Category: Middle East

  • MIL-OSI Security: IAEA Work Central at World Economic Forum in Davos

    Source: International Atomic Energy Agency – IAEA

    “The work of the IAEA is at the centre of the debates. In particular, the nexus between nuclear energy and artificial intelligence has attracted a lot of attention,” the Director General said in Davos.  

    The IAEA held a session on nuclear’s role in meeting energy demands for artificial intelligence (AI), with experts from Bloomberg and technology venture capitalists DCVC. “Big tech needs nuclear to power energy-intensive AI data centres,” explained Mr Grossi.  

    A major event was also held on tripling nuclear energy, and the need for standardization, regulation, financing and collaboration in scaling up nuclear.  

    The Director General met with multiple world leaders to discuss development, energy and world peace, including Panama’s President Jose Raul Mulino, Israel’s President Isaac Herzog, Austria’s Chancellor Alexander Schallenberg and Flanders’ Minister-President Matthias Diependaele.  

    Mr Grossi and Mr Mulino engaged on the IAEA’s Atoms4Food programme, as well as improving cancer care with the IAEA’s Rays Of Hope programme. “The IAEA is proud to stand with Panama in building a healthier, more resilient future for its people,” the Director General said. 

    The IAEA’s work on health, food and nutrition was a focus of multiple high-level dialogues. For example, Mr Grossi met with Viet Nam’s Minister of Science and Technology Huynh Thanh Dat to discuss the drought-tolerant, high-yield rice varieties that were developed with IAEA support, and with the CEO of Anglo American, Duncan Wanblad, on progress on a joint research project to fight soil salinity and advance sustainable farming practices. 

    Another key topic for the week was international security, particularly the IAEA’s role in ensuring nonproliferation worldwide. 

    The Director General was a speaker at the World Economic Forum’s Rubik’s Cube of Global Security, where he addressed pressures on nonproliferation amid rising geostrategic tensions, alongside Finland’s President Alexander Stubb, Libya’s Prime Minister Abdulhamid AlDabaiba, the International Crisis Group, Comfort Ero, Harvard Kennedy School’s Meghan O’Sullivan, and Foreign Affairs Magazine’s Dan Kurtz-Phelan. 

    Watch the recording of the session here.  

    The Director General was also active in closed sessions on artificial intelligence and sustainable energy in Latin America with leaders of the region, as well as an event on growing the African economy with leaders from the continent. 

    “The mission and the importance of the IAEA continue to grow. This is why we are here in Davos,” concluded the Director General. 

    MIL Security OSI

  • MIL-OSI: B2TRADER 2.2: C-Book Routing, Custom Markups, and Improved Mobile Trading

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    DUBAI, United Arab Emirates, Jan. 24, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — B2BROKER has rolled out a major update for B2TRADER, its multi-asset and multi-market trading platform. The latest version, B2TRADER 2.2, introduces key improvements that enhance order execution, risk management, and trading flexibility.
    This update includes the new C-Book order routing system, customisable markups, and the ability to connect multiple liquidity providers for a single asset type. Additionally, traders now have access to upgraded mobile apps for iOS and Android, ensuring a seamless experience across all devices.

    C-Book: More Control Over Order Execution

    B2TRADER 2.2 introduces C-Book, a new execution model that works alongside A-Book and B-Book. With this feature, brokers can decide how each order is handled—whether routed externally to liquidity providers or processed internally through B-Book.

    A new reporting system in the admin panel gives brokers complete transparency over executed orders, helping them manage risks more effectively. The C-Book model also helps reduce trading costs by optimising the use of liquidity providers.

    Custom Markups for Flexible Pricing

    With the latest update, brokers gain greater control over pricing strategies. B2TRADER 2.2 allows them to apply commissions, markups, or both, tailored to different trading conditions and client needs.

    Brokers can also create customised price streams, granting specific traders or groups access to different market conditions. This flexibility makes it easier to offer competitive and personalised trading options.

    Better Risk Management with Multiple Liquidity Providers

    Now, brokers can integrate multiple liquidity providers within B2TRADER, ensuring more stable and competitive trading conditions.

    Using multiple providers improves market depth, speeds up order execution, and minimises risks associated with reliance on a single provider. If one provider experiences issues, the platform automatically routes orders through another, ensuring uninterrupted trading.

    New Trading Tools: Take Profit, Stop Loss & Trailing Stops

    B2TRADER 2.2 introduces essential risk management tools that give traders more control over their positions. The update includes:

    • Take Profit: Automatically closes a position when a profit target is reached.
    • Stop Loss: Helps limit losses by closing a position at a predefined level.
    • Trailing Stop: Adjusts the stop level dynamically as the market moves in the trader’s favour.

    These tools allow traders to execute strategies more effectively, even when they’re not actively monitoring the markets.

    “At B2BROKER, we aim to stay ahead of the curve and empower brokers with innovative solutions that align with the rapidly evolving market needs. With B2TRADER 2.2, we remain committed to enabling our clients to thrive in a competitive environment while reflecting where the market is headed—towards greater customisation, advanced risk management, and unparalleled accessibility.

    We are proud to continue driving innovation that helps our clients succeed in an increasingly complex trading environment.”

    Mark Speare, Chief Client Officer at B2BROKER

    Enhanced Mobile Trading on iOS & Android

    Mobile trading has been significantly improved with the latest update. The upgraded apps for iOS and Android provide a full-featured trading experience, ensuring traders can access their accounts, monitor positions, and place orders easily from anywhere.

    Among the key features of the updated B2TRADER mobile app are:

    • User-Friendly Interface: The app mirrors the desktop experience, making trading on mobile simple and intuitive.
    • Access Anytime, Anywhere: Traders can manage their portfolios on the go without any limitations.
    • All-in-One Trading Platform: The mobile app supports complex order types, real-time chart analysis, and performance tracking.

    What’s Next for B2TRADER?

    B2BROKER continues to improve its multi-asset and multi-market trading platform with new features and enhancements. With B2TRADER 2.2, brokers and traders can take advantage of smarter execution models, flexible pricing strategies, and a seamless mobile trading experience.

    In the near future, the platform will introduce support for perpetual futures trading, expanding its already robust offerings, which include CRYPTO SPOT, Forex, and CFDs.

    Contact Details:

    Ketevan Julukhadze
    mail@b2broker.net

    Disclaimer: This content is provided by “B2BROKER”. The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the content provider. The information provided in this press release is not a solicitation for investment, nor is it intended as investment advice, financial advice, or trading advice. It is strongly recommended you practice due diligence, including consultation with a professional financial advisor, before investing in or trading cryptocurrency and securities. Please conduct your own research and invest at your own risk.

    Photos accompanying this announcement are available at:

    https://www.globenewswire.com/NewsRoom/AttachmentNg/d2e93a41-e30f-4b05-9257-60cebf01ed6b

    https://www.globenewswire.com/NewsRoom/AttachmentNg/761fd664-5a11-4fc2-9963-7c1ea24fafd1

    https://www.globenewswire.com/NewsRoom/AttachmentNg/228625b6-fcf5-433d-a5a5-c7bf49a8dae6

    https://www.globenewswire.com/NewsRoom/AttachmentNg/662971f7-d125-48c9-98d1-ff3b4738542e

    https://www.globenewswire.com/NewsRoom/AttachmentNg/a380ff8d-5090-46e9-812f-0c0ef270c1bc

    https://www.globenewswire.com/NewsRoom/AttachmentNg/7ef8ed23-7751-4b3e-91f7-e93b93da8caf

    The MIL Network

  • MIL-OSI: Marquette National Corporation Increases Quarterly Dividend 10.7 Percent and Announces a Common Stock Repurchase Program

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    CHICAGO, Jan. 24, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Marquette National Corporation (OTCQX: MNAT) today announced that its Board of Directors declared a cash dividend of $0.31 per share, an increase of 10.7% from the previous quarter dividend rate. The dividend will be payable on April 1, 2025 to shareholders of record on March 14, 2025. As of December 31, 2024, Marquette had 4,367,477 shares issued and outstanding.

    The Company also announced that its Board of Directors authorized the repurchase of up to $1,000,000 of its outstanding common stock at prevailing market prices through open market or negotiated transactions. The repurchase program is authorized to last through December 31, 2025.

    Marquette National Corporation is a diversified bank holding company with total assets of $2.2 billion. The Company’s banking subsidiary, Marquette Bank, is a full-service, community bank that serves the financial needs of communities in Chicagoland, offering an extensive line of financial solutions, including retail banking, real estate lending, trust, insurance, investments, wealth management and business banking to consumers and commercial customers. Marquette Bank has 20 branches located in: Chicago, Bolingbrook, Bridgeview, Evergreen Park, Hickory Hills, Lemont, New Lenox, Oak Forest, Oak Lawn, Orland Park, Summit and Tinley Park, Illinois. For more information visit: https://emarquettebank.com

    Special Note Concerning Forward-Looking Statements
    This document contains, and future oral and written statements of the Company and its management may contain, forward-looking statements with respect to the financial condition, results of operations, plans, objectives, future performance and business of the Company. Forward-looking statements, which may be based upon beliefs, expectations and assumptions of the Company’s management and on information currently available to management, are generally identifiable by the use of words such as “believe,” “expect,” “anticipate,” “plan,” “intend,” “estimate,” “may,” “will,” “would,” “could,” “should” or other similar expressions. A number of factors, many of which are beyond the ability of the Company to control or predict, could cause actual results to differ materially from those in its forward-looking statements. These factors include, among others, the following: (i) the strength of the local, state, national and international economies (including the effects of inflationary pressures and supply chain constraints); (ii) the economic impact of any future terrorist threats and attacks, widespread disease or pandemics, acts of war or other threats thereof (including the ongoing Israeli-Palestinian conflict and the Russian invasion of Ukraine), or other adverse external events that could cause economic deterioration or instability in credit markets, and the response of the local, state and national governments to any such adverse external events; (iii) changes in accounting policies and practices, as may be adopted by state and federal regulatory agencies, the Financial Accounting Standards Board or the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board; (iv) changes in local, state and federal laws, regulations and governmental policies concerning the Company’s general business as a result of the upcoming 2024 presidential election or any changes in response to failures of other banks; (v) changes in interest rates and prepayment rates of the Company’s assets (including the impact of the significant rate increases by the Federal Reserve since 2022); (vi) increased competition in the financial services sector (including from non-bank competitors such as credit unions and “fintech” companies) and the inability to attract new customers; (vii) changes in technology and the ability to develop and maintain secure and reliable electronic systems; (viii) the loss of key executives or employees; (ix) changes in consumer spending; (x) unexpected outcomes of existing or new litigation involving the Company; (xi) the economic impact of exceptional weather occurrences such as tornadoes, floods and blizzards; (xii) fluctuations in the value of securities held in our securities portfolio; (xiii) concentrations within our loan portfolio, large loans to certain borrowers, and large deposits from certain clients; (xiv) the concentration of large deposits from certain clients who have balances above current Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation insurance limits and may withdraw deposits to diversity their exposure; (xv) the level of non-performing assets on our balance sheets; (xvi) interruptions involving our information technology and communications systems or third-party servicers; (xvii) breaches or failures of our information security controls or cybersecurity-related incidents, and (xviii) the ability of the Company to manage the risks associated with the foregoing as well as anticipated.. These risks and uncertainties should be considered in evaluating forward-looking statements and undue reliance should not be placed on such statements. Additionally, all statements in this document, including forward-looking statements, speak only as of the date they are made, and the Company undertakes no obligation to update any statement in light of new information or future events.

    The MIL Network

  • MIL-OSI Global: Harvard expands its definition of antisemitism – when does criticism of Israel cross a line?

    Source: The Conversation – USA – By Joshua Shanes, Professor of Jewish Studies, College of Charleston

    Harvard has adopted a broader definition of antisemitism. Education Images/Universal Images Group via Getty Images

    As part of Harvard University’s agreement in response to two federal lawsuits filed by Jewish students alleging antisemitic discrimination, it will adopt the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance, or IHRA, “working definition” of antisemitism.

    This is a definition favored by many Jewish community leaders and politicians because its broad language can be applied to most anti-Israel rhetoric. This includes Kenneth Marcus, who served as assistant secretary of education during the first Trump administration and represented the students as chairman of the Louis D. Brandeis Center for Human Rights Under Law.

    In contrast, many scholars prefer either the competing Jerusalem Declaration on Antisemitism or the definition offered by the Nexus Task Force, a committee of experts led by the Bard Center for the Study of Hate. I am a member of the Nexus group and also helped compose its 2024 “Campus Guide to Identifying Antisemitism.”

    The controversy over this move indicates that many well-intentioned people still struggle to understand what exactly constitutes antisemitism and when anti-Israel rhetoric crosses the line.

    As a scholar of modern Jewish history, I offer this primer that helps answer this question.

    History of antisemitism

    There has been a sharp increase in antisemitism around the world since the Oct. 7, 2023, massacre by Hamas and Israel’s subsequent military attacks in the Gaza Strip.

    Anti-Jewish animosity dates to antiquity. The early Christian church attacked Jews, whom it blamed for crucifying Christ, and claimed to replace them as God’s chosen people. The Gospel of John in the New Testament accused Jews of being Satan’s children, while others called them demons intent on sacrificing the souls of men.

    Medieval Christians added other myths, such as the blood libel – the lie that Jews ritually murdered Christian children for their blood. Other myths accused them of poisoning wells or desecrating the consecrated host of the Eucharist to reenact the murder of Christ; some even claimed that Jews had inhuman biology such as horns or that they suckled at the teats of pigs.

    Such lies led to violent persecution of Jews over many centuries.

    Modern antisemitism

    In the 19th century, these myths were supplanted by the additional element of race – the claim that Jewishness was immutable and could not be changed via conversion. Though this idea first appeared in 15th-century Spain, it was deeply connected to the rise of modern nationalism.

    Nineteenth-century ethno-nationalists rejected the idea of a political nation united in a social contract with each other. They began imagining the nation as a biological community linked by common descent in which Jews might be tolerated but could never truly belong.

    Finally, in 1879, the German journalist Wilhelm Marr pushed the term “antisemitism” to reflect that his anti-Jewish ideology was based on race, not religion. Marr imagined the Jews as a foreign, “semitic” race, referring to the language group that includes Hebrew. The term has since persisted to mean specifically anti-Jewish hostility or prejudice.

    The myth of a Jewish conspiracy

    Modern antisemitism built on those premodern foundations, which never completely disappeared, but was fundamentally different. It emerged as part of the new politics of the democratic modern era.

    Antisemitism became the core platform of new political parties, which used it to unite otherwise opposing groups, such as shopkeepers and farmers, anxious about the modernizing world. In other words, it was not merely prejudice; it was a worldview that explained the entire world to its believers by blaming all of its faults on this scapegoat.

    Unlike earlier anti-Jewish hatred, this was less about religion and more about political and social issues. Antisemites believed the conspiracy theory that Jews all over the world controlled the levers of government, media and banking, and that defeating them would solve society’s problems.

    Thus, one of the most important features of modern antisemitic mythology was the belief that Jews constituted a single, malevolent group, with one mind, organized for the purpose of conquering and destroying the world.

    Negative traits attributed to Jews

    Antisemitic books and cartoons often used claws or tentacles to symbolize the “international Jew,” a shadowy figure they blamed for leading a global conspiracy, strangling and destroying society. Others depicted him as a puppet master running the world.

    In the late 19th century, Edmond Rothschild, head of the most famous Jewish banking family, was villainized as the symbol of international Jewish wealth and nefarious power. Today, the billionaire liberal philanthropist George Soros is often portrayed in similar ways.

    This myth that Jews constitute an international creature plotting to harm the nation has inspired massacres of Jews since the 19th century, beginning with the Russian pogroms of 1881 and leading up to the Holocaust.

    More recently, in 2018, Robert Bowers murdered 11 Jews at the Tree of Life synagogue in Pittsburgh because he was convinced that Jews, collectively under the guidance of Soros, were working to destroy America by facilitating the mass migration of nonwhite people into the country.

    Modern antisemites ascribe many immutable negative traits to Jews, but two are particularly widespread. First, Jews are said to be ruthless misers who care more about their allegedly ill-gotten wealth than the interests of their countries. Second, Jews’ loyalty to their countries is considered suspect because they are said to constitute a foreign element.

    Since Israel’s establishment in 1948, this hatred has focused on the accusation that Jews’ primary loyalty is to Israel, not the countries they live in.

    Antisemitism and anti-Zionism

    In recent years, the relationship between antisemitism and anti-Zionism has taken on renewed importance. Zionism has many factions but roughly refers to the modern political movement that argues Jews constitute a nation and have a right to self-determination in that land.

    Some activists claim that anti-Zionism – ideological opposition to Zionism – is inherently antisemitic because they equate it with denying Jews the right to self-determination and therefore equality.

    Others feel that there needs to be a clearer separation between anti-Zionism and antisemitism. They argue that equating anti-Zionism with antisemitism leads to silencing criticism of Israel’s structural mistreatment of Palestinians.

    Zionism in practice has meant the achievement of a flourishing safe haven for Jews, but it has also led to dislocation or inequality for millions of Palestinians, including refugees, West Bank Palestinians who still live under military rule, and even Palestinian citizens of Israel who face legal and social discrimination. Anti-Zionism opposes this, and critics argue that it should not be labeled antisemitic unless it taps into those antisemitic myths or otherwise calls for violence or inequality for Jews.

    This debate is evident in these competing definitions of antisemitism. Remarkably, the three main definitions tend to agree on the nature of antisemitism except regarding the relationship of anti-Israel rhetoric to antisemitism. The IHRA definition, which is by design vague and open to interpretation, allows for a wider swath of anti-Israel activism to be labeled antisemitic than the others.

    The Jerusalem Declaration, in contrast, understands rhetoric to have “crossed the line” only when it engages in antisemitic mythology, blames diaspora Jews for the actions of the Israeli state, or calls for the oppression of Jews in Israel. IHRA defenders use that definition to label a call for binational democracy – meaning citizenship for West Bank Palestinians – to be antisemitic. Likewise, they label boycotts, even of West Bank settlements that most of the world considers illegal, to be antisemitic. The Jerusalem Declaration does not.

    In other words, the key to identifying whether anti-Israel discourse has masked antisemitism is to see evidence of antisemitic mythology. For example, if Israel is described as leading an international conspiracy, or if it holds the key to solving global problems, all three definitions agree this is antisemitic.

    Equally, if Jews or Jewish institutions are held responsible for Israeli actions or are expected to take a stand one way or another regarding them, again all three definitions agree that this crosses the line because it is based on the myth of a global Jewish conspiracy.

    Identity and pride

    Critically, for many Jews living in other countries, Zionism is not primarily a political argument about the state of Israel. It instead constitutes a sense of Jewish identity and pride, even a religious identity. In contrast, many protests against Israel and Zionism are focused not on ideology but on the Israeli government and its real or alleged actions.

    This disconnect can lead to confusion if protests conflate Jews with Israel just because they are Zionist, which is antisemitic. On the other hand, Jews sometimes take protests against Israel in defense of Palestinian rights to be attacks on their Zionist identity and thus antisemitic, when they are not. There are certainly gray areas, but in general, calls for Palestinian equality, I believe, are legitimate even when they upset people with Zionist identities.

    Harvard’s statement captures this distinction. It posted a statement that, “For many Jewish people, Zionism is a part of their Jewish identity,” and added that Jews who subscribe to this identity must not be excluded from campus events on that basis.

    This does not mean that Jews are protected from hearing contrary views, any more than they are protected from hearing Christian preachers on campus or professors who teach secular views of the Bible. It means that they cannot be excluded based only on those beliefs.

    This does not, however, require an adoption of the IHRA definition of antisemitism, which goes much further. Many advocates of the IHRA definition use it to label political calls for Palestinian equality as antisemitic, as well as accusations against Israel that they consider wrong or unfair.

    Harvard’s adoption of the IHRA definition, accordingly, would mean that any speech that calls for full equality for Palestinians risks academic and legal sanction, even without any material discrimination against Jewish students. It is thus opposed by students who advocate for Palestinian rights as well as supporters of free speech more generally.

    Editor’s note: This is an updated version of an article first published on Jan. 29, 2024

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

    ref. Harvard expands its definition of antisemitism – when does criticism of Israel cross a line? – https://theconversation.com/harvard-expands-its-definition-of-antisemitism-when-does-criticism-of-israel-cross-a-line-248199

    MIL OSI – Global Reports

  • MIL-OSI Global: As Syria ponders a democratic future: 5 lessons from the Arab Spring

    Source: The Conversation – USA – By Robert Kubinec, Assistant Professor of Political Science, University of South Carolina

    The fall of Bashar Assad’s dictatorship in December 2024 has ushered in a nerve-wracking time of hope and fear for Syrians concerning future governance in the long-war-torn country.

    While it’s unclear what exact political path Syria will take, the dilemmas the country faces are similar to the experiences of other Arab countries more than a decade ago. In the winter of 2010, an outbreak of protests in Tunisia spread across the region, toppling several regimes in what became known as the Arab Uprisings.

    While some countries – Egypt and Tunisia – became democracies, albeit briefly, others, like Yemen, Libya and Syria, descended into violence.

    In the intervening years, political science scholars from across the world have examined these political transformations, looking at why so many of Arab Uprising countries failed to continue down the path of democratic reform. As a political scientist with expertise in the region, I have distilled this research into five key lessons that could help guide Syria now, as it seeks to build a stable and democratic state.

    1. Islamist politicians are politicians first, Islamists second

    One of the most pressing questions when considering Syria’s post-Assad political direction is the role played by Hayat Tahrir al-Sham, the rebel group that led the overthrow of Assad.

    Hayat Tahrir al-Sham is a former al-Qaida affiliate that has since backed away from extremist ideology – though there are worries that this moderation is temporary. While some observers may think that all Islamist groups want to rigidly enforce a narrow interpretation of Islamic law like the Taliban in Afghanistan, research shows a far wider range of possibilities for the policies Islamist groups implement while in office.

