Category: Donald Trump

  • MIL-OSI USA: Hoyer: This Bill is One Big Backbreaking Burden on Working Americans

    Source: United States House of Representatives – Congressman Steny H Hoyer (MD-05)

    WASHINGTON, DC – Congressman Steny H. Hoyer (MD-05) released the following statement this morning after voting against House Republicans’ budget proposal, which passed out of the House of Representatives early Thursday morning:

    “Yesterday, the Trump Administration put out a statement that said that voting against his ‘one big, beautiful bill’ would be the ‘ultimate betrayal’ of the president. Republicans obeyed, committing the ultimate betrayal of the American people instead.
     
    “Indeed, this bill betrays 13.7 million Americans who will lose their health insurance because of its cuts to Medicaid and the Affordable Care Act. It abandons 11 million people – including 4 million children – who will go hungry because of Republicans’ assault on the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP). And, crucially, this disastrous piece of legislation sells out future generations of Americans, saddling them with trillions of dollars in debt. 
     
    “Today, Republicans have voted to make the most vulnerable Americans even poorer so that the wealthiest among us can get even further ahead. I hope my colleagues in the Senate vote against this abhorrent legislation, just as I did today. This is not ‘one big beautiful bill.’ This is one big backbreaking burden on working Americans.”

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI USA: Hoyer Statement on the Trump Administration’s Acceptance of a Luxury Jet from Qatar

    Source: United States House of Representatives – Congressman Steny H Hoyer (MD-05)

    WASHINGTON, DC – Congressman Steny H. Hoyer (MD-05) released the following statement today after reports that the Trump Administration has formally accepted a Boeing 747 airliner from the government of Qatar:

    “It’s a sad day in America when, reportedly at the President’s request, a small but very rich Middle Eastern nation gives him a $400 million jet. Experts say that it will take two years and cost the government more than the value of the plane to bring the jet up to the standard necessary for Trump to use it.
     
    “This ‘gift’ is among the most flagrant abuses of power in American history – an act that violates our Constitution, defies our laws, and undermines our national security. The Founding Fathers are turning over in their graves.
     
    “Once again, Donald Trump shows us how he views the Office of the President of the United States of America. He sees it merely as a tool to enrich himself, his family, and his friends.
     
    “Nothing is ever free. This plane may not come with a price tag, but the person receiving it is making America and its reputation pay a deep cost. This is a sad day.”

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI USA: Attorney General Bonta Files Third Amicus Brief in Support of Challenge to Refugee Ban and Refugee Funding Suspension

    Source: US State of California

    Tuesday, May 27, 2025

    Contact: (916) 210-6000, agpressoffice@doj.ca.gov

    OAKLAND – California Attorney General Rob Bonta today, as part of a multistate coalition, filed an amicus brief in Pacito v. Trump in support of a challenge to the Trump Administration’s unlawful suspension of refugee admissions and funding under the United States Refugee Assistance Program. In the brief, the coalition urges the U.S. Court of Appeals to affirm the preliminary injunctions issued by the District Court in Washington. This is the States’ third amicus brief in the case. 

    A copy of the brief is available here. 

    # # #

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI USA: Warren, MA Delegation Sound Alarm on Trump Admin Attacks on International Students at Harvard and Nationwide

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Massachusetts – Elizabeth Warren
    May 29, 2025
    Letter follows recent DHS attempts to terminate Harvard’s ability to enroll international students on F-1 and J-1 visas
    Massachusetts hosts over 80,000 international students, who contribute almost $4 billion to state economy and support over 35,000 jobs in the state
    “The Administration’s apparent hostility to international students contributes to an overall climate of fear on campuses. This trend creates a chilling effect that discourages the best and brightest students from around the world from coming to study in the United States…” 
    Text of Letter (PDF)
    Washington, D.C. – U.S. Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) led Massachusetts’ Congressional delegation in pressing Secretary of Homeland Security Kristi Noem, Secretary of State Marco Rubio, and U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) Acting Director Todd Lyons on the Trump Administration’s attacks on international students, particularly last week’s attempt to terminate Harvard University’s ability to enroll international students on F-1 and J-1 visas. 
    The letter was signed by U.S. Senator Ed Markey (D-Mass.), along with Representatives Richard Neal (D-Mass.), Jim McGovern (D-Mass.), Lori Trahan (D-Mass.), Jake Auchincloss (D-Mass.), Katherine Clark (D-Mass.), Seth Moulton (D-Mass.), Ayanna Pressley (D-Mass.), Stephen Lynch (D-Mass.), and Bill Keating (D-Mass.).
    “As members of the Massachusetts congressional delegation, we are gravely concerned about the Trump Administration’s attacks on international students,” wrote the lawmakers. “This trend has been particularly damaging for Massachusetts, which is home to one of largest concentrations of higher education institutions and hosts over 80,000 international students, who contribute almost $4 billion to the state’s economy and support over 35,000 jobs in the state.”
    Last week, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) revoked Harvard’s certification in the Student and Exchange Visitor Program (SEVP), the system that allows the university to admit international students — not only blocking Harvard’s ability to enroll new international students, but also interfering with current international students’ ability to legally remain. In effect, this action would allow DHS to arrest, detain, and deport international students who remain at Harvard. Shortly thereafter, a federal judge temporarily enjoined DHS from enforcing the revocation.
    “This attack on Harvard and its international students appears to be an attempt to punish the university for not agreeing to the Trump Administration’s April 2025 demands,” wrote the lawmakers.
    This is the latest in the Trump Administration’s long pattern of attacks on international students nationwide. Starting in March, the Administration effectively terminated the legal status of over 4,700 international students across at least 48 states and 160 colleges. Often without notice to students or their universities, ICE terminated students’ records in the Student and Exchange Visitor Information System (SEVIS) — records that are “functionally equivalent to having lawful student status” — which exposed students to the “risk of arrest, detention, or removal.” The State Department also revoked many visas, adding to widespread confusion about students’ legal status.
    “While DHS and the State Department claimed to target those with a criminal history or history of engaging in campus protests,  some of the impacted students had neither, and in many cases, there was ‘no obvious cause for the revocations,’” wrote the lawmakers.
    International students in Massachusetts and nationwide continue to face serious threats, even beyond Harvard’s campus, including: ICE expanding its authority for terminating SEVIS records; not restoring — or re-terminating — students’ legal status; and leaving problematic gaps in records of students’ legal status. Some students who left the country after their visas or records were suspended face significant hurdles to returning. This week, the State Department reportedly ordered its overseas embassies and consulates to stop scheduling any international student visa interviews, causing serious delays.
    “The Administration’s apparent hostility to international students contributes to an overall climate of fear on campuses. This trend creates a chilling effect that discourages the best and brightest students from around the world from coming to study in the United States — which harms not only current and prospective international students, but also American universities, U.S. citizen students on campuses, and, in the long term, the nation’s prosperity and economic growth,” concluded the lawmakers.

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI USA: ICYMI: Warren Presses Trump Trade Officials’ Prioritizing Big Tech-Friendly Trade Deals at Expense of Everyday Americans

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Massachusetts – Elizabeth Warren
    May 29, 2025
    “The White House’s negotiations so far appear to be focused on securing advantages for Trump and his tech billionaire friends, rather than for American families.”
    “I am gravely concerned renegotiated trade deals will be used to advance Big Tech’s anti-consumer agenda while doing nothing to promote U.S. manufacturing or help American workers.”
    Text of Letter (PDF)
    Washington, D.C. – U.S. Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) wrote to Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick, and United States Trade Representative (USTR) Jamieson Greer, raising concerns that the Trump Administration is using bilateral trade negotiations to advance the interests of Big Tech monopolists at the expense of everyday Americans.
    “Big Tech firms have long sought to use trade deals to undermine pro-consumer, pro-competition policies,” wrote Senator Warren. “And now, given their massive donations to President Trump’s inauguration committee, the prime seats given to their CEOs at his inaugural address, and their success in lobbying for exemptions from the Administration’s chaotic tariff policy, I am gravely concerned renegotiated trade deals will be used to advance Big Tech’s anti-consumer agenda while doing nothing to promote U.S. manufacturing or help American workers.
    Last month, the Trump Administration announced indiscriminate “reciprocal” tariffs on most countries, causing consumer confidence to plummet and the U.S. economy to shrink for the first time in three years. To deflect from this economic chaos, President Trump temporarily reduced the tariff rates and claimed that the unprecedented tariffs were a bargaining chip to bring other nations to the negotiating table — where the United States could renegotiate deals to eliminate “tariff rates and non-tariff barriers.” As a result, the Administration is engaged in new trade negotiations with dozens of countries around the world.
    Big Tech appears to be continuing its years-long campaign to use trade negotiations to advance its own interests — now with a boost from the Trump Administration. During his announcement of the reciprocal tariff regime, President Trump held up the 2025 National Trade Estimates report as his “special book” on non-tariff trade barriers. The 2025 report included as targets — potentially at Big Tech’s behest — several tech-related pro-consumer and pro-competition policies. Last month, USTR tweeted a list of “10 unfair digital trade practices” to target for elimination, including the European Union’s Digital Markets Act and Digital Services Act and other policies that Big Tech had urged USTR to target. The State Department is also pressing the European Union to roll back tech regulations.
    “The White House’s negotiations so far appear to be focused on securing advantages for Trump and his tech billionaire friends, rather than for American families,” wrote Senator Warren. 
    Big Tech has long tried to shape international trade agreements to include provisions that could threaten American laws and regulations that protect workers, consumers, and small businesses. Sen. Warren previously pressed the issue with the Biden administration.
    “Big Tech companies have already successfully used their influence to secure special exemptions from tariffs and hide the true cost of President Trump’s chaotic trade policies,” wrote Senator Warren. “Now, these same companies are poised to exploit trade negotiations to thwart much-needed regulations at home and abroad. While small businesses and households continue to bear the brunt of the Administration’s punishing trade policy, the wealthiest Americans and largest corporations stand to benefit.”

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI Global: The American mass exodus to Canada amid Trump 2.0 has yet to materialize

    Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Lori Wilkinson, Professor of Sociology, University of Manitoba

    In February 2025, the New Republic, reported there were a growing number of Americans who wanted to leave the country following the election of Donald Trump.

    Canadian reports backed up the assertion, particularly the news that three high-profile Yale professors would be joining the faculty of the University of Toronto in the fall of 2025.




    Read more:
    Yale scholars’ move to Canada can prompt us to reflect on the rule of law


    For some Canadian observers, it may feel like a case of déjà vu. After Trump’s first election in 2016, some media predicted a sharp increase in Americans seeking to escape their country’s harsh social and political climate for Canada’s “sunny ways.”

    According to Google Analytics, web searches originating in the United States involving “how to move to Canada” increased by 350 per cent on election night in 2016. A few months earlier, they’d increased by 1,500 per cent over normal search rates for the same phrase in March 2016, when Trump clinched the Republican nomination for president.

    More Canadians head south

    Despite such post-election musings nine years ago, the pending American mass exit didn’t materialize. According to migration data (a download is required) from Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada (IRCC), the number of Americans applying for permanent residency from January through March 2017 rose only slightly. There were 1,882 applications, just 66 more than from the same period in 2016.

    As for visas and authorizations issued to people from the U.S. during the same time period, they barely increased — from 2,497 in 2016 to just 2,523 in 2017.

    Americans taking up permanent residency in Canada jumped from about 8,400 in 2016 to 10,800 in 2019. However, that increase in the modest number of moves from the U.S. to Canada can hardly be construed as an exodus. Over those same two years, the number of Canadians becoming permanent residents of the U.S. continued to exceed the number of Americans who headed north.

    There has been, however, a decline in the number of Canadians moving to the U.S. In 2016, the year Trump was first elected, just over 19,300 Canadians moved to the U.S. In 2019, the year before Trump lost to Joe Biden, 14,700 Canadians took up residence in the U.S.

    That trend didn’t last as the gap in cross-border permanent residency widened once more during the Biden era. In 2023, while 10,600 Americans moved to Canada, 18,600 Canadians moved to the U.S.

    Looking at the data from 2016 to 2023 suggests politics isn’t the primary reason why Americans head to Canada. It’s more likely driven by economic considerations, better job offers or family ties.

    In terms of the apparent uptick in migrants from the U.S. heading to Canada during Trumps’s second term, it’s too early to draw definitive conclusions. But numbers for the first quarter of 2025, according to the same IRCC datasets, show no signs of any significant uptake, with a drop from 2,485 Americans headed Canada’s way between January to March 2024 to 955 over the same period in 2025.

    Moving to Canada isn’t easy

    Despite the surge in American internet searches on moving to Canada in 2016, when Trump won the Republican nomination and then the presidency, acting on impulse in a moment of political turmoil is complicated.

    Moving to Canada is not as simple as it may seem; it can be long and arduous. There’s a process and a waiting line with requirements that include an offer of employment in Canada, liquid assets and language proficiency in English, or French if Québec is the ultimate destination.

    It’s easier to immigrate to Canada if there’s a close family member already living there, but still not guaranteed. Canada’s tax rate is a migration deterrent for some, even though these higher tax rates come with more services.

    Although Canada’s health-care system is more inclusive and affordable, the wait times for procedures, along with the perception that Canadian services are not as robust as American health services, could also be a deterrent to migration.

    In short, even for Americans, it’s not easy to migrate to Canada.

    There is, however, one group of people living in the U.S. who may consider relocating to Canada: asylum-seekers.

    The second Trump administration has ended Temporary Protection Status for Afghan, Venezuelan, Nicaraguan, Cuban and Haitian residents.

    This means that people from these strife-torn countries must apply for permanent residency or “self-deport” — otherwise, they will become undocumented.

    Haiti is currently unsafe. Gangs control the country’s cities and neighbourhoods and have staged a successful coup. The country is also still rebuilding after the devastating 2010 earthquake.




    Read more:
    With Haiti in chaos, Canada buries its head in the sand


    Afghanistan remains in the throes of a decades-long war where women have have no rights. Venezuela is in a state of civil unrest; about 19 million citizens do not have enough food or sanitation. Nearly 7.7 million people have fled the country.

    The plight of asylum-seekers

    The crackdown on other undocumented residents and the recent issuing of large “civil penalties” in the form of fines for failing to self-deport may force others to leave the U.S. Where might they go?

    Many will return to their country of residence, but others may be unable to do so and could consider Canada a convenient and safe destination. In 2016, 23,919 people made asylum claims in Canada. That number slowly rose throughout the first Trump administration to 64,020 in 2019, the last full year of the president’s first term.

    Those seeking asylum in Canada declined to 23,680 in 2020 — the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic — but had increased to 171,850 by the end of 2024.

    The geographic distribution of these asylum-seekers was uneven. In 2017, 50 per cent of all asylum-seekers to Canada made their claim in Québec; in 2022, 64 per cent of asylum claims were made there.

    So rather than seeing a large influx of American citizens migrating to Canada during Trump’s second administration, there will likely be a larger number of asylum-seekers, many of whom have legitimate fears of persecution. How Canada chooses to handle these claims remains to be seen — but it’s urgently important for Canadian elected officials to figure it out immediately.


    Jack Jedwab, CEO of the Association for Canadian Studies and the Metropolis Institute, co-authored this article

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

    ref. The American mass exodus to Canada amid Trump 2.0 has yet to materialize – https://theconversation.com/the-american-mass-exodus-to-canada-amid-trump-2-0-has-yet-to-materialize-256853

    MIL OSI – Global Reports

  • MIL-OSI USA: Governor Polis: Court Rejection of Trump Tariff Tax is A Win for Americans

    Source: US State of Colorado

    DENVER – Today, a court struck down President Trump’s tariffs that raised the cost for Americans on everyday goods. Colorado helped lead a lawsuit against this tariff tax. Governor Polis has been outspoken about the negative impacts these tariffs have on the American people and applauded the court for their decision today. 

    “This is great news for our economy and every American family. I am grateful that this court decision striking down many tariffs checks the sweeping presidential power that the President has attempted to impose on the American people and businesses. The President’s tariff tax on groceries and everyday items is bad for hardworking people, our economy and business certainty. Unfortunately, President Trump has already caused a lot of damage with his tariff tax and the uncertainty they’ve caused for business and our economy, effectively freezing investment, but I am thrilled with the court’s decision and encourage the President to strengthen trade with our allies and decreases taxes and barriers for imports and exports,” said Governor Polis. 

    In addition to raising prices, reports show that tariffs lead to increases in fraud and crime. 

    In 2024, Colorado exported a record $10.5 billion of goods to the world and imported $16.8 B in goods. Colorado’s top export partners are Mexico ($1.7B), Canada ($1.6B), China ($0.8B) South Korea ($0.6B), and Malaysia ($0.6 B), accounting for half of all Colorado exports in 2024. Top export commodities include meat (17%); nuclear reactors, boilers, machinery (15%); electric machinery (13%); optic, photo, medical or surgical instruments (11%); and aircraft, spacecraft, and related parts (5%). In 2022, exports from Colorado supported an estimated 40 thousand jobs. 

    Colorado in 2024 exported $500 million in aerospace, spacecraft, and related parts, accounting for roughly 4.8% of all Colorado exports. The European Union, Brazil, France, Canada and Mexico were the top five export destinations, accounting for 63% of Colorado’s aerospace exports. In 2024, Colorado imported $1 billion of aerospace, spacecraft and related parts, accounting for roughly 6.2% of all Colorado imports. Switzerland, the EU, Germany, Canada, and France were the top five import sources, accounting for over 90% of Colorado’s aerospace imports. 

    An estimated 820,200 jobs in Colorado are supported by international trade, representing 20.8% of all jobs in the state. Colorado’s top import partners are Canada ($5.4 B), China ($1.8 B), Mexico ($1.1 B), Switzerland ($0.9 B) and Germany ($0.9 B), accounting for 60% of imports in 2024. Top import commodities include oil, mineral fuel (20%); electric machinery (14%); nuclear reactors, boilers, machinery (11%); optic, photo, medical or surgical instruments (8%); and aircraft, spacecraft and related parts (6%). 

