NewzIntel.com

Category: Eurozone

  • MIL-Evening Report: Guests at a feast in Iran’s Zagros Mountains 11,000 years ago brought wild boars from all across the land

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Petra Vaiglova, Lecturer in Archaeological Science, Australian National University

    Kathryn Killackey

    Have you ever stopped by the grocery store on your way to a dinner party to grab a bottle of wine? Did you grab the first one you saw, or did you pause to think about the available choices and deliberate over where you wanted your gift to be from?

    The people who lived in western Iran around 11,000 years ago had the same idea – but in practice it looked a little different. In our latest research, my colleagues and I studied the remains of ancient feasts at Asiab in the Zagros Mountains where people gathered in communal celebration.

    The feasters left behind the skulls of 19 wild boars, which they packed neatly together and sealed inside a pit within a round building. Butchery marks on the boar skulls show the animals were used for feasting, but until now we did not know where the animals came from.

    By examining the microscopic growth patterns and chemical signatures inside the tooth enamel of five of these boars, we found at least some of them had been brought to the site from a substantial distance away, transported over difficult mountainous terrain. Bringing these boars to the feast – when other boars were available locally – would have taken an enormous amount of effort.

    A big feast from before the dawn of agriculture

    Feasting activities are widely documented in the archaeological record, primarily from communities that rely on agriculture to generate a food surplus. In fact, it has been suggested feasting may have been a driving force behind the adoption of agriculture, although this theory has been widely debated.

    While evidence from after the adoption of agriculture is plentiful from all reaches of the globe, evidence pre-dating agriculture is more sparse.

    What is special about the feast at Asiab is not only its early date and that it brought together people from wider reaches of the region. It is the fact that people who participated in this feast invested substantial amounts of effort, so that their contributions involved an element of geographic symbolism.

    Food and culture

    Food and long-standing culinary traditions form an integral component of cultures all over the globe. It is for this reason that holidays, festivals, and other socially meaningful events commonly involve food.

    We cannot imagine Christmas without the Christmas meal, for example, or Eid without the food gifts, or Passover without matzo ball soup.

    What’s more, food makes for gifts that are highly appreciated. The more a food item is reminiscent of a specific country or location, the better. It is for this reason that cheese from France, crocodile jerky from Australia, and black chicken from Korea make for good currency in the world of gift giving.

    Just like today, people who lived in the past noticed the importance of reciprocity and place, and formulated customs to celebrate them publicly.

    At ancient feasts at Stonehenge, for example, research has shown people ate pigs brought from wide reaches of Britain. Our new findings provide the first glimpse of similar behaviour in a pre-agricultural context.

    How to read a tooth

    Did you know that teeth grow like trees? Much like trees and their annual growth rings, teeth deposit visible layers of enamel and dentine during growth.

    These growth layers track daily patterns of development and changes in the dietary intake of certain chemical elements. In our study, we sliced the teeth of wild boars from Asiab in a way that allowed us to count these daily growth layers under the microscope.

    We then used this information to measure the composition of enamel secreted at approximately weekly intervals. The variability in the isotopic ratios we measured suggests at least some of the wild boars used in the feast at Asiab came from considerable distance: possibly from at least 70 km, or two or more days’ travel.

    The most likely explanation is that they were hunted in farther reaches of the region and transported to the site as contributions to the feast.

    Reciprocity is at the heart of social interactions. Just like a thoughtfully chosen bottle of wine does today, those boars brought from far and wide may have served to commemorate a place, an event and social bonds through gift-giving.

    The work was funded by Early Career Research grants from Griffith University and the Society for Archaeological Science.

    – ref. Guests at a feast in Iran’s Zagros Mountains 11,000 years ago brought wild boars from all across the land – https://theconversation.com/guests-at-a-feast-in-irans-zagros-mountains-11-000-years-ago-brought-wild-boars-from-all-across-the-land-260179

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Guests at a feast in Iran’s Zagros Mountains 11,000 years ago brought wild boars from all across the land

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Petra Vaiglova, Lecturer in Archaeological Science, Australian National University

    Kathryn Killackey

    Have you ever stopped by the grocery store on your way to a dinner party to grab a bottle of wine? Did you grab the first one you saw, or did you pause to think about the available choices and deliberate over where you wanted your gift to be from?

    The people who lived in western Iran around 11,000 years ago had the same idea – but in practice it looked a little different. In our latest research, my colleagues and I studied the remains of ancient feasts at Asiab in the Zagros Mountains where people gathered in communal celebration.

    The feasters left behind the skulls of 19 wild boars, which they packed neatly together and sealed inside a pit within a round building. Butchery marks on the boar skulls show the animals were used for feasting, but until now we did not know where the animals came from.

    By examining the microscopic growth patterns and chemical signatures inside the tooth enamel of five of these boars, we found at least some of them had been brought to the site from a substantial distance away, transported over difficult mountainous terrain. Bringing these boars to the feast – when other boars were available locally – would have taken an enormous amount of effort.

    A big feast from before the dawn of agriculture

    Feasting activities are widely documented in the archaeological record, primarily from communities that rely on agriculture to generate a food surplus. In fact, it has been suggested feasting may have been a driving force behind the adoption of agriculture, although this theory has been widely debated.

    While evidence from after the adoption of agriculture is plentiful from all reaches of the globe, evidence pre-dating agriculture is more sparse.

    What is special about the feast at Asiab is not only its early date and that it brought together people from wider reaches of the region. It is the fact that people who participated in this feast invested substantial amounts of effort, so that their contributions involved an element of geographic symbolism.

    Food and culture

    Food and long-standing culinary traditions form an integral component of cultures all over the globe. It is for this reason that holidays, festivals, and other socially meaningful events commonly involve food.

    We cannot imagine Christmas without the Christmas meal, for example, or Eid without the food gifts, or Passover without matzo ball soup.

    What’s more, food makes for gifts that are highly appreciated. The more a food item is reminiscent of a specific country or location, the better. It is for this reason that cheese from France, crocodile jerky from Australia, and black chicken from Korea make for good currency in the world of gift giving.

    Just like today, people who lived in the past noticed the importance of reciprocity and place, and formulated customs to celebrate them publicly.

    At ancient feasts at Stonehenge, for example, research has shown people ate pigs brought from wide reaches of Britain. Our new findings provide the first glimpse of similar behaviour in a pre-agricultural context.

    How to read a tooth

    Did you know that teeth grow like trees? Much like trees and their annual growth rings, teeth deposit visible layers of enamel and dentine during growth.

    These growth layers track daily patterns of development and changes in the dietary intake of certain chemical elements. In our study, we sliced the teeth of wild boars from Asiab in a way that allowed us to count these daily growth layers under the microscope.

    We then used this information to measure the composition of enamel secreted at approximately weekly intervals. The variability in the isotopic ratios we measured suggests at least some of the wild boars used in the feast at Asiab came from considerable distance: possibly from at least 70 km, or two or more days’ travel.

    The most likely explanation is that they were hunted in farther reaches of the region and transported to the site as contributions to the feast.

    Reciprocity is at the heart of social interactions. Just like a thoughtfully chosen bottle of wine does today, those boars brought from far and wide may have served to commemorate a place, an event and social bonds through gift-giving.

    The work was funded by Early Career Research grants from Griffith University and the Society for Archaeological Science.

    – ref. Guests at a feast in Iran’s Zagros Mountains 11,000 years ago brought wild boars from all across the land – https://theconversation.com/guests-at-a-feast-in-irans-zagros-mountains-11-000-years-ago-brought-wild-boars-from-all-across-the-land-260179

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-OSI China: Senior CPC official highlights global civilizations dialogue, cooperation at Beijing conference

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

    Senior CPC official highlights global civilizations dialogue, cooperation at Beijing conference

    Cai Qi, a member of the Standing Committee of the Political Bureau of the Communist Party of China (CPC) Central Committee and a member of the Secretariat of the CPC Central Committee, delivers a keynote speech at the opening ceremony of the Global Civilizations Dialogue Ministerial Meeting in Beijing, capital of China, July 10, 2025. The Global Civilizations Dialogue Ministerial Meeting opened here on Thursday. [Photo/Xinhua]

    BEIJING, July 10 — Senior Communist Party of China (CPC) official Cai Qi on Thursday called for greater efforts to promote dialogue and cooperation among global civilizations, as he attended the opening of the Global Civilizations Dialogue Ministerial Meeting in Beijing.

    Chinese President Xi Jinping sent a congratulatory letter to the meeting, which was read out at the opening ceremony by Li Shulei, a member of the Political Bureau of the CPC Central Committee and head of the Publicity Department of the CPC Central Committee.

    In his keynote speech, Cai, who is a member of the Standing Committee of the Political Bureau of the CPC Central Committee and a member of the Secretariat of the CPC Central Committee, said the Global Civilization Initiative proposed by President Xi more than two years ago has received enthusiastic responses and positive echoes from the international community.

    The initiative, which upholds the core principle of seeking common ground while reserving differences, is deeply rooted in China’s fine traditional culture and resonates with cultural values shared by many other nations, Cai said.

    Noting that the path to global peace and development remains long and challenging, Cai called for joint efforts to explore diverse development models, strengthen cultural inheritance and innovation, advance cultural and people-to-people exchanges, and build a diverse and multi-dimensional global network for dialogue and cooperation among civilizations.

    Themed “Safeguarding Diversity of Human Civilizations for World Peace and Development,” the meeting is co-hosted by the Publicity Department of the CPC Central Committee and the International Department of the CPC Central Committee.

    United Nations Secretary-General Antonio Guterres sent his message of congratulations to the event, which has attracted over 600 guests from about 140 countries and regions.

    Former heads of state and government from Indonesia, Namibia, Japan and Belgium delivered speeches at the opening ceremony.

    Li Shulei, a member of the Political Bureau of the Communist Party of China (CPC) Central Committee and head of the Publicity Department of the CPC Central Committee, reads out a congratulatory letter from Chinese President Xi Jinping at the opening ceremony of the Global Civilizations Dialogue Ministerial Meeting in Beijing, capital of China, July 10, 2025. The Global Civilizations Dialogue Ministerial Meeting opened here on Thursday. [Photo/Xinhua]

    MIL OSI China News –

  • MIL-Evening Report: ‘Storm clouds are gathering’: 40 years on from the bombing of the Rainbow Warrior

    From the prologue of the 40th anniversary edition of David Robie’s seminal book on the Rainbow Warrior’s last voyage, former New Zealand prime minister Helen Clark (1999-2008) writes about what the bombing on 10 July 1985 means today.

    The bombing of the Rainbow Warrior in Auckland Harbour on 10 July 1985 and the death of a voyager on board, Greenpeace photographer Fernando Pereira, was both a tragic and a seminal moment in the long campaign for a nuclear-free Pacific.

    It was so startling that many of us still remember where we were when the news came through. I was in Zimbabwe on my way to join the New Zealand delegation to the United Nations World Conference on Women in Nairobi. In Harare I met for the first time New Zealand Anglican priest Father Michael Lapsley who, in that same city in 1990, was severely disabled by a parcel bomb delivered by the intelligence service of the apartheid regime in South Africa. These two bombings, of the Rainbow Warrior and of Michael, have been sad reminders to me of the price so many have paid for their commitment to peace and justice.

    It was also very poignant for me to meet Fernando’s daughter, Marelle, in Auckland in 2005. Her family suffered a loss which no family should have to bear. In August 1985, I was at the meeting of the Labour Party caucus when it was made known that the police had identified a woman in their custody as a French intelligence officer. Then in September, French prime minister Laurent Fabius confirmed that French secret agents had indeed sunk the Rainbow Warrior. The following year, a UN-mediated agreement saw the convicted agents leave New Zealand and a formal apology, a small amount of compensation, and undertakings on trade given by France — the latter after New Zealand perishable goods had been damaged in port in France.

    Both 1985 and 1986 were momentous years for New Zealand’s assertion of its nuclear-free positioning which was seen as provocative by its nuclear-armed allies. On 4 February 1985, the United States was advised that its naval vessel, the Buchanan, could not enter a New Zealand port because it was nuclear weapons-capable and the US “neither confirm nor deny” policy meant that New Zealand could not establish whether it was nuclear weapons-armed or not.

    In Manila in July 1986, a meeting between prime minister David Lange and US Secretary of State George Schultz confirmed that neither New Zealand nor the US were prepared to change their positions and that New Zealand’s engagement in ANZUS was at an end. Secretary Schultz famously said that “We part company as friends, but we part company as far as the alliance is concerned”.

    New Zealand passed its Nuclear Free Zone, Disarmament and Arms Control Act in 1987. Since that time, until now, the country has on a largely bipartisan basis maintained its nuclear-free policy as a fundamental tenet of its independent foreign policy. But storm clouds are gathering.

    Australia’s decision to enter a nuclear submarine purchase programme with the United States is one of those. There has been much speculation about a potential Pillar Two of the AUKUS agreement which would see others in the region become partners in the development of advanced weaponry. This is occurring in the context of rising tensions between the United States and China.

    Many of us share the view that New Zealand should be a voice for deescalation, not for enthusiastic expansion of nuclear submarine fleets in the Pacific and the development of more lethal weaponry.

    Eyes of Fire: The Last Voyage and Legacy of the Rainbow Warrior . . . publication 10 July 2025. Image: David Robie/Little Island Press

    Nuclear war is an existential threat to humanity. Far from receding, the threat of use of nuclear weapons is ever present. The Doomsday Clock of the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists now sits at 89 seconds to midnight. It references the Ukraine theatre where the use of nuclear weapons has been floated by Russia. The arms control architecture for Europe is unravelling, leaving the continent much less secure. India and Pakistan both have nuclear arsenals. The Middle East is a tinder box with the failure of the Iran nuclear deal and with Israel widely believed to possess nuclear weapons. North Korea continues to develop its nuclear weapons capacity. An outright military conflict between China and the United States would be one between two nuclear powers with serious ramifications for East Asia, South-East Asia, the Pacific, and far beyond.

