NewzIntel.com

Category: Middle East

  • MIL-OSI NGOs: Nobel Peace Prize Forum: our perilous path and how we change course

    Source: International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) –

    IAEA Director General Rafael Mariano Grossi’s keynote address at the Nobel Peace Prize Forum 2024.

    I want to start by congratulating Nihon Hidankyō and the hibakusha for their Nobel Peace Prize.

    As a young diplomat almost 40 years ago, I was fortunate to be part of a UN disarmament fellowship programme and to visit Hiroshima. There, fellows had an opportunity to meet the hibakusha and I had a conversation with an ailing victim. I have carried to every meeting, to every negotiation, and to every posting, the memory this woman’s silent testimony. When I asked her about that morning in 1945, she struggled to express the horror in words. She tried to articulate some words but stayed silent. Looking at me, right into my eyes. The look in her eyes has stayed with me ever since, like a powerful reminder, a secret mandate, to work so that her suffering is never repeated.

    For decades after the Second World War, the international community has been dealing with this unique dilemma: we built robust norms and passed nonproliferation and disarmament treaties. Instead of dozens of countries armed with nuclear weapons, as was the concern in the 1960s, there are less than ten. Stockpiles of nuclear weapons have shrunk from tens of thousands to thousands.

    But on its journey through the perils of the atomic age, the world has come to a crucial crossroads. Our deep psychological connection caused by collectively seeing the horror of the consequences of nuclear war seems to be evaporating, taking with it our joint resolve to do everything possible to prevent a repetition.

    Like a giant spotlight, this year’s Nobel Peace Prize has lit up our path ahead. It has done it, by reminding us of the past, and of the consequences of ignoring the perils of nuclear weapons use.

    Context of conflicts

    To understand the important challenges we face, we must look at the global context, at what is happening around the world.  

    War has returned to Europe, and it directly involves a nuclear weapon state. The conflict in Ukraine is also an indirect confrontation between the world’s biggest nuclear weapon states, the first since the end of the Cold War. But nuclear exercises and open references to the use of nuclear weapons in the theatre of this war are increasing the risks and can not be ignored.

    In the Middle East, the conflict of the past year has ignited smoldering tensions between Israel and Iran and led to the unprecedented step of direct exchanges and attacks between the two. Here there is also a nuclear weapons dimension. On one side, the assumed presence of nuclear weapons looms in the background. On the other, the very real potential of nuclear proliferation is raising the stakes.

    We find ourselves in a harmful loop: the erosion of the restraints around nuclear weapons is making these conflicts more dangerous. Meanwhile, these conflicts are contributing to the erosion of the restraints. The vicious circle dynamic is in motion.

    An unfortunate change of direction

    Doctrines regarding the use of nuclear weapons are being revised or reinterpreted. The quantity and quality of nuclear weapon stockpiles are being increased. 

    And in some non-nuclear weapon states – states that are important in their region – leaders are asking “why not us?”. And they are asking this openly!

    At the start of the nuclear arms race, J Robert Oppenheimer described the USSR and the US as “two scorpions in a bottle” each capable of killing the other, but only by risking their own life.

    Oppenheimer’s blunt statement would later be developed and elaborated under the roof of deterrence and the more sophisticated concept of “Mutual Assured Destruction,” or MAD.

    Today, independent of the vantage point of the observer, there is widespread concern that the risk of mutual destruction through nuclear war is higher than it has been for more than a generation.

    Lessons from history

    But it does not have to be this way. We can do better. History has shown that effective dialogue among superpowers has, more often than not, led to confidence and, as a result, also to arms limitation and even disarmament. At certain moments in history, world leaders took the right decisions, to tone down, or, to use today’s parlance, to de-escalate. Let’s see:

    The end of the Cuban Missile Crisis happened thanks to the direct engagement of Soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev and US President John F Kennedy. Decades later, at the Geneva Summit of 1985, Mikhail Gorbachev and President Ronald Reagan agreed a crucial axiom: “Nuclear war cannot be won and should never be fought.” They met again the next year in Reykjavik and significant reductions in nuclear arsenals followed. Nuclear weapon reductions and the elimination of a whole category of weapon, through the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces, or INF, Treaty, were agreed. These steps towards rapprochement took leadership and courage. They often happened despite skepticism and voices against them.

    Diplomacy and dialogue (and the duty of nuclear weapon states)

    A return to diplomacy and dialogue is urgently needed, and this, not only in things nuclear. Shutting the other side out has never solved a problem and almost certainly aggravates it. Top leadership involvement is simply indispensable when nuclear weapons are involved. President Trump took the initiative and talked to Kim Jong Un. More of this is needed. Some have said these talks were ill prepared. I say, this is important. Nuclear weapon policy and limitations does not work bottom up. It is of course the other way around.

    We must be proactive in building the trust and protections that lower the risk of close calls and of brinkmanship, especially during today’s tensions. Not taking active steps means we rely on luck – or the assumption that the other side will show restraint – to save us from nuclear war. The longer you rely on luck, the more likely it is to run out.

    Conflict and tensions compel nations to arm themselves. Diplomacy and compromise create conditions in which they can disarm.

    The road to a nuclear weapon-free world is long and winding. The disarmament landscape is complex, and it’s worth acknowledging that. This does not diminish the responsibility nuclear weapons states have to make progress. After all, they committed themselves to this goal back in 1968, through the Non-Proliferation Treaty.

    Steps can be taken to decrease the reliance on nuclear weapons, both in their production and the scenarios for their use.

    Nuclear weapon states, through their actions at home and on the world stage, have a responsibility to avoid a scenario in which more countries seek nuclear weapons. Pushing ahead with increases in arsenals leads to despair, cynicism, and a growing skepticism about the value of past commitments. Disengagement and unilateralism fuel sentiments of vulnerability in other countries, and with that, the notion nuclear weapons could be the ultimate protection against outside threats.

    Engagement among the five permanent members of the Security Council is indispensable. Such engagement can take many different shapes, starting with direct contact among themselves, bilaterally or as a group. This dialogue, which still exists, has been reduced to a very low level, virtually without real impact. Perhaps its revival could be assisted by an international organization, or facilitated with the support of a respected, impartial leader. Therefore, it’s essential that the United Nations, other international organizations, and their leaders work effectively to ensure their continued relevance amid the changing needs of their stakeholders.

    Do not make things worse (by falling for the siren call of proliferation)

    The IAEA has played its indispensable technical role during past attempts of nuclear proliferation, particularly in the Middle East. As the difficult experiences in Iraq, Libya and Syria remind us, the draw of nuclear weapons is real and so is the geopolitical and military response.

    Today’s tensions are prompting even leaders of important counties that, so far, are in good standing with the NPT to ask: “Why shouldn’t we have a nuclear weapon too?”

    To this, I would say, “Do not make things worse.” Acquiring a nuclear weapon will not increase national security, it will do the opposite. Other countries will follow. And this will contribute to the unravelling of a nonproliferation regime that has had its ups and downs – and it still has its limitations – but none-the-less it has served humanity extraordinarily well. The problem and challenge to the NPT regime may come from those nuclear armed but also those who, while not having nuclear weapons, may feel the NPT has failed as a catalyst to disarmament.

    Weakening the non-proliferation treaty under the argument that progress on nuclear disarmament has been slow and more drastic approaches are required, would be totally misguided and may make us throw away existing international measures committing nuclear weapon states and non-nuclear weapon states in this field.

    I come from a non-nuclear weapon state. I understand the frustration that some people feel about the “haves” and “have-nots” of nuclear weapons. But I have also seen the legacy of peace and prosperity left by leaders who resisted that siren call. In the 1980s, vision, resolve and dialogue meant Brazil and Argentina changed course and did not go down the path to nuclear arms. Today, Latin America is a nuclear weapon free zone.

    Multilateral leaders: step up by stepping in

    Many wonder whether there’s still a role for multilateralism in guiding us through this maze of conflicting interests. Yes, there is. During difficult times in the past, international organizations have had a big impact on peace and security. But it only happens when leaders of these organizations get off the side lines and use their mandate and their own good offices effectively.

    We prove our relevance in extraordinary times.   

    Each organization has different tools, a different mandate, a different membership, and each of their leaders will determine how to act. I can speak for the IAEA.  We have nuclear science at our core, and we are the world’s nuclear weapons watchdog. Let me give you an example:

    For almost three years, Ukraine, the world and the IAEA have been confronted with a completely unprecedented situation – never before has a military conflict involved the seizure of a nuclear power plant and been fought among the facilities of a major nuclear power programme.

    At the beginning of the war, Ukraine’s biggest nuclear power plant – the biggest nuclear power plant in Europe, with nearly 6 gigawatts of installed capacity – was taken by Russia. This established a hotspot in the middle of a combat zone. The chance of an incident – or accident – causing terrible radiological consequences became real.

    Observing this from the outside was never, in my mind, an option. Staying on the sidelines and later reflecting on “lessons learned” may have been the more traditional – or expected – path for an international organization. But to me this would have been a dereliction of duty. So, we leaned into our core mission, crossed the front lines of war, and established a permanent presence of IAEA experts at all Ukraine’s nuclear power plants. That makes us the only international organization operating independently in occupied territory. We are informing the world of what’s going on and reducing the chance that a radiological incident enflames the conflict and causes even more devastation.

    We did the same by going to Kursk when a Russian nuclear reactor was at risk of coming into the line of fire. I am in constant communication with both sides.

    I have been meeting with President Zelenskyy, and President Putin regularly. Nuclear safety and security during this conflict must have the buy-in and continued involvement of both leaders. Talking to only one of them would not achieve this important goal. At the same time, I am keeping an open dialogue with leaders on all continents and briefing the UN Security Council. When it comes to nuclear safety in Ukraine it has been possible to build a level of agreement that is rare during the divisions of this conflict. Where there is agreement, there is hope for more agreement.

    Ukraine is not our only hotspot.

    In Iran, the IAEA’s job is to verify the exclusively peaceful nature of a growing nuclear programme. Iran has now enriched uranium to a level that is hard to justify. It has not yet answered the IAEA’s questions completely and it has made our work more difficult by taking away some of our cameras and blocking some of our most experienced safeguards inspectors from going into the country. This has caused concern and led to a pattern of mistrust and recriminations. In diplomacy, progress often requires prompting, catalyzing, and suggesting ways forward. This presents a role for an impartial, honest and effective broker. It is a role I, in my capacity as the IAEA’s Director General, have been playing. In fact, I returned from my latest visit to Tehran just a few weeks ago where I presented alternatives and ideas to reduce the growing tensions, and hopefully to retain Iran within the NPT and the non-proliferation norms.

    The danger of playing it safe

    When it comes to working on behalf of peace and security, playing it safe is dangerous.

    Silence and indifference can be deadly.

    Dag Hammerskjold, the second Secretary General of the United Nations, said: “It is when we all play safe that we create a world of utmost insecurity.”

    A new path

    This week, the Norwegian Nobel Committee looked beyond today’s conflicts. In its own way, it did not play it safe. Instead, it shined a light on the horrors of nuclear war and the people who have been warning us about them for many decades.

    In doing that, the Nobel Committee, Nihon Hidankyō and the hibakusha have illuminated the danger of the path we are now on.

    We have to make a new path.

    First, the leaders of the nuclear weapon states must recognize the need for a responsible management of their nuclear arsenals. Experiences from the past confirm that even at times of crisis and conflict it has been possible to recognize the unique terminal power of these weapons and the responsibility that comes with it. What Kennedy, Khrushchev, Reagan, Gorbachev, or Trump did by reaching out to a nuclear-armed adversary, sets a precedent, a useful one. Such contacts, either bilateral or at the P5 level could possibly be facilitated by a competent broker. These are the first steps to bringing down the tone so that nuclear sabre rattling recedes and the commitments to the unequivocal undertakings to move towards a nuclear free world can be fulfilled.

    Secondly, an iron-clad resolve to observe and strengthen the global non-proliferation regime needs to be adopted. Nuclear weapon and nuclear non-weapon states must work together to ensure the non-proliferation of nuclear weapons.

    Ladies and gentlemen,

    We need to walk through perilous times by recognizing limitations and keeping our eyes on our common objectives.

    Nuclear disarmament cannot be imposed on the nuclear armed.

    Realism is not defeatism. Diplomacy is not weakness.

    Difficult times call for enlightened leadership, at the national level, and at the international level as well.

    Putting the international system back on track is within our reach. World leaders, including those at the top of the multilateral system, have a duty and an irrevocable responsibility to work towards this.  

    Personally, I am convinced. Perhaps, because the secret mandate I received that day in Hiroshima from a hibakusha burns in me, stronger than ever. Thank you.

    MIL OSI NGO –

  • MIL-OSI NGOs: Nobel Peace Prize Forum: our perilous path and how we change course

    Source: International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) –

    IAEA Director General Rafael Mariano Grossi’s keynote address at the Nobel Peace Prize Forum 2024.

    I want to start by congratulating Nihon Hidankyō and the hibakusha for their Nobel Peace Prize.

    As a young diplomat almost 40 years ago, I was fortunate to be part of a UN disarmament fellowship programme and to visit Hiroshima. There, fellows had an opportunity to meet the hibakusha and I had a conversation with an ailing victim. I have carried to every meeting, to every negotiation, and to every posting, the memory this woman’s silent testimony. When I asked her about that morning in 1945, she struggled to express the horror in words. She tried to articulate some words but stayed silent. Looking at me, right into my eyes. The look in her eyes has stayed with me ever since, like a powerful reminder, a secret mandate, to work so that her suffering is never repeated.

    For decades after the Second World War, the international community has been dealing with this unique dilemma: we built robust norms and passed nonproliferation and disarmament treaties. Instead of dozens of countries armed with nuclear weapons, as was the concern in the 1960s, there are less than ten. Stockpiles of nuclear weapons have shrunk from tens of thousands to thousands.

    But on its journey through the perils of the atomic age, the world has come to a crucial crossroads. Our deep psychological connection caused by collectively seeing the horror of the consequences of nuclear war seems to be evaporating, taking with it our joint resolve to do everything possible to prevent a repetition.

    Like a giant spotlight, this year’s Nobel Peace Prize has lit up our path ahead. It has done it, by reminding us of the past, and of the consequences of ignoring the perils of nuclear weapons use.

    Context of conflicts

    To understand the important challenges we face, we must look at the global context, at what is happening around the world.  

    War has returned to Europe, and it directly involves a nuclear weapon state. The conflict in Ukraine is also an indirect confrontation between the world’s biggest nuclear weapon states, the first since the end of the Cold War. But nuclear exercises and open references to the use of nuclear weapons in the theatre of this war are increasing the risks and can not be ignored.

    In the Middle East, the conflict of the past year has ignited smoldering tensions between Israel and Iran and led to the unprecedented step of direct exchanges and attacks between the two. Here there is also a nuclear weapons dimension. On one side, the assumed presence of nuclear weapons looms in the background. On the other, the very real potential of nuclear proliferation is raising the stakes.

    We find ourselves in a harmful loop: the erosion of the restraints around nuclear weapons is making these conflicts more dangerous. Meanwhile, these conflicts are contributing to the erosion of the restraints. The vicious circle dynamic is in motion.

    An unfortunate change of direction

    Doctrines regarding the use of nuclear weapons are being revised or reinterpreted. The quantity and quality of nuclear weapon stockpiles are being increased. 

    And in some non-nuclear weapon states – states that are important in their region – leaders are asking “why not us?”. And they are asking this openly!

    At the start of the nuclear arms race, J Robert Oppenheimer described the USSR and the US as “two scorpions in a bottle” each capable of killing the other, but only by risking their own life.

    Oppenheimer’s blunt statement would later be developed and elaborated under the roof of deterrence and the more sophisticated concept of “Mutual Assured Destruction,” or MAD.

    Today, independent of the vantage point of the observer, there is widespread concern that the risk of mutual destruction through nuclear war is higher than it has been for more than a generation.

    Lessons from history

    But it does not have to be this way. We can do better. History has shown that effective dialogue among superpowers has, more often than not, led to confidence and, as a result, also to arms limitation and even disarmament. At certain moments in history, world leaders took the right decisions, to tone down, or, to use today’s parlance, to de-escalate. Let’s see:

    The end of the Cuban Missile Crisis happened thanks to the direct engagement of Soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev and US President John F Kennedy. Decades later, at the Geneva Summit of 1985, Mikhail Gorbachev and President Ronald Reagan agreed a crucial axiom: “Nuclear war cannot be won and should never be fought.” They met again the next year in Reykjavik and significant reductions in nuclear arsenals followed. Nuclear weapon reductions and the elimination of a whole category of weapon, through the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces, or INF, Treaty, were agreed. These steps towards rapprochement took leadership and courage. They often happened despite skepticism and voices against them.

    Diplomacy and dialogue (and the duty of nuclear weapon states)

    A return to diplomacy and dialogue is urgently needed, and this, not only in things nuclear. Shutting the other side out has never solved a problem and almost certainly aggravates it. Top leadership involvement is simply indispensable when nuclear weapons are involved. President Trump took the initiative and talked to Kim Jong Un. More of this is needed. Some have said these talks were ill prepared. I say, this is important. Nuclear weapon policy and limitations does not work bottom up. It is of course the other way around.

