Category: Military Intelligence

  • MIL-OSI China: Naval fleet led by Shandong aircraft carrier visit wins praise in Hong Kong

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

    A visitor poses for photos on the aircraft carrier Shandong in Hong Kong, south China, July 5, 2025. [Photo/Xinhua]

    A fleet of the Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) Navy led by the aircraft carrier Shandong made its first visit to Hong Kong, a move widely seen as not only a demonstration of military strength but also a step toward deepening ties between Hong Kong and the mainland.

    The naval fleet, comprising the aircraft carrier Shandong, the Yan’an missile destroyer, the Zhanjiang missile destroyer, and the Yuncheng missile frigate, arrived in Hong Kong on Thursday to begin a five-day visit.

    On the day the naval fleet arrived, hundreds — if not thousands — of Hong Kong residents gathered along the shore to watch. Local media rushed to cover the story.

    Chief executive of China’s Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (HKSAR) John Lee said that both the steadfast presence of the PLA garrison in Hong Kong and the cordial visit by the modernized naval fleet have made the “Pearl of the Orient” shine brighter, reflecting the country’s ability and determination in safeguarding peace, while allowing Hong Kong, under “one country, two systems,” to continue to play its part in the nation’s development.

    Chief Secretary for Administration of the HKSAR government Chan Kwok-ki attended the deck reception on the Shandong aircraft carrier. He believed the visit by the naval fleet allowed the wider public in Hong Kong to witness the strength of the country’s military and would help enhance students’ sense of national identity and pride.

    Deputy Chief Secretary for Administration of the HKSAR government Cheuk Wing-hing shared on social media that he toured the ski-jump flight deck, arresting cables, carrier-based fighter jets, and helicopters aboard the Shandong.

    “The rapid progress of our country’s national defense is truly remarkable,” Cheuk said. “I am deeply moved and feel proud of our nation.”

    The Shandong aircraft carrier was open to the public for visits. Starry Lee, a member of the National People’s Congress Standing Committee, said that this allowed people to experience firsthand the remarkable achievements of the country’s naval modernization, and held significant meaning in fostering a stronger sense of patriotism in Hong Kong society.

    Friday was the first open day of the fleet’s visit to Hong Kong, with a focus on student visitors. More than 10,000 visits were made aboard the Shandong, Zhanjiang, and Yuncheng ships.

    “My ancestral home is Shandong. When I first stepped onto the deck, I couldn’t help but cry. Our country has truly become strong!” a lecturer at Hong Kong Metropolitan University surnamed Wong said.

    Some secondary school students from Macao were organized by their schools to travel to Hong Kong for the visit. They happily toured the ships while taking photos with their smartphones to share with classmates who missed the visit. They said that boarding the warships was more than just a visit; it allowed them to witness the long history of China and the country’s remarkable progress.

    Seeing the modern carrier-based fighter jets and the spirited, high-morale crew aboard the vessels left a deep impression on Paul Chan, financial secretary of the HKSAR government.

    Chan said that the visit by the naval fleet fully reflected the country’s deep affection for Hong Kong. “A strong nation must have a strong military, and our country’s navy will only grow stronger,” he remarked.

    “Stepping aboard the domestically built aircraft carrier Shandong and standing on the deck of this steel giant filled me with excitement,” Jeffrey Lam, a member of the Executive Council of the HKSAR, said.

    Just as the Shandong sailed forward with strength and determination, Hong Kong, with the support of the country, will surely overcome all challenges and continue to enjoy prosperity and stability, Lam added. 

    People visit the Zhanjiang missile destroyer in Hong Kong, south China, July 5, 2025. [Photo/Xinhua]

    MIL OSI China News

  • PM Modi begins historic Argentina visit, holds bilateral talks with President Javier Milei

    Source: Government of India

    Source: Government of India (4)

    Prime Minister Narendra Modi on Saturday began his historic visit to Argentina by paying respects at the statue of General Jose de San Martin, the country’s revered freedom fighter and national hero, in Buenos Aires.

    PM Modi laid a wreath and paid tribute at the San Martin Memorial, marking the first bilateral visit by an Indian Prime Minister to the South American nation in 57 years.

    General Jose de San Martin is recognised as the liberator of Argentina, and the monument was created in 1862 by French sculptor Louis Joseph Daumas. It was the first equestrian statue in Buenos Aires.

    San Martin led crucial phases of Argentina’s struggle for independence between 1813 and 1818 — defeating Spanish forces at the Battle of San Lorenzo, reorganising the Army of the North, becoming Governor of Cuyo, and creating the Army of the Andes, which he led across the mountains into Chile to liberate the neighbouring country from Spanish rule. He later moved north to help liberate Peru in 1820.

    Later, the PM was warmly received by Argentina’s President Javier Milei at the historic Casa Rosada as the two leaders began bilateral engagements.

    PM Modi arrived in Argentina early Saturday on the third leg of his five-nation tour, following visits to Ghana and Trinidad and Tobago earlier in the week. The tour will continue with visits to Brazil (July 5–8) and Namibia (July 9).

    The Prime Minister was accorded a ceremonial welcome ahead of delegation-level talks, followed by a lunch hosted by President Milei in his honour.

    Argentina has been a strategic partner of India since 2019, and the two countries celebrated 75 years of diplomatic relations last year.

    The visit comes at a particularly significant time, as Argentina is undertaking major economic reforms that mirror those India implemented in the past, the Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) noted ahead of the visit.

    Both leaders are expected to discuss economic and trade matters to further strengthen bilateral relations.

    “India’s advancements in defence manufacturing, the space sector, and new areas such as information technology and Digital Public Infrastructure (DPI) can offer valuable expertise. We can share experiences with Argentina. Our expertise in telemedicine and digital healthcare solutions is also on offer to help Argentina expand access to medical services and improve overall quality and cost-effective healthcare delivery,” said MEA Secretary (East) P. Kumaran during a special media briefing ahead of the PM’s visit.

    The leaders are also expected to review ongoing cooperation and explore ways to enhance the India-Argentina partnership in key areas, including defence, agriculture, mining, oil and gas, renewable energy, trade and investment, and people-to-people ties.

    India and Argentina have made significant progress in bilateral cooperation in the mineral resources sector, particularly lithium — a key element in India’s green energy transition. An MoU on cooperation in mineral resources was signed in August 2022, and the first meeting of the Joint Working Group under the MoU was held in January 2025.

    “Argentina holds the world’s second-largest shale gas reserves and the fourth-largest shale oil reserves, along with substantial conventional oil and gas deposits, making it a potentially important energy partner for India. Its rich reserves of critical minerals such as lithium, copper, and rare earth elements complement India’s growing need for secure and sustainable supplies for clean energy and industrial growth. India’s public sector enterprise KABIL has already secured a few concessions in Argentina since 2024. Our leaders will discuss this further,” Kumaran added.

    Notably, India-Argentina bilateral trade more than doubled in three years — from 2019 to 2022 — peaking at USD 6.4 billion in 2022. In 2021 and 2022, India was Argentina’s fourth-largest trading partner. Argentina is a key supplier of edible oils — particularly soybean and sunflower oil — to India. In 2024, total annual bilateral trade rose by 33 percent to USD 5.23 billion, positioning India as Argentina’s fifth-largest trading partner and export destination.

    —IANS

  • MIL-OSI Russia: Egyptian President Reiterates Support for Political Settlement in Libya

    Translation. Region: Russian Federal

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

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

    CAIRO, July 5 (Xinhua) — Egyptian President Abdel-Fattah el-Sisi on Saturday reiterated the importance of reaching a comprehensive political settlement in Libya to hold long-delayed elections, according to a statement released by the Egyptian presidential office.

    A.-F. al-Sisi made the statement during a meeting with the speaker of the eastern Libyan House of Representatives, Aqeela Saleh, during which they discussed the latest developments in the country.

    The President reiterated Egypt’s support for Libya’s national institutions, stressing the importance of preserving the country’s sovereignty and unity. He also noted the need for all foreign forces to withdraw from Libya so that Libyan institutions can stabilize the country.

    A. Saleh, for his part, thanked Egypt for its support for Libya’s unity and institutions, calling it vital for restoring peace and moving towards elections.

    Libya has been in chaos since the overthrow of Muammar Gaddafi in 2011. The country remains divided between the UN-recognised Government of National Accord in Tripoli and an eastern administration backed by the House of Representatives and Khalifa Haftar’s Libyan National Army.

    UN-backed presidential elections scheduled for December 2021 have been postponed due to disagreements over electoral laws and eligibility of candidates, deepening the political crisis. –0–

    MIL OSI Russia News

  • MIL-OSI United Kingdom: Foreign Secretary reiterates UK’s ongoing support to Lebanon

    Source: United Kingdom – Government Statements

    World news story

    Foreign Secretary reiterates UK’s ongoing support to Lebanon

    British Foreign Secretary David Lammy visited Lebanon and reiterated the UK’s ongoing support for Lebanon’s security, stability and future prosperity.

    British Foreign Secretary David Lammy with President Joseph Aoun

    As part of a regional visit, Foreign Secretary David Lammy visits Lebanon on Friday 4 July 2025. He reiterated the UK’s ongoing support for Lebanon’s security, stability and future prosperity. 

    The Foreign Secretary met with President General Joseph Aoun at the Presidential Palace. Discussions focused on the latest local and regional developments and UK-Lebanon bilateral relations.

    The Foreign Secretary spoke about the urgency of efforts to reach a lasting peace in Lebanon and the region. He stressed the importance of Lebanon and Israel implementing the ceasefire agreement in full, including the withdrawal of Israeli Forces and the deployment of the Lebanese Armed Forces (LAF) throughout the South.

    He commended the long-standing and strong bilateral partnership between Lebanon and the UK including with the LAF, both in the South and on the border with Syria. Since 2009, the UK has spent over £115 million to support the LAF with infrastructure, vehicles, training and equipment and since 2013 supported the establishment of the Land Border Regiments (LBRs) on the border with Syria.

    The Foreign Secretary also reiterated the UK’s support for UNIFIL and the role they play for stability in South Lebanon, as mandated in UNSCR 1701.  He called for urgent implementation of essential economic reforms and transparent processes for justice and accountability. 

    British Ambassador Hamish Cowell said:

    I was pleased to welcome British Foreign Secretary David Lammy to Lebanon, following unprecedented regional tensions. 

    Efforts must continue to secure a lasting ceasefire in Lebanon and allow the full deployment of the Lebanese Army to the south of the country, as the sole legitimate defender of Lebanon. 

    Stability in the Middle East is in everyone’s interest. The full implementation of UNSCR 1701 is crucial to Lebanon and the region’s future security.

    Lebanon’s path to recovery is dependent on essential reforms, including those required to secure an IMF agreement to rebuild the economy and unlock international investment.  

    The UK remains a steadfast partner to Lebanon and its people.

    The Foreign Secretary also visited Syria as part of his regional trip. This is the first by a UK Minister in 14 years and renews the UK-Syria diplomatic relationship. The Foreign Secretary met President Al-Sharaa and Foreign Minister Al-Shaibani to reiterate the importance of an inclusive and representative political transition in Syria and offer continued UK support to the Syrian people.

    Updates to this page

    Published 5 July 2025

    MIL OSI United Kingdom

  • PM Modi begins historic Argentina visit by paying tribute to country’s liberator

    Source: Government of India

    Source: Government of India (4)

    Prime Minister Narendra Modi on Saturday began his historic visit to Argentina by paying respects at the statue of General Jose de San Martin, the country’s revered freedom fighter and national hero, in Buenos Aires.

    PM Modi laid a wreath and paid tribute at the San Martin Memorial, marking the first bilateral visit by an Indian Prime Minister to the South American nation in 57 years.

    General Jose de San Martin is recognised as the liberator of Argentina, and the monument was created in 1862 by French sculptor Louis Joseph Daumas. It was the first equestrian statue in Buenos Aires.

    San Martin led crucial phases of Argentina’s struggle for independence between 1813 and 1818 — defeating Spanish forces at the Battle of San Lorenzo, reorganising the Army of the North, becoming Governor of Cuyo, and creating the Army of the Andes, which he led across the mountains into Chile to liberate the neighbouring country from Spanish rule. He later moved north to help liberate Peru in 1820.

    Later, the PM was warmly received by Argentina’s President Javier Milei at the historic Casa Rosada as the two leaders began bilateral engagements.

    PM Modi arrived in Argentina early Saturday on the third leg of his five-nation tour, following visits to Ghana and Trinidad and Tobago earlier in the week. The tour will continue with visits to Brazil (July 5–8) and Namibia (July 9).

    The Prime Minister was accorded a ceremonial welcome ahead of delegation-level talks, followed by a lunch hosted by President Milei in his honour.

    Argentina has been a strategic partner of India since 2019, and the two countries celebrated 75 years of diplomatic relations last year.

    The visit comes at a particularly significant time, as Argentina is undertaking major economic reforms that mirror those India implemented in the past, the Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) noted ahead of the visit.

    Both leaders are expected to discuss economic and trade matters to further strengthen bilateral relations.

    “India’s advancements in defence manufacturing, the space sector, and new areas such as information technology and Digital Public Infrastructure (DPI) can offer valuable expertise. We can share experiences with Argentina. Our expertise in telemedicine and digital healthcare solutions is also on offer to help Argentina expand access to medical services and improve overall quality and cost-effective healthcare delivery,” said MEA Secretary (East) P. Kumaran during a special media briefing ahead of the PM’s visit.

    The leaders are also expected to review ongoing cooperation and explore ways to enhance the India-Argentina partnership in key areas, including defence, agriculture, mining, oil and gas, renewable energy, trade and investment, and people-to-people ties.

    India and Argentina have made significant progress in bilateral cooperation in the mineral resources sector, particularly lithium — a key element in India’s green energy transition. An MoU on cooperation in mineral resources was signed in August 2022, and the first meeting of the Joint Working Group under the MoU was held in January 2025.

    “Argentina holds the world’s second-largest shale gas reserves and the fourth-largest shale oil reserves, along with substantial conventional oil and gas deposits, making it a potentially important energy partner for India. Its rich reserves of critical minerals such as lithium, copper, and rare earth elements complement India’s growing need for secure and sustainable supplies for clean energy and industrial growth. India’s public sector enterprise KABIL has already secured a few concessions in Argentina since 2024. Our leaders will discuss this further,” Kumaran added.

    Notably, India-Argentina bilateral trade more than doubled in three years — from 2019 to 2022 — peaking at USD 6.4 billion in 2022. In 2021 and 2022, India was Argentina’s fourth-largest trading partner. Argentina is a key supplier of edible oils — particularly soybean and sunflower oil — to India. In 2024, total annual bilateral trade rose by 33 percent to USD 5.23 billion, positioning India as Argentina’s fifth-largest trading partner and export destination.

    —IANS

  • PM Modi begins historic Argentina visit by paying tribute to country’s liberator

    Source: Government of India

    Source: Government of India (4)

    Prime Minister Narendra Modi on Saturday began his historic visit to Argentina by paying respects at the statue of General Jose de San Martin, the country’s revered freedom fighter and national hero, in Buenos Aires.

    PM Modi laid a wreath and paid tribute at the San Martin Memorial, marking the first bilateral visit by an Indian Prime Minister to the South American nation in 57 years.

    General Jose de San Martin is recognised as the liberator of Argentina, and the monument was created in 1862 by French sculptor Louis Joseph Daumas. It was the first equestrian statue in Buenos Aires.

    San Martin led crucial phases of Argentina’s struggle for independence between 1813 and 1818 — defeating Spanish forces at the Battle of San Lorenzo, reorganising the Army of the North, becoming Governor of Cuyo, and creating the Army of the Andes, which he led across the mountains into Chile to liberate the neighbouring country from Spanish rule. He later moved north to help liberate Peru in 1820.

    Later, the PM was warmly received by Argentina’s President Javier Milei at the historic Casa Rosada as the two leaders began bilateral engagements.

    PM Modi arrived in Argentina early Saturday on the third leg of his five-nation tour, following visits to Ghana and Trinidad and Tobago earlier in the week. The tour will continue with visits to Brazil (July 5–8) and Namibia (July 9).

    The Prime Minister was accorded a ceremonial welcome ahead of delegation-level talks, followed by a lunch hosted by President Milei in his honour.

    Argentina has been a strategic partner of India since 2019, and the two countries celebrated 75 years of diplomatic relations last year.

    The visit comes at a particularly significant time, as Argentina is undertaking major economic reforms that mirror those India implemented in the past, the Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) noted ahead of the visit.

    Both leaders are expected to discuss economic and trade matters to further strengthen bilateral relations.

    “India’s advancements in defence manufacturing, the space sector, and new areas such as information technology and Digital Public Infrastructure (DPI) can offer valuable expertise. We can share experiences with Argentina. Our expertise in telemedicine and digital healthcare solutions is also on offer to help Argentina expand access to medical services and improve overall quality and cost-effective healthcare delivery,” said MEA Secretary (East) P. Kumaran during a special media briefing ahead of the PM’s visit.

    The leaders are also expected to review ongoing cooperation and explore ways to enhance the India-Argentina partnership in key areas, including defence, agriculture, mining, oil and gas, renewable energy, trade and investment, and people-to-people ties.

    India and Argentina have made significant progress in bilateral cooperation in the mineral resources sector, particularly lithium — a key element in India’s green energy transition. An MoU on cooperation in mineral resources was signed in August 2022, and the first meeting of the Joint Working Group under the MoU was held in January 2025.

    “Argentina holds the world’s second-largest shale gas reserves and the fourth-largest shale oil reserves, along with substantial conventional oil and gas deposits, making it a potentially important energy partner for India. Its rich reserves of critical minerals such as lithium, copper, and rare earth elements complement India’s growing need for secure and sustainable supplies for clean energy and industrial growth. India’s public sector enterprise KABIL has already secured a few concessions in Argentina since 2024. Our leaders will discuss this further,” Kumaran added.

    Notably, India-Argentina bilateral trade more than doubled in three years — from 2019 to 2022 — peaking at USD 6.4 billion in 2022. In 2021 and 2022, India was Argentina’s fourth-largest trading partner. Argentina is a key supplier of edible oils — particularly soybean and sunflower oil — to India. In 2024, total annual bilateral trade rose by 33 percent to USD 5.23 billion, positioning India as Argentina’s fifth-largest trading partner and export destination.

    —IANS

  • MIL-OSI United Kingdom: UK re-establishes diplomatic relations with Syria in first Ministerial visit for 14 years

    Source: United Kingdom – Executive Government & Departments

    Press release

    UK re-establishes diplomatic relations with Syria in first Ministerial visit for 14 years

    The Foreign Secretary has visited Syria to renew our diplomatic relationship, eight months on from the collapse of Assad’s regime.

    • Foreign Secretary’s visit to Syria marks first by a UK Minister in 14 years and renews the UK and Syria’s diplomatic relationship.
    • Commitment to support Syria as the new Government seeks to rebuild Syria’s economy, deliver an inclusive political transition and forge a path to justice for the victims of the Assad regime.
    • New UK funding to assist with removal of Assad era chemical weapons and provide urgent humanitarian assistance in Syria, to bolster UK and Middle East security, tackle irregular migration, and deliver on the Government’s Plan for Change.

    Eight months on from the collapse of the Assad regime, the UK has officially re-established diplomatic relations with the Syrian Government following the Foreign Secretary’s visit to Damascus today.

    As the first UK Minister to visit in 14 years, the Foreign Secretary emphasised that the UK will support the Syrian Government to deliver its commitments to build a more secure and prosperous future for Syrians, increasing security in the wider region and the UK.

    The Foreign Secretary met President Al-Sharaa and Foreign Minister al-Shaibani to reiterate the importance of an inclusive and representative political transition in Syria and offer continued UK support to the Syrian people.

    A stable Syria is in the UK’s interests. We want to ensure that Daesh’s territorial defeat endures, and they can never resurge, and we want to prevent vulnerable Syrians from being exploited by people smuggling gangs across Europe. Building closer diplomatic partnerships with Syria is critical to safeguard UK security, in line with the Government’s Plan for Change.

    Foreign Secretary, David Lammy said:

    As the first UK Minister to visit Syria since the fall of Assad’s brutal regime, I’ve seen first-hand the remarkable progress Syrians have made in rebuilding their lives and their country.

    After over a decade of conflict, there is renewed hope for the Syrian people. The UK is re-establishing diplomatic relations because it is in our interests to support the new government to deliver their commitment to build a stable, more secure and prosperous future for all Syrians.

    A stable Syria is in the UK’s interests, reducing the risk of irregular migration, ensuring the destruction of chemical weapons, tackling the threat of terrorism and delivering the Government’s Plan for Change.

    During his visit to Syria, the Foreign Secretary met Syrian Civil Defence volunteers (White Helmets) to learn more about the vital work they carry out across the country, including with the safe removal of unexploded ordnance and emergency lifesaving medical work.

    The fall of Assad presents an opportunity for the new Syrian government to fully declare and destroy Assad’s evil chemical weapons programme. As part of the visit, the UK has committed an additional £2 million this financial year to the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) to support their vital work addressing the horrific legacy of Assad’s chemical weapons in Syria. The UK contribution will support the OPCW’s operational requirements in Syria as they help the Syrian Government fulfil their commitments to eliminate Assad’s chemical weapons once and for all.

    Demonstrating the UK’s continued commitment to sustainable development and Syria’s recovery from conflict, the Foreign Secretary met women-led businesses in Syria, which have been supported by the UK’s livelihoods and economic recovery programme.

    UK support is set to continue, with the additional £94.5 million package announced today, which will provide urgent humanitarian aid to Syrians, support Syria’s longer-term recovery through education and livelihoods, and support countries hosting Syrian refugees in the region.

    The Foreign Secretary will travel on to Kuwait where strengthening regional security and boosting bilateral relations will be top of the agenda in meetings with His Highness the Crown Prince, His Highness the Prime Minister and His Excellency the Foreign Minister. The Foreign Secretary will advocate for UK businesses to have access to new opportunities to support Kuwaiti growing markets– further advancing business engagement between UK and Kuwait and the wider region.   

    The Foreign Secretary will also announce a new partnership with Kuwait to tackle the humanitarian crisis in Sudan. New funding will help provide nutrition support and restore clean drinking water supplies, as Sudan faces both famine and a devastating cholera outbreak. Support will also be made available to fund lifesaving work in Somalia where conflict and the climate crisis are driving pressing humanitarian needs. 

