiary (Public CBC reporting parent).

    The regime applies for reporting periods starting from 1 July 2024. For a Public CBC reporting parent with a reporting period end of 30 June, this will be from 1 July 2024. Reports are due within 12 months of the end of the reporting period.

    If a Public CBC reporting parent has a reporting period that does not end on 30 June, the regime will first apply from the start of the relevant period that occurs after 1 July 2024. For example, if a Public CBC reporting parent’s reporting period is from 1 April to 31 March, the regime will first apply for its reporting period starting 1 April 2025, with the first report due before 31 March 2027.

    The Public CBC reporting parent publishes their Public CBC report by providing selected tax information to the ATO in the approved form. We then facilitate the publication of the information on an Australian Government website.

    Public CBC reporting provides information to the public and enables better assessment of whether an entity’s economic presence in a jurisdiction aligns with the amount of tax they pay in that jurisdiction.

    Public CBC reporting requires disclosures about:

    • the revenues, profits and income taxes of the global group
    • the activities of the global group
    • an entity’s international related party dealings.

    Note: Public CBC reporting and country-by-country (CbC) reporting are different measures. For information about CBC reporting, go to Country-by-country reporting.

    Who is required to report

    An entity must report for a reporting period if all of the following apply:

    • it is a CBC reporting parent for the preceding period
    • it is an entity of the type specified
    • it satisfies the requirements for that reporting period.

    An entity is of the specified type if it is any one of the following:

    • constitutional corporation
    • trust, provided each of the trustees is a constitutional corporation
    • partnership, provided each of the partners is a constitutional corporation.

    ‘Constitutional corporation’ means a foreign corporation (one not formed within Australia), or a trading or financial corporation formed within the limits of the Commonwealth.

    An entity satisfies the requirements for a reporting period if all of the following apply:

    • it was a CBC reporting parent for a period that includes the whole or a part of the preceding reporting period
    • it was a member of a CBC reporting group at any time during the reporting period
    • at any point during the reporting period, it, or a member of its CBC reporting group, was an Australian resident or a foreign resident operating an Australian permanent establishment
    • $10 million or more of its aggregated turnover for the reporting period was Australian-sourced
    • it was not an exempt entity or included in a class of exempt entities.

    An entity is a CBC reporting parent for a reporting period if all of the following apply:

    • it is not an individual
    • if it is a member of a CBC reporting group at the end of the period; it is not controlled by any other member of the CBC reporting group at the end of the period
    • its annual global income for the period is $1 billion or more.

    Registration by Public CBC reporting parents

    Registration by Public CBC reporting parents allows for more efficient processing and helps to simplify the process of:

    • giving the Public CBC report to the ATO
    • requesting an extension of time to provide the Public CBC report
    • requesting an exemption from reporting obligations for a reporting period.

    The registration process doesn’t differentiate between resident and non-resident Public CBC reporting parents. A non-resident Public CBC reporting parent without an ATO reference number (ARN) will be automatically issued with an ARN as part of this registration process.

    Registration is also beneficial as it enables a Public CBC reporting parent entity to provide authorisation for representatives to act on its behalf. This includes having representatives satisfy its obligations, such as lodging the Public CBC report or applying for a Public CBC reporting exemption. Representatives can include:

    • designated officers or employees of the CBC reporting parent
    • an authorised representative of the Australian subsidiary
    • an adviser
    • other nominated person.

    The Public CBC registration form is in a fillable portable document format (PDF), and lodgment is via email. Upon lodgment, we will send an email acknowledging receipt.

    To get the form, see Public country-by-country (CBC) registration form (NAT 75645). You can also read the Instructions to complete Public country-by-country registration.

    Public CBC reporting obligations

    The reporting obligation is on the Public CBC reporting parent (whether located overseas or in Australia) to report selected tax information to us.

    An Australian subsidiary of a foreign entity generally does not have any reporting obligation of its own for a reporting period. An exception to that general principle is if a foreign entity does not include the Australian subsidiary in its group’s consolidated accounts, and the Australia subsidiary qualifies as a Public CBC parent entity in its own right.

    The Public CBC reporting parent entity must give the Public CBC report electronically in the approved form to the ATO within 12 months after the end of the relevant reporting period.

    An update to correct any material errors must be given to us within 28 days of the Public CBC reporting parent identifying or otherwise becoming aware of that error.

    Penalties apply for non-compliance.

    What is jurisdictional reporting

    For Australia and specified jurisdictions determined by the Minister, particular information must be published on a CBC basis.

    For operations in other jurisdictions, the Public CBC reporting parent has the choice to publish information on either a CBC basis or an aggregated basis.

    Specified jurisdictions list

    The Minister’s determination of jurisdictions for Public CBC reporting is provided by legislative instrument. The specified jurisdictions are outlined in the Taxation Administration (Country by Country Reporting Jurisdictions) Determination 2024External Link.

    Specified jurisdictions

    Specified jurisdictions that have a comprehensive international tax agreement with Australia:

    • Singapore
    • Switzerland.

    Other specified jurisdictions

    Other specified jurisdictions:

    • Andorra
    • Anguilla
    • Antigua and Barbuda
    • Aruba
    • Barbados
    • Bahamas
    • Bahrain
    • Belize
    • Bermuda
    • British Virgin Islands
    • Cayman Islands
    • Cook Islands
    • Curacao
    • Dominica
    • Gibraltar
    • Grenada
    • Guernsey
    • Hong Kong
    • Isle of Man
    • Jersey
    • Liberia
    • Mauritius
    • Monaco
    • Montserrat
    • Nauru
    • Niue
    • Panama
    • Republic of the Marshall Islands
    • Saint Kitts and Nevis
    • Saint Lucia
    • Saint Maarten (Dutch Part)
    • Saint Vincent & the Grenadines
    • Samoa
    • San Marino
    • Seychelles
    • Turks and Caicos Islands
    • US Virgin Islands
    • Vanuatu.

    Public CBC information to be reported

    The Public CBC reporting parent is required to publish the following information:

    • its own legal name
    • the names of each entity in the CBC reporting group
    • a description of the CBC reporting group’s approach to tax
    • information about Australia and specified jurisdictions, on a CBC basis
    • information about its other jurisdictions, either on a CBC or aggregated basis.

    Information required to be reported

    If the Public CBC reporting parent chooses to report on a CBC basis for all jurisdictions in which the group operates, it doesn’t need to publish any information on an aggregated basis.

    However, if the Public CBC reporting parent only publishes information on a CBC basis for Australia and the specified jurisdictions, it must publish information for all other jurisdictions on an aggregated basis.

    Australia and specified jurisdictions

    The Public CBC reporting parent is required to report the following information for Australia and specified jurisdictions:

    • name of the jurisdiction
    • description of main business activities
    • number of employees (on a full-time equivalent basis) at the end of the reporting period
    • revenue from unrelated parties
    • revenue from related parties that are not tax residents of the jurisdiction
    • profit or loss before income tax
    • book value at the end of the reporting period of tangible assets, other than cash and cash equivalents
    • income tax paid (on a cash basis)
    • income tax accrued (current year)
    • reasons for the difference between income tax accrued (current year) and the amount of income tax due if the income tax rate applicable to the jurisdiction were applied to profit and loss before income tax
    • currency used in calculating and presenting the above information.

    Other jurisdictions (aggregated information)

    The Public CBC reporting parent is required to report the following information on an aggregated basis for all other jurisdictions in which the group operates:

    • description of main business activities in those jurisdictions
    • number of employees (on a full-time equivalent basis) at the end of the reporting period
    • revenue from unrelated parties
    • revenue from related parties that are not tax residents of the jurisdiction in which that revenue is being derived
    • profit or loss before income tax
    • book value at the end of the reporting period of tangible assets, other than cash and cash equivalents
    • income tax paid (on a cash basis)
    • income tax accrued (current year)
    • the currency used in calculating and presenting the above information.

    Guidance

    The information required to be reported has been adopted from the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) 207: Tax 2019 (GRI 207) reporting standard. The GRI 207 may be used as a source of guidance in interpretating the publishing requirements. Greater detail on the interpretation of terms is contained in the BEPS Action 13 Guidance and OECD Transfer Pricing Guidelines.