    We must be proactive in building the trust and protections that lower the risk of close calls and of brinkmanship, especially during today’s tensions. Not taking active steps means we rely on luck – or the assumption that the other side will show restraint – to save us from nuclear war. The longer you rely on luck, the more likely it is to run out.

    Conflict and tensions compel nations to arm themselves. Diplomacy and compromise create conditions in which they can disarm.

    The road to a nuclear weapon-free world is long and winding. The disarmament landscape is complex, and it’s worth acknowledging that. This does not diminish the responsibility nuclear weapons states have to make progress. After all, they committed themselves to this goal back in 1968, through the Non-Proliferation Treaty.

    Steps can be taken to decrease the reliance on nuclear weapons, both in their production and the scenarios for their use.

    Nuclear weapon states, through their actions at home and on the world stage, have a responsibility to avoid a scenario in which more countries seek nuclear weapons. Pushing ahead with increases in arsenals leads to despair, cynicism, and a growing skepticism about the value of past commitments. Disengagement and unilateralism fuel sentiments of vulnerability in other countries, and with that, the notion nuclear weapons could be the ultimate protection against outside threats.

    Engagement among the five permanent members of the Security Council is indispensable. Such engagement can take many different shapes, starting with direct contact among themselves, bilaterally or as a group. This dialogue, which still exists, has been reduced to a very low level, virtually without real impact. Perhaps its revival could be assisted by an international organization, or facilitated with the support of a respected, impartial leader. Therefore, it’s essential that the United Nations, other international organizations, and their leaders work effectively to ensure their continued relevance amid the changing needs of their stakeholders.

    Do not make things worse (by falling for the siren call of proliferation)

    The IAEA has played its indispensable technical role during past attempts of nuclear proliferation, particularly in the Middle East. As the difficult experiences in Iraq, Libya and Syria remind us, the draw of nuclear weapons is real and so is the geopolitical and military response.

    Today’s tensions are prompting even leaders of important counties that, so far, are in good standing with the NPT to ask: “Why shouldn’t we have a nuclear weapon too?”

    To this, I would say, “Do not make things worse.” Acquiring a nuclear weapon will not increase national security, it will do the opposite. Other countries will follow. And this will contribute to the unravelling of a nonproliferation regime that has had its ups and downs – and it still has its limitations – but none-the-less it has served humanity extraordinarily well. The problem and challenge to the NPT regime may come from those nuclear armed but also those who, while not having nuclear weapons, may feel the NPT has failed as a catalyst to disarmament.

    Weakening the non-proliferation treaty under the argument that progress on nuclear disarmament has been slow and more drastic approaches are required, would be totally misguided and may make us throw away existing international measures committing nuclear weapon states and non-nuclear weapon states in this field.

    I come from a non-nuclear weapon state. I understand the frustration that some people feel about the “haves” and “have-nots” of nuclear weapons. But I have also seen the legacy of peace and prosperity left by leaders who resisted that siren call. In the 1980s, vision, resolve and dialogue meant Brazil and Argentina changed course and did not go down the path to nuclear arms. Today, Latin America is a nuclear weapon free zone.

    Multilateral leaders: step up by stepping in

    Many wonder whether there’s still a role for multilateralism in guiding us through this maze of conflicting interests. Yes, there is. During difficult times in the past, international organizations have had a big impact on peace and security. But it only happens when leaders of these organizations get off the side lines and use their mandate and their own good offices effectively.

    We prove our relevance in extraordinary times.   

    Each organization has different tools, a different mandate, a different membership, and each of their leaders will determine how to act. I can speak for the IAEA.  We have nuclear science at our core, and we are the world’s nuclear weapons watchdog. Let me give you an example:

    For almost three years, Ukraine, the world and the IAEA have been confronted with a completely unprecedented situation – never before has a military conflict involved the seizure of a nuclear power plant and been fought among the facilities of a major nuclear power programme.

    At the beginning of the war, Ukraine’s biggest nuclear power plant – the biggest nuclear power plant in Europe, with nearly 6 gigawatts of installed capacity – was taken by Russia. This established a hotspot in the middle of a combat zone. The chance of an incident – or accident – causing terrible radiological consequences became real.

    Observing this from the outside was never, in my mind, an option. Staying on the sidelines and later reflecting on “lessons learned” may have been the more traditional – or expected – path for an international organization. But to me this would have been a dereliction of duty. So, we leaned into our core mission, crossed the front lines of war, and established a permanent presence of IAEA experts at all Ukraine’s nuclear power plants. That makes us the only international organization operating independently in occupied territory. We are informing the world of what’s going on and reducing the chance that a radiological incident enflames the conflict and causes even more devastation.

    We did the same by going to Kursk when a Russian nuclear reactor was at risk of coming into the line of fire. I am in constant communication with both sides.

    I have been meeting with President Zelenskyy, and President Putin regularly. Nuclear safety and security during this conflict must have the buy-in and continued involvement of both leaders. Talking to only one of them would not achieve this important goal. At the same time, I am keeping an open dialogue with leaders on all continents and briefing the UN Security Council. When it comes to nuclear safety in Ukraine it has been possible to build a level of agreement that is rare during the divisions of this conflict. Where there is agreement, there is hope for more agreement.

    Ukraine is not our only hotspot.

    In Iran, the IAEA’s job is to verify the exclusively peaceful nature of a growing nuclear programme. Iran has now enriched uranium to a level that is hard to justify. It has not yet answered the IAEA’s questions completely and it has made our work more difficult by taking away some of our cameras and blocking some of our most experienced safeguards inspectors from going into the country. This has caused concern and led to a pattern of mistrust and recriminations. In diplomacy, progress often requires prompting, catalyzing, and suggesting ways forward. This presents a role for an impartial, honest and effective broker. It is a role I, in my capacity as the IAEA’s Director General, have been playing. In fact, I returned from my latest visit to Tehran just a few weeks ago where I presented alternatives and ideas to reduce the growing tensions, and hopefully to retain Iran within the NPT and the non-proliferation norms.

    The danger of playing it safe

    When it comes to working on behalf of peace and security, playing it safe is dangerous.

    Silence and indifference can be deadly.

    Dag Hammerskjold, the second Secretary General of the United Nations, said: “It is when we all play safe that we create a world of utmost insecurity.”

    A new path

    This week, the Norwegian Nobel Committee looked beyond today’s conflicts. In its own way, it did not play it safe. Instead, it shined a light on the horrors of nuclear war and the people who have been warning us about them for many decades.

    In doing that, the Nobel Committee, Nihon Hidankyō and the hibakusha have illuminated the danger of the path we are now on.

    We have to make a new path.

    First, the leaders of the nuclear weapon states must recognize the need for a responsible management of their nuclear arsenals. Experiences from the past confirm that even at times of crisis and conflict it has been possible to recognize the unique terminal power of these weapons and the responsibility that comes with it. What Kennedy, Khrushchev, Reagan, Gorbachev, or Trump did by reaching out to a nuclear-armed adversary, sets a precedent, a useful one. Such contacts, either bilateral or at the P5 level could possibly be facilitated by a competent broker. These are the first steps to bringing down the tone so that nuclear sabre rattling recedes and the commitments to the unequivocal undertakings to move towards a nuclear free world can be fulfilled.

    Secondly, an iron-clad resolve to observe and strengthen the global non-proliferation regime needs to be adopted. Nuclear weapon and nuclear non-weapon states must work together to ensure the non-proliferation of nuclear weapons.

    Ladies and gentlemen,

    We need to walk through perilous times by recognizing limitations and keeping our eyes on our common objectives.

    Nuclear disarmament cannot be imposed on the nuclear armed.

    Realism is not defeatism. Diplomacy is not weakness.

    Difficult times call for enlightened leadership, at the national level, and at the international level as well.

    Putting the international system back on track is within our reach. World leaders, including those at the top of the multilateral system, have a duty and an irrevocable responsibility to work towards this.  

    Personally, I am convinced. Perhaps, because the secret mandate I received that day in Hiroshima from a hibakusha burns in me, stronger than ever. Thank you.

    MIL OSI NGO –

  • MIL-OSI NGOs: Nobel Peace Prize Forum: our perilous path and how we change course

    Source: International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) –

    IAEA Director General Rafael Mariano Grossi’s keynote address at the Nobel Peace Prize Forum 2024.

    I want to start by congratulating Nihon Hidankyō and the hibakusha for their Nobel Peace Prize.

    As a young diplomat almost 40 years ago, I was fortunate to be part of a UN disarmament fellowship programme and to visit Hiroshima. There, fellows had an opportunity to meet the hibakusha and I had a conversation with an ailing victim. I have carried to every meeting, to every negotiation, and to every posting, the memory this woman’s silent testimony. When I asked her about that morning in 1945, she struggled to express the horror in words. She tried to articulate some words but stayed silent. Looking at me, right into my eyes. The look in her eyes has stayed with me ever since, like a powerful reminder, a secret mandate, to work so that her suffering is never repeated.

    For decades after the Second World War, the international community has been dealing with this unique dilemma: we built robust norms and passed nonproliferation and disarmament treaties. Instead of dozens of countries armed with nuclear weapons, as was the concern in the 1960s, there are less than ten. Stockpiles of nuclear weapons have shrunk from tens of thousands to thousands.

    But on its journey through the perils of the atomic age, the world has come to a crucial crossroads. Our deep psychological connection caused by collectively seeing the horror of the consequences of nuclear war seems to be evaporating, taking with it our joint resolve to do everything possible to prevent a repetition.

    Like a giant spotlight, this year’s Nobel Peace Prize has lit up our path ahead. It has done it, by reminding us of the past, and of the consequences of ignoring the perils of nuclear weapons use.

    Context of conflicts

    To understand the important challenges we face, we must look at the global context, at what is happening around the world.  

    War has returned to Europe, and it directly involves a nuclear weapon state. The conflict in Ukraine is also an indirect confrontation between the world’s biggest nuclear weapon states, the first since the end of the Cold War. But nuclear exercises and open references to the use of nuclear weapons in the theatre of this war are increasing the risks and can not be ignored.

    In the Middle East, the conflict of the past year has ignited smoldering tensions between Israel and Iran and led to the unprecedented step of direct exchanges and attacks between the two. Here there is also a nuclear weapons dimension. On one side, the assumed presence of nuclear weapons looms in the background. On the other, the very real potential of nuclear proliferation is raising the stakes.

    We find ourselves in a harmful loop: the erosion of the restraints around nuclear weapons is making these conflicts more dangerous. Meanwhile, these conflicts are contributing to the erosion of the restraints. The vicious circle dynamic is in motion.

    An unfortunate change of direction

    Doctrines regarding the use of nuclear weapons are being revised or reinterpreted. The quantity and quality of nuclear weapon stockpiles are being increased. 

    And in some non-nuclear weapon states – states that are important in their region – leaders are asking “why not us?”. And they are asking this openly!

    At the start of the nuclear arms race, J Robert Oppenheimer described the USSR and the US as “two scorpions in a bottle” each capable of killing the other, but only by risking their own life.

    Oppenheimer’s blunt statement would later be developed and elaborated under the roof of deterrence and the more sophisticated concept of “Mutual Assured Destruction,” or MAD.

    Today, independent of the vantage point of the observer, there is widespread concern that the risk of mutual destruction through nuclear war is higher than it has been for more than a generation.

    Lessons from history

    But it does not have to be this way. We can do better. History has shown that effective dialogue among superpowers has, more often than not, led to confidence and, as a result, also to arms limitation and even disarmament. At certain moments in history, world leaders took the right decisions, to tone down, or, to use today’s parlance, to de-escalate. Let’s see:

    The end of the Cuban Missile Crisis happened thanks to the direct engagement of Soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev and US President John F Kennedy. Decades later, at the Geneva Summit of 1985, Mikhail Gorbachev and President Ronald Reagan agreed a crucial axiom: “Nuclear war cannot be won and should never be fought.” They met again the next year in Reykjavik and significant reductions in nuclear arsenals followed. Nuclear weapon reductions and the elimination of a whole category of weapon, through the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces, or INF, Treaty, were agreed. These steps towards rapprochement took leadership and courage. They often happened despite skepticism and voices against them.

    Diplomacy and dialogue (and the duty of nuclear weapon states)

    A return to diplomacy and dialogue is urgently needed, and this, not only in things nuclear. Shutting the other side out has never solved a problem and almost certainly aggravates it. Top leadership involvement is simply indispensable when nuclear weapons are involved. President Trump took the initiative and talked to Kim Jong Un. More of this is needed. Some have said these talks were ill prepared. I say, this is important. Nuclear weapon policy and limitations does not work bottom up. It is of course the other way around.

    We must be proactive in building the trust and protections that lower the risk of close calls and of brinkmanship, especially during today’s tensions. Not taking active steps means we rely on luck – or the assumption that the other side will show restraint – to save us from nuclear war. The longer you rely on luck, the more likely it is to run out.

    Conflict and tensions compel nations to arm themselves. Diplomacy and compromise create conditions in which they can disarm.

    The road to a nuclear weapon-free world is long and winding. The disarmament landscape is complex, and it’s worth acknowledging that. This does not diminish the responsibility nuclear weapons states have to make progress. After all, they committed themselves to this goal back in 1968, through the Non-Proliferation Treaty.

    Steps can be taken to decrease the reliance on nuclear weapons, both in their production and the scenarios for their use.

    Nuclear weapon states, through their actions at home and on the world stage, have a responsibility to avoid a scenario in which more countries seek nuclear weapons. Pushing ahead with increases in arsenals leads to despair, cynicism, and a growing skepticism about the value of past commitments. Disengagement and unilateralism fuel sentiments of vulnerability in other countries, and with that, the notion nuclear weapons could be the ultimate protection against outside threats.

    Engagement among the five permanent members of the Security Council is indispensable. Such engagement can take many different shapes, starting with direct contact among themselves, bilaterally or as a group. This dialogue, which still exists, has been reduced to a very low level, virtually without real impact. Perhaps its revival could be assisted by an international organization, or facilitated with the support of a respected, impartial leader. Therefore, it’s essential that the United Nations, other international organizations, and their leaders work effectively to ensure their continued relevance amid the changing needs of their stakeholders.

    Do not make things worse (by falling for the siren call of proliferation)

    The IAEA has played its indispensable technical role during past attempts of nuclear proliferation, particularly in the Middle East. As the difficult experiences in Iraq, Libya and Syria remind us, the draw of nuclear weapons is real and so is the geopolitical and military response.

    Today’s tensions are prompting even leaders of important counties that, so far, are in good standing with the NPT to ask: “Why shouldn’t we have a nuclear weapon too?”

    To this, I would say, “Do not make things worse.” Acquiring a nuclear weapon will not increase national security, it will do the opposite. Other countries will follow. And this will contribute to the unravelling of a nonproliferation regime that has had its ups and downs – and it still has its limitations – but none-the-less it has served humanity extraordinarily well. The problem and challenge to the NPT regime may come from those nuclear armed but also those who, while not having nuclear weapons, may feel the NPT has failed as a catalyst to disarmament.

    Weakening the non-proliferation treaty under the argument that progress on nuclear disarmament has been slow and more drastic approaches are required, would be totally misguided and may make us throw away existing international measures committing nuclear weapon states and non-nuclear weapon states in this field.

    I come from a non-nuclear weapon state. I understand the frustration that some people feel about the “haves” and “have-nots” of nuclear weapons. But I have also seen the legacy of peace and prosperity left by leaders who resisted that siren call. In the 1980s, vision, resolve and dialogue meant Brazil and Argentina changed course and did not go down the path to nuclear arms. Today, Latin America is a nuclear weapon free zone.

    Multilateral leaders: step up by stepping in

    Many wonder whether there’s still a role for multilateralism in guiding us through this maze of conflicting interests. Yes, there is. During difficult times in the past, international organizations have had a big impact on peace and security. But it only happens when leaders of these organizations get off the side lines and use their mandate and their own good offices effectively.

    We prove our relevance in extraordinary times.   

    Each organization has different tools, a different mandate, a different membership, and each of their leaders will determine how to act. I can speak for the IAEA.  We have nuclear science at our core, and we are the world’s nuclear weapons watchdog. Let me give you an example:

    For almost three years, Ukraine, the world and the IAEA have been confronted with a completely unprecedented situation – never before has a military conflict involved the seizure of a nuclear power plant and been fought among the facilities of a major nuclear power programme.

    At the beginning of the war, Ukraine’s biggest nuclear power plant – the biggest nuclear power plant in Europe, with nearly 6 gigawatts of installed capacity – was taken by Russia. This established a hotspot in the middle of a combat zone. The chance of an incident – or accident – causing terrible radiological consequences became real.

    Observing this from the outside was never, in my mind, an option. Staying on the sidelines and later reflecting on “lessons learned” may have been the more traditional – or expected – path for an international organization. But to me this would have been a dereliction of duty. So, we leaned into our core mission, crossed the front lines of war, and established a permanent presence of IAEA experts at all Ukraine’s nuclear power plants. That makes us the only international organization operating independently in occupied territory. We are informing the world of what’s going on and reducing the chance that a radiological incident enflames the conflict and causes even more devastation.