    August 2025 marks the eightieth anniversary of the nuclear bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. A survivors’ group, Nihon Hidankyo, was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize last year. They bear tragic witness to the horror of the use of nuclear weapons. The world must heed their voice now and at all times.

    In the current global turbulence, New Zealand needs to reemphasise the principles and values which drove its nuclear-free legislation and its advocacy for a nuclear-free South Pacific and global nuclear disarmament. New Zealanders were clear — we did not want to be defended by nuclear weapons. We wanted our country to be a force for diplomacy and for dialogue, not for warmongering.

    The multilateral system is now in crisis — across all its dimensions. The UN Security Council is paralysed by great power tensions. The United States is unlikely to pay its dues to the UN under the Trump presidency, and others are unlikely to fill the substantial gap which that leaves. Its humanitarian, development, health, human rights, political and peacekeeping, scientific and cultural arms all face fiscal crises.

    This is the time for New Zealand to link with the many small and middle powers across regions who have a vision for a world characterised by solidarity and peace and which can rise to the occasion to combat the existential challenges it faces — including of nuclear weapons, climate change, and artificial intelligence. If our independent foreign policy is to mean anything in the mid-2020s, it must be based on concerted diplomacy for peace and sustainable development.

    Movement back towards an out-of-date alliance, from which New Zealand disengaged four decades ago, and its current tentacles, offers no safe harbour — on the contrary, these destabilise the region within which we live and the wide trading relationships we have. May this new edition of David Robie’s Eyes of Fire remind us of our nuclear-free journey and its relevance as a lode star in these current challenging times.

    • The 40th anniversary edition of Eyes of Fire: The Last Voyage and Legacy of the Rainbow Warrior by David Robie ($50, Little Island Press) can be purchased from Little Island Press. 

    Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: ‘Storm clouds are gathering’: 40 years on from the bombing of the Rainbow Warrior

    From the prologue of the 40th anniversary edition of David Robie’s seminal book on the Rainbow Warrior’s last voyage, former New Zealand prime minister Helen Clark (1999-2008) writes about what the bombing on 10 July 1985 means today.

    The bombing of the Rainbow Warrior in Auckland Harbour on 10 July 1985 and the death of a voyager on board, Greenpeace photographer Fernando Pereira, was both a tragic and a seminal moment in the long campaign for a nuclear-free Pacific.

    It was so startling that many of us still remember where we were when the news came through. I was in Zimbabwe on my way to join the New Zealand delegation to the United Nations World Conference on Women in Nairobi. In Harare I met for the first time New Zealand Anglican priest Father Michael Lapsley who, in that same city in 1990, was severely disabled by a parcel bomb delivered by the intelligence service of the apartheid regime in South Africa. These two bombings, of the Rainbow Warrior and of Michael, have been sad reminders to me of the price so many have paid for their commitment to peace and justice.

    It was also very poignant for me to meet Fernando’s daughter, Marelle, in Auckland in 2005. Her family suffered a loss which no family should have to bear. In August 1985, I was at the meeting of the Labour Party caucus when it was made known that the police had identified a woman in their custody as a French intelligence officer. Then in September, French prime minister Laurent Fabius confirmed that French secret agents had indeed sunk the Rainbow Warrior. The following year, a UN-mediated agreement saw the convicted agents leave New Zealand and a formal apology, a small amount of compensation, and undertakings on trade given by France — the latter after New Zealand perishable goods had been damaged in port in France.

    Both 1985 and 1986 were momentous years for New Zealand’s assertion of its nuclear-free positioning which was seen as provocative by its nuclear-armed allies. On 4 February 1985, the United States was advised that its naval vessel, the Buchanan, could not enter a New Zealand port because it was nuclear weapons-capable and the US “neither confirm nor deny” policy meant that New Zealand could not establish whether it was nuclear weapons-armed or not.

    In Manila in July 1986, a meeting between prime minister David Lange and US Secretary of State George Schultz confirmed that neither New Zealand nor the US were prepared to change their positions and that New Zealand’s engagement in ANZUS was at an end. Secretary Schultz famously said that “We part company as friends, but we part company as far as the alliance is concerned”.

    New Zealand passed its Nuclear Free Zone, Disarmament and Arms Control Act in 1987. Since that time, until now, the country has on a largely bipartisan basis maintained its nuclear-free policy as a fundamental tenet of its independent foreign policy. But storm clouds are gathering.

    Australia’s decision to enter a nuclear submarine purchase programme with the United States is one of those. There has been much speculation about a potential Pillar Two of the AUKUS agreement which would see others in the region become partners in the development of advanced weaponry. This is occurring in the context of rising tensions between the United States and China.

    Many of us share the view that New Zealand should be a voice for deescalation, not for enthusiastic expansion of nuclear submarine fleets in the Pacific and the development of more lethal weaponry.

    Eyes of Fire: The Last Voyage and Legacy of the Rainbow Warrior . . . publication 10 July 2025. Image: David Robie/Little Island Press

    Nuclear war is an existential threat to humanity. Far from receding, the threat of use of nuclear weapons is ever present. The Doomsday Clock of the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists now sits at 89 seconds to midnight. It references the Ukraine theatre where the use of nuclear weapons has been floated by Russia. The arms control architecture for Europe is unravelling, leaving the continent much less secure. India and Pakistan both have nuclear arsenals. The Middle East is a tinder box with the failure of the Iran nuclear deal and with Israel widely believed to possess nuclear weapons. North Korea continues to develop its nuclear weapons capacity. An outright military conflict between China and the United States would be one between two nuclear powers with serious ramifications for East Asia, South-East Asia, the Pacific, and far beyond.

    August 2025 marks the eightieth anniversary of the nuclear bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. A survivors’ group, Nihon Hidankyo, was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize last year. They bear tragic witness to the horror of the use of nuclear weapons. The world must heed their voice now and at all times.

    In the current global turbulence, New Zealand needs to reemphasise the principles and values which drove its nuclear-free legislation and its advocacy for a nuclear-free South Pacific and global nuclear disarmament. New Zealanders were clear — we did not want to be defended by nuclear weapons. We wanted our country to be a force for diplomacy and for dialogue, not for warmongering.

    The multilateral system is now in crisis — across all its dimensions. The UN Security Council is paralysed by great power tensions. The United States is unlikely to pay its dues to the UN under the Trump presidency, and others are unlikely to fill the substantial gap which that leaves. Its humanitarian, development, health, human rights, political and peacekeeping, scientific and cultural arms all face fiscal crises.

    This is the time for New Zealand to link with the many small and middle powers across regions who have a vision for a world characterised by solidarity and peace and which can rise to the occasion to combat the existential challenges it faces — including of nuclear weapons, climate change, and artificial intelligence. If our independent foreign policy is to mean anything in the mid-2020s, it must be based on concerted diplomacy for peace and sustainable development.

    Movement back towards an out-of-date alliance, from which New Zealand disengaged four decades ago, and its current tentacles, offers no safe harbour — on the contrary, these destabilise the region within which we live and the wide trading relationships we have. May this new edition of David Robie’s Eyes of Fire remind us of our nuclear-free journey and its relevance as a lode star in these current challenging times.

    • The 40th anniversary edition of Eyes of Fire: The Last Voyage and Legacy of the Rainbow Warrior by David Robie ($50, Little Island Press) can be purchased from Little Island Press. 

    Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-OSI China: US sanctions on UN human rights expert unacceptable: UN spokesman

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

    U.S. sanctions against a UN human rights expert are unacceptable, said a UN spokesman on Thursday.

    The imposition of sanctions on UN human rights special rapporteurs is a dangerous precedent, said Stephane Dujarric, spokesman for UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres, in response to U.S. sanctions on Francesca Albanese, UN special rapporteur on the human rights situation in the occupied Palestinian territory.

    Member states are perfectly entitled to their views and to disagree with the reports by the special rapporteurs, said the spokesman, “but we encourage them to engage with the UN human rights architecture. The use of unilateral sanctions against special rapporteurs, or any other UN expert or official, is unacceptable.”

    He also noted that Albanese, like all other UN human rights special rapporteurs, is an independent human rights expert appointed by the UN Human Rights Council and reporting to the Geneva-based council.

    Special rapporteurs do not report to the UN secretary-general, who has no authority over them or their work, added Dujarric.

    Washington on Wednesday announced sanctions against Albanese over her role in investigating alleged Israeli human rights violations against Palestinians. The move marks Washington’s latest efforts to deter international investigations into alleged war crimes committed by Israel amid its ongoing military operations in Gaza.

    The sanctions follow an executive order signed by U.S. President Donald Trump in February, which authorized punitive measures against the International Criminal Court for what the administration described as “illegitimate and baseless actions” targeting the United States and Israel. 

    MIL OSI China News –

  • MIL-OSI China: US sanctions on UN human rights expert unacceptable: UN spokesman

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

    U.S. sanctions against a UN human rights expert are unacceptable, said a UN spokesman on Thursday.

    The imposition of sanctions on UN human rights special rapporteurs is a dangerous precedent, said Stephane Dujarric, spokesman for UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres, in response to U.S. sanctions on Francesca Albanese, UN special rapporteur on the human rights situation in the occupied Palestinian territory.

    Member states are perfectly entitled to their views and to disagree with the reports by the special rapporteurs, said the spokesman, “but we encourage them to engage with the UN human rights architecture. The use of unilateral sanctions against special rapporteurs, or any other UN expert or official, is unacceptable.”

    He also noted that Albanese, like all other UN human rights special rapporteurs, is an independent human rights expert appointed by the UN Human Rights Council and reporting to the Geneva-based council.

    Special rapporteurs do not report to the UN secretary-general, who has no authority over them or their work, added Dujarric.

    Washington on Wednesday announced sanctions against Albanese over her role in investigating alleged Israeli human rights violations against Palestinians. The move marks Washington’s latest efforts to deter international investigations into alleged war crimes committed by Israel amid its ongoing military operations in Gaza.

    The sanctions follow an executive order signed by U.S. President Donald Trump in February, which authorized punitive measures against the International Criminal Court for what the administration described as “illegitimate and baseless actions” targeting the United States and Israel. 

    MIL OSI China News –

  • MIL-OSI China: German auto parts giant strengthens tech ties with Chinese automakers

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

    German auto parts giant ZF is intensifying its technology cooperation with Chinese automakers, the company said on Thursday.

    In a press release, ZF said it is benefiting from the increasing importance of chassis technology, driven by the future trends of e-mobility, software-defined vehicles, and automated driving.

    During its Chassis Tech Day, the company showcased its modular “Chassis 2.0” approach, which integrates smart actuators, system expertise, and software know-how to unlock new avenues for growth.

    Peter Holdmann, member of ZF’s Board of Management and head of Division Chassis Solutions, said the company is targeting 33 percent of the global chassis technology market by the end of the decade.

    At the core of Chassis 2.0 is the industrialization of by-wire technologies, which have already been implemented in vehicles from Chinese brands. The NIO ET9 is the first mass-produced car in China equipped with ZF’s pure steer-by-wire system.

    “This is a prime example of how Chinese and German companies can leverage their respective strengths for collaborative innovation,” said Zhang Hui, vice president of NIO Europe. He added that China-Germany cooperation thrives on the agility and innovation capacity of Chinese firms, paired with the engineering, safety, and industrial expertise of German manufacturers.

    ZF also revealed that it has received two additional orders from Chinese automakers for its latest chassis technologies and has secured a contract with luxury carmaker Mercedes-Benz.

    The company has been doubling down on its investment in China, which has gone into a new R&D centre and 10 newly-built or expanded factories in the past two years. Today, nearly one-third of ZF’s 161 global production sites are located in China. 

    MIL OSI China News –

  • MIL-OSI China: German auto parts giant strengthens tech ties with Chinese automakers

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

    German auto parts giant ZF is intensifying its technology cooperation with Chinese automakers, the company said on Thursday.

    In a press release, ZF said it is benefiting from the increasing importance of chassis technology, driven by the future trends of e-mobility, software-defined vehicles, and automated driving.

    During its Chassis Tech Day, the company showcased its modular “Chassis 2.0” approach, which integrates smart actuators, system expertise, and software know-how to unlock new avenues for growth.

    Peter Holdmann, member of ZF’s Board of Management and head of Division Chassis Solutions, said the company is targeting 33 percent of the global chassis technology market by the end of the decade.

    At the core of Chassis 2.0 is the industrialization of by-wire technologies, which have already been implemented in vehicles from Chinese brands. The NIO ET9 is the first mass-produced car in China equipped with ZF’s pure steer-by-wire system.

    “This is a prime example of how Chinese and German companies can leverage their respective strengths for collaborative innovation,” said Zhang Hui, vice president of NIO Europe. He added that China-Germany cooperation thrives on the agility and innovation capacity of Chinese firms, paired with the engineering, safety, and industrial expertise of German manufacturers.

    ZF also revealed that it has received two additional orders from Chinese automakers for its latest chassis technologies and has secured a contract with luxury carmaker Mercedes-Benz.

    The company has been doubling down on its investment in China, which has gone into a new R&D centre and 10 newly-built or expanded factories in the past two years. Today, nearly one-third of ZF’s 161 global production sites are located in China. 