    For example, the Tunisian Islamist group Ennahda stalwartly defended democracy and helped write a liberal constitution after the country ousted Zine El Abidine Ben Ali in 2011. Similarly, in Egypt after strongman leader Hosni Mubarak was removed the same year, the Muslim Brotherhood, a once-banned Islamist movement, competed successfully and fairly in the democratic process, though, of course, it faced the same challenges of any governing party in implementing policies once in power.

    But nor is such a path predetermined. Turkey’s recent democratic backslide and embrace of authoritarianism shows that Islamist politicians like President Recep Tayyip Erdogan can also undermine democracy when it serves their interests.

    What political science research has turned up time and again is that Islamist politicians are like politicians everywhere: When they need to win elections, they will gravitate toward voter concerns. According to regional survey data, a majority of Arabs express a preference for religious leaders who are apolitical.

    If Syria becomes a democracy, Hayat Tahrir al-Sham will, I believe, likely have to continue to embrace moderation. But whether the group backs democracy depends on the organization’s calculation of what its future looks like in democracy versus more authoritarian forms of governance. Broad negotiations that involve all parties in Syria can help convince Hayat Tahrir al-Sham that continuing on a path of moderation is in their best interests. While no one can forecast with certainty what Syria’s new institutions will look like, research shows that Islamists are just as likely as secular parties to support democratic norms.

    2. Ending corruption is all important

    One of the drivers of the Arab Spring and the Syrian revolution was anger over corrupt business deals. Indeed, relatives and cronies of Assad owned de facto monopolies over lucrative industries like cellphone networks. Unwinding these corrupt legacies and opening industries to competition and licensing should be an overriding priority for those seeking a less autocratic future.

    In Tunisia, established businesses fought anti-corruption reforms because they said it would hurt investment and growth. But the reason that economic growth is so poor in many parts of the Middle East is precisely due to these entrenched companies.

    Syria’s diaspora has many capable businesspeople who can return and found innovative companies if the new government opens up investment and entrepreneurship beyond people with political connections.

    3. Political disagreement is OK

    Many hope that Syria’s new government will be freely and fairly elected. For democracy to work, though, it must successfully implement changes in response to voters’ concerns.

    Initially, Syria will need to decide on basic rules like a constitution, which will involve many diverse groups. This broad coalition may have an easier time reaching compromises because of the opposition’s shared experiences under the prior dictatorship. Trying to maintain this unity, however, can mask important political debates that need to occur.

    In order for voters to see change, electoral competition must yield actual policy change. In Tunisia, top-heavy coalitions of parties promoted unity instead of tackling difficult decisions that resonated with people’s daily concerns. Over time, voters stopped identifying with parties and lost confidence in elections. Tunisia’s elected president, Kais Saied, took advantage of this apathy to shut down the country’s parliament – an action that was broadly popular despite the loss of democracy.

    A practical response to this concern is to build strong parties, a cause that pro-democracy organizations like the National Democratic Institute are very good at. Effective parties help voters by putting together a package of policies that will get through parliament and building coalitions.

    While Syria’s opposition has a lot of experience with waging war, it has relatively little in the way of running campaigns and building strong party brands. These more mundane goals are the key connective tissue that makes democracy work.

    4. Bureaucracies should serve the public

    Elections choose leaders, but lasting, popular change also requires bureaucrats who implement new policies – what is known as “horizontal accountability.” Egypt’s post-2011 democratic government left many state institutions untouched and later faced a revolt from autonomous anti-democratic agencies. Meanwhile, in Sudan, which saw a brief interlude of liberalization after the ouster of its longtime dictator, Omar al-Bashir, in 2019, democratic reformers launched an ambitious overhaul of state institutions that still failed because bureaucrats lobbied politicians for support.

    Without cooperative bureaucrats, basic state services fail, which leads to phenomena like crime waves and a loss of confidence in democracy.

    The Hayat Tahrir al-Sham-led government in Syria has already started reforming bureaucracies by prosecuting high-ranking officials from the prior regime while retaining the rank and file. Effective oversight, though, requires participation of elected leaders with the legitimacy to demand accountability from bureaucrats. For those who want to be involved in Syria’s transition, providing technical assistance to quickly rebuild ministries is one way to increase the odds of a successful transition.

    5. Keep the military close

    If Syria’s new government collapses, history suggests the military will be the most likely culprit. Egypt’s military undermined the country’s democratic transition by covertly supporting the anti-Islamist opposition. Sudan’s military acquiesced to protester demands for new leadership but kept de facto control of important government institutions.

    Recent research shows that keeping the military in check means giving it a stake in democracy by funding needed items like salaries and equipment. Just as important, however, is establishing civilian control over the military by mandating that the military report to elected leaders about its budgets, policies, and deployments. Military aid is necessary, yes, but still must be tied to strict commitments to civilian control.

    The future is Syria’s

    Political transitions are too complex to embark on easy forecasts. But the experience of nations who saw democracy rise and fall in the Arab Spring and subsequent winter can help Syria’s new leaders avoid costly political mistakes.

    Ultimately, though, the fate of the country rests with its own people. They are the ones who survived Assad’s regime – and who will make the most important decisions for Syria’s future.

    I know and have co-authored with people who wrote some of the studies that are linked to in this article.

    ref. As Syria ponders a democratic future: 5 lessons from the Arab Spring – https://theconversation.com/as-syria-ponders-a-democratic-future-5-lessons-from-the-arab-spring-246203

    MIL OSI – Global Reports

  • MIL-OSI: Simplifying Crypto Payments: Introducing Bybit Pay

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    DUBAI, United Arab Emirates, Jan. 24, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Bybit, the world’s second-largest cryptocurrency exchange by trading volume, is excited to launch Bybit Pay, an innovative payment platform designed to seamlessly connect traditional finance with the digital economy. This new solution is about processing payments and building strategic partnerships that drive growth, innovation, and financial inclusion on a global scale.

    Bybit Pay is a next-generation payment solution designed to simplify transactions across fiat and cryptocurrencies. With seamless integration across websites, mobile apps, and point-of-sale (POS) systems, Bybit Pay empowers businesses to offer efficient, secure, and low-cost payment options to their customers. Whether it’s for online platforms, in-store purchases, or cross-border payments, Bybit Pay bridges the gap between traditional payment methods and the growing demand for digital financial services.

    Bybit Pay is happy to welcome more forward-thinking partners joining its ecosystem – businesses, payment providers, and service platforms looking to innovate and scale their operations in the evolving digital finance landscape. Partners gain access to:

    • A Global User Base: Instantly connecting with Bybit’s network of over 60 million global users.
    • Seamless Integration: Easily incorporating Bybit Pay into existing financial infrastructures and business systems.
    • Scalable Solutions: Growing with flexible, future-proof payment technologies designed to adapt to market needs.
    • Cross-Industry Collaboration: Unlocking opportunities through partnerships across e-commerce, traditional finance, and digital asset sectors.

    Empowering Businesses and Customers Alike

    For businesses, Bybit Pay offers the tools to drive potential revenue growth, reduce operational costs, and improve financial efficiency. At the same time, customers are able to benefit from faster transactions, lower fees, and the freedom to choose between fiat and cryptocurrency payment methods – creating a frictionless payment experience for all.

    A Vision for the Future

    Joan Han, Bybit’s Sales and Marketing Director, envisions a brighter future for payments, noting: “Bybit Pay represents a shift in how we connect businesses to the digital future. It’s more than a payment platform; it’s a call to partners to innovate and redefine transactions with solutions that are efficient, accessible, and forward-thinking.”

    The Future of Payments Starts Here

    Bybit Pay represents a new chapter in digital finance – where innovation, scalability, and reliability come together to create unparalleled opportunities for growth.

    #Bybit / #TheCryptoArk

    About Bybit

    Bybit is the world’s second-largest cryptocurrency exchange by trading volume, serving a global community of over 60 million users. Founded in 2018, Bybit is redefining openness in the decentralized world by creating a simpler, open, and equal ecosystem for everyone. With a strong focus on Web3, Bybit partners strategically with leading blockchain protocols to provide robust infrastructure and drive on-chain innovation. Renowned for its secure custody, diverse marketplaces, intuitive user experience, and advanced blockchain tools, Bybit bridges the gap between TradFi and DeFi, empowering builders, creators, and enthusiasts to unlock the full potential of Web3. Discover the future of decentralized finance at Bybit.com.

    For more details about Bybit, please visit Bybit Press 

    For media inquiries, please contact: media@bybit.com

    For updates, please follow: Bybit’s Communities and Social Media

    Contact

    Head of PR

    Tony

    Bybit

    tony.au@bybit.com

    A photo accompanying this announcement is available at https://www.globenewswire.com/NewsRoom/AttachmentNg/7c878034-d424-4c73-9f6b-1056a73a4449

    The MIL Network

  • MIL-OSI Global: Trump labels drug cartels as terrorist groups – what it means for Mexico and beyond

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Amalendu Misra, Professor of International Politics, Lancaster University

    Donald Trump returned to the US presidency on January 20 with a flurry of executive orders. This included the designation of criminal gangs and drug cartels operating south of the Mexico border as “foreign terrorist organisations” – a first for a US president. The state department will now decide which groups are added to the list.

    Trump’s disdain for the criminal fraternity in Latin America is not new. When announcing his first run for the presidency in 2015, Trump claimed the Mexican government was deliberately sending drugs, rapists and criminals to the US.

    To keep them out, he floated and later implemented a rigorous border protection programme. This led not only to mass deportations, but also the building of a concrete and metal wall along the US-Mexico border that spans hundreds of miles.

    In his new order, Trump claimed the “cartels have engaged in a campaign of violence and terror throughout the western hemisphere that has not only destabilised countries with significant importance for our national interests but also flooded the US with deadly drugs, violent criminals, and vicious gangs”.

    How will this order, if it eventually becomes law, impact the people towards whom it is directed?

    Fears of military action

    A terrorist designation expands the government’s ability to collect military intelligence on the cartels and prosecute people deemed to be offering any “material support” to these groups. However, some fear the designation will also make it politically easier for the US government to order direct military intervention against the cartels without having to go through Congress.

    During Trump’s first term, for instance, Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps was designated as a foreign terrorist organisation. Its head, General Qasem Soleimani, was killed by a US drone strike less than a year later. The Trump Administration cited its foreign terrorist organisation order as justification for its actions.

    Trump has not yet ruled out similar military action in Mexico. On January 20, while signing executive orders in the Oval Office, Trump was asked whether he would send the special forces to confront Mexico’s cartels. “Could happen. Stranger things have happened”, he replied. In the past, Trump has also apparently suggested a missile attack on Mexican drug labs.

    The idea of unilateral US military action against the cartels has always faced stiff opposition from Mexico. And in December, as plans to designate the cartels as terrorist organisations gathered steam, Trump’s Mexican counterpart Claudia Sheinbaum said: “We collaborate, we coordinate, we work together, but we will never subordinate ourselves … Mexico is a free, sovereign, independent country and we do not accept interference.”

    However, US military operations in Mexico may not be so far-fetched. The US has previously staged armed interventions in Latin America when it has felt its national interests were under threat. The ousting of Panama’s leader, Manuel Noriega, in 1989 is a good example.

    That year, the then US president George H.W. Bush ordered 20,000 American troops to invade Panama in an operation to “protect the lives of American citizens”. Noriega, who was arrested after spending days hiding in Panama City’s Vatican embassy, was wanted by US authorities for racketeering and drug trafficking.

    The invasion resulted in the deaths of 514 Panamanian soldiers and civilians (though the unofficial count is closer to 1,000), and three American servicemen.

    Power of persuasion

    The terrorist designation could, on the other hand, simply be a tactic to pressure governments across Latin America into taking tougher action against the gangs. We have already seen the likes of El Salvador’s iron-fisted president, Nayib Bukele, do the heavy lifting for the US, so far as countering criminal gangs is concerned.

    With US assistance, El Salvador currently operates the infamous Terrorism Confinement Center, a maximum security jail that holds high-ranking members of the country’s main criminal gangs. Its critics consider it a “black hole of human rights” and one of the harshest prisons in the world.

    Over the past few weeks, Trump has rebuked Sheinbaum for not doing enough to curtail the power of cartels operating in her country. He claimed earlier in January that Mexico was “essentially run by the cartels”.

    Trump’s proposed appointment of Colonel Ronald Johnson, a former Green Beret with extensive experience in US military intelligence, as ambassador to Mexico signals a potential shift in US strategy toward direct confrontation with the region’s governments to step in line.

    Trump can also buy compliance from governments in Latin America to do his bidding against the cartels, as was the case with Plan Colombia. Launched in 2000, the US-funded US$1 billion project (equivalent to roughly £1.5 billion today) provided foreign and military aid to Colombia in an attempt to fight the production and trafficking of illegal narcotics in the country.

    Plan Colombia was subject to considerable controversy. Its critics claim it led to gross human rights violations as well as the destruction of the environment and people’s livelihoods. But successive US administrations have maintained that Plan Colombia, which came to an end in 2015, was a success.

    The terrorist designation will usher in seismic changes in Latin America. Should Sheinbaum embrace Trump’s initiative, in part or in its entirety, then it is likely to lead to a civil war-like situation in Mexico, given the firepower and deep pockets the cartels have.

    In 2007, under the so-called Mérida Initative, the US donated at least US$1.5 billion to help the then Mexican president, Felipe Calderón, launch his “war on drugs”. The outcome of that war was disastrous, with tens of thousands of lives lost and its effects still being felt today.

    Amalendu Misra is a recipient of British Academy and Nuffield Foundation Grants.

    ref. Trump labels drug cartels as terrorist groups – what it means for Mexico and beyond – https://theconversation.com/trump-labels-drug-cartels-as-terrorist-groups-what-it-means-for-mexico-and-beyond-248035

    MIL OSI – Global Reports

  • MIL-OSI USA: Tuberville Urges Senate to Confirm Hegseth and Rollins, Secure American Farmland with the FARM Act

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator Tommy Tuberville (Alabama)
    WASHINGTON – Yesterday, U.S. Senator Tommy Tuberville (R-AL) spoke on the Senate floor in support of Pete Hegseth, President Trump’s nominee to be Secretary of Defense, who will bring much-needed change to the Department of Defense.
    Additionally, Sen. Tuberville addressed legislation he reintroduced on Wednesday, the Foreign Adversary Risk Management (FARM) Act. The FARM Act will help secure America’s agricultural industry and food supply chains from foreign adversaries by creating a permanent seat for the Secretary of Agriculture on the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS). Additionally, Sen. Tuberville encouraged the Senate to move quickly on confirming President Trump’s pick for Secretary of Agriculture, Brooke Rollins, who will fight for America’s farming communities and defend against foreign influence in the U.S. agricultural sector.
    Read Sen. Tuberville’s remarks below or watch on YouTube or Rumble.

    ON CONFIRMING PETE HEGSETH
    “Thank you, Mr. President,
    I want to reiterate what my colleague from Tennessee just talked about, the importance of the vote that we just took. Just a few minutes ago our nominee for new Secretary Defense, Pete Hegseth. 
    Now the procedure is, as we just voted, to close the vote and now, we wait 30 hours from just a few minutes ago and have the final vote on his nomination, which it looks like that he has the votes of a majority to be appointed, or sent to the White House, to be confirmed as the next Secretary of Defense.
    I’m on the Armed Services Committee, and I’ve watched four years of the destruction of the best military in our world, United States of America. It is a shame what has happened, the DEI, the woke agenda that’s being pushed on the troops in our country, to me, is embarrassing.
    I’m a military brat. My dad died on active duty in the military. Awarded five bronze stars and a Purple Heart at age 17 driving a tank across Europe after landing the first day at Normandy. We have to change course in our military, and we can talk about inflation and pumping gas and the crime and all the things that we’re having a lot of problems with, but if you don’t have a strong military to protect our borders and protect the citizens in our country from adversaries all over the world, we got problems. And it’s got to start there.
    Pete Hegseth is the choice, the right choice. I like his age, I like his demeanor, I like the things he brings to our military. He’s exciting and he will energize this military into the next decade. And I’m excited about that. 
    So, hopefully in about 30 hours we’ll vote tomorrow night around 9:00 and we’ll vote to confirm Pete Hegseth as our new Secretary of Defense.
    ON THE FARM ACT
    Now, I’d like to turn to national security threats in our Nation’s agriculture sector and food supply chains.
    I’m on the Ag Committee. Over the past few years, the United States has experienced a rapid increase in foreign investment in agricultural sector, particularly from China. We have to open our eyes. Bad things are happening around us. Growing foreign investment in agriculture and other essential industries like health care and energy is a direct threat to our country’s national security.
    You know for years now I’ve been sounding the alarm about foreign ownership of American farmland and other elements of our food chain. According to USDA data from December 2023,  foreign investors own approximately 45 million acres of U.S. agriculture land. Now let me say that again: 45 million acres of our forest and agriculture land in this country has been sold to foreign entities. Does that not scare us? What [did] we just see during COVID about our drug supply? We looked around, we looked for health care and help after COVID hit our hit our borders and what happened? We found out that it was all being made in China.
    So, 45 million acres, this represents over 1.5 million acres in one calendar year. Foreign ownership of U.S. agricultural land in increased modestly from 2012 to [20]17 an average increase of 0.6 million acres per year, that’s 2012 to 2017. But since 2017, the number has skyrocketed to an average of 2.6 million acres a year that we’re selling, our farmland, to our adversaries. And it’s just not China. It’s Russia it’s other entities that don’t wish us well at the end of the day. So additionally, between 2010 and [20]21, entities or individuals from China increased their ownership of U.S. agriculture land more than twenty-fold from about 14,000 acres to 400,000 Acres. This is an unbelievable and unsustainable pace for the United States of America.
    Now, Alabama is experiencing, my state, this firsthand. We have the fourth largest amount of foreign owned agricultural land in the United States at 2.2 million acres, most of which is forest land. It’s not really agriculture in terms of growing row crops, it’s basically our forest. You know, I represent over 62,000 farmers in the state of Alabama. I hear from them time and time again about foreign activity in our agriculture community. Threats like these are something our states can’t handle all on their own.
    Which is why President Ford established, President Ford, established a Committee on Foreign Investments in the United States, also known in short terms, CFIUS. This was in 1975. In other words, this committee is supposed to keep an eye on foreign investments in our country. This is the governmental body that oversees the vetting process of foreign investments and acquisitions of American companies in the interest of national security. CFIUS is composed of nine members of President’s cabinet including the Secretaries of State, Treasury, Defense, Homeland Security, Commerce, and Energy. The Attorney General, the US Trade Representative, and the Director of Office of Science and Technology Policy also sit on this vetting board of industry and land in our country.
    Nowhere on that list did you hear me say the Secretary of Agriculture. Now why is that? […] Considering the massive increase in foreign investment in our country, we need additional oversight for what’s going on in our country. We got our eyes closed. Which is why yesterday I introduced the Foreign Adversary Risk Management Act, called the FARM Act, here on the floor that will accomplish three major things.
    First, it would add the Secretary of Agriculture as a permanent member of CFIUS. In other words, that somebody that’s going to help our agriculture people vet land that’s being bought by foreign entities. Second, it would protect U.S. agriculture industry from foreign control through transactions, mergers, and acquisitions, and agreements, and it would also designate agriculture supply chains as critical infrastructure and critical technology. Third, it would require a report to Congress on current and potential foreign investments in the U.S. agriculture industry. This legislation, folks, is long overdue.
    These foreign investments now reach into every aspect of agriculture industry and supply chains from farming and processing, to packaging and shipping. We cannot, and I repeat, we cannot allow our adversaries to have a foot in the door to our critical supply chains. Food security is national security. We must prioritize increased oversight of foreign investment, and our food supply chains especially those coming from China, Russia, Iran, and North Korea. 
    This starts with giving the agriculture community a permanent seat at the table of CFIUS. The FARM Act does just that.
    ON CONFIRMING BROOKE ROLLINS
    And there’s no better person to fill this permanent seat on CFIUS than my good friend, who we had a hearing today, as a new nominee for Secretary of Agriculture, Brooke Rollins. I’ve known Brooke for 30 years. I met her while I was coaching at Texas A&M. She was the student body president in 1994. The students saw then what President Trump, what they see in her today, her strong leadership and her conviction of agriculture. It will be no different when she becomes the Secretary of Agriculture for the United States of America. 
    Brooke was brought up in a small agricultural community of Glen Rose, Texas. She comes from several generations of American farmers. She participated in levels of 4-H and FFA. She raised livestock throughout her life. Now she is [a] mother, she’s involved in the show steer industry with her four children. She received her Bachelor of Science degree in agricultural development from A&M and later earned a law degree at the University of Texas. 
    Later at the Texas Public Policy Foundation, she was engaged with rural and agriculture communities throughout Texas. She led litigation efforts that focused on the defense of Texas landowners and farmers against federal interference and regulations. Next, Brooke went on to serve in several roles in President Trump’s White House. She served as the Director of Domestic Policy Council, Assistant to the President for Strategic Initiatives, and Director of The Office of American Innovation. In these roles, she helped roll back terrible EPA rules like Waters of the U.S., or WOTUS, that targeted farmers and ranchers. 
    After the White House, she joined the American First Policy Institute, where she focused on protecting U.S. farmland and foreign entities seeking to gain control, especially from the Chinese. At AFPI, she strove to improve American food security, independence, as well as support measures that defend U.S. agriculture trade. Brooke understands these many challenges.
    In short, Brooke is a conservative warrior and will be an excellent Ag Secretary. I look forward to working with her to secure our farmland from foreign entities and working with her on passing a Farm Bill that puts American producers first again.
    As Alabama’s voiced on the Senate Ag Committee, I will continue fighting to secure our agriculture supply chain so our agriculture community can continue to put food on the table. And that starts with someone like Brooke Rollins as our Secretary of Agriculture. She is a terrific nominee, and I look forward to working with her on the Committee.
    I expect to move, her to move easily through the Committee vote, and here on this floor. So, once she’s out of Committee, the Senate must vote on her for confirmation. She’ll do great. She’s perfect for the job and I ask that the Senate take up both efforts quickly to defend our agriculture communities which feeds not only the American people but the entire world.
    I yield the floor.”
    Senator Tommy Tuberville represents Alabama in the United States Senate and is a member of the Senate Armed Services, Agriculture, Veterans’ Affairs, HELP, and Aging Committees.