    We did the same by going to Kursk when a Russian nuclear reactor was at risk of coming into the line of fire. I am in constant communication with both sides.

    I have been meeting with President Zelenskyy, and President Putin regularly. Nuclear safety and security during this conflict must have the buy-in and continued involvement of both leaders. Talking to only one of them would not achieve this important goal. At the same time, I am keeping an open dialogue with leaders on all continents and briefing the UN Security Council. When it comes to nuclear safety in Ukraine it has been possible to build a level of agreement that is rare during the divisions of this conflict. Where there is agreement, there is hope for more agreement.

    Ukraine is not our only hotspot.

    In Iran, the IAEA’s job is to verify the exclusively peaceful nature of a growing nuclear programme. Iran has now enriched uranium to a level that is hard to justify. It has not yet answered the IAEA’s questions completely and it has made our work more difficult by taking away some of our cameras and blocking some of our most experienced safeguards inspectors from going into the country. This has caused concern and led to a pattern of mistrust and recriminations. In diplomacy, progress often requires prompting, catalyzing, and suggesting ways forward. This presents a role for an impartial, honest and effective broker. It is a role I, in my capacity as the IAEA’s Director General, have been playing. In fact, I returned from my latest visit to Tehran just a few weeks ago where I presented alternatives and ideas to reduce the growing tensions, and hopefully to retain Iran within the NPT and the non-proliferation norms.

    The danger of playing it safe

    When it comes to working on behalf of peace and security, playing it safe is dangerous.

    Silence and indifference can be deadly.

    Dag Hammerskjold, the second Secretary General of the United Nations, said: “It is when we all play safe that we create a world of utmost insecurity.”

    A new path

    This week, the Norwegian Nobel Committee looked beyond today’s conflicts. In its own way, it did not play it safe. Instead, it shined a light on the horrors of nuclear war and the people who have been warning us about them for many decades.

    In doing that, the Nobel Committee, Nihon Hidankyō and the hibakusha have illuminated the danger of the path we are now on.

    We have to make a new path.

    First, the leaders of the nuclear weapon states must recognize the need for a responsible management of their nuclear arsenals. Experiences from the past confirm that even at times of crisis and conflict it has been possible to recognize the unique terminal power of these weapons and the responsibility that comes with it. What Kennedy, Khrushchev, Reagan, Gorbachev, or Trump did by reaching out to a nuclear-armed adversary, sets a precedent, a useful one. Such contacts, either bilateral or at the P5 level could possibly be facilitated by a competent broker. These are the first steps to bringing down the tone so that nuclear sabre rattling recedes and the commitments to the unequivocal undertakings to move towards a nuclear free world can be fulfilled.

    Secondly, an iron-clad resolve to observe and strengthen the global non-proliferation regime needs to be adopted. Nuclear weapon and nuclear non-weapon states must work together to ensure the non-proliferation of nuclear weapons.

    Ladies and gentlemen,

    We need to walk through perilous times by recognizing limitations and keeping our eyes on our common objectives.

    Nuclear disarmament cannot be imposed on the nuclear armed.

    Realism is not defeatism. Diplomacy is not weakness.

    Difficult times call for enlightened leadership, at the national level, and at the international level as well.

    Putting the international system back on track is within our reach. World leaders, including those at the top of the multilateral system, have a duty and an irrevocable responsibility to work towards this.  

    Personally, I am convinced. Perhaps, because the secret mandate I received that day in Hiroshima from a hibakusha burns in me, stronger than ever. Thank you.

    MIL OSI NGO –

  • MIL-OSI United Nations: Nobel Peace Prize Forum: our perilous path and how we change course

    Source: International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA)

    IAEA Director General Rafael Mariano Grossi’s keynote address at the Nobel Peace Prize Forum 2024.

    I want to start by congratulating Nihon Hidankyō and the hibakusha for their Nobel Peace Prize.

    As a young diplomat almost 40 years ago, I was fortunate to be part of a UN disarmament fellowship programme and to visit Hiroshima. There, fellows had an opportunity to meet the hibakusha and I had a conversation with an ailing victim. I have carried to every meeting, to every negotiation, and to every posting, the memory this woman’s silent testimony. When I asked her about that morning in 1945, she struggled to express the horror in words. She tried to articulate some words but stayed silent. Looking at me, right into my eyes. The look in her eyes has stayed with me ever since, like a powerful reminder, a secret mandate, to work so that her suffering is never repeated.

    For decades after the Second World War, the international community has been dealing with this unique dilemma: we built robust norms and passed nonproliferation and disarmament treaties. Instead of dozens of countries armed with nuclear weapons, as was the concern in the 1960s, there are less than ten. Stockpiles of nuclear weapons have shrunk from tens of thousands to thousands.

    But on its journey through the perils of the atomic age, the world has come to a crucial crossroads. Our deep psychological connection caused by collectively seeing the horror of the consequences of nuclear war seems to be evaporating, taking with it our joint resolve to do everything possible to prevent a repetition.

    Like a giant spotlight, this year’s Nobel Peace Prize has lit up our path ahead. It has done it, by reminding us of the past, and of the consequences of ignoring the perils of nuclear weapons use.

    Context of conflicts

    To understand the important challenges we face, we must look at the global context, at what is happening around the world.  

    War has returned to Europe, and it directly involves a nuclear weapon state. The conflict in Ukraine is also an indirect confrontation between the world’s biggest nuclear weapon states, the first since the end of the Cold War. But nuclear exercises and open references to the use of nuclear weapons in the theatre of this war are increasing the risks and can not be ignored.

    In the Middle East, the conflict of the past year has ignited smoldering tensions between Israel and Iran and led to the unprecedented step of direct exchanges and attacks between the two. Here there is also a nuclear weapons dimension. On one side, the assumed presence of nuclear weapons looms in the background. On the other, the very real potential of nuclear proliferation is raising the stakes.

    We find ourselves in a harmful loop: the erosion of the restraints around nuclear weapons is making these conflicts more dangerous. Meanwhile, these conflicts are contributing to the erosion of the restraints. The vicious circle dynamic is in motion.

    An unfortunate change of direction

    Doctrines regarding the use of nuclear weapons are being revised or reinterpreted. The quantity and quality of nuclear weapon stockpiles are being increased. 

    And in some non-nuclear weapon states – states that are important in their region – leaders are asking “why not us?”. And they are asking this openly!

    At the start of the nuclear arms race, J Robert Oppenheimer described the USSR and the US as “two scorpions in a bottle” each capable of killing the other, but only by risking their own life.

    Oppenheimer’s blunt statement would later be developed and elaborated under the roof of deterrence and the more sophisticated concept of “Mutual Assured Destruction,” or MAD.

    Today, independent of the vantage point of the observer, there is widespread concern that the risk of mutual destruction through nuclear war is higher than it has been for more than a generation.

    Lessons from history

    But it does not have to be this way. We can do better. History has shown that effective dialogue among superpowers has, more often than not, led to confidence and, as a result, also to arms limitation and even disarmament. At certain moments in history, world leaders took the right decisions, to tone down, or, to use today’s parlance, to de-escalate. Let’s see:

    The end of the Cuban Missile Crisis happened thanks to the direct engagement of Soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev and US President John F Kennedy. Decades later, at the Geneva Summit of 1985, Mikhail Gorbachev and President Ronald Reagan agreed a crucial axiom: “Nuclear war cannot be won and should never be fought.” They met again the next year in Reykjavik and significant reductions in nuclear arsenals followed. Nuclear weapon reductions and the elimination of a whole category of weapon, through the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces, or INF, Treaty, were agreed. These steps towards rapprochement took leadership and courage. They often happened despite skepticism and voices against them.

    Diplomacy and dialogue (and the duty of nuclear weapon states)

    A return to diplomacy and dialogue is urgently needed, and this, not only in things nuclear. Shutting the other side out has never solved a problem and almost certainly aggravates it. Top leadership involvement is simply indispensable when nuclear weapons are involved. President Trump took the initiative and talked to Kim Jong Un. More of this is needed. Some have said these talks were ill prepared. I say, this is important. Nuclear weapon policy and limitations does not work bottom up. It is of course the other way around.

    We must be proactive in building the trust and protections that lower the risk of close calls and of brinkmanship, especially during today’s tensions. Not taking active steps means we rely on luck – or the assumption that the other side will show restraint – to save us from nuclear war. The longer you rely on luck, the more likely it is to run out.

    Conflict and tensions compel nations to arm themselves. Diplomacy and compromise create conditions in which they can disarm.

    The road to a nuclear weapon-free world is long and winding. The disarmament landscape is complex, and it’s worth acknowledging that. This does not diminish the responsibility nuclear weapons states have to make progress. After all, they committed themselves to this goal back in 1968, through the Non-Proliferation Treaty.

    Steps can be taken to decrease the reliance on nuclear weapons, both in their production and the scenarios for their use.

    Nuclear weapon states, through their actions at home and on the world stage, have a responsibility to avoid a scenario in which more countries seek nuclear weapons. Pushing ahead with increases in arsenals leads to despair, cynicism, and a growing skepticism about the value of past commitments. Disengagement and unilateralism fuel sentiments of vulnerability in other countries, and with that, the notion nuclear weapons could be the ultimate protection against outside threats.

    Engagement among the five permanent members of the Security Council is indispensable. Such engagement can take many different shapes, starting with direct contact among themselves, bilaterally or as a group. This dialogue, which still exists, has been reduced to a very low level, virtually without real impact. Perhaps its revival could be assisted by an international organization, or facilitated with the support of a respected, impartial leader. Therefore, it’s essential that the United Nations, other international organizations, and their leaders work effectively to ensure their continued relevance amid the changing needs of their stakeholders.

    Do not make things worse (by falling for the siren call of proliferation)

    The IAEA has played its indispensable technical role during past attempts of nuclear proliferation, particularly in the Middle East. As the difficult experiences in Iraq, Libya and Syria remind us, the draw of nuclear weapons is real and so is the geopolitical and military response.

    Today’s tensions are prompting even leaders of important counties that, so far, are in good standing with the NPT to ask: “Why shouldn’t we have a nuclear weapon too?”

    To this, I would say, “Do not make things worse.” Acquiring a nuclear weapon will not increase national security, it will do the opposite. Other countries will follow. And this will contribute to the unravelling of a nonproliferation regime that has had its ups and downs – and it still has its limitations – but none-the-less it has served humanity extraordinarily well. The problem and challenge to the NPT regime may come from those nuclear armed but also those who, while not having nuclear weapons, may feel the NPT has failed as a catalyst to disarmament.

    Weakening the non-proliferation treaty under the argument that progress on nuclear disarmament has been slow and more drastic approaches are required, would be totally misguided and may make us throw away existing international measures committing nuclear weapon states and non-nuclear weapon states in this field.

    I come from a non-nuclear weapon state. I understand the frustration that some people feel about the “haves” and “have-nots” of nuclear weapons. But I have also seen the legacy of peace and prosperity left by leaders who resisted that siren call. In the 1980s, vision, resolve and dialogue meant Brazil and Argentina changed course and did not go down the path to nuclear arms. Today, Latin America is a nuclear weapon free zone.

    Multilateral leaders: step up by stepping in

    Many wonder whether there’s still a role for multilateralism in guiding us through this maze of conflicting interests. Yes, there is. During difficult times in the past, international organizations have had a big impact on peace and security. But it only happens when leaders of these organizations get off the side lines and use their mandate and their own good offices effectively.

    We prove our relevance in extraordinary times.   

    Each organization has different tools, a different mandate, a different membership, and each of their leaders will determine how to act. I can speak for the IAEA.  We have nuclear science at our core, and we are the world’s nuclear weapons watchdog. Let me give you an example:

    For almost three years, Ukraine, the world and the IAEA have been confronted with a completely unprecedented situation – never before has a military conflict involved the seizure of a nuclear power plant and been fought among the facilities of a major nuclear power programme.

    At the beginning of the war, Ukraine’s biggest nuclear power plant – the biggest nuclear power plant in Europe, with nearly 6 gigawatts of installed capacity – was taken by Russia. This established a hotspot in the middle of a combat zone. The chance of an incident – or accident – causing terrible radiological consequences became real.

    Observing this from the outside was never, in my mind, an option. Staying on the sidelines and later reflecting on “lessons learned” may have been the more traditional – or expected – path for an international organization. But to me this would have been a dereliction of duty. So, we leaned into our core mission, crossed the front lines of war, and established a permanent presence of IAEA experts at all Ukraine’s nuclear power plants. That makes us the only international organization operating independently in occupied territory. We are informing the world of what’s going on and reducing the chance that a radiological incident enflames the conflict and causes even more devastation.

    We did the same by going to Kursk when a Russian nuclear reactor was at risk of coming into the line of fire. I am in constant communication with both sides.

    I have been meeting with President Zelenskyy, and President Putin regularly. Nuclear safety and security during this conflict must have the buy-in and continued involvement of both leaders. Talking to only one of them would not achieve this important goal. At the same time, I am keeping an open dialogue with leaders on all continents and briefing the UN Security Council. When it comes to nuclear safety in Ukraine it has been possible to build a level of agreement that is rare during the divisions of this conflict. Where there is agreement, there is hope for more agreement.

    Ukraine is not our only hotspot.

    In Iran, the IAEA’s job is to verify the exclusively peaceful nature of a growing nuclear programme. Iran has now enriched uranium to a level that is hard to justify. It has not yet answered the IAEA’s questions completely and it has made our work more difficult by taking away some of our cameras and blocking some of our most experienced safeguards inspectors from going into the country. This has caused concern and led to a pattern of mistrust and recriminations. In diplomacy, progress often requires prompting, catalyzing, and suggesting ways forward. This presents a role for an impartial, honest and effective broker. It is a role I, in my capacity as the IAEA’s Director General, have been playing. In fact, I returned from my latest visit to Tehran just a few weeks ago where I presented alternatives and ideas to reduce the growing tensions, and hopefully to retain Iran within the NPT and the non-proliferation norms.

    The danger of playing it safe

    When it comes to working on behalf of peace and security, playing it safe is dangerous.

    Silence and indifference can be deadly.

    Dag Hammerskjold, the second Secretary General of the United Nations, said: “It is when we all play safe that we create a world of utmost insecurity.”

    A new path

    This week, the Norwegian Nobel Committee looked beyond today’s conflicts. In its own way, it did not play it safe. Instead, it shined a light on the horrors of nuclear war and the people who have been warning us about them for many decades.

    In doing that, the Nobel Committee, Nihon Hidankyō and the hibakusha have illuminated the danger of the path we are now on.

    We have to make a new path.

    First, the leaders of the nuclear weapon states must recognize the need for a responsible management of their nuclear arsenals. Experiences from the past confirm that even at times of crisis and conflict it has been possible to recognize the unique terminal power of these weapons and the responsibility that comes with it. What Kennedy, Khrushchev, Reagan, Gorbachev, or Trump did by reaching out to a nuclear-armed adversary, sets a precedent, a useful one. Such contacts, either bilateral or at the P5 level could possibly be facilitated by a competent broker. These are the first steps to bringing down the tone so that nuclear sabre rattling recedes and the commitments to the unequivocal undertakings to move towards a nuclear free world can be fulfilled.

    Secondly, an iron-clad resolve to observe and strengthen the global non-proliferation regime needs to be adopted. Nuclear weapon and nuclear non-weapon states must work together to ensure the non-proliferation of nuclear weapons.

    Ladies and gentlemen,

    We need to walk through perilous times by recognizing limitations and keeping our eyes on our common objectives.

    Nuclear disarmament cannot be imposed on the nuclear armed.

    Realism is not defeatism. Diplomacy is not weakness.

    Difficult times call for enlightened leadership, at the national level, and at the international level as well.

    Putting the international system back on track is within our reach. World leaders, including those at the top of the multilateral system, have a duty and an irrevocable responsibility to work towards this.  

    Personally, I am convinced. Perhaps, because the secret mandate I received that day in Hiroshima from a hibakusha burns in me, stronger than ever. Thank you.

    MIL OSI United Nations News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Kraft Heinz Food Company Recalls Fully Cooked Turkey Bacon

    Source: US State of Rhode Island

    The Rhode Island Department of Health (RIDOH) is advising consumers that Kraft Heinz Food Company is recalling more than 350,000 pounds of fully cooked turkey bacon products that may be contaminated with Listeria monocytogenes (Lm). The company is recalling the following products that were produced from April 24, 2025, through June 11, 2025:

    –12-oz. vacuum-packed packages of Oscar Mayer Turkey BACON ORIGINAL with universal product code (UPC) 071871548601 printed on the packaging under the barcode with use-by dates ranging from 18 JUL 2025 to 02 AUG 2025, and lot code RS40; — 36-oz. packages containing three 12-oz. vacuum-packed packages of Oscar Mayer Turkey BACON ORIGINAL with UPC 071871548748 printed on the packaging under the barcode with use-by dates ranging from 23 JUL 2025 to 04 SEP 2025, and lot codes RS19, RS40, or RS42; and — 48-oz. packages containing four 12-oz. vacuum-packed packages of Oscar Mayer Turkey BACON ORIGINAL with UPC 071871548793 printed on the packaging under the barcode with use-by dates ranging from 18 JUL 2025 to 04 SEP 2025, and lot codes RS19, RS40, or RS42.

