NewzIntel.com

    • Checkout Page
    • Contact Us
    • Default Redirect Page
    • Frontpage
    • Home-2
    • Home-3
    • Lost Password
    • Member Login
    • Member LogOut
    • Member TOS Page
    • My Account
    • NewzIntel Alert Control-Panel
    • NewzIntel Latest Reports
    • Post Views Counter
    • Privacy Policy
    • Public Individual Page
    • Register
    • Subscription Plan
    • Thank You Page

Category: Military Intelligence

  • MIL-OSI USA: FACT SHEET: Trump and Musk Endanger Veterans’ Care, Heartlessly Fire Thousands Who’ve Served in Uniform

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Washington State Patty Murray

    Trump’s VA announced another round of 1,400 indiscriminate firings late Monday–jeopardizing veterans’ benefits and care

    VA’s cancellation of nearly 900 contracts supporting patient safety and veteran privacy, as well as its decision to reduce medical centers’ purchase card limits to $1, will further endanger veterans’ access to benefits and care

    Trump and Musk fire veterans across government

    Washington, D.C. – Today, U.S. Senator Patty Murray (D-WA), Vice Chair of the Senate Appropriations Committee, detailed how President Trump and his billionaire co-president Elon Musk’s hazardous directives and indiscriminate mass firings endanger the benefits and care veterans have earned and deserve–and how the two are thoughtlessly firing thousands of veterans who have served our nation in uniform who fulfill critical roles across the federal government.

    In a statement, Senator Murray said:

    “Donald Trump and Elon Musk are utterly betraying our veterans–indiscriminately firing men and women who have served our nation in uniform and endangering the care and benefits they deserve and have earned.

    “Trump and Musk’s heartless firings will worsen VA’s longstanding staffing shortage and force veterans to wait longer to have their claims handled, have their phone calls picked up, or even see a doctor. That is downright unacceptable.

    “Now, Trump and Musk are also paralyzing countless operations at VA hospitals across the country by essentially freezing their purchase cards–preventing them from buying more supplies for hospitals, operating shuttles for patients, covering lodging for veterans, and much more. This is a totally senseless and reckless move that is creating more chaos for VA providers and their patients. 

    “Trump and Musk have now fired thousands of veterans who–after serving their nation in uniform–have chosen to next serve their country as civilians. Now, these veterans are without jobs, wondering what they’ll do next and how they will provide for themselves and their families.

    “Trump and Musk are jeopardizing VA patient safety, and they are going to push out the VA staff that remain with their uninformed and thoughtless mandates and staffing cuts. This shutdown of the VA, bit by bit, must immediately stop.”

    INTENSIFYING VA’s STAFF SHORTAGE

    The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) has long suffered severe staffing shortages, including in clinical positions, which have negatively impacted veterans’ ability to get the support, benefits, and care they need. 

    To address these shortages, VA has sought–and Congress has provided–expanded hiring authorities and increased pay and bonus schedules for certain VA employees, underscoring how serious staffing challenges have been. VA’s Office of Inspector General reported, for instance, 2,959 severe occupational staffing shortages at Veterans Health Administration (VHA) facilities in fiscal year 2024.

    Nonetheless, President Trump has not only initiated a federal hiring freeze but has indiscriminately fired thousands of VA staff–without providing information about who has been laid off or why.

    Trump and Musk have now fired more than 2,400 staff at the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) in mass–with VA announcing the firing of 1,000 staff on February 13 and another 1,400 on February 23. 

    VA has also lost other critical staff through the Trump administration’s “deferred resignation program.”

    ENDANGERING VETERANS’ ACCESS TO BENEFITS AND CARE—AND PATIENTS’ SAFETY

    Veterans deserve to be able to get the benefits and care they have earned, but Donald Trump and Elon Musk’s heartless firings of VA staff are threatening their ability to do just that.

    Firing VA employees will–among much else–likely force veterans to wait longer: 

    • To see health care providers; 
    • To have their disability claims adjudicated;
    • To have someone to pick up their calls at the Veterans Crisis Line; 
    • To have burial and funeral expense reimbursement requests processed;
    • And much more. 

    A number of staff supporting the Veterans Crisis Line–which provides 24/7, confidential crisis support for veterans and their loved ones–were among those fired by Trump and Musk.

    In 2022, Congress also passed the PACT Act, the largest expansion of veterans’ benefits in two decades, which requires a significant influx of resources and staff to deliver the benefits and care under the law. Trump and Musk’s firings–and hiring freeze–badly undercut VA’s ability to process claims under the law. The mass firings and the ongoing hiring freeze, which prohibits new disability claims raters from coming on board, will force the backlog of unprocessed claims to grow above 254,000.

    Firing long-time VA researchers also puts clinical trials that veterans are enrolled in at risk and jeopardizes research that could yield critical breakthroughs for veterans. 

    • Ongoing VA research is examining treatment options for PTSD and opioid addiction, as well as for cancer that was caused by veterans’ exposure to toxic chemicals, among much else. 
    • According to VA, in fiscal year 2024, there were 102 active research sites nationwide, with 3,685 active principal investigators who led 7,278 active funded research projects involving teams of researchers. In addition, VA investigators authored or coauthored 11,732 published research articles.

    VA’s dangerous directives this week, which they have already begun to walk back, cause more harmful chaos and confusion and also have detrimental impacts on the ability of veterans to receive their care and benefits. 

    • VA issued a blanket cancellation on Tuesday of nearly 900 contracts–supporting patient safety efforts like chemical waste disposal and monitoring of hospital air quality, systems providing secure storage of veterans’ private records, clinical recruitment efforts, and more. 
    • VA also implemented a decision to reduce purchase card limits to $1–curbing VA medical centers’ ability to purchase supplies and equipment they need to serve veterans or to provide lodging for transplant patients.  

    While the Trump administration tries to rehire clinical staff they have already fired and may ultimately walk back the purchase card limits and contract cancellations, it is clear that they are acting before thinking–and the people paying the price are veterans.

    BETRAYING VETERANS WITH ZERO JUSTIFICATION

    Beyond indiscriminately firing workers who help get veterans the benefits and care they have earned, Trump and Musk have also indiscriminately fired thousands of veterans who have served our country in uniform. In firing probationary and other federal workers across government, Trump and Musk have fired scores of veterans.

    • Veterans make up 30% of the federal workforce, and the federal government is the largest single employer of veterans in the country.
    • Trump and Musk have already fired nearly 6,000 veterans, by one recent estimate.
    • Federal agencies uniquely work to hire and accommodate veterans with service-related disabilities. Longstanding law requires, for example, that veterans who are disabled or who serve on active duty in the Armed Forces in military campaigns are entitled to preference over others in hiring from a list of eligible, competitive applicants. In 2021, there were 337,000 disabled Veterans serving in the federal government, making up 16% of the federal workforce.

    As one veteran in Washington state who was laid off by VA through no fault of his own told Senator Murray last week: 

    “I swore an oath to serve our country—first in the U.S. Army and then at the VA—only to be abruptly terminated by the very institution that promised to care for those who have served. My termination isn’t just a personal tragedy; it’s a stark reminder that our federal government is dismantling essential support systems for veterans and vulnerable communities. When cost-cutting means sacrificing dedicated, disabled service members and committed federal employees, it isn’t about efficiency—it’s about eroding the trust and dignity that our nation owes to those who answer the call to serve.”

    MIL OSI USA News –

    February 27, 2025
  • MIL-OSI New Zealand: Employment – NZDF and PSA dispute settled

    Source: PSA

    PSA members at the New Zealand Defence Force have settled their dispute after nearly 8 months of bargaining and strike action. NZDF had previously refused to budge from an offer that included no pay rises.
    This week PSA members, who are civilian workers, voted to ratify a new collective agreement which includes pay increases for every union member covered by the Collective Agreement.
    “Collective action gets results, even in the face of Government austerity and hostility towards public service workers,” said PSA National Secretary Fleur Fitzsimons. “Our members refused to be disrespected and took action. They forced NZDF and the Government to take notice and table a new offer.”
    PSA members escalated industrial action last year after NZDF offered no pay rises during negotiations for a new collective agreement.
    This triggered a rare use of powers by the Minister of Defence, approving the military undertaking the work of striking civilian workers. A settlement was agreed after two days of facilitation by the Employment Relations Authority in January and has now been ratified by union members.
    “Such a drawn-out dispute is tough for members, but the alternative was accepting no pay increase while the cost of living is still high,” said Fitzsimons. “Through their determination and resolve they’ve won recognition and respect they deserve.”
    “There is still the outstanding issue of increased funding to restore the cuts made to NZDF and to stop further civilian job losses. We call on Government to reverse cuts already made and urgently invest in our Defence Force.”
    The Public Service Association Te Pūkenga Here Tikanga Mahi is Aotearoa New Zealand’s largest trade union, representing and supporting more than 95,000 workers across central government, state-owned enterprises, local councils, health boards and community groups.

    MIL OSI New Zealand News –

    February 27, 2025
  • MIL-Evening Report: Dutton hints he’ll sack 36,000 public servants. Voters deserve to know what services will be affected

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By John Hawkins, Senior Lecturer, Canberra School of Politics, Economics and Society, University of Canberra

    Peter Dutton and his Coalition colleagues have dithered for several weeks on their plans for the Commonwealth public sector.

    While being upfront that public service jobs would be targeted, they’ve made numerous contradictory statements about the number of public servants who would be sacked if the Coalition wins the coming election.

    But Peter Dutton’s most recent comments confirm that he clearly wants to make significant cuts.

    And it’s hard to see how the sackings wouldn’t erode important front line services that many Australians depend on for help and support.

    36,000 jobs on the line

    This week the opposition leader declared the Coalition would achieve A$24 billion in savings by reducing the size of the public service.

    He was unequivocal. The money would be clawed back over four years and would more than cover the Coalition’s promised $9 billion injection into Medicare.

    Dutton explicitly tied the $24 billion in savings to the 36,000 Commonwealth public servants who have been hired since the last election

    Under the Labor Party, there are 36,000 additional public servants, that’s at a cost of $6 billion a year, or $24 billion over the forward estimates. This program totals $9 billion over that period. So, we’ve well and truly identified the savings.

    While still not nominating a precise number of job cuts, it’s Peter Dutton’s clearest statement of intent to date. By “truly” identifying the savings, 36,000 jobs are on the line. And it accords with Dutton’s earlier comments that the extra workers are not providing value for money for Australian taxpayers.

    (They have) not improved the lives of Australians one iota

    While this sounds like he wants to dismiss them all, senior colleagues are more circumspect.

    According to Nationals leader David Littleproud, the number of job cuts has not yet been decided. Shadow Public Service Minister Jane Hume further muddied the waters by referring to the cuts being by attrition, and excluding frontline services.

    Frontline services

    The public service head count has grown to 185,343, as of June 2024. So cutting 36,000 staff, or even a large proportion of that number, would be a very significant reduction.

    The agencies that added the most public servants between June 2023 and June 2024 were the National Disability Insurance Agency (up 2,193), Defence (up 1,425), Health and Aged Care (up 1,173) and Services Australia (up 1,149).

    Many of these extra staff would be providing invaluable front line services to clients and customer who are accessing essential support.

    And some of the new public servants replaced more expensive outsourced workers. Finance Minister Katy Gallagher has claimed the Albanese government has saved $4 billion of taxpayers’ money by reducing spending on consultants and contractors.

    Rather than the alleged explosion in the size of the bureaucracy, the growth in public service numbers has closely matched the increase in the population. Last year, they accounted for 1.36% of all employed persons, up by only a minuscule degree on the 1.35% in 2016.

    Canberra bashing

    According to Dutton, the 36,000 additional public servants hired under Labor all work in Canberra. It was not a slip of the tongue. The claim is also in the Liberal Party’s pre-election pamphlet.

    But only 37% of the public service workforce is located in the national capital. Half are based in state capitals. A full quarter of those involved in service delivery work in regional Australia.

    The Liberals clearly think they have nothing to lose among Canberra voters, given they have no members or senators from the Australian Capital Territory.

    The coming election will no doubt tell us if Canberra bashing still resonates with voters elsewhere in the country. Dutton has clearly made the political judgement that it does.

    Another night of the long knives?

    A change of government often precipitates a clean out at the top of the public service.

    When the Howard government was elected in 1996, no fewer than six departmental secretaries were sacked on the infamous night of the long knives. Then prime minister Tony Abbott dismissed four departmental chiefs in one fell swoop after taking office in 2013. He didn’t even consult his treasurer before dumping the head of Treasury.

    This pattern of culling senior public servants represents a chilling risk to good policy development. Departmental secretaries concerned about losing their jobs may be reluctant to give the “frank and fearless advice” their positions demand.




    Read more:
    After robodebt, here’s how Australia can have a truly ‘frank and fearless’ public service again


    Spending cuts after the election

    Voters are entitled to know what the Coalition has planned for the public service before they cast their ballots.

    The lack of detail on job losses is matched by a reluctance to outline spending cuts elsewhere. Dutton has ruled out an Abbott-style audit commission. He is prepared to cut “wasteful” spending, but won’t say if it may be necessary to also chop some worthwhile outlays to dampen inflationary pressures.

    Dutton is adamant that any spending cuts by a government he leads will be determined after the election, not announced before it. This does nothing for democratic accountability. It does not give the electorate the chance to cast their votes on the basis of an alternative vision from the alternative government.

    All Australians, not just public servants, deserve to know before polling day just how deep Dutton and the Coalition are really planning to cut.

    John Hawkins is a former public servant and lives in Canberra.

    – ref. Dutton hints he’ll sack 36,000 public servants. Voters deserve to know what services will be affected – https://theconversation.com/dutton-hints-hell-sack-36-000-public-servants-voters-deserve-to-know-what-services-will-be-affected-250797

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

    February 27, 2025
  • MIL-Evening Report: A middle power with ‘great and powerful friends’: Australia’s changing role in the region

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Rebecca Strating, Director, La Trobe Asia, and Professor of International Relations, La Trobe University

    Debating Australia’s role in world politics is not always high on the political agenda. Elections here are more often fought on economic issues than foreign or defence policy. And while the major parties have different views on foreign policy, there tends to be bipartisanship on the central tenets of our strategic policy, including Australia’s alliance with the United States.

    In recent years, however, Australia has found itself wedged between two great powers: its security guarantor, the US, and its major trading partner, China. The increasing strategic competition between these two great powers, especially in Asia, has raised new questions about how Australia should manage these relationships and conceive of its role in the world.

    For some countries, having a prominent role on the global stage may be more obvious than for others. Wealthy states with large militaries and populations, for example, often play the part of “great powers”. These countries tend to make claims about their unique rights and responsibilities, such as having a greater say in multilateral institutions (like the United Nations) and the “rules” intended to govern international conduct.

    However, most of the world’s countries are not great powers. For a middle-sized nation like Australia, its role on the global stage is not necessarily static but determined by how our leaders balance national interests and values.

    These, in turn, are shaped by “material factors”, such as geography, population and economy size, natural resources, shared political ideals (for example, our belief in democratic institutions), norms and culture.

    In addition, a middle-sized country’s global role can change depending on how leaders perceive contemporary threats and challenges to their security.

    Australia as a ‘middle power’

    The National Defence Strategy released in 2024 describes Australia as an “influential middle power”. According to the strategy, this is demonstrated by several things:

    • our enduring democratic values
    • our history of safeguarding international rules and contributing to regional partnerships
    • the strong foundations of our economy
    • the strength of our partnerships in the Indo-Pacific.

    Whether Australia should be described as a “middle power”, though, has long been the subject of political debate. Since H.V. “Doc” Evatt, then-attorney general and minister for external affairs, used the term in 1945, it has been most often (but not always) associated with the Labor Party.

    Recent Coalition governments have been more reluctant to view Australia as “just” a middle power.

    Alexander Downer, the foreign minister in the Howard government, would occasionally use the term “pivotal power”. Pivotal powers, as one political analyst put it, are “destined to shape the contours of geopolitics in key regions of the world” due to their strategic location, economic power and political influence.

    Meanwhile, Julie Bishop, foreign minister in the Abbott and Turnbull administrations, preferred the term “top 20 country”, arguing this better reflected Australia’s standing and level of influence on the global stage.

    At the core of this historical debate is the extent to which a country like Australia can – and does – have influence in the region and globally.

    Middle powers have different characteristics from great or smaller powers. Size, geography and economic wealth affect the extent to which they can shape the world. As a result, middle powers often adopt certain types of actions or behaviours to enhance their influence.

    This concept, known as “middle power diplomacy”, has often been associated with Australia.

    There are a number of ways middle powers do this, such as by:

    • supporting adherence to international law and rules (because these can help restrain more powerful states from imposing their will on others)

    • encouraging cooperation through multilateralism (cooperation between multiple states)

    • finding creative new solutions to global problems, such as climate change

    • taking the diplomatic lead on specific, but important, issues.

    A liberal-democratic middle power, such as Australia, may also seek to promote its values internationally, including the respect for human rights, free and open trade, and the principles of democratic governance and accountability.

    Australia’s reliance on ‘great and powerful friends’

    In addition, middle powers often choose to align themselves with a bigger power to boost their influence even further.

    In Australia’s case, its strategic dependence on the United States developed, in part, by historical anxieties that faraway “great and powerful friends”, as former diplomat Allan Gyngell phrased it, might abandon it in a potentially hostile region.

    Prior to the second world war, Australia relied on its former colonial ruler, Britain, for its security. The Fall of Singapore in 1942, in which Japanese forces routed British and Australian troops defending the island, demonstrated the risks of our overdependence on a distant ally.

    In the aftermath of the war, Australia forged a new security alliance with a new global superpower, the United States, through the ANZUS Treaty. Yet, replacing one “great and powerful” but distant friend with another did not alleviate Australia’s abandonment anxieties.

    Since then, debates about Australia’s international role have largely focused on the extent to which it can – and should be – self-reliant in the context of the US alliance, or if it should pursue a more independent foreign policy.

    US domestic politics – particularly during President Donald Trump’s time in office – have also driven uncertainty about Washington’s reliability, as well as its commitment to Asia and the implications for allies like Australia.

    Despite such concerns, Australia’s relationship with the US is as strong and deeply entwined as it has ever been. In fact, it only got stronger during Trump’s first term. While Canberra has sought to deepen engagement with regional states it views as “like-minded”, such as Japan, South Korea and India, it has done so firmly in the context of its broader alliance with the United States.

    This, of course, is driven by the new anxieties over China’s rise as a major economic and military power in the region. In recent years, Beijing’s assertive and coercive behaviours in the region have made it the key national security threat facing Australia.

    This is a break from the past, when Australian leaders – both Labor and Liberal – broadly agreed that a “pragmatic approach” to engaging great powers meant Canberra would not have to “choose sides” between China and the US.

    In 2023, the Albanese government sought a détente of sorts with China, attempting to return to this pragmatic approach. But wariness of Beijing remains.

    Opponents to this strategy have called the government’s efforts to re-engage with China a “threat to Australian sovereignty, principles, and values”.

    Prime Minister Anthony Albanese’s visit to Beijing in late 2023.

    An Indo-Pacific power?

    In the context of these new challenges presented by a rising China, Australia has increasingly leaned into becoming an “Indo-Pacific” power in recent years. There are a number of ways in which this shift is observable.

    First, Australia has been instrumental in encouraging the global adoption of this phrase, “Indo-Pacific”, as a new way of referring to the region. This is partly driven by the desire to maintain US leadership and presence in Australia’s neighbourhood. The US is a Pacific state, so this concept anchors the US in our region in a way that “Asia” does not.

    And when people used the term “Asia-Pacific” to talk about the region in the past, this had a primarily economic connotation. This is due to the importance of the
    Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) forum and the move towards free-trade agreements between Australia and other countries in the region.

    However, the US has become less economically engaged in the region in recent years, with a focus on rebuilding its own industrial base. India, the other major economy in Asia, has also been reluctant to sign up to multilateral, regional free-trade agreements. Neither are parties to the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CP-TPP) or the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) agreements.

    As such, the new term “Indo-Pacific” has become more of a security concept centred on the region’s waters. Generally, it is used to incorporate South, Southeast and Northeast Asia, Oceania (Australia, New Zealand and the Pacific Islands) and the United States. By connecting the Indian (“Indo”) and the Pacific Oceans, it has become primarily a maritime strategic concept.

    The narratives usually associated with the Indo-Pacific also relate to the need to protect the international rules-based order, and freedom of navigation and overflight for ships and aircraft in the region. This, again, reflects the growing geopolitical anxieties about a rising China, particularly in the disputed South and East China seas and the Taiwan Strait.

    Australia does not have territorial or maritime claims in either sea, but we are nonetheless concerned about China’s efforts to undermine the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) and what this might mean for the “rules-based order” more generally.

    The second way Australia is moving more towards becoming a regional power is in the narrowing of its core defence interests to an “inner ring” focused on the South Pacific and maritime Southeast Asia, and to a lesser extent, an “outer ring” in the broader Indo-Pacific and wider world. These geographical boundaries have consequences for how Australia views its international role.

    After nearly two decades of military engagement in the Middle East and Afghanistan, Australia is shifting its focus back on its home region. This reflects not just the limits of our military capabilities, but also new concerns about the changing balance of power in Asia.

    Third, Australia is increasingly focusing on a more strategic, narrower form of multilateralism. This, too, has been more centred on our region.

    Multilateralism has always been seen as an important part of middle power identity. Australia, for instance, played a key role in setting up institutions like the United Nations.

    However, this began to shift under recent Coalition governments. Prime Minister Scott Morrison expressed scepticism about such institutions, criticising them as an “often ill-defined borderless global community” that promoted “negative globalism”.

    Under successive Coalition governments, Australia instead became a key player in two smaller groups of nations – the re-branded “Quad” in 2017 (along with Japan, the US and India) and AUKUS in 2021 (with the US and United Kingdom).

    Under the Albanese government, global multilateralism was reinstated as an important pillar of foreign policy. But Australia’s investment and involvement in these smaller groups has only deepened.

    Both AUKUS and the Quad demonstrate Australia’s changing role as a regional power in the Indo-Pacific. These groups offer Australia an opportunity to shape the regional security agenda by joining forces with other powerful states. They also provide a way of encouraging the US to maintain its presence and leadership in the region and to counterbalance China’s rise.

    As part of this, Australia has become a key proponent of what the Biden administration coined “integrated deterrence”.

    This is a central pillar of the US’ Indo-Pacific strategy that seeks to mobilise “like-minded” states – especially its regional allies such as Australia, Japan and South Korea – to form a regional coalition against rival states. This strategy reflects a growing awareness the US can’t provide security in Asia alone.

    The AUKUS security agreement, including the commitment to develop new nuclear-powered submarines for Australia, is a part of this strategy.

    Since the announcement of the submarine plan in 2021, both the procurement plan and the language that American and Australian leaders have been using suggest that Canberra is preparing to play a bigger security role in the region alongside the US.

    Time for a new ‘strategic imagination’?

    Has Australia’s shift to an Indo-Pacific regional power served it well?

    It has allowed the deepening of defence relationships with partners like Japan and India. And through its roles in the Quad and AUKUS, Australia has a seat at the table and is more visible in regional security discussions.

    But there are risks to a more assertive regional power stance. Australia could be viewed by its neighbours as too focused on military and not invested enough (or in the right way) in diplomacy or regional development. Australia’s overseas aid contribution, for example, has been declining for three decades.

    It is also unclear which other regional states are likely to participate in a US-led coalition if a real conflict with China ever broke out. The Quad and AUKUS groups may be viewed by others as exclusionary or contributing to increasing tensions in the region.

    How nuclear-powered submarines will “deter” potential adversaries is also yet to be clearly explained. These submarines could potentially entangle Australia in a regional conflict instead. Being able to clearly articulate and distinguish between Australian and US interests will remain vital for ensuring that future governments don’t “sleepwalk” into war.

    Finally, Australia’s advocacy of the “rules-based order” has left it – and the US – exposed to criticisms of hypocrisy and double standards, particularly with Washington’s support for Israel’s war on Gaza.

    In our recent book, Girt by Sea: Re-imagining Australian Security, Joanne Wallis and I argue that Australia needs to reconceptualise its role as a regional actor to

    …one which can develop a coherent security strategy by working with old and new allies and partners to shape the regional order in ways that ensure its security.

    The approach emphasises the need for all parts of our government to work in coordination to protect Australians from the range of complex conventional and unconventional challenges it faces (including climate change).

    Australia’s security and its international role should not be viewed through the lens of the “China threat” alone. Doing so is counter-productive, as many states in the region do not share the same perception about China.

    Instead, as Wallis and I wrote, Australia needs a “more comprehensive, nuanced and contingent understanding of the range of security opportunities and threats” we face.


    This is an edited extract from How Australian Democracy Works, a new collection of essays from The Conversation on all aspects of the country’s political landscape.

    Rebecca Strating receives funding from Australia’s Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade.

    – ref. A middle power with ‘great and powerful friends’: Australia’s changing role in the region – https://theconversation.com/a-middle-power-with-great-and-powerful-friends-australias-changing-role-in-the-region-228897

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

    February 27, 2025
  • MIL-Evening Report: Peter Dutton strongly hints he’ll sack 36,000 public servants. Voters deserve to know what services will be affected

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By John Hawkins, Senior Lecturer, Canberra School of Politics, Economics and Society, University of Canberra

    Peter Dutton and his Coalition colleagues have dithered for several weeks on their plans for the Commonwealth public sector.

    While being upfront that public service jobs would be targeted, they’ve made numerous contradictory statements about the number of public servants who would be sacked if the Coalition wins the coming election.

    But Peter Dutton’s most recent comments confirm that he clearly wants to make significant cuts.

    And it’s hard to see how the sackings wouldn’t erode important front line services that many Australians depend on for help and support.

    36,000 jobs on the line

    This week the opposition leader declared the Coalition would achieve A$24 billion dollars in savings by reducing the size of the public service.

    He was unequivocal. The money would be clawed back over four years and would more than cover the Coalition’s promised $9 billion injection into Medicare.

    Dutton explicitly tied the $24 billion in savings to the 36,000 Commonwealth public servants who have been hired since the last election

    Under the Labor Party, there are 36,000 additional public servants, that’s at a cost of $6 billion a year, or $24 billion over the forward estimates. This program totals $9 billion over that period. So, we’ve well and truly identified the savings.

    While still not nominating a precise number of job cuts, it’s Peter Dutton’s clearest statement of intent to date. By “truly” identifying the savings, 36,000 jobs are on the line. And it accords with Dutton’s earlier comments that the extra workers are not providing value for money for Australian taxpayers.

    (They have) not improved the lives of Australians one iota

    While this sounds like he wants to dismiss them all, senior colleagues are more circumspect.

    According to Nationals leader David Littleproud, the number of job cuts has not yet been decided. Shadow Public Service Minister Jane Hume further muddied the waters by referring to the cuts being by attrition, and excluding frontline services.

    Frontline services

    The public service head count has grown to 185,343, as of June 2024. So cutting 36,000 staff, or even a large proportion of that number, would be a very significant reduction.

    The agencies that added the most public servants between June 2023 and June 2024 were the National Disability Insurance Agency (up 2,193), Defence (up 1,425), Health and Aged Care (up 1,173) and Services Australia (up 1,149).

    Many of these extra staff would be providing invaluable front line services to clients and customer who are accessing essential support.

    And some of the new public servants replaced more expensive outsourced workers. Finance Minister Katy Gallagher has claimed the Albanese government has saved $4 billion of taxpayers’ money by reducing spending on consultants and contractors.

    Rather than the alleged explosion in the size of the bureaucracy, the growth in public service numbers has closely matched the increase in the population. Last year, they accounted for 1.36% of all employed persons, up by only a minuscule degree on the 1.35% in 2016.

    Canberra bashing

    According to Dutton, the 36,000 additional public servants hired under Labor all work in Canberra. It was not a slip of the tongue. The claim is also in the Liberal Party’s pre-election pamphlet.

    But only 37% of the public service workforce is located in the national capital. Half are based in state capitals. A full quarter of those involved in service delivery work in regional Australia.

    The Liberals clearly think they have nothing to lose among Canberra voters, given they have no members or senators from the Australian Capital Territory.

    The coming election will no doubt tell us if Canberra bashing still resonates with voters elsewhere in the country. Dutton has clearly made the political judgement that it does.

    Another night of the long knives?

    A change of government often precipitates a clean out at the top of the public service.

    When the Howard government was elected in 1996, no fewer than six departmental secretaries were sacked on the infamous night of the long knives. Then prime minister Tony Abbott dismissed four departmental chiefs in one fell swoop after taking office in 2013. He didn’t even consult his treasurer before dumping the head of Treasury.

    This pattern of culling senior public servants represents a chilling risk to good policy development. Departmental secretaries concerned about losing their jobs may be reluctant to give the “frank and fearless advice” their positions demand.




    Read more:
    After robodebt, here’s how Australia can have a truly ‘frank and fearless’ public service again


    Spending cuts after the election

    Voters are entitled to know what the Coalition has planned for the public service before they cast their ballots.

    The lack of detail on job losses is matched by a reluctance to outline spending cuts elsewhere. Dutton has ruled out an Abbott-style audit commission. He is prepared to cut “wasteful” spending, but won’t say if it may be necessary to also chop some worthwhile outlays to dampen inflationary pressures.

    Dutton is adamant that any spending cuts by a government he leads will be determined after the election, not announced before it. This does nothing for democratic accountability. It does not give the electorate the chance to cast their votes on the basis of an alternative vision from the alternative government.

    All Australians, not just public servants, deserve to know before polling day just how deep Dutton and the Coalition are really planning to cut.

    John Hawkins is a former public servant and lives in Canberra.

    – ref. Peter Dutton strongly hints he’ll sack 36,000 public servants. Voters deserve to know what services will be affected – https://theconversation.com/peter-dutton-strongly-hints-hell-sack-36-000-public-servants-voters-deserve-to-know-what-services-will-be-affected-250797

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

    February 27, 2025
  • MIL-OSI USA News: Remarks by President Trump Before Cabinet Meeting

    Source: The White House

    class=”has-text-align-center”>Cabinet Room

    11:42 A.M. EST

         THE PRESIDENT:  Okay.  Thank you very much.  We appreciate you being here.  And we’ve put together a great Cabinet.  And we’ve had tremendous success.  We’ve been given a lot of credit for having a very successful first month, and we want to make that many months — and years, actually.  But we’re going to have many good months, and we’re going to have many good years, I hope.  And we’re going to solve a lot of problems. 

         We’re doing very well with Russia-Ukraine.  President Zelenskyy is going to be coming on Friday.  It’s now confirmed.  And we’re going to be signing an agreement, which will be a very big agreement.  And I want to thank Howard and Scott for the job you guys did in putting it together.  Really did an amazing job.  And that’ll be on rare earth and other things. 

         And as you know, we’re in for, probably, $350 billion and Europe is in for $100 billion.  And that’s a big difference.  So, we’re in for, probably, three times as much.  And yet, it’s very important to everybody, but Europe is very close.  We have a big ocean separating us.  So, it’s very important for Europe.  And they, hopefully, will step up and do maybe more than they’re doing and maybe a lot more.

         The previous administration put us in a very bad position, but we’ve been able to make a deal where we’re going to get our money back and we’re going to get a lot of money in the future.  And I think that’s appropriate, because we have taxpayers that are — shouldn’t be footing the bill, and they shouldn’t be footing the bill at more than the Europeans are paying. 

         So, it’s all been worked out.  We’re happy about it.  And I think that, very importantly, we’re going to be able to make a deal. 

         Most importantly, by far, we’re going to make a deal with Russia and Ukraine to stop killing people.  They’ll stop killing young Russian soldiers and young Ukrainian soldiers and other people, in addition, in the towns and cities.  And we will consider that a very important thing and a big accomplishment, because it was going nowhere until this administration came in.  They hadn’t spoken to President Putin in two years.  And so, we’ll keep you advised.

         Before we begin the Cabinet, I’d like to have Scott

    and a couple of people say a few things.  But most importantly — where are you?

         SECRETARY TURNER:  I’m right here, sir.

         THE PRESIDENT:  This is a gentleman who’s going places — the head of HUD.  And he’s going to say — you all know him.  And you’re going to say grace —

         SECRETARY TURNER:  Yes, sir.

         THE PRESIDENT:  — and then we’ll have our meeting, right?

    SECRETARY TURNER:  Yes.

         THE PRESIDENT:  Thank you very much. 

         SECRETARY TURNER:  Thank you, Mr. President.  Let’s pray.

         Father, we thank you for this awesome privilege, Father, to be in your presence.  God, thank you that you’ve allowed us to see this day.  The Bible says that your mercies are new every morning.  And, Father God, we give you the glory and the honor.  Thank you, God, for President Trump, Father, for appointing us.  Father God, thank you for anointing us to do this job.  Father, we pray you’ll give the president and the vice president wisdom, Father God, as they lead. 

         Father, I pray for all of my colleagues that are here around the table and in this room.  Lord God, we pray that we would lead with a righteous clarity, Father God, and as we serve the people of this country and every perspective agency, every job that we have, Father, we would humble ourselves before you that we would lead in a manner that you’ve called us to lead and to serve. 

         Father, the Bible says the blessed is the nation whose God is the Lord.  But, Father, we today honor you.  And in your rightful place, Father, thank you for giving us this opportunity to restore faith in this country and be a blessing to the people of America.  And, Lord God, today in our meeting, we pray that you will be glorified in our conversation.
        
         In Jesus’ name, amen.

         PARTICIPANTS:  Amen.

         THE PRESIDENT:  Scott, that was a very good job you did.  You’ve done that before, haven’t you?  (Laughter.)  Wow. 

         So, Scott Turner is a terrific young guy.  He’s heading up HUD, and he’s going to make us all very proud, right?

         SECRETARY TURNER:  Thank you, Mr. President.  Yes, sir.

         THE PRESIDENT:  Thank you very much.  Great job. 

         In just over one month, illegal border crossings have plummeted by numbers that nobody has actually ever seen before.  It’s much more than 100 percent. 

    And we’ve unleashed American energy at levels that will soon be reported, but we think we’re going to get it going very quickly.  We have incredible people on the energy front. 

    I think we have really great people on every front.  I’ll let you know if they’re not good, but I think they really are. 

    And we’re fighting every day to get the prices down.  The inflation is stopping slowly, but part of the reason it’s stopping is because of high interest rates and other problems that we inherited.  But we have to get the prices down — not the inflation down — the prices of eggs and various other things.  Eggs are a disaster. 

         The secretary of Agriculture is going to be showing you a chart that’s actually mindboggling what’s happened — how low they were with us and how high they are now.  But I think we can do something about it —

         SECRETARY ROLLINS:  Yes, sir.

         THE PRESIDENT:  — Madam Secretary.

         SECRETARY ROLLINS:  Yes, sir.

         THE PRESIDENT:  And I think you’re going to do a fantastic job in that position. 

    One of the most important initiatives is DOGE, and we have cut billions and billions and billions of dollars.  We’re looking to get it maybe to a trillion dollars.  If we can do that, we’re going to start getting to be at a point where we can think in terms of balancing budgets, believe it or not, something you haven’t heard in many, many years — decades, actually.  And it’s a big — whether it’s this year or next year, I think we’ll be very close to balancing budgets.  And the DOGE is very important. 

    And Elon is here to give you a summary of what’s happening, some of the things they found — some of the horrible things they found — some of the theft and fraud, and we call it waste and abuse, but a lot of fraud, and probably some fraud that we’re not going to be able to prove is fraud, but when you hear the names and the places where this money is going, it’s a disgrace. 

         But we’ve requested that a lot of people — we want to make sure that the people are working.  So, letters were sent out, and I think everyone at this table is very much behind it.  And if they aren’t, I’d want them to speak up.  But they’re very much behind it. 

         Letters were sent out to people just to find out, if the people exist, do they work?  Who do they work for?  Where are they?  You know, where have they been working?  Have they been working for other companies or other entities at all and being paid by the government, so they have two jobs, but they’re supposed to have one? 

    And the letter asks some simple questions like, “What have you done lately?”  And if they can answer that — because I can.  I can tell you everything I’ve done for the last long period of time — a lot more than a week. 

    And in many cases, we haven’t gotten responses.  Usually that means that maybe that person doesn’t exist or that person doesn’t want to say they’re working for another company while being paid by the United States government. 

    So, there’s a lot of interesting things.  It’s very unique, but we have a very unique situation because we have a lot of people that were scamming our country.  We have a lot of dishonest people.  We have a lot of people that took advantage of a lot of different situations, and we’re not going to let that happen. 

    So, I’m going to ask, if it’s possible, to have Elon get up first and talk about DOGE, because it seems to be of great interest to everyone. 

    I will say that there is a large group of people in this country that have such admiration for what we’re doing.  I got elected with a tremendous vote — winning every swing state, winning the popular vote, winning the counties by thousands of counties.  I think it was 2,800 to 500.  2,800 counties to 500 counties.  Think of that. 

    And so, we have a mandate to do this, and this is part of the reason I got elected.  I got elected based on taxes and based on many things, the border, but also based on balancing budgets and getting our country back into shape, and this is a big part of it. 

    So, Elon, if you could get up and explain where you are, how you’re doing, and how much we’re cutting.  And it’s an honor to have you.  He’s been a tremendously successful guy.  He’s really working so hard.  And he’s got businesses to run.  And in many ways, they say, “How do you do this?”  And, you know, he’s sacrificing a lot and — getting a lot of praise, I’ll tell you, but he’s also getting hit.  And we would expect that, and that’s the way it works. 

    So, I’d like to have Elon Musk please say a few words.

         MR. MUSK:  Well, tha- — thank you —
        
         THE PRESIDENT:  Thank you, Elon.

    MR. MUSK:  Thank you, Mr. President.  Well, I a- — I actually just call myself humble tech support here — (laughter) — because this is actually — as crazy as it sounds, that — that is almost a literal description of the work that the DOGE team is doing is helping fix the government computer systems.  Many of these systems are extremely old.  They don’t communicate.  There are a lot of mistakes in the systems.  The software doesn’t work.  The — so, we are actually tech support.  It’s — it’s a — it’s ironic, but it’s true.

    The — the overall goal here with the DOGE team is to help address the enormous deficit.  We simply cannot sustain, as a country, $2 trillion deficits.  The interest rates — just the interest on the national debt now exceeds the Defense Department spending. 

    We spend a lot on the Defense Department, but we’re spending, like, over a trillion dollars on interest.  If this continues, the country will go — become de facto bankrupt.  It’s — it’s not an optional thing.  It is an essential thing.  That — that’s — that’s the reason I’m here and taking a lot of flak and getting a lot of death threats, by the way.  I can, like, stack them up, you know.

    But if we don’t do this, America will go bankrupt.  That’s why it has to be done.  And I’m confident, at this point — knock on wood, you know — knock on my wooden head — (laughter) — the — there’s a lot of wood up there — that we can actually find a trillion dollars in savings.  That would be roughly 15 percent of the $7 trillion budget.

    And obviously, that can only be done with the support of everyone in this room.  And I’d like to thank everyone for — for your support.  Thank you very much this.  This — this can only be done with — with your support.

    So, this is — it’s really — DOGE is a support function for the president and for the — the agencies and departments to help achieve those savings and to effect- — effectively find 15 percent in reduction in fraud and — and waste.

    And — and we bring the receipts.  So, people say, like, “Well, is this real?”  Just go to DOGE.gov.  We l- — we — line item by line item, we specify each item.  So — and w- — and I — I should say, we — also, we will make mistakes.  We won’t be perfect.  But when we make mistake, we’ll fix it very quickly. 

    So, for example, with USAID, one of the things we accidentally canceled, very briefly, was Ebola — Ebola prevention.  I think we all wanted Ebola prevention.  So, we restored the Ebola prevention immediately, and there was no interruption.

    But we do need to move quickly if we’re — if we’re to achieve a trillion-dollar deficit reduction in tw- — in — in financial year 2026.  It requires saving $4 billion per day, every day from now through the end of September.  But we can do it, and we will do it.

    Thank you. 

    THE PRESIDENT:  Well, do you have any questions of Elon while we’re on the subject of DOGE?  Because we’ll finish off with that.  And if you would have any questions, please ask — you could ask me or Elon.

    Go ahead, please. 

    Q    Thank you, Mr. President.  Thank you, Mr. Musk.  I just wanted to ask you, the — President Trump put out a Truth Social today saying that everybody in the Cabinet was — was happy with you.  I just wondered if that — if you had heard otherwise, and if you had heard anything about members of the Cabinet who weren’t happy with the way things were going.  And if so, what are you doing to address those — any dissatisfaction?

    MR. MUSK:  To the best of —

    THE PRESIDENT:  Hey, Elon, let the Cabinet speak just for a second.  (Laughter.) 

         Is anybody unhappy with Elon?  If you are, we’ll throw them out of here.  (Laughter.)  Is anybody unhappy?  (Applause.)

    They are — they have a lot of respect for Elon and that he’s doing this.  And some disagree a little bit, but I will tell you, for the most part, I think everyone is not only happy, they’re thrilled. 

    So, go ahead, Elon.

    SECRETARY ROLLINS:  And grateful.

    MR. MUSK:  And President Trump has put together, I think, the best cabinet ever, literally.  So, I — and I do not give false praise.  This — this is an incredible group of people.  I don’t think such a talented team has actually ever been assembled.  I think it’s literally the best cabinet that the country has ever had.  And I think the companies should be incredibly appreciative of the people in this room.

    Q    Mr. President —

    THE PRESIDENT:  Please.  Yeah.  Go ahead.

    Q    Mr. President, thank you.  Mr. Musk.  Are there — about half of the government employees so far appear to have responded to your request for what they’ve been doing over the past week.  Is there a timeline in place for next moves for people being fired?  And when can the American people expect to see results from that?

    MR. MUSK:  Yes.  Well, to be — to be clear, like, the — I think that email, perhaps, was misinterpreted as a performance review, but actually it was a pulse check review.  “Do you have a pulse?”  (Laughter.)  “Do you have a pulse and two neurons?”  (Laughter.)  So, if you have a pulse and two neurons, you can reply to an email.

    This is, you know, I think, not a high bar, is what I’m saying.  This is a — should be — anyone could accomplish this. 

    But what we are trying to get to the bottom of is we think there are a number of people on the government payroll who are dead, which is probably why they can’t respond, and — and some people who are not real people, like they’re literally fictional individuals that are collecting payche- — well, somebody is collecting paychecks on a fictional individual.  So, we’re just literally trying to figure out are these people real, are they alive, and can they write an email, which I think is a reasonable expectation for the Amer- — you know, the American public would have at least that expectation of someone in the public sector.

    Q    Mr. Musk —

    Q    Mr. Musk —

    Q    — roughly a million employees —

    MR. MUSK:  (Laughs.)  This is not a — this is not a high bar, guys.  Come on.  (Laughter.)

    Q    Roughly a million employees have responded so far to this email.  Does that mean that the remaining 1 million or so federal employees now risk being terminated?  And is it your understanding and expectation when you post a directive on X that the Cabinet secretaries will follow that order?  Because several agencies have instructed employees that this is voluntary or not to respond.

    MR. MUSK:  Yeah.  Well, I mean, to be cl — so, I guess there was a — like, last week, the president en- — encouraged me, via Truth Social and also via phone call, to be more aggressive.  And I was like, “Okay.”  You know, “Yes, sir, Mr. President.  We will indeed do that.”  The president is the commander in chief.  I — I do what the president asks.

    So — and I said, “Can we send out an email to everyone, just saying, ‘What did you get done last week?’”  The president said yes.  So, I — I did that. 

    And, you know, we — we got a partial response.  But we — we’re going to send another email.  But we — our — our goal is not to be capricious or — or unfair.  It’s — we want to give people every opportunity to send an email and the email could simply be “What I’m working on is too sensitive or classified to — to describe.”  Like, literally, just re- — that would be sufficient.  We’re — we’re — you know, I think this is just common sense. 

    Q    And what is your target number for — for how many workers, employees you’re looking to cut total?

    MR. MUSK:  We — we wish to keep everyone who is doing a job that is essential and doing that job well.  But if — if they’re — if the job is not essential or they’re not doing the job well, they obviously should not be on the public payroll. 

    (Cross-talk.)

    THE PRESIDENT:  No, I have to — I would like to add —

    (Cross-talk.)

    Wait a minute.  Wait.  Wait.  I’d like to add that those million people that haven’t responded, though, Elon, they are on the bubble.  You know, I wouldn’t say that we’re thrilled about it.  You know, they haven’t responded.  Now, maybe they don’t exist.  Maybe we’re paying people that don’t exist.

    Don’t forget, we just got here.  This group just got here.  But those people are on the bubble, as they say.  You know, maybe they’re going to be gone.  Maybe they’re not around.  Maybe they have other jobs.  Maybe they moved and they’re not where they’re supposed to be.  A lot of things could have happened.

    I wouldn’t say that Biden ran a very tight administration.  They spent money like nobody has ever spent money before, wasted money — the Green New Scam, all of the different things they spent money on. 

