NewzIntel.com

Category: MIL-Submissions

  • MIL-OSI Submissions: Design and Disability at the V&A is a rich, thought-provoking exhibition

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Laudan Nooshin, Professor of Music, School of Communication and Creativity, City St George’s, University of London

    One of the first things to greet visitors at the V&A’s new Design and Disability exhibition is a striking blue bench by artist Finnegan Shannon titled, Do You Want Us Here Or Not? This exhibit is a response to the often inadequate seating in museums, which not only acts as a barrier to accessibility for many people, but is more widely symptomatic of ableist approaches to museum and exhibition design.

    In this case, the invitation to “Please sit here!” sets the tone for the whole exhibition, which also includes a large sensory map of the layout (located at wheelchair level), a tactile map, and QR codes that link to audio description for blind and partially sighted visitors, and also British Sign Language interpretation.

    Looking for something good? Cut through the noise with a carefully curated selection of the latest releases, live events and exhibitions, straight to your inbox every fortnight, on Fridays. Sign up here.

    Aiming to showcase the radical contributions of disabled, deaf and neurodivergent people to design history and contemporary culture from the 1940s until the present, the exhibition goes well beyond this, addressing an impressively wide range of issues around access, disability and exclusion. It also reveals how ableism operates across a range of exclusions, such as race, gender, class and more.

    As the introductory notes point out: “Disabled people past and present have challenged and confronted the imbalance of design in society. This exhibition highlights disabled individuals at the heart of design history … It is both a celebration and a call to action.”

    While the fight for disability justice goes back many decades – also documented in the exhibition – it’s only relatively recently that questions of access and equality have gone beyond the physical. These include a wide range of issues related to neuro-inclusion and sensory access, including calm spaces and sensory maps that indicate noisy areas.

    My own interest in sound in museums has come partly out of research focusing on the role of acoustics in creating accessible spaces, and from my own experience of noise sensitivity conditions hyperacusis and misophonia. Inclusive sonic design seeks to address how sound operates as a factor of social inclusion and exclusion in places like museums.

    The V&A exhibition comprises three sections: visibility, tools and living. Visibility focuses on design and art as fundamental tools of activism and includes work created as part of disability justice movements over many decades. This section is a stark reminder of the justice and rights that only come about through extensive struggles.

    Tools highlight the extraordinary contribution to design innovation made by disabled people. Living explores stories of disabled people claiming space and imagining the worlds that they want to live in.

    Sections two and three both advocate for the social model of disability in which people are rendered disabled by their environment, something that calls for design solutions (as opposed to the medical model in which people are required to navigate and find solutions to their “problem”).

    The exhibition draws attention to a wide range of physical and sensory exclusions, both in the displays and the design of the space itself. The in-house design team includes staff with personal experience of disability who also worked closely with external partners living with disability.

    There are plenty of exhibits that can be experienced through touch. For partially sighted visitors, there are strong visual contrasts in the wall colours and the edges of displays are lit up. And there are raised edgings on all exhibits for people using a cane – all of which help with navigation.

    There are also quiet areas and plenty of seating. Some of these features are already being incorporated into gallery and exhibition design, and hopefully will soon become standard.

    I particularly liked the way various issues intersect in the exhibition, in which a range of exclusions are set alongside one another: race, hearing impairment, youth exclusion and stammering, for example.

    Other favourites included the B1 Blue Flame rattling football used for blind football, which visitors can pick up, feel, smell, shake and listen to. The Deaf Rave set and Woojer Vest are designed for deaf clubbers and performers and use vibrating tactile discs that amplify sound vibrations.

    The beautiful blanket and pillow entitled Public S/Pacing by Helen Statford offers an invitation to rest, drawing attention to “crip time”, accepting “a different pace to non-disabled norms, challenging conventions of productivity, and resting in radical ways that would actually benefit society at large”.

    The blanket highlights the failures of the design of public spaces to include disabled people, “challenging ableist assumptions with care and visibility”. The reverse of the blanket has a quotation from Rhiannon Armstrong’s Radical Act of Stopping (2016), embroidered by Poppy Nash.

    The exhibition includes many examples of “disability gain” by which design aimed at a particular group of people unintentionally benefits others, too. An example is the smartphone touchscreen, based on technology developed by engineers Wayne Westerman and John Elias as an alternative to the standard keyboard, which Westerman was unable to use due to severe hand pain.

    Initially marketed to people with hand disabilities, the technology was later sold to Apple where it revolutionised mobile phone technology.

    The final panel of the exhibition is titled Label for Missing Objects, an imaginative and fitting way to mark the continuing story of designing a world that works for “every body and every mind”.

    Design and Disability is a rich, thought-provoking and landmark exhibition. Kudos to the V&A, although its importance is so obvious, I wonder why it took this long to host a show dedicated to disabled artists and designers and the wider social impact of their work.

    I very much hope there are plans for the exhibition to tour the UK and beyond, and to become a permanent gallery at the V&A, so that it can inform curation and design work in other museums.

    Design and Disability at the V&A runs until February 15 2026.

    Laudan Nooshin received funding from the AHRC for the project Place-making Through Sound: Designing for Inclusivity and Wellbeing (2023-24).

    – ref. Design and Disability at the V&A is a rich, thought-provoking exhibition – https://theconversation.com/design-and-disability-at-the-vanda-is-a-rich-thought-provoking-exhibition-261135

    MIL OSI –

  • MIL-OSI Submissions: Design and Disability at the V&A is a rich, thought-provoking exhibition

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Laudan Nooshin, Professor of Music, School of Communication and Creativity, City St George’s, University of London

    One of the first things to greet visitors at the V&A’s new Design and Disability exhibition is a striking blue bench by artist Finnegan Shannon titled, Do You Want Us Here Or Not? This exhibit is a response to the often inadequate seating in museums, which not only acts as a barrier to accessibility for many people, but is more widely symptomatic of ableist approaches to museum and exhibition design.

    In this case, the invitation to “Please sit here!” sets the tone for the whole exhibition, which also includes a large sensory map of the layout (located at wheelchair level), a tactile map, and QR codes that link to audio description for blind and partially sighted visitors, and also British Sign Language interpretation.

    Looking for something good? Cut through the noise with a carefully curated selection of the latest releases, live events and exhibitions, straight to your inbox every fortnight, on Fridays. Sign up here.

    Aiming to showcase the radical contributions of disabled, deaf and neurodivergent people to design history and contemporary culture from the 1940s until the present, the exhibition goes well beyond this, addressing an impressively wide range of issues around access, disability and exclusion. It also reveals how ableism operates across a range of exclusions, such as race, gender, class and more.

    As the introductory notes point out: “Disabled people past and present have challenged and confronted the imbalance of design in society. This exhibition highlights disabled individuals at the heart of design history … It is both a celebration and a call to action.”

    While the fight for disability justice goes back many decades – also documented in the exhibition – it’s only relatively recently that questions of access and equality have gone beyond the physical. These include a wide range of issues related to neuro-inclusion and sensory access, including calm spaces and sensory maps that indicate noisy areas.

    My own interest in sound in museums has come partly out of research focusing on the role of acoustics in creating accessible spaces, and from my own experience of noise sensitivity conditions hyperacusis and misophonia. Inclusive sonic design seeks to address how sound operates as a factor of social inclusion and exclusion in places like museums.

    The V&A exhibition comprises three sections: visibility, tools and living. Visibility focuses on design and art as fundamental tools of activism and includes work created as part of disability justice movements over many decades. This section is a stark reminder of the justice and rights that only come about through extensive struggles.

    Tools highlight the extraordinary contribution to design innovation made by disabled people. Living explores stories of disabled people claiming space and imagining the worlds that they want to live in.

    Sections two and three both advocate for the social model of disability in which people are rendered disabled by their environment, something that calls for design solutions (as opposed to the medical model in which people are required to navigate and find solutions to their “problem”).

    The exhibition draws attention to a wide range of physical and sensory exclusions, both in the displays and the design of the space itself. The in-house design team includes staff with personal experience of disability who also worked closely with external partners living with disability.

    There are plenty of exhibits that can be experienced through touch. For partially sighted visitors, there are strong visual contrasts in the wall colours and the edges of displays are lit up. And there are raised edgings on all exhibits for people using a cane – all of which help with navigation.

    There are also quiet areas and plenty of seating. Some of these features are already being incorporated into gallery and exhibition design, and hopefully will soon become standard.

    I particularly liked the way various issues intersect in the exhibition, in which a range of exclusions are set alongside one another: race, hearing impairment, youth exclusion and stammering, for example.

    Other favourites included the B1 Blue Flame rattling football used for blind football, which visitors can pick up, feel, smell, shake and listen to. The Deaf Rave set and Woojer Vest are designed for deaf clubbers and performers and use vibrating tactile discs that amplify sound vibrations.

    The beautiful blanket and pillow entitled Public S/Pacing by Helen Statford offers an invitation to rest, drawing attention to “crip time”, accepting “a different pace to non-disabled norms, challenging conventions of productivity, and resting in radical ways that would actually benefit society at large”.

    The blanket highlights the failures of the design of public spaces to include disabled people, “challenging ableist assumptions with care and visibility”. The reverse of the blanket has a quotation from Rhiannon Armstrong’s Radical Act of Stopping (2016), embroidered by Poppy Nash.

    The exhibition includes many examples of “disability gain” by which design aimed at a particular group of people unintentionally benefits others, too. An example is the smartphone touchscreen, based on technology developed by engineers Wayne Westerman and John Elias as an alternative to the standard keyboard, which Westerman was unable to use due to severe hand pain.

    Initially marketed to people with hand disabilities, the technology was later sold to Apple where it revolutionised mobile phone technology.

    The final panel of the exhibition is titled Label for Missing Objects, an imaginative and fitting way to mark the continuing story of designing a world that works for “every body and every mind”.

    Design and Disability is a rich, thought-provoking and landmark exhibition. Kudos to the V&A, although its importance is so obvious, I wonder why it took this long to host a show dedicated to disabled artists and designers and the wider social impact of their work.

    I very much hope there are plans for the exhibition to tour the UK and beyond, and to become a permanent gallery at the V&A, so that it can inform curation and design work in other museums.

    Design and Disability at the V&A runs until February 15 2026.

    Laudan Nooshin received funding from the AHRC for the project Place-making Through Sound: Designing for Inclusivity and Wellbeing (2023-24).

    – ref. Design and Disability at the V&A is a rich, thought-provoking exhibition – https://theconversation.com/design-and-disability-at-the-vanda-is-a-rich-thought-provoking-exhibition-261135

    MIL OSI –

  • MIL-OSI Submissions: Why Russia is not taking Trump’s threats seriously

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Patrick E. Shea, Senior Lecturer in International Relations and Global Governance, University of Glasgow

    The US president, Donald Trump, recently announced that Russia had 50 days to end its war in Ukraine. Otherwise it would face comprehensive secondary sanctions targeting countries that continued trading with Moscow.

    On July 15, when describing new measures that would impose 100% tariffs on any country buying Russian exports, Trump warned: “They are very biting. They are very significant. And they are going to be very bad for the countries involved.”

    Secondary sanctions do not just target Russia directly, they threaten to cut off access to US markets for any country maintaining trade relationships with Moscow. The economic consequences would affect global supply chains, targeting major economies like China and India that have become Russia’s commercial lifelines.

    Despite the dire threats, Moscow’s stock exchange increased by 2.7% immediately following Trump’s announcement. The value of the Russian rouble also strengthened. On a global scale, oil markets appear to have relaxed, suggesting traders see no imminent risks.

    Get your news from actual experts, straight to your inbox. Sign up to our daily newsletter to receive all The Conversation UK’s latest coverage of news and research, from politics and business to the arts and sciences.

    This market reaction coincided with a nonplussed Moscow. While official statements noted that time was needed for Russia to “analyse what was said in Washington”, other statements suggested that the threats would have no effect. Former Russian president Dmitry Medvedev, for example, declared on social media that “Russia didn’t care” about Trump’s threats.

    The positive market reaction and lack of panic from Russian officials tell us more than simple scepticism about Trump’s willingness to follow through.

    If investors doubted Trump’s credibility, we would expect market indifference, not enthusiasm. Instead, the reaction suggests that financial markets expected a stronger response from the US. As Artyom Nikolayev, an analyst from Invest Era, quipped: “Trump performed below market expectations.”

    A reprieve, not a threat

    Trump’s threat isn’t just non-credible – the positive market reaction in Russia suggests it is a gift for Moscow. The 50-day ultimatum is seen not as a deadline but as a reprieve, meaning nearly two months of guaranteed inaction from the US.

    This will allow Russia more time to press its military advantages in Ukraine without facing new economic pressure. Fifty days is also a long time in American politics, where other crises will almost certainly arise to distract attention from the war.

    More importantly, Trump’s threat actively undermines more serious sanctions efforts that were gaining momentum in the US Congress. A bipartisan bill has been advancing a far more severe sanctions package, proposing secondary tariffs of up to 500% and, crucially, severely limiting the president’s ability to waive them.

    By launching his own initiative, Trump seized control of the policy agenda. Once the ultimatum was issued, US Senate majority leader John Thune announced that any vote on the tougher sanctions bill would be delayed until after the 50-day period. This effectively pauses a more credible threat facing the Kremlin.

    This episode highlights a problem for US attempts to use economic statecraft in international relations. Three factors have combined to undermine the credibility of Trump’s threats.

    First, there is Trump’s own track record. Financial markets have become so accustomed to the administration announcing severe tariffs only to delay, water down or abandon them that the jibe “Taco”, short for “Trump always chickens out”, has gained traction in financial circles.

    This reputation for failing to stick to threats means that adversaries and markets alike have learned to price in a high probability of backing down.



    Read more:
    Investors are calling Trump a chicken – here’s why that matters

    Second, the administration’s credibility is weakened by a lack of domestic political accountability. Research on democratic credibility in international relations emphasises how domestic constraints – what political scientists call “audience costs” – can paradoxically strengthen a country’s international commitments.

    When leaders know they will face political punishment from voters or a legislature for backing down from a threat, their threats gain weight. Yet the general reluctance of Congress to constrain Trump undermines this logic. This signals to adversaries that threats can be made without consequence, eroding their effectiveness.

    And third, effective economic coercion requires a robust diplomatic and bureaucratic apparatus to implement and enforce it. The systematic gutting of the State Department and the freezing of United States Agency for International Development (USAID) programmes eliminate the diplomatic infrastructure necessary for sustained economic pressure.

    Effective sanctions require careful coordination with allies, which the Trump administration has undermined. In addition, effective economic coercion requires planning and credible commitment to enforcement, all of which are impossible without a professional diplomatic corps.

    Investors and foreign governments appear to be betting that this combination of presidential inconsistency, a lack of domestic accountability, and a weakened diplomatic apparatus makes any threat more political theatre than genuine economic coercion. The rally in Russian markets was a clear signal that American economic threats are becoming less feared.

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

    – ref. Why Russia is not taking Trump’s threats seriously – https://theconversation.com/why-russia-is-not-taking-trumps-threats-seriously-261296

    MIL OSI –

  • MIL-OSI Submissions: When big sports events expand, like FIFA’s 2026 World Cup matches across North America, their climate footprint expands too

    Source: The Conversation – USA (2) – By Brian P. McCullough, Associate Professor of Sport Management, University of Michigan

    Lionel Messi celebrates with fans after Argentina won the FIFA World Cup championship in 2022 in Qatar. Michael Regan-FIFA/FIFA via Getty Images

    When the FIFA World Cup hits North America in June 2026, 48 teams and millions of soccer fans will be traveling to and from venues spread across the United States, Canada and Mexico.

    It’s a dramatic expansion – 16 more teams will be playing than in recent years, with a jump from 64 to 104 matches. The tournament is projected to bring in over US$10 billion in revenue. But the expansion will also mean a lot more travel and other activities that contribute to climate change.

    The environmental impacts of giant sporting events like the World Cup create a complex paradox for an industry grappling with its future in a warming world.

    A sustainability conundrum

    Sports are undeniably experiencing the effects of climate change. Rising global temperatures are putting athletes’ health at risk during summer heat waves and shortening winter sports seasons. Many of the 2026 World Cup venues often see heat waves in June and early July, when the tournament is scheduled.

    There is a divide over how sports should respond.

    Some athletes are speaking out for more sustainable choices and have called on lawmakers to take steps to limit climate-warming emissions. At the same time, the sport industry is growing and facing a constant push to increase revenue. The NCAA is also considering expanding its March Madness basketball tournaments from 68 teams currently to as many as 76.

    Park Yong-woo of team Al Ain from Abu Dhabi tries to cool off during a Club World Cup match on June 26, 2025, in Washington, D.C., which was in the midst of a heat wave. Some players have raised concerns about likely high temperatures during the 2026 World Cup, with matches scheduled June 11 to July 19.
    AP Photo/Julia Demaree Nikhinson

    Estimates for the 2026 World Cup show what large tournament expansions can mean for the climate. A report from Scientists for Global Responsibility estimates that the expanded World Cup could generate over 9 million metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent, nearly double the average of the past four World Cups.

    This massive increase – and the increase that would come if the NCAA basketball tournaments also expand – would primarily be driven by air travel as fans and players fly among event cities that are thousands of miles apart.

    A lot of money is at stake, but so is the climate

    Sports are big business, and adding more matches to events like the World Cup and NCAA tournaments will likely lead to larger media rights contracts and greater gate receipts from more fans attending the events, boosting revenues. These are powerful financial incentives.

    In the NCAA’s case, there is another reason to consider a larger tournament: The House v. NCAA settlement opened the door for college athletic departments to share revenue with athletes, which will significantly increase costs for many college programs. More teams would mean more television revenue and, crucially, more revenue to be distributed to member NCAA institutions and their athletic conferences.

    When climate promises become greenwashing

    The inherent conflict between maximizing profit through growth and minimizing environmental footprint presents a dilemma for sports.

    Several sport organizations have promised to reduce their impact on the climate, including signing up for initiatives like the United Nations Sports for Climate Action Framework.

    However, as sports tournaments and exhibition games expand, it can become increasingly hard for sports organizations to meet their climate commitments. In some cases, groups making sustainability commitments have been accused of greenwashing, suggesting the goals are more about public relations than making genuine, measurable changes.

    For example, FIFA’s early claims that it would hold a “fully carbon-neutral” World Cup in Qatar in 2022 were challenged by a group of European countries that accused soccer’s world governing body of underestimating emissions. The Swiss Fairness Commission, which monitors fairness in advertising, considered the complaints and determined that FIFA’s claims could not be substantiated.

    Alessandro Bastoni, of Inter Milan and Italy’s national team, prepares to board a flight from Milan to Rome with his team.
    Mattia Ozbot-Inter/Inter via Getty Images

    Aviation is often the biggest driver of emissions. A study that colleagues and I conducted on the NCAA men’s basketball tournament found about 80% of its emissions were connected to travel. And that was after the NCAA began using the pod system, which is designed to keep teams closer to home for the first and second rounds.

    Finding practical solutions

    Some academics, observing the rising emissions trend, have called for radical solutions like the end of commercialized sports or drastically limiting who can attend sporting events, with a focus on fans from the region.

    These solutions are frankly not practical, in my view, nor do they align with other positive developments. The growing popularity of women’s sports shows the challenge in limiting sports events – more games expands participation but adds to the industry’s overall footprint.

    Further compounding the challenges of reducing environmental impact is the amount of fan travel, which is outside the direct control of the sports organization or event organizers.