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI: Feather Your Trades: Bounce Back Stronger from Trading Losses

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    NICOSIA, Cyprus, Jan. 24, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — PU Prime is launching Feather Your Trades, a promotion designed to help traders recover from losses and trade with confidence. From 15 January to 15 February 2025, clients can redeem up to $30 in Trade Loss Vouchers to offset losses on selected closed trades.

    How It Works:

    1. Claim Your Vouchers: Redeem $30 worth of Trade Loss Vouchers ($5 x 6) via the PU Prime App.
    2. Apply to Closed Trades: Use the vouchers to partially cover your trading losses.
    3. Bounce Back Smarter: Regain momentum and refine your strategies.

    Eligibility:

    Available to new and existing clients with Standard or Islamic Standard Accounts. Each client can redeem the vouchers once during the promotion.

    Why Join?

    • Easy to Use: Redeem and apply vouchers directly through the app.
    • Boost Confidence: Offset losses and trade with a clearer mindset.
    • Inclusive: Open to traders of all experience levels.

    Take advantage of Feather Your Trades and bounce back stronger. Visit the PU Prime App or website to learn more and redeem your vouchers!

    For media inquiries, please contact the PR team via media@puprime.com.

    About PU Prime

    Founded in 2015, PU Prime is a leading global fintech company providing innovative online trading solutions. Today, we offer regulated financial products across various asset classes, including forex, commodities, indices, and cryptocurrencies. Committed to providing advanced technology and educational resources, PU Prime supports traders and investors at every stage, from beginner to professional. With a presence in over 120 countries and exceeding 40 million app downloads, PU Prime is dedicated to enabling financial success and fostering a global community of empowered traders.

    Organization: PU Prime
    Contact Person Name: Qianyi Hong
    Website: https://www.puprime.com/
    Email: media@puprime.com
    Phone No.: 3571 1111 111
    Address 01: 62 Athalassas, Mezzanine, Strovolos, 2012, Nicosia, Cyprus

    Disclaimer: This content is provided by the PU Prime. The statements, views, and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the content provider. The information shared in this press release is not a solicitation for investment, nor is it intended as investment, financial, or trading advice. It is strongly recommended that you conduct thorough research and consult with a professional financial advisor before making any investment or trading decisions. Please conduct your own research and invest at your own risk.

    A photo accompanying this announcement is available at https://www.globenewswire.com/NewsRoom/AttachmentNg/67ec54b3-5b59-4e7b-a12f-8f323577be1f

    The MIL Network

  • MIL-OSI Global: Trump inherits the Guantánamo prison, complete with 4 ‘forever prisoners’

    Source: The Conversation – USA – By Lisa Hajjar, Professor of Sociology, University of California, Santa Barbara

    A control tower overlooks the Camp VI detention facility, at Guantánamo Bay Naval Base, Cuba. AP Photo/Alex Brandon

    President Joe Biden’s record of handling the U.S. military prison at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, is decidedly mixed. He succeeded in reducing the detainee population he inherited by more than half, but he compounded problems in the military commissions that the Bush administration had invented in the wake of the 9/11 attacks to try people captured in the “war on terror.” Now all the problems at Guantánamo are again President Donald Trump’s.

    When Biden took office in 2021, there were 40 prisoners. Today there are 15, the lowest number since the first 20 Muslim men and boys captured in Afghanistan were airlifted to the base on Jan. 11, 2002.

    Biden left Trump four people the U.S. will not release but also cannot put on trial – the so-called “forever prisoners.” He also left intact the troubled military commissions system, with three pending criminal cases against a total of six detainees.

    In December 2021, former chief military defense attorney Brig. Gen. John Baker testified before the Senate Judiciary Committee: “It is too late in the process for the current military commissions to do justice for anyone. The best that can be hoped for at this point … is to bring this sordid chapter of American history to an end.” Baker made clear that the only viable option is to resolve the cases with plea bargains for the defendants.

    Marine Brig. Gen. John Baker tells U.S. senators that there is no opportunity for justice to be done at Guantánamo.

    A chance to make progress

    There are three cases that have not yet gone to trial – the 9/11 case with four defendants facing charges for their connections with the attacks, the USS Cole bombing in October 2000 with one defendant and the Bali bombing in October 2002 with one defendant.

    The 9/11 and USS Cole cases have been stuck in the pretrial phase since Biden was Barack Obama’s vice president. In the summer of 2024, a breakthrough in the 9/11 case appeared imminent: Prosecutors and defense lawyers for three of the four defendants reportedly reached plea-bargain agreements. Khalid Sheikh Mohammad – the alleged “mastermind” of the attacks – Walid bin Attash and Mustafa Hawsawi agreed to plead guilty and accept life sentences in exchange for the government taking the death penalty off the table. There was no deal for the fourth 9/11 defendant, Ammar al-Baluchi.

    The deals were approved on July 31 by the top military officer overseeing the Guantánamo commissions, retired Brig. Gen. Susan Escallier. But two days later, Biden’s defense secretary, Lloyd Austin, stepped into the process and overrode Escallier – whom he had appointed. Austin announced that the plea deals were revoked.

    The judge, Air Force Col. Matthew McCall, decided to schedule plea hearings for early January. But after some legal back-and-forth that forced a stay, he had to cancel them. Biden left the case against three 9/11 defendants in limbo.

    The basement of this government building in Bucharest, Romania, held a secret CIA prison, one of many across the world.
    AP Photo

    Witness to the transition

    In mid-January 2025, I made my sixteenth reporting trip to Guantánamo. I came for closing arguments on a motion in the 9/11 case that seeks to suppress statements that Ammar al-Baluchi made to the FBI in January 2007. That was four months after he and 13 others were transferred to Guantánamo from CIA black sites where they were held for years. The litigation to suppress those statements started in 2019.

    In Chapter 10 of my book, “The War in Court: Inside the Long Fight against Torture,” I detail how the litigation on this suppression motion made public previously unknown details and under-acknowledged horrors of the CIA’s rendition, detention and interrogation program.

    These closing arguments were the culmination of six years of litigation on the key question in the 9/11 case: Does torture matter in the pursuit of justice in the military commissions?

    A drawing by Guantánamo detainee Abu Zubaydah depicts a person being waterboarded.
    Copyright Abu Zubaydah 2019. Licensed by Professor Mark Denbeaux, Seton Hall Law School

    Can Guantánamo be closed?

    Of the 780 people ever detained at Guantánamo, 540 were released during the presidency of George W. Bush, who established the detention facility. Obama, who signed an executive order on his second day in office pledging to close Guantánamo within a year, released 200.

    In his first term, Trump pledged to keep the facility open. The only man to leave Guantánamo during Trump’s first term was Ahmed al-Darbi, who was repatriated to Saudi Arabia in 2018 to serve out the remainder of his sentence from a 2014 plea bargain agreement.

    When Biden took office, he said that he supported shutting down the military prison at Guantánamo. In the early years of his presidency, there was a slow stream of transfers, mostly people who had been cleared for release long ago and were freed.

    In Biden’s last months, the pace of transfers quickened. In December 2024, a Kenyan detainee, two Malaysian members of al-Qaida who had pled guilty the previous January, and a Tunisian man who had been in Guantánamo since the day the facility was opened were all repatriated to their countries of origin and freed. In January 2024, 11 Yemenis were transported from the prison to Oman to be resettled.

    15 men left behind

    The Biden administration had also planned to repatriate a severely disabled Iraqi detainee, Abd al-Hadi al-Iraqi, to serve out his plea-bargained sentence in a Baghdad prison. But a federal judge blocked that transfer, ruling that al-Iraqi would not get necessary medical treatment in Iraq and might be subject to abuse there.

    Al-Iraqi is one of the 15 that Biden left behind. Three of them – a Libyan, a Somali and a stateless Rohingya – have long been cleared for release. Their continuing detention without charges highlights a key element of the Guantánamo problem: No one can be released unless the U.S. government finds another country willing to accept them.

    One of the remaining detainees, Ali Bahlul, is serving a life sentence for conspiracy to commit war crimes. Six others, including the four 9/11 defendants, are awaiting their trials.

    There are also four detainees whom the government refuses to transfer but cannot put on trial for lack of evidence.

    The U.S. goverment says it cannot release Abu Zubaydah from Guantánamo because he would disclose classified interrogation techniques critics have labeled torture.
    U.S. Central Command via AP

    These so-called “forever prisoners” include Abu Zubaydah, a Saudi-born man of Palestinian descent who was taken into CIA custody in 2002 and was used as the guinea pig for the CIA torture program. The government long ago conceded that Abu Zubaydah was not a top leader of al-Qaida – in fact he was not even a member. But he will not be released because he knows how he was treated by the CIA, and that treatment remains highly classified.

    The newest forever prisoner is one of the original 9/11 defendants, Ramzi bin al-Shibh; in September 2023, he was declared mentally incompetent to stand trial. Now he is uncharged, unreleased and untreated for his psychological maladies that were caused by the torture he endured in CIA black sites.

    The ‘War on Terror’ is not over

    When Biden pulled U.S. troops out of Afghanistan in August 2021, he claimed to have ended America’s longest war – and repeated this claim in a January 2025 speech. But the Guantánamo prison remains open, and as long as it is, the “war on terror,” which first put U.S. troops in Afghanistan in 2001, is not over.

    How Trump will deal with Guantánamo is an open question. If he focuses on the death penalty, he will press ahead with military commission trials like his predecessors, hoping for unanimous guilty verdicts and death sentences. If he prioritizes cutting wasteful government spending, he will release additional detainees and allow the three plea bargain agreements to go into effect.

    No one I spoke to during my last trip was willing to predict what a second Trump term might bode for Guantánamo – except that it won’t be closed.

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

    ref. Trump inherits the Guantánamo prison, complete with 4 ‘forever prisoners’ – https://theconversation.com/trump-inherits-the-guantanamo-prison-complete-with-4-forever-prisoners-247058

    MIL OSI – Global Reports

  • MIL-OSI United Nations: UN rights office raises alarm over escalating violence in occupied West Bank

    Source: United Nations 4

    Peace and Security

    The UN human rights office, OHCHR, on Friday expressed grave concerns over escalating violence in the Jenin area of the occupied West Bank, condemning the use of “unlawful lethal force” by Israeli security forces.

    OHCHR spokesperson Thameen Al-Kheetan added that the Israeli military operation in and around the Jenin refugee camp had involved “disproportionate” use of force, including airstrikes and shootings that reportedly targeted unarmed residents.

    “The deadly Israeli operations in recent days raise serious concerns about unnecessary or disproportionate use of force, including methods and means developed for war fighting, in violation of international human rights law, norms and standards applicable to law enforcement operations.”

    OHCHR verified that at least 12 Palestinians – most reportedly unarmed – have been killed since Tuesday and a further 40 injured. Those injured include a doctor and two nurses, according to the Palestinian Red Crescent.

    Obligation to protect civilians

    Mr. Al-Kheetan reiterated that Israel, as the occupying power, has a responsibility under international law to protect civilians living under occupation.

    He stressed the need for investigations into alleged unlawful killings, warning that a lack of accountability risks perpetuating violence.

    “All killings in a law enforcement context must be thoroughly and independently investigated and those responsible for unlawful killings must be held to account,” he said.

    “By persistently failing, over the years, to hold accountable members of its security forces responsible for unlawful killings, Israel is not only violating its obligations under international law, but risks encouraging the recurrence of such killings,” he warned.

    Impact on communities

    The ongoing violence has displaced over 3,000 families in Jenin, and essential services such as water and electricity have been severely disrupted for weeks.

    The Israeli military has closed off major entrances to Palestinian cities, including Hebron, restricting movement, and paralyzing daily life. Thirteen new iron gates have reportedly been installed at other towns’ entrances across the West Bank.

    Briefing the Security Council on Thursday, UN Emergency Relief Coordinator Tom Fletcher also warned of record-high levels of casualties, displacement and access restrictions, since October 2023.

    Settler violence and settlement expansion

    Beyond military operations, there has been an uptick in settler attacks on Palestinian villages and the stoning of vehicles, in which several Palestinians have been injured.

    Houses and vehicles have been set on fire, according to the OHCHR spokesperson.

    He also voiced concern over some Israeli officials’ repeated comments about plans for further settlement expansion – in breach of international law.

    “We call for an immediate end to the violence in the West Bank. We also call on all parties, including third States with influence, to do everything in their power to ensure peace is achieved in the region,” Mr. Al-Kheetan stated.

    He reiterated High Commissioner Volker Türk’s call for Israel to halt settlement expansion and evacuate all settlements as required by international law.

    We call on all parties, including third States with influence, to do everything in their power to ensure peace is achieved in the region,” Mr. Al-Kheetan urged.

    MIL OSI United Nations News

  • MIL-OSI Security: 116 tortoises returned to Tanzania in landmark wildlife trafficking investigation

    Source: Interpol (news and events)

    24 January 2025

    Intercepted by Thai customs officials in July 2022, the tortoises will serve as vital evidence to prosecute the smuggler

    SINGAPORE – More than two years after a Ukrainian woman was stopped at Bangkok’s Suvarnabhumi Airport during an INTERPOL operation with 116 baby tortoises concealed in her luggage, the internationally protected species have been returned to Tanzania as evidence against their smuggler.

    The repatriation of the tortoises signals the final phase of a long-running enquiry into an international wildlife trafficking ring that has led to the arrest of 14 suspects from various countries and tracked down the Ukrainian smuggler after a global investigation.

    A handover ceremony marking the reptiles’ return was held yesterday in Bangkok, attended by high-level officials from Thailand and Tanzania.

    Police Major General Surapan Thaiprasert, Commander of the Foreign Affairs Division at the Royal Thai Police said:

    “Thailand worked closely with INTERPOL and our partners in Tanzania on this significant case. Through our strong detection capabilities, we were able to intercept the smuggler and rescue the tortoises. Their successful return to Tanzania is a testament to our collaborative efforts.”

    A rescued pancake tortoise. The species is critically endangered (CITES Appendix I)

    Rescued radiated tortoises placed in crates for their journey to Tanzania

    The Aldabra giant tortoise is one of the largest tortoises in the world. It is a vulnerable species. (CITES Appendix II)

    The Aldabra giant tortoise is one of the largest tortoises in the world. It is a vulnerable species. (CITES Appendix II).

    A rescued pancake tortoise. The species is critically endangered (CITES Appendix I).

    A rescued radiated tortoise. The species is critically endangered (CITES Appendix I).

    A rescued pancake tortoise. The species is critically endangered (CITES Appendix I).

    Tanzanian and Thai officials worked together to repatriate all 116 tortoises to Tanzania.

    Tanzanian and Thai officials worked together to repatriate all 116 tortoises to Tanzania.

    A radiated tortoise is carefully placed in a crate for its return to Tanzania.

    A tortoise crate being transferred to its next mode of transport.

    A handover ceremony marking the return of the tortoises was held in Bangkok on 23 January 2025.

    A handover ceremony marking the return of the tortoises was held in Bangkok on 23 January 2025.

    Criminal economy

    The trafficking of endangered tortoises is a significant criminal economy, with species removed from their natural habitats, often to be sold abroad as exotic pets.

    The 116 tortoises recovered in Bangkok included pancake tortoises, radiated tortoises and Aldabra giant tortoises, all of which are protected under the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES).

    Many of the tortoises died after being found in the smuggler’s luggage, despite urgent care provided by Thai authorities. All 116 were nevertheless repatriated as evidence.

    Cyril Gout, Acting Executive Director of Police Services at INTERPOL said:

    “Wildlife trafficking is a serious global threat that disrupts ecosystems and harms communities while enriching organized crime groups. This case demonstrates the resolve of law enforcement internationally to protect vulnerable species, stop illegal wildlife trafficking and bring criminals to justice.  

    “INTERPOL plays a vital role in facilitating coordinated action against wildlife crime and will continue to support our member countries in breaking up wildlife trafficking syndicates.”

    Dismantling a wildlife crime network

    Following her arrest in Bangkok, the Ukrainian smuggler fled Thailand before she could be fully prosecuted. Through intense international police collaboration and an INTERPOL Red Notice, she was located in Bulgaria in March 2023 and extradited to Tanzania three months later.

    Once it was established that the smuggler belonged to a larger wildlife trafficking network, INTERPOL provided investigative and operational support. As a result of these efforts, 14 additional suspects, from countries including Egypt, Indonesia, Madagascar and Tanzania, have so far also been arrested.

    Ramadhan Hamisi Kingai, Director of Criminal Investigation at the Tanzania Police Force said:

    “From the capture of the suspect to the repatriation of the tortoises, these successes were made possible through strong international police cooperation and a collaborative, multi-agency approach facilitated through INTERPOL. Tanzania is firmly committed to addressing wildlife crime and continues to work with other countries to ensure that those responsible are arrested and prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.”

    Local wildlife officials in Tanzania will quarantine and care for the surviving tortoises before assessing if they can be safely returned to their natural habitats.

    United States Agency for International Development (USAID) and other donors.

    MIL Security OSI

  • MIL-OSI: First Capital, Inc. Reports Quarterly Earnings

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    CORYDON, Ind., Oct. 25, 2024 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — First Capital, Inc. (the “Company”) (NASDAQ: FCAP), the holding company for First Harrison Bank (the “Bank”), today reported net income of $2.9 million, or $0.87 per diluted share, for the quarter ended September 30, 2024, compared to net income of $3.1 million, or $0.94 per diluted share, for the quarter ended September 30, 2023.

    Results of Operations for the Three Months Ended September 30, 2024 and 2023

    Net interest income after provision for credit losses increased $415,000 for the quarter ended September 30, 2024 as compared to the same period in 2023. Interest income increased $2.0 million when comparing the periods due to an increase in the average yield on interest-earning assets from 3.96% for the third quarter of 2023 to 4.53% for the third quarter of 2024. The average balance of interest-earning assets increased from $1.13 billion for the quarter ended September 30, 2023 to $1.17 billion at September 30, 2024. The increase in the yield was primarily due to an increase in the yield on loans to 6.09% for the third quarter of 2024 compared to 5.74% for the same period in 2023. In addition, the Company’s lower yielding securities continue to mature with proceeds being reinvested in higher yielding loans or federal funds sold. When compared to the quarter ended September 30, 2023, the average balance of the Company’s securities decreased $59.0 million, while the Company’s average loans and federal funds sold balances increased $40.6 million and $58.0 million, respectively, during the quarter ended September 30, 2024. Interest expense increased $1.5 million when comparing the periods due to an increase in the average cost of interest-bearing liabilities from 1.30% for the third quarter of 2023 to 1.87% for the third quarter of 2024, in addition to an increase in the average balance of interest-bearing liabilities from $813.2 million for the third quarter of 2023 to $875.8 million for the third quarter of 2024. The Company had no outstanding advances from the Federal Home Loan Bank (“FHLB”) during the quarter ended September 30, 2024 compared to $3.3 million with an average rate of 6.03% during the quarter ended September 30, 2023. The Company had average outstanding borrowings under the Federal Reserve Bank’s Bank Term Funding Program (“BTFP”) of $33.6 million and $13.0 million with an average rate of 4.89% and 5.02% during the quarters ended September 30, 2024 and 2023, respectively. As a result of the changes in interest-earning assets and interest-bearing liabilities, the net interest margin increased from 3.02% for the quarter ended September 30, 2023 to 3.12% for the same period in 2024.

    Based on management’s analysis of the Allowance for Credit Losses (“ACL”) on loans and unfunded loan commitments, the provision for credit losses increased from $290,000 for the quarter ended September 30, 2023 to $463,000 for the quarter ended September 30, 2024. The increase was due to loan growth during the period, the increase in nonperforming assets during the quarter described later in this release, as well as management’s consideration of macroeconomic uncertainty. The Bank recognized net charge-offs of $64,000 and $19,000 for the quarters ended September 30, 2024 and 2023, respectively.

    Noninterest income decreased $147,000 for the quarter ended September 30, 2024 as compared to the same period in 2023. The Company recognized a $196,000 loss on equity securities for the quarter ended September 30, 2024 compared to a loss of $131,000 for the same quarter in 2023. The Company did not sell any securities during the quarter ended September 30, 2024. The Company recognized a net $63,000 gain on sale of securities during the quarter ended September 30, 2023. During the quarter ended September 30, 2023, the Company sold securities available for sale with a market value of $9.4 million and an amortized cost basis of $9.5 million resulting in a net loss of $94,000. The net loss was more than offset by the $157,000 gain on sale of the Company’s VISA Class B stock in September 2023. In addition, other income decreased $54,000 during the quarter. These were partially offset by increases of $17,000 and $13,000 in ATM and debit card fees and service charges on deposit accounts, respectively.

    Noninterest expense increased $543,000 for the quarter ended September 30, 2024 as compared to the same period in 2023, due primarily to increases in professional fees and compensation and benefits of $213,000 and $160,000, respectively. The increase in professional fees is primarily due to increased costs associated with the Company’s annual audit and fees being accrued for the Company’s ongoing core contract negotiations. The increase in compensation and benefits is due to standard increases in salary and wages as well as increases in the cost of Company-provided health insurance benefits. In addition, data processing, advertising, and occupancy and equipment expenses increased $51,000, $45,000, and $41,000, respectively.

    Income tax expense decreased $35,000 for the third quarter of 2024 as compared to the third quarter of 2023 primarily due to a decrease in the Company’s taxable income. The effective tax rate for the quarter ended September 30, 2024 was 15.6% compared to 15.4% for the same period in 2023.