    All of the recalled products have the USDA mark of inspection on the front of the label. Pictures of the labels on the recalled products are available online. These products were shipped to retail locations nationwide.

    There have been no illnesses reported in association with this outbreak.

    People who eat food that is contaminated with Lm can get listeriosis, a serious infection that primarily affects older adults, people with weakened immune systems, and pregnant women and their newborns. Other people may be impacted, but it happens less often. Listeriosis can cause fever, muscle aches, headache, stiff neck, confusion, loss of balance, and convulsions sometimes preceded by diarrhea or other gastrointestinal symptoms. A serios infection can spread beyond the gastrointestinal system. In pregnant women, the infection can cause miscarriages, stillbirths, premature delivery, or life-threatening infection of the newborn. In addition, serious and sometimes fatal infections can occur in older adults and people with weakened immune systems.

    Listeriosis is treated with antibiotics. People in the high-risk groups who have flu-like symptoms within two months after eating food contaminated with Lm should get medical care and tell the healthcare professional they may have eaten food contaminated with Lm.

    Anyone who purchased the recalled products should not eat them. Recalled products should be thrown away or returned to the store where they were bought.

    ###

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI Security: District of Arizona Charges Seven Defendants as Part of National Health Care Fraud Takedown

    Source: US FBI

    PHOENIX, Ariz. – Today, United States Attorney Timothy Courchaine announced criminal charges against seven defendants in connection with alleged schemes to receive health care kickbacks and to defraud Medicare and Medicaid (specifically AHCCCS, the Arizona Health Care Cost Containment System). The charges filed in federal court are part of the Department of Justice’s 2025 National Health Care Fraud Takedown. The charges stem from alleged schemes to obtain over $1.1 billion by the collective submission of approximately $1.65 billion in fraudulent claims to Medicaid and Medicare and the receipt of health care kickbacks and bribes.

    “Health care fraud doesn’t just steal money from taxpayers, it also degrades trust in the system Americans rely on to care for themselves and their loved ones” said United States Attorney Timothy Courchaine. “I am proud that the District of Arizona, in coordination with the entire Department of Justice, is working hard to hold criminals accountable for putting ill-gotten gains above their community’s well-being.”   

    “This record-setting Health Care Fraud Takedown delivers justice to criminal actors who prey upon our most vulnerable citizens and steal from hardworking American taxpayers,” said Attorney General Pamela Bondi. “Make no mistake – this administration will not tolerate criminals who line their pockets with taxpayer dollars while endangering the health and safety of our communities.”

    The charges announced today by United States Attorney Courchaine are part of a strategically coordinated, nationwide law enforcement action that resulted in criminal charges against 324 defendants for their alleged participation in health care fraud and illegal drug diversion schemes that involved the submission of over $14.6 billion in intended loss and over 15 million pills of illegally diverted controlled substances. The defendants allegedly defrauded programs entrusted for the care of the elderly and disabled to line their own pockets. The United States has seized over $245 million in cash, luxury vehicles, and other assets in connection with the takedown.

    The following individuals were charged in the District of Arizona:

    Farrukh Jarar Ali, 41, of Pakistan, was charged by indictment with conspiracy to commit health care fraud and wire fraud, three counts of wire fraud, and money laundering in connection with an alleged $650 million scheme involving at least 41 substance abuse treatment clinics in Arizona. As alleged in the indictment, Ali owned ProMD Solutions (“ProMD”), a Pakistan-based company that provided credentialing, enrollment, medical coding, and billing services for outpatient treatment centers that were purportedly in the business of providing addiction treatment services for persons suffering from alcohol and drug addiction. Ali and ProMD credentialed and enrolled multiple substance abuse treatment clinics as providers with Arizona’s Medicaid agency, the Arizona Health Care Cost Containment System (“AHCCCS”), but these clinics did not provide legitimate care to patients, many of whom were recruited from the homeless population or Native American reservations. Ali submitted approximately $650 million in false and fraudulent claims to AHCCCS for addiction treatment services that were not provided, were not provided as billed, were so substandard that they failed to serve a treatment purpose, were not used as part of or integrated into any treatment plan, and were medically unnecessary. AHCCCS paid approximately $564 million for these false and fraudulent claims. Ali also created false therapy notes for treatment that was never provided, and the clinics working with Ali provided these falsified records to AHCCCS in response to audits. Ali personally received approximately $24.5 million of AHCCCS funds as a result of the scheme, and he used $2.9 million of the funds to purchase a home located on a golf estate in Dubai, United Arab Emirates. The case is being prosecuted by Trial Attorney S. Babu Kaza of the Midwest Strike Force, Assistant Chief James Hayes of the National Rapid Response Strike Force, and Assistant U.S. Attorney Matthew Williams of the District of Arizona.

    Cle’Esther Davenport, 51, of Peoria, Arizona, was charged by indictment with conspiracy to defraud the United States and receive and pay kickbacks, and receiving kickbacks, in connection with a substance abuse treatment scheme. As alleged in the indictment, Davenport owned a company, Davenport House LLC, that purportedly provided housing to individuals enrolled in health plans funded by the Arizona Health Care Cost Containment System (“AHCCCS”), Arizona’s Medicaid program. Davenport received approximately $739,000 in illegal kickbacks to refer individuals to Tusa Integrated Clinic, LLC (“Tusa”), an outpatient treatment center that purported to provide substance abuse and behavioral health treatment to AHCCCS-insured patients, resulting in improper payments of approximately $1.58 million from AHCCCS to Tusa. The case is being prosecuted by Assistant Chief James Hayes and Trial Attorneys Sarah Edwards and Lauren Randell of the National Rapid Response Strike Force and Assistant U.S. Attorney Matthew Williams of the District of Arizona.

    Ira Denny, 56, of Surprise, Arizona, was charged by information with conspiracy to commit health care fraud in connection with a scheme to defraud Medicare by billing for medically unnecessary amniotic allografts that were procured through kickbacks and bribes. As alleged in the information, medically untrained sales representatives identified and referred elderly Medicare beneficiaries to Denny, a nurse practitioner, who applied amniotic allografts to the beneficiaries without exercising independent medical judgment and in the amount and frequency determined by the sales representatives. Medicare was billed approximately $209,359,607 for allografts ordered and applied by Denny, which were medically unreasonable and unnecessary, ineligible for reimbursement, and procured through kickbacks and bribes. Medicare paid approximately $138,590,922 based on these false and fraudulent claims. The case is being prosecuted by Trial Attorneys William Hochul III and Shane Butland of the National Rapid Response Strike Force and Assistant U.S. Attorney Matthew Williams of the District of Arizona.

    Tyler Kontos, 29, of Mesa, Arizona, Joel “Max” Kupetz, 36, of Scottsdale, Arizona, and JorgeKinds, 49, of Phoenix, Arizona, were charged by indictment with conspiracy to commit health care fraud, health care fraud, and conspiracy to defraud the United States in connection with a $1 billion amniotic wound allograft fraud scheme. Kontos and Kupetz were also charged with transactional money laundering, and Kupetz was charged with receiving health care kickbacks. As alleged in the indictment, the defendants targeted elderly Medicare patients, many of whom were terminally ill in hospice care, through Arizona-based companies Apex Mobile Medical LLC, Apex Medical LLC, Viking Medical Consultants LLC, and APX Mobile Medical LLC to cause unnecessary and expensive allografts to be applied to these vulnerable patients’ wounds indiscriminately, without coordination with the patients’ treating physicians, to superficial wounds that did not need this treatment, and in sizes excessively larger than the wound. Kontos and Kupetz—neither of whom had any medical training—located elderly Medicare patients with wounds of any size or severity, ordered and recommended the ordering of allografts to be placed on the patients’ wounds, and referred the patients to Kinds and other nurse practitioners to apply the allografts. Kinds, a licensed nurse practitioner, applied whatever quantities and sizes of allografts medically untrained sales representatives ordered for the patients, without conducting an independent medical assessment, resulting in the application of numerous and inappropriately large allografts to single small wounds and wounds that required only traditional conservative treatment to heal. In just fourteen months, the defendants and their co-conspirators caused the submission of over $1 billion in false and fraudulent claims to Medicare, CHAMPVA, TRICARE, and commercial insurers, of which over $600 million was paid. Kontos and Kupetz received illegal kickbacks for ordering and arranging for and recommending the purchasing and ordering of allografts, while Kinds received up to $1,000 for each allograft application. Assets were seized upon the defendants’ indictment, including cryptocurrency and bank accounts totaling more than $7.2 million. The case is being prosecuted by Trial Attorneys William Hochul III and Shane Butland of the National Rapid Response Strike Force and Assistant U.S. Attorney Matthew Williams of the District of Arizona. Trial Attorney Yuliana Reyes of the Money Laundering and Asset Recovery Section and Assistant U.S. Attorney Joseph Bozdech of the District of Arizona are handling asset forfeiture.

    Gina Palacios, 40, of Phoenix, Arizona, was charged by information with conspiracy to commit health care fraud in connection with a scheme to defraud Medicare by billing for medically unnecessary amniotic allografts that were procured through kickbacks and bribes. As alleged in the information, medically untrained sales representatives identified and referred elderly Medicare beneficiaries to Palacios, a nurse practitioner, who applied amniotic allografts to the beneficiaries without exercising independent medical judgment and in the amount and frequency determined by the sales representatives. Medicare was billed approximately $59,470,478 for allografts ordered and applied by Palacios, which were medically unreasonable and unnecessary, ineligible for reimbursement, and procured through kickbacks and bribes. Medicare paid approximately $28,442,271 based on these false and fraudulent claims. The case is being prosecuted by Trial Attorneys William Hochul III and Shane Butland of the National Rapid Response Strike Force and Assistant U.S. Attorney Matthew Williams of the District of Arizona.

    “The FBI takes the responsibility to investigate and pursue those who commit fraud for personal gain extremely seriously,” said FBI Phoenix Special Agent in Charge Heith Janke.  “Fraud and dishonesty undermine the integrity of our health care system and cost taxpayers’ money; but beyond that and most importantly, when funds are diverted from where they are truly needed, the people who are most vulnerable are hurt the most.”

    The Health Care Fraud Unit’s National Rapid Response, Florida, Gulf Coast, Los Angeles, Midwest, New England, Northeast, and Texas Strike Forces; U.S. Attorneys’ Offices for the District of Arizona, Central District of California, Northern District of California, Southern District of California, District of Columbia, District of Connecticut, District of Delaware, Middle, District of Florida, Northern District of Florida, Southern District of Florida, Middle, District of Georgia, District of Idaho, Northern District of Illinois, Eastern District of Kentucky, Western District of Kentucky, Eastern District of Louisiana, Middle District of Louisiana, District of Maine, District of Massachusetts, Eastern District of Michigan, Northern District of Mississippi, Southern District of Mississippi, District of Montana, District of Nevada, District of New Hampshire, District of New Jersey, Eastern District of New York, Northern District of New York, Southern District of New York, Western District of New York, Eastern District of North Carolina, Western District of North Carolina, District of North Dakota, Northern District of Ohio, Southern District of Ohio, Northern District of Oklahoma, Western District of Oklahoma, District of Oregon, Eastern District of Pennsylvania, District of South Carolina, Middle District of Tennessee, Western District of Tennessee, Northern District of Texas, Southern District of Texas, Western District of Texas, District of Vermont, Eastern District of Virginia, Western District of Washington, and Northern District of West Virginia; and State Attorney Generals’ Offices for Arizona, California, Georgia, Illinois, Indiana, Louisiana, Massachusetts, Missouri, New York, Ohio, and Pennsylvania are prosecuting the cases in the National Health Care Fraud Takedown, with assistance from the Health Care Fraud Unit’s Data Analytics Team. Descriptions of each case involved in today’s enforcement action are available on the Health Care Fraud Unit’s Website.

    The District of Arizona, in particular, worked with the Department’s Criminal Division and the following law enforcement organizations to investigate and prosecute the cases filed during the enforcement period: the FBI, the Department of Health and Human Services Office of Inspector General, the Department of Defense – Defense Criminal Investigative Service, and the Department of Veterans Affairs Office of Inspector General.

    A complaint, information, or indictment is merely an allegation. All defendants are presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law.

    CASE NUMBERS:         CR-25-00822-PHX-DWL, CR-25-0083-PHX-MTL, CR-25-00915-PHX-SMB, CR-25-00944-PHX-SPL, CR-25-00947-PHX-DWL
    RELEASE NUMBER:    2025-106_Health Care Fraud Takedown

    # # #

    For more information on the U.S. Attorney’s Office, District of Arizona, visit http://www.justice.gov/usao/az/
    Follow the U.S. Attorney’s Office, District of Arizona, on Twitter @USAO_AZ for the latest news.

    MIL Security OSI –

  • MIL-OSI Security: Four North Koreans Charged in Nearly $1 Million Cryptocurrency Theft Scheme

    Source: US FBI

    ATLANTA – Four North Korean nationals, Kim Kwang Jin (김관진), Kang Tae Bok (강태복), Jong Pong Ju (정봉주), and Chang Nam Il (창남일), have been charged in a five-count wire fraud and money laundering indictment arising from a scheme to be hired as remote IT workers and then steal and launder over $900,000 in virtual currency.

    “The defendants used fake and stolen personal identities to conceal their North Korean nationality, pose as remote IT workers, and exploit their victims’ trust to steal hundreds of thousands of dollars,” said U.S. Attorney Theodore S. Hertzberg. “This indictment highlights the unique threat North Korea poses to companies that hire remote IT workers and underscores our resolve to prosecute any actor, in the United States or abroad, who steals from Georgia businesses.”

    “These schemes target and steal from U.S. companies and are designed to evade sanctions and fund the North Korean regime’s illicit programs, including its weapons programs,” said John A. Eisenberg, Assistant Attorney General for the Department’s National Security Division. “The Justice Department, along with our law enforcement, private sector, and international partners, will persistently pursue and dismantle these cyber-enabled revenue generation networks.”

    “North Korean operatives used false identities to infiltrate companies and steal digital assets to fund their regime,” said Paul Brown, Special Agent in Charge of FBI Atlanta. “The FBI is committed to exposing these threats and protecting U.S. businesses from nation-state cybercrime.”

    According to U.S. Attorney Hertzberg, the indictment, and other information presented in court: To generate revenue for the regime, the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (“North Korea” or “DPRK”) dispatches thousands of skilled IT workers around the world to deceive and infiltrate American companies. In October 2019, the defendants traveled to the United Arab Emirates on North Korean documents and worked there as a team. In approximately December 2020 and May 2021, respectively, Kim Kwang Jin (using victim P.S.’s stolen identity) and Jong Pong Ju (using the alias “Bryan Cho”) were hired as developers by an Atlanta, Georgia-based blockchain research and development company and a Serbian virtual token company. Both defendants concealed their North Korean identities from their employers by providing false identification documents containing a mix of stolen and fraudulent identity information. Neither company would have hired Kim Kwang Jin or Jong Pong Ju had it known the defendants were North Korean citizens. Later, on a recommendation from Jong Pong Ju, the Serbian company hired “Peter Xiao,” who in fact was Chang Nam Il.

    After gaining their employers’ trust, Kim Kwang Jin and Jong Pong Ju were assigned projects that provided them access to their employers’ virtual currency assets. In February 2022, Jong Pong Ju used that access to steal virtual currency then worth approximately $175,000. In March 2022, Kim Kwang Jin stole virtual currency then worth approximately $740,000 by modifying the source code of two of his employer’s smart contracts.

    To launder the funds after the thefts, Kim Kwang Jin and Jong Pong Ju used a virtual currency mixer and then transferred the funds to virtual currency exchange accounts controlled by defendants Kang Tae Bok and Chang Nam Il but held in the names of aliases.  The accounts were opened using fraudulent Malaysian identification documents.

    Kim Kwang Jin (김관진), Kang Tae Bok (강태복), Jong Pong Ju (정봉주), and Chang Nam Il (창남일) were indicted by a federal grand jury seated in the Northern District of Georgia on June 24, 2025.

    Members of the public are reminded that the indictment only contains charges.  The defendants are presumed innocent of the charges, and the government bears the burden to prove the defendants’ guilt beyond a reasonable doubt at trial.

    This case is being investigated by the Federal Bureau of Investigation. It is part of the Department of Justice’s DPRK RevGen: Domestic Enabler Initiative. Under the Initiative, launched by the National Security Division and FBI Cyber and Counterintelligence Divisions in March 2024, federal prosecutors and agents prioritize high-impact, strategic, and unified enforcement and disruption operations targeting the DPRK’s illicit revenue generation efforts and the U.S.-based enablers of those efforts.

    Assistant United States Attorneys Samir Kaushal and Alex R. Sistla, and Trial Attorney Jacques Singer-Emery of the National Security Division’s National Security Cyber Section, are prosecuting the case.