    In addition to the commodities traded, Colorado also trades services and runs a services trade surplus. In 2022, Colorado exported $16 B in services, supporting 97,260 jobs. Top services export markets were Canada ($1.3 B), the United Kingdom ($0.9 B), Mexico ($0.9 B), and China ($0.6 B). As a bloc, the EU was the top services export market with $3.8 B in services exports supporting over 18,900 jobs. 

    ###

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI Economics: Global renewable power installed capacity to surge to 11.2TW by 2035, forecasts GlobalData

    Source: GlobalData

    Global renewable power installed capacity to surge to 11.2TW by 2035, forecasts GlobalData

    Posted in Power

    The power sector is experiencing a notable growth in renewable energy sources, propelled by an array of factors such as technological progress, policy incentives, and a heightened awareness of the imperative for sustainable energy solutions. Consequently, renewable resources, particularly solar photovoltaic (PV) and wind energy, are gaining a larger share in the energy portfolio. Driven primarily by declining costs and strong policy support, particularly for solar PV and wind energy, the global renewable power installed capacity is estimated to surge from 3.42TW in 2024 to 11.2TW by 2035, according to GlobalData, a leading data and analytics company.

    GlobalData’s latest report, “Renewable Energy: Strategic Intelligence”,  reveals that the global renewables market expanded from a cumulative installed capacity of 0.93TW in 2015 to 3.42TW by the end of 2024, representing a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 16%. The total cumulative installed capacity is projected to record a CAGR of 11% during the period 2024-35.

    Solar PV and wind power were significant contributors to the renewable energy sector, accounting for 56% and 33% of the total installed capacity in 2024, respectively.  The Asia Pacific (APAC) region has emerged as the largest market for solar PV and wind installed capacity, boasting 1.18TW and 0.67TW in 2024, respectively.

    Rehaan Shiledar, Power Analyst at GlobalData, comments: “As the costs of solar photovoltaic (PV) and wind technologies continue to decline, these renewable energy sources are increasingly appealing to investors. Also, energy transition strategies, coupled with a rising demand for electricity—partly fueled by the emergence of hydrogen energy and the advent of artificial intelligence—will propel the market growth for renewable energy sources.”

    Artificial intelligence (AI) is transforming the renewable energy sector by enhancing generation optimization, advancing grid management, and increasing efficiency across multiple systems. AI algorithms possess the capability to forecast renewable energy production, oversee grid operations in real-time, and refine energy storage strategies. These advancements contribute to heightened reliability and efficiency, thereby rendering renewable energy more effective and economical.

    Leading offshore wind developers such as TotalEnergies, Corio Generation, EnBW, RWE, and Statkraft are leveraging digital platforms to enhance the efficiency of wind farm project development. Similarly, solar power developers such as NextEra Energy, EDF and ENGIE are employing machine learning models to enhance the efficiency of solar PV facilities.

    Shiledar continues: “The renewable energy sector stands on the cusp of substantial growth, with the solar PV and wind power industries at the forefront. Moreover, the worldwide pledge to curtail carbon emissions has cultivated a regulatory landscape conducive to investments in these sustainable energy alternatives.”

    Solar PV systems are poised to spearhead new investments, outpacing both onshore and offshore wind sectors. In 2024, solar PV garnered $329.1 billion in investments. In contrast, onshore wind investments stood at $151.2 billion, while offshore wind investments reached $69.6 billion by the end of 2024. Looking ahead, the onshore wind sector is forecasted to grow to $186.9 billion and the offshore wind sector to $150.4 billion by 2030. These figures correspond to a CAGR of 4% for onshore wind and an impressive 14% for offshore wind, signaling robust growth trajectories for these renewable energy sources.”

    Shiledar concludes: “Solar and wind power stand at the vanguard of the renewable segment, rapidly becoming cost-competitive with traditional fossil fuels. They are anticipated to dominate electricity generation in the near future. While the global community is committing to the expansion of renewable energy sources, the US appears to be slowing the pace of renewables growth in favor of prioritizing fossil fuels.

    “Tariffs and offshore wind lease restrictions policy by the Trump administration are significantly impacting the renewable energy industry. Nonetheless, the global commitment to reduce carbon emissions, technological advancements, and demand for cleaner energy solutions will accelerate the adoption of renewable energy across the globe.”

    MIL OSI Economics

  • MIL-OSI Security: DHS Secretary Noem Doubles Down and Escalates Action Against Harvard for their Continued Antisemitic Behavior, Fostering Violence, and CCP Coordination

    Source: US Department of Homeland Security

    The Trump Administration will be relentless in its efforts to end Harvard’s abuse of the American taxpayer and national security interests

    The United States Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security Kristi Noem continued to hold Harvard University accountable for failing to comply with Student Exchange Visa Program (SEVP) regulations, for encouraging and allowing antisemitic and anti-American violence to rage on its campus, and for coordinating with Chinese Communist Party officials on training that undermined American national security.

    Following a letter from Harvard officials indicating an “intent” to now comply with SEVP, Secretary Noem held firm and reminded the once respected institution, which has disgraced American values, it still has a long way to comply with requirements of the program and be trusted with U.S. taxpayer dollars

    “Harvard’s refusal to comply with SEVP oversight was the latest evidence that it disdains the American people and takes for granted U.S. taxpayer benefits,” said Secretary Kristi Noem. “Following our letter to Harvard, the school attempted to claim it now wishes to comply with SEVP standards. We continue to reject Harvard’s repeated pattern of endangering its students and spreading American hate—it must change its ways in order to participate in American programs.” 

    The Department will continue to engage in good faith with Harvard and looks forward to the University’s full compliance with its requests.

    Full text of the notice is available here.

    # # # #

    MIL Security OSI

  • MIL-OSI: OPEC Secretary General Announced as Keynote Speaker at Global Energy Show Canada

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    CALGARY, Alberta, May 29, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — dmg events is announcing that OPEC Secretary General, His Excellency Haitham Al Ghais, will make an official visit to Canada this June and appear as a Keynote Speaker at the Global Energy Show Canada (GESC) taking place June 10-12.

    Speaking as part of the Executive Conference ‘The Conversation’ hosted by Peter Mansbridge, His Excellency joins a who’s who of energy industry CEOs, policy leaders from the private sector, and ministerial and elected officials from across Canada and around the world. The convention gets set to tackle big questions and issues about what Canada’s energy mandate can look like over the next five years.

    “We are thrilled to welcome His Excellency Haitham Al Ghais to the Global Energy Show Canada this June in Calgary, for what is shaping up to be the most influential and important edition of the event in decades,” says Nick Samain, Senior Vice President of dmg events. “With pre-registration already trending close to double compared to the last edition in 2024, we expect to reach capacity attendance for this year’s conference program in the next few days.”

    This announcement comes alongside a roster of more than 150 distinguished private sector energy leaders from Canada and around the world, including: Hon. Rona Ambrose, Deputy Chairwoman, TD Securities; Stastia West, President & Country Chair and Vice President, Canada Integrated Gas, Shell Canada; Mark Maki, CEO, Trans Mountain; Mark Fitzgerald, President and CEO, PETRONAS Canada; Jon McKenzie, President and CEO, Cenovus Energy; Darlene Gates, President and CEO, MEG Energy; Nicole Bourque-Bouchier, CEO, The Bouchier Group; Clay Sell, CEO, X-energy; Luke Schauerte, CEO, Woodfibre LNG; Chris Doornbos, President and CEO, E3 Lithium; Kim Lauritsen, Senior Vice President, Enterprise Strategy and Growth, Ontario Power Generation; and Carl Marcotte, Senior Vice President Marketing and Business Development, Candu Energy, an AtkinsRéalis Company.

    Joining this roster of private sector energy leaders is strong representation from government, Indigenous, and policy leaders, including: Premier of Alberta Danielle Smith; Hon. Brian Jean, Minister of Energy and Minerals, Government of Alberta; Hon. Colleen Young, Minister of Energy and Resources, Government of Saskatchewan; Crystal Smith, Chief, Haisla First Nation; Dr. Orlando Velandia Sepúlveda, President, National Hydrocarbons Agency of Colombia (ANH); Chana Martineau, CEO, Alberta Indigenous Opportunities Corporation; Kenneth Wagner, Former Trump Administration Senior Executive at the US Environmental Protection Agency; Jason Lanclos, Director of State Energy Development and Planning, Louisiana Economic Development; Dale Hansen, Dean, McPhail School of Energy, SAIT; Justin Riemer, CEO, Emissions Reduction Alberta; Lisa Baiton, President and CEO, Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers (CAPP); Sonya Savage, Senior Counsel, Borden Ladner Gervais LLP; Marg McCuaig-Boyd, Senior Advisor, Counsel Public Affairs Inc.; Shannon Joseph, Chair, Energy for a Secure Future; Heather Exner-Pirot, Senior Fellow and Director of Natural Resources, Energy, and Environment, MacDonald-Laurier Institute; James Rajotte, Alberta’s Senior Representative to the United States, Government of Alberta; Hon. René Legacy, Deputy Premier, Minister of Finance, Minister responsible for Energy, Government of New Brunswick; Hon. Nathan Neudorf, Minister of Affordability and Utilities, Government of Alberta; Ehren Cory, CEO, Canada Infrastructure Bank; Gurpreet Lail, President and CEO, Enserva and Karen Ogen, CEO, First Nations Natural Gas Alliance.

    Delegates can expect a range of premium networking events throughout the three-day conference and exhibition including daily receptions, industry dinners, the Global Energy Show Awards, all on the backdrop of a robust exhibition featuring 500 exhibiting companies across five expansive exhibition halls.

    Exhibition hours are: Tuesday, June 10 and Wednesday, June 11 from 10 a.m. to 5 p.m. and Thursday, June 12 from 10 a.m. to 4 p.m. Please check the website for full conference program and hours.

    Media are required to pre-register to attend the show. In order to obtain a show badge for the event, media will need to provide accreditation (a piece of photo identification and an official business card) upon arrival. The Media Room is located on Level 2, BMO Centre.

    For more information on GESC, to pre-register or to inquire about attendance, please visit https://www.globalenergyshow.com.

    For media inquiries, please contact: 
    Shauna MacDonald
    403-585-4570
    Brookline Public Relations
    smacdonald@brooklinepr.com

    The MIL Network

  • MIL-OSI Global: Why are the US and Israel not on the same page over how to deal with Iran? Expert Q&A

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Scott Lucas, Professor of International Politics, Clinton Institute, University College Dublin

    The US president, Donald Trump, claimed on May 28 to have personally stopped Israel from attacking Iran’s nuclear facilities. When asked if he’d intervened during a phone call with the Israeli prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, Trump replied: “Well, I’d like to be honest. Yes, I did … I said, I don’t think it’s appropriate right now”. The Trump administration is currently in talks with Iran over the future terms of its nuclear programme.

    Middle East expert Scott Lucas answered the Conversation’s questions about the disagreement over Iran and how it might affect US-Israel relations.

    The US wants a nuclear deal with Iran. Israel doesn’t. Why the disagreement?

    Israel has long been sceptical of diplomatic overtures to Tehran, saying Iran is committed to Israel’s destruction. This position has not changed.

    When Trump apparently told Netanyahu recently that he wanted a diplomatic solution with Iran and believed in his ability to “make a good deal”, the Israeli leader insisted that the only “good deal” would be one that dismantled Iran’s nuclear facilities.

    But Trump’s priority is not a “good deal”. He is more interested in a photo opportunity portraying him as a “dealmaker” even when there is no substantive agreement.

    Trump’s first term saw him embrace North Korean leader Kim Jong-un, whom he had previously threatened with “fire and fury” and denounced as “little rocket man”, to proclaim a breakthrough in stalled nuclear talks. There wasn’t anything beyond a meaningless one-page memorandum, but Trump became the first serving US president to step into North Korea and garnered international attention for doing so.

    Then, at the start of his second term, Trump claimed he could end Russia’s war in Ukraine within 24 hours. But, more than four months later, he is frustrated and embittered. He recently called Russia’s leader Vladimir Putin “absolutely crazy”.

    Trump also said he could resolve Israel’s assault on Gaza. He claimed the glory of a phase one ceasefire agreement in which Hamas freed some hostages in return for Israel releasing hundreds of Palestinians detained in its prisons. But he walked away when Netanyahu’s government refused to move to a second phase.

    So now his hope, as outlandish as it might seem, is to appear alongside Iran’s president, Masoud Pezeshkian, or even the supreme leader, Ali Khamenei, making some kind of deal.

    What do the Gulf states hope for?

    Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates are rivals of Iranian regional leadership, but they want to avoid Israeli military action against Tehran as this could spark a conflagration across the region.

    They are looking to extract themselves from a decade-long war in Yemen, where their intervention has not toppled the Iran-backed Houthi insurgency. And they would like space for Syria to develop after five decades of Assad family rule came to an end in December 2024 – with possible profits for Gulf companies involved in recovery and reconstruction.


    Sign up to receive our weekly World Affairs Briefing newsletter from The Conversation UK. Every Thursday we’ll bring you expert analysis of the big stories in international relations.


    Qatar, which Trump also visited in May, as well as Oman have long burnished their reputations as peace brokers. This has included facilitating talks between the US and Iran.

    What is Iran’s position and how close is it to building a nuclear weapon?

    When Iran agreed the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPoA) in 2015 with the UK and other world powers, it gave up any potential for a military nuclear programme. Enrichment of uranium was limited to 3.67%, and stocks of 20% grade were shipped out of the country. While uranium enriched to 20% is not weapons-grade, it shortens the time it will take to produce a nuclear weapon considerably.

    It was Trump who allowed Iran to restart its nuclear programme when he pulled the US out of the JCPoA in May 2018 and imposed comprehensive sanctions six months later. Iran not only resumed 20% enrichment but began production of 60% uranium, which can be further enriched to the 90% required for military use.

    Tehran is still stopping short of that 90% level. And it has said it will forego any potential for a military programme in a renewed agreement with the US, but is refusing US demands to end enrichment for civil purposes.

    What might Israel do to disrupt the talks?

    Netanyahu could defy Trump and order military strikes. But such action would further alienate Israel from the international community, unsettle relations with Washington, and risk regional conflicts that would overstretch the Israeli military.

    Israeli intelligence and military institutions have opposed Netanyahu’s plans to attack Iran in the past, notably in 2010 and 2011. When he tried to lay the foundations for military action, they raised political, diplomatic and logistical obstacles that put an attack on hold.

    And, despite Netanyahu’s attempts to replace intelligence heads and military commanders with his loyalists, the new appointees are still likely to take the same position.

    For more than 15 years, Israel has pursued covert operations to disrupt Iran’s nuclear programme. These include sabotage, cyber-attacks, assassinations and explosions set off by agents inside Iran. Those operations have appeared to diminish in recent months, but they might be renewed without raising Trump’s ire.

    How does the disagreement over Iran affect US-Israel relations, especially when it comes to Gaza?

    We are in a world where Trump can hold back Netanyahu over Iran, but give him a blank cheque for the assault and starvation of Gaza.

    Trump’s administration did nothing to oppose the Netanyahu government’s inevitable rejection of the phase two ceasefire in Gaza at the start of March. This subsequently saw renewed military operations and imposition of a blockade on humanitarian aid. Trump’s envoy, real estate developer Steve Witkoff, has been ineffectual in his purported mediation efforts.

    Netanyahu has not only tabled the plan for Israel’s long-term occupation of Gaza, with four military zones and Gazans penned into three areas with limited movement. He has publicly embraced Trump’s proposal for the displacement – some would call it “ethnic cleansing” – of hundreds of thousands of Gazans.

    In October 2024, Trump reportedly told Netanyahu to “do what you have to do” in the offensive against Hamas. Then, in mid-February, he said: “Bibi, you do whatever you want”.

    So, even as Trump does what he wants over Iran to Netanyahu’s chagrin, the Israeli prime minister is finding that Trump is not restricting what he does closer to home in Gaza.

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

    ref. Why are the US and Israel not on the same page over how to deal with Iran? Expert Q&A – https://theconversation.com/why-are-the-us-and-israel-not-on-the-same-page-over-how-to-deal-with-iran-expert-qanda-257758

    MIL OSI – Global Reports

  • MIL-OSI Global: Nato faces a make-or-break decision about how to protect Europe and its future in next few weeks

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Amelia Hadfield, Head of Department of Politics, University of Surrey

    Nato is facing a pivotal moment in its history.

    Ahead of its June 24-25 summit in The Hague, Nato is weighing up whether it can truly continue to count on US support (and membership), whether it will become a European-only organisation, or whether it has a future at all. This suggests a massive shift for the intergovernmental organisation that sits at the heart of defence and security for Europe, and beyond.

    The past year has changed everything. Trump’s anti-Nato rhetoric has become increasingly vociferous and disrespectful, undermining both the organisation itself, and the other 31 Nato member countries, which include Germany, France, Canada, Turkey, the UK, Sweden and Norway. Add to this the Trump administration’s embrace of international isolationism, and the potential, consequential loss of clear US backing for the alliance, all of which highlight the organisation’s historical dependence on the US.

    This is what makes the June 2025 summit so critical. It is a make-or-break opportunity to unveil a plan for Nato’s wholesale transformation, or an event conclusively marking its obsolescence. The plan itself is simple: build – or rebuild – Nato as a possible Europe-only endeavour.




    Read more:
    Why it matters for European security if an American no longer commands Nato troops – by a former Trident submarine commander


    If this plan becomes reality, historians of European security and defence may spot earlier parallels for Nato with the original Western European Union (WEU). The WEU was the European defence security structure established in 1954 under the Paris Accords, which helped to redefine relations with West Germany.

    Ultimately subsumed into both Nato and EU governance structures, the WEU’s prime goal at the time was to bolster the European content of the Atlantic alliance.

    US never wanted Europe to lead

    There is a deep irony in Trump’s bluster about Nato states paying more towards their defence. The US has, for decades, been sanguine at best, and hostile at worst on almost every form of European defence autonomy, from basic ops-based endeavours established by the EU to more ambitious strategies. Instead, the US has insisted almost exclusively on increased defence spending by other Nato members, improved interoperability between the various national forces, but all “in furtherance of a US-dominated alliance”, rather than a more authentically US-European approach to safeguarding both European and American interests according to Max Bergman, a former senior adviser to the US state department.

    What is the future of Nato?