    Results of Operations for the Nine Months Ended September 30, 2024 and 2023

    For the nine months ended September 30, 2024, the Company reported net income of $8.7 million, or $2.59 per diluted share, compared to net income of $9.7 million, or $2.89 per diluted share, for the same period in 2023.

    Net interest income after provision for credit losses increased $72,000 for the nine months ended September 30, 2024 compared to the same period in 2023. Interest income increased $5.3 million when comparing the two periods due to an increase in the average yield on interest-earning assets from 3.80% for the nine months ended September 30, 2023 to 4.37% for the same period in 2024.   The increase in the yield was primarily due to an increase in the yield on loans to 5.99% for the first nine months of 2024 compared to 5.57% for the same period in 2023. In addition, the Company’s lower yielding securities continue to mature with proceeds being reinvested in higher yielding loans or federal funds sold. When compared to the nine months ended September 30, 2023, the average balance of the Company’s securities decreased $49.7 million, while the Company’s average loans and federal funds sold balances increased $50.8 million and $15.5 million, respectively, during the nine months ended September 30, 2024. Interest expense increased $5.0 million as the average cost of interest-bearing liabilities increased from 0.98% for the nine months ended September 30, 2023 to 1.72% for the same period in 2024, in addition to an increase in the average balance of interest-bearing liabilities from $805.1 million for the first nine months of 2023 to $846.8 million for the same period of 2024. The Company had average outstanding advances from the FHLB of $2.3 million and $2.6 million with an average rate of 5.69% and 5.49% during the nine months ended September 30, 2024 and 2023, respectively. The Company had average outstanding borrowings under the Federal Reserve Bank’s BTFP of $33.1 million and $6.4 million with an average rate of 4.84% and 5.03% during the nine months ended September 30, 2024 and 2023, respectively. As a result of the changes in interest-earning assets and interest-bearing liabilities, the net interest margin decreased from 3.10% for the nine months ended September 30, 2023 to 3.09% for the nine months ended September 30, 2024.

    Based on management’s analysis of the ACL on loans and unfunded loan commitments, the provision for credit losses increased from $833,000 for the nine months ended September 30, 2023 to $1.1 million for the nine months ended September 30, 2024. The increase was due to loan growth during the period, the increase in nonperforming assets described later in this release, as well as management’s consideration of macroeconomic uncertainty. The Bank recognized net charge-offs of $149,000 for the nine months ended September 30, 2024 compared to $380,000 for the same period in 2023.  

    Noninterest income decreased $79,000 for the nine months ended September 30, 2024 as compared to the nine months ended September 30, 2023 primarily due to the Company recognizing a $270,000 loss on equity securities during the nine months ended September 30, 2024 compared to an $86,000 loss during the same period in 2023.   This was partially offset by increases of $77,000 and $30,000 from gains on sale of loans and service charges on deposit accounts, respectively.

    Noninterest expenses increased $1.2 million for the nine months ended September 30, 2024 as compared to the same period in 2023. This was primarily due to increases in professional fees, compensation and benefits, data processing, and other expenses of $424,000, $374,000, $130,000, and $179,000, respectively, when comparing the two periods. The increase in professional fees is primarily due to increased costs associated with the Company’s annual audit and fees being accrued for the Company’s ongoing core contract negotiations. The increase in compensation and benefits is due to standard increases in salary and wages as well as increases in the cost of Company-provided health insurance benefits. The increase in data processing expense is primarily due to increased debit card interchange fees. Increases in other expenses included a $77,000 increase in the Company’s support of local communities through sponsorships and donations, $26,000 in increased dues and subscriptions and $24,000 of additional FDIC insurance assessments for the nine months ended September 30, 2024 compared to the same period of 2023.

    Income tax expense decreased $238,000 for the nine months ended September 30, 2024 as compared to the same period in 2023 resulting in an effective tax rate of 15.0% for the nine months ended September 30, 2024, compared to 15.4% for the same period in 2023.

    Comparison of Financial Condition at September 30, 2024 and December 31, 2023

    Total assets were $1.19 billion and $1.16 billion at September 30, 2024 and December 31, 2023, respectively. Net loans receivable and total cash and cash equivalents increased $16.2 million and $51.3 million from December 31, 2023 to September 30, 2024, respectively, while securities available for sale decreased $28.8 million, during the same period. Deposits were $1.03 billion at December 31, 2023 and September 30, 2024. The Bank had $33.6 million in borrowings outstanding through the Federal Reserve Bank’s BTFP at September 30, 2024 compared to $21.5 million at December 31, 2023. Nonperforming assets (consisting of nonaccrual loans, accruing loans 90 days or more past due, and foreclosed real estate) increased from $1.8 million at December 31, 2023 to $4.5 million at September 30, 2024.   The increase was primarily due to the nonaccrual classification of two commercial loan relationships totaling $2.6 million. Loans in the relationship are secured by a variety of real estate and business assets.

    The Bank currently has 18 offices in the Indiana communities of Corydon, Edwardsville, Greenville, Floyds Knobs, Palmyra, New Albany, New Salisbury, Jeffersonville, Salem, Lanesville and Charlestown and the Kentucky communities of Shepherdsville, Mt. Washington and Lebanon Junction.

    Access to First Harrison Bank accounts, including online banking and electronic bill payments, is available through the Bank’s website at http://www.firstharrison.com. For more information and financial data about the Company, please visit Investor Relations at the Bank’s aforementioned website. The Bank can also be followed on Facebook.

    Cautionary Note Regarding Forward-Looking Statements

    This press release may contain certain forward-looking statements within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Forward-looking statements can be identified by the use of the words “anticipate,” “believe,” “expect,” “intend,” “could” and “should,” and other words of similar meaning. Forward-looking statements are not historical facts nor guarantees of future performance; rather, they are statements based on the Company’s current beliefs, assumptions, and expectations regarding its business strategies and their intended results and its future performance.

    Numerous risks and uncertainties could cause or contribute to the Company’s actual results, performance and achievements to be materially different from those expressed or implied by these forward-looking statements. Factors that may cause or contribute to these differences include, without limitation, general economic conditions, including changes in market interest rates and changes in monetary and fiscal policies of the federal government; competition; the ability of the Company to execute its business plan; legislative and regulatory changes; the quality and composition of the loan and investment portfolios; loan demand; deposit flows; changes in accounting principles and guidelines; and other factors disclosed periodically in the Company’s filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission.

    Because of the risks and uncertainties inherent in forward-looking statements, readers are cautioned not to place undue reliance on them, whether included in this press release, the Company’s reports, or made elsewhere from time to time by the Company or on its behalf. These forward-looking statements are made only as of the date of this press release, and the Company assumes no obligation to update any forward-looking statements after the date of this press release.

    Contact:
    Joshua Stevens
    Chief Financial Officer
    812-738-1570

     
    FIRST CAPITAL, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
    Consolidated Financial Highlights (Unaudited)
                   
      Three Months Ended   Nine Months Ended
      September 30,   September 30,
    OPERATING DATA 2024   2023   2024   2023
    (Dollars in thousands, except per share data)              
                   
    Total interest income $ 13,224     $ 11,179     $ 37,279     $ 31,966  
    Total interest expense   4,099       2,642       10,897       5,926  
    Net interest income   9,125       8,537       26,382       26,040  
    Provision for credit losses   463       290       1,103       833  
    Net interest income after provision for credit losses   8,662       8,247       25,279       25,207  
                   
    Total non-interest income   1,800       1,947       5,722       5,801  
    Total non-interest expense   7,024       6,481       20,781       19,548  
    Income before income taxes   3,438       3,713       10,220       11,460  
    Income tax expense   537       572       1,532       1,770  
    Net income   2,901       3,141       8,688       9,690  
    Less net income attributable to the noncontrolling interest   3       3       10       10  
    Net income attributable to First Capital, Inc. $ 2,898     $ 3,138     $ 8,678     $ 9,680  
                   
    Net income per share attributable to First Capital, Inc. common shareholders:              
    Basic $ 0.87     $ 0.94     $ 2.59     $ 2.89  
                   
    Diluted $ 0.87     $ 0.94     $ 2.59     $ 2.89  
                   
    Weighted average common shares outstanding:              
    Basic   3,347,236       3,345,869       3,345,863       3,347,823  
                   
    Diluted   3,347,236       3,345,869       3,345,863       3,347,823  
                   
    OTHER FINANCIAL DATA              
                   
    Cash dividends per share $ 0.29     $ 0.27     $ 0.83     $ 0.81  
    Return on average assets (annualized) (1)   0.97 %     1.09 %     0.99 %     1.13 %
    Return on average equity (annualized) (1)   10.48 %     13.53 %     10.84 %     14.14 %
    Net interest margin   3.12 %     3.02 %     3.09 %     3.10 %
    Interest rate spread   2.66 %     2.66 %     2.65 %     2.82 %
    Net overhead expense as a percentage of average assets (annualized) (1)   2.35 %     2.25 %     2.38 %     2.28 %
                   
      September 30,   December 31,      
    BALANCE SHEET INFORMATION 2024   2023        
                   
    Cash and cash equivalents $ 89,939     $ 38,670          
    Interest-bearing time deposits   2,695       3,920          
    Investment securities   415,469       444,271          
    Gross loans   639,566       622,414          
    Allowance for credit losses   8,959       8,005          
    Earning assets   1,119,791       1,083,898          
    Total assets   1,189,295       1,157,880          
    Deposits   1,030,249       1,025,211          
    Borrowed funds   33,625       21,500          
    Stockholders’ equity, net of noncontrolling interest   116,775       105,233          
    Allowance for credit losses as a percent of gross loans   1.40 %     1.29 %        
    Non-performing assets:              
    Nonaccrual loans   4,483       1,751          
    Accruing loans past due 90 days                  
    Foreclosed real estate                  
    Regulatory capital ratios (Bank only):              
    Community Bank Leverage Ratio (2)   10.25 %     9.92 %        
                   
    (1) See reconciliation of GAAP and non-GAAP financial measures for additional information relating to the calculation of this item.
    (2) Effective March 31, 2020, the Bank opted in to the Community Bank Leverage Ratio (CBLR) framework. As such, the other regulatory ratios are no longer provided.
                   
    RECONCILIATION OF GAAP AND NON-GAAP FINANCIAL MEASURES (UNAUDITED):    
                   
    This presentation contains financial information determined by methods other than in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America (“GAAP”). Management uses these “non-GAAP” measures in its analysis of the Company’s performance. Management believes that these non-GAAP financial measures allow for better comparability with prior periods, as well as with peers in the industry who provide a similar presentation, and provide a further understanding of the Company’s ongoing operations. These disclosures should not be viewed as a substitute for operating results determined in accordance with GAAP, nor are they necessarily comparable to non-GAAP performance measures that may be presented by other companies. The following table summarizes the non-GAAP financial measures derived from amounts reported in the Company’s consolidated financial statements and reconciles those non-GAAP financial measures with the comparable GAAP financial measures.
                                   
      Three Months Ended   Nine Months Ended
      September 30,   September 30,
      2024   2023   2024   2023
                   
    Return on average assets before annualization   0.24 %     0.27 %     0.75 %     0.85 %
    Annualization factor   4.00       4.00       1.33       1.33  
    Annualized return on average assets   0.97 %     1.09 %     0.99 %     1.13 %
                   
                   
    Return on average equity before annualization   2.62 %     3.38 %     8.13 %     10.60 %
    Annualization factor   4.00       4.00       1.33       1.33  
    Annualized return on average equity   10.48 %     13.53 %     10.84 %     14.14 %
                   
                   
    Net overhead expense as a % of average assets before annualization   0.59 %     0.56 %     1.78 %     1.71 %
    Annualization factor   4.00       4.00       1.33       1.33  
    Annualized net overhead expense as a % of average assets   2.35 %     2.25 %     2.38 %     2.28 %
                   

    The MIL Network

  • MIL-OSI Economics: Transcript of IMFC Press Conference 2024 IMF Annual Meetings October 2024

    Source: International Monetary Fund

    October 25, 2024

    Speakers:

    Kristalina Georgieva, Managing Director, IMF

    Mohammed Aljadaan, Chair, IMFC

    Moderator: Julie Kozack, Director of the Communications Department, IMF

    *****

    Ms. Kozack: Good afternoon, everyone. Thank you for joining us this afternoon. My name is Julie Kozack. I’m the Director of communications at the IMF. Welcome to this press briefing of the IMFC. And I am delighted to have with us here today the Chair of the IMFC, His Excellency Mohammed Aljadaan, Minister of Finance of Saudi Arabia, and also our Managing Director, Kristalina Georgieva. They will first share with you a few takeaways from the IMFC meeting that just concluded, and then we will have time for your questions.

    Your Excellency, the floor is yours.

    Mr. Aljadaan: Thank you. Thank you very much, and thank you to all of you for being here. And thank you, Julie. Good afternoon, everyone.

    I would like to thank all the IMFC members for their strong and focused collaboration. I would also like to congratulate Kristalina for her second term as Managing Director. We wish her every success. And I must say that personally, I would congratulate myself and the members for her accepting, actually, to spend the next five years with us.

    It’s important to note that the IMF was established 80 years ago at Bretton Woods. Since 1944, the world has changed dramatically, and the IMF and the World Bank have evolved along with that.

    The evolution continues, as we respond to many challenges facing the global financial system. Above all, our approach seeks common ground to achieve the common good for all. The IMFC members are pleased to report that the global economy has moved closer to a soft landing. Global growth is steady, and inflation continues to moderate. However, progress has been uneven across members. There is uncertainty, with risks tilted to the downside; medium‑term growth prospects remain muted; and global public debt has reached a record high.

    Going forward, we will work to further secure a soft landing, while stepping up our reform efforts to shift away from the low growth/high debt path.

    I want to report on a few developments very quickly.

    The IMFC members welcomed the completion of the review of the Poverty Reduction and Growth Trust, ensuring that the IMF is supporting low‑income countries to address balance of payments challenges. We encourage the IMF and the World Bank to further develop their proposal to support countries with sustainable debt but experiencing liquidity challenges. We supported the IMF’s efforts to strengthen its capacity development assistance and to secure appropriate financing. We welcomed the new 25th chair in the IMF’s Executive Board for sub‑Saharan Africa, which will strengthen the voice and the representation of the region. We also welcomed the new member, Liechtenstein, as our 191st member. That makes the IMF almost universal, short of possibly one or two members. And we reaffirmed our commitment to a strong, quota‑based, and adequately resourced IMF at the center of the Global Financial Safety Net.

    We have secured or are working to secure domestic approvals for our consent to the quota increase under the Sixteenth General Review of Quotas by mid‑November this year, as well as relevant adjustments under the New Arrangements to Borrow.

    Of particular importance is the commitment to improve the Common Framework for sovereign debt relief in low‑income countries so it is implemented in a more predictable, timely, and coordinated manner. Also, we appreciate the reforms of the Fund’s lending toolkit, particularly for the PRGT.

    Finally, I would note the review of the charges and the surcharges policy, which will alleviate the financial cost of the Fund’s lending for borrowing countries, while preserving their intended incentives and safeguarding the Fund’s financial soundness.

    The IMFC has achieved some important milestones in this meeting. This shows that the IMF is essential to that spirit of multilateralism born at the Bretton Woods, as we seek common ground to assure progress and prosperity for all IMF members.

    Now I will turn it to you, Your Excellency. Please, Kristalina.

    Ms. Georgieva: Thank you very much. Thank you very much, Minister Aljadaan. Congratulations for chairing another very engaged, substantive, and successful meeting and, again, one that starts right on time and finishes on the dot. You bring this discipline symbolically, as we have no time to waste. There are very important topics to bring the membership together on.

    You have presented the substance of the meeting and the achievements of the meeting. I would like to add to that three points.

    First, to recognize the good balance that was achieved between confidence and caution. Confidence that the world economy has proven resilient. Inflation is in retreat. And this is being done without a risk of recession. Caution, that the problems that we need to address are still in front of us. They are complex. We have to attend to the concerns of people that maybe inflation is going down, but price levels are high. We have to recognize that in front of us is a prospect for low growth and high debt, a burden that is particularly heavy on low‑income countries, and that we are operating in an environment that is more impacted by forces of fragmentation. They are driven by wars that are happening and still going on. They are driven by security concerns in countries. They are driven by concerns about competitiveness.

    And in this environment, the second observation I would like to make is the good balance between attention to the short‑term priorities and what needs to happen in the medium to long term. For the short term, the focus is on two things. One, how to‑‑for central banks to remain attentive, be evidence‑based, carefully monitor data to make sure that they don’t cut either too early or too late, and that the monetary policy continues to be well communicated so expectations are anchored on the basis of this communication. And also, two, in the short term, a focus on the fiscal side as an immediate priority. Fiscal buffers have been exhausted, yet fiscal pressures are high. And that attention to medium‑term fiscal consolidation that starts now‑‑is not delayed‑‑came through for many of our members.

    And in terms of the medium to long term, not surprisingly, a very substantive, deep discussion on what can be done to lift up growth prospects in countries; what can enhance productivity; what can be a factor for countries to achieve better outcomes for their people but also attention to the role a more vibrant global economy can play for this higher‑‑higher growth trajectory.

    And my third point is going to be about debt. This was an issue that a majority of members addressed. Recognizing that you cannot‑‑actually, one of the Ministers quoted me from a previous engagement, me saying “you cannot borrow your way out of debt.” The topic of debt was particularly important in terms of the work the Bank and the Fund are undertaking on our so‑called three‑pillar approach; and I want to update you on it, since it gained a lot of interest.

    The three‑pillar approach we are proposing‑‑it is in the context of the Global Sovereign Debt Roundtable and the broader work on debt‑‑is to support countries that are not yet in a position that requires debt restructuring but are faced with significant liquidity problems that, if not addressed‑‑if they’re not addressed, can turn into a risk for solvency in the future.

    Pillar I, reforms to boost growth and mobilize domestic revenues. Pillar II, adequate financing, including from international financial institutions and a call on us to work together. Pillar III, crowding-in private financing at a lower cost.

    I felt that that strong endorsement of this three‑pillar approach is going to give the Bank and the Fund the guidance and encouragement to do our best. You will see us identifying countries in which we apply that three‑pillar approach.

    You walked us through all the important achievements. To us, the staff of the Fund, what we particularly cherish is that over the last months, we agreed on three historic firsts‑‑never done before. First time in our history, reaching our precautionary balances target. First time ever reducing charges and surcharges that would save $1.2 billion to borrowing members, a 36 percent reduction. First time deploying net income to boost our lending capacity for low‑income countries.

    Mr. Aljadaan: Kristalina, I think this is just a very clear illustration that, despite all the discussion about fragmentation, three firsts are agreed by the members, very important firsts. So it just shows, really, that there is a lot of support to management and the Fund from the members.

    Sorry, continue.

    Ms. Georgieva: Oh, no. Thank you. And they have been agreed unanimously.

    So my heart goes to all the staff of the Fund and all the members of the Fund. My gratitude to them. And a very special thanks to Brazil, Poland, Saudi Arabia, the UAE, and the U.S. for contributions to the PRGT; and the UAE for a contribution to the Resilience and Sustainability Trust. And I want to thank the U.K. for committing in the meeting to directly transfer its share of the GRA income distribution to the PRGT, and they called for others to follow.

    So, all in all, what we can say is that the meeting demonstrates, when there are forces of fragmentation, bridges become even more important. And we, the IMF, we are a bridgebuilder. Thank you.

    Ms. Kozack: Thank you very much, Minister, Managing Director. We will now turn to your questions. Please do raise your hand if you have a question, and please do identify yourself. Let’s see. I’m going to start all the way over on this side of the room. There’s a gentleman in the fourth row. Yep. Let’s start there.

    QUESTION: Good afternoon. Actually, I have two questions for today. My first question is for the Managing Director. As you reflect on the Annual Meetings, how do you assess the global economy, the main challenges and opportunities? My second question will be for Your Excellency, Minister Mohammed Aljadaan. What are the pressing IMFC issues and objectives for the coming years? Thank you.

    Ms. Georgieva: Thank you for your question. The meetings have been very useful to see the unanimous understanding on the progress we have made and quite a close view across members on the challenges ahead.

    The achievements in terms of bringing inflation down to open up, again, space for a reduction of interest rates that can contribute to better growth prospects in countries was recognized by a vast majority of our members. And at the same time, there was no sense of complacency. Why? Because the conditions of the world economy are good‑‑growth at 3.2 percent, inflation down‑‑but risks are tilted to the downside. And they are both in terms of the importance of monetary policy to remain vigilant and avoid a risk of misjudgment in the direction of interest rate policies and also risks that stem from a more fragmented world economy.

    In terms of challenges, three stood out throughout the meetings.

    First, the fiscal challenge. How to bring fiscal balance after these multiple shocks and years in which fiscal resources had to be deployed more actively? How to do that without undercutting prospects for investing in growth.

    Second, how to identify and put in place structural reforms that can rapidly build prospects for higher productivity, higher growth in terms of labor market reforms, product market reforms, as well as reforms that can allow an acceleration of the green and digital transformation.

    And three, how to build more resilience to future shocks. What we learned over these last years is that we are in a more shock‑prone world, and that requires building resilience in our economies for the future.

    Ms. Kozack: Thank you. Minister.

    Mr. Aljadaan: I will make it very quickly, actually, because they are very much related; so I will not repeat what the Managing Director has said. But the IMFC is basically the Governors’ body of this institution. And the whole idea of the IMFC meeting is, A, to exchange views on, what can we then do together collectively, really, to help the world economy but also to give steer to the management of the institution. And that’s really the point that you mentioned, whether it is ensuring that we actually do the last mile of dealing with inflation properly. Second is trying to ensure that we find ways out of the high debt/low growth and to more productivity growth and a more coordinated approach. We also wanted to make sure that we also provide the right support to the institution through finalizing our legislative approvals for the quota increase, making sure that we also provide the support that the Fund needs. And whether it is the PRGT or the trust fund or otherwise, I think there is the pure IMFC technical work that happens, but then there is a lot of coordination between management, the IMFC, and then the regional funds, multilateral development institutions; that we need to make sure that they all also connect.