    Many fans will follow their teams long distances, especially for mega-events like the World Cup or the NCAA tournament. During the men’s World Cup in Russia in 2018, more than 840,000 fans traveled from other countries. The top countries by number of fans, after Russia, were China, the U.S., Mexico and Argentina.

    There is an argument that distributed sporting events like March Madness or the World Cup can be better in some ways for local environments because they don’t overwhelm a single city. However, merely spreading the impact does not necessarily reduce it, particularly when considering the effects on climate change.

    How fans can cut their environmental footprint

    Sport organizations and event planners can take steps to be more sustainable and also encourage more sustainable choices among fans. Fans can reduce their environmental impact in a variety of ways. For example:

    • Avoid taking airplanes for shorter distances, such as between FIFA venues in Philadelphia, New York and Boston, and carpool or take Amtrak instead. Planes can be more efficient for long distances, but air travel is still a major contributing factor to emissions.

    • While in a host city, use mass transit or rent electric vehicles or bicycles for local travel.

    • Consider sustainable accommodations, such as short-term rentals that might have a smaller environmental footprint than a hotel. Or stay at a certified green hotel that makes an effort to be more efficient in its use of water and energy.

    • Engage in sustainable pregame and postgame activities, such as choosing local, sustainable food options, and minimize waste.

    • You can also pay to offset carbon emissions for attending different sporting events, much like concertgoers do when they attend musical festivals. While critics question offsets’ true environmental benefit, they do represent people’s growing awareness of their environmental footprint.

    Through all these options, it’s clear that sports face a significant challenge in addressing their environmental impacts and encouraging fans to be more sustainable, while simultaneously trying to meet ambitious business and environmental targets.

    In my view, a sustainable path forward will require strategic, yet genuine, commitment by the sports industry and its fans, and a willingness to prioritize long-term planetary health alongside economic gains – balancing the sport and sustainability.

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

    – ref. When big sports events expand, like FIFA’s 2026 World Cup matches across North America, their climate footprint expands too – https://theconversation.com/when-big-sports-events-expand-like-fifas-2026-world-cup-matches-across-north-america-their-climate-footprint-expands-too-259437

    MIL OSI –

  • MIL-OSI Submissions: The golden oyster mushroom craze unleashed an invasive species – and a worrying new study shows it’s harming native fungi

    Source: The Conversation – USA (2) – By Aishwarya Veerabahu, Ph.D. Candidate in Botany, University of Wisconsin-Madison

    Golden oyster mushrooms can be cultivated, but they can also escape into the wild. DDukang/iStock/Getty Images Plus

    Golden oyster mushrooms, with their sunny yellow caps and nutty flavor, have become wildly popular for being healthy, delicious and easy to grow at home from mushroom kits.

    But this food craze has also unleashed an invasive species into the wild, and new research shows it’s pushing out native fungi.

    In a study we believe is the first of its kind, fellow mycologists and I demonstrate that an invasive fungus can cause environmental harm, just as invasive plants and animals can when they take over ecosystems.

    A scientist documents golden oyster mushrooms growing wild in a Wisconsin forest, where these invasive fungi don’t belong. DNA tests showed the species had pushed out other native fungi.
    Aishwarya Veerabahu

    Native mushrooms and other fungi are important for the health of many ecosystems. They break down dead wood and other plant material, helping it decay. They cycle nutrients such as carbon and nitrogen from the dead tissues of plants and animals, turning it into usable forms that enter the soil, atmosphere or their own bodies. Fungi also play a role in managing climate change by sequestering carbon in soil and mediating carbon emissions from soil and wood.

    Their symbiotic relationships with other organisms also help other organisms thrive. Mycorrhizal fungi on roots, for example, help plants absorb water and nutrients. And wood decay fungi help create wooded habitats for birds, mammals and plant seedlings.

    However, we found that invasive golden oyster mushrooms, a wood decay fungus, can threaten forests’ fungal biodiversity and harm the health of ecosystems that are already vulnerable to climate change and habitat destruction.

    The dark side of the mushroom trade

    Golden oyster mushrooms, native to Asia, were brought to North America around the early 2000s. They’re part of an international mushroom culinary craze that has been feeding into one of the world’s leading drivers of biodiversity loss: invasive species.

    As fungi are moved around the world in global trade, either intentionally as products, such as kits people buy for growing mushrooms at home, or unintentionally as microbial stowaways along with soil, plants, timber and even shipping pallets, they can establish themselves in new environments.

    Where golden oyster mushrooms, an invasive species in North America, have been reported in the wild, including in forests, parks and neighborhoods. Red dots indicate new reports each year. States in yellow have had a report at some point. Aishwarya Veerabahu

    Many mushroom species have been cultivated in North America for decades without becoming invasive species threats. However, golden oyster mushrooms have been different.

    No one knows exactly how golden oyster mushrooms escaped into the wild, whether from a grow kit, a commercial mushroom farm or outdoor logs inoculated with golden oysters – a home-cultivation technique where mushroom mycelium is placed into logs to colonize the wood and produce mushrooms.

    As grow kits increased in popularity, many people began buying golden oyster kits and watching them blossom into beautiful yellow mushrooms in their backyards. Their spores or composted kits could have spread into nearby forests.

    Evidence from a pioneering study by Andrea Reisdorf (née Bruce) suggests golden oyster mushrooms were introduced into the wild in multiple U.S. states around the early 2010s.

    Species the golden oysters pushed out

    In our study, designed by Michelle Jusino and Mark Banik, research scientists with the U.S. Forest Service, our team went into forests around Madison, Wisconsin, and drilled into dead trees to collect wood shavings containing the natural fungal community within each tree. Some of the trees had golden oyster mushrooms on them, and some did not.

    We then extracted DNA to identify and compare which fungi, and how many fungi, were in trees that had been invaded by golden oyster mushrooms compared with those that had not been.

    We were startled to find that trees with golden oyster mushrooms housed only half as many fungal species as trees without golden oyster mushrooms, sometimes even less. We also found that the composition of fungi in trees with golden oyster mushrooms was different from trees without golden oyster mushrooms.

    For example, the gentle green “mossy maze polypore” and the “elm oyster” mushroom were pushed out of trees invaded by golden oyster mushrooms.

    Mossy maze polypore growing on a stump. This is one of the native species that disappeared from trees when the golden oyster mushroom moved in.
    mauriziobiso/iStock/Getty Images Plus

    Another ousted fungus, Nemania serpens, is known for producing diverse arrays of chemicals that differ even between individuals of the same species. Fungi are sources of revolutionary medicines, including antibiotics like penicillin, cholesterol medication and organ transplant stabilizers. The value of undiscovered, potentially useful chemicals can be lost when invasive species push others out.

    The invasive species problem includes fungi

    Given what my colleagues and I discovered, we believe it is time to include invasive fungi in the global conversation about invasive species and examine their role as a cause of biodiversity loss.

    That conversation includes the idea of fungal “endemism” – that each place has a native fungal community that can be thrown out of balance. Native fungal communities tend to be diverse, having evolved together over thousands of years to coexist. Our research shows how invasive species can change the makeup of fungal communities by outcompeting native species, thus changing the fungal processes that have shaped native ecosystems.

    There are many other invasive fungi. For example, the deadly poisonous “death cap” Amanita phalloides and the “orange ping-pong bat” Favolaschia calocera are invasive in North America. The classic red and white “fly agaric” Amanita muscaria is native to North America but invasive elsewhere.

    The orange ping-pong bat mushroom is invasive in North America. These were photographed in New Zealand.
    Bernard Spragg. NZ/Flickr Creative Commons

    The golden oyster mushrooms’ invasion of North America should serve as a bright yellow warning that nonnative fungi are capable of rapid invasion and should be cultivated with caution, if at all.

    Golden oyster mushrooms are now recognized as invasive in Switzerland and can be found in forests in Italy, Hungary, Serbia and Germany. I have been hearing about people attempting to cultivate them around the world, including in Turkey, India, Ecuador, Kenya, Italy and Portugal. It’s possible that golden oyster mushrooms may not be able to establish invasive populations in some regions. Continued research will help us understand the full scope of impacts invasive fungi can have.

    What you can do to help

    Mushroom growers, businesses and foragers around the world may be asking themselves, “What can we do about it?”

    For the time being, I recommend that people consider refraining from using golden oyster mushroom grow kits to prevent any new introductions. For people who make a living selling these mushrooms, consider adding a note that this species is invasive and should be cultivated indoors and not composted.

    If you enjoy growing mushrooms at home, try cultivating safe, native species that you have collected in your region.

    Most mushrooms you see in the grocery store are grown indoors.

    There is no single right answer. In some places, golden oyster mushrooms are being cultivated as a food source for impoverished communities, for income, or to process agricultural waste and produce food at the same time. Positives like these will have to be considered alongside the mushrooms’ negative impacts when developing management plans or legislation.

    In the future, some ideas for solutions could involve sporeless strains of golden oysters for home kits that can’t spread, or a targeted mycovirus that could control the population. Increased awareness about responsible cultivation practices is important, because when invasive species move in and disrupt the native biodiversity, we all stand to lose the beautiful, colorful, weird fungi we see on walks in the forest.

    Aishwarya Veerabahu receives funding from UW-Madison Dept. of Botany, the UW Arboretum, the Society of Ecological Restoration, and the Garden Club of America. Aishwarya Veerabahu was an employee of the USDA Forest Service.

    – ref. The golden oyster mushroom craze unleashed an invasive species – and a worrying new study shows it’s harming native fungi – https://theconversation.com/the-golden-oyster-mushroom-craze-unleashed-an-invasive-species-and-a-worrying-new-study-shows-its-harming-native-fungi-259006

    MIL OSI –

  • MIL-OSI Submissions: Paolo Borsellino: the murder of an anti-mafia prosecutor and the enduring mystery of his missing red notebook

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Felia Allum, Professor of Comparative Organised Crime and Corruption, University of Bath

    It has been 33 years since anti-mafia prosecutor Paolo Borsellino was blown up by Cosa Nostra in front of his mother’s home in Palermo, Sicily. His death on July 19 1992 came 57 days after the murder of his colleague, Giovanni Falcone. This was the peak of Cosa Nostra’s attack on state representatives.

    A vital document was lost that day – a red notebook believed to have been in Borsellino’s work bag. This loss has hampered attempts to understand how deep into the Italian state Cosa Nostra’s activities run.

    The early 1990s were a turbulent time in Italy. The fall of the Berlin wall in 1989 broke the Italian party system and wiped out the traditional political parties, which had been based around the opposing forces of the Christian Democrats (supported by the US and the Vatican) and the Communist party.

    The Christian Democrats, in power during the post-war period, had often protected Cosa Nostra. But losing power meant an inability to honour its “pact” with mafiosi. This led to the mafia attacking anyone who got in its way.

    Falcone and Borsellino, as anti-mafia prosecutors, had got under the skin of Cosa Nostra. Their work zoned in on its mentality and activities. They were the driving force behind the 1986 “maxi trial” that saw hundreds of mafiosi prosecuted. This was the first time important mafia bosses were imprisoned. Falcone and Borsellino had brought a new understanding to the internal workings of the mafia, including its links with politics and money laundering operations.

    The mafia was deploying terrorist tactics against state representatives and institutions in the early 1990s in what appears to have been an attempt to get the state to negotiate with it. Borsellino, it is believed, was investigating this when he was murdered.

    The red notebook

    Crucially, on the day Borsellino was murdered, his work bag, which contained his red notebook (“l’agenda rossa”) disappeared from the wreckage of his car.

    He carried his red notebook around with him everywhere, making copious notes of his investigations and ideas. Had it been recovered, l’agenda rossa could have revealed the possible links between state representatives (including with the police and judiciary), businessmen and Cosa Nostra.

    It could, in effect, have mapped out how and to what extent Cosa Nostra had infiltrated the Italian state and the nature of its relationships with the new political class, the business elite, freemasons and other covert actors.

    A photograph of a police officer walking off with what looks very much like the bag that presumably contained the notebook has circulated ever since. But this is where the trail ends. The bag – minus the notebook – was later found in the office of the head of the flying squad, with no explanation as to how and why it got there.

    The disappearance of the red notebook remains a persistent enigma – and one which continues to haunt contemporary Italy because of what it might suggest about the nation’s underworld and political class.

    This photo could even suggest that the goal of killing Borsellino was not just to eliminate a zealous public prosecutor but to remove a pantheon of knowledge about organised crime and its infiltration into the public realm as part of a more orchestrated plan.

    Then, in 1993, Cosa Nostra suddenly and inexplicably ceased its terrorist tactics against the state. It was as though a truce had been reached. Could this be the case?

    Many have speculated that there was a secret dialogue and a trattativa – a state-mafia negotiation entered and a deal struck between state representatives and Cosa Nostra leaders to stop the violence. In exchange for an end to the violence, it was suggested that state representatives promised softer anti-mafia laws. It’s possible that the disappearance of Borsellino’s red notebook could have been part of the deal.

    Interpreting history

    The history of these dynamics between state and the mafia has since been written and re-written, dividing Italians and mafia scholars.

    At the heart of all these disagreements lie two questions: was the notebook taken intentionally and why did Cosa Nostra stop its attacks on the state at the specific moment that it did?. The answer to these would essentially establish whether or not there was a negotiated peace between the mafia and the state.

    In 2014, high-profile politicians, police officers and mafiosi were put on trial, accused of playing a role and enabling these negotiations. This was, in effect, the Italian state putting itself on trial.

    Some legal experts and historians have argued that the theory of coordinated action by state representatives and mafiosi was always an absurd hypothesis. While there might have been some random informal contacts, they contest that there was never a formal pact. The end of Cosa Nostra‘s violence, they argue, was due to a combination of other factors, including greater enforcement of the law.

    Others argue that there is evidence of a pact. These include first-hand accounts from former criminals. But of course it is hard to make these stories stick because all evidence of a relationship of this kind would, by definition, be covert and off the books. As with many trials and in particular, mafia trials, there are no facts, just interpretations of facts.

    In 2018, some state representatives and mafiosi were found guilty. But in 2023, the Italian supreme court overturned the 2018 ruling and concluded that there was no pact and no state-mafia negotiation.

    All involved were cleared for different reasons as the court attempted to draw a line under the intrigue by articulating a clear position. But with the mafia, answers are rarely that simple. And history is not only written in the courtroom.

    Borsellino’s legacy is celebrated in Italy to this day – but the unresolved matter of his missing notebook haunts the country more profoundly. His bag – minus the notebook – has recently been put on show at the Italian senate to celebrate his life. The display is also a reminder of how much remains unresolved from that period.

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

    – ref. Paolo Borsellino: the murder of an anti-mafia prosecutor and the enduring mystery of his missing red notebook – https://theconversation.com/paolo-borsellino-the-murder-of-an-anti-mafia-prosecutor-and-the-enduring-mystery-of-his-missing-red-notebook-259101

    MIL OSI –

  • MIL-OSI Submissions: Muhammadu Buhari: Nigeria’s military leader turned democratic president leaves a mixed legacy

    Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Kester Onor, Senior Research Fellow, Nigerian Institute of International Affairs

    Nigeria’s former president, Muhammadu Buhari, who died in London on 13 July aged 82, was one of two former military heads of state who were later elected as civilian presidents. Buhari was the military head of state of Nigeria from 31 December 1983 to 27 August 1985 and president from 2015 to 2023.

    The other Nigerian politician to have been in both roles is former president Olusegun Obasanjo . He was a military ruler between 1976 and 1979 and elected president between 1999 and 2007.

    Buhari led Nigeria cumulatively for nearly a decade. His time as military head of state was marked with a war against corruption but he couldn’t do as much during his time as president under democratic rule.

    As a political scientist who once served in the Nigerian Army, I believe that former president Buhari’s government’s war on terrorism was largely underwhelming, despite promises and early gains.

    In his elected role, Buhari maintained a modest personal lifestyle and upheld electoral transitions. Nevertheless his presidency was marred by economic mismanagement, a failure to implement bold structural reforms, ethnic favouritism, and an unfulfilled promise of change.

    He did leave tangible infrastructural footprints, a focus on agriculture, and foundational efforts in transparency and anti-corruption.

    So his mark on Nigeria’s development trajectory was mixed.

    Early years

    Buhari was born on 17 December 1942, to Adamu and Zulaiha Buhari in Daura, Katsina State, north-west Nigeria. He was four years old when his father died. He attended Quranic school in Katsina. He was a Fulani, one of the major ethnic nationalities in Nigeria.

    After completing his schooling, Buhari joined the army in 1961. He had military training in the UK, India and the United States as well as Nigeria.

    In 1975 he was appointed military governor of North Eastern State (now Borno State), after being involved in ousting Yakubu Gowon in a coup that same year. He served as governor for a year.

    Buhari later became federal commissioner for petroleum resources, overseeing Nigeria’s petroleum industry under Obasanjo. Obasanjo had become head of state in 1976 when Gowon’s successor, Murtala Muhammed, was assassinated in a failed coup that year.

    In September 1979, he returned to regular army duties and commanded the 3rd Armoured division based in Jos, Plateau State, north central. Nigeria’s Second Republic commenced that year after the election of Shehu Shagari as president.

    The coup that truncated the Shagari government on 31 December 1983 saw the emergence of Buhari as Nigeria’s head of state.

    Buhari’s junta years

    Buhari headed the military government for just under two years. He was ousted in another coup on 27 August 1985.

    While at the helm he vowed that the government would not tolerate kick-backs, inflation of contracts and over-invoicing of imports. Nor would it condone forgery, fraud, embezzlement, misuse and abuse of office and illegal dealings in foreign exchange and smuggling.

    Eighteen state governors were tried by military tribunals. Some of the accused received lengthy prison sentences, while others were acquitted or had their sentences commuted.

    His government also enacted the notorious Decree 4 under which two journalists, Nduka Irabor and Dele Thompson, were jailed. The charges stemmed from three articles published on the reorganisation of Nigeria’s diplomatic service.

    Buhari also instituted austerity measures and started a “War Against Indiscipline” which sought to promote positive values in the country. Authoritarian methods were sometimes used in its implementation. Soldiers forced Nigerians to queue, to be punctual and to obey traffic laws.

    He also instituted restrictions on press and political freedoms. Labour unions were not spared either. Mass retrenchment of Nigerians in the public service was carried out with impunity.

    While citizens initially welcomed some of these measures, growing discontent on the economic front made things tougher for the regime.



    Read more:
    Why Buhari won even though he had little to show for first term

    Buhari, the democrat

    Buhari’s dream to lead Nigeria again through the ballot box failed in 2003, 2007 and 2011. To his credit, he didn’t give up. An alliance of opposition parties succeeded in getting him elected in 2015.

    The legacy he left is mixed.

    Buhari’s government deepened national disunity.

    His appointments, often skewed in favour of the northern region and his Fulani kinsmen, fuelled accusations of tribalism and marginalisation. His perceived affinity with Fulani herdsmen, despite widespread violence linked to some of them, further eroded public trust in his leadership.

    His anti-corruption mantra largely did not succeed. While some high-profile recoveries were made, critics argue that his anti-corruption war was selective and heavily politicised.

    Currently, his Central Bank governor is on trial for corruption charges.

    The performance of the economy was also dismal under his tenure. Not all these problems could be laid at his feet. Nevertheless his inability to tackle the country’s underlying problems, such as insecurity, inflation and rising unemployment, all contributed. He presided over two recessions, rising unemployment, inflation, and a weakened naira.

    He did, however, succeed on some fronts.