    And you’ve seen that.  You’ve seen that with some of the things that I read in speeches.  I read them, and people can’t believe, when I read them, $20 million here, $30 million here for, you know, a little educational course on something.  Circumcision, right?  Circumcision.  $20 million to inform the people of such-and-such a country on other things and other things other than that.

    So, yeah, those people are — right now, we’re trying to find out who those people are that haven’t responded.  Now, there’ll be some agencies — like Marco has people within State that are right now doing very classified, very confidential work.  And we understand that, and we’ve talked.  And, you know, we’re being a little more surgical. 

    And Marco is doing a lot of things himself.  He’s — and some of the secretaries are.  We’re going to be going to them.  We’re going to be talking about it today.  We’re going to ask them to do their own DOGE.  In other words, they’ll look in their group and who —

    I spoke with Lee Zeldin, and he thinks he’s going to be cutting 65 or so percent of the people from Environmental, and we’re going to speed up the process, too, at the same time.  He had a lot of people that weren’t doing their job — they were just obstructionists — and a lot of people that didn’t exist, I guess, Lee, too.  You found a lot of empty spots that the people weren’t there.  They didn’t exist.

    And I think Education is going to be one of those.  You go around Washington, you see all these buildings — the Department of Education.  We want to move education back to the states, where it belongs.  Iowa should have education.  Indiana should run their own education.  You’re going to see education go way up.

    Right now, we’re ranked at the very bottom of the list, but we’re at the top of the list in one thing: the cost per pupil.  We spend more money per pupil than any other country in the world, and yet it’s Denmark and Norway, Sweden.  And I — you hate to say this — and, you know, we’re going to get along very well with China, but it’s a competitor: They’re at the top of the list.  They’re among the top 10, usually.  And they’re a very big country, so we can’t use that as an excuse — right? — because we’re a very big country too.

    But we’re – we were ranked last time — under Biden, we were ranked 40 out of 40.  They do the 40 certain nations that they’ve done for a long time.  It seems to be 40, for whatever reason.  And we were ranked number 40.  A year ago, we were 38.  Then we were 39.  We’re — we hit 40.  And so, we’re last in that, and we’re first in cost per pupil.  So, I would say that’s unacceptable.

    Lawrence, do you have something?  Go ahead.

    Q    So, Mr. President, I know you like competition, and I know it’s early.  So, which department are you most impressed with? 

    And then, to Mr. Mu- — (laughter).  That’s the first one.  And, Mr. Musk, which department have you received the most resistance from? 

         Mr. President, you first.

    THE PRESIDENT:  Well, I think both of those questions are a little bit — well, you’re a pretty controversial guy.  (Laughter.)  Look, it’s very early.  Right now, I think I’m impressed with everybody.  So far, everybody.  If I wasn’t, in the first month, we’d — and some of them just got here.  They just got approved two days ago, right?

    But I think I’m very impressed with everybody.  So far, I’m very happy with all of the choices.

    I think that Elon has done incredibly with some groups.  And some groups are much easier than others.  It is true: State is a, you know, very difficult situation.  We’re right now negotiating very successfully, I think, with Russia and with Ukraine, and we have a lot of countries involved.  And we have to be a little bit careful what we do and who we’re terminating.  But Marco is doing that very — I think he’s going to be very precise.  It’s going to be —

    We’re cutting down government.  We’re cutting down the size of government.  We have to.  We’re bloated.  We’re sloppy.  We have a lot of people that aren’t doing their job.  We have a lot of people that don’t exist. 

         You look at Social Security as an example.  I mean, you have so many people in Social Security where, if you believe it, they’re 200 years old.  And what we’re doing is finding out: Are checks going out for that and is somebody cashing those checks who’s maybe 35 years old?  Okay? 

         So, there’s a lot of dishonesty.  There’s a lot of fraud. 

         But I think at this moment, I’ll take Elon off the spot.  I think that he’s impressed — he said it very well –better than I can say it — that he’s impressed with the people in this room.  Very impressed.  And I am too.  And it’s too early to say, but I think everybody is on board.  They all know — we want to balance a budget.  We want to have a balanced budget within a reasonably short period of time, meaning maybe by next year or the year after, but maybe — maybe even sooner than that. 

         Q    Mr. President, your — your number one issue was the border.  We just got new information that they’re doxing our federal agents.  They’re putting their personal information out there, these activists, and they’re disrupting the operations.  So, you got Tren de Aragua running all across the country —

         THE PRESIDENT:  Well, we have activists.  That’s true.  And a lot of those —

         Q    So, what are we going to do about the activists —

         THE PRESIDENT:  Yeah.  A lot of those activists are acting illegally.  And we’ll give that to our attorney general, and she’ll take a look at that very strongly.  But we’re also having tremendous support from Border Patrol, from ICE.  The ICE agents have been unbelievable.  Border Patrol — their leadership at Border Patrol has been incredible, and they’re working very well. 

         And, as you know — and I saw you reporting it this morning, actually — we set records on the least number of illegal aliens coming in, migrants coming into our country that we’ve had in more than 50 years.  And we did this all within a period of weeks, because we took over a mess.  The world was pouring in.  And remember, they were coming in from jails and prisons and mental institutions and insane asylums, and they were gang members and drug dealers.  Anybody who wanted to come in, they came.  And from not just South America, from all over the world.  So, it’s amazing what they’ve done. 

         And Kristi and — and Tom Homan, the job they’ve done has been absolutely amazing.  We set records for — and we want people to come into our country, by the way, but they want to come in — they have to come in legally. 

         I want that to be really understood.  We want people in our country, but they have to come in legally. 

         Q    Can I follow on that, Mr. President?

    Q    Mr. President.

    Q    About the — the Trump gold card idea —

         THE PRESIDENT:  Yeah.

         Q    — that you unveiled yesterday.

         THE PRESIDENT:  I hope you liked it.  (Laughter.)

         Q    I await more information.  But the question is: Does this reflect a view, on your part, that the American immigration system has never been properly monetized as you feel it should be?
        

         THE PRESIDENT:  Well, not so much monetized.  It hasn’t been properly run.  I get calls from, as an example, companies where they want to hire the number one student at a school.  A person comes from India, China, Japan, lots of different places, and they go to Harvard, the Wharton School of Finance.  They go to Yale.  They go to all great schools.  And they graduate number one in their class, and they are made job offers, but the offer is immediately rescinded because you have no idea whether or not that person can stay in the country.  I want to be able to have that person stay in the country. 

         These companies can go and buy a gold card, and they can use it as a matter of recruitment. 

         At the same time, the company is using that money to pay down debt.  We’re going to — we’re going to pay down a lot of debt with that.

         Q    Are they going to have to —

         THE PRESIDENT:  And I think the gold card is going to be used by — not only for that.  I mean, they’ll be used by companies.  I mean, I could see Apple — I’ve spoken with Tim Cook — and, by the way, he’s going to make a $500 billion investment in the country only because of the results of the election and, I think, because of tariffs.  He’s going to want to be in the country because of tariffs.  Because if you’re in the country, there is no tariff.  If you’re out of the country, you got to pay tariffs.  And that’s going to be a great investment, I think, that he’s making.  I know it’s going to be a great investment. 

         But we have to be able to get people in the country, and we want people that are productive people.  And I will tell you, the people that can pay $5 million, they’re going to create jobs.  They’re going to spend a lot of money on jobs.  They’re going to have to pay taxes on that too.  So, they’re going to be hiring people, they’re going to be bringing people in and companies in.  And, I don’t know, maybe it will sell like crazy.  I happen to think it’s going to sell like crazy.  It’s a bargain.

         But we’ll —

         Q    Will they have to commit to a certain number?

         THE PRESIDENT:  — know fairly soon.  I think Howard and — and Scott — a few of you, really, are responsible for it.  But, Howard, if you want to discuss that for a couple of minutes, I think I’d like to have you.  I think it’s going to be a very successful program.

         SECRETARY LUTNICK:  Sure.

         THE PRESIDENT:  This is Commerce.

         SECRETARY LUTNICK:  So, the EB-5 program, which has been around for many years, had investment of a million dollars into projects in America.  And those projects were often suspect, they didn’t really work out, there wasn’t any oversight of it.  And so, for a million-dollar investment, you got a visa, and then you came into the country and ended up with a green card. 

         So, it was poorly overseen, poorly executed.  Then you had our border open, where millions of people came through. 

         So, the idea is we will have a proper business.  We will modify the EB-5 agreement.  Kristi and I are working on it together.  For $5 million, they’ll get a license from the Department of Commerce.  Then they’ll make a proper investment on the EB-5, right?  And we think Scott and I will design the EB-5 investment model, because Scott and I are the best people together to do that.  So, this is joint. 

         This is exactly the Trump administration.  We all work together.  We work it out to be the best.  And if we sell — just remember — 200,000 — there’s a line for EB-5 of 250,000 right now — 200,000 of these gold green cards is $1 trillion

    to pay down our debt, and that’s why the president is doing it, because we are going to balance this budget, and we are going to pay off the debt under President Trump. 

         Q    Mr. —

    Q    And to qualify, do you have to promise and make commitments to create a certain number of jobs here in the U.S.?

         THE PRESIDENT:  No.  No.  Because not all these people are going to be job builders.  They’ll be successful people, or they’ll be people that were hired from colleges, like — sort of like paying an athlete a bonus.  I mean, Apple or one of the companies will go out and they’ll spend five mil- — they’ll buy five of them, and they’re going to get five people. 

         Look, I’ve had the complaint where — I’ve had the complaint from a lot of companies where they go out to hire people, and they can’t hire them b- — out of colleges.  And you know what they do?  They go back to India, or they go back to the country where they came, and they open up a company, and they become billionaires.  They become — and they’re employing thousands and there are a lot of examples. 

    There are some really big examples where they were forced out of the country.  They graduated top in their class at a great school, and they weren’t able to stay.  This is all the time you hear it. 

    And the biggest complaint I get from companies, other than overregulation, which we took care of, but we’re going to have to take care of it here, because a lot of that was put back on by Biden.  But the biggest complaint is the fact that they can’t have any longevity with people.  This way, they have pretty much unlimited longevity. 

    Also, with the $5 million, you know, that’s a path to citizenship.  So, that’s going to be — it’s sort of a green card-plus, and it’s a path to citizenship.  We’re going to call it the gold card.  And I think it’s going to be very treasured.  I think it’s going to do very well.  And we’re going to start selling, hopefully, in about two weeks.

    Now, just so you understand, if we sell a million — right? — a million, that’s $5 trillion.  Five trillion.  Howard was using a different number, but that’s $5 trillion.  If we sell 10 million, which is possible — 10 million highly productive people coming in or people that we’re going to make productive — they’ll be young, but they’re talented, like a talented athlete — that’s $50 trillion. 

    That means our debt is totally paid off, and we have $15 trillion above that.  And — now, I don’t know that we’re going to sell that many.  Maybe we won’t so many at all.  But I think we’re going to sell a lot, because I think there’s — there really is a thirst. 

    No other country can do this, because people don’t want to go to other countries.  They want to come here.  Everybody wants to come here, especially since November 5th.  (Laughter.)

    (Cross-talk.)

    SECRETARY LUTNICK:  They’ll all be vetted, by the way.  All these people will be vetted. 

    Q    How?

    SECRETARY LUTNICK:  Okay?  They’ll be vetted.

    Q    Mr. President, on Ukraine.  Can you talk a lot — a little bit about what type of security guarantees you’re willing to make?

    THE PRESIDENT:  Well, I’m not going to make security guarantees beyond very much.  We’re going to have Europe do that, because it’s in — you know, we’re talking about Europe is their next-door neighbor.  But we’re going to make sure everything goes well. 

    And as you know, we’ll be making a — we’ll be really partnering with Ukraine in terms of rare earth.  We very much need rare earth.  They have great rare earth.  We’ll be working with Secretary Burgum and with Chris.  You’ll be working on that together. 

    And we’re going to be able to have tremendous — I mean, this gives us — because we don’t have that much of it here.  We have some, but we don’t have that much, and we need a lot more to really propel us to the next level of — to lead in every way.  We’re leading right now with AI.  We’re leading with everything right now, but we have to — we need resources. 

    We have to double our electric capacity.  We have to do many things.  We have to really triple, if you think of it, the electric capacity from what we have right now, if you can believe it.  (Laughter.) 

    Q    But will the United States — can I —

    THE PRESIDENT:  So, I just say this.  So, the deal we’re making gets us — it brings us great wealth.  We get back the money that we spent, and we hope that we’re going to be able to settle this up. 

    We want to settle it.  We want to stop — I tell you what.  I’m doing it for two reasons, but the number one reason, by far, is to watch — all these people being killed.  I see pictures every week from — I assume satellite pictures, mostly, but there’s some pictures on site of thousands of soldiers that are being killed.  They’re being decimated, because equipment today — military equipment is so powerful and so devastating.  And, number one, I want to see people stop. 

    And they’re not from here.  They’re from primarily two other countries. 

    And then, by the way, let’s talk about the Middle East.  We got to solve that problem too.  And that’s come a long way.  We’re doing very well in that also.  A lot of things are happening on that.  But I’m watching soldiers being killed — Ukrainian and Russian soldiers being killed.  My number one thing is to get that stopped. 

    My number two thing is I don’t want to have to pay any more money, because we’ve — Biden has spent $350 billion without any chance of getting it back.  Now we’re going to be getting all of that money back, plus a lot more.  And we provided a great thing.  I mean, we’ve provided something very important, and we’ll be working with Ukraine and — because we’ll be taking that — we’re going to be taking what we’re entitled to take. 

    Now, they spent $350 billion, and Europe spent $100 billion.  Now, does anybody really think that’s fair?  But then we find out, a little while ago — not so long ago, a few months ago, I found out that the money they spent, they get back, but the money we spent, we don’t get back.  I said, “Well, we’re going to get it back.” 

    And we’ll be able to make a deal.  And again, President Zelenskyy is coming to sign the deal.  And it’s a great thing.  It’s a great deal for Ukraine, too, because they get us over there, and we’re going to be working over there.  We’ll be on the land.  And, you know, in that way, it’s — there’s sort of automatic security, because nobody’s going to be messing around with our people when we’re there.  And so, we’ll be there in that way. 

    But Europe will be watching it very closely.  I know that UK has said and France has said that they want to put — they volunteered to put so-called peacekeepers on the site.  And I think that’s a good thing.

    (Cross-talk.)

    Q    Mr. President, you had mentioned the high cost of eggs, and we’ve seen consumer confidence this week have a sharp drop from last month — the biggest dip in, I believe, three years.  Why is that — your assessment, why is that the case and is there anything you can do? 

    THE PRESIDENT:  Well, I think that consumer confidence — if you look at confidence in the nation, it had the biggest increase in the history of the chart.  It went up 42 points in a period of, like, days after the election, since the election.  So, since the election, the confidence in our nation — including right track, wrong track — the first time it’s ever happened, where we were on the right track, because this country has been on the wrong track for a long time. 

    So, the confidence in business, confidence in the country has reached an all-time high.  We have never reached levels like we are right now.

    Okay.

    (Cross-talk.)

    Q    Mr. President, you said — Mr. President, you’ve been very clear in saying that as long as you’re president, Iran will never get a nuclear weapon. 

    THE PRESIDENT:  That’s true. 

    Q    Is it also your policy that as long as you’re president, China will never take Taiwan by force?

    THE PRESIDENT:  I never comment on that.  I don’t comment on any — because I don’t want to ever put myself in that position.  And if I said it, I certainly wouldn’t be saying it to you.  I’d be saying it to other people, maybe people around this table — (laughter) — and very specific people around this table.  

    Q    Is it a concern (inaudible)?

    THE PRESIDENT:  So, I don’t want to put myself in that position.  But I can tell you what, I have a great relationship with President Xi.  I’ve had a great relationship with him.  We want them to come in and invest. 

    I see so many things saying that we don’t want China in this country.  That’s not right.  We want them to invest in the United States.  That’s good.  That’s a lot of money coming in.  And we’ll invest in China.  We’ll do things with China. 

    The relationship we’ll have with China would be a very good one.  I see all of these phony reports that we don’t want their money; we don’t want anything to do with them.  That’s wrong. 

    We’re going to have a good relationship with China, but they won’t be able to take advantage of us.  What they did to Biden was — he didn’t know what was happening.  He didn’t know what he was doing.  The administration didn’t know what they were doing.  It was very sad to watch. 

         But we’re going to have a good relationship with China and Russia and Ukraine and the Middle East.  We’re doing things that —

    Look, when I left, we had no wars.  We had defeated ISIS totally.  We had no inflation.  We didn’t have the Afghanistan withdrawal — the worst withdrawal anybody has ever seen.  I think that’s one of the reasons that President Putin looked at that.  He said, “Wow, these guys are a paper tiger.  Look at” — we’re no paper tiger. 

    Don’t forget: We got rid of ISIS in three weeks.  People said it would take five years.  We did it, because when I came in, I let them do what they had to do.  And the man that headed that operation is now going to be your — your chairman, right?

    SECRETARY HEGSETH:  Yes, sir.

    THE PRESIDENT:  Chairman of the Joint Chiefs. 

    SECRETARY HEGSETH:  Yes, sir.

    THE PRESIDENT:  And — “Razin” Caine.  I liked him right from the beginning.  As soon as I heard his name, I said, “That’s my guy.” 

    Okay.  Any other questions?

    (Cross-talk.)

    Q    Mr. President, has there been enough de- — decreases in crossings at the border for you to continue the pause on tariffs against Mexico and Canada?  And, if not —

    THE PRESIDENT:  No, no.  I’m going to — I’m not stopping the tariffs, no.  Millions of people have died because of the fentanyl that comes over the border. 

    Q    Even with the 90 percent drop in border crossings, though, this —

    THE PRESIDENT:  Well, that’s — well —

    Q    — last month compared to about a year ago?

    THE PRESIDENT:  Yeah, they’ve been good, but that’s also due to us.  Mostly due to us.  I mean —

    Q    Mr. President —

         Q    Mr. President, on CBS — 

    THE PRESIDENT:  — it’s very hard.  It’s, right now, very hard to come through the border.  But the — look, the damage has been done.  We’ve lost millions of people due to fentanyl.  It comes mostly from China, but it comes through Mexico, and it comes through Canada. 

    Q    Mr. Presi- —

    THE PRESIDENT:  And I have to tell you that, you know, on April 2nd — I was going to do it on April 1st, but I’m a little bit superstitious, so I made it April 2nd — the tariffs go on, not all of them but a lot of them.  And I think you’re going to see something that’s going to be amazing. 

    We’ve been taken advantage of as a country for a long period of time.  We’ve been — we’ve been tariffed, but we didn’t tariff.  Now, I did.  When I was here, I tariffed.  We took in $700 billion from China — $700 billion.  Not one president in this — in the history of our country took in 10 cents from China.  At the same time, China respected us. 

    Now, when COVID came in, that was a different deal.  I used to call it the China virus.  I guess I can call it the China virus again, but, you know, it was — it’s an accurate term, but I won’t do that out of respect to China.  Okay?

    (Cross-talk.)

    Say it again.  What?

    Q    On Gaza.  I just wondered if there’s any progress towards the second phase of the ceasefire that you can tell us about.

    THE PRESIDENT:  Well, I’m very disappointed when I see four — four bodies came in today.  These are young people.  Young people don’t die.  Okay?  Young people don’t die.  These are young people.  Four bodies came in today.  They think they’re doing us a favor by sending us bodies. 

    So, look, that’s a decision that has to be made by Israel, by Bibi, but Israel has to make that decision.  We got a lot of hostages back, but it’s very sad what happened to those people.  I mean, you had a young lady with her hand practically blown off.  You know why it blew up?  Because she put up her hand to try and stop a bullet that was coming her way, and it hit her hand and blew off her fingers, big part of her hand. 

    This is a vicious group of people, and Israel is going to have to decide what they’re doing.  Phase one is going to be ending.  Think of it: Today, they sent in four bodies.  Bodies. 

    And I will say one thing, though.  I’ve spoken to a lot of the parents and a lot of the people involved.  They want those bodies almost as much and maybe even just as much as they wanted their son or their daughter.  Amazing.  “Please, sir.  Please.  My son is dead, but they have his body.  Please can you get it for us?”  They — it’s the biggest thing.  It’s incredible the level — they want the bodies of these people.  They’re dead.  They’re dead. 

    And, you know, when I saw the ones that came in two weeks ago, they looked like they just got out of a concentration camp.  Then, the following week, a group came in, and they weren’t as bad — in as bad of shape.

    But Israel is going to have to make a decision.  You’re right, phase one, and now phase two has started.  And today, we got some, you know, very, very sad — we knew they were dead, by the way.  We knew they were going to be bodies, as opposed to people that were living.  But it’s a very sad situation. 

    At some point, somebody is going to say we got to do something about this.

    (Cross-talk.)

    Q    Mr. President, you were just talking about Afghanistan and the botched withdrawal.  Have all the generals or command staff that were involved with the withdrawal been fired or relieved of duty?

    THE PRESIDENT:  Well, that’s a great idea.  It’s — (laughter) — sorry, I’m not going to tell this man what to do, but I will say that.  If I had his place, I’d fire every single one of them, Pete.  Pete, that’s a very good question. 

    SECRETARY HEGSETH:  Well, it’s a question we’ve thought a lot about.  We’re doing a complete review of every single aspect of what happened with the botched withdrawal of Afghanistan and plan to have full accountability.  It’s one of the first things we announced at the Defense Department for that reason, sir. 

    Certainly General “Razin” Caine, who’s on his way in, was not a part of that.  Instead, was a part of leading the effort against ISIS by untying the hands of war fighters and finishing the job properly and then bringing our troops home. 

    So, we’re taking a very different view, obviously, than the previous administration, and there will be full accountability. 

    THE PRESIDENT:  I don’t see big promotions in that group.  (Laughter.)  And I think they’re going to be largely gone.  I know the man on my left.  I think they’re going to be largely gone. 

    That was a horrible display.  And, you know, I’ve dealt with the parents and the family of the 13 that were killed.  But, you know, nobody ever talks about the 40 that were so badly hurt, with the arms and the legs and the face and the whole thing — the missing arms and legs.  It was so terrible, the way that was handled.

    And it should have been gone through Bagram.  We have a big base with big fences that nobody can get in, and you have, you know, hundreds of acres, instead of a little local airport where the whole place went crazy.  That was so badly handled.  And I would think that most of those people are going to be gone. 

    Q    Are we going to take Bagram back?

    THE PRESIDENT:  So, I’ll tell you what has bothered me very much — very, very much: We give billions of dollars to Afghanistan.  Nobody knows that.  Nobody knew that.  Do you know we give billions of dollars to Afghanistan?  And yet we left behind all of that equipment, which wouldn’t have happened. 

    You know, we were getting out under me.  I’m the one that got it down to 5,000 people.  We were going to get out, but we were going to keep Bagram, not because of Afghanistan but because of China, because it’s exactly one hour away from where China makes its nuclear missiles. 

    So, we were going to keep Bagram.  We were going to keep a small force on Bagram.  We were going to have Bagram Air Base, one of the biggest air bases in the world.  One of the biggest runways, one of the most powerful runways, in the sense that it was very heavy concrete and steel.  You could carry about anything.  You could land anything on those runways. 

    We gave it up.  And you know who’s occupying it right now?  China.  China.  Biden gave it up.  So, we’re going to keep that, and we’re going to have a withdrawal, and we’re going to take our equipment.  We’re going to do it properly.  We’re going to do it very — we’re going to keep the equipment. 

         Well, they ran out.  It was — what happened there was a — in fact, you know, in all fairness to Putin, when he saw that, he said, “Well, this is our time to go and go into Ukraine,” I guess, because it was — the timing seemed to be about right. 

         But we send them billions of dollars in aid, which nobody knows.  If they — if the American public knew that — they know it now.  And if we’re doing that, I think they should give our equipment back.  And I told Pete to study that. 

    But we left billions — tens of billions of dollars’ worth of equipment behind.  Brand-new trucks.  You see them display it every year on their little roadway someplace where they have a road and they drive the — you know, waving the flag and talking about America.  Beautiful equipment that’s all — I mean, the top-of-the-line stuff, brand-new stuff.  Now it’s getting older. 

         But you know what?  We’re going to pay them.  I think we should get a lot of that equipment back. 

         You know that Afghanistan is one of the biggest sellers of military equipment in the world.  You know why?  They’re selling the equipment that we left.  We’re first.  They were second or third.  Can you believe it?  They’re selling 777,000

    rifles, 70,000 armor-plated — many of them were armor-plated trucks and vehicles — 70,000. 

         If you think of a used car lot, the biggest one in the country, you have — I would say, JD, if somebody had 500 cars, that would be a lot. 

    THE VICE PRESIDENT:  Yeah, that would be quite a lot.

    THE PRESIDENT:  This is 70,000 vehicles we had there, and we left it for them.  I think we should get it back.

         (Cross-talk.)

         Q    Mr. President, the spending bill that passed last night aims to cut $2 trillion.

         THE PRESIDENT:  Right.

         Q    Can you guarantee that Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security will not be touched?

         THE PRESIDENT:  Yeah.  I mean, I have said it so many times, you shouldn’t be asking me that question.  Okay?  This will not be “read my lips.”  It won’t be “read my lips” anymore: We’re not going to touch it.

         Now, we are going to look for fraud.  I’m sure you’re okay with that, like people that shouldn’t be on, people that are illegal aliens and others — criminals, in many cases.  And that’s with Social Security.  We have a lot of people — you see that immediately.  When you see people that are 200 years old that are being sent checks for Social Security — some of them are actually being sent checks. 

    So, we’re tracing that down, and I have a feeling that Pam is going to do a very good job with that.  But you have a lot of fraud. 

         But, no, I’m not — we’re not doing anything on that.

         Q    Mr. President, part of your mission, sir —

         Q    Mr. President — Mr. President, on CBS News.  Mr. President, you’re in litigation —
        
         Q    Part of your mission has been — thank you.  I’m sorry. 

         Part of your mission has been to restore executive control over the executive branch.  Is it your view of your authority that you have the power to call up any one of or all of the people seated at this table and issue orders that they’re bound to follow?

         THE PRESIDENT:  Oh, yeah.  They’ll follow the orders.  Yes, they will. 

         Q    No exceptions? 

         THE PRESIDENT:  No except- — well, let’s see.  Let me think.  Oh, yeah.  Yeah.  She’ll have an exception.  (The president points at Secretary Rollins.)  (Laughter.)

         Of course, no exceptions.  You know that.

         Q    Mr. President, can you clarify the Canada/Mexico tariffs.  You had put that 30-day pause. 

    THE PRESIDENT:  Yeah.

    Q    You just referred to —

         THE PRESIDENT:  It’s 25 percent.

         Q    Twenty-five percent.  When does it go into effect?

         THE PRESIDENT:  April 2nd. 

         Q    April 2nd for Canada and Mexico?

         THE PRESIDENT:  Correct.  And for —

         Q    And for the reciprocal?

         THE PRESIDENT:  — and for everything. 

         SECRETARY LUTNICK:  Well, we have the — the — fentanyl-related is a pause.  If they can prove to the president they’ve done an excellent job, that’s what they first do in 30 days.

         Q    Have you guys seen any changes?

         SECRETARY LUTNICK:  But then the overall is April 2nd.  So, the big transaction is April 2nd, but the fentanyl-related things, if they’re working hard on the border, at the end of that 30 days, they have to prove to the president that they’ve satisfied him to that regard.  If they have —

         THE PRESIDENT:  It’s going to be hard to satisfy.

         SECRETARY LUTNICK:  — then we’ll give them a pause or he won’t. 

         THE PRESIDENT:  It’s going to be hard to satisfy.

         SECRETARY LUTNICK:  But that’s up to him to see.

         THE PRESIDENT:  We lose 300,000 people a year to fentanyl.  Not 100-, not 95-, not 60-, like you read.  You know, you’ve been reading it for years. 

         We lost, in my opinion, over the last couple of years, on average, maybe close to 300,000 people dead, and the families are ruined.  You know, when they lose a daughter, when they lose a son, the families are never the same.  You’re never going to be the same.  So, you’re talking about a million people. 

         But when the daughters die, I see it — daughters die and the sons die because of fentanyl.  And in some cases, they don’t even know they’re taking it.  They — they’re buying something else, and it’s laced with fentanyl, and they end up dying.  And I’ve known many people who have lost children to fentanyl and for other reasons, but to fentanyl.  It’s such a big killer.  And those people are never the same people. 
        
         I mean, I’ve seen people that — for the rest of their lives, they’re not the same people.  They’re so different, it’s not even believable.  Dynamic people, happy people that are — they die a miserable death.  And that’s because of the crap that comes in through China and through Mexico and through Canada.  A lot of it comes through Canada. 

         The — Canada — look, we support Canada $200 billion a year in subsidies one way or the other.  We let them make millions of cars.  We let them send us lumber.  We don’t need their lumber.  We’re going to free up our lumber.  Lee is going to do — the head of environmental.  We’re going to free up our lumber.  We have the best lumber there is.  We don’t need their lumber.  What do we need their lumber for?

         When you look at the — we subsidize them $200 billion a year.  Without us, Canada can’t make it.  You know, Canada relies on us 95 percent.  We rely on them 4 percent.  Big difference.  And I say Canada should be our 51st state.  There’s no tariffs, no nothing. 
        
         And — and I say that, we give them military protection.  They have a very small military.  They spend very little money on military.  Or NATO, they’re just about last in terms of payment, because they say, “Why should we spend on military?”  That’s a tremendous cost.  Most nations can’t afford to even think about it.  “Why should we spend on military?  The United States protects us.” 

         And I would say that’s largely true.  We protect Canada.  But it’s not fair.  It’s not fair that they’re not paying their way.  And if they had to pay their way, they couldn’t exist. 

         When I spoke to — let’s call it the prime minister, rather than the governor.  (Laughter.)  But when I spoke to him, I said, “Why are we giving you $200 billion a year?”  He was unable to answer the question.  I said, “Why are we letting you make millions of cars and send them in?”  He was unable to answer the question — Justin Trudeau, a nice guy.  I think he’s a very good guy.  I call him Governor Trudeau. 

         He should be governor, because the fact is that if we don’t give them cars — we don’t have to give them cars.  The c- — tariffs will make it impossible for them to sell cars into the United States.  The tariffs will make it impossible to — for them to sell lumber or anything else into the United States. 

    And all I’m asking to do is break even or lose a little bit, but not lose $200 million.  And we love Canada.  I love Canada.  I love the people of Canada.  And — but, honestly, it’s not fair for us to be supporting Canada.  And if we don’t support them, they don’t subsist as a — as a nation. 

    Okay.

    Q    Mr. President, when you were talking to Elon —

    Q    Mr. President, on the EU tariffs.  Mr. President, have you made a decision on what level you will seek on tariffs on the European Union?

    THE PRESIDENT:  We have made a decision, and we’ll be announcing it very soon.  And it’ll be 25 percent, generally speaking, and that’ll be on cars and all other things. 

    And European Union is a different case than Canada — different kind of case.  They’ve really taken advantage of us in a different way.  They don’t accept our cars.  They don’t accept, essentially, our farm products.  They use all sorts of reasons why not.  And we accept everything of them, and we have about a $300 billion deficit with the European Union. 

    Now, I love the countries of Europe.  I guess I’m from there at some point, a long time ago, right?  (Laughter.)  But indirectly — well, pretty directly, too, I guess.  But I love the countries of Europe.  I — I love all countries, frankly.  All different.

    But European Union has been — it was formed in order to screw the United States.  I mean, look, let’s be honest.  The European Union was formed in order to screw the United States.  That’s the purpose of it, and they’ve done a good job of it, but now I’m president.

    Q    What will happen if these countries or the EU retaliate?

    THE PRESIDENT:  They can’t.  I mean, they can try, but they can’t. 

    Q    China did.  They imposed tariffs —

    Q    They are pledging to, sir.

    Q    — that are — went into effect, China’s retaliatory tariffs —

    THE PRESIDENT:  That’s right.  That’s right.  But —

    Q    — on the — the 10th of February.  Has there been any —

    THE PRESIDENT:  That’s right.

    Q    — impact that you’ve been able to observe?

    THE PRESIDENT:  That’s right.  No, they can do it, and they can try, but the numbers can never equal what ours, because we can go off.  We are the pot of gold.  We’re the one that everybody wants.  And they can retaliate, but it cannot be a successful retaliation, because we just go cold turkey.  We don’t buy anymore.  And if that happens, we win. 

    Q    Are you talking to Erik Prince about privatat- —

    THE PRESIDENT:  No.

    Q    — privatizing deportations?

    THE PRESIDENT:  No, I haven’t.  I haven’t.

    Q    Mr. President, you’re in litigation with CBS News.  Is this a case that you’d like to see go to trial, or are you open a settelm- —

    THE PRESIDENT:  With who?

    Q    CBS, the — “60 Minutes.”

    THE PRESIDENT:  CBS?

    Q    Yes.

    THE PRESIDENT:  Well, CBS did something that was amazing.  Kamala was unable to answer a question properly, and they took the question that they asked, and they inserted an answer.  They gave her an answer.  This was two days before the election, right before — the Sunday night before the election.  And they wrote out a — they put her words from another question that was asked about a half an hour later, and they put that into the question. 

    Nobody’s ever even heard of it before.  Nobody’s ever heard of anything like this before.  But they then did it, they say, on numerous occasions.  And the FCC is looking at it very strongly, and everybody’s looking at it, and I’m — but nobody’s ever seen anything. 

    Think of it.  They took her answers, and they changed them.  And I don’t mean they changed a word or two, or they cut off a half a sentence, or they cut off a couple of words.  I mean, I’ve had that happen too.  But that, you — you just say — you know, then they say, “Well, we want brevity.  You know, we wanted to do it for time.” 

    Q    Would — would you encourage —

    THE PRESIDENT:  They took out her answer, and they inserted an entirely different answer that made her sound competent.  And they did this, and nobody’s ever — I thought I’ve heard of everything when it comes to that stuff.  No — I’ve never heard of it.  Nobody has ever seen.  So, we sued, and we are in discussions of settlement. 

    Q    What would a number be?  Like a hu- — what — what’s a number that you would think would be appropriate?

    THE PRESIDENT:  I think it’s a lot.  (Laughter.) 

    Q    What’s the timeline and process —

    THE PRESIDENT:  No, I mean, it — look, it could have — it probably did affect the election.  I mean, we won by a lot.  As I said, “Too big to rig.”  But it probably did affect the election.  Yeah, probably could have won by more, but I could have lost the election because of that. 

    It’s — we have to get to honest elections.  We have to go back to paper ballots.  We have to go back to voter ID.  One-day election, ideally, or short term, not these 48-day and 61-day elections where boxes are put in a room, and, “Oh, let’s move the boxes, because we’re putting in a new air conditioning system.”  Then you see the boxes move, and then you say, “Well, where are all the boxes?”  You know, —

    Q    But would you —

    THE PRESIDENT:  “What happened to the boxes that never came back?” 

    No, our elections are extremely dishonest.  We’re the only country in the world that has mail-in voting and all of these different things that we put in.  Nobody — no other country in the world has it. 

    You know, France went to — they had some of the things that we had, and they went to same-day voting, all paper.  And, you know, paper is very sophisticated now.  It’s a very sophisticated — it’s a very sophisticated form of voting right now.  It’s a very safe form of voting. 

    You know, the other thing is for the governors.  I wish the governors would do it, because the paper ballots will cost 9 percent of the machines, and they’re 100 percent.  You know, they’re — I don’t — nothing’s foolproof, but they’re as close as you get.  So, we’ll see what happens. 

    But on the “60 Minute” thing, nobody’s ever seen anything like it. 

    Q    And would you link the FCC action to the litigation?  I mean, does it make se- —

    THE PRESIDENT:  I don’t think it’s linked, but probably the lawyers look at it, you know, because I know it’s going along.  FCC is headed by a very competent person, and you have some very competent people on the board, and so I think they’re looking at it very seriously. 

    Yeah.

    Q    Mr. President —

    Q    Sir, of all the deals that you’ve done in your life, all the people you’ve sat across from and negotiated with, is President Putin distinct in any way?

    THE PRESIDENT:  He’s a very smart guy.  He’s a very cunning person.  But I’ve dealt with some people that — I’ve dealt with some really bad people.  But I will tell you, as far as this is concerned, we’ve — you have to understand, he was — he had no intention, in my opinion, of settling this war.  I think he wanted the whole thing. 

    When I got elected, we spoke, and I think we’re going to have a deal.  I can’t guarantee you that.  You know, a deal is a deal.  Lots of crazy things happen in deals, right?  But I think we’re going to have a deal. 

    If I didn’t get elected, I believe he would have just continued to go through Ukraine, and over a period of time, a lot of people — a lot of people would have been killed.  It would have lasted for a period of time. 

    And the reason that Ukraine — and I give — I have great respect for the Ukraine as fighters.  They have great fighters.  But without our equipment, that war would have been over, like people said, in a very short period of time. 

    Q    Is there a timeline (inaudible) — 

    THE PRESIDENT:  And if you remember, I gave the Javelins, and the Javelins are the things that knocked out those tanks right at the beginning of the war.  They said that — that Obama, at the time, gave sheets, and Trump gave Javelins.  Well, I was the one that did that.  But I want to see it come to an end. 

    Q    Will he have to make concessions — President Putin?

    THE PRESIDENT:  Yeah, he will.  He will.  He’s going to have to.  And —

    Q    Can you preview that?

    THE PRESIDENT:  And I think — I believe that, because we got elected, that war will come to an end.  And I also believe, if we didn’t get elected, if this administration didn’t win the election by a lot, that that war would go on for a long time, and he would want to take the whole thing. 

    Q    What concessions?  What concessions?

    Q    On the — on the —

    THE PRESIDENT:  The big question I had is: Does he want to take the whole thing?  But the reason — and — and the Ukrainians are good fighters, I have to say, but without the equipment — without our equipment — we have the best equipment in the world.  We have the best military equipment in the world.  Without our equipment, that would have been over very quickly. 

    Q    What concessions would you like to see? 

    Q    On the (inaudible), sir?  On — on the —

    Q    What concessions would you like to see?

    THE PRESIDENT:  Oh, I don’t want to tell right now.  But I can tell you that NATO, you can forget about.  That’s been — I think that’s probably the reason the whole thing started.  And I think, JD, we can say that. 

    What — do you have a statement on that?  You’ve been very much involved. 

    THE VICE PRESIDENT:  (Laughs.)

    THE PRESIDENT:  I gave him the beauty.

    THE VICE PRESIDENT:  Great.  You gave me the — the hardest question, sir. 

    Q    Concessions from Russia.

    THE VICE PRESIDENT:  I mean, look, as the president said, we’re not going to do the negotiation in public with the American media.  He’s going to do it in private with the president of — of Russia, with the president of Ukraine, and with other leaders.  And I think that’s how this has to go. 

    I think the — I just want to push back against some of the criticism I’ve seen in the administration on this, because every single time the president engages in diplomacy, you guys preemptively accuse him of conceding to Russia.  He hasn’t conceded anything to anyone.  He’s doing the job of a diplomat, and he is, of course, the diplomat in chief as the president of the United States. 

    Q    On the gold cards, sir.  Can you talk a little bit more about the vetting process, you know —

    THE PRESIDENT:  They’ll go through a process.  The process is being worked out right now, and we’re going to be — we’re going to be very careful. 

    Q    And will there be restrictions on, for instance, can Chinese nationals get one? 

    THE PRESIDENT:  No, we’re not going to restrict. 

    Q    Can Iranian nationals get —

    THE PRESIDENT:  We’re probably not going to be restricting too much in — in terms of countries, but maybe in terms of individuals.  We want to make sure we have people that love our country and are capable of loving the country.

    Q    Is there a process, sir —

    Q    Mr. President, there is a measles outbreak in Texas at the moment in which a child is reported to have died.  Do you have concerns about that?  And have you asked Secretary Kennedy to look into that outbreak? 

    THE PRESIDENT:  Well, why don’t we — Bobby, do you want to speak on that, please?

    SECRETARY KENNEDY:  We are following the measles epidemic every day.  I think there’s 124 people who have contracted measles at this point, mainly in Gaines County, Texas; mainly, we’re told, in the Mennonite community. 

    There are two people who have died, but the — we’re watching it.  And there — there are about 20 people hospitalized, mainly for quarantine. 

    We’re watching it.  We put out a post on it yesterday, and we’re going to continue to follow it. 

    Q    Mr. President —

    SECRETARY KENNEDY:  Inci- — incidentally, there have been four measles outbreaks this year in this country.  Last year, there were 16.  So, it’s not unusual.  We have measles outbreaks every year. 

    Q    You sound a little under the weather yourself right now.  Are you all right?

    SECRETARY KENNEDY:  I just — I have a permanently bad throat. 

    Q    (Inaudible) coughing.

    Q    Mr. President, would you — would you send U.S. peacekeepers to just — to support the — the European peacekeepers?  Would you do any sort of U.S. —

    THE PRESIDENT:  No, we’re going to support Europe, yeah. 

    Q    And how would we do that?  How would the United States do that?

    THE PRESIDENT:  We’re very friendly with Europe.  We have a great relationship with Europe.  I mean, you could ask — you could talk about France.  You could talk about any of them.  Yeah, we have a great relationship with Europe. 

    Q    But how will we — how will the United States do that?  Would there be boots on —

    THE PRESIDENT:  Well, how?  I mean, you’re asking me a question: What are we doing in the — let’s worry — I hope we have that problem, where we can worry about peacekeeping.  We got to get there first.

    (Secretary Lutnick knocks on the table.)

    But I hope we have the problem of worrying about peacekeeping.  That’ll be the easiest problem, I think, JD, that we’ve ever had.  (Laughter.)

    THE VICE PRESIDENT:  I think so, sir.

    Q    That would be part of the deal, presumably, that the Ukrainians —

    THE PRESIDENT:  We’ll — we’re —

    Q    — would want —

    THE PRESIDENT:  We’ll do it at the time, but we’ll — peacekeeping is very easy.  It’s making the deal that’s very tough. 

    And, again, nobody was speaking to Russia at all.  And, you know, probably a million and a half soldiers have been killed — close to a million and a half soldiers, not to mention a treme- — I will tell you, the — the thing with that horrible war that should have never started — it would have never started if I were president, and it didn’t start for four years, and it was not even thought about starting.  But the thing with that war is that you’re highly underestimating the number of people that have been killed.  Far more people have been killed in that war than you talk about.  You know, you like to talk about numbers, like, a million people.  Well, they had much more than a million soldiers killed.

    But you have a lot of cities that have been knocked to the ground.  They’re demolition sites.  Literally, demolition sites.  Every single building is knocked to the ground, and a lot of people were killed in those buildings.  And you’ll hear a report, “Two people were minorly injured” or “just injured a little bit.”  No.  No.  People were killed by the thousands.

    And there are a lot more people killed in that war than the media wants to talk about, because Biden did a horrible, horrible job.  He should have prevented that war.  He could have prevented that war. 

    Putin would have never gone in.  I’ll tell you one thing: He would have never gone in.  That war would never have taken place if I were president. 

    Q    I think what people are trying to understand, Mr. President —

    Q    Mr. President —

    Q    — is how would the United States — what would you be willing to do to support this European peacekeeping effort?  Would there be —

    THE PRESIDENT:  Again, you’re asking me the same question?  (Laughter.)

    Q    I’m just trying —

    THE PRESIDENT:  How many times do you have to answer it?  You’re talking about after we make peace.  Let me make peace first. 

    Once we make peace, I’ll give you all the answers you want.  But how many times can you ask the same question?

    Q    Mr. President, on the Middle East.  Did you receive —

    Q    Is loosening the sanctions on —

    THE PRESIDENT:  Yeah, go ahead.  Behind.

    Q    Is loosening the sanctions on Russia a potential option as part of an overall deal?

    THE PRESIDENT:  Not now, no.  No.  We have sanctions on Russia.  No, I want to see if we make a deal first.  But I think we will.  I’ve had very —

    Q    But is it a bargaining chip, I’m asking.

    THE PRESIDENT:  I’ve had very good conversations with President Putin.  I’ve had very good conversations with President Zelenskyy.  And until four weeks ago, nobody had conversations with anybody.  It wasn’t even a consideration.  Nobody thought you could make peace.  I think you can. 

    Q    Mr. President, just —

    Q    But if Mr. Putin gets to keep his —

    Q    — just to bring this —

    Q    — the land that was claimed by force, if the Russians get to keep the territory that they — they claimed by force, doesn’t that send a dangerous message, let’s say, to China about Taiwan?

    THE PRESIDENT:  Oh, okay.  You try and take it away, right?  We’re going to do the best we can.  (Laughter.)  We’re going to do the best we can to make the best deal we can for both sides.  But for Ukraine, we’re going to try very hard to make a good deal so that they can get as much back as possible.  We want to get as much back as possible. 

    Q    Mr. President, just to bring this full —

    THE PRESIDENT:  And we’ll — we’ll cut it out after maybe this question.  Go ahead.