    For further detail, see:

    Publishing the information

    The Public CBC reporting parent is required to publish the information on an Australian Government website by giving the information in the approved form to the ATO. The approved form is in XML Schema format, and lodgment is via email. Upon lodgment, we will send an email acknowledging receipt.

    Instructions on the approved form are currently under development and will be available in the second half of 2025.

    The ATO’s role

    We will facilitate the publication of the reported information as soon as practicable on the Australian Government website.

    The first publication is expected to be released in late 2026.

    Extension of time to provide the Public CBC report

    The Public CBC report is due within 12 months after the end of the relevant reporting period. For example, for the reporting period ending 30 June 2025, the Public CBC report is due by 30 June 2026.

    A Public CBC reporting parent may apply to the ATO for an extension of time to provide the Public CBC report. The Public CBC reporting parent can submit their request for deferral to us via email.

    Correcting errors

    If a Public CBC reporting parent becomes aware of a material error in any of the published information, they must rectify the error by providing the corrected information to the ATO. The entity must provide the corrected Public CBC report in its entirety to us by email.

    A correction of a material error is required within 28 days after the entity becomes aware of the error. For example, we will consider an entity aware of a material error once its accountant or tax manager realises the error and prepares an amendment to the entity’s income tax return, necessitating an amendment to its Public CBC report.

    For a non-material error, the entity may choose to rectify the error by providing the corrected Public CBC report in its entirety to us by email.

    If a material or non-material error is rectified by the Public CBC reporting parent, we will publish the corrected information on the Australian Government website as soon as practicable. 

    Penalties apply for non-compliance.

    Exemptions to Public CBC reporting

    The purpose of the Public CBC reporting regime is to enhance tax transparency. However, a Public CBC reporting parent may seek an exemption from reporting obligations from the ATO. We have the discretion, for a single reporting period, to grant an entity a:

    • full exemption
    • partial exemption specifying that it is exempt from publishing information of a particular kind.

    Guidance on how we will administer the exemption will be made available in mid-2025. For updates, see [4148] Public country-by-country reporting transparency measure and exemption discretions.

    Government-related entities

    Government-related entities may be relieved from the Public CBC reporting regime.

    The following are government-related entities:

    • a department of the State of the Commonwealth
    • a Department of the Australian Parliament established under the Parliamentary Services Act 1999
    • an executive agency or statutory agency, within the meaning of the Public Service Act 1999
    • department of state of a state or territory
    • an organisation that satisfies all of the following
      • is either established by the Commonwealth, a state or territory (whether under a law or not) to carry on an enterprise or established for a public purpose by an Australian law
      • can be separately identified by reference to the nature of the activities carried on through the organisation or the location of the organisation
    • a local government body established by or under a state or territory law.

    A government-related entity that is a CBC reporting entity can be relieved from the regime for one or more reporting periods by written notice from the ATO.

    We will provide further guidance for government-related entities in late 2025.

    MIL OSI News –

    June 12, 2025
  • MIL-OSI China: Russian gymnasts to return to int’l games: sports federation

    Source: People’s Republic of China – State Council News

    Russian gymnasts and judges will return to international competitions as neutral participants, local media reported Wednesday, citing the Russian Gymnastics Federation.

    Alisa Medvedeva of Russia competes during the individual all-around qualifications at the 2024 International Rhythmic Gymnastics Tournament in Doha, Qatar, on Nov. 20, 2024. (Photo by Nikku/Xinhua)

    The participation of Russian athletes and judges has been confirmed in a series of international gymnastics competitions, according to a statement by the federation cited by TASS news agency.

    The federation noted that efforts are ongoing for Russian athletes to resume full-fledged participation in international sports.

    In March 2022, the International Gymnastics Federation (FIG) suspended Russian and Belarusian gymnastics from its tournaments. Later, the international federation eased the sanctions, allowing the two countries’ athletes to compete as neutrals.

    The Russian Gymnastics Federation said earlier in April that the country’s athletes would not participate in the upcoming FIG competitions despite being granted neutral status, citing “numerous unfounded and biased refusals” to grant such status to athletes. 

    MIL OSI China News –

    June 12, 2025
  • MIL-OSI USA: REMARKS: Ranking Member Coons calls out Secretary Hegseth for misplaced priorities, failure to submit budget in Defense Subcommittee hearing