    He tried with infrastructure. The Lagos-Ibadan expressway, a major road, was almost completed and he got the railways working again, completing the Abuja-Kaduna and Lagos-Ibadan lines. He also completed the Second Niger Bridge.

    There was an airport revitalisation programme which led to improvements in Lagos, Abuja and Port Harcourt airports.

    Buhari signed the Petroleum Industry Act after nearly 20 years’ delay. This is now attracting more investments into the oil industry.

    He also initiated some social investment schemes like N-Power, N-Teach and a school feeding programme. They provided temporary jobs for some and gave some poor people more money in their pockets. N-Power is a youth empowerment programme designed to combat unemployment, improve social development and provide people with relevant skills.

    These programmes later became mired in corruption which only became known after he left office.

    There was also an Anchor Borrowers Scheme to make the country more sufficient in rice production. Again, it got enmeshed in corruption and some of its officials are currently standing trial.

    In the fight against corruption, the Buhari administration made some progress through the Treasury Single Account, which improved financial transparency in public institutions. The Whistle Blower Policy also led to the recovery of looted funds.



    Read more:
    Why Buhari’s government is losing the anti-corruption war

    Security failures

    Buhari oversaw a deterioration of Nigeria’s security landscape. Banditry, farmer-herder clashes, kidnapping and separatist agitations escalated.

    In 2015 Buhari campaigned on a promise to defeat Boko Haram and restore territorial integrity in the north-east. Initially, his administration made some progress. Boko Haram was driven out of several local government areas it once controlled, and major military operations such as Operation Lafiya Dole were launched to reclaim territory.

    However, these initial successes were not sustained. Boko Haram splintered, giving rise to more brutal factions like the Islamic State West Africa Province. This group continued to launch deadly attacks.

    Buhari’s counter-terrorism strategy was often reactive, lacking a clear long-term doctrine. The military was overstretched and under-equipped. Morale issues and allegations of corruption in the defence sector undermined operations.

    Intelligence coordination remained poor, while civil-military relations suffered due to frequent human rights abuses by security forces. Community trust in the government’s ability to provide security dwindled.

    Buhari’s second coming as Nigeria’s leader carried high expectations, but he under-delivered.

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

    – ref. Muhammadu Buhari: Nigeria’s military leader turned democratic president leaves a mixed legacy – https://theconversation.com/muhammadu-buhari-nigerias-military-leader-turned-democratic-president-leaves-a-mixed-legacy-261079

    MIL OSI –

  • MIL-OSI Submissions: What makes ‘great powers’ great? And how will they adapt to a multipolar world?

    Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Andrew Latham, Professor of Political Science, Macalester College

    When greats clash! In this case, in the 1974 film ‘Godzilla vs. Mechagodzilla.’ FilmPublicityArchive/United Archives via Getty Images

    Many column inches have been dedicated to dissecting the “great power rivalry” currently playing out between China and the U.S.

    But what makes a power “great” in the realm of international relations?

    Unlike other states, great powers possess a capacity to shape not only their immediate surroundings but the global order itself – defining the rules, norms and structures that govern international politics. Historically, they have been seen as the architects of world systems, exercising influence far beyond their neighborhoods.

    The notion of great powers came about to distinguish between the most and least powerful states. The concept gained currency after the 1648 Peace of Westphalia and the Congress of Vienna in 1815 – events in Europe that helped establish the notion of sovereign states and the international laws governing them.

    Whereas the great powers of the previous eras – for example, the Roman Empire – sought to expand their territory at almost every turn and relied on military power to do so, the modern great power utilizes a complex tapestry of diplomatic pressure, economic leverage and the assertions of international law. The order emerging out of Westphalia enshrined the principles of national sovereignty and territorial integrity, which allowed these powers to pursue a balance of power as codified by the Congress of Vienna based on negotiation as opposed to domination.

    This transformation represented a momentous development in world politics: At least some portion of the legitimacy of a state’s control was now realized through its relationships and capacity to keep the peace, rather than resting solely on its ability to use force.

    From great to ‘super’

    Using their material capabilities – economic strength, military might and political influence – great powers have been able to project power across multiple regions and dictate the terms of international order.

    In the 19th-century Concert of Europe, the great powers – Britain, France, Austria, Prussia and Russia – collectively managed European politics, balancing power to maintain stability. Their influence extended globally through imperial expansion, trade and the establishment of norms that reflected their priorities.

    During the 20th century, the Cold War brought a stark distinction between great powers and other states. The U.S. and the Soviet Union, as the era’s two “superpowers,” dominated the international system, shaping it through a rivalry that encompassed military alliances, ideological competition and economic systems. Great powers in this context were not merely powerful states but the central actors defining the structure of global politics.

    Toward a multipolar world

    The post-Cold War period briefly ushered in a unipolar moment, with the U.S. as the sole great power capable of shaping the international system on a global scale.

    This era was marked by the expansion of liberal internationalism, economic globalization and U.S.-led-and-constructed multilateralism.

    However, the emergence of new centers of power, particularly China and to a lesser extent Russia, has brought the unipolar era to a close, ushering in a multipolar world where the distinctive nature of great powers is once again reshaped.

    In this system, great powers are states with the material capabilities and strategic ambition to influence the global order as a whole.

    And here they differ from regional powers, whose influence is largely confined to specific areas. Nations such as Turkey, India, Australia, Brazil and Japan are influential within their neighborhoods. But they lack the global reach of the U.S. or China to fundamentally alter the international system.

    Instead, the roles of these regional powers is often defined by stabilizing their regions, addressing local challenges or acting as intermediaries in great power competition.

    Challenging greatness

    Yet the multipolar world presents unique challenges for today’s great powers. The diffusion of power means that no single great power can dominate the system as the U.S. did in the post-Cold War unipolar era.

    Instead, today’s great powers must navigate complex dynamics, balancing competition with cooperation. For instance, the rivalry between Washington and Beijing is now a defining feature of global politics, spanning trade, technology, military strategy and ideological influence. Meanwhile, Russia’s efforts to maintain its great power status have resulted in more assertive, though regionally focused, actions that nonetheless have global implications.

    Great powers must also contend with the constraints of interdependence. The interconnected nature of the global economy, the proliferation of advanced technologies and the rise of transnational challenges such as climate change and pandemics limit the ability of any one great power to unilaterally dictate outcomes. This reality forces great powers to prioritize their core interests while finding ways to manage global issues through cooperation, even amid intense competition.

    As the world continues to adjust to multiple centers of power, the defining feature of great powers remains an unmatched capacity to project influence globally and define the parameters of the international order.

    Whether through competition, cooperation or conflict, the actions of great powers will, I believe, continue to shape the trajectory of the global system, making their distinctiveness as central players in international relations more relevant than ever.

    This article is part of a series explaining foreign policy terms commonly used but rarely explained.

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

    – ref. What makes ‘great powers’ great? And how will they adapt to a multipolar world? – https://theconversation.com/what-makes-great-powers-great-and-how-will-they-adapt-to-a-multipolar-world-260969

    MIL OSI –

  • MIL-OSI Submissions: Why is Israel bombing Syria?

    Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Ali Mamouri, Research Fellow, Middle East Studies, Deakin University

    Conflict in Syria has escalated with Israel launching bombing raids against its northern neighbour.

    It follows months of fluctuating tensions in southern Syria between the Druze minority and forces aligned with the new government in Damascus. Clashes erupted in the last few days, prompting Israeli airstrikes in defence of the Druze by targeting government bases, tanks, and heavy weaponry.

    Israel Minister Amichai Chikli has called the Syrian president Ahmed al-Sharaa –

    a terrorist, a barbaric murderer who should be eliminated without delay.

    Despite the incendiary language, a ceasefire has been reached, halting the fighting – for now.

    Syrian forces have begun withdrawing heavy military equipment from the region, while Druze fighters have agreed to suspend armed resistance, allowing government troops to regain control of the main Druze city of Suwayda.

    What do the Druze want?

    The Druze are a small religious minority estimated at over one million people, primarily concentrated in the mountainous regions of Lebanon, Syria, Israel, and Jordan.

    In Syria, their population is estimated at around 700,000 (of around 23 million total Syrian population), with the majority residing in the southern As-Suwayda Governorate – or province – which serves as their traditional stronghold.

    Since the 2011 uprising against the Assad regime, the Druze have maintained a degree of autonomy, successfully defending their territory from various threats, including ISIS and other jihadist groups.

    Following Assad’s fall late last year, the Druze — along with other minority groups such as the Kurds in the east and Alawites in the west — have called for the country to be federalized.

    They advocate for a decentralised model that would grant greater autonomy to regional communities.

    However, the transitional government in Damascus is pushing for a centralised state and seeking to reassert full control over the entire Syrian territory. This fundamental disagreement has led to periodic clashes between Druze forces and government-aligned troops.

    Despite the temporary ceasefire, tensions remain high. Given the core political dispute remains unresolved, many expect renewed conflict to erupt in the near future.

    Why is Israel involved?

    The ousting of the Assad regime created a strategic opening for Israel to expand its influence in southern Syria. Israel’s involvement is driven by two primary concerns:

    1. Securing its northern border

    Israel views the power vacuum in Syria’s south as a potential threat, particularly the risk of anti-Israeli militias establishing a foothold near its northern border.

    During the recent clashes, the Israeli military declared

    The Israeli Defence Forces will not allow a military threat to exist in southern Syria and will act against it.

    Likewise, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who has stated he will not allow Syrian forces south of Damascus:

    We are acting to prevent the Syrian regime from harming them [the Druze] and to ensure the demilitarisation of the area adjacent to our border with Syria.

    In line with these warnings, the Israeli Air Force has conducted extensive strikes against Syrian military infrastructure, targeting bases, aircraft, tanks, and heavy weaponry.

    These operations are intended to prevent any future buildup of military capacity that could be used against Israel from the Syrian side of the border.

    2. Supporting a federated Syria

    Israel is backing the two prominent allied minorities in Syria — the Kurds in the northeast and the Druze in the south — in their push for a federal governance model.

    A fragmented Syria, divided along ethnic and religious lines, is seen by some Israeli policymakers as a way to maintain Israeli domination in the region.

    This vision is part of what some Israeli officials have referred to as a “New Middle East” — one where regional stability and normalisation emerge through reshaped borders and alliances.

    Israeli Foreign Minister Gideon Sa’ar recently echoed this strategy, stating:

    A single Syrian state with effective control and sovereignty over all its territory is unrealistic.

    For Israel, the logical path forward is autonomy for the various minorities in Syria within a federal structure.

    The United States’ role?

    According to unconfirmed reports, Washington has privately urged Israel to scale back its military strikes on Syria in order to prevent further escalation and preserve regional stability.

    The US is promoting increased support for Syria’s new regime in an effort to help it reassert control and stabilise the country.

    There are also indications the US and its allies are encouraging the Syrian government to move toward normalisation with Israel. Reports suggest Tel Aviv has held talks with the new Sharaa-led regime about the possibility of Syria joining the Abraham Accords (diplomatic agreements between Israel and several Arab states), which the regime in Damascus appears open to.

    US Special Envoy Tom Barrack has described the recent clashes as “worrisome”, calling for de-escalation and emphasising the need for

    a peaceful, inclusive outcome for all stakeholders – including the Druze, Bedouin tribes, the Syrian government, and Israeli forces.

    Given the deep-rooted political divisions, competing regional agendas, and unresolved demands from minority groups, the unrest in southern Syria is unlikely to end soon.

    Despite another temporary ceasefire, underlying tensions remain. Further clashes are not only possible but highly probable.

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

    – ref. Why is Israel bombing Syria? – https://theconversation.com/why-is-israel-bombing-syria-261259

    MIL OSI –

  • MIL-OSI Submissions: China’s insertion into India-Pakistan waters dispute adds a further ripple in South Asia

    Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Pintu Kumar Mahla, Research Associate at the Water Resources Research Institute, University of Arizona

    Indian Border Security Force soldiers patrol near the line of control in Kashmir. Nitin Kanotra/Hindustan Times via Getty Images

    With the future of a crucial water-sharing treaty between India and Pakistan up in the air, one outside party is looking on with keen interest: China.

    For 65 years, the Indus Waters Treaty has seen the two South Asian rivals share access and use of the Indus Basin, a vast area covered by the Indus River and its tributaries that also stretches into Afghanistan and China.

    For much of that history, there has been widespread praise for the agreement as a successful demonstration of cooperation between adversarial states over a key shared resource. But experts have noted the treaty has long held the potential for conflict. Drafters failed to factor in the effects of climate change, and the Himalayan glaciers that feed the rivers are now melting at record rates, ultimately putting at risk the long-term sustainability of water supply. Meanwhile, the ongoing conflict over Kashmir, where much of the basin is situated, puts cooperation at risk.

    With treaty on ice, China steps in

    That latest provocation threatening the treaty was a terrorist attack in the Indian union territory of Jammu and Kashmir on April 22, 2025. In response to that attack, which India blamed on Pakistan and precipitated a four-day confrontation, New Delhi temporarily suspended the treaty.

    But even before that attack, India and Pakistan had been locked in negotiation over the future of the treaty – the status of which has been in the hands of international arbitrators since 2016. In the latest development, on June 27, 2025, the Permanent Court of Arbitration issued a supplementary award in favor of Pakistan, arguing that India’s holding of the treaty in abeyance did not affect its jurisdiction over the case. Moreover, the treaty does not allow for either party to unilaterally suspend the treaty, the ruling suggested.

    Amid the wrangling over the treaty’s future, Pakistan has turned to China for diplomatic and strategic support. Such support was evident during the conflict that took place following April’s terrorist attack, during which Pakistan employed Chinese-made fighter jets and other military equipment against its neighbor.

    Meanwhile, in an apparent move to counter India’s suspension of the treaty, China and Pakistan have ramped up construction of a major dam project that would provide water supply and electricity to parts of Pakistan.

    So, why is China getting involved? In part, it reflects the strong relationship between Pakistan and China, developed over six decades.

    But as an expert in hydro politics, I believe Beijing’s involvement raises concerns: China is not a neutral observer in the dispute. Rather, Beijing has long harbored a desire to increase its influence in the region and to counter an India long seen as a rival. Given the at-times fraught relationship between China and India – the two countries went to war in 1962 and continue to engage in sporadic border skirmishes – there are concerns in New Delhi that Beijing may respond by disrupting the flow of rivers in its territory that feed into India.

    In short, any intervention by Beijing over the Indus Waters Treaty risks stirring up regional tensions.

    Wrangling over waters

    The Indus Waters Treaty has already endured three armed conflicts between Pakistan and India, and until recently it served as an exemplar of how to forge a successful bilateral agreement between two rival neighbors.


    Riccardo Pravettoni, CC BY-SA

    Under the initial terms of the treaty, which each country signed in 1960, India was granted control over three eastern rivers the countries share – Ravi, Beas and Satluj – with an average annual flow of 40.4 billion cubic meters. Meanwhile, Pakistan was given access to almost 167.2 billion cubic meters of water from the western rivers – Indus, Jhelum and Chenab.

    In India, the relatively smaller distribution has long been the source of contention, with many believing the treaty’s terms are overly generous to Pakistan. India’s initial demand was for 25% of the Indus waters.

    For Pakistan, the terms of the division of the Indus Waters Treaty are painful because they concretized unresolved land disputes tied to the partition of India in 1947. In particular, the division of the rivers is framed within the broader political context of Kashmir. The three major rivers – Indus, Jhelum and Chenab – flow through Indian-administered Jammu and Kashmir before entering the Pakistan-controlled western part of the Kashmir region.

    But the instability of the Kashmir region – disputes around the Line of Control separating the Indian- and Pakistan-controlled areas are common – underscores Pakistan’s water vulnerability.

    Nearly 65% of Pakistanis live in the Indus Basin region, compared with 14% for India. It is therefore not surprising that Pakistan has warned that any attempt to cut off the water supply, as India has threatened, would be considered an act of war.

    It also helps to explain Pakistan’s desire to develop hydropower on the rivers it controls. One-fifth of Pakistan’s electricity comes from hydropower, and nearly 21 hydroelectric power plants are located in the Indus Basin region.

    Since Pakistan’s economy relies heavily on agriculture and the water needed to maintain agricultural land, the fate of the Indus Waters Treaty is of the utmost importance to Pakistan’s leaders.

    Such conditions have driven Islamabad to be a willing partner with China in a bid to shore up its water supply.

    China provides technical expertise and financial support to Pakistan for numerous hydropower projects in Pakistan, including the Diamer Bhasha Dam and Kohala Hydropower Project. These projects play a significant role in addressing Pakistan’s energy requirements and have been a key aspect of the transboundary water relationship between the two nations.

    Using water as a weapon?

    With it’s rivalry with India and its desire to simultaneously work with Pakistan on numerous issues, China increasingly sees itself as a stakeholder in the Indus Waters Treaty, too. Chinese media narratives have framed India as the aggressor in the dispute, warning of the danger of using “water as a weapon” and noting that the source of the Indus River lies in China’s Western Tibet region.

    Doing so fits Beijing’ s greater strategic presence in South Asian politics. After the terrorist attack, China Foreign Minister Wang Yi reaffirmed China’s support for Pakistan, showcasing the relationship as an “all-weather strategic” partnership and referring to Pakistan as an “ironclad friend.”

    And in response to India’s suspension of the treaty, China announced it was to accelerate work on the significant Mohmand hydropower project on the tributary of the Indus River in Pakistan.

    Construction at the Mohmand Dam.
    Pakistan Water and Power Development Authority

    Chinese investment in Pakistan’s hydropower sector presents substantial opportunities for both countries in regards to energy security and promoting economic growth.

    The Indus cascade project under the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor initiative, for example, promises to provide cumulative hydropower generation capacity of around 22,000 megawatts. Yet the fact that project broke ground in Gilgit-Baltistan, a disputed area in Pakistan-controlled Kashmir, underscores the delicacy of the situation.

    Beijing’s backing of Pakistan is largely motivated by a mix of economic and geopolitical interests, particularly in legitimizing the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor. But it comes at the cost of stirring up regional tensions.

    As such, the alignment of Chinese and Pakistani interests in developing hydro projects can pose a further challenge to the stability of South Asia’s water-sharing agreements, especially in the Indus Basin. Recently, the chief minister of the Indian state of Arunachal Pradesh, which borders China, warned that Beijing’s hydro projects in the Western Tibet region amount to a ticking “water bomb.”

    To diffuse such tensions – and to get the Indus Waters Treaty back on track – it behooves India, China and Pakistan to engage in diplomacy and dialogue. Such engagement is, I believe, essential in addressing the ongoing water-related challenges in South Asia.

    Pintu Kumar Mahla is affiliated with the Water Resources Research Center, the University of Arizona. He is also a member of the International Association of Water Law (AIDA).

    Pintu Kumar Mahla has not received funding related to this article.

    – ref. China’s insertion into India-Pakistan waters dispute adds a further ripple in South Asia – https://theconversation.com/chinas-insertion-into-india-pakistan-waters-dispute-adds-a-further-ripple-in-south-asia-258891

    MIL OSI –

  • MIL-OSI Submissions: Europe is stuck in a bystander role over Iran’s nuclear program after US, Israeli bombs establish facts on the ground

    Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Garret Martin, Hurst Senior Professorial Lecturer, Co-Director Transatlantic Policy Center, American University School of International Service

    Iran Foreign Minister Hossein Amirabdollahian, right, attends a news conference with EU foreign affairs representative Josep Borrell in Tehran on June 25, 2022. Atta KenareAFP via Getty Images

    The U.S. bombing of three Iranian nuclear facilities on June 22, 2025, sent shock waves around the world. It marked a dramatic reversal for the Trump administration, which had just initiated negotiations with Tehran over its nuclear program. Dispensing with diplomacy, the U.S. opted for the first time for direct military involvement in the then-ongoing Israeli-Iranian conflict.