    Ms. Kozack: Very good. Thank you. All right. Let’s go to the middle. I am going to go to the second row, gentleman, gray jacket, white shirt. Yep, you.

    QUESTION: I thought I had grabbed the wrong jacket. Managing Director, it’s been a long set of meetings. There are a lot of issues to get through, but one of the things that’s been kind of hanging over this set of meetings has been the U.S. election. And I am just wondering if you could describe sort of how this has been discussed in these meetings, what you’re thinking about it. And you know, there could be a major turn inward by the United States as a result of this. How do you avoid‑‑how do you deal with that? What do you tell people to do about it? Thank you.

    Ms. Georgieva: The discussions ‑‑ we had a total of four meetings in different formats and themes. And the discussions in the meetings were about the problems we collectively face and how to go about them. In other words, the sentiment of the membership is, elections are for the American people. What is for us is to identify, what are the challenges and how the IMF can constructively address these challenges.

    Mr. Aljadaan: I agree.

    Ms. Georgieva: So, yeah‑‑

    Mr. Aljadaan: Go ahead.

    Ms. Georgieva: I was just going to say, it was what‑‑what are the problems of the world in advanced economies, in emerging markets, in low‑income countries? What can the IMF do to help different parts of the membership to address these problems?

    Mr. Aljadaan: I think, basically, the institution ‑‑ I think there is a clear recognition the institution has, you know, existed for the last 80 years. It worked with multiple administrations from both sides and has managed to have a very good relationship with our host. So, we just need to make sure that we continue that dialogue.

    Ms. Kozack: Very good. I will go to this side. Second row, gentleman in the gray shirt, at the end.

    QUESTION: Good afternoon. My question is meant for the IMF MD. I would like to know what the IMF doing to increase Africa’s voice on your Board. And like the Minister said earlier, they have added one more seat for Africa. I don’t think that is enough. What are you doing that to raise that to maybe two or three? Thank you.

    Ms. Georgieva: Thank you very much for this question.

    The most significant step we have taken to increase the voice and representation of Africa is to add a third chair for sub‑Saharan Africa around the Board table at the Fund. So up to November 1, we have 24 Executive Directors, representing 190, soon to be 19‑‑well, no. There are already 191 members. And as of November 1, we will have 25 Executive Directors. That means that the sub‑Saharan African countries will have a better representation of their issues. And these are, as you know, that’s a diverse group of countries. When we only have two Directors, that means constituencies that have 23, 22 countries, it is very difficult for this Executive Director to voice the concerns of each and every one of the members. Now they will have three Directors, and that brings them at par with other parts of the world. We have Executive Directors representing‑‑one represents 16 countries, another one representing 13. So now sub‑Saharan Africa is not going to be an outlier. And that would allow the‑‑and that, of course, means an Executive Director but also offices with advisors and Alternative Executive Directors from the constituency.

    Beyond that, this is really important‑‑ So imagine you sit around this Board table, and now you have more voice.

    Beyond that, there are two other things we do at the Fund. One is to work very hard to have diversity of our staff. So we actually are very proud. We set a target for sub‑Saharan Africa. We have exceeded it. So we have more people coming from this part of the world.

    And the second one is how we engage with these countries. We have, over time, built offices in a number of countries, including training centers. And that brings us closer, makes it easier to hear the concerns of citizens and authorities.

    Actually, next to us‑‑when we had the meetings, next to us was a proud son of Kenya.

    Where is Ceda? Is he here, or no?

    The Secretary of our Board is from Kenya. So Africa was very visible. We can say we had the Arab world. We had emerging markets, Europe; and we had Africa.

    Mr. Aljadaan: I think, to be honest, Africa is very important. And it is not only about how many chairs in the Board that represent Africa. Actually, a lot of voices within the Board and there are a lot of voices within the IMFC, in the Governors‑‑even if they are not from Africa, they actually do a lot of work for Africa. And I can say, I am one of them. I have absolutely the full dedication to making sure low‑income countries, and particularly in Africa, are supported and provided ‑‑ not only financial support but also technical support to‑‑you know, for them to graduate from low‑income country status.

    Ms. Georgieva: Yep. Half of the countries in sub‑Saharan Africa have programs with the Fund. And these programs are not just about the financing; they are about bringing capacity development, bringing excitement about growth for the future in these countries.

    Ms. Kozack: And I know many of you have questions. Unfortunately, we do have to bring this press briefing to an end. I want to thank you very much for joining us today. The full transcript of this press briefing will be made available on our website. And of course, if you have further questions, please do reach out to my time at Media Relations. Thank you so much for joining us.

    IMF Communications Department
    MEDIA RELATIONS

    PRESS OFFICER: Randa Elnagar

    Phone: +1 202 623-7100Email: MEDIA@IMF.org

    @IMFSpokesperson

    MIL OSI Economics

  • MIL-OSI Australia: Joint press conference – Apia, Samoa

    Source: Australian Government – Minister of Foreign Affairs

    Anthony Albanese, Prime Minister: I’ve just come from the opening session of the Commonwealth Heads of Government meeting here in Samoa. And apart from what was a rather extraordinary cultural display, including all the countries of the Pacific, including Australia, the speech of His Majesty King Charles was, of course, a highlight. King Charles spoke about the existential threat of climate change to our region. He also spoke about the need to not divide, but to come together in our common interest as a Commonwealth. And it was very well received by the heads of government and by the delegates to this important conference that comes at an important time, and the first time, of course, that CHOGM has been held here in the Pacific. We also heard from the Prime Minister Fiamē, and I was able to have a bilateral meeting with the Samoan Prime Minister this morning, after which, I had a bilateral meeting with the Prime Minister of the UK, Keir Starmer, as well as I had a range of informal meetings while we were waiting for CHOGM to occur, with other Commonwealth leaders. The Pacific is, of course, a global leader in climate action, and Australia respects and supports that leadership. The meeting that we had today with the Prime Minister of Samoa, and other Pacific partners who we discussed with, was about galvanising action in our region, and it will be front and centre of the next two days deliberation. Australia and the United Kingdom, of course, are old friends, but we’re also close friends. And more than friends, we’re partners, and I’ve enjoyed a positive relationship with Prime Minister Starmer for some time. It’s the first time we’ve been able to meet face to face as Prime Ministers of our respective nations. We today discussed, importantly, our new climate and energy partnership that we will be delivering on. We have a common view about the challenge, but also the opportunity, that climate change action represents. We both are on the path to net zero through the transition, and we see that as an opportunity for new industries, new jobs and a new industrialisation of our respective countries. From Australia’s perspective, of course, a future made in Australia, from the UK’s perspective, a future made in the UK. And there’s a real opportunity for us to develop technologies together to make a difference, as well as look at cooperation in areas such as climate finance. The new partnership will allow us to explore cooperation right across the board in all of these areas. Today, also, we’re announcing grants on our Australia-UK Renewable Hydrogen Innovation Partnership Program. This is six companies in Australia, six companies and entities in the United Kingdom, cooperating and collaborating to make a difference with the emerging green hydrogen industry that has such promise to play a critical role in the transition to net zero, in the production of green metals, in a range of areas that will make a difference of lowering our emissions whilst producing new industries and new jobs and new opportunities for Australia, but also for the United Kingdom. Of course, we also discussed AUKUS and the progress that we are making together. And in December, the Foreign Minister and Defence Ministers of both countries will meet, and that will be the next step in making sure that we continue on that pathway, the optimum pathway, for the delivering of AUKUS, and both of us expressed our support for the progress that has been made. I will hand to the Foreign Minister, and then we’re happy to take some questions.

    Penny Wong, Minister for Foreign Affairs: Thanks very much, Prime Minister. Look, it’s fantastic to be here with the Prime Minister for the Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting. Obviously I had the Foreign Minister’s track yesterday and today is the important Head of Government Meeting, and it’s been a fantastic opportunity to engage with all members of the Commonwealth. Can I just say in relation to the partnership the Prime Minister has announced with Sir Keir Starmer, the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom. This is the Prime Minister’s first formal bilateral with the incoming government, and what a cracking start. Straight away, we’re set to work, working together on transforming our economies, on dealing with not just the existential threat, which is climate change, but all that we need to do economically for our own economies and for the world. So it’s a very exciting announcement that the Prime Minister is making today.

    Prime Minister: Happy to take some questions.

    Journalist: Prime Minister, the Prime Minister of Tuvalu has said that Australia is not doing enough to curb fossil fuel emissions. What do you say to that?

    Prime Minister: Well, I had positive discussions with Prime Minister Teo and other Pacific leaders here. They recognise that the challenge of climate change doesn’t mean that you can just flick a switch and act immediately. We need to make sure that energy security is prioritised in order to make sure that we have that support going forward. But we’ve worked very closely with our Falepili agreement with Tuvalu. The Prime Minister of Tuvalu was in Perth recently as well to pick up the vessel which will provide support there in Tuvalu. And I must say that the feedback I’ve had from Pacific leaders has been very welcoming of Australia’s leadership here in the Pacific when it comes to climate action.

    Journalist: Can I ask you further about climate change? Because the King’s speech was very interesting on the existential threat. He made some very dire warnings about what climate change could lead to without, well, global action, and I guess that means an agreement here. Now the King is usually meant to be above politics, isn’t he, but climate change is a very political issue. And in fact, politicians like Nigel Farage, for instance, once likened him to an eco-loony for taking a position on climate change. Admittedly, before he ascended the throne. Has he gone too far and beyond his official duties by being so political about climate change, or is he absolutely right to warn of division and conflict?

    Prime Minister: His Majesty is very passionate about the world in which he lives and about the responsibility that we have to future generations. It’s an issue which has characterised his public comments over a long period of time. He also made very strong comments in the Great Hall in Canberra. And in most parts of the world, with very few exceptions, climate change is above politics. It is about existential threat that exists to countries like Tuvalu and Kiribati. It’s about the world in which we live. It’s about our native fauna and flora. It’s about the natural disasters that we were warned would increase in intensity and in frequency. And that is precisely what we are seeing in Australia, but in other parts of the world as well, increased impact of climate change, whether it be rising sea levels, increased cyclones, increased bushfires, increased droughts, we are seeing the impact of climate change, that’s recognised by scientists around the world, and indeed one of the first world leaders to recognise the challenge of climate change and the need to act was Margaret Thatcher.

    Journalist: The King also talked about misinformation and the dangers of social media. It’s an area your government has worked on reform for. Have you discussed this topic with the leaders here today, and do you consider this an endorsement from the King?

    Prime Minister: Well, His Majesty, of course, speaks for himself, and he made comments about the world in which he resides. And social media is having an impact. It’s having an impact around the world, and much of that impact, of course, is positive. The capacity to communicate with each other is an important one. The use of new technologies to get information out there can be very important, but we also know that there can be a very negative impact as well. With misinformation, we’ve seen the use of artificial intelligence, including, fake information, and indeed, fake videos and a range of materials. And we know that social media when it comes to young people is having an enormous impact, and that’s what my government is doing. It’s something that we see discussed, I think, at the site of every tennis court on the weekend, netball court, football oval, swimming pool, we see parents after school, they’re very concerned about this impact. And I think that the fact that His Majesty, King Charles, is very conscious about the modern world and prepared to engage in debate about that discourse is, I think, of course, up to him, but it’s something that I think brings him credit.

    Journalist: If I could just ask, Keir Starmer and others have talked about conflicts, including that in the Middle East. Jim Chalmers has talked about the need for a ceasefire in the Middle East to prevent persistent global inflation. Do you agree that a ceasefire would go some way to doing it?

    Prime Minister: Well, we have been very clear about our view, and it’s a view we signed with Sir Keir Starmer and other leaders in the 13 countries that signed up to the statement some time ago. Quite clearly, we do need a resolution. We have said very clearly that we also want to see the hostages released. We want to see both Israelis, but also Palestinians and Lebanese to be able to live in peace and security. I note that Secretary Blinken is there in the region, and the Secretary of State has played a critical role in trying to bring about a reduction in conflict in the region, and we certainly wish him well,

    Journalist: Just, obviously, the legacy of colonialism is being discussed, and there are calls from African and Caribbean nations for Britain to pay reparations or engage in a process of reparatory justice for the evils of slavery. It’s something the UK Prime Minister has ruled out, but given Australia’s own history of black birding, is it something you’d support other Commonwealth nations in calling for, or at least for truth telling processes?

    Prime Minister: Well, the Australian Government has recognised black birding for a number of decades now. Paul Keating in 1994 said that black birding represented a sorry chapter in Australia’s history, and it does. What my government is focused on very much is a forward agenda of, how do we close the gap? How do we make a difference when the gap is there between Indigenous and non-Indigenous Australians in so many areas? We need to do better.

    Journalist: Prime Minister, just briefly back on climate change, if that’s all right. The King also spoke about the way that climate change could fuel social division and inequalities between nations. Is this something the Government’s examined in our own region, as temperatures rise and as natural calamities increase, the way that, for example, water shortages or other problems could fuel conflicts between countries, and given the ONA has done some assessment on this, ONI rather, sorry. Why should that assessment not be made public to the Australian people?

    Prime Minister: Because ONI that’s the job that it does so, I think with respect Stephen, you know the answer to why intelligent briefings are just that. But we know as well, it is no secret, and the Australian Government has made information available. That is one of the contexts of the discussions that take place at places like the Pacific Island Forum and indeed, CHOGM here, as well as bilateral visits. We’ve had visits, if you speak about the region, from the leaders of Papua New Guinea, Samoa, Tuvalu, Tonga, a range of countries in our region, Fiji too, since I’ve been Prime Minister, it’s always front and centre. And there is an equity aspect to climate change because of its impact is not even across the board, and so it is part of the context of the debate is making sure that Australia and those countries that, of course, are largely responsible for the emissions which are there, have a greater responsibility to act. That’s something that’s been recognised in, that’s part of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change. We need to act together as the world. And I think that was a theme of, Commonwealth essentially means common good, and it is something that was a theme of His Majesty’s speech. And I think it was a very fine speech, which will be well received by Commonwealth nations.

    Journalist: Could I ask Minister Wong about the work with women that you’ve been doing over the last couple of days. The Queen has obviously, you know, spoken extensively about ending violence in the Pacific against women. When we talk about Australia engaging with the Pacific nations, we often talk about rugby league. What’s our in with women to help the Pacific, a platform for us, for Australia to help the Pacific?

    Minister Wong: Well, thanks for the question. I appreciate it. And you know, one of the points that I made yesterday and Her Majesty also made, is that if you’re serious about progress and development and peace, then you have to ensure you deal with women’s experience of violence, women’s access to education, women’s access to economic empowerment. In other words, a country cannot be all that it could be unless women and girls are enabled to fulfil their potential. We’ve really sought to integrate this work into our development assistance programs. And so you will see in Australian development programs, there’s a much greater emphasis than under previous governments, on making sure that there is a perspective around gender. In other words, if you’re funding an economic initiative, what is needed to enable women to participate as well as men? Education, similarly, what is the infrastructure needed for women and girls to participate so there is no peace and stability and prosperity without women taking their full place in a society. And we’ll continue to talk with the region about that.

    Prime Minister: Thanks very much. One more.

    Journalist: Two more?

    Minister Wong: You’ve had one.

    Journalist: The King also said you can’t change the past, which is clear, but do you think the Lidia Thorpe’s outburst or protest in Parliament indicates the Commonwealth collectively has not progressed?

    Prime Minister: Well, Lidia Thorpe’s outburst was, of course, about Lidia Thorpe, and she achieved her objective because I’m getting a question about it now. I thought it was rude, outrageous and entirely inappropriate.

    Journalist: If the ocean declaration is signed tomorrow what would Australia’s commitment be?

    Prime Minister: Well, I’m not going to pre-empt the processes. I’m hoping to end this press conference so that I can go to, the sessions haven’t begun yet, they begin this afternoon. We’ll be working this afternoon in a couple of sessions, but then again, tomorrow. I can indicate about tomorrow, just to get this in your diaries as well, the Pacific Policing Initiative, a number of, particularly Samoa, but other countries as well, have recognised that this is the first time it’s operated. We announced it just months ago. There are 11 countries, 46 police officers, including three from Australia, participating, providing security here. There’s also the people who are looking after me here from the local police, were trained by Australians in the past, and tomorrow, we’ll be first thing meeting with the nations of the Pacific who are participating, because this will be something to really celebrate. This is a great example of how Australia can provide practical support with, of course, the three prongs. One is the joint operations such as this one. The second will be the centre there at Pinkenba in Brisbane, that will provide the training. And then the four Centres of Excellence, one of which will be in Papua New Guinea, another which will be in Fiji. This is an example of Australia really making a difference in the region. And I conclude with that, but to thank all the journalists as well who made the effort to come here. This is an important gathering, and I appreciate, and I think Australia appreciates, the fact that you’re here as well. Thanks very much.

    MIL OSI News

  • MIL-OSI Russia: Transcript of IMFC Press Conference 2024 IMF Annual Meetings October 2024

    Source: IMF – News in Russian

    October 25, 2024

    Speakers:

    Kristalina Georgieva, Managing Director, IMF

    Mohammed Aljadaan, Chair, IMFC

    Moderator: Julie Kozack, Director of the Communications Department, IMF

    *****

    Ms. Kozack: Good afternoon, everyone. Thank you for joining us this afternoon. My name is Julie Kozack. I’m the Director of communications at the IMF. Welcome to this press briefing of the IMFC. And I am delighted to have with us here today the Chair of the IMFC, His Excellency Mohammed Aljadaan, Minister of Finance of Saudi Arabia, and also our Managing Director, Kristalina Georgieva. They will first share with you a few takeaways from the IMFC meeting that just concluded, and then we will have time for your questions.

    Your Excellency, the floor is yours.

    Mr. Aljadaan: Thank you. Thank you very much, and thank you to all of you for being here. And thank you, Julie. Good afternoon, everyone.

    I would like to thank all the IMFC members for their strong and focused collaboration. I would also like to congratulate Kristalina for her second term as Managing Director. We wish her every success. And I must say that personally, I would congratulate myself and the members for her accepting, actually, to spend the next five years with us.

    It’s important to note that the IMF was established 80 years ago at Bretton Woods. Since 1944, the world has changed dramatically, and the IMF and the World Bank have evolved along with that.

    The evolution continues, as we respond to many challenges facing the global financial system. Above all, our approach seeks common ground to achieve the common good for all. The IMFC members are pleased to report that the global economy has moved closer to a soft landing. Global growth is steady, and inflation continues to moderate. However, progress has been uneven across members. There is uncertainty, with risks tilted to the downside; medium‑term growth prospects remain muted; and global public debt has reached a record high.

    Going forward, we will work to further secure a soft landing, while stepping up our reform efforts to shift away from the low growth/high debt path.

    I want to report on a few developments very quickly.

    The IMFC members welcomed the completion of the review of the Poverty Reduction and Growth Trust, ensuring that the IMF is supporting low‑income countries to address balance of payments challenges. We encourage the IMF and the World Bank to further develop their proposal to support countries with sustainable debt but experiencing liquidity challenges. We supported the IMF’s efforts to strengthen its capacity development assistance and to secure appropriate financing. We welcomed the new 25th chair in the IMF’s Executive Board for sub‑Saharan Africa, which will strengthen the voice and the representation of the region. We also welcomed the new member, Liechtenstein, as our 191st member. That makes the IMF almost universal, short of possibly one or two members. And we reaffirmed our commitment to a strong, quota‑based, and adequately resourced IMF at the center of the Global Financial Safety Net.

    We have secured or are working to secure domestic approvals for our consent to the quota increase under the Sixteenth General Review of Quotas by mid‑November this year, as well as relevant adjustments under the New Arrangements to Borrow.

    Of particular importance is the commitment to improve the Common Framework for sovereign debt relief in low‑income countries so it is implemented in a more predictable, timely, and coordinated manner. Also, we appreciate the reforms of the Fund’s lending toolkit, particularly for the PRGT.

    Finally, I would note the review of the charges and the surcharges policy, which will alleviate the financial cost of the Fund’s lending for borrowing countries, while preserving their intended incentives and safeguarding the Fund’s financial soundness.

    The IMFC has achieved some important milestones in this meeting. This shows that the IMF is essential to that spirit of multilateralism born at the Bretton Woods, as we seek common ground to assure progress and prosperity for all IMF members.

    Now I will turn it to you, Your Excellency. Please, Kristalina.

    Ms. Georgieva: Thank you very much. Thank you very much, Minister Aljadaan. Congratulations for chairing another very engaged, substantive, and successful meeting and, again, one that starts right on time and finishes on the dot. You bring this discipline symbolically, as we have no time to waste. There are very important topics to bring the membership together on.

    You have presented the substance of the meeting and the achievements of the meeting. I would like to add to that three points.

    First, to recognize the good balance that was achieved between confidence and caution. Confidence that the world economy has proven resilient. Inflation is in retreat. And this is being done without a risk of recession. Caution, that the problems that we need to address are still in front of us. They are complex. We have to attend to the concerns of people that maybe inflation is going down, but price levels are high. We have to recognize that in front of us is a prospect for low growth and high debt, a burden that is particularly heavy on low‑income countries, and that we are operating in an environment that is more impacted by forces of fragmentation. They are driven by wars that are happening and still going on. They are driven by security concerns in countries. They are driven by concerns about competitiveness.