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Delaware Christopher Coons
    WASHINGTON – U.S. Senator Chris Coons (D-Del.), Ranking Member of the Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Defense, criticized Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth for a series of failures in his management of the military ranging from focusing on culture war issues instead of military readiness, to straining relations with crucial allies, to discussing classified military operations over unsecured messaging apps, to a refusal to strategically fund the department.
    “It pains me to point out the obvious at this budget hearing: that in the face of these threats, the Department of Defense is more internally divided and beset by challenges of its own making than at any point in my memory,” said Ranking Member Coons. “We cannot win the fight for the future without allies, nor deter China and Russia without a functional Department of Defense, and we on this committee simply cannot do our job without an adequate budget submission.”
    Ranking Member Coons’ comments came at a hearing to review the president’s Defense Department budget request for fiscal year 2026. Despite the president’s budget being announced in a press release nearly one month ago, the current request for the Defense Department still only consists of a one-page table. The department’s own website still shows an error page instead of a full budget, as Ranking Member Coons pointed out in the hearing. 
    “It should go without saying that the People’s Republic of China does not operate under a continuing resolution. The fiscal year 2026 request is no better.  If you go to [the] DOD fiscal year 2026 page right now, this is what you’ll see. This is what is currently publicly available, and the budget request was not much better,” said Ranking Member Coons. “More than a month after OMB’s press release, we are still waiting for real budget details. This is officially the latest budget submission of the modern era.”
    The lack of an actual budget request is just one of Secretary Hegseth’s repeated failures to ensure our military has the funds it needs during his first months in office. Secretary Hegseth failed to speak out against a continuing resolution (CR) for fiscal year 2025, resulting in the first year-long CR for the Department of Defense in our nation’s history that has undermined military operations, procurement, and readiness. Secretary Hegseth is currently advocating for increasing military spending through the Republican tax bill, rather than the normal appropriations process. Not only does linking military spending to a controversial, party-line bill needlessly politicize the process, any increase through reconciliation will be a one-time increase, making it harder for Defense Department leaders to plan for the future.
    Secretary Hegseth’s brief tenure has been filled with errors far beyond his failure to put future military spending on a consistent footing. In March, Ranking Member Coons called for Secretary Hegseth to resign over revelations that he shared critical information about military operations over an unsecure messaging app that could have endangered U.S. servicemembers if compromised. His department has chosen to spend $134 million illegally deploying Marines to Los Angeles, and as much as $45 million on a military parade in Washington that President Trump requested for his birthday at a time when the defense budget is already stretched. He has also spent much of his time on culture war issues – including personally directing the Navy to rename ships named after Thurgood Marshall and Harvey Milk – instead of addressing military threats in Eastern Europe and the Indo Pacific.
    A full video of his remarks can be found here.
    Senator Coons: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you as well, Secretary Hegseth, Chairman Caine, Ms. McDonald, for joining us here today.
    We are confronting a world more dangerous today than at any time since the Cold War, and our nation needs and deserves a strong and coordinated response to deter the threats we face, to protect our freedoms, and keep our citizens safe. The last several administrations correctly prioritized China, the People’s Republic of China, as the pacing threat to our nation’s security. More recently, as the Chairman just said, and as I strongly agree, China, Russia, Iran, and North Korea are increasingly aligned in ways that are making each of them more threatening to our national security.
    This is happening right now in Ukraine. Russia’s aggression is buttressed by Iranian drones, North Korean soldiers and Chinese components, technology, and funding. Ukraine is, though, not just a preview of geopolitics, it’s also the future of warfare, and the pervasive electronic warfare and drone swarms we see on the front lines are lessons from which we must learn. We need to address the urgency of this moment, to unify our efforts, and focus our precious time and money on what’s important. Chairman McConnell and I are ready to do that with anyone interested in engaging in good faith, which is why it pains me to point out the obvious at this budget hearing: that in the face of these threats, the Department of Defense is more internally divided and beset by challenges of its own making than at any point in my memory.
    Let’s start with the budget. Our Department of Defense and our troops are currently operating under a full year continuing resolution for the very first time. The continuing resolution provides tens of billions of dollars less in purchasing power than under the previous administration. This does not deliver on ‘peace through strength.’ No one on this subcommittee wanted this outcome.  Mr. Secretary, we appealed to your office to timely and publicly oppose the CR as all previous secretaries had done, but you were silent. You never responded. That CR’s cuts are forcing DOD to halt training and shrink exercises, and it fundamentally undermines readiness. DOD has made the CR worse by paying for DHS border activities with DOD funds meant for military quality of life – money to repair buildings, to relocate military families, to keep the Navy’s fleet operationally ready. Shrinking budgets will not speed up our acquisition system, complete kill chains, or deepen our magazines. We are falling behind thanks to some poor choices. It should go without saying that the People’s Republic of China does not operate under a continuing resolution. The fiscal year 2026 request is no better. If you go to DOD fiscal year 2026 page right now, this is what you’ll see. [Holds up 404 Not Found Page.] This is what is currently publicly available, and the budget request was not much better.
    We were given this on Monday. [Holds up single page.] More than a month after OMB’s press release, we are still waiting for real budget details. This is officially the latest budget submission of the modern era. For anyone not versed in how this should go at this stage, we would have received at least this, if not reams more. [Holds up large stack of papers.] This committee – to do its job – wants to work with you on the details of exactly which programs and exactly which deployments and exactly which end strength you are requesting, so that in a timely way, we can complete our work and avoid another disastrous continuing resolution, but the department has been AWOL in the [FY] 26 debate, as it was in the [FY] 25 debate. Bills are already being written, and the department’s inability to explain its budget is slowly making it less relevant to what it receives in fiscal year 26 in our appropriations process.
    What’s clear is the base request is exactly the same funding level as the FY 25 CR that’s created problems. Mr. Secretary, you’re requesting an increase instead through budget reconciliation, a partisan gamble that I believe shows poor judgment about how to handle our nation’s security. DOD’s ability to take care of our warfighters should not be contingent on whether Congress can pass a bill that also explodes the national debt, gives billionaires tax cuts, cuts access to health care – in short, is controversial and uncertain. I think it sends a bad message to the U.S. defense industry about the uncertainty of appropriations for key systems at precisely the time we want certainty and we want more from them.  
    Who wins in all this? Not the American people; our adversaries.
    Mr. Secretary, I’m also concerned that far more of your time so far has been spent inside the building on culture wars, rather than outside the building deterring real ones. This administration began by firing a long list of qualified uniformed leaders without cause: The Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, the Chief of Naval Operations, the Vice Chief of the Air Force, the head of the National Security Agency, the U.S. military representative to NATO, the director of the Defense Health Agency, the head of the Coast Guard, and all of the Service Judge Advocates General; continues to push out tens of thousands of civilians who should instead be repairing our ships, testing equipment, providing healthcare. It’s rooting out fully qualified, combat proven service members solely because they are transgender to satisfy a petty animus, and it’s censoring service academy libraries so that no future leader of our military can read Maya Angelou or Janet Jacobs’ book on the Holocaust, even Jackie Robinson’s World War II service photo is not safe from culture warriors. In January of this year, any patriotic American who met the qualifications could serve our nation and the Marines at 29 Palms were training for the Indo-Pacific, not the streets of Los Angeles. We worried then about our enemies, rather than each other, and we should return to that model.
    We also, frankly, need to get back to partnering with and supporting our allies. This administration has publicly and repeatedly threatened to seize the territory of NATO allies and retake the Panama Canal. The president paused aid to Ukraine – both intelligence partnership and military support – in the middle of their just war against one of our primary global enemies. And at times, rather than help and partner with our allies, we have levied massive tariffs against our partners. The department’s fiscal year 26 request compounds these mistakes by explicitly eliminating assistance to Ukraine and slashing security cooperation with allies around the world, sending exactly the wrong signal. Our global network of strong allies is our asymmetric advantage. The administration’s budget request may try to abandon our allies, but this Congress should not. I’ll also cite a predecessor in your role, Secretary Mattis, who testified to Congress that we need to complement strong investments in defense with comparable investments in diplomacy and development. In fact, I think he once said famously, if we don’t spend adequately on diplomacy and development, I will need more bullets because we will be in more wars; yet, DOGE has shredded our development work, shredding trust as well with partners and allies.
    Last, I’m troubled by the chaos and poor judgment that have been on full display from the Pentagon front office. Mr. Secretary, you should not have shared operational details of U.S. military strikes on Signal with other executive branch officials or personal acquaintances. Mishandling important and sensitive military information in the middle of an operation by a secretary is unthinkable. You’ve also fired several top aides, and you’ve been unable to hire a new chief of staff for months.
    Mr. Secretary, this cannot continue. Your responsibilities to our troops and our nation are far too important. We cannot win the fight for the future without allies nor deter China and Russia without a functional Department of Defense, and we on this committee simply cannot do our job without an adequate budget submission. I welcome partnership on these important priorities, and I look forward to discussing why we haven’t been able to achieve that so far and where to go from here.
    Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

    MIL OSI USA News –

    June 12, 2025
  • MIL-OSI Security: Pacific Partnership 2025 Conducts Mission Stop in Suva, Fiji, June 9, 2025 [Image 4 of 13]

    Source: United States Navy (Logistics Group Western Pacific)

    Issued by: on


    SUVA, Fiji (June 9, 2025) Engineering Aide 2nd Class Jordanne Jones, left, and Construction Electrician 2nd Class Connor Croissant, both assigned to Amphibious Construction Battalion 1, conduct construction repairs at Waiqanake School during Pacific Partnership 2025 in Suva, Fiji, June 9, 2025. Now in its 21st iteration, the Pacific Partnership series is the largest annual multinational humanitarian assistance and disaster management preparedness mission conducted in the Indo-Pacific. Pacific Partnership works collaboratively with host and partner nations to enhance regional interoperability and disaster response capabilities, increase security and stability in the region, and foster new and enduring friendships in the Indo-Pacific. (U.S. Navy photo by Mass Communication Specialist 2nd Class Moises Sandoval/Released)

    Date Taken: 06.09.2025
    Date Posted: 06.11.2025 18:07
    Photo ID: 9104598
    VIRIN: 250609-N-ED646-7596
    Resolution: 7731×5158
    Size: 7.19 MB
    Location: SUVA, FJ

    Web Views: 2
    Downloads: 0

    PUBLIC DOMAIN  

    This work, Pacific Partnership 2025 Conducts Mission Stop in Suva, Fiji, June 9, 2025 [Image 13 of 13], by PO2 Moises Sandoval, identified by DVIDS, must comply with the restrictions shown on https://www.dvidshub.net/about/copyright.

    MIL Security OSI –

    June 12, 2025
  • MIL-Evening Report: Goodbye to all that? Rethinking Australia’s alliance with Trump’s America

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Mark Beeson, Adjunct professor, Australia-China Relations Institute, University of Technology Sydney

    Even the most ardent supporters of the alliance with the United States – the notional foundation of Australian security for more than 70 years – must be having some misgivings about the second coming of Donald Trump.

    If they’re not, they ought to read the two essays under review here. They offer a host of compelling reasons why a reassessment of the costs, benefits and possible future trajectory of the alliance is long overdue.


    Review: After America: Australia and the new world order – Emma Shortis (Australia Institute Press), Hard New World: Our Post-American Future; Quarterly Essay 98 – Hugh White (Black Inc)


    And yet, notwithstanding the cogency and timeliness of the critiques offered by Emma Shortis and Hugh White, it seems unlikely either of these will be read, much less acted upon, by those Shortis describes as the “mostly men in suits or uniforms, with no democratic accountability” who make security policy on our behalf.

    White, emeritus professor of strategic studies at the ANU, was the principal author of Australia’s Defence White Paper in 2000. Despite having been a prominent member of the defence establishment, it is unlikely even his observations will prove any more palatable to its current incumbents.

    Shortis, an historian and writer, is director of the Australia Institute’s International & Security Affairs Program. She is also a young woman, and while this shouldn’t matter, I suspect it does; at least to the “mostly men” who guard the nation from a host of improbable threats while ignoring what is arguably the most likely and important one: climate change.

    The age of insecurity

    To Shortis’s great credit, she begins her essay with a discussion of a “world on fire” in which the Trump administration is “locking in a bleaker future”.