    European governments have long pushed for a diplomatic solution to Tehran’s nuclear ambitions. Yet, the reaction in the capitals of Europe to the U.S. bombing of the nuclear facilities was surprisingly subdued.

    European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen noted Israel’s “right to defend itself and protect its people.” German Chancellor Friedrich Merz was equally supportive, arguing that “this is dirty work that Israel is doing for all of us.” And a joint statement by the E3 – France, the U.K. and Germany – tacitly justified the U.S. bombing as necessary to prevent the possibility of Iran developing nuclear weapons.

    Europe’s responses to the Israeli and American strikes were noteworthy because of how little they discussed the legality of the attacks. There was no such hesitation when Russia targeted civilian nuclear energy infrastructure in Ukraine in 2022.

    But the timid reaction also underscored Europe’s bystander role, contrasting with its past approach on that topic. Iran’s nuclear program had been a key focal point of European diplomacy for years. The E3 nations initiated negotiations with Tehran back in 2003. They also helped to facilitate the signing of the 2015 Iran nuclear deal, which also included Russia, the European Union, China, the U.S. and Iran. And the Europeans sought to preserve the agreement, even after the unilateral U.S. withdrawal in 2018 during President Donald Trump’s first term.

    As a scholar of transatlantic relations and security, I believe Europe faces long odds to once again play an impactful role in strengthening the cause of nuclear nonproliferation with Iran. Indeed, contributing to a new nuclear agreement with Iran would require Europe to fix a major rift with Tehran, overcome its internal divisions over the Middle East and manage a Trump administration that seems less intent on being a reliable ally for Europe.

    Growing rift between Iran and Europe

    For European diplomats, the 2015 deal was built on very pragmatic assumptions. It only covered the nuclear dossier, as opposed to including other areas of contention such as human rights or Iran’s ballistic missile program. And it offered a clear bargain: In exchange for greater restrictions on its nuclear program, Iran could expect the lifting of some existing sanctions and a reintegration into the world economy.

    As a result, the U.S. withdrawal from the deal in 2018 posed a fundamental challenge to the status quo. Besides exiting, the Trump White House reimposed heavy secondary sanctions on Iran, which effectively forced foreign companies to choose between investing in the U.S. and Iranian markets. European efforts to mitigate the impact of these U.S. sanctions failed, thus undermining the key benefit of the deal for Iran: helping its battered economy. It also weakened Tehran’s faith in the value of Europe as a partner, as it revealed an inability to carve real independence from the U.S.

    U.S. President Donald Trump walks past French President Emmanuel Macron, center, and German Chancellor Friedrich Merz, right, in The Hague, Netherlands, on June 25, 2025.
    Christian Hartmann/AFP via Getty Images

    After 2018, relations between Europe and Iran deteriorated significantly. Evidence of Iranian state-sponsored terrorism and Iran-linked plots on European soil hardly helped. Moreover, Europeans strongly objected to Iran supplying Russia with drones in support of Moscow’s invasion of Ukraine – and later on, ballistic missiles as well. On the flip side, Iran deeply objected to European support for Israel’s war in the Gaza Strip in the aftermath of the Oct. 7, 2023, attacks.

    These deep tensions remain a significant impediment to constructive negotiations on the nuclear front. Neither side currently has much to offer to the other, nor can Europe count on any meaningful leverage to influence Iran. And Europe’s wider challenges in its Middle East policy only compound this problem.

    Internal divisions

    In 2015, Europe could present a united front on the Iranian nuclear deal in part because of its limited nature. But with the nonproliferation regime now in tatters amid Trump’s unilateral actions and the spread of war across the region, it is now far harder for European diplomats to put the genie back in the bottle. That is particularly true given the present fissures over increasingly divisive Middle East policy questions and the nature of EU diplomacy.

    Europe remains very concerned about stability in the Middle East, including how conflicts might launch new migratory waves like in 2015-16, when hundreds of thousands of Syrians fled to mainland Europe. The EU also remains very active economically in the region and is the largest funder of the Palestinian Authority. But it has been more of a “payer than player” in the region, struggling to translate economic investment into political influence.

    In part, this follows from the longer-term tendency to rely on U.S. leadership in the region, letting Washington take the lead in trying to solve the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. But it also reflects the deeper divisions between EU member nations.

    With foreign policy decisions requiring unanimity, EU members have often struggled to speak with one voice on the Middle East. Most recently, the debates over whether to suspend the economic association agreement with Israel over its actions in Gaza or whether to recognize a Palestinian state clearly underscored the existing EU internal disagreements.

    Unless Europe can develop a common approach toward the Middle East, it is hard to see it having enough regional influence to matter in future negotiations over Iran’s nuclear program. This, in turn, would also affect how it manages its crucial, but thorny, relations with the U.S.

    Europe in the shadow of Trump

    The EU was particularly proud of the 2015 nuclear deal because it represented a strong symbol of multilateral diplomacy. It brought together great powers in the spirit of bolstering the cause of nuclear nonproliferation.

    Smoke rises from a building in Tehran after the Iranian capital was targeted by Israeli airstrikes on June 23, 2025.
    Elyas/Middle East Images/AFP via Getty Images

    Ten years on, the prospects of replicating such international cooperation seem rather remote. Europe’s relations with China and Russia – two key signers of the original nuclear deal – have soured dramatically in recent years. And ties with the United States under Trump have also been particularly challenging.

    Dealing with Washington, in the context of the Iran nuclear program, presents a very sharp dilemma for Europe.

    Trying to carve a distinct path may be appealing, but it lacks credibility at this stage. Recent direct talks with Iranian negotiators produced little, and Europe is not in a position to give Iran guarantees that it would not face new strikes from Israel.

    And pursuing an independent path could easily provoke the ire of Trump, which Europeans are keen to avoid. There has already been a long list of transatlantic disputes, whether over trade, Ukraine or defense spending. European policymakers would be understandably reticent to invest time and resources in any deal that Trump could again scuttle at a moment’s notice.

    Trump, too, is scornful of what European diplomacy could achieve, declaring recently that Iran doesn’t want to talk to Europe. He has instead prioritized bilateral negotiations with Tehran. Alignment with the U.S., therefore, may not translate into any great influence. Trump’s decision to bomb Iran, after all, happened without forewarning for his allies.

    Thus, Europe will continue to pay close attention to Iran’s nuclear program. But, constrained by poor relations with Tehran and its internal divisions on the Middle East, it is unlikely that it will carve out a major role on the nuclear dossier as long as Trump is in office.

    Garret Martin receives funding from the European Union for the organization, the Transatlantic Policy Center, that he co-directs.

    – ref. Europe is stuck in a bystander role over Iran’s nuclear program after US, Israeli bombs establish facts on the ground – https://theconversation.com/europe-is-stuck-in-a-bystander-role-over-irans-nuclear-program-after-us-israeli-bombs-establish-facts-on-the-ground-260740

    MIL OSI –

  • MIL-OSI Submissions: Angels, witches, crystals and black cats: How supernatural beliefs vary across different groups in the US

    Source: The Conversation – USA (3) – By Christopher P. Scheitle, Associate Professor of Sociology, West Virginia University

    Education, income and demographics shape our views of the unseen world, a survey found. karetoria/Collection Moment via Getty Images

    Younger Americans are more likely to express belief in witchcraft and luck, as our new research shows.

    As sociologists who research the social dynamics of religion in the United States, we conducted a nationally representative survey in 2021. Our survey posed dozens of questions to 2,000 Americans over the age of 18 on a wide range of beliefs in supernatural phenomena – everything from belief in the devil to belief in the magical power of crystals.

    Our statistical analyses found that supernatural beliefs in the United States tend to group into four types.

    The first represents what many consider “traditional religious beliefs.” These include beliefs in God, the existence of angels and demons, and belief in the soul and its journey beyond this lifetime.

    A second represents belief in “spiritual and mental forces,” some of which are associated with either paranormal or new age beliefs. These include communicating with the dead, predicting the future, or believing that one’s soul can travel through space or time.

    A third group represents belief in “witches and witchcraft.” This was measured on our survey with questions about the existence of “black magic” and whether it was “possible to cast spells on people.”

    The fourth and final group represents beliefs in supernatural forces that shape “luck” – for instance, that “black cats bring bad luck.”

    Our analysis finds that higher education and higher income are associated with lower levels of all four types of supernatural belief. Those with a bachelor’s degree or higher, for instance, score below average on all four types of belief, while those with less education score higher than average on all four.

    Looking at race and ethnicity, we found that Latino or Hispanic individuals were more likely than white individuals to express belief in the “witches and witchcraft” form of supernatural belief. About 50% of Latino or Hispanic individuals in our survey, for example, strongly agreed that “witches exist.” This compares with about 37% of white individuals.

    Comparing gender differences, we find that women are more likely than men to believe in the “spiritual and mental forces” forms of supernatural belief. For instance, about 31% of women in our survey agreed that “it is possible to communicate with the dead” compared with about 22% of men.

    Why it matters

    Our research addresses two key questions: first, whether people who hold one type of supernatural belief are also more likely to hold other types of supernatural beliefs; and second, how do different types of supernatural belief vary across key demographic groups, such as across educational levels, racial and ethnic groups, and gender?

    Answering these questions can be surprisingly difficult. Most scientific surveys of the U.S. public include, at best, only one or two questions about religious beliefs; rarely do they include questions about other types of supernatural beliefs, such as belief in paranormal or superstitious forces. This could lead to an incomplete understanding of how supernatural beliefs and practices are changing in the United States.

    An increasing number of Americans are leaving organized religion. However, it is not clear that supernatural beliefs have or will follow the same trajectory – especially beliefs that are not explicitly connected to those religious identities. For example, someone can identify as nonreligious but believe that the crystal they wear will provide them with supernatural benefits.

    Moreover, recognizing that supernatural beliefs can include more than traditionally religious supernatural beliefs may be vital for better understanding other social issues. Research has found, for example, that belief in paranormal phenomena is associated with lower trust in science and medicine.

    What’s next

    Our survey provides some insight into the nature and patterns of supernatural belief in the U.S. at one point in time, but it does not tell us how such beliefs are changing over time.

    We would like to see future surveys – both ours or from other social scientists – that ask more diverse questions about belief in supernatural beings and forces that will allow for an assessment of such changes.

    The Research Brief is a short take on interesting academic work.

    Christopher P. Scheitle receives funding from the National Science Foundation and the John Templeton Foundation. The research discussed in this article was supported by a grant from the Science and Religion: Identity and Belief Formation grant initiative spearheaded by the Religion and Public Life Program at Rice University and the University of California-San Diego and provided by the Templeton Religion Trust via The Issachar Fund.

    Bernard DiGregorio receives funding from the National Science Foundation. The research discussed in this article was funded by a grant from the Science and Religion: Identity and Belief Formation grant initiative spearheaded by the Religion and Public Life Program at Rice University and the University of California-San Diego and provided by the Templeton Religion Trust via The Issachar Fund.

    Katie E. Corcoran receives funding from the National Science Foundation, the John Templeton Foundation, and the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute. The research discussed in this article was supported by a grant from the Science and Religion: Identity and Belief Formation grant initiative spearheaded by the Religion and Public Life Program at Rice University and the University of California-San Diego and provided by the Templeton Religion Trust via The Issachar Fund.

    – ref. Angels, witches, crystals and black cats: How supernatural beliefs vary across different groups in the US – https://theconversation.com/angels-witches-crystals-and-black-cats-how-supernatural-beliefs-vary-across-different-groups-in-the-us-258377

    MIL OSI –

  • MIL-OSI Submissions: Energy Sector – Equinor’s second quarter 2025 safety results

    Source: Equinor

    16 JULY 2025 – Equinor’s long-term positive safety trend is reinforced through the second quarter of 2025. The total number of serious incidents and personal injuries per million hours worked is at the lowest level the company has ever experienced at the end of the second quarter.

    At the end of the second quarter of 2025, the serious incident frequency per million hours worked (SIF) was 0.27*, an improvement from the first quarter of 2025. Serious personal injuries are also included in the serious incident statistics.

    “Systematic and long-term cooperation has been the key to our efforts over time to improve overall safety results through prevention of major accidents and serious personal injuries. Safety results are created and achieved on a daily basis. We have also experienced incidents that we need to learn from. Our cooperation with our suppliers, our employees and employee representatives is important to ensure that we can maintain this trend,” says Jannicke Nilsson, executive vice president for safety, security and sustainability.

    As of the second quarter, the frequency of personal injuries per million hours worked (TRIF) is 2.2 for the last 12 months, the same level as in the first quarter 2025.

    Five oil and gas leaks were recorded over the last 12 months, the same level as in the first quarter. These leaks are classified according to the degree of severity in relation to the discharge rate.

    There have been no incidents with major accident potential or serious well control incidents in the second quarter.

    Preventive work

    Through the “Always Safe” annual wheel, Equinor is working with other operating companies and suppliers to enhance understanding of factors that get in the way of safe work. Working safely at heights is the topic for the “Always Safe” learning package for the third quarter. This builds on preventing personal injuries, which was the topic for the second quarter.

    Investigating working conditions at Hammerfest LNG

    During the second quarter, we opened two internal investigations at Hammerfest LNG. The first is linked to a falling accident in April and will also include associated reports regarding the culture of safety and working environment. The second is an investigation of exposure incidents in the L201 area in the summer of 2024, 9 April and 13 June 2025, where personnel reported symptoms of unknown origin. The Norwegian Ocean Industry Authority is also investigating these incidents.

    * As of the first quarter of 2025, SIF is being reported with two decimals to better reflect minor changes in the frequency.

    MIL OSI – Submitted News –

  • MIL-OSI Submissions: Mozambique: Increasing violence is severely compromising access to healthcare in Cabo Delgado – MSF

    Source: Médecins Sans Frontières/Doctors Without Borders (MSF)

    Pemba, 16 July 2025 – As Cabo Delgado experiences an alarming rise in violence, access to healthcare for communities in vulnerable circumstances is being severely compromised.

    Nearly eight years of conflict in northern Mozambique has already taken a huge toll on people living in the province, where more than 400,000 people are displaced. Fighting and insecurity have led to the forced reduction of medical activities and have limited the movements of health workers and the communities in the affected areas. Médecins Sans Frontières/Doctors Without Borders (MSF) is calling for the protection of medical workers and health facilities from violence, and to ensure a coordinated humanitarian response in places experiencing a surge of needs due to the arrival of displaced people.

    To date in 2025, 43,000 people have been displaced following attacks and violent incidents. Over 134,000 people were affected by violence in May alone, according to an OCHA report. This is the most significant rise in violence since June 2022. Many of these recent violent incidents took place in the district of Macomia, Mocímboa da Praia, Muidumbe and Meluco, and even spread to neighbouring Niassa province.

    Macomia, a major town in central Cabo Delgado, was attacked by a non-state armed group in May 2024, forcing MSF, as well as other humanitarian organizations, to stop or suspend activities. We were gradually able to resume operations in April 2025. More than a year after the attack, only one health facility is operational in the district, compared to the seven health centers that were functional before.

    “With the increase in displacements, many people have come to seek refuge in Macomia, overwhelming the only functional health center,” says Dr. Emerson Finiose, an MSF medical doctor in Macomia. “We’re struggling to do medical referrals. We must prioritize the most severe cases, leaving a significant gap in care for the rest of the community.”

    The situation in Macomia illustrates the fragility of the health system in Cabo Delgado, a pattern repeated across the three other districts where MSF is present: Mocímboa da Praia, Mueda and Palma. Since the conflict began, more than fifty percent of the province’s health facilities have been completely or partially destroyed, according to official data. The situation got worse when Cyclone Chido struck southern parts of Cabo Delgado late last year.

    At the same time, many health facilities are non-functional due to the absence of health workers. Services are frequently suspended or reduced, particularly in hard-to-reach areas, and many of the functional facilities are under-resourced or located too far for many people to access safely.

    In 2025, MSF was forced to suspend outreach activities five times due to insecurity, for at least two weeks at a time, particularly in Macomia and Mocímboa da Praia. This left thousands of people without access to healthcare and jeopardized the continuity of care for patients.

    MSF teams provide basic healthcare, treatment for HIV and TB, sexual and reproductive health services, mental health support as well as maternity and pediatric care. We also carry out donations of medicines and medical supplies and provide water and sanitation services. Between January and May 2025, MSF carried out a monthly average of 18,000 medical consultations (both inpatient and outpatient), 30 referrals of patients in need of specialized care and 740 deliveries were assisted across the four districts where we operate.

    The limitations – and sometimes inability – to offer care due to this volatile context has a deep impact on the community. This is evident in our medical data: in April, our teams in Mocímboa da Praia carried out 12,236 outpatient consultations. In May, as incidents intensified, that number dropped drastically to 1,951.

    A crucial part of MSF’s response is carried out by health promotion teams and community health workers known as APEs (Agentes Polivalentes Elementares). They work with communities to share essential health information and promote healthy practices, such as handwashing and water treatment to prevent waterborne diseases. MSF trains some of these workers to identify and treat common diseases, such as malaria, a leading cause of death in the region, and to process the referral of patients in need of specialized care.

    “Sharing health information is very important in times of conflict, when many people are psychologically affected,” says Fatima Abudo Laíde, an MSF health promoter at the Malinde community, Mocímboa da Praia district.  “Sometimes a person is sick but can’t be open, because emotionally they’re not well. I help them seek treatment at the nearest health center, so they’re not isolated. I’ve faced difficult situations, like accompanying a woman in labor at three in the morning, even though I felt unsafe. But we’re here to support our community, to overcome fear, and to make sure no one is left without help.”

    In addition to suffering acute psychological distress and trauma, some patients are forced to interrupt their treatments. This is particularly concerning for pregnant women, older adults, people with disabilities, and people living with chronic conditions or HIV.

    “I remember a case in Mbau community where a pregnant woman went into labor late at night,” says Sunga Antônio, an MSF midwife at the Rural Hospital of Mocímboa da Praia. “The health promoter called us for help, but it was too late and risky to evacuate her. She gave birth in the community, and we could only take her to the hospital by morning. Sadly, she fell into a coma, likely from complications, as she was carrying twins. If the local health center had been functional, she could have received timely care and had a safe delivery.”

    Recent cuts in humanitarian aid have intensified the deteriorating situation in Cabo Delgado. These funding shortfalls illustrate the broader global issue: the collective ability to respond to people’s needs is collapsing across all sectors and organizations. “Cabo Delgado’s conflict has become a severe humanitarian crisis,” says Dr. Finiose. “It affects every aspect of life, especially healthcare and education, and it strips people of their dignity. We need safe access to communities in need and we need support from other actors so we can help them cope with the consequences of this crisis.”

    MSF is an international, medical, humanitarian organisation that delivers medical care to people in need, regardless of their origin, religion, or political affiliation. MSF has been working in Haiti for over 30 years, offering general healthcare, trauma care, burn wound care, maternity care, and care for survivors of sexual violence. MSF Australia was established in 1995 and is one of 24 international MSF sections committed to delivering medical humanitarian assistance to people in crisis. In 2022, more than 120 project staff from Australia and New Zealand worked with MSF on assignment overseas. MSF delivers medical care based on need alone and operates independently of government, religion or economic influence and irrespective of race, religion or gender. For more information visit msf.org.au  

    MIL OSI – Submitted News –

  • MIL-OSI Submissions: Australia – New foundation aims to give refugee communities a voice – AMES

    Source: AMES

    Supporting vulnerable refugees, advocating for, and building the capacity of grass roots refugee communities is the mission of a new not-for-profit organisation.