    And in this environment, the second observation I would like to make is the good balance between attention to the short‑term priorities and what needs to happen in the medium to long term. For the short term, the focus is on two things. One, how to‑‑for central banks to remain attentive, be evidence‑based, carefully monitor data to make sure that they don’t cut either too early or too late, and that the monetary policy continues to be well communicated so expectations are anchored on the basis of this communication. And also, two, in the short term, a focus on the fiscal side as an immediate priority. Fiscal buffers have been exhausted, yet fiscal pressures are high. And that attention to medium‑term fiscal consolidation that starts now‑‑is not delayed‑‑came through for many of our members.

    And in terms of the medium to long term, not surprisingly, a very substantive, deep discussion on what can be done to lift up growth prospects in countries; what can enhance productivity; what can be a factor for countries to achieve better outcomes for their people but also attention to the role a more vibrant global economy can play for this higher‑‑higher growth trajectory.

    And my third point is going to be about debt. This was an issue that a majority of members addressed. Recognizing that you cannot‑‑actually, one of the Ministers quoted me from a previous engagement, me saying “you cannot borrow your way out of debt.” The topic of debt was particularly important in terms of the work the Bank and the Fund are undertaking on our so‑called three‑pillar approach; and I want to update you on it, since it gained a lot of interest.

    The three‑pillar approach we are proposing‑‑it is in the context of the Global Sovereign Debt Roundtable and the broader work on debt‑‑is to support countries that are not yet in a position that requires debt restructuring but are faced with significant liquidity problems that, if not addressed‑‑if they’re not addressed, can turn into a risk for solvency in the future.

    Pillar I, reforms to boost growth and mobilize domestic revenues. Pillar II, adequate financing, including from international financial institutions and a call on us to work together. Pillar III, crowding-in private financing at a lower cost.

    I felt that that strong endorsement of this three‑pillar approach is going to give the Bank and the Fund the guidance and encouragement to do our best. You will see us identifying countries in which we apply that three‑pillar approach.

    You walked us through all the important achievements. To us, the staff of the Fund, what we particularly cherish is that over the last months, we agreed on three historic firsts‑‑never done before. First time in our history, reaching our precautionary balances target. First time ever reducing charges and surcharges that would save $1.2 billion to borrowing members, a 36 percent reduction. First time deploying net income to boost our lending capacity for low‑income countries.

    Mr. Aljadaan: Kristalina, I think this is just a very clear illustration that, despite all the discussion about fragmentation, three firsts are agreed by the members, very important firsts. So it just shows, really, that there is a lot of support to management and the Fund from the members.

    Sorry, continue.

    Ms. Georgieva: Oh, no. Thank you. And they have been agreed unanimously.

    So my heart goes to all the staff of the Fund and all the members of the Fund. My gratitude to them. And a very special thanks to Brazil, Poland, Saudi Arabia, the UAE, and the U.S. for contributions to the PRGT; and the UAE for a contribution to the Resilience and Sustainability Trust. And I want to thank the U.K. for committing in the meeting to directly transfer its share of the GRA income distribution to the PRGT, and they called for others to follow.

    So, all in all, what we can say is that the meeting demonstrates, when there are forces of fragmentation, bridges become even more important. And we, the IMF, we are a bridgebuilder. Thank you.

    Ms. Kozack: Thank you very much, Minister, Managing Director. We will now turn to your questions. Please do raise your hand if you have a question, and please do identify yourself. Let’s see. I’m going to start all the way over on this side of the room. There’s a gentleman in the fourth row. Yep. Let’s start there.

    QUESTION: Good afternoon. Actually, I have two questions for today. My first question is for the Managing Director. As you reflect on the Annual Meetings, how do you assess the global economy, the main challenges and opportunities? My second question will be for Your Excellency, Minister Mohammed Aljadaan. What are the pressing IMFC issues and objectives for the coming years? Thank you.

    Ms. Georgieva: Thank you for your question. The meetings have been very useful to see the unanimous understanding on the progress we have made and quite a close view across members on the challenges ahead.

    The achievements in terms of bringing inflation down to open up, again, space for a reduction of interest rates that can contribute to better growth prospects in countries was recognized by a vast majority of our members. And at the same time, there was no sense of complacency. Why? Because the conditions of the world economy are good‑‑growth at 3.2 percent, inflation down‑‑but risks are tilted to the downside. And they are both in terms of the importance of monetary policy to remain vigilant and avoid a risk of misjudgment in the direction of interest rate policies and also risks that stem from a more fragmented world economy.

    In terms of challenges, three stood out throughout the meetings.

    First, the fiscal challenge. How to bring fiscal balance after these multiple shocks and years in which fiscal resources had to be deployed more actively? How to do that without undercutting prospects for investing in growth.

    Second, how to identify and put in place structural reforms that can rapidly build prospects for higher productivity, higher growth in terms of labor market reforms, product market reforms, as well as reforms that can allow an acceleration of the green and digital transformation.

    And three, how to build more resilience to future shocks. What we learned over these last years is that we are in a more shock‑prone world, and that requires building resilience in our economies for the future.

    Ms. Kozack: Thank you. Minister.

    Mr. Aljadaan: I will make it very quickly, actually, because they are very much related; so I will not repeat what the Managing Director has said. But the IMFC is basically the Governors’ body of this institution. And the whole idea of the IMFC meeting is, A, to exchange views on, what can we then do together collectively, really, to help the world economy but also to give steer to the management of the institution. And that’s really the point that you mentioned, whether it is ensuring that we actually do the last mile of dealing with inflation properly. Second is trying to ensure that we find ways out of the high debt/low growth and to more productivity growth and a more coordinated approach. We also wanted to make sure that we also provide the right support to the institution through finalizing our legislative approvals for the quota increase, making sure that we also provide the support that the Fund needs. And whether it is the PRGT or the trust fund or otherwise, I think there is the pure IMFC technical work that happens, but then there is a lot of coordination between management, the IMFC, and then the regional funds, multilateral development institutions; that we need to make sure that they all also connect.

    Ms. Kozack: Very good. Thank you. All right. Let’s go to the middle. I am going to go to the second row, gentleman, gray jacket, white shirt. Yep, you.

    QUESTION: I thought I had grabbed the wrong jacket. Managing Director, it’s been a long set of meetings. There are a lot of issues to get through, but one of the things that’s been kind of hanging over this set of meetings has been the U.S. election. And I am just wondering if you could describe sort of how this has been discussed in these meetings, what you’re thinking about it. And you know, there could be a major turn inward by the United States as a result of this. How do you avoid‑‑how do you deal with that? What do you tell people to do about it? Thank you.

    Ms. Georgieva: The discussions ‑‑ we had a total of four meetings in different formats and themes. And the discussions in the meetings were about the problems we collectively face and how to go about them. In other words, the sentiment of the membership is, elections are for the American people. What is for us is to identify, what are the challenges and how the IMF can constructively address these challenges.

    Mr. Aljadaan: I agree.

    Ms. Georgieva: So, yeah‑‑

    Mr. Aljadaan: Go ahead.

    Ms. Georgieva: I was just going to say, it was what‑‑what are the problems of the world in advanced economies, in emerging markets, in low‑income countries? What can the IMF do to help different parts of the membership to address these problems?

    Mr. Aljadaan: I think, basically, the institution ‑‑ I think there is a clear recognition the institution has, you know, existed for the last 80 years. It worked with multiple administrations from both sides and has managed to have a very good relationship with our host. So, we just need to make sure that we continue that dialogue.

    Ms. Kozack: Very good. I will go to this side. Second row, gentleman in the gray shirt, at the end.

    QUESTION: Good afternoon. My question is meant for the IMF MD. I would like to know what the IMF doing to increase Africa’s voice on your Board. And like the Minister said earlier, they have added one more seat for Africa. I don’t think that is enough. What are you doing that to raise that to maybe two or three? Thank you.

    Ms. Georgieva: Thank you very much for this question.

    The most significant step we have taken to increase the voice and representation of Africa is to add a third chair for sub‑Saharan Africa around the Board table at the Fund. So up to November 1, we have 24 Executive Directors, representing 190, soon to be 19‑‑well, no. There are already 191 members. And as of November 1, we will have 25 Executive Directors. That means that the sub‑Saharan African countries will have a better representation of their issues. And these are, as you know, that’s a diverse group of countries. When we only have two Directors, that means constituencies that have 23, 22 countries, it is very difficult for this Executive Director to voice the concerns of each and every one of the members. Now they will have three Directors, and that brings them at par with other parts of the world. We have Executive Directors representing‑‑one represents 16 countries, another one representing 13. So now sub‑Saharan Africa is not going to be an outlier. And that would allow the‑‑and that, of course, means an Executive Director but also offices with advisors and Alternative Executive Directors from the constituency.

    Beyond that, this is really important‑‑ So imagine you sit around this Board table, and now you have more voice.

    Beyond that, there are two other things we do at the Fund. One is to work very hard to have diversity of our staff. So we actually are very proud. We set a target for sub‑Saharan Africa. We have exceeded it. So we have more people coming from this part of the world.

    And the second one is how we engage with these countries. We have, over time, built offices in a number of countries, including training centers. And that brings us closer, makes it easier to hear the concerns of citizens and authorities.

    Actually, next to us‑‑when we had the meetings, next to us was a proud son of Kenya.

    Where is Ceda? Is he here, or no?

    The Secretary of our Board is from Kenya. So Africa was very visible. We can say we had the Arab world. We had emerging markets, Europe; and we had Africa.

    Mr. Aljadaan: I think, to be honest, Africa is very important. And it is not only about how many chairs in the Board that represent Africa. Actually, a lot of voices within the Board and there are a lot of voices within the IMFC, in the Governors‑‑even if they are not from Africa, they actually do a lot of work for Africa. And I can say, I am one of them. I have absolutely the full dedication to making sure low‑income countries, and particularly in Africa, are supported and provided ‑‑ not only financial support but also technical support to‑‑you know, for them to graduate from low‑income country status.

    Ms. Georgieva: Yep. Half of the countries in sub‑Saharan Africa have programs with the Fund. And these programs are not just about the financing; they are about bringing capacity development, bringing excitement about growth for the future in these countries.

    Ms. Kozack: And I know many of you have questions. Unfortunately, we do have to bring this press briefing to an end. I want to thank you very much for joining us today. The full transcript of this press briefing will be made available on our website. And of course, if you have further questions, please do reach out to my time at Media Relations. Thank you so much for joining us.

    IMF Communications Department
    MEDIA RELATIONS

    PRESS OFFICER: Randa Elnagar

    Phone: +1 202 623-7100Email: MEDIA@IMF.org

    @IMFSpokesperson

    https://www.imf.org/en/News/Articles/2024/10/25/tr102524-transcript-of-imfc-press-briefing

    MIL OSI

    MIL OSI Russia News

  • MIL-OSI China: 31st China Yangling Agricultural Hi-tech Fair kicks off

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

    MIL OSI China News

  • MIL-OSI Security: U.S. Naval Forces Participate in Republic of Korea Multi-National Mine Warfare Exercise

    Source: United States INDO PACIFIC COMMAND

    Naval forces from the U.S., the Republic of Korea (ROK) and 17 partner and allied nations concluded Multi-National Mine Warfare Exercise (MNMIWEX) 24 in Busan, ROK, Oct. 25, 2024.

    Part of an annual series of exercises hosted by the ROK Navy, MNMIWEX 24 increased proficiency in mine countermeasures (MCM) operations within a multi-national naval force.

    This year’s iteration had 19 nations and approximately 100 personnel participating, making MNMIWEX 24 the largest of the series to be held.

    “I was grateful for the opportunity to work with our hosts, the ROK Navy, and our partner nations and allies,” said Capt. Antonio Hyde, commodore of Mine Counter Measures Squadron (MCMRON) Seven, which belongs to Task Force 76, U.S. 7th Fleet’s expeditionary warfare force. “This multi-national training refines how we operate in a complex maritime environment to maintain open sea-lanes and freedom of navigation for all countries in the region.”

    MCM forces from the U.S., Australia, Canada and New Zealand embarked the tank landing ship ROKS Cheon Wang Bong (LST 686), which teamed with the Avenger-class mine countermeasures ship USS Patriot (MCM 7) to conduct mine hunting operations during the eight-day at-sea phase.

    A multinational watch floor directed MNMIWEX operations ashore. This facilitated a command structure that promoted interchangeability and helped build the capacity of multinational MCM forces to operate effectively as a team.

    “Through this exercise, we improve our abilities to carry out multinational mine operations to protect major ports and sea lines of communication from the complex threats of enemy in case of emergency,” said Capt. Lee Taek-sun, commander of ROK Navy Mine Squadron 52. “We will continue to develop the combat capabilities necessary for mine warfare and further improve mine operation abilities and procedures with multinational forces.”

    MNIMIWEX 24 featured participants from the United States, Republic of Korea, Japan, the United Kingdom, Australia, Canada, New Zealand, the Republic of the Philippines, Italy, Greece, Türkiye, Thailand, Belgium, Malaysia, Oman, Colombia, United Arab Emirates, Chile and the Netherlands.

    The exercise took place in U.S. 7th Fleet, the U.S. Navy’s largest forward-deployed numbered fleet, which routinely interacts and operates with allies and partners in preserving a free and open Indo-Pacific region.

    MIL Security OSI

  • MIL-OSI USA News: Remarks by President  Biden on the Biden-⁠ Harris Administration’s Record of Delivering for Tribal Communities, Including Keeping His Promise to Make this Historic Visit to Indian Country | Laveen Village,  AZ

    Source: The White House

    Gila Crossing Community School
    Laveen Village, Arizona

    10:44 A.M. MST

    PRESIDENT BIDEN:  I’m Joe Biden.  I’m Jill Biden’s husband  (Laughter.)

    Gov, thank you for that introduction and to the Gila Indian River Community — the — Gila — yeah, Gila — nothing wrong with me — (laughter) — Gila River Indian Community for welcoming me today. 

    You know — (applause) — I say this with all sincerity, this, to me, is one the most consequential things I’ve ever had an opportunity to do in my whole career and as president of the United States.  It’s an honor — a genuine honor to be in this special place on this special day. 

    Thank you to Senator Mark Kelly, a great friend, who also is married to an incredible woman who is my friend. 

    Please have a seat, by the way.  (Laughter.)

    And Congressman Greg Stanton.  I saw Greg when I came in.  He’s over there somewhere.  Greg, thank you.

    And I’m putting these glasses on because I’m having trouble seeing this. 

    And all the elected leaders and the Tribal community leaders for being here. 

    You know, I can’t tell you what a special thanks I have for Deb Haaland, my Interior secretary.  I was determined — (applause) — I was determined — I made a commitment when I became president to have an administration that looked like America.  Except you’re America, and there’s — never has been — never has been a Native American, an Indigenous person who was on — in the Cabinet or in a — in the secretary’s job or any consequential job in a presidential administration.

    She’s the first — but it’s clearly not the last — Native American Cabinet secretary ever.  (Applause.)  And her historic and dedicated leadership is strengthening the relationship between the Tribal Nations and the federal government — is unlike ever happened before. 

    That’s why we’re here today. 

    You know, when I got to the Senate, I was only 29 years old.  I had to wait 17 days to be eligible.  And I had — after I got elected, w- — while I waiting, my wife and daughter were killed and my two boys were badly injured.

    And a guy that came to my assistance was a guy named Danny Inouye.  And the first thing he taught me — not a joke — was, “Joe, it is not ‘Indians.’  It’s ‘Indian Nations’ — Indian N-” — (applause) — No, I — he was serious, deadly earnest about it.

    It’s been 10 years since a sitting president — president came and visited Indian Country.  That’s simply much too long.

    And that’s why I am here today not only to fulfil my promise to be a president that — first president to visit Indian Country but, more importantly, to right a wrong, to chart a new path toward a better future for us all.

    I am also here because, as I said, my wife Jill has been here 10 times in Indian Country, literally.  The first lady sends her love and said, “Joe, make sure you come home.”  (Laughter.)  Because every time she goes — she spent a lot of time in, excuse me for saying this, the Navajo Nation.  I’m worried — (applause) — every time she goes, I’m worried she’s not coming home.  (Laughter.)

    I watched that beautiful performance just now, and it moved me deeply.  It’s a reminder of everything Native people enjoy and employ: sacred traditions, culture passed down over thousands of — thousands of years.  (Applause.)  

    Long before there was a United States, Native communities flourished on these lands.  They practiced democratic government before we ever heard of it, developed advanced agriculture, contributed to science, art, and culture.  (Applause.)

    But eventually, the United States was established and began expanding, entering treaties with sovereign Tribal Nations.  But as time moved on, respect for s- — for Tribal sovereignty evaporated, was shattered, pushing Native people off their homelands, denying — denying their humanity and their rights, targeting children to cut their connection to their ancestors and their inheritance and their heritage. 

    At first, in the 19- — 1800s, the effort was voluntary, asking Tribes to sell their children — to send their children away to vocational schools.  But then — then the federal government mandated — mandated the removal of children from their families and Tribes, launching what’s called the Federal Indian Boarding School era — era.  Over a 150-year span — 150 years — from the early 1800s to 1870 — to 1970.  One of the most horrific chapters in American history.  We should be ashamed.  A chapter that most Americans don’t know about.  The vast majority don’t even know about it. 

    I was — I was at my hotel today.  I told the pe- — the hotel staff, as we were leaving.  They said, “Where are you going?”  I told them.  They said, “What are you doing?”  I told them.  They said they’re Natives here.  They said, “I never knew that.  I never knew that.”  Think of how many people don’t know.

    As president, I believe it’s imper- — important that we do know — know generations of Native children stolen, taken away to places they didn’t know with people they never met who spoke a language they had never heard.  Native communities silenced.  Their children’s laughter and play were gone. 

    Children would arrive at schools.  Their clothes taken off.  Their hair that they were told was sacred was chopped off.  Their names literally erased and replaced by a number or an English name. 

    One survivor later recounted her days when taken away.  She said, quote, “My mother standing on that sidewalk as we loaded into a green bus.  I can see the image of my mom burned into my mind and my heart where she was crying.”

    Another survivor described what it was like at the boarding school, and I quote, “When I would talk in my Tribal language, I would get hit.  I lost my tongue.  They beat me every day.”

    Children abused — emotionally, physically, and sexually abused.  Forced into hard labor.  Some put up for adoption without the consent of their birth parents.  Some left for dead in unmarked graves. 

    And for those who did return home, they were wounded in body and in spirit — trauma and shame passed down through generations. 

    The policy continued even after the Civil Rights Act, which got me involved in politics as a young man.  Even after the Civil Rights Act was passed in 1964, it continued. 

    All told, hundreds and hundreds of Federal Indian Boarding Schools across the country.  Tens of thousands of Native children entered the system.  Nearly 1,000 documented Native child deaths, though the real number is likely to be much, much higher; lost generations, culture, and language; lost trust. 

    It’s horribly, horribly wrong.  It’s a sin on our soul.

    I’d like to ask, with your permission, for a moment of silence as we remember those lost and the generations living with that trauma. 

    (A moment of silence is observed.)

    After 150 years, the United States government eventually stopped the program, but the federal government has never — never — formally apologized for what happened until today. 

    I formally apologize — (applause) — as president of the United States of America, for what we did.  I formally apologize.  And it’s long overdue.

    At the Tribal school — at a Tribal school in Arizona, a community full of tradition and culture, and joined by survivors and descendants to do just that: apologize, apologize, apolo- — rewrite the history book correctly.  (Applause.)

    I have a solemn responsibility to be the first president to formally apologize to the Native peoples — Native Americans, Native Hawaiians, Native Alaskans — and [at] Federal Indian Boarding Schools. 

    It’s long, long, long overdue.  Quite frankly, there’s no excuse that this apology took 50 years to make. 

    The Federal Indian Boarding School policy and the pain it has caused will always be a significant mark of shame, a blot on American history. 

    For too long, this all happened with virtually no public attention, not written about in our history books —

    AUDIENCE MEMBER:  Yeah, what about the people in Gaza?

    THE PRESIDENT:  — not taught in our schools.

    AUDIENCE MEMBER:  What about the people in Palestine, huh?

    (Cross-talk.)

    AUDIENCE:  Booo —

    AUDIENCE MEMBER:  (Inaudible.)

    THE PRESIDENT:  Let her talk.  Let her talk.

    AUDIENCE MEMBER:  (Inaudible) empty promise for our people.  How can you apologize for a genocide while committing a genocide in Palestine?

    Free Palestine!  Free Palestine!

    AUDIENCE MEMBER:  Get out of here!

    AUDIENCE MEMBER:  Free Palestine!

    THE PRESIDENT:  No, no.  Let — let her go.  There’s a lot of innocent people being killed. 

    AUDIENCE MEMBER:  (Inaudible.)

    THE PRESIDENT:  There’s a lot of innocent people being killed, and it has to stop.

    For those — (applause) — for those who went through this period, it was too painful to speak of.  For our nation, it was too shameful to acknowledge.  But just because history is silent doesn’t mean it didn’t take place.  It did take place.  (Applause.)

    While darkness can hide much, it erases nothing.  It erases nothing.  Some injustices are heinous, horrific, and grievous.  They can’t be buried, no matter how hard people try. 

    As I’ve said throughout my presidency, we must know the good, the bad, the truth of who we are as a nation.  That’s what great nations do.  We’re a great nation.  We’re the greatest of nations.  We do not erase history; we make history.  We learn from history, and we remember so we can heal as a nation.  It takes remembering.

    This formal apology is the culmination of decades of work by so many courageous people, many of whom are here today: survivors and descendants, allies and advocates — like the nation’s Native American Boarding School Healing Coalition and other — (applause) —

    All of you who are part of that, stand up.  Stand up.  (Applause.)  As my grandfather would say, you’re doing God’s work.

    And other courageous leaders who spent decades shining a light on this dark chapter.  And leaders like Secretary Haaland, whose grandparents were children at one of those boarding schools. 

    U.S. Interior Department, the same department that long ago oversaw Federal Indian Boarding Schools — guess what? — the extensive work on the — breaking ground, it’s happened with her.  It’s appropriate that she is bringing an end to what that very agency did.  (Applause.)  Groundbreaking report documenting what happened. 