    This matters for both generational and geographical reasons. While we live in what is arguably the safest place on the planet, the country has the rare distinction of regularly experiencing once-in-100-year floods and droughts, sometimes simultaneously.

    If that’s not a threat to security, especially of the young, it’s hard to know what is. It’s not one the current government or any other in this country has ever taken seriously enough.

    White gives a rather perfunctory acknowledgement of this reality, reflecting an essentially traditional understanding of security – even if some of his conclusions will induce conniptions in Canberra.

    While suggesting Trump is “the most prodigious liar in history”, White thinks he’s done Australia a favour by “puncturing the complacency” surrounding the alliance and our unwillingness to contemplate a world in which the US is not the reliable bedrock of security.

    Shortis doubts the US ever was a trustworthy or reliable ally. This helps explain what she calls the “strategy of pre-emptive capitulation”, in which Australian policymakers fall over themselves to appear useful and supportive to their “great and powerful friend”. Former prime minister John Howard’s activation of the ANZUS alliance in the wake of September 11 and the disastrous decision to take part in the war in Iraq is perhaps the most egregious example of this unfortunate national proclivity.

    White reminds us that all alliances are always transactional. Despite talk of a “history of mateship”, it’s vital to recognise if the great power doesn’t think something is in its “national interest”, it won’t be doing favours for allies. No matter how ingratiating and obliging they may be. While such observations may be unwelcome in Canberra, hopefully they won’t come as a revelation.

    Although White is one of Australia’s most astute critics of the conventional wisdom, sceptics and aspiring peace-builders will find little to cheer in his analysis.

    A good deal of his essay is taken up with the strategic situations in Europe and Asia. The discussion offers a penetrating, but rather despair-inducing insight into humanity’s collective predicament: only by credibly threatening our notional foes with nuclear Armageddon can we hope to keep the peace.

    The problem we now face, White argues, is the likes of Russia and China are beginning to doubt America’s part in the “balance of resolve”. During the Cold War both sides were confident about the other side’s ability and willingness to blow them to pieces.

    Now mutual destruction is less assured. While some of us might think this was a cause for cautious celebration, White suggests it fatally undermines the deterrent effect of nuclear weapons.

    Even before Trump reappeared, this was a source of angst and/or uncertainty for strategists around the world. The principle underpinning international order in a world in which nuclear weapons exist, according to White, is that

    a nuclear power can be stopped, but only by an unambiguous demonstration of willingness to fight a nuclear war to stop it.

    Trump represents a suitably existential threat to this cheery doctrine. Europeans have belatedly recognised the US is no longer reliable and they are responsible for their own security.

    Likewise, an ageing Xi Jinping may want to assure his position in China’s pantheon of great leaders by forcibly returning Taiwan to the motherland. It would be an enormous gamble, of course, but given Trump’s admiration for Xi, and Trump’s apparent willingness to see the world carved up into 19th century-style spheres of influence, it can’t be ruled out.

    Australia’s options

    If there’s one thing both authors agree on it’s that the AUKUS nuclear submarine project, the notional centrepiece of Australia’s future security is vastly overrated. It’s either a “disaster” (Shortis) or “insignificant” (White).

    Likewise, they agree the US is only going to help Australia if it’s judged to be in America’s interest to do so. Recognising quite what an ill-conceived, ludicrously expensive, uncertain project AUKUS is, and just how unreliable a partner the US has become under Trump, might be a useful step on the path to national strategic self-awareness.

    Shortis thinks some members of the Trump administration appear to be “aligned with Russia”. Tying ourselves closer to the US, she writes, “does not make us safer”. A major rethink of, and debate about, Australia’s security policy is clearly necessary.

    Policymakers also ought to take seriously White’s arguments about the need to reconfigure the armed forces to defend Australia independently in an increasingly uncertain international environment.

    Perhaps the hardest idea for Australia’s unimaginative strategic elites to grasp is that, as White points out,

    Asia’s future, and Australia’s, will not be decided in Washington. It will be decided in Asia.

    Former prime minister Paul Keating’s famous remark “Australia needs to seek its security in Asia rather than from Asia” remains largely unheeded. Despite plausible suggestions about developing closer strategic ties with Indonesia and even cooperating with China to offer leadership on climate change, some ideas remain sacrosanct and alternatives remain literally inconceivable.

    Even if we take a narrow view of the nature of security – one revolving around possible military threats to Australia – US Defence Secretary Pete Hesgeth’s demands for greater defence spending on our part confirm White’s point that,

    it is classic Trump to expect more and more from allies while he offers them less and less. This is the dead end into which our “America First” defence policy has led us.

    Quite so.

    Australia’s strategic elites have locked us into the foreign and strategic policies of an increasingly polarised, authoritarian and unpredictable regime.

    But as Shortis observes, we cannot be confident about our ability, or the world’s for that matter, to “just ride Trump out”, and hope everything will return to normal afterwards.

    It is entirely possible the international situation may get worse – possibly much worse – with or without Trump in the White House.

    The reality is American democracy may not survive another four years of Trump and the coterie of startlingly ill-qualified, inhumane, self-promoting chancers who make up much of his administration.

    A much-needed national debate

    Both authors think attempts to “smother” a serious national debate about defence policy in Australia (White), and the security establishment’s obsession with secrecy (Shortis), are the exact opposite of what this country needs at this historical juncture. They’re right.

    Several senior members of Australia’s security community have assured me if I only knew what they did I’d feel very differently about our strategic circumstances.

    Really? One thing I do know is that we’re spending far too much time – and money! – acting on what Shortis describes as a “shallow and ungenerous understanding of what ‘security’ really is”.

    We really could stop the conflicts in Ukraine and Gaza if Xi had a word with Putin and the US stopped supplying Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu with the weapons and money to slaughter women and children. But climate change would still be coming to get us.

    More importantly, global warming will get worse before it gets better, even in the unlikely event that the “international community” (whoever that may be) agrees on meaningful collective action tomorrow.

    You may not agree with all of the ideas and suggestions contained in these essays, but in their different ways they are vital contributions to a much-needed national debate.

    An informed and engaged public is a potential asset, not something to be frightened of, after all. Who knows, it may be possible to come up with some genuinely progressive, innovative ideas about what sort of domestic and international policies might be appropriate for an astonishingly fortunate country with no enemies.

    Perhaps Australia could even offer an example of the sort of creative, independent middle power diplomacy a troubled world might appreciate and even emulate.

    But given our political and strategic elites can’t free themselves from the past, it is difficult to see them dealing imaginatively with the threat of what Shortis calls the looming “environmental catastrophe”.

    No wonder so many of the young despair and have little confidence in democracy’s ability to fix what ails us.

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

    – ref. Goodbye to all that? Rethinking Australia’s alliance with Trump’s America – https://theconversation.com/goodbye-to-all-that-rethinking-australias-alliance-with-trumps-america-258066

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

    June 12, 2025
  • MIL-OSI Security: Florida Fuel Supplier Charged in Multimillion-Dollar Scheme to Defraud U.S. Department of Defense, other Federal Agencies

    Source: United States Attorneys General 1

    A federal grand jury in Miami returned an indictment today charging a Florida business owner with multiple counts of wire fraud, money laundering, and forgery for orchestrating a scheme to defraud the U.S. Department of Defense and other federal agencies by submitting altered and fake invoices to U.S. Navy ships and other vessels through the SEA Card Program, which allows U.S. vessels to purchase critical fuel from suppliers at ports around the world.

    According to court documents filed in the Southern District of Florida, between August 2022 and January 2024, Jasen Butler, 37, of Jupiter, Florida, the owner of Independent Marine Oil Services LLC, submitted dozens of falsified documents to multiple U.S. warships — including the USS Patriot — demanding and receiving over $5 million dollars in payments for phony expenses that Butler had not incurred. These ships were attempting to purchase fuel in international ports such as Saudi Arabia, Singapore, and Croatia, among others. Butler also concealed his identity from government officials by using a false name and feigning employment by a fictitious fuel division of a different company. As alleged in the indictment, Butler used the millions in fraud proceeds to personally enrich himself and purchase multiple properties, including in Florida and Colorado. 

    “This indictment sends a clear, public message: the Antitrust Division and its Procurement Collusion Strike Force under President Trump will not rest until all who defraud the brave men and women of the U.S. military and the American taxpayers receive swift justice,” said Assistant Attorney General Abigail A. Slater of the Justice Department’s Antitrust Division.