    The RCAA Foundation is a refugee driven organisation that also aims to give refugees with lived experience a voice to government and in national conversations.

    The inaugural foundation chair is settlement sector veteran and the retiring CEO of settlement agency AMES Australia Cath Scarth.

    An extension of the Refugee Communities Association of Australia, the bi-partisan foundation aims to work with grass roots refugee communities in Australia to build their capacity, advocacy and agency.

    Ms Scarth said the foundation was about self-determination and agency for refugee communities.

    “The foundation is an opportunity to build capacity within refugee communities to help them devise and deliver their own solutions to the challenges they face,” Ms Scarth said.

    “We saw during the COVID pandemic the ability of refugee communities to rise above challenges and support each other.

    “The foundation is also an opportunity for people who are not from refugee communities to play a part in supporting them,” Ms Scarth said.

     RCAA Foundation director Parsu Sharma Luital said the Foundation’s aim was “to incorporate the authentic, grassroots voices of refugees directly into key national discussions”.

    “The foundation aims to make our community work sustainable. We want to create opportunities to source resources that support refugee communities and empower them to have a voice in decisions that affect their lives.

    “Many people don’t understand that refugees are making positive contributions to Australia economically and socially. Part of the work of the foundation will be to change that.

    “Many people also think that refugees come with problems and challenges. But they also come with solutions, skills, expertise and the opportunity to put forward and implement those solutions could materially benefit many lives,” Mr Sharma Luital said.

    Fellow foundation director Elijah Buol OAM said the foundation was an extension of RCAA’s work in supporting refugee communities.

    “Our mission is to support refugees and people seeking asylum and to empower them as well as to provide resources and financial support so they can achieve their goals and aspirations and fulfil their potential,” Mr Buol said.

    The foundation’s constitution states its object is “to provide direct assistance to people in Australia who are disadvantaged by poverty, illness, suffering, distress, misfortune, disability, destitution or helplessness so as to arouse compassion in the community, with a particular emphasis on migrants, refugees, asylum seekers and people from a culturally and linguistically diverse backgrounds who are at financial risk or in other vulnerable circumstances”.

    RCAA is the national peak body for grass roots refugee communities.

    MIL OSI – Submitted News –

  • MIL-OSI Submissions: Australia – New foundation aims to give refugee communities a voice – AMES

    Source: AMES

    Supporting vulnerable refugees, advocating for, and building the capacity of grass roots refugee communities is the mission of a new not-for-profit organisation.

    The RCAA Foundation is a refugee driven organisation that also aims to give refugees with lived experience a voice to government and in national conversations.

    The inaugural foundation chair is settlement sector veteran and the retiring CEO of settlement agency AMES Australia Cath Scarth.

    An extension of the Refugee Communities Association of Australia, the bi-partisan foundation aims to work with grass roots refugee communities in Australia to build their capacity, advocacy and agency.

    Ms Scarth said the foundation was about self-determination and agency for refugee communities.

    “The foundation is an opportunity to build capacity within refugee communities to help them devise and deliver their own solutions to the challenges they face,” Ms Scarth said.

    “We saw during the COVID pandemic the ability of refugee communities to rise above challenges and support each other.

    “The foundation is also an opportunity for people who are not from refugee communities to play a part in supporting them,” Ms Scarth said.

     RCAA Foundation director Parsu Sharma Luital said the Foundation’s aim was “to incorporate the authentic, grassroots voices of refugees directly into key national discussions”.

    “The foundation aims to make our community work sustainable. We want to create opportunities to source resources that support refugee communities and empower them to have a voice in decisions that affect their lives.

    “Many people don’t understand that refugees are making positive contributions to Australia economically and socially. Part of the work of the foundation will be to change that.

    “Many people also think that refugees come with problems and challenges. But they also come with solutions, skills, expertise and the opportunity to put forward and implement those solutions could materially benefit many lives,” Mr Sharma Luital said.

    Fellow foundation director Elijah Buol OAM said the foundation was an extension of RCAA’s work in supporting refugee communities.

    “Our mission is to support refugees and people seeking asylum and to empower them as well as to provide resources and financial support so they can achieve their goals and aspirations and fulfil their potential,” Mr Buol said.

    The foundation’s constitution states its object is “to provide direct assistance to people in Australia who are disadvantaged by poverty, illness, suffering, distress, misfortune, disability, destitution or helplessness so as to arouse compassion in the community, with a particular emphasis on migrants, refugees, asylum seekers and people from a culturally and linguistically diverse backgrounds who are at financial risk or in other vulnerable circumstances”.

    RCAA is the national peak body for grass roots refugee communities.

    MIL OSI – Submitted News –

  • MIL-OSI Submissions: Australia – New foundation aims to give refugee communities a voice – AMES

    Source: AMES

    Supporting vulnerable refugees, advocating for, and building the capacity of grass roots refugee communities is the mission of a new not-for-profit organisation.

    The RCAA Foundation is a refugee driven organisation that also aims to give refugees with lived experience a voice to government and in national conversations.

    The inaugural foundation chair is settlement sector veteran and the retiring CEO of settlement agency AMES Australia Cath Scarth.

    An extension of the Refugee Communities Association of Australia, the bi-partisan foundation aims to work with grass roots refugee communities in Australia to build their capacity, advocacy and agency.

    Ms Scarth said the foundation was about self-determination and agency for refugee communities.

    “The foundation is an opportunity to build capacity within refugee communities to help them devise and deliver their own solutions to the challenges they face,” Ms Scarth said.

    “We saw during the COVID pandemic the ability of refugee communities to rise above challenges and support each other.

    “The foundation is also an opportunity for people who are not from refugee communities to play a part in supporting them,” Ms Scarth said.

     RCAA Foundation director Parsu Sharma Luital said the Foundation’s aim was “to incorporate the authentic, grassroots voices of refugees directly into key national discussions”.

    “The foundation aims to make our community work sustainable. We want to create opportunities to source resources that support refugee communities and empower them to have a voice in decisions that affect their lives.

    “Many people don’t understand that refugees are making positive contributions to Australia economically and socially. Part of the work of the foundation will be to change that.

    “Many people also think that refugees come with problems and challenges. But they also come with solutions, skills, expertise and the opportunity to put forward and implement those solutions could materially benefit many lives,” Mr Sharma Luital said.

    Fellow foundation director Elijah Buol OAM said the foundation was an extension of RCAA’s work in supporting refugee communities.

    “Our mission is to support refugees and people seeking asylum and to empower them as well as to provide resources and financial support so they can achieve their goals and aspirations and fulfil their potential,” Mr Buol said.

    The foundation’s constitution states its object is “to provide direct assistance to people in Australia who are disadvantaged by poverty, illness, suffering, distress, misfortune, disability, destitution or helplessness so as to arouse compassion in the community, with a particular emphasis on migrants, refugees, asylum seekers and people from a culturally and linguistically diverse backgrounds who are at financial risk or in other vulnerable circumstances”.

    RCAA is the national peak body for grass roots refugee communities.

    MIL OSI – Submitted News –

  • MIL-OSI Submissions: Trump free to begin gutting Department of Education after Supreme Court ‘shadow’ ruling − 5 essential reads

    Source: The Conversation – USA (2) – By Bryan Keogh, Managing Editor

    Protesters gather during a demonstration at the headquarters of the Department of Education in Washington. AP Photo/Mark Schiefelbein

    The Trump administration was given the green light by the Supreme Court on July 14, 2025, to proceed with mass layoffs at the Department of Education – part of a wider plan to dismantle the agency. In doing so, the conservative majority on the bench overruled a lower court judge that had blocked the move.

    While the court didn’t explain its decision – and didn’t rule on the merits of the case – Justice Sonia Sotomayor, one of the three liberal justices who objected, issued a strongly worded dissent: “When the Executive publicly announces its intent to break the law, and then executes on that promise, it is the Judiciary’s duty to check that lawlessness, not expedite it.”

    The Conversation has been following the administration’s efforts to take apart the Department of Education since President Donald Trump won the presidential election in November. Here are a few stories from our archives that explain the executive order targeting the department, why the agency has been in the crosshairs of conservatives, and some of the impacts of carrying out the order.

    1. Hollowing out education

    Trump has promised to eliminate the Department of Education since at least September 2023. What started out as a campaign promise eventually became the executive order he issued on March 20, 2025, released shortly after the administration announced plans to lay off about 1,300 of the 4,000 employees in the department.

    “Although the president has broad executive authority, there are many things he cannot order by himself,” wrote Joshua Cowen, a professor of education policy at Michigan State University. “And one of those is the dismantling of a Cabinet agency created by law. But he seems determined to hollow the agency out.”

    And that’s what the Supreme Court says he can do while the case plays out in lower courts. Ultimately, Trump’s order creates a lot of “legal and policy uncertainty around funding for children in local schools and communities.”



    Read more:
    Mass layoffs at Education Department signal Trump’s plan to gut the agency

    Secretary of Education Linda McMahon is responsible for carrying out Trump’s executive order.
    AP Photo/Rod Lamkey Jr.

    2. What the education secretary normally does

    The person directed to actually carry our the president’s order is the education secretary, Linda McMahon. She has called dismantling the department its “final mission.”

    But the secretary – and the department – have many other missions, such as managing students loans and administering Title I funding to help schools serving low-income students obtain an equitable education regardless of their socioeconomic status.

    “Every child in the United States is required to attend school in some capacity, and what happens at the federal level can have real-world impacts on students ranging from preschool to grad school,” wrote Dustin Hornbeck, a scholar of educational policy at the University of Memphis.

    In his article, Hornbeck explored the key duties of the education secretary and the role of the federal government in education, which he argued will continue even if the Education Department is abolished.



    Read more:
    US secretary of education helps set national priorities in a system primarily funded and guided by local governments

    3. Why MAGA targeted the department

    So why did Trump decide getting rid of the Education Department was a top priority and worth the legal risks?

    Fighting what he perceived as “wokeness” was likely one reason, wrote Alex Hinton, an anthropologist who has been studying U.S. political culture at Rutgers University − Newark.

    “First and foremost, Trump and his supporters believe that liberals are ruining public education by instituting what they call a ‘radical woke agenda’ that they say prioritizes identity politics and politically correct groupthink at the expense of the free speech of those, like many conservatives, who have different views,” he explains.

    Trump’s battle against DEI – or diversity, equity and inclusion – is of course a big part of that, but so too are what he and his supporters call “radical” race and gender policies.

    Hinton goes on to describe three other reasons – including supposed “Marxist indoctrination” and school choice – he argues that the MAGA faithful want to eliminate the Department of Education.



    Read more:
    Trump orders a plan to close Education Department – an anthropologist who studies MAGA explains 4 reasons why Trump and his supporters want to eliminate it

    4. It didn’t begin with Trump

    But conservative efforts to gut the department didn’t begin with Trump or MAGA. In fact, the Heritage Foundation, which created the Project 2025 blueprint for remaking the federal government, has been trying to limit or end its role in education since at least 1981 – just two years after the Department of Education was created.

    “In its 1981 mandate, the Heritage Foundation struck now-familiar themes,” including closing the Department of Education and ending funding for disadvantaged students, wrote Fred L. Pincus, a sociology professor focused on diversity and social inequality at the University of Maryland, Baltimore County. “And the Heritage Foundation called for ending federal support for programs it claimed were designed to ‘turn elementary- and secondary-school classrooms into vehicles for liberal-left social and political change.’”

    The conservative think tank struck similar themes in its Project 2025 playbook, though it went even further in calling out “leftist indoctrination” and “gender ideology extremism,” Pincus noted.



    Read more:
    Trump’s executive order to dismantle the Education Department was inspired by the Heritage Foundation’s decades-long disapproval of the agency

    Changes at the Department of Education will have a big impact on students across the country.
    skynesher/E+ via Getty Images

    5. Impact on most vulnerable students

    After all the already planned layoffs go into effect, the Department of Education will have roughly half the staff it started the year with. That will have a significant impact on its ability to carry out its many tasks, such as managing federal loans for college and tracking student achievement.

    The department also enforces civil rights for schools and universities, and that office has been hit especially hard by the job cuts, wrote education professors Erica Frankenberg of Penn State and Maithreyi Gopalan of the University of Oregon.

    “The Office for Civil Rights has played an important role in facilitating equitable education for all students,” they wrote. “The full effects of these changes on the most vulnerable public school students will likely be felt for many years.”



    Read more:
    Big cuts at the Education Department’s civil rights office will affect vulnerable students for years to come

    This story is a roundup of articles from The Conversation’s archives.

    – ref. Trump free to begin gutting Department of Education after Supreme Court ‘shadow’ ruling − 5 essential reads – https://theconversation.com/trump-free-to-begin-gutting-department-of-education-after-supreme-court-shadow-ruling-5-essential-reads-261218

    MIL OSI –

  • MIL-OSI Submissions: Trump free to begin gutting Department of Education after Supreme Court ‘shadow’ ruling − 5 essential reads

    Source: The Conversation – USA (2) – By Bryan Keogh, Managing Editor

    Protesters gather during a demonstration at the headquarters of the Department of Education in Washington. AP Photo/Mark Schiefelbein

    The Trump administration was given the green light by the Supreme Court on July 14, 2025, to proceed with mass layoffs at the Department of Education – part of a wider plan to dismantle the agency. In doing so, the conservative majority on the bench overruled a lower court judge that had blocked the move.

    While the court didn’t explain its decision – and didn’t rule on the merits of the case – Justice Sonia Sotomayor, one of the three liberal justices who objected, issued a strongly worded dissent: “When the Executive publicly announces its intent to break the law, and then executes on that promise, it is the Judiciary’s duty to check that lawlessness, not expedite it.”

    The Conversation has been following the administration’s efforts to take apart the Department of Education since President Donald Trump won the presidential election in November. Here are a few stories from our archives that explain the executive order targeting the department, why the agency has been in the crosshairs of conservatives, and some of the impacts of carrying out the order.

    1. Hollowing out education

    Trump has promised to eliminate the Department of Education since at least September 2023. What started out as a campaign promise eventually became the executive order he issued on March 20, 2025, released shortly after the administration announced plans to lay off about 1,300 of the 4,000 employees in the department.

    “Although the president has broad executive authority, there are many things he cannot order by himself,” wrote Joshua Cowen, a professor of education policy at Michigan State University. “And one of those is the dismantling of a Cabinet agency created by law. But he seems determined to hollow the agency out.”

    And that’s what the Supreme Court says he can do while the case plays out in lower courts. Ultimately, Trump’s order creates a lot of “legal and policy uncertainty around funding for children in local schools and communities.”



    Read more:
    Mass layoffs at Education Department signal Trump’s plan to gut the agency

    Secretary of Education Linda McMahon is responsible for carrying out Trump’s executive order.
    AP Photo/Rod Lamkey Jr.

    2. What the education secretary normally does

    The person directed to actually carry our the president’s order is the education secretary, Linda McMahon. She has called dismantling the department its “final mission.”

    But the secretary – and the department – have many other missions, such as managing students loans and administering Title I funding to help schools serving low-income students obtain an equitable education regardless of their socioeconomic status.

    “Every child in the United States is required to attend school in some capacity, and what happens at the federal level can have real-world impacts on students ranging from preschool to grad school,” wrote Dustin Hornbeck, a scholar of educational policy at the University of Memphis.

    In his article, Hornbeck explored the key duties of the education secretary and the role of the federal government in education, which he argued will continue even if the Education Department is abolished.



    Read more:
    US secretary of education helps set national priorities in a system primarily funded and guided by local governments

    3. Why MAGA targeted the department

    So why did Trump decide getting rid of the Education Department was a top priority and worth the legal risks?

    Fighting what he perceived as “wokeness” was likely one reason, wrote Alex Hinton, an anthropologist who has been studying U.S. political culture at Rutgers University − Newark.

    “First and foremost, Trump and his supporters believe that liberals are ruining public education by instituting what they call a ‘radical woke agenda’ that they say prioritizes identity politics and politically correct groupthink at the expense of the free speech of those, like many conservatives, who have different views,” he explains.

    Trump’s battle against DEI – or diversity, equity and inclusion – is of course a big part of that, but so too are what he and his supporters call “radical” race and gender policies.

    Hinton goes on to describe three other reasons – including supposed “Marxist indoctrination” and school choice – he argues that the MAGA faithful want to eliminate the Department of Education.



    Read more:
    Trump orders a plan to close Education Department – an anthropologist who studies MAGA explains 4 reasons why Trump and his supporters want to eliminate it

    4. It didn’t begin with Trump

    But conservative efforts to gut the department didn’t begin with Trump or MAGA. In fact, the Heritage Foundation, which created the Project 2025 blueprint for remaking the federal government, has been trying to limit or end its role in education since at least 1981 – just two years after the Department of Education was created.

    “In its 1981 mandate, the Heritage Foundation struck now-familiar themes,” including closing the Department of Education and ending funding for disadvantaged students, wrote Fred L. Pincus, a sociology professor focused on diversity and social inequality at the University of Maryland, Baltimore County. “And the Heritage Foundation called for ending federal support for programs it claimed were designed to ‘turn elementary- and secondary-school classrooms into vehicles for liberal-left social and political change.’”

    The conservative think tank struck similar themes in its Project 2025 playbook, though it went even further in calling out “leftist indoctrination” and “gender ideology extremism,” Pincus noted.



    Read more:
    Trump’s executive order to dismantle the Education Department was inspired by the Heritage Foundation’s decades-long disapproval of the agency

    Changes at the Department of Education will have a big impact on students across the country.
    skynesher/E+ via Getty Images

    5. Impact on most vulnerable students

    After all the already planned layoffs go into effect, the Department of Education will have roughly half the staff it started the year with. That will have a significant impact on its ability to carry out its many tasks, such as managing federal loans for college and tracking student achievement.

    The department also enforces civil rights for schools and universities, and that office has been hit especially hard by the job cuts, wrote education professors Erica Frankenberg of Penn State and Maithreyi Gopalan of the University of Oregon.

    “The Office for Civil Rights has played an important role in facilitating equitable education for all students,” they wrote. “The full effects of these changes on the most vulnerable public school students will likely be felt for many years.”



    Read more:
    Big cuts at the Education Department’s civil rights office will affect vulnerable students for years to come

    This story is a roundup of articles from The Conversation’s archives.

    – ref. Trump free to begin gutting Department of Education after Supreme Court ‘shadow’ ruling − 5 essential reads – https://theconversation.com/trump-free-to-begin-gutting-department-of-education-after-supreme-court-shadow-ruling-5-essential-reads-261218

    MIL OSI –

  • MIL-OSI Submissions: Florida is fronting the $450M cost of Alligator Alcatraz – a legal scholar explains what we still don’t know about the detainees

    Source: The Conversation – USA – By Mark Schlakman, Senior Program Director, The Florida State University Center for the Advancement of Human Rights, Florida State University

    Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis leads a tour of the new Alligator Alcatraz immigration detention facility for President Donald Trump and U.S. Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem. Andrew Cabellero-Reynolds/AFP via Getty Images

    The state of Florida has opened a migrant detention center in the Everglades. Its official name is Alligator Alcatraz, a reference to the former maximum security federal penitentiary in San Francisco Bay.