    ENDS

    Notes to Editors:

    • The UK has provided £4.5bn of assistance to Syria and countries in the region since 2011.
    • Over the past two years the UK has provided more than £5m to the White Helmets in support of their lifesaving emergency medical, firefighting and search rescue services. This includes £2.25m this financial year to continue this work and ensure a smooth transition of their activities to the Government.
    • The UK has already provided £837,300 to the OPCW Syria Missions since the fall of Assad to support their immediate work in ensuring the safe and rapid destruction of Syria’s chemical weapons.

    Media enquiries

    Email newsdesk@fcdo.gov.uk

    Telephone 020 7008 3100

    Email the FCDO Newsdesk (monitored 24 hours a day) in the first instance, and we will respond as soon as possible.

    Updates to this page

    Published 5 July 2025

    MIL OSI United Kingdom

  • Trump says tariff letters to 12 countries signed, going out Monday

    Source: Government of India

    Source: Government of India (4)

    U.S. President Donald Trump said he had signed letters to 12 countries outlining the various tariff levels they would face on goods they export to the United States, with the “take it or leave it” offers to be sent out on Monday.

    Trump, speaking to reporters aboard Air Force One as he traveled to New Jersey, declined to name the countries involved, saying that would be made public on Monday.

    In a global trade war that has upended financial markets and set off a scramble among policymakers to guard their economies, Trump in April announced a 10% base tariff rate and additional amounts for most countries, some ranging as high as 50%.

    However, all but the 10% base rate were subsequently suspended for 90 days to allow more time for negotiations to secure deals.

    That period ends on July 9, although Trump early on Friday said the tariffs could be even higher – ranging up to 70% – with most set to go into effect August 1.

    “I signed some letters and they’ll go out on Monday, probably twelve,” Trump said, when asked about his plans on the tariff front. “Different amounts of money, different amounts of tariffs.”

    Trump and his top aides initially said they would launch negotiations with scores of countries on tariff rates, but the U.S. president has soured on that process after repeated setbacks with major trading partners, including Japan and the European Union.

    He touched on that briefly late on Friday, telling reporters: “The letters are better … much easier to send a letter.”

    He did not address his prediction that some broader trade agreements could be reached before the July 9 deadline.

    The shift in the White House’s strategy reflects the challenges of completing trade agreements on everything from tariffs to non-tariff barriers such as bans on agricultural imports, and especially on an accelerated timeline.

    Most past trade agreements have taken years of negotiations to complete.

    The only trade agreements reached to date are with Britain, which reached a deal in May to keep a 10% rate and won preferential treatment for some sectors including autos and aircraft engines, and with Vietnam, cutting tariffs on many Vietnamese goods to 20% from his previously threatened 46%. Many U.S. products would be allowed to enter Vietnam duty free.

    A deal expected with India has failed to materialize, and EU diplomats on Friday said they have failed to achieve a breakthrough in trade negotiations with the Trump administration, and may now seek to extend the status quo to avoid tariff hikes.

    (Reuters)

  • MIL-OSI Security: FORMER EGLIN AIR FORCE BASE RESIDENT SENTENCED TO FEDERAL PRISON FOR CHILD PORN CRIMES

    Source: Office of United States Attorneys

    PENSACOLA, FLORIDA – Daniel R. McCaffrey, 41, formerly of Eglin Air Force Base, Florida, was sentenced to 35 years in federal prison for the transportation of child pornography, possession of child pornography, and abusive sexual contact with a minor female who had not yet reached 12 years of age. The sentence was announced by John P. Heekin, United States Attorney for the Northern District of Florida.

    U.S. Attorney Heekin said: “There is no penalty severe enough for those who harm our children, and my office will continue to aggressively pursue maximum punishment for these types of crimes.  This disgusting defendant not only victimized children online, he also sexually abused a child he had access to on Eglin Air Force Base. The substantial sentence that has been imposed reflects the severity of his crimes, but it cannot make up for the grave harm he has inflicted upon the most vulnerable members of our community. I am deeply appreciative of the incredible work of the agents and investigators with the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the Florida Department of Law Enforcement, Homeland Security Investigations, and the Air Force Office of Special Investigations to bring this heinous criminal to justice.”

    A jury found McCaffrey guilty of these charges after a federal trial.  Trial records reveal the defendant maintained a child pornography collection on a hidden micro SD card in his residence, where he lived with his then wife and two minor daughters.  McCaffrey’s wife was active duty United States Air Force at the time.  Multiple witnesses testified about the victimization McCaffrey personally inflicted upon the minor female to whom he had access. The child pornography he possessed reflected his penchant for minor females under the age of 12 years old.

    “The FBI is committed to protecting the most vulnerable individuals in our communities, and especially our kids,” said FBI Jacksonville Special Agent in Charge Jason Carley. “Those who abuse innocent children should know that the FBI and our partners will never stop working to identify you, and we will coordinate the full force of our resources to seek justice for your victims.”

    McCaffrey’s sentence of imprisonment will be followed by a lifetime term of supervised release and a requirement to register as a sex offender for the rest of his life.  

    The case involved a joint investigation by the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the Florida Department of Law Enforcement, Homeland Security Investigations, and the Office of Special Investigations of the United States Air Force.  The case was prosecuted by Assistant United States Attorneys David L. Goldberg and Jessica S. Etherton.

    This case was brought as part of Project Safe Childhood, a nationwide initiative to combat the growing epidemic of child sexual exploitation and abuse. Launched in May 2006 by the Department of Justice and led by the U.S. Attorney’s Offices and the Criminal Divisions Child Exploitation and Obscenity Section (CEOS), it marshals federal, state, and local resources to better locate, apprehend, and prosecute individuals who exploit children via the Internet, as well as to identify and rescue victims. For more information about Project Safe Childhood, please visit www.projectsafechildhood.gov.

    The United States Attorney’s Office for the Northern District of Florida is one of 94 offices that serve as the nation’s principal litigators under the direction of the Attorney General.  To access public court documents online, please visit the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Florida website. For more information about the United States Attorney’s Office, Northern District of Florida, visit http://www.justice.gov/usao/fln/index.html.

    MIL Security OSI

  • MIL-OSI Security: FORMER EGLIN AIR FORCE BASE RESIDENT SENTENCED TO FEDERAL PRISON FOR CHILD PORN CRIMES

    Source: Office of United States Attorneys

    PENSACOLA, FLORIDA – Daniel R. McCaffrey, 41, formerly of Eglin Air Force Base, Florida, was sentenced to 35 years in federal prison for the transportation of child pornography, possession of child pornography, and abusive sexual contact with a minor female who had not yet reached 12 years of age. The sentence was announced by John P. Heekin, United States Attorney for the Northern District of Florida.

    U.S. Attorney Heekin said: “There is no penalty severe enough for those who harm our children, and my office will continue to aggressively pursue maximum punishment for these types of crimes.  This disgusting defendant not only victimized children online, he also sexually abused a child he had access to on Eglin Air Force Base. The substantial sentence that has been imposed reflects the severity of his crimes, but it cannot make up for the grave harm he has inflicted upon the most vulnerable members of our community. I am deeply appreciative of the incredible work of the agents and investigators with the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the Florida Department of Law Enforcement, Homeland Security Investigations, and the Air Force Office of Special Investigations to bring this heinous criminal to justice.”

    A jury found McCaffrey guilty of these charges after a federal trial.  Trial records reveal the defendant maintained a child pornography collection on a hidden micro SD card in his residence, where he lived with his then wife and two minor daughters.  McCaffrey’s wife was active duty United States Air Force at the time.  Multiple witnesses testified about the victimization McCaffrey personally inflicted upon the minor female to whom he had access. The child pornography he possessed reflected his penchant for minor females under the age of 12 years old.

    “The FBI is committed to protecting the most vulnerable individuals in our communities, and especially our kids,” said FBI Jacksonville Special Agent in Charge Jason Carley. “Those who abuse innocent children should know that the FBI and our partners will never stop working to identify you, and we will coordinate the full force of our resources to seek justice for your victims.”

    McCaffrey’s sentence of imprisonment will be followed by a lifetime term of supervised release and a requirement to register as a sex offender for the rest of his life.  

    The case involved a joint investigation by the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the Florida Department of Law Enforcement, Homeland Security Investigations, and the Office of Special Investigations of the United States Air Force.  The case was prosecuted by Assistant United States Attorneys David L. Goldberg and Jessica S. Etherton.

    This case was brought as part of Project Safe Childhood, a nationwide initiative to combat the growing epidemic of child sexual exploitation and abuse. Launched in May 2006 by the Department of Justice and led by the U.S. Attorney’s Offices and the Criminal Divisions Child Exploitation and Obscenity Section (CEOS), it marshals federal, state, and local resources to better locate, apprehend, and prosecute individuals who exploit children via the Internet, as well as to identify and rescue victims. For more information about Project Safe Childhood, please visit www.projectsafechildhood.gov.

    The United States Attorney’s Office for the Northern District of Florida is one of 94 offices that serve as the nation’s principal litigators under the direction of the Attorney General.  To access public court documents online, please visit the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Florida website. For more information about the United States Attorney’s Office, Northern District of Florida, visit http://www.justice.gov/usao/fln/index.html.

    MIL Security OSI

  • MIL-OSI United Nations: What time is it on the Moon? It’s all relative…

    Source: United Nations MIL OSI

    Surely, you might think, we can just agree that one Earth time zone can be used for “Moon time”? Coordinated Universal Time (UTC), for example. How hard can it be? Unfortunately, this doesn’t work, for several reasons.

    Here on Earth, timekeeping is easy to take for granted: we divide our world into 24 time zones, based on longitude and the planet’s rotation, and can tell the time based on the position of the Sun in the sky.

    But on the Moon, the rules are different: one lunar “day” is approximately 29.5 Earth days long, and the Moon’s equatorial regions can experience up to 14 days of continuous sunlight. On some of the Moon’s tallest mountains, dubbed “peaks of eternal light,” the Sun never sets.

    On top of that, physicists and science fiction fans will know that time isn’t the same on the Moon as it is on Earth. Place two perfectly synchronised clocks – one on Earth and one on the Moon – and, after just one Earth day, the lunar clock would be ahead by about 56 microseconds. That might not sound like much, but for spacecraft navigation, this tiny discrepancy could be critical.

    Uniting efforts to standardize lunar time

    For a Moon time zone to work, aspiring lunar actors will need to agree on a common time standard that is reliable, traceable to Earth-based time, and usable by everyone. The UN Office for Outer Space Affairs (UNOOSA) is helping to lead the charge to make this a reality.

    In 2024, the UN’s International Committee on Global Navigation Satellite Systems (ICG) established a dedicated working group to focus on lunar positioning, navigation and timing, standardise lunar time and trace it back to UTC that we use on Earth, for the benefit of all future lunar missions.

    Peace on Earth, peace on Moon

    Coordinating seamless timekeeping on the Moon is part of a broader UN mission to ensure that lunar activities, whether public, private, scientific, or commercial, are safe, peaceful and sustainable. To that end, UNOOSA convened the first United Nations Conference on Sustainable Lunar Activities in June 2024, gathering heads of space agencies, legal experts, astronauts, companies, and academics from across the globe to discuss common ground, share concerns, and reaffirm the need for transparent, inclusive lunar governance mechanisms.

    © NASA/Jordan Salkin/Keegan Bar

    View of Earth from the NASA Earth Observatory

    One such mechanism to further international cooperation is the new Action Team on Lunar Activities Consultation (ATLAC), which is designed to help foster dialogue and formulate recommendations on how lunar exploration and activities can be coordinated internationally. ATLAC will work to finalize its workplan for the significant coming years and identify priority topics – such as coordinated lunar timekeeping – to ensure lunar activities proceed in a cooperative and orderly manner.

    Humanity is entering a new era of lunar exploration featuring a record number of spacefaring nations and organizations that could reshape our relationship with our closest celestial neighbours for generations to come.

    Member States will be able to work with UNOOSA to preserve the Moon as a domain of global cooperation, guided by the Outer Space Treaty’s core principle that “the exploration and use of outer space, including the Moon, shall be carried out for the benefit and in the interests of all countries.”

    NASA astronaut Harrison Schmitt on the moon (file, 1972)

    MIL OSI United Nations News

  • PM Modi receives grand welcome from Indian diaspora in Buenos Aires

    Source: Government of India

    Source: Government of India (4)

    Prime Minister Narendra Modi received a warm and traditional welcome from the Indian diaspora upon his arrival at the Alvear Palace Hotel in Buenos Aires, Argentina.

    Members of the Indian community greeted the Prime Minister with enthusiastic chants of “Modi-Modi”, “Jai Hind” and “Bharat Mata Ki Jai,” creating an electrifying atmosphere on Friday night.

    The vibrant reception featured a traditional Indian classical dance performance, celebrating India’s rich cultural heritage.

    Community members also had the opportunity to interact with Prime Minister Modi, many of whom received autographs from the leader, adding a personal touch to the historic visit.

    This heartfelt reception by the Indian community came shortly after PM Modi landed at Ezeiza International Airport, where he was accorded a ceremonial welcome.

    His two-day visit to Argentina marks the first bilateral visit by an Indian Prime Minister to the South American nation in 57 years, highlighting its historic significance.

    “Landed in Buenos Aires for a bilateral visit which will focus on augmenting relations with Argentina. I’m eager to be meeting President Javier Milei and holding detailed talks with him,” PM Modi shared on his official X account.

    During the visit, PM Modi is scheduled to pay homage at the statue of General Jose de San Martin, Argentina’s national hero. He will be received ceremonially and will hold delegation-level talks with President Milei, followed by a luncheon in his honour.

    This visit is part of PM Modi’s five-nation tour aimed at deepening ties with the Global South.

    The India-Argentina relationship, elevated to a Strategic Partnership in 2019, spans multiple sectors including trade, health, Defence, agriculture, green energy, digital innovation, and education.

    The year 2024 marked the 75th anniversary of diplomatic relations between India and Argentina, further underlining the importance of this high-level engagement.

    (IANS)

  • MIL-OSI China: National identity, pride grow as naval fleet led by China’s first homegrown aircraft carrier visits Hong Kong

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

    An aerial drone photo taken on July 4, 2025 shows visitors on-board the aircraft carrier Shandong anchored in Victoria Harbor in Hong Kong, south China. [Photo/Xinhua]

    The Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (HKSAR) celebrated the 28th anniversary of the city’s return to the motherland with a significant visit from a fleet of the Chinese People’s Liberation Army Navy, led by China’s first homegrown aircraft carrier Shandong.

    Since November 2024, the Chinese People’s Liberation Army Navy has made three visits to Hong Kong, deploying a range of vessels, including aircraft carriers, amphibious assault ships, and missile destroyers.

    Experts and academics underscore the multifaceted significance of this naval visit. “Only with the support of national strength can there be security and prosperity at home,” said Zheng Hong, a researcher at the Naval Research Academy.

    Recognized as a leading free trade port, Hong Kong has consistently ranked as the world’s freest economy for several years; The navy serves as the backbone of China’s maritime strength, playing a vital role in safeguarding national sovereignty, security, and development interests, said Zheng, noting that “the connection between the two is fundamentally intertwined.”

    China’s naval formations of two aircraft carriers, Liaoning and Shandong, have just completed their far-sea combat-oriented training. After several days of replenishment at the port, the Shandong made its first visit to Hong Kong, accompanied by other vessels.

    Zheng believed this visit showcases new achievements in China’s national defense and military development, demonstrating the country’s commitment and capability to maintain global and regional peace and security.

    Students pose for a group photo while visiting the aircraft carrier Shandong in Hong Kong, south China, July 4, 2025. [Photo/Xinhua]

    The Shandong, China’s first domestically built aircraft carrier, opened for public visits during this trip. “Choosing Hong Kong for this inaugural public event reflects the Chinese central government’s commitment and care for the region,” the expert noted, adding that this is the largest naval contingent visiting Hong Kong, impressing residents with a sense of warmth and connection.

    During their stay, naval officers and soldiers will engage in various cultural exchanges with local institutions and schools. Public open events will allow citizens to board the vessels, experience advanced weaponry up close, enhancing their sense of national pride and identity.

    In recent years, alongside naval fleets, astronauts, manned space program scientists, and lunar exploration researchers have also visited Hong Kong multiple times, conducting activities focused on national defense, military, aerospace technology, and maritime rights.

    Yang Yan, an associate professor at the Space Engineering University, believed that the naval fleet’s visit to Hong Kong opens a window for patriotic education in a more direct and vivid manner, fostering a favorable atmosphere of love for the country and national defense among the public, especially Hong Kong youth.

    “Hong Kong has a deep historical connection with the Navy. Some members of the Hong Kong-Kowloon Independent Brigade of the East River Column and maritime guerrilla units later participated in the founding of the Navy,” said Yung Chan, a member of the HKSAR Legislative Council.

    “The fleet’s visit to Hong Kong carries profound significance, showcasing the century-long transformation of our nation from weakness to strength, highlighting the national dignity and military might in defending our homeland, and reflecting Hong Kong’s important position in the national strategic framework,” said Chan.

    Particularly following the implementation of the Hong Kong national security law, which has established institutional guarantees for national security and long-term stability in the city, such naval visits further bolster confidence, Chan emphasized.

    MIL OSI China News

  • MIL-OSI United Nations: US strikes on Iran’s nuclear sites ‘marks perilous turn’: Diplomacy must prevail, says Guterres

    Source: United Nations 2

    After ten days of airstrikes initiated by Israel aimed at crippling Iran’s nuclear programme which have led to deadly daily exchanges of missile fire between Tehran and Tel Aviv, the UN chief said that diplomacy must now prevail.

    We now risk descending into a rathole of retaliation after retaliation,” he said, responding to the US intervention overnight in support of Israel’s military campaign, which targeted three facilities involved in uranium enrichment.

    Return to serious negotiations essential

    We must act – immediately and decisively – to halt the fighting and return to serious, sustained negotiations on the Iran nuclear programme,” Mr. Guterres added.

    He told ambassadors the citizens of the wider Middle East region could not endure yet another cycle of destruction. Demanding a ceasefire, he also put Iran on notice that it must “fully respect” the Non-Proliferation Treaty on the development of nuclear weapons as a cornerstone of peace and security worldwide.

    Iran has consistently denied the allegation from Israel and others that its ambitions are to become a nuclear armed State, versus developing atomic energy for purely peaceful purposes.

    Israel, the US and Iran face a stark choice. “One path leads to a wider war,” the UN chief continued, “deeper human suffering and serious damage to the international order. The other leads to de-escalation, diplomacy and dialogue.”

    Grossi warns of major risks following strikes

    The head of the UN’s atomic energy watchdog, the IAEA, warned ambassadors the recent military strikes by Israel and now the US on nuclear sites in Iran have badly compromised safety and could pose serious risks if the situation worsens.

    International Atomic Energy Agency Director General Rafael Grossi said the attacks had caused “a sharp degradation in nuclear safety and security”, even though there had been no radiation leaks which could potentially impact the public so far.

    The IAEA chief warned ambassadors that if the short window of opportunity to return to dialogue closes then the destruction could be “unthinkable” while the global nuclear non-proliferation regime “as we know it could crumble and fall.”

    Mr. Grossi confirmed that Iran’s main enrichment facility at Natanz had suffered major damage, including to key power infrastructure and underground halls containing uranium materials.

    He said the main concern inside the site was now chemical contamination, which can be dangerous if inhaled or ingested.

    Massive radiation leak still possible

    He also listed damage at other nuclear-related sites across the country, including Esfahan, Arak and Tehran, adding that while radiation levels outside remained normal, the attacks had raised alarm over Iran’s operational nuclear plant at Bushehr.

    Mr. Grossi warned that any strike on Bushehr could trigger a massive radiation release across the region. “The risk is real,” he said. “Military escalation threatens lives and delays the diplomacy that’s needed to resolve this crisis.”

    He urged all sides to show restraint and said the IAEA stood ready to send experts back in to help monitor and protect damaged nuclear sites.

    Senior political affairs official: ‘No military solution’

    Assistant Secretary-General for Political Affairs Miroslav Jenča told ambassadors that the world is facing “a dangerous moment” following the US bombing mission, as Iran considers potential retaliation.

    UN Photo/ Evan Schneider

    He warned the council that the region risks being “engulfed in further instability and volatility”, with “no military solution to this conflict”.

    Mr. Jenča confirmed extensive damage at Iranian sites, citing open-source satellite imagery and Iranian reports that tunnels and buildings at the Fordow nuclear facility had been hit. He urged Tehran to grant IAEA inspectors access “as soon as safety conditions allow”.

    Death toll mounting

    Hostilities between Iran and Israel are now into their tenth day, and Mr. Jenča said the humanitarian toll is mounting. “Most [of the 430 killed in Iran] have been civilians,” he noted, while also citing Israeli reports of 25 dead and over 1,300 injured.

    He also flagged growing threats from non-State armed groups, including the Houthis in Yemen, warning that their retaliation could widen the conflict. Iran’s parliament, meanwhile, has voiced support for closing the crucial trading route through the narrow Strait of Hormuz.

    The world will not be spared from the ramifications of this dangerous conflict,” Mr. Jenča said, urging countries to act in line with international law and the UN Charter.

    MIL OSI United Nations News

  • MIL-OSI United Nations: Myanmar on the ‘path to self-destruction’ if violence does not end

    Source: United Nations 2-b

    Since then, “there has been no end to the violence, even though thousands have been killed and thousands more injured,” said UN Special Envoy to Myanmar, Julie Bishop, on Tuesday, briefing the General Assembly.

    “I have stressed consistently that without a ceasefire, a de-escalation of violence and a focus on the needs of the people, there can be no inclusive lasting peace,” she said.

    Call for ceasefire

    Having spoken with survivors among the rubble of homes, hospitals and schools, Ms. Bishop said they “wanted the fighting to end so they could live in peace,” as armed clashes continue to obstruct the aid and reconstruction effort.

    Although some parties to the conflict have announced ceasefires, “they have largely not been observed,” she said.

    Reiterating her call for an end to hostilities she said civilian protection “must be the priority and inclusive and sustainable peace a shared goal.”

    Without an end to the violence she said Myanmar would continue on “the path to self-destruction.”