    If the US is now reducing its involvement in Nato, or abdicating entirely, the only option for Nato is to reduce its dependence on the US, and in doing so, to focus more on Europe. A clear mandate is needed, to ensure that being US-less does not render Nato itself useless. Without a mandate, opportunistic space would quickly open up for an aggressive Russia.

    Trump made clear early in his first administration that he was no fan of Nato, and argued that its funding structure should no longer overburden the US. In his second administration, Trump has been even clearer, has variously threatened to pull US troops from Nato joint exercises, reduce US security commitments to Nato as a whole, remove some or all of the 80,000 US troops on permanent rotation in Europe and vastly reduce the US’s contribution to Nato’s central budget of US$5 billion (£3.6 billion).

    These threats are now repeated routinely by US defence secretary Pete Hegseth and others in the Trump administration. This has profoundly rattled Nato as an institution and its individual member states.

    As Nato’s own records show, from 2023 onward, there have been major increases in European defence spending. But the opportunity to keep spending commitments high, as well as overhaul the organisation to meet Ukraine’s demands and defence opportunities for the EU as a whole – which could have been nailed onto Nato’s 75th anniversary summit in 2024 – did not materialise.

    There are pros and cons of a new Europe-focused approach for Nato, and these will work themselves out in the final five-to-ten-year plan which is being prepared ahead of the June summit.

    For some, building a European defence mission within Nato is an opportunity to plot a new and more sustainable course for Nato, rather than trying to shore up an expanding US-shaped hole. Spending increases that reduce Nato’s perceived helplessness, or reliance on the US, may also be a benefit.

    For others, the removal of US command and control, hardware, software, intelligence and much more from Nato is a futile endeavour that will leave the organisation in pieces at best, and present Russia with a golden opportunity for continued eastern aggression at worst.

    The signals from Washington remain confusing. Trump’s suggestion of a sudden and total US withdrawal from European defence was tempered in April by US secretary of state Marco Rubio’s suggestion that Trump remained supportive of Nato but also demanding expanded spending commitments (these demands vary from 2.5% to 5% of GDP), and for other members to take on far greater responsibility for developing Nato’s capabilities.

    An emerging European coalition

    Many members now support the emerging “coalition of the willing”, led by France and Britain, to underwrite a force and secure a post-conflict deal for Ukraine. In figuring out the current provision of military force, including logistics and intelligence capacities in addition to air, land and sea forces, Nato members are aiming to remove the US’s presence and fill the vacuum with European assets over a decade.

    The task is colossal, and not without risks. Nato does not want an overnight abdication of the US, as it currently relies far too heavily upon US capabilities, such as long-range precision missiles, and crucially, heavy-lift aircraft which are vital in shifting armoured forces around the continent rapidly. Nato also wants a clear plan, which new member Finland has emphasised as crucial, to prevent an abrupt and disjointed transition that Russia could exploit.

    A new vision must be set out by the end of June in order to deal sensibly with ongoing defence spending commitments, reworked governance structures, and possible planned responses to the war in Ukraine.

    Scrapping Nato is unnecessary and lays Europe – and the US, if the White House could but see far enough ahead – open to innumerable threats and consequences. Even without the US, Nato provides a valuable structure for security cooperation in Europe. Strengthening European capabilities within Nato, rather than creating an entirely new defence structure, makes sense.

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

    ref. Nato faces a make-or-break decision about how to protect Europe and its future in next few weeks – https://theconversation.com/nato-faces-a-make-or-break-decision-about-how-to-protect-europe-and-its-future-in-next-few-weeks-256348

    MIL OSI – Global Reports

  • MIL-OSI Asia-Pac: President Lai attends 2025 Europe Day Dinner

    Source: Republic of China Taiwan

    Details
    2025-05-28
    President Lai meets US delegation led by Senator Tammy Duckworth
    On the afternoon of May 28, President Lai Ching-te met with a delegation led by United States Senator Tammy Duckworth. In remarks, President Lai thanked the US Congress and government for their longstanding and bipartisan support for Taiwan. The president stated that Taiwan will continue to strengthen cooperation with the US and jointly safeguard regional peace and stability. He pointed out that the Taiwan government has already proposed a roadmap for deepening Taiwan-US trade ties and will encourage mutual investment between Taiwanese and US businesses. He then expressed hope of deepening Taiwan-US ties and creating more niches for both sides. A translation of President Lai’s remarks follows: I warmly welcome this delegation led by Senator Duckworth, a dear friend of Taiwan. Senator Duckworth previously visited in May last year to convey congratulations after the inauguration of myself and Vice President Bi-khim Hsiao. Your bipartisan delegation was the first group from the US Senate that I met with as president. Today, you are visiting just after the first anniversary of my taking office, demonstrating the staunch support of the US and our deep friendship. On behalf of the people of Taiwan, I extend my sincere appreciation and greetings. And I invite you to come back and visit next year, the year after that, and every year. Taiwan and the US share the values of democracy and the rule of law and believe in free and open markets. Both sides embrace a common goal of peace, stability, and prosperity in the Indo-Pacific region. I thank the US Congress and government for their longstanding, bipartisan, and steadfast support for Taiwan. In 2021, to help Taiwan overcome the challenges of the COVID-19 pandemic, Senator Duckworth made a special trip here to announce that the US government would be donating vaccines to Taiwan. In recent years, Senator Duckworth has also promoted the TAIWAN Security Act, STAND with Taiwan Act, and Taiwan and America Space Assistance Act in the US Congress, all of which have further deepened Taiwan-US cooperation and steadily advanced our ties. For this, I express my deepest appreciation. I want to emphasize that the people of Taiwan have an unyielding determination to protect their homeland and free and democratic way of life. Over the past year, the government and private sector have been working together to enhance Taiwan’s whole-of-society defense resilience. The government is committed to reforming national defense, and it has proposed prioritizing special budget allocations to ensure that our defense budget exceeds three percent of GDP. This will continue to bolster Taiwan’s self-defense capabilities. Moving forward, Taiwan will continue to strengthen cooperation with the US. In addition to jointly safeguarding regional peace and stability, we also aspire to deepen bilateral trade and economic ties. At the SelectUSA Investment Summit in Washington, DC, earlier this month, Taiwan’s delegation was once again the biggest delegation attending the event – proof positive of our close economic and trade cooperation. We have already proposed a roadmap for deepening Taiwan-US trade ties. We will narrow the trade imbalance through the procurement of energy and agricultural and other industrial products from the US. We will encourage mutual investment between Taiwanese and US businesses to stimulate industrial development on both sides, especially in such industries as national defense and shipbuilding. We therefore look forward to Congress passing the US-Taiwan Expedited Double-Tax Relief Act as soon as possible, as this would deepen Taiwan-US trade ties and create more niches for business. In closing, I once again thank Senator Duckworth for making the trip to Taiwan. Let us continue to work together to elevate Taiwan-US ties. I wish you a pleasant and successful visit. Senator Duckworth then delivered remarks, saying that she is happy to be back in Taiwan and that she wanted to make sure to come back just after President Lai’s one-year anniversary of taking office to show the dedication and the outstanding friendship that we have. She noted that because no matter who is in the White House, no matter which political party is in power in Washington, DC, she has always believed that if America wants to remain a leader on the global stage, it has to show up for friends like Taiwan.  Senator Duckworth mentioned that in the years that she has been coming to Taiwan since pre-COVID times, she has seen a remarkable increase in participation in its defense and the support of the Taiwanese people for defending the homeland. She then thanked Taiwan for making the commitment to its self-defense, and also for being a partner with other nations around the world.  The STAND with Taiwan Act, the senator noted, is so named because the US wants to stand side by side with Taiwan. Pointing out that Taiwan is an important leader in the Indo-Pacific and on the global stage, she reiterated that there is support on both sides of the aisle in Washington for Taiwanese democracy, and added that the people of Taiwan are showing that they are willing to shore up their own readiness. Senator Duckworth said that whether it is delivering vaccines to Taiwan or making sure that the US National Guard works with Taiwan’s reserve forces or even with its civilian emergency response teams, these are all important components to the ongoing partnership between our nations.  Senator Duckworth indicated that there are many great opportunities moving forward beyond our military cooperation with one another. Whether it is in chip manufacturing, agricultural investments, shipbuilding, or in the healthcare field, those investments in both nations will facilitate stability and development in both our nations. She said that is why she wants to continue the Taiwan-US relationship, underlining that they are in it for the long haul. The delegation was accompanied to the Presidential Office by American Institute in Taiwan Taipei Office Director Raymond Greene.

    President Lai meets delegation led by US House Natural Resources Committee Chair Bruce Westerman”>Details
    2025-05-27
    President Lai meets delegation led by US House Natural Resources Committee Chair Bruce Westerman
    On the afternoon of May 27, President Lai Ching-te met with a delegation led by Chair of the Natural Resources Committee of the United States House of Representatives Bruce Westerman. In remarks, President Lai stated that Taiwan and the US enjoy close industrial exchanges and continue to explore new opportunities for investment and collaboration. The president said that Taiwan will continue to increase purchases from and together build non-red supply chains with the US, expressing hope that economic and trade relations grow even closer and that both work together to jointly safeguard peace and stability throughout the region. A translation of President Lai’s remarks follows: I am delighted to meet and exchange views with members of the US House Committee on Natural Resources today. Chair Westerman, the leader of this delegation, is an old friend of Taiwan. On behalf of the people of Taiwan, I extend a very warm welcome to the delegation. I also want to thank you all for your long-term close attention to Taiwan-related affairs and your strong support for Taiwan. Taiwan and the US enjoy close ties and share ideals and values. There is an excellent foundation for cooperation between us, particularly in such areas as energy, the economy and trade, agriculture and fisheries, environmental protection, and sustainable development. In recent years, Taiwan-US ties have grown closer and closer. The US has become Taiwan’s largest destination for overseas investment, accounting for over 40 percent of Taiwan’s outbound investment. Taiwan is also the seventh largest trading partner of the US and its seventh largest export market for agricultural products. The SelectUSA Investment Summit held in Washington, DC earlier this month was the largest in its history. Taiwan’s delegation, representing 138 enterprises, was once again the biggest delegation attending the event. This shows that Taiwan and the US enjoy close industrial exchanges and continue to explore new opportunities for investment and collaboration. Looking ahead, with the global landscape changing rapidly, Taiwan will continue to increase purchases from the US, including energy resources such as natural gas and petroleum, as well as agricultural products, industrial products, and even military procurement. This will not only help balance our bilateral trade, but also strengthen development for Taiwan in energy autonomy, resilience, the economy, and trade. Taiwan and the US are also well-matched in such areas as high tech and manufacturing. As the US pursues reindustrialization and aims to become a global hub for AI, Taiwan is willing to take part and play an even more important role. We will strengthen Taiwan-US industrial cooperation and together build non-red supply chains. In addition to bringing our economic and trade relations even closer, this will also allow Taiwanese industries to remain rooted in Taiwan while expanding their global presence, helping bolster the US, and marketing worldwide. As for military exchanges, we are grateful to the US government for continuing its military sales to Taiwan and backing our efforts to upgrade our self-defense capabilities. Taiwan will continue to work with the US to jointly safeguard peace and stability throughout the region. In closing, I thank our guests once again for making the long journey here, not only offering warm friendship, but also demonstrating the staunch bipartisan support for Taiwan in the US Congress. Chair Westerman then delivered remarks, saying that it is an honor for him and his colleagues to be in Taiwan to talk about the strong relationship between the US and Taiwan and how that relationship can continue to grow in the future. The chair pointed out that natural resources are foundational to any kind of economic development, whether it is energy, which is key to manufacturing, or whether it is mining, which provides rare earth elements and all the minerals and metals needed for manufacturing. He said that as for natural resources including fish, wildlife, or timber, all are foundational to any society, but this is especially so for agriculture, noting that the US produces a lot of food and fodder and is always looking for more friends to share that with. Chair Westerman indicated that they are excited about opportunities to work with Taiwan, adding that Taiwan’s investments in the US have been greatly appreciated. He said they also are excited about the talks with the Trump administration and the future going forward on how we can have a stronger trade relationship, a stronger bilateral relationship, and how we can work with each other to help both economies grow and prosper. Chair Westerman concluded his remarks by expressing thanks for the opportunity to visit, saying that they treasure Taiwan’s friendship and our long-term relationship, and are very excited to be able to discuss in more detail how our two countries can work together. The delegation also included US House Natural Resources Committee Representatives Sarah Elfreth, Harriet Hageman, Celeste Maloy, and Nick Begich. The delegation was accompanied to the Presidential Office by American Institute in Taiwan Taipei Office Director Raymond Greene.  

    Details
    2025-05-27
    President Lai meets and hosts luncheon for delegation led by Governor Lourdes A. Leon Guerrero of Guam
    On the morning of May 27, President Lai Ching-te met with a delegation led by Governor Lourdes A. Leon Guerrero of Guam and her husband, and hosted a luncheon for the delegation at noon. In remarks, President Lai noted that this is the governor’s first trip to Taiwan, fully demonstrating the Guam government’s support and high regard for Taiwan. The president said that Guam, being the closest United States territory to Taiwan, is an important bridge for collaboration between Taiwan and the US. He stated that aside from promoting tourism, we can also explore even more opportunities for collaboration in other areas to further advance industrial development for both sides. He said that, as we begin a new chapter, we look forward to working together to generate even more momentum in bilateral cooperation and exchanges. A translation of President Lai’s remarks follows: On behalf of the people of Taiwan, I extend a warm welcome to Governor Leon Guerrero and her delegation. Last year, I transited through Guam en route for visits to Taiwan’s diplomatic allies in the Pacific. The enthusiastic reception I received from the government, legislature, people, and members of our overseas community in Guam was very touching and left me with a deep impression. During the morning tea reception hosted by Governor Leon Guerrero, we joined in singing our respective national anthems, as well as the Fanohge CHamoru. I also received at the Guam Legislature a copy of a Taiwan-friendly resolution it passed on behalf of the people of Taiwan. And I still remember to this day the striking scenery of the governor’s house and the warm reception I received there. It is therefore a great pleasure to meet with all of you today here at the Presidential Office. This is Governor Leon Guerrero’s first trip to Taiwan. Your visit fully demonstrates the Guam government’s support and high regard for Taiwan. As we begin a new chapter, we look forward to working with you to generate even more momentum in bilateral cooperation and exchanges. Taiwan and Guam are like family. We share the Austronesian spirit and culture. Our wide-ranging and mutually-beneficial collaboration is very fruitful. And now, we are facing the challenges of climate change, public health and medicine, and regional security together. The world is rapidly changing and tensions in the Indo-Pacific continue to rise. But if we combine our strengths, come together as one, and enhance cooperation, we can maintain regional peace, stability, and prosperity. Last Tuesday, I delivered an address on my first anniversary of taking office. I mentioned that for many years, Taiwan, the US, and our democratic partners have actively engaged in exchange and cooperation. Taking a market-oriented approach, we will promote an economic path of staying firmly rooted in Taiwan and expanding the global presence of our enterprises while strengthening ties with the US. Guam is the closest US territory to Taiwan. It is an important bridge for collaboration between Taiwan and the US. Last month, we were pleased to see United Airlines officially launch direct flights between Taipei and Guam. I believe this will benefit tourism and economic and trade exchanges for both sides. In the area of health care, many hospitals in Taiwan already offer referral services to patients from Guam. Both Governor Leon Guerrero and I have backgrounds in medicine. It is my hope that Taiwan and Guam can continue to work hand in hand to create even more positive outcomes from cooperation in public health and medical services. During the governor’s visit, aside from promoting tourism, we can also explore even more opportunities for collaboration in other areas. There is potential for more exchanges in aquaculture, food processing, hydroculture, manufacturing, pharmaceuticals, and recycling. This will further advance industrial development in Taiwan and Guam. In closing, I thank Governor Leon Guerrero and all our distinguished guests for backing Taiwan. I wish you all a smooth and successful visit.  Governor Leon Guerrero then delivered remarks, saying that she is very happy to come to Taiwan. She said that after learning during President Lai’s visit to Guam last year that he is a medical doctor, she felt more relaxed because healthcare colleagues are one in their endeavor to help enhance the health and well-being of people. She then expressed her heartfelt appreciation for the invitation to Taiwan.  Governor Leon Guerrero said that as they learn more about opportunities for collaboration with Taiwan, they are humbled by the hospitality they have experienced. In both of our islands, she said, hospitality is more than just a custom – it forms a part of our identities. She noted that despite being nearly 2,000 miles apart, we are connected by the Pacific Ocean and common roots, and our ancestors both value family, community, and tradition. That is why being here today, she said, she feels a strong sense of familiarity, like reconnecting with old friends. The governor remarked that Taiwan has evolved so quickly in all areas of essential life, sustenance, economy, and prosperity, adding that Taiwan’s resources in such areas as health, education, data, AI, advanced technology, aquaculture, agriculture, and commerce enhance our economic stability. She stated her belief that in collaboration and support, and working with each other, we can gain prosperity, maintain freedom and democracy, and live in peace.  Governor Leon Guerrero stated that their delegation is here to see how they can partner with Taiwan to help raise the quality of life for both our peoples, mentioning that one special concern of theirs is tourism. Tourism, she said, is the most influential engine and driver for the economy and quality of life in Guam, but they cannot have a vibrant economy and tourism without air connectivity. She added that they are prepared to help in any way to provide incentives and low-cost fees so that they can get more airlines from Taiwan to establish permanent flight schedules to Guam, so as to drive development in Guam’s tourism industry. Governor Leon Guerrero then proceeded to introduce each of the members of her delegation before remarking that while they have been very busy on this visit they are always reminded of the freedom and democracy that the people must protect. She said she looks forward to a great, strong relationship between Taiwan and Guam in cooperation on social and economic issues, in culture, marketing, tourism, and freedom and democracy. Among those in attendance were First Gentleman Jeffrey A. Cook, Chief of Staff Jon Junior Calvo, Director of the Department of Administration Edward Birn, General Manager of the Guam Visitors Bureau Regine Biscoe Lee, Deputy Executive Manager of the Guam International Airport Authority Artemio “Ricky” Hernandez, Board of Directors Chairman of the Guam International Airport Authority Brian J. Bamba, Deputy General Manager of the Guam Economic Development Authority Carlos Bordallo, Director of Landscape Management Systems Guam Bob Salas, Chairperson of the Guam Chamber of Commerce Tae Oh, President of the University of Guam Anita Borja Enriquez, and Director of the Guam Taiwan Office Felix Yen (嚴樹芬). After the meeting, President Lai, accompanied by Vice President Bi-khim Hsiao, hosted a luncheon for Governor Leon Guerrero, her husband, and the delegation.