    While touring Alligator Alcatraz on July 1, 2025, President Donald Trump said, “This facility will house some of the menacing migrants, some of the most vicious people on the planet.” But new reporting from the Miami Herald/Tampa Bay Times reveals that of more than 700 detainees, only a third have criminal convictions.

    To find out more about the state of Florida’s involvement in immigration enforcement and who can be detained at Alligator Alcatraz, The Conversation spoke with Mark Schlakman. Schlakman is a lawyer and senior program director for The Florida State University Center for the Advancement of Human Rights. He also served as special counsel to Florida Gov. Lawton Chiles, working as a liaison of sorts with the federal government during the mid-1990s when tens of thousands of Haitians and Cubans fled their island nations on makeshift boats, hoping to reach safe haven in Florida.

    U.S. Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem has characterized the migrants being detained in facilities like Alligator Alcatraz as “murderers and rapists and traffickers and drug dealers.” Do we know if the detainees at Alligator Alcatraz have been convicted of these sorts of crimes?

    The Times/Herald published a list of 747 current detainees as of Sunday, July 13, 2025. Their reporters found that about a third of the detainees have criminal convictions, including attempted murder, illegal reentry to the U.S., which is a federal crime, and traffic violations. Apparently hundreds more have charges pending, though neither the federal nor state government have made public what those charges are.

    There are also more than 250 detainees with no criminal history, just immigration violations.

    Is it a crime for someone to be in the U.S. without legal status? In other words, is an immigration violation a crime?

    No, not necessarily. It’s well established as a matter of law that physical presence in the U.S. without proper authorization is a civil violation, not a criminal offense.

    However, if the federal government previously deported someone, they can be subject to federal criminal prosecution if they attempt to return without permission. That appears to be the case with some of the detainees at Alligator Alcatraz.

    What usually happens if a noncitizen commits a crime in the U.S.?

    Normally, if a foreign national is accused of committing a crime, they are prosecuted in a state court just like anyone else. If found guilty and sentenced to incarceration, they complete their sentence in a state prison. Once they’ve served their time, state officials can hand them over to U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, or ICE. They are subject to deportation, but a federal immigration judge can hear any grounds for relief.

    DHS has clarified that it “has not implemented, authorized, directed or funded” Alligator Alcatraz, but rather the state of Florida is providing startup funds and running this facility. What is Florida’s interest in this? Are these mostly migrants who have been scooped up by ICE in Florida?

    It’s still unclear where most of these detainees were apprehended. But based on a list of six detainees released by Florida Attorney General James Uthmeier’s office, it is clear that at least some were apprehended outside of Florida, and others simply may have been transferred to Alligator Alcatraz from federal custody elsewhere.

    This calls to mind the time in 2022 when Gov. Ron DeSantis flew approximately 50 migrants from Texas to Martha’s Vineyard in Massachusetts at Florida taxpayer expense. Those migrants also had no discernible presence in Florida.

    To establish Alligator Alcatraz, DeSantis leveraged an immigration emergency declaration, which has been ongoing since Jan. 6, 2023. A state of emergency allows a governor to exercise extraordinary executive authority. This is how he avoided requirements such as environmental impact analysis in the Everglades and concerns expressed by tribal governance surrounding that area.

    For now, the governor’s declaration remains unchallenged by the Florida Legislature. Environmental advocates have filed a lawsuit over Alligator Alcatraz, and the U.S. Supreme Court upheld a decision by a federal judge temporarily barring Florida from enforcing its new immigration laws, which DeSantis had championed. But no court has yet intervened to contest this prolonged state of emergency.

    This presents a stark contrast to Gov. Lawton Chiles’ declaration of an immigration emergency during the mid-1990s. At that time, tens of thousands of Cubans and Haitians attempted to reach Florida shores in virtually anything that would float. Chiles’ actions as governor were informed by his experience as a U.S. senator during the Mariel boatlift in 1980, when 125,000 Cubans made landfall in Florida over the course of just six months.

    Chiles sued the Clinton administration for failing to adequately enforce U.S. immigration law. But Chiles also entered into unprecedented agreements with the federal government, such as the 1996 Florida Immigration Initiative with U.S. Attorney General Janet Reno. His intent was to protect Florida taxpayers while enhancing federal enforcement capacity, without dehumanizing people fleeing desperate circumstances.

    During my tenure on Chiles’ staff, the governor generally opposed state legislation involving immigration. In the U.S.’s federalist system of government, immigration falls under the purview of the federal government, not the states. Chiles’ primary concern was that Floridians wouldn’t be saddled with what ought to be federal costs and responsibilities.

    Chiles was open to state and local officials supporting federal immigration enforcement. But he was mindful this required finesse to avoid undermining community policing, public health priorities and the economic health of key Florida businesses and industries. To this day, the International Association of Chiefs of Police’s position reflects Chiles’ concerns about such cooperation with the federal government.

    Gov. Ron DeSantis outlines his plans for Alligator Alcatraz to the media on July 1, 2025.
    Andrew Caballero-Reynolds/AFP via Getty Images

    Now, in 2025, DeSantis has taken a decidedly different tack by using Florida taxpayer dollars to establish Alligator Alcatraz. The state of Florida has fronted the US$450 million to pay for this facility. DeSantis reportedly intends to seek reimbursement from FEMA’s Shelter and Services Program. Ultimately, congressional action may be necessary to obtain reimbursement. Florida is essentially lending the federal government half a billion dollars and providing other assistance to help support the Trump administration’s immigration enforcement agenda.

    Florida is also establishing another migrant detention facility at Camp Blanding Joint Training Center near Jacksonville. A third apparently is being contemplated for the Panhandle.

    ICE claims that the ultimate decision of whom to detain at these facilities belongs to the state of Florida, through the Florida Division of Emergency Management. Members of Congress who visited Alligator Alcatraz earlier this week have disputed ICE’s claim that Florida is in charge.

    You advised Florida Division of Emergency Management leadership directly for several years during the administrations of Gov. Charlie Crist and Gov. Rick Scott. Does running a detention facility like Alligator Alcatraz fall within its typical mission?

    The division is tasked with preparing for and responding to both natural and human-caused disasters. In Florida, that generally means hurricanes. While the division may engage to facilitate shelter, I don’t recall any policies or procedures contemplating anything even remotely similar to Alligator Alcatraz.

    DeSantis could conceivably argue that this is consistent with a 287(g) agreement authorizing state and local support for federal immigration enforcement. But such agreements typically require federal supervision of state and local activities, not the other way around.

    Mark Schlakman served as special counsel to Florida Gov. Lawton Chiles and as a consultant to Emilio Gonzalez at the U.S. Department of Homeland Security during his tenure as U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services Director during the George W. Bush administration.

    – ref. Florida is fronting the $450M cost of Alligator Alcatraz – a legal scholar explains what we still don’t know about the detainees – https://theconversation.com/florida-is-fronting-the-450m-cost-of-alligator-alcatraz-a-legal-scholar-explains-what-we-still-dont-know-about-the-detainees-260665

    MIL OSI –

  • MIL-OSI Submissions: How to give children the freedom to play all across the city – not just in playgrounds

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Michael Martin, Lecturer in Urban Design and Planning, University of Sheffield

    Co-created play space with children and the community, Via Val Lagarina Milan. Milan municipality

    Children play everywhere. Yet their right to play – protected by a UN convention – is constantly challenged by adults.

    Play is crucial to support children’s holistic development in cognitive, emotional, physical and social skills. Likewise, we know children’s environments significantly influence their health and wellbeing, for better or worse.

    But across cities, young people are let down by a built environment that fails to appropriately consider their needs.

    Places where children commonly used to play, such as streets and local neighbourhoods, have been transformed into car-only spaces where traffic and parking take priority. Likewise, city spaces frequently “design out” children by prohibiting skateboarding, ball games and other kinds of play.

    Over time, urban planning has confined children’s opportunities for play to dedicated playground spaces only.

    Get your news from actual experts, straight to your inbox. Sign up to our daily newsletter to receive all The Conversation UK’s latest coverage of news and research, from politics and business to the arts and sciences.

    However, children don’t have equal access to these formal play spaces. In the largest study of playgrounds in England, my colleagues and I found substantial inequalities in access to play. Children in the most deprived areas needed to travel further to their nearest playground.

    In new research, I’ve explored four international examples of how children and play can be promoted in less likely urban spaces. My findings show how play can be promoted in cities to support children’s right to play anywhere – but also that there is widespread hostility to children’s right to use urban spaces for play.

    Power of play

    In Sydney, a pedal park installation with temporary jumps, ramps and a pump track was set up in different car parks for the duration of the winter. In Paris, a play street was created in central Paris by closing road traffic on Friday afternoons in autumn and spring.

    In Belfast, temporary play equipment and playful street furniture was set up in the Cathedral Gardens public space.

    Cathedral Gardens pop-up play space in Belfast meaningfully encourages children to use the city.
    Park Hood Ltd.

    In Milan, a community-led design involved children in creating a colourful grid, planters, growing beds and games in a school car park, which went on to inspire a new municipal programme of temporary school streets and piazzas.

    These play spaces allowed children to play freely, play with objects, play pretend, play games with rules, and play physically – the core pillars of play. What’s more, they enabled children to develop new connections with their community by appropriating urban spaces to promote relaxation and fun. This was vital following the trauma of the global pandemic – all the projects were active during COVID-19 outside of lockdown.

    Intergenerational encounters at the weekly play street in the 3rd District of Paris.
    Rue’golotte

    These short-term projects invited children to enjoy urban life in new ways. In fact, they bolstered civic access for people of all generations. In Sydney, the closure of the car park fostered a new sense of community. Caregivers, grandparents and residents were able to connect with each other in a whole different setting.

    Children in Sydney play freely in a ‘pop-up pedal park’ created in a public car park.
    Randwick City Council

    Politics of play

    But despite the positives, over time, the projects faced protest and tension. In Milan, fears from residents emerged on play being used as a tool to displace poorer communities. This was in response to the area having long been earmarked for regeneration. In Sydney, Paris and Belfast, people actively targeted and sabotaged the informal play spaces.

    In Sydney, to park their cars, older citizens successfully lobbied local councillors to reduce the total amount of space for play, from the entire car park to one aisle of parking. In Paris, local businesses were exasperated by the presence of children. Collectively they threatened project initiators and staged a protest, claiming that “play streets kill local shops”. In Belfast, the pop-up play space was set on fire, multiple times. By summer 2022, much of the park had been destroyed.

    Destruction and criminal damage of the Cathedral Gardens play space in Belfast.
    Author

    The outcomes demonstrate the politics that children, and their play, were exposed to. Because of a range of aggressive behaviour from adults, children’s use of streets and public spaces were consistently restricted. A common statement from dissenters was “children can go elsewhere”. The reality is they can’t.

    In tracking informal play projects through the pandemic and subsequent years, two additional factors hampered their longer-term success. For the council projects in Sydney and Belfast, council officers hoped to direct more resources to urban play, but the lack of a specific local policy to support play was a significant constraint. By comparison, the community projects in Paris and Milan placed an unsustainable pressure on volunteers to ensure prolonged success.

    Lessons from previous crises highlight how tensions and conflict can affect innovative uses of space, often diluting their progressive purpose. Ultimately, children’s play in recovery from the pandemic experienced a similar fate.

    This is worrying because Unicef research has shown children’s wellbeing has continued to suffer after COVID-19.

    Places that allow for children’s play can create dynamic neighbourhoods, intergenerational encounters, and meaningful participation in urban spaces – if only we let it happen.

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

    – ref. How to give children the freedom to play all across the city – not just in playgrounds – https://theconversation.com/how-to-give-children-the-freedom-to-play-all-across-the-city-not-just-in-playgrounds-260444

    MIL OSI –

  • MIL-OSI Submissions: Why many Americans still think Darwin was wrong, yet the British don’t

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Edward White, PhD Candidate in Psychology, Kingston University

    One hundred years after a Tennessee teacher named John Scopes started a legal battle over what the state’s schools can teach children, Americans are still divided over evolution.

    Scopes was charged with violating Tennessee law by teaching evolution, in a highly publicised July 1925 trial that led to national debate over evolution and education. The trial tested whether a law introduced that year really could punish teachers over evolution lessons. It could and did: Scopes was fined US$100 (£74).

    But here’s the weird part: while Americans remain deeply divided about whether humans evolved from earlier species, our British predecessors largely settled this question decades before the Scopes trial.

    John Scopes one month before the Tennessee v. John T. Scopes Trial.
    Smithsonian Institution/ Watson Davis

    According to thinktank Pew Research Center data from 2020, only 64% of Americans accept that “humans and other living things have evolved over time”. Meanwhile, 73% of Brits are fine with the idea that they share a common ancestor with chimpanzees. That nine-percentage-point gap might not sound like much, but it represents millions of people who think Darwin was peddling fake news.

    From 1985 to 2010, Americans were in what researchers call a statistical dead heat between acceptance and rejection of evolution — which is academic speak for people couldn’t decide if we were descended from apes or Adam and Eve.

    Here’s where things get psychologically fascinating. Research into misinformation and cognitive biases suggests that fundamentalism operates on a principle known as motivated reasoning. This means selectively interpreting evidence to reach predetermined conclusions. And a 2018 review of social and computer science research also found that fake news seems to spread because it confirms what people already want to believe.

    Evolution denial may work the same way. Religious fundamentalism is what researchers call “the strongest predictor” for rejection of evolution. A 2019 study of 900 participants found that belief in fake news headlines was associated with delusionality, dogmatism, religious fundamentalism and reduced analytic thinking.

    Get your news from actual experts, straight to your inbox. Sign up to our daily newsletter to receive all The Conversation UK’s latest coverage of news and research, from politics and business to the arts and sciences.

    High personal religiosity, as seen in the US, reinforced by communities of like-minded believers, can create resistance to evolutionary science. This pattern is pronounced among Southern Baptists — the largest Protestant denomination in the US — where 61% believe the Bible is the literal word of God, compared to 31% of Americans overall. The persistence of this conflict is fuelled by organised creationist movements that reinforce religious scepticism.

    Brain imaging studies
    show that people with fundamentalist beliefs seem to have reduced activity in the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex — the brain region responsible for cognitive flexibility and analytical thinking. When this area is damaged or less active, people become more prone to accepting claims without sufficient evidence and show increased resistance to changing their beliefs when presented with contradictory information. Studies of brain-injured patients show damage to prefrontal networks that normally help us question information may lead to increased fundamentalist beliefs and reduced scepticism.

    Fundamentalist psychology helps explain the US position in international evolution acceptance surveys. In a 2006 study, of over 33,00 people from 34 countries from 34 countries, only Turkey ranked lower than the US, with about 27% accepting evolution compared to America’s 40% at the time. Among the developed nations surveyed, the US consistently ranks near the bottom — a pattern that persists in more recent international comparisons.

    Where did humans come from? Teaching children about evolution can be controversial, depending on where they live.
    vovan/Shutterstuck

    Research shows that political polarisation on evolution has historically been much stronger in the US than in Europe or Japan, where the issue rarely becomes a campaign talking point. In the US, anti-evolution bills are still being introduced in state legislatures.

    In the UK, belief in evolution became accepted among respectable clergymen around 1896, according to church historian Owen Chadwick’s analysis of Victorian christianity. But why did British religious institutions embrace science while American ones declared war?

    The answer lies in different approaches to intellectual challenges. British Anglicanism has a centuries-old tradition of seeking a “via media” — a middle way between extremes — that allowed church leaders to accommodate new ideas without abandoning core beliefs. Historian Peter documented how British religious leaders actively worked to reconcile science and religion, developing theological frameworks that embraced scientific discoveries as revealing God’s methods rather than contradicting divine authority.

    Anglican bishops and scholars tended to treat evolution as God’s method of creation rather than a threat to faith itself. The Church of England’s hierarchical structure meant that when educated clergy accepted evolution, the institutional framework often followed suit. A 2024 paper argued that many UK church leaders still view science and religion as complementary rather than conflicting.

    A different approach

    The British experience proves it’s possible to reconcile science and faith. But changing American minds requires understanding that evolution acceptance isn’t really about biology — it’s about identity, belonging, and the fundamental question of who gets to define truth. People don’t reject evolution because they’ve carefully studied the evidence. They reject it because it threatens their identity. This creates a context where education alone can’t overcome deeply held convictions.

    Misinformation intervention research suggests that inoculation strategies, such as highlighting the scientific consensus on climate change, work better than debunking individual articles. But evolution education needs to be sensitive. Consensus messaging helps, but only when it doesn’t threaten people’s core identities. For example, framing evolution as a function of “how” life develops, rather than “why it exists, allows for people to maintain religious belief while accepting the scientific evidence for natural selection.

    People’s views can change. A review published in 2024, analysed data which followed the same Gen X people in the US over 33 years. It found that, as they grew up, people developed more acceptance of evolution, though typically because of factors such as education and obtaining university degrees. But people who were taught at a private school seem less likely to become more accepting of evolution as they aged.

    As we face new waves of scientific misinformation, the century since the Scopes trial teaches us that evidence alone won’t necessarily change people’s minds. Understanding the psychology of belief might be our best hope for evolving past our own cognitive limitations.

    Edward White is affiliated with Kingston University.

    – ref. Why many Americans still think Darwin was wrong, yet the British don’t – https://theconversation.com/why-many-americans-still-think-darwin-was-wrong-yet-the-british-dont-260709

    MIL OSI –

  • MIL-OSI Submissions: Consolation, community, national identity: what is lost when pubs close – and how they can be saved

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Thomas Thurnell-Read, Reader in Sociology, Loughborough University

    William Perugini/Shutterstock

    Recent figures from the British Beer and Pub Association show that pubs will close at the rate of one a day in the UK during 2025. This is just the latest chapter in a familiar story – more than a quarter of British pubs have closed since 2000.

    The cost of running a pub has risen dramatically. The ingredients used to brew beer all cost more, as do the business rates, rents, duties, utilities and wages required to operate a welcoming venue in which to serve it. Some publicans have reported utility bills doubling in a matter of months.

    Many pubs occupy prime locations and high-value buildings, which, coupled with larger floor space, mean business rates can be high relative to turnover and profit.

    Meanwhile, food offerings which had provided many pubs with a profitable alternative to a drinks-only model have also been hit by rapid increases in costs. Supermarkets and delivery platforms now provide food and drink directly to consumers at prices few licenced venues can compete with. Even pubs that are economically viable are often more profitable converted into residential or retail space.

    These economic challenges accompany wider cultural trends, such as the continued prevalence of home working, changes in drinking habits and competition from alternative forms of in person and online leisure.

    We’ve researched pub closures in England and Wales to learn what the loss of pubs means for the communities who drink and gather in them.

    When pubs closed temporarily during COVID-19 lockdowns, many people realised that what they missed about pubs was not alcohol but the social contact pubs provided. Pubs have a clear social value. They offer a space for people to meet and interact and have been shown to help tackling loneliness and social isolation.

    Our research participants relayed stories of pub closure in relation to their own lives and communities:

    I’ve been consoled in there, I’ve consoled friends in there. We’ve chopped up family issues, work issues. We’ve drunk for the sake of drinking in there.

    Pubs help people feel connected to a local place. When they close, they can become sites of mourning, a painful reminder of change and decline. One resident of a former colliery village in Nottinghamshire said of the pub she had once worked in – now derelict, fire damaged and vandalised as it awaits redevelopment – that despite her wish that it had remained open it was now better to “knock it down” to “put us out of our misery”.