    MIL OSI China News –

  • MIL-OSI Analysis: A weakened Iran and Hezbollah gives Lebanon an opening to chart path away from the region’s conflicts − will it be enough?

    Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Mireille Rebeiz, Chair of Middle East Studies and Associate Professor of Francophone and Women’s, Gender and Sexuality Studies at Dickinson College. Adjunct Professor of Law at Penn State Dickinson Law., Dickinson College

    The national Lebanese flag hangs on a building amid a Hezbollah demonstration in the southern suburbs of Beirut on July 6, 2025. Photo by Nael Chahine / Middle East Images via AFP

    After a 12-day war launched by Israel and joined briefly by the United States, Iran has emerged weakened and vulnerable. And that has massive implications for another country in the region: Lebanon.

    Hezbollah, Tehran’s main ally in Lebanon, had already lost a lot of its fighters, arsenal and popular support during its own war with Israel in October 2024.

    Now, Iran’s government has little capacity to continue to finance, support and direct Hezbollah in Lebanon like it has done in the past. Compounding this shift away from Hezbollah’s influence, the U.S. recently laid down terms for a deal that would see the withdrawal of Israeli troops from southern Lebanon in return for the total disarmament of the paramilitary group – a proposal seemingly backed by the Lebanese government.

    As an expert on Lebanese history and culture, I believe that these changing regional dynamics give the Lebanese state an opening to chart a more neutral orientation and extricate itself from neighboring conflicts that have long exacerbated the divided and fragile country’s chronic problems.

    The shaping of modern Lebanon

    Ideologically, developments in Iran played a major role in shaping the circumstances in which Hezbollah, the Shiite Islamist political party and paramilitary group, was born.

    The Iranian Revolution of 1978-79 toppled the widely reviled and corrupt Western-backed monarchy of Shah Mohammad Reza and led to the establishment of an Islamic republic. That revolution resonated among the young Shiite population in Lebanon, where a politically sectarian system that was intended to reflect a balanced representation of Muslims and Christians in the country had led to de facto discrimination against underrepresented groups.

    Since Lebanon’s independence from France in 1943, most of the power has been concentrated in the hands of the Maronite Christians and Sunnis, leaving Shiite regions in south Lebanon and the Bekaa Valley lacking in development projects, social services and infrastructure.

    At the same time, Lebanon for decades had been irreparably changed by the politics of its powerful neighbor in Israel.

    In the course of founding its state in 1948, Israel forcibly removed over 750,000 Palestinians from their homeland – what Palestinians refer to as the Nakba, or “catastophe.” Many fled to Lebanon, largely in the country’s impoverished south and Bekaa Valley, which became a center of Palestinian resistance to Israel.

    In 1978, Israel invaded Lebanon to push Palestinian fighters away from its northern borders and put an end to rockets launched from south Lebanon. This fighting included the massacre of many civilians and the displacement of many Lebanese and Palestinians farther north.

    In 1982, Israel invaded Lebanon again with the stated purpose of eliminating the Palestinian Liberation Organization that had moved its headquarters to the country’s south. An estimated 17,000 to 19,000 Lebanese and Palestinian civilians and armed personnel were killed during the conflict and the accompanying siege of Beirut.

    It was in this cauldron of regional and domestic sectarianism and state abandonment that Hezbollah formed as a paramilitary group in 1985, buoyed by Shiite mobilization following the Iranian revolution and Israel’s invasion and occupation.

    Hezbollah’s domestic spoiler status

    Over time and with the continuous support of Iran, Hezbollah become an important player in the Middle East, intervening in the Syrian civil war to support the Assad regime and supporting the Kata’ib Hezbollah, a dominant Iraqi pro-Iranian militia.

    In 2016, Secretary General of Hezbollah Hassan Nasrallah officially recognized Iran’s role in funding their activities.

    People gather to stage a demonstration in support of Iran in front of the Iranian Embassy in Beirut, Lebanon, on June 25, 2025.
    Photo by Houssam Shbaro/Anadolu via Getty Images

    With Tehran’s support, Hezbollah was effectively able to operate as a state within a state while using its political clout to veto the vast majority of Lebanese parliamentary decisions it opposed. Amid that backdrop, Lebanon endured three long presidential vacuums: from November 2007 to May 2008; from May 2014 to October 2016; and finally from October 2022 to January 2024.

    Lebanon also witnessed a series of political assassinations from 2005 to 2021 that targeted politicians, academics, journalists and other figures who criticized Hezbollah.

    How the equation has changed

    It would be an understatement, then, to say that Hezbollah’s and Iran’s weakened positions as a result of their respective conflicts with Israel since late 2023 create major political ramifications for Lebanon.

    The most recent vacuum at the presidential level ended amid Hezbollah’s military losses against Israel, with Lebanon electing the former army commander Joseph Aoun as president.

    Meanwhile, despite the threat of violence, the Lebanese opposition to Hezbollah, which consists of members of parliament and public figures, has increased its criticism of Hezbollah, openly denouncing its leadership and calling for Lebanon’s political neutrality.

    These dissenting voices emerged cautiously during the Syrian civil war in 2011 and have grown after the Oct. 7 Hamas attacks and the subsequent war on Gaza.

    During the latest Israel-Iran war, the Lebanese opposition felt emboldened to reiterate its call for neutrality. Enabled by the U.S’s growing tutelage over Lebanon, some opposition figures have even called to normalize relations with Israel.

    These efforts to keep Lebanon out of the circle of violence are not negligible. In the past, they would have been attacked by Hezbollah and its supporters for what they would have considered high treason. Today, they represent new movement for how leaders are conceiving of politics domestically and diplomacy across the region.

    The critical regional context going forward

    As the political system cautiously changes, Hezbollah is facing unprecedented financial challenges and is unable to meet its fighters’ needs, including the promise to rebuild their destroyed homes. And with its own serious internal challenges, Iran now has much less ability to meaningfully support Hezbollah from abroad.

    But none of that means that Hezbollah is defeated as a political and military force, particularly as ongoing skirmishes with Israel give the group an external pretext.

    The Hezbollah-Israel war ended with a ceasefire brokered by the United States and France on Nov. 27, 2024. However, Israel has been attacking south Lebanon on an almost daily basis, including three incidents over the course of 10 days from late June to early July that have left several people dead and more than a dozen wounded.

    Amid these violations, Hezbollah continues to refuse to disarm and still casts itself as the only defender of Lebanon’s territorial integrity, again undermining the power of the Lebanese army and state.

    Lebanon’s other neighbor, Syria, will also be critical. The fall of the Assad regime in December 2024 diminished Hezbollah’s powers in the region and land access to Iraq and Iran. And the new Syrian leadership is not interested in supporting the Iranian Shiite ideology in the region but rather in empowering the Sunni community, one that was oppressed under the Assad dictatorship.

    While it’s too early to say, border tensions might translate into sectarian violence in Lebanon or even potential land loss. Yet the new Syrian government also has a different approach toward its neighbors than its predecessor. After decades of hostility, Syria seems to be opting for diplomacy with Israel rather than war. It is unclear what these negotiations will entail and how they will impact Lebanon and Hezbollah. However, there are real concerns about new borders in the region.

    The U.S. as ever will play a major role in next steps in Lebanon and the region. The U.S. has been pressing Lebanon to disarm Hezbollah, and the U.S Ambassador to Turkey and special envoy for Syria Thomas Barrack said he was “unbelievably satisfied” by Lebanon’s response thus far. But so far, there has been no fundamental shift on that front.

    Meanwhile, despite the calls for neutrality and the U.S pressure on Lebanon, it is hard to envision a new and neutral Lebanon without some serious changes in the region. Any future course for Lebanon will still first require progress toward peace in Gaza and ensuring Iran commits not to use Hezbollah as a proxy in the future.

    Mireille Rebeiz is affiliated with American Red Cross.

    – ref. A weakened Iran and Hezbollah gives Lebanon an opening to chart path away from the region’s conflicts − will it be enough? – https://theconversation.com/a-weakened-iran-and-hezbollah-gives-lebanon-an-opening-to-chart-path-away-from-the-regions-conflicts-will-it-be-enough-260031

    MIL OSI Analysis –

  • MIL-OSI Analysis: Rugby headgear can’t prevent concussion – but new materials could soften the blows over a career

    Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Nick Draper, Professor of Sport and Exercise Science, University of Canterbury

    The widely held view among rugby players, coaches and officials is that headgear can’t prevent concussion. If so, why wear it? It’s hot, it can block vision and hearing, and it can be uncomfortable.

    Headgear was originally designed to protect players from cuts and abrasions. But players still hope it will offer them a degree of protection against the collisions they experience in the game. Some players adopt it after previous concussions.

    We’re now seeing increasing numbers of professional players opting in. The Irish men’s team, for example, field up to five players each match sporting headgear. In Japan, it’s mandatory for juniors. And more parents in New Zealand are making their children wear it, too.

    The exact specifications for rugby match kit – boots, shorts, shoulder pads and
    headgear – are regulated through World Rugby’s Law 4 and Regulation 12. In 2019, the governing body launched a trial enabling players to wear headgear with new technical specifications in training and matches.

    The specifications have meant manufacturers can take advantage of novel “isotropic” materials that can potentially reduce the impact forces experienced by players.

    Conventional headgear is composed of soft foams that flatten when a player’s head collides with the ground or another player. As such, they can only minimally absorb those collision forces.

    Isotropic materials behave differently. They can absorb impacts from multiple directions and may offer a level of protection against the effects on a player’s head of a tackle or other collision event.

    Given these changes, and in light of recent research, we may need to change the narrative around rugby headgear: while it may not prevent concussion, it might reduce the total contact “burden” experienced by players in a game and over a whole season. And this could have benefits for long-term brain health.

    Impacts across seasons and careers

    Contact in rugby – through tackles, at the breakdown, and in scrums and lineouts – leads to players experiencing a number of collisions or “head acceleration events”. This contact is most commonly head to ground, head to body or head to head.

    By having players use “smart” mouthguards with embedded micro-accelerometers and gyroscopes to capture head movements, researchers can now measure each collision and each player’s contact load in a game – and potentially over a career.

    A player’s total contact load is found by adding together the magnitude of the impacts they experience in a game. These are measured as “peak linear accelerations” or “peak rotational accelerations”.

    While past research and media attention has focused on concussion, it has become clear the total contact burden in training and matches – the total “sub-concussive knocks” through head acceleration events – may be as important, if not more so.

    One of our own research projects involved following 40 under-16 players wearing smart mouthguards for all training and matches across one season. Peak Linear accelerations are measured as a g-force (g). Activities such as such as running, jumping and shaking the head would measure under 8g, for example, whereas heading a soccer ball might measure 31g.

    The results of our study showed the players differed greatly in their cumulative exposure over a whole season, from 300g to nearly 14,000g. These differences would be amplified further over an entire rugby career.

    Some of the variation is likely due to a player’s team position, with loose forwards having a greater burden than others. But it also seems some players just enjoy the contact aspects of the game more than others.

    Rugby is an impact sport: the Ireland and England women’s teams clash in 2025.
    Getty Images

    Potential benefits of new headgear materials

    Researcher Helen Murray at the University of Auckland has highlighted the need for more research into the burden of collisions, rather than just concussions, over a rugby career. In particular, we need to know more about its effect on future brain health.

    We hope to contribute to this by following our existing cohort of players through their careers. In the meantime, our research has examined the potential of existing rugby headgear and new isotropic materials to mitigate peak accelerations in rugby collisions.

    Using the field data collected from male and female players over the past four seasons, we have designed laboratory testing protocols to compare the conventional and newer materials.

    The results suggest the new forms of headgear do have the potential to reduce the impact burden for players.

    We found 55–90% of head acceleration events do involve direct contact with the head. As such, collision-mitigation headgear could be beneficial. And our laboratory testing produced an estimated 30% reduction in peak linear accelerations with the headgear compared to without.

    The nature of concussion is complex and related to the size of an impact as well as its direction and angle. For instance, we observed the concussions experienced by the junior players occurred between 12g and 62g – well below the male threshold of 70g requiring professional players to be removed from the field for a head injury assessment.

    Currently, it seems unlikely headgear can prevent concussion. But it does appear new headgear materials could significantly reduce the total impact burden for players during their careers. And this may help safeguard their future brain health.

    Nick Draper receives funding from the Health Research Council, Cure Kids, the Neurological Foundation, Canterbury Medical Research Foundation, Pacific Radiology Group, the Maurice and Phyllis Paykel Trust, and the UC Foundation.

    – ref. Rugby headgear can’t prevent concussion – but new materials could soften the blows over a career – https://theconversation.com/rugby-headgear-cant-prevent-concussion-but-new-materials-could-soften-the-blows-over-a-career-258912

    MIL OSI Analysis –

  • MIL-OSI Analysis: Does AI actually boost productivity? The evidence is murky

    Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Jon Whittle, Director, Data61, CSIRO

    Roman Samborskyi/Shutterstock

    There’s been much talk recently – especially among politicians – about productivity. And for good reason: Australia’s labour productivity growth sits at a 60-year low.

    To address this, Prime Minister Anthony Albanese has convened a productivity round table next month. This will coincide with the release of an interim report from the Productivity Commission, which is looking at five pillars of reform. One of these is the role of data and digital technologies, including artificial intelligence (AI).

    This will be music to the ears of the tech and business sectors, which have been enthusiastically promoting the productivity benefits of AI. In fact, the Business Council of Australia also said last month that AI is the single greatest opportunity in a generation to lift productivity.

    But what do we really know about how AI impacts productivity?

    What is productivity?