    Contested elections

    Ms. Bishop warned that unless there is an end to the violence and an inclusive and transparent electoral process, all that could result from any election – which the junta is planning to contest – would be “greater resistance and instability.”

    “It is inconceivable how an election could be inclusive,” she said, with so many political leaders still being held by the regime.

    Ms. Bishop also reiterated the UN’s call for the release of all arbitrary prisoners, including democratically elected leaders Win Myint and Aung San Suu Kyi.

    Rohingya’s plight

    With up to 80 per cent living in poverty, the situation of the mostly Muslim Rohingya minority in both Myanmar and Bangladesh remains dire.

    Caught in the crossfire between the Myanmar military and the Arakan Army, Rohingya civilians in their historic homeland of Rakhine State are being subjected to forced recruitment and other abuse.

    As aid dwindles, Rohingyas living in Bangladesh’s Cox’s Bazar face real consequences, including cuts to food rations and education.  

    “A viable future for Myanmar must ensure safety, accountability, and opportunity for all its communities, including Rohingya, and must address the root causes of conflict, discrimination and disenfranchisement in all its forms,” said Ms. Bishop. 

    MIL OSI United Nations News

  • MIL-OSI United Nations: ‘A moral failure’: Security Council hears about grave violations against children caught in war

    Source: United Nations 4

    “From that day on, our home became a travel bag and our path became that of displacement … My childhood was filled with fear and anxiety and people I was deprived of,” she said, speaking via videoconference from Syria.  

    Sila, now 17, described her experiences during the Syrian Civil War to a meeting of the UN Security Council held on Wednesday to discuss the findings of the Secretary-General’s latest report on Children and Armed Conflict.

    UN Photo/Manuel Elías

    Sila (on screen), Civil Society Representative, briefs the Security Council meeting on children and armed conflict.

    The report documented a 25 per cent increase in grave violations against children in 2024, the largest number ever recorded in its 20-year history. 

    This year’s report from the Secretary-General once again confirms what too many children already know — that the world is failing to protect them from the horrors of war,” said Sheema Sen Gupta, director of child protection at the UN Children’s Fund (UNICEF).

    Seema Sen Gupta, director of child protection and migration at UNICEF, briefs the Security Council. 

    “Each violation against children in every country around the globe represents a moral failure.”

    The real scale of the harm

    The report presented to the Security Council is published annually to document grave violations against children affected by war. It relies entirely on data compiled and verified by the UN, meaning that the real numbers are likely much higher than reported.  

    In 2024, the report documented a record 41,370 grave violations — including killing and maiming, rape, abduction and the targeting of infrastructure such as schools which supports children.  

    “Each child struck by these attacks carries a story, a stolen life, a dream interrupted, a future obscured by senseless violence and protracted conflict,” said Virginia Gamba, the Secretary-General’s Special Representative for Children and Armed Conflict, whose office produced the report.  

    Virginia Gamba, the Secretary-General’s Special Representative for Children and Armed Conflict, briefs the Security Council. 

    While many of these violations occurred during times of conflict — especially as urban warfare is on the rise — grave violations can persist even after a conflict ends. 

    They persist in the unexploded ordinances which still pepper the ground.  

    “Every unexploded shell left in a field, schoolyard, or alley is a death sentence waiting to be triggered,” said Ms. Sen Gupta.  

    They persist in the spaces which remain destroyed, impeding children from accessing healthcare and education.  

    And they persist in the trauma and injuries which never fully leave a child.  

    Scars that never heal

    Children who survive the grave violations do not escape unscathed — if they suffered violence, the injuries will stay with them for a lifetime. And even if they were not injured, the trauma remains.

    “The physical and psychological scars borne by survivors last a lifetime, affecting families, communities and the very fabric of societies,” said Ms. Gamba.  

    This is why UNICEF and its partners have worked to provide reintegration programmes and psychosocial support for children who are victims of grave violations.

    Sila said that the trauma of her childhood is still with her, and has pushed her to become an advocate for children in conflicts.  

    “From that moment on, nothing has felt normal in my life. I’ve developed a phobia of any sound that resembles a plane, of the dark, and even of silence,” she said.  

    ‘This cannot be the new normal’

    Ms. Gamba called for “unwavering condemnation and urgent action” from the international community in order to reverse the worrying trends which the report details.  

    We cannot afford to return to the dark ages where children were invisible and voiceless victims of armed conflict… Please do not allow them to slip back into the shadows of despair,” she said. 

    Current funding cuts to humanitarian aid are impeding the work of UN agencies and partners to document and respond to grave violations against children.

    In light of this, Ms. Sen Gupta’s call for the Security Council was simple: “Fund this agenda.”

    She said that the international community cannot allow this to become “a new normal,” and reminded the members of the Security Council that children are not and should never be “collateral damage.”

    Despite the devastation which the report detailed, there were “glimmers of hope” according to Ms. Sen Gupta. For example, the Syrian National Army signed an action plan which will prevent the recruitment, killing and maiming of children.  

    Sila also spoke of hope — she hopes that hers is the last generation to suffer these grave violations.  

    “I am from a generation that survived. Physically,” she said. “Our bodies survived but our hearts are still living in fear. Please help us replace the word displacement with return, the word rubble with home, the word war with life.” 

    MIL OSI United Nations News

  • MIL-OSI United Nations: US decision to sanction ICC judges ‘deeply corrosive’ to justice: UN rights chief

    Source: United Nations MIL OSI

    Mr. Türk was responding to an announcement by Marco Rubio, the US Secretary of State, on Thursday, of measures targeting the judges, who are overseeing a 2020 case of alleged war crime committed in Afghanistan by US and Afghan military forces, and the 2024 ICC arrest warrants issued against Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Yoav Gallant, the former Defence Minister.

    “I am profoundly disturbed by the decision of the Government of the United States of America to sanction judges of the International Criminal Court – specifically four women judges, from Benin, Peru, Slovenia and Uganda – who had been part of rulings in the situations in Afghanistan or in the State of Palestine,” said Türk, who called for the prompt reconsideration and withdrawal of the measures.

    UN Photo/Evan Schneider

    Volker Türk, UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, briefs a General Assembly informal meeting on missing persons.

    The sanctions, the statement continues, attack the judges for performing their judicial functions, an act which, he said, runs “directly counter to respect for the rule of law and the equal protection of the law – values for which the U.S. has long stood.”

    The statement by Mr. Türk follows the ICC’s strongly worded press release on Thursday, describing the sanctions as “a clear attempt to undermine the independence of an international judicial institution which operates under the mandate from 125 States Parties from all corners of the globe.”

    The ICC reinforced its position on Friday with a release from the Assembly of State Parties –the management oversight and legislative body of the court – rejecting the US sanctions which, it declared, “risk undermining global efforts to ensure accountability for the gravest crimes of concern to the international community and erode the shared commitment to the rule of law, the fight against impunity, and the preservation of a rules-based international order.”

    MIL OSI United Nations News

  • MIL-OSI United Nations: World News in Brief: ‘Indifference and impunity’ in Sudan, ICC judges speak out against sanctions, respiratory diseases overlooked in Europe

    Source: United Nations MIL OSI

    Tom Fletcher noted that over 30 million people require humanitarian assistance. Moreover, with famine declared in multiple places and over 14.6 million people displaced, Sudan represents the largest humanitarian crisis in the world.

    “Again and again, the international community has said that we will protect the people of Sudan. The people of Sudan should ask us if, when and how we will start to deliver on that promise,” the relief chief said.

    When will the international community fully fund aid efforts in Sudan?

    When will accountability for the violence in Sudan happen?

    He called on the international community to stop acting with ‘indifference and impunity’ towards Sudan,

    Health system ‘smashed to pieces’

    Since the conflict in Sudan broke out in April 2022, civilian infrastructure across the country has been damaged or destroyed, including health facilities and water and sanitation systems. 

    The health system in particular has been “smashed to pieces,” according to Mr. Fletcher, leading to increasingly dire measles and cholera outbreaks.

    The cholera outbreak, which began in July 2024 and is now confirmed in 13 of Sudan’s 18 states, has infected more than 74,000 people in total and killed 1,826.

    “I have seen first-hand the devastation caused by the cholera outbreak in Khartoum, where the health system has been devastated by conflict and is struggling to cope with the tremendous demand on health facilities,” said Dr. Shible Sahbni, WHO representative in Sudan.

    The World Health Organization (WHO), in partnership with the Sudanese Ministry of Health, is launching a 10-day cholera vaccination campaign in Khartoum State.

    The campaign will aim to reach 2.6 million people in an effort to contain the cholera outbreak in the state.

    “The vaccines will help stop cholera in its tracks as we strengthen other response interventions,” said Dr. Sahbni.

    ICC judges express support for colleagues sanctioned by US

    Judges at the International Criminal Court (ICC) expressed solidarity with their colleagues who have recently been sanctioned by the United States Government, describing the move as “coercive measures aimed at undermining the independence of the judiciary.”

    “The Judges stand united and will continue to exercise their functions independently, impartially and conscientiously, fulfilling the demands of the rule of law,” they said in a statement on Thursday.

    The US announced sanctions on 6 June against four judges from Benin, Peru, Slovenia and Uganda. The justices are currently overseeing a 2020 case which alleges war crimes in Afghanistan committed by the US and Afghan armies and the 2024 ICC arrest warrants issued for sitting Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former Defence Minister Yoav Gallant.

    The International Court of Justice

    The UN Human Rights Chief Volter Türk previously said that he was “deeply disturbed” by these sanctions, arguing that they corroded international governance and justice.

    No improper influence

    The ICC is an independent judicial body established under the Rome Statute, adopted in 1998. Although not part of the United Nations, the ICC works closely with it under a cooperative framework.

    In the statement, the Judges said that they decide, and will continue to decide, cases based on facts and without regard to threats, restrictions or improper influence issued “from any quarter or for any reason.”

    “The Judges reaffirm that they are equal in the performance of their functions and that they will always uphold the principle of equality before the law.”

    Over 80 Million Europeans suffering from overlooked chronic respiratory diseases

    Chronic respiratory diseases such as asthma are vastly underestimated, underdiagnosed and poorly managed in Europe – affecting 80 million people and costing $21 billion a year, the UN World Health Organization (WHO) said on Thursday.

    A new report by WHO Europe and the European Respiratory Society highlights how smoking and air pollution are driving the growing crisis.

    “We take 22,000 breaths a day, yet respiratory health remains one of the most neglected areas in global health,” said Professor Silke Ryan, President of the European Respiratory Society.

    6th leading cause of death

    Data analysis shows that chronic respiratory illnesses are the sixth leading cause of death in Europe. They are often misdiagnosed owing to weak diagnostic systems, limited training and inadequate health data.

    Although effective treatments are available, asthma-related deaths remain high among young people, while chronic obstructive pulmonary disease is responsible for eight in 10 respiratory disease deaths.

    As preparations begin for the 2025 UN High-Level Meeting on non-communicable diseases, WHO Europe urged governments to prioritize chronic respiratory disease, set measurable targets and tackle root causes like tobacco and air pollution.

    MIL OSI United Nations News

  • MIL-OSI United Nations: Syria: UN commission hails recent action to address past violations

    Source: United Nations MIL OSI

    Paulo Sérgio Pinheiro highlighted the establishment of the National Transitional Authority and the National Authority for Missing Persons which are expected to help reveal the fate of the more than 100,000 Syrians estimated to have been forcibly disappeared or gone missing.

    They are also expected to expose the truth about systematic violations like arbitrary detention, torture and ill-treatment, and about widespread attacks which killed hundreds of thousands of civilians and maimed millions during hostilities.

    Syria continues along the path to transition following the overthrow of the Assad regime last December.

    Wave of retaliatory attacks

    Mr. Pinheiro said the security vacuum left after the dismissal of the armed forces and security services, together with a lack of clarity on the new framework for justice, contributed to an atmosphere where victims of past crimes and violations attempted to take the law into their own hands and settle scores.

    Retaliatory attacks that took place in coastal areas in March, and on a smaller scale in other parts of the country, were “in part a response to five decades of systematic crimes perpetrated by security forces with impunity which affected all Syrians,” he said.

    “More recently, sectarian fault lines have also been fuelled by widespread hate speech and incitement against Alawis, off and online, including posts with false information reportedly often originating from abroad.”

    Eyewitness accounts

    The Commission conducted its latest visit to Syria last week and travelled to several locations on the coast where killings and looting had occurred.  The team met with several civil and security authorities, as well as eyewitnesses and victims’ families.

    “First-hand accounts by survivors of these events…revealed in detail how residential areas were raided by large groups of armed men, many of them members of factions now affiliated with the State. They told us how the assailants detained, ill-treated and executed Alawis,” he said.

    He acknowledged the interim authorities’ establishment of a National Inquiry to investigate the violations as well as an additional High-Level Committee to Maintain Civil Peace.  Furthermore, dozens of alleged perpetrators have been arrested.

    “Protection of civilians is essential to prevent further violations and crimes,” he said. 

    “We welcome the commitment of President (Ahmed) al-Sharaa to hold those responsible accountable to restore confidence for State institutions amongst the affected communities.”

    He also pointed to a deadly attack on a Greek Orthodox church in Damascus last Sunday, saying the authorities must ensure the protection of places of worship and threatened communities, and perpetrators and enablers must be held accountable.

    Foreign intervention

    Mr. Pinheiro told the Council that “the Syrian conflict has had no shortage of internal challenges and grievances, many of which were made worse by foreign interventions.”

    In recent weeks, Israel has carried out a wave of airstrikes in and around Damascus, including near the presidential palace. Military bases and weapons depots in Daraa, Hama, Tartous and Latakia have also been targeted as part of its sustained military campaign in Syria. Several civilians were killed.

    Civilian casualties were also reported in the context of Israeli operations in the buffer zone in Quneitra and southwestern Daraa monitored by the UN Disengagement Observer Force (UNDOF)

    “These actions raise serious concerns of violations of international human rights and humanitarian law as UN Secretary-General (António) Guterres further stated recently,” he said.

    Millions in need 

    Mr. Pinheiro reported that more than two million Syrians have returned home since December, including nearly 600,000 from neighbouring countries and just under 1.5 million internally displaced persons (IDPs).

    “For many of the over seven million Syrians who remain displaced, massive property-related challenges will need to be tackled in the wake of industrial-scale destruction, pillage and confiscation of homes and lands,” he said.

    Moreover, he noted that “despite the recent encouraging steps towards lifting of sectoral sanctions and opening the country to new investments, nearly 16.5 million Syrians remain in need of humanitarian assistance.” Among them are nearly three million people facing severe food insecurity.

    Mr. Pinheiro concluded his remarks, saying “the interim authorities’ repeated commitments to protect the rights of everyone and all communities in Syria without discrimination of any kind are encouraging” and “should be met with the necessary support from the international community.”

    About the Commission

    The Independent International Commission of Inquiry on the Syrian Arab Republic was by the Human Rights Council in August 2011 with a mandate to investigate all alleged violations of international human rights law since March 2011.

    The members are Mr. Pinheiro and Commissioners Hanny Megally and Lynn Welchman.

    They are not UN staff and do not receive any payment for their work.

    MIL OSI United Nations News

  • MIL-OSI Analysis: Low turnout and an unfair voting system: UK elections ranked in the bottom half of countries in Europe

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Toby James, Professor of Politics and Public Policy, University of East Anglia

    The UK has historically been held up as leading democracy with free and fair elections. However, our new report shows election quality in the UK is now ranked in the bottom half of countries in Europe.

    The Global Electoral Integrity Report provides scores for election quality around the world. It defines electoral integrity as the extent to which elections empower citizens.

    Iceland received the highest score for an election that took place in 2024, the “year of elections” during which 1.6 billion people went to the polls, according to Time Magazine. This was an unprecedented concentration of democratic activity in a single year. Iceland has a successful system of automatic voter registration and an electoral system that is judged to be fair to smaller parties.


    Want more politics coverage from academic experts? Every week, we bring you informed analysis of developments in government and fact check the claims being made.

    Sign up for our weekly politics newsletter, delivered every Friday.


    Countries that scored highly based on their most recent election include Sweden, Denmark, Canada, Finland and Lithuania. Those at the opposite end of the scale include Syria, Belarus, Egypt, and Nicaragua. The UK is ranked 24th out of 39 countries in Europe. It is below Estonia, the Czech Republic, Italy, Austria, Luxembourg and Slovakia. It is ranked 53rd out of 170 countries overall.

    The US also saw a decline. The beacons for electoral democracy are therefore now found in mainland Europe (most notably Scandinavia), Australasia, South America and the southern parts of Africa – rather than the UK and US. The centre of global democratic authority has shifted away from Westminster.

    Electoral Integrity in most recent national election up to the end of 2024.
    Electoral Integrity Project, CC BY-ND

    The weaknesses in the UK system

    There remain many areas of strength in UK elections. UK electoral officials show professionalism and independence and there is no concern about the integrity of the vote counting process. There is no evidence of widespread electoral fraud.

    A major weakness is in the fairness of the electoral rules for small parties. The electoral system generated a very disproportional result in 2024. Labour took nearly two-thirds of the seats in parliament, a total of 412, with less than 10 million votes (only 34% of votes cast). Labour won a massive majority in terms of parliamentary arithmetic but the the government did not enter office with widespread support.

    By contrast, Reform and the Greens received 6 million votes between them, but only nine MPs. The electoral system may have worked when Britain had a two-party system – but the two-party system no longer holds. Today’s Britain is more diverse, and political support is more distributed.

    The UK also scores poorly on voter registration. It is estimated that there are around 7 million to 8 million people not correctly registered or missing from the registers entirely. This is not many less than the 9.7 million people whose votes gave the government a landslide majority. The UK does not have a system of automatic voter registration, which is present in global leaders such as Iceland, where everyone is enrolled without a hiccup.

    Another problem is participation. Turnout in July 2024 was low – with only half of adults voting. Voting has been made more difficult as the Elections Act of 2022 introduced compulsory photographic identification for the first time at the general election. This was thought to have made it more difficult for many citizens to vote because the UK does not have a national identity card which all citizens hold.

    Meanwhile, there are further swirling headwinds. The spread of disinformation by overseas actors in elections has become a prominent challenge around the world and there was evidence of disinformation in this campaign too. Violence during the electoral period was thought to have been removed from British elections in Victorian times. But more than half candidates experience abuse and intimidation during the electoral period.

    Action needed

    One year into its time in office, the government is yet to act on this issue. The word “democracy” was missing from the prime minister’s strategic defence review, despite the emphasis on protecting the UK from Russia, a country known for electoral interference and other forms of attack on democracies.

    This was a sharp contrast to the former government’s 2021 review, which emphasised that a “world in which democratic societies flourish and fundamental human rights are protected is one that is more conducive to our sovereignty, security and prosperity as a nation”.

    In its election manifesto, Labour promised to “address the inconsistencies in voter ID rules”, “improve voter registration” and give 16 and 17-year-olds the right to vote in all elections. There needs to be firm action on electoral system change, automatic voter registration, campaign finance reform, voter identification changes and other areas.

    The Reform party is ahead in the polls and has consistently promised proportional representation. If Labour doesn’t make the reforms, another party might do so instead – and reap the benefits.

    There are a complex set of challenges facing democracy and elections. New technological challenges, change in attitudes, international hostility and new emergencies are combining to batter the door of democracy down.

    International organisations are increasingly stressing that political leaders need to work together and take proactive action to protect elections against autocratic forces. This means not only supporting democracy in their messages on the world stage – but also introducing reforms to create beacons of democracy in their own countries.

    Toby James has previously received funding from the AHRC, ESRC, Joseph Rowntree Reform Trust, British Academy, Leverhulme Trust, Electoral Commission, Nuffield Foundation, the McDougall Trust and Unlock Democracy. His current research is funded by the Canadian SSHRC.

    Holly Ann Garnett receives funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada and the Canadian Defence Academy Research Programme. She has previously received funding from: the British Academy, the Canadian Institute for Advanced Research, the NATO Public Diplomacy Division, the American Political Science Association Centennial Centre, and the Conference of Defence Associations.

    ref. Low turnout and an unfair voting system: UK elections ranked in the bottom half of countries in Europe – https://theconversation.com/low-turnout-and-an-unfair-voting-system-uk-elections-ranked-in-the-bottom-half-of-countries-in-europe-260396

    MIL OSI Analysis

  • MIL-OSI Analysis: Hope for a ceasefire in Gaza (but not much)

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Jonathan Este, Senior International Affairs Editor, Associate Editor

    This article was first published in The Conversation UK’s World Affairs Briefing email newsletter. Sign up to receive weekly analysis of the latest developments in international relations, direct to your inbox.


    Each day that has passed recently has brought another report of mass killings in Gaza. Today’s headline was as grim as any: according to reports from Gaza’s Hamas-run health ministry, another 118 people were killed in the past 24 hours, including 12 people trying to get aid supplies. This is a particularly unpalatable feature of a wretched conflict: the number of people being killed as they queue for food.

    A bulletin carried on the United Nations website bore the headline: “GAZA: Starvation or Gunfire – This is Not a Humanitarian Response.” It said that more than 500 Palestinians have been killed and almost 4,000 injured just trying to access or distribute food.

    There are, however, hopes of a hiatus in the violence. Donald Trump announced on July 2 that Israel had accepted terms for a 60-day ceasefire and Hamas is reportedly reviewing the conditions. Donald Trump on his TruthSocial platform wrote: “I hope… that Hamas takes this Deal, because it will not get better – IT WILL ONLY GET WORSE.”


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


    For his part, the Israeli prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, said: “There will be no Hamas [in postwar Gaza]”. This doesn’t bode well for the longevity of any deal, writes Julie M. Norman.

    Norman, an expert in international security at UCL who specialises in the Middle East, says we’ve been here before. The ceasefire deal negotiated with great fanfare as the Biden presidency passed over to Trump’s second term in January, fell to bits after phase one of a mooted three-phase deal, with accusations of bad faith on both sides.

    Further talk of a new deal in May never got any further than the drawing board. And the two sides’ positions seem to remain utterly irreconcilable. Hamas wants the ceasefire to end in a permanent peace deal and the withdrawal of Israeli forces from Gaza. Israel wants Hamas dismantled, out of Gaza and out of the picture, full stop.

    Netanyahu is due to visit Washington next week, for the third time in less than six months. Whether the US president can bring pressure to bear on Netanyahu to compromise remains to be seen.