    For many, pubs are a sort of bellwether for wider anxiety about social and generational change. The loss of pubs speaks to where “we” might be heading as a nation or as a community. Our recent analysis of how the British press has reported on pub closures since 2000 shows that a sense of national identity under threat is a recurring theme.

    Both local and national newspapers have made repeated use of the word “our” in this context, warning readers of the grave threat to “our pubs” and “our heritage”, often invoking an idyllic image of rural life. However, much of this coverage has also praised the pub as a great leveller, as a place where people come together as a community to socialise despite their differences.

    Can pubs be saved?

    The Campaign for Real Ale, the leading consumer group for beer drinkers and pub goers, suggests changing planning and licensing laws to protect pubs at local and national levels, and more support and publicity for pubs to cater to changing markets.

    Others have more directly lobbied for duty cuts that give pubs a fighting chance against supermarkets benefiting from economies of scale, VAT exemptions and convenience.

    A hot meal served in a pub incurs a standard 20% rate of VAT, while a supermarket ready meal to be heated at home does not. The rationale for a tax cut to support pubs would rest on the social benefits they offer to communities, in contrast to supermarket-bought alcohol typically consumed at home.

    A boarded-up pub in Bristol.
    Thomas Turnell-Read

    The Localism Act 2011 gave communities the right to bid to take pubs into community ownership, designating them as assets of community value. Yet while there are some terrific examples of community-owned pubs becoming both thriving businesses and a revived focal point for communities, residents in poorer areas lack the resources to sustain viable campaigns.

    In one village in our study, a pub listed as a going concern at £500,000 in fact sold as a development plot for over £660,000. A viability study suggested that an investment of £225,000, plus working capital of at least £20,000, would be needed to reopen the pub. The residents we spoke to all conceded that a purchase was far beyond the modest resources of the local community.

    While the loss of so many pubs is shocking, it obscures the fact that when other licensed venues, such as bars, restaurants and licensed cafes are factored in, the downward trend is flattened – and even reversed in some areas. This suggests a long-term diversification of the sector – the pub is no longer the only option when going out for a drink.

    This may also reflect a feeling that other hospitality venues better cater to different people and groups who may feel less at home in traditional pubs. Some interviewees told us that they felt craft brewery taprooms were more welcoming and family friendly. Others found cafe-bars to have a more appealing mix of coffee, food and both alcoholic and non-alcoholic drinks.

    There’s a long history of pubs adapting to serve new needs and markets. Pub is the Hub, for example, has supported rural pubs to incorporate everything from village shops and libraries to pizza ovens and IT skills hubs. There have been promising experiments with fitting pubs for co-working and meeting space. And micropubs can continue to offer the benefits of a convivial social space, in a back-to-basics approach that reduces the costs of running bigger venues. Pubs can and must evolve.

    Thomas Thurnell-Read receives funding from The Leverhulme Trust.

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

    – ref. Consolation, community, national identity: what is lost when pubs close – and how they can be saved – https://theconversation.com/consolation-community-national-identity-what-is-lost-when-pubs-close-and-how-they-can-be-saved-260774

    MIL OSI –

  • MIL-OSI Submissions: Taurine could power your energy drink – and maybe cancer cells too. Here’s what you need to know

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Gulshanara (Rumy) Begum, Senior Lecturer in Nutrition & Exercise Science, University of Westminster

    shutterstock New Africa/Shutterstock

    Energy drinks are big business. Marketed as quick fixes for fatigue and performance dips, energy drinks are especially popular among young people, athletes, sports enthusiasts, and so-called “weekend warriors” – people who pack their workouts into the weekend instead of exercising regularly. Gamers are now a major target too.

    But as the market grows, so do concerns about what’s actually in these drinks – and what these ingredients might be doing to our bodies.

    Many energy drinks contain some combination of three familiar stimulants: caffeine, found naturally in coffee, tea and cacao; guarana, an Amazonian plant rich in caffeine; and taurine, a naturally occurring amino acid found in scallops, mussels, turkey and chicken.

    Taurine, in particular, has drawn both hype and hope. It is credited with performance-enhancing properties and potential health benefits. But new research is raising important questions about how it behaves in the body – and when it might do more harm than good.

    In May 2025, a study published in Nature sparked headlines and unease in equal measure. It found that taurine may fuel the progression of leukaemia, a group of blood cancers that begin in the bone marrow.

    The study showed that while healthy bone marrow cells naturally produce taurine, leukaemia cells cannot. But they can absorb taurine from their surroundings and use it as a fuel source to grow and multiply. Research on mice and in human leukaemia cell samples demonstrated that taurine in the tumour microenvironment – the area around a tumour that includes blood vessels, immune cells and structural support – accelerated the progression of leukaemia.

    Crucially, when researchers blocked taurine uptake by leukaemia cells (using genetic techniques), cancer progression slowed significantly. The authors suggest taurine supplements could potentially worsen outcomes in people with leukaemia and propose that developing targeted ways to block taurine uptake by cancer cells might offer a new treatment strategy.

    Taurine: friend or foe?

    Taurine is one of the most abundant free amino acids in the human body, found in especially high concentrations in the heart, muscles and brain. In healthy people, it’s mainly obtained through diet, but the body can also synthesise taurine from the amino acids methionine and cysteine, provided it has enough vitamin B6, which is found in foods such as salmon, tuna, chicken, bananas and milk.

    Most people consuming a typical western diet take in 40mg–400mg of taurine a day from food alone. This figure refers only to taurine that is directly ingested, not including the additional amount the body can synthesise internally, which may vary depending on age, diet and health.

    Scallops contain high levels of taurine.
    barmalini/Shutterstock

    Taurine is listed on the Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA’s) generally recognised as safe (GRAS) database, and according to the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA), it’s safe to consume up to six grams per day. By comparison, a serving of Red Bull or Monster contains around one gram – comfortably below that threshold.

    Despite recent concerns about a possible link to blood cancer progression, taurine isn’t inherently harmful. In fact, some people may benefit from supplementation, especially those receiving long-term parenteral nutrition, where nutrients are delivered directly into the bloodstream because the gut isn’t working properly. People with chronic liver, kidney or heart failure may also have trouble producing or holding on to enough taurine, making supplementation helpful in specific clinical settings.

    Ironically, some research suggests taurine may actually help reduce the side effects of chemotherapy in leukaemia patients – even as emerging studies raise concerns that it could also fuel the disease. This contradiction underscores how much context matters: the effects of taurine depend not just on dosage and delivery, but also on the patient’s underlying condition. What helps in one context, could harm in another.

    But here’s the catch: taking taurine as a supplement for particular health reasons is very different from consuming large quantities through energy drinks, which often combine taurine with high levels of caffeine and sugar. This combination can put strain on the heart, interfere with sleep and increase the risk of side effects, particularly for people with underlying health conditions or those taking other stimulants.

    The latest research raises important questions about whether taurine-heavy products could be harmful in some cases, especially for people with, or at risk of, blood cancers.

    So, should you worry?

    According to the current evidence, if you’re a healthy adult who occasionally sips an energy drink, there’s little cause for alarm. But moderation is key. Consuming multiple high-taurine drinks daily or taking taurine supplements (without prior professional consultation), on top of a taurine-rich diet might not be wise, especially if future research confirms links between taurine and cancer progression.

    Until more is known, the safest approach would be to enjoy your energy boosts by consuming a nutritious diet rather than consuming energy drinks. If you have any underlying health conditions – or a family history of cancer – it’s always best to consult a healthcare professional before diving into taurine supplementation or consumption of energy drinks.

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

    – ref. Taurine could power your energy drink – and maybe cancer cells too. Here’s what you need to know – https://theconversation.com/taurine-could-power-your-energy-drink-and-maybe-cancer-cells-too-heres-what-you-need-to-know-256957

    MIL OSI –

  • MIL-OSI Submissions: What Trump’s decision to send more weapons to Ukraine will mean for the war

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By David Hastings Dunn, Professor of International Politics in the Department of Political Science and International Studies, University of Birmingham

    At face value, Donald Trump’s announcement about his plans on Russia and Ukraine look like a major policy change. Speaking from the Oval Office on July 14, where he had been meeting with Nato secretary general Mark Rutte, the US president said he would send “top-of-the-line-weapons” to help Kyiv and – unless a ceasefire deal is agreed inside a 50-day time limit – the US would impose secondary sanctions on any countries dealing with Russia.

    But while this represents a significant departure from Trump’s previous approach, it’s more of a step back towards the policy approach of his predecessor Joe Biden than the U-turn that some commentators are claiming.

    For months Russia has stepped up its bombardment of Ukraine, buoyed by the fact that neither the US Congress nor the White House has authorised any new military aid to Kyiv. Moscow would have been aware of this lack of US action and its missile and drone attacks against Ukraine have aimed to run down the stocks of air defence missiles supplied by Biden while paying lip service to the idea of peace negotiations.

    For Trump the penny appears finally to have dropped as to what was happening. His frustration and disappointment in Putin is what has finally led to him calling this out. According to Trump, Putin “fooled a lot of people – Clinton, Bush, Obama, Biden – he didn’t fool me. At a certain point talk doesn’t talk, it’s got to be action”.

    The decision to send new supplies of defensive – and potentially even longer-range offensive missiles – to Ukraine (even if the Europeans pay for them) is an important signal to Russia. But so too is the threat of tariffs of 100% on countries, such as India and China, that sustain the Russian economy by buying its oil and gas at knockdown prices.

    The US senate, led by Lindsay Graham, the influential Republican senator for South Carolina, has been itching to pass these secondary sanctions for months. Now that the Trump administration appears to have adopted this plan it is a significant policy instrument to pile the pressure on Russia.

    The change in Trump’s approach may also mean that the $US8 billion (£6 billion) of frozen Russian assets in the US (and US$223 billion in Europe) could be released to aid Ukraine, which would provide a ready means to pay for the US arms transfers.

    Limits to US support

    What has not changed, however, is the goal of Trump’s policy towards the war in Ukraine. While the Biden administration called out the illegality of Putin’s unprovoked aggression and called for the restoration of Ukrainian sovereignty, Trump is merely calling for a ceasefire.

    Trump may say he is “disappointed” with Putin, but he has not labelled him as the aggressor. In fact at one point he was blaming Ukraine for the invasion. And, significantly, he has not demanded that Russia give up the 20% of Ukraine that it currently illegally occupies.

    As at July 14, Russian troops occupy about 20% of Ukraine’s sovereign territory.
    Institute for the Study of War

    The US president is also silent on what the US would commit to in terms of security and stability for Ukraine after the fighting stops. This is a much bigger question than Ukraine’s Nato membership. America’s European allies in Nato regard some sort of stability force on Ukrainian territory as necessary to deter any future Russian aggression.

    Whether or not US troops would be involved (and all the signs are that they would not), some sort of US security “back-stop” or guarantee is still seen in Europe as key to its success – as would be US logistical and intelligence support for its operation.

    But why the 50-day delay?

    Another aspect of the change in Trump’s policy is the long lead time that Russia has been given to come to the table. A lot of Ukrainian civilians are likely to die during this period if the intense bombardment continues. On the battlefield, 50 days would give the Russians an extended window during a renewed summer offensive to make further territorial gains inside the occupied provinces.

    So Trump’s proposals have to be viewed through the prism of his propensity to set deadlines that are then pushed back multiple times – as with the on-again, off-again tariffs, which have given Trump the nickname Taco (“Trump always chickens out”) on Wall Street.

    Russian senator, Konstantin Kosachev, was certainly taking this view when he told the BBC after Trump’s announcement that, “if this is all Trump had to say about Ukraine today, then so far it’s been much ado about nothing”.

    This sentiment was shared by the Russian stock market which rose 2.7% in the aftermath of Trump’s announcement. Analysts had expected much worse, so the long delay in the prospect of anything actually happening was clearly seen as a long way off and potentially subject to change or cancellation. Trump is seen by many as both inconsistent in his threats and unpredictable as to where policy will eventually settle.

    The fact that Trump told BBC Washington correspondent Gary O’Donoghue that while he was “disappointed” with Putin, he was “not done with him” – and his clear reluctance to act quickly and decisively in sanctioning Russia – should be seen as an important counterpart to the apparent policy shift.

    Like so many things with the 47th US president, it’s important not to react to the media appearances or the headlines they provoke, without also paying attention to the policy actions of his administration.

    David Hastings Dunn has previously received funding from the ESRC, the Gerda Henkel Foundation, the Open Democracy Foundation and has previously been both a NATO and a Fulbright Fellow.

    – ref. What Trump’s decision to send more weapons to Ukraine will mean for the war – https://theconversation.com/what-trumps-decision-to-send-more-weapons-to-ukraine-will-mean-for-the-war-261192

    MIL OSI –

  • MIL-OSI Submissions: Why the Nazis stole a fragment of the Bayeux tapestry

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Millie Horton-Insch, Postdoctoral Research Fellow, History of Art Department, Trinity College Dublin

    There was great excitement at the news this month that the Bayeux tapestry – the 11th-century embroidered epic depicting the conquest of England by William the Conqueror in 1066 – will go on display at the British Museum in 2026. However, the tapestry had already been in the news earlier this year, admittedly to much less fanfare.

    In March, it was reported that a fragment of the Bayeux tapestry had been discovered in Germany in the Schleswig-Holstein state archives. To understand how it ended up there, we must turn to a troubling and little-known episode in the tapestry’s history: Sonderauftrag Bayeux (Special Operation Bayeux), a project operated by the Nazi Ahnenerbe, the SS regime’s heritage research group.

    Looking for something good? Cut through the noise with a carefully curated selection of the latest releases, live events and exhibitions, straight to your inbox every fortnight, on Fridays. Sign up here.

    It has often been observed that art seems to have been of disproportionate concern to the Nazis. However, their manipulation of visual and material culture should be understood as central to – not separate from – Hitler’s genocidal regime and its efforts towards global domination.

    The Ahnenerbe, under the ultimate authority of Heinrich Himmler, was established to develop and disseminate histories in support of that mythology central to the Nazi regime: the supremacy of the Aryan race. To this end, the Ahnenerbe oversaw research that claimed to use unassailable scientific methods.

    However, it has long been acknowledged that their projects consciously manipulated historical evidence to construct fabricated histories that would support racist ideologies. To achieve this, numerous research projects were conducted. These projects saw scholars travel across the globe in the pursuit of objects that could act as monuments to the mythologies of Aryan supremacy. Sonderauftrag Bayeux was one such project.

    Nazi interest in the Bayeux tapestry may seem surprising to British people, where the tapestry is considered a symbol of a singularly significant moment in Britain’s history. However, just as politicians in modern Britain have found it tempting to reference the tapestry in the advancement of their political agendas, so too did the Ahnenerbe.

    Sonderauftrag Bayeux aimed to produce a multi-volume study of the tapestry that would assert its inherently Scandinavian character. The objective was to present the tapestry as proof of the supremacy of the early medieval Norman people, whom the Ahnenerbe claimed as the ancestors of modern German Aryans and descendants of “Viking” northern Europeans.

    By June 1941, work on Sonderauftrag Bayeux had begun in earnest. Among the team sent to Normandy to study the tapestry first hand was Karl Schlabow, a textile expert and head of the Germanic Costume Institute at Neumünster in Germany. Schlabow spent a fortnight in Bayeux, and it was he who removed a fragment of the tapestry’s backing fabric and brought it back to Germany when his research visit was complete.

    Though initial reports suggested that Schlabow removed this fragment when the embroidery was later transferred by the Nazis to Paris, it is more likely that he did so during June 1941, when he and his fellow members of Sonderauftrag Bayeux were stationed in Bayeux.

    In a sketch by Herbert Jeschke – the artist commissioned to create a painted reproduction of the tapestry – during this visit, Jeschke depicted himself with Schlabow and Herbert Jankuhn (the director of the project) hunched over the tapestry. The sketch is accompanied by the emphatic title, “Die Tappiserie!”, an expression of delight at their privileged viewing of this medieval masterpiece.

    To join the Ahnenerbe, Schlabow, like others involved in the Sonderauftrag Bayeux, was inducted into the SS. He held the rank of SS-Unterscharführer (roughly the equivalent of a sergeant in today’s British army). After the second world war many members of the Ahnenerbe denied having sympathy for Nazi policies.

    However, documents seized by US intelligence officers at the end of the second world war reveal that some were denied entry to the Ahnenerbe if they, for instance, had had Jewish friends or expressed sympathy towards communist ideas. They therefore had to (at least outwardly) appear sympathetic to Nazism to be inducted into its ranks.

    Details of what exactly the Ahnenerbe project uncovered, or even hoped to uncover, from this study of the tapestry are opaque. It appears that, to a large extent, the act of producing an illustrated study and dispatching researchers to the original textile was enough to claim the object as a monument to Germanic Aryan supremacy. It is clear that perceived Scandinavian influence within the tapestry’s designs was to be central to the study’s conclusions, but the project was not completed before Germany’s defeat at the end of the war.

    Like many other members of the Ahnenerbe, Schlabow returned to research after the war, working at the Schleswig-Holstein State Museum in Gottorf Castle.

    The discovery of even the tiniest fragment of this remarkable medieval object is cause for much excitement. However, its recovery should be framed firmly in the context in which it was removed. It should come as no surprise that Schlabow felt empowered to steal this piece of the tapestry; the regime for which he worked claimed the object as a piece of his heritage, his birthright as an Aryan German.

    This find is a timely reminder that the past is closer than we realise and that there is still much work to be done to explore the long shadows cast by previous practices in the histories we inherit. The recovered fragment is currently on display in Schleswig-Holstein, but will return to the Musée la Tapisserie de Bayeux in Normandy in time for the museum’s re-opening in 2027 when the two elements will be reunited for the first time since 1941.

    Millie Horton-Insch receives funding from the Leverhulme Trust.

    – ref. Why the Nazis stole a fragment of the Bayeux tapestry – https://theconversation.com/why-the-nazis-stole-a-fragment-of-the-bayeux-tapestry-260048

    MIL OSI –

  • MIL-OSI Submissions: Why the Sycamore Gap tree provoked such strong emotional reactions – a psychologist explains

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Samuel Fairlamb, Senior Lecturer, Department of Psychology, Royal Holloway University of London

    Joe Rey Photography/Shutterstock

    In September 2023, so many people were shocked when the famous Sycamore Gap tree, thriving in a dip along Hadrian’s Wall, was deliberately cut down overnight. For many, the tree symbolised British resilience, heritage and an enduring history. The public response was swift and intense, with widespread outrage and grief over the loss of this cultural landmark.

    The two men convicted of felling the Sycamore Gap tree have been sentenced to four years and three months in prison. Meanwhile, the tree lives on thanks to an AI-generated alternate world in the film 28 Years Later.

    As a psychologist, I’m interested in what inspired such a strong reaction to the destruction of a single tree. One psychological explanation, known as “terror management theory”, suggests that the emotional response reflects deeper anxieties about death – and not just about this tree.

    Get your news from actual experts, straight to your inbox. Sign up to our daily newsletter to receive all The Conversation UK’s latest coverage of news and research, from politics and business to the arts and sciences.

    Terror management theory, developed by psychologists Sheldon Solomon, Jeff Greenberg and Tom Pyszczynski, builds on the work of cultural anthropologist Ernest Becker, author of the Pulitzer prize-winning The Denial of Death (1973).

    This book’s central idea is simple yet profound. In it, Becker proposes that our awareness of mortality creates the potential for considerable existential anxiety.