    Put simply, productivity is how much output (goods and services) we can produce from a given amount of inputs (such as labour and raw materials). It matters because higher productivity typically translates to a higher standard of living. Productivity growth has accounted for 80% of Australia’s income growth over the past three decades.

    Productivity can be thought of as individual, organisational or national.

    Your individual productivity is how efficiently you manage your time and resources to complete tasks. How many emails can you respond to in an hour? How many products can you check for defects in a day?

    Organisational productivity is how well an organisation achieves its goals. For example, in a research organisation, how many top-quality research papers are produced?

    National productivity is the economic efficiency of a nation, often measured as gross domestic product per hour worked. It is effectively an aggregate of the other forms. But it’s notoriously difficult to track how changes in individual or organisational productivity translate into national GDP per hour worked.

    AI and individual productivity

    The nascent research examining the relationship between AI and individual productivity shows mixed results.

    A 2025 real-world study of AI and productivity involved 776 experienced product professionals at US multinational company Procter & Gamble. The study showed that individuals randomly assigned to use AI performed as well as a team of two without. A similar study in 2023 with 750 consultants from Boston Consulting Group found tasks were 18% faster with generative AI.

    A 2023 paper reported on an early generative AI system in a Fortune 500 software company used by 5,200 customer support agents. The system showed a 14% increase in the number of issues resolved per hour. For less experienced agents, productivity increased by 35%.

    But AI doesn’t always increase individual productivity.

    A survey of 2,500 professionals found generative AI actually increased workload for 77% of workers. Some 47% said they didn’t know how to unlock productivity benefits. The study points to barriers such as the need to verify and/or correct AI outputs, the need for AI upskilling, and unreasonable expectations about what AI can do.

    A recent CSIRO study examined the daily use of Microsoft 365 Copilot by 300 employees of a government organisation. While the majority self-reported productivity benefits, a sizeable minority (30%) did not. Even those workers who reported productivity improvements expected greater productivity benefits than were delivered.

    AI and organisational productivity

    It’s difficult, if not impossible, to attribute changes in an organisation’s productivity to the introduction of AI. Businesses are sensitive to many social and organisational factors, any one of which could be the reason for a change in productivity.

    Nevertheless, the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) has estimated the productivity benefits of traditional AI – that is, machine learning applied for an industry-specific task – to be zero to 11% at the organisational level.

    A 2024 summary paper cites independent studies showing increases in organisational productivity from AI in Germany, Italy and Taiwan.

    In contrast, a 2022 analysis of 300,000 US firms didn’t find a significant correlation between AI adoption and productivity, but did for other technologies such as robotics and cloud computing. Likely explanations are that AI hasn’t yet had an effect on many firms, or simply that it’s too hard to disentangle the impact of AI given it’s never applied in isolation.

    AI productivity increases can also sometimes be masked by additional human labour needed to train or operate AI systems. Take Amazon’s Just Walk Out technology for shops.

    Publicly launched in 2018, it was intended to reduce labour as customer purchases would be fully automated. But it reportedly relied on hiring around 1,000 workers in India for quality control. Amazon has labelled these reports “erroneous”.

    More generally, think about the unknown number (but likely millions) of people paid to label data for AI models.

    AI and national productivity

    The picture at a national level is even murkier.

    Clearly, AI hasn’t yet impacted national productivity. It can be argued that technology developments take time to affect national productivity, as companies need to figure out how to use the technology and put the necessary infrastructure and skills in place.

    However, this is not guaranteed. For example, while there is consensus that the internet led to productivity improvements, the effects of mobile phones and social media are more contested, and their impacts are more apparent in some industries (such as entertainment) than others.

    Productivity isn’t just doing things faster

    The common narrative around AI and productivity is that AI automates mundane tasks, making us faster at doing things and giving us more time for creative pursuits. This, however, is a naive view of how work happens.

    Just because you can deal with your inbox more quickly doesn’t mean you’ll spend your afternoon on the beach. The more emails you fire off, the more you’ll receive back, and the never-ending cycle continues.

    Faster isn’t always better. Sometimes, we need to slow down to be more productive. That’s when great ideas happen.

    Imagine a world in which AI isn’t simply about speeding up tasks but proactively slows us down, to give us space to be more innovative, and more productive. That’s the real untapped opportunity with AI.

    Jon Whittle works at CSIRO which receives R&D funding from a wide range of government and industry clients.

    – ref. Does AI actually boost productivity? The evidence is murky – https://theconversation.com/does-ai-actually-boost-productivity-the-evidence-is-murky-260690

    MIL OSI Analysis –

  • MIL-OSI China: China Soong Ching Ling Foundation hosts Silk Road-themed summer camp

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

    More than 80 young people and representatives from 12 countries gathered in Beijing on July 7 for the launch of the “Youth Development for a Shared Future” Summer Camp, organized by the China Soong Ching Ling Foundation (CSCLF).

    The seven-day event brings together participants from Armenia, Gambia, Malaysia, Mongolia, Oman, the Philippines, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Slovakia, Spain, Thailand and Uzbekistan to experience Chinese culture.

    Participants pose for a group photo at the launch of the “Youth Development for a Shared Future” Summer Camp organized by the China Soong Ching Ling Foundation in Beijing, July 7, 2025. [Photo provided to China.org.cn]

    CSCLF Vice Chairperson Zhang Jiming said the event aims to create a platform for youth from different countries to engage, enhance understanding and friendship, and promote unity and cooperation. 

    He expressed hope that the participants will strengthen their appreciation of the richness of different civilizations, uphold the spirit of the Silk Road, and contribute to building a global community of shared future.

    China Soong Ching Ling Foundation Vice Chairperson Zhang Jiming delivers a speech at the launch event of the “Youth Development for a Shared Future” Summer Camp in Beijing, July 7, 2025. [Photo provided to China.org.cn]

    During the opening ceremony, students from several countries introduced themselves and thanked the foundation for the opportunity.

    They said the camp is a valuable way to learn more about Chinese culture, wisdom and heritage, and they looked forward to building lasting friendships.

    The summer camp runs from July 6 to 12 and features visits and cultural exchanges in Beijing and Shaanxi province, an area with historical significance to the ancient Silk Road.

    MIL OSI China News –

  • MIL-OSI New Zealand: Advocacy – PSNA condemns the New Zealand government’s silence over US sanctions against United Nations Special Rapporteur Francesca Albanese

    Source: Palestine Solidarity Network Aotearoa (PSNA)

     The Palestine Solidarity Network has just demanded that the government speak out against the US sanctions imposed on United Nations Special Rapporteur Francesca Albanese.

    Albanese released a damning report identifying companies complicit in Israel’s mass killing and mass starvation of civilians in Gaza, provoking the US to sanction her.

     

    PSNA Co-Chair Maher Nazzal says it is unacceptable for the US to bully the UN and for New Zealand to stay silent.

     

    “Anyone who stands up for Palestinians is attacked and menaced by the US.  New Zealand claims to support the United Nations and the so-called ‘rules-based international order’ but we stay cowardly mute when the Trump administration does Israel’s bidding and attacks United Nations representatives and UN agencies such as the United Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA).”

    “New Zealand’s silence is eerily reminiscent of western silence as the Nazi regime in 1930s Germany targeted Jews, socialists, communists, gays, and gypsies, and took over country by country through Europe.” 

    “New Zealanders are calling on the government to sanction Israel, but our government remains cowardly complicit” says Nazzal. “Our silence represents the weakest and worst of human nature.”


    “Silence is what empowers racism, genocide and imperial thuggery as personified in US Secretary of State, Marco Rubio’s attack on Albanese.

     

    PSNA, last week, referred four New Zealand government ministers and two business leaders to the International Criminal Court for investigation over their criminal support for Israeli war crimes in Gaza.


    Maher Nazzal

    Co-Chair 

    Palestine Solidarity Network Aotearoa (PSNA)

    MIL OSI New Zealand News –

  • MIL-OSI Security: 21st Iteration of Pacific Partnership Prepares for Indo-Pacific Mission Aboard USS Pearl Harbor

    Source: United States Navy (Logistics Group Western Pacific)

    JOINT BASE PEARL HARBOR-HICKAM, Hawaii – Pacific Partnership 2025 (PP-25) officially kicks off with the arrival of the Harpers Ferry-class dock landing ship USS Pearl Harbor (LSD 52) at Joint Base Pearl Harbor-Hickam, led by Rear Admiral Todd F. Cimicata, U.S. Pacific Fleet Executive Agent for Pacific Partnership, and the mission commander, U.S. Navy Captain Mark B. Stefanik.

    The PP-25 team, embarked aboard the Harpers Ferry-class dock landing ship USS Pearl Harbor (LSD 52), arrived at Joint Base Pearl Harbor-Hickam to make final preparations ahead of its upcoming port visits throughout the Indo-Pacific region. The PP-25 team will conduct medical exchanges, engineering projects, community outreach, and disaster preparedness engagements with host nation partners.

    “Pacific Partnership is a testament to what we can achieve together,” said Cimicata. “By working alongside our allies and partners, we strengthen regional capacity and resilience and lay the foundation for a collective response to crises. It’s about preparing in calm to respond in crisis.”

    This year’s PP-25 mission will include mission stops in Papua New Guinea, Federated States of Micronesia, Palau, Samoa, and Vanuatu. Prior to the USS Pearl Harbor’s departure, separate fly-in missions were conducted in the Philippines, Fiji, and Tonga in June.

    “This enduring mission provides us the opportunity to build on our relationships, share expertise, and learn from one another,” said Stefanik. “Our shared experiences help create more resilient communities, and I’m proud to lead a team committed to strengthening partnerships across the Indo-Pacific.”

    Pacific Partnership brings together more than 1,500 personnel from the United States and participating nations including Australia, Canada, Germany, Japan, New Zealand, Republic of Korea, Singapore, and the United Kingdom. Activities will include engineering projects at schools and clinics, medical subject matter expert exchanges, and performances by the Pacific Partnership Band, composed of musicians from the U.S. Pacific Fleet and partner nations.

    The mission team will work alongside allies and partners to strengthen relationships, bolster host nation capacity to provide essential humanitarian services, and support efforts to reduce the risk of, prepare for, and respond to disasters.

    Every day, the U.S. Pacific Fleet operates to protect the security, freedom, and prosperity for the U.S. and our allies and partners. The U.S. Pacific Fleet continues to advance a shared vision, alongside our allies and partners, of a free, open, and secure Indo-Pacific.

    Now in its 21st iteration, the Pacific Partnership series is the largest annual multinational humanitarian assistance and disaster management preparedness mission conducted in the Indo-Pacific. Pacific Partnership works collaboratively with host and partner nations to enhance regional interoperability and disaster response capabilities, increase security and stability in the region, and foster new and enduring friendships in the Indo-Pacific.

    For updates and multimedia from Pacific Partnership 2025, follow #PacificPartnership, #PP25, and #PacificPartnership25 on social media or visit: https://www.dvidshub.net/feature/PacificPartnership

    Date Taken: 07.09.2025
    Date Posted: 07.10.2025 20:57
    Story ID: 542493
    Location: JOINT BASE PEARL HARBOR-HICKAM, HAWAII, US
    Web Views: 3
    Downloads: 0

    PUBLIC DOMAIN  

    This work, 21st Iteration of Pacific Partnership Prepares for Indo-Pacific Mission Aboard USS Pearl Harbor, by LCDR Andrew Bertucci, identified by DVIDS, must comply with the restrictions shown on https://www.dvidshub.net/about/copyright.

    MIL Security OSI –

  • MIL-OSI China: Britain, France agree to coordinate nuclear deterrence, unveil new migration scheme

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

    British Prime Minister Keir Starmer (L) welcomes French President Emmanuel Macron at 10 Downing Street in London, Britain, on July 10, 2025. [Photo/Xinhua]

    British Prime Minister Keir Starmer said on Thursday that Britain and France have signed a new deal to allow the two countries to coordinate their nuclear deterrents for the first time.

    During a joint press conference with French President Emmanuel Macron at a military base in Northwood, near London, Starmer said the two countries had signed the Northwood Declaration, a deal designed to show adversaries that any attack on either nation would result in a response from both nations.

    For his part, Macron, who will conclude a three-day state visit to Britain later Thursday, highlighted the importance of defense and security cooperation between the two countries, noting that times have changed in Europe and the Britain-France partnership “must change accordingly.”

    Referring to the Russia-Ukraine conflict, Macron said Europe must be able to rely on the strategic collaboration between Britain and France, Europe’s only two nuclear powers.

    A statement by Downing Street underscored the “extreme threat to Europe” that would prompt a joint nuclear response. “Any adversary threatening the vital interests of Britain or France could be confronted by the strength of the nuclear forces of both nations,” it said.

    Meanwhile, Britain and France plan to order additional highly lethal Storm Shadow cruise missiles and step up replenishment of arms depots as part of a renewed defense agreement, according to the statement.

    Following a Britain-France Summit at Downing Street and a “coalition of the willing” virtual meeting, which included Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, Starmer announced that a new coalition headquarters supporting Ukraine will be established in Paris.

    On the issue of migration, the two leaders unveiled a new “one in, one out” scheme to reduce English Channel crossings.

    Under the scheme, migrants arriving in Britain via small boats will be “detained and returned to France in short order,” Starmer said. In parallel, individuals who have not previously attempted to cross the Channel illegally will be allowed to enter Britain through a newly created route.

    The route will be subject to strict security checks and limited to those meeting the eligibility criteria. Starmer described the plan as “groundbreaking” but didn’t specify how many migrants would be returned.

    Macron said he’s “totally committed” to the pilot scheme, which will come into effect within weeks.