    For further information please contact the U.S. Attorney’s Public Affairs Office at USAGAN.PressEmails@usdoj.gov or (404) 581-6185.  The Internet address for the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Northern District of Georgia is http://www.justice.gov/usao-ndga

    MIL Security OSI –

  • MIL-OSI Canada: Announcement of new diplomatic appointments

    Source: Government of Canada News

    July 3, 2025 – Ottawa, Ontario – Global Affairs Canada

    The Honourable Anita Anand, Minister of Foreign Affairs, today announced the following diplomatic appointments:

    Alexandre Bilodeau will become Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary to the Republic of Tunisia. Mr. Bilodeau will replace Lorraine Diguer.

    Anderson Blanc will become High Commissioner in the Republic of Mozambique. Mr. Blanc will replace Sara Nicholls.

    Natalie Britton will become Consul General in Istanbul (Republic of Türkiye). Ms. Britton will replace Tara Scheurwater.

    Sandra Choufani will become Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary to the Republic of Côte d’Ivoire. Ms. Choufani will replace Anderson Blanc.

    Christian DesRoches will become Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary to the Kingdom of Cambodia. Mr. DesRoches will replace Ping Kitnikone.

    Ambra Dickie will become Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary to the Association of Southeast Asian Nations, in Jakarta. Ms. Dickie will replace Vicky Singmin.

    Stephen Doust will become Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary to Mongolia. Mr. Doust will replace Sandra Choufani.

    Gregory Galligan will become Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary to the Lebanese Republic. Mr. Galligan will replace Stefanie McCollum.

    Alison Grant will become Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary to the Republic of Austria and Ambassador and Permanent Representative to the International Organizations in Vienna. Ms. Grant will replace Troy Lulashnyk.

    Marie-Claude Harvey will become High Commissioner in the Republic of Cameroon. Ms. Harvey will replace Lorraine Anderson.

    Patrick Hébert will become Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary to the Republic of Finland. Mr. Hébert will replace Jeanette Stovel.

    Jean-Dominique Ieraci will become Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary to the Republic of Peru. Mr. Ieraci will replace Louis Marcotte.

    Tarik Khan will become High Commissioner in the Islamic Republic of Pakistan. Mr. Khan will replace Leslie Scanlon.

    Craig Kowalik will become Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary to the Republic of Ecuador. Mr. Kowalik will replace Stephen Potter.

    Philippe Lafortune will become Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary to the Republic of Korea. Mr. Lafortune will replace Tamara Mawhinney.

    Jean-Paul Lemieux will become Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary to the Swiss Confederation. Mr. Lemieux will replace Patrick Wittmann.

    Isabelle Martin will become High Commissioner in the Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka. Ms. Martin will replace Eric Walsh.

    Karim Morcos will become Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary to the State of Qatar. Mr. Morcos will replace Isabelle Martin.

    James Nickel will become Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary to the Socialist Republic of Vietnam. Mr. Nickel will replace Shawn Steil.

    Tara Scheurwater will become Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary to the State of Kuwait. Ms. Scheurwater will replace Aliya Mawani.

    Nicolas Simard will become Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary to the Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia. Mr. Simard will replace Joshua Tabah.

    Joshua Tabah will become High Commissioner in the Republic of Kenya and Permanent Representative to the United Nations Human Settlements Programme and to the United Nations Environment Programme. Mr. Tabah will replace Christopher Thornley.

    Kent Vachon will become Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary to the Lao People’s Democratic Republic. Mr. Vachon will replace Ping Kitnikone. 

    MIL OSI Canada News –

  • MIL-OSI Canada: Announcement of new diplomatic appointments

    Source: Government of Canada News

    July 3, 2025 – Ottawa, Ontario – Global Affairs Canada

    The Honourable Anita Anand, Minister of Foreign Affairs, today announced the following diplomatic appointments:

    Alexandre Bilodeau will become Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary to the Republic of Tunisia. Mr. Bilodeau will replace Lorraine Diguer.

    Anderson Blanc will become High Commissioner in the Republic of Mozambique. Mr. Blanc will replace Sara Nicholls.

    Natalie Britton will become Consul General in Istanbul (Republic of Türkiye). Ms. Britton will replace Tara Scheurwater.

    Sandra Choufani will become Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary to the Republic of Côte d’Ivoire. Ms. Choufani will replace Anderson Blanc.

    Christian DesRoches will become Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary to the Kingdom of Cambodia. Mr. DesRoches will replace Ping Kitnikone.

    Ambra Dickie will become Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary to the Association of Southeast Asian Nations, in Jakarta. Ms. Dickie will replace Vicky Singmin.

    Stephen Doust will become Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary to Mongolia. Mr. Doust will replace Sandra Choufani.

    Gregory Galligan will become Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary to the Lebanese Republic. Mr. Galligan will replace Stefanie McCollum.

    Alison Grant will become Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary to the Republic of Austria and Ambassador and Permanent Representative to the International Organizations in Vienna. Ms. Grant will replace Troy Lulashnyk.

    Marie-Claude Harvey will become High Commissioner in the Republic of Cameroon. Ms. Harvey will replace Lorraine Anderson.

    Patrick Hébert will become Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary to the Republic of Finland. Mr. Hébert will replace Jeanette Stovel.

    Jean-Dominique Ieraci will become Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary to the Republic of Peru. Mr. Ieraci will replace Louis Marcotte.

    Tarik Khan will become High Commissioner in the Islamic Republic of Pakistan. Mr. Khan will replace Leslie Scanlon.

    Craig Kowalik will become Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary to the Republic of Ecuador. Mr. Kowalik will replace Stephen Potter.

    Philippe Lafortune will become Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary to the Republic of Korea. Mr. Lafortune will replace Tamara Mawhinney.

    Jean-Paul Lemieux will become Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary to the Swiss Confederation. Mr. Lemieux will replace Patrick Wittmann.

    Isabelle Martin will become High Commissioner in the Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka. Ms. Martin will replace Eric Walsh.

    Karim Morcos will become Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary to the State of Qatar. Mr. Morcos will replace Isabelle Martin.

    James Nickel will become Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary to the Socialist Republic of Vietnam. Mr. Nickel will replace Shawn Steil.

    Tara Scheurwater will become Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary to the State of Kuwait. Ms. Scheurwater will replace Aliya Mawani.

    Nicolas Simard will become Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary to the Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia. Mr. Simard will replace Joshua Tabah.

    Joshua Tabah will become High Commissioner in the Republic of Kenya and Permanent Representative to the United Nations Human Settlements Programme and to the United Nations Environment Programme. Mr. Tabah will replace Christopher Thornley.

    Kent Vachon will become Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary to the Lao People’s Democratic Republic. Mr. Vachon will replace Ping Kitnikone. 

    MIL OSI Canada News –

  • MIL-OSI Africa: Qatar, European External Action Service Hold Round of Political Consultations

    Source: Government of Qatar

    Doha, July 03, 2025

    The 4th round of political consultationsآ between the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the European External Action Service (EEAS) was held Thursday in Doha.

    The Qatari side was headed by HE Minister of State for Foreign Affairs Sultan bin Saad Al Muraikhi, and the European side was headed by HE EEAS Deputy Secretary-General for Political Affairs Olof Skoog.

    The political consultations discussed cooperation relations and ways to support and enhance them. 

    MIL OSI Africa –

  • MIL-OSI Africa: Qatar Participates in 131st Session of Permanent Council of La Francophonie

    Source: Government of Qatar

    Paris, July 3, 2025

    The State of Qatar participated in the 131st Session of the Permanent Council of La Francophonie, held in Paris.

    HE Qatar’s Ambassador to the French Republic and its Representative to the Organization, Sheikh Ali bin Jassim Al-Thani represented the State of Qatar at the session .

    In her opening remarks, HE Secretary-General of the International Organization of La Francophonie, Louise Mushikiwabo praised the State of Qatar’s role in mediating between the Republic of Rwanda and the Democratic Republic of the Congo to reach a peaceful solution to the conflict in eastern DRC. She expressed her gratitude to Qatar for its contribution to establishing security and peace at the regional and international levels.

    Participants in the session discussed the outcomes of the 19th La Francophonie Summit, held in France in October 2024, and the preparations for the 46th Session of the La Francophonie Ministerial Conference, slated for November in Kigali, Rwanda. 

    MIL OSI Africa –

  • MIL-OSI Canada: Infrastructure Announcement in Mahone Bay

    Source: Government of Canada News

    Mahone Bay, Nova Scotia, July 3, 2025 — Members of the media are invited to an infrastructure announcement with Jessica Fancy-Landry, Member of Parliament for South Shore–St. Margarets; Her Worship Suzanne Lohnes-Croft, Mayor of the Town of Mahone Bay; and Jordan Veinot, Climate Change Program Manager, Coastal Action.

    Date:
    Friday, July 4, 2025

    Time:
    10 a.m. ADT

    Location:
    The Michael O’Connor Memorial Bandstand
    Next to 543 Main Street (Nick’s Your Independent Grocer)
    Mahone Bay, Nova Scotia, B0J 2E0

    MIL OSI Canada News –

  • Hamas seeks ceasefire guarantees as scores more are killed in Gaza

    Source: Government of India

    Source: Government of India (4)

    Hamas is seeking guarantees that a new U.S. ceasefire proposal for Gaza would lead to the war’s end, a source close to the militant group said on Thursday, as medics said Israeli strikes across the territory had killed scores more people.

    Israeli officials said prospects for reaching a ceasefire deal and hostage deal appeared high, nearly 21 months since the war between Israel and Hamas began.

    Efforts for a Gaza truce have gathered steam after the U.S. secured a ceasefire to end a 12-day aerial conflict between Israel and Iran, but on the ground in Gaza intensified Israeli strikes continued unabated, killing at least 59 people on Thursday, according to health authorities in the territory.

    On Tuesday, U.S. President Donald Trump said that Israel had accepted the conditions needed to finalise a 60-day ceasefire with Hamas, during which the parties will work to end the war.

    Hamas is seeking clear guarantees that the ceasefire will eventually lead to the war’s end, the source close to the group said. Two Israeli officials said that those details were still being worked out.

    Ending the war has been the main sticking point in repeated rounds of failed negotiations.

    Egyptian security sources said Egyptian and Qatari mediators were working to secure U.S. and international guarantees that talks on ending the war would continue as a way of convincing Hamas to accept the two-month truce proposal.

    A separate source familiar with the matter said that Israel was expecting Hamas’ response by Friday and that if it was positive, an Israeli delegation would join indirect talks to cement the deal.

    The proposal includes the staggered release of 10 living Israeli hostages and the return of the bodies of 18 more in exchange for Palestinian prisoners held in Israeli jails, sources say. Of the 50 remaining hostages in Gaza, 20 are believed to still be alive.

    A senior Israeli official close to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said preparations were in place to approve a ceasefire deal even as the premier heads to Washington to meet Trump on Monday.

    ‘READINESS TO ADVANCE’

    Israeli Energy Minister Eli Cohen, who sits on Netanyahu’s security cabinet, told news website Ynet that there was “definitely readiness to advance a deal.”

    In Gaza, however, there was little sign of relief. At least 17 people were killed in an Israeli strike that hit a school in Gaza City where displaced families were sheltering, according to medics.

    “Suddenly, we found the tent collapsing over us and a fire burning. We don’t know what happened,” one witness, Wafaa Al-Arqan, told Reuters. “What can we do? Is it fair that all these children burned?”

    According to medics at Nasser hospital farther south, at least 20 people were killed by Israeli fire en route to an aid distribution site.

    The Israeli military said it was looking into the reports and that its forces were taking precautions to mitigate harm to civilians as it battled Palestinian militants throughout Gaza.

    The war began when Hamas fighters stormed into Israel on October 7, 2023, killing 1,200 people and taking 251 hostages back to Gaza, according to Israeli tallies.

    Israel’s subsequent military assault has killed more than 57,000 Palestinians, according to the Gaza health ministry, while displacing most of the population of more than 2 million, triggering widespread hunger and leaving much of the territory in ruins.

    Israel says it won’t end the war while Hamas is still armed and ruling Gaza. Hamas, severely weakened, says it won’t lay down its weapons but is willing to release all the hostages still in Gaza if Israel ends the war.

    -Reuters

  • MIL-OSI Canada: Infrastructure Announcement in Mahone Bay

    Source: Government of Canada News

    Mahone Bay, Nova Scotia, July 3, 2025 — Members of the media are invited to an infrastructure announcement with Jessica Fancy-Landry, Member of Parliament for South Shore–St. Margarets; Her Worship Suzanne Lohnes-Croft, Mayor of the Town of Mahone Bay; and Jordan Veinot, Climate Change Program Manager, Coastal Action.

    Date:
    Friday, July 4, 2025

    Time:
    10 a.m. ADT

    Location:
    The Michael O’Connor Memorial Bandstand
    Next to 543 Main Street (Nick’s Your Independent Grocer)
    Mahone Bay, Nova Scotia, B0J 2E0

    MIL OSI Canada News –

  • Hamas seeks ceasefire guarantees as scores more are killed in Gaza

    Source: Government of India

    Source: Government of India (4)

    Hamas is seeking guarantees that a new U.S. ceasefire proposal for Gaza would lead to the war’s end, a source close to the militant group said on Thursday, as medics said Israeli strikes across the territory had killed scores more people.

    Israeli officials said prospects for reaching a ceasefire deal and hostage deal appeared high, nearly 21 months since the war between Israel and Hamas began.

    Efforts for a Gaza truce have gathered steam after the U.S. secured a ceasefire to end a 12-day aerial conflict between Israel and Iran, but on the ground in Gaza intensified Israeli strikes continued unabated, killing at least 59 people on Thursday, according to health authorities in the territory.

    On Tuesday, U.S. President Donald Trump said that Israel had accepted the conditions needed to finalise a 60-day ceasefire with Hamas, during which the parties will work to end the war.

    Hamas is seeking clear guarantees that the ceasefire will eventually lead to the war’s end, the source close to the group said. Two Israeli officials said that those details were still being worked out.

    Ending the war has been the main sticking point in repeated rounds of failed negotiations.

    Egyptian security sources said Egyptian and Qatari mediators were working to secure U.S. and international guarantees that talks on ending the war would continue as a way of convincing Hamas to accept the two-month truce proposal.

    A separate source familiar with the matter said that Israel was expecting Hamas’ response by Friday and that if it was positive, an Israeli delegation would join indirect talks to cement the deal.

    The proposal includes the staggered release of 10 living Israeli hostages and the return of the bodies of 18 more in exchange for Palestinian prisoners held in Israeli jails, sources say. Of the 50 remaining hostages in Gaza, 20 are believed to still be alive.

    A senior Israeli official close to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said preparations were in place to approve a ceasefire deal even as the premier heads to Washington to meet Trump on Monday.

    ‘READINESS TO ADVANCE’

    Israeli Energy Minister Eli Cohen, who sits on Netanyahu’s security cabinet, told news website Ynet that there was “definitely readiness to advance a deal.”

    In Gaza, however, there was little sign of relief. At least 17 people were killed in an Israeli strike that hit a school in Gaza City where displaced families were sheltering, according to medics.

    “Suddenly, we found the tent collapsing over us and a fire burning. We don’t know what happened,” one witness, Wafaa Al-Arqan, told Reuters. “What can we do? Is it fair that all these children burned?”

    According to medics at Nasser hospital farther south, at least 20 people were killed by Israeli fire en route to an aid distribution site.

    The Israeli military said it was looking into the reports and that its forces were taking precautions to mitigate harm to civilians as it battled Palestinian militants throughout Gaza.

    The war began when Hamas fighters stormed into Israel on October 7, 2023, killing 1,200 people and taking 251 hostages back to Gaza, according to Israeli tallies.

    Israel’s subsequent military assault has killed more than 57,000 Palestinians, according to the Gaza health ministry, while displacing most of the population of more than 2 million, triggering widespread hunger and leaving much of the territory in ruins.

    Israel says it won’t end the war while Hamas is still armed and ruling Gaza. Hamas, severely weakened, says it won’t lay down its weapons but is willing to release all the hostages still in Gaza if Israel ends the war.

    -Reuters

  • Hamas seeks ceasefire guarantees as scores more are killed in Gaza

    Source: Government of India

    Source: Government of India (4)

    Hamas is seeking guarantees that a new U.S. ceasefire proposal for Gaza would lead to the war’s end, a source close to the militant group said on Thursday, as medics said Israeli strikes across the territory had killed scores more people.

    Israeli officials said prospects for reaching a ceasefire deal and hostage deal appeared high, nearly 21 months since the war between Israel and Hamas began.

    Efforts for a Gaza truce have gathered steam after the U.S. secured a ceasefire to end a 12-day aerial conflict between Israel and Iran, but on the ground in Gaza intensified Israeli strikes continued unabated, killing at least 59 people on Thursday, according to health authorities in the territory.

    On Tuesday, U.S. President Donald Trump said that Israel had accepted the conditions needed to finalise a 60-day ceasefire with Hamas, during which the parties will work to end the war.