    Details
    2025-05-27
    President Lai meets delegation from European Parliament
    On the morning of May 27, President Lai Ching-te met with a delegation from the European Parliament. In remarks, President Lai thanked the European Parliament for continuing to pay close attention to peace and stability across the Taiwan Strait and voice support for Taiwan. The president expressed hope for an even closer relationship and diversified cooperation between Taiwan and the European Union. The president said that Taiwan and the EU can work together in such areas as semiconductors, AI, and green energy to create more resilient supply chains for global democracies and contribute to global prosperity and development. A translation of President Lai’s remarks follows: I warmly welcome our guests to the Presidential Office. After being elected last year, MEPs Reinis Pozņaks and Beatrice Timgren are making their first visits to Taiwan, demonstrating support for Taiwan through concrete action. On behalf of the people of Taiwan, I extend my sincerest welcome and appreciation. I would also like to take this opportunity to thank the European Parliament for continuing to pay close attention to peace and stability across the Taiwan Strait. Just last month, the European Parliament adopted resolutions with regard to annual reports on the implementation of the European Union’s Common Foreign and Security Policy and Common Security and Defence Policy. These resolutions reaffirmed the EU’s steadfast commitment to maintaining the status quo across the Taiwan Strait. The European Parliament also condemned China for continuing to take provocative military actions against Taiwan and emphasized that Taiwan is a key democratic partner in the Indo-Pacific region. It called on the EU and its member states to continue working closely with Taiwan to strengthen economic, trade, and investment ties. Once again, I thank the European Parliament for voicing support for Taiwan. Just as MEPs Pozņaks and Timgren are visiting Taiwan to strengthen Taiwan-EU exchanges, our Minister of Economic Affairs Kuo Jyh-huei (郭智輝) also led a delegation to Europe last year, marking the first in-person dialogue between high-ranking economic and trade officials of Taiwan and the EU. Moving ahead, we look forward to bringing Taiwan-EU ties even closer and to diversifying our cooperation. The EU is Taiwan’s largest source of foreign investment. Both sides are highly complementary in such areas as semiconductors, AI, and green energy. Through our joint efforts, we can create more resilient supply chains for global democracies and further contribute to global prosperity and development. Looking ahead, I hope that MEPs Pozņaks and Timgren will continue to make the case in the European Parliament for the signing of a Taiwan-EU economic partnership agreement. This would not only yield mutually beneficial development, but also consolidate economic security and boost international competitiveness for both sides. In closing, I am sure that you will gain a deeper understanding of Taiwan through this visit. Please feel welcome to come back as often as possible as we continue to elevate Taiwan-EU ties.  MEP Pozņaks then delivered remarks, saying that it is a great honor to be here and thanking everybody involved in arranging this trip that allows them the opportunity to better know Taiwan. He added that it is definitely not the last time they will be here, as Taiwan is a very beautiful country. MEP Pozņaks mentioned that he comes from Latvia, and despite their being on the other side of the world, they know how the Taiwanese people feel, because they also have a big neighbor who is claiming that Latvia belongs to them. Unfortunately, he said, there is already war in Europe, but he is confident that their situation is similar to Taiwan’s, adding that they have a neighbor who uses disinformation attacks. MEP Pozņaks said that we live in very challenging times, and that our choices will define the future of the world, asking whether it will be a world where the rule of law prevails or where physical power and aggression succeeds. Coming from a small country, he said he clearly understands that for them there is no other possibility; they must protect the world where the rule of law prevails. That is why now, he emphasized, it is very crucial for all democracies around the world to stick together to protect our freedoms, values, and democracy. MEP Timgren then delivered remarks, thanking President Lai for meeting with them and saying it is a big honor. Noting that they arrived here two days ago and that while she really loves Taiwan, its food, and the good weather, she stated that the reason they are here is because of the values that we share, our good relationships, and solidarity with other democratic countries in the world, which is important for them in Europe and in Sweden. MEP Timgren, referring to MEP Pozņaks’s earlier remarks, said that they face a big threat from Russia that is discernible even in the European Parliament. Actually, she pointed out, there is a war inside Europe that shows us how important it is that we support one another. She said that the Russian people thought it would be easy to take over Ukraine, but it was not, because all European countries stepped up and provided weapons and support. And that is why, MEP Timgren said, it is important that democratic countries maintain good relationships and let China and Russia see that we have good relationships, because a part of defense is solidarity. In closing, she expressed her gratitude for having the honor to be here in this beautiful country.

    Details
    2025-05-20
    President Lai hosts state banquet for President Surangel Whipps Jr. of Republic of Palau
    On the evening of May 20, President Lai Ching-te, accompanied by Vice President Bi-khim Hsiao, hosted a state banquet at the Presidential Office in honor of President Surangel Whipps Jr. of the Republic of Palau and his wife. In remarks, President Lai said that he looks forward to working closely with President Whipps to promote tourism exchanges and sports cooperation so that Taiwan and Palau shine brightly together on the international stage. A translation of President Lai’s remarks follows: It is a pleasure to host this banquet tonight at the Presidential Office for President Whipps, First Lady Valerie Whipps, and the esteemed members of their delegation. Welcome to Taiwan. During my trips to Palau in 2022 and last year, President and First Lady Whipps received me with great hospitality. Wearing my island shirt, I enjoyed a very friendly reception from the people of Palau. It felt warm and friendly, just like being welcomed back home. The first time I visited Palau, President Whipps and I piloted a boat to the Milky Way lagoon. We both tried volcanic mud facial masks. We also fished together and enjoyed the breeze as we walked on the beach. Last year, on my second visit to Palau, I was honored to be invited to address the National Congress. I also observed the results of the close bilateral cooperation between our two nations. Due to its world-famous ocean scenery, Palau is sometimes referred to as “God’s aquarium.” And it is even possible to snorkel with sharks. It leaves a deep impression. Nothing compares to seeing Palau firsthand. During the COVID-19 pandemic, Taiwan and Palau launched a travel bubble that created a safe means of travel. Now, with the pandemic behind us, I hope that even more Taiwanese can tour Palau and gain a greater understanding of our diplomatic ally. In addition to tourism exchanges, I mentioned on my visit to Palau last year that I hoped Taiwan and Palau could promote sports cooperation by providing training away from home. Next month, Palau will be holding the Pacific Mini Games. And right now, Palau’s national baseball and table tennis teams are holding training sessions here in Taiwan. We will do our utmost to support Palau’s national players and we hope they stand out and achieve outstanding results in the events. I look forward to working closely with President Whipps so that Taiwan and Palau shine brightly together on the international stage. Thank you! Mesulang! President Whipps then delivered remarks, saying that it is truly an honor to be here once again one year after President Lai’s inauguration. Mentioning that this is his first state visit after being reelected to a second term, he said that it is important to be here among friends, and that we are more than friends, we are family. He thanked President Lai for the generous words and, most importantly, Taiwan’s enduring support. He remarked that our relationship continues to get stronger in each passing year. President Whipps said that President Lai’s diplomacy initiative, leadership, and vision deeply resonate with them. Diplomacy must be rooted in our shared values, he said, and an unwavering support for our allies and a commitment to a sustainable, inclusive development are all deeply appreciated by their people. President Whipps emphasized that, as we look into the future and the challenges that we face, from security to climate change, it is so important that we are united. He added that it is important for the world, and especially important for them in Palau, that they stand up for Taiwan, so that Taiwan can participate on international fora that address climate change, security, and health, because they know the world is better when Taiwan has a seat at the table. Mentioning that Palau will host the Pacific Islands Forum next year, President Whipps said that Palau remains committed to working closely with Taiwan to ensure a successful event, and that they will continue to speak up for Taiwan’s indispensable contributions as we stand together against any efforts to silence or isolate democratic partners. President Whipps said that our nations have navigated challenges and emerged stronger, bound by a partnership that is built on trust, respect, and hope for a better world. Whether it is in clean energy, education, smart medicine, or tourism, our shared journey is just beginning, he said, and we are stronger together.  Also in attendance at the banquet were Palauan Minister of State Gustav Aitaro, Minister of Public Infrastructure and Industries Charles Obichang, Minister of Human Resources, Culture, Tourism and Development Ngiraibelas Tmetuchl, Senate Floor Leader Kerai Mariur, House of Delegates Floor Leader Warren Umetaro, High Chief of Ngiwal State Elliot Udui, Governor of Peleliu State Emais Roberts, and Governor of Koror State Eyos Rudimch.

    Details
    2025-05-20
    President Lai interviewed by Nippon Television and Yomiuri TV
    In a recent interview on Nippon Television’s news zero program, President Lai Ching-te responded to questions from host Mr. Sakurai Sho and Yomiuri TV Shanghai Bureau Chief Watanabe Masayo on topics including reflections on his first year in office, cross-strait relations, China’s military threats, Taiwan-United States relations, and Taiwan-Japan relations. The interview was broadcast on the evening of May 19. During the interview, President Lai stated that China intends to change the world’s rules-based international order, and that if Taiwan were invaded, global supply chains would be disrupted. Therefore, he said, Taiwan will strengthen its national defense, prevent war by preparing for war, and achieve the goal of peace. The president also noted that Taiwan’s purpose for developing drones is based on national security and industrial needs, and that Taiwan hopes to collaborate with Japan. He then reiterated that China’s threats are an international problem, and expressed hope to work together with the US, Japan, and others in the global democratic community to prevent China from starting a war. Following is the text of the questions and the president’s responses: Q: How do you feel as you are about to round out your first year in office? President Lai: When I was young, I was determined to practice medicine and save lives. When I left medicine to go into politics, I was determined to transform Taiwan. And when I was sworn in as president on May 20 last year, I was determined to strengthen the nation. Time flies, and it has already been a year. Although the process has been very challenging, I am deeply honored to be a part of it. I am also profoundly grateful to our citizens for allowing me the opportunity to give back to our country. The future will certainly be full of more challenges, but I will do everything I can to unite the people and continue strengthening the nation. That is how I am feeling now. Q: We are now coming up on the 80th anniversary of the end of World War II, and over this period, we have often heard that conflict between Taiwan and the mainland is imminent. Do you personally believe that a cross-strait conflict could happen? President Lai: The international community is very much aware that China intends to replace the US and change the world’s rules-based international order, and annexing Taiwan is just the first step. So, as China’s military power grows stronger, some members of the international community are naturally on edge about whether a cross-strait conflict will break out. The international community must certainly do everything in its power to avoid a conflict in the Taiwan Strait; there is too great a cost. Besides causing direct disasters to both Taiwan and China, the impact on the global economy would be even greater, with estimated losses of US$10 trillion from war alone – that is roughly 10 percent of the global GDP. Additionally, 20 percent of global shipping passes through the Taiwan Strait and surrounding waters, so if a conflict breaks out in the strait, other countries including Japan and Korea would suffer a grave impact. For Japan and Korea, a quarter of external transit passes through the Taiwan Strait and surrounding waters, and a third of the various energy resources and minerals shipped back from other countries pass through said areas. If Taiwan were invaded, global supply chains would be disrupted, and therefore conflict in the Taiwan Strait must be avoided. Such a conflict is indeed avoidable. I am very thankful to Prime Minister of Japan Ishiba Shigeru and former Prime Ministers Abe Shinzo, Suga Yoshihide, and Kishida Fumio, as well as US President Donald Trump and former President Joe Biden, and the other G7 leaders, for continuing to emphasize at international venues that peace and stability across the Taiwan Strait are essential components for global security and prosperity. When everyone in the global democratic community works together, stacking up enough strength to make China’s objectives unattainable or to make the cost of invading Taiwan too high for it to bear, a conflict in the strait can naturally be avoided. Q: As you said, President Lai, maintaining peace and stability across the Taiwan Strait is also very important for other countries. How can war be avoided? What sort of countermeasures is Taiwan prepared to take to prevent war? President Lai: As Mr. Sakurai mentioned earlier, we are coming up on the 80th anniversary of the end of WWII. There are many lessons we can take from that war. First is that peace is priceless, and war has no winners. From the tragedies of WWII, there are lessons that humanity should learn. We must pursue peace, and not start wars blindly, as that would be a major disaster for humanity. In other words, we must be determined to safeguard peace. The second lesson is that we cannot be complacent toward authoritarian powers. If you give them an inch, they will take a mile. They will keep growing, and eventually, not only will peace be unattainable, but war will be inevitable. The third lesson is why WWII ended: It ended because different groups joined together in solidarity. Taiwan, Japan, and the Indo-Pacific region are all directly subjected to China’s threats, so we hope to be able to join together in cooperation. This is why we proposed the Four Pillars of Peace action plan. First, we will strengthen our national defense. Second, we will strengthen economic resilience. Third is standing shoulder to shoulder with the democratic community to demonstrate the strength of deterrence. Fourth is that as long as China treats Taiwan with parity and dignity, Taiwan is willing to conduct exchanges and cooperate with China, and seek peace and mutual prosperity. These four pillars can help us avoid war and achieve peace. That is to say, Taiwan hopes to achieve peace through strength, prevent war by preparing for war, keeping war from happening and pursuing the goal of peace. Q: Regarding drones, everyone knows that recently, Taiwan has been actively researching, developing, and introducing drones. Why do you need to actively research, develop, and introduce new drones at this time? President Lai: This is for two purposes. The first is to meet national security needs. The second is to meet industrial development needs. Because Taiwan, Japan, and the Philippines are all part of the first island chain, and we are all democratic nations, we cannot be like an authoritarian country like China, which has an unlimited national defense budget. In this kind of situation, island nations such as Taiwan, Japan, and the Philippines should leverage their own technologies to develop national defense methods that are asymmetric and utilize unmanned vehicles. In particular, from the Russo-Ukrainian War, we see that Ukraine has successfully utilized unmanned vehicles to protect itself and prevent Russia from unlimited invasion. In other words, the Russo-Ukrainian War has already proven the importance of drones. Therefore, the first purpose of developing drones is based on national security needs. Second, the world has already entered the era of smart technology. Whether generative, agentic, or physical, AI will continue to develop. In the future, cars and ships will also evolve into unmanned vehicles and unmanned boats, and there will be unmanned factories. Drones will even be able to assist with postal deliveries, or services like Uber, Uber Eats, and foodpanda, or agricultural irrigation and pesticide spraying. Therefore, in the future era of comprehensive smart technology, developing unmanned vehicles is a necessity. Taiwan, based on industrial needs, is actively planning the development of drones and unmanned vehicles. I would like to take this opportunity to express Taiwan’s hope to collaborate with Japan in the unmanned vehicle industry. Just as we do in the semiconductor industry, where Japan has raw materials, equipment, and technology, and Taiwan has wafer manufacturing, our two countries can cooperate. Japan is a technological power, and Taiwan also has significant technological strengths. If Taiwan and Japan work together, we will not only be able to safeguard peace and stability in the Taiwan Strait and security in the Indo-Pacific region, but it will also be very helpful for the industrial development of both countries. Q: The drones you just described probably include examples from the Russo-Ukrainian War. Taiwan and China are separated by the Taiwan Strait. Do our drones need to have cross-sea flight capabilities? President Lai: Taiwan does not intend to counterattack the mainland, and does not intend to invade any country. Taiwan’s drones are meant to protect our own nation and territory. Q: Former President Biden previously stated that US forces would assist Taiwan’s defense in the event of an attack. President Trump, however, has yet to clearly state that the US would help defend Taiwan. Do you think that in such an event, the US would help defend Taiwan? Or is Taiwan now trying to persuade the US? President Lai: Former President Biden and President Trump have answered questions from reporters. Although their responses were different, strong cooperation with Taiwan under the Biden administration has continued under the Trump administration; there has been no change. During President Trump’s first term, cooperation with Taiwan was broader and deeper compared to former President Barack Obama’s terms. After former President Biden took office, cooperation with Taiwan increased compared to President Trump’s first term. Now, during President Trump’s second term, cooperation with Taiwan is even greater than under former President Biden. Taiwan-US cooperation continues to grow stronger, and has not changed just because President Trump and former President Biden gave different responses to reporters. Furthermore, the Trump administration publicly stated that in the future, the US will shift its strategic focus from Europe to the Indo-Pacific. The US secretary of defense even publicly stated that the primary mission of the US is to prevent China from invading Taiwan, maintain stability in the Indo-Pacific, and thus maintain world peace. There is a saying in Taiwan that goes, “Help comes most to those who help themselves.” Before asking friends and allies for assistance in facing threats from China, Taiwan must first be determined and prepared to defend itself. This is Taiwan’s principle, and we are working in this direction, making all the necessary preparations to safeguard the nation. Q: I would like to ask you a question about Taiwan-Japan relations. After the Great East Japan Earthquake in 2011, you made an appeal to give Japan a great deal of assistance and care. In particular, you visited Sendai to offer condolences. Later, you also expressed condolences and concern after the earthquakes in Aomori and Kumamoto. What are your expectations for future Taiwan-Japan exchanges and development? President Lai: I come from Tainan, and my constituency is in Tainan. Tainan has very deep ties with Japan, and of course, Taiwan also has deep ties with Japan. However, among Taiwan’s 22 counties and cities, Tainan has the deepest relationship with Japan. I sincerely hope that both of you and your teams will have an opportunity to visit Tainan. I will introduce Tainan’s scenery, including architecture from the era of Japanese rule, Tainan’s cuisine, and unique aspects of Tainan society, and you can also see lifestyles and culture from the Showa era.  The Wushantou Reservoir in Tainan was completed by engineer Mr. Hatta Yoichi from Kanazawa, Japan and the team he led to Tainan after he graduated from then-Tokyo Imperial University. It has nearly a century of history and is still in use today. This reservoir, along with the 16,000-km-long Chianan Canal, transformed the 150,000-hectare Chianan Plain into Taiwan’s premier rice-growing area. It was that foundation in agriculture that enabled Taiwan to develop industry and the technology sector of today. The reservoir continues to supply water to Tainan Science Park. It is used by residents of Tainan, the agricultural sector, and industry, and even the technology sector in Xinshi Industrial Park, as well as Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company. Because of this, the people of Tainan are deeply grateful for Mr. Hatta and very friendly toward the people of Japan. A major earthquake, the largest in 50 years, struck Tainan on February 6, 2016, resulting in significant casualties. As mayor of Tainan at the time, I was extremely grateful to then-Prime Minister Abe, who sent five Japanese officials to the disaster site in Tainan the day after the earthquake. They were very thoughtful and asked what kind of assistance we needed from the Japanese government. They offered to provide help based on what we needed. I was deeply moved, as former Prime Minister Abe showed such care, going beyond the formality of just sending supplies that we may or may not have actually needed. Instead, the officials asked what we needed and then provided assistance based on those needs, which really moved me. Similarly, when the Great East Japan Earthquake of 2011 or the later Kumamoto earthquakes struck, the people of Tainan, under my leadership, naturally and dutifully expressed their support. Even earlier, when central Taiwan was hit by a major earthquake in 1999, Japan was the first country to deploy a rescue team to the disaster area. On February 6, 2018, after a major earthquake in Hualien, former Prime Minister Abe appeared in a video holding up a message of encouragement he had written in calligraphy saying “Remain strong, Taiwan.” All of Taiwan was deeply moved. Over the years, Taiwan and Japan have supported each other when earthquakes struck, and have forged bonds that are family-like, not just neighborly. This is truly valuable. In the future, I hope Taiwan and Japan can be like brothers, and that the peoples of Taiwan and Japan can treat one another like family. If Taiwan has a problem, then Japan has a problem; if Japan has a problem, then Taiwan has a problem. By caring for and helping each other, we can face various challenges and difficulties, and pursue a brighter future. Q: President Lai, you just used the phrase “If Taiwan has a problem, then Japan has a problem.” In the event that China attempts to invade Taiwan by force, what kind of response measures would you hope the US military and Japan’s Self-Defense Forces take? President Lai: As I just mentioned, annexing Taiwan is only China’s first step. Its ultimate objective is to change the rules-based international order. That being the case, China’s threats are an international problem. So, I would very much hope to work together with the US, Japan, and others in the global democratic community to prevent China from starting a war – prevention, after all, is more important than cure.