    However, it remains unclear whether the scheme will serve as an effective deterrent. Despite joint funding and efforts, more than 20,000 people have crossed the Channel in small boats so far this year, marking a 50 percent increase compared to the same period in 2024.

    Both Macron and Starmer face rising pressure at home from far-right and anti-immigration sentiment. Addressing the British parliament on Tuesday, Macron described the migration challenge as “a burden” shared by both countries.

    Starmer also said the two countries “have gone further” to improve trade and investment, adding that both sides will strengthen collaboration on supercomputers, satellite connectivity, and artificial intelligence.

    Macron hailed the development as a “reset” in bilateral ties, noting that trade volumes have topped pre-Brexit levels and the two countries are strengthening their partnerships in civilian nuclear power and cooperating in space exploration.

    During his visit, Macron reiterated support for the two-state solution to solving the conflicts in Gaza, and called recognition of the State of Palestine the “only path to peace.”

    The visit marks the first state trip to Britain by a French president since 2008, and Macron is the first European Union head of state to visit since Brexit.

    Observers said trust between the two sides still needs to be rebuilt after years of tension, particularly during the Brexit negotiations. Macron previously described Brexit as a product of “lies and false promises.” Dialogue between the two nations had diminished following disputes on fishing rights and the Britain-Australia submarine deals.

    Sebastien Maillard, an expert at London-based think tank Chatham House, said that “the memory of these difficult times has not vanished” on either side. “Trust needs time to build,” he added. 

    MIL OSI China News –

  • MIL-OSI China: China’s innovative solutions propel global shifts toward smarter, greener industries

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

    A staff member sets parameters before welding at Guangdong Lyric Robot Automation Co., Ltd. in Huizhou, south China’s Guangdong Province, June 27, 2025. [Photo/Xinhua]

    As global industries accelerate their transition toward intelligence and sustainability, China’s innovative solutions form vital components of international supply chains, driving cross-sector transformation.

    Smarter factories 

    At Guangdong Lyric Robot Automation’s Huizhou facility in south China, an automated warehouse operates efficiently with only two staff members. Materials glide autonomously through storage systems, arriving precisely at workstations as needed. A central control screen displays real-time inventory levels, material usage frequency, and shelf capacity.

    “This system cuts operational costs by over 30 percent while boosting productivity by 40 percent,” said Duan Yajie, general manager of Lyric subsidiary Shunchu Intelligence. Overseas orders for such integrated solutions now constitute over 40 percent of the subsidiary’s total business.

    Lyric’s intelligent factories serve industry leaders across six countries. From battery plants in North America to a comprehensive automotive logistics center in Hungary, as well as sectors like renewable energy and AI computing, Lyric has supported clients in establishing digital factories using technologies such as intelligent sensing, precision control and execution systems.

    With subsidiaries in 14 countries, including the United Kingdom, Poland, France, Switzerland, Germany, Canada, and the United States, Lyric has navigated cross-cultural challenges through co-developed standards. “Building consensus during the design phase helps prevent conflicts during implementation,” Lyric’s co-founder Lu Jiahong said.

    “Once rare on European streets, electric vehicles are now increasingly common, reflecting the combined efforts of Chinese equipment, battery and auto manufacturers,” she added.

    Powering energy revolution 

    EVE Energy Co., Ltd., a leading Chinese lithium battery company headquartered in Huizhou, Guangdong Province, is advancing its global manufacturing strategy with a new battery production base in Hungary’s Debrecen.

    The facility represents a transformative industrial upgrade for the region, introducing advanced manufacturing systems where agricultural production once dominated the local economy.

    “We’re bringing advanced industrial production to this region, creating employment while accelerating the energy transition,” stated EVE vice president Jiang Min. He added that the Debrecen base is scheduled to begin production in late 2026, while their overseas facility in Malaysia is already operational.

    Ranked fourth globally in cylindrical battery shipments and second in energy storage capacity for 2024, EVE Energy operates 12 production bases across Asia, Europe and North America. Its power batteries supply premier global automakers including Mercedes-Benz, BMW and Jaguar Land Rover.

    According to Jiang, the company continues to expand investments in carbon-reduction technologies. It has recently established a comprehensive resource recovery ecosystem with over 10 partners. “Collaborative expansion across the industrial chain creates mutual benefits,” Jiang said.

    A staff member operates a robot to perform synchronous action at a provincial embodied artificial intelligence robot innovation center in Shenzhen, south China’s Guangdong Province, June 25, 2025. [Photo/Xinhua]

    Vision for intelligent machines 

    At Orbbec’s Shenzhen exhibition hall, a food-delivery robot navigates through display areas, skillfully avoiding obstacles.

    This agility comes from its 3D vision sensors, powered by the proprietary “MX6600” chip, which measures about 9 square millimeters. This chip processes depth-sensing data to enable high-precision spatial mapping.

    Currently, 7 out of 10 service robots in China use Orbbec sensors, while international clients grew by 77 percent year on year to 1,469 in 2024, including major companies like Nvidia and Microsoft.

    “We concentrate on foundational technologies,” said Huang Yuanhao, founder of Orbbec. “We are one of the few companies worldwide to cover all major 3D vision perception technology approaches, serving global robotics enterprises across various sectors, such as smart factories, warehouse logistics, construction automation, and intelligent inspection,” he added.

    Orbbec also offers rapid technical support to better serve its global users. “Some of our products have demanding technical service requirements, and excellent service is a major factor why overseas users choose us,” said Orbbec’s CFO Chen Bin.

    China’s global engagement is transitioning from manufacturing exports to integrated technological empowerment, said Yang Boru, professor at the School of Electronics and Information Technology, Sun Yat-sen University in Guangdong. As these innovative solutions expand worldwide, they have become key drivers of intelligent and sustainable industrialization, he added.  

    MIL OSI China News –

  • MIL-OSI Russia: American Politicians Try to Shift Their Employment Problems to China — Chinese Ambassador to Russia Zhang Hanhui

    Translation. Region: Russian Federal

    Source: People’s Republic of China in Russian – People’s Republic of China in Russian –

    An important disclaimer is at the bottom of this article.

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

    Moscow, July 10 /Xinhua/ — The rhetoric of American politicians about “China depriving Americans of manufacturing jobs” is essentially an attempt to attribute the internal structural economic problems of the United States to other countries, Chinese Ambassador to Russia Zhang Hanhui said in an opinion piece published in the Russian newspaper Argumenty i Fakty on Thursday.

    As Zhang Hanhui noted in an article titled “Who ‘stole’ American manufacturing jobs?”, in recent years, American politicians have often promoted the thesis of “China taking away American manufacturing jobs.” From US President Donald Trump’s statement that “China has taken more jobs from the United States than any other country” to US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent’s unfounded claim of a “China shock,” the US leadership has continued to try to shift responsibility for its own problems to other countries.

    According to the Chinese ambassador, the decline in employment in manufacturing is a global trend in developed economies. “Research by the Groningen Growth and Development Center (GGDC) in the Netherlands shows that employment in manufacturing typically follows an inverted U-shaped trajectory: during the industrialization stage, labor moves from agriculture to industry, but as socio-economic development progresses, consumer spending shifts from finished goods to services, and the labor force accordingly moves from industry to services,” the article notes.

    The United States has long since transitioned to a service-based economy, with manufacturing providing only 10 percent of all jobs in the country. Some experts point out that the process of gradual reduction in manufacturing in developed countries began even before China joined the World Trade Organization (WTO). From 1977 to 2001, manufacturing employment in the United States fell by 41 percent, while in 10 other developed countries, including Japan, Great Britain, France, and Canada, it fell by 20 to 50 percent.

    As Zhang Hanhui pointed out, the main reason for the decline in industrial employment is the technological revolution. For example, some experts point out that from 2001 to 2023, US manufacturing employment fell by 22 percent, while output grew by 50 percent, which convincingly proves how automation and technological progress are replacing a significant part of the workforce. The Chinese diplomat also cites research from the US Brookings Institution, according to which it took 25 jobs to create $1 million in manufacturing in 1980, while today it only takes 6.5.

    The ambassador is confident that the US’s own problems have accelerated the erosion of its industrial potential. First, the negative gap in labor costs in the United States is virtually insurmountable. For example, the hourly wage of a garment worker in the US is about $22, which is many times higher than $2.8 in Bangladesh, while the productivity of an American worker is only about 60 percent of that of a Bangladeshi worker.

    The diplomat also points out the aging US infrastructure, which seriously limits the competitiveness of American industry. Much of the US electrical grid was built in the 1960s and 1970s and has reached or is approaching the end of its useful life; a third of the country’s bridges require major repairs or reconstruction.

    In addition, the unilateral imposition of tariffs on many imported goods has hit American industry hard. The long-term shift of the American economy toward the financial sector has led to a shortage of skilled labor in the labor market, Zhang Hanhui noted.

    “China calls on the United States to immediately stop the erroneous practice of ‘slinging mud at China’, to return to the mainstream of multilateral cooperation and, together with the Chinese side, on an equal basis, to find ways of mutually beneficial cooperation,” the head of the Chinese diplomatic mission in Russia emphasized.

    In a changing world, China and Russia, with their comprehensive strategic partnership of coordination in the new era, will jointly advance bilateral cooperation along the designated path, uphold the multilateral trading system led by the WTO, and promote the safe, stable and smooth operation of global industrial and supply chains through in-depth cooperation, he said.

    “We will consistently promote an equitable and orderly multipolar world and inclusive economic globalization to inject strong impetus and new hope into global development,” Zhang Hanhui concluded. –0–

    Please note: This information is raw content obtained directly from the source of the information. It is an accurate report of what the source claims and does not necessarily reflect the position of MIL-OSI or its clients.

    .

    MIL OSI Russia News –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Dawn service held 40 years on from Rainbow Warrior bombing

    TVNZ 1News

    The Greenpeace flagship Rainbow Warrior has sailed into Auckland to mark the 40th anniversary of the bombing of the original Rainbow Warrior in 1985.

    Greenpeace’s vessel, which had been protesting nuclear testing in the Pacific, sank after French government agents planted explosives on its hull, killing Portuguese-Dutch photographer Fernando Pereira.

    Today, 40 years on from the events on July 10 1985, a dawn ceremony was held in Auckland.

    Author Margaret Mills was a cook on board the ship at the time, and has written about her experience in a book entitled Anecdotage.

    Author Margaret Mills tells TVNZ Breakfast about the night of the Rainbow Warrior bombing 40 years ago. Image: TVNZ

    The 95-year-old told TVNZ Breakfast the experience on board “changed her life”.

    “I was sound asleep, and I heard this sort of bang and turned the light on, but it wouldn’t go on.

    She said when she left her cabin, a crew member told her “we’ve been bombed”.

    ‘I laughed at him’
    “I laughed at him, I said ‘we don’t get bombs in New Zealand, that’s ridiculous’.”

    She said they were taken to the police station after a “big boom when the second bomb came through”.

    “I realised immediately, I was part of a historical event,” she said.

    TVNZ reporter Corazon Miller talks to Greenpeace Aotearoa executive director Russel Norman (centre) and journalist David Robie after the Rainbow Warrior memorial dawn service today. Image: TVNZ

    Journalist David Robie. who travelled on the Rainbow Warrior and wrote the book Eyes of Fire: The Last Voyage and Legacy of the Rainbow Warrior published today, told Breakfast it was a “really shocking, shocking night”.

    “We were so overwhelmed by the grief and absolute shock of what had happened. But for me, there was no doubt it was France behind this.”

    “But we were absolutely flabbergasted that a country could do this.”

    He said it was a “very emotional moment” and was hard to believe it had been 40 years since that time.

    ‘Momentous occasion’
    “It stands out in my life as being the most momentous occasion as a journalist covering that whole event.”

    Executive director of Greenpeace Aotearoa Russel Norman said the legacy of the ship was about “people who really stood up for something important”.

    “I mean, ending nuclear testing in the Pacific, imagine if they were still exploding bombs in the Pacific. We would have to live with that.

    “And those people back then they stood up and beat the French government to end nuclear testing.

    “It’s pretty inspirational.”

    He said the group were still campaigning on some key environmental issues today.

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-OSI Submissions: School smartphone bans reflect growing concern over youth mental health and academic performance

    Source: The Conversation – USA (2) – By Margaret Murray, Associate Professor of Public Communication and Culture Studies, University of Michigan

    New laws that ban smartphones or social media for youth are being introduced across several Western nations. SeventyFour/iStock via Getty Images

    The number of states banning smartphones in schools is growing.

    New York is now the largest state in the U.S. to ban smartphones in public schools. Starting in fall 2025, students will not be allowed to use their phones during the school day, including during lunch, recess or in between classes. This bell-to-bell policy will impact almost 2.5 million students in grades K-12.

    By banning smartphones in schools, New York is joining states across the country. The bans are happening in both traditionally liberal and conservative states.

    Alabama, Arkansas, Nebraska, North Dakota, Oklahoma and West Virginia all passed legislation in 2025 that requires schools to have policies that limit access to smartphones. The policies will go into effect in the 2025-2026 school year. This brings the total to 17 states, plus Washington, D.C., that have phone-free school legislation or executive orders.

    I’m a professor who studies communication and culture, and while writing a book about parenting culture, I’ve noticed the narrative around smartphones and social media shifting over the past decade.

    A turning tide

    Statewide cellphone policies are gaining momentum, with many states aiming to restrict use of the devices in classrooms.
    Thomas Barwick/Digital Vision via Getty Images

    According to the Pew Research Center, 67% of American adults support banning smartphones during class time, although only 36% support banning them for the entire school day. Notably, a majority of Republican, Democratic and independent voters all support bans during class time.