    Q    To bring this full circle, back to —

    THE PRESIDENT:  Unless it’s a bad question, and then we’ll (inaudible).  (Laughter.)

    Q    And back to —

    THE PRESIDENT:  You always like to finish on a good one.

    THE VICE PRESIDENT:  But, sir, they want you to negotiate with them instead of President Putin.

    THE PRESIDENT:  I know.  I know.

    Q    Back to the question about the —

    THE PRESIDENT:  They want to continue to talk about the peacekeepers.  (Laughter.)  They’re — you have a lot of confidence in us, because you assume there’s going to be peace.  You know, it’s possible it doesn’t work out.  There is possibility. 

         Q    And I had —

         THE PRESIDENT:  But I hope it does, for the sake of humanity, because if you look at the pictures that I’ve looked at, you don’t want to look at them. 

         Go ahead.

         Q    I had a question back on these cuts to the federal workforce.  You mentioned you — you’re interested in doing another round of this email.  When would you like to

    see that?  What would be the deadline?  And —

         THE PRESIDENT:  I — I’m not — I think —

         Q    — this time, would it be mandatory?

         THE PRESIDENT:  I think Elon — I think Elon wants to.  And I think it’s a good idea because, you know, those people, as I said before, they’re on the bubble.  You got a lot of people that have not responded, so we’re trying to figure out, do they exist?  Who are they?  And it’s possible that a lot of those people will be actually fired. 

         Q    And —

         THE PRESIDENT:  And if that happened, that’s okay, because that’s what we’re trying to do. 

         This country has gotten bloated and fat and disgusting and incompetently run. 

         I think we had the worst president in the history of our country.  He just left office.  I think he’s a disgrace.  What he’s done to our country by allowing millions of people to come into our country like that and all of the other things — the inflation, which he caused because of energy and stupid spending.  To spend hundreds of millions, trillions and trillions of dollars on the Green New Scam — a total scam.  I have the best energy people, the best environmental people in the world around this table, and they — they can’t even believe he got away with it. 

         And then, in leaving office, to send $20 billion here and $20 million there and $10 million and $5 million, and they couldn’t spend the money fast enough, and “Let’s get it out before Trump gets in.  Let’s just get it out to anybody.”  This is a disgrace to our nation.

         And you don’t write the fair thing.  But, look, you know the good news?  The people see it, and that’s why we won the election by so much. 

         Thank you very much, everybody.  I appreciate it.  Thank you.  Thank you.   

         Q    Thank you, Mr. President.

         THE PRESIDENT:  Thank you very much, Doug.  Pulitzer Prize.

         THE VICE PRESIDENT:  Sir, how many peacekeepers are you going to send to — (laughter) —

         THE PRESIDENT:  “What will you do?”  “How will it be?”  (Laughter.)

         SECRETARY LUTNICK:  “How will you address this?”

                                    END            12:47 P.M. EST

    MIL OSI USA News –

    February 27, 2025
  • MIL-OSI Australia: Independent experts selected to advise Government on investments from Regional Development Trust

    Source: New South Wales Government 2

    Headline: Independent experts selected to advise Government on investments from Regional Development Trust

    Published: 27 February 2025

    Released by: Minister for Regional NSW


    Six independent experts across regional and rural economics, primary industries, natural resources, and Aboriginal economic development have been appointed to help guide the NSW Government as it invests in new regional businesses and job creation projects throughout NSW.

    The NSW Government’s Regional Development Trust and its Advisory Council are part of the Minns Labor Government’s long-term commitment to regional NSW, jobs creation and businesses development and a direct response to a decade of pork barrelling and poor decision making by the previous National Liberal Government.

    The 2025 Regional Development Advisory Council has been appointed by the Minister for Regional NSW, Tara Moriarty, to ensure regional and rural communities continue to be placed at the centre of government investment decision making.

    Through the Advisory Council the Minns Government has restored integrity to how government funds are used, ensuring they reflect the needs of regional communities and deliver real outcomes.

    The Council provides independent and strategic advice to support investment decisions made from the Regional Development Trust, ensuring independent oversight and transparency for the allocation of public funds.

    Since the Regional Development Trust was announced in September 2023 more than $37 million has been invested in strategic initiatives that are evidence-based, meet regional needs and achieve real outcomes for communities, including:

    • $15 million to upgrade airstrips in Deniliquin, Bourke and White Cliffs to future proof access to essential services in these communities.
    • $10 million to improve workforce participation in Western NSW by supporting increased childcare availability and service upgrades in Bourke, Broken Hill and Cobar.
    • $5 million to support Aboriginal businesses and organisations in regional NSW to expand and reach their potential, delivering improved economic and employment outcomes.
    • $5 million for alow interest loans pilot program to enable eligible small and medium enterprises in the food and beverage manufacturing sectors to increase productivity and create jobs in regional NSW.
    • $2 million to support the continuation of subsidised commercial flights to Cobar, Bourke, Walgett and Lightning Ridge.

    In addition, a further $50 million is currently being assessed to fund regional projects and programs. Successful applicants will be announced within the coming months following advice from the new Advisory Council.

    The 2025 Advisory Council members have been appointed for a 12-month term following an extensive public expression of interest process.

    Regional Development Advisory Council members

    Professor Alison Sheridan – Chairperson  

    Professor Alison Sheridan is Emeritus Professor at the University of New England (UNE). Professor Sheridan holds a Bachelor of Agricultural Economics (Hons) from the University of Sydney and PhD in Management from the University of New England (UNE).

    Professor Sheridan has been based in regional NSW for 35 years and was previously head of UNE’s Business School. In this role, she led the establishment of the UNE Smart Region Incubator and co-led the development of the Master of Economic and Regional Development course.

    Alison Stone – Member

    Alison Stone is an executive leader with 40 years’ experience working across rural and regional communities in the public sector, board and advisory roles. Ms Stone specialises in land and infrastructure management and development, fire and emergency management and primary industries at state and national levels. Ms Stone is also the first statutory Agriculture Commissioner for NSW.  

    David Harding – Member

    David Harding is Executive Director at Business NSW. In this role, he provides leadership and a voice to businesses across metropolitan and regional NSW.  Mr Harding is experienced in policy and major projects development working with all three levels of government.

    Dianna Somerville – Ex-Officio member

    Dianna Somerville is Chairperson of Regional Development Australia Riverina. She holds a Bachelor of Arts from the Australian Defence Force Academy University of New South Wales.

    Mrs Somerville has extensive experience working across the public and not-for-profit sectors including with defence industries.

    Phil Usher – Member

    Phil Usher is a Wiradjuri man, born and raised on Gomeroi Country. 

    Mr Usher is the CEO of First Nations Foundation, which works to build capacity and financial prosperity of Aboriginal organisations, businesses and communities. 

    Thomas McKeon – Member

    Thomas McKeon is an accomplished professional with over 40 years of experience in the agriculture, asset, and investment management industries.

    Based in South East NSW, and having strong connections to regional areas and communities, Mr McKeon has an extensive background in senior and executive management roles both in Australia and internationally.

    For more information visit the Regional Development Advisory Council webpage.

    Minister for Regional NSW Tara Moriarty said:

    “The Regional Development Advisory Council and the Regional Development Trust Fund ensure NSW Government investments are made where they are needed most in regional NSW.”

    “The 2025 Advisory Council members have been appointed following an extensive public expression of interest process. I congratulate all the members on their appointment and look forward to working with them for the next year.”

    “I’d also like to congratulate the Interim Council who helped steer the Trust investment decisions over the course of its 12-month term.”

    “The Regional Development Trust and its Advisory Council marks a completely new direction in the way the NSW Government supports rural and regional development in NSW.”

    “After a decade of waste and poor decision making by the former Government, the establishment of the Regional Development Advisory Council is an important step towards the provision of independent and expert advice on what projects and programs should be funded.”

    “Our intention is to ensure rural, remote and regional communities receive their fair share and money is spent on projects that are actually needed and will be delivered.”

    Advisory Council Chairperson Professor Alison Sheridan said:

    “This is a wonderful opportunity to deliver robust and sustainable investment for regional and rural NSW, knowing how important strategic investment is for achieving real outcomes for our communities.”

    MIL OSI News –

    February 27, 2025
  • MIL-OSI Video: Ready, Set, Ski

    Source: United States Department of Defense (video statements)

    The Ski Trooper Cup was a multifaceted competition designed to test the strength, endurance, and tactical skills of #USArmy soldiers in winter warfare and alpine environments.

    Members of the #10thMountainDivision tested a range of skills including pushups, slope climbing, rappelling, skiing between gates, pullups, and glissading at the sixth annual Ski Trooper Cup in Vail, Colo.

    For more on the Department of Defense, visit: http://www.defense.gov

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1s9elnQsGRY

    MIL OSI Video –

    February 27, 2025
  • MIL-OSI USA: Florida Financial Advisor Pleads Guilty to Promoting Illegal Tax Shelter and Stealing Client Funds

    Source: US State Government of Utah

    Defendant Helped Clients in Mississippi and Elsewhere File False Tax Returns That Caused Nearly $40M in Tax Loss to the IRS

    A Florida man pleaded guilty today to orchestrating a nearly decade-long scheme to promote an illegal tax shelter and commit wire fraud. He also pleaded guilty to assisting in the preparation of false tax returns for tax shelter clients.

    According to court documents and statements made in court, Stephen T. Mellinger III, of Delray Beach, was a financial advisor, insurance salesman, and securities broker operating in Florida, Michigan, Mississippi, and elsewhere. Beginning in late 2013, Mellinger conspired with others to promote an illegal tax shelter whereby clients would claim false tax deductions for so-called “royalty payments” to fraudulently reduce their taxes.

    In reality, as Mellinger knew, the “royalty payments” were merely a circular flow of money designed to give the appearance of genuine business expenses. Typically, a client would send money to bank accounts controlled by Mellinger and other co-conspirators, who then sent the money — less a fee — right back to a different bank account that the client controlled. In this way, tax shelter participants retained control of the money they transferred, while falsely deducting the transfers as business expenses on their tax returns.

    In total, Mellinger and his co-conspirators helped clients prepare tax returns that claimed over $106 million in false tax deductions, which caused a tax loss to the IRS of approximately $37 million.

    Mellinger and a co-conspirator who was a relative, collectively earned approximately $3 million in fees from promoting the scheme.

    In January 2016, Mellinger learned that several of his clients were being investigated and that the United States had started seizing their funds. Mellinger and a relative subsequently stole more than $2.1 million of funds from some of those clients, some of which he used to buy a home in Delray Beach.

    Mellinger is scheduled to be sentenced on Sept. 16, and faces a maximum penalty of five years in prison for conspiring to defraud the IRS and commit wire fraud, and three years in prison for aiding in the preparation of false tax returns. A federal district court judge will determine any sentence after considering the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines and other statutory factors.

    Acting Deputy Assistant Attorney General Karen E. Kelly of the Justice Department’s Tax Division, Supervisory Official Antoinette T. Bacon of the Justice Department’s Criminal Division, and Acting U.S. Attorney Patrick A. Lemon for the Southern District of Mississippi made the announcement.

    IRS Criminal Investigation and the Department of Defense, Office of Inspector General, Defense Criminal Investigative Service are investigating the case.

    Trial Attorneys Richard J. Hagerman, William Montague, and Matthew Hicks of the Tax Division, Assistant U.S. Attorney Charles W. Kirkham for the Southern District of Mississippi, and Trial Attorneys Emily Cohen and Jasmin Salehi Fashami of the Criminal Division’s Money Laundering and Asset Recovery Section (MLARS) are prosecuting the case.

    MIL OSI USA News –

    February 27, 2025
  • MIL-OSI Security: Florida Financial Advisor Pleads Guilty to Promoting Illegal Tax Shelter and Stealing Client Funds

    Source: United States Attorneys General 1

    Defendant Helped Clients in Mississippi and Elsewhere File False Tax Returns That Caused Nearly $40M in Tax Loss to the IRS

    A Florida man pleaded guilty today to orchestrating a nearly decade-long scheme to promote an illegal tax shelter and commit wire fraud. He also pleaded guilty to assisting in the preparation of false tax returns for tax shelter clients.

    According to court documents and statements made in court, Stephen T. Mellinger III, of Delray Beach, was a financial advisor, insurance salesman, and securities broker operating in Florida, Michigan, Mississippi, and elsewhere. Beginning in late 2013, Mellinger conspired with others to promote an illegal tax shelter whereby clients would claim false tax deductions for so-called “royalty payments” to fraudulently reduce their taxes.

    In reality, as Mellinger knew, the “royalty payments” were merely a circular flow of money designed to give the appearance of genuine business expenses. Typically, a client would send money to bank accounts controlled by Mellinger and other co-conspirators, who then sent the money — less a fee — right back to a different bank account that the client controlled. In this way, tax shelter participants retained control of the money they transferred, while falsely deducting the transfers as business expenses on their tax returns.

    In total, Mellinger and his co-conspirators helped clients prepare tax returns that claimed over $106 million in false tax deductions, which caused a tax loss to the IRS of approximately $37 million.

    Mellinger and a co-conspirator who was a relative, collectively earned approximately $3 million in fees from promoting the scheme.

    In January 2016, Mellinger learned that several of his clients were being investigated and that the United States had started seizing their funds. Mellinger and a relative subsequently stole more than $2.1 million of funds from some of those clients, some of which he used to buy a home in Delray Beach.

    Mellinger is scheduled to be sentenced on Sept. 16, and faces a maximum penalty of five years in prison for conspiring to defraud the IRS and commit wire fraud, and three years in prison for aiding in the preparation of false tax returns. A federal district court judge will determine any sentence after considering the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines and other statutory factors.

    Acting Deputy Assistant Attorney General Karen E. Kelly of the Justice Department’s Tax Division, Supervisory Official Antoinette T. Bacon of the Justice Department’s Criminal Division, and Acting U.S. Attorney Patrick A. Lemon for the Southern District of Mississippi made the announcement.

    IRS Criminal Investigation and the Department of Defense, Office of Inspector General, Defense Criminal Investigative Service are investigating the case.

    Trial Attorneys Richard J. Hagerman, William Montague, and Matthew Hicks of the Tax Division, Assistant U.S. Attorney Charles W. Kirkham for the Southern District of Mississippi, and Trial Attorneys Emily Cohen and Jasmin Salehi Fashami of the Criminal Division’s Money Laundering and Asset Recovery Section (MLARS) are prosecuting the case.

    MIL Security OSI –

    February 27, 2025
  • MIL-OSI USA: APPLICATIONS OPEN: Senator Collins Forms Federal Appointments Advisory Committee to Evaluate Maine Nominees

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Maine Susan Collins
    Published: February 26, 2025

    Washington, D.C. — U.S. Senator Susan Collins is accepting applications for several federal appointments. She today announced the establishment of her “Federal Appointments Advisory Committee” to evaluate candidates for Senate-confirmed positions in Maine. As the senior Republican member of Maine’s congressional delegation, Senator Collins will advise the Trump Administration as it selects candidates for federal positions in the state. The Committee’s recommendations will be an integral part of that process.
    The Committee will assess the qualifications of dozens of interested applicants for U.S. Attorney and U.S. Marshal for Maine, and for U.S. Circuit Judge for the First Circuit. It will also consider nominations for other current and future vacancies, including, but not limited to, U.S. District Judge for the District of Maine, USDA Farm Service Agency State Director, USDA Rural Development State Director, and Federal Co-Chair of the Northern Border Regional Commission.  
    Interested applicants for the listed vacancies should submit a resume, cover letter, and references to Adminapps@collins.senate.gov
    The Committee, chaired by Ann Robinson, is comprised of seven community leaders and experienced attorneys from across the state.
    The members of the Federal Appointments Advisory Committee are:
    Ann Robinson (Portland), Attorney, Pierce Atwood LLP
    Stephanie Anderson (Cape Elizabeth), Former Cumberland County DA
    Hon. Josh Tardy (Palmyra), Attorney, Rudman Winchell; Former Minority Leader of the Maine House of Representatives
    Sarah Newell (Winterport), Attorney, Eaton Peabody
    Rick Solman (Caribou), Attorney, Solman and Hunter
    Chris Gardner (Edmunds Township), Executive Director, Eastport Port Authority; Former County Commissioner, Washington County
    Mark Brooks (Hartland), Chief Security Officer at Cianbro and Director of the Cianbro Institute, Retired Colonel from U.S. Army Reserve and Retired Lieutenant and Troop Commander of the Maine State Police

    MIL OSI USA News –

    February 27, 2025
  • MIL-OSI USA: Boozman, Murray Unveil Bipartisan Legislation to Improve Support for Disabled Veterans and Their Families, Including Young Caregivers

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Arkansas – John Boozman

    WASHINGTON––U.S. Senators John Boozman (R-AR) and Patty Murray (D-WA), senior members of the Senate Committee on Veterans’ Affairs, introduced the Helping Heroes Act, legislation to support the families and children of disabled veterans who take on caregiving roles.

    The Helping Heroes Act seeks to improve the assistance provided to children under the age of 18 that offer invaluable support to the veteran family members they live with. Because these dependents face unique challenges and take on responsibilities that their peers do not carry, this bill aims to bolster the accessibility and quality of mental health care and peer support services they can receive through the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA).

    “Investing in the families of our veterans is part of the commitment we have made to those who have served,” said Boozman. “By expanding the VA’s capabilities and resources to better support the needs of caregivers, including the children of disabled veterans, they will benefit in their own lives as well as enjoy more access to comprehensive tools and networks. Better grasping and responding to the impact of caring for their loved ones is an important step to raise their quality of life.”

    “I’m proud to reintroduce my bipartisan legislation to help VA better support the families of disabled veterans—especially children who frequently take on caregiving roles in their families and could benefit from additional supportive services,” said Murray, daughter of a WWII veteran and Purple Heart recipient who was later diagnosed with multiple sclerosis during her childhood. “Veterans and their families have sacrificed so much for our country, and we have a responsibility to make sure the federal government is there for them and that we’re constantly working to improve the services they get through VA.”

    Specifically, the Helping Heroes Act would:

    • Establish a permanent Family Support Program to provide supportive services to eligible family members of disabled veterans;
    • Require a coordinator at each Veterans Integrated Services Network (VISN) to assess the needs of veteran families in their catchment area and refer them to available local, state and federal resources; and
    • Require VA to collect data on the experiences of disabled veteran families to better identify and understand their needs.

    The legislation is also cosponsored by Senators Richard Blumenthal (D-CT), Lisa Murkowski (R-AK), Bernie Sanders (I-VT), Cory Booker (D-NJ), Adam Schiff (D-CA), Dick Durbin (D-IL), Tim Kaine (D-VA) and Peter Welch (D-VT).

    The Helping Heroes Act is supported by the Elizabeth Dole Foundation, Veterans of Foreign Wars, Paralyzed Veterans of America, Disabled American Veterans, The American Legion, Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America, American Veterans and the Association of the United States Army.

    More information on supporting the healthy development of children from military and veteran caregiving homes can be found in this report commissioned by the Elizabeth Dole Foundation. 

    Click here for full text of the legislation.

    MIL OSI USA News –

    February 27, 2025
  • MIL-OSI USA: Senator Coons, colleagues introduce bipartisan, bicameral bill to restore injunctive relief for patent infringement

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Delaware Christopher Coons

    WASHINGTON – U.S. Senators Chris Coons (D-Del.) and Tom Cotton (R-Ark.) today introduced the Realizing Engineering, Science, and Technology Opportunities by Restoring Exclusive (RESTORE) Patent Rights Act of 2025. This bipartisan, bicameral bill would restore the presumption that courts will issue an injunction to stop patent infringers, strengthening protections for U.S. inventors, entrepreneurs, universities, and startups. This legislation was initially introduced in the 118th Congress. Representatives Nathaniel Moran (R-Texas) and Madeleine Dean (D-Pa.) also introduced the House companion bill. 

    “Thanks to a wrongheaded decision from the Supreme Court, there are now companies who steal patented technologies rather than license them from inventors and then justify their actions as simply the cost of doing business. Innovators at universities and startups who lack resources are often unable to stop patent infringement in court and are forced into licensing deals they do not want,” said Senator Coons. “The RESTORE Patent Rights Act will protect innovators across the country, stop the infringe-now, pay-later model in its tracks, and strengthen America’s economic competitiveness for generations to come.”

    “American ingenuity should be rewarded and protected,” said Senator Cotton. “Current patent law fails to protect inventors and leaves them vulnerable to intellectual property theft from adversaries like China. This bipartisan legislation will help solidify America’s edge in technological innovation.”

    For more than two centuries, courts granted injunctive relief in most patent cases upon a finding of infringement, preventing patent infringers from continuing to produce goods that ran afoul of patent laws. However, this practice was upended in 2006 when the Supreme Court’s decision in eBay v. MercExchange created a four-factor test to determine whether a permanent injunction is warranted in infringement cases, altering the longstanding remedy for patent infringement.

    Since that decision, obtaining injunctive relief in patent cases has become significantly more difficult and rare. A recent study found that requests for permanent injunctions in patent cases fell by 65% for companies that use their patented technology to manufacture a product; grants of permanent injunctions to those companies fell even more significantly. Requests and grants for licensing patent owners like universities and research clinics dropped even further: Requests fell by 85%, and grants fell by 90%. 

    The RESTORE Patent Rights Act would undo the damage of the eBay decision by returning to patent owners a rebuttable presumption that an injunction is warranted after a court makes a final ruling that their rights are being infringed. This would deter predatory infringers and restore meaning to the right to exclude.

    “American innovation is only as strong as the confidence in knowing ideas cannot be stolen by competitors. In the last two decades, innovators have found it harder to obtain a permanent injunction from U.S. courts, which stops bad actors from stealing their intellectual property (IP). Our legislation will restore the rights of American innovators by ensuring permanent injunctions are accessible from U.S. courts. This bill will provide greater certainty in the protection of IP and prevent cases from being taken overseas to countries like China. When U.S. courts enforce the exclusivity of patent rights, America becomes a world leader in innovation,” said Congressman Moran.  

    “Enforceable patents are vital to our ability to invent, improve and advance – yet today, it is increasingly difficult for patent holders to enforce their rights through permanent injunctions, even after proving infringement in court,” said Congresswoman Dean. “The bipartisan, bicameral RESTORE Act addresses this issue and safeguards American innovation. I’m grateful to be joined by Congressman Moran, Senator Coons, and Senator Cotton in our push to protect patentholders, including universities, research laboratories, and startups.”

    The Innovation Alliance, Council for Innovation Promotion, Association of University Technology Managers, Conservatives for Property Rights, Alliance of U.S. Startups & Inventors for Jobs, The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers-USA, Inventors Defense Alliance, and the Medical Device Manufacturers Association have endorsed the RESTORE Patent Rights Act.

    “The Innovation Alliance applauds Senators Coons and Cotton and Representatives Moran and Dean for reintroducing the bipartisan, bicameral RESTORE Patent Rights Act. With a simple, single-sentence clarification of the law, RESTORE will bring balance back to patent law and allow small inventors to stand toe to toe with Big Tech after a court has ruled that Big Tech is stealing their inventions. We urge Congress to pass this vital bill,” said Brian Pomper, Executive Director of the Innovation Alliance.

    “Our nation’s economic success and national security depend on inventors having confidence that their intellectual property will not be unfairly exploited,” said Andrei Iancu, board co-chair of C4IP and former Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual Property and USPTO Director from 2018 to 2021. “The RESTORE Patent Rights Act will provide inventors with the reassurance they need to propel American leadership in critical technology fields.”

    “Now more than ever, it’s critical that our leaders stand up for the startups and entrepreneurs who drive our nation’s economy and create life-changing breakthroughs,” said David Kappos, board co-chair of C4IP and former Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual Property and USPTO Director from 2009 to 2013. “By passing the RESTORE Patent Rights Act, Congress can reinvigorate the U.S. patent system and reaffirm America’s commitment to protecting its innovators.”

    “AUTM thanks Senator Coons and the other co-sponsors for introducing this legislation. Strengthening the ability of patent holders to protect their patents via injunction is crucial to incentivizing innovation. We look forward to working with the committee on this important legislation,” said Steve Susalka, CEO of AUTM. 

    “The RESTORE Patent Rights Act restores meaning to the promised exclusive rights to one’s invention. Without fully enforceable exclusive rights, the inventor’s end of the ‘patent bargain’ is broken. Since 2006, the Supreme Court’s eBay v. MercExchange ruling has made permanent injunction extremely difficult to obtain in patent infringement cases. Courts have thereby turned the right to exclude into a compulsory licensing clause. This is unjust. The RESTORE Patent Rights Act ends the judicially created categorical rule of routinely denying injunctions. It restores the historical remedy of injunctive relief in patent cases, as it is with other forms of property, including other intellectual property,” said James Edwards, Executive Director, Conservatives for Property Rights. 

    “The RESTORE Patent Rights Act is, perhaps, the most impactful thing that can be done to empower American inventors, entrepreneurs and disruptive startups. The ability to pursue injunctive relief when a competitor infringes on a patented invention was the standard in the United States for over 200 years. The Supreme Court moved the goalposts in 2006 and set up a convoluted test that makes it nearly impossible for a growth tech startup to stop the predatory infringement of their intellectual property by larger competitors. This practice has been perfected by Big Tech companies that now routinely ingest the innovations of disruptive competitors knowing that they cannot be stopped. Patent law and legislation is often complicated. The RESTORE Act is not. It is a clear and unambiguous bill that simply restores balance between large corporations that ingest others’ IP and the startups and entrepreneurs that invent it,” said Chris Israel, Executive Director of The Alliance of U.S. Startups & Inventors for Jobs (USIJ).

    “A functioning IP system must be fair, and as importantly, be perceived to be fair. Nondiscriminatory access to the legal system for enforcing and defending IP property rights is essential for securing the property rights necessary for investment. When innovators are unable to secure the property right embodied in a patent, investment is deterred and commercial activity, innovation and job creation impeded,” said Timothy Lee, IEEE-USA president.

    “The RESTORE Patent Rights Act is a crucial step in safeguarding America’s small businesses, startups, and entrepreneurs from predatory patent infringement. By providing a clear path for justice and injunctive relief, this bill empowers innovators and fosters a more equitable patent system that benefits American inventors and consumers,” said Kristen Osenga, the chief policy counselor at the Inventors Defense Alliance.

    “There unfortunately continues to be ongoing efforts across the world to steal American innovations and intellectual property, and it is critical that Congress establishes new protections so that the United States can remain the global leader in medical technology innovation,” said Mark Leahy, President and CEO, Medical Device Manufacturers Association. “The ‘RESTORE Patent Rights Act’ would help restore a level playing field if enacted, and would codify the presumption that a permanent injunction will be granted after infringement is proven.  MDMA applauds Senators Coons and Cotton and Representatives Moran and Dean for their leadership in helping America’s innovators protect their intellectual property, and we will continue to work closely with them so the medical technology ecosystem can deliver the cures, therapies and diagnostics that patients and providers need.”

    The text of the bill is available here.

    A one-pager is available here.

    MIL OSI USA News –

    February 27, 2025
  • MIL-OSI United Kingdom: Secretary of State for Northern Ireland meets Tánaiste in Dublin

    Source: United Kingdom – Executive Government & Departments

    Press release

    Secretary of State for Northern Ireland meets Tánaiste in Dublin

    The Secretary of State for Northern Ireland, Rt Hon Hilary Benn MP met with the Tánaiste, Minister for Foreign Affairs, Trade and Minister for Defence, Simon Harris TD, this evening at Iveagh House, Dublin.

    Secretary of State for Northern Ireland, Rt Hon Hilary Benn MP and the Tánaiste, Minister for Foreign Affairs, Trade and Minister for Defence, Simon Harris TD.

    The Secretary of State for Northern Ireland, Rt Hon Hilary Benn MP, and the Tánaiste, Minister for Foreign Affairs, Trade and Minister for Defence, Simon Harris TD, met this evening [Wednesday 26 February] at Iveagh House, Dublin.

    The discussions marked the first official in-person engagement between the two following the formation of the new Irish Government.

    Speaking afterwards, the Secretary of State said:

    It was a pleasure to meet with the Tánaiste this evening in Dublin, to congratulate him in person, and wish him well in his new role. The UK’s relationship with Ireland is of great importance and I look forward to continuing to work closely with the Tánaiste, and the whole Irish Government, to further enhance the partnership between our two countries.

    We had a warm and productive discussion, focusing on the strength of the bilateral relationship, our shared commitment to the Good Friday Agreement, and the importance of upholding political stability in Northern Ireland. I also outlined the importance of the Northern Ireland Executive’s work to reform and modernise public services, an issue that is so important to people, as I set out in my speech at Ulster University last month.

    In addition, the Tánaiste and I discussed progress in discussions between our two governments in seeking an approach to addressing the legacy of the past in Northern Ireland that all communities can have confidence in.

    We agreed on the importance of a continuing strong and close relationship between the UK and Irish Governments as we work together on a range of issues. This will be reaffirmed by the first UK-Ireland Summit next month between the Prime Minister and Taoiseach.

    Share this page

    The following links open in a new tab

    • Share on Facebook (opens in new tab)
    • Share on Twitter (opens in new tab)

    Updates to this page

    Published 26 February 2025

    MIL OSI United Kingdom –

    February 27, 2025
  • MIL-OSI Security: Federal Jury Finds New Haven Man Guilty of Drug Trafficking and Firearm Possession Offenses

    Source: Office of United States Attorneys

    Marc H. Silverman, Acting United States Attorney for the District of Connecticut, today announced that a federal jury in New Haven has found WILLIE FRANCO, 36, of New Haven, guilty of narcotics trafficking and firearm possession offenses.  The trial began on February 20 and the guilty verdicts were returned this afternoon.

    According to court documents and statements made in court, in August 2016, Franco was sentenced in Hartford federal court to 80 months of imprisonment, followed by 10 years of supervised release, for distributing crack cocaine and heroin.  The investigation also revealed that, in January 2015, Franco distributed heroin to an individual in East Haven who died after ingesting the drug.  Franco was released from federal prison in December 2020.

    In December 2021, the U.S. Postal Inspection Service’s Narcotics and Bulk Cash Trafficking Task Force and Drug Enforcement Administration began investigating resumed narcotics trafficking activity by Franco and his then girlfriend, Daniella Fox.  The investigation revealed that, beginning in approximately July 2021, parcels originating in Arizona and California that likely contained narcotics had been mailed to addresses associated with Franco and Fox.  Investigators also determined that two overdose deaths in August 2021 in Branford and Guilford, and one overdose death in September 2021 in Milford, were connected to Franco’s drug activities.

    According to the evidence introduced during the trial, in early March 2022, investigators intercepted a U.S. Postal Service parcel destined for an address in East Haven associated with Franco and Fox.  A court-authorized search of the parcel revealed approximately one kilogram of cocaine and one kilogram of fentanyl.  On March 7, 2022, investigators made a controlled delivery of the intercepted parcel to the East Haven address.  Franco and Fox, who were waiting in a car that was parked on the street, were arrested after Fox retrieved the package.  A subsequent search of Franco and Fox’s New Haven residence resulted in the seizure of more than one kilogram of fentanyl, a quantity of crack cocaine, digital scales and other narcotics packaging paraphernalia, a loaded Glock .40 pistol with an obliterated serial number, a drum extended magazine for a high-capacity rifle, a bulletproof vest, ammunition, and more than $300,000 in cash.

    Subsequent analysis of cellphones seized from Franco revealed hundreds of videos, several of which were entered into evidence during the trial, depicting Franco’s drug trafficking activity and possession of firearms.

    The jury found Franco guilty of conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute 400 grams or more of fentanyl and 500 grams or more of cocaine, possession with intent to distribute 400 grams or more of fentanyl, possession of a firearm in furtherance of a drug trafficking crime, and unlawful possession of a firearm by a felon.  At sentencing, which is not scheduled, Franco faces a mandatory minimum term of imprisonment of 20 years and a maximum term of imprisonment of life.

    Franco has been detained since his arrest.

    Fox previously pleaded guilty to a related charge and awaits sentencing.

    This investigation has been conducted by the U.S. Postal Inspection Service’s Narcotics and Bulk Cash Trafficking Task Force and the Drug Enforcement Administration, with assistance from the New Haven Police Department, East Haven Police Department, and Connecticut State Police.  The Task Force includes members from the U.S. Postal Inspection Service, the U.S. Postal Service – Office of the Inspector General, the Connecticut Army National Guard, and the Hartford, New Britain, Meriden, and Town of Groton Police Departments.

    The case is being prosecuted by Assistant U.S. Attorneys Konstantin Lantsman and Hal Chen.

    MIL Security OSI –

    February 27, 2025
  • MIL-OSI USA: In Joint Senate-House Veterans Hearing, King Stresses Supporting Servicemembers Shifting to Civilian Life

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Maine Angus King
    WASHINGTON, D.C. — In a joint hearing before the Senate Veterans Affairs Committee (SVAC) and the House Veterans Affairs Committee (HVAC), Senator Angus King (I-Maine), spoke about the importance of ensuring a smooth transition from active duty status to civilian life for veterans with James LaCoursiere, Jr., the National Commander of The American Legion. In the exchange, Senator King referenced the bipartisan TAP Promotion Act, legislation he championed that would proactively help veterans in the Transition Assistance Program (TAP) as they begin applying for their well-deserved benefits, and Commander LaCoursiere voiced his support for the bill — calling it “very critical.” According to the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA), approximately 200,000 servicemembers make the transition to civilian life each year. Additionally, the first few months after leaving active duty are often the most fragile for veterans, putting them at an increased risk for self-harm and suicide. According to a National Veteran Suicide Prevention Annual Report, suicide is the second leading cause of death in veterans under the age of 45.
    “Now, I do want to talk about transition for a minute. Be The One is one of the most important initiatives going on in the country right now. Thank you for staffing that, for setting it up and for making it actually happen. I have a simple formula for transition. I think the Defense Department should spend as much money on transition as they do on recruitment. One of the things we are working on here is something called the TAP Promotion Act which would bring Veteran Service Organizations (VSO) into the process of transition. We have to have a warm hand off. I think you quoted a number, a very large percentage of the suicides are at the first year or two after transition. That is a place where we really need to give some effort. Commander, tell me about how important you think transition is,” said Senator King.
    “Thank you very much for that question. The TAP program is very critical. It is a very important element and critical that [veterans] get 365 days to transition and educate themselves on it. As we all know, the more knowledge you have, it gives us a much better sense of direction on where to go and what you need but it serves you in the right direction for gainful future employment. As we all know, employment starts you in the right direction for stability with your family and it also drives the economy forward. Too often we sit back and they don’t know where to go for assistance when they get out of the military. I am not saying the second you get out of the military that you need assistance, but down the road you may need that assistance. They need to be afforded all the tools and resources and even get a start in their next career as they take off the uniform, replied Commander LaCoursiere.
    “My vision is someone meet you at the airport when you come home and says, ‘welcome home, here’s what the VA can do for you — here are the programs. Give me a call if you need any help.’ That is where things like the Be The One Program can be a difference. Thank you for what you’re doing. Be our eyes and ears and let us know what is happening out there so we can protect and defend the most sacred obligation this government has which is to its veterans,” said Senator King.
    Representing one of the states with the highest rates of military families and veterans per capita, Senator King has been a staunch advocate for America’s servicemembers and veterans. A member of the Senate Veterans’ Affairs Committee (SVAC), he works to ensure American veterans receive their earned benefits and that the VA is properly implementing various programs such as the PACT Act, the State Veterans Homes Domiciliary Care Flexibility Act, and the John Scott Hannon Act. Earlier this month, in a letter to VA Secretary Doug Collins, Senator King joined his colleagues in urging for immediate action to secure veterans’ personal information provided by VA or other agencies to Elon Musk and his “Department of Government Efficiency” (DOGE), a measure that would protect millions of veterans’ medical records stored in VA’s computer systems. Previously, Senator King introduced the Lethal Means Safe Storage for Veteran Suicide Prevention Act to provide firearm storage to veterans in an effort to reduce suicides among the veteran population. In addition, he helped pass the Veterans COLA Act, which increased benefits for 30,000 Maine veterans and their families. Recently, Senator King introduced bipartisan legislation alongside SVAC Chairman Senator Jerry Moran (R-KS) to improve care coordination for veterans who rely on both VA health care and Medicare. This week, Senator King was honored by the Disabled American Veterans as its 2025 Legislator of the Year. Last year, he was recognized by the Wounded Warrior Project as the 2024 Legislator of the Year for his “outstanding legislative effort and achievement to improve the lives of the wounded, ill, and injured veterans.”

    MIL OSI USA News –

    February 27, 2025
  • MIL-OSI USA: Duckworth Slams Trump Administration for Purging Top Military Leadership While Pushing DoD Cuts, Both of Which Will Harm Readiness and National Security

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Illinois Tammy Duckworth
    February 26, 2025
    [WASHINGTON, D.C.] – Yesterday, combat Veteran and U.S. Senator Tammy Duckworth (D-IL)—a member of the U.S. Senate Armed Services Committee—slammed President Trump and his Administration for putting our military readiness and national security at risk by firing our nation’s top military leaders while the Administration continues to push for 8% cuts to the defense budget for the next five years. Additionally, Duckworth expressed her outrage that Donald Trump is siding with Russian dictator Vladimir Putin in his unjustified and unlawful war against Ukraine and pressed the Deputy Secretary of Defense nominee Stephen Feinberg to admit that Russia was the one who started the war. Ultimately, Mr. Feinberg refused to answer. Duckworth’s full remarks can be found on the Senator’s YouTube.
    “By firing our top military leaders and removing JAG officers who ensure our military doesn’t break the law, Donald Trump is behaving like a wanna-be dictator and jeopardizing our military readiness and national security,” said Duckworth. “While I’m glad Mr. Feinberg could publicly pledge that he would refuse an unlawful order—clearing the absolute lowest bar for Senate consideration—his inability to acknowledge basic, public facts about vitally important defense issues, like that it was Russia, not Ukraine, who started this devastating, three-years long war, made it clear I cannot support his nomination. Given how grossly unqualified Secretary Hegseth is to lead our nation’s Defense Department, our men and women in uniform deserve a Deputy Secretary who will have their backs and be more than just a yes-man for President Trump.”
    When Duckworth pressed the nominee to admit that it was Russia who invaded Ukraine, Mr. Feinberg offered a concerning non-answer, responding: “I don’t feel that I should publicly comment in the middle of a tense negotiation when I’m not privy to the facts.”
    Additionally, Duckworth underscored that due to the utter lack of qualifications of Secretary Hegseth, Mr. Feinberg would manage the minutiae of the Department of Defense and be solely responsible for managing the budget and day-to-day operations, stating: “You are it. You are second in command.” She pressed Mr. Feinberg to state that he would push back against orders that would undermine our military readiness and ensure stability at the Department. 
    Duckworth is an outspoken vocal critic of Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and voted against his confirmation. During Hegseth’s confirmation hearing, Duckworth demonstrated some of the areas where he lacks the experience or knowledge that a serious Defense Secretary nominee should have, grilling him on basic questions that he failed to answer. She asked him if he ever led an audit. He would not confirm. She asked him to describe at least one of the main international security agreements a Secretary of Defense is responsible for leading. He could not name any. She asked him to name at least one nation that is a part of ASEAN, an organization with several member states who have mutual defense treaties, alliances or enhanced defense cooperation agreements with the U.S. None of the three countries he named were correct.
    Duckworth then delivered an impassioned speech on the Senate floor slamming Hegseth for his lack of experience and qualifications to lead the Department of Defense. Speaking next to a framed copy of the Soldier’s Creed—a copy that hangs over her desk in the Senate and hung above her bed during her recovery at Walter Reed Medical Center after the helicopter she co-piloted was shot down—Duckworth underscored that it is insulting to ask our servicemembers to train and perform to the absolute highest standards when the Senate confirms a Secretary of Defense who is wholly unprepared and unqualified to lead them in any way.
    -30-

    MIL OSI USA News –

    February 27, 2025
  • MIL-OSI USA: Murray, Boozman Reintroduce Bipartisan Legislation to Improve Support for Disabled Veterans and Their Families, Including Young Caregivers

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Washington State Patty Murray
    Washington, D.C. — Today, U.S. Senators Patty Murray (D-WA) and John Boozman (R-AR), senior members of the Senate Committee on Veterans’ Affairs, reintroduced their Helping Heroes Act, legislation to support the families of disabled veterans, including children who take on caregiving roles.
    The Helping Heroes Act recognizes the work done by the approximately 2.3 million children under the age of 18 living in a household with a disabled veteran, who provide invaluable support to their veteran family members and, in doing so, face unique challenges and often take on responsibilities that their peers do not carry. The bill seeks to improve the support and assistance provided to these children—including mental health care, peer support, and other supportive services that can help children in veteran families lead healthier lives. More about this issue can be found in this report commissioned by the Elizabeth Dole Foundation on supporting the healthy development of children from military and veteran caregiving homes.
    “I’m proud to reintroduce my bipartisan legislation to help VA better support the families of disabled veterans—especially children who frequently take on caregiving roles in their families and could benefit from additional supportive services,” said Senator Murray. “Veterans and their families have sacrificed so much for our country, and we have a responsibility to make sure the federal government is there for them and that we’re constantly working to improve the services they get through VA.”
    “Investing in the families of our veterans is part of the commitment we have made to those who have served,” said Senator Boozman. “By expanding the VA’s capabilities and resources to better support the needs of caregivers, including the children of disabled veterans, they will benefit in their own lives as well as enjoy more access to comprehensive tools and networks. Better grasping and responding to the impact of caring for their loved ones is an important step to raise their quality of life.”
    In addition to Senators Murray and Boozman, Senators Richard Blumenthal (D-CT), Lisa Murkowski (R-AK), Bernie Sanders (I-VT), Cory Booker (D-NJ), Adam Schiff (D-CA), Dick Durbin (D-IL), Tim Kaine (D-VA), and Peter Welch (D-VT) are original cosponsors of the legislation.
    Specifically, the Helping Heroes Act would:
    Establish a permanent Family Support Program to provide supportive services to eligible family members of disabled veterans.
    Require a coordinator at each VISN to assess the needs of veteran families in their catchment area and refer them to available local, state, and federal resources.
    Require VA to collect data on the experiences of disabled veteran families to better identify and understand their needs.
    The Helping Heroes Act is supported by the Elizabeth Dole Foundation,  Veterans of Foreign Wars (VFW), Paralyzed Veterans of America (PVA), Disabled American Veterans (DAV), The American Legion, Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America (IAVA), American Veterans (AMVETS), and the Association of the United States Army (AUSA).
    Senator Murray, the daughter of a WWII veteran and Purple Heart recipient who was later diagnosed with multiple sclerosis during her childhood, has been a longtime advocate of veterans and has placed an emphasis on expanding benefits and support for veteran caregivers. During her time as Chair of the Senate Veterans’ Affairs Committee, Senator Murray oversaw the initial implementation of the Caregiver Support Program in 2011 and has been following its implementation closely and worked diligently to expand it since then.  Senator Murray has long pushed back against efforts to curtail eligibility of the program, and she urged former VA Secretary Denis McDonough to revise VA’s unnecessarily restrictive criteria for caregivers program to ensure it aligns with Congressional intent so that veterans and their families can access the critical services and care they have earned.
    In September 2022, following Murray’s push, VA announced that it would extend eligibility for its Caregivers program for legacy participants through September 2025. Senator Murray’s Helping Heroes Act, which she has introduced every Congress since 2022, builds on her longtime efforts to support veteran families and caregivers.
    The full text of the legislation is HERE.