    We owe it to all of you across Indian Country.  The truth — the truth must be told.  And the truth must be heard all across America. 

    But this official apolocy [apology] is only one step toward and forward from the shadows of failed policies of the past.  That’s why I’ve committed to working with Indigenous communities across the country to write a new and better chapter of our — in our history, to honor the solemn promise the United States made to Tribal Nations, to fulfill our federal trust and treaty obligations.  It’s long, long, long overdue.  (Applause.)

    And I say this with all sincerity, from day one, my administration, Jill and I, Kamala and Secretary Haaland, our entire administration have worked to include Indigenous voices in all we do.  Along with Secretary Haaland, I’ve appointed Native Americans to lead across the federal government.

    I signed a groundbreaking executive order to give Tribes the — more autonomy to make your own decisions — (applause) — requiring federal agencies to streamline grant appro- — grant appropriations and applications, to comanage federal programs, to eliminate heavy-handed reporting requirements.  It’s about representing your autonomy.  And, I might add, it’s a hell of a lot more efficient when you do it too.  (Applause.)

    Folks, I’m proud to have reestablished the White House Council on Native American Affairs — (applause); relaunched the White House Tribal Na- — Tribal Nations Summit — (applause); and taken historic steps to improve Tribal consultation.  (Applause.) 

    With the historic laws I’ve signed, we’re making some of the most significant investments in Native communities ever — ever in American history. 

    It’s part of my Invest in America agenda, and it’s helping all Americans from every state and every Tribe, and that’s good for all America. 

    Helping Native communities get through the pandemic with vaccine shots in arms and checks in pockets. 

    I’m proud this helped cut child poverty in Native communities by more than one third.  (Applause.) 

    I’m proud our economy — our economic plan has created 200,000 jobs for Native Americans, record-low [un]employment in Native communities. 

    With the strong support from Secretary Haaland and all of you, we’re finally modernizing Tribal infrastructure, for God’s sake — (applause) — building new roads, new bridges; delivering clean water, affordable high-speed broadband in every Native community; and so much more. 

    Folks, we’re just getting started.  We’re making historic climate investments in clean energy, conservation, and clean water [for] Native communities, including co-stewardships of our land and waters. 

    We just des- — designated the first National Marine Sancrutary — Sanctuary proposed by Indigenous communities, which is off the coast of California.  We just got that done.  (Applause.)  And I have restored and designated multiple national monuments to honor Tribal Nations, including the Ancestral Footprints of the Grand Canyon, right here in Arizona, where I had the honor of visiting.  (Applause.)  It was breathtaking.  It was breathtaking.

    I secured the first-ever advanced funding for Indian Health Services — (applause) — so Tribal hospitals can plan ahead, order supplies, hire doctors and know that the money will be there.  (Applause.)  

    We’re also preserving ancestral Tribal homelands, restoring salmon and other native fish, recognizing the value of Indigenous knowledge and languages, especially those damaged in the boarding school era. 

    In fact, my administration was proud to defend the Indian Child Welfare Act — (applause) — an act that was passed in 1970 [1978] in no small part to remedy the harms of 150 years of taking Native children away from their families. 

    But you all know, that act was challenged just a few years ago in the summer of 2023.  Those who opposed us challenged — challenged on the grounds that Native families should not have priority over everyone else in adopting Native children.  Well, I took that all the way to the Supreme Court and we won.  We won.  (Applause.)

    We also extended mental health programs through the Bureau of Indian Education so young people have the tools to end cycles of generational trauma. 

    As an educator, this is something Jill cares deeply about, my wife, just as she’s traveled across Native communities to increase access to health care and so much more, including helping open the first cancer cure [care] center in Navajo Nation.  (Applause.)

    And more to do — a lot more to do.

    And, by the way, the infrastructure bill is over a trillion dollars.  It’s not a decade.  I mean, it’s not a quarter.  It’s going to be there for a decade.  Much, much more to come, and you got to get your fair share.   

    By [re]authorizing the Violence Against Women Act — an Act I took great pains in writing 30 years ago, we also — (applause) — we also reasirmed [reaffirmed] Tribal sovereignty and expanded Tribal jurisdiction in cases where outside predators [perpetrators] harm members of your Nation. 

    And as we mark Native Americans History Month in November — this November, we recognize the contributions of Indigenous people in — to American history.  You — you are the first Americans.  I might add, you’re among the most patriotic Americans.  (Applause.)  Well, that’s a fact.  The whole of America should know, all Americans should know Indigenous people volunteer to serve in the United States military five times more than any other single group.  (Applause.)  Five times.  Five.  Five.  Five.  (Applause.)  Many having paid the ultimate sacrifice in every war since our founding. 

    To all of you, thank you — thank you for serving in so many ways — as first responders, artists, entrepreneurs, educators, doctors, scientists, and so much more — sharing your culture and your knowledge for the good of future generations, believing in possibilities — the possibility to usher in a new era to a nation-to-nation relationship grounded in dignity and respect.  It matters. 

    My dad used to have an expression.  He’d say, “Joey, everyone — everyone — is entitled to be treated with dignity.  Everyone.”  “Everyone is enti-” — he meant it.  (Applause.)

    Well, let me close with this.  It’s about restoring your dignity.

    I know no apology can or will make up for what was lost during the darkness of the Federal Boarding School policy.  But today, we’re finally moving forward into the light. 

    As president of the United States, I’ve had the honor to bestow our nation’s most prestigious medals to distinguished people and organizations all across America.  That includes Native Americans who survived the boarding school era. 

    Early in my term, I bestowed the Medal of Freedom — our highest civilian honor — on a man my grandfather, who was an Irish immigrant and was not treated very well because he was an Irish Catholic in the coal-mine era in Scranton — but he went on to be an all-American football player at Santa Clara.  And every time they’d talk about all-Americans, he’d say, “Joey, the greatest athlete in American history is Jim Thorpe.”  (Applause.)  Oh, I’m seri- — I knew a lot about Jim Thorpe before some of you probably even knew.  (Laughter.)

    As a child, Jim was taken from his home but went on to become one of the greatest athletes ever, ever, ever in all of American history. 

    And earlier this week, I bestowed two other revere- — revered medals — the National Medals of Arts and the National Medal of the Humanities — to 39 extraordinary Americans and organizations, including Roseta Wrol [Rosita Worl], an Alaskan Native.  (Applause.) 

    More than 80 years ago, she was a six-year-old when she was taken to a federal boarding school.  She spent three years without her family, her family not knowing if she’d ever come home.  Nine years old, she was one of those who did come home. 

    Over the next seven decades, she became a leading anthropologist and advocate, building a new era of understanding.  Her story, from being taken from her home as child to standing in the Oval Office receiving one of the nation’s most consequential medals, is a story of the truth, the power of healing. 

    When Roseta [Rosita] sees young people signing tradi- — singing traditional songs, just like we heard today, she says, and I quote, “We will hear the voices of our ancestors, and we are now hearing it through our children.”

    For too long, this nation sought to silence the voices of generations of Native children, but now your voices are being heard.    

    That’s the America that we should be.  That’s the America we can all be proud of.  That’s who we are.  For God’s sake, let’s make sure we reach out and embrace, because you make us stronger.  You are America.

    God bless you all.  And may God protect our troops. 

    Thank you.  (Applause.)

    11:07 A.M. MST

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI China: Strong explosions heard in Iran’s capital

    Source: China State Council Information Office

    The powerful explosions heard around Iran’s capital, Tehran, early Saturday were linked to air defense responses against attempted Israeli airstrikes on three locations outside the city, according to state-run IRIB TV.

    The dimensions and details of the air defense responses are under investigation, according to a statement by the Tehran Province Air Defense’s public relations, as reported by IRIB TV.

    The source of the blasts has not yet been identified and seemed to have originated in the suburbs of Tehran, said IRIB TV.

    The TV quoted security sources as saying that some of the explosions pertained to the activities of the air defense systems deployed near the capital.

    The situation remains normal in the capital, according to the semi-official Tasnim news agency report.

    Israel confirmed it had launched “precise strikes on military targets in Iran” early Saturday morning local time, with the Israel Defense Forces saying that the strikes were in response to “months of continuous attacks” from Iran.

    The Israeli military said later that it had completed its “targeted” attacks against military targets in Iran after three waves of strikes.

    On Oct. 1, Iran fired approximately 180 missiles at Israeli targets, describing the action as retaliation for the assassinations of several leaders of regional resistance groups, among other grievances.

    In response, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu warned that Iran had made a “grave mistake” and vowed retaliation.

    Iran’s aviation authority announced that it had suspended all flights until further notice. The air defense headquarters of Iran said that it had successfully countered the Israeli attack, with only “limited damage” to some areas, according to Tasnim news agency.

    MIL OSI China News

  • MIL-OSI China: Israel completes strike on Iranian targets

    Source: China State Council Information Office

    Israel has completed what it called a retaliatory attack on military targets in Iran, said the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) early Saturday morning.

    The IDF launched “precise and targeted” air strikes on targets in several areas in Iran, in response to the attacks from Iran in recent months, it said in a statement.

    The IDF statement was issued about three and a half hours after it announced the start of the operation.

    Israeli aircraft struck missile manufacturing facilities, surface-to-air missile arrays, and additional Iranian aerial capabilities, according to the statement.

    Israel’s state-owned Kan TV News reported that dozens of jets, including F35, F16 and F15, attacked 20 military targets in Iran.

    IDF spokesman Daniel Hagari said in a video statement that the operation has foiled immediate threats to Israel, warning Iran against further response if there’s a new round of escalation.

    Iranian eyewitnesses said early Saturday that big explosions were heard around the country’s capital Tehran. Shortly afterward, Iranian state-run IRIB TV reported that Iran’s air defense was engaged against Israeli strike attempts.

    On Oct. 1, Iran fired approximately 180 missiles at Israeli targets, describing the action as retaliation for the assassinations of several leaders of regional resistance groups, among other grievances.

    MIL OSI China News

  • MIL-OSI China: Israeli airstrikes target military sites in Syria

    Source: China State Council Information Office

    The Syrian Defense Ministry reported early Saturday that Israeli forces launched a series of airstrikes against military sites in Syria’s southern and central regions.

    The strikes, reportedly carried out around 2:00 a.m. local time (2300 GMT Friday), involved missiles launched from the direction of the Israeli-occupied Golan Heights and Lebanese airspace.

    According to the ministry, Syrian air defenses intercepted and downed several missiles, and efforts to assess the full impact of the strikes were ongoing.

    The Syrian Observatory for Human Rights, a Britain-based war monitor, reported that Israeli aircraft entered Syrian airspace to target locations linked to Iran. The monitor added that while Syrian air defenses attempted to intercept the jets, they were unable to prevent them from reaching their targets.

    Also on Saturday, Israel announced it launched “precise strikes” on military targets in Iran and the operation had concluded. Iran reported it had successfully countered the attack, with initial reports from local media indicating there was limited damage to some areas. 

    MIL OSI China News

  • MIL-OSI China: Highlights of Xi’s remarks during 16th BRICS Summit

    Source: China State Council Information Office 3

    Chinese President Xi Jinping attended the 16th BRICS Summit from Tuesday to Thursday in Kazan, where he also had in-depth exchanges with world leaders on BRICS cooperation, bilateral relations and the current international situation.

    The following are some of the highlights of Xi’s remarks and statements.

    On Global South

    — The collective rise of the Global South is a distinctive feature of the great transformation across the world. Global South countries marching together toward modernization is monumental in world history and unprecedented in human civilization.

    — Standing at the forefront of the Global South, we should use our collective wisdom and strength, and stand up to our responsibility for building a community with a shared future for mankind.

    — We should strengthen global security governance, and explore solutions to address both symptoms and roots of hotspot issues.

    — The Global South emerges for development and prospers through development. We should make ourselves the main driving force for common development.

    — We should play an active and leading role in the global economic governance reform, and make development the core of international economic and trade agenda.

    — Diversity of civilization is the innate quality of the world. We should be advocates for exchanges among civilizations.

    — China will coordinate with others to form a Global South Think Tanks Alliance to promote people-to-people exchanges and experience-sharing in governance.

    — No matter how the international landscape evolves, we in China will always keep the Global South in our heart, and maintain our roots in the Global South.

    — We support more Global South countries in joining the cause of BRICS as full members, partner countries or in the “BRICS Plus” format so that we can combine the great strength of the Global South to build together a community with a shared future for mankind.

    On China-India relations

    — China and India should strengthen communication and cooperation, enhance strategic mutual trust, and facilitate each other’s pursuit of development aspirations.

    — China-India relations are essentially a question of how the two large developing countries and neighbors, each with a 1.4-billion-strong population, treat each other.

    — The two sides should continue to uphold their important understandings, including that China and India are each other’s development opportunity rather than threat, and cooperation partner rather than competitor.

    — The two countries should maintain a sound strategic perception of each other, and work together to find the right and bright path for big, neighboring countries to live in harmony and develop side by side.

    On China-Iran relations

    — No matter how the international and regional situation changes, China will unswervingly develop friendly cooperation with Iran.

    — The Chinese side supports Iran in safeguarding national sovereignty, security and national dignity, steadily advancing its own economic and social development, and improving and deepening good-neighborly and friendly relations with neighboring countries.

    — China is willing to strengthen cooperation with Iran within BRICS and other multilateral frameworks, further volume up the influence and voice of the Global South, and push forward the development of the international order in a more just and reasonable direction.

    On China-Egypt relations

    — China is willing to be a sincere friend that looks out for each other and a close partner for joint development with Egypt.

    — The two sides should continue to firmly support each other, consolidate political mutual trust, deepen practical cooperation, jointly build the Belt and Road with high quality, strengthen people-to-people and cultural exchanges, and push bilateral relations toward the goal of building a China-Egypt community with a shared future in the new era.

    — China appreciates Egypt’s efforts to promote a ceasefire and end of war, and stands ready to strengthen coordination and cooperation with Egypt to jointly push for an early end to the Palestinian-Israeli conflict and the easing of the regional situation.

    MIL OSI China News

  • MIL-OSI United Kingdom: Patrick Harvie Autumn Conference 2024 speech

    Source: Scottish Greens

    Patrick Harvie called for the Scottish Government to take serious climate action and deliver a fairer, greener and better budget for Scotland.

    Greens always aim to offer an inspiring and positive vision at election times, because we believe that politics is capable of changing our society for the better.

    Labour, by contrast, spent the whole election campaign trying to lower everyone’s expectations. Maybe they thought it was better to under-promise, rather than under-deliver. And yet somehow, they have managed to do both.

    I don’t think there can be a single voter left in the UK who can honestly say they’ve been inspired by what has happened since. 

    Of course there is reason to be happy about seeing the end of 14 years of Tory austerity, corruption, and downright lies; to be rid of Boris Johnson and his pals partying in Downing street; or the shameless profiteering on the back of Brexit and the pandemic; or the Liz Truss blink-and-you-miss-it catastrophe – it’s no wonder the British public jumped at the opportunity for a change of government. 

    But Labour’s offer to the electorate, after they’d dumped every remnant of a radical programme and purged their progressive candidates, was so insipid that I warned that the UK was likely to get a change of government without a change of politics. And that’s exactly what we’ve seen from Keir Starmer’s Labour since then. 

    We’ve just passed the 100 day mark of this new Labour government. And what have they achieved in that time? 

    Keir Starmer has some lovely new suits, and if you can believe it thousands of pounds worth of quite boring glasses. Some of the cabinet have had some nice free holidays and Taylor Swift tickets.

    But have they lifted the cruel two-child benefit cap which has forced families, and especially women and children into poverty? Perish the thought.

    Have they cut the artificial link between gas and electricity prices, instantly making renewable home heating cheap and affordable for millions? Of course not, instead they’ve removed winter fuel payments from nearly 10 million pensioners, forcing vulnerable older people to choose between heating their home and feeding themselves. 

    It is a decision that is up there with the worst of the Tories; it’s one that will kill people. And unlike so many of their bad policies, this one wasn’t even in the Labour manifesto.

    Our message to Keir Starmer is simple: reverse this cut. Do it now or your first year’s legacy will be a cold and deadly winter.

    This is a Labour Government working for the few, not the many. A Labour government that is defending a broken status quo and standing up for the interests of big business and their corporate donors rather than working people.

    Here in Scotland, Anas Sarwar told us to ‘read his lips’, promising that there would be ‘no austerity under Labour’. 

    Anas was probably hoping that a long Labour honeymoon would let him coast for much of the way to the 2026 election. Instead people have been given an instant reminder of just how underwhelming a Labour government can be.

    Two weeks ago, Scottish Labour had the chance to take a different path, and condemn their London colleagues’ decision to means-test the winter fuel payment in a vote in the Scottish Parliament. 

    Instead, they doubled down, standing up for Starmer’s decision and supporting one of the cruellest cuts for years.

    But perhaps Labour’s most shameful failure has been on the international stage.

    The last 12 months have seen daily horrors and atrocities inflicted on the people of Gaza. So many children, so many whole families, have had their lives destroyed in some of the gravest war crimes in living memory. It has been the collective punishment of millions of people.

    The killing has spread to Lebanon, and missile attacks between Israel and Iran, with Netanyahu deliberately increasing the risk of a wider regional war.

    For the international community this has been one of the most profound moral tests for our age, and it is one that Labour has failed badly.

    When hospitals and homes have been bombed into rubble, and when genocide is being inflicted, we all have a moral duty to stand against it, and to stand on the side of humanity.

    Yet, Keir Starmer can’t even bring himself to end political and military support for Israel or take action against even its most extreme far right politicians.

    Every government is under a moral obligation to do everything possible to oppose the atrocities. That is why we have persistently called on the Scottish Government to block all public contracts for companies who are complicit in the illegal settlements in the West Bank, and why we have called for an end to all public grants and support for the companies who are profiting from the killing.

    Even ending the arms sales and the bombing isn’t enough; peace requires justice, and that means an end to the decades of occupation, and it means statehood for Palestine.

    Conference, it is long past time to end this complicity. It is long past time for a watertight arms embargo and it is long past time for an end to all trade with the illegal settlements in the occupied territories.

    It is long past time for Scotland and the UK to join the call for boycott, disinvestment and sanctions against Israel. Because profiting from atrocities must have no place in a civilised society.

    Conference, the months and years ahead will be crucial for peace, and they will also be crucial for the fate of our planet.

    With global temperatures rising, Governments must take bold and urgent action both here in Scotland and around the world.

    With just 18 months left of this session of the Scottish Parliament, the SNP now face some key tests on an issue they still claim is a priority. 

    The first of those is underway already, as Holyrood considers the Scottish Government’s new Climate bill. 

    The first two Climate Change Acts were statements of high ambition. This third one will be an admission that, as Greens have long argued, Scotland is years behind where we should be. That’s an admission that needs to be made; but making it demands an urgent acceleration of action here and now, not just promise of more plans to come.

    When we last met in April, I said that Scotland has been held back by too many politicians ready to celebrate the supposed ‘world-leading’ targets, while blocking the action needed to actually meet them. 

    We have known for decades how to do it – it’s getting people out of cars and onto clean public transport; replacing fossil fuel for home heating with cheap, abundant renewables; changing the way we manage our land and farm our food, so we lock up more carbon than we produce; and ending the extraction of oil and gas in the north sea for good. 

    But what have we seen in the last six months from the now minority Scottish Government? Instead of accepting that missed targets demand accelerated action, they’ve chosen a sharp u-turn on much of the action that the Greens had been advancing. 

    Cutting the funding for climate projects and net-zero investment; returning to exorbitant prices on our railways; rolling back on new clean standards for home heating – these are not the actions of a Government that is serious about climate action.

    And on some key climate policy areas they are simply stalling. A new energy strategy is long overdue; they said it was ready to publish before the UK election, but we’re still waiting.

    Greens had insisted on a climate assessment of their road building plan for the A96, and it’s been sitting on Ministers’ desks too, unpublished. They need to come clean, publish that assessment, and make a decisive shift in their priorities, from unsustainable road building, to the green, low carbon infrastructure we need.

    While this dithering and inaction continues, experts like Jim Skea of the IPCC are now warning not only could 1.5 degrees of warming be moving out of reach, but that we are potentially headed to more than 3°C of global warming in this century if we carry on with the policies we have at the moment.

    Three degrees plus of warming would be catastrophic for life on this planet. We know what we need to do, yet the Scottish Government is refusing to take some of the most basic steps.

    So the Scottish Greens will not waive the Climate Targets bill through Holyrood as a ‘minor technical amendment’ as the Scottish Government claims. 

    When parliament goes back next week, Mark Ruskell and I will be moving amendments to the bill to try and improve it where we can. 

    We’ll try to keep the interim targets alive, as crucial milestones on our path to net zero; we’ll put forward improvements to the timescales in the bill, because as it stands they risk wasting most of the time left till the next Holyrood election without an agreed climate plan. 

    But the thing is, outside of the text of the Bill, what’s really needed now is an immediate programme of accelerated action to deliver emission cuts that are long overdue.

    A climate plan is only worthwhile if it takes the steps that are necessary, like halting new road building projects, investing in public transport and refusing the plan to expand the gas-fuelled power station at Peterhead. 

    These are just some of the actions that we have put forward as part of our Climate Reset package, published in August. Even these plans aren’t the end of the story, not by a long way, but without these kinds of changes right now, the Scottish Greens cannot vote for the new Climate bill. 

    Our demands for climate action must not end with this legislation however – tackling the climate emergency must be a mission across all parts and all levels of Government. 

    Nowhere is this more pressing than the upcoming Budget. 

    We recognise the challenges that come with the limitations of devolution, as well as the impact of 14 years of Tory cuts and now what looks like continued austerity under Labour. We know our full ambition for a fairer, greener economy can best be delivered with the powers of a normal independent country. 

    However, we’ve also been clear in recent months that we still have a duty to use every last lever available to solve the current crisis in Scotland’s public finances.