    More broadly, parent-led movements to limit children’s use of smartphones, social media and the internet have sprung up around the country. For example, the Phone-Free Schools Movement in Pennsylvania was launched in 2023, and Mothers Against Media Addiction started in New York in March 2024. These organizations, which empower parents to advocate in their local communities, follow in the footsteps of organizations such as Wait Until 8th in Texas and Screen Time Action Network at Fairplay in Massachusetts, which were formed in 2017.

    The concerns of these parent-led organizations were reflected in the best-selling book “The Anxious Generation,” which paints a bleak picture of modern childhood as dominated by depression and anxiety brought on by smartphone addiction.

    Phone-free schools are one of the four actions the book’s author, Jonathan Haidt, recommended to change course. The other three are no smartphones for children before high school, waiting until 16 for social media access, and allowing more childhood independence in the real world.

    Haidt’s research team collaborated with The Harris Poll to survey Gen Z. They found that almost half of those age 18-27 wish social media had never been invented, and 21% wish smartphones had never been invented. About 40% of Gen Z respondents supported phone-free schools.

    The Pew Research Center found that almost 40% of kids age 8-12 use social media, and almost 95% of kids age 13-17 use it, with nearly half of teens reporting that they use social media almost constantly.

    Phone-free schools are also part of the larger trend of states and nations resisting Big Tech, the large technology companies that play a significant role in global commerce.

    In May 2025, two U.S. senators introduced the Stop the Scroll Act, which would require mental health warnings on social media.

    New laws that ban smartphones or social media for youth are being introduced across several Western nations. Australia has banned all social media for those under 16.

    After a fatal stabbing at a middle school in eastern France on June 10, French President Emmanuel Macron announced the same day that he wants the European Union to set the minimum age for social media at 15. He argued that social media is a factor in teen violence. If the EU doesn’t act within a few months, Macron has pledged to enact a ban in France as soon as possible.

    The impact on learning

    Research suggests that students are less focused in class when they have access to cellphones.
    isuzek/E+ via Getty Images

    Although this trend of restricting use of phones in school is new, more states may adopt smartphone bans in the future. Bell-to-bell bans are viewed as especially powerful in improving academic performance.

    Some research has suggested that when children have access to a smartphone, even if they do not use it, they find it harder to focus in class. Initial research has found that academic performance improves after the bans go into effect.

    Test scores fell across the U.S. during the pandemic lockdown and have not returned to prepandemic levels. Some states, such as Maine and Oregon, are almost a full year behind grade level in reading. Not a single state has recovered in both math and reading.

    Statewide bans free local school districts from having to create their own technology bans, which can lead to heated debates. Although a majority of adults approve of banning smartphones in class, 24% oppose it for reasons such as wanting to be able to contact their kids throughout the day and wanting parents to set the boundaries.

    However, 72% of high school teachers say that phones are a major distraction. Anecdotally, schools report that students like the bans after getting used to the change.

    I signed the Wait Until 8th pledge mentioned in the article, promising not to give my kids a smartphone or social media until at least the end of 8th grade.

    – ref. School smartphone bans reflect growing concern over youth mental health and academic performance – https://theconversation.com/school-smartphone-bans-reflect-growing-concern-over-youth-mental-health-and-academic-performance-259962

    MIL OSI –

  • MIL-OSI Russia: UK, France agree to coordinate nuclear deterrents – UK PM

    Translation. Region: Russian Federal

    Source: People’s Republic of China in Russian – People’s Republic of China in Russian –

    An important disclaimer is at the bottom of this article.

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

    LONDON, July 10 (Xinhua) — British Prime Minister Keir Starmer said on Thursday that Britain and France have signed a new agreement that will allow the two countries to coordinate their nuclear deterrents for the first time.

    During a joint press conference with French President Emmanuel Macron at the Northwood military base outside London, Starmer said the two countries had signed the Northwood Declaration, which he said was intended to demonstrate to their adversaries that any attack would be met with a response from both countries.

    In turn, E. Macron, who ends a three-day state visit to the UK on Thursday, stressed the importance of cooperation between the two countries in the field of defense and security. He noted that times in Europe have changed, and the British-French partnership “must change accordingly.”

    The French leader said both countries must confront a major conflict in Europe, referring to the conflict between Russia and Ukraine. He added that Europe must be able to rely on the strategic cooperation of Britain and France, the only nuclear powers in Europe.

    The statement from the British Prime Minister’s residence in Downing Street speaks of an “extraordinary threat to Europe” that will provoke a response from both countries. “Any adversary threatening the vital interests of the United Kingdom or France will face the power of the nuclear forces of both states,” the document emphasizes.

    Under the updated deal, London and Paris also plan to order more Storm Shadow cruise missiles with high lethality, while accelerating the replenishment of their arsenals, according to the statement. –0–

    Please note: This information is raw content obtained directly from the source of the information. It is an accurate report of what the source claims and does not necessarily reflect the position of MIL-OSI or its clients.

    .

    MIL OSI Russia News –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Rugby headgear can’t prevent concussion – but new materials could soften the blows over a career

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Nick Draper, Professor of Sport and Exercise Science, University of Canterbury

    The widely held view among rugby players, coaches and officials is that headgear can’t prevent concussion. If so, why wear it? It’s hot, it can block vision and hearing, and it can be uncomfortable.

    Headgear was originally designed to protect players from cuts and abrasions. But players still hope it will offer them a degree of protection against the collisions they experience in the game. Some players adopt it after previous concussions.

    We’re now seeing increasing numbers of professional players opting in. The Irish men’s team, for example, field up to five players each match sporting headgear. In Japan, it’s mandatory for juniors. And more parents in New Zealand are making their children wear it, too.

    The exact specifications for rugby match kit – boots, shorts, shoulder pads and
    headgear – are regulated through World Rugby’s Law 4 and Regulation 12. In 2019, the governing body launched a trial enabling players to wear headgear with new technical specifications in training and matches.

    The specifications have meant manufacturers can take advantage of novel “isotropic” materials that can potentially reduce the impact forces experienced by players.

    Conventional headgear is composed of soft foams that flatten when a player’s head collides with the ground or another player. As such, they can only minimally absorb those collision forces.

    Isotropic materials behave differently. They can absorb impacts from multiple directions and may offer a level of protection against the effects on a player’s head of a tackle or other collision event.

    Given these changes, and in light of recent research, we may need to change the narrative around rugby headgear: while it may not prevent concussion, it might reduce the total contact “burden” experienced by players in a game and over a whole season. And this could have benefits for long-term brain health.

    Impacts across seasons and careers

    Contact in rugby – through tackles, at the breakdown, and in scrums and lineouts – leads to players experiencing a number of collisions or “head acceleration events”. This contact is most commonly head to ground, head to body or head to head.

    By having players use “smart” mouthguards with embedded micro-accelerometers and gyroscopes to capture head movements, researchers can now measure each collision and each player’s contact load in a game – and potentially over a career.

    A player’s total contact load is found by adding together the magnitude of the impacts they experience in a game. These are measured as “peak linear accelerations” or “peak rotational accelerations”.

    While past research and media attention has focused on concussion, it has become clear the total contact burden in training and matches – the total “sub-concussive knocks” through head acceleration events – may be as important, if not more so.

    One of our own research projects involved following 40 under-16 players wearing smart mouthguards for all training and matches across one season. Peak Linear accelerations are measured as a g-force (g). Activities such as such as running, jumping and shaking the head would measure under 8g, for example, whereas heading a soccer ball might measure 31g.

    The results of our study showed the players differed greatly in their cumulative exposure over a whole season, from 300g to nearly 14,000g. These differences would be amplified further over an entire rugby career.

    Some of the variation is likely due to a player’s team position, with loose forwards having a greater burden than others. But it also seems some players just enjoy the contact aspects of the game more than others.

    Rugby is an impact sport: the Ireland and England women’s teams clash in 2025.
    Getty Images

    Potential benefits of new headgear materials

    Researcher Helen Murray at the University of Auckland has highlighted the need for more research into the burden of collisions, rather than just concussions, over a rugby career. In particular, we need to know more about its effect on future brain health.

    We hope to contribute to this by following our existing cohort of players through their careers. In the meantime, our research has examined the potential of existing rugby headgear and new isotropic materials to mitigate peak accelerations in rugby collisions.

    Using the field data collected from male and female players over the past four seasons, we have designed laboratory testing protocols to compare the conventional and newer materials.

    The results suggest the new forms of headgear do have the potential to reduce the impact burden for players.

    We found 55–90% of head acceleration events do involve direct contact with the head. As such, collision-mitigation headgear could be beneficial. And our laboratory testing produced an estimated 30% reduction in peak linear accelerations with the headgear compared to without.

    The nature of concussion is complex and related to the size of an impact as well as its direction and angle. For instance, we observed the concussions experienced by the junior players occurred between 12g and 62g – well below the male threshold of 70g requiring professional players to be removed from the field for a head injury assessment.

    Currently, it seems unlikely headgear can prevent concussion. But it does appear new headgear materials could significantly reduce the total impact burden for players during their careers. And this may help safeguard their future brain health.

    Nick Draper receives funding from the Health Research Council, Cure Kids, the Neurological Foundation, Canterbury Medical Research Foundation, Pacific Radiology Group, the Maurice and Phyllis Paykel Trust, and the UC Foundation.

    – ref. Rugby headgear can’t prevent concussion – but new materials could soften the blows over a career – https://theconversation.com/rugby-headgear-cant-prevent-concussion-but-new-materials-could-soften-the-blows-over-a-career-258912

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Does AI actually boost productivity? The evidence is murky

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Jon Whittle, Director, Data61, CSIRO

    Roman Samborskyi/Shutterstock

    There’s been much talk recently – especially among politicians – about productivity. And for good reason: Australia’s labour productivity growth sits at a 60-year low.

    To address this, Prime Minister Anthony Albanese has convened a productivity round table next month. This will coincide with the release of an interim report from the Productivity Commission, which is looking at five pillars of reform. One of these is the role of data and digital technologies, including artificial intelligence (AI).

    This will be music to the ears of the tech and business sectors, which have been enthusiastically promoting the productivity benefits of AI. In fact, the Business Council of Australia also said last month that AI is the single greatest opportunity in a generation to lift productivity.

    But what do we really know about how AI impacts productivity?

    What is productivity?

    Put simply, productivity is how much output (goods and services) we can produce from a given amount of inputs (such as labour and raw materials). It matters because higher productivity typically translates to a higher standard of living. Productivity growth has accounted for 80% of Australia’s income growth over the past three decades.

    Productivity can be thought of as individual, organisational or national.

    Your individual productivity is how efficiently you manage your time and resources to complete tasks. How many emails can you respond to in an hour? How many products can you check for defects in a day?

    Organisational productivity is how well an organisation achieves its goals. For example, in a research organisation, how many top-quality research papers are produced?

    National productivity is the economic efficiency of a nation, often measured as gross domestic product per hour worked. It is effectively an aggregate of the other forms. But it’s notoriously difficult to track how changes in individual or organisational productivity translate into national GDP per hour worked.

    AI and individual productivity

    The nascent research examining the relationship between AI and individual productivity shows mixed results.

    A 2025 real-world study of AI and productivity involved 776 experienced product professionals at US multinational company Procter & Gamble. The study showed that individuals randomly assigned to use AI performed as well as a team of two without. A similar study in 2023 with 750 consultants from Boston Consulting Group found tasks were 18% faster with generative AI.

    A 2023 paper reported on an early generative AI system in a Fortune 500 software company used by 5,200 customer support agents. The system showed a 14% increase in the number of issues resolved per hour. For less experienced agents, productivity increased by 35%.

    But AI doesn’t always increase individual productivity.

    A survey of 2,500 professionals found generative AI actually increased workload for 77% of workers. Some 47% said they didn’t know how to unlock productivity benefits. The study points to barriers such as the need to verify and/or correct AI outputs, the need for AI upskilling, and unreasonable expectations about what AI can do.

    A recent CSIRO study examined the daily use of Microsoft 365 Copilot by 300 employees of a government organisation. While the majority self-reported productivity benefits, a sizeable minority (30%) did not. Even those workers who reported productivity improvements expected greater productivity benefits than were delivered.

    AI and organisational productivity

    It’s difficult, if not impossible, to attribute changes in an organisation’s productivity to the introduction of AI. Businesses are sensitive to many social and organisational factors, any one of which could be the reason for a change in productivity.

    Nevertheless, the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) has estimated the productivity benefits of traditional AI – that is, machine learning applied for an industry-specific task – to be zero to 11% at the organisational level.

    A 2024 summary paper cites independent studies showing increases in organisational productivity from AI in Germany, Italy and Taiwan.

    In contrast, a 2022 analysis of 300,000 US firms didn’t find a significant correlation between AI adoption and productivity, but did for other technologies such as robotics and cloud computing. Likely explanations are that AI hasn’t yet had an effect on many firms, or simply that it’s too hard to disentangle the impact of AI given it’s never applied in isolation.

    AI productivity increases can also sometimes be masked by additional human labour needed to train or operate AI systems. Take Amazon’s Just Walk Out technology for shops.

    Publicly launched in 2018, it was intended to reduce labour as customer purchases would be fully automated. But it reportedly relied on hiring around 1,000 workers in India for quality control. Amazon has labelled these reports “erroneous”.

    More generally, think about the unknown number (but likely millions) of people paid to label data for AI models.

    AI and national productivity

    The picture at a national level is even murkier.

    Clearly, AI hasn’t yet impacted national productivity. It can be argued that technology developments take time to affect national productivity, as companies need to figure out how to use the technology and put the necessary infrastructure and skills in place.