    “Investigating complex fraud schemes which impact U.S. Coast Guard operations is a priority for CGIS,” said Special Agent in Charge Josh Packer of the Coast Guard Investigative Service (CGIS) Southeast Field Office. “CGIS remains committed to working with our law enforcement partners to investigate any fraud which undermines the integrity of the Coast Guard’s supply chain.”

    “Mr. Butler’s alleged involvement in unlawfully submitting fraudulent invoices related to U.S. naval ships receiving fuel during port visits is an affront to the warfighter and taxpayer,” said Special Agent in Charge Greg Gross of the Naval Criminal Investigative Service (NCIS) Economic Crimes Field Office. “NCIS remains committed to thoroughly investigating those who commit fraud impacting the Department of Navy.”

    If convicted, Butler faces maximum penalties of 20 years in prison for each count of wire fraud, up to 10 years for each count of forgery, and up to 10 years for each count of money laundering. A federal district court judge will determine any sentence after considering the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines and other statutory factors. 

    Assistant Chief Sara Clingan and Trial Attorney Jonathan Pomeranz and of the Antitrust Division’s Washington Criminal Section are prosecuting the case.

    The NCIS and CGIS are investigating the case.

    Anyone with information about this investigation or other procurement fraud schemes should notify the PCSF at www.justice.gov/atr/webform/pcsf-citizen-complaint. The Justice Department created the PCSF in November 2019. It is a joint law enforcement effort to combat antitrust crimes and related fraudulent schemes that impact government procurement, grant and program funding at all levels of government — federal, state and local. For more information, visit www.justice.gov/procurement-collusion-strike-force.

    An indictment is merely an allegation and all defendants are presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law. 

    MIL Security OSI –

    June 12, 2025
  • MIL-OSI USA: Cassidy on Senate Floor: Reestablishing American Energy Dominance Starts in Louisiana

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Louisiana Bill Cassidy

    [embedded content]

    WASHINGTON – U.S. Senator Bill Cassidy, M.D. (R-LA) delivered a speech on the U.S. Senate floor highlighting Louisiana’s energy abundance and detailing how unleashing American energy will benefit American families, the economy, and our national security.
    “The benefits of unleashing American energy go beyond our borders. President Trump’s America First policies are good for the U.S., good for Louisiana, and good for the world,” said Dr. Cassidy. 
    “America has the resources. We have an abundance. Let’s put it to use,” concluded Dr. Cassidy. 
    Background
    In January, Cassidy released a statement applauding President Trump’s executive order to lift the Biden administration’s harmful pause on liquefied natural gas (LNG) export permitting. In March, Cassidy was joined by U.S. Senator John Kennedy (R-LA) in reiterating support for President Trump’s approach to American energy. 
    Last year, immediately following the Biden administration’s announcement that they would freeze pending applications for LNG export permits, Cassidy led 25 of his Republican colleagues in condemning the decision. Cassidy later delivered a speech on the U.S. Senate floor blasting the decision. In February 2024, Cassidy penned an op-ed with U.S. Senator John Cornyn (R-TX) in the Houston Chronicle underscoring the devastating economic, environmental, and national security impacts of the LNG export freeze.
    Cassidy also introduced the LNG Security Act to reverse President Biden’s LNG export ban and require the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) to approve LNG exports to all countries that have imported, currently import, or are capable of importing Russian or Iranian natural gas. Additionally, he introduced the Unlocking Domestic LNG Potential Act, which depoliticizes the export of American LNG. It eliminates the requirement for the DOE to authorize exports and instead gives the U.S. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) sole authority over the approval process. 
    Cassidy’s remarks as prepared for delivery are below:
    Louisiana fuels the world.
    That is what we say in my state. And that is true.
    Louisiana accounted for more than 60% of U.S. energy exports last year. The United States is the world’s largest LNG exporter—Louisiana has some of the largest export terminals in the world.
    And it’s a whole-of-state initiative! A lot of the gas that we export is produced in the Haynesville shale, which is in Northwest Louisiana.
    And that gas comes down to Cameron LNG in Hackberry, Louisiana. That one is capable of exporting 12 million metric tons of LNG per year.
    Cheniere Energy in Cameron Parish. 30 million metric tons of LNG per year.
    Venture Global in Plaquemines Parish. 27 million metric tons of LNG per year, and it is growing.
    President Trump wants to reestablish American energy dominance. That dominance starts in Louisiana.
    Louisiana has the infrastructure, the strategic location, and most importantly the workers to put America back on top.
    Louisiana’s ports, railroads, highways, and pipelines provide an outlet for gas and oil from landlocked states to export through our ports.
    Some oil is transported by rail. And the only place in the United States of America where six major freight railway carriers converge is in—you guessed it—Louisiana. 
    Our fully integrated, 50,000-mile pipeline network and 11,000 miles of state highways make Louisiana an obvious choice when considering which states can best transport these goods.
    We’re positioned where the Mississippi River drains into the Gulf of America.
    Besides our LNG export terminals, we have six combined deep draft ports.
    Louisiana moves oil and gas, and we also move the refined products of that oil and gas, which is part of fueling the world.
    Louisiana is critical to production and distribution of fuel and fuel products.
    I’m making these points because reestablishing American energy dominance is about creating better jobs—higher-paying jobs—changing the trajectory of a family in my state and across the nation. 
    By the end of President Biden’s term, after four years of attacks against American energy production, the Department of Energy reported tens of thousands of jobs lost.
    But tens of thousands of jobs is a statistic! **These are real people, real families we’re talking about!
    Think of the young couple with children who have lost their job!
    The wife immediately wonders how they’re going to pay the house note.
    The husband feels as if he’s letting his family down.
    The kids see conflict that was never there before between the parents.
    Those are human stories and those stories are relived over and over when those jobs are killed. Not because the fuel is not needed, but because the last administration decided they didn’t like it. 
    That was the case for tens of thousands of Americans under President Biden. His war on American energy was a war on American jobs, which is a war on American families.
    That war on the American family is over. I recognize, President Trump recognizes, that American energy dominance fueling our state, our country, and the world—and along with it, giving enough product for the manufacturing of the refined products that we all need—creates with it the high-paying jobs for the Americans who should never have been out of work in the first place. 
    Woodside Energy recently announced the largest single foreign direct investment in Louisiana history: a $17.5 billion investment in Calcasieu Parish for a new LNG export facility.
    It will support 15,000 jobs during construction and, once operational, thousands more after it’s built.
    By the way, there are other things we do with this plentiful, abundant energy! There are wonderful spin-offs!
    Last month, Hyundai Steel announced a $5.8 billion investment to build a new, next-generation steel production facility in Ascension Parish. The facility is expected to generate $4.1 billion in annual revenue and will bring nearly 1,500 direct jobs to the state, plus thousands of indirect jobs.
    That’s low-cost energy paving the way for more opportunity!
    By the way, this benefits my state, our nation, but guess who else it benefits? Our allies!
    Europe imports 45% of its LNG from the United States. Now they still get 20 from Russia, and the rest from Qatar and other countries.
    But WE send them 45% of their LNG. Before the Russia-Ukraine war, it was only 27%!
    We have a bill before Congress now to put even stricter sanctions upon Russia. If the Europeans buy even less gas from Russia, they’ll need more gas from us.
    We can make up that difference.
    With our LNG export facilities and with our gas, I want to send MORE natural gas from the Haynesville shale, through those LNG export facilities, across the Atlantic Ocean, creating tax revenue for my parish governments and wealth for my workers—to help their national security, to help our economy, to help my working families.
    The European Union using more U.S. LNG hurts Vladimir Putin’s war machine.
    Last year, the EU paid 22 billion euros for Russian natural gas, and Putin used that for his war machine.
    Next year, if the Europeans buy that much U.S. natural gas, that’s $25 billion coming to OUR economy!
    After Putin’s brutal invasion of Ukraine in 2022, America stood up against Putin. Europe did too. Let’s help them do it even more so.
    We can help them by saying, “Don’t buy Putin’s gas to fuel his war, buy OUR gas.”
    Louisiana is ready to help.
    America has the resources. We have an abundance. Let’s put it to use.