    On Wednesday, when the UK Government publishes its budget, we’ll have a better idea of the financial situation Scotland faces. Labour could and should choose to end austerity, and restore Scotland’s budget to workable levels. But given their track record, none of us will be holding our breath for that.

    Even the current rumours of an increase in capital spending won’t take us anywhere near the levels of investment that are needed, and UK Ministers have openly lobbied against the public service cuts they are being told to make.

    There are those in Scottish politics who refuse the responsibility to offer solutions. Instead they demand the impossible, pretending that every tax can be cut and every service funded, and they never need to make the sums add up. That’s dishonest politics, and it’s never been the Green approach.

    The Scottish Greens have been honest about needing to raise more money through fair taxes if we want to support public services. We are proud that we have the most progressive tax system anywhere in the UK. That is because of the work of Green activists and members in this hall and across this country, and our work in Parliament.

    That’s why there’s an extra billion and a half pounds going into public services every year. It’s why councils are now able to raise more tax from second homes, and from the tourism industry.

    We’ll continue to ensure the Scottish Government comes good on the commitments we secured to introduce new local taxes such as on cruise ships and carbon emissions from land, and we’ll hold them to account on the long overdue commitment for wider reform of local government finance – one of the biggest missed opportunities of the first 25 years of the Scottish Parliament, and one where the SNP are still dragging their feet. 

    We’ve shown how we could make big savings by stopping tax breaks to wealthy landowners and enterprise grants to arms companies, and by bringing in more money to support our healthcare system through a public health levy on supermarkets. 

    But these steps are only the start. Extra funds raised through tax or coming from the UK Government must go into reversing the broken promises made by the SNP government since they ended the Bute House Agreement. 

    That includes reinstating the plan to roll out free school meals to all children in Scotland’s primary schools before the next election, restoring the Scottish Green’s Nature Restoration Fund, fully funding an ambitious programme to cut energy bills and emissions from our home heating, and reversing the decision to bring back peak rail fares which punish workers and students.

    But crucially, John Swinney must also address the very real issue of the trust that was broken this year. 

    In the last six months we’ve not only seen Bute House Agreement policies facing the axe, but commitments which were agreed before we even entered Government, as well as commitments that were made to local government. 

    Now, for the first time in four years, we’re being asked to back a Scottish Government budget without a role in overseeing how it’s implemented; to vote on the basis of trust. That is a risk we cannot take lightly.

    Later today, our Finance portfolio lead Ross Greer will open a conference debate calling on the Scottish Government to guarantee no future agreements will be subject to in-year cuts.

    But even with that in place, we still face a challenging few months ahead. As Scottish Green MSPs, we have a responsibility to engage with the process in good faith, and with honesty. But as the only party that ever brought down an SNP budget, as John Swinney knows to his cost, we need to be clear that they cannot take our votes for granted. 

    Conference, this budget marks a turning point, not just because of the difficult circumstances and the challenges facing the country, but also because it’s the last full year budget for this parliamentary session.

    In just 18 months, Scotland will go back to the polls. Voters will make a decision that will be crucial to ensuring a sustainable and livable future for our planet, and for the people of Scotland.

    We’ve made important progress for Green politics in recent years – a string of ‘best ever’ election results at every level, from the 2019 European elections onward. Our first opportunity to enter government, and sustained high polling through turbulent times when the political right threw everything they had at us. 

    And despite the end of the Bute House Agreement, we have a clear role and opportunity to ensure delivery of what we got started, and hold the SNP to account for progressive Green policies they choose to drop, demonstrating to voters the reason why Green votes make a difference.

    But if we want the 2026 election to continue that string of election successes, and turn our potential into a reality, we need to keep learning, developing, and becoming the effective and professional political force we are capable of being.

    As a movement, Greens don’t exist for easy times. We’re here to draw attention to the profound challenges our society faces, from environmental destruction to poverty and inequality, from global threats to democracy, to the abuse of power by those who operate today’s failed economic model for their own short term benefit.

    Lots of politicians talk about “tough choices”, but what they really mean is sticking with the consequences of the status quo. They make brutal choices, but easy ones – hurting the most vulnerable is the path of least resistance, far easier then challenging the powerful. 

    Greens exist to take on the really tough choices – the choice to change our society, our economy and our politics, knowing that it’s not an easy path.

    Our party will do that, and will earn the trust of those who know it needs to be done, if we are united, true to our values, politically disciplined, and honest. And if we work hard – knocking on doors, campaigning in our communities and making green change happen at every level. 

    That’s what we are, that’s why we’re here, to be more than just a party, to be a movement. A movement for people, a movement for planet and a movement for peace. And a movement that is needed more than ever.

    MIL OSI United Kingdom

  • MIL-OSI USA: Background Press Call on Israel’s Targeted Strikes Against Military Targets in  Iran

    US Senate News:

    Source: The White House
    Via Teleconference
    11:15 P.M. EDT
    MODERATOR:  Good evening, everyone.  Thanks so much for joining the call, especially one on short notice and late on a Friday. 
    As a reminder, this call is on background, attributable to a senior administration official.  For your awareness, not for your reporting, on the call today we have [senior administration official]. 
    This call is embargoed until the conclusion of the call. 
    [Senior administration official] is going to have a few words at the top, and then we’ll take your questions. 
    Over to you.
    SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL:  Thank you, everybody, for joining here late on a Friday. 
    So, I’m here to provide some brief comment and background on Israel’s response earlier this evening against Iran.  And just as you will recall, on October 1st, so a few weeks ago, Iran launched an unprecedented attack of nearly 200 ballistic missiles at Israel, which was a significant escalation.  Many of these missiles targeted Israel’s most populated city of Tel Aviv.  Those missiles had the potential to kill hundreds of civilians. 
    Fortunately, that attack was defeated and ineffective thanks in no small part to U.S. assistance.  President Biden directed the U.S. military to help defend Israel during the attack.  And in the hours after that attack, we promised serious consequences for Iran. 
    The next morning, on October 2nd, the President spoke with his G7 counterparts to coordinate a diplomatic response.  And over the course of the following week, we and our partners implemented a coordinated series of sanctions against Iran.
    And just to review:
    The United States, we issued new sanctions against Iran’s oil sector, including its so-called Ghost Fleet that carries illicit oil products around the world. 
    The European Union for the first time sanctioned Iran’s civilian airliners, including Iran Air, rendering those airlines no longer able to access European destinations. 
    The United Kingdom and Australia issued new and sweeping sanctions against Iran’s missile program. 
    This is a coordinated effort across multiple jurisdictions that President Biden led, and those efforts are ongoing with allies and partners. 
    Tonight, Israel carried out a direct military response against Iran.  Specifically, Israel conducted precision airstrikes against multiple military targets across Iran and outside populated areas. 
    The United States was not a participant in this military operation. 
    The President and his national security team, of course, worked with the Israelis over recent weeks to encourage Israel to conduct a response that was targeted and proportional with low risk of civilian harm, and that appears to have been precisely what transpired this evening. 
    The President discussed the overall situation with Prime Minister Netanyahu last week.  He encouraged the Prime Minister to design a response that served to deter further attacks against Israel while reducing risk of further escalation.  And that is our objective; it’s Israel’s objective, as well, as they have stated this evening.
    Should Iran choose to respond, we are fully prepared to once again defend against any attack.  We recently deployed a THAAD battery, which is a ballistic missile defense system, to Israel.  And we have worked to strengthen Israel’s air defense systems in the run-up to tonight’s response.
    President Biden and Vice President Harris have demonstrated clearly that we will always help defend Israel and secure its people and territory from Iran and its proxy terrorist groups.
    If Iran chooses to respond once again, we will be ready, and there will be consequences for Iran once again.  However, we do not want to see that happen.  This should be the end of this direct exchange of fire between Israel and Iran.  Israel has made clear to the world that its response is now complete. 
    Accordingly, we would call on all countries of influence to press Iran to stop these attacks against Israel so that we can move beyond this direct cycle of attacks.
    Over the coming days, we are prepared to lead an effort to secure an end to the war in Lebanon through an agreement that allows civilians on both sides of the Blue Line to safely return to their homes.  We are also prepared to lead an effort to finally achieve a ceasefire in Gaza together, with the return of hostages, which must happen without delay. 
    The overall contours of those arrangements are in place.  Tony Blinken was in the region last week.  This week, there will be further engagements, including a meeting of hostage negotiators over the coming days.  And it’s time to bring these deals to a resolution once and for all.  
    I would just note for some color on the recent hours here over the course of this evening: Of course, the President was briefed throughout the evening by Jake Sullivan, his National Security Advisor, as we are here at the White House.  Secretary Austin spoke with his Israeli counterpart, Minister Yoav Gallant, a couple of hours ago.  And we just issued a — the Defense Department just issued a readout of that call, again, affirming Israel’s full right to self-defense against Iran and our support for its actions tonight, and our commitment to help defend Israel should Iran make the mistake to respond to this attack. 
    And with that, I’m happy to take a few questions. 
    MODERATOR:  Thank you.  We’ve got time for just a couple of questions. 
    First up, we’ll go to Aamer Madhani.  You should be able to unmute yourself. 
    Q    Hey.  Thank you both.  Did the U.S. assist in any manner at all?  Target selection, intel, jamming?  And do you assess this action to have had significant-enough impact on Iran’s ability to continue to strike Israel directly or its ability to arm Hezbollah?
    SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL:  So, as I said in my statement, we did not participate in this military operation, and I think that’s very clear. 
    I would just say: I’ll leave it to the Israelis to describe the scope and breadth of their response this evening.  It was extensive.  It was targeted.  It was precise.  It was against military targets across Iran.  It was in multiple waves.  It was very carefully prepared.  And again, I think it was designed to be effective. 
    And I think — again, I will leave it, though, to the Israelis to characterize and to provide more details, given that this was their military operation. 
    MODERATOR:  Next up, we’ll go to Trevor Hunnicutt.
    Q    Hey.  Thanks for doing this.  Could you talk a little bit about what, if any, communications or indications you had from Iran heading into this about what level of response they’re willing to engage in?  And could you talk a little bit about the President’s — any plans for the President to follow up with Netanyahu after this?
    SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL:  We do have multiple channels with Iran, direct and indirect.  We try to avoid any sense of miscommunication.  And they know exactly what our position is on multiple issues, including the dangers and risks of their course of conduct, particularly the launching of 200 ballistic missiles focusing primarily on densely populated areas in Israel’s most populated city, which also includes tens of thousands of Americans. 
    That is totally unacceptable.  We will not accept it.  We will support Israel defending itself.  And, obviously, we’ll support Israel fully in its right to self-defense.  Iran knows our position on that is unequivocal.  And we are quite clear that there’s no misunderstanding or miscommunication between us and Iran.
    In terms of communication with the Israelis, we are in constant communication with the Israelis up and down their system — military to military, intel to intel, and at the political level.  That is something that is ongoing and continuous. 
    Again, Jake briefed the President multiple times throughout the evening as this was unfolding and, of course, throughout the day today as it was developing.  And I think that will obviously continue through the weekend.  But I don’t have any calls to preview or read out.
    MODERATOR:  We have time for one last question.  We’ll go to the line of Kayla Tausche.
    Q    Thank you, guys, so much for doing this.  We appreciate it. 
    I have two questions.  The first is: You’ve described these strikes as “designed to be effective.”  Can you elaborate on what effect they were intended to have and whether they, in fact, did?
    And then, you’ve suggested that this should be the end to the conflict, but does the administration believe it will be the end of the conflict?
    SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL:  So, first of all, the effect, it’s a proportionate self-defense response to an unbelievably brazen and reckless ballistic missile attack, almost unprecedented in history, that has launched almost three weeks ago.  So, the effect is to deter future attacks and also to degrade the capabilities of Iran being able to conduct those types of activities.
    As to specific targets, I will say we know them, but I would leave it to the Israelis to discuss them in any further detail. 
    What was your second question?  I’m sorry.
    Q    The second question was: You have suggested that this should be the end of the conflict, but does the administration actually believe that it will be?
    SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL:  Well, this should be the end of the direct military exchange between Israel and Iran.  And so, we had a direct exchange in April, and that was closed off, and we’ve now had this direct exchange.  Again, a direct — 200 ballistic missiles fired from Iran at Israel.  Israel did not attack Iran.  Iran attacked Israel, 200 ballistic missiles.  And Israel, tonight, has responded to that attack as an exercise of self-defense.  As far as we’re concerned, that should close out that direct exchange between Israel and Iran.
    As to the broader conflicts in the region, obviously much more complex.  I mentioned and alluded to them in my statement.  We do have a number of initiatives ongoing with respect to those. 
    But as to the direct military exchange between Israel and Iran, we do think this should complete that direct exchange.  And, again, should Iran choose to respond, we are fully prepared to defend Israel and support Israel, and there will be consequences should Iran make that unfortunate decision. 
    But as far as we’re concerned, this direct exchange, this should be the end of it.  I will say we’ve heard the same thing from many across the region, including many with close ties to Iran.  So we’ll see how that unfolds. 
    But that is our very strong view.  That’s been communicated to our partners throughout the region, and obviously it’s been communicated through multiple channels, indirectly and directly, to Iran. 
    MODERATOR:  Thanks, everyone.  That’s all the time we have for tonight.  As a reminder, this call was on background to a senior administration official, and the embargo is now lifted.  Thanks so much, and have a good night.
    11:27 P.M. EDT

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI United Nations: Secretary-General’s video message to the Donor Conference to Support Internally Displaced People and Refugees in Sahel and Lake Chad Region

    Source: United Nations secretary general

    Download the video:  https://s3.amazonaws.com/downloads2.unmultimedia.org/public/video/evergreen/MSG+SG+/SG+8+Oct+24/3271915_MSG+SG+SAHEL+AND+LAKE+CHAD+08+OCT+24.mp4

    Excellencies, friends,

    I thank the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and the Organization of Islamic Cooperation for convening this vital event.

    The Sahel and Lake Chad Basin regions have immense potential: rich in cultures, with vibrant youth populations, and endless possibilities for renewable energy – all valuable building blocks for sustainable development.  

    However, the area also faces profound challenges: from violence and terrorism, to the climate crisis.

    This year floods swept through the lives of around five million people.

    Across the regions we see crises of hunger, crises of hope, and crises of displacement.

    The Sahel is home to over seven and a half million people driven from their homes, including two million refugees. Over thirty million require humanitarian assistance.

    The United Nations is on the ground, supporting governments and communities to provide food, healthcare, education, and shelter.

    But we need more support.

    Our humanitarian response plans are around forty percent funded.

    I sincerely thank all those that have contributed for their generosity. This will save lives and livelihoods. But I also ask countries to dig deeper to help fund our response plans in full.

    And I urge action to move beyond aid, and tackle the root causes of crises:

    Addressing poverty and inequality, particularly among women and girls;

    Adapting to climate change;

    Promoting peace and democracy;

    And urging parties to end hostilities, protect civilians and ensure full humanitarian access.

    The United Nations is eager to work with communities, countries, humanitarian partners, Multilateral Development Banks, and international funds, to deliver change. 

    Together, let’s renew our resolve to help forge a path to a more secure, prosperous, and dignified future for the people of Sahel and Lake Chad.

    Thank you.
     

    MIL OSI United Nations News

  • MIL-OSI Africa: Secretary-General’s video message to the Donor Conference to Support Internally Displaced People and Refugees in Sahel and Lake Chad Region

    Source: United Nations – English

    strong>Download the video:  https://s3.amazonaws.com/downloads2.unmultimedia.org/public/video/evergreen/MSG+SG+/SG+8+Oct+24/3271915_MSG+SG+SAHEL+AND+LAKE+CHAD+08+OCT+24.mp4

    Excellencies, friends,

    I thank the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and the Organization of Islamic Cooperation for convening this vital event.

    The Sahel and Lake Chad Basin regions have immense potential: rich in cultures, with vibrant youth populations, and endless possibilities for renewable energy – all valuable building blocks for sustainable development.  

    However, the area also faces profound challenges: from violence and terrorism, to the climate crisis.

    This year floods swept through the lives of around five million people.

    Across the regions we see crises of hunger, crises of hope, and crises of displacement.

    The Sahel is home to over seven and a half million people driven from their homes, including two million refugees. Over thirty million require humanitarian assistance.

    The United Nations is on the ground, supporting governments and communities to provide food, healthcare, education, and shelter.

    But we need more support.

    Our humanitarian response plans are around forty percent funded.

    I sincerely thank all those that have contributed for their generosity. This will save lives and livelihoods. But I also ask countries to dig deeper to help fund our response plans in full.

    And I urge action to move beyond aid, and tackle the root causes of crises:

    Addressing poverty and inequality, particularly among women and girls;

    Adapting to climate change;

    Promoting peace and democracy;

    And urging parties to end hostilities, protect civilians and ensure full humanitarian access.

    The United Nations is eager to work with communities, countries, humanitarian partners, Multilateral Development Banks, and international funds, to deliver change. 

    Together, let’s renew our resolve to help forge a path to a more secure, prosperous, and dignified future for the people of Sahel and Lake Chad.

    Thank you.
     

    MIL OSI Africa

  • MIL-OSI Russia: Dmitry Chernyshenko: All regions of Russia and eight friendly countries participate in the Abilympics championship

    Translation. Region: Russian Federation –

    Source: Government of the Russian Federation – An important disclaimer is at the bottom of this article.

    Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Chernyshenko attended the events of the final of the National Championship of Professional Skills among the Disabled and People with Limited Health Abilities “Abilympics”, which started at Gostiny Dvor in Moscow.

    Previous news Next news

    Dmitry Chernyshenko attended the events of the final of the National Championship of Professional Skills among the Disabled and People with Disabilities “Abilympics”, which started in Gostiny Dvor in Moscow

    The Deputy Prime Minister emphasized the importance of the championship and noted that in 10 years, Abilympics has come a long way, increasing the number of participants from 250 to 120 thousand.

    “We have more than 1.2 million children with various types of disabilities who need to be given the opportunity to compete and be active citizens of society. And, as President Vladimir Putin instructed, to realize their potential and talents. And we saw a lot of talent at the championship. Today, representatives of all regions of the country are here, including new subjects. What is noteworthy is that eight friendly countries are also participating in these competitions. I believe that the most important result of “Abilympics” is that 93% of participants find work after the championship,” said Dmitry Chernyshenko.

    The Deputy Prime Minister also expressed gratitude to the Moscow government, where the Abilympics finals are traditionally held. He emphasized that he is grateful to businesses that responsibly approach the creation of jobs for people with disabilities.

    The Deputy Prime Minister visited the venues where the championship was held. At the stand of the Ministry of Industry and Trade of Russia, he was presented with the latest technical rehabilitation equipment for people with disabilities. He also got acquainted with the exhibition and sale of goods from entrepreneurs who opened their own businesses.

    In addition, the Deputy Prime Minister spoke with participants and experts in various competencies, including Pottery, Industrial Robotics, Graphic Design, and Character Design/Animation.

    At Gostiny Dvor, the Deputy Prime Minister was accompanied by Deputy Minister of Education Olga Koludarova, Minister of the Moscow Government, Head of the Moscow Department of Labor and Social Protection of the Population Evgeny Struzhak, and Head of the National Center “Abilympics” of the Institute for the Development of Professional Education Dina Makeeva.

    “Over the past 10 years, the movement has become an important part of the system of professional education and employment of people with disabilities. Thanks to Abilympics, thousands of talented schoolchildren, students and working citizens have the opportunity to demonstrate their skills and abilities, as well as find a job they like. And we are confident that the Abilympics movement will continue to develop. This year, regional centers for the development of the movement opened in the Donetsk People’s Republic and the Kherson region. We hope that in the future, Abilympics will open its representative offices in all regions of our country,” noted Dina Makeeva.

    The championship competitions in 2024 will be held in 50 approved core competencies in 11 areas of the economy: education, IT technologies, arts and crafts, creative industries, industry, catering, services, economics and management, construction, and medical professions. The judging will be carried out by 277 experts from 52 subjects of the Russian Federation.

    It is also planned to hold competitions in 12 competencies and 1 presentation competence of the championship with the participation of representatives of friendly states in person: the Republic of Azerbaijan, the Republic of Abkhazia, the Republic of Belarus, the Republic of Zimbabwe and the State of Qatar. Representatives of the Republic of Armenia, the Republic of Nicaragua and the People’s Republic of China will participate remotely.

    Over 10 years, the number of subjects of the Russian Federation where regional Abilympics championships are held has increased from 29 to 89, and the number of competitive competencies has grown from 29 to 206.

    The project operator is the National Center “Abilympics” of the Institute for the Development of Professional Education, Ministry of Education of the Russian Federation.

    Please note: This information is raw content directly from the source of the information. It is exactly what the source states and does not reflect the position of MIL-OSI or its clients.

    MIL OSI Russia News

  • MIL-OSI United Nations: Statement attributable to the Spokesperson for the Secretary-General – on the Middle East

    Source: United Nations secretary general

    Following the attacks overnight by the Israel Defense Forces on targets in the Islamic Republic of Iran, the Secretary-General is deeply alarmed by the continued escalation in the Middle East. All acts of escalation are condemnable and must stop.
     
    The Secretary-General urgently reiterates his appeal to all parties to cease all military actions, including in Gaza and Lebanon, exert maximum efforts to prevent an all-out regional war and return to the path of diplomacy.
     

    MIL OSI United Nations News

  • MIL-OSI Africa: Statement attributable to the Spokesperson for the Secretary-General – on the Middle East

    Source: United Nations – English

    ollowing the attacks overnight by the Israel Defense Forces on targets in the Islamic Republic of Iran, the Secretary-General is deeply alarmed by the continued escalation in the Middle East. All acts of escalation are condemnable and must stop.
     
    The Secretary-General urgently reiterates his appeal to all parties to cease all military actions, including in Gaza and Lebanon, exert maximum efforts to prevent an all-out regional war and return to the path of diplomacy.
     

    MIL OSI Africa