    MIL OSI USA News –

    February 27, 2025
  • MIL-OSI Europe: REPORT on human rights and democracy in the world and the European Union’s policy on the matter – annual report 2024 – A10-0012/2025

    Source: European Parliament

    MOTION FOR A EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT RESOLUTION

    on human rights and democracy in the world and the European Union’s policy on the matter – annual report 2024

    (2024/2081(INI))

    The European Parliament,

    – having regard to the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union,

    – having regard to the European Convention on Human Rights,

    – having regard to Articles 2, 3, 8, 21 and 23 of the Treaty on European Union (TEU),

    – having regard to Articles 17 and 207 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU),

    – having regard to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and other United Nations human rights treaties and instruments,

    – having regard to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights,

    – having regard to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights,

    – having regard to the Geneva Convention relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War,

    – having regard to the United Nations 1951 Refugee Convention and the 1967 Protocol thereto,

    – having regard to the United Nations Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide of 1948 and United Nations Human Rights Council Resolution 43/29 of 22 June 2020 on the prevention of genocide,

    – having regard to the United Nations Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women of 18 December 1979,

    – having regard to the United Nations Convention against Torture and other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment  of 10 December 1984 and the Optional Protocol thereto, adopted on 18 December 2002,

    – having regard to the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities  of 12 December 2006 and the Optional Protocol thereto, adopted on 13 December 2006,

    – having regard to the International Convention on the Suppression and Punishment of the Crime of Apartheid of 1976,

    – having regard to the Declaration on the Elimination of All Forms of Intolerance and of Discrimination Based on Religion or Belief, proclaimed by United Nations General Assembly Resolution 36/55 of 25 November 1981,

    – having regard to the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Persons Belonging to National or Ethnic, Religious and Linguistic Minorities of 18 December 1992,

    – having regard to the United Nations Declaration on Human Rights Defenders, adopted by consensus by the United Nations General Assembly Resolution 53/144 on 9 December 1998,

    – having regard to the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples of 13 September 2007,

    – having regard to the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Peasants and Other People Working in Rural Areas of 28 September 2018,

    – having regard to the Programme of Action of the Cairo International Conference of Population and Development in 1994 and its review conferences,

    – having regard to the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child of 20 November 1989 and the two Optional Protocols thereto, adopted on 25 May 2000,

    – having regard to the United Nations Arms Trade Treaty, which entered into force on 24 December 2014, and the EU Code of Conduct on Arms Exports of 5 June 1998,

    – having regard to the United Nations Beijing Declaration and Platform for Action of September 1995 and its review conferences,

    – having regard to the United Nations 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development adopted on 25 September 2015, in particular goals 1, 3, 4, 5, 8, 10 and 16 thereof,

    – having regard to the United Nations Global Compact for Safe, Orderly and Regular Migration adopted on 19 December 2018 and the United Nations Global Compact on Refugees adopted on 17 December 2018,

    – having regard to the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court adopted on 17 July 1998, which entered into force on 1 July 2002,

    – having regard to the Agreement between the European Union and the International Criminal Court on cooperation and assistance of 10 April 2006[1],

    – having regard to the Council of Europe Conventions of 4 April 1997 for the Protection of Human Rights and Dignity of the Human Being with regard to the Application of Biology and Medicine, and the Additional Protocols thereto, of 16 May 2005 on Action against Trafficking in Human Beings, and of 25 October 2007 on the Protection of Children against Sexual Exploitation and Sexual Abuse,

    – having regard to the Council of Europe Convention of 11 May 2011 on preventing and combating violence against women and domestic violence (the Istanbul Convention), which not all Member States have ratified but which entered into force for the EU on 1 October 2023,

    – having regard to Protocols Nos 6 and 13 to the Council of Europe Convention of 28 April 1983 for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms concerning the Abolition of the Death Penalty,

    – having regard to Council Regulation (EU) 2020/1998 of 7 December 2020 concerning restrictive measures against serious human rights violations and abuses[2],

    – having regard to Regulation (EU) 2021/947 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 9 June 2021 establishing the Neighbourhood, Development and International Cooperation Instrument – Global Europe[3],

    – having regard to the Council conclusions of 22 January 2024 on EU Priorities in UN Human Rights Fora in 2024,

    – having regard to the EU Action Plan on Human Rights and Democracy 2020-2024, adopted by the Council on 17 November 2020 and its Mid-term Review adopted on 9 June 2023,

    – having regard to the Council conclusions of 27 May 2024 on the alignment of the EU Action Plan on Human Rights and Democracy 2020-2024 with the Multiannual Financial Framework 2021-2027,

    – having regard to the EU Gender Action Plan (GAP) III – an ambitious agenda for gender equality and women’s empowerment in external action (JOIN(2020)0017),

    – having regard to the EU Gender Equality Strategy 2020-2025 (COM(2020)0152),

    – having regard to the EU LGBTIQ Equality Strategy 2020-2025 (COM(2020)0698),

    – having regard to the EU strategy on the rights of the child (COM(2021)0142),

    – having regard to the EU Strategy for the Rights of Persons with Disabilities 2021-2030 (COM(2021)0101),

    – having regard to the EU anti-racism action plan 2020-2025 (COM(2020)0565),

    – having regard to the EU Roma strategic framework for equality, inclusion and participation (COM(2020)0620),

    – having regard to the EU Guidelines on human rights defenders, adopted by the Council on 14 June 2004 and revised in 2008, and the second guidance note on the Guidelines’ implementation, endorsed in 2020,

    – having regard to the EU Guidelines on violence against women and girls and combating all forms of discrimination against them, adopted by the Council on 8 December 2008,

    – having regard to the EU Guidelines on promoting compliance with international humanitarian law (IHL) of 2005, as updated in 2009,

    – having regard to the EU Guidelines on the death penalty, as updated by the Council on 12 April 2013,

    – having regard to the EU Guidelines to promote and protect the enjoyment of all human rights by LGBTI persons, adopted on 24 June 2013,

    – having regard to the EU Guidelines on the promotion and protection of freedom of religion or belief, adopted by the Council on 24 June 2013,

    – having regard to the EU Guidelines on freedom of expression online and offline, adopted by the Council on 12 May 2014,

    – having regard to the EU Guidelines on non-discrimination in external action, adopted by the Council on 18 March 2019,

    – having regard to the EU Guidelines on safe drinking water and sanitation, adopted by the Council on 17 June 2019,

    – having regard to the revised EU Guidelines on EU policy towards third countries on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, adopted by the Council on 16 September 2019,

    – having regard to the revised EU Guidelines on human rights dialogues with partner/third countries, approved by the Council on 22 February 2021,

    – having regard to the revised EU Guidelines on children and armed conflict, approved by the Council on 24 June 2024,

    – having regard to the Commission communication of 12 September 2012 entitled ‘The roots of democracy and sustainable development: Europe’s engagement with Civil Society in external relations’ (COM(2012)0492),

    – having regard to the Council conclusions of 10 March 2023 on the role of the civic space in protecting and promoting fundamental rights in the EU,

    – having regard to Directive (EU) 2024/1760 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 June 2024 on corporate sustainability due diligence and amending Directive (EU) 2019/1937 and Regulation (EU) 2023/2859[4],

    – having regard to the Commission proposal of 14 September 2022 for a regulation of the European Parliament and the Council on prohibiting products made with forced labour on the Union market (COM(2022)0453),

    – having regard to the joint proposal from the Commission and the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy of 3 May 2023 for a Council regulation on restrictive measures against serious acts of corruption (JOIN(2023)0013),

    – having regard to the 2023 EU Annual Report on Human Rights and Democracy in the World,

    – having regard to its Sakharov Prize for Freedom of Thought, which in 2024 was awarded to María Corina Machado, as the leader of the democratic forces in Venezuela, and President-elect Edmundo González Urrutia, representing all Venezuelans inside and outside the country fighting for the reinstitution of freedom and democracy,

    – having regard to its resolution of 15 January 2019 on EU Guidelines and the mandate of the EU Special Envoy on the promotion of freedom of religion or belief outside the EU[5],

    – having regard to its resolution of 23 October 2020 on Gender Equality in EU’s foreign and security policy[6],

    – having regard to its resolution of 19 May 2021 on human rights protection and the EU external migration policy[7],

    – having regard to its resolution of 8 July 2021 on the EU Global Human Rights Sanctions Regime (EU Magnitsky Act)[8],

    – having regard to its resolution of 28 February 2024 on human rights and democracy in the world and the European Union’s policy on the matter – annual report 2023[9], and to its previous resolutions on earlier annual reports,

    – having regard to its resolutions on breaches of human rights, democracy and the rule of law (known as urgency resolutions), adopted in accordance with Rule 150 of its Rules of Procedure, in particular those adopted in 2023 and 2024,

    – having regard to Rule 55 of its Rules of Procedure,

    – having regard to the opinion of the Committee on Women’s Rights and Gender Equality,

    – having regard to the report of the Committee on Foreign Affairs (A10-0012/2025),

    A. whereas the EU is founded on the values of respect for human dignity, freedom, democracy, equality, the rule of law and respect for human rights, as set out in Articles 2 and 21 TEU; whereas the EU’s action worldwide must be guided by the universality and indivisibility of human rights and by the fact that the effective protection and defence of human rights and democracy is at the core of the EU’s external action;

    B. whereas consistency and coherence across the EU’s internal and external policies are key for achieving an effective and credible EU human rights policy, and in defending and supporting freedom and democracy;

    C. whereas democratic systems are the most suitable to guarantee that every person has the ability to enjoy their human rights and fundamental freedoms; whereas effective rules-based multilateralism is the best organisational system to defend democracies;

    D. whereas the EU strongly believes in and fully supports multilateralism, a rules-based global order and the set of universal values, principles and norms that guide the UN member states and that the UN member states have pledged to uphold, in accordance with the UN Charter; whereas a world of democracies, understood as a world of political systems that defend and protect human rights worldwide, is a safer world, as democracies have significant checks and balances in place to prevent the unpredictability of autocracies;

    E. whereas the rise in authoritarianism, totalitarianism and populism threatens the global rules-based order, the protection and promotion of freedom and human rights in the world, as well as the values and principles on which the EU is founded;

    F. whereas in December 2023, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights celebrated its 75th anniversary; whereas today, more than ever since the UN’s foundation, totalitarian regimes challenge the UN Charter’s basic principles, seek to rewrite international norms, undermine multilateral institutions and threaten peace and security globally;

    G. whereas in November 2024, the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child celebrated its 35th anniversary;

    H. whereas the United Nations Beijing Declaration and Platform for Action is regarded as a turning point for the global agenda on gender equality and will celebrate its 30th anniversary in 2025;

    I. whereas the legitimacy and functioning of the international rules-based order are dependent on compliance with the orders of, and respect for, international bodies, such as United Nations General Assembly and Security Council resolutions and orders and decisions of the International Court of Justice and the International Criminal Court (ICC); whereas multilateralism is being challenged by increasing global threats, such as terrorism and extremism, which threaten compliance with such orders and decisions, as well as, generally, with provisions of international law, human rights law and international humanitarian law in emerging and ongoing conflict situations; whereas international institutions, their officials, and those cooperating with them, are the subject of attacks and threats; whereas the international community, including the EU, has a responsibility to uphold the international rules-based order by enforcing universal compliance, including by its partners;

    J. whereas the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court establishes a framework of accountability for genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes; whereas the independence of the ICC is vital to ensure that justice is delivered impartially and without political interference;

    K. whereas the 2023 Mid-term Review of the EU Action Plan on Human Rights and Democracy 2020-2024, now extended to 2027, has shown that, despite the progress achieved so far, more needs to be done, in cooperation with like-minded democratic partners, especially in the context of the unprecedented challenges the world has experienced since its adoption;

    L. whereas human rights defenders (HRDs) and civil society organisations (CSOs) are crucial partners in the EU’s efforts to safeguard and advance human rights, democracy and the rule of law, as well as to prevent conflicts globally; whereas state and non-state actors around the world are increasingly censoring, silencing and harassing, among others, HRDs, CSOs, journalists, religious communities, opposition leaders and other vulnerable groups in their work, shrinking the civil space ever further; whereas this behaviour includes measures encompassing strategic lawsuits against public participation (SLAPPs), restrictive government policies, transnational repression, defamation campaigns, discrimination, intimidation and violence, including extrajudicial and extraterritorial killings, abductions, and arbitrary arrests and detention; whereas attacks on HRDs are increasingly extending to their families and communities, including those living in exile;

    M. whereas gender equality is a core EU value, and the human rights of women and girls, including their sexual and reproductive rights, continue to be violated across the world; whereas women experience unique and disproportionate impacts from conflicts, climate change and migration, including increased risks of gender-based violence, economic marginalisation and barriers to accessing resources; whereas women HRDs and CSOs continue to experience shrinking space for their critical work, as well as threats of violence, harassment and intimidation;

    N. whereas the past year has been marked by a further proliferation of laws on ‘foreign agents’ or foreign influence, including in countries with EU candidate status, targeting CSOs and media outlets and attempting to prevent them from receiving financial support from abroad, including from the EU and its Member States, fostering a climate of fear and self-censorship;

    O. whereas in 2024, more than half the world’s population went to the polls, and many of these elections were marked by manipulation, disinformation and attempts at interference from inside or outside the country;

    P. whereas the 2024 World Press Freedom Index by Reporters Without Borders (RSF) warns of a decline in the intent of states and other political forces to protect press freedom; whereas, according to RSF, 47 journalists and media workers have been killed, most of them in conflict zones, and 573 have been imprisoned since 1 January 2024;

    Q. whereas 251 million children and young people are deprived of their fundamental right to education and remain out of school, according to the UNESCO Global Education Monitoring Report 2024; whereas girls and women are affected not only by poverty but also by cultural norms, gender bias, child marriage and violence through official, discriminatory policies that prevent them from accessing education and the labour market and attempt to erase them from public life;

    R. whereas at least one million people are unjustly imprisoned for political reasons, among them several laureates and finalists of Parliament’s Sakharov Prize for Freedom of Thought;

    S. whereas environmental harm and the impacts of climate change are intensifying precariousness, marginalisation and inequality, and increasingly displacing people from their homes or trapping them in unsafe conditions, thereby heightening their vulnerability and jeopardising their human rights;

    Global challenges to democracy and human rights

    1. Reasserts the universality, interdependence, interrelatedness and indivisibility of human rights and the inherent dignity of every human being; reaffirms the duty of the EU and its Member States to promote and protect democracy and the universality of human rights around the world; calls for the EU and its Member States to lead by example, in line with its values, to promote and strictly uphold human rights and international justice;

    2. Insists that respect, protection and fulfilment of human rights and fundamental freedoms must be the cornerstone of the EU’s external policy, in line with its founding principles; strongly encourages the EU and its Member States, to that end, to strive for a continued ambitious commitment to make freedom, democracy and human rights and their protection a central part of all EU policies in a streamlined manner and to enhance the consistency between the EU’s internal and external policies in this field, including through all of its international agreements;

    3. Stresses that the EU must be fully prepared to counter the rise of authoritarianism, totalitarianism and populism, as well as the increasing violations of the principles of universality of human rights, democracy and international humanitarian law;

    4. Condemns the increasing trend of violations and abuses of human rights and democratic principles and values across the world, such as, among others, threats of backsliding on human rights, notably women’s rights, as well as executions, extrajudicial killings, arbitrary arrests and detentions, torture and ill treatment, gender-based violence, clampdowns on civil society, political opponents, marginalised and vulnerable groups including children and elderly people, migrants, refugees and asylum seekers, and  ethnic and religious minorities; condemns, equally, slavery and forced labour, excessive use of violence by public authorities, including violent crackdowns on peaceful protests and other assemblies, systematic and structural discrimination, instrumentalisation of the judiciary, censorship and threats to independent media, including threats in the digital sphere such as online surveillance and internet shutdowns, political attacks against international institutions and the rules-based international order, and increasing use of unlawful methods of war in grave breach of international humanitarian law and human rights law; deplores the weakening of the protection of democratic institutions and processes, and the shrinking space for civil societies around the world; denounces the transnational repression, by illiberal regimes, of citizens and activists who have sought refuge abroad, including on EU soil;

    5. Notes with deep concern the ongoing international crisis of accountability and the challenge to the pursuit of ending impunity for violations of core norms of international human rights and humanitarian law in conflicts around the world; reaffirms the neutrality and importance of humanitarian aid in all conflicts and crises; underlines the serious consequences of discrediting and attacking the organisations of multilateral forums, such as the UN, which can foster a culture of impunity and undermine the trust in and functioning of the UN system; calls for the EU to uphold the international legal system and take effective measures to enforce compliance;

    6. Notes with satisfaction that there are also ‘human rights bright spots’ within this context of major challenges to human rights worldwide; highlights, in particular, the work of CSOs and HRDs; underlines the need for a more strategic communication on human rights and democracy by spreading news about positive results, policies and best practices; supports the Good Human Rights Stories initiative[10] as a way of promoting positive stories about human rights and recommends that it be updated; underlines the role of the EU’s public and cultural diplomacy, as well as international cultural relations, in the promotion of human rights, and calls for the Strategic Communication and Foresight division of the European External Action Service (EEAS) to increase its efforts in this regard;

    Strengthening the EU’s toolbox for the promotion and protection of human rights and democracy around the world

    7. Notes with concern the increasing divide worldwide; stresses the shared responsibility of the EU to continue defending democratic values and principles and human rights, international justice, peace and dignity around the world, which are even more important to defend in the current volatile state of global politics; calls upon the EU to keep communication channels open with different stakeholders and to continue to develop a comprehensive toolbox to strengthen human rights and democracy globally;

    EU action plan on human rights and democracy

    8. Observes that the EU and its Member States have made substantial progress in implementing the EU action plan on human rights and democracy, although they have not reached all of its goals, in part also due to the unprecedented challenges the world has experienced since its adoption; welcomes, in this sense, the extension of the action plan until 2027, with a view to maximising the synergies and complementarity between human rights and democracy at local, national and global levels;

    EU Special Representative (EUSR) for Human Rights

    9. Fully supports the work of the EUSR for Human Rights in contributing to the visibility and coherence of the EU’s human rights actions in its external relations; upholds the EUSR’s central role in the EU’s promotion and protection of human rights by engaging with non-EU countries and like-minded partners; underlines the need for close cooperation between the EUSR for Human Rights and other EUSRs and Special Envoys in order to further improve this coherence, and calls for greater visibility for the role of the EUSR for Human Rights; calls for the EUSR to be supported in his work with increased resources and better coordination with EU delegations around the world; regrets, despite continuous calls, Parliament’s exclusion from the process of selecting the EUSR; insists on the need for the EUSR to report back to Parliament regularly;

    Neighbourhood, Development and International Cooperation Instrument – Global Europe and the human rights and democracy thematic programme

    10. Recalls the fundamental role of the Neighbourhood, Development and International Cooperation Instrument (NDICI) – Global Europe, including its thematic programme on human rights and democracy, as a flagship EU instrument in promoting and protecting human rights and democracy around the world; highlights the need to engage with civil society in all the EU’s relevant external activities, including the Global Gateway Strategy which is financed through the NDICI-Global Europe; reiterates the importance of streamlining a human-rights based approach in the EU’s external action instruments; underlines Parliament’s role in the instrument’s programming process and calls on the Commission and the EEAS to share all relevant information in a timely manner in order to enable Parliament to play its role accordingly, in particular during high-level geopolitical dialogues with the Commission and in the mid-term review process as well as in its resolutions; calls on the EEAS and the Commission to ensure that a response is provided to the recommendation letters following each geopolitical dialogue and each resolution; urges the Commission to develop and launch a comprehensive, centralised website dedicated to the NDICI-Global Europe, including information on all the multiannual indicative programmes, detailing their respective budgets, associated actions and the financial allocations they are backing, organised both by country and by theme; notes that the NDICI-Global Europe and all future instruments must focus on the fundamental drivers of ongoing challenges, including the need to strengthen the resilience of local communities and democracy support activities by supporting economic development;

    11. Calls for independent, ex ante assessments to determine the possible implications and risks of projects with regard to human rights, in line with Article 25(5) of  Regulation (EU) 2021/947; calls for independent human rights monitoring throughout the implementation of projects in third countries, especially in relation to projects entailing a high risk of violations; calls for a suspension of projects that (in)directly contribute to human rights violations in non-EU countries; reiterates the prohibition on allocating EU funds to activities that are contrary to EU fundamental values, such as terrorism or extremism; calls on the Commission to share all human rights-related assessments with Parliament in a proactive manner;

    EU trade and international agreements

    12. Reiterates its call to integrate human rights assessments and include robust clauses on human rights in agreements between the EU and non-EU countries, supported by a clear set of benchmarks and procedures to be followed in the event of violations; calls on the Commission and the EEAS to ensure that the human rights clauses in current international agreements are actively monitored and effectively enforced and to improve their communication with Parliament concerning considerations and decisions regarding this enforcement; reiterates that in the face of persistent breaches of human rights clauses by its partner countries, including those related to the Generalised Scheme of Preferences Plus programme, the EU should react swiftly and decisively, including by suspending the agreements in question if other options prove ineffective; calls for the EU Ombudsman’s recommendation concerning the creation of a complaint-handling portal to be implemented, within the framework of EU trade and financial instruments, or for the Commission’s Single Entry Point to be adapted to allow complaints regarding failure to comply with human rights clauses to be submitted; calls on the EU institutions to engage regularly with the business community and civil society in order to strengthen the links between international trade, human rights and economic security; calls for the EU to ensure human rights promotion and protection through its Global Gateway investments and projects, by ensuring that they do no harm;

    EU human rights dialogues

    13. Stresses the important role of human rights dialogues within the EU’s human rights toolbox and as a key vehicle for the implementation of the EU action plan on human rights and democracy; highlights that these dialogues must address the overall situation of human rights and democracy with the relevant countries; notes that human rights dialogues should be seen as a key element of sustained EU engagement and not as a free-standing instrument, and that the persistent failure of non-EU countries to genuinely engage in dialogues and to implement key deliverables should lead to the use of other appropriate foreign policy tools; recalls that these dialogues need to be used in conjunction and synergy with other instruments, using a more-for-more and a less-for-less approach; reiterates the need to raise individual cases, in particular those of Sakharov Prize laureates and those highlighted by Parliament in its resolutions, and ensure adequate follow-up; calls on the EEAS and EU delegations to increase the visibility of these dialogues and their outcomes, ensuring that they are results-oriented and based on a clear set of benchmarks that can be included in a published joint press statement, and to conduct suitable follow-up action on it; calls for the enhanced and meaningful involvement of civil society in the dialogues; stresses that genuine CSOs must not be impeded from participating in human rights dialogues and that any dialogue must include all genuine CSOs without any limitations;

    EU Global Human Rights Sanctions Regime (GHRSR – EU Magnitsky Act)

    14. Welcomes the increasing use of the EU GHRSR as a key political tool in the EU’s defence of human rights and democracy across the world; regrets, however, that its use has continued to be limited, especially in the current geopolitical landscape; notes, however, the challenges that the requirement of unanimity poses in the adoption of sanctions and reiterates its call on the Council to introduce qualified majority voting for decisions on the GHRSR; recalls, in this regard, the formal request submitted by Parliament to the Council in 2023, on calling an EU reform convention, with the aim, among others, of increasing the number of decisions taken by qualified majority; calls for a stronger use of the GHRSR and other ad hoc sanctions regimes on those responsible for serious violations of human rights and international humanitarian law, including high-level officials; fully supports the possibility of imposing targeted anti-corruption sanctions within the EU framework in this regard, which has been a long-standing priority of Parliament, whether through its inclusion in the GHRSR or under a different regime; highlights the need for the complete enforcement of sanctions and calls for circumventions to be tackled;

    Democracy support activities

    15. Reiterates its concern regarding the increasing attacks by authoritarian and illiberal regimes on democratic principles, values and pluralism; stresses that the defence and support of democracy around the world is increasingly becoming of geopolitical and strategic interest; emphasises the importance of Parliament’s efforts in capacity-building for partner parliaments, promoting mediation and encouraging a culture of dialogue and compromise, especially among young political leaders, and empowering women parliamentarians, HRDs and representatives from civil society and independent media; reiterates its call on the Commission to continue and expand its activities in these areas by increasing funding and support for EU bodies, agencies and other grant-based organisations; stresses the critical importance of directly supporting civil society and persons expressing dissenting views, particularly in the current climate of growing global tensions and repression in increasing numbers of countries; reiterates the importance of EU election observation missions and Parliament’s contribution to developing and enhancing their methodology; calls for the development of an EU toolbox to be used in cases of disputed or non-transparent election results in order to prevent political and military crises in the post-election environment; calls for enhanced EU action to counter manipulative and false messages against the EU in election campaigns, in particular in countries that receive significant EU humanitarian and development assistance and in countries that are candidates for EU membership; calls for enhanced collaboration between Parliament’s Democracy Support and Election Coordination Group, the relevant Commission directorates-general and the EEAS;

    EU support for human rights defenders

    16. Is extremely concerned by the continuing restriction of civil society space and rising threats to the work of HRDs and members of CSOs, as well as their families, communities and lawyers, and finds particularly concerning the increasingly sophisticated means used to persecute them; strongly condemns their arbitrary detentions and killings; deplores the harassment of CSOs through legislative provisions such as foreign agents laws and similar, and other restrictions they face; deplores the fact that women HRDs continue to face relentless and ever more sophisticated violations against them, including targeted killings, physical attacks, disappearances, smear campaigns, arrests, judicial harassment and intimidation; notes with concern that these attacks seem designed to systematically silence women HRDs and erase their voices from the public sphere; supports wholeheartedly the work of HRDs and EU action to ensure their protection worldwide; underscores the pressing need for a comprehensive and timely revision of the EU Guidelines on HRDs, with a view to addressing the emerging challenges and threats, and to ensuring their applicability and effectiveness in the protection of HRDs globally, while integrating gender-sensitive and intersectional approaches in the updated Guidelines, reflecting the diverse backgrounds and experiences of HRDs, and taking into account the specific vulnerabilities they may face; calls for the complete and consistent application of the EU Guidelines on HRDs by the EU and its Member States; calls for efforts to enhance communication strategies to increase the visibility of EU actions and channels for the protection of and the support mechanisms for HRDs;

    17. Raises serious concerns over the increasing phenomenon of transnational repression against HRDs, journalists and civil society; calls for the formulation of an EU strategy harmonising national responses to transnational repression;

    18. Expresses deep concern regarding the increasingly precarious financial landscape faced by HRDs and communities advocating for rights, particularly within a global context characterised by intensifying repression; notes that, as a result of the current geopolitical context, HRDs’ need for support has increased; calls, therefore, for the EU and its Member States to make full use of their financial support for HRDs, ensuring the establishment of flexible, accessible and sustained funding mechanisms that enable these defenders to continue their vital work in the face of mounting challenges;

    19. Insists that the EEAS, the Commission and the EU delegations pay particular attention to the situation of the Sakharov Prize laureates and finalists at risk and take resolute action, in coordination with the Member States and Parliament, to ensure their well-being, safety or liberation;

    20. Welcomes the update of the EU Visa Code Handbook in relation to HRDs and calls for its full and consistent application by the Member States; reiterates its call for the Commission to take a proactive role in the establishment of a coordinated approach among the Member States for HRDs at risk, for instance streamlining visa procedures and promoting harmonisation in the EU’s visa application process;

    Combating impunity and corruption

    21. Underlines that both impunity and corruption enable and aggravate human rights violations and abuses and the erosion of democratic principles; welcomes the anti-corruption actions in EU external policies in the joint communication from the Commission and the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy of 3 May 2023 on the fight against corruption (JOIN(2023)0012); supports the anti-corruption provisions included in the EU trade agreements with non-EU countries; stresses the important role of civil society and journalists in non-EU countries in the oversight of the fight against impunity and corruption; calls for the EU and its Member States to increase their efforts in justice reforms, the fight against impunity, and the improvement of transparency and of anti-corruption institutions in non-EU countries; encourages the EU and its Member States to coordinate more closely with allies and partners wherever possible in order to counter systemic corruption that enables autocrats to maintain power, deprives societies of key resources and undermines democracy, human rights and the rule of law;

    22. Insists on the need for the EU to take clear steps to recognise the close link between corruption and human rights violations in order to target economic and financial enablers of human rights abusers;

    EU actions at multilateral level

    23. Reaffirms that promoting the respect, protection and fulfilment of human rights around the world requires strong international cooperation at a multilateral level; underlines the particularly important role of the UN and its bodies as the main forum which must be able to effectively advance efforts for peace and security, sustainable development and respect for human rights and international law; calls for the EU and its Member States to continue supporting the work of the UN, its agencies and special procedures, both politically and financially, to ensure that it is fit for purpose, and to push back against the influence of authoritarian and totalitarian regimes; stresses that the current multilateral order needs to fully incorporate into its architecture the new global actors, especially those focusing on democracy and human rights; reiterates the need for the EU and its Member States to speak with one voice at the UN and in other multilateral forums in order to effectively tackle global challenges to human rights and democracy in multilateral forums and to support the strongest possible language in line with international human rights standards; calls, to this end, for progress in ensuring that the EU has a seat in international organisations, including the UN Security Council, in addition to the existing Member States’ seats; calls for EU delegations to play a stronger role in multilateral forums, for which they should have appropriate resources available;

    24. Is deeply concerned by growing attacks against the rules-based global order by authoritarian and totalitarian regimes, including through unprovoked and unjustified aggression against peaceful neighbours and through the undermining of the functioning of UN bodies, namely the abuse of veto power at the UN Security Council; underlines that the diminished effectiveness of these bodies brings with it real costs in terms of conflicts, lives lost and human suffering, and seriously weakens the general ability of countries to deal with global challenges; calls on the Member States and like minded partners to develop a robust strategy and to intensify their efforts to reverse this trend and to send a united and strong message of support to those organisations when they are attacked or threatened; believes that the UN, its bodies, and other multilateral organisations are in need of reform, in order to address these growing challenges and threats;

    25. Reiterates the strong support of the EU for the International Court of Justice and the ICC as essential, independent and impartial jurisdictional institutions amid a particularly challenging time for international justice; recalls that a well-funded ICC is essential for the effective prosecution of serious international crimes; welcomes the political and financial support the EU has given to the ICC, including the Office of the Prosecutor (OTP) of the ICC, and the launch of the ‘Global initiative to fight against impunity for international crimes’ offering financial support to CSOs dedicated to fostering justice and accountability for international crimes and serious human rights violations, including by facilitating survivors’ participation in legal proceedings; calls for the EU and its Member States to continue and intensify their support to the ICC – including to the ICC Trust Fund for Victims – with the necessary means, including resources and political backing, and to use all instruments at their disposal to combat impunity worldwide and enable the ICC to fulfil its mandate effectively; calls on all the Member States to respect and implement the actions and decisions of the International Court of Justice and all organs of the ICC, including the OTP and the Chambers, to urge other countries to join and cooperate with the court, including to enforce ICC arrest warrants, and to support their work as an independent and impartial international justice institution everywhere in the world; regrets the failure of some ICC member states to execute ICC arrest warrants, thereby undermining the court’s work; calls for the EU to urge non-EU countries, including its major partners, to recognise the ICC and become a state party to the Rome Statute;

    26. Stresses the importance of not politicising the ICC, as trust in the court is eroded if its mandate is misused; condemns, in particular and in the most critical terms, the political attacks, sanctions and other coercive measures introduced or envisaged against the ICC itself and against its staff; calls on the Member States and the EU institutions to cooperate to work on solutions in order to protect the institution of the ICC and its staff from any future sanctions that would threaten the functioning of the court;

    27. Recognises universal jurisdiction as an important tool of the international criminal justice system to prevent and combat impunity and promote international accountability; calls on the Member States to apply universal jurisdiction in the fight against impunity;

    28. Calls for the EU and its Member States to lead the global fight against all forms of extremism and welcomes the adoption of an EU strategy to this end; demands that the fight against terrorism be at the top of the EU’s domestic and foreign affairs agenda;

    Upholding international humanitarian law

    29. Notes with concern the increasing disregard for international humanitarian law and international human rights law, particularly in the form of ongoing conflicts around the world; strongly condemns the increase in deliberate, indiscriminate and disproportionate attacks on civilians and civilian objects in multiple conflict settings; underlines that it is of the utmost importance that all UN and humanitarian aid agencies are able to provide full, timely and unhindered assistance to all people in vulnerable situations and calls on all parties to armed conflicts to fully respect the work of these agencies and ensure they can meet the basic needs of civilians without interference; denounces attempts to undermine UN agencies delivering humanitarian aid; urges all parties to armed conflicts to protect civilian populations, humanitarian and medical workers, and journalists and media workers; calls on all parties to armed conflicts to respect the legitimacy and inviolability of UN peacekeeping missions; calls on all states to unconditionally and fully conform with international humanitarian law; calls on the international community, and the Member States in particular, to promote accountability and the fight against impunity for grave breaches of international humanitarian law; calls for the systematic creation of humanitarian corridors in regions at war and in combat situations, whenever necessary, in order to allow civilians at risk to escape conflicts, and strongly condemns any attacks on them; demands unhindered access for humanitarian organisations monitoring and assisting prisoners of war, as provided for in the Geneva Convention on Prisoners of War; expects international organisations to abide by international law regarding the treatment of prisoners of war; calls for international cooperation and assistance in the return of forcibly deported persons, in particular children and hostages;

    30. Reiterates its call on the Member States to help contain armed conflicts and serious violations of human rights or international humanitarian law by strictly abiding by the provisions of Article 7 of the UN Arms Trade Treaty of 2 April 2013 on Export and Export Assessment and Council Common Position 2008/944/CFSP of 8 December 2008 defining common rules governing control of exports of military technology and equipment;

    31. Given the gendered impacts of armed conflicts, deplores the insufficient priority and focus given to sexual and gender-based violence and to sexual and reproductive health and rights (SRHR) across the EU’s humanitarian and refugee response; reiterates that humanitarian crises intensify SRHR- and gender-related challenges and recalls that in crisis zones, particularly among vulnerable groups such as refugees and migrants, women and girls are particularly exposed to sexual violence, sexually transmitted diseases, sexual exploitation, rape as a weapon of war and unwanted pregnancies; calls on the Commission and the Member States to give high priority to gender equality and SRHR in their humanitarian aid and refugee response, as well as accountability and access to justice and redress for sexual and reproductive rights violations and gender-based violence, including in terms of training for humanitarian actors, and existing and future funding;

    Team Europe approach

    32. Recognises the potential for stronger alignment in approaches to human rights protection and promotion between EU institutions, Member States’ embassies and EU delegations in non-EU countries, particularly in encouraging those countries to comply with their international obligations and to refrain from harassment and persecution of critical voices; emphasises the opportunity for Member States’ embassies to take an increasingly active role in advancing and safeguarding human rights, while also supporting civil society in these countries; calls for the EU and its Member States to use all possible means to urge countries to release political prisoners; highlights the importance of shared responsibility between Member States and EU delegations in these efforts; calls for the EU and its Member States to intensify their collective efforts to promote the respect, protection and fulfilment of human rights and to support democracy worldwide; encourages careful monitoring and assessment of the capacity of EU delegations to ensure that each one has a designated point of contact for cases of human rights violations, and that this mandate is allocated sufficient resources to respond in an effective and timely manner; reiterates, in this context, the importance, for the EU delegations, of existing EU guidelines related to specific areas of human rights;

    Responding to universal human rights and democracy challenges

    Right to freedom from torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment

    33. Condemns any action or attempt to legalise, instigate, authorise, consent or acquiesce to torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment methods under any circumstances; condemns the increasing reports of the use of torture by state actors in many different contexts, including in custodial and extra-custodial settings – of political prisoners, among others – and in conflict situations around the world, notably in violation of the Geneva Convention on Prisoners of War, as well as the killing of prisoners of war, which amounts to a war crime, and reiterates the non-derogable nature of the right to be free from torture or other forms of inhuman or degrading treatment; reiterates the EU’s zero-tolerance policy to torture and other ill-treatment and calls on the relevant institutions, including the European Court of Human Rights, to take a thorough stance on any such case;

    34. Reiterates its calls for universal ratification of the UN Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment and its Optional Protocol thereto, and for the need for states to bring their national provisions in this respect in line with international standards; reiterates, in accordance with the revised Guidelines on the EU’s policy towards third countries on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, adopted by the Council on 16 September 2019, the importance of engaging with relevant stakeholders in the fight to eradicate torture, and to monitor places of detention;

    Right to freedom of peaceful assembly and association

    35. Reiterates the need to protect the EU democratic space and the exercise of fundamental freedoms therein, particularly freedoms of assembly and association; highlights the growing violent repression of protest and peaceful assemblies within the EU civic space, with cases of torture and ill-treatment resulting in deaths and other serious violations; underscores the need to strengthen this fundamental right in conjunction with the absolute prohibition of torture and ill-treatment;

    Right to food, water and sanitation

    36. Recalls that the right to food, including having physical and economic access to adequate food or the means to its procurement, is a human right; is extremely concerned about the challenges to the right to food worldwide, especially in situations of war and conflicts; condemns the increasing reports of the weaponisation of food in situations of armed conflict; calls for the EU and its Member States to promote mandatory guidelines on the right to food without discrimination within the UN system; urges the EU and the Member States to fully support, politically and financially, organisations and agencies working to secure the right to food in conflict zones; recalls the importance of the UN Declaration on the Rights of Peasants and Other People Working in Rural Areas in view of attaining food security; commends the work of the UN World Food Programme, in this regard;

    37. Reaffirms the rights to safe drinking water and to sanitation as human rights, both rights being complementary; underlines that access to clean drinking water is indispensable to a healthy and dignified life and is essential for the maintenance of human dignity; highlights the fact that the right to water is a fundamental precondition for the enjoyment of other rights, and as such must be guided by a logic grounded in the public interest, and in common public and global goods; underscores the importance of the EU Guidelines on safe drinking water and sanitation, and urges the EU institutions and the Member States to implement and promote their application in non-EU countries and in multilateral forums;

    Climate change and the environment

    38. Highlights that climate change and its impact on the environment has direct effects on the effective enjoyment of all human rights; recognises the important work of CSOs, indigenous peoples and local communities, land and environmental HRDs and indigenous activists for the protection of a clean, healthy and sustainable environment, including access to land and water sources; deplores the risks that environmental HRDs and indigenous activists face and calls for their effective protection to be guaranteed; notes that communities contributing the least to climate change are the ones more likely to be affected by climate risks and natural disasters and calls, in this regard, for increasing support to the most vulnerable groups; recalls that indigenous peoples and local communities play an important role in the sustainable management of natural resources and the conservation of biodiversity; recalls that the transition to clean energy must be fair and respect everyone’s fundamental rights; reiterates the importance of the achievement of the UN sustainable development goals (SDGs) for the protection of the human rights of present and future generations;

    39. Notes with deep concern the increasing threats to a clean, healthy and sustainable environment posed by the deployment of weapons of mass destruction and other forms of warfare that adversely and disproportionately affect the environment; stresses the need to effectively address the displacement of people caused by environmental destruction and climate change, which increases the risk of human rights violations and heightens vulnerabilities to different forms of exploitation; recognises that children face more acute risks from climate-related disasters and are also one of the largest groups to be affected; calls for the EU to focus on addressing the impacts of climate change on the enjoyment of the rights of the child;

    Rights of the child

    40. Calls for a systematic and consistent approach to promoting and defending children’s rights, including for those most marginalised and those in the most vulnerable situations, through all of the EU’s external policies; calls for more concerted efforts to promote the respect, protection and fulfilment of children’s rights in crisis or emergency situations; condemns the decline in respect for the rights of the child and the increasing violations and abuses of these rights, including through violence, early and forced marriage, sexual abuse including genital mutilation, trafficking, child labour, honour killings, recruitment of child soldiers, lack of access to education and healthcare, malnutrition and extreme poverty; further condemns the increase in deaths of children in situations of armed conflict and stresses the need for effective protection of children’s rights in active warfare; calls for new EU initiatives to promote and protect children’s rights, with a view to rehabilitating and reintegrating conflict-affected children, ensuring that they have a protected, family- and community-based environment as a natural context for their lives, in which assistance and education are fundamental elements; reiterates its call for a systematic and consistent approach to promoting and defending children’s rights through all EU external policies; calls on all countries to ratify the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child as a matter of urgency, in order to allow for the universal ratification of this foundational instrument;

    41. Stresses the importance of closing the financing gap that would enable countries to meet their SDG 4 targets on quality education and ensure access to education for all children and young people; reiterates its calls to address cultural norms and gender biases that prevent girls and women from receiving an education and urges the creation of gender-responsive education systems worldwide;

    42. Stresses that education represents the starting point for cultivating principles and values that contribute to the personal development of children, as well as to social cohesion and democracy, and the rule of law around the world; to that end calls for the EU to promote its values through supporting access to education and learning for women and girls;

    Rights of women and gender equality

    43. Stresses that women’s rights and gender equality are indispensable and indivisible human rights, as well as a basis for the rule of law and inclusive resilient democracies; deplores the fact that millions of women and girls continue to experience discrimination and violence, especially in the context of conflicts, post-conflict situations and displacements, and are denied their dignity, autonomy and even life; condemns the impunity with which perpetrators commit violations against women HRDs; is appalled by the use of rape and sexual violence as a weapon of war and stresses the need to shed light on these instances, and for better international cooperation on fighting impunity for these crimes; calls for the EU, its Member States and like-minded partners to step up their efforts to ensure the full enjoyment and protection of women’s and girls’ human rights, and to incorporate a gender mainstreaming approach across all policies, taking into account the differentiated impacts of global challenges such as climate change or conflicts; condemns in the strongest terms the increasing attacks on SRHR around the world, as well as gender-based violence; strongly deplores cases of female genital mutilation, honour killings, child marriages and forced marriages; welcomes the accession of the EU to the Istanbul Convention and strongly encourages the remaining EU Member States to ratify the Istanbul Convention without further delay; calls for the EU and its international partners to strengthen their efforts to ensure that women fully enjoy human rights and are treated equally to men; emphasises the importance of safeguarding the rights of women, ensuring that their health, safety and dignity are protected, particularly in the context of healthcare access and workplace protections; underlines the need to keep opposing and condemning, in the strongest terms, anti-abortion laws that punish women and girls with decades-long jail sentences, even in cases of rape, incest or when the life of the pregnant woman is at risk; stresses the need to pursue efforts to fully eradicate the practice of female genital mutilation; fully supports the role of the EU Ambassador for Gender and Diversity;

    44. Recognises that gender apartheid constitutes a systematic and institutionalised form of oppression, depriving women and girls of fundamental rights solely on the basis of their gender; notes with deep concern the entrenchment of gender apartheid in certain regions, where women face extensive restrictions on education, employment, healthcare and freedom of movement, often underpinned by legal and cultural frameworks that reinforce gender-based discrimination; urges the EU and the Member States to proactively address gender apartheid through strengthened diplomatic efforts, targeted economic measures and accountability mechanisms that support civil society organisations advocating for gender equality; calls for the formal recognition of gender apartheid as a distinct human rights violation and for support for international initiatives for its classification as a crime against humanity, thus contributing to the establishment of a global accountability standard;

    Rights of refugees and asylum seekers

    45. Denounces the erosion of the human rights and the safety of refugees, asylum seekers and forcibly displaced persons; reaffirms their inalienable human rights and fundamental right to seek asylum; recalls the obligation of states to protect them in accordance with international law; underlines the importance of identification and registration of individuals, including children, as a key tool for protecting refugees and ensuring the integrity of refugee protection systems, preventing human trafficking and the recruitment of children into armed militias; calls for the EU and its Member States to effectively uphold their rights in the EU’s asylum and migration policy and in the EU’s cooperation with partner countries in this regard; deplores the increasing xenophobia, racism and discrimination towards migrants, as well as the different forms of violence they face, including during their displacement, and the many barriers they face, including in access to healthcare; condemns the instrumentalisation of migration at EU borders by foreign actors, which constitutes hybrid attacks against the Member States as well as a dehumanisation of migrants; stresses that the EU should step up its efforts to acknowledge and develop ways to address the root causes of irregular migration and forced displacement, building the resilience of migrants’ communities of origin and helping them offer their members the possibility to enjoy a decent life in their home country; calls for the EU and its Member States to continue and, where possible, step up their support for countries hosting the most refugees, as well as for transit countries; reiterates that close cooperation and engagement with non-EU countries, with full respect for fundamental rights, remain key to preventing migrant smuggling; stresses, in this regard, that the dissemination of information and awareness-raising campaigns on the risks of smuggling are crucial, as well as of the migration laws of the destination countries, in order to prevent the undertaking of unnecessarily risky journeys by those who do not have grounds for asylum; calls for EU-funded humanitarian operations to take into consideration the specific needs and vulnerabilities of children and to ensure their protection while they are displaced; underlines the importance of developing an effective framework of safe and legal pathways to the EU and welcomes, in this regard, the Commission communication on attracting skills and talent to the EU[11], including the development of talent partnerships with partner countries; calls for respect for the principle of non-refoulement to countries where the life and liberty of people would be threatened; calls for the EU and its Member States to discuss the phenomenon of instrumentalised migration orchestrated by authoritarian regimes and organised crime groups, and emphasises the need to conduct a comprehensive analysis of this phenomenon, develop effective countermeasures, and consider its implications for the human rights framework;

    46. Reaffirms that no agreement with a non-EU country designated as a transit country should be concluded without Parliament’s scrutiny, and calls on the Commission and the Member States to include robust human rights clauses, monitoring mechanisms and impact assessments therein; reiterates its call on the Commission to integrate ex ante human rights impact assessments into such agreements;

    Rights of LGBTIQ+ persons

    47. Deplores the human rights violations, including discrimination, persecution, violence and killings, against lesbian, gay, bisexual, trans, non-binary, intersex and queer (LGBTIQ+) persons around the world; is extremely concerned by the spreading of hatred and anti-LGBTIQ+ narratives and legislation that target LGBTIQ+ persons and HRDs; calls for the adoption of policies that protect LGBTIQ+ people and give them the tools to safely report a violation of their rights, in line with the EU Guidelines to Promote and Protect the Enjoyment of all Human Rights by LGBTI Persons; expresses special concern over LGBTIQ+ people living under non-democratic regimes or in conflict situations, and calls for rapid response mechanisms to protect them as well as their defenders; reiterates its calls for the full implementation of the LGBTIQ Equality Strategy 2020-2025 as the EU’s tool for improving the situation of LGBTIQ+ people around the world; calls for  the use of the death penalty to be rejected under all circumstances, including any legislation that would impose the death penalty for homosexuality; calls for the EU and its Member States to further engage the countries with such legislation in reconsidering their position on the death penalty; notes further that the imposition of the death penalty on the basis of such legislation is arbitrary killing per se, and a breach of Article 6 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights;