    MIL OSI USA News –

    June 12, 2025
  • MIL-OSI USA: GOP bill seeks to ban and deport visa holders who support Hamas amid wave of antisemitic violence in America

    Source: United States House of Representatives – Congressman August Pfluger (TX-11)

    Originally Published in Fox News on June 11, 2025.

    FIRST ON FOX: New legislation would broadly ban any visa holders who support Hamas or other designated terror groups from remaining in the U.S. 

    The Terrorist Inadmissibility Codification Act, led by Rep. August Pfluger, R-Texas, expands current law under the Immigration and Nationality Act to ban any members of Hamas, Hezbollah, al Qaeda, ISIS and Palestine Islamic Jihad from entering or remaining in the U.S. – in addition to anyone who endorses or espouses the activity of these groups. 

    “There is no place in America for foreign adversaries or terrorist sympathizers. As our nation faces a disturbing rise in antisemitic and illegal alien terror attacks, along with increasing pro-Hamas sentiment on our college campuses,” Pfluger said in a statement. “We must take action to ensure our borders are secure from those wishing harm against Americans.”

    The bill comes after a wave of antisemitic attacks in light of Israel’s offensive campaign in Gaza that followed Hamas’ Oct. 7 attacks. 

    The Trump administration has started revoking student visas of those who engage in pro-Gaza protest activity. The State Department paused new student visa interviews late last month while it restructures the vetting process. 

    The Immigration and Nationality Act already bars individuals who engage in terrorist activity, are members of designated Foreign Terrorist Organizations or who provide material support to such groups. However, much of this is interpreted on a case-by-case basis, often requiring evidentiary thresholds such as proof of direct involvement or financial or material aid. It is subject to the whims of administrative designations. 

    The Terrorist Inadmissibility Codification Act seeks to broaden these standards by codifying that mere endorsement or espousal of terrorist groups’ ideology could be grounds for inadmissibility or deportation. 

    This could signal a shift from conduct-based immigration enforcement to speech- or association-based scrutiny: even those who are not formal members of foreign terrorist organizations could have their speech scrutinized for support of such groups. 

    An attack in Boulder, Colorado, on June 1 on a group gathered to raise awareness about hostages gathered in Gaza was the latest in a string of violence believed to be antisemitic in nature. 

    The suspect, Mohammed Sabry Soliman, told police he wanted to “kill all Zionist people” and is accused of throwing Molotov cocktails at demonstrators. 

    In May, a young Washington, D.C., couple was killed outside the Capital Jewish Museum by a suspect who shouted “free Palestine” following the shooting.

    MIL OSI USA News –

    June 12, 2025
  • MIL-OSI USA: Boozman Touts Arkansas National Security Contributions, Cites Military Installation Vulnerability to Drone Threat

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Arkansas – John Boozman

    WASHINGTON—U.S. Senator John Boozman (R-AR) secured public support from Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General John Caine for several Natural State military missions and support capacities during a Senate Appropriations Defense Subcommittee hearing. He also expressed concerns about the potential for drone attacks on domestic military assets in light of the latest Ukrainian operation against Russia’s air force.

    Boozman highlighted the recent graduation of two Polish pilots at Ebbing Air National Guard Base in Fort Smith, the first to complete the F-35 Foreign Military Sales pilot training, and emphasized the program’s importance.

    “[This is] an accomplishment we’re very excited to see repeated,” Boozman said before inviting Hegseth to explain “the importance of training our partners and allies on American systems and how that enables mission readiness and deterrence around the world.” 

    “Our ability to project power by, with and through allies is one of the most important force multipliers that we have. The training of their people, and military-to-military training, creates enduring bonds over generations that we’re then able to leverage for future capability. I’m encouraged to hear about those two graduations. I know it keeps our defense industrial base robust and also projects capabilities to allies and partners,” Hegseth responded. 

    The senator then addressed the depletion of munitions amid conflicts in Ukraine and Israel while raising the need to adequately re-stockpile this capability through our organic industrial base as well as through private industry efforts, including in south Arkansas.

    “I had the opportunity of taking your predecessor to Camden, Arkansas, to see the great work our industry partners are doing to help solve the problem, however, the Department’s organic industrial base also fills important capability gaps,” Boozman said. “Where can we invest more to fix that?” he continued. 

    “One of my jobs as Chairman is to make sure the youngsters have the combat capability they need, at scale, before they need it. My hope is that we can raise everybody’s capacity through changing the culture not only in munitions production but across the entire national and defense industrial base, encourage competition to keep the prices down, write better contracts and increase the overall capacity,”Caine answered.

    Boozman has repeatedly championed investments in Camden and the industries that produce some of the world’s most effective weapon systems and munitions, including recent expansions by RTX, General Dynamics, Lockheed Martin and Aerojet Rocketdyne – an L3Harris Technologies company. 

    The senator, who chairs the Military Construction and Veterans Affairs Appropriations Subcommittee, also took the opportunity to underscore how vulnerable U.S. installations remain to potential attacks and asked Hegseth how Ukraine’s successful Operation Spider’s Web has changed the way we defend military infrastructure and installations from emerging threats like armed drones. 

    “Even before that operation, it’s something we put on the forefront of our planning. Cheaper, commercially available drones with small explosives represent a new threat. That day, we met to evaluate that we’re doing enough. It’s a critical reality of the modern battlefield that we have a responsibility to address,” Hegseth explained.

    MIL OSI USA News –

    June 12, 2025
  • MIL-OSI NGOs: Iran: Woman Life Freedom protester executed after sham trial and torture

    Source: Amnesty International –

    Mojahed Kourkouri has been executed three years after he was arrested

    Iranian authorities have so far executed 11 individuals in connection with the Woman Life Freedom protests

    ‘Kourkouri was tortured to extract forced ‘confessions’ which were then broadcast in propaganda videos on Iran’s state media’ – Hussein Baoumi

    Reacting to an announcement by Iran’s judiciary that the Iranian authorities executed Mojahed (Abbas) Kourkouri in connection with the 2022 Woman Life Freedom protests in Iran, Hussein Baoumi, Amnesty International’s Middle East and North Africa Deputy Director, said: 

    “Mojahed Kourkouri’s arbitrary execution is utterly appalling. It exposes yet again the Iranian authorities’ disdain for the right to life and their determination to use the death penalty as a tool to crush dissent and instil fear in Iran’s population.  

    “Kourkouri was sentenced to death by a Revolutionary Court following a grossly unfair sham trial. He was subjected to enforced disappearance for months and tortured to extract forced ‘confessions’ which were then broadcast in propaganda videos on Iran’s state media. In one video he is seen in a hospital bed with his arm visibly bandaged.  

    “The ongoing arbitrary execution of protesters amid a horrific rise in executions in Iran demonstrates yet again that Iranian authorities will persist in committing crimes under international law and other grave human rights violations unless the international community takes concrete and robust accountability measures. 

    “It underscores the need for governments to initiate criminal investigations under the principle of universal jurisdiction against all those suspected of criminal responsibility for crimes under international law during the protests, including senior Iranian officials.” 

    Mojahed Kourkouri

    Iranian authorities had accused Mojahed Kourkouri of involvement in the killing of nine-year-old Kian Pirfalak during the Woman Life Freedom protests that took place in Iran between September-December 2022. However, Kian Pirfalak’s family have repeatedly publicly refuted the accusation and attributed responsibility to Iran’s security forces. The authorities denied Mojahed Kourkouri access to a lawyer at the investigation phase of his case and never investigated his torture allegations. Amnesty has documented a pattern of the Iranian authorities systematically covering up and concealing their crimes and denying responsibility for the unlawful killings of children by security forces during nationwide protests. 

    See here for more details on Mojahed Kourkouri’s case. 

    Executions in connection with Woman Life Freedom

    Iranian authorities have so far executed 11 individuals in connection with the Woman Life Freedom protests, all following grossly unfair sham trials. Several other individuals remain at risk of execution in connection with the Woman Life Freedom protests. See here for more details. 

    Amnesty opposes the death penalty in all cases without exception regardless of who is accused, the nature or circumstances of the crime, guilt or innocence, or the method of execution. Amnesty has long called on the Iranian authorities to immediately establish a moratorium on executions with a view of fully abolishing the death penalty. 