    However, this is not guaranteed. For example, while there is consensus that the internet led to productivity improvements, the effects of mobile phones and social media are more contested, and their impacts are more apparent in some industries (such as entertainment) than others.

    Productivity isn’t just doing things faster

    The common narrative around AI and productivity is that AI automates mundane tasks, making us faster at doing things and giving us more time for creative pursuits. This, however, is a naive view of how work happens.

    Just because you can deal with your inbox more quickly doesn’t mean you’ll spend your afternoon on the beach. The more emails you fire off, the more you’ll receive back, and the never-ending cycle continues.

    Faster isn’t always better. Sometimes, we need to slow down to be more productive. That’s when great ideas happen.

    Imagine a world in which AI isn’t simply about speeding up tasks but proactively slows us down, to give us space to be more innovative, and more productive. That’s the real untapped opportunity with AI.

    Jon Whittle works at CSIRO which receives R&D funding from a wide range of government and industry clients.

    – ref. Does AI actually boost productivity? The evidence is murky – https://theconversation.com/does-ai-actually-boost-productivity-the-evidence-is-murky-260690

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-OSI Video: Sustainable Development Goals Report 2025, Francesca Albanese & other topics – Daily Press Briefing

    Source: United Nations (video statements)

    Noon Briefing by Stéphane Dujarric, Spokesperson for the Secretary-General.

    Highlights:
    Sustainable Development Goals Report 2025
    Francesca Albanese
    Occupied Palestinian Territory
    Lebanon
    Ukraine
    Sudan
    Somalia
    Democratic Republic of the Congo
    Libya
    UN Environment Programme/Report
    Briefings

    SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT GOALS REPORT 2025
    On Monday, in a press conference, the Secretary-General will launch the Sustainable Development Goals Report 2025. He will be joined by the Deputy-Secretary-General Amina Mohammed and our Under-Secretary-General for Economic and Social Affairs, Li Junhua.

    The press conference will take place at 12:45 p.m., just after the noon briefing.

    FRANCESCA ALBANESE
    In response to questions on the sanctions imposed by the United States on Francesca Albanese, the Spokesman said that the imposition of sanctions on special rapporteurs is a dangerous precedent.

    Francesca Albanese, like all other Special UN Human Rights Rapporteurs, is an independent human rights expert appointed by the UN Human Rights Council and reporting to the Human Rights Council. Special Rapporteurs do not report to the Secretary-General, and he has no authority over them or their work.

    That being said, Member States are perfectly entitled to their views and to disagree with the reports by the Special Rapporteurs, but we encourage them to engage with the UN human rights architecture.
    The use of unilateral sanctions against special rapporteurs, or any other UN expert or official is unacceptable.

    OCCUPIED PALESTINIAN TERRITORY
    The Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) said that a UN team managed to bring about 75,000 litres of fuel from Israel into the Gaza Strip. That is the first such provision in 130 days. As mentioned yesterday during the noon briefing, the UN and its humanitarian partners need hundreds of thousands of litres of fuel each day to keep essential life-saving and life-sustaining operations going, meaning the amount entered yesterday isn’t sufficient to cover even one day of energy requirements. Fuel is still running out and services will shut down if greater volumes do not enter Gaza Strip immediately.

    One partner, for instance, reported that this week that in a matter of days, fuel shortages could cut off supplies of clean drinking water to about 44,000 children that depend on that water source. The lack of fresh water would further increase the risk of waterborne illnesses such as cholera, diarrhea and dysentery. 

    Meanwhile, the Israeli military continues its operations across the Gaza Strip, including shelling and ground incursions. This morning, people waiting to get nutritional supplements were reportedly struck in Deir al Balah. According to Al-Aqsa Hospital, the attack resulted in dozens of casualties, the majority of whom were women and children. 

    In a statement issued today, Catherine Russell, the Executive Director of the UN Children’s Fund (UNICEF), said she was appalled by the reported killing of 15 Palestinians, including nine children and four women, who were just waiting in line for nutritional supplies their children. And I can tell you that the UN, yet again, condemns the killing of civilians in Gaza.

    OCHA stresses that parties are bound by international humanitarian law to prevent such excessive death and injury of civilians in the midst of war.
    All parties must take all feasible precautions to avoid and minimize civilian harm, and indiscriminate attacks are strictly prohibited.

    Another strike today reportedly hit the office of a humanitarian partner in Gaza city; three staff were killed.

    Yesterday, UN partners providing education services said that between October 2023 and June of this year, 626 temporary learning spaces have been established in Gaza, with 240,000 students enrolled, about half of those students are girls. However, UN partners say that only 299 spaces are currently operational due to the ongoing displacement orders, funding shortfalls and other challenges.

    UN humanitarian partners, including first responders, health workers, and aid workers, continue to deliver food and other assistance under intolerable conditions, and they themselves are facing hunger. A number of our own colleagues are also facing hunger. They also face water scarcity and threats to their personal safety, just like everyone else in Gaza.
    As we said, time and again: This catastrophic situation must end. A ceasefire is not only urgent, it is long overdue, and all of the hostages need to be released unconditionally and immediately.

    Full highlights: https://www.un.org/sg/en/content/noon-briefing-highlight?date%5Bvalue%5D%5Bdate%5D=10%20July%202025

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oCq6GB-B6Sk

    MIL OSI Video –

  • MIL-OSI Russia: Member of the Standing Committee of the Politburo of the CPC Central Committee Stresses the Importance of Dialogue, Cooperation at the Ministerial Meeting of the Global Dialogue among Civilizations

    Translation. Region: Russian Federal

    Source: People’s Republic of China in Russian – People’s Republic of China in Russian –

    An important disclaimer is at the bottom of this article.

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

    BEIJING, July 10 (Xinhua) — Cai Qi, a member of the Standing Committee of the Political Bureau of the Communist Party of China (CPC) Central Committee and a member of the Secretariat of the CPC Central Committee, attended and delivered a keynote speech at the opening ceremony of the ministerial meeting of the Global Dialogue among Civilizations on Thursday, calling for more active promotion of dialogue and cooperation among world civilizations.

    Chinese President Xi Jinping sent a congratulatory message to the event participants, which was read at the opening ceremony by Li Shulei, member of the Politburo of the CPC Central Committee and head of the Publicity Department of the CPC Central Committee.

    In his speech, Cai Qi pointed out that the Global Civilization Initiative, put forward by President Xi Jinping more than two years ago, has received a warm and positive response from the international community.

    Cai Qi noted that this initiative is rooted in the best traditional culture of China. Its key essence is to strive for the common while preserving differences, which echoes the cultural concepts of many countries around the world.

    The member of the Standing Committee of the Politburo of the CPC Central Committee stressed that the path to world peace and development is long and difficult. He called for jointly strengthening research on the diversity of development models, actively promoting the protection of cultural heritage and the development of cultural affairs, strengthening cultural and humanitarian exchanges, and promoting the construction of a diverse and multidimensional global network of dialogue and cooperation among civilizations.

    The ministerial meeting on the theme of “Preserving the Diversity of Human Civilizations for World Peace and Development” was jointly organized by the Publicity Department of the CPC Central Committee and the International Liaison Department of the CPC Central Committee.

    UN Secretary-General António Guterres also sent a congratulatory message to the event, which attracted more than 600 guests from some 140 countries and regions.

    Former heads of state and government of Indonesia, Namibia, Japan and Belgium spoke at the opening ceremony. –0–

    Please note: This information is raw content obtained directly from the source of the information. It is an accurate report of what the source claims and does not necessarily reflect the position of MIL-OSI or its clients.

    .

    MIL OSI Russia News –

  • MIL-OSI Canada: Prime Minister Carney participates in a virtual meeting in support of Ukraine

    Source: Government of Canada – Prime Minister

    Today, the Prime Minister, Mark Carney, participated in a virtual meeting of the Coalition of the Willing.

    The meeting was co-chaired by the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, Sir Keir Starmer, and the President of France, Emmanuel Macron. It was also attended by many of Canada’s closest allies and partners, including the President of Ukraine, Volodymyr Zelenskyy, and representatives of the United States – senators Lindsay Graham and Richard Blumenthal as well as U.S. Special Envoy General Keith Kellogg.

    The Coalition unequivocally condemned Russia’s latest strikes against Ukraine. They affirmed collective efforts to exert pressure on Russia, including through further sanctions as well as military and financial assistance to Ukraine. Prime Minister Carney raised Canada’s robust support to Ukraine, most recently through a major sanctions package targeting Russia’s shadow fleet and energy revenues; an additional $2 billion in new military support, with funding for drones, ammunition, and armoured vehicles, among other capabilities; and the disbursement of a $2.3 billion loan, to help rebuild Ukraine’s infrastructure and public systems.

    The Coalition underscored their steadfast support for Ukraine’s long-term security and sovereignty, and actions to establish a post-ceasefire force. To advance a just and lasting peace, the Coalition of the Willing will have new permanent headquarters in Paris, with plans in place for a future co-ordination cell in Kyiv.

    Associated link

    MIL OSI Canada News –

  • MIL-OSI United Nations: Human Rights Committee Holds Emergency Meeting with States Parties as the United Nations’ Financial Crisis Threatens its Survival

    Source: United Nations – Geneva

    The Human Rights Committee today held an emergency meeting with States parties to discuss the financial challenges of the United Nations and the Committee’s future.

    Committee Chairperson Changrok Soh, in opening remarks, said the Committee’s ability to fulfil its mandate was under serious threat. Austerity measures had been imposed on it that jeopardised not just its current work, but the very future of the Committee itself.

    The Committee’s most pressing concern was the cancellation of its third session this year, Mr. Soh said. This was the first time in its 50-year history that such a cancellation had occurred. Losing a session meant serious delays in reviewing State party reports and in deciding on individual complaints of Covenant violations. Many victims had already waited years for justice. Now, they would wait even longer, he said.

    Mr. Soh appealed to States parties to help the Committee find a solution. The Committee needed States’ political will, financial commitment, and concrete support — not only to help it find a way to hold its third session this year, but also to strengthen the system for the future.

    In the ensuing discussion, States parties expressed support for the Committee and the treaty body system, and concern regarding the financial crisis and the cancellation of the third session. They called on the Committee to come up with new, sustainable, cost-effective solutions to address the structural issues underpinning the situation, while maintaining its work and integrity.

    Concluding the meeting, Mr. Soh said that treaty bodies were not receiving enough funding for their core work. They were doing their best in terms of rationalisation and increasing efficiency, but as allocated resources declined, support for the treaty bodies’ work diminished, creating a vicious cycle.

    To address this situation, special measures were needed, such as utilising voluntary contributions transparently, he said. Without a properly functioning treaty body system, human rights protections would weaken around the world. Decisive and urgent action was needed to protect the treaty body system and human rights around the world, he concluded.

    Speaking in the meeting were representatives of the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, as well as Japan, Spain, Serbia, Egypt, Croatia, Colombia, Russian Federation, Costa Rica, Islamic Republic of Iran and France.

    The Human Rights Committee’s one hundred and forty-fourth session is being held from 23 June to 17 July 2025. All the documents relating to the Committee’s work, including reports submitted by States parties, can be found on the session’s webpage . Meeting summary releases can be found here . The webcast of the Committee’s public meetings can be accessed via the UN Web TV webpage.

    The Committee will next meet in public at 3 p.m. on Tuesday 15 July to hear the progress report of the Special Rapporteur on follow-up to the Committee’s concluding observations.

    Opening Statements by Committee Experts

    CHANGROK SOH, Committee Chair, said the Committee had convened the emergency meeting to discuss a single, urgent issue: “The financial challenges of the United Nations and the future of the Human Rights Committee.” The Committee came before States today with a profound sense of urgency.

    All members of the Human Rights Committee were deeply honoured to take enormous responsibility for monitoring the implementation of the Covenant. They took this duty very seriously. But today, its ability to fulfil this mandate was under serious threat. The austerity measures imposed on the Committee jeopardised not just its current work, but the very future of the Committee itself.

    These were truly unprecedented times — for the Committee and for the entire treaty body system. The Committee’s most pressing concern was the cancellation of its third session this year, scheduled for October and November, as announced by the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights. This was the first time in the Committee’s 50-year history that such a cancellation had occurred. 

    The cancellation put the Committee in a very difficult position. Its rules of procedure required it to meet three times a year. This was a fundamental obligation under the Committee’s mandate and indispensable to the effectiveness of its work. If it lost a session, nearly eight months would pass without a single meeting in Geneva. This meant serious delays in reviewing State party reports and in deciding on individual complaints of Covenant violations. Many victims had already waited years for justice. Now, they would wait even longer. Every delay weakened the Committee’s recommendations, diminished their impact, and undermined their ability to prevent further violations.

    The Committee recognised that the United Nations’ financial crisis was serious, and that the Secretariat was doing its best under the current constraints. But it was clear that the rules and structures of the system were too rigid to cope with situations like this. For example, in early June, during the Treaty Body Chairs’ meeting, several Chairs explored the possibility of mobilising emergency funding to hold autumn sessions. However, they were told that this was not possible, as treaty bodies were required to rely exclusively on the regular budget to carry out their mandated activities. This rule was intended to safeguard the Committee’s independence. But it made little sense if, in practice, it prevented it from functioning at all when the regular budget fell short. The Covenant clearly obliged the Secretary-General to ensure that the Committee could carry out its work. If the current approach blocked the fulfilment of that obligation, then it needed to change.

    The Committee therefore appealed to States parties to help it find a solution. Open and frank communication with the States parties was crucial because, ultimately, it was in States’ interest to ensure that the treaty bodies could continue their vital work, even in difficult times. The Committee needed States’ political will, financial commitment, and concrete support — not only to help it find a way to hold its third session this year, but also to strengthen the system for the future. 