    As Norman points out after the 12-day war against Iran, which both Trump and Netanyahu have been trumpeting as a huge success, the Israeli prime minister may have the political clout to defy his more hardline colleagues in pursuit of a deal. Trump, meanwhile, having done everything he can to help Netanyahu, can call in some big favours in his quest to play dealmaker. Hamas is seriously weakened and its main ally in the region, Iran, seems unlikely to intervene after its recent conflict with Israel and the US.

    So while recent history makes a cessation of violence in Gaza seem as far off as ever, there is at least some reason for hope.




    Read more:
    A new Gaza ceasefire deal is on the table – will this time be different?


    As noted higher up, one of the more terrible features of this wretched conflict of late has been the number of people being killed as they queue to get food. The death toll at aid distribution centres has mounted steadily since Israel, with US backing, introduced a new system run by an American company: Gaza Humanitarian Foundation (GHF). This organisation replaced more than 400 aid points (previously run by a UN agency) with just four, mainly in the south of the Gaza Strip.

    This was always going to cause problems, writes Leonie Fleischmann of City St George’s, University of London, who specialises in the conflict between Israel and Palestine. While Israel says the new system is designed to prevent Hamas taking control of aid supplies, all reports are that the scenes around the four distribution centres are descending into anarchy. According to a UN report, “Thousands [of people] released into chaotic enclosures to fight for limited food supplies … These areas have become sites of repeated massacres in blatant disregard for international humanitarian law.”

    “Arguably, this chaos and violence is inbuilt in the new aid delivery system,” writes Fleischmann, who concludes that the new system should be seen as a “a mechanism of forced displacement” which is part of a plan by the Netanyahu government “relocate Palestinians to a ‘sterile zone’ in Gaza’s far south” as it continues to clear the north of the Gaza strip.




    Read more:
    Chaotic new aid system means getting food in Gaza has become a matter of life – and often death


    The 12-day war

    But if Trump and Netanyahu think the recent short war will lead to a complete reset in the region, leaving a crippled Iran licking its wounds, they way well have miscalculated. That’s the assessment of the situation by Bamo Nouri, a Middle East specialist at City St George’s, University of London. He believes that the 12-day war may prove to have been a strategic blunder by Israel and the US.

    For a start, he writes, one outcome of the conflict is that Iran suspended cooperation with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), ending inspections and giving Tehran the freedom to expand its nuclear programme with no oversight. And its response to Israel’s airstrikes, involving more than 1,000 missiles and drones, breached the country’s “iron dome” defensive system, causing considerable damage and inflicting a serious psychological blow against Israel.

    Tehran has also deepened its relationships with both Moscow and Beijing. And far from prompting regime change, the war appears to have prompted an upsurge in nationalist sentiment in Iran.

    Nouri concludes: “Israel emerges militarily capable but politically shaken and economically strained. Iran, though damaged, stands more unified, with fewer international constraints on its nuclear ambitions.”




    Read more:
    The US and Israel’s attack may have left Iran stronger


    It’s hard to get a clear picture of what was achieved, which isn’t surprising when you consider that there remains considerable doubt, even in this information age, what was achieved by the US bombing raid against Iran’s heavily fortified nuclear installations.

    First they were “completely obliterated”. Or at least that was what Donald Trump posted on the night of the raid. Then it seemed that they may not have been as obliterated as first thought. In fact an initial assessment prepared by the US Office of Defense Intelligence thought that the damage may only have hindered Iran’s nuclear programme by a few months.

    Cue outrage from the US president and his senior colleagues, amplified by their friends in the US media. There followed some new intelligence which seemed to favour Trump’s position. Then the head of the IAEA, Rafael Grossi, weighed in, saying Iran could be enriching uranium again in a “matter of months”. The latest contribution was from the Pentagon which is saying that timescale is actually closer to “one to two years”. Clear as mud then.

    But as Rob Dover reminds us, former US defense secretary Donald Rumsfeld once pronounced: “If it was a fact it wouldn’t be called intelligence.” Dover, who is an intelligence specialist at the University of Hull, explains that intelligence almost always has a political dimension and should be viewed through that prism.

    “The assessment given to the public may well be different from the one held within the administration,” writes Dover. This is not necessarily a bad thing, he concludes as “security diplomacy is best done behind closed doors”. Or at least it used to be. Now the US president seems happy to discuss sensitive information in public.




    Read more:
    Row over damage to Iran’s nuclear programme raises questions about intelligence


    The medium is the message

    But then, as Sara Polak observes, Donald Trump’s use of social media is changing the way government is conducted in the US. Polak is a specialist in US politics at Leiden University with a particular interest in the way politics and media intersect.

    As she writes, for more than a century since Teddy Roosevelt cultivated print journalists, through FDR’s adept use of radio and JFK’s mastery of television, each new media platform has its master. For Trump it is social media. And he is using it to remake politics.




    Read more:
    How Trump plays with new media says a lot about him – as it did with FDR, Kennedy and Obama


    Nowhere has Trump’s mastery of art of issuing simple messages which make for effective soundbites been displayed so clearly than in the name of his landmark tax-cutting legislation still being wrangled over in the US Congress at the time of writing: the One Big Beautiful Bill Act.

    While undoubtedly big – it runs to 940 pages – its beauty is what the US House of Representatives has been debating fiercely for 24 hours or more, after it passed the Senate with the help of a casting vote from US president J.D. Vance when three Republican senators voted against it.

    Dafydd Townley from the University of Portsmouth, who writes regularly for The Conversation about US politics, has written this incisive analysis of the politics around the legislation which appears set to continue for some time to come.




    Read more:
    Trump wins again as ‘big beautiful bill’ passes the Senate. What are the lessons for the Democrats?


    World Affairs Briefing from The Conversation UK is available as a weekly email newsletter. Click here to get updates directly in your inbox.


    ref. Hope for a ceasefire in Gaza (but not much) – https://theconversation.com/hope-for-a-ceasefire-in-gaza-but-not-much-260460

    MIL OSI Analysis

  • MIL-OSI Analysis: How Europe dropped the ball on its own defence and was left fawning over Donald Trump – podcast

    Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Gemma Ware, Host, The Conversation Weekly Podcast, The Conversation

    The language from European leaders was fawning and obsequious. At one point, the head of Nato, Mark Rutte, even called Donald Trump “daddy”. But when the US president left the Nato summit in late June, there was a sigh of relief that he had not made any more angry criticism of the alliance.

    After months of American pressure, Nato members – with the exception of Spain – agreed to increase their spending on defence to 5% of GDP by 2035. Trump called it “very big news”, and even reconfirmed his commitment to Nato’s article 5, which means an attack on one Nato country is an attack on them all.

     How did Europe become so unable to defend itself that it was forced to resort to outright flattery of an American president?

    In this episode of The Conversation Weekly podcast, we report from the recent Siena Conference on the Europe of the Future in Italy about how the EU dropped the ball on its own defence and what its options are now.

     The European Commission, the executive branch of EU government, only appointed its first commissioner for defence in December 2024. There is no EU army, and no consensus as to whether democratic nations could ever allow one to be built.

    But in the period after the second world war, ambitions for a united European defence policy were much grander, as Ana Juncos Garcia, professor of European politics at the University of Bristol in the UK, explains:

    There was this idea to establish a European Defence Community which would pool competencies at the national level in defence to the European level, creating a supranational organisation with its own minister of defence, its own military committee.

    That failed in 1954 when the French national assembly rejected ratification of the treaty and progress on a pan-European defence strategy stalled. Nato, founded in 1949, became the core military alliance organising Europe’s defence, with the US as its main guarantor.

    Ever since, the EU has tried to balance the need for maintaining that transatlantic relationship, and figuring out a way to organise, and procure, its own defence capabilities in a joined up way.

    Listen to The Conversation Weekly podcast, which includes interviews with Francesco Grillo, academic fellow in political science at Bocconi University in Italy, and François Lafond, former assistant professor at  Sciences Po University in Paris and former advisor to the Western Balkans on European integration.

    This episode of The Conversation Weekly was written and produced by Gemma Ware with assistance from Katie Flood and Mend Mariwany. Mixing and sound design by Eloise Stevens and theme music by Neeta Sarl.

    Newsclips in this episode from National Defence, NBC News, CNBCtelevision, Forbes Breaking News, CBS News and Critical Past.

    Listen to The Conversation Weekly via any of the apps listed above, download it directly via our RSS feed or find out how else to listen here. A transcript of this episode is available on Apple Podcasts or Spotify.

    Ana Juncos Garcia has received UKRI funding for a MSCA Doctoral Network and funding from Horizon Europe, ESRC IAA and WUN. She is also a visiting professor at the College of Europe.

    Francesco Grillo is associated to VISION think tank.

    ref. How Europe dropped the ball on its own defence and was left fawning over Donald Trump – podcast – https://theconversation.com/how-europe-dropped-the-ball-on-its-own-defence-and-was-left-fawning-over-donald-trump-podcast-260152

    MIL OSI Analysis

  • MIL-OSI Submissions: Low turnout and an unfair voting system: UK elections ranked in the bottom half of countries in Europe

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Toby James, Professor of Politics and Public Policy, University of East Anglia

    The UK has historically been held up as leading democracy with free and fair elections. However, our new report shows election quality in the UK is now ranked in the bottom half of countries in Europe.

    The Global Electoral Integrity Report provides scores for election quality around the world. It defines electoral integrity as the extent to which elections empower citizens.

    Iceland received the highest score for an election that took place in 2024, the “year of elections” during which 1.6 billion people went to the polls, according to Time Magazine. This was an unprecedented concentration of democratic activity in a single year. Iceland has a successful system of automatic voter registration and an electoral system that is judged to be fair to smaller parties.


    Want more politics coverage from academic experts? Every week, we bring you informed analysis of developments in government and fact check the claims being made.

    Sign up for our weekly politics newsletter, delivered every Friday.


    Countries that scored highly based on their most recent election include Sweden, Denmark, Canada, Finland and Lithuania. Those at the opposite end of the scale include Syria, Belarus, Egypt, and Nicaragua. The UK is ranked 24th out of 39 countries in Europe. It is below Estonia, the Czech Republic, Italy, Austria, Luxembourg and Slovakia. It is ranked 53rd out of 170 countries overall.

    The US also saw a decline. The beacons for electoral democracy are therefore now found in mainland Europe (most notably Scandinavia), Australasia, South America and the southern parts of Africa – rather than the UK and US. The centre of global democratic authority has shifted away from Westminster.

    Electoral Integrity in most recent national election up to the end of 2024.
    Electoral Integrity Project, CC BY-ND

    The weaknesses in the UK system

    There remain many areas of strength in UK elections. UK electoral officials show professionalism and independence and there is no concern about the integrity of the vote counting process. There is no evidence of widespread electoral fraud.

    A major weakness is in the fairness of the electoral rules for small parties. The electoral system generated a very disproportional result in 2024. Labour took nearly two-thirds of the seats in parliament, a total of 412, with less than 10 million votes (only 34% of votes cast). Labour won a massive majority in terms of parliamentary arithmetic but the the government did not enter office with widespread support.

    By contrast, Reform and the Greens received 6 million votes between them, but only nine MPs. The electoral system may have worked when Britain had a two-party system – but the two-party system no longer holds. Today’s Britain is more diverse, and political support is more distributed.

    The UK also scores poorly on voter registration. It is estimated that there are around 7 million to 8 million people not correctly registered or missing from the registers entirely. This is not many less than the 9.7 million people whose votes gave the government a landslide majority. The UK does not have a system of automatic voter registration, which is present in global leaders such as Iceland, where everyone is enrolled without a hiccup.

    Another problem is participation. Turnout in July 2024 was low – with only half of adults voting. Voting has been made more difficult as the Elections Act of 2022 introduced compulsory photographic identification for the first time at the general election. This was thought to have made it more difficult for many citizens to vote because the UK does not have a national identity card which all citizens hold.

    Meanwhile, there are further swirling headwinds. The spread of disinformation by overseas actors in elections has become a prominent challenge around the world and there was evidence of disinformation in this campaign too. Violence during the electoral period was thought to have been removed from British elections in Victorian times. But more than half candidates experience abuse and intimidation during the electoral period.

    Action needed

    One year into its time in office, the government is yet to act on this issue. The word “democracy” was missing from the prime minister’s strategic defence review, despite the emphasis on protecting the UK from Russia, a country known for electoral interference and other forms of attack on democracies.

    This was a sharp contrast to the former government’s 2021 review, which emphasised that a “world in which democratic societies flourish and fundamental human rights are protected is one that is more conducive to our sovereignty, security and prosperity as a nation”.

    In its election manifesto, Labour promised to “address the inconsistencies in voter ID rules”, “improve voter registration” and give 16 and 17-year-olds the right to vote in all elections. There needs to be firm action on electoral system change, automatic voter registration, campaign finance reform, voter identification changes and other areas.

    The Reform party is ahead in the polls and has consistently promised proportional representation. If Labour doesn’t make the reforms, another party might do so instead – and reap the benefits.

    There are a complex set of challenges facing democracy and elections. New technological challenges, change in attitudes, international hostility and new emergencies are combining to batter the door of democracy down.

    International organisations are increasingly stressing that political leaders need to work together and take proactive action to protect elections against autocratic forces. This means not only supporting democracy in their messages on the world stage – but also introducing reforms to create beacons of democracy in their own countries.

    Toby James has previously received funding from the AHRC, ESRC, Joseph Rowntree Reform Trust, British Academy, Leverhulme Trust, Electoral Commission, Nuffield Foundation, the McDougall Trust and Unlock Democracy. His current research is funded by the Canadian SSHRC.

    Holly Ann Garnett receives funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada and the Canadian Defence Academy Research Programme. She has previously received funding from: the British Academy, the Canadian Institute for Advanced Research, the NATO Public Diplomacy Division, the American Political Science Association Centennial Centre, and the Conference of Defence Associations.

    ref. Low turnout and an unfair voting system: UK elections ranked in the bottom half of countries in Europe – https://theconversation.com/low-turnout-and-an-unfair-voting-system-uk-elections-ranked-in-the-bottom-half-of-countries-in-europe-260396

    MIL OSI

  • MIL-OSI United Kingdom: Minister Smith Keynote Speech at SKOPE Skills Summit, Oxford

    Source: United Kingdom – Executive Government & Departments

    Speech

    Minister Smith Keynote Speech at SKOPE Skills Summit, Oxford

    Speech delivered by Skills Minister Jacqui Smith at the University of Oxford on higher education reform, access and participation and working with the FE sector

    Introduction

    Good morning.

    Thank you for inviting me today.

    I am delighted to see the exciting work on skills education being led by SKOPE’s research on joined-up tertiary education systems.  It is being discussed across the sector.

    And I include government in that, as part of our commitment to evidence-based policymaking.

    It’s a pleasure to be back in Oxford, where I studied all those years ago.

    I was at Hertford, 5 minutes down the road, a college with a proud tradition of inclusion. I was a beneficiary of the Hertford Scheme to encourage state school pupils to apply.

    I hardly dared hope on a snowy December day in 1980 that I could be the first person from my Worcestershire comprehensive to study here.

    It was Hertford, with its pioneering approach to outreach, that gave me the confidence to apply.

    Starting in 1965, it dramatically raised the college’s academic standards and performance.

    In fact, at one point, the university threatened to disassociate Hertford for unfairly ‘poaching’ the best students!

    But many colleges set up similar schemes to emulate its success, before admissions were finally standardised in 1984.

    Why am I telling you this?

    Because it shows that breaking down barriers to opportunity is the key to success.

    For Oxford to succeed, it must welcome-in the best talent, from across the whole population.

    Challenging Oxford

    Oxford recently released their state school admissions data for 2024.

    And the results were poor.

    66.2% – the lowest entry rate since 2019.

    I want to be clear, speaking at an Oxford college today, that this is unacceptable.

    The university must do better.

    The independent sector educates around 6% of school children in the UK.

    But they make-up 33.8% of Oxford entrants.

    Do you really think you’re finding the cream of the crop, if a third of your students come from 6% of the population?

    It’s absurd.

    Arcane, even.

    And it can’t continue.

    It’s because I care about Oxford and I understand the difference that it can make to people’s lives that I’m challenging you to do better.  But it certainly isn’t only Oxford that has much further to go in ensuring access. 

    For example, it is shocking how few care leavers attend university, let alone this one!

    Just 14% enter higher education, and they are more than twice as likely to drop-out.

    University entry is supposed to be a meritocracy.

    But there’s still an awful lot of untapped talent out there.

    People with the potential to soar in higher education.

    Universities have got to go further.

    Play a stronger role in expanding access, and improve outcomes for disadvantaged students.

    And this must include more support for care leavers, some of the most vulnerable people in our society.

    I welcome Oxford’s recent commitment, along with other Russell Group universities, to do more for students who grew-up in care.

    And to increase your admissions transparency, and use of contextual admissions.

    I look forward to seeing some tangible outcomes from this pledge.

    I’m not looking for tinkering at the edges. A leg-up here, a bursary there.

    As a Labour government, we want Big Picture change.

    This is about individual opportunity, but it matters across government,

    from education, to health, to the economy. Just yesterday, Wes and Bridget have set out how we’re asking universities to do more to support our mission to break down the barriers to opportunity.  We’re looking at better transparency over university admissions, starting with publishing data on medical schools’ admission of those from lower socio-economic backgrounds.

    We must strive to ensure, from early years all the way through to higher education, that background never equals destiny.

    And that’s where our Post-16 Education and Skills Strategy comes in.

    The Post-16 Education and Skills Strategy

    We will publish the strategy soon.  

    It will include our vision for a world-leading skills system.

    One that takes a whole-system, mission-driven approach to breaking down barriers to opportunity to unleash growth.

    This means:

    • A more focused skills system, underpinned by Skills England’s national view of skills needs.

    • Clear, high-quality qualifications that ensure every learner has a clear route to further study or work.

    • Firm foundations, putting the system on a financially stable footing that supports strategic specialisation.

    And finally,

    • A new culture of ‘skills first’ where it is everyone’s responsibility – individuals, employers, and the state – to ensure workers reskill and upskill throughout their lives.

    This will boost personal and national prosperity, and reduce reliance on migration to fill skills gaps.

    What do we need to do to achieve this?

    First, there needs to be a renewed partnership between government and business.

    This means both local and central government working with business to identify skills gaps and develop solutions.

    We’ve heard the calls for more flexibility in the skills offer by introducing foundation and short apprenticeships.

    Now we’re going further with new short courses from April 2026, funded through the Growth and Skills Levy, in areas such as digital, artificial intelligence and engineering.

    These support priority sectors named in our Industrial Strategy, like the Creative Industries and Advanced Manufacturing.

    Because we recognise the importance of key sectors to delivering our Industrial Strategy and our Plan for Change.

    That’s why we’ve adopted a sector-based approach to address key skills needs.

    We started with our construction skills package, worth £625 million.

    To train up to 60,000 extra construction workers – crucial for delivering on our pledge to build 1.5 million new homes.

    We announced a further three further packages in the Industrial Strategy:

    • An Engineering package worth over £100 million, to support the pipeline of engineers into priority sectors like Advanced Manufacturing,

    • Clean Energy Industries, and Digital Technology.

    • A Defence package that is foundational for national security and economic growth,
      including establishing Defence Technical Excellence Colleges.

    • And a Digital package, including £187 million investment for digital and AI skills,
      and a commitment to train 7.5 million UK workers in essential AI skills
      by 2030, through a new industry partnership with major tech players.

    Raising the prestige of Further Education

    We understand that the economy needs both technical skills and academic disciplines in order to grow.

    It’s not a zero sum game – because both have so much to offer our people and our economy.

    And, dare I say it, much to learn from each other!

    Further education needs to emerge from the shadow of Higher Education as an equal partner.

    That means positive prominence in careers advice.

    And public recognition that’s long overdue.

    Technical education needs to be a respected alternative to academic pathways.

    And Technical Excellence Colleges will be at the heart of this.

    Only when there is parity, will we secure high-quality post-16 routes for all learners, rather than the lucky few.

    For learners from 16-19, we will be guided by the independent  Curriculum and Assessment Review, set to publish this autumn.

    High esteem follows high-quality teaching and student outcomes.

    We will provide funding to recruit and retain high-quality Further Education teachers, especially for courses delivering scarce skills to priority sectors.

    And this is backed by funding secured at the recent Spending Review.

    We are investing £1.2 billion a year more in skills by 2028-29, alongside over £2 billion of capital investment in skills to support the condition and capacity of the estate.

    Strengthening Higher Education’s role within the skills system I said earlier that Further Education needs to be an equal partner of Higher Education. Since we came into Government in July, we’ve ended the culture of talking down universities, and dismissing the opportunities higher education provides.

    We’re doing quite the opposite, working with you to:

    • drive up standards;
    • maintain our position as a world-class beacon of excellence;
    • build on a proud history of innovation and brilliance in higher education.

    But as the world changes, so must our higher education system.

    We cannot allow the town and gown divide to widen, and for universities and their communities to drift.

    We need collaboration, partnership, and mutual respect.

    Higher Education needs to reach out and play a bigger role in the skills system.

    Because ‘high-quality post-16 routes for all learners’ doesn’t necessarily mean they must choose between HE and FE.

    Our analysis shows the majority of the future skills we’ll need will be at higher levels.

    This means technical students will need access to cutting-edge facilities and courses, as they build their qualifications.

    So the artificial barriers between Further and Higher Education must come down – in a coordinated, effective way.

    And this will be facilitated by the Lifelong Learning Entitlement.

    The Lifelong Learning Entitlement

    The ability to learn across our working lives is no longer just admirable, or valuable. It’s essential.

    People aren’t just working for longer.

    They are changing roles and careers more frequently.

    And the skills needed for those roles are also evolving rapidly.

    Yet despite all this change, the student finance system still largely operates on the assumption that learning only happens early in life.

    To break down the barriers to opportunity, we must support learning at every stage of life.

    This is exactly what the Lifelong Learning Entitlement – or LLE – will do, offering choice, flexibility and opportunity to adults across their working lives.

    From January 2027, the LLE will replace the student finance system.

    It will continue to fund students entering higher education to take traditional degrees.

    But it will also fund new, flexible modular pathways, widening student finance to a broader range of courses and learners.