    MIL OSI NGO –

    June 12, 2025
  • MIL-OSI NGOs: Iran: Arbitrary execution of Woman Life Freedom protester after sham trial and torture 

    Source: Amnesty International –

    Reacting to an announcement by Iran’s judiciary that the Iranian authorities this morning executed Mojahed (Abbas) Kourkouri in connection with the 2022 Woman Life Freedom protests in Iran, Amnesty International’s Deputy Regional Director for the Middle East and North Africa, Hussein Baoumi, said: 

    “The news of Mojahed Kourkouri’s arbitrary execution is utterly appalling. It exposes yet again the Iranian authorities’ disdain for the right to life and their determination to use the death penalty as a tool to crush dissent and instil fear in Iran’s population.  

    “Mojahed Kourkouri was sentenced to death by a Revolutionary Court following a grossly unfair sham trial. He was subjected to enforced disappearance for months and tortured to extract forced ‘confessions’ which were then broadcast in propaganda videos on Iran’s state media. In one video he is seen in a hospital bed with his arm visibly bandaged.  

    The news of Mojahed Kourkouri’s arbitrary execution is utterly appalling. It exposes yet again the Iranian authorities’ disdain for the right to life and their determination to use the death penalty as a tool to crush dissent and instil fear in Iran’s population. 

    Hussein Baoumi, MENA Deputy Regional Director

    “The ongoing arbitrary execution of protesters amid a horrific rise in executions in Iran demonstrates yet again that Iranian authorities will persist in committing crimes under international law and other grave human rights violations unless the international community takes concrete and robust accountability measures. 

    “It underscores the need for states to initiate criminal investigations under the principle of universal jurisdiction against all those suspected of criminal responsibility for crimes under international law during the protests, including senior Iranian officials.” 

    Background 

    Iranian authorities had accused Mojahed Kourkouri of involvement in the killing of nine-year-old Kian Pirfalak during the Woman Life Freedom protests that took place in Iran between September-December 2022. However, Kian Pirfalak’s family have repeatedly publicly refuted the accusation and attributed responsibility to Iran’s security forces. 

    The authorities denied Mojahed Kourkouri access to a lawyer at the investigation phase of his case and never investigated his torture allegations. 

    Amnesty International has documented a pattern of the Iranian authorities systematically covering up and concealing their crimes and denying responsibility for the unlawful killings of children by security forces during nationwide protests. 

    Iranian authorities have so far executed 11 individuals in connection with the Woman Life Freedom protests, all following grossly unfair sham trials. Several other individuals remain at risk of execution in connection with the Woman Life Freedom protests. See here for more details. 

    Amnesty International opposes the death penalty in all cases without exception regardless of who is accused, the nature or circumstances of the crime, guilt or innocence, or the method of execution. The organization has long called on the Iranian authorities to immediately establish a moratorium on executions with a view of fully abolishing the death penalty. 

    See here for more details on Mojahed Kourkouri’s case. 

    MIL OSI NGO –

    June 12, 2025
  • MIL-OSI NGOs: What happened to the Madleen and why were they trying to reach Gaza? 

    Source: Amnesty International –

    On 1 June 2025, 12 people set sail on the Madleen with the goal of breaking Israel’s unlawful blockade on the occupied Gaza Strip and delivering desperately needed food and medical supplies to Gaza. 

    For almost 18 years, Israeli authorities have maintained an unlawful blockade of Gaza that restricts access to essential supplies and services. On 2 March 2025, they tightened the blockade and in doing so, imposed a total siege on Gaza. Israel’s use of starvation of civilians and siege tactics are part of a calculated plan to bring about the physical destruction of Palestinians in Gaza. This is genocide.  

    The Madleen and its crew attempted to challenge Israel’s genocide and this cruel and inhumane policy of using starvation of civilians as a method of warfare and collective punishment. They were unarmed and acting with full accordance with international and maritime law. And yet, eight days into their mission, they were intercepted in international waters and unlawfully detained by Israeli forces. Their detention is arbitrary and without any legal basis. 

    Israel’s actions against the flotilla are yet another demonstration of how far it will go to silence global solidary with Palestinians and continue its genocide and inhuman and collective punishment of Palestinians in Gaza.  

    MIL OSI NGO –

    June 12, 2025
  • MIL-OSI NGOs: World Cup 2026: Growing threats to human rights set to undermine FIFA’s responsibilities one year out from kick off

    Source: Amnesty International –

    One year to go until the largest-ever sporting event across the USA, Canada and Mexico

    Urgent human rights risks in 2026 host countries – particularly in the USA – are impacting immigrants, the right to protest, and LGBTI+ rights

    Growing threats to civil liberties and human rights risk undermining FIFA’s commitments and responsibilities

    ‘FIFA and the US authorities must ensure that the World Cup does not become a pretext for stifling dissent or expanding mass surveillance’ – Daniel Noroña, Amnesty USA

    FIFA must take urgent and concrete action to uphold human rights for everyone involved in the 2026 FIFA Men’s World Cup, the Sport & Rights Alliance said today.

    With just one year remaining before the tournament begins across the United States, Canada, and Mexico – and only days before the Club World Cup kicks off on June 14 – growing threats to civil liberties and human rights risk undermining FIFA’s own commitments and responsibilities in this area.

    In its statutes, Human Rights Policy, and 2026 Bidding Process Guide, FIFA accepts its responsibility to respect human rights in line with the United Nations Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights. The Bidding Process Guide specifically requires would-be hosts to document their commitment to “ensur[ing] that the hosting and staging of the Competition do[es] not involve adverse impacts on internationally recognised human rights.” The guide gives particular attention to “labour rights, the rights of children, gender equality, freedom of expression and peaceful assembly, and protecting all individuals from all forms of discrimination.”

    The Sport & Rights Alliance has identified several critical areas where government policies in the 2026 host countries, particularly the United States under President Donald Trump, pose significant and immediate risks to the human rights of immigrants; freedom of the press and free expression; LGBTI+ rights; safety for children; and the right to be free from discrimination, requiring urgent and transparent intervention.

    Andrea Florence, Executive Director of the Sport & Rights Alliance, said:

    “In 2018, the US, Mexico, and Canada provided clear human rights commitments in their bid documents to host the 2026 FIFA Men’s World Cup.

    “Despite FIFA’s mantra that ‘football unites the world,’ a World Cup held under discriminatory and exclusionary policies risks deepening social divides rather than bridging them. FIFA should exert its leverage and demand concrete, legally binding guarantees that human rights won’t be further sacrificed for the sake of the game.”

    Right to protest; freedom of expression

    With the 2026 Men’s World Cup potentially serving as a spotlight for public criticism and controversy, the escalating crackdowns on freedom of expression and peaceful assembly, particularly for people engaged in speech and protest related to Palestinian rights, is deeply troubling, the Alliance said. Students and activists have been detained and their visas revoked for speaking out about their views. The Trump administration has also deployed National Guard troops to Los Angeles following protests against immigration arrests, claiming they constitute an act of “rebellion” against the government.

    FIFA’s stated commitments to free expression have also previously been contradicted when it has imposed rules prohibiting players and fans from making political or religious statements. At the 2022 Men’s World Cup in Qatar, for example, Iranian fans displaying “Woman, Life, Freedom” banners were removed from stadiums, while rainbow flags were confiscated at a number of matches.

    Daniel Noroña, Americas Advocacy Director at Amnesty International USA, said:

    “The ability to peacefully protest without fear of retribution is a cornerstone of a free society, yet it is increasingly under threat in the United States.

    “There is a long history of peaceful protest in global football. FIFA and the US authorities must ensure that the World Cup does not become a pretext for stifling dissent or expanding mass surveillance, and every player, fan, journalist, and resident can participate and protest without fear of sanction, arbitrary detention or discriminatory treatment.”

    Discriminatory immigration policies

    FIFA anticipates that as many as 6.5 million people could attend the 2026 tournament across the host countries. The current US administration’s abusive immigration policies, including enforced disappearances under the Alien Enemies Act, travel bans, increased detention, and visa restrictions, threaten the inclusivity and global nature of the World Cup.

    Despite President Trump’s executive order stating that teams qualifying for the 2026 Men’s World Cup will be exempt from travel bans, as of now fans and extended family members from banned countries will not be allowed to enter the United States. Delays, denials, and the real prospect of detention for fans, media, and other participants from specific countries could severely disrupt the tournament.