    Hamas is seeking clear guarantees that the ceasefire will eventually lead to the war’s end, the source close to the group said. Two Israeli officials said that those details were still being worked out.

    Ending the war has been the main sticking point in repeated rounds of failed negotiations.

    Egyptian security sources said Egyptian and Qatari mediators were working to secure U.S. and international guarantees that talks on ending the war would continue as a way of convincing Hamas to accept the two-month truce proposal.

    A separate source familiar with the matter said that Israel was expecting Hamas’ response by Friday and that if it was positive, an Israeli delegation would join indirect talks to cement the deal.

    The proposal includes the staggered release of 10 living Israeli hostages and the return of the bodies of 18 more in exchange for Palestinian prisoners held in Israeli jails, sources say. Of the 50 remaining hostages in Gaza, 20 are believed to still be alive.

    A senior Israeli official close to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said preparations were in place to approve a ceasefire deal even as the premier heads to Washington to meet Trump on Monday.

    ‘READINESS TO ADVANCE’

    Israeli Energy Minister Eli Cohen, who sits on Netanyahu’s security cabinet, told news website Ynet that there was “definitely readiness to advance a deal.”

    In Gaza, however, there was little sign of relief. At least 17 people were killed in an Israeli strike that hit a school in Gaza City where displaced families were sheltering, according to medics.

    “Suddenly, we found the tent collapsing over us and a fire burning. We don’t know what happened,” one witness, Wafaa Al-Arqan, told Reuters. “What can we do? Is it fair that all these children burned?”

    According to medics at Nasser hospital farther south, at least 20 people were killed by Israeli fire en route to an aid distribution site.

    The Israeli military said it was looking into the reports and that its forces were taking precautions to mitigate harm to civilians as it battled Palestinian militants throughout Gaza.

    The war began when Hamas fighters stormed into Israel on October 7, 2023, killing 1,200 people and taking 251 hostages back to Gaza, according to Israeli tallies.

    Israel’s subsequent military assault has killed more than 57,000 Palestinians, according to the Gaza health ministry, while displacing most of the population of more than 2 million, triggering widespread hunger and leaving much of the territory in ruins.

    Israel says it won’t end the war while Hamas is still armed and ruling Gaza. Hamas, severely weakened, says it won’t lay down its weapons but is willing to release all the hostages still in Gaza if Israel ends the war.

    -Reuters

  • Hamas seeks ceasefire guarantees as scores more are killed in Gaza

    Source: Government of India

    Source: Government of India (4)

    Hamas is seeking guarantees that a new U.S. ceasefire proposal for Gaza would lead to the war’s end, a source close to the militant group said on Thursday, as medics said Israeli strikes across the territory had killed scores more people.

    Israeli officials said prospects for reaching a ceasefire deal and hostage deal appeared high, nearly 21 months since the war between Israel and Hamas began.

    Efforts for a Gaza truce have gathered steam after the U.S. secured a ceasefire to end a 12-day aerial conflict between Israel and Iran, but on the ground in Gaza intensified Israeli strikes continued unabated, killing at least 59 people on Thursday, according to health authorities in the territory.

    On Tuesday, U.S. President Donald Trump said that Israel had accepted the conditions needed to finalise a 60-day ceasefire with Hamas, during which the parties will work to end the war.

    Hamas is seeking clear guarantees that the ceasefire will eventually lead to the war’s end, the source close to the group said. Two Israeli officials said that those details were still being worked out.

    Ending the war has been the main sticking point in repeated rounds of failed negotiations.

    Egyptian security sources said Egyptian and Qatari mediators were working to secure U.S. and international guarantees that talks on ending the war would continue as a way of convincing Hamas to accept the two-month truce proposal.

    A separate source familiar with the matter said that Israel was expecting Hamas’ response by Friday and that if it was positive, an Israeli delegation would join indirect talks to cement the deal.

    The proposal includes the staggered release of 10 living Israeli hostages and the return of the bodies of 18 more in exchange for Palestinian prisoners held in Israeli jails, sources say. Of the 50 remaining hostages in Gaza, 20 are believed to still be alive.

    A senior Israeli official close to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said preparations were in place to approve a ceasefire deal even as the premier heads to Washington to meet Trump on Monday.

    ‘READINESS TO ADVANCE’

    Israeli Energy Minister Eli Cohen, who sits on Netanyahu’s security cabinet, told news website Ynet that there was “definitely readiness to advance a deal.”

    In Gaza, however, there was little sign of relief. At least 17 people were killed in an Israeli strike that hit a school in Gaza City where displaced families were sheltering, according to medics.

    “Suddenly, we found the tent collapsing over us and a fire burning. We don’t know what happened,” one witness, Wafaa Al-Arqan, told Reuters. “What can we do? Is it fair that all these children burned?”

    According to medics at Nasser hospital farther south, at least 20 people were killed by Israeli fire en route to an aid distribution site.

    The Israeli military said it was looking into the reports and that its forces were taking precautions to mitigate harm to civilians as it battled Palestinian militants throughout Gaza.

    The war began when Hamas fighters stormed into Israel on October 7, 2023, killing 1,200 people and taking 251 hostages back to Gaza, according to Israeli tallies.

    Israel’s subsequent military assault has killed more than 57,000 Palestinians, according to the Gaza health ministry, while displacing most of the population of more than 2 million, triggering widespread hunger and leaving much of the territory in ruins.

    Israel says it won’t end the war while Hamas is still armed and ruling Gaza. Hamas, severely weakened, says it won’t lay down its weapons but is willing to release all the hostages still in Gaza if Israel ends the war.

    -Reuters

  • MIL-OSI United Kingdom: ‘Aberdeen welcomed me when I needed it most’: Eissa’s resilience sees him graduate Eissa Hassan’s journey to graduation has been more challenging than most.

    Source: University of Aberdeen

    Eissa has faced many challenges in his journey to graduation

    Eissa Hassan’s journey to graduation has been more challenging than most.
    After leaving his home in Yemen, the 28-year-old arrived in the UK, determined not to be defined by his past, but his future.
    Eissa explains: “Arriving in the UK as a refugee with nothing but hope, with limited resources, I faced the daunting task of rebuilding my life from the ground up. I sought a place that didn’t just offer education – but transformation.
    “I chose the University of Aberdeen because it embodies opportunity and growth. This institution opened its doors to me at a time I needed it most, nurturing my potential and empowering me to turn hardship into leadership. This University welcomed me with open arms and gave me not just an education, but a community and a future.
    “Entering this new academic environment felt like stepping into a world vastly different from anything I had known. I confronted self-doubt about my ability to integrate and succeed. As a refugee adjusting to unfamiliar cultural and educational norms, I grappled with feelings of uncertainty and isolation.
    “However, this initial apprehension gave way to resilience. Through daily engagement, academic challenges and support from the University community, I began to adapt and grow. This period marked a critical turning point, affirming my capacity to overcome adversity, embrace new opportunities and commit myself to lifelong learning and personal development.”

    Where we begin does not define where we can go” Eissa Hassan

    While studying for his degree in Business Management, Eissa was able to pursue not only his academic passions, but learn more about himself and what he wanted for his future.
    He continues: “Studying Business Management has been both academically enriching and personally empowering. I had the privilege of representing youth voices on climate justice globally, coordinate sustainability programmes and lead community events – all while balancing my studies.
    “One of the most meaningful highlights was working with climate and refugee networks across the UK and internationally, turning my lived experience into leadership. Of course, there were challenges – financial pressure, culture shock and grief after losing my mother, who passed away four months after I arrived in Aberdeen. But I found strength in my purpose and support from peers and staff who believed in me. Aberdeen gave me more than a degree; it gave me the platform to become the change I want to see in the world.”
    His journey has not been easy, but with resilience and support from the University community, Eissa is proud to be celebrating his hard work at his graduation.
    “Graduating fills me with profound gratitude and heartfelt reflection. This milestone represents not only the culmination of my academic journey but also the resilience required to overcome significant challenges. It reaffirms my belief that where we begin does not define where we can go and honours the sacrifices of my late mother. She was such an important part of my life and her dream was always to see me succeed. I was always trying to make her proud and happy and in the end, I feel like she succeeded.
    “This achievement is a testament to the power of perseverance, reminding me of my potential and the meaningful impact that dedication and determination can create. My future aspirations are to advance my work in climate justice, with a particular focus on supporting vulnerable communities disproportionately impacted by climate change. I look forward to leading with purpose, guided by the lessons of my past and hope for the future.”

    MIL OSI United Kingdom –

  • MIL-OSI: eToro Appoints Former SEC Commissioner Laura Unger and Wix CFO Lior Shemesh as Board Members

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    NEW YORK, July 03, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — eToro Group Ltd. (“eToro”, or the “Company”) (NASDAQ: ETOR), the trading and investing platform, today announced the appointment of Laura Unger and Lior Shemesh as Board Members. Both Ms. Unger and Mr. Shemesh will also join eToro’s Audit & Risk Committee.

    Commenting on the appointments, Yoni Assia, Co-founder and CEO, said: “As eToro enters this new chapter as a Nasdaq listed company, we are delighted that Laura Unger and Lior Shemesh will join eToro’s Board. As leaders in their respective fields, they bring extensive knowledge and expertise to the Board. We look forward to benefiting from Laura’s experience across regulatory governance and risk management, as well as Lior’s financial and operational leadership as we continue to grow eToro’s presence around the world, including our goal to expand our operations in the U.S.”

    Ms. Unger is a financial services regulatory, legislative, policy and strategy expert. She has held a variety of public and private sector roles and served on multiple corporate boards over the last twenty years, including Borland Software, MBNA, Merrill Lynch IQ Funds, Ambac Financial, CA Technologies, CIT Group and Navient Corporation. She is a former SEC Commissioner and Acting Chair, and former Counsel to the U.S. Senate Banking Committee.

    Ms. Unger currently serves as an independent director and Risk Committee Chair for the global investment bank Nomura Holdings Inc. (NYSE “NMR”) (Tokyo), as Audit Chair and director of its largest subsidiary, Nomura Holdings America, and director of its trading platform, Instinet.

    Ms. Unger began her government career as an SEC Enforcement Attorney in NYC and Washington, DC, followed by her service as Securities Counsel to the US Committee on Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs. She received a B.A. in Rhetoric from the University of California at Berkeley in 1983, and a J.D. from New York Law School in 1987.

    “I’m pleased to join eToro’s Board at such an exciting moment for the company and for the investing landscape more generally. I look forward to sharing my two decades of experience by providing capital markets, regulatory and governance insights. Beyond this, eToro and I share a passion for understanding technology’s impact on capital markets. At a time when the pace of technological innovation is accelerating, I’m thrilled to be joining a company which prides itself on being at the forefront of compliant innovation,” said Ms. Unger.

    ​Lior Shemesh is an experienced CFO with a strong track record of shaping and leading the financial strategy and operations for technology companies. He has served as CFO of Nasdaq listed software company Wix since April 2013. Before joining Wix, Lior served as VP Finance and then CFO at Alverion Ltd., a provider of optimized wireless broadband solutions. Previously, he held senior finance roles at Veraz Networks Inc., a softswitch, media gateway and digital compression solutions provider, and ECI Telecom Ltd., a network infrastructure provider.

    ​From July 2012 to June 2021, Mr. Shemesh served on the board of directors of Aspen Group Ltd., where he was also on the compensation committee, financial statements committee, as well as Chair of the audit committee.

    ​Mr. Shemesh began his career as an accountant at Israel Aerospace Industries. He has a B.A. in Accounting & Economics and an M.B.A. from Bar-Ilan University.

    “I’m honored to be joining the Board of eToro at such a pivotal time in its growth journey. I’ve spent years in the technology space and am deeply impressed by eToro’s commitment to harnessing technology to empower individual investors around the world. I look forward to working with the Board and eToro’s leadership team to support the company’s mission and help drive its continued growth and success,” said Mr. Shemesh.

    About eToro
    eToro is the trading and investing platform that empowers you to invest, share and learn. We were founded in 2007 with the vision of a world where everyone can trade and invest in a simple and transparent way. Today we have 40 million registered users from 75 countries. We believe there is power in shared knowledge and that we can become more successful by investing together. So we’ve created a collaborative investment community designed to provide you with the tools you need to grow your knowledge and wealth. On eToro, you can hold a range of traditional and innovative assets and choose how you invest: trade directly, invest in a portfolio, or copy other investors. You can visit our media center here for our latest news.

    Cautionary Language Concerning Forward-Looking Statements
    This press release contains “forward-looking statements” within the meaning of the “safe harbor” provisions of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995, including but not limited to, statements regarding eToro’s financial outlook and market positioning. These forward-looking statements are made as of the date they were first issued and were based on current expectations, estimates, forecasts and projections as well as the beliefs and assumptions of management. Words such as “outlook,” “guidance,” “expect,” “anticipate,” “should,” “believe,” “hope,” “target,” “project,” “plan,” “goals,” “estimate,” “potential,” “predict,” “may,” “will,” “might,” “could,” “intend,” “shall” and variations of these terms or the negative of these terms and similar expressions are intended to identify these forward-looking statements. Forward-looking statements are subject to a number of risks and uncertainties, many of which involve factors or circumstances that are beyond eToro’s control. eToro’s actual results could differ materially from those stated or implied in forward-looking statements due to a number of factors, including but not limited to market volatility and erratic market movements; failure to retain existing users or adding new users; extreme competition; changes in regulatory and legal framework under which eToro operates; regulatory inquiries and investigations; eToro’s estimates of its financial performance; interest rate fluctuations; the evolving cryptoasset market, including the regulations thereof; conditions related to eToro’s operations in Israel, including the ongoing war; risks related to data security and privacy and use of OSS; risks related to AI; changes in general economic or political conditions; changes to accounting principles and guidelines; the ability to maintain the listing of eToro’s securities on Nasdaq; unexpected costs or expenses; and other factors described in “Risk Factors” in eToro’s Registration Statement on Form F-1, filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”) on March 24, 2025, as amended, and declared effective by the SEC on May 13, 2025. Further information on potential risks that could affect actual results will be included in the subsequent filings that eToro makes with the SEC from time to time.

    Past performance is not necessarily indicative of future results. The forward-looking statements included in this press release represent eToro’s views as of the date of this press release. eToro anticipates that subsequent events and developments will cause its views to change. eToro undertakes no intention or obligation to update or revise any forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information, future events, or otherwise. These forward-looking statements should not be relied upon as representing eToro’s views as of any date subsequent to the date of this press release.

    Contact
    Media Relations – pr@etoro.com
    Investor Relations – investors@etoro.com

    Photos accompanying this announcement are available at

    https://www.globenewswire.com/NewsRoom/AttachmentNg/e5e9931e-ef09-48e3-b5c9-448e9ecfb052

    https://www.globenewswire.com/NewsRoom/AttachmentNg/89bdaab3-6db5-4493-ad09-8535b5e87f45

    The MIL Network –

  • MIL-OSI USA: U.S. International Trade in Goods and Services, May 2025

    Source: US Bureau of Economic Analysis

    The U.S. Census Bureau and the U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis announced today that the goods and services deficit was $71.5 billion in May, up $11.3 billion from $60.3 billion in April, revised.

    U.S. International Trade in Goods and Services Deficit
    Deficit:

    $71.5 Billion

    +18.7%°
    Exports:

    $279.0 Billion

    –4.0%°
    Imports:

    $350.5 Billion

    –0.1%°

    Next release: Tuesday, August 5, 2025

    (°) Statistical significance is not applicable or not measurable. Data adjusted for seasonality but not price changes

    Source: U.S. Census Bureau, U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis; U.S. International Trade in Goods and Services, July 3, 2025

    Exports, Imports, and Balance (exhibit 1)

    May exports were $279.0 billion, $11.6 billion less than April exports. May imports were $350.5 billion, $0.3 billion less than April imports.

    The May increase in the goods and services deficit reflected an increase in the goods deficit of $11.2 billion to $97.5 billion and a decrease in the services surplus of $0.1 billion to $26.0 billion.

    Year-to-date, the goods and services deficit increased $175.0 billion, or 50.4 percent, from the same period in 2024. Exports increased $73.6 billion or 5.5 percent. Imports increased $248.7 billion or 14.8 percent.

    Three-Month Moving Averages (exhibit 2)

    The average goods and services deficit decreased $16.8 billion to $90.0 billion for the three months ending in May.

    • Average exports increased $0.1 billion to $283.5 billion in May.
    • Average imports decreased $16.7 billion to $373.6 billion in May.

    Year-over-year, the average goods and services deficit increased $18.8 billion from the three months ending in May 2024.

    • Average exports increased $17.9 billion from May 2024.
    • Average imports increased $36.6 billion from May 2024.

    Exports (exhibits 3, 6, and 7)

    Exports of goods decreased $11.4 billion to $180.2 billion in May.

      Exports of goods on a Census basis decreased $10.8 billion.