    Rights of persons with disabilities

    48. Is concerned by the challenges to the full enjoyment of the rights of persons with disabilities; reiterates its calls for the EU to assist partner countries in the development of policies in support of carers of persons with disabilities; calls for the raising of social awareness and the combating of discriminatory behaviours against persons with disabilities; points to the additional complications faced by persons with disabilities in conflict situations and natural disasters, as they are more vulnerable to violence and often do not receive adequate support; urges all parties to conflict situations worldwide to take adequate measures to mitigate the risks to them as much as possible; emphasises the need to safeguard children with disabilities from any form of exploitation; calls for the EU, in its external policy, to make use of the strategy for the rights of persons with disabilities 2021-2030 as a tool to improve the situation of persons with disabilities, particularly concerning poverty and discrimination, but also problems with access to education, healthcare and employment, and participation in political life; encourages the EU to support partner countries in developing inclusive economic policies that promote accessible vocational training and employment opportunities for persons with disabilities, fostering their full and active economic participation;

    Rights of elderly people

    49. Reiterates its call for the EU and its Member States to develop new avenues to strengthen the rights of elderly people, taking into account the multiple challenges they face, such as age-based discrimination, poverty, violence and a lack of social protection, healthcare and other essential services, as well as barriers to employment; calls for the implementation of specific measures to combat the risk of poverty for older women through increased social support; underlines the work of the UN Open-ended Working Group on Ageing on a legally binding instrument to strengthen the protection of the human rights of older people and calls for the EU and its Member States to consider actively supporting that work; stresses the need for a cross-cutting intergenerational approach in EU policies, in order to build and encourage solidarity between young people and elderly people;

    Right to equality and non-discrimination

    50. Reiterates its condemnation of all forms of racism, intolerance, antisemitism, Islamophobia, persecution of Christians, xenophobia and discrimination on the basis of race, ethnicity, nationality, social class, disability, caste, religion, belief, age, sexual orientation or gender identity; condemns the growing international threat of hate speech and speech that incites violence, including online; reiterates the crucial role of education and dialogue in promoting tolerance, understanding and diversity; calls for the adoption or the strengthening of mechanisms for reporting discriminatory behaviours as well as access to effective legal remedies, to help end the impunity of those who engage in this behaviour;

    Right to life: towards the universal abolition of the death penalty

    51. Reiterates its principled opposition to the death penalty, which is irreversible and incompatible with the right to life and with the prohibition of torture, and a cruel, inhuman and degrading punishment; stresses that the EU must be relentless in its pursuit of the universal abolition of the death penalty as a major objective of its human rights foreign policy; notes that despite the trend in some non-EU countries to take steps towards abolishing the death penalty, significant challenges in this regard still exist; deplores the fact that in other non-EU countries the number of death sentences that have been carried out has reached its highest level in the last five years; reiterates its call for all countries to completely abolish the death penalty or establish an immediate moratorium on the use of the death penalty (sentences and executions) as a first step towards its abolition; urges, in this regard, the EU to intensify diplomatic engagement with countries that continue to practise the death penalty, encouraging dialogue and cooperation on human rights issues and providing support for the development of judicial reforms that could lead towards its abolition;

    Right to freedom of thought, conscience, religion and belief

    52. Reiterates its concern regarding violations of the right to freedom of thought, conscience, religion and belief; is concerned about the worldwide increase in intolerance towards different religious communities; deplores the instrumentalisation of religious or belief identities for political purposes and the exclusion of persons belonging to religious and belief minorities and religious communities, including from political participation, as well as the destruction and vandalism of sites and works of art of cultural and historical value, in certain non-EU countries; stresses that the freedom to choose one’s religion, to believe or not to believe is a human right that cannot be punished; condemns, therefore, the existence and implementation of so-called apostasy laws and blasphemy laws that lead to harsh penalties, degrading treatment and, in some cases, even to death sentences; calls for the abolition of apostasy laws and blasphemy laws; stresses that the Special Envoy for the promotion and protection of freedom of religion or belief outside the EU should be granted more resources so that he can efficiently carry out his mandate; highlights the need for the Special Envoy to continue to work closely and in a complementary manner with the EUSR for Human Rights and the Council Working Party on Human Rights; calls for the EU and its Member States to step up their efforts to protect the right to freedom of thought, conscience, religion or belief, to raise these issues at UN human rights forums and to continue working with the relevant UN mechanisms and committees; calls for the EU to request and consolidate reports by EU delegations on the state of freedom of thought, conscience, religion and belief;

    53. Recalls that most of the drivers of violent conflicts worldwide involve minority grievances of exclusion, discrimination and inequalities linked to violations of the human rights of minorities, as observed by the UN Special Rapporteur on minority issues; stresses the need to mainstream the protection of the rights of minorities and for the development of protection mechanisms at the level of the UN; recalls the obligations of states to protect the rights of their national, ethnic, cultural, religious or linguistic minorities within their respective territories; calls on the Commission to support the protection of the rights of persons belonging to minorities worldwide, including this as a priority under the human rights and democracy thematic programme of the EU’s NDICI-Global Europe;

    Right to freedom of expression, academic freedom, media freedom and the right to information

    54. Emphasises the critical significance of freedom of expression and access to trustworthy and diverse sources of information for sustaining democracy and a thriving civic space; recalls that democracies can only function when citizens have access to independent and reliable information, making journalists key players in the safeguarding of democracy; is therefore seriously concerned about the increasing restrictions on freedom of expression in numerous countries worldwide, particularly for journalists, through censorship, enforced self-censorship, so-called foreign agents laws and the misuse of counter-terrorism or anti-corruption laws to suppress journalists and civil society groups; is concerned by the use of hate speech against journalists, both online and offline, leading to a deterrent effect; raises concerns, additionally, about the physical security of journalists and media workers and their being targeted in conflict zones; notes the number of journalists killed in conflict situations in 2023, according to the Committee to Protect Journalists, has increased alarmingly – by 85 % – since 2022;

    55. Calls urgently for the EU to back trustworthy media and information outlets that promote the accountability of authorities and support democratic transitions, while stressing the need to preserve the principles of pluralism, transparency and independence; highlights the role played by fact checkers in the media landscape, ensuring that the public can trust the information they receive; is concerned that they are therefore major targets for attacks by illiberal regimes that originate and disseminate disinformation, propaganda and fake news; condemns the extensive use of SLAPPs to silence journalists, activists, trade unionists and HRDs globally; welcomes, in this context, the directive designed to shield journalists and HRDs from abusive legal actions and SLAPPs; encourages lawmakers in non-EU countries to develop legislation with the same goal, as part of broader efforts to promote and protect media freedom and pluralism; requests that attacks on media freedom, as well as the persistent and systematic erosion of the right to information, be taken into account in the EU’s monitoring of the compliance of international agreements;

    56. Welcomes the Commission’s plan to finance initiatives that support journalists on legal and practical matters, including beyond the EU, through the European Democracy Action Plan; calls for the EU to strengthen its efforts to aid targeted journalists globally, recalling that independent journalists are on the frontline of the fight against disinformation, which undermines democracies; acknowledges the contribution to achieving this goal of programmes such as the now-defunct Media4Democracy and other EU-funded activities, including those of the European Endowment for Democracy; urges the EU to help make reliable news sources available to more people living in countries that restrict press freedom;

    57. Remains deeply concerned by the deteriorating state of press freedom around the world; condemns the censorship of journalists, HRDs and CSOs through the application of so-called foreign agents laws, as well as other legislative and non-legislative measures adopted by authoritarian and illiberal regimes;

    58. Reaffirms its commitment to protecting and promoting academic freedom as a key component of open and democratic societies; underlines the attacks to academic freedom not only by authoritarian and totalitarian regimes, but also by extreme and populist forces worldwide; calls for the development of benchmarks for academic freedom into institutional quality assurance within academic rankings, procedures and criteria;

    59. Notes with concern that more than half of the world’s population lives within environments of completely or severely restricted levels of academic freedom, which has severe consequences for the right to education, the enjoyment of the benefits of scientific progress and the freedom of opinion and expression; urges the EU and its Member States to step up their efforts to halt censorship, threats or attacks on academic freedom, and especially the imprisonment of scholars worldwide; welcomes the inclusion of academics at risk in the EU Human Rights Defenders Mechanism; calls on the Commission to ensure continued high-level support for the Global Campus of Human Rights, which has provided a safe space for students and scholars who had to flee their countries for defending democracy and human rights;

    Rights of indigenous peoples

    60. Notes with regret that indigenous peoples continue to face widespread and systematic discrimination and persecution worldwide, including forced displacements; condemns arbitrary arrests and the killing of human rights and land defenders who stand up for the rights of indigenous peoples; stresses that the promotion of the rights of indigenous peoples and their traditional practices are key to achieving sustainable development, combating climate change and conserving biodiversity; urges governments to pursue development and environmental policies that respect economic, social and cultural rights, and that are inclusive of indigenous peoples and local populations, in line with the UN SDGs; reiterates its call for the EU, its Member States and their partners in the international community to adopt all necessary measures for the recognition, protection and promotion of the rights of indigenous people, including as regards their languages, lands, territories and resources, as set out in the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, including the principle of free, prior and informed consent; calls on all states to ensure that indigenous peoples and local communities are included in the deliberations and decision-making processes of international climate diplomacy; encourages the Commission to continue to promote dialogue and collaboration between indigenous peoples and the EU;

    Right to public participation

    61. Deplores that the right to participate in free and fair elections is not respected in authoritarian, illiberal, and totalitarian regimes; highlights that these regimes conduct fake elections with the aim of entrenching their power, as they lack real political contestation and pluralism; is alarmed by current trends in electoral processes, such as the increasing decline in electoral participation and democratic performance or the growing disputes concerning the credibility of elections; highlights with deep concern the growing interference by some states in other countries’ elections through hybrid tactics; reaffirms the necessity of increasing political representation of women, young people and vulnerable groups and to guarantee the public participation of minorities; underlines that distrust in the electoral process can be exacerbated not only by irregularities but also by public statements, including from participants; emphasises that public perception of electoral process is as crucial as the process itself, as its manipulation can lead to polarisation or targeted attacks; calls on non-EU countries to reinforce their efforts to clearly communicate all the steps of their respective electoral processes and systems, as well as the existing accountability mechanisms in case of irregularities; calls on the EEAS and the Commission to analyse and report to Parliament their initiatives to tackle the challenges posed by articifical intelligence (AI) in electoral processes;

    Human rights, business and trade

    62. Stresses the role of trade as a major instrument to promote and improve the human rights situation in the EU’s partner countries; urges the Commission to improve coordination between the EU’s trade, investment and development policies and prioritise and promote the development of human rights through EU trade policies, including the Generalised Scheme of Preferences Plus; notes, however, that there has been little to no improvement in some of the countries concerned; stresses the responsibilities of states and other actors, such as corporations, to mitigate the effects of climate change, prevent their negative impact on human rights and promote appropriate policies in compliance with human rights obligations; deplores the detrimental effects of some excessive and exploitative business activities on human rights and democracy; welcomes the harmonisation resulting from the adoption of the Directive on corporate sustainability due diligence with binding EU rules on responsible corporate behaviour with regard to human, labour and environmental rights; further welcomes the Regulation on prohibiting products made with forced labour on the Union market[12] and calls for its swift implementation at Member State level; calls for the implementation of the EU Ombudsman’s recommendation concerning the creation of a complaint-handling portal, within the framework of EU trade and financial instruments, and for the adaptation of the Commission’s Single Entry Point to allow for the submission of complaints regarding failures to comply with human rights clauses, which should be accessible, citizen-friendly and transparent; calls for the EU to continue its efforts to eliminate child labour, and forced and bonded labour; stresses the importance of remediation and access to justice measures that are in line with the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights, including financial and non-financial measures in consultation with the victims; calls on the Council to adopt an ambitious mandate for the EU to engage in the ongoing negotiations on the UN legally binding instrument on business and human rights as soon as possible;

    63. Highlights that in many regions of the world, micro-, small and medium-sized enterprises (MSMEs) are often the driving force of local economies with an increasing number of women running them; underlines that MSMEs account for 90 % of businesses, 60 to 70 % of employment and 50 % of gross domestic product worldwide; highlights the importance of MSMEs in their contribution to the 2030 Agenda and the achievement of the SDGs, namely those on the eradication of poverty and decent working conditions for all;

    Human rights and digital technologies

    64. Is concerned by the threat that AI can pose to democracy and human rights, especially if it is not duly regulated; highlights the need for oversight, robust transparency and appropriate safeguards for new and emergent technologies, as well as a human-rights based approach; welcomes the Council conclusions on Digital Diplomacy of 26 June 2023 to strengthen the EU’s role and leadership in global digital governance, in particular its position as a shaper of the global digital rulebook based on democratic principles; welcomes, in this regard, the adoption of the EU Artificial Intelligence Act which aims to harmonise the rules on AI for protecting human rights, and the advantages that AI can bring to human wellbeing; is deeply concerned about the harmful consequences of the misuse of AI and deepfakes, particularly for women and children; notes with concern the adverse effects of the ‘fake content industry’ on the right to information and press freedom, including the rapid development of AI and the subsequent empowerment of the disinformation industry[13]; condemns the use of new and emerging technologies, such as facial recognition technology and digital surveillance, as coercive instruments and their use in the increasing harassment, intimidation and persecution of HRDs, activists, journalists and lawyers; calls on the Council for the listing under the EUGHRSR of state and non-state actors that are engaging in these practices; notes with concern the rapid development of AI in military applications, as well as the potential development and deployment of autonomous systems that could make life-or-death decisions without human input;

    65. Recalls that the international trade in spyware to non-EU countries where such tools are used against human rights activists, journalists and government critics, is a violation of the fundamental rights enshrined in the Charter;

    66. Welcomes the adoption in May 2024 of the first Council of Europe Framework Convention on Artificial Intelligence and Human Rights, Democracy and the Rule of Law, aimed at ensuring that activities within the entire life cycle of AI systems are fully consistent with human rights, democracy and the rule of law; reiterates the need for greater legislative attention to be paid to the profound changes arising from activities within the life cycle of AI systems, which have the potential to promote human prosperity, individual and social well-being, sustainable development, gender equality, and the empowerment of all women and girls, but also pose the risk of creating or exacerbating inequalities and incentivising cyber and physical violence, including violence experienced by women and individuals in vulnerable situations;

    67. Stresses that the internet should be a place where freedom of expression prevails; considers, nevertheless, that the rights of individuals need to be respected; is of the opinion that, where applicable, what is considered to be illegal offline, should be considered illegal online; expresses concern for the growing number of internet shutdowns; highlights that internet shutdowns are often used by authoritarian regimes, among others, to silence political dissidence and curb political freedom; calls urgently for the EU to combat this alarming phenomenon, including considering allowing EU-based providers to offer safe communication tools to people who have been thereby deprived of online access; urges the EU to take a firm stance against any attempts by tech giants to circumvent or undermine national legal systems and independent court decisions, and to protect democratic principles and implement measures to maintain the integrity of elections, as well as to protect the right to information, especially during electoral periods;

    °

    ° °

    68. Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council, the Commission, the Vice-President of the Commission / High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, the European Union Special Representative for Human Rights, the governments and parliaments of the Member States, the United Nations Security Council, the United Nations Secretary-General, the President of the 79th session of the United Nations General Assembly, the President of the United Nations Human Rights Council, the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights and the European Union Heads of Delegation.

    EXPLANATORY STATEMENT

    Each year, the European Parliament adopts three annual reports on the EU’s foreign, security and defence, and human rights policies.

     

    The three reports are on:

     

    • the implementation of the Common Foreign and Security Policy – annual report 2024 (based on the report of the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Policy to the European Parliament on the Common Foreign and Security Policy) – competence of the AFET Committee,

    • Human Rights and Democracy in the world and the European Union’s policy on the matter – annual report 2024 (based on the EU Annual report on Human Rights and Democracy in the World) – competence of the DROI Subcommittee, and

    • the implementation of the Common Security and Defence Policy – annual report 2024 (based on the report of the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Policy to the European Parliament on the Common Foreign and Security Policy) – competence of the SEDE Subcommittee.

     

    These reports monitor and assess the implementation of the Common Foreign and Security Policy, including the EU policy on Human Rights and the Common Security and Defence Policy. They are a key component of the European Parliament’s contribution to EU foreign policy making, most notably in regard to the strengthened right of scrutiny conferred to the European Parliament by the Treaty of Lisbon. It is essential that the European Parliament responds to the annual reports issued by other institutions as soon as they are published.

    ANNEX I: ENTITIES OR PERSONS FROM WHOM THE RAPPORTEUR HAS RECEIVED INPUT

    Pursuant to Article 8 of Annex I to the Rules of Procedure, the rapporteur declares that she has received input from the following entities or persons in the preparation of the report, until the adoption thereof in committee:

    Entity and/or person

    European Partnership for Democracy/International Dalit Solidarity Network

    Clean Clothes Campaign

    Protection International

    Race & Equality

    FIDH – International Federation for Human Rights

    International Partnership for Human Rights

    Cairo Institute for Human Rights Studies

    Front Line Defenders

    Save the Children

    Avocats Sans Frontières

    Center for Reproductive Rights

    Reporters without Borders

    End FGM European Network

     

    The list above is drawn up under the exclusive responsibility of the rapporteur.

     

    Where natural persons are identified in the list by their name, by their function or by both, the rapporteur declares that she has submitted to the natural persons concerned the European Parliament’s Data Protection Notice No 484 (https://www.europarl.europa.eu/data-protect/index.do ), which sets out the conditions applicable to the processing of their personal data and the rights linked to that processing.

     

    ANNEX II: INDIVIDUAL CASES RAISED BY THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT FROM DECEMBER 2023 TO JANUARY 2025

     

    COUNTRY

     

    Individual

    BACKGROUND

    ACTION TAKEN BY THE PARLIAMENT

    AFGHANISTAN

     

    Manizha Seddiqi Ahmad Fahim Azimi

    Sediqullah Afghan, Fardin Fedayee  Ezatullah Zwab

    Manizha Seddiqi, Ahmad Fahim Azimi, Sediqullah Afghan, Fardin Fedayee and Ezatullah Zwab are human rights defenders who have been detained in Afghanistan.

    In its resolution of 14 March 2024, the European Parliament:

     

    – Condemns the arbitrary detention of human rights defenders, including Manizha Seddiqi, Ahmad Fahim Azimi, Sediqullah Afghan, Fardin Fedayee and Ezatullah Zwab;

     

    – Calls for victims of violence against women and girls to be released from prison, where they are being held in inhumane conditions to the detriment of their mental and physical health.

     

    ALGERIA

     

    Boualem Sansal

    French-Algerian writer Boualem Sansal was detained on 16 November 2024 by the Algerian authorities, his whereabouts remained unknown for over a week, during which time he was denied access to his family and legal counsel; he was subsequently charged with national security-related offences under Article 87bis of the Algerian Penal Code, and he is awaiting trial.

    In its resolution of 23 January 2025, the European Parliament:

     

    – Condemns the arrest and detention of Boualem Sansal and calls for his immediate and unconditional release;

     

    – Equally condemns the arrests of all other activists, political prisoners, journalists, human rights defenders and others detained or sentenced for exercising their right to freedom of opinion and expression, including journalist Abdelwakil Blamm and writer Tadjadit Mohamed, and calls for their release;

     

    – Reiterates, as enshrined in the EU-Algeria Partnership Priorities, the importance of the rule of law in order to consolidate freedom of expression; stresses that renewing this agreement must be based upon continued and substantial progress in the aforementioned domains and underscores that all future disbursements of EU funds should consider the progress made in this regard.

     

    AZERBAIJAN

     

    Dr Gubad Ibadoghlu

    Ilhamiz Guliyev

    Ulvi Hasanli Sevinj Vagifgizi

    Nargiz Absalamova

    Hafiz Babali,

    Elnara Gasimova Aziz Orujov

    Rufat Muradli

    Avaz Zeynalli

    Elnur Shukurov

    Alasgar Mammadli

    Farid Ismayilov

     

    Gubad Ibadoghlu, a political economist and opposition figure, was arrested by Azerbaijani authorities in July 2023 and remained in detention until 22 April 2024, when he was transferred to house arrest; his health has deteriorated significantly since his arrest, as a result of torture, inhumane detention conditions and refusal of adequate medical care, thus endangering his life.

     

    Ilhamiz Guliyev, a human rights defender, was arbitrarily arrested on 4 December 2023 on dubious accusations of drug trafficking after he testified as whistleblower about the police tampering with evidence against government critics; he is facing up to 12 years in prison.

     

    Tofig Yagublu, Akif Gurbanov, Bakhtiyar Hajiyev are political prisoners, and Ulvi Hasanli, Sevinj Vagifgizi, Nargiz Absalamova, Hafiz Babali, Elnara Gasimova, Aziz Orujov, Rufat Muradli, Avaz Zeynalli, Elnur Shukurov, Alasgar Mammadli, Farid Ismayilov are human rights defenders and journalists.

    In its resolution of 25 April 2024, the European Parliament:

     

    – Urges Azerbaijan to immediately and unconditionally release Ilhamiz Guliyev; notes that Gubad Ibadoghlu has been released and placed under house arrest and calls on the authorities to lift the travel ban and drop all charges against him; calls on Azerbaijan to urgently ensure that he receives an independent medical examination by a doctor of his own choosing and to allow him to receive treatment abroad;

     

    – Urges Azerbaijan to immediately and unconditionally release all other political prisoners, including Tofig Yagublu, Akif Gurbanov, Bakhtiyar Hajiyev, human rights defenders and journalists Ulvi Hasanli, Sevinj Vagifgizi, Nargiz Absalamova, Hafiz Babali, Elnara Gasimova, Aziz Orujov, Rufat Muradli, Avaz Zeynalli, Elnur Shukurov, Alasgar Mammadli, Farid Ismayilov, as well as EU and other nationals.

     

    AZERBAIJAN

     

    Dr Gubad Ibadoghlu, Anar Mammadli, Kamran Mammadli, Rufat Safarov and Meydan TV

    Political prisoner and 2024 Sakharov Prize finalist Gubad Ibadoghlu remains under house arrest; the European Court of Human Rights ruled that his health condition is critical, requiring hospitalisation and urgent heart surgery.

     

    Civil society leader Anar Mammadli has been in pre-trial detention since April 2024 on bogus charges, with his health deteriorating due to denied healthcare.

     

    In early December 2024, the Azerbaijani authorities arrested MeydanTV journalists Aynur Ganbarova, Aytaj Ahmadova, Khayala Agayeva, Natig Javadli and Aysel Umudova, and journalists Ramin Jabrayilzade and Ahmad Mukhtar; they also arrested Baku Journalism School deputy director Ulvi Tahirov, political leader Azer Gasimli and human rights defender Rufat Safarov; all face unfounded, politically motivated charges.

     

    In its resolution of 19 December 2024, the European Parliament:

     

    – Urges the Azerbaijani authorities to immediately end the crackdown on all dissident groups and unconditionally release and drop all charges against human rights defenders, journalists and political and other activists prosecuted under fabricated, politically motivated charges;

     

    – Demands that the authorities immediately lift the travel ban on Ibadoghlu, unconditionally drop all charges against him and allow him to receive urgent treatment abroad; deplores the fact that Ibadoghlu was not allowed to attend the Sakharov Prize ceremony or connect remotely;

     

    – Calls on Azerbaijan to lift undue restrictions on independent media by aligning its laws on the registration and funding of non-governmental groups and media with Venice Commission recommendations; demands that the authorities end the repression of MeydanTV, ToplumTV, Abaz Media and Kanal13;

     

    – Calls for EU sanctions under its global human rights sanctions regime to be imposed on Azerbaijani officials responsible for serious human rights violations, including Fuad Alasgarov, Vilayat Eyvazov and Ali Naghiyev.

     

    BELARUS

     

    Marina Adamovich, Mikalai Statkevich  Tatsiana Seviarynets, Pavel Seviarynets Daria Losik

    Ihar Losik

    Mikalai Kazlou

    Ryhor Kastusiou Mikalai Statkevich Pavel Seviarynets

    Marina Adamovich, wife of Mikalai Statkevich (political prisoner), Tatsiana Seviarynets, mother of Pavel Seviarynets (political prisoner), and earlier-arrested Daria Losik, wife of Ihar Losik (political prisoner), have suffered interrogations and detentions by the KGB. 

     

    Mikalai Kazlou, Ryhor Kastusiou, Mikalai Statkevich and Pavel Seviarynets, all political prisoners, face isolation, torture, denial of medical care and forced labour.

    In its resolution of 14 December 2023, the European Parliament:

     

    – Strongly condemns the recent wave of mass arrests in Belarus and urges the illegitimate Lukashenka regime to cease repression, especially any gender-based persecution, and reminds the regime of its international obligations;

     

    – Calls for the immediate unconditional release and compensation of all more than 1 400 political prisoners, as well as their families and arbitrarily detained persons, while restoring their full rights.

     

    BELARUS

     

    Mikola Statkevich

    Ales Bialiatski

    Maria Kalesnikava Siarhei Tsikhanouski Viktar Babaryka Maksim Znak

    Pavel Sevyarynets Palina Sharenda-Panasiuk

    Andrzej Poczobut  Ihar Losik

    Former presidential candidate and 2020 Sakharov Prize laureate Mikola Statkevich has been imprisoned on politically motivated charges for 14 years; he is kept in solitary confinement under maximum security; his health is deteriorating and his lawyers and family have been denied information and contact for over 300 days.

     

    Prominent Belarusian political prisoners, including Ales Bialiatski, Maria Kalesnikava, Siarhei Tsikhanouski, Viktar Babaryka, Maksim Znak, Pavel Sevyarynets, Palina Sharenda-Panasiuk, Andrzej Poczobut and Ihar Losik, have been subjected to similar isolation.

    In its resolution of 8 February 2024, the European Parliament:

     

    – Demands the immediate, unconditional release of Mikola Statkevich and all 1 500 political prisoners; calls for the withdrawal of all charges against them, their full rehabilitation and financial compensation for the damage suffered as a result of being deprived of liberty;

     

    – Insists that the prisoners must receive proper medical assistance and access to lawyers, family, diplomats and international organisations, which can assess their condition and provide aid; regrets the inaction of the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) in Belarus;

     

    – Strongly condemns the unjustified, politically motivated sentences and continued repression of Belarusian democratic forces, civil society, human rights defenders, trade unionists, journalists, clergy, political activists and their family members.

     

    CHINA

     

    Ding Yuande

    Ma Ruimei

     

    On 12 May 2023 Falun Gong practitioners Mr Ding Yuande and his wife Ms Ma Ruimei were arrested without a warrant; Ms Ma was released on bail, but was then intimidated by police because of a rescue campaign launched by their son abroad.

     

    Mr Ding was detained with no family visits for eight months; on 15 December 2023 he was sentenced to three years in prison with a CNY 15 000 fine.

    In its resolution of 18 January 2024, the European Parliament:

     

    – Strongly urges the PRC to immediately end the persecution of Falun Gong practitioners and other minorities, including Uyghurs and Tibetans; demands the immediate and unconditional release of Mr Ding and all Falun Gong practitioners in China;

     

    – Calls for the PRC to end domestic and transnational surveillance and control and the suppression of religious freedom; urges the PRC to abide by its obligations under international law and its own constitution to respect and protect human rights.

     

    CHINA

     

    Ilham Tohti

    Gulshan Abbas

    In 2014 Ilham Tohti was convicted of politically motivated charges of ‘separatism’ and sentenced to life imprisonment; he worked to foster dialogue between Uyghurs and Han Chinese; he was awarded the 2019 Sakharov Prize. Gulshan Abbas has been serving a 20-year sentence on fallacious terrorism-related charges relating to activities of her sister, a defender of the human rights of persecuted Uyghurs in the PRC.

     

     

    Gulshan Abbas, is a Uyghur retired doctor, who was forcibly disappeared in retaliation of her sisters public criticism of the treatment of Uyghurs. She has received a 20-year sentence in 2020, for participating in a terrorist organisation.

     

    In its resolution of 10 October 2024, the European Parliament:

     

    – Strongly condemns the PRC’s violations of the human rights of Uyghurs and people in Tibet, Hong Kong, Macau and mainland China;

     

    – Urges the PRC to immediately and unconditionally release Ilham Tohti and Gulshan Abbas, as well as those arbitrarily detained in China and those mentioned by the EU during the 57th session of the UN Human Rights Council, guarantee their access to medical care and lawyers, provide information on their whereabouts and ensure family visiting rights; calls for the EU and the Member States to apply pressure in this respect at every high-level contact;

     

    – Demands that the PRC authorities halt their repression and targeting of Uyghurs with abusive policies, including intense surveillance, forced labour, sterilisation, birth prevention measures and the destruction of Uyghur identity, which amount to crimes against humanity and a serious risk of genocide; calls for the closure of all internment camps;

     

    – Strongly condemns the PRC for not implementing the recommendations of the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR); calls on the PRC to allow the OHCHR independent access to XUAR and invites the OHCHR to issue a comprehensive situational update and an action plan for holding the PRC accountable;

     

    – Welcomes the EU’s forced labour regulation and insists on its full implementation; calls on businesses operating in the PRC, particularly in XUAR, to comply with their HR due diligence obligations.

     

    CUBA

     

    José Daniel Ferrer Garcia

     

    Human rights defender and opposition leader José Daniel Ferrer García was detained on 11 July 2021 in the context of widespread protests in Cuba, and has been held in isolation since 14 August 2021; the Cuban regime has imprisoned, harassed and intimidated him for over a decade for his peaceful political activism; since March 2023, he has been held incommunicado and his family have received no information about his health and have been denied the right to visit him.

    In its resolution of 19 September 2024, the European Parliament:

     

    – The Cuban regime holds political prisoners in the most appalling conditions; whereas reports indicate that José Daniel Ferrer is in a critical condition and has been held without access to medical treatment, with inadequate food and in unsanitary conditions, which constitute forms of torture, inhuman or degrading treatment;

     

    – The human rights situation in Cuba is alarming, particularly for dissidents, who are subjected to worrying levels of surveillance and arbitrary detention; whereas the number of political prisoners is unknown but reliable sources state that the regime holds over a thousand prisoners, including minors; whereas among the many political prisoners are Luis Manuel Otero Alcántara and Lizandra Gongora, whose health condition is critical;

     

    – Urges the Cuban regime to immediately and unconditionally release José Daniel Ferrer and all persons politically and arbitrarily detained for exercising their rights to freedom of expression and peaceful assembly;

     

    – Condemns the torture and inhuman, degrading and ill-treatment perpetrated by the Cuban authorities against José Daniel Ferrer and the other political prisoners; calls for the families of victims of the regime’s persecution to be granted immediate access to them, pending their release, and for the victims to be given medical care.

     

    CRIMEA

    Iryna Danylovych, Tofik Abdulhaziiev and Amet Suleymanov

    Crimean journalist and human rights defender Iryna Danylovych was abducted in 2022, accused of possessing explosives and sentenced to 6 years and 11 months of imprisonment; NGO activist Tofik Abdulhaziiev was arrested in 2019 and sentenced to 12 years in a maximum security prison on trumped-up charges, and since 2023 is being held in a prison some 2 700 km away from Crimea; citizen journalist Amet Suleymanov was sentenced to 12 years of prison in 2021.

     

    In its resolution of 19 December 2024, the European Parliament:

     

    – Condemns Russia’s continuous targeting of ethnic Ukrainians and systematic persecution of indigenous Crimean Tatars, which aims to erase their identity, heritage and culture, echoing, for the Crimean Tatars, the genocidal deportations of 1944; considers that Crimea’s future is tied to its recognition as the Crimean Tatars’ historic homeland;

     

    – Condemns the persecution of journalists, civil society activists and human rights defenders and the deportation of civilians including political prisoners from Crimea to penitentiary institutions across Russia, contrary to international law;

     

    – Demands the immediate and unconditional release of Iryna Danylovych, Tofik Abdulhaziiev and Amet Suleymanov and other political prisoners; calls for immediate medical care to be provided; denounces the upholding of verdicts against seriously ill individuals, which constitutes a blatant violation of international human rights standards; calls on the International Committee of the Red Cross and the UN to establish the whereabouts of civilian detainees from Crimea.

     

    DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC OF THE CONGO

     

    Jean-Jacques Wondo

    Jean-Jacques Wondo, a Belgian-Congolese security, military and political expert, was arrested following a failed coup on 19 May 2024, for which he was accused of being the ‘intellectual perpetrator’, on 13 September 2024, Wondo and 36 others were sentenced to death by a military court.

     

    In its resolution of 23 January 2025, the European Parliament:

     

    – Strongly condemns the sentencing to death of Wondo and others and the grave violations of their right to a fair trial;

     

    – Urges the DRC Government to immediately overturn the death sentences, reinstate a moratorium on executions and take steps towards the full abolition of the death penalty;

     

    –  Expresses deep concern about Wondo’s deteriorating health, calls for him to be given immediate access to medical treatment and insists on his immediate release;

     

    – Calls for systemic reforms to be implemented in the DRC to rebuild the judiciary into an independent, fair and efficient institution that guarantees due process and the protection of fundamental rights.

     

    GREECE

     

    George Karaivaz

    George Karaivaz was a journalist who have been murdered on 9 April 2021.

    In its resolution of 7 February 2024, the European Parliament:

     

    – Is deeply concerned by the failure of law enforcement and the judicial authorities in Greece to make progress in the investigation into the murder of the Greek journalist George Karaivaz on 9 April 2021; notes that two suspects were arrested in April 2023, but otherwise there has not been any discernible activity in the police investigation; strongly urges the authorities to take all the necessary steps towards conducting a thorough and effective investigation, and to bring those involved in the murder, at any level, to justice; urges the authorities to request assistance from Europol.

     

    HONG KONG

     

    Andy Li

    Joseph John

    Andy Li, a pro-democracy activist and key witness in Jimmy Lai’s trial, allegedly confessed, under torture, to conspiracy and collusion with foreign entities.

     

    Joseph John, a HK-Portuguese dual national, is the first extraterritorial application of the NSL to an EU citizen; John was arrested for allegedly posting anti-China social media content and committing, from Europe, incitement to ‘secession’, and was sentenced on 11 April 2024 to five years’ imprisonment.

    In its resolution of 25 April 2024, the European Parliament:

     

    – Urges the HK Government to immediately and unconditionally release Li, John, Lai, Kok Tsz-lun and all other pro-democracy representatives and activists detained for exercising their freedoms and democratic rights, and to drop all charges against them;

     

    – Highlights the SNSO’s undermining of press freedoms; calls on the authorities to stop harassing and prosecuting journalists.

     

    HONG KONG/ CHINA

     

    Jimmy Lai

    Jimmy Lai has been detained since 2020 on trumped-up charges; his trial started in 2023 after various delays; he denied these charges and faces life imprisonment; his British lawyer has been refused permission to represent him. Jimmy Lai a British national since 1996, is a Hong Kong media tycoon, and a known pro- democracy supporter.  Political prisoners in HK endure difficult conditions, often affecting their health, throughout lengthy pre-trial detentions, as with 76-year-old Lai, who has diabetes and has been denied Communion in prison.

     

    45 pro-democracy politicians, activists and journalists were sentenced for subversion, in the ‘Hong Kong 47’ case, for organising unofficial election primaries; their trials were the largest national security trials to date;

     

    In its resolution of 28 November 2024, the European Parliament:

     

    – Condemns the sentencing of pro-democracy activists on national security charges, in violation of international law; calls for the repeal of the NSL and the SNSO; denounces the degradation of basic freedoms in HK;

     

    – Urges the HK Government to immediately and unconditionally release all pro-democracy activists, including Lai and Chung, and to drop all charges against them;

     

    – Calls on the EEAS and the Member States to warn China that its actions in HK will have consequences for EU-China relations; calls on the Council to review its 2020 conclusions on HK and to impose targeted sanctions on John Lee and other HK and Chinese officials responsible for human rights violations, to revoke HK’s favourable customs treatment and review the status of the HK Economic Trade Office in Brussels; urges the Member States to file an ICJ case against China’s decision to impose the NSL on HK and Macau.

     

    IRAN

     

    Pakhshan Azizi and Wrisha Moradi

    Kurdish activists, social worker Pakhshan Azizi and advocate for women’s rights Verisheh (Wrisha) Moradi were sentenced to death for ‘armed rebellion against the state’.

    In its resolution of 23 January 2025, the European Parliament:

     

    – Denounces the Iranian regime’s unrestrained repression of human rights, in particular the targeting of women activists; strongly condemns the death sentence against Pakhshan Azizi and Wrisha Moradi; demands that Iran immediately and unconditionally release all unjustly imprisoned human rights defenders and political prisoners, including Pakhshan Azizi, Wrisha Moradi and at least 56 other political prisoners on death row;

     

    – Calls for the EU and its Member States to increase support for Iranian human rights defenders and expresses its full support and solidarity with Iranians united in the ‘Woman, Life, Freedom’ movement;

     

    – Urges the Iranian authorities to immediately release, safely repatriate and drop all charges against EU nationals, including Olivier Grondeau, Cécile Kohler, Jacques Paris and Ahmadreza Djalali; strongly condemns Iran’s use of hostage diplomacy; calls for the EU and its Member States to undertake joint diplomatic efforts and work collectively towards their release;

     

    – Strongly condemns the murder of Jamshid Sharmahd; urges the Islamic regime in Iran to provide details of the circumstances of his death and for his remains to be immediately returned to his family;

     

    – Reiterates its call on the Council to designate the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps a terrorist organisation and to extend EU sanctions to all those responsible for human rights violations, including Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, President Masoud Pezeshkian, Judiciary Chief Gholam-Hossein Mohseni-Eje’i, Prosecutor-General Mohammad Movahedi-Azad and Judge Iman Afshari;

     

    – Urges the Iranian authorities to provide the UN Special Rapporteur on the human rights situation in Iran and the UN fact-finding mission with full, unimpeded access to enact their mandates.

     

    KYRGYZSTAN

     

    Temirlan Sultanbekov

    Temirlan Sultanbekov is the leader of the Kyrgyzstan Social Democrats party (SDK), he and other party officials have been arrested for vote-buying allegations, with an audiotape of unknown origin serving as the primary evidence, for which the judicial authorisation is unclear and its connection with the detainees unknown.

    In its resolution of 19 December 2024, the European Parliament:

     

    – Urges the Kyrgyz authorities to immediately release Mr Sultanbekov and other party officials and adopt alternative measures to detention, while respecting their right to due process in line with the civil and political rights guaranteed under the Kyrgyz constitution and international obligations; calls on the authorities to ensure his safety and well-being;

     

    – Urges the Kyrgyz government to halt its campaign of intimidation and legal persecution against opposition parties, independent media outlets and journalists; is concerned by the adoption of the Russian-style ‘foreign agents’ law; urges the Kyrgyz authorities to drop all charges against human rights defenders, including Makhabat Tazhibek Kyzy, Azamat Ishenbekov, Aktilek Kaparov and Ayke Beishekeeva, journalists from the Temirov Live and Ait Ait Dese channels.

     

    RUSSIA

     

    Alexei Navalny

    Vladimir Kara-Murza

    Yuri Dmitriev

    Ilya Yashin

    Alexei Gorinov

    Lilia Chanysheva Ksenia Fadeeva, Vadim Ostanin

    Daniel Kholodny Vadim Kobzev

    Igor Sergunin

    Alexei Liptser Viktoria Petrova Maria Ponomarenko Alexandra Skochilenko

    Svetlana Petriychuk Evgenia Berkovich Dmitry Ivanov

    Ioann Kurmoyarov Igor Baryshnikov Dmitry Talantov Alexei Moskalev

    Oleg Orlov

    Boris Kagarlitsky

    Ivan Safronov

     

    Alexei Navalny, a prominent Russian political figure and the 2021 laureate of the Sakharov Prize for Freedom of Thought, perished in a Siberian penal colony north of the Arctic Circle while serving a unfounded, politically motivated prison sentence. He had been in detention since 17 January 2021, the date on which he returned to Russia following medical rehabilitation after an attempted state-sponsored assassination using the internationally banned nerve agent Novichok; he had previously been detained and arrested many times and had been sentenced, on fabricated and politically motivated grounds, to long prison terms in evident attempts to stop his political activities and anti-corruption campaigns.

     

    Vladimir Kara-Murza, Yuri Dmitriev, Ilya Yashin, Alexei Gorinov, Lilia Chanysheva, Ksenia Fadeeva, Vadim Ostanin, Daniel Kholodny, Vadim Kobzev, Igor Sergunin, Alexei Liptser, Viktoria Petrova, Maria Ponomarenko, Alexandra Skochilenko, Svetlana Petriychuk, Evgenia Berkovich, Dmitry Ivanov, Ioann Kurmoyarov, Igor Baryshnikov, Dmitry Talantov, Alexei Moskalev, Oleg Orlov, Boris Kagarlitsky and Ivan Safronov are political prisoners.

     

    In its resolution of 29 February 2024, the European Parliament:

     

    – Strongly condemns the murder of Alexei Navalny; expresses its wholehearted condolences to his family, associates and colleagues, and to his countless supporters across Russia; expresses its full support to Yulia Navalnaya in her determination to continue the work started by Alexei Navalny with her support, and to the Anti-Corruption Foundation founded by Navalny, which is continuing its work under the new circumstances;

     

    – Calls on the Russian authorities to drop all arbitrary charges and to immediately and unconditionally release all political prisoners and arbitrarily detained persons.

    TAJIKISTAN

     

    Abdullo Ghurbati Daler Imomali Zavqibek Saidamini Abdusattor Pirmuhammadzoda Ulfatkhonim Mamadshoeva Khushruz Jumayev Khurshed Fozilov

    Manuchehr Kholiknazarov Buzurgmehr Yorov

     

    Abdullo Ghurbati, Daler Imomali, Zavqibek Saidamini, Abdusattor Pirmuhammadzoda, Ulfatkhonim Mamadshoeva, Khushruz Jumayev and Khurshed Fozilov are journalists who have been sentenced to between seven and over 20 years in prison in retaliation for their coverage of social issues and human rights abuses, including in GBAO.

     

    Manuchehr Kholiknazarov and Buzurgmehr Yorov  are human rights lawyers who have been detained.

    In its resolution of 18 January 2024, the European Parliament:

     

    – Strongly condemns the ongoing crackdown, including anti-extremism legislation, against independent media, government critics, human rights activists and independent lawyers; condemns the closure of independent media and websites, including the online media outlets Pamir Daily News, New Tajikistan 2 and Akhbor.com;

     

    – Condemns all politically motivated trials and the lack of fair and public hearings by independent courts; urges the authorities to stop persecuting journalists, immediately and unconditionally release those who have been arbitrarily detained and drop all charges against them, stop the persecution of lawyers defending government critics and release human rights lawyers Manuchehr Kholiknazarov and Buzurgmehr Yorov;

     

    – Urges the government to ensure that detainees have access to adequate healthcare; calls for a thorough investigation into allegations of mistreatment in custody and forced confessions, and those responsible to be brought to justice.

     

    TÜRKIYE

     

    Bülent Mumay

    Bülent Mumay is a Turkish journalist and coordinator of the Istanbul bureau of Deutsche Welle’s Turkish editorial office, was sentenced to 20 months in prison for social media posts about a pro-government company’s seizure of Istanbul Municipality’s subway funds during the AKP administration; his appeal was rejected, and his tweets removed.

    In its resolution of 10 October 2024, the European Parliament:

     

    – Condemns the sentence against Bülent Mumay, which follows a broader pattern of silencing critical journalism; calls on the Turkish authorities to drop the charges against Bülent Mumay, and all arbitrarily detained media workers and journalists, as well as political opponents, human rights defenders, civil servants and academics;

     

    –  Is deeply concerned about the ongoing deterioration of democratic standards in Türkiye, relentless crackdown on any critical voices and targeting of independent journalists, activists and opposition members amid frequent reports of legal intimidation, censorship and financial coercion as ways to suppress criticism and investigative journalism.

     

    VENEZUELA

     

    Rocío San Miguel

    General Hernández Da Costa 

    Ronald Ojeda

    María Corina Machado

    Juan Freites

    Luis Camacaro Guillermo Lopez Emil Brandt

     

    Rocío San Miguel is a lawyer and human rights activist with Spanish nationality, who got kidnapped by the Venezuelan regime on 9 February 2024, and sentenced on politically motivated grounds of suspected conspiracy against Nicolás Maduro and his regime; she is currently being detained in El Helicoide prison, which is known for human rights abuses, including torture.