    MIL OSI Asia Pacific News

  • MIL-OSI Global: Beyond the backlash: What evidence shows about the economic impact of DEI

    Source: The Conversation – USA – By Rodney Coates, Professor of Critical Race and Ethnic Studies, Miami University

    DEI has a long history. Nora Carol Photography via Getty Images

    Few issues in the U.S. today are as controversial as diversity, equity and inclusion – commonly referred to as DEI.

    Although the term didn’t come into common usage until the 21st century, DEI is best understood as the latest stage in a long American project. Its egalitarian principles are seen in America’s founding documents, and its roots lie in landmark 20th-century efforts such as the 1964 Civil Rights Act and affirmative action policies, as well as movements for racial justice, gender equity, disability rights, veterans and immigrants.

    These movements sought to expand who gets to participate in economic, educational and civic life. DEI programs, in many ways, are their legacy.

    Critics argue that DEI is antidemocratic, that it fosters ideological conformity and that it leads to discriminatory initiatives, which they say disadvantage white people and undermine meritocracy. Those defending DEI argue just the opposite: that it encourages critical thinking and promotes democracy − and that attacks on DEI amount to a retreat from long-standing civil rights law.

    Yet missing from much of the debate is a crucial question: What are the tangible costs and benefits of DEI? Who benefits, who doesn’t, and what are the broader effects on society and the economy?

    As a sociologist, I believe any productive conversation about DEI should be rooted in evidence, not ideology. So let’s look at the research.

    Who gains from DEI?

    In the corporate world, DEI initiatives are intended to promote diversity, and research consistently shows that diversity is good for business. Companies with more diverse teams tend to perform better across several key metrics, including revenue, profitability and worker satisfaction.

    Businesses with diverse workforces also have an edge in innovation, recruitment and competitiveness, research shows. The general trend holds for many types of diversity, including age, race and ethnicity, and gender.

    A focus on diversity can also offer profit opportunities for businesses seeking new markets. Two-thirds of American consumers consider diversity when making their shopping choices, a 2021 survey found. So-called “inclusive consumers” tend to be female, younger and more ethnically and racially diverse. Ignoring their values can be costly: When Target backed away from its DEI efforts, the resulting backlash contributed to a sales decline.

    But DEI goes beyond corporate policy. At its core, it’s about expanding access to opportunities for groups historically excluded from full participation in American life. From this broader perspective, many 20th-century reforms can be seen as part of the DEI arc.

    Consider higher education. Many elite U.S. universities refused to admit women until well into the 1960s and 1970s. Columbia, the last Ivy League university to go co-ed, started admitting women in 1982. Since the advent of affirmative action, women haven’t just closed the gender gap in higher education – they outpace men in college completion across all racial groups. DEI policies have particularly benefited women, especially white women, by expanding workforce access.

    Many Ivy League universities didn’t admit women until surprisingly recently.

    Similarly, the push to desegregate American universities was followed by an explosion in the number of Black college students – a number that has increased by 125% since the 1970s, twice the national rate. With college gates open to more people than ever, overall enrollment at U.S. colleges has quadrupled since 1965. While there are many reasons for this, expanding opportunity no doubt plays a role. And a better-educated population has had significant implications for productivity and economic growth.

    The 1965 Immigration Act also exemplifies DEI’s impact. It abolished racial and national quotas, enabling the immigration of more diverse populations, including from Asia, Africa, southern and eastern Europe and Latin America. Many of these immigrants were highly educated, and their presence has boosted U.S. productivity and innovation.

    Ultimately, the U.S. economy is more profitable and productive as a result of immigrants.

    What does DEI cost?

    While DEI generates returns for many businesses and institutions, it does come with costs. In 2020, corporate America spent an estimated US$7.5 billion on DEI programs. And in 2023, the federal government spent more than $100 million on DEI, including $38.7 million by the Department of Health and Human Services and another $86.5 million by the Department of Defense.

    The government will no doubt be spending less on DEI in 2025. One of President Donald Trump’s first acts in his second term was to sign an executive order banning DEI practices in federal agencies – one of several anti-DEI executive orders currently facing legal challenges. More than 30 states have also introduced or enacted bills to limit or entirely restrict DEI in recent years. Central to many of these policies is the belief that diversity lowers standards, replacing meritocracy with mediocrity.

    But a large body of research disputes this claim. For example, a 2023 McKinsey & Company report found that companies with higher levels of gender and ethnic diversity will likely financially outperform those with the least diversity by at least 39%. Similarly, concerns that DEI in science and technology education leads to lowering standards aren’t backed up by scholarship. Instead, scholars are increasingly pointing out that disparities in performance are linked to built-in biases in courses themselves.

    That said, legal concerns about DEI are rising. The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission and Department of Justice have recently warned employers that some DEI programs may violate Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Anecdotal evidence suggests that reverse discrimination claims, particularly from white men, are increasing, and legal experts expect the Supreme Court to lower the burden of proof needed by complainants for such cases.

    The issue remains legally unsettled. But while the cases work their way through the courts, women and people of color will continue to shoulder much of the unpaid volunteer work that powers corporate DEI initiatives. This pattern raises important equity concerns within DEI itself.

    What lies ahead for DEI?

    People’s fears of DEI are partly rooted in demographic anxiety. Since the U.S. Census Bureau projected in 2008 that non-Hispanic white people would become a minority in the U.S by the year 2042, nationwide news coverage has amplified white fears of displacement.

    Research indicates many white men experience this change as a crisis of identity and masculinity, particularly amid economic shifts such as the decline of blue-collar work. This perception aligns with research showing that white Americans are more likely to believe DEI policies disadvantage white men than white women.

    At the same time, in spite of DEI initiatives, women and people of color are most likely to be underemployed and living in poverty regardless of how much education they attain. The gender wage gap remains stark: In 2023, women working full time earned a median weekly salary of $1,005 compared with $1,202 for men − just 83.6% of what men earned. Over a 40-year career, that adds up to hundreds of thousands of dollars in lost earnings. For Black and Latina women, the disparities are even worse, with one source estimating lifetime losses at $976,800 and $1.2 million, respectively.

    Racism, too, carries an economic toll. A 2020 analysis from Citi found that systemic racism has cost the U.S. economy $16 trillion since 2000. The same analysis found that addressing these disparities could have boosted Black wages by $2.7 trillion, added up to $113 billion in lifetime earnings through higher college enrollment, and generated $13 trillion in business revenue, creating 6.1 million jobs annually.

    In a moment of backlash and uncertainty, I believe DEI remains a vital if imperfect tool in the American experiment of inclusion. Rather than abandon it, the challenge now, from my perspective, is how to refine it: grounding efforts not in slogans or fear, but in fairness and evidence.

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

    ref. Beyond the backlash: What evidence shows about the economic impact of DEI – https://theconversation.com/beyond-the-backlash-what-evidence-shows-about-the-economic-impact-of-dei-252143

    MIL OSI – Global Reports

  • MIL-OSI Global: There’s no evidence work requirements for Medicaid recipients will boost employment, but they are a key piece of Republican spending bill

    Source: The Conversation – USA – By Colin Gordon, Professor of History, University of Iowa

    Work requirements for receiving government benefits have a long history. FatCamera/E+ via Getty Images

    Republicans in the U.S. Senate are sparring over their version of the multitrillion-dollar budget and immigration bill the House of Representatives passed on May 22, 2025.

    Some GOP senators are insisting on shrinking the budget deficit, which the House version would increase by about US$3.8 trillion over a decade.

    Others are saying they oppose the House’s cost-cutting provisions for Medicaid, the government’s health insurance program for people who are low income or have disabilities.

    Despite the calls from U.S. Sen. Josh Hawley of Missouri and a few other Republican senators to protect Medicaid, as a scholar of American social policy I’m expecting to see the Senate embrace the introduction of work requirements for many adults under 65 who get health insurance through the program.

    The House version calls for the states, which administer Medicaid within their borders and help pay for the program, to adopt work requirements by the end of 2026. The effect of this policy, animated by the conviction that coverage is too generous and too easy to obtain, will be to deny Medicaid eligibility to millions of those currently covered – leaving them without access to basic health services, including preventive care and the management of ongoing conditions such as asthma or diabetes.

    Ending welfare

    The notion that people who get government benefits should prove that they deserve them, ideally through paid labor, is now centuries old. This conviction underlay the Victorian workhouses in 19th-century England that Charles Dickens critiqued through his novels.

    U.S. Rep. Brett Guthrie, R-Ky., put it bluntly earlier this month: Medicaid is “subsidizing capable adults who choose not to work,” he said.

    Demonstrators in Illinois hold signs in support of Medicaid in 2018.
    Charles Edward Miller via Wikimedia Commons, CC BY-SA

    This idea also animated the development of the American welfare state, from its origins in the 1930s organized around the goals of maintaining civil order and compelling paid labor. Enforcing work obligations ensured the ready availability of low-wage labor and supported the growing assumption that only paid labor could redeem the lives and aspirations of the poor.

    “We started offering hope and opportunity along with the welfare check,” Wisconsin Gov. Tommy Thompson argued in the early 1990s, “and expecting certain responsibilities in return.”

    This concept also was at the heart of the U.S. government’s bid to end “welfare as we know it.”

    In 1996, the Democratic Clinton administration replaced Aid to Families with Dependent Children, or AFDC, a long-standing entitlement to cash assistance for low-income families, with Temporary Aid for Needy Families, known commonly as TANF. The TANF program, as its name indicates, was limited to short-term support, with the expectation that most people getting these benefits would soon gain long-term employment.

    Since 1996, Republicans serving at the state and federal levels of government have pressed to extend this principle to other programs that help low-income people. They’ve insisted, as President Donald Trump put it halfway through his first term, that unconditional benefits have “delayed economic independence, perpetuated poverty, and weakened family bonds.”

    Such claims are unsupported. There is no evidence to suggest that work requirements have ever galvanized independence or lifted low-income people out of poverty. Instead, they have punished low-income people by denying them the benefits or assistance they require.

    Work requirements haven’t worked

    Work requirements have consistently failed as a spur to employment. The transition from the AFDC to TANF required low-income families to meet work requirements, new administrative burdens and punitive sanctions.

    The new work expectations, rolled out in 1997, were not accompanied by supporting policies, especially the child care subsidies that many low-income parents with young children require to hold a job. They were also at odds with the very low-paying and unstable jobs available to those transitioning from welfare.

    Scholars found that TANF did less to lift families out of poverty than it did to shuffle its burden, helping the nearly poor at the expense of the very poor.

    The program took an especially large toll on low-income Black women, as work requirements exposed recipients to long-standing patterns of racial and gender discrimination in private labor markets.

    Restricting access to SNAP

    Work requirements tied to other government programs have similar track records.

    The Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, which helps millions of Americans buy groceries, adopted work requirements for able-bodied adults in 1996.

    Researchers have found that SNAP’s work requirements have pared back eligibility without any measurable increase in labor force participation.

    As happens with TANF, most people with SNAP benefits who have to comply with SNAP work requirements are already working to the degree their personal circumstances and local labor markets allow.

    The requirements don’t encourage SNAP recipients to work more hours; they simply lead people to be overwhelmed by red tape and stop renewing their SNAP benefits.

    Failing in Arkansas

    The logic of work requirements collapses entirely when extended to Medicaid.

    Red states have been pressing for years for waivers that would allow them to experiment with work requirements – especially for the abled-bodied, working-age adults who gained coverage under the Affordable Care Act’s Medicaid expansion.

    The first Trump administration granted 13 such waivers for what it saw as “meritorious innovations,” building “on the human dignity that comes with training, employment and independence.”

    The House passed the budget bill on May 22, 2025. It includes steep cuts to Medicaid and imposes work requirements for eligibility.

    Arkansas got the furthest with adding work requirements to Medicaid at that time. The results were disappointing.

    “We found no evidence that the policy succeeded in its stated goal of promoting work,” as one research team concluded, “and instead found substantial evidence of harm to health care coverage and access.”

    The Biden administration slowed down the implementation of these waivers by directing the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services to suspend or stem any state programs that eroded coverage. Meanwhile, state courts consistently ruled against the use of Medicaid work requirements.

    In Trump’s second term, Iowa, Arizona and at least a dozen other states have proposed “work requirement” waivers for federal approval.

    Trying it again

    The waiver process is meant to allow state experiments to further the statutory objectives of the Medicaid program, which is to furnish “medical assistance on behalf of families with dependent children and of aged, blind, or disabled individuals, whose income and resources are insufficient to meet the costs of necessary medical services.”

    On these grounds, the courts have consistently held that state waivers imposing work requirements not only fail to promote Medicaid’s objectives but amount to an arbitrary and capricious effort to undermine those objectives.

    “The text of the statute includes one primary purpose,” the D.C. Circuit ruled in 2020, “which is providing health care coverage without any restriction geared to healthy outcomes, financial independence or transition to commercial coverage.”

    Changing Medicaid in all states

    The House spending bill includes a work requirement that would require all able-bodied, childless adults under 65 to demonstrate that they had worked, volunteered or participated in job training for 80 hours in the month before enrollment.

    It would also allow states to extend such work requirements to six months and apply the new requirements not just to Medicaid recipients but to people who get subsidized health insurance through an Affordable Care Act exchange.

    If passed in some form by the Senate, the House spending bill would transform the landscape of Medicaid work requirements, pushing an estimated 4.8 million Americans into the ranks of the uninsured.

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

    ref. There’s no evidence work requirements for Medicaid recipients will boost employment, but they are a key piece of Republican spending bill – https://theconversation.com/theres-no-evidence-work-requirements-for-medicaid-recipients-will-boost-employment-but-they-are-a-key-piece-of-republican-spending-bill-257289

    MIL OSI – Global Reports

  • MIL-OSI Global: Trump’s white genocide claims about South Africa have deep roots in American history

    Source: The Conversation – USA – By Alex Hinton, Distinguished Professor of Anthropology; Director, Center for the Study of Genocide and Human Rights, Rutgers University – Newark

    President Donald Trump shows printed news articles during a meeting with South African President Cyril Ramaphosa at the White House on May 21, 2025. Demetrius Freeman/The Washington Post via Getty Images

    President Donald Trump says there is a genocide of white people taking place in South Africa, meaning that Black South Africans are deliberately attempting to kill white farmers because of their race.

    Trump and his spokesperson, Karoline Leavitt, have said violence targeting white farmers in South Africa justifies admitting about 60 white Afrikaner farmers to the U.S. as refugees in May 2025.

    This comes after Trump, in January, suspended admitting people, most of whom are not white, from other countries through the United States’ refugee program. The U.S. had previously given refugee status – a legal right to remain and work in the country – to tens of thousands of people each year who were fleeing violence and persecution in their home countries.

    During a May 21 White House meeting with South African President Cyril Ramaphosa, Trump highlighted white genocide in South Africa, saying, “We have thousands of stories talking about it.” Ramaphosa denied that a white genocide is happening in his country. Trump then had a staffer dim the lights and play a video that, among other inflammatory content, showed white crosses along a road.

    “These are burial sites,” Trump said. “Over a thousand white farmers.”

    Trump’s white genocide claims, which echoed assertions he made during his first term, were quickly debunked by independent fact-checkers.

    Fact-checkers pointed out that while crime rates in South Africa are high in general, there is no evidence of white genocide there. The crosses in the video Trump showed did not mark mass graves of white farmers. They were part of a 2020 tribute to two white farmers murdered by armed men who stormed their house that year.

    As someone who has studied genocide and far-right extremists for years, I think it is necessary to understand what white genocide is and how it developed into a central issue in U.S. immigration debates starting in Trump’s first term.

    A group of South Africans who were granted admission to the U.S. as refugees arrive at Washington Dulles International Airport in Virginia on May 12, 2025.
    Saul Loeb/AFP via Getty Images

    The origins of white genocide

    As I detail in my 2021 book “It Can Happen Here: White Power and the Rising Threat of Genocide in the US,” white genocide is a far-right extremist conspiracy theory claiming that allegedly bad people, often Jews, are carrying out a dangerous plot to destroy the white race. While this idea circulates worldwide, it has distinctly American roots.