    That includes those returning to education later in life, who may be working whilst studying. Providing flexibility around personal commitments like caring responsibilities.

    What does means in practice?

    I want you to imagine Sarah, a full-time receptionist and mother who decides she wants a career change. However, Sarah is concerned about committing to studying full-time, as her family is still growing, and she is struggling to take out time to pursue retraining in computer science.

    Through the LLE and the funding of individual modules, Sarah will be able to study one module at a time, to build up her credits over time, alongside her work and family commitments.

    The LLE will not just change the type of provision on offer.

    It also has the potential to transform how employers work with providers to train and recruit staff, allowing modular top-up to build or update their skills.

    We’re already seeing this play out through our modular acceleration programme.

    We want education providers to innovate in how they respond to the new model, so that lifelong upskilling becomes accessible and unremarkable.

    At the same time, employers must be active partners in LLE provision, co-designing flexible courses that create accessible pathways into the workforce.

    We will shortly set-out the final policy design of the LLE, so FE and HE providers can plan for this transformational change.

    Improving local join-up

    The final thing we must do to widen opportunity and build growth is better local join-up. This means strategic collaboration between local education providers, employers, research hubs and health services.

    We set the scene at the end of last year with our ‘Get Britain Working’ and ‘English Devolution’ White Papers.

    These described how mayors and Local Growth Plans will play a key role in shaping their regional skills systems. Local Get Britain Working plans will drive joined-up action to reduce economic inactivity, and take forward our Youth Guarantee.

    This is key for ensuring young people in difficult circumstances are supported to achieve good qualifications and good employment.

    The skills system is at its most effective when detailed local understanding is matched with insight from local employers and training providers.

    Many young adults face complex barriers to engaging with skills courses; an estimated 1 in 8 young people are NEET – not in education, employment or training.

    Improving the accessibility of training will be crucial to reducing the number of NEETs,.

    But to bring them into the fold, you have to understand local barriers as well as national, systemic issues.

    Further Education colleges often do this well by working with many local partners. They are big participants in Local Skills Improvement Plans (or LSIPs).

    These collaborations identify and respond to gaps in skills provision, giving employers a more strategic role in the system.

    I believe in LSIPs because they facilitate partnership  

    Early evidence shows Plans are already having an impact, raising the number of learners training in priority sectors – with more employers telling us that local skills provision meets their needs.

    But we must go further to join-up local systems to drive opportunity and growth.

    Which bring me back to universities.

    Discussions on LSIPs should involve all local providers, and all levels of education – including up to Doctorate level! 

    If your university offers a course that relates to your local skills offer, or local employers, you have something to contribute to these discussions.

    And to the outcomes of local students studying beyond your campus, in neighbouring colleges.

    And let’s not forget the role of research and innovation.

    Universities are renowned for delivering solutions to global challenges.

    But this also happens at a local level, as seen with the Oxford Local Policy Lab.

    HE also brings new ideas to market, through start-ups and partnerships with industry.

    Whichever way you look at it, Higher Education has a huge role in driving local growth and opportunity.

    You need to be part of this conversation.

    Universities involved in local growth

    And this is not just some government aspiration!

    There are plenty of examples of institutions stepping-up to play their part.

    The London South Bank University group acts as an anchor institution within the local education community. It brings together FE colleges, sixth form colleges and employers – particularly the NHS – to ensure a truly collaborative approach to education, training and skills provision.

    You’ll hear later from Professor Kathryn Mitchell, Vice Chancellor of Derby University.

    They work closely with FE colleges and local employers, particularly Rolls Royce to ensure clear links between education and the labour market.

    And in the North East, organisations like Sunderland Software City are leading the tech industry to match local education and training provision with regional requirements.

    It’s great to see – and shows just what university participation in inclusive growth can do for the local economy and community.

    Conclusion

    I know I’m not alone here in admiring this, and wanting change.

    Many people in this room who are working to make Further and Higher Education better – to better serve our people and our nation.

    I’d like to thank you for your innovation and dedication to this – which can sometimes be uphill work!

    I’m grateful to SKOPE, who’ve worked with my officials to share their expertise in developing our Post-16 Education and Skills Strategy.

    And to the Nuffield Foundation for helping to fund SKOPE’s research.

    The strategy is just the beginning, by the way!

    The different parts of the system will need to work together to meet its vision.

    To bring about a fairer society, where everyone has the chance to gain good qualifications, get a good job, support their family, and contribute to their community and our economy.

    Let’s make it happen!

    Thank you.

    Updates to this page

    Published 5 July 2025

    MIL OSI United Kingdom

  • MIL-OSI Analysis: Military force may have delayed Iran’s nuclear ambitions – but history shows that diplomacy is the more effective nonproliferation strategy

    Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Stephen Collins, Professor of Government and International Affairs, Kennesaw State University

    View of the United Nations logo at a 2022 conference of the Parties to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons. Angela Weiss/AFP via Getty Images)

    While the U.S. military’s strikes on Iran on June 21, 2025, are believed to have damaged the country’s critical nuclear infrastructure, no evidence has yet emerged showing the program to have been completely destroyed. In fact, an early U.S. Defense Intelligence Agency assessment surmised that the attack merely delayed Iran’s possible path to a nuclear weapon by less than six months. Further, Rafael Mariano Grossi, director of the United Nations’ International Atomic Energy Agency, stated that Iran may have moved its supply of enriched uranium ahead of the strikes, and assessed that Tehran could resume uranium enrichment “in a matter of months.”

    Others have warned that the strikes may intensify the Islamic Republic’s nuclear drive, convincing the government of the need to acquire a bomb in order to safeguard its survival.

    As a scholar of nuclear nonproliferation, my research indicates that military strikes, such as the U.S. one against Iran, tend not to work. Diplomacy — involving broad and resolute international efforts — offers a more strategically effective way to preempt a country from obtaining a nuclear arsenal.

    The diplomatic alternative to nonproliferation

    The strategy of a country using airstrikes to attempt to eliminate a rival nation’s nuclear program has precedent, including Israel’s 1981 airstrike on Iraq’s Osirak nuclear reactor and its 2007 air assault on Syria’s Kibar nuclear complex.

    Yet neither military operation reliably or completely terminated the targeted program. Many experts of nuclear strategy believe that while the Israeli strike destroyed the Osirak complex, it likely accelerated Iraq’s fledgling nuclear program, increasing Saddam Hussein’s commitment to pursue a nuclear weapon.

    The Osirak nuclear power research station in 1981.
    Jacques Pavlovsky/Sygma via Getty Images

    In a similar vein, while Israeli airstrikes destroyed Syria’s nascent nuclear facility, evidence soon emerged that the country, under its former leader, Bashar Assad, may have continued its nuclear activities elsewhere.

    Based on my appraisal of similar cases, the record shows that diplomacy has been a more consistently reliable strategy than military force for getting a targeted country to denuclearize.

    The tactics involved in nuclear diplomacy include bilateral and multilateral engagement efforts and economic tools ranging from comprehensive sanctions to transformative aid and trade incentives. Travel and cultural sanctions – including bans on participating in international sporting and other events – can also contribute to the effectiveness of denuclearization diplomacy.

    The high point of denuclearization diplomacy came in 1970, when the majority of the world signed the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons. The treaty obliged nonnuclear weapons states to refrain from pursuing them, and existing nuclear powers to share civilian nuclear power technology and work toward eventual nuclear weapons disarmament.

    I’ve found that in a majority of cases since then – notably in Argentina, Brazil, Libya, South Africa, South Korea and Taiwan – diplomacy played a pivotal role in convincing nuclear-seeking nations to entirely and permanently relinquish their pursuit of nuclear weapons.

    Case studies of nuclear diplomacy

    In the cases of U.S. allies Argentina, Brazil, South Korea and Taiwan, the military option was off the table for Washington, which instead successfully used diplomatic pressure to compel these countries to discontinue their nuclear programs. This involved the imposition of significant economic and technological sanctions on Argentina and Brazil in the late-1970s, which substantially contributed to the denuclearization of South America. In the South Korea and Taiwan cases, the threat of economic sanctions was effectively coupled with the risk of losing U.S. military aid and security guarantees.

    South Africa represents one of the most compelling cases in support of diplomatic measures to reverse a country’s nuclear path. In the latter years of the Cold War, the country had advanced beyond threshold nuclear potential to assemble a sizable arsenal of nuclear weapons. But in 1991, the country decided to relinquish that arsenal, due in large part to the high economic, technological and cultural costs of sanctions and the belief that its nuclear program would prevent its reintegration into the international community following years of apartheid.

    Completing the denuclearization of Africa, diplomatic pressure applied by the U.S. was the primary factor in Libya’s decision to shutter its nuclear program in 2003, as ending U.S. sanctions and normalizing relations with Washington became a high priority for the government of Moammar Gadhafi.

    In the case of Iraq, the Hussein regime eventually did denuclearize in the 1990s, but not through a deal negotiated directly with the U.S. or the international community. Rather, Hussein’s decision was motivated by the damaging economic and technological costs of the U.N. sanctions and his desire to see them lifted after the first Gulf War.

    In the 11 countries in which diplomacy was used to reverse nuclear proliferation, only in the cases of India and Pakistan did it fail to induce any nuclear reversal.

    In the case of North Korea, while Pyongyang did for a time join the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, it later left the accord and subsequently built an arsenal now estimated at several dozen nuclear weapons. The decades-long efforts at diplomacy with the country cannot, therefore, be coded a success. Still, these efforts did result in notable moves in 1994 and 2007 by North Korea to curtail its nuclear facilities.

    Meanwhile, analysts debate whether diplomacy would have been more successful at containing North Korea’s nuclear program if the George W. Bush administration had not shifted toward a more confrontational policy, including naming North Korea as a member of the “axis of evil” and delaying aid promised in the 1994 U.S.-North Korean Agreed Framework.

    The Iran deal and beyond

    Consistent with the historical track record for diplomacy concerning other nuclear powers, Iran offers compelling evidence of what diplomacy can achieve in lieu of military force.

    Diplomatic negotiations between the U.S, Iran and five leading powers yielded the landmark Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action in 2015. The so-called Iran deal involved multilateral diplomacy and a set of economic sanctions and incentives, and persuaded Iran to place stringent limits on its nuclear program for at least 10 years and ship tons of enriched uranium out of the country. A report from the International Atomic Energy Agency in 2016 confirmed that Iran had abided by the terms of the agreement. Consequently, the U.S., European Union and U.N. responded by lifting sanctions.

    Representatives of the nations involved in signing the 2015 Iran nuclear deal pose for a group photo following talks in July 2015.
    AP Photo/Ronald Zak

    It was only after President Donald Trump ordered the U.S. withdrawal from the agreement in 2018, and reimposed sanctions on Iran, that Tehran resumed its alarming enrichment activities.

    Trump signaled quickly after the recent attack on Iran a willingness to engage in direct talks with Tehran. However, Iran may rebuff any agreement that effectively contains its nuclear program, opting instead for the intensified underground approach Iraq took after the 1981 Osirak attack.

    Indeed, my research shows that combining military threats with diplomacy reduces the prospects of successfully reaching a disarmament agreement. Nations will be more reluctant to disarm when their negotiating counterpart adopts a threatening and combative posture, as it heightens their fear that disarmament will make it more vulnerable to future aggression from the opposing country.

    A return to an Iran nuclear deal?

    Successful denuclearization diplomacy with Iran will not be a panacea for Middle East stability; the U.S. will continue to harbor concerns about Iran’s military-related actions and relationships in the region.

    It is, after all, unlikely that any U.S. administration could strike a deal with Tehran on nuclear policy that would simultaneously settle all outstanding issues and resolve decades of mutual acrimony.

    But by signing and abiding to the terms of the JCPOA, Iran has demonstrated a willingness to cooperate on the nuclear issue in the past. Under the agreement, Iran accepted a highly limited and low-proliferation-risk nuclear program subject to intrusive inspections by the international community.

    That arrangement was beneficial for regional stability and for buttressing the global norm against nuclear proliferation. A return to a JCPOA-type agreement would reinforce a diplomatic approach to relations with Iran and create an opening for progress with the country on other areas of concern.

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

    ref. Military force may have delayed Iran’s nuclear ambitions – but history shows that diplomacy is the more effective nonproliferation strategy – https://theconversation.com/military-force-may-have-delayed-irans-nuclear-ambitions-but-history-shows-that-diplomacy-is-the-more-effective-nonproliferation-strategy-259769

    MIL OSI Analysis

  • MIL-OSI Analysis: Friday essay: ‘whose agony is greater than mine?’ Testimonies of Gaza and October 7 ask us to recognise shared humanity

    Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Juliet Rogers, Associate Professor Criminology, The University of Melbourne

    In 1962, poet and Auschwitz survivor Yehiel Dinur took the stand in Jerusalem in the trial of Nazi war criminal Adolf Eichmann. Dinur was a much-anticipated witness, bearing the audience’s hope this man, a poet, would be able to explain – to capture and to transmit – the experience of Auschwitz, and of the Holocaust; that he could speak the unspeakable. Prosecutor Gideon Hausner hoped such a witness might “do justice to the six million personal tragedies”.

    Dinur used the name Katzetnik 135633 in his writings, also translated as “Prisoner 135663”. On the stand, he said: “I believe wholeheartedly that I have to continue to bear this name until the world awakens.”

    Awakening, understanding, empathy and change are the sentiments many survivors hope for, or ask for, during and after periods of trauma. The 20th century saw many of those pleas. The 21st century has done no better at honouring the promise, captured in the title of the 1984 Argentinian commission report on forced disappearances, Nunca Mas: never again. No matter how many such pleas appear before the courts, before the aggressors, before those in solidarity, the horrors of war, torture, starvation and genocide seem to happen again – and again.

    Three recent books from the region where war was been raging since the Hamas attacks on Israel on October 7 2023, and the ensuing war on Gaza, are part of these pleas.


    Review: Eyes on Gaza – Plestia Alaqad (Macmillan), Letters from Gaza – edited by Mohammed Al-Zaqzooq & Mahmoud Alshaer (Penguin), Gates of Gaza – Amir Tibon (Scribe)


    Eyes on Gaza is an on-the-ground account of the death and destruction of the first 45 days of the war by now 23-year-old Palestinian journalist Plestia Alaqad, who moved to Melbourne with her family in November 2023. Letters from Gaza is a collection of 50 stories, poems and fragments from Palestinian writers enduring the past 20 months. And Gates of Gaza is the story of Israeli journalist Amir Tibon, a resident of Nahal Oz, one of the border kibbutz attacked by Hamas on October 7.

    Plestia Alaqad.
    Plestia

    These are all first-person testimonies of experiences of being under attack, though those attacks differ. We might say they fit into the genre adopted in truth commissions, such as the Truth and Reconciliation Commission in South Africa: a response to the nation’s years of living under the apartheid laws, discarded when Nelson Mandela took power in 1994.

    The commission was one effort to heal from this past. But, like the Eichmann trial, it needed stories to explain the histories of violence, and it needed the pain to be voiced to explain its impacts on communities, families and relationships.

    The use of people’s narratives to “bear witness” to the complex layers of legally sanctioned and militarily executed pain, loss and the traumas they can produce, is sometimes effective in helping audiences understand them. The Bringing Them Home Report in 1997 used this form to explain the incidence and impacts of the forced removal of Indigenous children by the Australian state. It was effective as one form of creating a shared reality for all in Australia, who then understood the term “stolen generations” and the pain, loss and genocidal intent to which this phrase refers.

    More recently, the Yoorrook Justice Commission in Victoria, Australia’s first formal truth-telling inquiry into historic and ongoing systemic injustices perpetrated against First Nations Peoples by colonisation, has also brought histories of loss, dispossession and abuse to light, using stories. Stories can make sense of the impact incurred through the intertwined web of policies, statistics, discrimination and quotidian violence at the hands of the state.

    The work of testimony

    The narratives in these books written since October 7 2023 are part of this genre of testimony or storytelling. But at least two of these books are not attempting to explain the past. They might be described better as pleas to stop what the International Court of Justice has called “a plausible genocide” happening in the present.

    They are, in one reading, wishes for the world to understand the experience of pain, rage, loss, fear, distress and defeat that accompanies destruction and unbearable loss. A wish for the world to hear, or perhaps feel, the words on the page – and make the pain stop.

    They wish the world would “awaken” to what is happening right now.

    The dynamic of awakening is the stock in trade of truth commissions. One party testifies or speaks to an experience, and the audience wakes up to what has been happening. As a result, they either change or facilitate change. The truth, captured as testimony, is supposed to set people free. Not just the speaker, but the community of speakers weighed down by history – or by the struggles of the past or the present.

    In legal forms the reason to speak is clear. The reason to speak in literature, biographies and works of nonfiction is less clear. What does the author want from us, the readers? But perhaps more importantly, what can we offer?

    Plestia wants her life back

    Plestia Alaqad is very clear about what she wants in her book, The Eyes of Gaza: A Diary Of Resilience.

    She wants the genocide to stop. She wants a free Palestine. She wants her home and her life back. The stories in this book show readers outside Gaza some of the life and death of those first six and a half weeks.


    Her last entry before she leaves Gaza for Egypt – and then Australia – is dated Day 45. During those 45 days, she puts on a press helmet and jacket, which both give her protection and weigh her down. And then she speaks: to cameras, to followers, to anyone who will listen. Her social media feeds documenting the war gained worldwide attention, her Instagram following rising from around 3,700 to 4.1 million today.

    There are too many deaths to be witnessed – by her and the reader. She describes genocide as an understatement for what is occurring in Gaza: “we lose more people than our hearts can handle”. She has seen so much death, heard so many screams. By day 30,

    all you can hear is a voice crying for help from under the rubble. You turn your back and walk away, because there’s nothing you can do to help.

    But Plestia’s project is more than documenting death. She is careful to show many aspects of life in Gaza. She shows how Palestinians retain relationships, family and pets. How a young boy just needs his “pot plant” from his destroyed house, under skies filled with drones and bombs. This is a plea for the genocide to stop, but it is also a celebration of being Palestinian. It is an homage to life in Gaza.

    It is also a plea to see Palestinians as more than numbers – and more than how they are depicted by Israel.

    “The world,” she says, “sometimes treats us like terrorists, trying to justify its complacency in allowing us to be massacred. And we know the perception, we read the propaganda just like everyone else. But the reality is that we’re the opposite.”

    She describes gentle moments of love and care between her fellow journalists and the people they interview. The children they bring sweets for, the “bird lady” who renames her tortoise “Plestia” after her. Both Plestia the tortoise and the “bird lady” are now living in a tent. She speaks of the doctors who work tirelessly.

    In the midst of brutal amputations and unimaginable burns, she recounts the care of a doctor giving cream for a skin rash that has tormented her, diagnosed as a product of her anxiety. Anxiety seems a gentle diagnosis for symptoms produced by witnessing and documenting such brutality.

    Anxiety over her helplessness, perhaps, over the lack of sleep, of nourishing food: dwindling even in those first 45 days. Anxiety seems like a Western preoccupation, from this writing distance. What Plestia experiences seems more like layers of embodied distress. Her empathy allows her to feel, perhaps too much. Empathy can be an enemy.

    Around page 100, she begins to deteriorate. “It’s funny how genocide changes a person,” she writes, describing herself as “Genocide Plestia”. She’s devastated, exhausted. She has lost hope. The journal entries are shorter, more repetitive.
    They recite her helplessness with what Jacqueline Rose, co-director of the Birkbeck Institute for the Humanities, has called the “repetitive thud of referentiality”.

    You feel Plestia’s effort to try to speak with some life in the pages, to use writing as a therapeutic tool. You wish it for her, but she has trouble summoning the energy, the life, any hope. As she poignantly quips: “Fake it till you make it doesn’t work during a Genocide”. What is there to say in such relentless days of loss?

    You want Plestia to get up, you want a happy ending, for a conclusion to the painful story, but the problem is time. The reader’s time, the reality of time since she wrote her book.

    Day 45, her last day in Gaza, is Monday November 20 2023. I read this book in June 2025, 646 days later – and it hasn’t stopped. When Plestia leaves Gaza and finally arrives here in Melbourne, the conditions she describes have been ongoing for more than 20 months. A recently released survey by the Palestinian Center for Policy and Survey Research estimates almost 84,000 people died in Gaza between October 2023 and early January 2025, as a result of the war. And that was six months ago.

    50 letters from Gaza

    The numbers are a way of reducing the experience of grief, devastation, loss (and the viewer’s guilt) to simple digits. Digits have no face and no sound. This is helpful to viewers, but it does not do justice to the 84,000, as Gideon Hausner knew well. No one awakens by hearing the numbers. But they matter.

    In Letters from Gaza, psychologist Ahmed Mortaja fears becoming a news story, “a dull number … I don’t want my name and my family name to be reduced to mere numbers, whether odd or even”.


    This book, a fragmented collection of 50 poems, stories and accounts, is devoted to giving life to those numbers. To animating the loss, so readers can apply their own imaginations, so we can understand the incomprehensible. It is a collection of fragments of lives since October 7 2023, squeezed into expressive pages. There is no “letter” more than six pages long. They are backed up against each other, permeating one another.

    Each letter tells a different story and the same story. Each finds a detail that has no language: flowers in a girl’s hair, dreams of careers that will perhaps never be, the sounds of explosions. They are stories of the impossible search for bread, the longing for a bed and a pillow. And, as in Plestia’s account, they evoke the relentless buzz of the drones in the sky in Gaza: everywhere, all day, every day since October 7 2023. Like tinnitus, like torture.

    The book begins with an effort to give names to numbers. On the first page, in the publisher’s note, we read that two of the authors, Sara al-Assar and Basma al-Hor, cannot be contacted. Because of communication lines and constant displacements, the details “may not reflect their current location or circumstances”. Authors may have died or been further displaced. Communication towers are destroyed. Tents are moved as people are moved on. Tents are destroyed.

    In Plestia’s accounts, there are displacements to safe zones that then become unsafe, so they move again and again – until the only choice is tents, often without food or blankets. She describes seeing 33,000 people in a displacement shelter, this number increasing daily. Just as numbers are not people, tents are not homes. In Letters from Gaza, the displaced tents are character, metaphor and reality.

    The stories are different, as are the deaths and losses within them, but these painful accounts help explain each other. The personal stories help animate words like displacement, refugee camp, genocide, so they do not fall into the pile of legal terms disconnected from names.