     

    Hernández Da Costa has been a political prisoner since August 2018; on 19 February 2024, he was forcibly transferred to El Rodeo 1 prison, designed to detain political prisoners; an unknown number of prisoners, including some EU citizens, were also transferred; the general suffers from medical ailments that require constant treatment, which he is being denied.

     

    Ronald Ojeda was a former political prisoner who escaped the Maduro regime, and got murdered in Chile.

     

    Juan Freites, Luis Camacaro, Guillermo Lopez and Emil Brandt are four campaign coordinators working for the opposition to the regime’s presidential candidate, and have been detained on political grounds.

     

    In its resolution of 14 March 2024, the European Parliament:

     

    – Demands the immediate unconditional release of all political prisoners and arbitrarily detained persons, and the full restoration of their rights; exhorts the regime to cease its policy of repression and attacks on civil society and the opposition;

     

    – Strongly condemns the Maduro regime for imprisoning hundreds of political prisoners;

     

    – Calls on the international community to support a return to democracy in Venezuela, particularly in the light of the upcoming elections, in which the leader of the opposition to the regime, María Corina Machado, must be allowed to fully participate.

    VENEZUELA

     

    Maria Corina Machado

    Juan Freites

    Luis Camacaro Guillermo López

    Maria Corina Machado was selected as the presidential candidate of the democratic opposition to the regime, winning with 92,35 % of the votes in the primary elections. She got a disqualification of 15 years.

     

    For several months, members of María Corina Machado’s campaign team – including Juan Freites, Luis Camacaro and Guillermo López, who were unlawfully detained and have since been reported missing.

    In its resolution of 8 February 2024, the European Parliament:

     

    – Calls for the immediate and unconditional release of all the arbitrarily arrested political and social leaders, including three campaign staffers of the presidential candidate of the opposition to the regime María Corina Machado, namely Juan Freites, Luis Camacaro and Guillermo Lopez;

     

    – Strongly condemns the attempts to disqualify the presidential candidate of the democratic opposition to the regime, María Corina Machado, and others, such as Henrique Capriles, from holding public office;

     

    – Urges the Venezuelan regime to immediately stop the persecution of the primary winner and thus fully legitimate candidate of the opposition to the regime, María Corina Machado, and other opposition politicians.

     

     

     

     

    ANNEX III: LIST OF SAKHAROV PRIZE LAUREATES AND FINALISTS IMPRISONED AND DEPRIVED OF LIBERTY

     

    Year of Sakharov Prize award

    Name and surname

    Laureate / Finalist

    Country

    Situation (Detention / house arrest / temporarily released)

    Length of prison sentence

    Start date of detention

    2024

    Gubad Ibadoghlu

    Finalist

    Azerbaijan

    Under travel ban

     

    A court rejected Ibadoglu’s appeal against the travel ban on 3/12/2024

    2021

    Alexei Navalny

    Laureate

     

    Russia

    Deceased in prison on 16/2/2024

     

    3,5 + 9 + 19 years

    Last detained 17/2/21, last sentenced 4/8/23

    2020

    Siarhei Tsikhanouski

     

    Maryia Kalesnikava

     

    Mikola Statkevich

     

     

    Ales Bialiatski

    Laureate

     

    Laureate

     

    Laureate

     

     

    Laureate

    Belarus

     

    Detention

     

    Detention

     

    Detention

     

     

    Detention

    18 years

     

    11 years

     

    14 years

     

     

    10 years

     

    Detained 29/5/20, sentenced 14/12/21

    Detained 07/9/20, sentenced 06/9/21

    Last detained 31/5/20, last sentenced 14/12/21

    Last detained 15/7/21, last sentenced 03/03/23

    2020

    Porfirio Sorto Cedillo, José Avelino Cedillo, Orbin Naún Hernández, Kevin Alejandro Romero, Arnold Javier Aleman, Ever Alexander Cedillo, Daniel Marquez and Jeremías Martínez Díaz

    Finalists

    Honduras

    Detention

    Unknown

    1/9/2019, released on 24/2/2022, after a ruling by the Supreme Court of Honduras

    2019

    Ilham Tohti

    Laureate

    China

    Detention

    Unknown

    23/9/2014

    2018

    Nasser Zefzafi

     

    Finalist

    Morocco

    Detention

    20 years

    5/4/2019

    2017

    Dawit Isaak

    Finalist

    Eritrea

    Incommunicado detention

    Unknown

    23/9/2001

    2015

    Raif Badawi

    Laureate

    Saudi Arabia

    Released on 11/3/2022, since then under a 10-year travel ban

     

    10 years

    First sentenced on 17/12/2012, but announced on 30/3/2013

    2012

    Nasrin Sotoudeh

     

     

     

     

     

     

    Jafar Panahi

    Laureate

     

     

     

     

     

     

    Laureate

    Iran

     

     

     

     

     

     

    Iran

    Detention, on temporary medical furlough since July 2021, arrested again 29/10/2023 and released 15/11/2023

     

    Detained in 2022,

    released on 3/2/2023 after hunger strike

    38 years

     

     

     

     

     

     

    6 years

    6/3/2019 (most recent)

     

     

     

     

     

    compelled in July 2022 to serve a 10-years old prison sentence

    2011

    Razan Zaitouneh

    Laureate

    Syria

    Kidnapped in 2013. Presumptions of detention and death.

     

    9/12/2013

    2009

    Memorial – Oleg Orlov

    Laureate

     

     

    Russia

    Released on 1/8/2024 as part of a prisoner exchange with the US and Germany

    2.5 years

    Latest sentence in February 2024. Memorial as legal entity liquidated in January 2022.

     

     

    ANNEX IV: LIST OF RESOLUTIONS

    List of resolutions adopted by the European Parliament from December 2023 to January 2025 and related directly or indirectly to human rights violations in the world

     

     

    Country/Region

    Date of adoption in plenary

     

    Title

    Africa

     

     

    Algeria

    23.01.2025

    The case of Boualem Sansal in Algeria

    Democratic Republic of the Congo

    23.01.2025

    The case of Jean-Jacques Wondo

     

    Gambia

     

    25.04.2024

    On the proposed repeal of the law banning female genital mutilation in The Gambia

    Nigeria

    08.02.2024

    On the recent attacks on Christmas Eve in Plateau State in Nigeria

    Sudan

    18.01.2024

    On the threat of famine following the spread of the conflict in Sudan

    Tanzania

    14.12.2023

    On the Maasai Communities in Tanzania

    Americas

     

     

    Cuba

    29.02.2024

    On the critical situation in Cuba

    Cuba

    19.09.2024

    The case of José Daniel Ferrer García in Cuba

    Guatemala

    14.12.2023

    On the attempt at a coup d’état in Guatemala

    Venezuela

    08.02.2024

    On further repression against the democratic forces in Venezuela: attacks on presidential candidate María Corina Machado

     

    Venezuela

     

    14.03.2024

    On the case of Rocío San Miguel and General Hernández Da Costa, among other political prisoners in Venezuela

    Venezuela

    19.09.2024

    Situation on Venezuela

    Venezuela

    23.01.2025

    Situation in Venezuela following the usurpation of the presidency on 10 January 2025

    Asia

     

     

     

    Afghanistan

     

     

    14.03.2024

    On the repressive environment in Afghanistan, including public executions and violence against women

    Afghanistan

    19.09.2024

    The deteriorating situation of women in Afghanistan due to the recent adoption of the law on the “Promotion of Virtue and Prevention of Vice”

     

    Azerbaijan

     

    25.04.2024

    On Azerbaijan, notably the repression of civil society and the cases of Dr Gubad Ibadoghlu and Ilhamiz Guliyev

    Azerbaijan

    19.12.2024

    Continued repression of civil society and independent media in Azerbaijan and the cases of Dr Gubad Ibadoghlu, Anar Mammadli, Kamran Mammadli, Rufat Safarov and Meydan TV

    Cambodia

    28.11.2024

    The shrinking space for civil society in Cambodia, in particular the case of the labour rights organisation CENTRAL

     

    China

     

    18.01.2024

    On the ongoing persecution of Falun Gong in China, notably the case of Mr Ding Yuande

    China

     

    10.10.2024

    The cases of unjustly imprisoned Uyghurs in China, notably Ilham Tohti and Gulshan Abbas

    China/ Taiwan

    24.10.2024

    Misinterpretation of UN resolution 2758 by the People’s Republic of China and its continuous military provocations around Taiwan

     

    Hong Kong

     

    25.04.2024

    On the new security law in Hong Kong and the cases of Andy Li and Joseph John

    Hong Kong/ China

     

    28.11.2024

    Hong Kong, notably the cases of Jimmy Lai and the 45 activists recently convicted under the national security law

    Kyrgyzstan

    19.12.2024

    Human rights situation in Kyrgyzstan, in particular the case of Temirlan Sultanbekov

    Tajikistan

    18.01.2024

    On Tajikistan: state repression against the independent media

     

    Tibet

     

    14.12.2023

    On the abduction of Tibetan children and forced assimilation practices through Chinese boarding schools in Tibet

    Middle East

     

     

     

    Iran/Israel

     

    25.04.2024

    On Iran’s unprecedented attack against Israel, the need for de-escalation and an EU response

     

    Iran

     

    08.02.2024

    On the increased number of executions in Iran, in particular the case of Mohammad Ghobadlou

    Iran

    28.11.2024

    The increasing and systematic repression of women in Iran

    Iran

    23.01.2025

    Systematic repression of human rights in Iran

    Iraq

    10.10.2024

    Iraq, notably the situation of women’s rights and the recent proposal to amend the Personal Status Law

     

    Palestine

     

    18.01.2024

    On the humanitarian situation in Gaza, the need to reach a ceasefire and the risks of regional escalation

     

    Palestine

     

    14.03.2024

    On the immediate risk of mass starvation in Gaza and the attacks on humanitarian aid deliveries

    Europe and Eastern Partnership countries

     

     

     

    Azerbaijan/Armenia

     

    13.03.2024

    On closer ties between the EU and Armenia and the need for a peace agreement between Azerbaijan and Armenia

    Azerbaijan/ Armenia

    24.10.2024

    Situation in Azerbaijan, violation of human rights and international law and relations with Armenia

     

    Belarus

     

    14.12.2023

    On the unknown status of Mikola Statkevich and the recent attacks on Belarusian politicians’ and activists’ family members

     

    Belarus

     

    08.02.2024

    on the new wave of mass arrests in Belarus of opposition activists and their family members

    Belarus

    19.09.2024

    The severe situation of political prisoners in Belarus

    Belarus

    22.01.2025

    Actions to address the continued oppression and fake elections in Belarus

    Crimea

    19.12.2024

    11th year of the occupation of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea and the city of Sevastopol by the Russian Federation and the deteriorating human rights situation in occupied Crimea, notably the cases of Iryna Danylovych, Tofik Abdulhaziiev and Amet Suleymanov

     

    Georgia

     

    25.04.2024

    On attempts to reintroduce a foreign agent law in Georgia and its restrictions on civil society

    Georgia

    09.10.2024

    The democratic backsliding and threats to political pluralism in Georgia

    Georgia

    28.11.2024

    Georgia’s worsening democratic crisis following the recent parliamentary elections and alleged electoral fraud

    Greece

    07.02.2024

    On the rule of law and media freedom in Greece

     

    Hungary

     

    24.04.2024

    On ongoing hearings under Article 7(1) TEU regarding Hungary to strengthen the rule of law and its budgetary implications

    Hungary

    18.01.2024

    On the situation in Hungary and frozen EU funds

    Moldova

    09.10.2024

    Strengthening Moldova’s resilience against Russian interference ahead of the upcoming presidential elections and a constitutional referendum on EU integration

     

    Russia

     

    29.02.2024

    On the murder of Alexei Navalny and the need for EU action in support of political prisoners and oppressed civil society in Russia

     

    Russia

     

    08.02.2024

    On Russiagate: allegations of Russian interference in the democratic processes of the European Union

     

     

    Russia

     

     

    25.04.2024

    On new allegations of Russian interference in the European Parliament, in the upcoming EU elections and the impact on the European Union

     

    Russia

     

    25.04.2024

    On Russia’s undemocratic presidential elections and their illegitimate extension to the occupied territories

    Russia

     

    14.11.2024

    EU actions against the Russian shadow fleets and ensuring a full enforcement of sanctions against Russia

    Russia

     

    23.01.2025

    Russia’s disinformation and historical falsification to justify its war of aggression against Ukraine

    Russia/ North Korea

    28.11.2024

    Reinforcing EU’s unwavering support to Ukraine against Russia’s war of aggression and the increasing military cooperation between North Korea and Russia

    Serbia

    08.02.2024

    On the situation in Serbia following the elections

     

    Slovakia

     

    17.01.2024

    On the planned dissolution of key anti-corruption structures in Slovakia and its implications for the rule of law

    Türkiye

    10.10.2024

    European Parliament resolution of 10 October 2024 on the case of Bülent Mumay in Türkiye

    Cross-cutting issues

     

     

    Children liberty

    13.12.2023

    On the situation of children deprived of liberty in the world

     

    LGBTIQ rights

     

    08.02.2024

    On the implementation of the EU LGBTIQ Equality Strategy 2020-2025

     

     

    Protection of journalists

     

     

    27.02.2024

    On the proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on protecting persons who engage in public participation from manifestly unfounded or abusive court proceedings

     

    Human rights and democracy

     

    28.02.2024

    Human rights and democracy in the world and the European Union’s policy on the matter – annual report 2023

    Foreign and security policy

    28.02.2024

    Implementation of the common foreign and security policy – annual report 2023

     

     

    Media freedom

     

     

    13.03.2024

    On the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing a common framework for media services in the internal market

     

     

    Forced labour

     

     

    23.04.2024

    On the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on prohibiting products made with forced labour on the Union market

    Right of abortion

    11.04.2024

    On including the right to abortion in the EU Fundamental Rights Charter

     

     

    Due diligence

     

     

    24.04.2024

    On the proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence and amending Directive

     

    Fundamental rights

     

    18.01.2024

    On the situation of fundamental rights in the European Union – annual report 2022 and 2023

    Hate speech

    18.01.2024

    On extending the list of EU crimes to hate speech and hate crime

     

     

    Business and human rights

     

     

    18.01.2024

    On shaping the EU’s position on the UN binding instrument on business and human rights, in particular on access to remedy and the protection of victims

    Freedom of scientific research

    17.01.2024

    On promotion of the freedom of scientific research in the EU

    Citizens, equality, rights and values

    16.01.2024

    On the implementation of the Citizens, Equality, Rights and Values programme 2021-2027

     

     

    Violence against women

     

     

    24.04.2024

    On the proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on combating violence against women and domestic violence

     

    Human beings traffic

     

    23.04.2024

    On preventing and combating trafficking in human beings and protecting its victims

     

    MIL OSI Europe News –

    February 27, 2025
  • MIL-OSI Europe: Written question – Report by Adega (Association for the Environmental Defence of Galicia): lapsed application to Augas de Galicia for a water permit for a large-scale cellulose plant by Altri – E-000768/2025

    Source: European Parliament

    Question for written answer  E-000768/2025
    to the Commission
    Rule 144
    Ana Miranda Paz (Verts/ALE)

    Following a press leak indicating that the Galician Government had received a positive report from the technicians of the public water company, Augas de Galicia, regarding the establishment of a large-scale celullose plant by Altri in Palas de Rei, the Association for the Environmental Defence of Galicia (Adega) published valuable information showing that such an assessment and authorisation could not take place, as neither the deadline nor the procedural requirements were met.

    Adega cites Article 116(5) of the Regulation on Public Water Resources (RDPH), which lays down a maximum period of 18 months for the competent authority to reach a decision on an application for a water permit. Adega therefore calls on Augas de Galicia to reject the application and to close the case on the grounds that it is out of time and form.

    There have been procedural shortcomings regarding the waer permit (E-001704/2024), a boycotting of the debate in the Committee on Petitions of the European Parliament at the request of the Galician Government (E-000604/2025), leaks by vested interests in order to promote the project…

    In light of the above:

    Will the Commission take an interest in the irregular procedure that the Galician government is set to follow in an attempt to establish Altri’s large-scale cellulose plant, which would breach EU regulations if the project goes ahead?

    Submitted: 19.2.2025

    Last updated: 26 February 2025

    MIL OSI Europe News –

    February 27, 2025
  • MIL-OSI Europe: REPORT on the assessment of the implementation of Horizon Europe in view of its interim evaluation and recommendations for the 10th Research Framework Programme – A10-0021/2025

    Source: European Parliament

    MOTION FOR A EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT RESOLUTION

    on the assessment of the implementation of Horizon Europe in view of its interim evaluation and recommendations for the 10th Research Framework Programme

    (2024/2109(INI))

    The European Parliament,

    – having regard to Articles 179 to 188 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU),

    – having regard to Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2024/2509 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 September 2024 on the financial rules applicable to the general budget of the Union[1],

    – having regard to Regulation (EU) 2021/695 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 28 April 2021 establishing Horizon Europe – the Framework Programme for Research and Innovation, laying down its rules for participation and dissemination, and repealing Regulations (EU) No 1290/2013 and (EU) No 1291/2013[2],

    – having regard to Council Decision (EU) 2021/764 of 10 May 2021 establishing the Specific Programme implementing Horizon Europe – the Framework Programme for Research and Innovation, and repealing Decision 2013/743/EU[3],

    – having regard to Regulation (EU) 2021/819 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 May 2021 on the European Institute of Innovation and Technology[4],

    – having regard to Decision (EU) 2021/820 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 May 2021 on the Strategic Innovation Agenda of the European Institute of Innovation and Technology (EIT) 2021-2027: Boosting the Innovation Talent and Capacity of Europe and repealing Decision No 1312/2013/EU[5],

    – having regard to Council Regulation (EU) 2021/2085 of 19 November 2021 establishing the Joint Undertakings under Horizon Europe and repealing Regulations (EC) No 219/2007, (EU) No 557/2014, (EU) No 558/2014, (EU) No 559/2014, (EU) No 560/2014, (EU) No 561/2014 and (EU) No 642/2014[6],

    – having regard to Regulation (EU) 2021/697 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2021 establishing the European Defence Fund and repealing Regulation (EU) 2018/1092[7],

    – having regard to the Commission communication of 30 September 2020 entitled ‘A new ERA for Research and Innovation’ (COM(2020)0628),

    _ having regard to the Commission communication of 22 October 2024 entitled ‘Implementation of the European Research Area (ERA) – Strengthening Europe’s Research and Innovation: The ERA’s Journey and Future Directions’ (COM(2024)0490),

    – having regard to the Commission communication of 18 May 2021 on the Global Approach to Research and Innovation Europe’s strategy for international cooperation in a changing world (COM(2021)0252),

    – having regard to its resolution of 6 April 2022 on a global approach to research and innovation: Europe’s strategy for international cooperation in a changing world[8],

    – having regard to its resolution of 22 November 2022 on the implementation of the European Innovation Council[9],

    – having regard to the Commission communication of 19 July 2023 entitled ‘EU Missions two years on: assessment of progress and way forward’ (COM(2023)0457),

    – having regard to its resolution of 14 December 2023 on young researchers[10],

    – having regard to its resolution of 17 January 2024 with recommendations to the Commission on promotion of the freedom of scientific research in the EU[11],

    – having regard to the European Research and Innovation Area Committee Opinion of 26 June 2024 on Guidance for the next Framework Programme for Research & Innovation,

    – having regard to the partnership evaluation reports published in 2024 on eight of the nine Knowledge and Innovation Communities, namely EIT Urban Mobility, EIT Climate-KIC, EIT Food, EIT InnoEnergy, EIT Health, EIT Manufacturing, EIT Raw Materials, and EIT Digital,

    – having regard to the Report of the CERIS Expert Group of November 2024 entitled ‘Building resilience in the civil security domain based on research and technology’,

    – having regard to European Court of Auditors Special Report 09/2022 of September 2022 entitled ‘Climate spending in the 2014-2020 EU budget– Not as high as reported’,

    – having regard to the Commission communication of 19 January 2016 entitled ‘On the Response to the Report of the High Level Expert Group on the Ex Post Evaluation of the Seventh Framework Programme’(COM(2016)0005),

    – having regard to Enrico Letta’s report of 17 April 2024 entitled ‘Much more than a market’,

    – having regard to Mario Draghi’s report of 9 September 2024 entitled ‘The future of European competitiveness’,

    – having regard to the report by the Commission Expert Group on the Interim Evaluation of Horizon Europe of 16 October 2024 entitled ‘Align, Act, Accelerate: Research, Technology and Innovation to boost European Competitiveness,

    – having regard to Rule 55 of its Rules of Procedure,

    – having regard to the report of the Committee on Industry, Research and Energy (A10-0021/2025),

    A. whereas Horizon Europe (HEU) is the EU’s largest centrally managed funding programme and the largest publicly funded research and development (R&D) programme in the world; whereas Parliament initially proposed a budget of EUR 120 billion rather than the EUR 93.4 billion left after the revision of the multiannual financial framework;

    B. whereas investments in R&D are essential for EU competitiveness, societal progress and innovation; whereas the report on the Future of European Competitiveness (the Draghi report) and the report by the Commission Expert Group on the Interim Evaluation of Horizon Europe (the Heitor report) recommended a budget for the 10th Framework Programme for Research and Innovation (FP10) of EUR 200 billion and EUR 220 billion respectively;

    C. whereas the FP must be founded on European values, scientific independence, freedom and excellence, as well as on high European ethical standards and a drive to improve European competitiveness as well as to address societal challenges;

    D. whereas the Draghi report showed that Europe is a world leader in science and innovation with the second highest share of high quality scientific publications and the third highest share of patent applications globally; whereas the Draghi report also concluded that the value chain that goes from research to innovative products that improve citizens’ lives in the EU is less effective compared to the US and China in translating good research into successful businesses providing quality jobs, new products and services to European citizens, as illustrated by the persistent gap between the US and EU in innovation performance, and the closing gap between the EU and China; whereas the Draghi report highlights that Europe lags particularly when it comes to the scaling up of start-ups;

    E. whereas Commissioner Zaharieva, in her hearing with Parliament, committed to fighting for an independent and simplified FP and expressed her support for an increased budget and more expert-driven governance;

    F. whereas the Heitor report outlines that in the first three years of Horizon Europe, 7 474 SMEs (34 % of all participants) were participating in the programme and that more than half of Horizon Europe SMEs are new to EU research, development and innovation programmes; whereas the success rates of SME applications has strongly improved (up to 19.9 % from 12 % in Horizon 2020);

    G. whereas the Letta report proposes the establishment of a ‘fifth freedom’ to encompass research, innovation and education as a new dimension of the single market, as the four original freedoms are fundamentally based on 20th-century theoretical principals;

    H. whereas the Letta report’s ‘freedom to stay’ reiterates the importance of avoiding internal brain drain, and the Heitor report’s ‘Choose Europe’ initiative sets out to foster research careers and turn the current European brain drain into a ‘brain gain’ by 2035;

    General observations on Horizon Europe and Research and Innovation (R&I)

    1 Recalls that we are at a crucial moment for R&I, and that Commission President Ursula von der Leyen stated that Europe needs to put ‘research and innovation at the heart of our economy’ during the presentation to Parliament of her programme for her second term as president of the European Commission in July 2024;

    2. Notes that the Draghi, Letta and Heitor reports consider R&I to be of central importance to achieving European competitiveness and stress the urgent need to act not to fall behind; stresses that a strong commitment is needed to achieve a future framework programme that constitutes a crucial contribution to the competitiveness of Europe and its overall welfare;

    3. Recalls that the Draghi and the Heitor reports are a wake-up call for Europe to face global competition and the significant rise of Chinese science in recent years; welcomes the higher success rate of HEU compared to Horizon 2020 (H2020); appreciates HEU’s responsiveness in crises, such as COVID-19 and geopolitical challenges, but regrets not only the lack of additional funding but also the continuous funding cuts, which compromise original priorities;

    4. Regrets that there have been negative experiences with the implementation of HEU because the shift from H2020 to HEU has mostly been experienced as an increase in complexity and bureaucracy; underlines that the success rates in some parts of the programme are still so low as to discourage potentially excellent applications, especially from researchers from research institutions with smaller budgets and SMEs; considers that strategic planning  should lead to more substantial benefits for the quality of the programming and a strengthened commitment of all R&I stakeholders, which so far do not seem to have materialised sufficiently; believes that FP10 should be built on instruments under Horizon Europe that have proven to be effective and efficient;

    5. Highlights the importance of an agile FP; notes that the Heitor report outlines the importance of responding to the fast-changing field of science and innovation and recommends a radical reform in engaging practitioners in the governance  of the  programme, notably through the two proposed new Councils as well as less prescriptive calls; recalls that the Draghi report notes that the current governance of the FP is slow and bureaucratic, that its organisation should be redesigned to be more outcome-based and evaluated by top experts and that the future FP should be governed by people with a proven track record at the frontier of research or innovation; notes that innovative ideas cannot always be predicted and programmed and underlines the need for sufficient funding that is not pre-programmed in order to tap the full potential of developing innovation;

    6. Highlights the importance of having an FP based on excellence in order to ensure the participation of the best researchers in Europe through the whole programme; argues that one of the critical weakness of the EU R&I policy landscape is also linked to the lack of a meaningful, integrated and complementary approach between place-based and excellence-driven R&I activities, in particular between the FP and the R&I window of the cohesion policy, which are of the same order of magnitude in terms of the EU budget; notes that the scale-up and commercialisation of research results remains a big challenge in Europe;

    7. Recalls the recommendation by the Heitor report to foster an attractive and inclusive European research, development and innovation ecosystem; recalls the recommendation by the Letta report to foster the development of a fifth freedom in the single market; recalls the observation of the Draghi report that the fragmentation of the EU innovation ecosystem is one of the root causes of Europe’s weak innovation performance; recalls that the Treaties situate the FP in the development of the European Research Area; is convinced that to maximise the impact of the framework programme, it needs to be embedded in a broader European research policy that ensures that Europe is an attractive location for research activities which attracts global talent, which effectively translates science into economic growth and societal progress, and which effectively addresses the innovation gap within the EU; considers that the upcoming European Research Area Act (ERA Act) should aim at achieving this Europe; recognises that there are still significant obstacles to ‘brain circulation’ among Member States, including the recognition of qualifications;

    8. Insists on the absolute need for that Member States to adopt concrete commitments to reach a target of 3 % of GDP spending on R&D by 2030; notes that the EU is investing significantly less than other global powers, and that it has failed to reach the 3 % target for more than two decades, investing 2.24 % of its GDP in R&D in 2022, for example, compared to 3.5 % in the US; underlines that each year the EU under invests in R&D worsens the situation and deepens the gap with third countries; specifies that major discrepancies exist between the R&D intensity of the 27 EU Member States, with five reaching the 3 % spending target, while some others are below 1 %; recalls that, at less than 7 % of the total[12], the EU budget’s contribution to R&D spending is a very minor share of the overall public spending on R&D in the EU; notes that national spending for research should not be cut in response to  the availability of EU research funding as alternative funding; highlights that a joint effort between European and national funding for research and innovation is needed; underlines as well the important role of private investment in research and innovation in order to complement public funding; regrets that European private investment in research, development and innovation is lagging behind that in China and the US, reaching 1.3 % of GDP in the EU, compared to 2.4 % in the US and 1.9 % in China; insists, therefore, on the vital role of EU intervention as a catalyst for R&D spending, and on the need for further coordination and alignment  between national and EU R&D spending;

    9. Insists on the vital role of long-term public funding to support excellent basic research, driven by scientific curiosity with the only aim of advancing scientific knowledge and without an obvious nor immediate benefit, sometimes characterised by serendipity;

    10. Highlights recital 72 of the Horizon Europe Regulation, which states that in order to guarantee scientific excellence, and in line with Article 13 of the Charter, the programme should promote the respect of academic freedom in all countries benefiting from its funds; underlines that while several incidents regarding academic freedom took place in several countries benefiting from Horizon Europe funds, the Commission has not used this recital effectively to address specific problems; welcomes the commitment by the Commissioner responsible for start-ups, research and innovation, in her hearing with Parliament, to propose a legislative proposal on the freedom of scientific research; calls on the Commission to present such a legislative proposal in line with Parliament’s resolution of 17 January 2024;

    11. Supports the high levels of climate spending in the first years of Horizon Europe; urges the Commission to stay on course to achieve the overall climate spending target of 35 % over the full lifetime of the programme;

    12. Highlights that Horizon Europe is on track to meet its climate spending targets without, according to the Horizon Europe Programme Guide, considering the Do No Significant Harm principle in the evaluation of proposals, unless it was relevant for the content of the call; underlines that there is no legal obligation or legal basis for the horizontal application of either the Do No Significant Harm principle or the Do No Harm principle; welcomes the commitment by the Commissioner responsible for start-ups, research and innovation, in her hearing with Parliament, to assess the current approach and the new approach to the application of the Do No Significant Harm principle, including the legal basis for its application, and to share the assessment with Parliament; urges the Commission to report to Parliament, before the start of FP10, on the impact of the use of Do No (Significant) Harm under Horizon Europe, including an estimate of the associated costs of its implementation for the Commission and beneficiaries, and its impact on the simplification of project applications;

    13. Considers that during the implementation of Horizon Europe, several major global events put thousands of researchers at risk, including in the EU’s neighbourhood, leading to significant spikes in applications by researchers at risk for an emergency placement in Europe; concludes, however, that under the current programme, the EU does not have sufficient funding available to support researchers at risk and that efforts by some Member States and NGOs are fragmented;

    14. Affirms the importance of international cooperation for the advancement of science; is concerned in this regard that international cooperation has declined under Horizon Europe compared to Horizon 2020; encourages the Commission to seek and conclude other association agreements with third countries, restates[13] and emphasises that Parliament’s ability to give meaningful consent to international agreements specifically concerning the participation of countries referred to in Article 16(1)d of the Horizon Europe Regulation in EU programmes is impeded where such agreements do not provide for a structure that guarantees parliamentary scrutiny under a consent procedure for association to a specific EU programme;

    15. Welcomes in particular the association of the UK and Switzerland to Horizon Europe as it recognises the fact that UK and Swiss science and innovation are an integral part of the European science and innovation ecosystem; restates its concern about the amended Protocol in 2023 and its provisions regarding the automatic rebate for the UK; emphasises that any international agreement on the association of Switzerland to EU programmes should fully respect the prerogative of Parliament to provide meaningful consent in line with its resolution on association agreements for the participation of third countries in Union programmes;

    16. Takes note of the Commission white paper on options for enhancing support for research and development involving technologies with dual-use potential; considers that nearly all respondents to the public consultation on the white paper rejected option 3; emphasises that many respondents considered that the implications of options 1 and 2 were not clear enough to allow them to determine which option would be preferable; highlights that it is widely recognised that the current constellation requires improvement to ensure the efficient use of public funds and to boost Europe’s technological sovereignty; notes that Commissioner Zaharieva committed, in her hearing with Parliament, to continuing this evaluation, potentially through a new study to ensure the views expressed are representative of all stakeholders;

    17. Notes that significant advances have been made in the framework of Horizon Europe with gender equality plans (GEPs) as an eligibility criterion and the gender dimension in the content of R&I as an award criterion by default across the programme; recognises that recent analyses confirm that the GEP eligibility criterion has had a catalytic effect;

    Observations on competitiveness

    18. Is deeply convinced that EU spending on science, research and innovation is the best investment in our common European future and for increasing competitiveness and societal progress, and successfully closing the innovation gap; agrees with Mr Draghi that all public R&D spending in the EU should be better coordinated at EU level, meaning properly aligning investments with the EU’s strategic priorities, focusing on funding initiatives that achieve relevant impact and create added value, and that a reformed and strengthened FP is crucial to achieving this; underlines that, in order to ensure real added value, R&D spending should also be better coordinated at national level between Member States; reiterates that the reformed fiscal rules exclude national funds used to co-finance EU programmes, and calls for this possibility to be put to full use in order to boost EU research funding;

    19. Underlines the importance of standardisation activities to ensure that European companies can effectively capitalise on the competitive advantage from research and innovation;

    20. Underlines the significant role of research and innovation across different industrial sectors that contributes to creating jobs and increasing European competitiveness compared to third countries;

    21. Emphasises the importance of the European Innovation Council (EIC) for Europe’s competitiveness; highlights in this regard that investments under the EIC are bridging the ‘valley of death’ and lead to innovations of a disruptive nature that have breakthrough and scale-up potential; highlights also the unique proposition of the EIC Accelerator to provide tailor-made support for high-potential, non-bankable start-ups;

    22. Welcomes the fact that 44 % of the Horizon Europe budget to date has contributed to the digital and industrial transitions, most notably by stimulating cooperation for technology development, which are fundamental for European competitiveness;

    23. Strongly believes that, beyond their key role for long-term and sustainable competitiveness, applied research, development and innovation policies are instrumental to avoid, anticipate and cope with the main global and societal challenges;

    Observations on technical implementation

    24. Considers that administrative simplification stagnated under Horizon Europe given that 32 % of participants consider applying to Horizon Europe to be more burdensome than Horizon 2020, while nearly half of participants report no difference[14], is concerned about the ‘exploded cumulative transaction and administrative costs’[15]; notes that on average beneficiaries reported spending 6-10 % of their project budget on administrative costs, with 48 % reporting administrative costs of more than 10 %, including a 10 % share of beneficiaries reporting administrative costs of more than 20 %; deplores the fact that the time-to-grant under Horizon Europe is longer than it was under Horizon 2020, and that it exceeds the target of eight months set by the Commission[16]; insists on further administrative simplification, streamlining of the relevant procedures, cost cutting and a greater focus on applicants, and underlines that simplification must be for the benefit of the applicants, while ensuring that applications contain all the information needed for the evaluation of their excellence;

    25. Recalls that the first full version of the Annotated Model Grant Agreement for Horizon Europe was published only in May 2024, more than three years after the start of the programme; notes that without a full version of this document, beneficiaries are not fully informed of the legal and financial conditions associated with signing a Grant Agreement; recalls that the first version of the Annotated Model Grant Agreement for Horizon 2020 was published before the official start of the programme; notes that the apparent cause of the delayed publication is the corporate approach to Model Grant Agreements which the Commission took for EU programmes under the current multiannual financial framework;

    26. Notes that there are various opinions and experiences among different beneficiaries regarding the functionality of lump sums; recognises that some beneficiaries do not consider the introduction of lump-sum funding to be a simplification for them; underlines that the 2024 assessment of lump sum funding presents unclear data, which leaves important worries and questions unanswered, such as the uncertainty of the impact of an ex-post audit, while confirming other objections, such as the artificial increase of the number of work packages[17]; considers that this assessment confirms that lump-sum funding can be a simplification for some beneficiaries, but not for all[18];

    27. Considers that the simplification offered by lump-sum funding consists of removing all obligations on actual cost reporting by beneficiaries to the Commission and removing financial ex-post audits for projects; welcomes the fact that this results in a lower error rate; underlines, however, that the error rate is a tool to ensure proper spending of public funds and not a goal in itself; warns, in that context, against putting at risk the quality of the spending of a highly successful programme by ramping up the use of lump sums too quickly;

    28. Observes that the average size of consortia in Horizon Europe is significantly larger than in Horizon 2020[19]; considers that consortia foster collaboration and that bigger consortia contribute to broader, and potentially more diverse, collaboration; underlines, however, that managing bigger consortia also requires more time and effort both in the proposal preparation phase and in the project implementation phase, which takes away resources from performing research; considers, furthermore, that more complex consortia are less attractive to join for newcomers, given the complexity and the resources as well as the experience needed to manage them;

    29. Underlines the importance of an open and accessible programme with low thresholds for applying in order to ensure participation of newcomers as well as SMEs; underlines that more than half of SME participants in Horizon Europe are newcomers[20]; considers that administrative burdens, the time investments needed and the complexity of applications risk discouraging SMEs from participating in the programme[21]; notes that the simple, small and fast grants of the SME Instrument under H2020 were a magnet for newcomer SMEs[22];

    30. Considers that the Commission has not succeeded in creating agile but strong management of HEU, which has led to complex implementation; expects that the interim evaluation report should address shortages and possible solutions;

    Observations on Pillar 1

    31. Recognises the importance of Pillar 1 in promoting scientific excellence and attracting highly-skilled research, through the European Research Council (ERC), and programmes such as the Marie Skłodowska Curie Actions (MSCA);

    32. Welcomes the continued success of the ERC; underlines that its success is dependent on the independence of the Scientific Council; stresses that the last few years have shown that the presence of a capable and committed president of the Scientific Council with respected scientific credentials is essential for the functioning and independence of the ERC; notes that the bottom-up calls and independent governance of the ERC Scientific Council have proven highly effective;

    33. Highlights the ability of both the ERC and the MSCA to attract scientific talent to Europe; notes the valuable contribution of the MSCA to European scientific leadership; notes with worry the low success rates in the MSCA;

    34. Underlines that research projects funded under Pillar 1 should adhere to the principle of ‘high risk/high gain’; suggests clarifying evaluation criteria to strictly ensure the realisation of ‘high risk/high gain’ when evaluating research proposals; observes that ‘high risk’ also means employing new research methods;

    35. Emphasises that research infrastructures, in particular digital research infrastructures, provide a vital platform for researchers and innovators across disciplines and sectors to share data, methods and expertise, fostering the development and application of new technologies to strengthen Europe’s technological sovereignty; welcomes, particularly in this regard, the progress made on the European Open Science Cloud and the European Museums Cloud;

    Observations on Pillar 2

    36. Emphasises that collaborative research is at the heart of the European framework programmes; recognises the importance of Pillar 2, which serves as a vital strategic tool, fostering pan-European collaboration by pooling resources and knowledge, and aligning public and private R&I agendas; notes that collaboration would not occur without EU funding at a similar rate, highlighting the unique added value of EU collaboration programmes, in particular for enabling Europe to address complex societal challenges and integrate businesses into critical, continent-wide value chains; considers that Pillar 2 has fostered research collaboration and has in particular been able to support joint research and innovation agendas for technology maturation through the joint undertakings, which contributes to the competitiveness of the EU;

    37. Considers Pillar 2 a strategic tool for enabling pan-European collaboration and pooling of knowledge and resources, attracting private investments, and for bringing together public and private stakeholders across Europe to tackle complex societal challenges; believes it is important to continue support for these collaborations; acknowledges, however, the complexity of Pillar 2; believes that the implementation of this pillar remains too complex and should be improved, simplified and streamlined with a view to targeting results rather than solely addressing expenditure; notes that the number of instruments involved such as a multitude of partnerships, the complex, top-down administrative implementation of missions, and the many budgetary shifts have resulted in unnecessary complexity which discourages applicants, and especially newcomers, from participating; emphasises the importance of the accessibility of these instruments, particularly for SMEs from across all European regions, in order to enable participation for all excellent researchers and innovators as well as to foster the absorption capacities of companies; welcomes the announcement of the rebalancing in Pillar 2 towards a better equilibrium between the different types of R&I activities, from fundamental research to market-oriented innovation, as announced in the second strategic plan for Horizon Europe; notes in that context the conclusion in the European Research and Innovation Area Committee opinion on FP10 that the Cluster structure of Horizon Europe creates an unnecessary obstacle for participants looking for funding, in particular newcomers, as well as the conclusion of the Draghi report that ‘[t]he programme should consolidate the overall fragmented and heterogeneous activities’;

    Observations on Pillar 3

    38. Notes that scaling up and commercialising research outcomes remains Europe’s greatest challenge; recalls the decisive role of entrepreneurship, for instance in the commercial and economic exploitation of excellent applied research into breakthrough innovation;

    39. Highlights that the European Innovation Council is filling a widely recognised investment gap for scale-up finance for break-through innovations[23]; takes note of the very low success rate under the EIC and considers this a confirmation of the relevance of EIC funding as well as a worrying signal of underfunding of the programme; welcomes that fact that the EIC was completed as an instrument by the introduction of transition activities because these complete the innovator’s journey from early idea to scale-up by facilitating technology maturation and validation; underlines the quality and relevance of the advice provided by the EIC Board and recalls in this regard the importance of expert advice to guide the implementation of the framework programme;

    40. Considers that the EIC is a needed and excellent instrument in principle; agrees that streamlining and boosting the EIC, attracting private investments and supporting the commercialisation of research is at the core of Pillar 3, as confirmed by the Heitor report; regrets, however, that the Commission made some implementation decisions that led the EIC away from its intended purpose to help companies scale up; recognises that the EIC should have the flexibility to strategically maximise its potential to support breakthrough technology; firmly believes that the EIC can achieve its full potential if the legal and institutional setting of the programme is clarified and strengthened;

    41. Regrets that not all of Parliament’s recommendations set out in its resolution of 22 November 2022 on the implementation of the European Innovation Council have been implemented, most notably the recommendation that a thorough assessment be made of ways to improve the EIC’s implementation, considering as an option the establishment of an independent EU body under Article 187 TFEU as the main entity responsible for implementing the EIC; regrets, moreover, that its recommendation to ensure the implementation of both the equity and grant components with direct coordination between the two components has been ignored;

    42. Draws attention to the work of the programme managers in the EIC; strongly believes in the approach of strategic intelligence developed by experts with widely recognised expertise in the field to effective programming of strategic challenge-based calls; appreciates, in particular, the work done by programme managers to help projects find and realise added value by bringing together projects with a common interest;

    43. Notes the generally positive assessments (in particular in terms of EU added value) made by independent experts of the Knowledge and Innovation Communities; notes that EIT KICs contribute to strengthening links between higher education and business as well as to closing the ‘skills gap’, and that synergies should be explored with the academies introduced in recent EU legislation (e.g. Net Zero Industry Act, Critical Raw Materials Act, Cybersecurity Package); highlights, moreover, that the EIT regional innovation scheme (RIS) activities contribute to reducing the European innovation capacity divide; recalls that more synergies to bridge the innovation divide should be created between the EIT and other actions such as the EU preparatory action entitled ‘Innovation for place-based transformation’ and believes that the EIT KICs could improve synergies within the framework programme (in pillar 3 activities and between pillars), and establish concrete synergies between excellence-driven and place-based innovation, for instance via the implementation of successors of R&I activities led by the Directorate-General for Regional and Urban Policy, such as the Interregional Innovation Investments (I3) instrument;

    44. Regrets to conclude, however, that the relevance of the EIT as a programme is questioned by several stakeholders, including some of its biggest beneficiaries; underlines that in principle the concept of knowledge and innovation communities is appreciated by stakeholders as a useful instrument for effective innovation ecosystem development and integration; considers that the two main concerns raised are the financial self-sustainability requirement for KICs[24] and the central management by the EIT organisation which is too bureaucratic and burdensome, and which creates governance difficulties for the KICs[25]; concludes that for many stakeholders the financial and other costs, including the high burden of participating in a KIC, outweigh the benefits of the relatively little funding support relevant for them;

    45. Regrets that, although some efforts have already been made, synergies between the EIC, the EIT and the ERC are not sufficiently developed;

    Observations on Part 4

    46. Welcomes that participation of entities from widening countries has increased in HEU; acknowledges that the innovation divide persists, notwithstanding a slight decrease in the disparities in innovation performance across Europe, in spite of two decades of widening efforts; underlines, however, that the existence of this innovation gap in Europe has negative consequences for the EU as a whole given that it means available talent is left unused and economic disparities within the EU can be expected to grow; notes that this low participation can be partially explained by structural factors, including inadequate national public investment in R&D, which undermines the effectiveness of the national R&I systems, as reflected by low scores on the European Innovation Scoreboard; notes, furthermore, that there is a link between high levels of FP participation and high levels of national public investment in R&D; is strongly convinced that without national reforms, the innovation gap cannot be closed, regardless of the efforts made at European level, and refers to the European Court of Auditors Special Report 09/2022 on this matter; recognises that new and more effective mechanisms to increase widening are needed, but that financing for these actions should primarily come from the national level and be complemented by cohesion policy funds; calls on the Commission to ensure that the upcoming ERA Act lays down strong obligations for Member States to improve the functioning of their R&I system in order to eliminate subpar performance due to structural challenges;

    47. Underlines the importance of the Seal of Excellence under Horizon Europe; considers that the Seal in part mitigates the persistent issue of underfunding in Horizon Europe, which significantly hampers the ability to adequately support all high-quality proposals; acknowledges furthermore that the Seal can contribute to improving the relative participation of researchers from widening countries; emphasises, however, that the Seal cannot be considered as a substitute for direct financial support, particularly because the Seal is not a guarantee for funding;

    48. Notes that a thriving European innovation ecosystem requires strong and well-connected place-based innovation ecosystems and that a better connected European innovation ecosystem will be essential for enhancing the competitiveness of Europe, its resilience and strategic autonomy; recognises that collaboration among territorial ecosystems enables European regions to leverage their combined strengths to develop innovative solutions more efficiently; underlines that this collaboration also accelerates the commercialisation and scaling of technologies, bolstering the EU’s competitiveness also globally; recognises the vital role of public research organisations, including universities, as drivers of place-based innovation;