    This conspiracy dates back to the 1800s and the rise of nativism, a xenophobic belief held by some white Protestant Americans that certain immigrants, especially German and Irish Catholics, were dangerous and threatened to disrupt American traditions, culture and economic security.

    Nativist fears have continued to influence U.S. politics and culture.

    The American lawyer Madison Grant, for example, made nativist arguments in his 1916 book “The Passing of the Great Race,” which warned of immigrants’ threat to Americans and “race suicide.” Adolf Hitler once called Grant’s book his bible.

    Nativism has also influenced white power extremists, who believe in white superiority and dominance. They began using the specific term “white genocide” after the 1960s Civil Rights Movement, which they perceived as eroding white people’s power.

    The growth in this term’s popularity among some right-wing extremists also coincided with Congress approving the Immigration and Nationality Act in 1965. This act significantly increased the number of immigrants the U.S. legally accepted into the country each year and also allowed more non-European – and nonwhite – immigrants to settle in America.

    In the 1970s, William Pierce, an American former physics professor turned neo-Nazi, wrote a book called “The Turner Diaries.” The book, which the FBI has called the “bible of the racist right,” is about how a fictional extremist group, “The Order,” overthrows a U.S. government that gives power to nonwhite citizens and is controlled by Jews. The order proceeds to kill nonwhite people and Jews, as well as “race traitors” who don’t support their cause.

    The book inspired a 1980s group of violent neo-Nazis who also called themselves The Order, based off the fictitious group in Pierce’s book. Timothy McVeigh’s 1995 bombing of Oklahoma City’s Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building, which killed 168 people, was modeled on a scene from “The Turner Diaries,” which depicts the extremist group’s bombing of the FBI headquarters.

    In 1988, David Lane, a former member of The Order, crystallized the idea of white genocide in a short essay, “The White Genocide Manifesto.” The manifesto asserts that there is a “Zionist conspiracy to mix, overrun and exterminate the White race.”

    Jews do this, Lane claims, through “control of the media … industry, finance, law and politics” and by promoting antiwhite policies such as desegregation. To prevent white genocide, Lane calls for the establishment of a white homeland in North America – by violence, if necessary.

    White genocide’s entry into the mainstream

    Research shows that 61% of Trump voters believe “a group of people in this country are trying to replace native-born Americans with immigrants and people of color who share their political views.”

    This belief is often known as replacement theory, a variant of the idea of white genocide.

    Many of the Jan. 6, 2021, insurrectionists believed that white Americans were being replaced. So, too, did the far-right protesters who chanted, “You will not replace us!” at the extremist Unite the Right rally in Charlottesville, Virginia, in 2017.

    There are also instances of such white power extremist views leading to violent acts. One example is the mass shooting of 11 Jewish people at the Tree of Life Synagogue in Pittsburgh in 2018. Another is the El Paso Walmart shooting that resulted in 23 murdered Latino victims in 2019.

    Right-wing populists such as Tucker Carlson and Elon Musk have helped fuel replacement theories by contending that Democrats are trying to replace white voters with nonwhite immigrants.

    Neo-Nazis and white supremacists march leading up to the ‘Unite the Right’ rally in Charlottesville, Va., in August 2017.
    Zach D Roberts/NurPhoto via Getty Images

    Concern for white farmers isn’t actually about South Africa

    I believe that Trump’s recent focus on alleged white genocide in South Africa has little to do with South Africa. It is all about American politics and advancing some of Trump’s goals, such as reducing immigration into the U.S.

    First, by suggesting white genocide is taking place in South Africa, Trump amplifies his supporters’ fears that they, too, could soon be outnumbered by nonwhite people – in this case, immigrants.

    Trump has been harping on the alleged dangers of nonwhite immigration since he first ran for election in 2015, and it was central to his 2024 election victory.

    Replacement theory claims also help justify Trump’s goal of deporting immigrants living illegally in the U.S., as well as stopping refugee admissions from many countries, by highlighting the supposed dangers nonwhite immigrants pose to Americans, both in terms of potential threats to their physical safety and job prospects and security.

    This recent example is not the first time Trump has made white genocide claims to advance his agenda. Based on his track record, it is likely he will do so again.

    Alex Hinton receives receives funding from the Rutgers-Newark Sheila Y. Oliver Center for Politics and Race in America, Rutgers Research Council, and Henry Frank Guggenheim Foundation.

    ref. Trump’s white genocide claims about South Africa have deep roots in American history – https://theconversation.com/trumps-white-genocide-claims-about-south-africa-have-deep-roots-in-american-history-257510

    MIL OSI – Global Reports

  • MIL-OSI Global: Weaponized storytelling: How AI is helping researchers sniff out disinformation campaigns

    Source: The Conversation – USA – By Mark Finlayson, Associate Professor of Computer Science, Florida International University

    The human proclivity for storytelling makes disinformation difficult to combat. Westend61 via Getty Images

    It is not often that cold, hard facts determine what people care most about and what they believe. Instead, it is the power and familiarity of a well-told story that reigns supreme. Whether it’s a heartfelt anecdote, a personal testimony or a meme echoing familiar cultural narratives, stories tend to stick with us, move us and shape our beliefs.

    This characteristic of storytelling is precisely what can make it so dangerous when wielded by the wrong hands. For decades, foreign adversaries have used narrative tactics in efforts to manipulate public opinion in the United States. Social media platforms have brought new complexity and amplification to these campaigns. The phenomenon garnered ample public scrutiny after evidence emerged of Russian entities exerting influence over election-related material on Facebook in the lead-up to the 2016 election.

    While artificial intelligence is exacerbating the problem, it is at the same time becoming one of the most powerful defenses against such manipulations. Researchers have been using machine learning techniques to analyze disinformation content.

    At the Cognition, Narrative and Culture Lab at Florida International University, we are building AI tools to help detect disinformation campaigns that employ tools of narrative persuasion. We are training AI to go beyond surface-level language analysis to understand narrative structures, trace personas and timelines and decode cultural references.

    Disinformation vs. misinformation

    In July 2024, the Department of Justice disrupted a Kremlin-backed operation that used nearly a thousand fake social media accounts to spread false narratives. These weren’t isolated incidents. They were part of an organized campaign, powered in part by AI.

    Disinformation differs crucially from misinformation. While misinformation is simply false or inaccurate information – getting facts wrong – disinformation is intentionally fabricated and shared specifically to mislead and manipulate. A recent illustration of this came in October 2024, when a video purporting to show a Pennsylvania election worker tearing up mail-in ballots marked for Donald Trump swept platforms such as X and Facebook.

    Within days, the FBI traced the clip to a Russian influence outfit, but not before it racked up millions of views. This example vividly demonstrates how foreign influence campaigns artificially manufacture and amplify fabricated stories to manipulate U.S. politics and stoke divisions among Americans.

    Humans are wired to process the world through stories. From childhood, we grow up hearing stories, telling them and using them to make sense of complex information. Narratives don’t just help people remember – they help us feel. They foster emotional connections and shape our interpretations of social and political events.

    Stories have profound effects on human beliefs and behavior.

    This makes them especially powerful tools for persuasion – and, consequently, for spreading disinformation. A compelling narrative can override skepticism and sway opinion more effectively than a flood of statistics. For example, a story about rescuing a sea turtle with a plastic straw in its nose often does more to raise concern about plastic pollution than volumes of environmental data.

    Usernames, cultural context and narrative time

    Using AI tools to piece together a picture of the narrator of a story, the timeline for how they tell it and cultural details specific to where the story takes place can help identify when a story doesn’t add up.

    Narratives are not confined to the content users share – they also extend to the personas users construct to tell them. Even a social media handle can carry persuasive signals. We have developed a system that analyzes usernames to infer demographic and identity traits such as name, gender, location, sentiment and even personality, when such cues are embedded in the handle. This work, presented in 2024 at the International Conference on Web and Social Media, highlights how even a brief string of characters can signal how users want to be perceived by their audience.

    For example, a user attempting to appear as a credible journalist might choose a handle like @JamesBurnsNYT rather than something more casual like @JimB_NYC. Both may suggest a male user from New York, but one carries the weight of institutional credibility. Disinformation campaigns often exploit these perceptions by crafting handles that mimic authentic voices or affiliations.

    Although a handle alone cannot confirm whether an account is genuine, it plays an important role in assessing overall authenticity. By interpreting usernames as part of the broader narrative an account presents, AI systems can better evaluate whether an identity is manufactured to gain trust, blend into a target community or amplify persuasive content. This kind of semantic interpretation contributes to a more holistic approach to disinformation detection – one that considers not just what is said but who appears to be saying it and why.

    Also, stories don’t always unfold chronologically. A social media thread might open with a shocking event, flash back to earlier moments and skip over key details in between.

    Humans handle this effortlessly – we’re used to fragmented storytelling. But for AI, determining a sequence of events based on a narrative account remains a major challenge.

    Our lab is also developing methods for timeline extraction, teaching AI to identify events, understand their sequence and map how they relate to one another, even when a story is told in nonlinear fashion.

    Objects and symbols often carry different meanings in different cultures, and without cultural awareness, AI systems risk misinterpreting the narratives they analyze. Foreign adversaries can exploit cultural nuances to craft messages that resonate more deeply with specific audiences, enhancing the persuasive power of disinformation.

    Consider the following sentence: “The woman in the white dress was filled with joy.” In a Western context, the phrase evokes a happy image. But in parts of Asia, where white symbolizes mourning or death, it could feel unsettling or even offensive.

    In order to use AI to detect disinformation that weaponizes symbols, sentiments and storytelling within targeted communities, it’s critical to give AI this sort of cultural literacy. In our research, we’ve found that training AI on diverse cultural narratives improves its sensitivity to such distinctions.

    Who benefits from narrative-aware AI?

    Narrative-aware AI tools can help intelligence analysts quickly identify orchestrated influence campaigns or emotionally charged storylines that are spreading unusually fast. They might use AI tools to process large volumes of social media posts in order to map persuasive narrative arcs, identify near-identical storylines and flag coordinated timing of social media activity. Intelligence services could then use countermeasures in real time.

    In addition, crisis-response agencies could swiftly identify harmful narratives, such as false emergency claims during natural disasters. Social media platforms could use these tools to efficiently route high-risk content for human review without unnecessary censorship. Researchers and educators could also benefit by tracking how a story evolves across communities, making narrative analysis more rigorous and shareable.

    Ordinary users can also benefit from these technologies. The AI tools could flag social media posts in real time as possible disinformation, allowing readers to be skeptical of suspect stories, thus counteracting falsehoods before they take root.

    As AI takes on a greater role in monitoring and interpreting online content, its ability to understand storytelling beyond just traditional semantic analysis has become essential. To this end, we are building systems to uncover hidden patterns, decode cultural signals and trace narrative timelines to reveal how disinformation takes hold.

    Mark Finlayson receives funding from US Department of Defense and the US National Science Foundation for his work on narrative understanding and influence operations in the military context.

    Azwad Anjum Islam receives funding from Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA).

    ref. Weaponized storytelling: How AI is helping researchers sniff out disinformation campaigns – https://theconversation.com/weaponized-storytelling-how-ai-is-helping-researchers-sniff-out-disinformation-campaigns-251349

    MIL OSI – Global Reports

  • MIL-OSI United Kingdom: FMQ: SNP must recall destructive Flamingo Land appeal

    Source: Scottish Greens

    There is still time to save Loch Lomond. The First Minister must act now.

    The First Minister must listen to objections against Flamingo Land’s development in Loch Lomond and overturn his Government’s decision to accept the mega-resort’s latest appeal, says Scottish Greens co-leader Patrick Harvie.

    Speaking at First Minister’s Questions, Mr Harvie urged the SNP to listen to campaigners and the local community and take action to stop this destructive development in the iconic national park. 

    Prior to FMQs, campaigners met at a rally outside the Scottish Parliament today to express their anger and stand together to save Loch Lomond.

    In his first question to the First Minister, Mr Harvie said: 

    “Outside Parliament today, many people have gathered to express their anger at the Scottish Government’s intention to approve a resort development, by Flamingo Land, on the shores of Loch Lomond.

    “It’s been opposed by the National Trust for Scotland; by the Scottish Environment Protection Agency; and by over 155,000 people; and rejected unanimously by the National Park.

    “It’s the most unpopular development in the history of the Scottish planning system. 

    “I know the First Minister will tell us that he can’t comment on a specific appeal.
     
    “But his Minister has already made a political decision – it took Ivan McKee just two working days to announce his refusal to act in the public interest and recall the appeal. 

    “He, and the First Minister, have to be accountable for that now. 

    “There’s still a chance we can save Loch Lomond – this decision isn’t yet set in stone. 

    “So – will the First Minister listen to all those that have been objecting for years, put the natural environment ahead of corporate profit, and recall the decision?” 

    First Minister John Swinney would not comment in detail on the proposal as the Flamingo Land appeal is still live, but gave no indication that he was willing to recall the decision.

    In his second question, Mr Harvie asked:

    “I don’t think the First Minister is even attempting to acknowledge the scale of the anger – demonstrated by the people outside Parliament today and more than 44,000 people who have already written to the Minister – that anger is a result of this unnecessary, unwanted and destructive development.

    “But it’s not the first time this First Minister has defended that kind of development. 

    “In 2007, when John Swinney had been in government for less than a year, he overturned a local planning decision to approve another controversial, environmentally destructive project from a greedy, bullying developer.

    “That, of course, was to give Donald Trump his golf course. And even Trump’s project director from those days has made it clear that the Government was hoodwinked.

    “This isn’t standing up for Scotland. Did the First Minister learn nothing from his mistake, and why is he still willing to back greedy developers who can’t look at a landscape without seeing an opportunity to bulldoze it for profit?”

    MIL OSI United Kingdom

  • Israel announces new West Bank settlements despite sanctions threat

    Source: Government of India

    Source: Government of India (4)

    Israel’s government has approved 22 new Jewish settlements in the occupied-West Bank, Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich said on Thursday, a move that could deepen divisions with some allies, who have threatened sanctions over further expansion.

    Far-right Smotrich, an advocate for Israeli sovereignty over the West Bank, wrote on X that the new settlements would be located in the northern area of the West Bank, without specifying where.

    Israeli media cited the Defense Ministry as saying that among the new Jewish settlements, existing “outposts” would be legalised and new settlements would also be built.

    Around 700,000 Israeli settlers live among 2.7 million Palestinians in the West Bank and East Jerusalem, territories Israel captured from Jordan in the 1967 war. Israel later annexed East Jerusalem, a move not recognized by most countries, but has not formally extended sovereignty over the West Bank.

    Palestinians see expansion of the settlements as a hindrance to their aspirations to establish an independent Palestinian state in the Gaza Strip and the West Bank, including occupied East Jerusalem.

    There is a growing list of European countries demanding that Israel end the war in Gaza, while Britain, France and Canada this month warned Israel it could impose targeted sanctions if Israel continued to expand settlements in the West Bank.

    Most of the international community considers the Jewish settlements illegal. The Israeli government deems settlements legal under its own laws, while some so-called “outposts” are illegal but often tolerated and sometimes later legalised.

    Settlement activity in the West Bank has accelerated sharply since the war in Gaza, now in its 20th month, adding to escalating Israeli military operations against Palestinian militants and increasing numbers of settler attacks targeting Palestinian residents.

    Nabil Abu Rudeineh, a spokesperson for Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas, called Israel’s decision a “dangerous escalation”, accusing the government of continuing to drag the region into a “cycle of violence and instability”.

    “This extremist Israeli government is trying by all means to prevent the establishment of an independent Palestinian state,” he told Reuters, urging U.S. President Donald Trump’s administration to intervene.

    Hamas official Sami Abu Zuhri condemned the announcement and called on the United States and the European Union to take action.

    “The announcement of the building of 22 new settlements in the West Bank is part of the war led by Netanyahu against the Palestinian people,” Abu Zuhri told Reuters.

    (Reuters)

  • US cancels more than $700 million funding for Moderna bird flu vaccine

    Source: Government of India

    Source: Government of India (4)

    The Trump administration has canceled a contract awarded to Moderna for the late-stage development of its bird flu vaccine for humans, as well as the right to purchase shots, the drugmaker announced on Wednesday.

    Shares of Moderna were flat in after-market trading.

    Moderna in January was awarded $590 million by the Biden administration to advance the development of its bird flu vaccine, and support the expansion of clinical studies for up to five additional subtypes of pandemic influenza

    This was in addition to $176 million awarded by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) last year to complete the late-stage development and testing of a pre-pandemic mRNA-based vaccine against the H5N1 avian influenza.

    HHS told Reuters earlier this year that it was reviewing agreements made by the Biden administration for vaccine production.

    “The cancellation means that the government is discarding what could be one of the most effective and rapid tools to combat an avian influenza outbreak,” said Amesh Adalja, senior scholar at the Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security, adding that it is the opposite approach Trump took with Operation Warp Speed to combat COVID-19.

    An HHS spokesperson said that after a comprehensive internal review, the agency had determined that the project did not meet the scientific standards or safety expectations required for continued federal investment.

    Bird flu has infected 70 people, most of them farm workers, over the past year as it has spread aggressively among cattle herds and poultry flocks.

    Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has questioned the use of vaccines and earlier this year drew censure from some in the U.S. Congress after he suggested in a television interview that poultry farmers should let the bird flu spread unchecked through their flocks to study chickens who did not contract it.

    Moderna said it plans to explore alternatives for late-stage development and manufacturing of the vaccine.

    The company has been banking on revenue from newer mRNA shots, including its bird flu vaccine and experimental COVID-flu combination vaccine, to make up for waning post-pandemic demand for its COVID vaccine.

    Moderna also said on Wednesday that it had received positive interim data from a mid-stage trial set up to test the safety and immunogenicity of its bird flu vaccine targeting the H5 avian influenza virus subtype.

    -REUTERS

  • MIL-Evening Report: Grattan on Friday: Trump, tariffs and the Middle East are looming challenges for Albanese

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of Canberra

    Australia these days receives invitations to big-league international conferences. And so Anthony Albanese will be off soon to the G7 meeting in Alberta, Canada, on June 15-17.