    • Industrial supplies and materials decreased $10.0 billion.
      • Nonmonetary gold decreased $5.5 billion.
      • Natural gas decreased $1.1 billion.
      • Finished metal shapes decreased $1.0 billion.
    • Capital goods decreased $1.9 billion.
      • Semiconductors decreased $0.6 billion.
      • Civilian aircraft engines decreased $0.5 billion.
      • Telecommunications equipment decreased $0.4 billion.
      • Computer accessories increased $0.8 billion.
    • Consumer goods increased $1.5 billion.
      • Pharmaceutical preparations increased $1.1 billion.

      Net balance of payments adjustments decreased $0.6 billion.

    Exports of services decreased $0.2 billion to $98.8 billion in May.

    • Travel decreased $0.3 billion.
    • Transport decreased $0.2 billion.
    • Charges for the use of intellectual property increased $0.1 billion.
    • Other business services increased $0.1 billion.

    Imports (exhibits 4, 6, and 8)

    Imports of goods decreased $0.2 billion to $277.7 billion in May.

      Imports of goods on a Census basis decreased $0.3 billion.

    • Consumer goods decreased $4.0 billion.
      • Other textile apparel and household goods decreased $0.8 billion.
      • Toys, games, and sporting goods decreased $0.7 billion.
      • Pharmaceutical preparations increased $2.5 billion.
    • Industrial supplies and materials decreased $0.9 billion.
      • Finished metal shapes decreased $1.7 billion.
      • Nuclear fuel materials increased $0.6 billion.
    • Automotive vehicles, parts, and engines increased $3.4 billion.
      • Passenger cars increased $3.1 billion.
    • Other goods increased $1.0 billion.
    • Capital goods increased $0.3 billion.
      • Computers increased $4.4 billion.
      • Computer accessories decreased $2.8 billion.

      Net balance of payments adjustments increased $0.1 billion.

    Imports of services decreased $0.1 billion to $72.8 billion in May.

    • Transport decreased $0.4 billion.
    • Travel decreased $0.2 billion.
    • Other business services increased $0.1 billion.
    • Maintenance and repair services increased $0.1 billion.

    Real Goods in 2017 Dollars – Census Basis (exhibit 11)

    The real goods deficit increased $8.1 billion, or 9.6 percent, to $92.5 billion in May, compared to a 12.3 percent increase in the nominal deficit.

    • Real exports of goods decreased $8.2 billion, or 5.3 percent, to $148.3 billion, compared to a 5.7 percent decrease in nominal exports.
    • Real imports of goods decreased $0.1 billion, or 0.1 percent, to $240.8 billion, compared to a 0.1 percent decrease in nominal imports.

    Revisions

    Revisions to April exports

    • Exports of goods were revised up $1.1 billion.
    • Exports of services were revised up $0.1 billion.

    Revisions to April imports

    • Imports of goods were revised down less than $0.1 billion.
    • Imports of services were revised down $0.2 billion.

    Goods by Selected Countries and Areas: Monthly – Census Basis (exhibit 19)

    The May figures show surpluses, in billions of dollars, with Netherlands ($4.8), Hong Kong ($3.6), South and Central America ($3.3), Switzerland ($3.3), United Kingdom ($3.0), Australia ($1.5), Brazil ($0.5), Saudi Arabia ($0.5), Belgium ($0.4), Singapore ($0.3), and Israel ($0.1). Deficits were recorded, in billions of dollars, with European Union ($22.5), Mexico ($17.1), Vietnam ($14.9), China ($14.0), Ireland ($11.8), Taiwan ($11.5), Germany ($6.8), Japan ($5.8), South Korea ($5.4), India ($5.1), Canada ($2.8), Italy ($2.6), Malaysia ($2.4), and France ($0.5).

    • The deficit with Mexico increased $3.6 billion to $17.1 billion in May. Exports decreased $0.3 billion to $27.5 billion and imports increased $3.3 billion to $44.6 billion.
    • The deficit with Ireland increased $2.4 billion to $11.8 billion in May. Exports increased $0.2 billion to $1.6 billion and imports increased $2.5 billion to $13.4 billion.
    • The deficit with China decreased $5.7 billion to $14.0 billion in May. Exports decreased $1.7 billion to $6.9 billion and imports decreased $7.4 billion to $20.9 billion.

    All statistics referenced are seasonally adjusted; statistics are on a balance of payments basis unless otherwise specified. Additional statistics, including not seasonally adjusted statistics and details for goods on a Census basis, are available in exhibits 1-20b of this release. For information on data sources, definitions, and revision procedures, see the explanatory notes in this release. The full release can be found at www.census.gov/foreign-trade/Press-Release/current_press_release/index.html or www.bea.gov/data/intl-trade-investment/international-trade-goods-and-services. The full schedule is available in the Census Bureau’s Economic Briefing Room at www.census.gov/economic-indicators/ or on BEA’s website at www.bea.gov/news/schedule.

    Next release: August 5, 2025, at 8:30 a.m. EDT
    U.S. International Trade in Goods and Services, June 2025

    Notice

    Update to BEA’s Annual International Services Tables

    BEA’s annual international services tables—BEA’s most detailed trade in services statistics by service type and geographic area—are scheduled for release at 10:00 a.m. on July 3, 2025, for statistics through 2024. With this release, BEA is introducing “Table 2.4. U.S. Trade in Services, Expanded Geographic Detail,” which presents total services exports, imports, and balance for 237 countries and areas, 147 more than the 90 presented in tables 2.2 and 2.3, beginning with statistics for 2018.

    If you have questions or need additional information, please contact BEA, Balance of Payments Division, at InternationalAccounts@bea.gov.

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: U.S. International Trade in Goods and Services, May 2025

    Source: US Bureau of Economic Analysis

    The U.S. Census Bureau and the U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis announced today that the goods and services deficit was $71.5 billion in May, up $11.3 billion from $60.3 billion in April, revised.

    U.S. International Trade in Goods and Services Deficit
    Deficit:

    $71.5 Billion

    +18.7%°
    Exports:

    $279.0 Billion

    –4.0%°
    Imports:

    $350.5 Billion

    –0.1%°

    Next release: Tuesday, August 5, 2025

    (°) Statistical significance is not applicable or not measurable. Data adjusted for seasonality but not price changes

    Source: U.S. Census Bureau, U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis; U.S. International Trade in Goods and Services, July 3, 2025

    Exports, Imports, and Balance (exhibit 1)

    May exports were $279.0 billion, $11.6 billion less than April exports. May imports were $350.5 billion, $0.3 billion less than April imports.

    The May increase in the goods and services deficit reflected an increase in the goods deficit of $11.2 billion to $97.5 billion and a decrease in the services surplus of $0.1 billion to $26.0 billion.

    Year-to-date, the goods and services deficit increased $175.0 billion, or 50.4 percent, from the same period in 2024. Exports increased $73.6 billion or 5.5 percent. Imports increased $248.7 billion or 14.8 percent.

    Three-Month Moving Averages (exhibit 2)

    The average goods and services deficit decreased $16.8 billion to $90.0 billion for the three months ending in May.

    • Average exports increased $0.1 billion to $283.5 billion in May.
    • Average imports decreased $16.7 billion to $373.6 billion in May.

    Year-over-year, the average goods and services deficit increased $18.8 billion from the three months ending in May 2024.

    • Average exports increased $17.9 billion from May 2024.
    • Average imports increased $36.6 billion from May 2024.

    Exports (exhibits 3, 6, and 7)

    Exports of goods decreased $11.4 billion to $180.2 billion in May.

      Exports of goods on a Census basis decreased $10.8 billion.

    • Industrial supplies and materials decreased $10.0 billion.
      • Nonmonetary gold decreased $5.5 billion.
      • Natural gas decreased $1.1 billion.
      • Finished metal shapes decreased $1.0 billion.
    • Capital goods decreased $1.9 billion.
      • Semiconductors decreased $0.6 billion.
      • Civilian aircraft engines decreased $0.5 billion.
      • Telecommunications equipment decreased $0.4 billion.
      • Computer accessories increased $0.8 billion.
    • Consumer goods increased $1.5 billion.
      • Pharmaceutical preparations increased $1.1 billion.

      Net balance of payments adjustments decreased $0.6 billion.

    Exports of services decreased $0.2 billion to $98.8 billion in May.

    • Travel decreased $0.3 billion.
    • Transport decreased $0.2 billion.
    • Charges for the use of intellectual property increased $0.1 billion.
    • Other business services increased $0.1 billion.

    Imports (exhibits 4, 6, and 8)

    Imports of goods decreased $0.2 billion to $277.7 billion in May.

      Imports of goods on a Census basis decreased $0.3 billion.

    • Consumer goods decreased $4.0 billion.
      • Other textile apparel and household goods decreased $0.8 billion.
      • Toys, games, and sporting goods decreased $0.7 billion.
      • Pharmaceutical preparations increased $2.5 billion.
    • Industrial supplies and materials decreased $0.9 billion.
      • Finished metal shapes decreased $1.7 billion.
      • Nuclear fuel materials increased $0.6 billion.
    • Automotive vehicles, parts, and engines increased $3.4 billion.
      • Passenger cars increased $3.1 billion.
    • Other goods increased $1.0 billion.
    • Capital goods increased $0.3 billion.
      • Computers increased $4.4 billion.
      • Computer accessories decreased $2.8 billion.

      Net balance of payments adjustments increased $0.1 billion.

    Imports of services decreased $0.1 billion to $72.8 billion in May.

    • Transport decreased $0.4 billion.
    • Travel decreased $0.2 billion.
    • Other business services increased $0.1 billion.
    • Maintenance and repair services increased $0.1 billion.

    Real Goods in 2017 Dollars – Census Basis (exhibit 11)

    The real goods deficit increased $8.1 billion, or 9.6 percent, to $92.5 billion in May, compared to a 12.3 percent increase in the nominal deficit.

    • Real exports of goods decreased $8.2 billion, or 5.3 percent, to $148.3 billion, compared to a 5.7 percent decrease in nominal exports.
    • Real imports of goods decreased $0.1 billion, or 0.1 percent, to $240.8 billion, compared to a 0.1 percent decrease in nominal imports.

    Revisions

    Revisions to April exports

    • Exports of goods were revised up $1.1 billion.
    • Exports of services were revised up $0.1 billion.

    Revisions to April imports

    • Imports of goods were revised down less than $0.1 billion.
    • Imports of services were revised down $0.2 billion.

    Goods by Selected Countries and Areas: Monthly – Census Basis (exhibit 19)

    The May figures show surpluses, in billions of dollars, with Netherlands ($4.8), Hong Kong ($3.6), South and Central America ($3.3), Switzerland ($3.3), United Kingdom ($3.0), Australia ($1.5), Brazil ($0.5), Saudi Arabia ($0.5), Belgium ($0.4), Singapore ($0.3), and Israel ($0.1). Deficits were recorded, in billions of dollars, with European Union ($22.5), Mexico ($17.1), Vietnam ($14.9), China ($14.0), Ireland ($11.8), Taiwan ($11.5), Germany ($6.8), Japan ($5.8), South Korea ($5.4), India ($5.1), Canada ($2.8), Italy ($2.6), Malaysia ($2.4), and France ($0.5).

    • The deficit with Mexico increased $3.6 billion to $17.1 billion in May. Exports decreased $0.3 billion to $27.5 billion and imports increased $3.3 billion to $44.6 billion.
    • The deficit with Ireland increased $2.4 billion to $11.8 billion in May. Exports increased $0.2 billion to $1.6 billion and imports increased $2.5 billion to $13.4 billion.
    • The deficit with China decreased $5.7 billion to $14.0 billion in May. Exports decreased $1.7 billion to $6.9 billion and imports decreased $7.4 billion to $20.9 billion.

    All statistics referenced are seasonally adjusted; statistics are on a balance of payments basis unless otherwise specified. Additional statistics, including not seasonally adjusted statistics and details for goods on a Census basis, are available in exhibits 1-20b of this release. For information on data sources, definitions, and revision procedures, see the explanatory notes in this release. The full release can be found at www.census.gov/foreign-trade/Press-Release/current_press_release/index.html or www.bea.gov/data/intl-trade-investment/international-trade-goods-and-services. The full schedule is available in the Census Bureau’s Economic Briefing Room at www.census.gov/economic-indicators/ or on BEA’s website at www.bea.gov/news/schedule.

    Next release: August 5, 2025, at 8:30 a.m. EDT
    U.S. International Trade in Goods and Services, June 2025

    Notice

    Update to BEA’s Annual International Services Tables

    BEA’s annual international services tables—BEA’s most detailed trade in services statistics by service type and geographic area—are scheduled for release at 10:00 a.m. on July 3, 2025, for statistics through 2024. With this release, BEA is introducing “Table 2.4. U.S. Trade in Services, Expanded Geographic Detail,” which presents total services exports, imports, and balance for 237 countries and areas, 147 more than the 90 presented in tables 2.2 and 2.3, beginning with statistics for 2018.

    If you have questions or need additional information, please contact BEA, Balance of Payments Division, at InternationalAccounts@bea.gov.

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: U.S. International Trade in Goods and Services, May 2025

    Source: US Bureau of Economic Analysis

    The U.S. Census Bureau and the U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis announced today that the goods and services deficit was $71.5 billion in May, up $11.3 billion from $60.3 billion in April, revised.

    U.S. International Trade in Goods and Services Deficit
    Deficit:

    $71.5 Billion

    +18.7%°
    Exports:

    $279.0 Billion

    –4.0%°
    Imports:

    $350.5 Billion

    –0.1%°

    Next release: Tuesday, August 5, 2025

    (°) Statistical significance is not applicable or not measurable. Data adjusted for seasonality but not price changes

    Source: U.S. Census Bureau, U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis; U.S. International Trade in Goods and Services, July 3, 2025

    Exports, Imports, and Balance (exhibit 1)

    May exports were $279.0 billion, $11.6 billion less than April exports. May imports were $350.5 billion, $0.3 billion less than April imports.

    The May increase in the goods and services deficit reflected an increase in the goods deficit of $11.2 billion to $97.5 billion and a decrease in the services surplus of $0.1 billion to $26.0 billion.

    Year-to-date, the goods and services deficit increased $175.0 billion, or 50.4 percent, from the same period in 2024. Exports increased $73.6 billion or 5.5 percent. Imports increased $248.7 billion or 14.8 percent.

    Three-Month Moving Averages (exhibit 2)

    The average goods and services deficit decreased $16.8 billion to $90.0 billion for the three months ending in May.

    • Average exports increased $0.1 billion to $283.5 billion in May.
    • Average imports decreased $16.7 billion to $373.6 billion in May.

    Year-over-year, the average goods and services deficit increased $18.8 billion from the three months ending in May 2024.

    • Average exports increased $17.9 billion from May 2024.
    • Average imports increased $36.6 billion from May 2024.

    Exports (exhibits 3, 6, and 7)

    Exports of goods decreased $11.4 billion to $180.2 billion in May.

      Exports of goods on a Census basis decreased $10.8 billion.

    • Industrial supplies and materials decreased $10.0 billion.
      • Nonmonetary gold decreased $5.5 billion.
      • Natural gas decreased $1.1 billion.
      • Finished metal shapes decreased $1.0 billion.
    • Capital goods decreased $1.9 billion.
      • Semiconductors decreased $0.6 billion.
      • Civilian aircraft engines decreased $0.5 billion.
      • Telecommunications equipment decreased $0.4 billion.
      • Computer accessories increased $0.8 billion.
    • Consumer goods increased $1.5 billion.
      • Pharmaceutical preparations increased $1.1 billion.

      Net balance of payments adjustments decreased $0.6 billion.

    Exports of services decreased $0.2 billion to $98.8 billion in May.

    • Travel decreased $0.3 billion.
    • Transport decreased $0.2 billion.
    • Charges for the use of intellectual property increased $0.1 billion.
    • Other business services increased $0.1 billion.

    Imports (exhibits 4, 6, and 8)

    Imports of goods decreased $0.2 billion to $277.7 billion in May.

      Imports of goods on a Census basis decreased $0.3 billion.

    • Consumer goods decreased $4.0 billion.
      • Other textile apparel and household goods decreased $0.8 billion.
      • Toys, games, and sporting goods decreased $0.7 billion.
      • Pharmaceutical preparations increased $2.5 billion.
    • Industrial supplies and materials decreased $0.9 billion.
      • Finished metal shapes decreased $1.7 billion.
      • Nuclear fuel materials increased $0.6 billion.
    • Automotive vehicles, parts, and engines increased $3.4 billion.
      • Passenger cars increased $3.1 billion.
    • Other goods increased $1.0 billion.
    • Capital goods increased $0.3 billion.
      • Computers increased $4.4 billion.
      • Computer accessories decreased $2.8 billion.

      Net balance of payments adjustments increased $0.1 billion.

    Imports of services decreased $0.1 billion to $72.8 billion in May.

    • Transport decreased $0.4 billion.
    • Travel decreased $0.2 billion.
    • Other business services increased $0.1 billion.
    • Maintenance and repair services increased $0.1 billion.

    Real Goods in 2017 Dollars – Census Basis (exhibit 11)

    The real goods deficit increased $8.1 billion, or 9.6 percent, to $92.5 billion in May, compared to a 12.3 percent increase in the nominal deficit.