    Observations on missions and partnerships

    49. Highlights the science communication role of the missions and the need to strengthen this even further because this will bring research results closer to society and help address the challenge of distrust in R&I, while simultaneously helping gain societal approval for public investments in R&I; recalls that the Commission communication entitled ‘EU Missions two years on: assessment of progress and way forward’ did not constitute a positive assessment of the missions and concluded that missions had failed on core objectives such as crowding in external funding;

    50. Recalls the fundamental role of partnerships in bringing together the Commission and private and/or public partners, and is of the opinion that they must receive continuous support with a defined target and scope; emphasises that public-private partnership governance structures should be streamlined and simplified to avoid unnecessary burdens and enhance focus on key priorities; considers the joint undertakings as very useful instruments to foster better coordination and alignment of research agendas across the EU, as well as to foster co-investment in R&D between the public and private sectors; notes with regret that the Joint Undertakings have not yet resulted in increased R&D spending by European industry overall;

    Recommendations for the remaining part of Horizon Europe

    51. Notes that no significant changes in the implementation of the missions have taken place since the publication of the communication; concludes that the current approach to missions is not sufficiently oriented towards fostering creative novel and R&I ideas to address challenges; believes mission-oriented programming should have objectives that can be reached through R&I, should be implemented through open calls for bottom-up ideas to achieve the mission, and should be managed through a portfolio approach building on the experience of the EIC programme managers; considers that mission-oriented programming should first and foremost be a novel approach to research programming which puts more emphasis on bottom-up research ideas, which fosters interdisciplinarity and in particular creates space for synergies between Social Sciences, Humanities and the Arts (SSHA)-driven and technology-driven activities, to address problems; therefore calls on the Commission to pilot this approach in the remaining years of Horizon Europe by spending the majority of the funds allocated to the missions through openly formulated calls that invite proposals for R&I activities that can contribute to achieving a specific objective; encourages the Commission to consider whether it is appropriate to continue funding each mission under Horizon Europe and to find additional funding and support for the continuation of the missions in other parts of the EU budget and at national as well as regional level, where appropriate;

    52. Supports the proposal in the Heitor report to set up an experimental unit under Horizon Europe to experiment with new implementation methods and instruments in order to foster real simplification for participants and to develop a more agile implementation of the programme; urges the Commission to launch, from 2025, a task force to improve the efficacy of the European Semester, in line with the EU’s share towards the 3 % target, as clearly described in the Draghi and Heitor reports and reiterated by European leaders in the Budapest Declaration on the New European Competitiveness Deal;

    53. Insists that the Commission should continue the use of lump-sum funding under HEU, and apply it to beneficiaries for which the assessments show it to be clearly experienced as a simplification, such as SMEs and projects for which there is solid evidence that it is a genuine simplification; underlines in that regard that the intended ramping up of the use of lump sums for the 2026-2027 work programme remains questionable given the existing worries and unknowns regarding the impact of lump sums with regard to the simplification they offer to some beneficiaries and their impact on the quality of the projects funded; calls on the Commission to take all necessary steps to ensure sound and efficient use of EU funds before increasing the share of the Horizon Europe budget spend through lump sums in the last years of Horizon Europe and to explore the further improvement of the system to ensure lump-sum funding leads to genuine simplification for beneficiaries; supports the recommendation of the European Court of Auditors to define the scope of ex-post controls for lump-sum grants;

    54. Supports the Heitor report’s urgent call to introduce a ‘Choose Europe’ co-funding line and to turn the current ‘European brain drain’ into a ‘brain gain’ by 2035, noting that this should be considered a major and unique opportunity for Europe in the current uncertain geopolitical context, in particular following the recent US election, and should therefore be implemented urgently from 2025;

    55. Calls on the Commission to restore EIC autonomy and agility without delay in order to get rid of existing complex processes that lead to lower implementation; believes the EIC transition activities should be open to proposals based on results from any FP project, regardless of which programme part funded that project;

    56. Urges the Commission, as guardian of the Treaties, to rely on recital 72 of the Horizon Europe Regulation to enforce more respect for academic freedom in the EU as well as in associated countries, in particular to use it as a basis to openly and directly address blatant violations of academic freedom by national governments;

    57. Recommends that the use of the Do No (Significant) Harm principle should be accompanied by detailed guidance from the Commission on how compliance with the principle will be evaluated in the context of the specific call in which the principle is used;

    Recommendations for the 10th Research Framework Programme (FP10)

    58. Calls for FP10 to be a stand-alone EU programme, in the context of the upcoming discussion of the highly anticipated Competitiveness Fund, as announced by Commission President Ursula von der Leyen in her speech of 17 July 2024 in Strasbourg, dedicated to EU research and innovation excellence and strategic technology development, with a substantially higher budget appropriate  for achieving the 3 % GDP spending target and sufficient to fund  at least 75 % of the excellent[26] proposals submitted; recommends that FP10 focus on three core objectives:

    (a) creating a European competition of ideas, and a funnel to accelerate the development from fundamental science to innovation scale-up, providing support for blue-sky and basic research as well as strengthening the deployment and exploitation of innovative solutions,

    (b) supporting strategic research initiatives which require large-scale and European collaboration, as the programme’s ability to prioritise these initiatives will be of utmost importance for Europe’s ability to address the societal challenges it faces as well as for European industry and SMEs, including for technology maturation and fostering of European ecosystems, to address the competitiveness gap with our global competitors, focussing on the development of priority innovative advanced technologies and their translation into concrete applications of innovative products, processes and services,

    (c) advancing the ERA, including by addressing the innovation gap in Europe;

    59. Recommends that the Commission ensure user-oriented, science-led, effective and efficient implementation of the programme, including by:

    (a) implementing an improved governance, inspired by the findings of the Heitor expert group and the Draghi report, addressing the need to improve the programme’s agility, which should:

    i. be oriented towards facilitating the best science, technology development and innovation,

    ii. contribute to EU priorities on the terms of science and innovation,

    iii. be based on the principle of self-governance, through which recognised, independent specialists from the relevant field that act in the public interest can  advise on how research and innovation can best contribute to the achievement of the policy priorities set by policymakers; recommends, as part of implementing this principle, setting up new Councils in line with the Heitor report to deliver expert advice on the strategic priorities of the programme as well as on the formulation of call texts to ensure their quality,

    (b) including positions for programme managers for the EIC, comparable to programme managers at the American ARPA-style agencies, who are experts appointed from outside the Commission with a proven track record in the relevant field, appointed for a predefined period, as special advisers to the Commissioner responsible for research and innovation to ensure their seniority in the Commission, to manage strategic visionary portfolios of projects, fostering collaboration between projects where relevant across the whole programme for their mutual benefit and set out challenges based on strategic intelligence and with a view to fostering global leadership for Europe in specific areas of their field,

    (c) implementing a radical simplification in the administrative work related to the application for and management of FP10 projects, following the proposal of the Heitor report to trust first and check later for the application system as well as keeping the information requested in applications to an absolute minimum – no information which is not absolutely necessary for a good qualitative evaluation of the scientific or innovative quality of a proposal should be included in the proposal stage,

    (d) promoting synergies and coordinated programming and implementation with other programmes and sectoral policies in particular with the future new industrial policy and the next important projects of common European interest dealing with research, development and innovation at national and EU level;

    60. Recommends that the GEPs as eligibility criteria for funding should be maintained in FP10 in their current form as a permanent and integral element of EU research funding requirements;

    61. Recommends that the general objective on advancing the ERA should  lead to the development of an excellent, unified and well-functioning European Research Area that attracts  talent, integrates  newcomers in existing networks and provides access to world leading research and technology infrastructures while remaining open for excellent research proposals irrespective of the supporting research institution and supports joint early research programmes with national funders; underlines that the forthcoming ERA Act needs to ensure increased national investments, national reforms and the elimination of barriers to the free movement of knowledge, technology and researchers, to create the conditions for FP10 to support the achievement of a well-functioning ERA;

    62. Considers that the Research Infrastructures, COST and Teaming programmes should contribute to the achievement of this general objective; is convinced that FP10 should provide for an instrument for strategic investments in technology infrastructures; believes that the MSCA is a crucial instrument for achieving this objective as it facilitates the mobility across the EU and between sectors of the best and the brightest who are selected based on the excellence of their proposal; believes that, to further the integration of the ERA, participation of entities from areas with low research performance should be encouraged in the programme;

    63. Firmly believes that FP10 should include a newly established European fellowship programme for researchers at risk, incorporating the lessons learnt from the ongoing preparatory action, to achieve this general objective;

    64. Continues to support the knowledge triangle approach of the EIT to foster innovation in Europe; believes that a reformed and refocussed EIT should contribute to the achievement of this general objective, given its particular role of integrating the European innovation ecosystem;

    65. Believes that in FP10 an expanded and interlinked ERC and EIC should be the engine for a European competition of ideas and that an increase of their budgets should be prioritised in the FP10 budget; recommends that these programmes be designed so that they create a European, bottom-up funnel for innovation to develop quickly from fundamental science to innovation scale-up;

    66. Considers that the EIC can only succeed if it can (i) offer blended finance as a single project and (ii) act with the same predictability and agility as private actors on the venture capital market through a tailor-made legal entity for its implementation; underlines that the strengthened autonomy and self-governance of both the ERC and the EIC are crucial to achieving this; considers in this regard that new options must be investigated to ensure their independence and long-term stability, such as creating dedicated legal entities;

    67. Considers that the expansion of the EIC and ERC should include increased funding for blue-sky, collaborative and early research projects; recommends this expansion to fund smaller projects and consortia in order to lower the barrier to participation, to increase the success rate and to encourage experimentation with new ideas and collaborations; considers that both the EIC Pathfinder and the ERC Synergy Grants have a role to play in this expanded space for bottom-up collaborative research; underlines that the EIC Pathfinder should continue to fund Challenges, but they should be reformed from Challenge-based calls to ARPA-style Challenges which leave space for bottom-up proposals while securing strategic technology development;

    68. Urges the Commission to design FP10 such that it can effectively support strategic research, technology development and deployment initiatives, focussing on a limited number of priorities to support research-based competitiveness and the resilience of key sectors in the European economy as well as to address societal challenges with 2040 as the time horizon and which require cross-border collaboration due to the scale and complexity of the issue at hand; believes that these initiatives could take the form of (i) societal mission-oriented programmes which address socio-economic and/or ecological challenges, (ii) technology mission-oriented programmes to accelerate the development of strategic technologies in Europe, and (iii) joint undertakings to secure joint investments by the private sector, Member States and the EU;

    69. Is furthermore convinced that a share of the budget of FP10 should remain available for higher Technology Readiness Level collaborative calls to support strategic collaboration not covered in the strategic initiatives, in particular this budget could be used for strategic calls developed by the programme managers to further develop an emerging ecosystem;

    70. Emphasises that mission-oriented programmes under FP10 should be fundamentally differently organised than the current missions in Horizon Europe; calls on the Commission to implement mission-oriented programmes under FP10 that set objectives that can be reached through R&I, implemented through open calls for bottom-up ideas, fostering interdisciplinarity, including between SSHA-driven and technology-driven activities, to achieve the mission, and managed through a portfolio approach building on the experience of the pilot under Horizon Europe; underlines that the successful management of these mission-oriented programmes requires outstanding expertise on the topic of the missions rather than generic expertise;

    71. Underlines that procedures for obtaining support under FP10 must align with companies’ realities; is of the opinion that, to this end, an industry-oriented application procedure, building on the experience of the Fast Track to Innovation from Horizon 2020, should be re-introduced under FP10, in particular where the programme aims to support strategic initiatives;

    72. Is convinced that a strategic approach to international cooperation is more important than ever; believes that global collaboration in science is essential for the knowledge development of humanity, but cannot be pursued in a naive manner; recommends that the Commission develops a clear strategic policy framework for its decisions on international collaboration which includes (i) a clear policy on the association of third countries which recognises that association is a tool for political partnerships, (ii) a structured process for determining how open or closed FP10 projects need to be to foster the best possible research while also considering the strategic interests of the EU, and (iii) a plan to boost global collaboration through the programme;

    73. Underlines the importance of FP10’s compliance with the Council recommendation on research security; calls on the Commission to include in the strategic approach whether the right balance between security and openness can be best achieved at the level of programmes, calls or selected projects; believes as well that, beyond the agility of the framework programme itself, delivering resilience must be mainstreamed to become an integral part of all the applied research, development and innovation activities of the next framework programme, in a differentiated manner depending on the topic and the type of activity; believes in particular that innovation activities close to the market must take into account the risk of increased dependency on third countries stemming from them, and the necessary enhanced strategic autonomy of the EU;

    74. Recommends in principle maintaining the civilian nature of the next framework programme and leaving calls specifically for defence applications to the successor of the European Defence Fund; urges the Commission further to develop options to strengthen the synergies between civilian and defence R&D spending; calls on the Commission in particular to explore how the exploitation of dual-use potential can be maximised, especially through interventions after project selection rather than in call or programme definition; underlines that academic freedom includes the right of researchers to decide to what research and development they wish to contribute;

    75. Recommends that the programme should recognise the role of interdisciplinary research in addressing societal challenges, also including a better integration of SSHA; reiterates the need for sufficient funding for research projects that address societal challenges and that fall within the area of SSHA;

    76. Recommends the introduction of research actions in order to foster and encourage more lower Technology Readiness Level research and basic research;

    77. Notes that the allocation of at least 35 % of Horizon Europe expenditure to climate objectives served the general EU objective of mainstreaming climate actions into its sectoral policies and funds; considers this an ambitious target to ensure that FP10 adequately funds science, research and innovation that support the EU climate objectives;

    78. Underlines that any potential application of the Do No (Significant) Harm principle under FP10 should, in line with Article 33(2)d of the Financial Regulation, be set out in the FP10 legislation;

    79. Recommends that the central role of standardisation in driving innovation, enhancing competitiveness, and ensuring impactful, market-ready solutions be recognised in FP10 by ensuring that costs associated with standardisation activities, where relevant in projects, are clearly recognised as eligible for reimbursement under the programme as well as by offering support to researchers in their standardisation activities;

    80. Insists that rules regarding the association of third countries to FP10 should require that these associations can only be concluded through international agreements, which requires the consent of the Parliament for each specific association to a specific EU programme, including for the scope of that association;

    81. Notes that FP10 should take into account the use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) as a way to foster European research and development while identifying specific risks that may arise form an abusive use of AI in the scientific environment and the corresponding mitigation measures;

    °

    ° °

    82. Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council, the Commission and the governments of the Member States.

     

    MIL OSI Europe News –

    February 27, 2025
  • MIL-OSI Asia-Pac: DRDO & Indian Navy successfully conduct flight-trials of first-of-its-kind Naval Anti-Ship missile

    Source: Government of India

    Posted On: 26 FEB 2025 7:45PM by PIB Delhi

    Defence Research & Development Organisation (DRDO) and Indian Navy carried out successful flight-trials of first-of-its-kind Naval Anti-Ship missile (NASM-SR) from Integrated Test Range (ITR), Chandipur on February 25, 2025. The trials demonstrated the missile’s capability against ship targets while launched from an Indian Naval Seaking Helicopter.

    The trials have proven the missile’s Man-in-Loop feature and scored a direct hit on a small ship target in sea-skimming mode at its maximum range. The missile uses an Indigenous Imaging Infra-Red Seeker for terminal guidance. The mission also has demonstrated the high bandwidth two way datalink system, which is used to transmit the seeker live images back to the pilot for in-flight retargeting.

    The missile was launched in Bearing-only Lock-on after launch mode with several targets in close vicinity for selecting one among them. The missile initially locked on to a large target within a specified zone of search and during the terminal phase, the pilot selected a smaller hidden target resulting in its being  hit with pinpoint accuracy.

    The missile uses an indigenous Fiber Optic Gyroscope-based INS and Radio Altimeter for its Mid-course guidance, an Integrated avionics module, Electro-Mechanical actuators for Aerodynamic and Jet vane control, thermal batteries and PCB warhead. It uses solid propulsion with an in-line ejectable booster and a long-burn sustainer. The trials have met all the mission objectives.

    The missile is developed by different labs of DRDO including Research Centre Imarat, Defence Research and Development Laboratory, High Energy Materials Research Laboratory and

    Terminal Ballistics Research Laboratory. The missiles are currently being produced by Development cum Production Partners with the help of MSME’s, start-ups and other production partners.

    Raksha Mantri Shri Rajnath Singh has congratulated DRDO, Indian Navy and the industries for the successful flight tests. The tests for Man-in-Loop features is unique as it gives the capability of in flight retargeting, he said.

    Secretary, Department of Defence R&D and Chairman DRDO Dr Samir V Kamat also congratulated the entire DRDO team, users and the industry partners.

    SR/Savvy

    (Release ID: 2106482) Visitor Counter : 56

    MIL OSI Asia Pacific News –

    February 27, 2025
  • MIL-OSI Asia-Pac: Mahakumbh 2025: A Spectacle of Faith, Unity, and Tradition

    Source: Government of India

    Categories24-7, Asia Pacific, Government of India, India, MIL OSI

    Post navigation

    Ministry of Information & Broadcasting

    Mahakumbh 2025: A Spectacle of Faith, Unity, and Tradition

    As the sacred waters settle, the echoes of devotion and grandeur leave an everlasting imprint on history

    Posted On: 26 FEB 2025 7:22PM by PIB Delhi

    Introduction

    In a world marked by the hustle of modernity, few events hold the power to bring millions together in pursuit of something greater than themselves. The Maha Kumbh Mela, currently being held from 13 January 2025 to 26 February 2025, is a sacred pilgrimage that is celebrated four times over a course of 12 years. Kumbh Mela, the world’s largest peaceful gathering, draws millions of pilgrims who bathe in sacred rivers seeking to purify themselves from sins and attain spiritual liberation. The Maha Kumbh Mela is deeply embedded in Hindu mythology and represents one of the most significant gatherings of faith in the world. This sacred event rotates between four locations in India-Haridwar, Ujjain, Nashik, and Prayagraj– each situated by a holy river, from the Ganges to the Shipra, the Godavari, and the confluence of the Ganges, Yamuna, and the mythical Sarasvati in Prayagraj. The expected turnout of 45 crore devotees in 45 days was exceeded within a month, reaching 66 crores+ by the concluding day.

    Attractions of Kumbh Mela 2025

    • Triveni Sangam: The sacred confluence of the Ganga, Yamuna, and Saraswati, offering a deeply spiritual experience.
    • Ancient Temples: Hanuman Mandir, Alopi Devi Mandir, and Mankameshwar Temple, showcasing the city’s religious heritage.
    • Historical Landmarks: Ashoka Pillar, University of Allahabad, and Swaraj Bhawan, reflecting India’s rich history and colonial-era architecture.
    • Cultural Vibrance: Bustling streets, markets, local art, and cuisine providing a glimpse into the city’s life.
    • Kalagram: Kalagram, set up by the Ministry of Culture in Sector-7 of the Maha Kumbh district, is a vibrant cultural village showcasing India’s rich heritage. Designed around the themes of Craft, Cuisines, and Culture, it offered an immersive experience through performances, exhibitions, and interactive zones.
    • Akhara Camps: Spiritual hubs where sadhus and seekers engaged in meditation, discussions, and philosophical exchanges.
    • Immersive Digital Experiences: Inspired by Kumbh 2019, ten stalls facilitating the pilgrims with this experience were specially set up at prime locations in the Kumbh Mela to show videos of major events such as Peshwai, auspicious bathing days, Ganga aarti, etc.
    • Drone Show: A Grand Drone show was organised by the Uttar Pradesh Tourism Department featuring hundreds of drones creating vibrant shapes in the sky. Devotees were mesmerized by the divine depiction of the Samudra Manthan (churning of the ocean) and Gods drinking from the Amrit Kalash.
    • Cultural events at the Ganga Pandal: It saw renowned artists from across the country mesmerize devotees with grand presentations of music, dance, and art from 7th – 10th February. The main highlights of the event included performances by famous artists like Odissi dancer Dona Ganguly on 7th; renowned singer Kavita Krishnamurti and Dr. L. Subramaniam on 8th; Suresh Wadkar and Sonal Mansingh on 9th; and, on 10th, celebrated singer Hariharan. In addition, prominent artists from various Indian classical dance and music traditions made the evening musical and grand.
    • International Bird Festival: Held from February 16-18, 2025, showcasing over 200 migratory and local birds, including endangered species.

    Key Rituals and Practices

    • Shahi Snan: The most significant ritual, where millions bathe at Triveni Sangam to cleanse sins and attain Moksha. Special dates like Paush Purnima and Makar Sankranti witness grand processions of saints and Akharas, marking the official start of the Maha Kumbh.
    • Ganga Aarti: A visually stunning ritual where priests offer glowing lamps to the sacred river, evoking devotion.
    • Kalpavas: A month-long period of spiritual discipline where devotees renounce comforts, engage in meditation, and participate in Vedic rituals like Yajnas and Homas.
    • Prayers & Offerings: Dev Pujan honors deities, while rituals like Shraadh (ancestral offerings) and Veeni Daan (offering hair to the Ganges) symbolize surrender and purification. Acts of charity, such as Gau Daan (cow donation) and Vastra Daan (clothing donation), hold great merit.
    • Deep Daan: Thousands of lamps are floated on the river, creating a celestial glow that symbolizes devotion and divine blessings.
    • Prayagraj Panchkoshi Parikrama: A sacred journey around Prayagraj’s holy sites, reviving an ancient tradition and offering spiritual fulfillment.

     

    History and Major Bathing Dates

     

    The origins of the Kumbh Mela are rooted in Hindu mythology. According to the Samudra Manthan (churning of the ocean) story in the ancient Hindu scriptures, the gods (Devas) and demons (Asuras) fought over the Amrit (nectar of immortality). During this celestial battle, drops of the nectar fell at four locations—Prayagraj, Haridwar, Ujjain, and Nashik—where the Kumbh Mela is now held, with the Maha Kumbh occurring once every 144 years at Prayagraj.  Historically, the Maha Kumbh Mela has been referenced since ancient times, with records dating back to the Maurya and Gupta periods. It received royal patronage from various dynasties, including the Mughals, and was documented by colonial administrators like James Prinsep. Over centuries, it evolved into a global spiritual and cultural phenomenon. Recognized by UNESCO as an intangible cultural heritage, the Kumbh Mela symbolizes India’s enduring traditions, fostering unity, spirituality, and cultural exchange among millions worldwide.

    The timing of each Kumbh Mela is determined by the astrological positions of the Sun, Moon, and Jupiter, believed to signal an auspicious period for spiritual cleansing and self-enlightenment. The festival embodies a confluence of faith, culture, and tradition, attracting ascetics, seekers, and devotees alike. The event’s grandeur is marked by Shahi Snans (bathing rituals), spiritual discourses, and vibrant cultural processions that reflect India’s deep spiritual heritage.

     

    Major bathing dates are:

    Date

    Bathing Occasion

    Significance

    Number of Devotees taking a dip

    (Approx.)

    January 13, 2025

    Paush Purnima

    It serves as an unofficial inauguration of the Maha Kumbh Mela, signifying the commencement of this grand event. Additionally, Paush Purnima marks the initiation of Kalpvasa, a period of intense spiritual practice and devotion observed by pilgrims during the Maha Kumbh Mela.

    1.5 crore

    January 14, 2025

    Makar Sankranti

    (First Shahi Snan)

    Makar Sankranti signifies the sun’s transition to its next astronomical position in accordance with the Hindu calendar. This auspicious day marks the initiation of charitable donations at the Maha Kumbh Mela. Pilgrims traditionally make contributions based on their own volition and generosity.

    3.5 crore

    January 29, 2025

    Mauni Amavasya

    (Second Shahi Snan)

    Mauni Amavasya is a day steeped in significance, as it is believed that the celestial alignments are most propitious for the sacred act of bathing in the holy river. It commemorates a profound event when Rishabh Dev, revered as one of the first sages, broke his protracted vow of silence and immersed himself in the purifying waters of the Sangam. As a result, Mauni Amavasya draws the largest congregation of pilgrims to the Kumbh Mela, making it a momentous day of spiritual devotion and purification.

    5 crore

    February 3, 2025

    Basant Panchami

    (Third Shahi Snan)

    Basant Panchami symbolizes the transition of seasons and celebrates the arrival of the Goddess of Knowledge, Saraswati, in Hindu mythology.

    2.33 crore

    February 12, 2025

    Maghi Purnima

    Maghi Purnima is renowned for its connection with the veneration of Guru Brahaspati and the belief that the Hindu deity Gandharva descends from the heavens to the sacred Sangam.

    2 crore

    February 26, 2025

    Maha Shivratri

    Maha Shivaratri holds deep symbolism as it marks the final holy bath of the Kalpvasis, and it is intrinsically connected to Lord Shankar.

    1.3 crore

     

    Key Infrastructure Development

     

    • Temporary City Setup: Maha Kumbh Nagar had been transformed into a temporary city with thousands of tents and shelters, including super deluxe accommodations like the IRCTC’s “Maha Kumbh Gram” luxury tent city which offers deluxe tents and villas with modern amenities.
    • Roads and Bridges:
    • Renovation of 92 roads and beautification of 17 major roads
    • Construction of 30 pontoon bridges using 3,308 pontoons.
    • Signage for Navigation: A total of 800 multi-language signages (Hindi, English, and regional languages) were installed to guide visitors.
    • Public Utilities: Over 2,69,000 checkered plates had been laid for pathways. Mobile toilets and robust waste management systems ensured hygiene.

     

    Medical Facilities at Maha Kumbh

     

    The Maha Kumbh 2025 witnessed an extensive medical setup to ensure the well-being of millions of devotees. With over 2,000 medical personnel deployed across the Mela area, the Uttar Pradesh government implemented high-tech healthcare services in every sector. From minor treatments to major surgeries, all medical needs were addressed efficiently.

     

    Key Medical Arrangements:

    • Central Hospital at Parade Ground:
      • 100-bed capacity
      • OPD, ICU, and emergency care
      • Conducted over 10,000 treatments and multiple successful deliveries
    • Additional Hospitals:
      • 23 hospitals with a total capacity of 360 beds
      • Two sub-central hospitals (25 beds each)
      • Eight sector hospitals (20 beds each)
      • Two infectious disease hospitals (20 beds each)
    • Medical Services Expansion During Amrit Snan & Magh Purnima:
      • 133 ambulances deployed, including seven river ambulances and one air ambulance
      • Medical Observation Rooms at key railway stations for emergencies
      • First aid posts with trained staff at multiple locations
    • SRN Hospital and Other City Hospitals on High Alert:
      • 250 beds reserved at SRN Hospital
      • Blood bank stocked with 200 units
      • Swaroop Rani Nehru Hospital prepared with:
        • 40-bed trauma center
        • 50-bed surgical ICU
        • 50-bed medicine ward
        • 10-bed cardiology ward and ICU
    • Medical Teams and Emergency Readiness:
      • 300 specialist doctors deployed at the Super Specialty Hospital
      • Expert doctors from AIIMS Delhi and BHU remained on high alert
      • 150 AYUSH medical personnel provided alternative treatments
    • Advanced Facilities and AI Integration:
      • ECG services and Central Pathology Lab conducting 100+ tests daily
      • 50+ free diagnostic tests available for pilgrims
      • AI-driven translation technology enabled doctors to communicate in 22 regional and 19 international languages
    • Affordable Medicines through Jan Aushadhi Kendras:
    • Five Jan Aushadhi Kendras set up in Mahakumbh Nagar, including one in Kalagram
    • Established under Pradhan Mantri Bhartiya Janaushadhi Pariyojana (PMBJP)
    • Provided affordable and quality medicines to pilgrims throughout the Mela
    • Part of a nationwide network of 15,000+ Jan Aushadhi centers, with 62 centers in Prayagraj
    • Contributed to the national target of ₹2,000 crore in medicine sales, with ₹1,500 crore already achieved.

     

    The entire medical infrastructure was continuously monitored by senior officials to ensure smooth operations, cleanliness, and quick emergency responses. These arrangements played a crucial role in managing the healthcare needs of millions at the Maha Kumbh 2025.

     

    AYUSH at Maha Kumbh

     

    The Ayush OPDs, clinics, stalls, and wellness sessions emerged as major attractions for devotees and visitors at Maha Kumbh 2025, Prayagraj. The Ministry of Ayush, in collaboration with the National Ayush Mission, Uttar Pradesh, provided free healthcare services to both domestic and international pilgrims. With a strong focus on traditional healing systems, Ayush services received widespread participation, reinforcing the global trust in Ayurveda, Homeopathy, and Naturopathy.

     

    Key Highlights of Ayush Services:

    1. Extensive Healthcare Support: Over 1.21 lakh devotees availed Ayush services during the festival.
    2. Dedicated Ayush OPDs: A team of 80 doctors across 20 OPDs provided 24×7 medical services, addressing both common and chronic conditions.
    3. International Participation: Foreign devotees also accessed Ayush OPD consultations and wellness therapies.
    4. Yoga Therapy Sessions: Daily therapeutic yoga sessions were conducted from 8:00 AM to 9:00 AM at designated camps in the Sangam area and Sector-8, led by experts from the Morarji Desai National Institute of Yoga (MDNIY), New Delhi.
    5. Integrated Healthcare: Over 7 lakh pilgrims received medical care, including:
      • 4.5 lakh treated at 23 allopathic hospitals
      • 3.71 lakh pathology tests conducted
      • 3,800 minor and 12 major surgeries successfully performed
    6. Specialist Involvement: Experts from AIIMS Delhi, IMS BHU, and international specialists from Canada, Germany, and Russia contributed to providing world-class healthcare.
    7. Traditional Treatments: 20 AYUSH hospitals offered treatments in Ayurveda, Homeopathy, and Naturopathy to over 2.18 lakh pilgrims.
    8. Holistic Wellness: Services such as Panchakarma, yoga therapy, and health awareness campaigns were well-received, enhancing the overall well-being of attendees.

     

    Security Measures

    Security at Maha Kumbh 2025 had been strengthened through a seven-tier system with AI-powered surveillance, a vast deployment of personnel, and emergency response mechanisms. Over 50,000 security personnel, including paramilitary forces, 14,000 home guards, and 2,750 AI-based CCTV cameras, had been deployed. Enhanced measures included drone and underwater surveillance, cyber security, and river safety. Fire safety infrastructure had been expanded with specialized vehicles and firefighting stations. Lost and Found centers used digital registration and social media updates to reunite missing persons with their families.

     

    Key Security Measures

    1. Surveillance and Law Enforcement
    • AI & Drone Monitoring: 2,750 AI-powered cameras, drones, anti-drones, and tethered drones for real-time tracking.
    • Underwater Drones: First-time deployment for 24/7 river surveillance, operating up to 100 meters deep.
    • Checkpoints & Intelligence Squads: Screening at multiple entry points, hotel and vendor inspections, and patrols.
    • Seven-Tier Security System: Layered protection from the outer perimeter to the inner sanctum.

     

    1. Fire Safety Measures
    • ₹131.48 crore allocated for fire safety, ensuring the deployment of:
      • 351 firefighting vehicles.
      • 50+ fire stations and 20 fire posts.
      • Four Articulating Water Towers (AWT) equipped with thermal cameras, reaching 35 meters in height.
      • Over 2,000 trained fire personnel.
      • Fire safety equipment installed in all tent settlements.

     

    1. Emergency & Disaster Response
    • Multi-Disaster Response Vehicles: Equipped with lifting bags (10-20 tonnes), rescue tools, and victim location cameras.
    • Remote-Controlled Life Buoys: Deployed for immediate water rescue operations.
    • Incident Response System (IRS): Ensures swift emergency handling through a coordinated command structure.

     

    1. Enhanced River Security
    • 3,800 Water Police personnel deployed, including 2,500 currently on duty and 1,300 additional personnel before the event.
    • 11 FRP Speed Motor Boats and four Anaconda motorboats with built-in changing rooms for patrol.
    • Three Water Police Stations & Two Floating Rescue Stations operating 24/7.
    • Four Water Ambulances equipped with medical facilities stationed along the river.
    • Deep-Water Barricading: An 8-km stretch secured to prevent accidents.
    • Equipment Deployment: 100 diving kits, 440 lifebuoys, and over 3,000 life jackets.

     

    1. Overall Deployment & Infrastructure
    • Security Forces: 10,000+ police personnel, NDRF, SDRF, CAPF, PAC, and bomb disposal squads.
    • Prayagraj Police Infrastructure:
      • 57 permanent police stations.
      • 13 temporary police stations.
      • 23 security checkpoints.
      • 8 zones, 18 security sectors.
    • 700+ boats with police and disaster response personnel stationed along the rivers.
    • Mock Drills & Inspections: Conducted by police and ATS teams for security preparedness.

     

    1. CRPF’s Role in Maha Kumbh 2025
    • 24/7 Security: Personnel deployed at ghats, Mela grounds, and key routes.
    • Use of Modern Technology: Vigilant monitoring to handle emergencies effectively.
    • Guidance & Assistance: Helping devotees navigate massive crowds with a polite approach.
    • Disaster Management: Rapid response team on high alert for crises.
    • Humanitarian Efforts: Assisting in reuniting lost children and elderly with their families.

     

    Cyber Security at Maha Kumbh

    More than 65 crore devotees have visited the Maha Kumbh Nagar. To ensure that such a large number of devotees are well-informed, the Uttar Pradesh government had decided to utilize every platform, including print, digital, and social media. Cyber experts have been actively monitoring online threats and investigating gangs exploiting platforms such as AI, Facebook, X, and Instagram. A mobile cyber team was also deployed for large-scale public awareness campaigns.

    Special cyber security arrangements were initiated to safeguard devotees from across the globe:

    • Deployment of 56 dedicated cyber warriors and experts for cyber patrolling.
    • Establishment of a Maha Kumbh cyber police station to counter cyber threats like fraudulent websites, social media scams, and fake links.
    • 40 Variable Messaging Displays (VMDs) installed in both the fair area and the commissionerates for raising awareness about cyber threats.
    • Formation of a dedicated helpline number, 1920, and promotion of verified government websites.

     

    Ease of Making Payments at Maha Kumbh

    • Seamless Digital Banking Services: Ensuring convenience, safety, and security for millions of devotees and pilgrims.
    • Service Infrastructure: Service counters, mobile banking units, and customer assistance kiosks at five key locations.
    • Daak Sevaks: Trusted Daak Sevaks offering doorstep banking services for cash withdrawals via Aadhaar-linked accounts through AePS (Aadhaar ATM).
    • ‘Banking at Call’ facility: Pilgrims can dial 7458025511 to access banking services anywhere within Maha Kumbh.
    • Empowering Digital Transactions: Enabling local vendors and businesses to accept digital payments through DakPay QR Cards, fostering a cashless ecosystem.
    • Awareness Campaigns: Educating pilgrims and vendors through trained professionals, Daak Sevaks, hoardings, and digital demonstrations and assisting with account openings, transactions, and queries.
    • Memorabilia Offer: Free printed photographs for visitors as a keepsake.

    Railway Transportation at Maha Kumbh

    Maha Kumbh 2025, necessitated extensive preparations by Indian Railways to ensure seamless transportation, safety, and infrastructure readiness. Indian Railways has undertaken massive operational, infrastructural, and security measures to handle the unprecedented influx of devotees at Prayagraj and adjoining regions.

    1. Operational Measures To manage the surge in passengers, Indian Railways has implemented the following measures:

    • Special Train Services: Over 1,000 special trains are being introduced on high-demand routes to Prayagraj from various parts of India.
    • Increased Train Frequencies: Regular trains operating on critical routes have been augmented to handle additional passengers.
    • Reservation System Enhancements: Tatkal and special booking counters have been set up to facilitate smooth ticketing.
    • Dedicated Help Desks: Information booths and inquiry counters have been increased at major railway stations to assist pilgrims.

    2. Security and Crowd Management Given the large congregation, security measures have been significantly bolstered:

    • Deployment of RPF and GRP Personnel: More than 10,000 personnel from the Railway Protection Force (RPF) and Government Railway Police (GRP) have been deployed at key stations.
    • CCTV Surveillance: High-resolution CCTV cameras have been installed across railway stations and inside trains for real-time monitoring.
    • Drone Surveillance: Drones are being used for crowd monitoring and quick response to emergencies.
    • AI-Based Crowd Management Systems: Advanced AI-based predictive modeling is being used to monitor crowd density and prevent stampedes.

     

    3. Infrastructure Development To accommodate the increased footfall, major infrastructural upgrades have been carried out:

    • Expansion of Platforms: Stations in Prayagraj and nearby regions have undergone expansion to handle additional trains.
    • New Foot Over Bridges (FOBs): Additional FOBs have been constructed to ease passenger movement.
    • Enhanced Lighting and Signage: Railway stations have been equipped with improved lighting and digital signboards for better navigation.
    • Escalators and Lifts: Stations have been upgraded with escalators and lifts for the convenience of elderly and differently-abled passengers.

    4. Passenger Amenities and Digital Initiatives To ensure a comfortable experience for devotees, Indian Railways has introduced several passenger-friendly initiatives:

    • Additional Waiting Rooms and Rest Areas: Temporary waiting halls with adequate seating, clean drinking water, and sanitation facilities have been established.
    • Food and Water Distribution: Special food counters and kiosks have been set up to provide hygienic meals and drinking water.
    • Digital Ticketing and Mobile App Services: The Indian Railways app has been upgraded with real-time train tracking, ticket booking, and emergency services information.
    • Public Announcement Systems: High-quality PA systems have been installed for timely announcements regarding train arrivals and departures.

     

    5. Disaster Preparedness and Emergency Response To mitigate risks and handle emergencies effectively, Indian Railways has implemented:

    • Quick Response Teams (QRTs): Deployed at key stations to handle medical emergencies and crowd control.
    • Onboard Medical Facilities: Special medical coaches have been added to long-distance trains.
    • Fire Safety Measures: Fire extinguishers and emergency exits have been reviewed and upgraded in railway coaches and stations.
    • Coordination with Local Authorities: Continuous coordination with local police, healthcare units, and disaster management teams to handle contingencies.

    Bus Transportation at Maha Kumbh

    The Uttar Pradesh government had deployed 1200 additional buses on 12 February 2025, supplementing the 3050 already allocated for Maha Kumbh 2025. Special shuttle services had also been arranged to enhance intra-city transportation.

    • Buses were available every 10 minutes at four temporary bus stations.
    • 750 shuttle buses were operating every 2 minutes for intra-city connectivity.
    • Measures taken to prevent overcrowding and ensure smooth pilgrim movement.

    Air Transportation for Maha Kumbh

    Prayagraj Airport underwent significant modernization to support the large influx of devotees during the Maha Kumbh Mahotsav from January 13 to February 26, 2025. Expansion efforts improved connectivity, capacity, and passenger services, ensuring a seamless travel experience. To ensure seamless travel for tourists attending the Maha Kumbh, the Ministry of Tourism had partnered with Alliance Air to enhance air connectivity to Prayagraj from multiple cities across India.

    1. Flight Operations & Connectivity
    • 81 new flights were introduced in January 2025 to accommodate pilgrims.
    • The total number of flights increased to 132, providing around 80,000 monthly seats.
    • Direct connectivity expanded from 8 cities in December 2024 to 17 cities, while connecting flights reached 26 cities, including Srinagar and Visakhapatnam.
    • The Union Civil Aviation Minister directed airlines to regulate airfares, especially for peak days like the Shahi Snan (January 29, February 3) and other major bathing days (February 4, 12, and 26).

     

    1. Passenger and Flight Traffic
    • The airport witnessed 30,172 passengers and operated 226 flights within a week.
    • For the first time, over 5,000 passengers traveled through the airport in a single day.
    • Night flights were introduced, providing 24/7 connectivity—a historic first in the airport’s 106-year history.

     

    1. Infrastructure Expansion
    • The terminal area expanded from 6,700 sq. m. to 25,500 sq. m.
    • The old terminal was reconfigured to accommodate 1,080 peak-hour passengers, while a new terminal handled 1,620 passengers.
    • Parking capacity increased from 200 to 600 vehicles.
    • Check-in counters rose from 8 to 42, and baggage scanning machines (XBIS-HB) increased from 4 to 10.
    • Aircraft parking bays grew from 4 to 15, while conveyor belts increased from 2 to 5.
    • Taxi tracks and airport gates were expanded from 4 to 11.

     

    1. Enhanced Passenger Experience
    • Boarding bridges increased from 2 to 6 for smoother passenger movement.
    • New lounges, a childcare room, and additional F&B counters were introduced.
    • The UDAN Yatri Café was established for affordable food options.
    • Meet-and-greet services were launched for differently-abled passengers.
    • Prepaid taxi counters and city bus services were introduced in collaboration with the UP Government.

     

    1. Safety & Medical Facilities
    • Security infrastructure was strengthened with additional aerobridges and door-framed metal detectors.
    • Ambulances and air ambulance services were deployed to handle medical emergencies.
    • Arriving pilgrims were given a floral welcome, enhancing their spiritual journey.

    Ensuring Food Availability and Safety

    The Union Government and Uttar Pradesh government have taken multiple measures to provide affordable food and ensure food safety at Maha Kumbh 2025. Subsidized rations, free meals, and stringent food safety protocols are in place to cater to millions of devotees.

     

    1. Subsidized Ration Distribution by NAFED
    • Quality ration at affordable prices distributed across Prayagraj.
    • Over 1000 metric tons of rations provided.
    • 20 mobile vans ensure delivery across Maha Kumbh.
    • Orders via WhatsApp/call on 72757 81810 for doorstep delivery.
    • Subsidized items:
      • Wheat flour & rice (10 kg packets).
      • Moong, masoor, and chana dal (1 kg packets).

     

    1. Free Meal Distribution & Cooking Gas Arrangements
    • 20,000 people served free meals daily.
    • 25,000 new ration cards issued for Maha Kumbh.
    • 35,000+ gas cylinders refilled and 3,500 new connections issued.
    • 5,000 gas cylinders refilled daily to support food preparation.

     

    1. Food Safety Measures by FSSAI & UP Government
    • 5 zones & 25 sectors monitored for food hygiene.
    • 56 Food Safety Officers (FSOs) deployed across the fair.
    • 10 Mobile Food Testing Labs (Food Safety on Wheels) conducting on-the-spot food safety tests.
    • Hotels, dhabas & stalls regularly inspected for hygiene compliance.
    • Public health lab in Varanasi testing food samples from Maha Kumbh.

     

    1. Awareness & Public Engagement
    • FSSAI’s interactive pavilion educating visitors on food safety.
    • Nukkad Natak performances & live quizzes promoting hygiene awareness.
    • Adulteration checks & training sessions for vendors and food businesses.

    Cleanliness and Sanitation

    The Swachh Maha Kumbh Abhiyan has set a benchmark for environmental stewardship, ensuring a cleaner and more sustainable pilgrimage experience.

     

    1. Sanitation Infrastructure
    • 10,200 sanitation workers and 1,800 Ganga Sevadut deployed for cleanliness.
    1. Waste Management Initiatives
    • 22,000 sanitation workers ensuring litter-free fairgrounds.
    • Water treatment initiatives to maintain clean river water for bathing.
    • Strict plastic ban and use of biodegradable cutlery.
    • Thousands of bio-toilets and automated garbage disposal units installed.

     

    1. Major Bathing Days and Cleanliness Efforts
    • Basant Panchami (Feb 14, 2025):
      • 2.33 crore devotees took a dip in the Triveni Sangam.
      • 15,000 sanitation workers and 2,500 Ganga Seva Doots deployed.
      • Special cleaning of akhada paths and ghats.
      • Quick Response Teams (QRTs) ensured swift waste removal.
    • Magh Purnima (Feb 24, 2025):
      • Over 2 crore devotees participated.
      • Overnight cleaning drive restored ghats and fairgrounds.
      • Special cleaning vehicles and cesspool operations maintained sanitation.

     

    1. Sanitation and Waste Disposal System
    • 12,000 FRP toilets with septic tanks.
    • 16,100 prefabricated steel toilets with soak pits.
    • 20,000 community urinals installed.
    • 20,000 trash bins and 37.75 lakh liner bags for waste collection.
    • Special sanitation teams clearing waste post-major rituals.

     

    1. Miyawaki Forests: A Green Initiative
    • 119,700 saplings of 63 species planted in 2023-24 across 34,200 sqm.
    • Buswar dumping yard transformed into a green zone with 27,000 saplings.
    • Species planted: Mango, neem, peepal, tamarind, tulsi, gulmohar, and medicinal plants.

     

    1. Public Participation and Awareness
    • Swachhata Rath Yatra promoting cleanliness.
    • Street plays, musical performances, and public address systems spreading awareness.
    • Waste disposal initiatives: Segregation at source and organized garbage collection.

     

    1. River Cleaning with Trash Skimmer Machines
    • Two machines remove 10-15 tons of waste daily from Ganga and Yamuna.
    • Machine capacity: 13 cubic meters, covering a 4 km stretch of the river.
    • Waste disposal at Naini plant, plastic sent for recycling, and organic waste composted.

     

    1. Welfare of Sanitation Workers
    • Sanitation colonies with housing and amenities.
    • Primary schools for workers’ children under Vidya Kumbh initiative.
    • Proper food, accommodation, and timely wages ensured.