    For the prime minister, what’s most important about this trip is not so much the conference itself, but his expected first meeting with US President Donald Trump, either on the sidelines of the G7 or in a visit to Washington while he’s in North America.

    Nothing is locked in. But it’s impossible to think such a meeting won’t take place. The Australian PM certainly needs to have his first face-to-face talks with the US president sooner rather than later.

    During the election, there was much argument over whether Albanese or Peter Dutton would be better at dealing with the difficult and unpredictable Trump, in particular, in trying to extract some concessions on his tariffs

    Australia has been hit by Trump’s 25% tariff on aluminium and steel, as well as by his general 10% tariff.

    The Trump tariff regime has been a chaotic story of decisions, pauses and changes of mind. In the latest drama, the United States Court of International Trade on Wednesday blocked Trump’s “Liberation Day” tariffs (as far as Australia goes, this relates to the 10% general tariff but not that on aluminium and steel). The court found the president had exceeded his powers. The administration immediately appealed the decision.

    We can’t know how this imbroglio will play out. But assuming Australia will still be confronting some tariffs, Albanese’s pitch for special treatment will be made around what we can do for the Americans with our large deposits of critical minerals and rare earths. These are vital for the production of a huge range of items, including for defence purposes.

    Australia’s ambassador to the US, Kevin Rudd, speaking at a conference in Detroit this week, pointed out that the two countries already had a draft accord on these minerals.

    “What we need to work out […] is how do we collaborate both on the mining, the extraction, the transportation and the processing and the stockpiling to make our economies resilient, including what you’ll need for future battery manufacture,” Rudd said.

    When Albanese does get together with Trump, he will have the advantage of meeting him as the big winner of the recent election. Trump said of him post-election, “He’s been very, very nice to me, very respectful to me”.

    But that’s no iron-clad guarantee of success. With the US president, there are always multiple “known unknowns”.

    For Albanese, success on the tariff front would be important, but not, of course, as important politically as it would have been pre-election.

    A range of other issues will also be on the agenda when the two meet: including progress on AUKUS.

    The president would no doubt be pleased the government is in the process of booting the Chinese lessee out of the Port of Darwin (with American investment firm Cerberus expressing an interest in taking over, although the government’s preference is for the port to be in Australian hands).

    Trump might not think, however, that the government’s commitment to defence spending, due to reach 2.3% of gross domestic product by 2033-34, is enough. The Americans would prefer a level of 3% of GDP.

    No doubt the Middle East would also be canvassed in such talks. While Middle East policy is not a frontline issue in the Australian-American relationship, the Albanese government struggles at home to strike the right stance.

    Since the October 2023 Hamas attack on Israel, Australia has seen a deterioration in local social cohesion. Antisemitism spiked to a degree not anticipated; pro-Palestinian demonstrations became a regular and controversial feature. The government found itself under political fire from the Jewish community and pro-Palestinian critics alike.

    With the Israeli government disregarding international criticism, and the humanitarian crisis in Gaza growing more dire, Albanese this week toughened his rhetoric.

    On Monday he said: “It is outrageous that there be a blockade of food and supplies to people who are in need in Gaza. We have made that very clear by signing up to international statements”. He described Israel’s actions as “completely unacceptable”.

    Within Labor, the pressure to go further has been mounting. It is on two fronts. Some want sanctions against Israel (beyond the existing sanctions in relation to settlers on the West Bank). There is also the issue of whether Australia should recognise a Palestinian state ahead of a two-state solution.

    Ed Husic, a Muslim, was relatively outspoken even while he was in cabinet. Since being dumped from the ministry, he is much freer to put forth his view.

    This week, he was calling for imposing sanctions if other nations were to do so. “I think we should be actively considering […] drawing up a list of targeted sanctions where we can join with others”.

    Significantly, former Labor Foreign Minister Gareth Evans was another advocate, saying sanctions “would send a powerful message”.




    Read more:
    Gareth Evans: the case for recognising Palestine


    But when the question of sanctions was put to Albanese, he was dismissive, raising the issue of substantive outcomes.

    At the Labor party’s grassroots level, there is strong pressure for a more pro-Palestinian approach.

    It is not unreasonable to think that would strike a sympathetic chord with both Albanese and Foreign Minister Penny Wong, but they are very cognisant of the politics – both international and local.

    Wong a year ago raised the possibility of recognising Palestine statehood as a step along a peace process, ahead of a two-state solution.

    Australia’s ambassador to the United Nations, James Larson, last week delivered an Australian statement to a preparatory meeting for a June conference in New York on “the question of Palestine and the implementation of the two-state solution”.

    Echoing Wong’s earlier position, he said: “A two-state solution – a Palestinian state alongside the state of Israel – is the only hope of breaking the endless cycle of violence, and the only hope of a just and enduring peace, for Israelis and Palestinians alike.”

    “Like other partners, Australia no longer sees recognition of a Palestinian state as only occurring at the end of negotiations, but rather as a way of building momentum towards a two-state solution.”

    Evans, in an article for Pearls and Irritations this week, says the “strongest and most constructive contribution” Australia could make on the issue would be to announce at the conference “that we are immediately recognising Palestinian statehood: not just as the final outcome of a political settlement but as a way of kickstarting it”.

    The government is tight-lipped about what stand it will take for the June 17-20 conference, saying it doesn’t have details yet and is unable to say who will attend for Australia. It says it is not being framed as a conference where countries are expected to make pledges.

    Nevertheless, many within Labor will be watching closely whether the coming weeks will see any change in Australia’s Middle East policy. But that, in turn, would depend on whether others make any moves, because Australia wants to have company from like-minded countries.

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

    ref. Grattan on Friday: Trump, tariffs and the Middle East are looming challenges for Albanese – https://theconversation.com/grattan-on-friday-trump-tariffs-and-the-middle-east-are-looming-challenges-for-albanese-257333

    MIL OSI AnalysisEveningReport.nz

  • Indian stock market ends in green over positive global cues

    Source: Government of India

    Source: Government of India (4)

    The Indian stock market closed in green on Thursday amid positive global cues. Sensex closed 320.70 points or 0.39 per cent up at 81,633.02 while Nifty ended up 81.15 points or 0.33 per cent at 24,833.60.

    Buying was seen in midcap and smallcap along with largecap. Nifty Midcap 100 index was up 315.85 points or 0.55 per cent at 57,457.25 and Nifty Smallcap 100 index was up 105.40 points or 0.59 per cent at 17,889.

    On a sectoral basis, metal, IT, financial services, realty, media and energy indices were in the green, while, PSU Bank, FMCG and PSE sectors were in the red.

    “Global sentiment improved after a US court struck down Donald Trump’s reciprocal tax policy. However, the domestic market remained mostly rangebound during the day due to rising oil prices and higher US 10-year bond yields,” said Vinod Nair, Head of Research, Geojit Investments Limited.

    Some recovery was seen toward the end of the session, driven by F&O expiry led covering.

    “Export-focused sectors like IT and Pharma performed well, supported by hopes of easing trade tensions. Lack of positive domestic triggers and a drop in industrial output to an eight-month low could lead to short-term market consolidation,” he mentioned.

    Nifty witnessed a volatile session on the day of monthly expiry. The momentum continues to remain weak, with the RSI still pointing downward.

    “The next crucial support is at 24,670. If the index falls below this level, a sharp correction may occur, potentially dragging the index down to 24,400/ 24,300. On the other hand, if Nifty holds above 24,670, it could witness a smart recovery towards 25,000 or 25,150 in the short term,” said Rupak De from LKP Securities.

    Gold prices traded weak in the first half of the session after the FOMC meeting minutes indicated that the U.S. Federal Reserve is unlikely to ease interest rates in the near term, maintaining a data-dependent stance. In the domestic market, MCX gold holds support near Rs 94,000, with resistance around Rs 96,500, said experts.

    –IANS

  • MIL-OSI NGOs: Amnesty International warns of devastating consequences as abrupt U.S. Foreign Aid cuts threaten human rights globally

    Source: Amnesty International –

    The Trump administration’s abrupt, chaotic and sweeping suspension of U.S. foreign aid is placing millions of lives and human rights at risk across the globe. In its research briefing Lives at Risk, released today, Amnesty International examines how the cuts have halted critical programs across the globe, many of which provided essential health care, food security, shelter, medical services, and humanitarian support for people in extremely vulnerable situations, including women, girls, survivors of sexual violence, and other marginalized groups, as well as  refugees and those seeking safety.

    The cuts have come in response to the executive order ‘Reevaluating and Realigning United States Foreign Aid’ issued by President Donald Trump on January 20, 2025, as well as other executive orders that targeted specific groups and programs for cuts. In his testimony on May 21 and 22 in both the U.S. Senate and House of Representatives, Secretary of State Marco Rubio provided weak or incomplete answers about the grave human rights impact of the implementation of this order contrary to the evidence gathered by Amnesty and other organizations. He even erroneously asserted there have been no deaths associated with these cuts. Given the scale of the cuts, the number and extent of robust modeling predicting substantial mortality, and the fact that deaths have been documented already, the assertion that there has not been any death stemming from these cuts defies logic.

    “This abrupt decision and chaotic implementation by the Trump administration is reckless and profoundly damaging,” said Amanda Klasing, national director of government relations and advocacy with Amnesty International USA. “The decision to cut these programs so abruptly and in this untransparent manner violates international human rights law which the U.S. is bound by and undermines decades of U.S. leadership in global humanitarian and development efforts. While U.S. funding over the decades has had a complex relationship with human rights, the scale and suddenness of these current cuts have created a life-threatening vacuum that other governments and aid organizations are not realistically able to fill in the immediate term, violating the rights to life and health, and dignity for millions.”

    This abrupt decision and chaotic implementation by the Trump administration is reckless and profoundly damaging (…) the scale and suddenness of these current cuts have created a life-threatening vacuum that other governments and aid organizations are not realistically able to fill in the immediate term, violating the rights to life and health, and dignity for millions

    Amanda Klasing, National Director of Government Relations and Advocacy with Amnesty International USA

    Two areas in which the cuts have caused significant harm globally are the forced cutbacks to – or complete closing of – programs that ensured health care and treatment to marginalized people and those supporting migrants and people seeking safety in countries around the world.

    MIL OSI NGO

  • MIL-OSI Global: Germany steps up to replace ‘unreliable’ US as guarantor of European security

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Stefan Wolff, Professor of International Security, University of Birmingham

    Two statements from world leaders this week bear closer examination. On May 27, the US president Donald Trump took to his Truth Social social media channel to proclaim that if it wasn’t for him, “lots of really bad things would have already happened to Russia”. The following day the German chancellor, Friedrich Merz, announced that his country would assist Ukraine in developing long-range missiles to deploy against targets inside Russia. Both statements are quite extraordinary.

    Even by Trump’s own standards, the public declaration by a sitting US president that he is protecting the Russian president, Vladimir Putin, is unprecedented. Putin is under indictment for war crimes and has been waging a war of aggression against Ukraine for more than three years after having illegally annexed Crimea over a decade ago. There can now be no doubt left that the US has become an unreliable ally for Ukraine and its European partners.

    This is the context in which Merz’s announcement of increasing defence cooperation with Ukraine becomes significant. While Trump continues to chase an impossible deal with Putin – even after threatening to abandon his mediation efforts less than ten days ago – Germany has doubled down on Ukraine’s defence.

    Not only that, but as the EU’s largest and Nato’s second-largest economy, Germany is now also aiming to turn its Bundeswehr (the German army, navy and air force) into the “strongest conventional army in Europe”. Its most senior military officer and chief of defence, Carsten Breuer, has published plans for a rapid and wide-ranging expansion of defence capabilities.


    Sign up to receive our weekly World Affairs Briefing newsletter from The Conversation UK. Every Thursday we’ll bring you expert analysis of the big stories in international relations.


    Germany is finally beginning to pull its weight in European defence and security policy. This is absolutely critical to the credibility of the EU in the face of the threat from Russia. Berlin has the financial muscle and the technological and industrial potential to make Europe more of a peer to the US when it comes to defence spending and burden sharing. This will be important to salvage what remains of Nato in light of a highly probable American down-scaling – if not complete abandonment – of its past security commitments to the alliance.

    After decades of failing to develop either a grand strategy to deal with Russia or the hard power capabilities that need to underpin it, achieving either will take some time. But it is important to acknowledge that some critical first steps have been taken by the new German government.

    Facing a growing threat

    For Germany, and much of the rest of Europe, the investment in more defence capabilities does not simply require producing more ammunition or procuring more advanced defence systems. These are important – but what is also needed is a significant investment in developing manpower. This means either finding more volunteers or reintroducing conscription, which is now no longer a taboo in Germany.

    Sending a whole new brigade to Lithuania, in its first international deployment since the second world war, is an important signal to Nato allies about Germany’s commitment to the alliance. It is also a clear signal to Russia that Germany finally is putting its money where its mouth is when it comes to containing the threat from Russia. It’s a threat which has grown significantly since the beginning of the Kremlin’s full-scale Russian invasion of Ukraine in February 2022.

    The three years of Russia’s war against its neighbour have also highlighted the threat that Russia poses beyond Ukraine’s borders. The war against Ukraine has exposed European vulnerabilities and its dependence on the US. And it has taught military planners important lessons about what a future confrontation with Russia might look like. This is why Germany’s military planners have identified air defence systems, precision strike capabilities, drones, and electronic and cyber warfare assets as procurement priorities.

    Beyond Germany, the signs have have been that Europe more broadly is beginning to learn to stand on its own feet when it comes to its security. For the continent, the challenge is threefold. It needs to beef up its defence spending in light of the ongoing war against Ukraine and Russian threats to expand it further. Europe also needs to come to terms with the dismantling of the transatlantic alliance by Trump. And, finally, there is a populist surge that threatens the very foundations of European democracy and risks undermining efforts to stand up to both Trump and Putin. This has been given extra fuel by the alignment of Trump’s “America-first” Maga movement with Putin’s Russia.

    Major challenges ahead

    These are enduring challenges with no quick fixes. The first test of this apparent new-found European mettle will be the war in Ukraine. Giving Ukraine permission to use long-range missiles against targets in Russia is not a new development. Such a move was first taken by the then US president, Joe Biden, in November 2024 when he authorised Ukraine to launch limited strikes into Russia using US-made long-range missiles, followed by similar authorisations from London and Paris at the time, but not Berlin.

    Now, as then, how effective this will be depends not only on how many actual missiles Ukraine has but also on whether US intelligence sharing will continue. This is crucial for targeting. What’s more, effectiveness will also be difficult to measure. In a best-case scenario, Ukraine will now be able to stave off Russia’s reportedly impending summer offensive.

    The Kremlin has already indicated its displeasure and ratcheted up its nuclear sabre rattling.

    Trump, meanwhile, remains all talk when it comes to putting any pressure on Russia. By contrast, the Europeans, for once, are much more action orientated, which is another indication of the increasing rift across the Atlantic.

    This does not mean an end to transatlantic relations and pragmatic cooperation, as demonstrated by the meeting between the US secretary of state, Marco Rubio, with his German counterpart, Johann Wadephul, which happened almost simultaneously with Trump’s and Merz’s statements.

    What it does mean, however, is that Europe’s security now entirely depends on whether key players on the continent can muster the will to mobilise the resources required to defend the continent against an aggressive foe to the east. Berlin and other European capitals seem to have recognised at long last that this needs to happen. Now they need to demonstrate that they can follow through with swift and decisive action.

    Stefan Wolff is a past recipient of grant funding from the Natural Environment Research Council of the UK, the United States Institute of Peace, the Economic and Social Research Council of the UK, the British Academy, the NATO Science for Peace Programme, the EU Framework Programmes 6 and 7 and Horizon 2020, as well as the EU’s Jean Monnet Programme. He is a Trustee and Honorary Treasurer of the Political Studies Association of the UK and a Senior Research Fellow at the Foreign Policy Centre in London.

    ref. Germany steps up to replace ‘unreliable’ US as guarantor of European security – https://theconversation.com/germany-steps-up-to-replace-unreliable-us-as-guarantor-of-european-security-257735

    MIL OSI – Global Reports

  • MIL-OSI USA: Governor Newsom announces appointments 5.28.25

    Source: US State of California 2

    May 28, 2025

    SACRAMENTO – Governor Gavin Newsom today announced the following appointments:

    LaCandice Ochoa, of Sacramento, has been appointed Deputy Director of the Independent Living and Community Access Division at the Department of Rehabilitation. Ochoa has been Dean of Workforce and Economic Development in the Office of the Chancellor of the California Community Colleges since 2020, where she was previously Operations Manager of Workforce and Economic Development from 2020 to 2022. She was the Operations Manager for the Commission on Disability Access at the Department of General Services from 2018 to 2020. Ochoa was a Program Manager at the Governor’s Office of Emergency Services from 2015 to 2018. She was a Program Analyst for the Health Professions Education Foundation at the Department of Healthcare Access and Information from 2014 to 2015. Ochoa was an Associate Governmental Program Analyst at the California Department of Rehabilitation from 2012 to 2014. She was an Executive Assistant at Disability Rights California from 2011 to 2012. Ochoa was an Outreach and Training Advocate at the California Foundation for Independent Living Centers from 2009 to 2011. She was a Support Staff Assistant for Bob Segalman, Ph.D. from 2008 to 2009. Ochoa is a member of the California Community College Association of Occupational Educators, Association of California Community College Administrators, and Association of California State Employees with Disabilities. She earned a Master of Science degree in Assistive Technology and Human Services from California State University, Northridge and a Bachelor of Arts degree in Ethnic Studies from University of California, San Diego. This position does not require Senate confirmation, and the compensation is $137,616. Ochoa is a Democrat.