    The Committee monitored the fundamental rights of individuals in 174 States parties — as part of the approximately 1,400 treaty obligations regularly reviewed by the treaty bodies. This was a remarkable early warning and accountability system — one that States parties created. The Committee urged States to ensure that this system could continue to function effectively. If not, what alternative was available?

    This should not be treated as a one-time problem. If this unprecedented cancellation were allowed to be “normalised”, it would set a dangerous precedent. Each time the United Nations faced a funding shortfall, the credibility and effectiveness of the treaty body system, a core pillar of the United Nations’ human rights architecture, would erode further.

    There was growing global pushback against human rights, especially the very rights the Committee was mandated to protect. This was not the moment to weaken United Nations human rights mechanisms. On the contrary, the world needed this remarkable early warning and accountability system now more than ever. 

    The Committee called on States to do three things. First, support the Committee — even at this late stage — in finding a solution to hold its third session this year, and commit to holding all three regular sessions in 2026. Second, allow voluntary contributions from States to be used transparently and responsibly to support the Committee’s work, while fully preserving the independence and impartiality of the treaty bodies. Third, help the Committee function effectively by fulfilling reporting obligations, engaging with the Committee in dialogue, and supporting its work financially and politically, both now and in the long term.

    Statements and Questions by States Parties 

    In the ensuing dialogue, many States expressed appreciation for the ongoing efforts of the Committee and the treaty bodies and their firm commitment to the treaty bodies, which were a cornerstone of the international human rights system. The Committee, they said, made significant contributions to upholding civil and political rights around the world.

    Several speakers expressed deep concern about the financial crisis, which was affecting the mandates of all treaty bodies, the Human Rights Council and Special Procedures, among other mechanisms in the United Nations system. This situation had serious implications for these bodies’ important work.

    One speaker said that their country had increased contributions to the treaty body system and was paying its dues on time, and had also increased unearmarked financial contributions to the Office of the High Commissioner. The speaker said that the country would work to strengthen the capacity of the Secretariat through its contributions.

    Some speakers said treaty bodies needed to work to harmonise their working methods. Cooperation between treaty bodies could lead to solutions to backlogs in individual communications. The Committee had a backlog of over 1,000 individual communications. One speaker asked if the Committee had assessed additional measures to address its backlog.

    Many speakers expressed dismay that the Committee’s third session for the year was to be cancelled, and called for an urgent, mitigating solution to be found to hold the Committee’s third session in November. Without this session, the Committee’s backlog of cases would only increase. Was this issue related to the ordinary budget or to liquidity? One speaker suggested using new technologies and virtual meetings to hold the third session. The Committee needed to come up with new, sustainable, cost-effective solutions to address the structural issues underpinning the situation, while maintaining its work and integrity. 

    Some speakers commended the UN80 initiative and the United Nations’ efforts to address evolving global challenges. However, some speakers said that austerity measures implemented through the UN80 initiative should not affect the work of the treaty bodies and the international human rights system.

    One speaker said it was worth exploring the Chair’s proposal regarding the use of voluntary contributions to facilitate the Committee’s third session, provided that there were no legal barriers to this solution and that the independence and impartiality of the Committee were not affected. The speaker commended the Committee’s efforts to find a solution.

    Another speaker said that their country had attempted to fund one of the treaty bodies’ mandates directly but had been told that funding could only come from the regular budget. If a voluntary funding scheme for the Committee was established, it needed to be established for all the treaty bodies and other mechanisms receiving funds from the regular budget. The speaker said that their country would support solutions proposed by States, while working within the norms of the United Nations’ system.

    A speaker said that one State had traditionally contributed significantly to the funding of the human rights system; the reasons for its sudden cessation of funding needed to be examined. States were the owners of the treaty body system.

    One speaker said multilingualism needed to be an essential value of the treaty bodies; it should not be sacrificed to achieve budgetary austerity.

    Responses by Committee Experts and Others

    A Committee Expert said States were authors of the Covenant and the Optional Protocol on individual communications. The harmonisation of working methods related to individual communications began around three years ago, both formally and informally. There was no resistance from the Committee in this regard. The Human Rights Committee received the largest number of individual communications, given the broad scope of the Covenant. It was proud of its record in dealing with these communications. Delays in issuing decisions on communications affected the relevance and legitimacy of the decisions that the Committee adopted. The Committee had had only three days this session to assess individual communications, while it had had a full week previously.

    The Secretariat had exerted efforts to maintain its staff in the financial crisis. The Committee had a human resources issue; there was a lack of staff to assess individual complaints, prepare draft decisions, and assess follow-up to the Committee’s decisions. The issue of resources needed to be addressed; simply freeing up time in sessions to assess individual communications would not fix the backlog.

    Digitisation was a long-standing structural issue for the Committee. The system that the Committee worked with was not sufficiently digitised.

    Another Committee Expert said the Committee welcomed States’ support and was encouraged by their presence in the dialogue. The Committee received over half of all the individual communications received by the treaty body system. If the Secretariat could not prepare individual cases for assessment, the Committee could not assess them. Without sufficient pre-sessional working time, the Committee’s backlog would only increase. Diplomats in Geneva understood the complexities of the treaty body system. They needed to mobilise with colleagues in New York to support treaty bodies’ efficiency.

    This was the first time that the Committee had organised a special, focused meeting, and it had been very successful. It would be helpful to have annual meetings with States, as well as emergency meetings to discuss urgent issues.

    One Committee Expert proposed that the Committee use digital technologies to hold the third session remotely. A decision on this issue needed to be taken rapidly. However, this was not a solution to the structural problems the Committee faced. The Committee needed to take slow steps forward in this situation.

    Another Committee Expert said that the young generation was questioning the capacity of the human rights system to protect human rights, in the context of the recent increase in violations of human rights and international humanitarian law around the world. The Committee was witnessing the emergence of new challenges, including in relation to climate change and artificial intelligence. It was considering how to address these challenges while preserving human rights. The Committee’s objective was not to level accusations at States; it was to accompany them on their journey toward achieving the best implementation of their commitments. Member States needed to support the Committee now, in the same manner as they had supported it for decades.

    A Committee Expert thanked States parties for their support to the international human rights system. States had created the Committee, recognising the need to monitor and protect civil and political rights. The Committee had an enormous workload and required appropriate financial resources, so that the Secretariat could hire necessary human resources to facilitate its work. The Expert called on States to take initiatives to address the crisis. Solutions needed to address the overall structural crisis over the long term.

    CHANGROK SOH, Committee Chair, said the Committee would present a proposal to States regarding the use of voluntary contributions for holding the third session, but only States could approve this. Mr. Soh expressed support for the idea of holding annual meetings with States parties.

    The Committee met online during the COVID-19 pandemic. It found that these meetings were not effective for various reasons, including time difference and limitations on dialogue and interpretation. The treaty body Chairs had discussed this issue, but had decided that online meetings were not an effective option. However, the Committee would continue to use digital technology, including artificial intelligence, to increase the efficiency of its work.

    WAN-HEA LEE, Chief, Civil, Political, Economic, Social and Cultural Rights Section, Human Rights Council and Treaty Mechanisms Division, Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights , said that, in the past, the Office of the High Commissioner had reduced the working time of pre-sessional working groups to manage the financial crisis. The working group for the third session had been cancelled.

    In the past, the treaty bodies had been facing a liquidity crisis. Dues were being paid, but did not reach the treaty bodies in a timely manner. However, it was not an issue of liquidity anymore. The budget of the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights for this year had been cut, and the situation had moved from a liquidity to a financial crisis. The financial outlook for next year was also not bright.

    DINA ROSSBACHER, Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights , said that there was a structural problem in terms of the processing of decisions related to individual communications. The formula adopted by Member States regarding the processing of individual communications had not been fully adopted and this had been exacerbated by the financial crisis. The Committee had taken several steps to address the situation, including efforts to align working methods and increase the efficiency of processing individual communications. Last year, the Committee adopted a record number of decisions on communications – over 450. However, the large backlog remained, and the situation remained urgent.

    Statements and Questions by States Parties

    States expressed support for the work of the Committee, the treaty bodies and the human rights system. It was the responsibility of States to support the work of the Committee, one speaker said.

    Speakers said creative initiatives were needed to address the financial situation, including digital meetings. One State expressed support for the Committee’s efforts to harmonise and increase efficiency for its work.

    One speaker said the Committee needed to further consider the cultural diversity of States in preparing its concluding observations. If the Committee did not consider challenges such as terrorism and unilateral coercive measures, its recommendations would be considered irrelevant to the realities on the ground in some countries. The speaker called on the Committee to prepare a general comment on the impact of unilateral coercive measures on civil and political rights.

    Responses by a Committee Expert

    A Committee Expert said the treaty bodies were implementing innovative methods to review States parties. The Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women had this year conducted a special, informal meeting in Fiji to review States parties in the region. This initiative was funded by States parties, and could be a model for other Committees to follow. The application of simplified procedures to individual communications would not be sufficient for fully addressing the Committee’s backlog.

    Closing Remarks

    CHANGROK SOH, Committee Chair, said treaty bodies were at the core of the human rights architecture. However, the Committee’s third session would not happen without extraordinary measures, and this trend would continue if the Committee continued to rely on the United Nations’ regular budget. Less than five per cent of the United Nations’ regular budget was allocated to the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights. The treaty body system was not receiving enough funding for its core work. It was doing its best in terms of rationalisation and increasing efficiency. But as allocated resources declined, support diminished, creating a vicious cycle.

    To address this situation, special measures were needed, such as utilising voluntary contributions transparently. Without a properly functioning treaty body system, human rights protections would weaken around the world. Decisive and urgent action was needed to protect the treaty body system and human rights around the world.

    ____________

    This document is produced by the United Nations Information Service at Geneva and is intended for public information; it is not an official document.
    The English and French versions of our news releases are different because they are the product of two separate coverage teams that work independently.

    CCPR25.017E

    MIL OSI United Nations News –

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Bilateral meeting with Prime Minister Tusk of Poland at Ukraine Recovery Conference

    Source: Government of Italy (English)

    10 Luglio 2025

    The President of the Council of Ministers, Giorgia Meloni, met today with the Polish Prime Minister, Donald Tusk, in the margins of the Ukraine Recovery Conference.

    The meeting focused on bilateral relations between Poland and Italy, from economic and trade collaboration to defence industry cooperation.

    Particular attention was also paid to issues on the European agenda, starting with the common commitment on migration. In this regard, the two leaders confirmed their determination to continue searching for innovative solutions to fight irregular immigration.

    MIL OSI Europe News –

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Written question – Secret negotiations between Türkiye and Syria on the delimitation of maritime zones in the Eastern Mediterranean – E-002735/2025

    Source: European Parliament

    Question for written answer  E-002735/2025/rev.1
    to the Vice-President of the Commission / High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy
    Rule 144
    Yannis Maniatis (S&D)

    According to a letter from the Turkish Foreign Minister to the Office of the President of the Turkish Grand National Assembly, published today[1], Türkiye has initiated secret negotiations with the new regime in Syria on the delimitation of maritime zones beyond territorial waters in the Eastern Mediterranean region.

    Bearing in mind that Türkiye has very close relations with the new Syrian regime, and that the Turkish-Libyan memorandum of understanding – by which Türkiye tried to establish an Exclusive Economic Zone between Türkiye and Libya – violates international law, the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea and the sovereign rights of Greece, as recognised by the European Council in its conclusions, can the Vice-President of the Commission / High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy say:

    • 1.Are there any conditions for lifting sanctions on the Syrian regime? If so, what are they?
    • 2.What steps will she take to prevent such an agreement and protect the sovereign rights of EU Member States in the Eastern Mediterranean?
    • 3.What sanctions will she impose on both Türkiye and the new Syrian regime, should an agreement on the delimitation of maritime zones such as an EEZ or continental shelf between Syria and Türkiye violate international law and the sovereign rights of EU Member States?

    Submitted: 3.7.2025

    • [1] https://www.iefimerida.gr/kosmos/nordic-monitor-mystikes-diapragmateyseis-toyrkia-syria
    Last updated: 10 July 2025

    MIL OSI Europe News –

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Answer to a written question – Closure of the Monastery of St Catherine in Sinai and violation of religious freedoms by the Egyptian authorities – E-002164/2025(ASW)

    Source: European Parliament

    The EU and the EU Delegation in Cairo are aware of and continue to monitor the recent developments in Egypt after the Ismailia Court of Appeals issued a ruling linked to the legal status of Saint Catherine’s Monastery in Sinai.

    In a meeting called by the Arab Republic of Egypt’s Foreign Ministry, the Egyptian authorities assured Member States’ Ambassadors and the EU Head of Delegation in Cairo that the Egyptian government remains fully committed to preserving the monastery’s religious, historical, and spiritual status, adding that the current status of the area around Saint Catherine’s Monastery is untouchable. It was reaffirmed that the monks’ access to the site will not be affected by the court ruling.

    The EU welcomes the commitments of the governments of Greece and Egypt to work together towards safeguarding the rights of Saint Catherine’s Monastery and awaits any new developments with regard to its legal status.

    The EU will continue to follow the situation closely and await the result of the discussions between the Egyptian and Greek Authorities, insisting on the necessity to preserve the monastery’s religious, historical, and spiritual status, in accordance with the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation World Heritage Convention[1].

    • [1] United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation World Heritage convention website, Saint Catherine Monastery: https://whc.unesco.org/en/list/954/.
    Last updated: 10 July 2025

    MIL OSI Europe News –