    Minky Worden, Director of Global Initiatives at Human Rights Watch, said:

    “FIFA should publicly acknowledge the threat US immigration and other anti-human rights policies pose to the tournament’s integrity and use its leverage with the US government to ensure that the rights of all qualified teams, support staff, media, and fans are respected as they seek to enter the United States regardless of nationality, gender identity, religion, or opinion.

    “FIFA should establish clear benchmarks and timelines for the US policy changes needed to ensure respect for immigrants’ rights during the 2026 World Cup and beyond.”

    Human Rights Watch wrote to FIFA on May 5 to say that it should use its leverage to push the Trump administration to roll back discriminatory immigration policies in the United States. FIFA responded on June 3, stating that it “expects … host countries take measures to ensure that any eligible persons who are involved in the Competition are able to enter the respective countries,” and “is actively working on this matter with relevant authorities.” FIFA also said it would engage with relevant authorities if it became aware of human rights concerns.

    Ronan Evain, Executive Director of Football Supporters Europe, said:

    “Fans travel to the World Cup to celebrate and express their passion, and any attempt to curtail our fundamental rights, including the right to free speech, is a betrayal of the spirit of football.

    “We’re particularly concerned about the potential for selective enforcement and discrimination against fans based on our perceived political views or national origin. FIFA must obtain the necessary guarantees to ensure fans from all over the world are able to safely travel and attend the games.”

    Discrimination and violence against LGBTI+ people

    The increasing legislative and rhetorical attacks on the rights of LGBTI+ people, particularly transgender people in the United States, underscore the current administration’s intention to erase transgender people from public life and dismantle crucial human rights protections. Discriminatory laws and the hostile political climate around LGBTI+ rights in the United States could directly threaten the security, bodily autonomy, dignity, and inclusion of LGBTI+ fans, players, and workers at the 2026 Men’s World Cup.

    In Mexico, LGBTI+ people, and especially trans and gender-diverse people, face violence across the country, which affects their daily lives and participation in public events. Federal and state authorities should take urgent steps to prevent and punish violence against LGBTI+ people, with particular attention to the specific risks faced by trans and gender-diverse communities.

    Gurchaten Sandhu, Director of Programs at ILGA World, said:

    “The alarming discrimination and violence against LGBTI+ individuals in the United States and Mexico cast a chilling shadow over the promise of an inclusive World Cup.

    “As organiser of the event, FIFA should demand that all host cities and states uphold universal human rights, ensuring no fan, worker, or athlete faces discrimination based on their sexual orientation, gender expression, gender identity, or sex characteristics, and that any discriminatory laws are actively challenged and nullified.”

    Press freedom

    Journalists covering the 2026 Men’s World Cup face distinct and alarming risks in both Mexico and the United States. Mexico consistently ranks among one of world’s most dangerous and deadly countries for media professionals, who face threats, harassment, and violence from both organised crime and public officials. The pervasive impunity for these crimes creates a chilling effect and zones of silence in which critical information is suppressed. In the United States, journalists could face intrusive screening, social media monitoring, and be denied entry based on perceived political views, undermining their ability to report independently.

    Antoine Bernard, Advocacy and Assistance Director at Reporters Without Borders (RSF), said:

    “Journalists covering the World Cup must be granted unimpeded access, free from arbitrary restrictions, detention, or violence.

    “FIFA and the local authorities must implement exceptional measures to protect all media workers – not only ensuring smooth entry for foreign press but actively safeguarding all journalists who will be covering large crowds, excited spectators, and potential protests, and addressing the systemic impunity that allows violence against them to persist.

    “Local law enforcement’s policies need to be strengthened to ensure the distinction of journalists from demonstrators, bystanders, and fans, and they must clearly communicate the policies they intend to follow in ensuring this distinction, in full respect of journalists’ freedom and independence.”

    Labour rights

    The immense scale of the 2026 Men’s World Cup will necessitate a massive workforce in host cities to staff stadiums, hospitality, transport, and more. The Trump administration’s dismantling of federal programs and anti-union sentiment increase the risk of exploitation and child labour, wage theft, and unsafe working conditions for these critical workers.

    Luc Triangle, General Secretary of the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC), said:

    “The extensive network of contracts for stadium construction, hospitality, and event services in the host cities must be built on a foundation of respect for workers’ rights.

    “We are gravely concerned that without strong, enforceable labour protections, this tournament will inadvertently fuel precarious work and child labour, suppress wages, and deny workers their fundamental rights to organise and bargain collectively. FIFA must demand robust social dialogue and binding agreements to protect every worker contributing to this World Cup.”

    Transparency and anti-corruption

    The Sport & Rights Alliance also harbours significant concerns related to low governmental transparency and weak anti-corruption regulations in and around the 2026 Men’s World Cup, particularly given recent policy shifts in the United States and Mexico. As the tournament approaches, robust oversight and unwavering commitment to ethical principles are needed to prevent the exploitation of this global event for private gain at the expense of human rights and public trust.

    Tor Dølvik, Special Advisor at Transparency International, said:

    “The 2026 FIFA World Cup will take place in a global context where anti-corruption efforts are increasingly under strain.

    “All host countries and FIFA must uphold their anti-corruption responsibilities by establishing comprehensive risk management mechanisms that close potential loopholes for corruption, and reliable systems for detecting and reporting irregularities. Full transparency regarding all expenditures related to the World Cup – before, during, and after the events – will be vital in building trust and ensuring integrity throughout the process.”

    FIFA’s responsibility

    FIFA, as the chief actor responsible for an event that will leave a tremendous footprint, needs to conduct an updated human rights due diligence assessment, and unequivocally leverage its influence to ensure that the 2026 Men’s World Cup is a rights-respecting and rights-advancing event.

    A new human rights due diligence assessment should consider the need for tangible commitments to reverse discriminatory policies, strengthen protections for historically marginalised groups, ensure substantial accountability for human rights abuses, and establish truly effective, transparent, and independent grievance mechanisms for people to seek support and a remedy. Failure to act decisively risks irrevocably tarnishing the legacy of the 2026 FIFA Men’s World Cup and setting a dangerous precedent for future mega-sporting events.

    About the Sport & Rights Alliance

    The Sport & Rights Alliance’s mission is to promote the rights and well-being of those most affected by human rights risks associated with the delivery of sport. Its partners include Amnesty International, The Army of Survivors, Football Supporters Europe, Human Rights Watch, ILGA World (The International Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Trans and Intersex Association), the International Trade Union Confederation, Reporters Without Borders, Transparency International, and World Players Association, UNI Global Union.

    As a global coalition of leading nongovernmental organisations and trade unions, the Sport & Rights Alliance works together to ensure sports bodies, governments, and other relevant stakeholders give rise to a world of sport that protects, respects, and fulfills international standards for human rights, labour rights, child wellbeing and safeguarding, and anti-corruption.

    MIL OSI NGO –

    June 12, 2025
  • MIL-OSI Economics: IADC Suez University Chapter Hosts Milestone Technical Gathering

    Source: International Association of Drilling Contractors – IADC

    Headline: IADC Suez University Chapter Hosts Milestone Technical Gathering

    The IADC Suez University Student Chapter, in collaboration with fellow faculty student chapters and the Faculty of Petroleum and Mining Engineering, Suez University, proudly hosted the Third Student Conference of the Faculty of Petroleum and Mining Engineering and the Second IADC Suez Technical Exhibition!

    Throughout the conference, industry professionals and academic experts shared invaluable perspectives on emerging trends, challenges, and innovations in the oil and gas sector. Their contributions inspired meaningful dialogue and forward-thinking ideas.

    The Second IADC Suez Technical Exhibition featured impressive student projects, groundbreaking research, and cutting-edge technology, reinforcing the innovative spirit of the student community.

    Dynamic competitions pushed participants to demonstrate their technical expertise, creativity, and teamwork. Congratulations to all the winners for their outstanding performances!

    The event welcomed enthusiastic students from universities across Egypt, creating an enriching environment of collaboration, networking, and shared learning.

    MIL OSI Economics –

    June 12, 2025
←Previous Page
1 … 137 138 139 140 141 … 427
Next Page→
NewzIntel.com

NewzIntel.com

MIL Open Source Intelligence

  • Blog
  • About
  • FAQs
  • Authors
  • Events
  • Shop
  • Patterns
  • Themes

Twenty Twenty-Five

Designed with WordPress