    Water Supply

    A large-scale arrangement for clean and pure drinking water has been made for millions of pilgrims coming from across the country and abroad at the Maha Kumbh:

    • 233 Water ATMs installed across the Mela area, operational 24/7.
    • RO (Reverse Osmosis) purified water provided to pilgrims.
    • Over 40 lakh pilgrims benefited from these Water ATMs between January 21 and February 1, 2025.
    • Initially, water was available at ₹1 per liter via coins or UPI payments, but now it is completely free.
    • Each ATM is equipped with sensor-based monitoring to detect faults.
    • SIM-based technology ensures connectivity with the administration’s central network.
    • Each ATM dispenses 12,000 to 15,000 liters of RO water daily.
    • On-site operators ensure smooth functioning and quick resolution of technical issues.
    • Pilgrims must refill bottles instead of using plastic, reducing waste.
    • Water supply arrangements focus on cleanliness and sustainability.
    • Technical teams monitor ATMs to ensure uninterrupted service.

     

    International Bird Festival

    This festival blended science, nature, and culture, inspiring conservation efforts and sustainable development.

    • Date & Venue: February 16-18, 2025, in Prayagraj.
    • Bird Species: Over 200 migratory and local birds, including endangered species.
    • Objective: Promote environmental conservation and biodiversity awareness.

     

    Festival Highlights

    • Bird Watching & Awareness
      • Rare birds like Indian Skimmer, Flamingo, and Siberian Crane.
      • Thousands of migratory birds from Siberia, Mongolia, Afghanistan, and other regions.
      • Eco-tourism plan for devotees, featuring expert-led bird walks and nature walks.
    • Competitions & Activities
      • Photography, painting, slogan writing, debates, and quizzes.
      • Prizes worth ₹21 lakhs (₹10,000 to ₹5 lakhs).
    • Expert Insights
      • Ornithologists, environmentalists, and conservation experts in technical sessions.
      • Discussions on bird migration, habitat protection, climate change impact.
    • Cultural & Educational Programs
      • Street plays, art exhibitions, and cultural performances on biodiversity.
      • Student participation in conservation activities for hands-on learning.

    List of Notable Personalities at Maha Kumbh

     

    Various well-known personalities visited Prayagraj to take a dip in the holy Triveni Sangam. These include:

    • Hon. President of India Smt. Droupadi Murmu
    • Prime Minister Shri Narendra Modi
    • Home Minister Shri Amit Shah
    • Defense Minister Shri Rajnath Singh
    • Governor of Uttar Pradesh Smt. Anandiben Patel
    • UP Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath & Cabinet Ministers
    • Chief Ministers:
      • Rajasthan – Shri Bhajan Lal Sharma
      • Haryana – Shri Nayab Singh Saini
      • Manipur – Shri N. Biren Singh
      • Gujarat – Shri Bhupendra Patel
    • Union Ministers:
      • Shri Gajendra Singh Shekhawat
      • Shri Arjun Ram Meghwal
      • Shri Shripad Naik
    • Members of Parliament:
      • Dr. Sudhanshu Trivedi
      • Shri Anurag Thakur
      • Smt. Sudha Murthy
      • Shri Ravi Kishan
    • Sports & Entertainment Personalities
    • Olympic Medalist Saina Nehwal
    • Cricketer Suresh Raina
    • International Wrestler Khali
    • Renowned Poet Kumar Vishwas
    • Choreographer Remo D’Souza
    • Bollywood Actress Katrina Kaif
    • Bollywood Actress Raveena Tandon

    Kalagram

    Kalagram, set up by the Ministry of Culture in Sector-7 of the Maha Kumbh district, is a vibrant cultural village showcasing India’s rich heritage. Designed around the themes of Craft, Cuisines, and Culture, it offers an immersive experience through performances, exhibitions, and interactive zones. The space brings together traditional arts, folk performances, digital storytelling, and culinary delights, making it a must-visit for devotees and tourists. The exhibition featured performances by nearly 15,000 artists from different parts of the country.

     

    Key Highlights of Kalagram

    • Grand Entrance: 635 ft wide, 54 ft high façade depicting 12 Jyotirlingas and Lord Shiva consuming Halahal.
    • Massive Stage: 104 ft wide and 72 ft deep, themed on Char Dham.
    • Performances: 14,632 artists perform daily on multiple stages.
    • Anubhuti Mandapam: 360° immersive experience narrating the descent of Ganga.
    • Aviral Shashwat Kumbh: Digital exhibition by ASI, NAI, and IGNCA on Kumbh’s history.
    • Food Zone: Offers satvik cuisine from different regions and Prayagraj’s local delicacies.
    • Sanskriti Aangans: Handicrafts and handlooms by 98 artisans from seven Zonal Cultural Centres.

    International Tourism at Maha Kumbh

    The Maha Kumbh 2025 in Prayagraj emerged as a global phenomenon, attracting foreign tourists, travel writers, and spiritual seekers from various countries. The Uttar Pradesh government and the Ministry of Tourism implemented extensive initiatives to facilitate international participation, promote cultural exchange, and position the event on the world tourism map.

     

    1. International Participation and Tourism Initiatives
    • A group of British travel writers visited the Maha Kumbh on February 25–26, 2025, exploring religious, historical, and cultural sites in Prayagraj.
    • Special plans were executed to provide accommodation, guided tours, digital information centers, and cultural programs for foreign visitors.
    • The delegation also visited Prayagraj Fort, Anand Bhawan, Akshayavat, Alfred Park, and the Sangam area, along with trips to Ayodhya, Varanasi, and Lucknow.

     

    1. Foreign Tourists and Cultural Engagement
    • Pilgrims and tourists from South Korea, Japan, Spain, Russia, the United States, and other nations participated in the festival.
    • Many engaged with local guides at the Sangam Ghat to understand the spiritual and cultural significance of the event.
    • A visitor from Spain described the experience as a “once-in-a-lifetime opportunity.”
    • Foreign devotees actively participated in the rituals and ceremonies, with many international sadhus and sanyasis taking the holy dip.

     

    1. Maha Kumbh as a Global Cultural Brand
    • The event was promoted as part of the “Brand UP” vision, highlighting Uttar Pradesh’s potential for tourism and investment.
    • The Uttar Pradesh government engaged with global tourism and hospitality stakeholders at international fairs to foster sustainable tourism and investment opportunities.
    • The strategic engagement aimed to enhance India’s reputation as a land of spirituality and innovation.

     

    1. Promotion at International Tourism Fairs
    • Maha Kumbh 2025 was showcased at FITUR in Madrid, Spain (January 24–28, 2025) and ITB Berlin, Germany (March 4–6, 2025).
    • Special 40-square-meter pavilions were set up to display Uttar Pradesh’s cultural heritage and attract global tourists.
    • VVIP lounges facilitated B2B and B2C interactions, ensuring international collaborations.
    • Promotional materials in multiple languages helped reach a diverse global audience.

     

    1. Digital Maha Kumbh and Global Engagement
    • The event’s official website saw 33 lakh visitors from 183 countries in the first week of January.
    • Visitors from 6,206 cities worldwide accessed the platform, with India, the United States, Britain, Canada, and Germany leading the traffic.
    • The technical team managing the site reported a surge in global traffic, with millions of daily users exploring content on Maha Kumbh’s history and spiritual significance.
    • The digital initiative ensured seamless access to information, enabling visitors to focus on the spiritual aspects of the festival without logistical challenges.

     

    1. Incredible India Pavilion and Tourist Services
    • On January 12, 2025, the Ministry of Tourism set up the Incredible India Pavilion, a 5,000 sq. ft. immersive space at Maha Kumbh.
    • The pavilion facilitated foreign tourists, scholars, researchers, journalists, photographers, and the Indian diaspora.
    • The Dekho Apna Desh People’s Choice Poll allowed visitors to vote for their favorite tourism destinations in India.
    • A dedicated toll-free Tourist Infoline (1800111363 or 1363) was launched, operating in 10 international languages and Indian regional languages like Tamil, Telugu, Kannada, Bengali, Assamese, and Marathi.

     

    1. Luxury Accommodation and Travel Packages
    • The Ministry of Tourism collaborated with UPSTDC, IRCTC, and ITDC to provide curated tour packages and luxury accommodations.
    • ITDC set up 80 luxury accommodations at Tent City, Prayagraj, while IRCTC introduced luxury tents for the convenience of international tourists.
    • A digital brochure detailing the tour packages was widely circulated through Indian Missions and India Tourism Offices to reach a broader audience.

     

    Through these extensive efforts, Maha Kumbh 2025 successfully established itself as a global spiritual and cultural event, reinforcing Uttar Pradesh’s identity as a premier destination for religious tourism and international investment.

    Key Exhibitions at Maha Kumbh

    The Maha Kumbh Mela 2025 featured a vast array of exhibitions designed to showcase India’s rich cultural, artistic, and spiritual heritage. These exhibitions provided visitors and pilgrims with a unique opportunity to engage with the traditions, crafts, and historical narratives of India.

     

    1. Kumbh Gram (Sector 7) Exhibitions

    A specially curated space in Sector 7 of Kumbh Gram hosted several exhibitions reflecting the diverse aspects of India’s heritage, handicrafts, tourism, and disaster preparedness. These included:

    • Khadi Gramodyog Exhibition: Displaying the significance of khadi and village industries, promoting indigenous craftsmanship and self-reliance.
    • One District One Product (ODOP) Pavilion: Showcasing district-specific products from Uttar Pradesh, supporting local artisans and businesses.
    • Uttar Pradesh Darshan Mandapam: A visual journey through the major cultural and religious sites of Uttar Pradesh.
    • Incredible India Kala Gram: Featuring a vast collection of artistic works that celebrated India’s folk and traditional art forms.
    • Chhattisgarh Exhibition: Presenting the unique cultural and traditional aspects of Chhattisgarh, including tribal art and crafts.
    • Uttar Pradesh Tourism Exhibition: Highlighting major tourist destinations within Uttar Pradesh, encouraging travel and exploration.
    • North Central Zone Cultural Centre (NCZCC) Pavilion: Dedicated to promoting the region’s diverse cultural performances, arts, and heritage.
    • National Disaster Management Authority (NDMA) Exhibition: Educating visitors on disaster preparedness, resilience, and emergency response mechanisms.

    2. ‘Bhagwat’ Exhibition at Allahabad Museum

    Union Minister Gajendra Singh Shekhawat inaugurated the ‘Bhagwat’ exhibition at the Allahabad Museum, an initiative that showcased a remarkable collection of miniature paintings inspired by the Bhagwat. The exhibition presented intricate depictions of significant events from the Bhagwat, offering visitors a deep insight into India’s spiritual and artistic traditions.

    3. ‘Aviral Shashvat Kumbh’ Exhibition

    This exhibition provided a historical perspective on the Kumbh Mela, tracing its origins and evolution over centuries. Featuring artifacts, digital displays, and informational posters, ‘Aviral Shashvat Kumbh’ aimed to educate visitors on the enduring legacy of this grand festival and its role in India’s spiritual landscape.

    The exhibitions at Maha Kumbh 2025 not only enhanced the spiritual experience of pilgrims but also served as a window into India’s rich cultural heritage. Through a blend of traditional artistry, historical retrospectives, and interactive showcases, these exhibitions played a crucial role in making Maha Kumbh 2025 an enriching and memorable event for millions of attendees.

    Telecom at Maha Kumbh: BSNL

    Under the Atmanirbhar Bharat initiative, Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited (BSNL) played a crucial role in strengthening the communication infrastructure at the Maha Kumbh 2025, ensuring reliable connectivity for millions of pilgrims, administrative officials, security forces, and volunteers. A dedicated customer service center was set up in the Mela area, where visitors received on-site assistance, complaint resolution, and uninterrupted communication services.

    Pilgrims from different parts of the country were provided with free SIM cards from their respective circles. If any pilgrim lost or damaged their SIM card, they did not need to return to their home state, as BSNL had arranged for SIM cards from all circles across the country to be available in the Mela area. This service was provided free of charge, allowing devotees to stay connected with their families throughout the event.

    BSNL established a camp office at Lal Road, Sector-2, from where all communication services were managed. There was a significant increase in demand for fiber connections, leased line connections, and mobile recharges during the Kumbh, and BSNL ensured the availability of SIM cards from different states, benefiting both pilgrims and security personnel.

    To guarantee uninterrupted communication, BSNL activated a total of 90 BTS towers in the Mela area:

    • 30 BTS towers operating on the 700 MHz 4G band
    • 30 BTS towers on the 2100 MHz band
    • 30 BTS towers with 2G-enabled connectivity

     

    Additionally, BSNL provided several advanced communication services, including:

    • Internet leased lines
    • Wi-Fi hotspots
    • High-speed internet (FTTH)
    • Webcasting
    • SD-WAN services
    • Bulk SMS services
    • M2M SIMs
    • Satellite phone services

     

    Through these initiatives, BSNL ensured seamless communication throughout the Mahakumbh 2025, supporting both the public and the administrative machinery in managing the grand event efficiently.

    Akharas at Maha Kumbh

    In Maha Kumbh 2025, the Akharas played a significant role, representing various traditions and sects of Sanatan Dharma. The word ‘Akhara’ originates from ‘Akhand,’ meaning indivisible. These religious institutions have existed since the 6th century during the time of Adi Guru Shankaracharya and have been the custodians of spiritual practices and rituals at the Kumbh Mela.

     

    A total of 13 Akharas participated in this Maha Kumbh, including the Kinnar Akhara, Dashnam Sannyasini Akhara, and Mahila Akhara, symbolizing gender equality and a progressive outlook. The grand processions and sacred rituals of the Akharas were among the main attractions of the event, inspiring millions of devotees toward spiritual growth, discipline, and unity.

    These institutions not only preserved the spiritual and cultural values of Sanatan Dharma but also embraced modern sensibilities by promoting inclusivity and equality. The presence of the Akharas at Maha Kumbh fostered unity across caste, religion, and cultural diversity, making the event a symbol of spiritual and cultural enrichment.

    Green Maha Kumbh: A National-Level Environmental Discussion

    The Green Maha Kumbh was held on January 31, 2025, as a significant platform to promote environmental awareness alongside cultural and spiritual traditions. The event brought together over 1,000 environmental and water conservation experts from across the country. It was organized as part of the Gyan Maha Kumbh – 2081 series by Shiksha Sanskriti Utthan Nyas.

    The discussions at the Green Maha Kumbh focused on:

    • Issues related to nature, the environment, water, and cleanliness.
    • Maintaining the balance of the five elements of nature.
    • Sharing best practices in environmental conservation and cleanliness.
    • Strategies to engage devotees in sustainability efforts during Maha Kumbh.

     

    Experts from various fields shared their insights and experiences on tackling environmental challenges and implementing eco-friendly solutions. Additionally, the discussions explored ways to raise awareness among visitors about environmental protection, promoting initiatives that ensured a cleaner and greener Maha Kumbh. The event reinforced the vision of an environmentally responsible Maha Kumbh, setting a precedent for sustainable practices in future religious gatherings.

    Netra Kumbh

     

    Maha Kumbh 2025 witnessed several record-breaking initiatives, with a significant focus on healthcare and social welfare. One of the most remarkable efforts was the Netra Kumbh, a massive eye care initiative aimed at combating vision impairment. Spanning 10 acres in Sector 5 near Nagvasuki, the event set new benchmarks in eye testing and spectacle distribution, striving to secure a place in the Guinness Book of World Records.

    • Record-Breaking Eye Tests & Spectacles: Over 5 lakh people underwent eye tests, and 3 lakh spectacles were distributed.
    • Daily OPD & Facilities: The Netra Kumbh had 11 hangars, offering 10,000 consultations daily with specialists and optometrists.
    • Previous Achievement: The earlier Netra Kumbh secured a place in the Limca Book of Records.
    • Aim for Guinness World Record: The 2025 event sought to surpass previous achievements and enter the Guinness Book of World Records.
    • Eye Donation Camp: Encouraged donations to help reduce blindness, addressing corneal issues affecting over 15 million people in India.

     

    BHASHINI in Maha Kumbh

    At Maha Kumbh 2025, the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MeitY) successfully leveraged BHASHINI, a revolutionary initiative under the Digital India program, to overcome language barriers and enhance communication. By offering multilingual access in 11 Indian languages, BHASHINI transformed information dissemination, navigation, emergency response, and governance, ensuring a seamless experience for millions of pilgrims. Additionally, the Kumbh Sah’AI’yak chatbot, powered by AI, provided real-time assistance, making Maha Kumbh 2025 more accessible and technologically advanced than ever before.

    BHASHINI’s Role in Maha Kumbh 2025:

    1. Real-Time Information Dissemination: Announcements, event schedules, and safety guidelines were translated into 11 Indian languages, enabling pilgrims to stay informed regardless of their native language.
    2. Simplified Navigation: BHASHINI’s speech-to-text, text-to-speech tools, and multilingual chatbot, integrated with mobile applications and kiosks, assisted devotees in finding their way.
    3. Accessible Emergency Services: The CONVERSE feature helped pilgrims communicate with the 112-emergency helpline in their native languages, in collaboration with the UP Police.
    4. E-Governance Support: Authorities used BHASHINI to effectively communicate regulations, guidelines, and public service announcements to a diverse audience.
    5. Lost and Found Assistance: BHASHINI’s Digital Lost & Found Solution enabled visitors to register lost or found items using voice inputs, with real-time translations simplifying the process.

     

    Kumbh Sah’AI’yak Chatbot:

    • Launched by Prime Minister Narendra Modi, this AI-powered, multilingual, voice-enabled chatbot played a crucial role in assisting pilgrims.
    • Powered by advanced AI technologies like Llama LLM, it provided real-time navigation and event-related information.
    • BHASHINI’s language translation enabled the chatbot to function in Hindi, English, and nine other Indian languages, ensuring inclusivity and accessibility.

     

    Akashvani’s Kumbhvani

     

    In a significant initiative to keep devotees and pilgrims informed, Akashvani’s Kumbhvani News Bulletins were broadcasted live through the public address system in Mahakumbh Nagar in Prayagraj, Uttar Pradesh. The first Kumbhvani News Bulletin was aired on public address system today i.e. 18.01.2025 at 8:30 am. The Kumbhvani news bulletins were broadcasted three times a day, at 8:30-8:40 am, 2:30-2:40 pm, and 8:30-8:40 pm, providing updates on various activities related to the Mahakumbh Mela. Additionally, devotees could also tune in to Kumbhvani news bulletins on 103.5 MHz frequency in Prayagraj.

     

    References

    https://pib.gov.in/EventDetail.aspx?ID=1197&reg=3&lang=1

    https://www.instagram.com/airnewsalerts/p/DE3txwqIpRQ/

    Click here to see PDF:

    Santosh Kumar | Sarla Meena | Rishita Aggarwal

    (Release ID: 2106476)

    MIL OSI Asia Pacific News –

    February 27, 2025
  • MIL-OSI Asia-Pac: Union Minister Shri Sarbananda Sonowal to Chair Post-Budget Industry Meet on February 27, 2025

    Source: Government of India

    Union Minister Shri Sarbananda Sonowal to Chair Post-Budget Industry Meet on February 27, 2025

    Major Maritime initiatives to be announced in Mumbai

    Posted On: 26 FEB 2025 7:25PM by PIB Delhi

    Union Minister of Ports, Shipping and Waterways, Shri Sarbananda Sonowal will chair a high-level industry consultation in Mumbai on February 27, 2025 (Thursday). The event will bring together industry leaders, government officials, and stakeholders to discuss key maritime sector announcements from Union Budget 2025 and their impact on India’s maritime growth.

    Senior officials of the Ministry of Ports, Shipping, and Waterways (MoPSW), including the Secretary (MoPSW), port authorities, all subordinate organisations, Consulate Generals of major maritime nations, maritime associations, and major maritime industry stalwarts will participate in discussions on modernising maritime infrastructure, improving operational efficiency, and promoting sustainability in the sector.

    Strategic Dialogue on Budget-2025

    • Establishment of the ₹25,000 crore Maritime Development Fund (MDF): This fund aims to support long-term investments in the sector, with the government contributing 49% and the remaining 51% mobilised from ports and private sector investments.
    • Introduction of the Revamped Shipbuilding Financial Assistance Policy (SBFAP 2.0): With an outlay of ₹18,090 crore, this policy will strengthen domestic shipyards and enhance their global competitiveness.
    • Large ships are classified as infrastructure assets to facilitate long-term, low-cost financing.

    New Maritime Initiatives-2025

    • Global Maritime India Summit and Sagarmanthan: The Great Oceans Dialogue: The Union Minister will announce the dates for these significant events aimed at strengthening India’s global maritime leadership.
    • Major maritime initiatives: The Union Minister will also announce initiatives aimed at further strengthening India’s position as a global maritime leader.

    Technical Sessions on Shipbuilding & Shipbreaking

    The event will feature focused discussions on shipbuilding and shipbreaking policies:

    • Session 1: Key Union Budget announcements on shipbuilding, including financial assistance policies led by industry leaders and government representatives.
    • Session 2: Financial and policy support for shipbuilding clusters, shipbreaking regulations, and capital assistance for infrastructure development.
    • Session 3: Future strategies for shipbuilding, incentives for industry growth, and expansion of shipbreaking operations.

    Key Attendees

    The event will see participation from leading organisations, including:

    • All major Industry Associations like FICCI, CII, ASSOCHAM, PHCCI, FIEO, etc.
    • All major Maritime related Associations like INSA, ICCSA, MASSA, CSLA, CFSAI, Shipyards Association of India, etc.
    • All major, international and national, shipping lines, Port & Terminal Operators, Shipyards, Freight forwarders, Stevedores, Cruise & Ferry operators, etc.
    • Major PSUs associated with ports and shipbuilding like those of Defence, MoPNG, etc.
    • Domestic and Foreign Banks, Financial Institutions and Funds.

    ***

     

    G.D. Hallikeri / Henry

    (Release ID: 2106477) Visitor Counter : 69

    MIL OSI Asia Pacific News –

    February 27, 2025
  • MIL-OSI: LIS Technologies Inc. Appoints Preeminent Researcher Neil Campbell, Ph.D., as its Chairman of the Advisory Board for Laser Innovation and Modeling

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    Oak Ridge, Tennessee, Feb. 26, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — LIS Technologies Inc. (“LIST” or “the Company”), a proprietary developer of advanced laser technology and the only USA-origin and patented laser uranium enrichment company, today announced that it has appointed Neil Campbell, Ph.D., as its Chairman of the Advisory Board for Laser Innovation and Modeling.

    “I am delighted to join LIS Technologies at this pivotal moment for the U.S. nuclear energy industry,” said Dr. Neil Campbell, Chairman of the Advisory Board for Laser Innovation and Modeling of LIS Technologies Inc. “The Company’s strong technical and leadership teams provide a solid foundation, and I look forward to contributing my own expertise to help ensure timely advancement to the next phase of development and, ultimately, demonstration.”

    Neil Campbell, Ph.D. possesses extensive expertise in laser technology, optics, pulse power, and fluid dynamics. He has been engaged extensively in laser development, spectrally from the ultraviolet through to the longwave infrared across chemical, gas and solid-state lasers -these being discharge, photolytically, relativistic electron beam, flashlamp, optically pumped molecular and diode laser excited. His work has been primarily within the research and development arena, for national and university laboratories, industry and defense, and including organizations such as the Atomic Energy Corporation of South Africa, the Council for Scientific and Industrial Research of South Africa, Grintek Avitronics, ARMSCOR, Applied Research Associates, and the University of New Mexico. Dr. Campbell also dedicates substantial time to mentoring master’s and doctoral students.

    Figure 1 – LIS Technologies Inc. Appoints Dr. Neil Campbell as its Chairman of the Advisory Board for Laser Innovation and Modeling.

    For several decades, Dr. Campbell’s efforts have been directed at alternate pump solutions for selected molecular lasers, with the goal of enabling a disruptive change in specific systems’ capability and performance envelopes. The goal has been to access much needed practical operational domain gains and performance parameters not currently viable via existing laser approaches. He holds eight patents, of which a subset focused on molecular lasers have been the subject of a successful, multi-year Department of Defense–funded research and development program. This laser technology holds promise for medical, energy, and extreme light science applications.

    “Neil’s addition is an important milestone for the Company, bringing on board a seasoned leader to advance our technology to the next phase,” said Jay Yu, Executive Chairman and President of LIS Technologies Inc. “The demand for our proprietary CRISLA technology has never been greater in the United States, as the government moves to strengthen its domestic capabilities and reclaim a leadership role in the nuclear energy sector. With Neil on board, LIST is positioned to capitalize on this growing momentum, and I’m confident his leadership will be invaluable as we continue to advance this vital technology to market.”

    Dr. Campbell is the most recent addition to the Company’s Laser Tiger Team and he will play a crucial role in the advancement of the Company’s proprietary technology following its recent selection as one of six companies to participate in the Low-Enriched Uranium (LEU) Enrichment Acquisition Program, worth up to $3.4 billion overall, with contracts lasting for up to 10 years. LIST’s Condensation Repression Isotope Selective Laser Activation (CRISLA) technology is the world’s only proven US-origin and patented advanced laser enrichment solution. Optimized for Low-Enriched Uranium (LEU), which is crucial for the continued operation of the United States’ current fleet of 94 nuclear reactors, and High-Assay Low-Enriched Uranium (HALEU), which is required to power the next generation of advanced nuclear reactors, CRISLA overcomes many of the complexities and limitations of traditional 16µm CO2 lasers, featuring a streamlined design due to its lower absorption and shorter wavelength at 5.3µm.

    With high throughput, high duty cycle and reduced complexity compared to competing technologies, the Company projects highly competitive capital and operational costs. Demonstrated in the 1980s and 90s, this technology is protected by a patent from the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO).

    “It is a pleasure to welcome Dr. Campbell to the team,” said Christo Liebenberg, CEO of LIS Technologies Inc. “I have known Neil as a brilliant Laser Scientist dating back to our MLIS days at the Atomic Energy Corporation of South Africa in the 80’s and 90’s. His laser expertise will be immensely valuable as we move toward scaling our current infrared lasers that will be used in test loop demonstrations of our CRISLA technology. I also look forward to seeing how Neil will leverage his modeling skills to strengthen our future laser engineering efforts, and collaborate with him to position LIS Technologies at the forefront of this innovative and burgeoning industry.”

    About LIS Technologies Inc.

    LIS Technologies Inc. (LIST) is a USA based, proprietary developer of a patented advanced laser technology, making use of infrared lasers to selectively excite the molecules of desired isotopes to separate them from other isotopes. The Laser Isotope Separation Technology (L.I.S.T) has a huge range of applications, including being the only USA-origin (and patented) laser uranium enrichment company, and several major advantages over traditional methods such as gas diffusion, centrifuges, and prior art laser enrichment. The LIST proprietary laser-based process is more energy-efficient and has the potential to be deployed with highly competitive capital and operational costs. L.I.S.T is optimized for LEU (Low Enriched Uranium) for existing civilian nuclear power plants, High-Assay LEU (HALEU) for the next generation of Small Modular Reactors (SMR) and Microreactors, the production of stable isotopes for medical and scientific research, and applications in quantum computing manufacturing for semiconductor technologies. The Company employs a world class nuclear technical team working alongside leading nuclear entrepreneurs and industry professionals, possessing strong relationships with government and private nuclear industries.

    In 2024, LIS Technologies Inc. was selected as one of six domestic companies to participate in the Low-Enriched Uranium (LEU) Enrichment Acquisition Program. This initiative allocates up to $3.4 billion overall, with contracts lasting for up to 10 years. Each awardee is slated to receive a minimum contract of $2 million.

    For more information please visit: LaserIsTech.com

    For further information, please contact:
    Email: info@laseristech.com
    Telephone: 800-388-5492
    Follow us on X Platform
    Follow us on LinkedIn

    Forward Looking Statements

    This news release contains “forward-looking statements” within the meaning of Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. In this context, forward-looking statements mean statements related to future events, which may impact our expected future business and financial performance, and often contain words such as “expects”, “anticipates”, “intends”, “plans”, “believes”, “will”, “should”, “could”, “would” or “may” and other words of similar meaning. These forward-looking statements are based on information available to us as of the date of this news release and represent management’s current views and assumptions. Forward-looking statements are not guarantees of future performance, events or results and involve known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors, which may be beyond our control. For LIS Technologies Inc., particular risks and uncertainties that could cause our actual future results to differ materially from those expressed in our forward-looking statements include but are not limited to the following which are, and will be, exacerbated by any worsening of global business and economic environment: (i) risks related to the development of new or advanced technology, including difficulties with design and testing, cost overruns, development of competitive technology, loss of key individuals and uncertainty of success of patent filing, (ii) our ability to obtain contracts and funding to be able to continue operations and (iii) risks related to uncertainty regarding our ability to commercially deploy a competitive laser enrichment technology, (iv) risks related to the impact of government regulation and policies including by the DOE and the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission; and other risks and uncertainties discussed in this and our other filings with the SEC. Only after successful completion of our Phase 2 Pilot Plant demonstration will LIS Technologies be able to make realistic economic predictions for a Commercial Facility. Readers are cautioned not to place undue reliance on these forward-looking statements, which apply only as of the date of this news release. These factors may not constitute all factors that could cause actual results to differ from those discussed in any forward-looking statement. Accordingly, forward-looking statements should not be relied upon as a predictor of actual results. We do not undertake to update our forward-looking statements to reflect events or circumstances that may arise after the date of this news release, except as required by law.

    Attachment

    • LIS Technologies Inc.

    The MIL Network –

    February 27, 2025
  • MIL-OSI: Frog Knox Begins Highly Anticipated Fair Launch Presale of its Official Token FROX

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    PUNTARENAS, Costa Rica, Feb. 26, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Frog Knox, a highly anticipated meme coin project, has opened the presale of its official token $FROX, a meme-driven culture coin. $FROX aims to set a new benchmark for transparency and fairness to push for a sustainable meme economy. Unlike traditional meme launches often marred by hidden risks, Frog Knox introduces an unprecedented fair launch mechanism, featuring zero team allocation, burnt liquidity, and a strategic reserve to support long-term sustainability, making it one of the most anticipated presales in 2025.

    Amid growing investor concerns about volatility, insider manipulation, and unsustainable token structures, $FROX sets itself as a compelling alternative. “Our model eliminates insider allocations and ensures liquidity burnt, creating a truly level playing field for investors,” says Jorge Alberto Cortez from Frog Knox. “This isn’t a short-term project—it’s designed for lasting impact and long-term community growth.”

    Frog Knox’s unique tokenomics not only offer security against typical market risks but also build a robust meme-driven economy owned and operated by its community. The strategic reserve further guarantees continued reinvestment into the ecosystem, providing ongoing support for growth and expansion.

    Investors now have an exclusive opportunity to participate early through Frog Knox’s live presale of $FROX. To learn more and be a part of the $FROX presale, visit: www.frogknox.com

    About Frog Knox
    Frog Knox is a meme-driven culture coin inspired by the legendary Fort Knox, symbolizing security, strength, and lasting value. Just as Fort Knox protects gold reserves, Frog Knox safeguards and nurtures its own crypto ecosystem. With burnt liquidity, no team tokens, and a steadfast community-driven ethos, Frog Knox is designed for longevity and resilience. The project delivers unique long-term value through strategic rewards, sustained community engagement, and a vibrant, resilient meme culture.

    For updates, join the community of Frog Knox on:
    Telegram: https://t.me/FrogKnox
    X: https://x.com/frogknox

    Media Contact
    Company name: Frog Knox
    Contact person: Jorge Alberto Cortez
    Website: frogknox.com
    Email: marketing@frogknox.com

    Disclaimer: This press release is provided by Frog Knox. The statements, views, and opinions expressed in this content are solely those of the content provider and do not necessarily reflect the views of this media platform or its publisher. We do not endorse, verify, or guarantee the accuracy, completeness, or reliability of any information presented. This content is for informational purposes only and should not be considered financial, investment, or trading advice. Investing in crypto and mining related opportunities involves significant risks, including the potential loss of capital. Readers are strongly encouraged to conduct their own research and consult with a qualified financial advisor before making any investment decisions. However, due to the inherently speculative nature of the blockchain sector–including cryptocurrency, NFTs, and mining–complete accuracy cannot always be guaranteed. Neither the media platform nor the publisher shall be held responsible for any fraudulent activities, misrepresentations, or financial losses arising from the content of this press release.

    A photo accompanying this announcement is available at https://www.globenewswire.com/NewsRoom/AttachmentNg/dbbe9f09-b7f2-4131-a8e9-8adfe8bacfd3

    The MIL Network –

    February 27, 2025
  • MIL-OSI USA: Hawley Reintroduces Bill Blocking Agencies from Partnering with Pro-CCP Consulting Firms

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator Josh Hawley (R-Mo)

    Wednesday, February 26, 2025

     Today, U.S. Senator Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) reintroduced his legislation to prohibit the Department of Defense and other federal agencies from contracting with consulting firms, like McKinsey & Company, which provides services to the Chinese government or its affiliates while being contracted by the United States government. The Time to Choose Act would force these firms to choose whether to stand with the U.S. in its efforts to protect America against China’s global ambitions, or forfeit U.S. government contracts entirely.

    This bipartisan legislation passed the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee with strong bipartisan support in the 118th Congress. Senator Gary Peters (D-Mich.) and Senator Rick Scott (R-Fla.) are both original cosponsors. 

    “For too long, these companies have basked in the financial security of government contracts while actively undermining our own national security,” said Senator Hawley. “It is unconscionable that we’ve allowed them to sell us out to the Chinese Communist Party by advancing their agenda rather than putting America’s interests first. My bill would bring that to an end.” 

    “The Chinese Communist Party is actively working to undermine our country at every turn,” said Senator Peters. “This commonsense, bipartisan bill would prohibit companies that are providing consulting services to the Chinese government from receiving highly competitive government contracts, paid for by American taxpayers, to protect both our national security and our competitive edge in the global economy.”

    “Any firm who wants to help, support or represent Communist China’s best interests clearly is choosing to work against America’s best interests and choosing to forfeit access to federal tax dollars. It’s a clear conflict of interest,” said Senator Scott. “The Chinese Communist Party is one of our greatest adversaries, hellbent on destroying our way of life, crippling our industries and spying on our citizens. Our bill, the Time to Choose Act, requires firms to make a choice: support the freedom-loving United States or support the regime in Communist China. There’s no in between.”

    The Time to Choose Act would:

    • Prohibit federal agencies from contracting with consulting firms that hold a contract with the Chinese government and other foreign adversaries.
    • Impose penalties on consulting firms that intentionally hide or misrepresent contracts with the Chinese government and other foreign adversaries, including:
      • Terminating affected federal contracts.
      • Debarring relevant firms from future work with the federal government.
      • Requiring relevant firms to pay damages equivalent to three times the amount spent by the U.S. government on the contracts.

    Read the full bill text here.

    MIL OSI USA News –

    February 27, 2025
  • MIL-OSI USA: Fischer Questions Michael Kratsios and Mark Meador at Nomination Hearing

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Nebraska Deb Fischer

    U.S. Senator Deb Fischer (R-Neb.), a member of the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation, questioned two of President Trump’s nominees: Mr. Michael Kratsios, nominated to be the Director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP), and Mr. Mark Meador, nominated to be a Federal Trade Commissioner.

    During the hearing, Senator Fischer asked Mr. Kratsios about emerging technologies and the Department of Defense’s essential role in shaping national spectrum policy, especially given its unique testing abilities for wireless technology. She also asked about the lessons learned from the America’s Mid-Band Initiative Team (AMBIT) spectrum auction.

    Additionally, Senator Fischer questioned Mr. Meador about how he would effectively use agency resources to uphold the Federal Trade Commission’s (FTC) mission. She emphasized the importance of the FTC’s coordination with the Department of Justice (DOJ) on enforcement efforts to protect consumers.

    Click the image above to watch a video of Senator Fischer’s questioning

    Click here to download audio

    Click here to download video

    On the DoD’s Cutting-Edge Spectrum Testing and Innovation:

    Senator Fischer: Mr. Kratsios, I welcome your enthusiasm for advancing American leadership on emerging technologies. As you know, OSTP is responsible for coordinating science and tech policy among federal agencies. 

    When you were the United States Chief Technology Officer, one of your focuses was advancing DoD’s unique testing abilities to drive innovation. And at the time, you stated that the Department of Defense is “at the forefront of cutting-edge 5G testing and experimentation.” Do you still believe that?

    Michael Kratsios: I do, yes.

    Senator Fischer: 
    And when it comes to 5G and other spectrum matters, do you believe that DOD testing should be faithfully integrated into a national spectrum policy?

    Michael Kratsios: Yes, DOD is a critical component of the spectrum strategy.

    On AMBIT:

    Senator Fischer: Previously, I understood you were involved with “America’s Mid-Band Initiative Team,” known as AMBIT, and you brought that up a couple times yesterday in our discussion. And so, I looked into it a little bit more to familiarize myself with it. That was an auction of mid-band spectrum held by DOD, and it was to make those licenses available to wireless companies. Is that correct?

    Michael Kratsios: Yes. 

    Senator Fischer: Did the AMBIT auction cause more congestion for defense systems operating in the lower 3 [GHz] band?

    Michael Kratsios: 
    In my opinion, I think AMBIT provided an opportunity for a technical analysis of that spectrum range and find a way to be able to still complete the national security mission by moving some of the workloads that were in the auction band to lower bands. 

    Senator Fischer: 
    So, they had to compress that band even more then in order to accommodate that into the lower 3. Is that correct?

    Michael Kratsios: 
    Yeah, so some of the activities that were in the band that ultimately were auctioned were moved down to lower bands.

    Senator Fischer: 
    I also understand that AMBIT struggled on the back end with major relocation costs from the defense systems that were displaced in that process of compressing them. Is that correct?

    Michael Kratsios: 
    I haven’t tracked the details of that since I left office, but there’s always transition costs associated with freeing up bands, typically.

    Senator Fischer: Are you familiar with any of the costs? Are those readily available, so we can access those? Do you know how that cut into the net revenue that was expected from the auction?

    Michael Kratsios: 
    I’m not familiar with those details, but I can try to see what’s publicly available.

    Senator Fischer: That would be great. 

    On Responsible FTC Enforcement:

    Senator Fischer: 
    Mr. Meador, over the years, the Federal Trade Commission has faced off in court against the deepening pockets of major corporations, especially when it comes to Big Tech. If confirmed, how would you prioritize litigation and effectively use agency resources in upholding the FTC mission?

    Mark Meador: That’s a very important topic. I will say the FTC staff have gotten very good at doing a lot with often much less. If confirmed, my first step will be to consult with the Chairman and the Commissioners and of course, the staff, who understand what challenges they are facing. What do we have on our docket and what resources do we have available? And then we’re collaborating with all of them to determine which cases are the highest priority to protect the largest number of consumers from the gravest threats. 

    On FTC Coordination with the Department of Justice: 

    Senator Fischer: It’s my understanding that at times there can be tension with that enforcement coordination with the Department of Justice. Do you have any comments on that? Or if that would occur, what would you do?

    Mark Meador: Sure, this is something that has happened frequently in the past. Some of it has unfortunately been very public. I’m confident that President Trump has selected leaders for this administration who can work very well together. I think it is of paramount importance that both agencies be singing from the same hymn sheet, be aligned on policy and enforcement decisions, and there should really be no daylight between them when it comes to how they’re enforcing the antitrust laws.

    I think anything is possible if you don’t care who gets the credit. And so, when it comes to merger clearance, we should be focusing on protecting consumers as fast as possible, not trying to get one up on the other agency.

    Senator Fischer: Thank you both for putting yourselves forward to serve in these very dangerous times that we live in. I really appreciate it and thank you to your families as well.

    MIL OSI USA News –

    February 27, 2025
  • MIL-OSI USA: Fischer Questions Stephen Feinberg at Confirmation Hearing on Spectrum Policy

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Nebraska Deb Fischer

    U.S. Senator Deb Fischer (R-Neb.), a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, questioned Stephen Feinberg at the confirmation hearing on his nomination to be Deputy Secretary of Defense.  

    During the hearing, Senator Fischer asked Feinberg whether the Department of Defense deserves a seat at the table in shaping spectrum policy. She also asked him to clarify that, while sharing with commercial entities may be possible, the national security risks posed by forcing the Department to vacate airwaves entirely far outweigh economic considerations.

    Click the image above to watch a video of Senator Fischer’s questioning

    Click here to download audio

    Click here to download video

    On Spectrum Defense:

    Senator Fischer: Mr. Feinberg, there are currently efforts underway to force the Department of Defense to vacate critical bands of spectrum, including the lower 3 band and the 7-8 GHz band, and this would mean that the Department would not be allowed to operate radar systems or satellite systems that allow our warfighters to detect, discriminate, track, and shoot incoming missiles and enemy targets.

    I adamantly believe that forcing national security systems to vacate these bans would be detrimental to national security. It would degrade our missile defense capabilities when we should be aggressively pursuing an Iron Dome for America. That would be off the table if these were vacated. 

    However, I also understand that sharing these bands with commercial entities may be possible. This would potentially allow DoD systems to operate and coexist with commercial systems in the same exact bands without forcing us to lose these capabilities. Do you believe the Department of Defense must have a meaningful co-leadership role in interagency determinations about the future of federal spectrum? Should DoD be at the table to be involved in those decisions?

    Stephen Feinberg: I totally agree we need spectrum to defend our country. We also need commercial use of it to develop the technologies that will defend our country. The best solution is sharing. But we have to get it right, make sure sharing can be done without risk. That needs to get tested, and until that it’s clear that it can be done without risk, we must protect DoD’s spectrum position.

    Senator Fischer: 
    Thank you. It must be clear that it can be done without risk, correct?

    Stephen Feinberg: Yes, Senator, 100 percent. 

    Senator Fischer: Thank you, sir.

    MIL OSI USA News –

    February 27, 2025
  • MIL-OSI: Johanna Bartee Appointed to Boards of First Fed and First Northwest Bancorp

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    PORT ANGELES, Wash., Feb. 26, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — First Northwest Bancorp (NASDAQ: FNWB) and its subsidiary First Fed Bank are pleased to announce the appointment of Johanna Bartee to the Board of Directors for both companies.

    Ms. Bartee brings extensive experience in banking, finance, and economic development, along with a strong commitment to community-driven initiatives across the North Olympic Peninsula.

    “We are thrilled to welcome Johanna to our Board of Directors,” said Matt Deines, President and CEO of First Fed Bank and FNWB. “Her expertise in finance and community development will be invaluable as we continue to serve our customers and communities.”

    Ms. Bartee is the Executive Director of JST Capital, a Native Community Development Financial Institution (CDFI) in Sequim, WA, dedicated to supporting underserved communities. Before founding JST Capital in 2018, she built a successful career in finance, working in institutional banking, investment banking, and business development roles at leading financial firms in New York and Southern California. Prior to completing an MBA at Columbia Business School, she managed large-scale communications and IT security projects as an Account Manager for a Department of Defense contractor in Honolulu, Hawaii.

    Beyond her professional achievements, Ms. Bartee is actively involved in community development. She serves as a Board Director for the Clallam County Opportunity Fund and is a member of the Port Angeles Waterfront District Board, advocating for economic growth and revitalization initiatives.

    Ms. Bartee’s appointment reflects First Fed’s commitment to strengthening its leadership with professionals dedicated to fostering economic and social impact.

    About FNWB

    First Northwest Bancorp (Nasdaq: FNWB) is a financial holding company engaged in investment activities including the business of its subsidiary, First Fed Bank. First Fed is a Pacific Northwest-based financial institution which has served its customers and communities since 1923. Currently First Fed has 18 locations in Washington state including 12 full-service branches. First Fed’s business and operating strategy is focused on building sustainable earnings by delivering a full array of financial products and services for individuals, small businesses, non-profit organizations and commercial customers. In 2022, First Northwest made an investment in The Meriwether Group, LLC, a boutique investment banking and accelerator firm. Additionally, First Northwest focuses on strategic partnerships to provide modern financial services such as digital payments and marketplace lending. First Northwest Bancorp was incorporated in 2012 and completed its initial public offering in 2015 under the ticker symbol FNWB. First Fed is headquartered in Port Angeles, Washington.

    First Fed Bank was recognized by Puget Sound Business Journal as a Best Workplace in 2023 and top Corporate Philanthropist in 2023 and 2024. By popular vote, First Fed received 2024 awards for Best Bank and Best Lender in Best of the Peninsula for Clallam County. First Fed is a Member FDIC and equal housing lender.

    Contact: Matthew P. Deines
    President & CEO
    (360) 457-0461

    The MIL Network –

    February 27, 2025
←Previous Page
1 … 281 282 283 284 285 … 420
Next Page→
NewzIntel.com

NewzIntel.com

MIL Open Source Intelligence

  • Blog
  • About
  • FAQs
  • Authors
  • Events
  • Shop
  • Patterns
  • Themes

Twenty Twenty-Five

Designed with WordPress