    But after the United Nations declarations in the opening pages, we hear no more of law – and little of justice. As Palestinian human rights lawyer and founder of the Palestinian Centre for Human Rights, Raji Sourani said: Gaza is in danger of becoming “the graveyard of international law”. What is left are stories. The short stories, poems and brief accounts are packaged so they do not ask too much of the reader – just enough to provoke tears, and perhaps donations. Many readers will feel some of the helplessness in these pages.

    There are stories of hunger; the loss of grandmothers and children. I cried many times reading this book, but the next story would quickly arrive and sometimes bring relief. There is something sad, but ordinary, about details like a cat who finds a tent too hot. Unlike Plestia’s clear analysis and summation of the genocide in Gaza, the politics of this book are comparably quiet. Not absent, but quiet. The word genocide is mentioned four times, “Holocaust” only once. (I counted.)

    In Letters from Gaza, no one says Israel, only “the occupiers”. Husam Maarouf writes, “we no longer want anything from you […] Only to die in safety.” His entry is dated March 1 2024; he may well be dead. Batool Abu Akleen makes simple requests of the reader (or perhaps of God): “I want a grave, I don’t want my corpse to rot in the open road.” But the book seems to intentionally not accuse. We are told:

    this is not a book about war. It is a book about human souls that strive to avoid being hunted down by war. It is about how innocents are forced to learn how to survive when everything around them is about killing, destruction and death.

    But the accusation is there. How could it not be? Against Israel as occupier and aggressor – and the reader as bystander.

    Accusation sometimes comes embedded in questions. “Is one person’s pain greater than another’s?” asks Gaza poet and teacher Doha Kahlout. This question resonates with one inscribed on the Holocaust Memorial Tree in Hungary: “Whose agony is greater than mine?”

    When comparing agony, only one can live

    Jewish author, philosopher and psychoanalyst Jessica Benjamin, writing on Palestine and Israeli peace struggles, cautions against pitting stories from Israel and Palestine against each other, such that “only one can live”. Only one story, one narrative, one version of pain and loss.

    Holding multiple stories of suffering in mind is very difficult: for the survivor, for the listener and even for the psychoanalyst. Many survivors suffer symptoms of trauma that reduce the world to interpretation through their experience of its painful histories.

    In Eyes of Gaza, writing from Melbourne, Plestia shows a moment of this:

    On the train home, I see a lady with a suitcase, and the first thing that I think of is displacement, imagining how everyone in Gaza carries their whole life in their bag […] Then the announcement: Next Stop […] And I’m snapped back into reality.

    In this moment, the suitcase is only read through the lens of the past. It’s what is described colloquially as living in the past – a type of banal flashback, often a symptom of trauma. But when pain colonises bodies and narratives, recognising the pain of others is difficult to see. It may be impossible to see the experiences of the other’s world through any other lens than one’s own pain. Whose agony is greater than mine? is a competitive statement, not a question.

    In the war of greater pain, an Israeli child in fear may be read against a Palestinian child enduring the loss of their limbs and their whole family. Only one (story) can live.

    To hold two competing stories of pain, loss and agony in mind requires a feat of mental health endurance few are capable of: the Nelson Mandelas of this world. Working in the field of transitional justice, I have met a few.

    Most have experienced great loss and know there is no comparison at the level of agony. They resist “the repetitive thud of referentiality” because it drowns out conversation, annihilating curiosity and empathy alike. They know all stories must have their time.

    In October 2023, “liberal” London Jewish journalist and filmmaker Michael Segalov, once a “staunch defender of Israel”, tried to hold competing stories. He wrote about seeing Israel–Palestine through the lens of “fear and trauma – of the Shoah, of the Nakba, of generations now born into perpetual fear”.

    Early Jewish settlers were not “imperial soldiers”, but “a persecuted population failed by global governments pre and post Holocaust”, he points out. But by 1948, the year after the UN resolution that called for Palestine to be divided into Arab and Jewish states, “more than 750,000 Palestinians were made refugees, 15,000 killed”.

    “While these lands might well feel a Jewish ancestral home,” he wrote, “within living memory, it was shared with another people: the majority.” In 1922, in the first census carried out under the British Mandate, the population of Palestine was 763,550: 89% were Arabs and 11% Jewish.

    As Palestinian psychiatrist Eyad El Sarraj stressed while talking with Jessica Benjamin during peace negotiations, we must “stand simultaneously for the recognition of all injuries, while at the same time being clear that one side was coming from the position of Occupied and less powerful, the other Occupying and dominating”. Stories matter, politics matters.

    And some stories take more time than others – some stories are given more time than others. This is a matter of politics and practicality.

    Surviving the October 7 attacks

    Israeli journalist Amir Tibon and his family survived the October 7 attack on Kibbutz Nahal Oz, on the Gaza border; they are now internal refugees in northern Israel. He and his partner settled in Nahal Oz and raised a family. On the morning of October 7, they heard the sounds of the attack and raced to their safe room, spending the next five hours in there trying to keep their children – Galia, 3 years old and Carmel, aged 19 months – quiet.

    Amir Tibon and his family survived the Oct 7 attack on Kibbutz Nahal Oz, on the Gaza border.
    Scribe

    In discussing Tibon’s book, Gates of Gaza: a story of betrayal, survival and hope in Israel’s borderlands, I risk comparison and competition. Sometimes stories speak to each other, even when they speak to the silences. I resisted this one’s proximity to the above stories. But that is also to resist reality. It is to resist the importance of difference. All experience is valuable, but sometimes comparison reveals inequality.

    Plestia knows this well. The survivor guilt of which she writes is part of the hierarchy experienced by all survivors of mass violence. That she and her family survived, that she migrated, is to feel guilt for escaping the fate of those who have been starved, tortured, obliterated.

    Yehiel Dinur spoke from this position of guilt on the stand in 1962, saying he was speaking for those who died in Auschwitz. In the face of others’ death, all survivors struggle with justification. Competition is one form of this: Whose agony is greater than mine?


    Tibon was a resident of Nahal Oz, having moved there with his partner because of its beauty, nine years before October 7. He describes it as having “a strong, left-wing, liberal political leaning”, and says residents of the border areas are “some of the strongest advocates of Israeli–Palestinian peace”. He writes that the kibbutz movement has, “for decades”, been in favour of “a compromise that would allow Jews and Arabs to share this land, with agreed-upon borders – borders that, of course, would have to be protected”.

    In the 300-plus pages, Tibon describes the morning of October 7 in detail. The fear of his children and his partner as they stayed quiet in a safe room for some five hours. The sounds of shootings and desperation as he read pleas and accounts from other residents on the community’s WhatsApp group as the attacks unfolded.

    The narrative of that morning is interspersed with accounts from people who survived in his community: his parents, some of those who attended the Nova music festival, and Israeli Defense Force (IDF) soldiers. The narrative moves between that morning and a history of the kibbutz, framed in a history of Israel’s political lurching between right and left – and back again – over the 87 years since its recognition as a nation state by the UN.

    In one reading, this is a history book of 87 years – not just an account of five hours. It is a particular history.

    The narrative of those five hours is intense, peppered with stories of his parents racing from Tel Aviv to the kibbutz. Tibon’s father is a crucial figure in this narrative. A retired IDF general with “more than three decades” in the military, including combat experience, he seemingly has the capacity to assess situations and navigate a war zone with skill. It is his father who finally knocks on the “safe room” door in the afternoon (about halfway through the book). Tibon reports hearing “a strong bang and a familiar voice” from inside.

    The father, we could say, is the embodiment of Tibon’s feelings for – and belief in – a strong, kind Israel. An army general, protective husband and grandfather (in Hebrew, Saba), he is longed for by Tibon’s young children, who “loved their grandparents”, particularly his father, “who pampered and spoiled them at every opportunity”. This grandfather’s presence at the safe-room door allows the family to re-enter the safety of Israel.

    If the father is Israel, the sleeping children are its citizens. Carmel and Galia slept through much of the conflict, barely awakened by gunshots. They were rushed to the safe room the moment the shots were heard.

    Once you know the stories from Letters of Gaza, it is hard not to compare this to the waking of Mohammed Al Zaqzooq’s three boys – Baraa, Jawad and Basil – to the sound of “Huge missiles in large numbers making terrifying sounds” and the need to flee. Not least, because Amir’s children were barely awakened by shots outside. Their safe room kept the noise muffled and the danger at bay. This is not to say their fear won’t impact on their actions later. Transgenerational trauma has a way of influencing the future.

    Mohammed’s children moved quickly, within half an hour, to a refugee camp. At the time of writing, they remain there. His story is five pages long. Amir’s is 300-plus. Amir, an author and award-winning diplomatic correspondent for Haaretz, Israel’s liberal paper of record, has access to a computer, electricity and the security required to think, research and write.

    But why does he write this book? In the acknowledgements, he describes himself as needing to be encouraged, unsure of the worth of telling the story of his five hours in the safe room. But he describes much more than five hours.

    His book is a story of Israel – and particularly, of its informal settlements. In the early 1950s, he writes, 20 young soldiers – ten men and ten women – were taken by bus to this site to settle it. Nahal Oz is so close to Gaza, it has “agricultural lands which literally touch the border fence”. The kibbutzim functioned as a kind of human border, with increased populations: the 20 broke into couples, then families. Within a few years, they had a small farming community, with a person devoted to security.

    Empty land?

    This is not a story of military invasion and colonisation, however. It is a story of settlement on land represented as empty. We know this story well in Australia. In this context, it can be a plea for a recognition of innocence.

    As Amir tells it, there were no Palestinians in the place before: no one was removed or relocated. Only in passing does he mention the Bedouin who passed through the area before.

    In Australia, Irene Watson and Aileen Moreton-Robinson have, in different ways, explained lands do not need to be sites of permanent agriculture to be crucial to the survival of some groups or nations. Borders and settlements can disturb land, law and life regardless of whether houses are demolished or not.

    The beauty of Nahal Oz, Amir writes, was due to its access to water and its site on fertile land, where trees provided shelter and probably food. Its loss was likely no small thing to people who required sustenance and shelter as they moved through. After the settlement, they no longer could.

    After Israel set up its border there, only Israelis could pass through without being subject to the checkpoints that are well documented sites of humiliation and arbitrary punishment for Palestinians.

    By 1997, the walls went up near Nahal Oz. But the walls to shield Nahal Oz from Gaza – and particularly from its people – were not enough. Amir describes the elaborate and extensive tunnels used by Palestinian soldiers to enter Israel (he calls them “terrorists” and “suicide bombers”).

    The tunnels became the problem of Palestinian attacks on Israeli settlers. To deal with this problem, the concrete walls were built, reaching 160 metres underground, preventing any permeation. Then, on October 7, the walls could not provide security. Then, there was only the safe room.

    The safe room is an obvious metaphor in this book. It is Israel under attack. One of these rooms has been built into every house in the kibbutz, so families can be safe from the mortar attacks from Gaza – a regular occurrence since the 1987 Intifada.

    Plestia tells us that the materials for a safe room are not allowed to be brought into Gaza. There are no safe rooms there. Tibon doesn’t mention this; maybe he doesn’t even know this fact, which is its own symptom of the political and social environment in Israel.

    He does describe “the unimaginable destruction that Israel has unleashed on Gaza in the aftermath” of the October 7 attacks. He is critical of this “destruction”, though he does not use the term genocide. (There are those who wait for the International Court of Justice to decide if it was more than “plausible” – and there are those who cannot wait.)

    Tibon is critical of Israel’s right wing, which cultivates war. He wants peace. But peace here is its own violence.

    Like the rhetoric of reconciliation in South Africa, calls for peace can do violence to historical experiences of injustice. There, reconciliation discourse has been criticised, along with its apolitical leanings. Reconciliation in South Africa has largely meant people subject to historical injustices must reconcile themselves to their losses and their reality.

    A story attributed to Father Mxolisi Mapanbani, of Tom and Bernard and the bicycle, has been used many times to critique “reconciliation” rhetoric in South Africa. It is helpful here.

    Tom and Bernard are friends and live opposite each other. One day, Tom stole Bernard’s bicycle. Every day, Bernard saw Tom cycling to school on it. After some time, Tom went up to Bernard and said, “Let us reconcile and put the past behind us.” Bernard said, “Okay, let’s reconcile – what about the bicycle?” “Oh no,” said Tom, “I’m not talking about the bicycle, I’m talking about reconciliation.”

    In the Australian context, after Kevin Rudd’s apology to the stolen generations in 2008, human rights and social justice campaigner Tom Calma described this form of reconciliation as the “unfinished business of justice”.

    The apology might have offered some form of acknowledgement, and gone some way toward creating a shared reality on the injustices of the past, but while justice remains unfinished, many are not at peace.

    Amir wants peace. He doesn’t want to live in a safe house – but he wants his house and his family to live securely in Nahal Oz. He wants Palestinians to be at peace with this reality.

    The word “peace”, like “reconciliation”, does a lot of work to present Tibon on the side of “the good”. Just like, in Letters From Gaza, the relative lack of the word “genocide” keeps the accusation at bay and politics in the background – and it keeps its calls for recognition of suffering at the fore. In this book about “human souls”, the editors call for a recognition of shared humanity.

    Tibon is careful not to group “terrorists” under that name – though he uses a Hebrew word that means exactly that. (Mehablim, he calls the people who attacked Nahal Oz.) Why? Though he writes in English and undoubtably spoke Hebrew throughout the siege, why does he speak of the Palestinian attackers as Mehablim?

    The answer might be found in the fact no Palestinian name, beyond former Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat, appears in these pages. He has interviewed many people, but none of them are Palestinian. Their narrative remains outside his text.

    We must find the humanity of the Palestinians in other stories.

    If the safe room is a metaphor for Israel, the tent – as described in so many of the stories in Letters from Gaza, and in Plestia’s account of those 45 days – is a metaphor for the lives of Palestinians in Israel, and perhaps the world’s eyes.

    A tent is permeable, fragile, disposable. Bodies within it are subject to displacement, starvation, genocide. Every house in Tibon’s kibbutz has a safe room. There have been at least seven bombings of tent camps in Gaza. How can you not do the maths?

    Stories, awakening and halting the bombs

    Stories demand people are not reduced to mathematics. They place the reader in the scene and plead for identification and understanding. Writing on the Eichmann trial, Holocaust historian and legal scholar Lawrence Douglas describes “the words of the survivors that built a bridge from the accused to the world of ashes”.

    Afrikaaner journalist and poet Antje Krog writes, on the Truth and Reconciliation Commission in South Africa, “In all the stories a landscape is created.”

    But this landscape, if it is to have any effect, must be mapped across previous perceptions. For that, it must do damage to the secure world – the pre-existing imaginative landscape – of the reader or of the listener.

    Moral philosopher Rai Gaita describes remorse as “a dying to the world”: a little death is required of the listener or reader who is implicated as a bystander, encountering the suffering of others. A death of complacency. A small disintegration that may mean our own peaceful worlds are no longer tenable.

    This is why stories, particularly, are mobilised in truth commissions. They animate the impossible numbers – the dry policies and repetitive loss – with scenes of humanity. Testimony – personal stories – link the words (genocide, massacre, terror) to an imagination of a scene, a person, a child or a parent. To people we can identify or empathise with.

    Like the two worlds connected in Ahmed Mortaja’s poem, Hubb and Harb, In Letters from Gaza:

    tonight I will fall asleep telling myself that the noise outside is fireworks, a celebration and nothing more.
    That the frightened screams of children are the gleeful terror of suspense before something long-awaited, like Eid.
    Tonight, I will fall asleep scrolling through the photos on my phone, telling myself that my evening with friends wasn’t that great – really, I was bored – so now I’m skimming through memories to pass the time.

    If empathy were all it took to halt the counting of the 646 days in Gaza, then Letters from Gaza and Eyes on Gaza would achieve their aim. But empathy rarely produces political change.

    Stories – the 50 voices in Letters from Gaza, accounts like Plestia’s – make us cry, perhaps make us donate, but they do not halt the bombs. This, and more, might be what Yehiel Dinur meant when he asked for the world to “awaken”, that it change, that it stop what Tibon calls “the unimaginable destruction”.

    Until then, Dinur pledged to remain Katzetnik 135633. Until then, we will likely only know “Genocide Plestia”: “it’s funny how genocide changes a person”.

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

    ref. Friday essay: ‘whose agony is greater than mine?’ Testimonies of Gaza and October 7 ask us to recognise shared humanity – https://theconversation.com/friday-essay-whose-agony-is-greater-than-mine-testimonies-of-gaza-and-october-7-ask-us-to-recognise-shared-humanity-257554

    MIL OSI Analysis

  • MIL-OSI Submissions: Military force may have delayed Iran’s nuclear ambitions – but history shows that diplomacy is the more effective nonproliferation strategy

    Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Stephen Collins, Professor of Government and International Affairs, Kennesaw State University

    View of the United Nations logo at a 2022 conference of the Parties to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons. Angela Weiss/AFP via Getty Images)

    While the U.S. military’s strikes on Iran on June 21, 2025, are believed to have damaged the country’s critical nuclear infrastructure, no evidence has yet emerged showing the program to have been completely destroyed. In fact, an early U.S. Defense Intelligence Agency assessment surmised that the attack merely delayed Iran’s possible path to a nuclear weapon by less than six months. Further, Rafael Mariano Grossi, director of the United Nations’ International Atomic Energy Agency, stated that Iran may have moved its supply of enriched uranium ahead of the strikes, and assessed that Tehran could resume uranium enrichment “in a matter of months.”

    Others have warned that the strikes may intensify the Islamic Republic’s nuclear drive, convincing the government of the need to acquire a bomb in order to safeguard its survival.

    As a scholar of nuclear nonproliferation, my research indicates that military strikes, such as the U.S. one against Iran, tend not to work. Diplomacy — involving broad and resolute international efforts — offers a more strategically effective way to preempt a country from obtaining a nuclear arsenal.

    The diplomatic alternative to nonproliferation

    The strategy of a country using airstrikes to attempt to eliminate a rival nation’s nuclear program has precedent, including Israel’s 1981 airstrike on Iraq’s Osirak nuclear reactor and its 2007 air assault on Syria’s Kibar nuclear complex.

    Yet neither military operation reliably or completely terminated the targeted program. Many experts of nuclear strategy believe that while the Israeli strike destroyed the Osirak complex, it likely accelerated Iraq’s fledgling nuclear program, increasing Saddam Hussein’s commitment to pursue a nuclear weapon.

    The Osirak nuclear power research station in 1981.
    Jacques Pavlovsky/Sygma via Getty Images

    In a similar vein, while Israeli airstrikes destroyed Syria’s nascent nuclear facility, evidence soon emerged that the country, under its former leader, Bashar Assad, may have continued its nuclear activities elsewhere.

    Based on my appraisal of similar cases, the record shows that diplomacy has been a more consistently reliable strategy than military force for getting a targeted country to denuclearize.

    The tactics involved in nuclear diplomacy include bilateral and multilateral engagement efforts and economic tools ranging from comprehensive sanctions to transformative aid and trade incentives. Travel and cultural sanctions – including bans on participating in international sporting and other events – can also contribute to the effectiveness of denuclearization diplomacy.

    The high point of denuclearization diplomacy came in 1970, when the majority of the world signed the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons. The treaty obliged nonnuclear weapons states to refrain from pursuing them, and existing nuclear powers to share civilian nuclear power technology and work toward eventual nuclear weapons disarmament.

    I’ve found that in a majority of cases since then – notably in Argentina, Brazil, Libya, South Africa, South Korea and Taiwan – diplomacy played a pivotal role in convincing nuclear-seeking nations to entirely and permanently relinquish their pursuit of nuclear weapons.

    Case studies of nuclear diplomacy

    In the cases of U.S. allies Argentina, Brazil, South Korea and Taiwan, the military option was off the table for Washington, which instead successfully used diplomatic pressure to compel these countries to discontinue their nuclear programs. This involved the imposition of significant economic and technological sanctions on Argentina and Brazil in the late-1970s, which substantially contributed to the denuclearization of South America. In the South Korea and Taiwan cases, the threat of economic sanctions was effectively coupled with the risk of losing U.S. military aid and security guarantees.

    South Africa represents one of the most compelling cases in support of diplomatic measures to reverse a country’s nuclear path. In the latter years of the Cold War, the country had advanced beyond threshold nuclear potential to assemble a sizable arsenal of nuclear weapons. But in 1991, the country decided to relinquish that arsenal, due in large part to the high economic, technological and cultural costs of sanctions and the belief that its nuclear program would prevent its reintegration into the international community following years of apartheid.

    Completing the denuclearization of Africa, diplomatic pressure applied by the U.S. was the primary factor in Libya’s decision to shutter its nuclear program in 2003, as ending U.S. sanctions and normalizing relations with Washington became a high priority for the government of Moammar Gadhafi.

    In the case of Iraq, the Hussein regime eventually did denuclearize in the 1990s, but not through a deal negotiated directly with the U.S. or the international community. Rather, Hussein’s decision was motivated by the damaging economic and technological costs of the U.N. sanctions and his desire to see them lifted after the first Gulf War.

    In the 11 countries in which diplomacy was used to reverse nuclear proliferation, only in the cases of India and Pakistan did it fail to induce any nuclear reversal.

    In the case of North Korea, while Pyongyang did for a time join the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, it later left the accord and subsequently built an arsenal now estimated at several dozen nuclear weapons. The decades-long efforts at diplomacy with the country cannot, therefore, be coded a success. Still, these efforts did result in notable moves in 1994 and 2007 by North Korea to curtail its nuclear facilities.

    Meanwhile, analysts debate whether diplomacy would have been more successful at containing North Korea’s nuclear program if the George W. Bush administration had not shifted toward a more confrontational policy, including naming North Korea as a member of the “axis of evil” and delaying aid promised in the 1994 U.S.-North Korean Agreed Framework.

    The Iran deal and beyond

    Consistent with the historical track record for diplomacy concerning other nuclear powers, Iran offers compelling evidence of what diplomacy can achieve in lieu of military force.