    To manage this, we rely on cultural worldviews. These are our belief systems. These worldviews can be religious, secular, political or national. They all share a promise that life is meaningful and offer prescriptions for how we should live. When we live in accordance with our cultural values and standards – whether by being a good parent, a loyal citizen or following religious texts – we gain a sense of self-esteem and feel we are contributing to something enduring and significant.

    These worldviews also offer the promise of immortality. Some do so literally, as in religious faiths that promise life beyond death. Others offer symbolic immortality, through lasting achievements, family bloodlines, or the continuation of one’s nation. By embedding ourselves in these worldviews, we gain a sense that some part of us will continue after we die.

    Cultural symbols such as flags, religious icons, or even a tree can embody our core values and collective identity and are therefore treated with deep reverence. Throughout history, people have waged wars and shown intense emotional reactions to the desecration of such symbols (burning the American flag or the Qur’an, for example).

    The Sycamore Gap tree was cut down in September 2023.
    SunCity/Shutterstock

    The Sycamore Gap tree carried similar significance. As a centuries-old landmark, it came to represent Britain’s heritage, strength and continuity. From the perspective of terror management theory, its felling may have stirred strong reactions because it reminded people that even the symbols we rely on for a sense of permanence can be suddenly lost.

    This sense of cultural loss is also echoed by other recent events, such as Brexit and the immigration crisis. A collective fear over the erosion of British values and traditions place questions about the loss of British identity at the centre of public consciousness.

    Rooted in mortality

    Decades of psychological research support this theory’s claims. One common method (a technique called “mortality salience”) involves making participants subtly aware of their mortality (control participants are not reminded of death).

    In studies carried out in the 1990s, researchers found that when the solution to a task required desecrating a cultural symbol, such as using an American flag to separate ink from a jar of sand, participants reminded of death took longer to complete the task and experienced greater apprehension.

    Hundreds of studies also show how being reminded of death can increase anger and hostility towards people who threaten or violate one’s cultural values. One line of research examining reactions to those who commit moral transgressions may be particularly appropriate to this case.

    For instance, in one study, participants reminded of their own death were more likely to support harsher punishments for those who committed moral transgressions such as someone who destroyed an irreplaceable artefact (much like the cutting down of a tree). Other research has shown similar effects: participants (including judges!) when reminded of death gave out harsher penalties or sentencing for those who have committed a crime.

    You might question whether these effects truly reflect death anxiety or if they could be explained without invoking a desire for immortality. Research may provide compelling evidence. One study found that reminders of death increased support for harsher punishments for moral transgressors (replicating the study mentioned earlier).

    However, when participants were first presented with evidence of an afterlife, the effect of death increasing harsher punishments disappeared. In other words, the promise that death is not the end appeared to buffer from the anxiety that death arouses.

    The fall of the Sycamore Gap tree was more than a loss of natural beauty. It was, for many, a symbolic attack on permanence, on meaning, and on shared identity. Yet while such losses can stir outrage and calls for punishment, research also shows that when people endorse prosocial values like empathy, reminders of death can actually foster forgiveness towards those who commit moral transgressions.

    According to terror management theory, these responses are not just about anger, but about what it means to be human in the face of inevitable death. In this light, the tree’s felling uprooted something sacred: a collective continuity that gives meaning to our brief lives. As we grieve its loss, perhaps we’re also mourning something more elusive – the comforting illusion that some things might last forever.

    This article features references to books that have been included for editorial reasons, and may contain links to bookshop.org. If you click on one of the links and go on to buy something from bookshop.org The Conversation UK may earn a commission.

    Don’t have time to read about climate change as much as you’d like?

    Get a weekly roundup in your inbox instead. Every Wednesday, The Conversation’s environment editor writes Imagine, a short email that goes a little deeper into just one climate issue. Join the 45,000+ readers who’ve subscribed so far.

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

    – ref. Why the Sycamore Gap tree provoked such strong emotional reactions – a psychologist explains – https://theconversation.com/why-the-sycamore-gap-tree-provoked-such-strong-emotional-reactions-a-psychologist-explains-257165

    MIL OSI –

  • MIL-OSI Submissions: England’s redesigned banknotes will reveal how the country sees itself

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Pavan Mano, Lecturer in Global Cultures, King’s College London

    Richard z/Shutterstock

    The Bank of England has announced a redesign of its banknotes and invited the public to suggest new themes that might feature on them. Victoria Cleland, the Bank of England’s chief cashier, said this was as “a symbolic representation of our collective national identity and an opportunity to celebrate the UK”.

    Even though they can appear like the unifying symbols Cleland suggests, my research shows that there are contradictions that surround many national symbols. They are not as unifying as they might seem. In fact, in many cases they also work to exclude people.

    For a long time, there has been a persuasive argument about belonging and the nation. As one of the grand theorists of the nation, Benedict Anderson, once put it, the nation is an “imagined political community”.

    The idea here is that the nation is simply a collection of people who form a community together, something larger than themselves. And national symbols are supposed to represent this community. As such, national symbols are often taken as markers of belonging.

    But what is often overlooked is the exclusionary element of the nation. In my book, Straight Nation, I show how for some people to belong to a nation, others must be portrayed as not belonging. It can be difficult to pinpoint exactly how one belongs to the nation; it is far easier to point at someone else and declare that they do not.

    The invitation to contribute to the redesign will therefore show two things. It will tell us how the country sees itself. It will also demonstrate the contradictions around national symbols and the exclusions they can produce. The former perhaps more straightforward than the latter.

    Looking for something good? Cut through the noise with a carefully curated selection of the latest releases, live events and exhibitions, straight to your inbox every fortnight, on Fridays. Sign up here.

    How does England see itself?

    In theory, the banknote is a perfectly neat national symbol. It is an object that is only valid within the borders of the state it is issued in, so the images printed on it can be treated as representations of the nation. Current notes feature images of historically significant characters: former prime minister Sir Winston Churchill, author Jane Austen, painter J.M.W. Turner and scientist Alan Turing.

    Jane Austen is one of only three women who have been on the banknote.
    Dudaeva/Shutterstock

    Indeed, the Bank of England has suggested that images should not be “divisive”. In other words, they need to be as inclusive as possible. But in the current political environment, far-right politics and division have become extremely commonplace both globally and closer to home.

    In the US, the current administration has squarely taken aim at diversity, equity and inclusion programmes and launched a massive wave of deportations. Across much of western Europe, far-right parties are going from strength to strength.

    In the UK, rightwing Reform has emerged as the party that would win the most seats if a general election were held this year. The current prime minister, Keir Starmer, recently gave a speech where he warned the UK risked becoming an “island of strangers” without tougher immigration policies.

    Amid these political currents, it will be interesting to see which themes and images are eventually chosen to adorn the new banknotes from the consultation which closes at the end of July. The designs will be instructive not least because they will show how how the current climate translates onto these notes as well as how the country sees itself.

    For instance, there has never been a person of colour and only three women have previously featured on a banknote. It would be a a long time coming if this were to change.

    The exclusions at the heart of national symbols

    Perhaps more importantly, however, is the ironic contradiction around asking for the public’s views on banknotes when banknotes are disappearing from public view.

    At the start of this year, Lloyds Banking Group announced it would be closing 136 of its high street banks. This follows a broader trend. Since 2015, banks have closed more than 6,000 branches, and the number of cash machines has fallen by more than 7,000 between June 2021 and June 2024.

    Banking is becoming increasingly digital and carried out through a smartphone app. A growing number of establishments have gone entirely cashless.

    Many people are affected by this, including those with disabilities, older people, those living in rural areas and small businesses. Not only is cash no longer king, it is barely in the building.

    When it is redesigned, the new banknote will be released into an environment where it is less used and, in a growing number of establishments that have gone entirely cashless, will be almost entirely unwelcome.

    National belonging is often romanticised. There is a sense that nationalism and unity go hand in hand, and that the nation is simply a basin of belonging. National symbols are portrayed as a matter of pride.

    We do not know yet what designs they will bear when the crisp new banknotes are issued. But we do know that they will be issued in decreasing quantities and many people will find it harder to get their hands on them. That captures the contradictions of national symbols, and the exclusions they produce.

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

    – ref. England’s redesigned banknotes will reveal how the country sees itself – https://theconversation.com/englands-redesigned-banknotes-will-reveal-how-the-country-sees-itself-260842

    MIL OSI –

  • MIL-OSI Submissions: 3 ways Canadians can take control of their finances in an age of economic uncertainty

    Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Omar H. Fares, Assistant Professor, Faculty of Business, University of New Brunswick

    Canadian consumers are beginning to move from short-term economic concerns to a more persistent mindset of financial precarity, and it’s starting to affect how they live.

    People are delaying major purchases and starting to show signs of subscription fatigue, according to recent findings. One recent survey found that 70 per cent of Canadians are deferring major life decisions, including home ownership and family planning, as a consequence of this sustained economic uncertainty.

    This anxiety is now reflected in broader sentiment. The Bank of Canada’s latest Consumer Expectations Survey found a sharp rise in economic pessimism. About two-thirds of Canadians now anticipate a recession within the year, up from 47 per cent in late 2024.

    Concerns about job security, debt repayment and access to credit are also mounting. For the first time since early 2024, more consumers report cutting back on spending. Home-buying intentions are declining, especially among those expecting a downturn, and an increasing share of mortgage holders plan to reduce expenses ahead of higher renewal payments.

    Consumers are no longer just reacting to inflation or interest rates, but adjusting to the idea that financial uncertainty may be here to stay.

    Why today’s economic anxiety feels different

    While the link between economic uncertainty and reduced spending is well established, what makes today’s situation different is the convergence of multiple pressures facing consumers.

    This includes a challenging job market — particularly for younger Canadians — concerns about the disruptive effects of AI-driven automation, the threat of tariffs from the United States, ongoing global conflicts and the growing cost of living.

    With economic uncertainty now a defining feature of everyday life for many Canadians, the sense of financial precarity is shaping how people think, plan and spend.

    Addressing this new reality will require equipping ourselves with tools and mental habits that can help develop financial stability, even in unpredictable times. Here are three research-backed ways to do this.

    A Global News segment about how half of Canadians are living bill-to-bill.

    1. Budget based on values

    With many people feeling the pinch or uncertainty around money, a more deliberate, values-based approach to personal finance is needed beyond traditional budgeting methods. If you’re looking for more control over your finances, it can help to shift your focus from just tracking where your money goes to making sure it goes where you actually want it to.

    Research in consumer behaviour supports this shift in mindset. Mental accounting, introduced by economist Richard Thaler, explains how people naturally divide their money into mental categories like stability, family or learning. Budgeting then becomes less about cutting back and more about making intentional choices.

    Studies have found that pairing this kind of values-based budgeting with simple practices, such as setting clear goals and automating transfers, can lead to lower spending and more consistent long-term behaviour. The goal is not to manage every dollar perfectly, but to make sure your money aligns with what matters most to you.

    Since values tend to guide sustainable decision-making, a practical starting point is to identify three to five core values, such as financial security, personal development or time with family. Next, review your recent transactions and group them by the value they support. This reframes budgeting as a way to assess whether your current spending aligns with what you consider most important.

    From there, assign a reasonable monthly amount to each category based on your income and fixed obligations. You don’t need to track every detail, but having value-based benchmarks will improve day-to-day choices.

    Renaming categories in your budgeting app or spreadsheet is another important approach. For example, changing “discretionary” to “family time” or “well-being” can reinforce the link between spending and values. Set up automated transfers that reflect your goals; this might include creating a savings buffer, funding education or contributing to a low-risk investment account. Automation helps reduce decision fatigue and supports consistency.

    2. Use pessimism to your advantage

    While recognizing economic risks is entirely rational, how people respond to that risk makes a significant difference. Psychologists have studied a mindset known as “defensive pessimism,” a strategy that involves anticipating potential problems in order to plan effectively, rather than being overwhelmed by uncertainty.

    Unlike chronic anxiety or fear, which can impair decision-making and lead to poorer financial and consumption choices, defensive pessimism encourages people to take a more measured, thoughtful approach. It combines realism with preparation and helps individuals stay focused and responsive in uncertain conditions.

    People are more resilient when they focus on what can be changed. In practical terms, this might include learning a new skill, starting a side project or strengthening personal or professional networks.

    To apply defensive pessimism, start by clearly identifying what could go wrong, then outline specific actions to address those possibilities. Break big tasks into smaller, manageable steps, create a backup plan and regularly reassess progress. This approach helps maintain focus, reduce surprises and turn worry into preparation.

    These small, proactive steps with detailed personal reflection can offer a sense of agency that counters feelings of helplessness. Rather than ignoring challenges, defensive pessimism coupled with consistent reflection is about figuring out how to work around them.

    3. Adopt a long-term outlook

    Despite ongoing uncertainty, maintaining a long-term financial perspective remains very important. Research consistently shows that people who engage in long-term planning tend to accumulate greater wealth over time.

    Long-term planning involves continuing to plan for future goals such as retirement or education, even when timelines need to shift due to changing circumstances.

    One of the greatest challenges with this approach is known as the “sour grape effect.” This refers to the tendency people have to downplay a future goal or reward after experiencing early setbacks or failures.

    A 2020 study with 1,304 participants in Norway and the U.S. found that setbacks can lead individuals to disengage from their goals. Participants were given either positive or negative feedback on an initial task and then asked to predict how much happiness they would feel if they succeeded in a later round.

    Those who experienced failure anticipated much less happiness from future success. When everyone actually did succeed, their levels of happiness were the same regardless of initial feedback. Setbacks can lead people to devalue their goals as a self-protective strategy. However, participants with high achievement motivation did not show this bias.

    In other words, when short-term disappointments are interpreted as failure, there is a risk that people may give up on long-term plans altogether. In these moments, the most effective course of action is staying consistent and committed, while still remaining agile enough to adapt as needed.

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

    – ref. 3 ways Canadians can take control of their finances in an age of economic uncertainty – https://theconversation.com/3-ways-canadians-can-take-control-of-their-finances-in-an-age-of-economic-uncertainty-260785

    MIL OSI –

  • MIL-OSI Submissions: Vanishing data in the U.S. undermines good public policy, with global implications

    Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Kristi Thompson, Research Data Management Librarian, Western University

    The recent tragic floods in Texas have focused attention on the human impact of the cuts to government infrastructure and services in the United States by Donald Trump’s administration.

    Although initial analyses suggest that recent budget cuts and loss of staff played no role in the timeliness of the warnings, many are concerned that a lack of data used to make critical predictions and decisions will increasingly become apparent as a serious problem.

    As researchers focused on data management (Kristi) and behavioural sciences (Albert) and whose work tackles the significance of research with open access data, we have been concerned about how the data sets that scholars around the world rely on have been vanishing from U.S. government sites.

    Vanishing data is of dire concern far beyond the U.S., including for Canadians.

    Danielle Goldfarb, an expert on trade, real-time data, economics and public policy, notes that cuts to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s Arctic monitoring programs weaken Canada’s ability to assess shared climate risks and global shipping impacts. The American dismantling of key weather reporting also threatens the availability of crucial data for Canada’s disaster preparedness.

    The Canadian data community is watching U.S. events closely, and this has led to the recent founding of the Canadian Data Rescue Project. The project has a dual focus: to support data rescue efforts in the U.S. and to set up preventative life support for Canadian government data.

    Attack on knowledge

    The attack on knowledge in the U.S. began in January 2025 when Trump signed executive orders mandating the removal of information on topics such as diversity and “gender ideology” from government websites.

    Next, entire websites, data distribution systems and data collection systems began to disappear. The result was not only growing alarm over how the needs of marginalized populations are represented in democratic life and how public safety could be affected, but also concerns about a research and public policy crisis.

    Environmental data was a major target, with climate change tracking tools disappearing.

    And as part of the defunding of the Department of Education, nearly all of the staff, including the commissioner at the National Center for Education Statistics, were fired.



    Read more:
    Trump orders a plan to close Education Department – an anthropologist who studies MAGA explains 4 reasons why Trump and his supporters want to eliminate it

    Fundamental records

    Government data provides the most fundamental record of how a society works. Health, social, economic and education data collections show a clear picture of how people live, and allow researchers to track how public policy changes affect everyday lives.

    Government data is a unique resource because governments can require and enforce the collection of accurate information. This data also provides records of the activities of elected governments.

    Eliminating data collection breaks the system of knowledge that allows governments to work well, and lets the public transparently see how they are working well.

    Accuracy of data affects how people live

    Data and budget cuts are already undermining economic policy in the U.S.

    Inflation is a key indicator of economic health, and was an important electoral issue for Americans, with egg prices and other indicators coming up repeatedly in election campaigns.

    But the Bureau of Labor Statistics, responsible for monitoring price changes, has been forced by staffing shortages to rely on less accurate data-collection methods. Now, according to the Wall Street Journal, economists are questioning the accuracy of the government’s inflation data.

    Similar budget pressures hit climate science. The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration decommissioned its Billion-Dollar Weather and Climate Disasters Database as of May 8.



    Read more:
    Three scientists speak about what it’s like to have research funding cut by the Trump administration

    This data tracked weather disasters where damages or costs reached or exceeded $1 billion and helped local and state governments plan, allocate budgets and advocate for funding. Employment losses are also expected.

    Internationally, shuttering the U.S. Agency for International Development has led to data losses that will severely hinder global development goals. The Demographic and Health Surveys program helped governments of many low- and middle-income countries collect health and service data.

    Losing aid funding will harm people directly. Losing the data will worsen that harm by preventing governments from making informed decision on allocating scarce resources, and it will hide how much harm is being done.

    Limiting what can be known

    Data destruction is a way to disrupt and control discourse by limiting what can be known. Without data, questions like “What impact are climate-related disasters having?” or “What’s the inflation rate?” are unanswerable. It becomes harder to effectively critique government actions.

    If data destruction is an act of political suppression, then data preservation can be an act of political resistance.

    In February 2025, several U.S. academic and non-profit associations got together to form the Data Rescue Project. They have worked to download data files, create documentation and prepare the data for publication on donated platforms.

    While researchers are unable to change the termination of data collection programs, they are preserving as much data as possible so researchers and critics can at least access information.

    The Canadian Data Rescue Project has hosted three data rescue events to create documentation for rescued American data sets, and is setting up processes to download and archive Canadian government data as a safeguarding measure.

    Canadian data concerns

    Disappearing data could happen here, and similar events have. Stephen Harper’s Conservative government cut data collection programs and issued gag orders to federal scientists.

    The federal government reduced funding for environmental data collection and eliminated the First Nations Statistical Institute.

    Researcher Melonie Fullick noted in 2012 that since 2009, “research on post-secondary education in Canada has been undermined by a systematic elimination of resources.” With the termination of varied education bodies or councils also came a scarcity of data.

    The Harper government also eliminated the 2011 long-form census, replacing it with a voluntary survey, leading to the resignation of Canada’s national statistician and disrupting the baseline for all social and health data collection in Canada over the next few years.

    Subsequent governments restored the census and some other data-collection programs, but in the case of education, researchers say some of the pains now being felt in the sector can be traced back to this period.

    Canada at crossroads

    A society knows itself through data, and makes a declaration about what it values by what it chooses to count.

    Canada is now at a crossroads. Our researchers and policy analysts have piggybacked on U.S. data collection in critical areas from health to climate and weather forecasting. We now need a national response to help mitigate the effects of data destruction.

    The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

    – ref. Vanishing data in the U.S. undermines good public policy, with global implications – https://theconversation.com/vanishing-data-in-the-u-s-undermines-good-public-policy-with-global-implications-258230

    MIL OSI –