    • Real exports of goods decreased $8.2 billion, or 5.3 percent, to $148.3 billion, compared to a 5.7 percent decrease in nominal exports.
    • Real imports of goods decreased $0.1 billion, or 0.1 percent, to $240.8 billion, compared to a 0.1 percent decrease in nominal imports.

    Revisions

    Revisions to April exports

    • Exports of goods were revised up $1.1 billion.
    • Exports of services were revised up $0.1 billion.

    Revisions to April imports

    • Imports of goods were revised down less than $0.1 billion.
    • Imports of services were revised down $0.2 billion.

    Goods by Selected Countries and Areas: Monthly – Census Basis (exhibit 19)

    The May figures show surpluses, in billions of dollars, with Netherlands ($4.8), Hong Kong ($3.6), South and Central America ($3.3), Switzerland ($3.3), United Kingdom ($3.0), Australia ($1.5), Brazil ($0.5), Saudi Arabia ($0.5), Belgium ($0.4), Singapore ($0.3), and Israel ($0.1). Deficits were recorded, in billions of dollars, with European Union ($22.5), Mexico ($17.1), Vietnam ($14.9), China ($14.0), Ireland ($11.8), Taiwan ($11.5), Germany ($6.8), Japan ($5.8), South Korea ($5.4), India ($5.1), Canada ($2.8), Italy ($2.6), Malaysia ($2.4), and France ($0.5).

    • The deficit with Mexico increased $3.6 billion to $17.1 billion in May. Exports decreased $0.3 billion to $27.5 billion and imports increased $3.3 billion to $44.6 billion.
    • The deficit with Ireland increased $2.4 billion to $11.8 billion in May. Exports increased $0.2 billion to $1.6 billion and imports increased $2.5 billion to $13.4 billion.
    • The deficit with China decreased $5.7 billion to $14.0 billion in May. Exports decreased $1.7 billion to $6.9 billion and imports decreased $7.4 billion to $20.9 billion.

    All statistics referenced are seasonally adjusted; statistics are on a balance of payments basis unless otherwise specified. Additional statistics, including not seasonally adjusted statistics and details for goods on a Census basis, are available in exhibits 1-20b of this release. For information on data sources, definitions, and revision procedures, see the explanatory notes in this release. The full release can be found at www.census.gov/foreign-trade/Press-Release/current_press_release/index.html or www.bea.gov/data/intl-trade-investment/international-trade-goods-and-services. The full schedule is available in the Census Bureau’s Economic Briefing Room at www.census.gov/economic-indicators/ or on BEA’s website at www.bea.gov/news/schedule.

    Next release: August 5, 2025, at 8:30 a.m. EDT
    U.S. International Trade in Goods and Services, June 2025

    Notice

    Update to BEA’s Annual International Services Tables

    BEA’s annual international services tables—BEA’s most detailed trade in services statistics by service type and geographic area—are scheduled for release at 10:00 a.m. on July 3, 2025, for statistics through 2024. With this release, BEA is introducing “Table 2.4. U.S. Trade in Services, Expanded Geographic Detail,” which presents total services exports, imports, and balance for 237 countries and areas, 147 more than the 90 presented in tables 2.2 and 2.3, beginning with statistics for 2018.

    If you have questions or need additional information, please contact BEA, Balance of Payments Division, at InternationalAccounts@bea.gov.

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI Video: A youth delegate on her journey to the development financing conference | #FFD4 | United Nations

    Source: United Nations (video statements)

    Twenty-year old Yvonne Bejjani, who grew up in Lebanon, describes how that experience helped shaped her convictions and led her to attend the Fourth International Conference on Financing for Development as an official delegate.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L3rqnv55GmE

    MIL OSI Video –

  • MIL-OSI Africa: Speech by HE the Prime Minister and Minister of Foreign Affairs upon acceptance Tipperary International Peace Award

    Source: Government of Qatar

    Ladies and Gentlemen,

    Esteemed Members of the Tipperary Peace Convention,

    Distinguished Guests,

    It is with deep humility and immense gratitude that I accept the Tipperary International Peace Award, not as a personal honor, but on behalf of the State of Qatar—its people, its principles, and its leadership. It is a recognition of what Qatar represents in the world today: a steady voice for peace, a defender of dialogue, and a nation that does not waver in the face of hardship.

     To stand here in Ireland—a country whose peace was earned through reconciliation and moral courage—is profoundly meaningful. Your journey affirms what we in Qatar have always believed: peace is not given, it is built.

    I am reminded of the late John Hume, who said: “The basis of peace and stability, in any society, has to be the fullest respect for the human rights of all its people.”

    However, today, I speak to you not about my story, but the story of the proud people of Qatar.

    I am often asked, What guides Qatar’s efforts, from Gaza to Afghanistan, from Lebanon to Ukraine, Some have claimed that Qatar does this for its own gain. This cannot be further from the truth.

    Our work is not transactional; it is transformational. It is not a tactic; it is a national identity shaped by culture, driven by faith, enshrined in the constitution, and inspired by leadership.

    His Highness the Amir is a model of leadership rare in today’s world. He does not simply govern—he feels, putting his heart and soul in every duty, from the needs of his citizens, to regional and international peace. He sees the people of the region, and innocent people around the world, as his own, grieves for every life lost, and envisions peace as his legacy.

    Words cannot express my pride in His Highness. I had the honor to serve my country under his leadership for over ten years, and will be honored to do so for as long as I am able to. It is his wisdom, passion, and determination that I personally draw from the inspiration to propel me forward.

    This award comes at a moment of great significance.

    Just a week ago, our country came under direct missile attack, a direct result of recklessness concerning the peace and stability of our region. But even as our air defences were falling, our diplomats were doing theirs, securing a ceasefire by dawn. Most importantly, dawn broke with no lives lost and no human cost. That realization led to the choice of restraint rather than retaliation. At that difficult moment, while we were discussing with the Emir options of what our next move will be, he decided that as long as thankfully no lives were lost in the attack, none shall be lost. The choice was restraint.
    And I must be clear: Qatar chose restraint from a position of strength, not weakness, because we prioritized regional stability and the well-being of all in our region, over rhetoric and pity show of force.

    And frankly speaking, we do not want to be among the countries who are in the club preaching something and doing something else. So we are trying to at least practice what we preach.

    We have long warned of the dangers of regional spillover and of how the reckless behavior of Israel risked widening the conflict beyond repair. The price of ignoring those warnings is being paid not only in Gaza but across the region.

    The ever-expanding conflicts in our world today have put to the test the ideals and principles that are supposed to secure international peace, the blatant violations of international law, and especially international humanitarian law that are ongoing, with very little accountability and complete impunity perpetrated by members of the United Nations are increasing every day. The erosion of trust in the international order and norms. Nowhere is it safe.

    Nowhere is that tragedy more visible than in Gaza. The images from there are unbearable. The loss is unspeakable. Yet in the face of devastation, His Highness the Amir has remained unwavering in his commitment to the people of Gaza, whether it be through continuous aid, actively working towards peace, or defending their dignity in the international arena.

    In the international arena, not only the people of Gaza, but we remain committed to freeing the remaining Israeli hostages despite the Israeli government’s apathy towards a peaceful outcome. A human life to us is sacred, regardless of political or any other identity.

    Their suffering weighs heavily on our conscience and strengthens our resolve.

    Even when provoked, even when attacked, we remain committed to peace—not as a slogan, but as a duty. Our armed forces protect our sovereignty with courage. Our diplomats build bridges in silence. And through it all, our people stand united.

    As our beloved Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) said:

    “Shall I not tell you what is better than the rank of prayer, fasting, and charity? It is reconciling people.”

    To the next generation—those watching from afar: do not believe that peace is naïve. It is harder than war. But it is worth every effort. It is stronger than cynicism and louder than violence.

    On behalf of the people of Qatar, I thank the Tipperary Peace Convention for this recognition. And on their behalf, I accept it with humility and with renewed commitment—that Qatar will remain a voice of calm, a partner in peace, and a friend to all who believe that dialogue must triumph over destruction.

    May we remain faithful to that cause.

    Thank you.

    MIL OSI Africa –

  • MIL-OSI Economics: CBB Government Development Bond Issue No. 41 Oversubscribed

    Source: Central Bank of Bahrain

    CBB Government Development Bond Issue No. 41 Oversubscribed

    Published on 3 July 2025

    Manama, Bahrain –3rd July 2025 – The Central Bank of Bahrain (CBB) announces that the issue of the 4-year Government Development Bond has been oversubscribed by 267%.

    Subscriptions worth BD 667.621 million were received for the BD 250 million issue, which carries a maturity of 4 years.

    The fixed annual coupon rate on the issue, which begins on 9th July 2025 and matures on 9th July 2029, is 6.25%.

    The Government Development Bonds are issued by the CBB on behalf of the Government of the Kingdom of Bahrain.

    This is Government Development Bond issue No.41 (ISIN BH000551W253).

    Share this

    MIL OSI Economics –

  • MIL-OSI Economics: CBB Government Development Bond Issue No. 41 Oversubscribed

    Source: Central Bank of Bahrain

    CBB Government Development Bond Issue No. 41 Oversubscribed

    Published on 3 July 2025

    Manama, Bahrain –3rd July 2025 – The Central Bank of Bahrain (CBB) announces that the issue of the 4-year Government Development Bond has been oversubscribed by 267%.

    Subscriptions worth BD 667.621 million were received for the BD 250 million issue, which carries a maturity of 4 years.

    The fixed annual coupon rate on the issue, which begins on 9th July 2025 and matures on 9th July 2029, is 6.25%.

    The Government Development Bonds are issued by the CBB on behalf of the Government of the Kingdom of Bahrain.

    This is Government Development Bond issue No.41 (ISIN BH000551W253).

    Share this

    MIL OSI Economics –

  • OPCW hosts 23rd Asia Regional Meeting to boost Chemical Weapons Convention implementation

    Source: Government of India

    Source: Government of India (4)

    The Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW), in collaboration with India’s National Authority Chemical Weapons Convention (NACWC), convened the 23rd Regional Meeting of National Authorities of States Parties in Asia from July 1 to 3, at Vanijya Bhawan, New Delhi. The meeting brought together senior officials from OPCW, international delegates from across Asia, and representatives from India’s Ministry of External Affairs and Cabinet Secretariat.

    This regional meeting is part of the OPCW’s ongoing efforts to support the effective implementation of the Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC), which came into force in 1997. With 193 member states, the OPCW is the global authority overseeing the verifiable and permanent elimination of chemical weapons. The organisation was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 2013 for its commitment to global chemical disarmament.

    India, an original signatory to the Convention, has played a significant role in furthering its objectives. The NACWC, the national body responsible for implementing the CWC in India, recently mentored Kenya’s National Authority under the OPCW’s Mentorship/Partnership Programme, aimed at enhancing implementation capacities worldwide.

    The Indian Chemical Council (ICC), the country’s oldest chemical industry association, also received international recognition for its work in promoting chemical safety and compliance. In 2024, ICC was awarded the OPCW-The Hague Award, marking the first time a chemical industry body anywhere in the world received this honour. The award acknowledged ICC’s contributions to advancing the goals of the Convention and improving industry-wide safety and security practices in India.

    This year’s regional meeting in New Delhi served as a platform for 38 delegates from 24 Asian countries — including Australia, Bangladesh, Bhutan, China, Japan, the Republic of Korea, Singapore, and the United Arab Emirates, among others — to share experiences, discuss national implementation challenges, and exchange best practices. The discussions addressed key topics such as legislative frameworks, chemical safety and security, the role of industry stakeholders, and the emerging use of Artificial Intelligence in chemical monitoring and compliance.

     

  • MIL-OSI United Nations: 3 July 2025 News release Readout on WHO participation in global nuclear emergency exercise

    Source: World Health Organisation

    On 25 June, the World Health Organization (WHO) concluded its participation in a 36-hour nuclear emergency exercise organized by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).

    The exercise was part of the IAEA’s Level 3 Convention Exercise (ConvEx-3), the highest and most complex level of its emergency exercises. These large-scale exercises are conducted every three to five years to test emergency preparedness and response capacities and identify areas in need of improvement. The last ConvEx-3 exercise took place in 2021 in cooperation with the United Arab Emirates.

    The exercise involved more than 75 countries and 10 international organizations and was based on a simulated accident at a nuclear power plant in Romania, resulting in the release of significant amounts of radioactive material. Participating countries and organizations exchanged information in real time, assessed evolving risks, coordinated communications, and decided on appropriate protective actions, including the medical response.

    As part of the simulation, WHO set up an Incident Management Support Team composed of experts from country, regional and headquarters offices. The WHO teams liaised with national authorities to monitor the public health impact, developed public health messages on protective actions, and provided guidance on mental health support for affected communities and emergency responders.

    New elements this year included the close coordination of protective measures by neighbouring countries Bulgaria and the Republic of Moldova, the deployment of international assistance missions and the additional challenge of cybersecurity threats. An expanded social media simulator was used to test crisis communication strategies.

    By simulating high-risk cross-border nuclear emergencies, these exercises test existing structures and technical readiness, help build trust and strengthen a coordinated global response. WHO’s ongoing work to strengthen radiation protection of the public, patients and workers worldwide includes providing Member States with evidence-based guidance, tools and technical advice on public health issues related to ionizing and non-ionizing radiation.

    Following the exercise, the IAEA will compile and publish a detailed review of best practices and areas for improvement. WHO will review the lessons learned and adjust processes accordingly.

    MIL OSI United Nations News –

  • MIL-OSI United Nations: 3 July 2025 News release Readout on WHO participation in global nuclear emergency exercise

    Source: World Health Organisation

    On 25 June, the World Health Organization (WHO) concluded its participation in a 36-hour nuclear emergency exercise organized by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).

    The exercise was part of the IAEA’s Level 3 Convention Exercise (ConvEx-3), the highest and most complex level of its emergency exercises. These large-scale exercises are conducted every three to five years to test emergency preparedness and response capacities and identify areas in need of improvement. The last ConvEx-3 exercise took place in 2021 in cooperation with the United Arab Emirates.

    The exercise involved more than 75 countries and 10 international organizations and was based on a simulated accident at a nuclear power plant in Romania, resulting in the release of significant amounts of radioactive material. Participating countries and organizations exchanged information in real time, assessed evolving risks, coordinated communications, and decided on appropriate protective actions, including the medical response.

    As part of the simulation, WHO set up an Incident Management Support Team composed of experts from country, regional and headquarters offices. The WHO teams liaised with national authorities to monitor the public health impact, developed public health messages on protective actions, and provided guidance on mental health support for affected communities and emergency responders.

    New elements this year included the close coordination of protective measures by neighbouring countries Bulgaria and the Republic of Moldova, the deployment of international assistance missions and the additional challenge of cybersecurity threats. An expanded social media simulator was used to test crisis communication strategies.

    By simulating high-risk cross-border nuclear emergencies, these exercises test existing structures and technical readiness, help build trust and strengthen a coordinated global response. WHO’s ongoing work to strengthen radiation protection of the public, patients and workers worldwide includes providing Member States with evidence-based guidance, tools and technical advice on public health issues related to ionizing and non-ionizing radiation.

    Following the exercise, the IAEA will compile and publish a detailed review of best practices and areas for improvement. WHO will review the lessons learned and adjust processes accordingly.

    MIL OSI United Nations News –

  • MIL-OSI United Nations: 3 July 2025 News release Readout on WHO participation in global nuclear emergency exercise

    Source: World Health Organisation

    On 25 June, the World Health Organization (WHO) concluded its participation in a 36-hour nuclear emergency exercise organized by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).

    The exercise was part of the IAEA’s Level 3 Convention Exercise (ConvEx-3), the highest and most complex level of its emergency exercises. These large-scale exercises are conducted every three to five years to test emergency preparedness and response capacities and identify areas in need of improvement. The last ConvEx-3 exercise took place in 2021 in cooperation with the United Arab Emirates.

    The exercise involved more than 75 countries and 10 international organizations and was based on a simulated accident at a nuclear power plant in Romania, resulting in the release of significant amounts of radioactive material. Participating countries and organizations exchanged information in real time, assessed evolving risks, coordinated communications, and decided on appropriate protective actions, including the medical response.

    As part of the simulation, WHO set up an Incident Management Support Team composed of experts from country, regional and headquarters offices. The WHO teams liaised with national authorities to monitor the public health impact, developed public health messages on protective actions, and provided guidance on mental health support for affected communities and emergency responders.

    New elements this year included the close coordination of protective measures by neighbouring countries Bulgaria and the Republic of Moldova, the deployment of international assistance missions and the additional challenge of cybersecurity threats. An expanded social media simulator was used to test crisis communication strategies.

    By simulating high-risk cross-border nuclear emergencies, these exercises test existing structures and technical readiness, help build trust and strengthen a coordinated global response. WHO’s ongoing work to strengthen radiation protection of the public, patients and workers worldwide includes providing Member States with evidence-based guidance, tools and technical advice on public health issues related to ionizing and non-ionizing radiation.

    Following the exercise, the IAEA will compile and publish a detailed review of best practices and areas for improvement. WHO will review the lessons learned and adjust processes accordingly.

    MIL OSI United Nations News –