    Diplomatic negotiations between the U.S, Iran and five leading powers yielded the landmark Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action in 2015. The so-called Iran deal involved multilateral diplomacy and a set of economic sanctions and incentives, and persuaded Iran to place stringent limits on its nuclear program for at least 10 years and ship tons of enriched uranium out of the country. A report from the International Atomic Energy Agency in 2016 confirmed that Iran had abided by the terms of the agreement. Consequently, the U.S., European Union and U.N. responded by lifting sanctions.

    Representatives of the nations involved in signing the 2015 Iran nuclear deal pose for a group photo following talks in July 2015.
    AP Photo/Ronald Zak

    It was only after President Donald Trump ordered the U.S. withdrawal from the agreement in 2018, and reimposed sanctions on Iran, that Tehran resumed its alarming enrichment activities.

    Trump signaled quickly after the recent attack on Iran a willingness to engage in direct talks with Tehran. However, Iran may rebuff any agreement that effectively contains its nuclear program, opting instead for the intensified underground approach Iraq took after the 1981 Osirak attack.

    Indeed, my research shows that combining military threats with diplomacy reduces the prospects of successfully reaching a disarmament agreement. Nations will be more reluctant to disarm when their negotiating counterpart adopts a threatening and combative posture, as it heightens their fear that disarmament will make it more vulnerable to future aggression from the opposing country.

    A return to an Iran nuclear deal?

    Successful denuclearization diplomacy with Iran will not be a panacea for Middle East stability; the U.S. will continue to harbor concerns about Iran’s military-related actions and relationships in the region.

    It is, after all, unlikely that any U.S. administration could strike a deal with Tehran on nuclear policy that would simultaneously settle all outstanding issues and resolve decades of mutual acrimony.

    But by signing and abiding to the terms of the JCPOA, Iran has demonstrated a willingness to cooperate on the nuclear issue in the past. Under the agreement, Iran accepted a highly limited and low-proliferation-risk nuclear program subject to intrusive inspections by the international community.

    That arrangement was beneficial for regional stability and for buttressing the global norm against nuclear proliferation. A return to a JCPOA-type agreement would reinforce a diplomatic approach to relations with Iran and create an opening for progress with the country on other areas of concern.

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

    ref. Military force may have delayed Iran’s nuclear ambitions – but history shows that diplomacy is the more effective nonproliferation strategy – https://theconversation.com/military-force-may-have-delayed-irans-nuclear-ambitions-but-history-shows-that-diplomacy-is-the-more-effective-nonproliferation-strategy-259769

    MIL OSI

  • MIL-OSI Submissions: Military force may have delayed Iran’s nuclear ambitions – but history shows that diplomacy is the more effective nonproliferation strategy

    Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Stephen Collins, Professor of Government and International Affairs, Kennesaw State University

    View of the United Nations logo at a 2022 conference of the Parties to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons. Angela Weiss/AFP via Getty Images)

    While the U.S. military’s strikes on Iran on June 21, 2025, are believed to have damaged the country’s critical nuclear infrastructure, no evidence has yet emerged showing the program to have been completely destroyed. In fact, an early U.S. Defense Intelligence Agency assessment surmised that the attack merely delayed Iran’s possible path to a nuclear weapon by less than six months. Further, Rafael Mariano Grossi, director of the United Nations’ International Atomic Energy Agency, stated that Iran may have moved its supply of enriched uranium ahead of the strikes, and assessed that Tehran could resume uranium enrichment “in a matter of months.”

    Others have warned that the strikes may intensify the Islamic Republic’s nuclear drive, convincing the government of the need to acquire a bomb in order to safeguard its survival.

    As a scholar of nuclear nonproliferation, my research indicates that military strikes, such as the U.S. one against Iran, tend not to work. Diplomacy — involving broad and resolute international efforts — offers a more strategically effective way to preempt a country from obtaining a nuclear arsenal.

    The diplomatic alternative to nonproliferation

    The strategy of a country using airstrikes to attempt to eliminate a rival nation’s nuclear program has precedent, including Israel’s 1981 airstrike on Iraq’s Osirak nuclear reactor and its 2007 air assault on Syria’s Kibar nuclear complex.

    Yet neither military operation reliably or completely terminated the targeted program. Many experts of nuclear strategy believe that while the Israeli strike destroyed the Osirak complex, it likely accelerated Iraq’s fledgling nuclear program, increasing Saddam Hussein’s commitment to pursue a nuclear weapon.

    The Osirak nuclear power research station in 1981.
    Jacques Pavlovsky/Sygma via Getty Images

    In a similar vein, while Israeli airstrikes destroyed Syria’s nascent nuclear facility, evidence soon emerged that the country, under its former leader, Bashar Assad, may have continued its nuclear activities elsewhere.

    Based on my appraisal of similar cases, the record shows that diplomacy has been a more consistently reliable strategy than military force for getting a targeted country to denuclearize.

    The tactics involved in nuclear diplomacy include bilateral and multilateral engagement efforts and economic tools ranging from comprehensive sanctions to transformative aid and trade incentives. Travel and cultural sanctions – including bans on participating in international sporting and other events – can also contribute to the effectiveness of denuclearization diplomacy.

    The high point of denuclearization diplomacy came in 1970, when the majority of the world signed the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons. The treaty obliged nonnuclear weapons states to refrain from pursuing them, and existing nuclear powers to share civilian nuclear power technology and work toward eventual nuclear weapons disarmament.

    I’ve found that in a majority of cases since then – notably in Argentina, Brazil, Libya, South Africa, South Korea and Taiwan – diplomacy played a pivotal role in convincing nuclear-seeking nations to entirely and permanently relinquish their pursuit of nuclear weapons.

    Case studies of nuclear diplomacy

    In the cases of U.S. allies Argentina, Brazil, South Korea and Taiwan, the military option was off the table for Washington, which instead successfully used diplomatic pressure to compel these countries to discontinue their nuclear programs. This involved the imposition of significant economic and technological sanctions on Argentina and Brazil in the late-1970s, which substantially contributed to the denuclearization of South America. In the South Korea and Taiwan cases, the threat of economic sanctions was effectively coupled with the risk of losing U.S. military aid and security guarantees.

    South Africa represents one of the most compelling cases in support of diplomatic measures to reverse a country’s nuclear path. In the latter years of the Cold War, the country had advanced beyond threshold nuclear potential to assemble a sizable arsenal of nuclear weapons. But in 1991, the country decided to relinquish that arsenal, due in large part to the high economic, technological and cultural costs of sanctions and the belief that its nuclear program would prevent its reintegration into the international community following years of apartheid.

    Completing the denuclearization of Africa, diplomatic pressure applied by the U.S. was the primary factor in Libya’s decision to shutter its nuclear program in 2003, as ending U.S. sanctions and normalizing relations with Washington became a high priority for the government of Moammar Gadhafi.

    In the case of Iraq, the Hussein regime eventually did denuclearize in the 1990s, but not through a deal negotiated directly with the U.S. or the international community. Rather, Hussein’s decision was motivated by the damaging economic and technological costs of the U.N. sanctions and his desire to see them lifted after the first Gulf War.

    In the 11 countries in which diplomacy was used to reverse nuclear proliferation, only in the cases of India and Pakistan did it fail to induce any nuclear reversal.

    In the case of North Korea, while Pyongyang did for a time join the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, it later left the accord and subsequently built an arsenal now estimated at several dozen nuclear weapons. The decades-long efforts at diplomacy with the country cannot, therefore, be coded a success. Still, these efforts did result in notable moves in 1994 and 2007 by North Korea to curtail its nuclear facilities.

    Meanwhile, analysts debate whether diplomacy would have been more successful at containing North Korea’s nuclear program if the George W. Bush administration had not shifted toward a more confrontational policy, including naming North Korea as a member of the “axis of evil” and delaying aid promised in the 1994 U.S.-North Korean Agreed Framework.

    The Iran deal and beyond

    Consistent with the historical track record for diplomacy concerning other nuclear powers, Iran offers compelling evidence of what diplomacy can achieve in lieu of military force.

    Diplomatic negotiations between the U.S, Iran and five leading powers yielded the landmark Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action in 2015. The so-called Iran deal involved multilateral diplomacy and a set of economic sanctions and incentives, and persuaded Iran to place stringent limits on its nuclear program for at least 10 years and ship tons of enriched uranium out of the country. A report from the International Atomic Energy Agency in 2016 confirmed that Iran had abided by the terms of the agreement. Consequently, the U.S., European Union and U.N. responded by lifting sanctions.

    Representatives of the nations involved in signing the 2015 Iran nuclear deal pose for a group photo following talks in July 2015.
    AP Photo/Ronald Zak

    It was only after President Donald Trump ordered the U.S. withdrawal from the agreement in 2018, and reimposed sanctions on Iran, that Tehran resumed its alarming enrichment activities.

    Trump signaled quickly after the recent attack on Iran a willingness to engage in direct talks with Tehran. However, Iran may rebuff any agreement that effectively contains its nuclear program, opting instead for the intensified underground approach Iraq took after the 1981 Osirak attack.

    Indeed, my research shows that combining military threats with diplomacy reduces the prospects of successfully reaching a disarmament agreement. Nations will be more reluctant to disarm when their negotiating counterpart adopts a threatening and combative posture, as it heightens their fear that disarmament will make it more vulnerable to future aggression from the opposing country.

    A return to an Iran nuclear deal?

    Successful denuclearization diplomacy with Iran will not be a panacea for Middle East stability; the U.S. will continue to harbor concerns about Iran’s military-related actions and relationships in the region.

    It is, after all, unlikely that any U.S. administration could strike a deal with Tehran on nuclear policy that would simultaneously settle all outstanding issues and resolve decades of mutual acrimony.

    But by signing and abiding to the terms of the JCPOA, Iran has demonstrated a willingness to cooperate on the nuclear issue in the past. Under the agreement, Iran accepted a highly limited and low-proliferation-risk nuclear program subject to intrusive inspections by the international community.

    That arrangement was beneficial for regional stability and for buttressing the global norm against nuclear proliferation. A return to a JCPOA-type agreement would reinforce a diplomatic approach to relations with Iran and create an opening for progress with the country on other areas of concern.

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

    ref. Military force may have delayed Iran’s nuclear ambitions – but history shows that diplomacy is the more effective nonproliferation strategy – https://theconversation.com/military-force-may-have-delayed-irans-nuclear-ambitions-but-history-shows-that-diplomacy-is-the-more-effective-nonproliferation-strategy-259769

    MIL OSI

  • MIL-OSI Submissions: Military force may have delayed Iran’s nuclear ambitions – but history shows that diplomacy is the more effective nonproliferation strategy

    Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Stephen Collins, Professor of Government and International Affairs, Kennesaw State University

    View of the United Nations logo at a 2022 conference of the Parties to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons. Angela Weiss/AFP via Getty Images)

    While the U.S. military’s strikes on Iran on June 21, 2025, are believed to have damaged the country’s critical nuclear infrastructure, no evidence has yet emerged showing the program to have been completely destroyed. In fact, an early U.S. Defense Intelligence Agency assessment surmised that the attack merely delayed Iran’s possible path to a nuclear weapon by less than six months. Further, Rafael Mariano Grossi, director of the United Nations’ International Atomic Energy Agency, stated that Iran may have moved its supply of enriched uranium ahead of the strikes, and assessed that Tehran could resume uranium enrichment “in a matter of months.”

    Others have warned that the strikes may intensify the Islamic Republic’s nuclear drive, convincing the government of the need to acquire a bomb in order to safeguard its survival.

    As a scholar of nuclear nonproliferation, my research indicates that military strikes, such as the U.S. one against Iran, tend not to work. Diplomacy — involving broad and resolute international efforts — offers a more strategically effective way to preempt a country from obtaining a nuclear arsenal.

    The diplomatic alternative to nonproliferation

    The strategy of a country using airstrikes to attempt to eliminate a rival nation’s nuclear program has precedent, including Israel’s 1981 airstrike on Iraq’s Osirak nuclear reactor and its 2007 air assault on Syria’s Kibar nuclear complex.

    Yet neither military operation reliably or completely terminated the targeted program. Many experts of nuclear strategy believe that while the Israeli strike destroyed the Osirak complex, it likely accelerated Iraq’s fledgling nuclear program, increasing Saddam Hussein’s commitment to pursue a nuclear weapon.

    The Osirak nuclear power research station in 1981.
    Jacques Pavlovsky/Sygma via Getty Images

    In a similar vein, while Israeli airstrikes destroyed Syria’s nascent nuclear facility, evidence soon emerged that the country, under its former leader, Bashar Assad, may have continued its nuclear activities elsewhere.

    Based on my appraisal of similar cases, the record shows that diplomacy has been a more consistently reliable strategy than military force for getting a targeted country to denuclearize.

    The tactics involved in nuclear diplomacy include bilateral and multilateral engagement efforts and economic tools ranging from comprehensive sanctions to transformative aid and trade incentives. Travel and cultural sanctions – including bans on participating in international sporting and other events – can also contribute to the effectiveness of denuclearization diplomacy.

    The high point of denuclearization diplomacy came in 1970, when the majority of the world signed the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons. The treaty obliged nonnuclear weapons states to refrain from pursuing them, and existing nuclear powers to share civilian nuclear power technology and work toward eventual nuclear weapons disarmament.

    I’ve found that in a majority of cases since then – notably in Argentina, Brazil, Libya, South Africa, South Korea and Taiwan – diplomacy played a pivotal role in convincing nuclear-seeking nations to entirely and permanently relinquish their pursuit of nuclear weapons.

    Case studies of nuclear diplomacy

    In the cases of U.S. allies Argentina, Brazil, South Korea and Taiwan, the military option was off the table for Washington, which instead successfully used diplomatic pressure to compel these countries to discontinue their nuclear programs. This involved the imposition of significant economic and technological sanctions on Argentina and Brazil in the late-1970s, which substantially contributed to the denuclearization of South America. In the South Korea and Taiwan cases, the threat of economic sanctions was effectively coupled with the risk of losing U.S. military aid and security guarantees.

    South Africa represents one of the most compelling cases in support of diplomatic measures to reverse a country’s nuclear path. In the latter years of the Cold War, the country had advanced beyond threshold nuclear potential to assemble a sizable arsenal of nuclear weapons. But in 1991, the country decided to relinquish that arsenal, due in large part to the high economic, technological and cultural costs of sanctions and the belief that its nuclear program would prevent its reintegration into the international community following years of apartheid.

    Completing the denuclearization of Africa, diplomatic pressure applied by the U.S. was the primary factor in Libya’s decision to shutter its nuclear program in 2003, as ending U.S. sanctions and normalizing relations with Washington became a high priority for the government of Moammar Gadhafi.

    In the case of Iraq, the Hussein regime eventually did denuclearize in the 1990s, but not through a deal negotiated directly with the U.S. or the international community. Rather, Hussein’s decision was motivated by the damaging economic and technological costs of the U.N. sanctions and his desire to see them lifted after the first Gulf War.

    In the 11 countries in which diplomacy was used to reverse nuclear proliferation, only in the cases of India and Pakistan did it fail to induce any nuclear reversal.

    In the case of North Korea, while Pyongyang did for a time join the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, it later left the accord and subsequently built an arsenal now estimated at several dozen nuclear weapons. The decades-long efforts at diplomacy with the country cannot, therefore, be coded a success. Still, these efforts did result in notable moves in 1994 and 2007 by North Korea to curtail its nuclear facilities.

    Meanwhile, analysts debate whether diplomacy would have been more successful at containing North Korea’s nuclear program if the George W. Bush administration had not shifted toward a more confrontational policy, including naming North Korea as a member of the “axis of evil” and delaying aid promised in the 1994 U.S.-North Korean Agreed Framework.

    The Iran deal and beyond

    Consistent with the historical track record for diplomacy concerning other nuclear powers, Iran offers compelling evidence of what diplomacy can achieve in lieu of military force.

    Diplomatic negotiations between the U.S, Iran and five leading powers yielded the landmark Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action in 2015. The so-called Iran deal involved multilateral diplomacy and a set of economic sanctions and incentives, and persuaded Iran to place stringent limits on its nuclear program for at least 10 years and ship tons of enriched uranium out of the country. A report from the International Atomic Energy Agency in 2016 confirmed that Iran had abided by the terms of the agreement. Consequently, the U.S., European Union and U.N. responded by lifting sanctions.

    Representatives of the nations involved in signing the 2015 Iran nuclear deal pose for a group photo following talks in July 2015.
    AP Photo/Ronald Zak

    It was only after President Donald Trump ordered the U.S. withdrawal from the agreement in 2018, and reimposed sanctions on Iran, that Tehran resumed its alarming enrichment activities.

    Trump signaled quickly after the recent attack on Iran a willingness to engage in direct talks with Tehran. However, Iran may rebuff any agreement that effectively contains its nuclear program, opting instead for the intensified underground approach Iraq took after the 1981 Osirak attack.

    Indeed, my research shows that combining military threats with diplomacy reduces the prospects of successfully reaching a disarmament agreement. Nations will be more reluctant to disarm when their negotiating counterpart adopts a threatening and combative posture, as it heightens their fear that disarmament will make it more vulnerable to future aggression from the opposing country.

    A return to an Iran nuclear deal?

    Successful denuclearization diplomacy with Iran will not be a panacea for Middle East stability; the U.S. will continue to harbor concerns about Iran’s military-related actions and relationships in the region.

    It is, after all, unlikely that any U.S. administration could strike a deal with Tehran on nuclear policy that would simultaneously settle all outstanding issues and resolve decades of mutual acrimony.

    But by signing and abiding to the terms of the JCPOA, Iran has demonstrated a willingness to cooperate on the nuclear issue in the past. Under the agreement, Iran accepted a highly limited and low-proliferation-risk nuclear program subject to intrusive inspections by the international community.

    That arrangement was beneficial for regional stability and for buttressing the global norm against nuclear proliferation. A return to a JCPOA-type agreement would reinforce a diplomatic approach to relations with Iran and create an opening for progress with the country on other areas of concern.

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

    ref. Military force may have delayed Iran’s nuclear ambitions – but history shows that diplomacy is the more effective nonproliferation strategy – https://theconversation.com/military-force-may-have-delayed-irans-nuclear-ambitions-but-history-shows-that-diplomacy-is-the-more-effective-nonproliferation-strategy-259769

    MIL OSI

  • MIL-OSI Submissions: Friday essay: ‘whose agony is greater than mine?’ Testimonies of Gaza and October 7 ask us to recognise shared humanity

    Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Juliet Rogers, Associate Professor Criminology, The University of Melbourne

    In 1962, poet and Auschwitz survivor Yehiel Dinur took the stand in Jerusalem in the trial of Nazi war criminal Adolf Eichmann. Dinur was a much-anticipated witness, bearing the audience’s hope this man, a poet, would be able to explain – to capture and to transmit – the experience of Auschwitz, and of the Holocaust; that he could speak the unspeakable. Prosecutor Gideon Hausner hoped such a witness might “do justice to the six million personal tragedies”.

    Dinur used the name Katzetnik 135633 in his writings, also translated as “Prisoner 135663”. On the stand, he said: “I believe wholeheartedly that I have to continue to bear this name until the world awakens.”

    Awakening, understanding, empathy and change are the sentiments many survivors hope for, or ask for, during and after periods of trauma. The 20th century saw many of those pleas. The 21st century has done no better at honouring the promise, captured in the title of the 1984 Argentinian commission report on forced disappearances, Nunca Mas: never again. No matter how many such pleas appear before the courts, before the aggressors, before those in solidarity, the horrors of war, torture, starvation and genocide seem to happen again – and again.

    Three recent books from the region where war was been raging since the Hamas attacks on Israel on October 7 2023, and the ensuing war on Gaza, are part of these pleas.


    Review: Eyes on Gaza – Plestia Alaqad (Macmillan), Letters from Gaza – edited by Mohammed Al-Zaqzooq & Mahmoud Alshaer (Penguin), Gates of Gaza – Amir Tibon (Scribe)


    Eyes on Gaza is an on-the-ground account of the death and destruction of the first 45 days of the war by now 23-year-old Palestinian journalist Plestia Alaqad, who moved to Melbourne with her family in November 2023. Letters from Gaza is a collection of 50 stories, poems and fragments from Palestinian writers enduring the past 20 months. And Gates of Gaza is the story of Israeli journalist Amir Tibon, a resident of Nahal Oz, one of the border kibbutz attacked by Hamas on October 7.

    Plestia Alaqad.
    Plestia

    These are all first-person testimonies of experiences of being under attack, though those attacks differ. We might say they fit into the genre adopted in truth commissions, such as the Truth and Reconciliation Commission in South Africa: a response to the nation’s years of living under the apartheid laws, discarded when Nelson Mandela took power in 1994.

    The commission was one effort to heal from this past. But, like the Eichmann trial, it needed stories to explain the histories of violence, and it needed the pain to be voiced to explain its impacts on communities, families and relationships.

    The use of people’s narratives to “bear witness” to the complex layers of legally sanctioned and militarily executed pain, loss and the traumas they can produce, is sometimes effective in helping audiences understand them. The Bringing Them Home Report in 1997 used this form to explain the incidence and impacts of the forced removal of Indigenous children by the Australian state. It was effective as one form of creating a shared reality for all in Australia, who then understood the term “stolen generations” and the pain, loss and genocidal intent to which this phrase refers.

    More recently, the Yoorrook Justice Commission in Victoria, Australia’s first formal truth-telling inquiry into historic and ongoing systemic injustices perpetrated against First Nations Peoples by colonisation, has also brought histories of loss, dispossession and abuse to light, using stories. Stories can make sense of the impact incurred through the intertwined web of policies, statistics, discrimination and quotidian violence at the hands of the state.

    The work of testimony

    The narratives in these books written since October 7 2023 are part of this genre of testimony or storytelling. But at least two of these books are not attempting to explain the past. They might be described better as pleas to stop what the International Court of Justice has called “a plausible genocide” happening in the present.

    They are, in one reading, wishes for the world to understand the experience of pain, rage, loss, fear, distress and defeat that accompanies destruction and unbearable loss. A wish for the world to hear, or perhaps feel, the words on the page – and make the pain stop.

    They wish the world would “awaken” to what is happening right now.

    The dynamic of awakening is the stock in trade of truth commissions. One party testifies or speaks to an experience, and the audience wakes up to what has been happening. As a result, they either change or facilitate change. The truth, captured as testimony, is supposed to set people free. Not just the speaker, but the community of speakers weighed down by history – or by the struggles of the past or the present.