    Aaron Christian, of Chino, has been appointed Chief of Population Risk, Quality Assurance, and Data Operations at the Department of Developmental Services. Christian has been Deputy Director of the Division of Community Assistance and Resolutions at the California Department of Developmental Services since 2024, where he has held several roles since 2020, including Assistant Deputy Director and Southern Region Manager. He held several roles at the San Gabriel/Pomona Regional Center from 2010 to 2020, including Director of Client Services, Director of Community Services, Assistant Director of Community Services, Resource Developer, and Service Coordinator. Christian was a Youth Counselor at the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation from 2007 to 2009. He was a Program Manager at Esperanza Services from 2003 to 2007. Christian earned a Master of Public Administration degree in Public Sector Leadership from California State University, Northridge and a Bachelor of Science degree in Human Services from University of Phoenix. This position does not require Senate confirmation, and the compensation is $187,104. Christian is registered with no party preference. 

    Sherri Miller, of Sacramento, has been appointed Special Assistant to the Secretary at the California Environmental Protection Agency. Miller has been Executive Office Manager at California High-Speed Rail Authority since 2023, where she was previously Staff Services Manager II from 2021 to 2023. She held several roles at the California Department of Motor Vehicles from 2012 to 2019, including Administrative Assistant II to the Department of Motor Vehicles Director and Executive Secretary. Miller is a participant of the Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Program at California High-Speed Rail Authority. This position does not require Senate confirmation, and compensation is $108,000. Miller is a Democrat.

    Jason Paguio, of Coronado, has been reappointed to the Commission on Asian and Pacific Islander American Affairs, where he has served since 2022. Paguio has been President and Chief Executive Officer of the Asian Business Association San Diego and the Asian Business Association Foundation since 2019 and a Member of the United States Coast Guard Auxiliary since 2017. He was Director for North America at Dalman & Narborough from 2006 to 2025. Paguio was Director of Strategic Partnerships and Political Director for the California Asian Pacific Chamber of Commerce from 2020 to 2022. He was a Land Use Advisor for the San Diego County Board of Supervisors from 2017 to 2019. Paguio was Chief of Staff for the Office of the Deputy Mayor of the City of Chula Vista from 2015 to 2017. He is Chair of the Board of Directors of the San Diego Community Housing Corporation, Immediate Past Chair of the Board of Directors of LEAD San Diego, Member of the Board of Directors of the San Diego Regional Chamber of Commerce, NTC Foundation, and San Diego Opera and a member of the California Entrepreneurship and Economic Mobility Task Force in the Office of the Small Business Advocate. This position does not require Senate confirmation, and there is no compensation. Paguio is a Democrat.

    Rajan Gill, of Yuba City, has been reappointed to the California Commission on Asian and Pacific Islander American Affairs, where he has served since 2013. Gill has been a Filmmaker at Neena Filmhouse since 2024, Professor of History at Yuba College since 2019, and Managing Partner at Gill Ranches since 2010. He was Professor of History at Las Positas College from 2018 to 2019. Gill was an Adjunct Professor at Yuba College from 2015 to 2018. He earned a Master of Arts degree in History from the University of California, Santa Cruz and a Bachelor of Arts degree in History and Middle Eastern and South Asian studies from the University of California, Davis. This position does not require Senate confirmation, and there is no compensation. Gill is a Democrat.

    Press releases, Recent news

    Recent news

    News SACRAMENTO – Governor Gavin Newsom issued the following statement after a federal court ruled today that President Trump exceeded his use of emergency powers to enact broad-sweeping tariffs that hurt states, consumers, and businesses: “Like we said when we filed…

    News SACRAMENTO – Governor Gavin Newsom today announced that he has signed the following bill:SB 49 by Senator Shannon Grove (R-Bakersfield) – Tribal gaming: compact and amendment ratification.For full text of the bill, visit: leginfo.legislature.ca.gov.  Recent…

    News SACRAMENTO – Governor Gavin Newsom today issued an emergency proclamation for Trinity County to assist in recovery from the December 2024 winter storms that caused significant damage to the local area. The emergency proclamation authorizes the Governor’s Office…

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI USA: Governor Newsom issues statement on court decision affirming Trump’s tariffs as unlawful

    Source: US State of California 2

    May 28, 2025

    SACRAMENTO – Governor Gavin Newsom issued the following statement after a federal court ruled today that President Trump exceeded his use of emergency powers to enact broad-sweeping tariffs that hurt states, consumers, and businesses:

    “Like we said when we filed our lawsuit: These tariffs are illegal, full stop. The court agreed today that Donald Trump overstepped his authority with his unlawful tariffs, which have created chaos and hurt American families and businesses.”

    Governor Gavin Newsom

    On April 16, Governor Newsom and Attorney General Rob Bonta filed a lawsuit arguing that President Trump lacks the authority to unilaterally impose tariffs through the International Economic Emergency Powers Act, creating immediate and irreparable harm to California, the world’s fourth largest economy, and nation’s leading manufacturing and agriculture state. Today’s decision was issued as part of a separate lawsuit filed by private parties and other states, but aligns with California’s arguments.

    Recent news

    News SACRAMENTO – Governor Gavin Newsom today announced that he has signed the following bill:SB 49 by Senator Shannon Grove (R-Bakersfield) – Tribal gaming: compact and amendment ratification.For full text of the bill, visit: leginfo.legislature.ca.gov.  Recent…

    News SACRAMENTO – Governor Gavin Newsom today issued an emergency proclamation for Trinity County to assist in recovery from the December 2024 winter storms that caused significant damage to the local area. The emergency proclamation authorizes the Governor’s Office…

    News Sacramento, California – Governor Gavin Newsom today issued a proclamation declaring May 2025, as “Jewish American Heritage Month.”The text of the proclamation and a copy can be found below PROCLAMATIONThroughout our history, generations of Jewish immigrants…

    May 28, 2025

    SACRAMENTO – Governor Gavin Newsom issued the following statement after a federal court ruled today that President Trump exceeded his use of emergency powers to enact broad-sweeping tariffs that hurt states, consumers, and businesses:

    “Like we said when we filed our lawsuit: These tariffs are illegal, full stop. The court agreed today that Donald Trump overstepped his authority with his unlawful tariffs, which have created chaos and hurt American families and businesses.”

    Governor Gavin Newsom

    On April 16, Governor Newsom and Attorney General Rob Bonta filed a lawsuit arguing that President Trump lacks the authority to unilaterally impose tariffs through the International Economic Emergency Powers Act, creating immediate and irreparable harm to California, the world’s fourth largest economy, and nation’s leading manufacturing and agriculture state. Today’s decision was issued as part of a separate lawsuit filed by private parties and other states, but aligns with California’s arguments.

    Recent news

    News SACRAMENTO – Governor Gavin Newsom today announced that he has signed the following bill:SB 49 by Senator Shannon Grove (R-Bakersfield) – Tribal gaming: compact and amendment ratification.For full text of the bill, visit: leginfo.legislature.ca.gov.  Recent…

    News SACRAMENTO – Governor Gavin Newsom today issued an emergency proclamation for Trinity County to assist in recovery from the December 2024 winter storms that caused significant damage to the local area. The emergency proclamation authorizes the Governor’s Office…

    News Sacramento, California – Governor Gavin Newsom today issued a proclamation declaring May 2025, as “Jewish American Heritage Month.”The text of the proclamation and a copy can be found below PROCLAMATIONThroughout our history, generations of Jewish immigrants…

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI Global: Trump’s global trade plans are in disarray, after a US court ruling on ‘Liberation Day’ tariffs

    Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Susan Stone, Credit Union SA Chair of Economics, University of South Australia

    A United States court has blocked the so-called “Liberation Day” tariffs that US President Donald Trump imposed on imported goods from around 90 nations. This puts implementation of Trump’s current trade policy in disarray.

    The Court of International Trade ruled the emergency authority Trump used to impose the tariffs could not override the role of Congress, which has the right to regulate commerce with other countries.

    Tariffs imposed via other legislative processes – such as those dealing with cars, steel and aluminium – continue to stand. But the broad-based “reciprocal” tariffs will need to be removed within ten days of the court’s ruling. Trump administration officials have already filed plans to appeal.

    The ruling calls into question trade negotiations underway with more than 18 different nations, which are trying to lower these tariffs. Do these countries continue to negotiate or do they wait for the judicial process to play out?

    The Trump administration still has other mechanisms through which it can impose tariffs, but these have limits on the amount that can be imposed, or entail processes which can take months or years. This undermines Trump’s preferred method of negotiation: throwing out large threats and backing down once a concession is reached.

    Emergency powers were a step too far

    The lawsuits were filed by US importers of foreign products and some US states, challenging Trump’s use of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act of 1977.

    The lawsuits argued the national emergencies cited in imposing the tariffs – the trade deficit and the fentanyl crisis – were not an emergency and not directly addressed by the tariff remedy. The court agreed, and said by imposing tariffs Trump had overstepped his authority.

    The ruling said the executive orders used were “declared to be invalid as contrary to law”.

    The act states the president is entitled to take economic action in the face of “an unusual and extraordinary threat”. It’s mainly been used to impose sanctions on terrorist groups or freeze assets from Russia. There’s nothing in the act that refers to tariffs.

    The decision means all the reciprocal tariffs – including the 10% tariffs on most countries, the 50% tariffs Trump was talking about putting on the EU, and some of the Chinese tariffs – are ruled by the court to be illegal. They must be removed within 10 days.

    The ruling was based on two separate lawsuits. One was brought by a group of small businesses that argued tariffs materially hurt their business. The other was brought by 12 individual states, arguing the tariffs would materially impact their ability to provide public goods.

    Some industry tariffs will remain in place

    The ruling does not apply to tariffs applied under Section 201, known as safeguard tariffs. They are intended to protect industries from imports allegedly being sold in the US market at unfair prices or through unfair means. Tariffs on solar panels and washing machines were brought under this regulation.

    Also excluded are Section 232 tariffs, which are applied for national security reasons. Those are the steel and aluminium tariffs, the automobile and auto parts tariffs. Trump has declared all those as national security issues, so those tariffs will remain.

    Most of the tariffs against China are also excluded under Section 301. Those are put in place for unfair trade practices, such as intellectual property theft or forced technology transfer. They are meant to pressure countries to change their policies.

    Other trade investigations are still underway

    In addition, there are current investigations related to copper and the pharmaceuticals sector, which will continue. These investigations are part of a more traditional trade process and may lead to future tariffs, including on Australia.

    The Trump administration is still weighing possible sector-specific tariffs on pharmaceuticals.
    Planar/Shutterstock

    Now for the appeals

    The Trump administration has already filed its intention to appeal to the federal appeals court. This process will take some time. In the meantime, there are at least five other legal challenges to tariffs pending in the courts.

    If the appeals court provides a ruling the Trump administration or opponents don’t like, they can appeal to the Supreme Court.

    Alternatively, the White House could direct customs officials to ignore the court and continue to collect tariffs.

    The Trump administration has ignored court orders in the past, particularly on immigration rulings. So it remains to be seen if customs officials will release goods without the tariffs being paid in ten days’ time.

    The administration is unlikely to lie down on this. In addition to its appeal process, officials complained about “unelected judges” and “judicial overreach” and may contest the whole process. The only thing that continues to be a certainty is that uncertainty will drive global markets for the foreseeable future.

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

    ref. Trump’s global trade plans are in disarray, after a US court ruling on ‘Liberation Day’ tariffs – https://theconversation.com/trumps-global-trade-plans-are-in-disarray-after-a-us-court-ruling-on-liberation-day-tariffs-257812

    MIL OSI – Global Reports

  • MIL-OSI Global: Influencer Andrew Tate is charged with a raft of sex crimes. His followers will see him as the victim

    Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Steven Roberts, Professor of Education and Social Justice, Monash University

    British prosecutors have this week charged social media influencer Andrew Tate with a string of serious sexual offences, including rape and human trafficking, alleged to have been committed in the United Kingdom between 2012 and 2015.

    This comes in the wake of an ongoing case in Romania. There, Tate and his brother Tristan face similar charges of coercing and exploiting women through what is sometimes described as the “loverboy method” of manipulation that is used to control and monetise women through webcam performances.

    A self-described misogynist, Tate is a widespread figure of notoriety for his views on women and his role in the internet “manosphere”. He has millions of followers globally, including ten million on X alone.

    This latest round of prosecutions will likely further entrench the loyalty of those followers: boys and young men who will see their leader as the victim of a corrupt system.

    Who is Andrew Tate?

    Tate is a British-American social media influencer and former kickboxer. He gained international notoriety for his violently misogynistic videos and pronouncements.

    He’s built a massive, loyal social media following through a brand that is part provocateur, part self-help guru and part conspiracy theorist.

    His rhetoric emphasises an aspirational masculinity geared towards extreme wealth and a physically fit body, combined with resentment towards women and so-called “feminised” societies. He has, for example, stated that women should “bear responsibility” for sexual assault.

    Tate is a leading ideological figurehead of what is often called the “manosphere” – a loose network of online communities and content creators who promote regressive ideas about masculinity, gender roles and male identity.

    Tate offers a template for many boys and young men to make sense of their place in the world, playing up ideas that boys are disenfranchised by social, economic, or cultural change.

    This is part of an emotional hook that provides belonging and clarity in a world his followers are told is stacked against them.

    Tate’s content involves both overt and, more often, insidious celebration of harmful gender norms and misogynistic ideologies.

    Research has found boys’ exposure to this content has contributed to a resurgence of a sense of male supremacy in classrooms. This then increases sexism and hostility towards women teachers and girl peers.

    Reinforcing the narrative

    Given this context, it is unlikely the new charges will erode his popularity.

    To be clear, he is not universally admired. In fact, the majority of boys reject what he stands for.

    However, for the significant minority who comprise his hardcore followers, these new charges will likely be used to reinforce a persecution narrative.

    In this way, Tate has paved the way for more violent and extreme misogyny to become standard, not rare.

    This was exactly the pattern when the Romanian charges first emerged. His followers flooded platforms with hashtags like #FreeTopG, reframing his arrest as proof that he was “telling the truth” and being punished for it.

    Figures like US President Donald Trump provide a relevant comparison. Trump has faced multiple criminal indictments and was found liable in a civil trial for sexually assaulting E. Jean Carroll.

    Yet, his popularity among his base has held firm.

    For many of his supporters, these legal challenges are not signs of wrongdoing, but evidence their champion is being unfairly targeted by corrupt institutions.

    Tate is similar in that his hypermasculine posturing and anti-establishment bravado ensures his audience see him the same way.

    Prompting more loyalty

    Given their previous responses, we can already predict how the Tate brothers will respond this time. They will deny the charges, of course, but more importantly, they will use the moment to deepen their mythos.

    We might expect to see talk of “the matrix” of shadowy elites, and the weaponisation of justice systems to silence truth-telling men.

    They will insist the charges are not about what they did, but about who they are: disruptors of a weak, feminised society. This victim-persecutor framing is central to their appeal and will remain so as this unfolds.

    Their followers will, then, likely respond with greater loyalty. For those already steeped in online misogyny and disillusionment, legal accusations such as these don’t raise doubt, but instead confirm the story they already buy into.

    This makes combating Tate’s influence a complex challenge. Simply “calling it out” is not enough.

    As our research shows, Tate’s brand thrives not in spite of controversy, but because of it.

    This is why we need a more strategic, long-term approach to address the harms Tate and other such figureheads represent.

    We need robust gender education in schools, stronger commitments to critical media literacy, and the elevation of alternative role models who can speak to the same emotional terrain without reinforcing misogyny.

    This can include other content creators, like Will Hitchins, but also youth workers or people of any gender from boy’s existing communities.

    A key lesson here is that, for the manosphere’s key figures, being charged or even found guilty of crimes (should that occur) might not signal their downfall or diminish their relevance.

    Steven Roberts receives funding from Australia’s National Research Organisation for Women’s Safety, the Australian Research Council and the Australian Government. He is a Board Director at Respect Victoria, but this article is written wholly separate from and does not represent that role.

    Stephanie Wescott receives funding from Australia’s National Research Organisation for Women’s Safety.

    ref. Influencer Andrew Tate is charged with a raft of sex crimes. His followers will see him as the victim – https://theconversation.com/influencer-andrew-tate-is-charged-with-a-raft-of-sex-crimes-his-followers-will-see-him-as-the-victim-257805

    MIL OSI – Global Reports

  • MIL-OSI USA: As President Trump Helps Storm-Impacted Arkansas Families, the State Steps Up for Damaged Communities

    Source: US State of Arkansas

    As President Trump Helps Storm-Impacted Arkansas Families, the State Steps Up for Damaged Communities

    LITTLE ROCK, Ark. – Following President Trump’s Major Disaster Declaration in response to Arkansas’ March 14-15 storms and tornadoes and his announcement that he would provide Individual Assistance to Arkansans impacted by these storms, Governor Sarah Huckabee Sanders today announced that the State will provide Public Assistance to storm-impacted county and local governments.
     
    “Arkansas is grateful for President Trump’s support as we continue to rebuild from this spring’s devastating tornadoes,” said Governor Sanders. “The State of Arkansas is going to step up to give additional assistance to our counties and cities to help pay for some of the costs incurred during storm cleanup efforts.”
     
    Arkansas Division of Emergency Management (ADEM) Public Assistance staff and Area Coordinators will coordinate projects based on the Preliminary Damage Assessment the State previously submitted to the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA).
     
    When project work is complete, counties and cities will submit documentation to ADEM Public Assistance staff for all expenses incurred. Following ADEM’s review of those documents and inspection of project completion, the State will cover 35% of cleanup and rebuilding project costs.

    The proclamation activating the state Public Assistance program is linked here.

    ###

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI USA: President Trump Delivers Assistance to Arkansans Recovering from April Storms

    Source: US State of Arkansas

    LITTLE ROCK, Ark. – President Donald J. Trump today announced that he will declare a Major Disaster in Arkansas for the state’s April 2 storms and flooding. Governor Sanders previously submitted a request for a Major Disaster Declaration in response to this storm.
     
    “President Trump stands with Arkansas. As we recover from a long series of severe weather events, our state is incredibly thankful for President Trump’s leadership and work to deliver aid to storm-impacted communities,” said Governor Sanders. “I have had continued conversations with the Trump Administration and Secretary Noem about their plans to reform FEMA and look forward to working with them to save money and get assistance directly in the hands of disaster victims.”
     
    As part of the Major Disaster declaration, President Trump will offer Individual Assistance to Arkansans impacted by these storms and Public Assistance for county and local government expenses related to storm recovery.

    MIL OSI USA News