    In legal forms the reason to speak is clear. The reason to speak in literature, biographies and works of nonfiction is less clear. What does the author want from us, the readers? But perhaps more importantly, what can we offer?

    Plestia wants her life back

    Plestia Alaqad is very clear about what she wants in her book, The Eyes of Gaza: A Diary Of Resilience.

    She wants the genocide to stop. She wants a free Palestine. She wants her home and her life back. The stories in this book show readers outside Gaza some of the life and death of those first six and a half weeks.


    Her last entry before she leaves Gaza for Egypt – and then Australia – is dated Day 45. During those 45 days, she puts on a press helmet and jacket, which both give her protection and weigh her down. And then she speaks: to cameras, to followers, to anyone who will listen. Her social media feeds documenting the war gained worldwide attention, her Instagram following rising from around 3,700 to 4.1 million today.

    There are too many deaths to be witnessed – by her and the reader. She describes genocide as an understatement for what is occurring in Gaza: “we lose more people than our hearts can handle”. She has seen so much death, heard so many screams. By day 30,

    all you can hear is a voice crying for help from under the rubble. You turn your back and walk away, because there’s nothing you can do to help.

    But Plestia’s project is more than documenting death. She is careful to show many aspects of life in Gaza. She shows how Palestinians retain relationships, family and pets. How a young boy just needs his “pot plant” from his destroyed house, under skies filled with drones and bombs. This is a plea for the genocide to stop, but it is also a celebration of being Palestinian. It is an homage to life in Gaza.

    It is also a plea to see Palestinians as more than numbers – and more than how they are depicted by Israel.

    “The world,” she says, “sometimes treats us like terrorists, trying to justify its complacency in allowing us to be massacred. And we know the perception, we read the propaganda just like everyone else. But the reality is that we’re the opposite.”

    She describes gentle moments of love and care between her fellow journalists and the people they interview. The children they bring sweets for, the “bird lady” who renames her tortoise “Plestia” after her. Both Plestia the tortoise and the “bird lady” are now living in a tent. She speaks of the doctors who work tirelessly.

    In the midst of brutal amputations and unimaginable burns, she recounts the care of a doctor giving cream for a skin rash that has tormented her, diagnosed as a product of her anxiety. Anxiety seems a gentle diagnosis for symptoms produced by witnessing and documenting such brutality.

    Anxiety over her helplessness, perhaps, over the lack of sleep, of nourishing food: dwindling even in those first 45 days. Anxiety seems like a Western preoccupation, from this writing distance. What Plestia experiences seems more like layers of embodied distress. Her empathy allows her to feel, perhaps too much. Empathy can be an enemy.

    Around page 100, she begins to deteriorate. “It’s funny how genocide changes a person,” she writes, describing herself as “Genocide Plestia”. She’s devastated, exhausted. She has lost hope. The journal entries are shorter, more repetitive.
    They recite her helplessness with what Jacqueline Rose, co-director of the Birkbeck Institute for the Humanities, has called the “repetitive thud of referentiality”.

    You feel Plestia’s effort to try to speak with some life in the pages, to use writing as a therapeutic tool. You wish it for her, but she has trouble summoning the energy, the life, any hope. As she poignantly quips: “Fake it till you make it doesn’t work during a Genocide”. What is there to say in such relentless days of loss?

    You want Plestia to get up, you want a happy ending, for a conclusion to the painful story, but the problem is time. The reader’s time, the reality of time since she wrote her book.

    Day 45, her last day in Gaza, is Monday November 20 2023. I read this book in June 2025, 646 days later – and it hasn’t stopped. When Plestia leaves Gaza and finally arrives here in Melbourne, the conditions she describes have been ongoing for more than 20 months. A recently released survey by the Palestinian Center for Policy and Survey Research estimates almost 84,000 people died in Gaza between October 2023 and early January 2025, as a result of the war. And that was six months ago.

    50 letters from Gaza

    The numbers are a way of reducing the experience of grief, devastation, loss (and the viewer’s guilt) to simple digits. Digits have no face and no sound. This is helpful to viewers, but it does not do justice to the 84,000, as Gideon Hausner knew well. No one awakens by hearing the numbers. But they matter.

    In Letters from Gaza, psychologist Ahmed Mortaja fears becoming a news story, “a dull number … I don’t want my name and my family name to be reduced to mere numbers, whether odd or even”.


    This book, a fragmented collection of 50 poems, stories and accounts, is devoted to giving life to those numbers. To animating the loss, so readers can apply their own imaginations, so we can understand the incomprehensible. It is a collection of fragments of lives since October 7 2023, squeezed into expressive pages. There is no “letter” more than six pages long. They are backed up against each other, permeating one another.

    Each letter tells a different story and the same story. Each finds a detail that has no language: flowers in a girl’s hair, dreams of careers that will perhaps never be, the sounds of explosions. They are stories of the impossible search for bread, the longing for a bed and a pillow. And, as in Plestia’s account, they evoke the relentless buzz of the drones in the sky in Gaza: everywhere, all day, every day since October 7 2023. Like tinnitus, like torture.

    The book begins with an effort to give names to numbers. On the first page, in the publisher’s note, we read that two of the authors, Sara al-Assar and Basma al-Hor, cannot be contacted. Because of communication lines and constant displacements, the details “may not reflect their current location or circumstances”. Authors may have died or been further displaced. Communication towers are destroyed. Tents are moved as people are moved on. Tents are destroyed.

    In Plestia’s accounts, there are displacements to safe zones that then become unsafe, so they move again and again – until the only choice is tents, often without food or blankets. She describes seeing 33,000 people in a displacement shelter, this number increasing daily. Just as numbers are not people, tents are not homes. In Letters from Gaza, the displaced tents are character, metaphor and reality.

    The stories are different, as are the deaths and losses within them, but these painful accounts help explain each other. The personal stories help animate words like displacement, refugee camp, genocide, so they do not fall into the pile of legal terms disconnected from names.

    But after the United Nations declarations in the opening pages, we hear no more of law – and little of justice. As Palestinian human rights lawyer and founder of the Palestinian Centre for Human Rights, Raji Sourani said: Gaza is in danger of becoming “the graveyard of international law”. What is left are stories. The short stories, poems and brief accounts are packaged so they do not ask too much of the reader – just enough to provoke tears, and perhaps donations. Many readers will feel some of the helplessness in these pages.

    There are stories of hunger; the loss of grandmothers and children. I cried many times reading this book, but the next story would quickly arrive and sometimes bring relief. There is something sad, but ordinary, about details like a cat who finds a tent too hot. Unlike Plestia’s clear analysis and summation of the genocide in Gaza, the politics of this book are comparably quiet. Not absent, but quiet. The word genocide is mentioned four times, “Holocaust” only once. (I counted.)

    In Letters from Gaza, no one says Israel, only “the occupiers”. Husam Maarouf writes, “we no longer want anything from you […] Only to die in safety.” His entry is dated March 1 2024; he may well be dead. Batool Abu Akleen makes simple requests of the reader (or perhaps of God): “I want a grave, I don’t want my corpse to rot in the open road.” But the book seems to intentionally not accuse. We are told:

    this is not a book about war. It is a book about human souls that strive to avoid being hunted down by war. It is about how innocents are forced to learn how to survive when everything around them is about killing, destruction and death.

    But the accusation is there. How could it not be? Against Israel as occupier and aggressor – and the reader as bystander.

    Accusation sometimes comes embedded in questions. “Is one person’s pain greater than another’s?” asks Gaza poet and teacher Doha Kahlout. This question resonates with one inscribed on the Holocaust Memorial Tree in Hungary: “Whose agony is greater than mine?”

    When comparing agony, only one can live

    Jewish author, philosopher and psychoanalyst Jessica Benjamin, writing on Palestine and Israeli peace struggles, cautions against pitting stories from Israel and Palestine against each other, such that “only one can live”. Only one story, one narrative, one version of pain and loss.

    Holding multiple stories of suffering in mind is very difficult: for the survivor, for the listener and even for the psychoanalyst. Many survivors suffer symptoms of trauma that reduce the world to interpretation through their experience of its painful histories.

    In Eyes of Gaza, writing from Melbourne, Plestia shows a moment of this:

    On the train home, I see a lady with a suitcase, and the first thing that I think of is displacement, imagining how everyone in Gaza carries their whole life in their bag […] Then the announcement: Next Stop […] And I’m snapped back into reality.

    In this moment, the suitcase is only read through the lens of the past. It’s what is described colloquially as living in the past – a type of banal flashback, often a symptom of trauma. But when pain colonises bodies and narratives, recognising the pain of others is difficult to see. It may be impossible to see the experiences of the other’s world through any other lens than one’s own pain. Whose agony is greater than mine? is a competitive statement, not a question.

    In the war of greater pain, an Israeli child in fear may be read against a Palestinian child enduring the loss of their limbs and their whole family. Only one (story) can live.

    To hold two competing stories of pain, loss and agony in mind requires a feat of mental health endurance few are capable of: the Nelson Mandelas of this world. Working in the field of transitional justice, I have met a few.

    Most have experienced great loss and know there is no comparison at the level of agony. They resist “the repetitive thud of referentiality” because it drowns out conversation, annihilating curiosity and empathy alike. They know all stories must have their time.

    In October 2023, “liberal” London Jewish journalist and filmmaker Michael Segalov, once a “staunch defender of Israel”, tried to hold competing stories. He wrote about seeing Israel–Palestine through the lens of “fear and trauma – of the Shoah, of the Nakba, of generations now born into perpetual fear”.

    Early Jewish settlers were not “imperial soldiers”, but “a persecuted population failed by global governments pre and post Holocaust”, he points out. But by 1948, the year after the UN resolution that called for Palestine to be divided into Arab and Jewish states, “more than 750,000 Palestinians were made refugees, 15,000 killed”.

    “While these lands might well feel a Jewish ancestral home,” he wrote, “within living memory, it was shared with another people: the majority.” In 1922, in the first census carried out under the British Mandate, the population of Palestine was 763,550: 89% were Arabs and 11% Jewish.

    As Palestinian psychiatrist Eyad El Sarraj stressed while talking with Jessica Benjamin during peace negotiations, we must “stand simultaneously for the recognition of all injuries, while at the same time being clear that one side was coming from the position of Occupied and less powerful, the other Occupying and dominating”. Stories matter, politics matters.

    And some stories take more time than others – some stories are given more time than others. This is a matter of politics and practicality.

    Surviving the October 7 attacks

    Israeli journalist Amir Tibon and his family survived the October 7 attack on Kibbutz Nahal Oz, on the Gaza border; they are now internal refugees in northern Israel. He and his partner settled in Nahal Oz and raised a family. On the morning of October 7, they heard the sounds of the attack and raced to their safe room, spending the next five hours in there trying to keep their children – Galia, 3 years old and Carmel, aged 19 months – quiet.

    Amir Tibon and his family survived the Oct 7 attack on Kibbutz Nahal Oz, on the Gaza border.
    Scribe

    In discussing Tibon’s book, Gates of Gaza: a story of betrayal, survival and hope in Israel’s borderlands, I risk comparison and competition. Sometimes stories speak to each other, even when they speak to the silences. I resisted this one’s proximity to the above stories. But that is also to resist reality. It is to resist the importance of difference. All experience is valuable, but sometimes comparison reveals inequality.

    Plestia knows this well. The survivor guilt of which she writes is part of the hierarchy experienced by all survivors of mass violence. That she and her family survived, that she migrated, is to feel guilt for escaping the fate of those who have been starved, tortured, obliterated.

    Yehiel Dinur spoke from this position of guilt on the stand in 1962, saying he was speaking for those who died in Auschwitz. In the face of others’ death, all survivors struggle with justification. Competition is one form of this: Whose agony is greater than mine?


    Tibon was a resident of Nahal Oz, having moved there with his partner because of its beauty, nine years before October 7. He describes it as having “a strong, left-wing, liberal political leaning”, and says residents of the border areas are “some of the strongest advocates of Israeli–Palestinian peace”. He writes that the kibbutz movement has, “for decades”, been in favour of “a compromise that would allow Jews and Arabs to share this land, with agreed-upon borders – borders that, of course, would have to be protected”.

    In the 300-plus pages, Tibon describes the morning of October 7 in detail. The fear of his children and his partner as they stayed quiet in a safe room for some five hours. The sounds of shootings and desperation as he read pleas and accounts from other residents on the community’s WhatsApp group as the attacks unfolded.

    The narrative of that morning is interspersed with accounts from people who survived in his community: his parents, some of those who attended the Nova music festival, and Israeli Defense Force (IDF) soldiers. The narrative moves between that morning and a history of the kibbutz, framed in a history of Israel’s political lurching between right and left – and back again – over the 87 years since its recognition as a nation state by the UN.

    In one reading, this is a history book of 87 years – not just an account of five hours. It is a particular history.

    The narrative of those five hours is intense, peppered with stories of his parents racing from Tel Aviv to the kibbutz. Tibon’s father is a crucial figure in this narrative. A retired IDF general with “more than three decades” in the military, including combat experience, he seemingly has the capacity to assess situations and navigate a war zone with skill. It is his father who finally knocks on the “safe room” door in the afternoon (about halfway through the book). Tibon reports hearing “a strong bang and a familiar voice” from inside.

    The father, we could say, is the embodiment of Tibon’s feelings for – and belief in – a strong, kind Israel. An army general, protective husband and grandfather (in Hebrew, Saba), he is longed for by Tibon’s young children, who “loved their grandparents”, particularly his father, “who pampered and spoiled them at every opportunity”. This grandfather’s presence at the safe-room door allows the family to re-enter the safety of Israel.

    If the father is Israel, the sleeping children are its citizens. Carmel and Galia slept through much of the conflict, barely awakened by gunshots. They were rushed to the safe room the moment the shots were heard.

    Once you know the stories from Letters of Gaza, it is hard not to compare this to the waking of Mohammed Al Zaqzooq’s three boys – Baraa, Jawad and Basil – to the sound of “Huge missiles in large numbers making terrifying sounds” and the need to flee. Not least, because Amir’s children were barely awakened by shots outside. Their safe room kept the noise muffled and the danger at bay. This is not to say their fear won’t impact on their actions later. Transgenerational trauma has a way of influencing the future.

    Mohammed’s children moved quickly, within half an hour, to a refugee camp. At the time of writing, they remain there. His story is five pages long. Amir’s is 300-plus. Amir, an author and award-winning diplomatic correspondent for Haaretz, Israel’s liberal paper of record, has access to a computer, electricity and the security required to think, research and write.

    But why does he write this book? In the acknowledgements, he describes himself as needing to be encouraged, unsure of the worth of telling the story of his five hours in the safe room. But he describes much more than five hours.

    His book is a story of Israel – and particularly, of its informal settlements. In the early 1950s, he writes, 20 young soldiers – ten men and ten women – were taken by bus to this site to settle it. Nahal Oz is so close to Gaza, it has “agricultural lands which literally touch the border fence”. The kibbutzim functioned as a kind of human border, with increased populations: the 20 broke into couples, then families. Within a few years, they had a small farming community, with a person devoted to security.

    Empty land?

    This is not a story of military invasion and colonisation, however. It is a story of settlement on land represented as empty. We know this story well in Australia. In this context, it can be a plea for a recognition of innocence.

    As Amir tells it, there were no Palestinians in the place before: no one was removed or relocated. Only in passing does he mention the Bedouin who passed through the area before.

    In Australia, Irene Watson and Aileen Moreton-Robinson have, in different ways, explained lands do not need to be sites of permanent agriculture to be crucial to the survival of some groups or nations. Borders and settlements can disturb land, law and life regardless of whether houses are demolished or not.

    The beauty of Nahal Oz, Amir writes, was due to its access to water and its site on fertile land, where trees provided shelter and probably food. Its loss was likely no small thing to people who required sustenance and shelter as they moved through. After the settlement, they no longer could.

    After Israel set up its border there, only Israelis could pass through without being subject to the checkpoints that are well documented sites of humiliation and arbitrary punishment for Palestinians.

    By 1997, the walls went up near Nahal Oz. But the walls to shield Nahal Oz from Gaza – and particularly from its people – were not enough. Amir describes the elaborate and extensive tunnels used by Palestinian soldiers to enter Israel (he calls them “terrorists” and “suicide bombers”).

    The tunnels became the problem of Palestinian attacks on Israeli settlers. To deal with this problem, the concrete walls were built, reaching 160 metres underground, preventing any permeation. Then, on October 7, the walls could not provide security. Then, there was only the safe room.

    The safe room is an obvious metaphor in this book. It is Israel under attack. One of these rooms has been built into every house in the kibbutz, so families can be safe from the mortar attacks from Gaza – a regular occurrence since the 1987 Intifada.

    Plestia tells us that the materials for a safe room are not allowed to be brought into Gaza. There are no safe rooms there. Tibon doesn’t mention this; maybe he doesn’t even know this fact, which is its own symptom of the political and social environment in Israel.

    He does describe “the unimaginable destruction that Israel has unleashed on Gaza in the aftermath” of the October 7 attacks. He is critical of this “destruction”, though he does not use the term genocide. (There are those who wait for the International Court of Justice to decide if it was more than “plausible” – and there are those who cannot wait.)

    Tibon is critical of Israel’s right wing, which cultivates war. He wants peace. But peace here is its own violence.

    Like the rhetoric of reconciliation in South Africa, calls for peace can do violence to historical experiences of injustice. There, reconciliation discourse has been criticised, along with its apolitical leanings. Reconciliation in South Africa has largely meant people subject to historical injustices must reconcile themselves to their losses and their reality.

    A story attributed to Father Mxolisi Mapanbani, of Tom and Bernard and the bicycle, has been used many times to critique “reconciliation” rhetoric in South Africa. It is helpful here.

    Tom and Bernard are friends and live opposite each other. One day, Tom stole Bernard’s bicycle. Every day, Bernard saw Tom cycling to school on it. After some time, Tom went up to Bernard and said, “Let us reconcile and put the past behind us.” Bernard said, “Okay, let’s reconcile – what about the bicycle?” “Oh no,” said Tom, “I’m not talking about the bicycle, I’m talking about reconciliation.”

    In the Australian context, after Kevin Rudd’s apology to the stolen generations in 2008, human rights and social justice campaigner Tom Calma described this form of reconciliation as the “unfinished business of justice”.

    The apology might have offered some form of acknowledgement, and gone some way toward creating a shared reality on the injustices of the past, but while justice remains unfinished, many are not at peace.

    Amir wants peace. He doesn’t want to live in a safe house – but he wants his house and his family to live securely in Nahal Oz. He wants Palestinians to be at peace with this reality.

    The word “peace”, like “reconciliation”, does a lot of work to present Tibon on the side of “the good”. Just like, in Letters From Gaza, the relative lack of the word “genocide” keeps the accusation at bay and politics in the background – and it keeps its calls for recognition of suffering at the fore. In this book about “human souls”, the editors call for a recognition of shared humanity.

    Tibon is careful not to group “terrorists” under that name – though he uses a Hebrew word that means exactly that. (Mehablim, he calls the people who attacked Nahal Oz.) Why? Though he writes in English and undoubtably spoke Hebrew throughout the siege, why does he speak of the Palestinian attackers as Mehablim?

    The answer might be found in the fact no Palestinian name, beyond former Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat, appears in these pages. He has interviewed many people, but none of them are Palestinian. Their narrative remains outside his text.

    We must find the humanity of the Palestinians in other stories.

    If the safe room is a metaphor for Israel, the tent – as described in so many of the stories in Letters from Gaza, and in Plestia’s account of those 45 days – is a metaphor for the lives of Palestinians in Israel, and perhaps the world’s eyes.

    A tent is permeable, fragile, disposable. Bodies within it are subject to displacement, starvation, genocide. Every house in Tibon’s kibbutz has a safe room. There have been at least seven bombings of tent camps in Gaza. How can you not do the maths?

    Stories, awakening and halting the bombs

    Stories demand people are not reduced to mathematics. They place the reader in the scene and plead for identification and understanding. Writing on the Eichmann trial, Holocaust historian and legal scholar Lawrence Douglas describes “the words of the survivors that built a bridge from the accused to the world of ashes”.

    Afrikaaner journalist and poet Antje Krog writes, on the Truth and Reconciliation Commission in South Africa, “In all the stories a landscape is created.”

    But this landscape, if it is to have any effect, must be mapped across previous perceptions. For that, it must do damage to the secure world – the pre-existing imaginative landscape – of the reader or of the listener.

    Moral philosopher Rai Gaita describes remorse as “a dying to the world”: a little death is required of the listener or reader who is implicated as a bystander, encountering the suffering of others. A death of complacency. A small disintegration that may mean our own peaceful worlds are no longer tenable.

    This is why stories, particularly, are mobilised in truth commissions. They animate the impossible numbers – the dry policies and repetitive loss – with scenes of humanity. Testimony – personal stories – link the words (genocide, massacre, terror) to an imagination of a scene, a person, a child or a parent. To people we can identify or empathise with.

    Like the two worlds connected in Ahmed Mortaja’s poem, Hubb and Harb, In Letters from Gaza:

    tonight I will fall asleep telling myself that the noise outside is fireworks, a celebration and nothing more.
    That the frightened screams of children are the gleeful terror of suspense before something long-awaited, like Eid.
    Tonight, I will fall asleep scrolling through the photos on my phone, telling myself that my evening with friends wasn’t that great – really, I was bored – so now I’m skimming through memories to pass the time.

    If empathy were all it took to halt the counting of the 646 days in Gaza, then Letters from Gaza and Eyes on Gaza would achieve their aim. But empathy rarely produces political change.

    Stories – the 50 voices in Letters from Gaza, accounts like Plestia’s – make us cry, perhaps make us donate, but they do not halt the bombs. This, and more, might be what Yehiel Dinur meant when he asked for the world to “awaken”, that it change, that it stop what Tibon calls “the unimaginable destruction”.

    Until then, Dinur pledged to remain Katzetnik 135633. Until then, we will likely only know “Genocide Plestia”: “it’s funny how genocide changes a person”.

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

    ref. Friday essay: ‘whose agony is greater than mine?’ Testimonies of Gaza and October 7 ask us to recognise shared humanity – https://theconversation.com/friday-essay-whose-agony-is-greater-than-mine-testimonies-of-gaza-and-october-7-ask-us-to-recognise-shared-humanity-257554

    MIL OSI